Beneficial or Baneful?: Stuyvesant’s Thoughts on a School Cell Phone Ban

All students are expected to silence and put away their phones upon entering their classrooms. While this varies from class to class, most students oblige, allowing teachers to follow their lesson plan without any distractions. However, once the final bell rings, many students immediately take out their phones, hoping to cram in a few minutes of screen time before their next class starts. Some check for messages from friends, others scroll social media, and the truly desperate try to fit in five minutes of studying before their next period.

Now, a proposed statewide cell phone ban might put an end to this behavior. Proposed in a budget presentation on January 21, 2025, Governor Katherine Hochul’s ban would bar students from using their phones in between classes (the use of phones, tablets, and smartwatches in classrooms would be left up to each individual district). Ideally, this would decrease distractions for students and promote quality learning. However, not everyone is wholly supportive of this new measure, or even confident that it is a feasible plan. This new proposition has generated much conversation within Stuyvesant as both students and teachers grapple with the possible consequences should it be instated. 

One of the main arguments against the ban is that most students rely on their devices for everyday schoolwork, with many taking notes and finishing homework on their tablets and laptops. Most students feel too reliant on technology to completely give it up, seeing it as vital to all of their projects and assignments. “We live in a digital age. We can’t suddenly go back to paper and pencil for everything, because we live in an age where electronic devices rule,” senior Muhib Muhib declared. 

Sophomore Caleb Lee agreed, noting that the ban ignores students like Stuyvesant students, who often use their devices for more academic than personal uses. “[Hochul is] not keeping in mind the people who need that cell phone device for their own personal business. They’re just not putting that into perspective,” sophomore Caleb Lee commented.

Oftentimes, cell phone use is even encouraged in the classroom, especially when teachers utilize common tools, such as online engagement games, to increase participation and Google Classroom to share updates and assignments. There’s no doubt that Stuyvesant teachers and students have become increasingly reliant on such technology since the pandemic. Since most students use devices with teacher permission, it seems unnecessary to implement this ban. However, if the proposed ban turns into reality, history teacher and Stuyvesant alumnus Hing Li believes that teachers will be able to adapt to the change. “If I were to lose the use of it in the classroom, I would have to adapt. That's what life is about. You lose one tool, you have to figure out a different way,” Li said. “It's like when we all had to go remote. It requires time.”

Even with the prevalence of technology, most students are able to manage their screen time wisely. Sophomore Amanda He shared her belief that it’s important for students to be self-disciplined without needing a ban. “It’s a good skill to be able to have something and not be distracted by it. [A ban is] somebody forcing you to not be able to do something, and that's not a good life skill to have. You have to be able to take initiative and realize that you can't be distracted,” He argued.

With all that said, there might actually be a silver lining to the ban. While most students disagree with the policy, some are considering all the possible pros and cons. These devices, while useful in some cases, can also be detrimental to a student’s well-being. Some students have spent so much time on their phones and other devices that their attention spans have decreased. Additionally, with such technologically advanced social media, many people are prone to believe all that they see on the Internet. “People are addicted, especially to certain platforms. And not only have there been some mental health issues, but a lot of these social media platforms are often, if you don’t use them well, very good at perpetuating misinformation,” Muhib remarked.

Additionally, the policy may be beneficial considering the amount of hallway traffic Stuyvesant has during passing periods. Using one’s phone while walking in a crowd can be a serious hazard, and the ban would prevent injuries due to inopportune timing. “[Before] kids were on their phones, but not to the extent that we see them today, where kids are running into me because they're looking at their phones,” Li shared.

However, one of the biggest concerns regarding communication via cell phones and other devices is what might happen during an emergency. In a school where so many have hour-long commutes, students rely heavily on their devices for communication throughout the day. “Parents always want to have that constant communication with their child,” junior Raahat Amin explained. When phones are taken away, so is that method of communication. 

This scenario is one brought up by more than just the students themselves. “I feel sad that [safety] is a concern that students have to have [...] in a place that they're supposed to just focus on learning and socializing,” Li shared.

For English teacher Dr. Emily Moore, a policy of using phone pockets—pouches hung from a classroom door for students to leave their phone in during the lesson—has been ideal. With this setup, students can have access to their devices in any extreme event. “In an emergency, students can access phones, for instance, on the way out for a fire drill, but during class there’s less of a temptation,” Dr. Moore said in an email interview.

But some students also worry about what the ban would mean for their after school or lunch activities. “In school, I use my phone to communicate with my friends. [...] If I don’t have that form of communication anymore, how am I going to let my friends know anything?” He asked, echoing a common concern of students.

Though many students worry about the practical implications of the ban limiting their communication, Li believes that the most beneficial impact of the ban would be helping students socialize and build in-person relationships. “I think putting emphasis on building a stronger community, that’s what I ultimately want to see out of the cell phone ban, developing those pragmatic people skills,” he stated. Li believes that extra effort on the school to support student socializing would be needed after a ban. “I don’t want there to just be a phone ban, and call it a day. I think that’s lazy. I think we need structures for socialization,” Li proposed. “If we were to get rid of cell phones, the next step is helping students have conversations, or creating a space for students to come together [and engage in] common interests, like a small club [or games] in the middle of the day.” Although they would be unable to communicate through messaging apps, students would be able to use homeroom or their free periods for face-to-face interactions, forming lasting relationships.

Whether due to such safety concerns or the need to do homework, some believe that it may be difficult to enforce the ban. According to Stuyvesant’s current phone policy, students are expected to resist the temptation to check their phones when in the hallways. This policy is meant to discourage students from bumping into peers and walls alike, though it is rarely enforced and often ignored. “I don’t understand why they would want to [implement this ban], because it’s not really going to do anything. It’s just going to make kids find ways to sneak their cell phone in, rather than be open about their usage,” junior Sarah Zhang stated.

In a similar sentiment, some teachers realize that it’s almost impossible to ban the use of technology without opposition. Even if the ban is possible, it would be even harder to determine which devices should be banned, and which should stay. “Some people are going to try to figure out a new thing to grab onto. You're going to see a lot more laptops. How do you enforce [a laptop ban]?” Li asked. “That creates an equity issue: those that can afford laptops versus those that can’t. So that’s the nuance we need to consider.” These questions have yet to be addressed, as the proposal is still in the works.

Like any new policy proposals, Governor Hochul’s plan to ban cellphones has been met with mixed reactions. Most recognize that many students are constantly on their phones, though teachers and students agree that this occurs mostly outside of the classroom. Even when technology is used inside the classroom, students are mostly productive, working on class assignments and studying with peers. Communication and safety concerns are common, which reflects the reality of school violence in today’s world. Though a cell phone ban will undoubtedly cause pushback, it may be just what students need to foster face-to-face interactions, especially if the school puts structures in place to promote socialization. For now, we can’t know for sure what the effects of the ban will be, if it even goes through. “Will it actually change behaviors and mentalities? Maybe. A lot of this is up in the air for me. I’m open to change. I’m flexible to change,” Li said. As more is known about this proposed ban and its effects, we as a community will have to adapt accordingly, as we have for every major educational shift. “Instead of just complaining about ‘do this’ or ‘do that,’ I want to see it happen. I want to be a part of it,” Li proclaimed.