The Bell to Bell Ban isn't that Bad or In Defense of the Device Ban

The state of New York passed a law that banned the use of phones, laptops, and any internet-enabled devices in their entirety from the first bell to the last of our school day in May of this year. The law, championed by Governor Kathy Hochul, has been marketed as an effort to improve academic performance in public schools across the state, with the consensus being that this ban was a necessary step in removing distractions from the classroom. 

To many, it seems quite counterintuitive to move away from devices in favor of an analog, “inferior” approach to teaching and learning. Others view the implementation of such a “barbaric” policy as the result of adults in Albany not understanding the importance of electronics in the everyday lives and activities of high school students. However, the policy might be much more beneficial than a lot of Stuyvesant students are willing to admit.

When I first heard about what to expect from this coming school year, I could not wrap my head around being in school for eight hours a day without being able to check my phone. No more watching reels in the cafeteria or opening up the weather app when someone I don’t like walks by. For the first time since my middle school’s magnetically locked Yondr pouches, I would no longer have access to my phone, something that I relied on for nearly everything. However, as I discussed the new policies with my dad, a public high school teacher, I began to realize that this mandated time away from screens might be just what I needed.

A lot of the discontent with the radical policy that students had built up over the summer fizzled out when school started and everyone realized that it wasn’t actually that terrible to be off our phones for a few hours each day. No one walked out (though dozens threatened to), and despite the general consensus that the device ban sucked, nobody was keen to do anything about it. Surprisingly enough, after the first day of school, no one seemed to mind that much that they couldn’t constantly be on their phones.

Obviously, the bell-to-bell ban won’t be as effective in its mission to improve academic environments if teachers aren’t willing to grant some leeway to students and make an effort to move away from tech-based teaching and homework in these next few weeks. However, many teachers likely will, and if that can happen, then this phone ban becomes not a backward policy but a reversion to a tried and tested method of teaching. According to a 2024 study done by the Norwegian Institute of Science and Tech, writing things down (both for notes and homework) leaves you with a much higher chance of retaining the information compared to typing. This ban will most likely push educators towards implementing more non-digital work into classwork and homework assignments while avoiding online resources such as Deltamath and VHL, which would still allow students to complete assignments during school hours without any electronics. This would mean establishing a workspace more compatible with the device ban, which would have the added benefit of encouraging more effective paper-based learning techniques.

Yes, the phone ban will force many people to adjust study habits or complete homework assignments before the school day starts, but people who want to learn will be able to adapt easily and do so just as effectively without a phone to aid them during school hours. What many people in favor of removing the device ban fail to mention is the overwhelming amount of time that students spend on their phones. The average Gen Z student spends more than six hours a day on their phone, with more than 50 percent of them acknowledging that they feel addicted to their devices. In this technologically advanced world, humans (particularly teenagers like us) have become so dependent on electronic devices and constant digital stimulation that even a school day without them seems unfathomable. 

On the first day of school, in lieu of being able to check my stock portfolio or push trophies on Clash during my free periods, I folded 100 paper cranes, a zen and incredibly rewarding activity. I would not have picked up origami over the summer if it wasn’t for my parent’s harsh rules regarding my phone usage, and I doubt I would have continued it if I could be on my phone at school, jumping to check notifications every minute. Lots of people say that they wish they were off their phones more, so perhaps a drastic change like this one is exactly what is needed.

However, not every aspect of the device ban is necessary in fostering a more engaged learning environment. Many students rely on computers and iPads to complete homework. For quite a few people, there might be distractions or other obligations that make it difficult to do assignments at home, so having the extra time during frees makes the difference between consistently on-time and consistently late work. Many people that I’ve talked to about this device ban are warming up to spending some time without our phones, but they lament being unable to use computers to do actual schoolwork.

Ideally, a device ban that allows students to use their computers for academic purposes would be an effective middle ground that keeps students off of their phones while giving them the option to get work done. However, Stuyvesant has given students a few options, such as allowing us to use phones off-campus and offering the library for computer usage, opening up options to those who can’t do all of their work at home. This policy does not have to be as disruptive as it is now, and with time will come more accommodations to ease the transition while staying true to the core principles of the policy. The change in attitudes towards the device ban aren’t going to come quickly; it will be a long process of students realizing the benefits of the policy. However, this ban will ultimately be a net positive for our school and all of its students.