14 Comments

Ryan, I agree with you that this should be more about classroom disruption and classroom management. Why is lunch not an appropriate time for cell phone use, was any information given as to why this rule was put forth as a possibility? When I was teaching years ago, cell phones were just becoming really popular. If a student had a phone out I would just take it and turn it into the office for the student to pick up at the end of the day. If they refused security was called and they were removed from the classroom and had a harsher penalty. Why is something like this not the norm in CISD? If this is really about mental health then net needs to be much wider than cell phones. If the district really cared about mental health the conversation needs to also include proper support for SPED students, actually recognizing disabilities in students and harsher penalties for bullying to just name a few. Thanks for being on the committee, I appreciate the time and effort you are putting into this committee.

Expand full comment

Had no idea you used to teach! I agree, the no phones at lunch thing was odd to me because if the requirement is that there are no phones at all, or within 20 minutes across ‘designated periods’, then that means they’ll likely get all the human interaction they need in classes throughout the day. Lunch time shouldn’t be a forced social event and is absolutely a time for you to take a break and zone out while you eat (maybe it’s just me though). Or if you want to socialize you can.

Thinking about over 20 years ago when I was in school, it was super easy for me to send or receive an important message through the front desk to my family. The idea that we must always be connected to our kids doesn’t make sense to me. If they’re never untethered from their parents, then they’ll never build the confidence of being on their own. Not saying there aren’t special needs for many kids who may need that, but overall if there’s an issue I’d expect the teacher or front desk to call me.

I know parents think about the worst, and they need that safety net. I just don’t think the trade off is balanced when you think about all the bad things that comes with having the internet in your pocket as a teen.

Expand full comment

Ryan, this summary is excellent. Thank you for providing insights for those of us who could not become members of the committee.

Expand full comment

I agree we need to assess the leadership of principals from the perspective ofnthe teachers. I conducted research on 222 Principals and Asst Principals in CISD concerning the top Administration as leaders. We need the Principals from the teachers perspective, I agree.

Expand full comment

There's a lot of things that can happen for which recording them provided answers as to what happened, having access means connection in times of emergency. And some people medically have a need like I know a kid who has serious diabetes who is supposed to have his phone directly on him but he doesn't bc he wants to be like everyone else. Having the phones in a phone caddy to be left alone most of the time, I think works. I really don't understand the seeming strong desire by people to control other people who really have no legitimate reason to control them. I am kind of on the side of freedom..

Expand full comment

On the Principals leading well issue, I would argue that parents need to work together to promote good principals and to get rid if less good ones. Same with teachers who teach bad things or don't teach enough subject matter. One way to have evidence of any behavior is to record it with what...cell phones.

Expand full comment

As far as disruption, I don't think teachers allow disruption of any kind and thise that do it is an issue of the teacher and less the ability of the teacher. There already exists at the schools sufficient cell policies for enforcement. Why not use a cell phone to reward getting work done? Please explain that one to me. Bear in mind a lot of teachers don't. But for thise who do and the children who benef>t from that...why would you prevent it?

Expand full comment

District technology rules ARE used to restrict students when it is deemed approriate.

Expand full comment

I agree we can't always trust the principals but thwy did admit the issue of enforcement and what I hear from my children, the Principals are mostly correct. This can be regarded as anedotal evidence which suggests that cell phone use is mostly limited at schools except for some teachers who allow it for free time. Some few newer teachers are learning to be consistent with the others in enforcement of the rules. Principals are saying to what little extent that occurs, they are working on it.

Expand full comment

As far as the consistency argument. Let's examine that for a moment. Usually its good to have consistency. Sounds good. But let's start by asking who does it need to be consistent for? The answer to this question should determine the overall answer. If it is consistent for the kids who have to abide by the rule and consistent for those enforcing the rules - including teachers, and parents the rule only needs to be consistent within each school. Consistency is for an articulatable reason not for its own sake. At the school level it is so it can be enforced. At the district level it is for consistency. That's a circular argument or logical fallacy.

Expand full comment

Yes, I agree there is research indicating a correlation between social media use and declining mental health. But we need to understand what thst really means. It is nota causal relationship. Social media does not CAUSE declining mental health or at least that hasn't been demonstrated yet. What we have is a correlation. All that means is that a measurement has been taken of the operationally defined variable social media and another, let's say depression and it been found that when one varies, the other also varies.

So, as ice cream sales goes up, shark bites goes up. This is a real one btw. Does not mean eating an ice cream results in sharks biting you. The great thing about a correlation measure is that it provides the strength and direction of the relationship. For our example of ice cream and bites we'll say the strength is relatively weak and the direction is positive. Meaning they do vary together, when one one goes up the other goes up. Super strong relationship would be a perfect result they both go up exactly the same amount, but that is not the case here. With ice cream and bites ice cream goes up a lot and shark bites goes up some. The question becomes why? This is explained by the presence of a third variable summer or warm weather. When it gets hotter both people eat more ice cream AND more people go to the beach. Likewise it is not social media that causes say depression; rather it is a certain type of social media that results in depression. We know, in the research, now that "vaugebooking" is moderately to strongly correlated with suicidal ideation. This is bad. But crossing a road is going to be strongly correlated with getting ran over by a car, but it does not account for all the times a person needed to cross the road and didn't get run over. Banning cell phones is like never letting a kid cross a road. Of course there is danger and limitations according to ability and trust help determine how much looser those limitations are.

Expand full comment

Thank you for putting this together. I am a parent on the committee. SHAC is full of it. There does not appear to be a link between cell phone use and mental health at school nor can be demonstrated any link between the recommended policies and any health issue. What I understand to be the case is that there is a concern for Tic Tok fight pages and sexting but there has been no evidence yet presented to indicate that the is a serious problem in CISD schools and to the extend it exists is very limited and if so how does this justify a total ban on cell phones? At this stage, the current policies simply need to be enforced and this is capably handled by the principals. ALL of the principals before the committee tonight indicated that all is well at their schools heavily implying that no new policy is needed. Several parents in the group tonight, to include myself, intend to vote no to any new policy unless a need for them can be demonstrated, which so far it has not been. Those pushing for it, namely, Trustee Odenweller and Chair of SHAC Speer, bear the burden of proof that a new policy is needed. So far they have failed to demonstrate to thinking parents that this is the case. On the other side of things, it probably is important that children not have phones during most of the class time and that they should have ready access to them should they be needed to record for evidence something wrong going on at school or for emergencies and before, after, and at lunch to communicate with parents. Also, some lonely kids at lunch find comfort in them unless the school will provide projects through which they can connect with others. Therefore, I would recommend only to ask students to put their phones into a phone caddy during class period in such a way that everyone can see a person accessing them and to be placed in such a way that all students can readily access them if needed. This overall effort to simply control all students should get a big NO. Possibly a rule at the school level for gross violators that use them to cheat on work, or do direct and calculable harm to temporarily remove them and to work with those children's parents to find a suitable solution to the behavior.

Expand full comment

I do believe there is good research that shows correlation between social media use and declining mental health, especially as it relates to children (and adults). I’ve been collecting much of it in the link below. But I suppose the question is now does the medium for which they use social media, namely cell phones, impact their mental health WHILE at school. I see that answer as more nuanced, as all the school principals reported that the social media issues occur mostly outside the school and then it comes in, similar to any other problem like children who may experience depression, abuse, homelessness, or countless other issues.

My skepticism with what the principals reported is that I didn’t expect them to just come out and say, “we have major issues with cell phones.” They all have policies, although some are more well defined enforced than others. For example, both York and Knox had rampant issues with cell phones before their new principals came in and cleaned house. To me that says we need a district guideline just for consistency and for cases where you do not have strong local admins who can’t make good policy. The suggested guidelines still give the freedom to local Foundations teams to loosen or restrict cell phones during certain times, but at a minimum it sets consistency for all schools that local admin can point to when parents are upset their kid’s phones got taken up.

For me, I see this as less about mental health and more about keeping classroom disruption to a minimum. Give admin and teachers these guidelines, which would be Board implemented, so they have the authority to take up phones no matter which school they’re at. The one guideline I do believe is much needed is to not allow cell phone use to be used as a reward to complete work in class.

It really all comes down to enforcement, and as I mentioned during the meeting, not all admin are created equal. As the husband of a teacher, who she had the joy of teaching kicked out of her by a principal, I have little faith in many principals to lead their campuses well. These guidelines won’t mean jack if they don’t hold the line with students and parents on enforcement.

https://www.wehavequorum.net/p/cell-phone-committee-research-list

Expand full comment

I have reviewed the Surgeon General's Advisory and research and he agrees with me in every respect on the research.

Expand full comment