An editorial is an article that reflects the opinion of the Wildcat Chronicle’s staff, offering analysis and commentary on a current issue affecting the school or larger community. Unlike news stories, editorials aim to persuade or influence readers’ perspectives.
Last school year, phone pouches were hung in almost every classroom, but they often sat empty. This fall, the policy was tightened: students must place their devices in a numbered pocket or lockbox, with consequences for noncompliance. While the intent is clear, the execution has raised concerns.
As reported by the Chronicle previously, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker proposed legislation last spring that would have banned cellphones during class time in schools statewide. Although the measure failed to pass before the end of the spring legislative session, many districts — including ours — moved forward with anti-phone policies of their own.
Last school year, phone pouches were hung in almost every classroom, but they often sat empty. This fall, the policy was tightened: students must place their devices in a numbered pocket or lockbox, with consequences for noncompliance. While the intent is clear, the execution has raised concerns.
Safety/Health Concerns
Positive effects aside, safety should be part of the conversation. Gun violence in schools, while rare, is an ongoing issue in the United States. Students worry that being separated from their phones during an emergency could make it harder to contact family or call for help if locked outside a classroom.
Executive Director of Operations and Safety Dave Pater acknowledged those anxieties.
“We just got to be fluid,” Pater said. “There’s no right answer for any of this stuff, and I think that’s what increases everyone’s anxiety, because then they go through all the bad things that can happen in their head. And I’m guilty of it too, and the point is that we have to make the best decision for us based upon all the variables that we have, and that’s troubling.”
Health concerns are another issue. More than 40% of school-aged children live with a chronic health condition.
Phones often serve as health tools, whether for monitoring glucose levels or managing stress. While District 94 allows students with diabetes to keep their phones for medical monitoring, other 504 accommodations — such as those for ADHD — are not covered. For students with different health needs, the restrictions can feel unnecessarily rigid and add to anxiety.
Principal Limaris Pueyo said the school has systems in place for emergencies.
“Even though your cell phone is put away, if you do need to communicate outside, we have the nurse and different offices that can help facilitate that communication,” she said.
Student focus
We agree that banning phone usage in the classroom has benefits. Studies have shown that students perform better without phones in their possession. Removing the most obvious distraction forces us to pay attention, and research shows students perform better when phones are out of reach.
It must be stated, however, that for some students, phones are also tools for focus.
“Personally, I think in study hall [the ban on phones] can be useful because I get more done. But it makes it a lot harder to listen to music, which people like to do when they study,” senior Jessie Myers said.
Many of us agree. Phones can be a distraction, but they can also help us focus. Listening to music, using calendars, recording interviews, or checking group chats are all legitimate tools that Chromebooks do not always replace.
To us, the new phone policy serves as an experiment: as the school year continues, we will track whether student participation and overall engagement increase or stay relatively the same. The Chronicle hopes to see a positive spike in student contributions to the classroom, but we are not so convinced that phones are the entire problem.
When to draw the line
The strictest flaws in the policy show up in spaces where students are not earning credit: den, study hall, the LRC during lunch. Should phones really be banned in those settings?
“I didn’t care until gym, when we’re not doing anything [and] God forbid I want to listen to music,” junior Jayden Morales said.
Allowing limited, responsible phone use in noncredit periods could balance focus with flexibility. Students who are passing all classes should be trusted with that privilege. Those failing classes could still be restricted.
Our call
We support the idea of reducing distractions during instructional time. But the current system does not account for school-wide emergencies, additional health needs, or legitimate academic uses. The policy would be stronger if it allowed exceptions during uncredited classes and recognized the ways phones can support learning.
A phone ban is not a bad idea. But if District 94 truly wants the policy to succeed, it should adjust the rules to address safety and health concerns and give students more autonomy in study hall, den, and the LRC. Only then can “bell-to-bell, no cell” live up to its promise.
