When schools re-opened across America, social media became flooded with students’ complaints about new phone policies. The most passionate reactions came from students whose schools had never monitored phones so heavily, beyond the previous restriction of phone usage during lessons. The policing of phones isn’t new, but the latest method has sparked outrage: phone pouches. These pouches differ with some students zipping their phones into connected pouches that hang off a wall, while others slip them into modernized sacs with lock systems.
Yondr, a magnetic pouch with automatic locks that open when tapped onto an unlocking base, has become an infamous name among students. Whole school districts, from the Thorndale Independent School District in central Texas to the Greece Central School District in New York State, have recently adopted this technology. Some individual schools, such as Springfield Central High School in Massachusetts, have taken similar measures. School officials have cited research correlating increased phone usage with poor academic performance, cyberbullying and mental health issues to justify these policies.
Nonetheless, criticism against these policies persists. Among the many comments on posts that scrutinize this stricter wave of phone policing, one widespread discussion was the risk of phone theft. These suspicions were confirmed by students who have used these pouches before, such as Harrison High School student Jayden StClair who stated, “I have had my phone stolen because of this.” Other students chimed in to share similar experiences with @lightcicle specifically adding that security sometimes had to stop lessons to find stolen phones. Such instances led many to point out how these policies still lead to classroom disruptions.
Others commented that students’ safety would also be compromised. In case of an emergency, particularly if a student was isolated, how would they contact a trusted adult or loved one? Or what if they get an “emergency call about a loved one going to the hospital,” as noted by one commentator? How does this impact low-income students whose parents can’t afford to buy them a phone? Or anyone else who doesn’t have a phone for whatever reason? As these questions bounced around, individuals like @jadenpham4 provided an answer. They detailed how a student got “bullied for not having a phone” after a teacher pointed out their empty pouch.
Other commentators described the disciplinary consequences they were subjected to when they truly didn’t have a phone, but their teachers didn’t believe them. For those who did have a phone and resisted these policies, commentators like @nathan.w_06 described how the arguments between those students and teachers escalated until school resource officers had to come in and suspensions were enforced. This is not to mention how many commentators referenced students’ constitutional right to private property to justify their criticism of these “invasive” policies.
Nearly equal to the volume of these arguments were proposed methods of resistance, especially by students with more experience with such policies. Handing in a burner phone, old phone, phone case, or calculator was the main tip, followed by pretending you don’t have a phone. Although some commentators noted that such resistance wasn’t necessary for them because their teacher didn’t even implement these policies, others explained that their teacher gave extra credit to students who locked their phones away. Pouches were even used to track attendance, so whoever had an empty pouch would be marked absent.
Teachers also took to social media to voice their opinions. Derek McElwee, a high school English teacher, described himself as “kind of pro-Yondr” because they led to “more engagement [from students].” Alex Perez, a teacher from Cleveland Central Catholic High School, confessed that using pouches was “really a debate for [him]” because “people do steal.” However, his experiences as a substitute teacher showed him that phones were a distraction for many students, so he ultimately decided to collect phones. However, Perez gives irreversible 0/5 scores to those he catches with a burner phone.
Despite all the criticism and consequences, it’s worth noting that even milder phone policies are making a presence, such as Montgomery County Public School District’s Personal Mobile Device policy. It remains to be seen how many schools stick with these policies.
Article written by Obse Abebe of Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School
Phot courtesy of Akiwen Ewimbi of Seneca Valley High School