EVANSVILLE — The details that could make all the difference have not yet emerged in EVSC’s developing response to Indiana’s tough new bell-to-bell ban on cellphones in schools.
And that has left some teachers fearing that enforcing the new law — which bans wireless communication devices for the entire school day, not just classroom time — will be a giant headache if EVSC does not strictly decree that devices must be stored away and inaccessible in lockers.
EVSC does not currently demand that students put phones in inaccessible lockers to comply with a state law passed in 2024 that banned “any portable wireless device” from being used during instructional time, said one high school teacher who spoke on condition of anonymity.
That makes it easier for students to disregard the law, this teacher said — something they likely also will try to do in passing periods and during lunchtime after the tougher new law takes effect on July 1. The teacher said some students do obey the current law. But for many of the teenagers, a state statute has little meaning.
“(The device) could be in their pocket, it could be in their binder, some kids even stuff it down the front of their pants,” the teacher said.
This teacher said EVSC also should expect furious opposition from some parents, given that some have been vocal about the less strict requirement passed in 2024.
“Parents will say, ‘My kid’s not doing that,'” the teacher said. “I’ve had parents directly say, ‘You don’t pay my kid’s cell phone bill; you can’t tell my kid what to do with their cell phone.'”
Jennifer Smith-Margraf, president of the Indiana State Teachers Association, told WDRB Louisville in February that teachers and administrators wanted a stricter ban than the one passed in 2024.
“This wasn’t being well enforced across the state, and students were still using their cellphones all the time during instructional time,” Smith-Margraf said.
Officially, the new statute says students may not use wireless communication devices, which it defines as any portable, wireless device with the capability to provide voice messaging or other data communication between two or more parties, including cellphones, tablets, laptops, gaming devices and smart watches.
While the new law is careful to provide a broad definition of the devices banned, the conversation around it among teachers and school administrators has been almost exclusively about cellphones.
The prevailing standard currently observed by many EVSC teachers, said the one who spoke to the Courier & Press, is that “as long as I don’t see (a student’s device in the classroom), I believe you.”
The teacher has pockets hanging on a door in their classroom into which students can put their phones and other devices. But EVSC does not strictly require use of the pockets, the teacher said. The teacher simply operates with the expectation that cellphones won’t be visible in their classroom.
“I do have a select few students who legitimately do keep it in their locker, but I also have students who will lie and say that it’s in their locker, but it’s not,” the teacher said. “But I know that there are other teachers that don’t fight this. They don’t fight having the kids put their phones up every day because it is a fight. It is not easy to get (students) into the routine of putting their phone up every day.”
The teacher said EVSC must require phones and other devices be put in lockers — and find a way to strictly enforce the edict — or enforcement will be left to educators and administrators who would be outnumbered and overwhelmed.
“They’re going to have to do something,” the teacher said. “The lunch part is what’s going to be the hardest battle.
“It’s much easier to get away with having your phone at lunch because the space is huge in our cafeteria. And not only that, but they can just go to the bathroom too. They’re teenagers, and they’ll find creative loopholes.”
If EVSC does require students to put their devices into lockers, who’s going to make sure they actually do it?
“I guess teachers are, just because there’s more of us and we have a more direct line with students,” the teacher said. “We have not been given any parameters yet.”
EVSC sees compliance to the 2024 law
EVSC Chief of Staff Rick Cameron told the school board on May 18 that the corporation likely will require students to store their devices in “lockers or some other place” in lieu of its other option under the law — forbidding the devices from being brought to school altogether.
But EVSC has not yet made public a proposed policy that the corporation acknowledges doesn’t address the nitty-gritty details of what enforcement will look like in schools.
Cameron and EVSC spokesman Jason Woebkenberg said after the May 18 school board meeting that the proposed policy had been given to board members preliminarily and would be made public after the body’s June 8 meeting.
“I would say this: we’re not stipulating where (devices) have to be in the policy,” Cameron said.
The Courier & Press asked whether EVSC may allow students to put their devices in bookbags that could be brought into classrooms.
“Those are the specific details that we are in the process of discussing right now,” Woebkenberg replied. “This takes affect July 1, the law does. School obviously doesn’t start until August.
“So, clearly, as we move from one school year to the other, it’s those nitty-gritty details that we will be working through and then making sure that our students and families understand. The story’s not over yet. We’re in the midst of it right now.”
Woebkenberg has spoken not of student and parent defiance to the 2024 law governing instructional time only, but of compliance to it. He says EVSC students “have really handled it very well.”
Woebkenberg said students have told him that the law has made a positive impact on them.
“We’ve had several students, I have personally, that have said, ‘You know, we don’t feel like we’re interrupted. We don’t feel the pressure to check (phones) constantly. We’re not distracted from academics, from teaching. And we’re engaging in more conversations with our peers, with adults,'” the EVSC spokesman said.
EVSC, WCSC leaders ‘didn’t really see the need for this’
In fact, EVSC Superintendent Darla Hoover did not support the bill that passed the General Assembly creating the new, stricter devices ban, said Sen. Vaneta Becker.
Becker was one of 12 state senators who voted against Senate Enrolled Act 78 in a 36-12 roll call vote. Sen. Jim Tomes, who represents parts of Posey and Vanderburgh counties, voted in favor of it.
Becker, who represents parts of Vanderburgh and Warrick counties, said she called Hoover and Warrick County School Corp. (WCSC) Superintendent Abbie Redmon seeking their opinions about Senate Enrolled Act 78 before she voted on it.
“They both said that what we had done before (the law passed in 2024 that banned “any portable wireless device” from being used during instructional time) really worked,” Becker said. “They didn’t really see the need for this.”
Woebkenberg said Hoover wasn’t dead set against the new, tougher devices ban.
“(Hoover) said while she understands the value of not having (phones and other devices) in the cafeteria, her primary concern was the classroom instruction interruption, and that was already being addressed,” the EVSC spokesman said.
“So that is why her initial comment was, ‘I’m good where it’s at.’ But she certainly understands moving forward with it too.”
Redmon told the Courier & Press by email that WCSC has enjoyed success with the 2024 law, noting that the corporation “did NOT allow cell phones during passing periods either” in high schools.
“What we were doing was working so we did not see the need for expanded legislation to include the lunch periods, which is what Senator Becker’s comment is referencing,” Redmon wrote.
The EVSC teacher who spoke to the Courier & Press offered a possible reason for the opposition of top district administrators. Yes, building administrators could be drawn into larger roles enforcing an unpopular law and could have to deal with more discipline referrals as a result, this teacher said, but there’s more.
“I just fear that that relationship between students and teachers and parents and teachers going to be hurt as a result because we’re just trying to enforce the rules,” the teacher said. “But people don’t like this law, but there’s nothing we can do.
“We just want what’s best for the students — and unfortunately, what’s best for the students is to remove that distraction.”
‘A smart restriction on personal distractions’
Also among the minority of legislators who did not support Senate Enrolled Act 78 was Rep. Wendy McNamara, who in her day job is director of early college high school at EVSC. McNamara, whose district includes Posey County and part of Vanderburgh County, is out of the country, her spokesman said.
The House of Representatives voted in favor of Senate Enrolled Act 78 by a margin of 82-13, NcNamara being one of the 13. Rep. Matt Hostettler, whose district includes parts of Gibson, Knox and Vanderburgh counties, also voted no.
Rep. Tim O’Brien was foursquare in favor of the new, tougher devices ban signed into law by Gov. Mike Braun in March.
“The way I look at it is, it’s not a ban on technology,” said O’Brien, whose district includes portions of Vanderburgh and Warrick counties. “I think it’s a smart restriction on personal distractions during school hours.”
O’Brien said he had been stopped by a constituent on Wednesday, one who has two children in local schools.
“They said, ‘Thank you for doing that,'” he recalled. “They said, ‘I want my kids to go to school to learn. I’m trying to wean them off of all the screen time at home as well, and this kind of helps with that.'”
This article originally appeared on Evansville Courier & Press: EVSC’s emerging response to tough new devices ban awaits details
Reporting by Thomas B. Langhorne, Evansville Courier & Press / Evansville Courier & Press
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
