It was around mid-February of the 2024-2025 school year when, in many of my classes, my teachers announced that the new phone policy would be implemented on March 3rd, 2025. I remember seeing mixed reactions, and I was skeptical about whether this would really make a difference.
HCPSS describes the purpose of the policy to “define expectations for individuals regarding the responsible use of technology, digital tools, and social media for HCPSS-sponsored programs.”, with a simple statement reading “Students will keep personal technology devices away and silenced and ensure they are not a distraction during the student day.”
The consequences for violation of the policy include action for a first and second incident. The first incident includes confiscation of the student’s devices until the end of the school day. The second incident is confiscation of the device until it is picked up by a parent/guardian.
When the policy was actually implemented in schools, those mixed reactions from before its implementation remained. Students participated in peaceful protests and walkouts all over the county. Teachers were very strict about the policy at first, with many of mine calling the front office or tally-marking students who were using their phones. A petition was made against it titled “Revoke the Ban on Phones in Howard County Schools”, which gained 3,000+ signatures, aiming to prove a point to the higher ups in Howard County.
Policy violations were highest in the first month according to HCPSS data, with over 2,500 infractions. However, that number dropped to 800 in April and continued to decrease until the end of the school year. These statistics show noticeable progress within the policy. However, these numbers only report violations that were observed.
Now, almost a year later, I find the phone policy incredibly weak despite how strictly it is supposed to be enforced. I find it weak because students simply disobey it by finding ways around it, becoming sneakier, and the differences in enforcement across each Howard County school.
When I’m in class, I see classmates with their phones out regardless of whether teachers are aware of it. It is incredibly easy for students to sneak their phones, even if they are simply choosing not to pay attention. Junior Keziah Mansoor says, “Many students discreetly keep their phones in their laps or use smartwatches to check notifications without being caught. Many also go to the bathrooms or take walks in the halls to use their phones.”
Strict enforcement of the policy becomes problematic when students get their phones taken and are unable to communicate. Teenagers need to be able to stay in contact with their families or other important people in their lives, especially while at school for seven hours. If I urgently need to contact someone, a teacher should not decide whether I can use my phone. I know it is rare for a teacher to deny such a request, but anything is possible.
Sophomore Henry McClay says the policy interferes with extracurricular activities. “Honestly, it’s kind of limited me from being filled in on my fall sports and coach updates. Each time I’m in class, I get notifications from my coaches with important announcements, but when I take my phone out to check, my teacher is already scolding me.”
I see the biggest issue of the phone policy as how Howard County schools enforce the policy differently from one another. This creates confusion, as nobody knows what the actual expectations are. If students are aware that the policy is enforced differently at other schools, it begins to feel less serious. Inconsistent enforcement across the county undermines the policy’s goal of limiting phone use in schools.
For teachers, managing the policy is a hassle in the classroom. They have to constantly walk around addressing student behavior, and now they must also worry about whether students have their phones out. Teachers only have two eyes, and they can’t monitor all 10 or more students in a class at all times to check for phone use.
Social Studies teacher Mr. Press shows love for the phone policy and the authority it gives, “Before, you would have to try to convince a student, using facts and logic, to be off their phones. But now we have the rod of correction, which is the phone call down to the office to really enforce the policy.”
To me this doesn’t feel like progress, it feels like control and punishment. Students who do disobey the policy are not having fear invoked into them to stop, it’s just improving how and when they hide their phones to avoid detection and then the following consequences.
Jabria Jackson, a student at Long Reach High School, believes teachers treat the policy as a weapon. “They say the policy is for the benefit of the students and focused on education, but they use it as a ‘gotcha’ technique.” This implies that some teachers may use the policy more as a form of punishment than as a way to motivate students to stay focused. Phones may be taken if they are visible, even if the student is not using them. In some cases, phones may be taken during non-class times, such as transitions, or enforcement may target certain students while others are ignored.
Mikayla Washington, a student at Atholton High School, says phones are collected like loose change. “It’s annoying, especially because we can’t have them at lunch. Including AirPods and headphones in the policy is stupid, but nobody really cares. I see lots of people with their phones and AirPods in the hallways. I’m sure teachers know—they just don’t say anything.”
Overall, the phone policy is still active but fails to meet its intended purpose. While it unintentionally limits communication creating its harsh aspect, its fragility is revealed when students continue to break the rules and schools across the county enforce it inconsistently. For these reasons, Howard County’s phone policy cannot be considered truly effective so far for me.
Improving the phone policy should start with ensuring that enforcement actually makes a difference. Howard County should reconsider this policy by balancing enforcement with student’s need for communication so that it becomes fair, effective, and practical rather than weak in execution.
