Editorial: I’m At a Payphone (’Cause My Phone’s in the Cubby)

Correction; In paragraph four, the number of teachers who were in support of instating a policy was incorrectly reported to be 60%. According to Dr. Majerus, the actual number is 73%. Please see her comment at the end of the story for more details.

On January 27, a new phone policy will be implemented at Uni. While the policy is yet to be put in place, there has already been backlash from both students and staff. 

After looking at the policy and asking teachers and administration about their opinions, we have come to our own opinions about the policy. The Gargoyle believes that although this policy has the best interest of the students at heart, it is too strict with the disallowing of phone use during brain breaks and study halls and requiring students to set their phones in cubbies at the start of class. We believe a more flexible policy should be set for the trial period. Students should be given the benefit of the doubt in a “one-and-done” system allowing students to keep their phones in the backpack until it is seen out. Once the student is caught using their phone during instructional time for unapproved uses, that is when it should go into the cubby until the end of class. 

The message behind the cell phone policy is that the policy is for students’ benefit and should not be seen as a punishment. Despite this, students were not approached about the creation of a new policy nor could they give their input during its development period. With the cell phone policy first being announced on Dec. 16, and its final version being put out a little over a month later, we believe that due to the abruptness of the policy it should go under more trial and consideration before being implemented. 

Uni faculty opinions on the cell phone policy are divided. According to Uni Director Elizabeth Majerus, faculty voted to have the cell phone policy passed with a slim margin — 60%. Gargoyle staff interviewed several teachers, and although four out of the eleven teachers we asked declined to comment on the record, the ones who did had varying opinions on the strictness of the policy even if they supported it. It is nigh impossible to enforce a policy when the ones who are enforcing it don’t believe in it in the first place. Students cannot be expected to have faith in this policy if not all those who are enforcing it support it.

It is important to note that our world is changing swiftly, and scientific studies are just starting to catch up. The debate on cell phone use is nuanced, and researchers argue that while it can have adverse effects, it is also not entirely devoid of positive effects. A study by researchers Bekalu, McCloud, and Viswanath points out the social benefits of phones. Phones can help build larger and more involved social networks, which leads to better mental and physical health as people build support systems. A common refrain of those supporting the policies is that disconnecting from phones can develop better relationships with your peers. Still, that sentiment disregards the large amount of communication that happens in our daily lives over the internet, even with people we see in-person on a regular basis. 

Ultimately, we believe that the cell phone policy should be less restrictive and suggest that only when a phone is a distraction to a student should it be put into the phone boxes with request by a teacher. With this system instead of all students having to put their phones up, only those who are struggling or feel like they want to have their phones out of reach will have them in the box. By implementing this, it allows students to get in and out of classes quicker as well as allowing students to still have control of their possessions even with the policy remaining in place.