By Melissa Wentarmini
Associate Editor
On a typical school day between classes, the hallway outside the main office at Superior Central School swells with middle and high schoolers. For most, the passing time between classes is an opportunity to check messages, scroll social feeds or snap quick selfies, getting a brief dopamine hit before heading into class.
But Superintendent Bill Valima has spent the last year watching this ritual with increasing concern.
“They don’t even realize there are 100 other kids around them,” Valima said. “They’re just locked in. I just want kids to talk to each other and not be on their phones all the time.”
That desire is part of what led Superior Central Schools to introduce a proposed phone-free policy, unveiled at the July 21 school board meeting and scheduled for a final vote later this month.
If adopted, the policy will require students to deposit their phones each morning in a secure locker inside their last-hour classroom and retrieve them only at day’s end. The plan applies to Grades 6 through 12 and aims to foster greater academic focus, social interaction and student well-being without completely banning phones.
“We don’t want to use the word ‘ban.’ That’s a negative connotation,” Valima said. “We’re using ‘phone-free school.’ That’s how we’re promoting it, as something that’s going to be good for students and parents.”
‘The Anxious Generation’
The idea gained momentum after the school’s administrative team read Jonathan Haidt’s book “The Anxious Generation” and began discussing its implications for local students. The book draws connections between a spike in adolescent mental health issues and the proliferation of smartphones and social media.
“After we were introduced to the book and discussed it as a staff, it just felt like — this is our kids now,” Valima said. “They’re never really alone. They never get a break. Everything they do is recorded, shared, judged.”
According to Valima, teachers have long reported attention struggles in class, and students themselves are often unable to disconnect.
“Trying to hold a kid’s attention when they’re waiting for the next notification is nearly impossible,” he said. “And it’s not just them — it’s all of us. We’re wired that way now.”
Research supports the idea that phones play a large role in students’ daily lives. A 2023 study by the nonprofit Common Sense Media found adolescents receive a median of 237 smartphone notifications daily, with about a quarter arriving during school hours.
A recent 14-country report by UNESCO offered even starker findings. The report, which prompted a Washington Post editorial titled “Schools should ban smartphones. Parents should help,” emphasized the brain’s vulnerability to even brief distractions.
According to the study, while it might take a student only 10 seconds to respond to a text message from a parent, it could take their brain 20 minutes to fully refocus on the academic task in front of them.
UNESCO researchers recommended phone bans in schools for all age groups, citing improved academic performance and reduced bullying in countries that have implemented restrictions.
Student views: concern, skepticism and caution
While the school board has received little public pushback so far, not all students are convinced.
“I acknowledge the potential benefits of limiting phone use during class time to improve focus and engagement,” senior Kylee Purdy said. “But I’m concerned about the implications for student safety. Immediate communication with parents or guardians can be crucial in emergencies.”
Senior Joseph Augustyn expressed strong opposition.
“Most kids use their phones as an escape,” he said. “Taking that away won’t solve anything — and might even make anxiety worse. Maybe students will talk to each other more, but that’s not always what students really want to do. Stripping that choice away won’t make anyone happier.”
Junior William Spranger said the problem isn’t phones — it’s inconsistency.
“Last year’s policy would have worked if teachers enforced it,” Spranger said. “In Ms. Waring’s class, nobody was on their phone because she watched for signs and followed through. If a teacher is concerned about distractions, just call on the kid who’s been looking into their lap for 10 minutes. That’s how you handle it — case by case.”
Hannah Theodore, also a senior, shared a more nuanced view.
“Yes, phones can be distracting, but that really depends on the student,” she said. “Some of us use our phones to focus better, like listening to music, or to check in with divorced parents about pickup plans. Others use them to connect with friends or look something up.”
She noted that the impact of a phone-free day will likely vary.
“It might foster more face-to-face conversation at lunch, but I don’t think it will change much during passing periods,” she said. “Most of us are focused on getting to our lockers and class.”
Theodore added that nearly all her teachers tried phone-free classrooms last year, with mixed results. In classes where students stayed busy, phones weren’t an issue. In others, where free time was common, phones filled the gap.
Each student highlighted a recurring theme: Enforcement matters. Valima acknowledged this concern and said that a clear, consistent, schoolwide approach could help alleviate confusion between classrooms.
National and state context
Superior Central’s proposed policy reflects a growing national trend. At least 13 states have now passed laws or issued guidance encouraging schools to restrict or prohibit student phone use, according to Education Week.
Michigan came close to joining them. In July, House Bill 4141, which would have required all districts to adopt a cell phone policy, failed despite initial bipartisan support.
The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Mark Tisdel (R-Rochester), would have prohibited cell phone use in schools during instructional hours only. The measure initially gained bipartisan support and had even been floated by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in her 2025 State of the State address, signaling statewide interest in restricting student phone use.
In her speech, Whitmer acknowledged that while phones keep families connected, they also pose significant classroom challenges. But the bill was defeated in the Michigan House in July by a 53-43 margin, with nearly every House Democrat voting against it. Lawmakers cited confusing language and implementation concerns.
Tisdel told the Michigan Advance he plans to rewrite and reintroduce the bill with stricter bell-to-bell language modeled after New York’s pending phone ban, which mandates distraction-free school days across all public schools.
Supporters of the bill cited national data showing that excessive phone use was contributing to academic underperformance and mental health declines. Critics expressed concern over local control and enforcement burdens.
Among those disappointed by the bill’s failure was State Superintendent Michael Rice, who had urged lawmakers to pass the legislation, citing “rampant distraction” in Michigan classrooms.
Valima had been watching that bill closely.
“I was surprised it didn’t pass. It could’ve given more teeth to what we’re doing,” he said. “But honestly, we’re moving ahead either way. Our community supports this.”
According to a February 2025 survey by the National Parents Union, the No. 1 reason parents say they want their child to have a phone at school is to communicate during an emergency.
But safety experts warn that unrestricted phone use during an active threat can cause more harm than good.
“If you have 20 kids in a classroom texting, calling, livestreaming, they’re not paying attention to adult instructions,” said Ken Trump, president of National School Safety and Security Services, in a 2024 interview. “You have seconds to follow directions and move.”
Trump and others point out that phones can also draw unwanted attention, jam emergency communication networks, or cause traffic blockages when panicked parents rush to the scene. In this regard, Valima agrees.
“Law enforcement has told us they do not want kids on their phones in an emergency,” he said. “The priority needs to be following adult instructions, not texting out of fear.”
That sentiment was echoed by Joseph Pacheco, a retired Michigan State Police trooper and certified ALICE training instructor. Pacheco said that while he empathizes with parents who want peace of mind, phones often interfere with emergency response training.
“In the 1% of 1% of 1% chance that something like an active shooter event happens, yes, it’s understandable to want to reach your child,” he said. “But from a tactical standpoint, phones can be a dangerous distraction. If a student is texting or answering a call instead of listening to directions, that hesitation could cost lives.”
Pacheco added that misinformation on social media during an unfolding event can also escalate confusion and that sharing location-tagged content could unintentionally reveal where students are hiding.
“We need to get school back to school, and the worry and the parenting back to the house,” he said.
Implementation and outlook
If passed at the August board meeting, the new policy would go into effect for the 2025-26 school year. Phones would be stored in designated, locked cabinets in each seventh-hour classroom. Students would drop them off each morning before the start of class and retrieve them after the final bell in their seventh-hour class.
Valima believes the change, while difficult at first, will ultimately benefit students — even if they don’t see it right away.
“It’s going to feel weird at first. I know that,” he said. “But I think a lot of kids will come to appreciate not having that constant pressure to respond, to perform, to keep up.”
Valima said the district will continue discussing the change at its upcoming open house and on social media. Additional community input is welcome.
“At the end of the day, we just want to help kids succeed,” Valima said. “And that means helping them be present — not just physically, but mentally and emotionally.”
A final vote on the policy is scheduled for Monday, Aug. 18. For details, visit superiorcentralschools.org.