GOMEZ & GUITERREZ | CLMI
CREATING A DISTRACTION-FREE ZONE: A LOOK INTO SCHOOL CELL PHONE BANS
VANESSA GOMEZ | CLMI
In an age where the internet plays a pivotal role in our daily lives, ubiqitously integrated in our schools, jobs, and personal life, it's no secret that the internet and smart devices are this current generation’s main source of socialization and entertainment (it was a bit like that during the last generation). While the public has mixed opinions on children/teens and social media, many argue that phones and other devices have negatively impacted the way students live their academic and social life. However, when does it get to a point where districts feel the need to completely ban all smart devices during school hours? Looking to replicate the first such ban in Southern Australia - implemented in 2020 - a number of school districts in the U.S. also want to find an answer to that question.
How Does The Policy Work?
The second largest school district in the country, the Los Angeles Unified School District, began their Use of Cellular Telephones and Other Electronic Devices by Students policy. This policy essentially states that students are not permitted to use cell phones (or any other electronic devices such as smartwatches) while on campus starting from the beginning of the school day until the last bell. This means the policy is still active during intervals where class is not in session, such as passing periods, breaks, lunch, and on-campus school activities. Although these rules are strict and most of the time non-negotiable, various exceptions to this policy can be made by the school administrator for reasons such as medical need issues of a student, general emergencies, or circumstances approved by the teacher.
Eight states have adopted similar bans …
While it is up to each individual school/class to determine how they would like to withdraw the devices, the options range from teachers requiring students to place their devices in special class lockers or pouches, to simply letting students store them in their own backpacks, purses, or pockets as long as they remain “off”. Overall, students are still permitted to possess devices, but the primary idea is to have them completely out of sight during the school hours mentioned, creating a distraction-free environment. If a school staff member happens to discover these devices on premises or in a classroom, they are required to confiscate them until a parent or legal guardian restores it.
Some additional guidelines to this policy include students and parents being aware that the district is not responsible for students lost or stolen devices or confiscation of such by staff members at any point of the day are permitted. The school site’s policies are subject to change or become stricter at any time, informing the parents or legal guardians before they take action.
The Benefits of No Devices in Class
Studies show that having devices in class is ultimately impacting students much more negatively than it would positively. As non-profit ExcelinEd studies show …
The presence of cell phones in classrooms disrupts the learning process, as evidenced by declining test scores and increasing reports of classroom distractions, with low-income students often the most affected.
Teachers overwhelmingly express concerns about the negative impact of cell phones on student attention and students’ social-emotional development and mental health
The data on declining performance is pretty clear cut. According to the California Learning Resource Network, students having access to their devices during school hours decreases focus, attention span, and academic integrity. Most experts, meanwhile, argue this can lead to digital addiction and creates a culture of dependency …
Examples of this can be students failing academic performance due to lack of focus or cheating on their homework or tests and getting sidetracked with social media (and, later, heavy use of artificial intelligence applications such as ChatGPT to make up for the shortfall). The repercussions of this can include students also falling behind in secondary education, as well. Beyond college, the ramifications of this could be destructive beyond repair.
Criticisms and Controversies
All new proposals come with positive feedback and criticisms, and those affected by this policy such as students, parents, and school staff have been vocal about all of it. Parents have expressed their concern about not being able to reach their student in case of an emergency, as well as teachers stating they don’t want to have the responsibility of taking away their students’ phones. Students themselves express how they use social media throughout their school days to communicate with friends and even create memories of their time in high school.
Yet, many remain curious to see how cell phone bans will unfold and whether it will produce meaningful results. In South Australia, at least according to the Education Department, student behavior and performance improved significantly.
93% of leaders and 79% of teachers reported a decrease in staff time spent following up issues with phones/social media.
83% of leaders and 75% of teachers reported more positive break-time activities.
76% of leaders and 70% of teachers reported increased focus and engagement during learning time.
75% of leaders and 64% of teachers reported a lower frequency of critical incidents involving devices happening at school.
Should the LAUSD experiment and others prove successful, could this be the start of more U.S. districts being influenced and implementing similar policies? While some remain skeptical, others are hopeful that it will lead to positive outcomes for students’ social life, academic performance, and future success.
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION POLICIES ON LGBTQ+ RIGHTS
ALLANA GUITERREZ | CLMI
Overview
There is a complex relationship happening between political leadership, social media, and LGBTQ+ rights. Considering the power of digital platforms, coupled with the challenge of reinforcing policy decisions, there is an ongoing struggle for equality in the digital age.
This then brings into full view the current Trump administration’s aggressive policies on LGBTQ+ rights. These have been viewed with concern and generally regressive by LGBTQ+ advocacy groups, with a focus on limiting protections and upholding religious exemptions that most likely could lead to discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals.
As Trump himself stated …
The only genders recognized by the untied states government are male and female; and they are assigned at birth.
The administration is now heavily focused on ending what is sees as government policy attempting to “socially engineer race and gender into every aspect of public and private life.” On January 20, 2025, President Donald trump signed an executive order titled "Defending Women Form Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal government." This order mandates that federal agencies recognize only two sexes, male and female determined at birth, and prohibits the promotion of "gender ideology."
What Are LGBTQ+ RIghts?
LBBTQ+ rights encompass the legal and social rights of individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and others. The fight for those rights gained momentum in the 1960s, particularly after the Stonewall uprising in 1969, which became a catalyst for the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement. In contrast to the United States at the moment, many countries have made or continue to make significant strides in recognizing LGBTQ+ rights. For instance, as of 2023, same-sex marriage is legal in over 30 counties, including (still) the United States, Canada, and many European nations.
In many places, laws have been enacted to protect LGBTQ+ individuals from discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations. However, it’s important to consider that these protections are not universal, and gaps still exist. Transgender individuals, especially, often face unique challenges, including access to healthcare and legal recognition of their gender identity. During the 2024 election, presidential campaigns passionately debated both sides of the debate on transgender rights, with some political analysts concluding that Donald Trump’s last-minute political advertising push against transgender individuals - associating them with Democratic nominee Kamala Harris - may have tilted voter support his way. As Vox reported …
A recent ABC News report found that nearly a third of recent campaign funds — or $21 million, according to the report — for television advertising has been spent on anti-trans messaging from the Trump campaign and various conservative political groups. The independent journalist collective the Bulwark pushed the total even higher — to $40 million poured into anti-trans advertising within the last five weeks.
This advertising looked to capitalize on recent polling which hinted at growing discontent towards transgender individuals …
Advocacy for transgender rights still continues being increasingly prominent. While progress has been made in some regions, many countries still criminalize homosexuality, leading to severe penalties and human rights abuses against LGBTQ+ individuals.
Proposed Equality Act legislation aims to amend the Civil Rights Act to include protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in various areas, including employment, housing, and public accommodations. It has been introduced multiple times but has not yet passed. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr, Hate Crimes Prevention Act, passed in 2009, expanded federal hate crime laws to include crimes motivated by sexual orientation and gender identity, providing better protection for LGBTQ+ individuals. Meanwhile, many states have laws that either allow prohibit LGBTQ+ individuals and couples from adopting or fostering children. On the flipside, states have made strides to ensure that LGBTQ individuals can adpot without discrimination. Healthcare access policies around healthcare have evolved to include protections for LGBTQ+ individuals, ensuring access to necessary medical services, including hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgeries. However, access can still vary based on state laws, including private insurance and state employee benefits ...
Meanwhile, some state have enacted laws to protect LGBTQ+ students from bullying and discrimination in schools. Additionally, policies promoting inclusive curricula that represent LGBTQ+ history and issues are gaining traction in some areas. Still, just as the administration did in 2017, Trump announced a ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, a policy that faced legal challenges and widespread debate. The new administration is more aggressive in its second term on this issue than it was during its second. For example, the Department of Health and Human services, under Trump’s directive, seeks to define gender strictly based on sex assigned at birth, effectively excluding the recognition of transgender and non-binary identities.
Social media plays an outsized role in this. Trump utilized platforms like X to announce and justify policy decisions, reaching millions instantly and bypassing traditional media filters. Conversely, advocay organization leveraged social media to organize protests, disseminate information, and rally support for LGBTQ+ rights, countering policy changes. Social media is then fast evolving into a frontline, as well as a breeding ground for both misinformation and disinformation, all the while leading to increased polarization on issues related to gender and sexuality.
VANESSA GOMEZ & ALLANA GUITERREZ are both Fellows at the Civic Literacy and Media Influence Institute at Learn4Life.