Finding Balance: Teen Perspectives on Phone Policies in Schools

When it comes to crafting policies about smartphone use in schools, a refreshing approach has emerged from Seattle: asking the students themselves. The University of Washington’s Youth Advisory Board, comprised of about 20 teenagers from Seattle-area schools, recently released a thoughtful memo addressing this contentious issue. Unlike many top-down policies created by administrators, these recommendations reflect the nuanced understanding that teens have about their own technology use. “The whole point of the memo was to bring teen experiences into real policy conversations,” explained Jaden Hong, a sophomore at Eastlake High School who participated in the board. This approach acknowledges that effective policies must consider the perspectives of those most affected—the students themselves. The board’s work demonstrates that when given the opportunity, teens can contribute sophisticated, balanced insights that rival or even exceed adult-created regulations, particularly since they understand the realities of modern student life firsthand.

The recommendations developed by the Youth Advisory Board reflect a pragmatic middle ground rather than absolutist positions. Based on data from 4,400 students, teachers, and parents across Washington state schools, the teens crafted guidelines that acknowledge both the benefits and drawbacks of smartphone access during school hours. They suggest a compromise approach where phones are restricted during academic time but permitted during breaks and lunch periods—avoiding all-day bans that might create unnecessary tension. The students also emphasized the importance of language, recommending neutral terminology instead of polarizing words like “ban” or “phone free.” This subtle but significant shift in framing can help foster student buy-in rather than resistance. The board stressed that consistency is crucial; rules should apply school-wide rather than varying by teacher or classroom, which can create confusion and resentment. Perhaps most importantly, they recognized that diverse student needs—including medical requirements and family responsibilities—necessitate some flexibility in how policies are implemented.

What makes these recommendations particularly valuable is that they’re rooted in research and diverse perspectives, not just personal preferences. The board’s work was informed by extensive research conducted by developmental psychologist Lucía Magis-Weinberg, who heads the International Adolescent Connection and Technology Laboratory at the University of Washington. The data revealed that teachers observed fewer classroom distractions, more social engagement, and reduced bullying when phone access was limited. Students themselves acknowledged that restrictions decreased cheating. However, the research also highlighted legitimate concerns about restricted communications during emergencies and the educational benefits phones can provide for students with specific learning needs. Abbie Huang, a board participant from Eastlake High School, found that examining the research expanded her perspective: “As a student, sometimes it’s hard to look outside of yourself… It was really cool to see other schools and the way they approached it, and just other people’s perspectives that I didn’t think about before.”

The policy landscape for smartphone use in schools varies widely across Washington state and beyond. While the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction allows districts to establish their own policies, approximately 75% of the state’s districts have already implemented some form of restriction—either banning phones during class time or throughout the entire school day. By comparison, Oregon has taken a more uniform approach by prohibiting phone use during school hours in all K-12 public schools statewide. Seattle Public Schools has not mandated a district-wide policy, though individual schools have taken action, with at least three middle schools banning phones completely and some high schools prohibiting their use during class time. This patchwork approach underscores the need for thoughtful, consistent guidelines that balance educational needs with realistic expectations about technology use. The UW researchers recognized the value of the Youth Advisory Board’s contributions, showcasing their memo at the Washington Educational Research Association conference in Tacoma.

Beyond phone policies, the board participants emphasized that student input is equally crucial for other pressing technology issues, particularly artificial intelligence and social media. Recent data from the Pew Research Center reveals the scale of these challenges: 64% of U.S. teens report having used an AI chatbot, with 31% doing so daily, while the vast majority engage with social media platforms (92% on YouTube and 68% on TikTok). These technologies present complex concerns regarding mental health, misinformation, privacy, and academic integrity. Sirjana Kaur, a senior board participant from Redmond High School, highlighted the disconnect in some current approaches, describing how her AP literature course forbids AI use and requires handwritten work, while the year-end AP test—which determines college credit—will be computer-based. “There’s definitely a lot of work to be done around AI regulations,” she noted. “I think there’s a balance that needs to be struck between avoiding AI, but also not making things even harder for students.”

The Youth Advisory Board’s approach to technology policies demonstrates a key insight that education leaders would be wise to embrace: effective school policies must balance structure with flexibility, prohibition with education, and authority with student agency. Their recommendations go beyond simple restrictions to address the whole educational environment, suggesting schools should actively foster social engagement during classes and provide structured activities outside academics. They advocate for digital wellness education that goes beyond basic technology literacy to help students develop healthy relationships with their devices. Rotem Landesman, a UW graduate student helping lead the Advisory Board, emphasized the critical importance of youth voices in these conversations: “I really want to highlight how important it is to get the youth voice in there,” especially as technology integration accelerates “at such a rapid pace.” This collaborative approach—bringing together research, student perspectives, and educational expertise—offers a promising model for addressing the complex technological challenges facing today’s schools. By treating students as partners rather than subjects of regulation, schools can develop policies that are not only more effective but also more readily embraced by the very population they aim to serve.