By: Marinda von Bismarck
3/21/25

The updated phone policy for the upper school has received intense criticism since the year began. Some are asking: was a change necessary at all? 

Students expressed a sense of losing control after the new phone policy was set into place. Lila, a sophomore at Field, said “I dislike that we have to put our phones in one big box because they might break.” Asia, a sophomore, recalled that “in 6th grade we didn’t have the phone policy, and at least for me it didn’t seem like that big of a distraction.” Orlando, another sophomore at Field, said, “We’re not given the chance to show responsibility.” 

Concerns were raised about the safety of students if they were left without phones. Students like Asia, Orlando, and Lila repeatedly voiced that they felt unsafe when they were not able to communicate with their family and friends when they were having an emergency. Asia stated that “it isn’t preparing us for college and other experiences in life where we will have full access to our phones.” 

Despite the criticism, there were a few students who agreed that the policy could break up some strong addictions the students at Field might have to their phones. Iris, a junior, said “it takes part of a distraction away from us.” Asia also said that “I can see why they might have added it to keep students focused, but it didn’t seem like the biggest issue at school.” 

Many students didn’t notice that cell phone use was a problem to begin with. Lila stated, “Some people may have been using their phones so I guess I can see why they made a change but most people weren’t and I didn’t think it was that big of a deal.” 

Some students felt as though there wasn’t a problem with phone usage and that they “were never addicted to their phone” said Orlando, who also wondered why there was a group punishment for something that seemed like such a small issue. Several students agree that a large punishment for a large group of people over a small issue will more likely turn people against each other rather than bring them together. Orlando said “I think instead of completely restricting kids phone usage, the school should teach us to limit our phone usage instead.” She also mentioned that “having all phone usage banned encourages kids to want to use their phone more, which is the opposite of what they’re trying to do anyway.” Another point made was that phones can be much more useful and convenient than computers in certain situations for assignments. Amwaj, a sophomore, said, “There are often references or academic purposes for my phone and it’s hard to access. It is also convenient to have my key card in my phone and a hassle to have to take it out of my phone case every time I want or need to go somewhere during class.” Iris said it was fair to mention that “it’s just kind of annoying to have to put it (your phone) there (the box) before every class.” 

 Lila thought that a possible explanation for the policy could be “because they don’t want people to use their phones at all during class, to make absolutely sure there was no phone use.” Amwaj stated that she “doesn’t think it’s necessary but I think it was added so that students engage with one another and are able to make the most out of their class time.” 

Last year, phones were collected with phone pouches on the wall. It was generally successful, but even when it wasn’t, most individuals didn’t seem to notice much phone usage in their classes. Students felt that the change was unnecessary, and were confused by its addition to the school. Orlando noticed that “some people could have been addicted to their phones, but it’s not fair that everyone was punished.” It’s important that the leaders of the school don’t over-do punishments and policy changes as it can be seen as pure hatred or boredom when too intense with little explanation.

In the email sent out to students at Field, there was little reasoning provided for the policy change beyond interacting with others, leaving students guessing as to the motivation behind the change. In fact, every student that was interviewed said they didn’t know of any confirmed context as to why the policy was implemented. Students that were interviewed hypothesized that the reason this was added to Field’s policies was because the teachers felt like a change was needed in order to engage the Field community.  Although, it is a general consensus from the students who were asked that eliminating phone usage will divide people through their disagreements on the policy rather than engaging them. 

If the idea is to unite the community, students have other ideas of what could be effective. Asia, Orlando, and Lila, suggested making more classes and events include middle and high schoolers, and promoting school-wide activities that encourage the Field community to work together (such as fighting for either the blue or gold team). Providing more instances where students can help each other, like peer tutoring, would be more effective in uniting Field’s community than trying to eliminate phones completely.