By Eliza PARTIKA

At the Nov. 4 meeting of the Glendale Unified School District (GUSD) board of education, board members discussed changes to the phone and artificial intelligence policies at district schools after requesting guidance from parents and the Glendale Teachers Association (GTA). 

The policy revisions incorporate recommended language from California School Boards Association, as suggested by the GTA in previous meetings, and has been updated to clarify language relating to searching students’ electronic devices. The changes reflect a new law – AB 3216, passed in 2024 – that requires the board to, by July 1, 2026, develop, adopt and update a policy to limit or prohibit student use of smartphones while at school or under the supervision of District employees. The GUSD policy would be reviewed every two years and updated every five years.

At the last board of education meeting, there was a request to have families, teachers and guardians review the document for their thoughts. 

The proposed policy language was shared with GUSD parents/ guardians in a survey that was sent to families and was shared with the GTA. A total of 631 parent and guardian responses were reviewed. 

Major themes, according to the GUSD board agenda for Nov 4, were strong support for a strict ban during instructional time, concerns about cellphone access for safety or during emergencies, the need to include smart watches and wearable technology as a banned mobile communications device, and the ability to enforce and differentiate policies for elementary, middle and high schools based on the development of students. 

In the current policy, students are not allowed to use their phones during instructional or non-instructional time, but have access to their phones during emergencies and during dismissal to coordinate pick ups. 

The revised document reviewed by the board addressed parent and guardian concerns and the GTA’s recommendations for implementation of the policy without undue burden on teachers.

In the current policy, each school can determine how best to implement a ban depending on where the phone is kept, like in a backpack or pencil case. Schools will limit access in bathrooms or locker rooms unless a physician determines it necessary; for instance, the use of insulin pumps connected to phones. There are also privacy limits when teachers search a device. If teachers take a device from someone, teachers need to return it to the student before the end of the day. 

Board member Kathleen Cross asked whether the board could change or broaden the term “communications devices” to include other types of technology. 

Kelly King, assistant superintendent of Educational Services, said the term is recommended by the CSBA because it wants to make distinctions between devices like Chromebooks or iPads used for instruction versus cellphones that might be used to text or share photos or videos during the day. 

Board member Neda Farid asked whether Hoover High School, which has been piloting a cellphone ban to test the efficacy of the current policy, has seen improvements in the classroom. 

“I’d be curious to know if there is a correlation between test scores improving beyond just focus in the classroom,” Farid said. 

King responded by saying Hoover started to see those types of improvements  with some data analysis. 

“There’s not necessarily a correlation, but it could be,” King said. 

“I’m glad that we’ve been able to have the benefit of so much feedback on the current version of this because I anticipate that this will continue to evolve in the coming months and years,” said board member Shant Sahakian. “I’m very cognizant of the fact that we want a distraction-free learning environment for our students but we have the balancing act of also preparing them for the world that’s going to meet them in college, in their careers, in life. Whether we like it or not, a significant amount of that life will be digital and it will involve technology.”

Sahakian wanted to ensure that the issue is looked at it “comprehensively” but wanted to ensure sight of media literacy and digital literacy is not lost for students. 

“Perhaps at a future board meeting we can have a discussion about how to keep students safe while having digital literacy,” he said. 

UCLA School of Education and Information Studies and the UC/CSU Collaborative Collaborative for Neuroscience, Diversity and Learning released a research brief on cellphone policies for K-12 schools that emphasizes creating flexible, research-informed and equitable policies rather than blanket technology bans. King cited the study as a reason the policy is being carefully reviewed and revised with feedback from across the school community. 

“When we see this, we need to make sure we are taking it into account when developing our policies and share them with our school sites as they are developing theirs,” she said.