Local school officials, including leaders from Emporia Public Schools, say while the issue deserves discussion, decisions about student device use are best made at the local level. They caution that a statewide mandate could raise concerns related to enforcement, cost, liability and local control.
Both the Kansas House and Senate are weighing bills that would limit student cellphone use in schools. While the proposals share a common goal, they differ in key areas that could affect how districts implement and enforce the rules, including how the school day is defined and how student devices would be stored.
Supporters of classroom cellphone bans often cite research linking phone use to decreased attention, lower academic performance and rising mental health challenges among students. Studies over the past decade suggest increased screen time and social media use contribute to anxiety, depression and difficulty focusing in educational settings.
“100 percent support it,” Andrea Messer said. “This will improve the mental health of our youth. I highly recommend that all parents of children under 18 to read The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt.”
Others argue that cellphones serve important purposes for students, including access to information and the ability to communicate with family members. Safety concerns are frequently raised by parents who want their children to be able to contact family members during emergencies, including school shootings or other violent incidents.
“Nope,” Becky Ziviski said. “This world is crazy. I would want my kid to be able to call me if something happened. Cellphone recordings in school catch a lot of bad stuff. But they should be in backpacks and not used during class unless needed.”
Nationally, much of the push for school cellphone bans has been led by Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist and New York University professor who authored The Anxious Generation, a book examining the impact of smartphones and social media on youth mental health. Haidt points to research showing a sharp rise in mental health disorders among adolescents beginning in the early 2010s, a period that coincided with increased smartphone use.
“The teachers have hated the phones for 10 or 15 years,” Haidt said. “How can you teach when your kids are watching TikTok and porn?”
Haidt’s comments reflect a broader national movement pushing for stricter school phone policies, though districts across the country differ widely in how they address the issue.
While the debate continues at the state level, local educators are focused on how such policies would function in practice. During Wednesday’s Emporia school board meeting, USD 253 Superintendent David McGehee outlined several concerns with the proposed legislation, including intrusion on local decision-making, logistical challenges related to storing student devices and potential liability tied to an unfunded mandate.
McGehee also flagged the screen-time data collection and reporting requirement included in HB 2421 as a specific concern, noting it could create additional administrative and compliance burdens for school districts.
Those concerns were echoed by community members during online discussions. In a conversation on The Gazette’s Facebook page, one parent suggested allowing students to keep phones in their backpacks as a compromise. Teachers responded that the approach has already been tried with limited success.
“I teach high school kids,” Judy Goetz said. “Trust me on this, many can’t handle having them in their backpacks. We tried that. They do everything to sneak a peek at their phones and then we have to fight them on it all day long. In my opinion, requiring that their phones reside in a pouch in the classroom works so much better.”
Peggy Mains, who works at the high school, agreed, saying enforcement remains difficult regardless of policy.
“No matter how many times you tell them to keep them in their backpacks, they don’t,” Mains said. “They try to sneak them. They put them in their bras. They put them in their waistbands. They hide them under the desk thinking nobody sees them texting.”
Other community members echoed McGehee’s concerns about state-level involvement in decisions traditionally made by local school boards.
“This should be decided at the district level and not the state level,” Angie Lewis said.
“I don’t disagree with the concept,” Kelly Atherton said. “But do we really need the legislature making a one-size-fits-all ban? We have local school boards that already have the authority to do this. Local boards can tailor a policy to meet the specific needs of their districts. Many boards in the state already are making policies. Leave it to the local districts. The legislature should stay out of local decisions and start focusing on the pressing needs of property taxes and other affordability issues.”
As the debate continues in Topeka, the conversation in Emporia reflects a familiar tension in public education — balancing consistency with flexibility, and student well-being with the day-to-day realities inside classrooms.
Whether lawmakers move forward with a statewide cellphone ban or leave decisions to local districts, educators and parents agree on one point: how phones are handled in schools will continue to shape student learning, behavior and mental health long after the legislative session ends.
© 2026 The Emporia Gazette. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
