Cellphones in Caddo Parish Classrooms: Navigating New Laws, Liability Risks, and Effective Policies
Cell Phone Policies in Schools: Balancing Rules and Liability
With the increasing prevalence of smartphones among students, schools are grappling with how to effectively manage cell phone use while avoiding potential liability issues. A new Louisiana law going into effect for the 2024-2025 school year prohibits students from possessing cell phones during instructional time. However, enforcing this policy comes with some significant liability concerns that schools need to carefully consider.
The New Law and School Policies
Louisiana's Act 313 of 2024, codified under La. R.S. 17:239(A), states that beginning in the 2024-2025 school year, "no student shall possess, on his person, an electronic telecommunication device throughout the instructional day." If a student brings a device to school, it must be turned off and properly stored away or prohibited from being turned on during instructional hours.
Many school districts are updating their policies to align with this new law. For example, the Caddo Parish School Board's revised policy states that students cannot use or possess electronic devices during the school day unless specifically authorized by a teacher or principal for academic purposes.
Disciplinary Guidelines and Graduated Consequences
The Caddo Parish School Board's Middle and High School Discipline Guidelines under Policy JCDA-2, Infraction #15, provide a framework for addressing violations of the electronic device policy. These guidelines demonstrate a graduated approach to discipline:
1. First offense: The item is willingly relinquished to the administration. A mandatory meeting with the parent/guardian is held to review expectations. The device may be held for up to three days before being returned to the parent/guardian.
2. Second offense: Similar to the first offense, but refusal to relinquish the item results in up to two days of out-of-school suspension, followed by a parent return meeting and referral to the school counselor.
3. Third offense: The student is suspended for up to two days with a parent return conference. The student is barred from bringing the item for the remainder of the semester.
4. Fourth offense: The student is suspended for up to nine days pending an expulsion hearing.
The Liability Dilemma
While the law, policies, and disciplinary guidelines are clear about prohibiting cell phone possession during class, enforcing these rules by confiscating devices creates potential liability issues for teachers and schools. Consider a scenario where a student has the latest smartphone worth $1,000 or more. If a teacher takes this expensive device from a student, they could potentially be held financially liable if anything happens to the phone while it's in their possession.
There are several reasons why schools may want to avoid having teachers or staff confiscate phones:
1. Financial liability: As mentioned, teachers could be responsible for replacing costly devices if damaged or lost while confiscated.
2. Potential for conflict: Attempting to take a phone from an uncooperative student could lead to verbal or physical altercations.
3. Privacy concerns: Student phones may contain sensitive personal information.
4. Disruption: The act of confiscating phones could cause more classroom disruption than the initial policy violation.
5. Staff time and resources: Securely storing and tracking confiscated phones takes time away from education.
Recommended Approaches
Given these liability concerns, schools may want to consider alternative approaches to managing cell phone use:
1. Clear policies with consequences: Have well-communicated policies outlining prohibited phone use and specific consequences that don't involve confiscation (e.g. detention, loss of privileges).
2. Secure storage options: Provide secure lockers or pouches where students can voluntarily store phones during class time.
3. Education on responsible use: Teach students about appropriate technology use rather than relying solely on punitive measures.
4. Parental involvement: Communicate with parents about phone policies and enlist their support in enforcement.
5. Limited confiscation: If phones must be taken, have students turn them off and place them in sealed envelopes to be picked up at the end of the day. This limits handling by staff.
6. Documentation: If confiscation is unavoidable, carefully document the phone's condition upon confiscation and return.
7. Graduated discipline: Implement a system of escalating consequences for repeat offenders, similar to the Caddo Parish guidelines, but consider alternatives to physical confiscation of devices.
8. Relinquish to Security/Office: Teachers can direct students to relinquish phones to security or the office instead of confiscating them personally. This approach:
Reduces teacher liability
Provides secure storage
Creates a standard process
Keeps teachers focused on teaching
Minimizes potential conflicts
It's a safer way to enforce cell phones while avoiding direct handling of expensive devices by teachers.
Conclusion
While banning cell phones during instructional time aims to reduce distractions, schools must carefully weigh the risks of strict enforcement through confiscation. By focusing on clear policies, education, and alternatives to taking possession of devices, schools can work towards compliance with new laws while limiting their potential liability.
The Caddo Parish approach of involving parents, providing counseling, and implementing graduated consequences offers a model that other districts might consider adapting. However, schools should still be cautious about physically taking possession of expensive devices due to potential liability issues.
As smartphone technology continues to evolve, schools will need to continually reassess and adapt their approaches to effectively manage student cell phone use while balancing educational needs, legal compliance, and liability concerns.