Legislation in Topeka regarding personal cellphone use in schools across the state has shifted from a proposed mandate to instead a proposed recommendation.

Central Christian Academy and Atchison County Community Schools serve distinct K-12 populations, but superintendents of both oppose a proposed mandate by the Kansas Legislature to force private and public schools to ban personal cellphones and other electronic devices during school hours.

On Monday, the House Education Committee got the message. The committee waded through eight amendments before voting on a ninth that sent the full House a bill recommending, rather than mandating, that public and private schools take cellphones and other devices away from students throughout the school day.

David Landis, superintendent of the 660-student private Christian school in Wichita, said the school’s leadership adopted several years ago nearly all the cellphone restrictions proposed in the original form of House Bill 2421. He objected to politicians in Topeka mandating those policies on private schools.

“We stand opposed to the state making financial and reporting policy decisions on behalf of any private school,” he said. “We ask that HB 2421 be rewritten to exclude all nonpublic schools.”

Andrew Gaddis, superintendent of the Atchison County district and its 500 students, said the bill was a departure from the state’s commitment to the principle of local control in public education. He said elected school boards collaborating with administrators, teachers and families were best suited to adopt policy respectful of local values and culture.

While many public school districts in Kansas previously enacted cellphone restrictions, Gaddis said, a one-size-fits-all law wouldn’t reflect diversity of thought on the in-school use of devices.

“Preserving local control allows districts to adjust practices as student needs change, technology evolves and community input is considered,” Gaddis said.

Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly endorsed the concept of an in-school ban on cellphones. Twenty-eight Republicans and Democrats in the Kansas Senate sponsored a bill creating a statewide ban. In the House, nine Republicans or Democrats did the same.

What will bills do?

Under  the original House bill, students attending accredited nonpublic and public elementary or secondary schools would be prohibited from using cellphones, smartwatches and earbuds during instructional time. The prohibition included lunch breaks and gaps between classes.

However, Rep. Sherri Brantley, R-Hoisington, proposed a successful amendment that swapped the word “shall” in the bill with the new word “may,” which transformed it from a ban to a recommendation.

Brantley made the move after the House committee rejected her amendment to exempt accredited private schools from a ban. Republicans and Democrats defeated this amendment, despite defiant advocacy by Rep. Rebecca Schmoe, R-Ottawa.

“Quite frankly,” Schmoe said, “we don’t get to tell the private schools what to do. Public rules for public schools.”

The committee followed her commentary by casting aside on a 7-9 vote the notion of shielding accredited private schools from a ban. The original text didn’t apply the restrictions to homeschools or private schools not accredited by the state.

The original version of the House bill would have required personal electronic communication devices owned by students and brought to school to be securely stored in a school building. The legislation wouldn’t have allowed storage in student backpacks or lockers, but it didn’t offer state funding for schools to buy containers to sequester electronic devices. A legislative document outlining the bills said it could cost nearly $13.4 million for public schools to purchase $30 fabric pouches with locks for 446,000 students.

The House bill was expanded by the committee with an amendment from Rep. Susan Estes, R-Wichita, that shielded schools from liability if any stored electronic device owned by a student was lost or damaged.

Exceptions to the ban would be have been made for students with personal medical issues. Exemptions would have been extended to students with an individualized education plan, or IEP, and those with a 504 plan outlining school accommodations designed to guarantee equal access to education. Students would have been able to contact a parent or guardian with a school-owned telephone or device.

The House version of the the bill retained a section that significantly limited ways school district employees could communicate with students. An amendment proposed by Rep. Shawn Chauncey, R-Junction City, built upon the original bill’s prohibition on teachers and students communicating by Facebook, X or other platforms. His amendment banned all two-way communication, including texts or telephone calls, between students and district employees unless the employee was a parent or guardian of the student.

The bill would have directed local public school boards of education or governing bodies of accredited private schools to comply by Sept. 1, 2026. The House committee deleted a provision that would have directed school administrators to report to the Kansas State Board of Education the average amount of time students in first through fourth grades spent on electronic devices during a typical school day.

A companion to the original House bill banning in-school use of personal communication devices during school hours was introduced as Senate Bill 302. The Senate Education Committee conducted a hearing on the bill in January.

Rep. Lon Pishny, R-Garden City, said a survey of 256 Kansas public school districts revealed 40 had bell-to-bell cellphone bans in all school district buildings. Similar prohibitions were in place at 157 elementary schools, 143 middle schools and 74 high schools across Kansas.

Supporters of prohibition

Adrienne Olejnik, vice president of Kansas Action for Children, said schools implementing bell-to-bell cellphone restrictions contemplated in the legislation were beginning to see signs that children experienced better relationships, mental well-being and educational achievement.

“Digital devices interfere with so many critical aspects of children’s development and schools should thoughtfully consider how technology is integrated into a student’s day,” she said.

Olejnik said use of individual digital devices wasn’t intrinsically dangerous for children, but it was important schools step in to help young people find a healthy balance.

Kim Whitman, a Kansas leader of Smartphone Free Childhood US, said cellphones and social media platforms were designed to be addictive. A study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association said students spent an average of 70 minutes per school day on their phones. That added up to loss of the equivalent of 30 instructional days per year, she said.

“When devices are stored away, students focus better and teachers can teach instead of policing phones,” Whitman said.

She said change was necessary because an estimated 11% of Kansas public school students were enrolled in districts enforcing phone-free policies covering the entire school day.

Wichita school board member Ngoc Vuong, a doctoral student at Wichita State University, endorsed the legislation. Vuong urged Kansas lawmakers to respond to unhealthy relationships many children and adolescents had with smartphones and social media.

“While I recognize and respect the local control argument, as a researcher and local school board member, I have come to the conclusion that, given the universality of problematic smartphone and social media use and its disproportionate impact on K-12 students, state-level action is necessary to mitigate its harms and promote more constructive, focused and engaging learning environments,” Vuong said.

_ _ _

Story via Kansas Reflector