How many hours in a school day do you think you’ve lost because of your phone?

Personally, I know I’ve spent hours of class time in high school on my phone scrolling or texting my friends, just waiting for time to pass so that I could be freed by the bell. Looking back now, I wish that my school was stricter about their phone policy and that they would have enforced stronger rules against phone usage. As 72% of high school teachers in the United States have said, there is a big problem with the amount of distractions phones create for learning environments especially in middle and high school.
I have never lived in a time where phones weren’t everywhere. Every school year I have heard the same advice: to not use them in class and to stay focused. But in practice, simply putting your phone in your backpack or back pocket doesn’t erase the potential for distraction, especially when a class gets boring or material is hard to learn. Every buzz tells your brain that there is something more important or more entertaining happening online and attention is easily pulled away.

Because of this I can agree with Governor Kathy Hochul’s new restrictions on phone usage in schools because I have experienced first-hand the constant distraction that they create. Along with her new mascot for the cause, Frankie Focus, she is hoping to appease the student populations who may not be the quickest to support their phones being taken away. Frankie is a large, neon green, eyeglass-wearing creature that looks like something from “Monsters, Inc.” His appearance has been criticized since he was clearly created for an audience significantly younger than the thousands of high school students affected by the phone ban. Frankie and Hochul’s goal is to improve children’s attention spans and create a more conducive learning environment for students, which is something parents and students both want. Although it may be hard to convince students to give up their phones, there have been plenty of kids who have said they appreciate having fewer distractions in their classrooms. Kids as young as 12 years old are happy to feel more connected to their peers and have phone free schools. For those reasons, I completely understand and support limiting students’ access to phones during school hours, especially in younger grade levels.

But, as I was writing this article, a friend of mine sent me an Instagram post by a student from Atlanta, Georgia, and my perspective shifted. The post was against banning phones because there was the risk for students not being able to contact their parents, guardians or loved ones in the tragic occurrence of a school shooting. Although this example may seem extreme, school shootings are not uncommon in the U.S. In 2024, there were 83 school shootings and so far in 2025 there have been 53. These statistics make it extremely concerning that there may be students left without the ability to leave messages for concerned caregivers.

Since there is a real danger in schools it feels imperative that students have easy access to their phones in case of an emergency. It could be argued that in the event of a school shooting students should not be on their phones, but we live in a time where emergent scenarios are most commonly handled with technology in some way. When considering emergencies like school shootings, it does seem much harder to be in complete agreement with Hochul’s new ban. While Hochul’s plan does allow for exceptions to the bell-to-bell ban, including exceptions for students to contact parents, it is unclear how such an exception would work during an emergency, given students’ phones are locked in magnetic pouches.

Beyond the concern for safety it is important to note that the ban cost $25 million to instate across New York. This includes the investment into Yondr pouches (magnetic sealed pouches that keep students’ phones secure during school hours) and the implementation of new rules in schools. This is a high price to pay to keep phones out of the hands of students, especially when looking at the dozens of other issues with America’s education system. Lowered federal funding, less teachers and learning gaps can make it hard to stomach the spending on phone restrictions.

Hochul and Frankie together are trying to convince the public that the phone ban is in the best interest of students, and I was initially convinced that restrictions on phone use in school would lead to a better learning experience. The concern with phone usage is a real one and should be addressed by school administrations, with policies that could teach students how to manage the distractions they will face for the rest of their lives. But we need to properly address safety concerns before we can build solutions.  Although cell phone use is a prevalent issue, students need fewer reasons to be afraid in order to make this new ban more broadly accepted.