Starting this school year, August 15th, the new phone pockets were officially introduced and enforced by Carl Sandburg High School.

Many students argue against this policy, yet oftentimes teachers provide many good points that support this policy.

”I think they(phone pockets) shouldn’t be there because a student should be responsible for their own actions for focusing in class and they don’t have to punish the students that are doing well,” said Nehaal Mozzam sophomore.

On the other hand, Spanish teacher Mrs. Nappo said, “I don’t have to be phone police anymore, they just go up these (phone pockets) and I don’t need to worry about them.”
These two contradicting claims are provoked by the new rule: Phones are to be placed in assigned phone-pockets at the beginning of each class and are not to be taken until the end of that class period.

While many students argue for the security of having their cell phones near them in cases of emergency, others agree that being free from any potential distractions has an overall positive outcome when it comes to paying attention in class. 

The complaints often include the sense of security that students have when their phones are near them, the ability to call home in case of an emergency and the unfairness of being punished for other students’ wrong doings.

Security is one of the most common points brought up by students. Putting an expensive personal belonging away for a duration of over 40 minutes in an assigned pocket often raises concerns on whether or not the student can reach this belonging in time in case of an emergency and contact their loved ones or the police. While this is a rare possibility, the potential chaos of 30 students plunging and stumbling for their phones while there’s a fire or intruder would create damaging results to both the students’ safety and their phones.

Furthermore, the some students perceive that majority of students being punished by having their phones taken away because of the minority of students actions is also deemed very unfair by students that never struggled with focusing in class and staying off their phones. 

Carl Sandburg social studies teacher Mrs. Huelsman enforces a policy where students that are using their phones must put them in phone jail, while the rest of the class enjoys the luxury of having their cellular device with them even though they cannot use it during the class duration. 

On the contrary, these complaints are outnumbered by positive results after the policy was enforced. For example, less distractions only means more focus, grades going up along with participation, class work being done quicker and screen time reducing for each student that follows this policy.

There have been multiple studies done by The Nexus, Scientific American and University of Waterloo along with other sites showing the increase in class participation following the mandatory cell-jail. Sandburg is following the trend as all of the teachers reported that their students are getting more classwork done after the enforced phone jail. 

Now that there isn’t anything more interesting than the teacher in each classroom, students have no choice but to listen to what is being said. With no sound to block off the information presented to them and with no digital entertainment to make them forget about their assignments, students naturally become more engaged in their classwork. With this in mind, teachers have shown nothing but proudness of their students and their outstanding abilities to accomplish their school-based goals. 

Overall it is safe to say that Carl Sandburg High School has met the goal that it was reaching for: increase student focus and limit distractions.

Editor Zainab Azeem senior surveyed students in a voluntary poll on Instagram.

To begin with, freshmen were mostly neutral about the policy and had no passionate complaints or praises for the policy, as it was introduced during their first year of highschool. Sophomores, juniors and seniors all had similar unbiased opinions about the policy.

 The only result that may have been seen as unexpected is the majority of votes that stated that the removal of phones did not reduce class disruption. All the classes followed a similar trend in voting, the majority being neutral and fixed on how the absence of phones transformed classrooms. 

Regardless of countless similar opinions expressed by students, this policy is still largely favored by teachers and therefore will be a school continuity until a majority authority opinion changes.