The Connecticut State Board of Education adopted new guidance Wednesday encouraging schools to implement bell-to-bell restrictions on cellphone and personal technology use.
The new guidelines follow an unsuccessful attempt in the General Assembly this spring to impose a statewide bell-to-bell ban on cellphone use in public schools. Gov. Ned Lamont and state legislative leaders have signaled they plan to renew the legislation next year; in the meantime, the new guidance nudges schools to begin moving in that direction without imposing a direct mandate.
Under the new guidance, the board is urging schools to enact “districtwide Personal Technology Use and Purposeful Screen Time Policies.” In addition, it “strongly recommends such policies restrict the student use of personal technology, including cell phones and other current and emerging technology, from the beginning to the end of the school day (i.e., ‘bell to bell’)” — with an exception for students with disabilities and other “documented needs” receiving individualized supports.
That’s a stronger prescription than the board’s previous recommendation to “restrict the use of cell phones during the school day.” Those guidelines, released in 2024, stopped short of recommending a full bell-to-bell restriction. Most schools in Connecticut have implemented policies in line with the 2024 guidance, but only 31% of high schools have gone as far as implementing a bell-to-bell ban.
The inclusion of “personal technology” in the new guidance signals the state is also casting its net beyond cellphones.
While it’s too early to say whether the General Assembly will turn these recommendations into a statutory requirement, it’s not out of the question. After the board released its 2024 guidance, legislators passed a law requiring districts to align their cellphone policies accordingly. Lamont has also signaled he believes the failed bell-to-bell cellphone ban legislation will pass next year.
Concerns have been growing about the impact cellphones — and digital technologies more broadly — have had on K-12 students, spurred in large part by Jonathan Haidt’s “The Anxious Generation.” The new guidance follows from those same worries: It criticizes phone notifications and social media platforms for damaging students’ ability to focus and references a 2025 warning from the U.S. Surgeon General linking early screen exposure with poor social, emotional and health outcomes. It also cites a 2025 survey from the State Department of Education in which 57% of educators identified cellphone use as a major classroom disruption.
Shepard Fisher, a new student member of the State Board of Education from Maloney High School in Meriden, said students have come around to the idea of a bell-to-bell ban and recognize how disruptive cellphones are in school. He said his concern now is how this all will be implemented.
“Whether that policy is actually followed is a question that remains unanswered,” Fisher said. “I know from my experience as a student, the transparent … answer is no.”
Meriden has an “off-and-away” policy, meaning students can use their devices in the hallways and at lunch but should have them off and away during class, unless the teacher says otherwise. During this year’s debate over the bell-to-bell ban, the district’s superintendent, Mark Benigni, said the policy provided a mix of accountability and flexibility that would be lost if the ban passed. The head of Meriden’s teachers union supported a ban, saying the existing rules created too many opportunities for conflict between students and teachers at the start of each class.
In a statement Wednesday, Benigni said his district appreciated that the board left the ultimate decision on cellphone restrictions to local districts.
“Meriden Public Schools will continue to support our ‘off and away’ procedures, and the district does not intend to make any changes at this time,” Benigni said.
Fisher, who helped lead a student walkout at Maloney this spring in support of increased state funding for public schools, said he hopes the state matches the new recommendations with material support.
“It really comes down to a matter of resources, and how much are we willing to commit financially to developing a curriculum in … classrooms about how to deal with technology,” Fisher said.
Moving beyond personal technology, the new guidance also urges districts to audit their educational technology in order to figure out the impact it has on schools and, if appropriate, shift away from “screen-based learning.”
It includes an overview of the role educational technology should play for elementary, middle and high school students, adapted from guidance from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. And it offers extensive guidance to districts on how to develop and implement policies with support from stakeholders throughout the community.
This story was originally published by the Connecticut Mirror.
