From commonly simple call and message receivers 15 years ago, to an endless stream of music, games, social media, and more, smartphones of today have become a dominating force in society and an ever-growing distraction in school. Think about it – the market for an app is simply any person who owns a smartphone, of which there are billions. Apps that can maintain a user’s attention will succeed by selling usage data, subscriptions, or ad views, while those that cannot will fail. The important piece of this trend is that apps that provide useful services for students at school are now competing with a much larger field of unproductive, time-wasting apps. Indeed this has become evident at school, with more students going out of their way to avoid the firewall and spend time on things other than work. This led to Belmont Hill’s new policy, revoking Upper Schoolers’ previous reasonable use privileges.
While many students are upset by this change, it’s likely that it will reinforce good habits, enabling students to spend less time distracted and more time working. While it might have been acceptable for students to check their phones while sitting in study hall, this is now forbidden, forcing students to use their computers in one of two ways. They can use their computer to do the same thing, potentially still getting distracted or sidetracked, or use their computer for homework (which is much easier than on a phone, given its larger screen and more usable keyboard). In essence, this forces students to lean on the larger, more capable devices, rather than their phones. Given that many of the things students would use phones for are considered unproductive if a student is using a computer, odds are that what they are doing is more productive than what they would be doing on a phone.
While increased productivity is really a win for everyone, that’s not the only benefit this new policy will have. While most people were groaning about the much tighter restrictions placed on phone use, some might have failed to notice the other, smaller policy change this came with, the restrictions on headphone use. The new policy states that students are to use headphones for work, wherever that means they are. The policy is clearly engineered to prevent students from walking around with headphones, which inhibits conversation and acts as a signal to others that they’re unwilling to talk. Belmont Hill clearly states that one of its goals is to build community and connections, and students choosing to make it more difficult to have conversations is clearly in opposition to that value.
Importantly, the policy lies in the hands of the teachers, who act as a human checkpoint between the language of the policy and its enforcement, which conveniently still allows some of the productive uses of phones. Ultimately this policy is a quite logical path for the school, as it encourages both productivity and community building, while only minorly inconveniencing students.
