The Independent received a letter from a parent complaining about cell-phone policies in the Eureka Springs School District. The letter objected to the district’s student handbook, which includes the provisions of the Bell-to-Bell No Cell Act (Act 122) passed by the legislature in July. The letter specifically objected to language regarding possible searches of phones for content.
Supt. Bryan Pruitt explained that the cell-phone policies come from the state, although individual districts have some room for choice of methods. For example, many districts issue Yondr pouches to students, who must keep their phone locked up during the school day. Eureka Springs simply asks students to keep phones in their backpacks.
“We’re not out there looking for cell phones,” Pruitt said. The superintendent added that Eureka’s policy shows more trust, and the vast majority of students have complied with little issue. He further explained the variety of reasons why the school would grant an exemption. For example, a student with medical monitoring would have no problems wearing a smart watch. Students needing to call home can come into the office to use their phones.
The letter-writers especially objected to language that noted, “Students have no right of privacy as to the content contained on any electronic devices on campus.” A Supreme Court decision in 1985 had already clarified that students have no right to privacy on campus.
Pruitt explained that the district would only look into the contents of a phone in extreme circumstances, including a proven act of bullying, a terroristic act, or a drug deal. In those cases, both the courts and the legislature have given schools a lot of latitude in search and seizure.
The letter expressed concern that “a teacher could request a child’s smartphone to then edit, copy, erase, share, or delete the information on the device without the consent of a parent.” Pruitt again emphasized that the district has no interest in typical phone content, and the search provisions would only be invoked in the listed circumstances.
The complaining parents eventually signed their agreement with the student handbook, since that signature is required for all students in the district. They concluded, “At the moment, we’re looking at what’s best for our child, and unfortunately, we may be stuck with giving up more rights for us as parents and our child.”