We are writing on behalf of the Arlington Special Education Parent Teacher Association (Arlington SEPTA). Arlington SEPTA supports the educational experience of students with disabilities in Arlington Public Schools, who comprise approximately 15% of our school division population. SEPTA urges you to support SB 738 and HB 1961. These bills relate to regulation of student cell phone possession and use in schools. In the absence of governing law in this area, the Governor of Virginia directed the Virginia Department of Education to issue guidance to Virginia’s public schools. We ask you to support these bills because of problems with the VDOE guidance that particularly affect students with disabilities. SB 738 and HB 1961 are a substantial improvement over the current VDOE guidance in the following ways: We support the bills’ allowance of more flexibility for local school divisions to craft age-appropriate and developmentally-appropriate policies that work for each school division, as opposed to VDOE’s one-size-fits-all approach. The VDOE guidance removes local control from division School Boards and puts decision-making in the hands of those who are not familiar with the students, the environment, or other pertinent circumstances. The bills restore the correct balance. We support the bills’ prohibition of the use of exclusionary discipline for violations of personal device rules. Excluding students from class or school is not an effective behavior modification technique, and it is not evidence-based. Indeed, it is often counterproductive to remove students from their instructional setting. It is well established that students with disabilities and other at-risk students are disproportionately subjected to exclusionary discipline in schools. This disproportionate impact is seen across the U.S. and here in Virginia. HB 1961 and SB 738 are needed to prevent this situation from worsening further. We support the language in the bills regarding accommodations for students with disabilities who need their phones for disability/medical reasons. The bills are needed to override the VDOE guidance, which limits the provision of accommodations by directing that "Viable alternatives to using a cell phone or personal electronic communication device should be explored and implemented in collaboration with the student's family." Based on reports we are hearing from families, school divisions are using this directive to deny students' requests for accommodations to use their personal devices. This is creating hardship to students who have found success with their personal devices, but now need to attempt to transition and adjust to a different type of technology/support that may not be as effective or accessible. In short, the VDOE guidance erects unnecessary roadblocks to the success and well-being of students with disabilities. Please remove those barriers by voting for SB 738 and HB 1961. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input and for the work you do on behalf of children in Arlington and throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. Sincerely, Sascha Foertsch, President Laura Swanson, Executive Vice President Wendy Pizer, Advocacy Chair Arlington Special Education PTA Arlington, Virginia

Comments Document

I am writing you today to address pending legislation before the Virginia House of Delegates K-12 Subcommittee. I am a native Virginian from Newport News. I earned two degrees from Virginia Tech and a PhD from Virginia Commonwealth University in educational research and evaluation. I am currently an associate professor in the College of Education at Auburn University. I am writing to express my opposition to HB 1961 and to urge you to oppose this legislation. Research has shown a significant relationship between screen time and negative academic, social, emotional, and mental health outcomes for children. Preliminary evidence from Indiana, New York City, and other locations suggests that policies banning cell phones in schools have helped mitigate these issues. My colleague Dr. Tim Pressley of Christopher Newport University and I have collaborated with a school division to assess the efficacy of the current cell phone ban in Virginia. In December, prior to the policy's implementation, we surveyed teachers in each of the middle and high schools within the division. We discovered that over three-fourths of teachers believe that cell phones are a major distraction in the classroom, and nearly 85% of teachers support the existing ban. However, teachers also expressed concerns about the uniform enforcement of the policy and whether they would receive adequate support to uphold the ban. HB 1961 effectively nullifies the policy by removing meaningful consequences, which are precisely what teachers have indicated they want to see enforced. Restricting cell phone use without real repercussions is likely to place an even greater burden on teachers, especially at a time when we should be seeking ways to support them. I have attached a research brief containing our preliminary baseline findings. Dr. Pressley and I plan to follow up with the same teachers at the end of this year to evaluate the effectiveness of the current cell phone policy. We would be pleased to discuss our findings with you. If you support the academic, emotional, social, and mental health well-being of Virginia’s students, I encourage you to advocate for the removal of cell phones from schools. If you support Virginia’s teachers, I urge you to oppose HB 1961.

We are writing on behalf of the Arlington Special Education Parent Teacher Association (Arlington SEPTA). Arlington SEPTA supports the educational experience of students with disabilities in Arlington Public Schools, who comprise approximately 15% of our school division population. SEPTA urges you to support SB 738 and HB 1961. These bills relate to regulation of student cell phone possession and use in schools. In the absence of governing law in this area, the Governor of Virginia directed the Virginia Department of Education to issue guidance to Virginia’s public schools. We ask you to support these bills because of problems with the VDOE guidance that particularly affect students with disabilities. SB 738 and HB 1961 are a substantial improvement over the current VDOE guidance in the following ways: We support the bills’ allowance of more flexibility for local school divisions to craft age-appropriate and developmentally-appropriate policies that work for each school division, as opposed to VDOE’s one-size-fits-all approach. The VDOE guidance removes local control from division School Boards and puts decision-making in the hands of those who are not familiar with the students, the environment, or other pertinent circumstances. The bills restore the correct balance. We support the bills’ prohibition of the use of exclusionary discipline for violations of personal device rules. Excluding students from class or school is not an effective behavior modification technique, and it is not evidence-based. Indeed, it is often counterproductive to remove students from their instructional setting. It is well established that students with disabilities and other at-risk students are disproportionately subjected to exclusionary discipline in schools. This disproportionate impact is seen across the U.S. and here in Virginia. HB 1961 and SB 738 are needed to prevent this situation from worsening further. We support the language in the bills regarding accommodations for students with disabilities who need their phones for disability/medical reasons. The bills are needed to override the VDOE guidance, which limits the provision of accommodations by directing that "Viable alternatives to using a cell phone or personal electronic communication device should be explored and implemented in collaboration with the student's family." Based on reports we are hearing from families, school divisions are using this directive to deny students' requests for accommodations to use their personal devices. This is creating hardship to students who have found success with their personal devices, but now need to attempt to transition and adjust to a different type of technology/support that may not be as effective or accessible. In short, the VDOE guidance erects unnecessary roadblocks to the success and well-being of students with disabilities. Please remove those barriers by supporting SB 738 and HB 1961. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input and for the work you do on behalf of children in Arlington and throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. Sincerely, Sascha Foertsch, President Laura Swanson, Executive Vice President Wendy Pizer, Advocacy Chair Arlington Special Education PTA Arlington, Virginia

Comments Document

I am Dr. Tim Pressley, an associate professor of educational psychology at Christopher Newport University. Over the past five years, I have published over 20 peer-reviewed papers on teacher well-being and burnout. Recently, my colleague, Dr. David Marshall, a Newport News native and current faculty member at Auburn University, surveyed teachers from a local school division on their perspectives regarding Executive Order 33, the cell phone ban that just went into place. Based on my expertise and our recent findings, I am expressing my opposition to HB 1961. I have attached the policy brief of our research findings, but I can share some of the highlights. Among the teachers we surveyed, 78% shared that cell phones are distractions in their classroom, and 84% believed the new cell phone policy was appropriate for their school. In short, most teachers see the need for the policy and approve their school’s plan to address it. Though most approved of the new policy, teachers did have concerns regarding the implementation. For instance, they will fail if these policies are not implemented and enforced consistently with clearly communicated consequences. Teachers also expressed worries about insufficient backing from school leaders, which could lead to difficulties enforcing the policy. Lastly, teachers also shared concerns about the effective implementation of the policy, particularly regarding communication and consequences. I fear the current Bill would remove consequences and impact teachers' ability to enforce the executive order. The executive order is one that teachers seem to favor, but for it to be successful, there must be consequences for breaking the rule. If you have any follow-up questions, I am happy to discuss this research in more depth.

Thank goodness for Governor Youngkin’s executive order on cellphones. It is now up to the school districts and parents to follow through with the policy.