News for
August 5, 2026

 

By Myrna Trauntvein
TN Correspondent

There will be no cell phones in Juab School District classrooms bell-to-bell.

There was a lengthly discussion as the Juab School District Board of Education evaluated two main choices for the high school when it came to cell phone use.

Option A presents a strict “Bell-to-Bell” ban and restricts personal electronic devices on school premises throughout the entire school day, including instructional time, passing periods, and lunch periods.

Option B provides a “Modified Bell-to-Bell” cell phone policy. It restricts electronic devices during instructional and passing time, but allows students to use personal electronic devices on campus during their lunch period.

“This is the third reading and we have had a robust discussion in the past,” said Dr. Kodey Hughes, superintendent. “We have both principals here--junior high and high school, although, this is strictly a high school concern.”

The junior high had already had the bell-to-bell in place last year, he said.

Hollie Holman, board member, said she could not waiver from her support of the bell-to-bell ban.

She said that research showed phones are harmful to education and social-emotional development.

Exceptions create an environment of failure.

“I was a teacher for 16 years,” Holman said. “Opening the door a crack creates problems. I support Option A.”

Allowing “cracks” in policy (like lunch-only use) makes enforcement significantly harder, creating ambiguity similar to trying to enforce smoking bans in specific areas.

Janet Ware, board member, said allowing phones during lunch encourages isolation rather than peer interaction. In addition, she said, that research showed that cell phone use was not good for education.

“Our role, as a board, is to provide governance,” said Ware “Administration then has the job of implementation.”

Bart Mills, board member, said he had never been a teacher but, though he liked Option A, he had concerns about implementation. He knew that the option looked good on paper but, in reality, he wondered about enforcement. Everyone had to buy in to make it successful.

He had the concern that making educators and administrators act as “phone police” distracted from instruction and core administrative duties.

 “The conversation might be, ‘With all I have to do, here I am policing cell phone use,’” he said.

The junior high campus operated last year on a bell-to-bell ban and reported fewer implementation issues than anticipated, said Ware.

“Bell-to-bell, those phones do not come out,” she said.

She said she had a concern that if a student had a phone on their person to be used in the cafeteria at lunch time, they would suddenly need to use the bathroom because they heard a buzz and wanted to check it out.

Mills said that it was “silly” to compare the junior high and the high school It was not comparing apples to apples. High school students and junior high students were different.

Junior high students tend to have lower impulse control, making unmonitored phone access a severe distraction for social media and gaming during instructional time, said Ware.

It was true, said Linda Hanks, board president, that the board provided governance and administration provided the how.

“But it is state law,” she said. “Abby Cox [the state’s First Lady of Utah], is very passionate about limiting cell phone use in schools.”

Todd Quarnberg, Juab High School Principal, and Richard Pay, vice principal, were asked their reactions. He said that dealing with students on partial schedules/off-campus programs would be challenging.

“We conducted a survey,” Quarnberg said. “The teacher wants the bell-to-bell ban but they want us [administration] to enforce it.”

He said that the high school would support the board of education in their decision but wanted them to know that teachers backed the bell-to-bell ban.

Pay said that the parking lot encompassed two acres and would be difficult to monitor. However, they were already trying to monitor it for vaping.

“Last year, we had 87 cell phones come to the office,” he said.

Hughes said that recently there had been a meeting of superintendents in Cedar City. Thirty-six were in attendance and they addressed the cell phone issue.

“One district had invested $70,000 in pouches for the phones to be stored and it didn’t work,” he said. “Another superintendent walked into the high school lunch room and couldn’t believe how noisy it was because students were engaging in conversations face to face.”

Monitoring cell phone use was like monitoring smoking, bullying and other behaviors that schools worked to prevent among students.

“There then comes the punitive side,” said Hughes. “There have to be expectations. Most superintendents did not think it would happen fast but by November or December, it will work if everyone has the expectation.”

For any policy to work, a total buy-in across all staff is required because, otherwise, inconsistent enforcement leads to chaos and policy failure.

“It is the teacher’s job to enforce the ban in the classroom,” said Ware.

“This policy is for the educators,” said Hanks. “Teachers, we are on your team.”

She said that a cell phone ban in the classroom helps teachers by saving instructional time, improving student focus, and easing behavioral management and educators report higher rates of student concentration, class discussion, and task completion.

“Our role is in setting policy,” said Ware. “We provide the governance.”

“This is the state law,” said Hanks.

She told the principals that they answer public pressure by blaming the school board. The school staff can cite board policy and state law when enforcing rules.

Ware wanted policy Option A under High School item 1 to have a line struck out for the last sentence ending at lunch periods.

The motion was made by Ware to adopt Option A with one line modified and seconded by Holman. All voted in favor.

Under Utah law, students are prohibited from using cell phones, smartwatches, and similar personal technology during classroom instructional time. Passed via Senate Bill 178, the legislation establishes a clear state baseline to remove digital distractions from learning environments.