By an anonymous writer, based on a student survey.
The recent announcement of the implementation of a phone ban at our school has sparked massive debates among students. While Mr. Halden and many other administration members claim that this policy will lead to better focus and social interaction, the overwhelming student response suggests otherwise. A survey conducted among the student body reveals that the ban is widely viewed as unnecessary, impractical, and detrimental to the school environment.
One of the most common concerns raised in the survey is the ban’s impact on communication. Many students rely on their phones to locate friends during breaks and lunch. Without access to their devices, they anticipate increased difficulty in coordinating plans. Some believe that rather than promoting social interaction, the ban will lead to students feeling isolated, as one respondent pointed out: “If you end up all alone because you can’t find your friends anywhere, you’re just going to end up alone. And yes, the whole point is to socialize more, but will we really?”
Another major argument against the ban relates to practicality. Several students emphasized that phones play a crucial role in academic life. IB students frequently use their devices to check schedules, complete assignments, and access school platforms such as Google Classroom and ManageBac. One survey respondent stated, “I use my phone as an agenda, my school WiFi doesn’t work, and I need it to communicate with friends during lunch. Not being able to use my phone will make it harder to do schoolwork.” Others pointed out the hypocrisy of banning phones while expecting students to demonstrate independence in managing their academic responsibilities.
A particularly strong reaction came from IB students, who feel that the ban treats them like younger students despite the maturity required to complete their rigorous coursework. One respondent wrote, “If the school expects us to handle the IB, which requires a high level of maturity, then how can they claim we are not mature enough to control our phone use?” Many believe that if the school is concerned about excessive phone use, the policy should target younger grades rather than senior students who have already developed a sense of responsibility.
LGB takes pride in being the school that created the International Baccalaureate, a diploma program designed to foster independence and global responsibility. It emphasizes the development of mature, self-regulating individuals, yet this new phone ban contradicts those very principles. By enforcing blanket restrictions, the administration implies that students lack the ability to make their own decisions.
Moreover, the argument that this ban will improve focus fails under scrutiny. Phones are already banned inside classrooms, meaning they do not interfere with in-class learning. While some students acknowledge that phones can be a distraction in the library, they argue that this should be a matter of personal responsibility rather than institutional control. As one student succinctly put it, “This is our own responsibility. The school shouldn’t dictate how we manage our free time.”
Another significant concern is the broader impact on school life. Many students predict that this policy will discourage them from spending time on campus during breaks and after school. One student warned, “No one will want to stay in school at lunch or after school to work if phones are banned, because they are part of our lives and a key way of communicating.” Instead, students may choose to leave campus more frequently and this would create a fragmented and less vibrant school environment. If the goal is to foster a sense of community, restricting a primary means of social connection may have the opposite effect.
While some students acknowledge that excessive phone use can be an issue, they argue that a more reasonable policy would target younger grades rather than IB students. Many respondents suggested that Year 9 to Year 11 students may benefit from stricter limitations, as they are still developing self-regulation skills. However, IB students in Years 12 and 13 should not be subject to these same restrictions.
The long-term impact of this policy remains to be seen. For now, the student body remains largely opposed to the ban (76% saying they disagree with the ban). They view it as an unnecessary and counterproductive measure. Whether the administration will reconsider its decision is uncertain, but what is clear is that the policy has already sparked frustration among many students. 96 percent of students believe that others will not follow this policy. How this unfolds in the coming months will determine whether this new rule truly serves its intended purpose—or alienates the very students it aims to help.
