Legislature passed a new technology bill with a 20-2 vote on Jan. 10 with one student and one teacher opposing.
The bill has been sent to Headmaster Deborah Holman, who has 15 days to sign, veto or propose certain changes to the bill before it can take effect.
The new policy, Rule 1.4: The Policy on Personal Electronic Devices, “recognizes the pervasiveness of technology in today’s world” and acknowledges “a school culture that positions human interaction and the establishment of strong human relationship ahead of popular culture.”
The bill outlines the use of personal electronic devices at the school with the acronym SMARTS: Students, Manners, Availability, Respect, Teachers and Silence.
According to Rule 1.4, the acronym emphasizes respectful, polite and silent usage of technology while in the building. Additionally, the use of technology should not interfere with a student’s availability to others.
Under these guidelines, students may use personal electronic devices, including cell phones, pagers, smartphones, computers, tablets, MP3 players and cameras throughout the building.
According to senior Natanya Levine, a legislator, the bill proposes that all technology can be used throughout the building as long as it is used silently. This makes certain activities like texting “legal” in the hallways, she said.
Rule 1.4 includes some restrictions on technology use. Students may not talk on cell phones during the day unless they are in the space between the atrium and the main doors, or outside.
Headphones are not allowed in the hallways unless a student is seated, and, as outlined in the current headphones policy, are not allowed during lunch hours in the cafeteria, overflow or quad.
Technology use in specific classrooms will be at the teacher’s discretion, according to the bill.
Levine said she favors more flexible technology guidelines at the school, as long as this technology is used responsibly, respectfully and silently.
“We’re hoping to make the technology policy more liberal,” she said. “Students already use technology in the school, and that’s perfectly legitimate. We just hope to make technology that is useful to students more accessible and legal within the school.”
Dean Scott Butchart, a legislator, said that if he had arrived in time to vote on Rule 1.4, he would have voted against it.
“In a general sense, I favor this ‘liberalization’ of the policy,” Butchart said. “But Ms. Alexander and I still feel some of the specific language is ambiguous. So, Ms. Alexander and I are asking the headmaster to let the faculty and administrative council still reflect a bit about whether the exact words used create a policy that is workable and fair and good. So what Legislature passed may still not be a final product.”
According to Holman, the drafting committee successfully created a proposal that captured the essence of Legislature’s many discussions concerning technology reform.
“As a first draft, it is really thoughtful,” Holman said. “There are things in it that I recognize and feel good about, but the next big piece is taking it to a faculty meeting for wider faculty discussion. I really want to hear what the faculty has to say about it, and after I hear from them I’ll make some decisions about what I’ll do with it in terms of approving it or giving it back to Legislature to revise.”
Holman said she plans to work quickly with staff in order to arrive at her decision within the 15-day deadline. She also said she hopes to have a multi-week pilot period for the bill next semester, after which students and faculty will evaluate its successes and failures.
Junior Jonathan You, a legislator, said he understands that some teachers may be skeptical about the bill, but he thinks it strikes an appropriate balance between using technology and adhering the school’s values.
“Human interaction is important,” he said. “So is evolving with the changing world.”
Miriam El-Baz can be contacted at [email protected].
Ben Gladstone and Emmanuel D’Agostino contributed reporting.
