Report on Oklahoma’s School Cell Phone Policy and its Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: State-Mandated Policy for Enhanced Educational Environments

The state of Oklahoma has implemented a new law for the current academic year, mandating that all schools establish a policy prohibiting the use of personal electronic devices during instructional hours. This “bell to bell, no cell” policy represents a significant step towards improving educational outcomes and aligns with several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those focused on education, health, and institutional effectiveness.

SDG 4: Quality Education

The primary objective of the new policy is to directly support SDG 4 by creating a more focused and effective learning environment. By eliminating distractions from personal devices, the initiative aims to enhance the quality of education provided to all students.

• Target 4.1 (Free, Equitable and Quality Education): The policy seeks to create a more equitable classroom setting where technology-based distractions are minimized for all students, allowing for improved concentration on core curriculum and instruction.
• Target 4.7 (Education for Sustainable Development): A distraction-free environment is more conducive to developing critical thinking and interpersonal communication skills. The policy encourages direct, face-to-face interaction, which is fundamental for fostering collaborative skills necessary for sustainable development.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The restriction on device usage during the school day also contributes to SDG 3 by promoting the mental and social well-being of students.

• Target 3.4 (Promote Mental Health and Well-being): Reducing screen time during school hours can mitigate potential negative impacts associated with constant digital connectivity. The policy encourages students to engage in physical and social activities, such as conversation or games, which supports positive mental health outcomes.
• Social Development: As noted by Amasha Samaraweera, Teen Superintendent for Oklahoma City Public Schools, the ban is intended to foster “more physical face-to-face connections.” This shift is expected to improve students’ social skills and adaptability over time.

Policy Implementation and Scope

The law has been enacted by the state legislature and requires compliance from all school districts, including Oklahoma City Public Schools and Tulsa Public Schools. The implementation details underscore the policy’s comprehensive nature.

Prohibited Devices During Instructional Hours

According to Tony Childers, General Counsel for Oklahoma City Public Schools, the prohibition extends beyond just cell phones to include a range of personal electronic devices. The goal is to limit access to the internet and smartphone connectivity during class time.

• Cell phones
• Smart watches
• Tablets
• AirPods and other wireless earbuds
• Any device capable of connecting to the internet or a smartphone

Policy Clarifications

Officials have clarified that the policy is not designed to sever communication between students and their families. Students are permitted to possess their devices on school grounds for use before or after school hours, or in case of an emergency, but they must remain unused and put away from the first bell to the last.

1. SDGs Addressed in the Article

The issues discussed in the article, primarily the implementation of a cell phone ban in Oklahoma schools, are connected to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  This is the most prominent SDG related to the article. The new policy is explicitly designed to improve the learning environment. The article states, “Phones can be a problem, especially if you’re trying to learn,” directly linking the ban to the quality of education. The goal is to create a more focused and effective instructional setting, which is the core of SDG 4.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  This SDG is relevant through the social and mental well-being aspects discussed. The Teen Superintendent, Amasha Samaraweera, hopes the ban will lead students to “make more physical face-to-face connections” and “spark a conversation, make some new friends.” This promotion of in-person social interaction over digital communication contributes to the mental and social well-being of students, a key component of SDG 3.

2. Specific Targets Identified

Based on the article’s content, the following specific targets under the identified SDGs can be identified:

1. Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.

   The article directly supports this target. The state’s implementation of the “bell to bell, no cell policy” is a strategic effort to create a more effective learning environment. By removing the distraction of personal electronic devices, the policy aims to make the school environment more conducive to learning for all students.

2. Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.

   While not explicitly stated, this target is an underlying goal of the policy. The rationale that “Phones can be a problem, especially if you’re trying to learn” implies that the ban is expected to improve concentration and, consequently, lead to more effective learning outcomes for students across Oklahoma schools.

3. Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.

   The article touches upon this target through the anticipated social benefits of the ban. The hope that students will “make more physical face-to-face connections” and “start a lunchtime card game circle” points directly to the promotion of mental health and well-being by fostering stronger interpersonal relationships and reducing digital isolation during the school day.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied

The article does not mention official UN indicators, but it implies several ways to measure progress towards the identified targets:

• Policy Implementation as an Indicator

  The primary indicator mentioned is the policy itself. The quote, “The law that was passed this last spring by our state legislature requires that every school in Oklahoma have a policy in place that prohibits the use of cell phones during the school day,” serves as a direct indicator for Target 4.a. The existence and enforcement of this statewide policy is a measurable action toward creating an effective learning environment.

• Observable Social Interaction as an Indicator

  An implied indicator for Target 3.4 is the change in student social behavior. The Teen Superintendent’s suggestion that students might “spark a conversation, make some new friends maybe bring a couple of card games, maybe start a lunchtime card game circle” provides a qualitative, observable indicator. An increase in such face-to-face activities would signify progress in promoting social well-being.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: okcfox.com