// This is a machine generated transcript. Please report any transcription errors to will-help@illinois.edu.

[00:00:00]
Brian Mackey: Today on the 21st show, school districts across Illinois will soon be required to ban cell phones and related electronic devices during the day. We'll hear how that will work in practice and talk through the pros and cons for students, their families and the teachers and school administrators responsible for enforcing the law.

[00:00:21]
Speaker 1: Part of our job is going to be over the next several years, as we're dealing with the ubiquitousness of phones in our schools, is to reassure parents that their children are safe.

[00:00:35]
Brian Mackey: Our guests today include the state senator who pushed for the change, a school superintendent, the leader of a teachers union in [Bloomington], a professor of education policy, and you. Join us throughout the hour at 800-222-9455. I'm Brian Mackey. That's all coming up today on the 21st show, which is a production of Illinois Public Media. But first, news.

From Illinois Public Media, this is the 21st show. I'm Brian Mackey. Starting with the next academic year, summer 2027, school districts across Illinois will be required to ban cell phones and related devices during instruction time. This is something that's been in the works in state government for a while now. Governor Pritzker called for it in his state of the state address, not just this year, but last year, early 2025. Meanwhile, individual districts have already been putting their own bans in place. This week, the state Board of Education is set to share a template policy for districts to use in developing their own. So, what's the hope for these policies? What does the law actually require and not require? And how do people feel about the changes? We're going to be talking about all of this today.

Joining me is State Senator Christina Castro. She represents the 22nd district, which includes Elgin, Hanover Park, and Streamwood in Cook and Kane counties in the Chicago suburbs. She's been a member of the state Senate since 2017 and is also a majority caucus whip. She was the lead sponsor of the legislation enacting the cell phone ban. Senator Castro, welcome back to the 21st show. Thank you for having me.

Also with us, Rebecca Hines Pifer. She's an assistant professor in the Department of Education Policy, Organization and Leadership in the College of Education at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Her PhD is in public policy from the University of Chicago. [Doctor Hines Pifer], welcome, welcome to you to the 21st show. It's great to be here.

And Julie Riley is a literacy coach at Bloomington Junior High School, a longtime educator and the president of the Bloomington Education Association, the organization, the union if you will, representing teachers in District 87. Ms. Riley, welcome to you as well.

[00:03:01]
Julie Riley: Good morning and thank you.

[00:03:03]
Brian Mackey: And we'll also hear from Dr. Sharon Williams as we go on. She wasn't able to join us live today. She's superintendent at Rock Island [Milan] School District 41 in the Quad Cities. We did have a chance to talk with her on Friday. We'll play a few excerpts of that throughout the program.

You can join us live, though. 800-222-9455 is the number. What do you think of these cell phone bans in schools? Do you support them? Do you oppose them? Maybe you have a young person in your life who uses this sort of technology. How has it affected them or their learning? Or maybe you're in a district that already has one of these bans in place. How's it going? 800-222-9455 is the number. 800-222-9455.

All right, Senator Castro, I'm going to start with you. If you could just say a little more than I did in the introduction there about what exactly the law establishes in terms of device policies.

[00:04:01]
Sen. Christina Castro: So the law, which is now — Senate was Senate Bill 2427 — requires all school boards and charter schools to adopt a policy prohibiting students from using wireless communication devices. I know we call it a cell phone ban bill, but it's in regards to wireless communication devices during school time. It's usually referred to as a bell-to-bell ban, during school days. So it's usually from the minute the students start school to when they end school. So it's during that class instruction time.

The only exception we made is for high school level. We figured that it was up to a school board, if they so choose, to go ahead and allow it during passing period. The reason for that — you know, you have a lot of students in the high school range who have jobs, are doing dual credit and different things and need maybe to be able to access some of that. We also make some exceptions when it comes to IEP plans, 504 plans, if someone is an English language learner, and those that are caregivers, so there are some exceptions within the bill to allow them to go ahead and be allowed a cell phone.

Look, I think one of the things that I would say is why I champion this. We are all guilty of being on our phones. The minute we hear a ping or see our phone light up or watch light up, we tend to focus our attention to that device, whether it's an iPad, a phone, your watch, a smartwatch. I think one of the things that I would say is, by enacting these types of bans, it allows the students to focus in on what is the most important thing — their education. On top of the fact of developing those social-emotional skills, you know, soft skills, the ability to interact with not only their instructor, their teacher, but also fellow students, to develop the skill set that they need to be successful in the future. So when you look at a lot of these policies, I know the kids don't like them, but parents and teachers are actually very, very supportive of them.

[00:06:21]
Brian Mackey: Hold on, I'm just checking my phone here. No, no, I'm kidding.

[00:06:24]
Sen. Christina Castro: We're all guilty of that.

[00:06:26]
Brian Mackey: [Doctor Hines Pifer], maybe pick up on that. What do we know about the effects of — OK, not just cell phones, smartwatches — you know, I don't think anyone's carrying pagers anymore, but these communication devices on students' learning.

[00:06:40]
Rebecca Hines Pifer: So I think there are several things that Senator Castro brought up that are really important to highlight. The first is that especially smartphones have highly addictive content on them, and so creating a space within the school day where students are able to not feel the need to be constantly checking their phones, checking their messages, talking to one another via these communication devices — in theory, the theory strongly supports that idea.

Similarly, in terms of what does it mean for the practicalities of educators during the school day, I think that schools have been grappling with this type of technology for decades, and it is from a policy perspective very useful to have an articulated, straightforward and, in my mind, well-thought-out statement. It's sort of a guardrail. The policy lines up things that should be true: students should not be using devices to communicate to one another during classroom instruction. They should not be checking their Instagram during classroom instruction. They should not be watching YouTube during recess — which, to be clear, I've seen happening. I have children of my own.

And this bill does a lot of very clear things for school districts in terms of highlighting these are the guardrails and here's where you have flexibility. I think that the carveouts, particularly for IEPs, for students who are in special education, for whom technology has been a huge boon to have appropriate communication devices during the school day, is very well thought out.

I also think that there may be space in the future for policy that thinks about the ever-presence of school-issued devices in students' lives and thinking about how the [Chromebooks] that many districts adopted universally during the pandemic are now being used in many different ways that were not originally part of the mission — like watching YouTube during recess.

I think that the final piece is, in terms of what research shows on the actual impact of these types of bans, it's a little bit mixed, but on balance seems to indicate either something positive or something neutral. And in a few cases there have been some evidence of — oh, students might feel uncomfortable for a period of time, there might be a slight increase in disciplinary occurrences — but those things seem to fade out after a year. So there's going to be a growing and learning period as school districts put this into place, and I think that's the critical moment for school districts to communicate clearly with parents, to have a coherent school-level approach that's within the guardrails set out by this policy, but that ultimately is at the core of what educators do in terms of thinking about how to enforce the policy in a way that supports students, that is done in an equitable manner, that is aligned with the district's goals and with the community's specific needs.

[00:10:12]
Brian Mackey: Julie Riley, let me come to you now, president of the Bloomington Education Association, also a literacy coach at Bloomington Junior High. How have you and other educators seen all of this playing out in the classrooms, this technology creep?

[00:10:27]
Julie Riley: I would absolutely agree with the notion that schools have been grappling with this for decades. And I work in a middle school, as you said, and we have been really trying to work on this since the mid-2010s. I know an awful lot of extremely gifted and engaging educators. None of us can compete with the entire internet in the palm of a child's hand. And especially in the secondary years — that need to be social, that need to be caught up on all the trends — it's a very, very hard thing for a child to ignore. I think we also mentioned that sometimes it's hard for adults to ignore the pull of those devices and programs. So it absolutely is a thing that we've been working on for a long time, and we've had periods of really good success and periods of more struggle. So I have some ideas later on about what I think is really key.

[00:11:28]
Brian Mackey: All right, I mentioned we also have some tape from Dr. Sharon Williams, who's superintendent at the Rock Island [Milan] Schools. Let's listen to that.

[00:11:38]
Dr. Sharon Williams: We're always thinking about how to keep our scholars engaged while we're learning, and the presence of technology devices — personal technology devices such as cell phones — certainly may take away from that engagement between the teacher and the scholar and scholars with each other. So what I've noticed over time is that our attention spans are getting shorter, and teachers are definitely having to think about how to structure classrooms that are engaging and can keep the attention of our students.

[00:12:26]
Brian Mackey: All right. So, Julie, let me come back to you. What — first off, remind me — what are the rules where you work, and what has enforcing those rules looked like in your district?

[00:12:40]
Julie Riley: In our district, we have a bell-to-bell policy in both the middle school and the high school. At the middle school, we've had one for quite some time, and the expectation is that cell phones are turned off and put away, preferably all the way inside a backpack. And we also don't really permit backpacks in classrooms, so that should be in lockers. We've had it for a long time. The high school is in their second year of having a building-wide policy.

[00:13:16]
Brian Mackey: What does enforcement look like?

[00:13:19]
Julie Riley: At the middle school, because we're in a pretty good place of kids following the rule — we're on a first-time basis — if we see your phone out during class, a teacher is going to take it and it's going to the office, and a parent will need to come and get it. At the high school, as they were — well, last year as they were trying to get their rollout done — I don't think parents were involved at that initial step, but I do know that there were discipline referrals to the office written for not keeping that phone put away.

[00:13:57]
Brian Mackey: And I understand that COVID — as it has in so many areas of life — was part of the story here. How did that change what you saw in terms of device usage in schools?

[00:14:09]
Julie Riley: I think that time period, when so many students were away from class, caused us to lose a lot of ground. Kids were much more accustomed to being on their phones all the time. Even parents were used to being able to get a hold of their kids very quickly. And it just — we had lots of change happening in lots of areas, and it became a place where really having a common, united front on this policy lost some steam. And when the adults weren't able to stay on the same page, the kids saw an in and kind of went for it.

[00:14:51]
Brian Mackey: All right, let me take a moment here to reintroduce our conversation. If you're just joining us, we're talking about cell phone bans in Illinois schools. Many districts have been putting those in place in one form or another, and under a new state law, all districts will soon be required to have policies banning cell phones and smartwatches and other related communication devices during school time.

We heard from some of you in our texting group about this. In particular, one of the questions we asked was: Is this a reasonable protection or government overreach?

Lloyd in Danville said, "Education is the foundation of a society. Overreach is a stretch, so disciplined approaches like bell to bell sound reasonable, given the fact that we're already behind the curve on this issue. Let's use the technology to educate students in school rather than alienate them. Why America can't get ahead of these issues is beyond me. Bell to bell is a start. Let's see what we can make of it," Lloyd says.

We also heard from Ann in Urbana, who told us, "I think this is brilliant. If we want children and youth to learn and excel, they need to be focused on lessons and not be distracted. I think it is a reasonable protection. My husband says, as a former teacher, I can see no reason or need for a cell phone in the classroom."

And one more from Helen in Springfield: "When I was in junior high school, Mad Magazine was forbidden in our classrooms. Students put great effort into smuggling current issues into their class, where they surreptitiously read them until discovered and confiscated. This will likely happen with mobile phones as well. However, most students will comply with the rule and will benefit by it."

My guests today are Julie Riley, president of the Bloomington Education Association; Rebecca Hines Pifer, professor of education policy at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; and state senator Christina Castro, who sponsored the legislation enacting the statewide ban. We'd love [to hear] from you at 800-222-9455. We're going to take a break, but we will continue this conversation for the rest of the hour today. Again, the number to call in: 800-222-9455. What do you think about this new law that's going to ban cell phones and other communication devices from Illinois classrooms — if it's not already happening in your district, which it may well be. Again, 800-222-9455. More to come after a short break. This is the 21st show.

It's the 21st show. I'm Brian Mackey. We are talking about a new state law that, starting with the next school year — so the one that starts most places August 2027 — schools are going to be required to have bell-to-bell bans of electronic communication devices such as cell phones, smartwatches, two-way radios. I don't know if kids are carrying two-way radios these days. And this is, again, because of a new law signed by Governor Pritzker and sponsored by state senator Christina Castro, who joins us now. She is from the area including Elgin, Hanover Park and Streamwood, and the Cook and Kane County area of the Chicago suburbs.

Rebecca Hines Pifer is also with us. She is an assistant professor in the Department of Education Policy, Organization and Leadership in the College of Ed at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

Julie Riley, literacy coach at Bloomington Junior High and president of the Bloomington Education Association, which represents teachers there in District 87.

If you want to join us, 800-222-9455. That's 800-222-9455.

And let's go now to the phones. We have Christina calling on line one from Thompson, Illinois. Cristina, thanks for calling in.

[00:18:56]
Cristina (caller): Yeah, hi. I'm a substitute teacher at the schools, and I've seen cell phones be useful for kids uploading their homework and monitoring their diabetes, and not to mention calling 911 if there's a school shooting. I think we should — I agree that cell phones are a problem, but I think that the state should regulate the corporations and make their algorithm less addictive and increase productivity for everyone.

[00:19:29]
Brian Mackey: Interesting. So it sounds like you have concerns about this law going into effect.

[00:19:34]
Cristina (caller): I'm not — my kid doesn't have a cell phone, but I see it does harm more than just children.

[00:19:43]
Brian Mackey: Interesting. Christina, thank you so much for calling in. I appreciate it. And, Senator Christina Castro, I'm going to come to you if you want to respond to our caller.

[00:19:52]
Sen. Christina Castro: Sure. I think — thanks, got a great name by the way. What I will tell you is I think one of the things the General Assembly has been looking at, aside from this bill — my colleague Senator Willie Preston was doing some work in regards to social media and its behaviors and algorithms. You also have the growing presence of AI and different things. So I would just say he passed a bill that the governor signed into law this year that looks at that.

When it comes to the cell phone ban bill, if you do have diabetes, that is allowed. You can use your phone to track any kind of medical [condition] — you just need a note from your doctor or nurse practitioner. So that is one of the exceptions allowed under the current law.

And one of the things that I'm glad she brought up is the safety component. Actually, law enforcement is very supportive of this bill. Here's why: because in the event of a school crisis, you want to follow those protocols that have been put in place in regards to those situations. So you want students to be focused on their teacher and those protocols that they've been taught — not on their phone texting. For law enforcement, that's what they want, because what ends up happening is you end up with erroneous information on the internet, you get parents who are panicked, and rightfully so, but then they start to rush a scene. So now they have it coming at them in several ways when they're trying to secure a scene — they don't need a lot of people racing to the scene as well. So it can create a bigger problem than just if they would follow the directives that have been issued to them by their school or school district. So I think when you look at it from a safety standpoint, law enforcement was very, very supportive of this.

But look, Rebecca brought up a good point earlier about managing screen time. Rebecca, I'm already starting to do work on that and research. There are no model bills out there in regards to that, because I think when you look at screen time — technology is here to stay, and we all can recognize that — but we also need to identify what is appropriate use of the technology, what is the appropriate screen time. And to Christina's point, there's a lot of addicting content out there, also content that brings upon anxiety, bullying, and you name it. So that is why this ban helps to kind of curtail a lot of that, because the student doesn't have access to their phones unless, again, based on the necessity that has been outlined in the bill.

So I hear you — it's multifaceted — but just know the Illinois General Assembly continues to work on addressing screen time, appropriate use, and even holding some of the social media companies accountable for the content they create and the algorithms.

[00:23:06]
Brian Mackey: You know, that safety component — let me just touch on that briefly — because anyone who's been in a school in recent years has seen how things have changed because of the threat from shooters. There are now, if classroom doors have windows, there are often some kind of curtain or shade that can be pulled down. There are locks on these doors. There are trauma kits in the hallway — at schools I've seen anti-bleed kits.

And we didn't actually pull the tape of this, but Dr. Sharon Williams, the superintendent from the Rock Island [Milan] School District, did touch on this. Looking at the transcript of our conversation, she said, "What we've done in the school district, actually last year, is made sure that all of our elementary teachers have a phone in their classroom — [that] was not the case previously. Sometimes families are quite concerned that they need to be able to reach their child at any time during the day, so we installed those phones to take away that barrier in elementary schools." She said junior high school and high school teachers already had phones in their classrooms, "to help alleviate some of the angst parents feel when they cannot immediately reach their children."

Julie Riley, let me come to you, president of the Bloomington Education Association. I wonder how this rule that you have there — does it apply to teachers as well? Are teachers supposed to be off their phones, and how has that gone down?

[00:24:26]
Julie Riley: The rules that we have do not cover teachers. Most student handbook policies are for students. Certainly, teachers are encouraged to be as focused as the children are, but we do have people who use different tools that are based on their personal cell phone, even though I always encourage them not to use their personal cell phone for work. But there are times when folks are taking attendance because it's an app-based system.

[00:24:58]
Brian Mackey: Yes, so many of us are sort of required to use our personal cell phones for work in this day and age.

Let me come back to — and, Dr. Rebecca Hines Pifer, I'll come to you for this — that idea of addiction that our caller brought up as well. And I did want to ask you because, as we're talking, there's this new settlement with Meta, the company formerly known as Facebook, over teen social media addiction. Can you tie that together with what we're seeing in cell phones more broadly, especially in terms of how this affects teens and mental health?

[00:25:35]
Rebecca Hines Pifer: Absolutely, and I think that this is something that spans society. So the Meta settlement is something that we can think of as occurring on the national level, and a state like Illinois has some ability to take action regarding the addictive nature of content via participating in these types of lawsuits, but also doesn't necessarily have the regulatory power to pass laws that will shape things that are really products at the national and international scale. So we want to think about what is within the scope of power of a state government and what is within the scope of power of a school district.

Within the scope of the state government is precisely these types of actions: looking at the portions of a child's day that entities like schools are actually responsible for and saying, we understand the addictive nature of content — we understand what one of the most important pieces of research that's come out in the last few years has made clear, that AI use actually deeply interferes with the learning process.

And I'd like to take this back to calculators. No one learns their times tables if they are allowed to use a calculator on every single multiplication fact that they ever learn. And learning your times tables is actually a crucial foundational skill to subsequent mathematical fluency. Well, AI at this point has the ability to write for children and produce highly fluent, excellent writing — but that means that kids don't learn how to do it. It directly interferes with their ability to do it. So it's both the addictive nature of the content and also, today, as we move beyond cell phones, the ways in which the technological tools are interfering with students learning the fundamental things that they're supposed to be learning in school.

So at the school district level, school districts have a high degree of control and choice in terms of what technological tools are present in the classroom, what types of tools their teachers are encouraged to use. I think that there's then a separate social norms kind of a question. At this point I think parents expect to be able to see their students' grades and missing assignments fairly quickly. I think that parents largely expect that as you get into the middle grades and high school, if a student has missed class, they will be able to access a learning management system like Google Classroom to download the missing work and complete the assignment unless it's a task. So there are lots of uses of technology — like the caller talking about students uploading missing work to Google Classroom — that I think society has accepted as appropriate. But school districts then are sort of the responsible agency for thinking about, within their community, within what parents in their community expect, within what's happening in their city, how can the tools that are out there be used.

And I have to name, at a national level and at a state level, the fact that the companies that create educational technology have no incentive to make it non-addicting at this point. They have no incentive to show that it's not interfering with student learning. That's the type of thing that state regulation can meaningfully change.

[00:29:36]
Brian Mackey: All right, let me remind listeners: This is the 21st show. We're talking today about the new Illinois law that is going to require all school districts — many of them already have this sort of policy in place — to have bell-to-bell bans on the use of cell phones and related electronic devices. So basically not during school time.

If you want to join us today, 800-222-9455 is the number. We're talking about this with Professor Rebecca Hines Pifer of the College of Ed at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Julie Riley — who is president of the Bloomington Education Association, also a literacy coach at the junior high school in Bloomington — and state senator Christina Castro, who sponsored the legislation that became the law that we are talking about today. Again, to join us: 800-222-9455. That's 800-222-9455.

So Senator Castro, I had the experience about a month ago of being in a store in the checkout line, and two of the cashiers were talking with each other while they were — waiting for a price check or something like that. And one of them seemed to be an educator of some sort — you know, this was maybe a second job or something — and was talking about how when they go back to school, they're really concerned about this policy and, are kids going to be getting suspended if they have the cell phones, and no, this is just government overreach and that sort of thing. And cause I've been a state house reporter, I actually called up the law on my phone and was scrolling through it while we were waiting for this price check.

And I'm going to read from the text of the law now. It says, "No school district may enforce the wireless communication device policy through fees, fines, suspensions, expulsions, or the deployment of a school resource officer or local law enforcement officer." Senator, talk about the reasoning behind that provision.

[00:31:23]
Sen. Christina Castro: I think it was very much what was described by those folks who are concerned. We didn't want it to be used as a weapon against students. We wanted them to practice good habits and be able to recognize that using a cell phone is not appropriate during school time. And that was part of some of the negotiations that we had with a lot of different entities — teachers, school districts, some who already currently have programs in place — and it was really to make sure it was implemented in a fair and equitable manner, so that schools clearly define the consequences of viol[ating the] cell phone policy, and this includes information in handbooks. Also, their policy needs to be put out for the public for them to review it.

It also sets forth to provide an alternative for situations where the school has required a parent or guardian to retrieve the device from the school, but the parent or guardian is unable to appear in person. So if they do confiscate the device, the parent can come get it. But again, it is mostly to not be a tool that is used in a negative light. We want this to be an opportunity to show students what is appropriate use of your device. And when we say — when the school adopts a policy that says not during the instructional time, put it away — I think that is key to what the message around this bill is.

But of course the policy sets forth, like, if they do confiscate the device, the device goes back to the student — or what are the rules? And I think that is probably the best way of just handling it versus, you know, suspending a kid, putting him in detention and so forth.

[00:33:26]
Brian Mackey: We need to take a break in about a minute here, but, Dr. Hines Pifer, I wonder if you can just talk briefly about how policies like this can potentially affect some of the inequities we see in education.

[00:33:38]
Rebecca Hines Pifer: Absolutely. I really appreciate the way that this ban specifically tells schools not to use exclusionary discipline and not to get law enforcement involved. Educators have a lot of experience in managing distractions in the classroom, and that's what we should be treating cell phones as. We know that when exclusionary discipline and when the police are called — when those tools are used in schools — they disproportionately affect lower-income students, students of color, [and students] with disabilities. And I think it is very appropriate to name the fact that when schools think about enforcing the cell phone ban, it's really important that there is a straightforward — first instance, this is what happens; second instance, this is what happens; third instance — that is universally applied, and that students don't see within the classroom, you know, so-and-so is allowed to do this, gets to put it in their bag rather than having it taken away the first time.

[00:34:49]
Brian Mackey: Yeah, or the cool teacher lets them do it. OK, we're going to come back and continue this conversation here on the 21st show. Stay with us.

It's the 21st show. I'm Brian Mackey, and our topic today is bans on cell phones and related electronic devices in Illinois schools. Individual districts and schools have been implementing their own policies, and starting next year, under a new state law, all districts will be required to have policies banning phones during school time — bell to bell, as they say.

A few more texts from our listeners, which you can join our texting group by sending the word "talk" to 217-803-0730.

Julie in Bettendorf, Iowa, said, "As a teacher who's already enforced this rule for two years, I'll tell you it works. Cell phones have multiple uses, but this also makes them the ultimate distraction machine. Our brains are meant to have immersive learning experiences, and especially for children whose brains are not fully developed yet, we need to train them and keep them healthy. You wouldn't want students watching TV for entertainment during a lesson or passing notes back and forth about non-academic content."

We also heard from Jean in Champaign, who said, "I think technology has robbed our youth of learning about life by living it, instead of playing it on a phone or computer. Cell phones have no place in classrooms for so many reasons — opportunity to cheat on exams, texting instead of listening, and the disruption a ringing phone brings to any assembly of people."

We're talking about this with Rebecca Hines Pifer, professor of education policy at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; state senator Christina Castro, who sponsored the legislation that was responsible for the statewide ban; and Julie Riley, president of the Bloomington Education Association. You can join us: 800-222-9455. That's 800-222-9455.

And let's come back to this idea that we were touching on a little earlier about safety and concerns around safety. Cell phones have become part of the way that families keep in touch. We heard from Karen in [Champaign] who said, "We live without cell phones for most of my 60 years of living, but now we have gotten rid of the infrastructure that cell phones replaced — landlines, the red emergency phones, even daily newspapers. We rely on cell phones for weather information, active shooter alerts, bus schedules, and communication to find each other after a fire or tornado, and I worry about the immigrant kids who could — I could imagine — cling to all connections to communication from their family members." End quote from Karen.

Senator Castro, can you talk about how this new statewide framework accommodates for that?

[00:37:44]
Sen. Christina Castro: I think one of the things I would say — again, there are some exceptions. Let me outline again what those exceptions are. When a medical professional determines it is necessary for the management of a student's health; to fulfill an individualized education plan, 504 plan, or another written accommodation plan; when the device is necessary for students who are English learners to access learning materials; when a student is a caregiver or is routinely responsible for the care and well-being of a family member. Again, we talked about high school students [being able] to access their phones during lunch and passing periods — obviously that is up to that particular school district if they wish to allow it. In the event of an emergency, if it is specified within the school district's emergency response plans. When a teacher or instructor has authorized the use of a device for instructional purposes — the Chromebooks, technology-based activities — those are school-issued-type devices. Those are exceptions.

The part that I want to highlight: in the event of an emergency, if it is specified within the school district's emergency response plans. There are also instances where there's a family emergency — it is no different in that situation where you can ask your teacher, "Hey, I don't feel well, I need to call my parents." You can go and ask for a pass to go to the office and contact your family member. And that's in some of the instances that I have seen — one of my assistant's sons is allowed still to do that. So there are still ways to get a hold of family members.

But I wanted to outline all of that because we were very intentional and thoughtful in how we looked at this. We also put in there that every three years this needs to be reviewed — for a lot of intents and purposes, technology continues to grow. And we didn't want the Illinois [State] Board of Education to constantly have to come back to the General Assembly for modifications to what I call the framework. They're allowed to review it every three years and identify what is appropriate or not appropriate.

I think one of the things that you're going to see — and Rebecca probably will allude to this — is the use of AI. We are seeing more and more schools rely on the use of AI. I'm not against AI, but there also needs to be a [discussion of] what is appropriate use of AI, to teach students what is appropriate and not to be reliant upon it. We shouldn't also be reliant on cell phones, wireless devices, technology software — because I'm a little bit of a fossil. I remember the pagers, and everybody wanted to be cool because you had a pager. But at the end of the day, we all knew our times tables, we all knew phone numbers by heart. We had to memorize a lot of those things because, like everything, technology fails. It does fail, and then what happens when that fails? How do you continue to move forward with whatever project you're working on, whatever you're required [to do]?

I bet a lot of us on this call probably don't know — probably remember — I have probably five phone numbers memorized, where many moons ago we probably had almost every phone number memorized. So I think when you're looking at trying to balance access to cell phones and technology, it's also making sure we as a society are not so codependent on it and reliant on it. It is not going away, like I have said. It is a part of our life, but we also need to set boundaries of how we let it integrate into our life.

I have personally started to pull back from the cell phone and the use of it. I put my "do not disturb" on on my devices. I try to develop healthy habits — like even when we're at a restaurant or out with friends, I put the device away. And you'd be surprised: it's hard at first, but you'd be surprised that once you get yourself into that habit, how liberating it is at times not to have the device on you.

And so I think that is one of the things as we continue moving forward with these types of policies — across not only the state but across the nation. Because this is not a red or blue issue. This is a bipartisan issue, and I want to thank all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who recognize this was a very important first step in making sure students focus on their [academic] progress and goals, and also helping teachers in the classroom by making sure those students focus on those educational achievements. So I think this is a problem regardless of where your background is, and how do we develop good policies that help us move forward.

[00:43:15]
Brian Mackey: Yeah, I can second what you said. The last phone number I memorized was a friend I made in 2005, and anyone I've met since then, it's just on speed dial or in the contacts app or however you want to say it.

Julie Riley, let me come back to you, because communicating with families here, I think, is going to be a big part of this — and I'm sure it's been a part of this since you have this policy already where you are. Talk to me about communicating with families about these specific policies, but also just in a general way. I mean, is it the role of educators to help parents understand what they can do to help their kids be more thoughtful about using technology such as cell phones, Chromebooks, those sorts of things?

[00:43:57]
Julie Riley: Sure. I think you definitely need a multi-pronged approach in communicating with families. There needs to be a really clear policy that's in handbooks and in board policy, sort of thing, but there also needs to be communication directly from the principal or other administrators about a building-wide expectation, and then again at the classroom level — that indeed, you know, I as a teacher, I'm going to enforce this rule — talking with students about why it's important. And surely there are times when we try and offer counsel to parents about why we think a certain practice is good for students and their learning — not just about cell phones, but also about things like independent reading time or having some physical activity each day. There are lots of things in which we try and help families navigate raising their child.

[00:44:57]
Brian Mackey: Let me come back to Rebecca Hines Pifer for maybe to help us bring this conversation home. We've only got about five minutes left in the show today. And let's go bigger picture here, because cell phones — you know, they were a technological revolution. They've become part of the fabric of our lives. There are people who look at artificial intelligence, or what we're calling artificial intelligence — large language models — and say, well, this is new now, but soon it's going to just be part of our lives. The story of technology and education: How do schools, educators, and the law keep up with everything that is changing, seemingly faster and faster these days?

[00:45:38]
Rebecca Hines Pifer: I think that there is a real place for experts, including education experts, at state and national levels to be clearly articulating when and how certain forms of technology — and in this case I am specifically thinking about AI — support learning and when they impede learning and when they might be distractions that aren't necessarily going in any direction.

I think that we often — and technology companies are very good at selling the idea that AI could help in this way or that way — however, the base products don't help in those ways. If we look at the way that the basic — you know, [Claude] or ChatGPT, any of those basic AI large language models — functions, they are not supporting the learning process. And so I think that a key point to make is that school districts rarely have the internal ability to carefully vet the technologies that are being sold to them. School districts, however, are the entity making most of the purchasing decisions in education. And so as we think about what might an agency like the Illinois State Board of Education be doing, one crucial role is to serve as a disseminator of capacity and knowledge about these new technology tools, because school districts have very limited resources and oftentimes have to make purchasing decisions about technology without complete information.

And I think that there are things that school districts should be looking at: like protection of student data, like the idea that if their students are interacting with large language models, that that data is not then being sent back to the company for training — because the truth is, if you're using a large language model and the data's going back to the company, that company is rapidly developing a highly detailed individual profile.

And I think that it's really important that policymakers at the state and national level and education experts with platforms are taking the time to work with school districts to communicate about what — again, this is a question of guardrails — what needs to be in place to allow for appropriate use of technology in schools. Because what is being sold by private companies — that's not what the companies are responsible for maximizing or optimizing. So at the end of the day, that is something that school districts need to be working with state and national experts on to identify, I think, a fairly constrained set of possible uses of technology in the classroom.

[00:48:47]
Brian Mackey: Constrained does seem to be the watchword these days.

Rebecca Hines Pifer is assistant professor in education policy, organization and leadership at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. State Senator Christina Castro represents the 22nd district — Elgin, Hanover Park and Streamwood in the Chicago suburbs. She's also the Democratic Majority caucus whip. And Julie Riley is president of the Bloomington Education Association, also a literacy coach at Bloomington Junior High.

Senator Castro, Professor Pifer, Ms. Riley, thank you so much for being with us today here on the 21st show. Appreciate your time.

[00:49:24]
Sen. Christina Castro: Thank you. Thanks for having us.

[00:49:26]
Rebecca Hines Pifer: Thanks [for] the conversation.

[00:49:30]
Brian Mackey: And that is it for us today. Coming up on tomorrow's show: You don't have to look far to see Illinois's deep economic ties to Canada. There are tens of billions of dollars' worth of goods and services going back and forth. So we'll talk about what President Trump's escalating trade war with our neighbor means here in the 21st state.

Plus, Pokey LaFarge came up in Normal, Illinois, came of age in the late '90s, early 2000s, but he found his calling in the music of several generations earlier. We'll talk with him ahead of his return to Bloomington next week, where he's launching an album and an international tour.

The 21st show is produced by Christine Hatfield and Jose Zepeda. Our digital producer is Colson Kahn. Technical direction and engineering comes from Jason Croft and Steve Mork. Reginald Hardwick is our news director. The 21st show is a production of Illinois Public Media. I'm Brian Mackey. Thanks for listening. We'll talk with you again tomorrow.

---

**Items flagged for human review:**

- **[00:00:35]** "Bbloomington" appears to be a typo in the original transcript for Bloomington; corrected in the refined transcript but flagged for verification.
- **[00:03:03]** The host refers to the guest as "Doctor Heinz Peifer" and later as "Heinz-Pifer," "Heinz Piier," and "Heinz Piifer." The closing segment uses "Hines Pifer." The spelling and pronunciation of Dr. Rebecca Hines Pifer's surname appears inconsistently throughout the transcript and should be verified.
- **[00:03:03]** The superintendent's district is referred to as "Rock Island Myan School District 41" and later "Rock Island Myland." The correct name appears to be Rock Island Milan School District 41 — [Milan] has been used throughout, but should be verified.
- **[00:06:26]** The host addresses the professor as "Doctor Heinz Peier" — flagged for name spelling verification (see above).
- **[00:18:56] / [00:19:43]** The caller is introduced as "Christina" by the host but addressed as "Cristina" when thanked. The caller's name spelling is uncertain and should be verified.
- **[00:23:06]** The host references "Rock Island Myland School District" — see Milan/Myland flag above.
- **[00:37:44]** "Karen inchampaignne" appears in the original transcript; rendered as "Karen in [Champaign]" — flagged for verification of the caller's city.
- **[00:45:38]** The professor refers to "cloud or chatgbT" — rendered as "[Claude] or ChatGPT" based on context, but the original may have intended a different AI product name. Flagged for verification.
- **[00:49:26]** The original transcript reads "Thanks.'s for the conversation" — rendered as "Thanks [for] the conversation." Flagged for verification.
- **[00:49:30]** "Pokey Lafarge" appears in the original transcript. The musician's name is spelled "Pokey LaFarge" — corrected in the refined transcript but flagged for verification.
- **[00:49:30]** "Normal Illinois" — the host says LaFarge "came up in normal Illinois." It is unclear whether this refers to the city of Normal, Illinois, or is a general descriptor. Rendered as "Normal, Illinois" based on context but flagged for verification.