Utah’s Cellphone, Smart Watch & Emerging Technology Policy

In 2025, the Utah Legislature passed a new law (Utah Code 53G-7-227) to limit student cellphone and similar device use during instructional time. This law shifts the default from unrestricted use—where devices were generally allowed unless a school or district adopted its own policy—to a statewide expectation that instructional time remains focused and free from personal device distractions.

Key Requirements:

• During classroom hours – Students may not use cellphones, smart watches, or “Emerging technologies” that function like or in place of a cellphone. (School-issued devices are not included.)

• Classroom hours are defined as scheduled, teacher-supervised instruction (physical or virtual) during regular school hours as part of the approved curriculum. Does not include lunch, recess, transitions, unsupervised study halls, after-school activities, or independent study outside scheduled instruction.

• LEAs must allow device use for:

  1. Health or safety emergencies

  2. School-wide emergenciesUse of the SafeUT Crisis Line

  3. An IEP or Section 504 accommodation

  4. Medical necessity

• LEAs may also allow use in other situations they determine appropriate.

• Local flexibility – LEAs can extend restrictions beyond classroom hours (e.g., during lunch or transitions) and can impose stricter limits than the state requirement.

• Default Policy Enforcement: Under SB178, if a local education agency (LEA) does not formally adopt a different device policy, the state-defined restrictions automatically become the binding policy. LEAs and schools are legally required to enforce this default, which prohibits student use of cellphones, smart watches, and emerging technologies during classroom hours—except in the limited exemptions specified by law. Failure to implement or enforce these restrictions may result in noncompliance with state law.

Effective Date: July 1, 2025

Media Highlight 

Why Utah Lawmakers Changed Their Tune on Cellphones in Schools

Across the country, more states are adopting or considering school-based cell phone restrictions. Nationally, public support for such policies is rising: 74% of U.S. adults now favor banning cell phone use during class in middle and high schools (up from 68% in 2024), and 44% support full-day bans (up from 36%) 

When asked about potential impacts, most Americans believe full-day bans would improve students’ social skills, grades, and classroom behavior, though fewer see benefits for physical safety. Concerns also differ: while 36% worry that governments won’t go far enough in regulating cell phone use in schools, 29% worry they may go too far. Younger adults are especially concerned about overreach, according to Pew Research Center.

In Utah, SB178 reflects this national trend by shifting the default: if a district or school (LEA) does not adopt its own policy, the minimum requirement is a classroom-only restriction. At the same time, the law preserves local control, allowing LEAs to tailor policies to community needs. This flexibility means Utah could be represented as both “gold” (statewide requirement) and “orange” (local adaptation) on the map below.

Source: Pew Research Center, “Most Americans support cellphone bans in schools” (June 2025); Campus Safety Magazine, “Which States Have Banned Cell Phones in Schools?”

Utah’s Evolving Landscape of Device Policies

Utah’s device policy landscape is rapidly evolving following the passage of SB178. Some districts had policies in place before the law and used this moment to refine or strengthen them, while others are still developing their approach. A few adopted early and more restrictive models, while many are gradually modifying policies as they learn what works best for their communities.

Policies vary widely not only by district but also by grade level. Elementary schools often face stricter restrictions than secondary schools, and in some LEAs, individual schools set rules that go beyond district minimums. Most districts fall somewhere between a Full-day Focus policy (devices stored or inaccessible for the entire day) and a Structured Use policy (the statewide default), with some allowing limited use at lunch or during passing periods.

As schools refine their policies, they are also adapting to how students use personal devices as learning tools, balancing classroom management with opportunities for educational integration. LEAs are explicitly building in exceptions for medical needs, emergencies, SafeUT access, and IEP/504 plans, as defined by law, while also providing discretion for teachers to permit device use for instructional purposes.

In short, Utah’s approach to student devices is best understood as a dynamic, iterative process: an evolving landscape where early adopters, flexible implementation, and ongoing adjustments are shaping a new culture of focus and connection in schools.

Best Practices

Implementing a device policy is more than setting rules—it’s a chance to strengthen school culture and support student success. The following best practices are designed to help schools move beyond compliance and build community ownership of the policy. By focusing on the “why,” engaging the right stakeholders, and planning clear and positive communication, schools can create an environment where reduced device use fosters focus, connection, and meaningful learning.

Explain the “Why”

Establishing a clear purpose is the foundation of a successful device policy. Schools that frame this as a culture change—rather than just device management—are more likely to gain buy-in and sustain long-term success. The “why” should be tailored to your community but grounded in shared benefits.

• Highlight Core Benefits: Increased focus, stronger teaching time, improved social connections, and reduced bullying.

• Connect to Community Needs: Identify the outcomes that matter most locally (e.g., student well-being, fewer classroom disruptions).

• Use Positive Framing: Position the policy as “more connection” or “better focus,” not a “ban.”

• Leverage Evidence: Share data (e.g., 72% of high school teachers say phone distraction is a major problem – Pew Research) and real-world success stories from other schools/districts.

Sample Approach

• Nebo School District Payson Junior High School

Engage Stakeholders

Effective device policies succeed when schools involve their community in planning and communication. SB178 gives schools local flexibility, making it critical to build understanding, invite input, and create a shared vision for how reduced cell phone use benefits students.

1. Start with the “Why”

Frame the conversation around benefits, not punishment. Emphasize that device policies support:

• Improved focus and learning environments

• Stronger student social connections

• More engaged teaching and classroom time

• Healthier technology habits and brain breaks

• Support for adults seeking balance

Use data and real-world success stories to build confidence (e.g., Pew Research showing 72% of U.S. high school teachers view cell phone distraction as a major problem; Tooele School District and Centennial Jr. High, which used early stakeholder involvement and positive messaging).

2. Identify Your Stakeholders

Bring together a diverse mix of voices to ensure buy-in and practical insights:

• Administrators – leadership alignment and resources

• Teachers – classroom perspectives and solutions

• Students & Families – shared ownership and consistent messaging

• SCCs & Community Leaders – advisory input and credibility

• Business or Civic Partners – potential funding or programmatic support

A representative task force or advisory group can guide both policy development and communication strategy.

3. Gather Input Collaboratively

Actively invite stakeholders to shape the policy and its rollout:

• Surveys – gather broad perspectives (Sample Stakeholder Engagement Survey)

• Workshops & Listening Sessions – explore ideas and address concerns

• SCC/Board Discussions – review and refine draft concepts

• Student Voice – involve students in announcements, posters, peer messaging, and ambassador programs 

• Family Voice – invite families to share at-home strategies (tech-free dinners, charging stations) and highlight them in newsletters or events

Celebrate progress and reinforce the impact by sharing stories from both students and families (e.g., testimonials, student-created videos, social media spotlights). See the Resource Library and Case Studies for inspiration, including Centennial Junior High School’s student-created video.

Define the Scope

Clearly outlining the scope of your policy helps ensure consistency, fairness, and community understanding. Decide what the rules cover, how exceptions are handled, and what supports will make implementation practical for staff, students, and families.

• Set the Scope: Decide whether the policy is district-wide or school-specific, and whether expectations vary by grade level.

• Clarify Covered Devices: Define all personal electronic devices (phones, smartwatches, earbuds, headphones, gaming devices, etc.) to avoid loopholes.

• Include Required Exceptions: Ensure alignment with SB178 by explicitly allowing for emergencies, IEP/504 plans, medical needs, mental health access (SafeUT), and safety threats.

• Reinforce Expectations: Consider using a simple student/parent agreement at the start of the year to build awareness and ownership (see Appendix for examples of a Student Agreement, Parent/Guardian Agreement, and combined Student/Parent Agreement).

• Align with Broader Policies: Connect device rules with bullying prevention, emergency procedures, and teacher support policies for consistency.

• Design Incentives and Consequences: Collaborate with stakeholders to establish fair approaches. Avoid suspensions as a consequence; instead, use Action Plans with family and counselor involvement.

• Plan Storage Solutions: Decide in advance where and how devices will be stored (lock pouches, lockers, classroom organizers).

• Ensure Communication Access: Establish designated methods for students to contact parents during the day if needed.

• Plan for Special Contexts: Clarify expectations for after-school events and school-issued technology.

Prepare for Implementation

Effective rollout is critical to making a device policy sustainable. Schools should invest in training, communication, and culture-building strategies while planning for a realistic adjustment period.

• Train and Onboard Staff: Provide training for teachers and staff, ideally after they’ve contributed to the policy design. Reinforce that consistent enforcement and positive modeling are essential.

• Communicate Clearly and Consistently: Share expectations with parents and students through multiple channels (letters, meetings, digital platforms), avoiding reliance on social media alone.

• Model Healthy Device Habits: Encourage staff to model the same behaviors expected of students.Promote Positive Culture: Provide families with resources to encourage off-screen activities at home (see Family/Home-Based Resources section).

• Track and Celebrate Progress: Monitor adherence to the policy and highlight improvements to build momentum.

• Plan for a Ramp-Up Phase: Expect challenges as routines shift. Use a phased rollout, allow time for adjustments, and reassure staff, students, and families that consistency will come with practice and support.

Support Educator Authority

Teachers need to feel confident and backed by leadership when enforcing a device policy. Principals should establish a clear school-wide policy with defined consequences, communicate it to students and families, and provide unwavering public support for teachers when questions arise. Schools should also set up an immediate backup system (e.g., an administrator on call) so that teachers are never left in prolonged power struggles with students.

To ensure teachers have the authority to enforce a new cell phone ban, school administration must first create a supportive framework. This involves: 

• Creating a Clear Policy: School administration must establish a clear, non-negotiable policy with defined consequences. This policy needs to be clearly communicated to all students and parents before enforcement begins. 

• Providing Unwavering Support: The administration's role is to provide unwavering public support for teachers. When a parent or student challenges a teacher's action, the administration must publicly back the teacher's enforcement of the school-wide rule. 

• Offering Immediate Backup: A critical step is creating a clear protocol for non-compliance. If a student refuses to hand over their phone, the teacher should have an administrator they can call for immediate assistance. This removes the teacher from a prolonged power struggle and reinforces their authority.

Establish Feedback Loops 

A strong feedback loop is essential to the success of any device policy. Past efforts to limit cell phone use often faltered because teacher perspectives were not consistently gathered or addressed. Since teachers bear the primary responsibility for day-to-day enforcement, administrators should schedule regular, structured check-ins during the rollout phase and beyond. These check-ins should focus on identifying unintended consequences, sharing effective strategies, and brainstorming solutions together. Creating clear, open channels for teachers to report challenges—without fear of blame—helps ensure that concerns are addressed quickly and that teachers feel supported as partners in building a healthier learning environment.

Practical Ways to Build a Feedback Loop

• Quick Pulse Surveys: Send short, anonymous weekly surveys (1–3 questions) to capture emerging challenges and successes.

• Regular Staff Meetings: Dedicate 10 minutes of existing faculty meetings to device policy reflections.

• Designated Point-of-Contact: Identify an administrator or lead teacher who gathers input and escalates concerns.

• Anonymous Reporting Forms: Provide an option for staff to share candid feedback without hesitation.

• Teacher Focus Groups: Host periodic small-group sessions to explore solutions and highlight what’s working.

Managing Expectations During Adoption

It is important to acknowledge that teachers themselves will also experience an adoption curve. Adjusting routines, reinforcing new norms, and navigating student pushback takes time. Administrators should set clear expectations that challenges are normal in the early phases and emphasize that the policy will grow stronger through collaboration and persistence. Framing this as a shared process of culture change—not just rule enforcement—will help teachers feel both supported and empowered throughout the transition.

Extending the Feedback Loop to Students & Families

Just as teachers need opportunities to share their experiences, students and families should also be included in ongoing reflection. Gathering feedback from these groups helps identify barriers to adoption, uncovers creative solutions, and strengthens buy-in. Examples of strategies include:

• Student Advisory Groups: Involve student leaders in providing feedback and sharing peer perspectives.

• Family Surveys: Send short check-ins to parents/guardians to understand home-to-school dynamics (e.g., communication expectations, stress points).

• Listening Sessions or Town Halls: Host opportunities for open dialogue with families and students, especially during the first semester of adoption.

• Celebrating Progress: Share success stories and improvements with families to reinforce that their input is valued and the policy is producing positive results.

By weaving together teacher, student, and family voices, schools can create a continuous improvement cycle that ensures policies are effective, sustainable, and embraced by the entire community.

Sample policies are informed by best practices and age-appropriate strategies. These examples offer sample language and structures that support effective enforcement while complying with SB178’s required exceptions (e.g., emergencies, medical needs, IEP/504 accommodations).

This section is designed as an LEA “Build Your Own Adventure” toolkit—you can select the components and language that fit your community’s needs, without starting from scratch.

This resource presents 2 different policy types, Full Day Focus and Structured Use, differing in timing and parameters of use that reflect the most commonly used types of policies. 

Components of Effective Device Policies

1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
   A short explanation of the policy’s goals, emphasizing promotion of student focus, safety, and social connection while supporting responsible technology use.

2. INTRODUCTION
   Provides context for the policy, including alignment with SB178, the school’s mission, and the process of stakeholder engagement to ensure community buy-in.

3. DEFINITION OF TERMS
   Clear definitions for key terms such as “personal electronic devices,” “classroom time,” “emergency,” and other relevant language to prevent misunderstandings.

4. EXPLANATION OF CHOSEN POLICY APPROACH
   Outlines whether the policy applies district-wide or varies by school, and whether grade-level differences exist. Explains the rationale for the selected approach—Structured Use or Full Day Focus—supported by research and the school’s goals for learning and engagement.

5. USE OF DISTRICT-OWNED DEVICES
   Details expectations and acceptable use guidelines for school-issued technology, including instructional purposes, security, and care responsibilities.

6. USE OF STUDENT-OWNED DEVICES
   Specifies rules for when and where personal devices may be used, including during non-instructional times, with guidance for classroom use to minimize distraction.

7. PARENT/GUARDIAN & STUDENT COMMUNICATION
   Identifies approved channels for contact during the school day and emergency communication procedures to ensure timely and safe information sharing.

8. EXCEPTIONS
   Covers situations required by SB178, including emergencies, IEP/504 accommodations, medical necessity, and SafeUT mental health access. Additional school-determined exceptions may include learning-based or legitimate after-school communication needs.

9. COMPLIANCE REWARDS PROGRAM (Optional but encouraged)
   Encourages positive reinforcement strategies such as recognition programs, privileges, or incentive events to promote adherence to the policy.

10. CONSEQUENCES FOR VIOLATION
    Defines progressive disciplinary steps designed to maintain instructional time and address root causes of violations, including Action Plans, parent involvement, and, when necessary, temporary loss of device privileges.

11. NOTICE TO STUDENTS AND PARENTS
    Outlines how the policy and any updates will be communicated, such as inclusion in the student handbook, email notifications, and presentations to the School Community Council.

12. CREATIVE & INNOVATIVE USES FOR ELECTRONIC DEVICES
    Provides guidance for intentional integration of technology in learning and community-building activities, including examples such as sharing resources, providing feedback, and enhancing student engagement.

13. OTHER PROVISIONS
    Addresses interactions with other school policies (e.g., bullying prevention, emergency procedures, teacher workload support), expectations for modeling healthy device habits, liability, common space use, and rules for hallway, lunch, and restroom device use.

14. FINALIZING THE POLICY
    Specifies the approval process, including recording the date/time once approved by the governing board, and establishes a review cycle (annually or biannually) to assess effectiveness and make updates as needed.

Schools can select a policy type that aligns with their goals for learning, student autonomy, and school culture. Each approach balances device management with student access and responsibility.  Common approaches are described below and example language for each approach can be found throughout the Sample Device Policy Language section. 

Reminder that if an LEA does not adopt its own device policy, Utah Code 53G-7-227 default restrictions automatically apply and must be enforced. 

OPTION 1: Full-Day Focus Policy 

Alternative names: “Bell-to-Bell” or “Secure Storage” or “Off & Away” (storage variation)

Description

Under a Full-Day Focus policy, students are required to store their devices for the entire school day—from the first bell until dismissal—or to leave them at home altogether, unless a teacher specifically authorizes use. This approach eliminates or minimizes device access, prioritizes sustained attention, reduces classroom disruptions, and promotes a more focused learning environment.

In Utah, a Full-Day Focus policy is strongly supported by Governor Cox, legislative leaders, USBE leadership, and experts in digital wellness as the most effective approach to improving student focus, reducing distractions, and fostering healthier school culture.

Key Features

• Devices remain physically inaccessible during school hours.

• Options for storage may vary by school resources, ranging from structured secure systems to student-managed “off & away.” Schools may also choose to prohibit student-owned devices on school property entirely.

• Applies consistently across grade levels, though implementation may be adapted for age appropriateness.

Benefits

• Eliminates distractions in class and throughout the building.

• Reduces enforcement burden on teachers.

• Supports in-person social skill development and positive school culture.

• Provides a simple, no-cost option for families when students leave devices at home.

• Creates consistent expectations for all students.

Considerations

• Centralized secure storage may require upfront investment. (See Interventions section for more information on storage options.)

• Off & Away is no-cost but requires consistent teacher and staff enforcement.

• Students may have limited access for after-school coordination or emergencies, which should be addressed through communication policies.

• Most effective when implemented schoolwide for consistency and fairness.

Sample Approaches 

In the examples below, you’ll find both simple and detailed device policies currently in use across Utah, representing a variety of schools and districts. Each has strengths worth considering, and most also have opportunities for growth—whether to align with Utah Code 53G-7-227 and required exceptions or to incorporate best practices for stronger implementation. We encourage LEAs that had policies in place prior to 2025 to review and update them as needed.