HB1195 would require the Hawaii Department of Education to adopt a statewide prohibition on student cell phone use during instructional hours beginning with the 2025-2026 school year. The bill bars students from using or operating electronic telecommunication devices during instructional time, and it also requires that students not possess such devices during the instructional day unless they are turned off and properly stowed away. It further prohibits student access to social media on school-provided internet, except when a teacher specifically directs its use for educational purposes.
The bill also directs the department to create and administer age-appropriate K-12 social media education, with a required focus for grades 6-12 on the social, emotional, and physical effects of social media. Topics must include mental health impacts, addiction, misinformation, manipulation, online permanence, personal security, cyberbullying, predatory behavior, human trafficking, and reporting suspicious online conduct. The department must make instructional materials available online and notify parents of their availability, and it must adopt rules to implement both the phone restrictions and the education program.
HB1195 would amend chapter 302A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by adding new statewide requirements for public schools concerning student device use and social media instruction. It would shift authority from individual schools setting their own cell phone policies to a uniform statewide standard, while also requiring the Department of Education to promulgate administrative rules under chapter 91. The bill would affect students in public schools, school administrators, teachers, and families, and it would create exceptions for students with IEPs, accommodation plans, section 504 plans, individualized health plans, teacher-authorized instructional use, and emergency situations.
The bill’s stated purpose and findings reflect a strong pro-restriction sentiment, emphasizing classroom disruption, reduced instructional time, and concerns about social media’s effects on student mental health and learning. The bill text cites broad teacher support for phone bans and frames the measure as a response to a statewide problem that individual school policies have not adequately solved. No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or formal vote history in the available materials.
The main points of contention implied by the bill are the breadth of the phone ban and how it would be enforced in schools. Potential concerns include whether a statewide prohibition is too restrictive, how schools would manage exceptions and discipline, and whether the ban could interfere with legitimate educational or emergency uses of devices. Another likely area of debate is the social media education mandate, including what content should be taught, how age-appropriate the instruction should be, and the extent of parental notification and transparency. The bill itself addresses some concerns by carving out exemptions for disability-related needs, health plans, teacher-approved use, and emergencies.