Relative to the use of mobile devices in public school districts
H574 would add a new section to Chapter 71 of the Massachusetts General Laws to restrict student use of mobile electronic devices during the school day in public schools. The bill broadly defines covered devices to include cellphones, smart watches, tablets, laptops, gaming-capable devices, and other portable communications or display equipment, while carving out certain non-covered items such as some vehicle-installed navigation equipment and devices that only tell time or track health or location. Under the bill, students generally may not use these devices during the school day at public schools.
The bill requires each school district to adopt a policy specifying when device use is necessary for an imminent safety threat, an Individualized Education Plan or Section 504 accommodation, certain English learner needs, or medical necessity. Districts may also adopt additional reasonable exceptions so long as they do not interfere with the learning environment. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education would be authorized to issue model policies, including options such as limiting use to certain times or locations or requiring devices to be stored in classrooms, offices, or secure containers. The department would also be directed, subject to appropriation, to create a grant program to help districts buy equipment needed to implement the restrictions, such as magnetic locking pouches, and to promulgate regulations within 180 days of enactment.
If enacted, the bill would create a new statewide framework governing student access to mobile devices in public schools and would require districts to formalize local policies consistent with the statute. It would also give the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education new rulemaking authority, including the ability to publish model policies and administer a grant program for implementation equipment. The bill would affect students, school districts, and the department, while also interacting with existing special education and accommodation obligations under IEPs and Section 504 plans.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be presented as a school-discipline and classroom-management proposal rather than a controversial fiscal or regulatory overhaul. Its structure suggests a policy goal of reducing distractions and improving the learning environment while preserving exceptions for safety, disability accommodations, English learner needs, and medical necessity. No formal vote history or hearing record is provided here, so there is no documented opposition or support beyond the bill’s sponsors.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the breadth of the device ban, the extent of local district discretion, and the practical burden of enforcement. School districts may differ on how strictly to prohibit devices, what counts as a reasonable exception, and whether storage requirements such as secure containers or locking pouches are feasible. Another likely issue is balancing classroom distraction concerns against student safety, accessibility, communication with families, and accommodations for students with disabilities, English learners, or medical needs. The bill also raises implementation and funding questions because the grant program is subject to appropriation.