As of Jan. 1, 2026, all North Carolina public schools must have a policy in place that “at minimum… prohibits students from using wireless communication devices during instructional time,” according to the NC General Assembly’s House Bill 959. To date, the vast majority of North Carolina’s school districts have adopted this bare-minimum policy, which allows free access to wireless devices between every class and lunch. The Smart-Phone Free Childhood USA and others has given a “C” rating for its ability to protect our children.
Only a handful of the state’s districts have opted for the “best practice” policy that the NC Governor’s Council for Student Safety & Wellbeing recommended to protect students’ mental health: cell phones off and away, from the first bell to the last bell of the day.
North Carolina is now completely surrounded by states with bell-to-bell policies. A total of 17 US states, plus DC, have these best-practice polices, and another five states are in process of passing bell-to-bell bills.
As a North Carolina resident, public health professional, and a new father concerned about my daughter’s future educational environment, I strongly urge members of the NCGA to amend the current bill in the 2026 short session. To protect all the state’s children in every publicly funded school from the harms associated with access to wireless devices throughout the school day, to allow students a distraction-free environment, and to allow teachers to focus on teaching, I urge our lawmakers to pass a state-wide, bell-to-bell policy, and include no use of social media to communicate with students.
Everyone wins from a bell-to-bell policy, as the outcomes are quickly becoming clear. In my evaluation work with Granville County Schools, we have found significant, positive correlations since the bell-to-bell policy began: increases in academic performance in math, science, and English language arts; major reduction in disciplinary referrals, long-term suspensions; and improved teacher satisfaction.
Positive correlations of bell-to-bell outcomes from other schools in the US and abroad are similar, and also include: improved teacher-student relationships, reduced social isolation, reduced demand for mental health counseling, and reduced incidences of school violence and cyberbullying. The results of a national survey of more than 20,000 teachers confirm these benefits.
“There’s a gradient,” concludes Dr. Angela Duckworth, the study lead, “The farther the phone, the more restrictive the policy, the better the outcome.”
Beyond Granville County, a handful of other districts in the state have committed to bell-to-bell policies for similar benefits, including at least Brunswick, Chatham, and Randolph counties.
The primary pushback from parents on bell-to-bell policies seems to be the desire to communicate with students in the event of school shooter. Fortunately, school safety experts, including the National Association of School Resource Officers, have found that students are safest when they do not have their phones, and are instead focused on the adults in front of them providing instructions, with their location not revealed by a phone’s lights and binging, and clear access to the school for faster response time by first responders. School resource officers found that students are also safer on ordinary school days, due to fewer in-school fights (largely coordinated through social media). For instance, Boston’s largest high school had very serious issues with violence that were largely resolved with their bell-to-bell policy.
Former English teacher Emily Cherkin has made the clear distinction between what is “scary” vs. what is “dangerous.” It may be scary for parents not to be able to contact their children in case of an emergency. Yet giving a child a smart phone is dangerous, due to social media’s addictive design that lures children into many risks: reduced self-esteem, child predators, promotion of suicidal behavior, untraceable drug deals, and increased rates of psychiatric and medical conditions related to excessive screen time — all well documented by psychiatrist Victoria Dunckley, MD; Jonathan Haidt, PhD and others.
Because of these dangers, at least 42 US attorneys general filed suit against social media giant Meta, plus a total of 200 US public school districts, including 12 in North Carolina. House bill 959 calls on boards of education to “prohibit and prevent students from accessing social media platforms…” and provide instruction on social media and its effects on health, once in elementary and middle school, and twice in high school. Yet the current NCGA bill allows children to access social media platforms every day between every classes.
Local control for bell-to-bell policies can be maintained with decisions about implementation: consequences for students who violate the policy, education to the school community, and storage solutions. Storage can be accomplished in numerous ways, such as phone lockers, Yondr pouches, or very-inexpensive padded envelopes kept in plastic crates and collected each morning.
As a public health professional, I am an ardent defender of grass roots, bottom up, and localized solutions to public health challenges. And yet, I acknowledge that there are certain public health crises which warrant a centralized response. Our epidemic of youth mental illness, one that is largely a product of excessive screen time and social media use, is that crisis. Over the last decade, the proportion of high school students reporting persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness increased by 40%; the share seriously considering attempting suicide increased by 36%; and the share creating a suicide plan increased by 44%.
These numbers should shock us. Unless something powerful is done, these numbers could get worse. Anything less than a statewide, bell-to-bell policy will not address the depth of this crisis. I urge parents, local school boards, and the NC General Assembly to commit to creating phone-free schools in 2026.