How have two high schools restricted cell phones to students, and how have they responded?

Two high schools in Slovenia have implemented different measures regarding students' mobile phone usage, sparking varied responses from both educators and families. At one school, phones are strictly prohibited during lessons and must be stored in bags or lockers, while at another, their use is permitted only in designated areas. Both institutions emphasize that their policies aim not just to restrict phone use, but to foster responsible and balanced technology habits among students. The new law regulating electronic devices in primary schools, which came into effect on September 1, 2025, mandates specific guidelines for device use during educational activities. Students can use their phones only when necessary for teaching purposes, as outlined in the annual work plan, or for health-related reasons. If they do not meet these criteria, they must store their devices in a specified area. This regulation applies exclusively to primary schools, leaving secondary schools with autonomy over their own rules. In contrast, secondary schools such as the two Catholic grammar schools in Slovenia have adopted distinct approaches. The School of Anton Martin Slomšk in Maribor has opted for a strict policy prohibiting phone use during classes. Phones must be kept in bags or lockers and set to silent mode. Exceptions are made when teachers explicitly permit their use, such as for specific applications during lessons. During breaks, there are no formal restrictions, though the school encourages alternative forms of communication. The headmaster of the School of Anton Martin Slomšk, Dr. Samo Repolusk, explained that if a student uses their phone improperly despite the rules, the teacher will confiscate it and hand it over to the principal. A discussion with the student and notification to parents follows. In case of repeated violations, disciplinary action is taken. Additionally, the school plans to introduce a dedicated storage area for phones during written exams or upon instruction from teachers. While the school does not enforce an absolute ban, it emphasizes the importance of teaching students self-regulation in using digital tools responsibly. Dr. Repolusk noted that students often discuss the consequences of excessive phone use, and some parents support the school's efforts. However, he acknowledged exceptions, such as parents who allow multiple phones or call their children during class. He expressed satisfaction when families align with the school’s approach to education. The school also observes challenges similar to those seen in broader society, including disrupted sleep patterns, reduced concentration, and increased screen time leading to less physical activity. It warns against online harassment and the imposition of values on young people, noting that families and schools sometimes struggle to keep pace. The institution stresses the need to provide alternatives to phone-based leisure both at home and in school. At the other school, the approach appears to be more lenient, allowing phone use in designated zones. While specifics remain unclear, this contrasts with the stricter policy at the School of Anton Martin Slomšk. As the debate around digital device management continues, both schools reflect the ongoing challenge of balancing technological access with the well-being and development of students.