School district to implement new cellphone policy in the fall

The ping of a notification. A text sent between classes. Those familiar moments of student phone use are about to disappear at Rhinelander High School as the district is rolling out a “bell to bell” ban on personal communication devices (phones, smartwatches, etc.) in September.
According to district superintendent Eric Burke, when the new school year starts RHS students will be required to keep their personal devices in their lockers from the first bell of the day to the last, just as students at James Williams Middle School are currently required to do.
The policy change, approved by the school board on March 23, is in response to a new state law that may soon be broadened.
“We know that phones are a regular part of students’ lives, but we are seeing increasing impacts on attention, engagement, and peer interaction during the school day,” Burke told the Star Journal. “This shift is intended to help students stay more present in their learning, build stronger connections with peers, and reduce distractions to ensure the highest levels of learning possible.”
(Until the end of the current term, high school students are allowed to continue to use their phones during their lunch period and during passing time between classes.)

As of late October, state law requires school districts to enact a policy by July 1 banning the use of phones during instructional time. However, the state Assembly recently passed a bill that would put in place a bell-to-bell ban starting in 2027. That bil still requires approval from the state Senate as well as the governor’s signature, but Rhinelander has chosen to adopt it early.
Exceptions to the policy include use of school-issued devices such as Chromebooks. There are also exceptions for emergencies, health needs, IEPs/504 plans, and teacher-authorized educational use.
According to the district, the consequences for students found to be using their phone during school hours will be as follows:
1st offense: Phone confiscated for 1 day and returned to student at the end of the day.
2nd offense: Phone must be kept in the office for two days and returned at the end of the day.
3rd offense: Phone must be kept in the office for 5 days and returned at the end of the day.
During the board discussion, it was noted that parents will need to call the school office to connect with their children and vice versa.
“Parents can call any of our offices to get a message to their children,” Burke explained. “They can leave a message and we will check those messages throughout the day. Students use the phone in the Activities Office to call out if they need to during passing times. Parents can also use the Infinite Campus app to put in absences remotely. Students will also have access to their emails throughout the day on their chromebooks, as well.”
Another change coming for fall is a backpack ban.
“Prior to COVID we did not allow backpacks during school hours,” Burke noted. “We allowed backpacks once COVID started to prevent the use of lockers and communal touch points. We are moving back to not allowing backpacks (only small handbags, binders, etc...) that we had in prior years. The main reasons are for safety and security for all students and staff.”
When the personal communication device (PCD) policy revision was discussed by the district’s instruction and accountability committee on March 9, questions were raised about students’ privacy rights and the limits of school authority over personally owned phones.
The discussion was sparked by policy language stating that students have no expectation of confidentiality with respect to their use of personal communication devices while on school property. Retired police captain and board member Ron Lueneburg raised concerns about whether that language could be enforced — particularly for students who are 18 and legally adults.
“I look at it as a right to privacy versus a right to confidentiality,” said Lueneburg, drawing on his law enforcement background. He questioned whether the policy could hold up when applied to a personally owned device, as distinct from a school-issued Chromebook.
Board member Kurt Helke, a sergeant with the Rhinelander Police Department, agreed that at least some level of reasonable suspicion should be required before an administrator could search a student’s phone — a lower bar than the warrant required for law enforcement, but a bar nonetheless. “I don’t think they surrender their Fourth Amendment rights due to a school policy,” Helke said.
District administrators noted that the operative word in the policy is “use” — not “search.” The intent, they said, is not to assert a blanket right to search a student’s personal device, but to make clear that how a student uses their phone while on school grounds falls under school oversight. Content created or transmitted on a personal device during the school day is subject to the district’s scrutiny if there is reason to believe school rules were violated.
“That word ‘use’ — I know it’s a small word, but it’s very important in this policy,” a district administrator clarified. “It’s not insinuating search. There is no privacy once you’re here on site for the use of that phone.”
Administrators also acknowledged practical limits: staff will ask a student to hand over a phone but will not physically search a student’s pockets to retrieve it, they explained.