By Dr. Jennifer Harrison, Principal, Legacy Magnet Academy
During the 2024–25 school year, like many schools across the country, we found ourselves grappling with a familiar challenge: how to balance technology in ways that support learning, well-being, and authentic connection. At Legacy Magnet Academy, a 6th through 12th-grade school centered on innovation and entrepreneurship, this question felt especially complex. Technology is deeply woven into how we learn, collaborate, and create.
What we did not fully understand at the time was this: the success of any policy depends less on the rule itself and more on whether students believe in it.
In spring 2025, we launched a one-month, schoolwide, bell-to-bell no cell phone policy as part of a broader tech detox. During unstructured times such as passing periods and lunch, we also restricted student use of one-to-one devices. Our goal was not to eliminate technology entirely, but to create intentional, tech-free spaces where students could put devices down, reconnect with the people around them, build relationships, move their bodies, and engage more fully with their environment.
To ensure students still had access to technology for academic purposes, we created a designated tech-safe zone in the library. During lunch, students who wanted to work on schoolwork could use devices in that space under the supervision of our librarian, who ensured the area remained focused on academic use rather than social or recreational screen time.
Within classrooms, we did not remove one-to-one devices. As a one-to-one district, instructional technology remained an important part of teaching and learning. However, we encouraged teachers to be more intentional about when and how technology was used. Throughout the detox, teachers reflected on opportunities to incorporate no-tech or low-tech instructional strategies and considered whether technology was enhancing learning or simply being used out of habit or convenience. In many cases, this led to richer discussion, greater student interaction, and a reminder that meaningful learning does not always require a device.
The detox was grounded in research and motivated by care for students’ focus, mental health, and relationships. But it also surfaced a critical lesson that has since reshaped our approach.
Understanding the “why” matters. But buy-in matters more.
Buy-in happens when students do not just comply with a policy, but when they feel invited into the problem-solving process and genuinely want to be part of the solution. We learned the hard way that buy-in cannot be retrofitted after a decision is made. It has to be built from the beginning.
Where We Went Wrong
Although the detox was temporary, we failed to bring students along early and often. We did not frontload our reasoning or create opportunities for students to engage in dialogue before the change began. From a student perspective, the detox felt like something done to them, not with them.
We understood our intentions clearly. Students did not.
What followed was one of the hardest leadership moments of my career. Multiple students, independently and unsolicited, asked to meet with me to share their honest feedback and frustration. High school students, in particular, expressed that the detox made them feel untrusted and excluded from decisions that directly affected their daily lives.
One student leader shared feedback that stayed with me deeply. As he explained, “We’ve always felt trusted here, like we were part of shaping the school with you. The tech detox made it feel like that wasn’t true anymore, like we couldn’t be trusted and decisions were being made about us instead of with us.”
That feedback hurt. It was painful to hear because it was never our intent. But intent does not equal impact.
While some students reported positive outcomes during the detox, such as increased face-to-face conversation and more movement around campus, others felt anxious, disconnected, or unsure how to navigate the school day without their phones. Without student buy-in, the detox ultimately limited our ability to engage students meaningfully in ongoing learning about technology use.
The biggest lesson was clear: policies without student voice do not stick.
Related Resource: Read our article in COSN, “Whose Call: A Student-Driven Approach to School Cell Phone Policies” (May 2025)
What We Changed Moving Forward
Rather than stepping away from the work, we recommitted to doing it differently.
This year, we partnered with Challenge Success and fundamentally shifted our approach by centering student voice from the start. The most significant change was the creation and elevation of our Compass Guides, a diverse team of student leaders and stakeholders who work alongside staff and administrators to help steer Legacy forward. Their purpose is to ensure that student perspectives actively shape the decisions that define our school’s learning experience, culture, and environment.
Student voice was not just about being heard. It became the pathway to shared ownership and lasting buy-in.
Compass Guides are not a symbolic group. They analyze survey data, facilitate student fishbowls, surface themes from peers, and help guide next steps. Adults do not pre-decide outcomes. We intentionally hold back so students can lead the learning and help shape solutions that feel authentic and fair.
Instead of rolling out a single, sweeping policy, we are now conducting two-week mini-pilots, each focused on one small, testable change. Our first pilot removes phone use during lunch. Students complete pre- and post-surveys, and Compass Guides dig deeper through qualitative conversations with peers. That feedback directly informs what we try next.
Early signs from our first pilot are encouraging. While some students initially found the change frustrating, many shared that the adjustment happened quickly. As one student explained, “At first it was annoying, but honestly by the second day I didn’t even notice my phone wasn’t an option anymore.”
Other students have described discovering new ways to connect during unstructured time, often by trying things they never would have noticed before. One student shared, “I’d never played hacky sack before, but I saw people playing and joined. Now I’m kind of into it.”
We are also seeing students experiment with healthier, more social uses of technology. As another student put it, “People still bring tech, but now it’s like someone brings a Switch and we all play together instead of everyone just being on their own phones.”
Related Resource: Learn about the Challenge Success School Partnership for K-12 Schools
Where We Are Now and Where We Are Going
We are currently in the pilot phase, learning alongside our students rather than dictating outcomes. This work is also happening within the context of California’s Phone-Free Schools Act, which requires schools to adopt a cell phone policy by July 2026. While compliance matters, our deeper goal is cultural rather than punitive.
By the 2026–27 school year, we plan to implement a schoolwide cell phone policy informed by student data, lived experience, and sustained dialogue. The process matters just as much as the policy itself.
What We Hope Other Schools Take Away
If there is one lesson we would offer other schools, it is this: tech balance is more effective than tech bans, and student partnership is essential for meaningful buy-in.
Students are experts in their own experience. When we invite them into the process early and often, we build trust, clarity, and shared responsibility. When we skip that step, even well-intentioned policies can undermine belonging.
This work is messy. It requires vulnerability, patience, and a willingness to admit when we get it wrong. But it also creates the conditions for more sustainable change.
We are still learning. And this time, we are learning with our students.
Related Resource: Discover more research, tools, and articles in our Technology, Social Media, and AI Resource Library.
Dr. Jennifer Harrison is the principal of Legacy Magnet Academy, a 6th–12th grade public magnet school in Tustin Unified School District focused on innovation, entrepreneurship, and student-centered learning. With more than 25 years in public education as a teacher and administrator across grade levels, she most recently led the planning and opening of Legacy, where student voice, well-being, and authentic engagement guide school design and decision-making. Dr. Harrison holds a doctorate in K–12 Educational Leadership from the University of Southern California.
Challenge Success, a nonprofit affiliated with the Stanford Graduate School of Education, elevates student voice and implements research-based, equity-centered strategies to increase well-being, engagement, and belonging in K-12 schools.