Hazlet is a tightly-knit, hard-working, blue-collar community of 20,000 citizens in Monmouth County that prioritizes sports, weekend barbecues, and their children. The municipality shares borders with Middletown, the largest district in Monmouth, and Holmdel, a prestigious, upscale area. The district serves 2700 students across eight schools and works hand-in-hand with all stakeholders to honor and support every youngster. To that end, when we hired an external candidate as our new principal at Hazlet Middle School, he arrived with a host of fresh ideas that were both untried and imaginative.
I realize that “thinking outside the box” is an overused phrase, but it turns out that Chris Albrizio and his team, really did have both the gumption and creativity to make things happen. Middle school is often a difficult experience for certain children, as they are beginning to leave their childhood for a semblance of the adults they will become, and that journey is often accompanied by inherent challenges and concerns. He was undeterred, and what follows is a first-person account from Hazlet Middle School principal, Christopher Albrizio, reflecting on this school’s evolving cell phone policy: A telling of a major success story on the issue of student cell phone use (one of several successful initiatives in this school), and long before Governor Murphy put cell phone restrictions into play. —Scott Ridley
A New Start
My arrival to a new school district in the summer of 2022 marked not just a personal transition, but an immersion into a community navigating a complex landscape. As a newly-hired middle school principal, my building housed 400 seventh and eighth grade students, together under one roof in the district. And like all schools with post-pandemic adolescents, an evolving “all hands-on deck” situation managing higher frequency/greater intensity behavioral incidents and the escalating demand for more resources was par for the course. At the same time, instructional staff who were nearing exhaustion over post-pandemic shifts, organizational change, and the strain of doing more with less were now being asked to adapt to new leadership.
Recognizing a Quiet Crisis
On a building tour before my official start date, I took notice of students using their cell phones in the hallways and classrooms. In my previous district, personal devices were not permitted, so it clearly stood out to me. While I was concerned about how unregulated phone use may undermine more than just instructional time, my plan at that point was to take it one day at a time. As the
“new guy,” I would simply spend the first year observing and learning from stakeholders with “boots on the ground” experience about what the pressing issues were and then help forge a path forward to address them.
In working with the School Climate Team that first summer, I gained a strong sense of the pulse of the school from those who knew it best. It became clear that there was at least a critical mass of staff who were looking to better balance access to technology with fundamental student well-being and academic focus. That committee’s work identified a significant list of needs with the most frequent and concerning challenge the distraction caused by cell phones. And because the committee was looking for progress, I brought a proposal of “no phones” to our summer district administrative roundtable (so much for one day at a time). The collective feedback, although appreciating the purpose, advised evolution, not revolution. So we began that first school year closely monitoring and continuing to gather insights through observation and discussions with staff as well as parents.
During those first few months, the challenge became increasingly evident. The existing Student Handbook did not have explicit guardrails outlined for technology other than the general Acceptable Use Policy and the District’s one-to-one computer initiative. As staff predicted and anticipated, the constant low hum of distraction was eroding student engagement and diminishing presence. That digital tether, while at times innocuous, was shaping and steering our school’s ecosystem. The simple act of managing appropriate boundaries was consuming an inordinate amount of time and energy, shifting focus from academics to management and policing.
More critically, the not always subtle, yet pervasive, negative mental health implications of constant connectivity were undeniable: fractured attention spans, inappropriate in-person social interactions, elevated basal levels of anxiety, and the uptick in digital drama impacting the school day was crippling our path forward. Needless to say, not all untoward incidents were directly related to phones, but at its height, we were averaging 150+ discipline referrals a month—not including high intensity incidents such as mental health crises and physical altercations. By the end of the school year, we had 1,300+ referrals with phone-related incidents representing about 20% of that data.
My assistant principal, Mrs. Massimini, and I were stretched so thin that we were wading through what felt like an endless sea of discipline referrals each day, then drowning each afternoon in parent close-out phone calls. We would try and reflect when we could. One afternoon, she shared, “I really don’t think the root of the issue is students breaking rules. I think they’re just fundamentally disengaged.” Not only was she right, her insight was profound. With students using their phones during transitions, while at lunch, and even covertly under desks in classrooms, their attention was constantly fragmented. Whether scrolling to consume content, playing a game, or simply anticipating a message made us wonder: if they aren’t truly present in the classroom, are they not fully present for interpersonal interactions as well?
From Policy to Practice, with Purpose
Initiating a major change during the school year is analogous to “turning a ship around in a storm.” To that end, we started developing basic guardrails for cell phones and accessories based on teacher preferences. We then began a communication campaign to alert students and families of an upcoming in-year change in expectations. We utilized our morning announcements, lunchroom alerts, and notices in the weekly parent newsletter ahead of the official start date. However, significant culture shifts require more than just new rules and alerts, they necessitate a deep understanding of why they are necessary. Therefore, at the same time, we dedicated discussions through character education lessons and schoolwide meetings to reinforce the research-backed reasons for the change: the impact of social media on adolescent mental health, the importance of focused attention for learning, and the benefits of fostering face-to-face interactions. We wanted to highlight that the focus was on creating an optimal environment for student growth and well-being.
The initial restrictions were basic: students may continue to carry their devices, but classrooms will utilize mandatory “phone parking lots” to help students resist the urge to interact with them. Students would be permitted to use their phones during lunch and study hall, but they must keep them out of sight otherwise. All forms of wireless accessories (i.e. earbuds) are no longer allowed; only wired headphones during class with teacher permission. We purchased door hanging shoe organizers for each classroom as the parking lot, closely monitored universal practice, and provided support and reinforcement to staff to ensure consistent application of the “no phones” posture. Every teacher’s classroom became a part of the guardrails, and that consistency was crucial in demonstrating our collective commitment. Finally, we made certain to reinforce that no student will be unreasonably denied the opportunity to be excused from class to contact a parent using a building landline. With that, we did start to see improvement. But because the new protocol only discouraged possession, it was not effectively curbing the presence of the device, which, for many adolescents, was synonymous with its use.
It became clear that to fully address the problem, we needed to eliminate the temptation. We needed to transition from “not encouraged” to “not an option.” So we opened that next school year with unequivocally clear expectations that personal devices (phones, smartwatches, wireless earbuds) are not permitted to be on a student’s person at any time during the school day, and to be left in their lockers. We also clarified enforcement—any device seen or heard would be confiscated, with clear consequences outlined in our student handbook including potential loss of privilege to bring a device to school at all.
Looking Back
The decision to pivot to a stricter “no-phone” posture stemmed from what our staff identified as a priority. Teachers wanted to reclaim the foundational purpose of their school: to be a place of genuine human connection; where students engage and thrive without constant interference and additional sources of cognitive noise. They lived firsthand the data Governor Murphy is now highlighting: the anxiety, the fractured attention, the social pressures. My school was forced to act proactively for our students’ well-being, for our academic mission, and for our own sanity.
Understandably, there was an initial period of adjustment. For some students, phones had become a crutch, a constant source of entertainment or social validation. We experienced the grumbles and gripes: “What if there’s an emergency?” or “I need my phone for my music.” We addressed the concerns head-on, reinforcing clear protocols for communication during emergencies, and highlighting the broader benefits.
In the classroom, we found the change helped students recommit to being a member of a team, learning to collaborate, contribute, and respect each other’s diverse perspectives, ideas, and needs. Beyond academics, one of the most profound and perhaps unexpected benefits has been the dramatic empowerment of social-emotional learning. Without devices, students are more present with each other. This is nowhere more evident than in our cafeteria and hallways. Where before, students were mostly head down tied to their device, we now see blossoming interpersonal skills. They more readily recognize social cues and how to respectfully manage dissent firsthand. Our hallways and classrooms now hum with real conversations, as students engage authentically to mediate conflict, work on their character, and put energy into developing meaningful and healthy relationships.
The proof has also been evident in our data as well: a marked decrease both in low-level behavioral and phone-related issues the likes of arguments over social media posts, ‘secret’ recordings, and of course the distraction of looking at non-academic content. This past school year, we processed only 285 total discipline referrals, a 76% decrease from that first school year, with cell phone related incidents making up only 10 of those referrals. It is true that limiting in-school phone access has pushed some related issues outside of school hours and off school grounds. And while it doesn’t eliminate the problem, it has afforded students a safer, more focused experience during the school day, free from the immediate pressures and clandestine communications that such devices facilitate.
Fundamentally, restricting cell phones was not about disciplining device use; it was about eliminating a pervasive distraction. The mere presence of a cell phone on a student’s person creates an irresistible pull, constantly diverting focus from learning, from their peers, and from the rich experiences happening in front of them. The phone itself is not the problem, but its distracting power is undeniable.
The shift at Hazlet Middle School wasn’t without its initial challenges, but the deliberate “why” and the comprehensive “how” yielded significant rewards, transforming our school into a more engaged, focused, and genuinely connected learning community. It is not to say that even now every day is perfect. But the overwhelming sentiment has been one of relief and renewed focus. Our students are learning and thriving without the constant digital noise.
A How-To Guide for Other Districts: Lessons from HMS
For other school districts considering a similar program, our experience offers valuable insights:
- Promote the WHY. Educating students and parents about the ‘why’ is crucial. Utilize schoolwide assemblies, advisory periods, and parent workshops to share research on adolescent brain development, social media’s impact on mental health, and the benefits of focused learning environments. When people understand the ‘why,’ they are more likely to support the ‘how.’
- Clear Communication and CONSISTENCY. The key to our success wasn’t just announcing a ban; it was about clear communication, consistent enforcement, and a strong partnership with our community. We distributed alerts, detailed explanations, and made sure every staff member understood and supported the rationale behind the policy. From a logistical standpoint, we explored various storage solutions, from ‘phone parking lots’ in classrooms, to secured pouches. The chosen method must be practical for your school’s unique layout and student population. Consistency across all grades and classrooms is paramount to avoid confusion and undermine the policy.
- START SMALL and Adapt. We learned a lot during our pilot phase. Flexibility in implementation, while maintaining the core principle of prioritizing our learning environment, allowed us to address unforeseen challenges and refine our approach. Cell phones were not the only major issue we were battling. There will not be a one-size-fits-all solution, but the principles of clear intent, consistent application, and community buy-in are universal.
- Strategic Flexibility and Trust-Building. While our core approach was a phone-free school day, we recognized the importance of building trust and acknowledging the social role technology plays outside of school. An excellent example of this strategic flexibility was the Phone Use Contract. As a privilege earned, we offered eighth graders controlled opportunities to use their phones, like at our eighth grade dance. The contract, which clearly outlines acceptable use, sharing boundaries, and consequences of misuse during the event, helped build trust that our protocol was not about absolute prohibition, but about appropriate use and context. It serves as a powerful incentive and a way to celebrate maturity and demonstrate that responsibility leads to earned privileges.
- Shared Responsibility in a Digital World We are clear-eyed that schools cannot, and should not, be solely responsible for managing every aspect of a child’s development, especially in the ever-evolving digital landscape. Issues like cyberbullying, social media overuse, and digital etiquette are fundamentally societal challenges. Our role is to create the best possible learning environment. Parents can support that mission by embracing their vital responsibility in teaching and enforcing responsible digital practices, just as they do with social etiquette, healthy habits, and overall life balance in this connected world.
Dr. Scott Ridley is the superintendent of schools in Hazlet and president of the Monmouth County Superintendents Roundtable
Christopher Albriziois the principal of Hazlet Middle School. He has served in a variety of building and district level leadership roles, including technology coordinator, assistant principal, principal, and chief school administrator.
