LESC bill analyses are available on the New Mexico Legislature website (www.nmlegis.gov). Bill analyses are
prepared by LESC staff for standing education committees of the New Mexico Legislature. LESC does not assume
any responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they are used for other purposes.
LEGISLATIVE EDUCATION STUDY COMMITTEE
BILL ANALYSIS
57th Legislature, 1st S ession, 2025
Bill Number SB11 Sponsor Brantley
Tracking Number .228845.1 Committee Referrals SEC/SFC
Short Title Anti-Distraction Policy in Schools
Original Date 1/27/2025
Analyst Davalos Last Updated
BILL SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
Senate Bill 11 (SB11) would amend current law on Local School Boards (Chapter 22, Article 5
NMSA 1978) to define “ anti-distraction policy.” This policy would allow local school boards and
charter school governing bodies to voluntarily adopt measures restricting student use of personal electronic devices during the school day. Additionally, SB11 directs the Public Education Department (PED) to encourage local school boards and charter school governing bodies to implement anti-distraction policies. To support this
initiative, the bill includes an appropriation of $10 million to provide schools with specialized
storage equipment for securing students’ electronic devices. FISCAL IMPACT
The bill appropriates $10 million from the g eneral fund to PED for expenditure in FY26 through
FY28. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of FY28 shall revert to the
general fund.
PED would be directed to use these funds to reimburse school districts and charter schools for
purchasing specialized storage equipment. M anaging the reimbursement program may add
administrative tasks for PED. PED must ensure effective use of allocated funds and monitor reimbursement claims. School districts and charter schools would need to provide the initial
funding for purchasing specialized storage equipment as PED would reimburse schools for their purchase. SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
Effects of Electronic Devices in Schools. The widespread availability of digital devices among
students reshapes their daily lives and educational experiences. According to a 2022 survey
from
the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan and nonadvocacy fact tank, most teenagers now have
access to electronic devices: 95 percent own smartphones, 90 percent have desktop or laptop
SB11 – Page 2
computers, and 80 percent have gaming consoles. Additionally, the number of teen s using the
internet daily has increased from 92 percent in 2014 to 97 percent in 2022. Notably, the proportion
of teens who report being online “almost constantly” has nearly doubled, increasing from 24
percent in 2014 to 46 percent in 2022.
According to Pew Research Center , smartphone ownership among teens aged 13 to 17 also surged,
with a 22 percentage point increase since 2014, reaching 95 percent in 2022 compared with 73
percent in 2014. Many teenagers reported
smartphones offer more benefits than drawbacks,
highlighting their role in fostering creativity, inspiring new hobbies, and aiding academic success .
However, a significant number of teens also acknowledged the adverse effects of smartphones on
social skills, with many finding it more challenging to form healthy friendships.
Since smartphones serve as platforms for social media apps frequently used by teenagers,
understanding their broader impact is crucial. For instance, t he American Psychological
Association (APA), the United States primary professional psychology organization, released a
report in April 2024 addressing the influence of social media on children. Research
from 2022
further underscores the challenges associated with technology use, showing e xcessive or
problematic us age among secondary school students correlates with lower academic performance
and reduced feelings of school connectedness.
According to ExcelinEd , a non- profit organization focused on student-centered policies, data
from
the International Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows a
clear correlation between electronic distractions and academic performance. Specifically, students
who spend more leisure time on devices and social media, especially during school hours, tend to perform lower in math. ExcelinEd notes the use of cell phones in classrooms undermines the
learning environment, contributing to decreased academic performance and increased classroom
distractions, with low-income students disproportionately impacted.
Further reporting from EducationWeek
, a nonprofit news organization covering kindergarten
through 12th (K-12) grade education, corroborates these findings. Reporting on the same data, the
publication indicated approximately two-thirds of U.S. students admit to being distracted by digital
devices during school hours, while 54 percent report being distracted by classmates using the se
resources. Teachers share similar concerns, with many emphasizing the detrimental effects of cell
phones on student attention and their social emotional development.
A survey
conducted in 2023 by Pew Research Center found 33 percent of U.S. public K-12
teachers identify students’ distraction due to cell phone use as a major classroom issue. The
problem is more pronounced in high schools, where 72 percent of teachers report significant
disruptions, compared with 33 percent in middle school and 6 percent in elementary schools.
Concerns extend beyond academic performance to student mental health. According to a report
by
the National Education Association (NEA), a nonprofit educational advocacy organization, over
90 percent of educators believe student mental health is a critical issue in their school. Many
educators note an increase in mental health concerns in recent years, attributing this increase to
factors such as social media, excessive use of personal devices, and insufficient mental health
resources in schools.
In-School Personal Device Restrictions. The majority of educators strongly support policies
limiting personal device use in schools. According to NEA, 90 percent of its members advocate
restricting cell phones and personal devices during instructional time. Additionally, 83 percent
SB11 – Page 3
favor a full-day ban on personal devices, allowing exceptions only for essential needs such as
medical or assistive technology.
Data from a 2022 survey on safety and security measures by the National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES), a statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Education, fu rther highlights this
trend. The survey found that over 76 percent of schools nationwide have implemented policies
prohibiting non-academic use of cell phones or smartphones during school hours.
Policies on P ersonal Electronic Devices in New Mexico Schools. Many school districts and
individual schools in New Mexico have implemented policies restricting personal electronic
devices during school hours to minimize distractions and enhance the learning environment.
Notable examples include:
• Albuquerque Public Schools: The Student Acceptable Use of Technology Policy
allows
students to possess devices but requires them to be powered off and out of sight during
school hours and activities. Schools may adopt additional internal procedures for stricter
regulation.
• Santa Fe Public Schools: The Wireless Communication Device Policy prohibits personal
devices at all school levels, with limited exceptions for middle and high school students at
specific times. While the policy has not been amended since 2013, Superintendent Hilario
Chavez announced plans to revamp it in August 2024.
• Las Cruces Public Schools: Board of Education p olicy permits students to possess devices
on school property and at events but imposes restrict ions that vary by grade level .
• Ruidoso High School: The 2022-2023 Student Handbook mandates devices be silenced
or powered off and stored in the student’s backpacks, pockets, or purses during school
hours. Use is allowed before school, at lunch, or after school.
• Hobbs Middle School: The 2023-2024 Handbook prohibits device use during the school
day and requires devices to remain off and out of sight.
National Context. As of 2024, several states have enacted legislation regulating the use of cell
phones and personal devices in schools. These measures are designed to minimize distractions and
improve student focus during the school day. Figure 1. State Policies Regarding Cell Phones i n
Schools below illustrates the states that have implemented restrictions on personal electronic
devices in schools and the severity of these measures.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
PED. Managing the reimbursement program for specialized storage equipment may add
administrative tasks for PED. PED must ensure effective use of allocated funds and monitor reimbursement claims. PED may need to develop guidelines or policies for implementing anti-
distraction measures and using the storage equipment.
Incentives Policy Policy Recommended Policy Required Statewide Restriction
Arkansas Alabama California Florida
Delaware Alaska Indiana Louisiana
Idaho Connecticut Kentucky South Carolina
Pennsylvania Kansas Minnesota
Oklahoma Ohio
Oregon Virginia
Washington
Figure 1. State Policies Regarding Cell Phones in Schools
Source: ExcelinEd, Education Commission of the States, and Education Week
SB11 – Page 4
School Districts and Charter Schools. Schools may need to develop and enforce anti-distraction
policies, potentially leading to increased accountability for students and staff. New Mexico Public
Schools Insurance Authority (NMPSIA) noted SB11 lacks measurable outcomes to evaluate the
success of anti-distraction policies in enhancing academic success and student well-being.
OTHER SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
Federal Legislative Efforts. In November 2023, U.S. S enators Tom Cotton (R- Ark.) and Tim
Kaine (D- Va.) introduced Senate Bill 3266, the Focus on Learning Act
. This proposed legislation
aimed to mandate that the federal Department of Education and the federal Department of Health
and Human Services study and report on the effects of cell phone use on various aspects of student
life, including academic performance, engagement, mental health, behavior, classroom instruction,
and school climate. This bill ultimately failed to pass.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
• LESC Files
• Early Childhood Education and Care Department (ECECD)
• New Mexico Public Schools Insurance Authority (NMPSIA)
ND/clh/mca/jkh