In two very different corners of North America, schools are grappling with the role of technology and tradition in the classroom—sometimes with more confusion than clarity. From the digital dilemmas facing British Columbia’s students to the cultural controversy over beloved musicals in Los Angeles, parents, educators, and administrators are wrestling with what it means to educate children in 2025.
In British Columbia, a sweeping cellphone restriction took effect at the start of the 2024-2025 school year. Premier David Eby made the government’s intentions clear, saying in August 2024 that the policy was designed “to make sure that kids can be kids and can learn and can develop strong social relationships with their friends at school in the absence of these devices.” The new rule is simple on its face: a bell-to-bell ban on cellphones in classrooms, hallways, and schoolyards, with exceptions only for students with disabilities.
But as Heather Pauls Murray discovered, the reality is anything but straightforward. Her son, Hamish, entered Grade 9 at a Chilliwack high school this September without a smartphone—a conscious family choice. “It’s hard enough as a 42-year-old woman to stay off my phone,” Murray explained, reflecting on her family’s decision to keep their three children “more present.” She and her husband, a computer scientist, wanted their kids to experience real-life friendships, hobbies, and nature before succumbing to the ever-present pull of digital devices.
Yet, on the very first day of high school, Hamish found himself in an awkward position. In one class, the teacher asked all students to place their phones in a box at the front of the room. When the teacher noticed one phone missing, Hamish had to raise his hand and explain he didn’t own one. “My kid is pretty confident, so it wasn’t a big deal. But this was the first day of high school, and another kid might have been mortified,” Murray recalled. The irony wasn’t lost on her: “It’s like rule one, no phone. Rule two, teacher decides if you can use your phone.”
Hamish’s challenges didn’t end there. Some assignments required downloading apps or using Microsoft Teams for group work. As the only student without a smartphone in several classes, he scrambled as teachers tried to find ways to include him. Eventually, the school provided a tablet, but Murray was left questioning the equity of the policy. “Kids who might not have a phone because their parents need to spend that money on groceries or housing could feel very singled out,” she said.
The Chilliwack school district’s policy, like many across B.C., requires students to silence and store devices during instructional time. However, it gives teachers discretion to allow phone use for educational purposes. In a statement, the district clarified that students “wouldn’t be expected to do homework on a cellphone” and that schools work directly with students facing barriers to technology access.
This patchwork approach has left some educators and counselors frustrated. Calvin White, a school counselor, described the ban as “little more than a rule to be broken.” He observed, “Kids will use it whenever they can get away with it, and no teacher wants to be the one getting kids in trouble for it.” White also pointed out that many students show signs of phone addiction, questioning whether “responsible usage” is even possible when students’ minds are already wired to use devices in a certain way.
On the other hand, some experts see potential in integrating technology thoughtfully. Ron Darvin, a professor in the University of B.C.’s department of language and literacy education, noted that digital literacy is crucial in today’s world. Phones, he argued, can help with translation, math games, and collaboration, but more importantly, they can be tools for teaching students to verify information and recognize misinformation. Still, Darvin acknowledged the “tension” inherent in balancing educational benefits with the need for real-world social interaction. “We want students to be able to use the phones in a way that aids education, but doesn’t prevent them from interacting with the people around them,” he said.
Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, a different kind of educational tradition is under threat. The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) announced plans to ban a celebrated series of fifth-grade musical plays about American history at Marquez Charter Elementary, citing concerns over cultural insensitivity. For nearly three decades, students have performed musicals such as Miracle in Philadelphia (about the Constitutional Convention), Hello, Louisiana! (the Lewis and Clark expedition), and Water and Power (the Industrial Revolution). A fourth-grade play, Gold Dust or Bust, covers California history.
The educational impact of these musicals is well documented. According to a UCLA study, Marquez students scored more than twice as high on history assessments compared to peers at other schools. As reported by KABC-7, researchers found that students who participated in the plays “did extraordinarily well and far outclassed their competition.” Many alumni, like Jeanette Mills, have gone on to careers in the performing arts, crediting their early exposure to Lantos’s productions.
However, LAUSD officials raised objections to specific elements of the plays. They flagged language considered racially offensive, jokes about the Three-Fifths Compromise, and depictions of slavery that might overlook the humanity of enslaved people. The district also took issue with the lack of female representation at the Constitutional Convention—a historical reality, though female students often play male roles in costume. After community pushback, the district relented slightly, permitting only Miracle in Philadelphia to continue, but only if the script was changed to be more politically correct. For example, a deaf character would be described as “hearing impaired,” and a female character could no longer be called “cutie pie.”
Jeff Lantos, co-writer of the musicals and a Tony Award nominee for K-12 education, expressed his frustration to Breitbart News. He described being summoned to what he called “a Star Chamber of four or five DEI experts down at LAUSD” and being barred from campus until the issue is resolved. “We’re essentially doing Hamilton three times a year for fifth graders—it’s hard to imagine anyone would object to this,” Lantos lamented. He also noted that for 28 years, scenes involving African-American and Native American characters had been performed without complaint.
In a statement to Breitbart News on September 22, 2025, an LAUSD spokesperson clarified, “No decision has been made at this time. We understand the value that participating in a play holds for student engagement, creative expression, and growth, and we are committed to our students having these experiences.” Still, the future of the musicals remains uncertain, especially after the Marquez Charter Elementary school burned down in the January 2025 Palisades Fire, forcing students to perform at Fox Studios.
Both the B.C. cellphone policy and the LAUSD musical ban highlight a common struggle: how to balance educational innovation and inclusion with the realities of modern society. Whether it’s the expectation that every student has a device, or the demand that history be retold in a way that meets contemporary cultural standards, schools are at the heart of debates about what—and how—children should learn. For now, parents like Heather Pauls Murray and educators like Jeff Lantos are left navigating the gray areas, advocating for their children and their communities in a rapidly changing educational landscape.
