Across the United States, a consensus has emerged around the need to limit youths’ access to smartphones in schools. Manhattan Institute polling done in July 2024 revealed that 60% of likely voters nationwide are extremely or very worried about cellphone use in school. Despite today’s divisive political landscape, 73% of voters agree that schools should take steps to limit access to cellphones in schools. Generation Z, those born after 1995 and often lauded as “digital natives,” was the first cohort to grow up with constant access to technology. This fluency with digital devices was often framed as a benefit, equipping today’s youth to navigate the modern world with ease.
But as social psychologist Jonathan Haidt and others have written in recent years, this constant digital stimulation—especially on social media platforms—comes with downsides. As Haidt notes, the six to eight hours of screen-based leisure that teens spend each day comes with a high opportunity cost: time not spent playing with friends, learning new skills, and exploring the physical world. In a recent poll of 1,006 Gen Z adults aged 18 to 27, 60% responded that they use social media for at least four hours each day, with 22% spending seven or more hours daily. Almost half wish that social media platforms like TikTok and Snapchat were never invented, indicating the frustration that many young American adults feel with social media.
Generation Alpha—the children born from 2010 onward and often known as “screenagers”—has screen time rates that exceed those of previous generations, even Gen Z. About 65% of Generation Alpha spends up to four hours a day on social media, with 58% obtaining a smartphone before the age of 10. This younger generation of students has already had its elementary educational and social experience hindered by COVID-19 related masking and remote-learning policies. Smartphone dependency is eroding their educational capabilities and social development further. Americans increasingly recognize that smartphone dependence can harm our youngest generation.
Mounting evidence from personal experiences as well as from scientific studies demonstrates that smartphone use relates to poorer academic performance, heightened anxiety, loneliness, distress, and risks to healthy childhood socialization. Teachers confirm that cellphones and smartphones are pulling students’ attention away from their work. A recent Pew Research poll found that “72% of high school teachers say students being distracted by their cellphones in the classroom is a major problem.” As a result, states, cities, and individual school districts across the U.S. are revising their policies on phone use in public schools. The problem transcends partisan, state, and even national lines. Large urban and small rural districts, Republican and Democratic jurisdictions alike, are beginning to look for solutions. The United Nations’ UNESCO body has even called for a global smartphone ban in schools.
1. The Deleterious Effects of Smartphones in Schools
Smartphone use in schools can harm children in at least two major ways: 1) distracting from the educational experience of students, particularly as related to learning and classroom management; and 2) impeding healthy childhood socialization. These two aspects of the in-person, academic experience can be fundamental to children’s development into well-functioning, well-adjusted adults. Local education agencies’ authority to restrict smartphone use is justified for potentially two reasons related to these harms. First, public schools historically operate in loco parentis, meaning that when minor children are entrusted by parents to a school, the school has a duty to support the learning and safety of its students, but schools’ ability to do so may be particularly impeded by smartphone use.
Second, the role of the public education system is, at least in part, preparation for productive participation in a democratic society. Contrary to arguments for technology use, given its existence in the “real world,” schools are the primary place where children learn to interact face-to-face, which remains necessary for a well-functioning society. In addition to distracting from the educational experience, smartphone use negatively impacts academic performance. Students with access to smartphones often use them during lectures, when they are supposed to be reading and performing schoolwork, and when they are supposed to be learning from one another in group-learning settings.
2. Distracting from the Educational Experience and Impact on Academic Performance
Even when students are not actively using their phones, they can be preoccupied by their mere presence and accessibility: they think about incoming texts, feel vibrations, and hear hushed alert sounds. Students feel compelled to check their smartphones with alarming regularity, constantly thinking about their next use. According to Santa Barbara High School Principal Bill Woodard: “If that phone is pinging in your pocket, it can take you up to 20 minutes to refocus.” Data and anecdotal observations support these contentions. Research using granular data that tracked mobile phone notifications found that teens received 237 notifications a day, on average, with about 25% of those notifications occurring during the school day.
In one study of college students, over 90% reported receiving texts while in class, and 86% reported texting someone from class. A separate study found that using Facebook or texting while doing schoolwork can tax cognitive processing capacity that may preclude deeper learning. Smartphone use and addiction have also been associated with poorer sleep quality, and sleep quality has a significant correlation with academic performance. Perhaps more directly relevant, in addition to the complicated effects that screen time may have on the brain and learning processes, a systematic review of the literature on smartphone use in schools elucidates a large body of evidence that supports a negative relationship with academic performance.
Several researchers have independently found that phone use distracts students in significant ways, noting that “cellphone addiction and distractedness played key roles in impacting the effects of condition on test performance” and that “[p]articipants who kept their cellphone performed worse on the quiz for material presented in the third quarter of the lecture than those without cellphones. Distracted participants performed worse on the test for the same material than those who were not distracted. Findings indicate that having cellphones in a short lecture has its largest impact on attention and learning 10-15 minutes into the lecture.”
3. Corrosive Effects on Social Development and Well-Being
Smartphone use in schools also harms children by stunting their social development and well-being in several ways. First, children distracted by their phones have fewer synchronous interactions with their fellow classmates. Children often sit together in silence while they scroll on their phones in school instead of talking and learning with one another. At recess, they likewise eschew play for phone time, despite overwhelming evidence that children need ample opportunities for play, which is fundamental for healthy brain development and social functioning. It is difficult to overstate how the reduced frequency of these social interactions risks healthy childhood development.
Haidt concludes that the only plausible theory for the international decline in teen mental health over the last 15 years “is the sudden and massive change in the technology that teens were using to connect with each other.” Other research shows that children with latent social anxiety may choose digital interactions over in-person ones: “opting to substitute digital media for interpersonal communication to avoid feared situations may become cyclically reinforced over time, making the person even more avoidant and worsening the symptoms and severity of social anxiety disorder.” Research has also shown that “by banning smartphones, students communicate and socially interact directly with each other more often. This promotes the development of social skills and strengthens the community within the school.”
Relatedly, cellphone bans can result in “positive effects on satisfaction, conflicts, and competition.” In fact, proactive in-person social interactions in place of excessive social media use can be effective for helping students get past social anxiety. Experiments reducing social media exposure generally show improvements in anxiety and depression. Second, the content that children overconsume when using applications like Instagram or TikTok has been shown to increase anxiety and depression in children, especially in girls. Social media use is significantly correlated with these mental health conditions. Young adults are particularly susceptible to feelings of envy and dissatisfaction with their lives when exposed to social media.
4. Emerging Approaches to Cell and Smartphone Bans
Fully 77% of public schoolchildren nationwide already attend a school with some sort of cell- or smartphone restriction for nonacademic use. Most teachers support smartphone restrictions or bans. Nationwide, 90% of teachers in the National Education Association union support policies prohibiting cellphone use during instructional time, and 83% favor going further to prohibit phone usage during the entire school day. An NEA-published article found that many teachers wanted guidance and a clear policy from the school district, but many school administrators avoided the responsibility to set uniform rules. In New York State, 60% of voters support banning smartphones in classrooms.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul has expressed support for a “bell to bell” (8 am to 3 pm) prohibition on the use of personal internet devices in public schools. In May 2024, Hochul said that education leaders “have to liberate” public school children from the fear of missing out on what others might be saying about them and the felt need to respond to their smartphone notifications. Among NYC public school teachers, 63% support a citywide ban. The details of policy design and enforcement have been left to each school, however, resulting in inconsistency and a halting start to a citywide policy. While 38% of teachers in schools that have implemented bans say that they have been a success—indicating that bans can work—a greater share (40%) said that bans had been a failure.
Those who called their school’s ban a failure most frequently blamed a lack of planning and organization. Among teachers in schools that had a ban, 70% supported introducing a citywide ban. Michael Mulgrew, president of the powerful city teachers’ union, has said that any citywide policy should incorporate what has worked in schools that have implemented restrictions. According to a union press release, educators reported that in middle and high schools, collecting phones as students walked into the school building worked the best. For elementary schools, keeping phones in backpacks and turned off worked best.
5. Recommendations
Because of the detrimental impact on socialization and classroom learning, and the potential harms to healthy childhood socialization, states, cities, and school districts should severely restrict the use of smartphones on school grounds for the entire school day and during other school-sponsored activities. This approach is aligned with the scientific and experiential evidence that the use of smartphones in schools distracts students from social interactions and academic responsibilities necessary for healthy development. It also accords with Haidt’s recommendation of a completely phone-free school day.
As the experience of multiple districts and schools attests, such a policy must be clearly defined and consistently enforced to achieve effectiveness. Our model policy thus proposes, in essence, that no smartphones should be visible on school grounds during school hours or in school-sponsored activities. Because school hours may vary from district to district or school to school, we refer to the school handbook for the times of day in which phone access is to be restricted.
School districts should require students to deposit their smartphones in a locker or other secure storage system, give the devices to a school official when they enter the school building for safekeeping, or keep their phones turned off and stored in backpacks throughout the entire school day. Those who have deposited their phones can retrieve them at the end of school hours, ensuring a phone-free learning environment. Ideally, districts would require locker-based storage, but resource limitations and respect for local preferences call for the inclusion of a restrictive “Off and Away” option, with phones turned off and stored in students’ backpacks during the entire school day.
6. Addressing Concerns
Parents and education advocates have well-intended, understandable concerns about cellphone bans. These concerns are primarily related to safety, digital literacy, and medical conditions. Parents are worried that a smartphone ban would prevent them from connecting with their child in the case of an emergency, such as a natural disaster or an active threat scenario. They have voiced that phone bans “cut off a lifeline parents have to make sure their children are safe during school shootings or other emergencies.” Though schools have landline phones and other ways for students and teachers to communicate in the case of an emergency, many parents would prefer that their children have access to a device with which they could communicate immediately if necessary.
But law enforcement officials and school safety experts suggest that phones can, in fact, detract from student safety, noting the importance of getting students to devote full attention to adult directions when quick action is needed; mere seconds may make the difference in saving their lives. In response to parents upset over a NYC school’s failure to inform them about what turned out to be an unfounded school safety threat, Governor Hochul reiterated that smartphones can distract students in the event of imminent danger. While mass school shootings are highly publicized, they remain rare occurrences.
Excusing inaction on common-sense smartphone restrictions in schools for this reason sends a false message to students and parents that excessive fear is warranted, which itself can induce greater student anxiety and also risks normalizing extreme behavior. In any case, our model language addresses these concerns by banning smartphones, not cellphones with bare-bones calling capabilities. As defined in the policy, a “basic phone” is a handheld cellular radio telephone or electronic device that lacks the capability to install third-party applications beyond those preinstalled by the manufacturer, or to access social-media platforms via websites or applications. Schools would retain the authority to regulate basic-phone use, such as by requiring that they remain silenced throughout class.
7. Initial Warning
A member of the school staff shall give the student a verbal caution that smartphone use is not allowed during the school day and shall inform the student that the violation will be recorded in the school’s records. This clear, immediate feedback helps set expectations and makes students aware of the seriousness of the policy. By ensuring that all staff members are consistent in applying this initial warning, schools can create a uniform standard of behavior and address potential issues before they escalate.
It’s essential that students understand the reasons behind the rules, and teachers can take this opportunity to explain how smartphone distractions can negatively impact their learning experience. This first step lays the groundwork for more stringent measures should the student continue to violate the policy. Consistency in enforcement across the board helps maintain fairness and credibility in the school’s approach to managing smartphone use.
8. Second Infraction
The student shall be required to hand over the smartphone to a member of school staff, who shall promptly place the smartphone in a smartphone storage rack or in a secure location. The student shall report to the principal’s office at the end of school hours, where a member of school staff shall inform the student that the violation has been recorded in the school’s records and return the smartphone to the student. This step builds on the initial warning by implementing a consequence that is both immediate and tangible.
At this stage, students begin to feel the impact of their actions as they lose personal access to their devices during school hours. The requirement to report to the principal’s office adds an additional layer of accountability, ensuring that students understand the seriousness of the violation. This measure also helps to reinforce the school’s commitment to maintaining a distraction-free learning environment.
9. Third Offense
The student shall be required to hand over the smartphone to a member of the school staff, who shall promptly place the smartphone in a smartphone storage rack or a secure location until retrieved by the student at the end of school hours. No later than the day following the violation, a signed letter from a member of the school staff shall be delivered to the student and the student’s parent or guardian. This letter shall include the requirements of the school district’s smartphone policy and a warning of the consequences of future noncompliance. The student and the student’s parent or guardian shall be required to sign an acknowledgment of these consequences and a pledge to comply with the school district’s smartphone policy.
This escalation aims to involve parents or guardians in the process, fostering a home-school partnership in addressing the issue. By ensuring that both the student and the parents are aware of the policy and its consequences, the school emphasizes the importance of compliance. The signed acknowledgment serves as a formal record, underscoring the student’s responsibility to adhere to the policy and setting the stage for more severe consequences if the behavior continues.
10. Fourth Violation
The student shall be required to hand over the smartphone to a member of school staff, who shall promptly place the smartphone in a smartphone storage rack, or in a secure location, until retrieved by the student’s parent or guardian. This step further increases the stakes by requiring parents or guardians to come to the school to retrieve the device, thereby involving them more directly in managing their child’s behavior.
This measure underscores the seriousness of the policy and the need for family support in enforcing it. By engaging parents or guardians in this way, schools can foster a collaborative approach to addressing smartphone misuse, highlighting the shared responsibility in promoting a conducive learning environment. This step also helps to ensure that students understand the potential consequences of their actions, thereby encouraging them to comply with the policy to avoid further disruptions to their daily routine.
11. Fifth Breach
The student shall be required to hand over the smartphone to a member of the school staff, who shall promptly place the smartphone in a smartphone storage rack or in a secure location, until retrieved by a parent or guardian. Upon retrieval, a member of the school staff and a school counselor shall meet with the student and the student’s parent or guardian, or schedule such a meeting within the next seven calendar days, to discuss the circumstances of the student’s violations thus far and the consequences of future noncompliance.
This step includes a more involved intervention, with a meeting involving school staff, the student, and the parents or guardians to address the persistent issue. The goal is to identify the underlying causes of the behavior and develop a plan to support the student in adhering to the policy. By providing a structured opportunity for dialogue and problem-solving, schools can address potential barriers to compliance and work collaboratively with families to find effective solutions. This joint effort helps ensure that the student understands the repercussions of their actions and receives the necessary support to comply with the policy moving forward.
undefined
The student shall be suspended for a period of days, according to the school district’s suspension policy. The principal shall deliver a signed letter to the student and the student’s parent or guardian stating the terms of the suspension and consequences of future noncompliance. At this stage, the school enforces a more severe consequence, reflecting the repeated nature of the violations.
Suspension serves as a significant deterrent, illustrating the seriousness with which the school regards the policy. The involvement of the principal in communicating the suspension terms helps to emphasize the high level of concern and the importance of adherence. This step aims to prevent further infractions by demonstrating that continued noncompliance will result in increasingly severe consequences. The principal’s signed letter provides a formal record of the action taken, ensuring clear communication and accountability.
13. Final Measures
Across the United States, there is a growing agreement on the need to restrict youths’ access to smartphones in schools. A survey conducted by the Manhattan Institute in July 2024 found that 60% of likely voters are very or extremely concerned about cellphone use in schools. Despite the current political divide, 73% of voters think schools should limit smartphone access. Generation Z, born after 1995 and known as “digital natives,” was the first to grow up with constant access to technology, often seen as a benefit.
However, as social psychologist Jonathan Haidt and others have noted, this constant digital interaction, especially on social media, has drawbacks. Teens spend six to eight hours daily on screens, missing out on playing with friends, learning new skills, and discovering the physical world. A poll of 1,006 Gen Z adults aged 18 to 27 revealed that 60% use social media for at least four hours daily, with 22% spending seven or more hours. Nearly half wish platforms like TikTok and Snapchat were never created, signaling frustration with social media.
Generation Alpha, those born from 2010 onward, surpass previous generations in screen time, with 65% spending up to four hours a day on social media and 58% getting smartphones before age 10. This group’s elementary education and social experiences have already been impacted by Covid-19 measures, and smartphone dependence further harms their learning and social development.
Evidence shows that smartphone use correlates with lower academic performance, increased anxiety, loneliness, and hindered socialization. Teachers note that smartphones distract students, with 72% of high school teachers identifying it as a major issue according to a recent Pew Research poll. Consequently, states, cities, and school districts are revising phone use policies in public schools. The problem transcends political and geographical boundaries, prompting even the United Nations’ UNESCO to advocate for a global smartphone ban in schools.