As concerns over youth screen time rise, 33 states have enacted cellphone bans in schools, prompting debate over their effectiveness in improving student behavior and academic performance.
Amid growing apprehension regarding youth screen time, 33 states have mandated K–12 schools to impose restrictions on cellphone usage, often throughout the entire school day. A recent court ruling has also implicated platforms like Meta and YouTube in fostering addiction, with young people reportedly averaging 5.5 hours a day on their devices, primarily driven by social media engagement.
During an April 3 briefing hosted by American Community Media (ACoM), experts discussed whether cellphone bans in schools represent an effective solution or if the benefits of social media—such as fostering connections, encouraging creativity, and providing access to supportive communities—outweigh the associated risks.
Dr. David Marshall, an Associate Professor at Auburn University in Alabama, and Dr. Timothy Pressley, an Associate Professor at Christopher Newport University, shared insights from their research on cellphone usage in educational settings.
Pressley highlighted the various types of cellphone bans currently in place. The most common is the “bell-to-bell” ban, which requires students to store their personal devices from the first bell in the morning until the final dismissal. Instructional bans allow cellphone use during lunch or in hallways but prohibit them during class. Targeted restrictions may apply to specific contexts, such as recess, testing, or particular classes.
Some states permit school districts to adopt flexible models that best suit their needs. In certain cases, schools have implemented total bans, securing student phones in Yondr pouches that teachers cannot access. Students retrieve their devices only after the school day concludes.
“It’s important that we teach students to self-regulate their behaviors, as they will need to learn when it’s inappropriate to use their phones in real-world settings,” Pressley remarked. “We also need to find a balance in how students use this technology, and that’s something that warrants further exploration.”
Research indicates that cellphone bans can lead to gradual improvements in academic performance, according to Pressley. His study found positive behavioral changes and increased engagement among students. Teachers reported fewer classroom disruptions following the implementation of bans, resulting in enhanced focus and participation. A study conducted in New York City revealed a 50% increase in after-school activities and sporting events, as students were more inclined to support their peers.
A study in Florida documented improvements in academic achievement, although these were only evident in the second year after the ban was enacted. Mental health outcomes varied; for instance, while a decrease in bullying was noted in Australia, anxiety and depression levels remained unchanged. Pressley attributed these discrepancies to differences in how bans are implemented. “We don’t see schools applying these policies uniformly,” he explained. “Students continue to use their phones outside of school, which can affect their mental health.”
Concerns have been raised by parents regarding the potential lack of communication with their children during emergencies, as well as for routine matters like pick-ups and drop-offs. However, Pressley encouraged parents to trust school leadership. “For special needs students, these situations should be addressed in their individual education plans as necessary accommodations,” he added.
Some teachers have expressed apprehension about bans, particularly those who rely on cellphones for academic tasks when school internet access fails or when certain websites are blocked. They worry that such restrictions may eliminate a valuable classroom resource.
Experts recommend that policymakers and school leaders solicit input from students, parents, teachers, and administrators when developing cellphone policies, as these groups are directly impacted. The objectives of the ban should also be clearly defined—whether aimed at improving academics, behavior, social interaction, or mental health, Pressley noted.
Furthermore, the experts emphasized the importance of teacher training, clear communication with families and administrators, and consistent enforcement across classrooms and the entire school.
Dr. Marshall shared findings from a Virginia school district regarding teacher support for cellphone bans. He noted that 95% of teens have access to phones, with many admitting they use them more than they would prefer. “One challenge we face in schools is that when we attempt to address a problem, not everyone agrees it is a problem, which can hinder our desired outcomes,” he stated.
In this particular district, however, teacher support for a ban was strong, with 84% in favor and 76% viewing phones as a significant distraction in the classroom. Following the implementation of a bell-to-bell ban, teachers reported spending less time managing distractions, while peer interaction increased—lunchrooms became noisier, and hallway conversations flourished, even after school hours.
Despite some inconsistencies in how the policy was applied across schools, 78% of teachers continued to endorse the policy and its rollout.
Dr. Marshall remarked that establishing a nationwide cellphone policy for classrooms would be challenging. “In the United States, a single national policy on cell phones in classrooms would be difficult to implement because education policy is largely determined at the state and local levels, and local contexts significantly influence what works in practice. Nonetheless, we are witnessing a broader national trend where states and school districts are converging around similar approaches. The evidence increasingly suggests that limiting cellphone use—especially during instructional time—can enhance student focus, behavior, and, in some cases, academic outcomes, although results depend heavily on how policies are designed and executed.”
He stressed that success hinges on effective implementation: “The key challenge is not merely adopting a policy, but ensuring it is clear, consistent, and supported by the school community. Successful approaches typically involve early input from students, parents, teachers, and administrators; clearly defined goals and expectations; and, most importantly, consistent enforcement across classrooms. When enforcement varies, policies quickly lose credibility.”
On the topic of protecting teens from predatory behavior, he noted that consistent enforcement of bans can mitigate risks, as restricted access to phones prevents their use for exploitative purposes.
Recent high school graduates Nicholas Torres and Kai Bwor, a senior at Granada Hills Charter School, expressed that phones often serve as students’ primary connection to the outside world, particularly in the post-COVID era when safety concerns limit social outings. While they acknowledged the addictive nature of social media algorithms, they also pointed out that phones help alleviate loneliness and maintain friendships.
They advocated for a mutual understanding between teachers and students regarding phone usage rather than outright bans. “Kids will find a way to be sneaky,” Bwor remarked.
This article was produced with support from the American Community Media Fellowship Program, highlighting the ongoing debate surrounding cellphone usage in schools.