A national survey published this month by researchers at Stanford, Duke, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Michigan, analyzed more than 40,000 schools nationwide using data from Yondr, a company that makes magnetic lock bags for student cellphones.
Researchers found that cell phone activity in schools dropped sharply after schools adopted the pouches. Cell phone “pings” from school grounds decreased by 30 percent, and teachers reported far less non-academic use of phones in class.
But the study found “close to zero” effects on test scores, attendance and online bullying, even three years after schools adopted the bags. The researchers compared Yondr schools to schools that had similar demographics and academic outcomes.
At first glance, these findings appear to contradict a study schools in florida issued last year that found small academic gains a year after nationwide cell phone restrictions take effect in 2023.
The researchers behind the study, from the University of Rochester and RAND, compared schools where student cell phone use has historically been high with schools where phone use was already relatively low before the nationwide restrictions were implemented. Their logic was that schools with more intensive cell phone use before the ban should experience a greater effect from the policy change.
The national Yondr study, by contrast, largely compared schools using a particularly strict form of enforcement against schools that often already have more lenient cell phone restrictions. Some schools in the comparison group still require students to keep their phones in their backpacks or out of sight during class.
In other words, the national study largely compared stricter restrictions versus weaker ones, while the Florida study compared schools with high versus low cell phone use before the ban.
Even with the different methodologies and research questions, the researchers of both US studies emphasized in interviews how similar their results were. The Florida study estimates that the academic gains that materialize in the second year after the ban are less than a percentile, the equivalent of moving a student from the 50th percentile, dead in the middle, to the 51st percentile. In practice, the difference between a small gain and almost no effect may not matter.
Both studies documented an initial increase in disciplinary incidents before behavior stabilized, and both found signs of non-academic benefits, including improvements in school climate or student well-being.
However, broader international research remains truly mixed.
The the first quantitative study of mobile phone bans, published in England in 2016, found that mobile phone restrictions improved exam results mostly for low-performing students. But a A Swedish study in 2020 found no academic or behavioral benefits.
The Swedish researchers speculate that their results may reflect the country’s long history of integrating computers into classrooms. In the 1970s, Sweden was one of Europe’s early adopters of school technology, so students already relied heavily on laptops and other digital devices during lessons before the ubiquity of cellphones. Separately Swedish case study also found that students often use phones between assignments rather than during class time.
Since then he has been studying at Spain, Norway, Brazil and India all have found academic benefits from cell phone restrictions, although gains vary widely. The randomized trial in India has produced some of the greatest academic achievements in the literature. Researchers there randomly assigned students by field of study to store their phones in wooden boxes before class while others held them. Unlike many American universities, there weren’t many laptops or tablets in these Indian classrooms. Eliminating the phones may have actually removed all digital distractions from the classroom.
One possible explanation for the disappointing results in the US is that students are still surrounded by digital distractions even when the phones are gone. David Figlio, the lead author of the Florida study, said students often switch to texting, gaming or social media on laptops and tablets that remain allowed at school.
Another possibility is that the academic harms of modern technology are not primarily caused by classroom distractions themselves. Smartphones can affect sleep, study habits, sustained attention and reading endurance outside of school hours in ways that a ban on the seven-hour school day cannot easily reverse.
“Cell phones can still have a big effect on reducing student achievement, even if cell phone bans don’t change that massively,” Figlio said. “Students may stop studying or stay up late and get less sleep.”
Tom Dee, a Stanford education researcher who led the national study, said the “sobering” findings in this country should not discourage schools from continuing to experiment with cellphone policies.
“We just have to keep iterating, which is something we do too rarely in education policy,” Dee said. “Let’s not jump to the next fad or the next flavor of the day. This issue is too important not to stay in the fight to try to figure out how to responsibly manage our children’s use of digital devices.”
