More schools are banning cell phones. The academic benefits haven’t materialized
School cell phone bans aren’t as new as you might think. While a growing number of states have adopted them over the past three years, the practice dates to 1989, when Maryland prohibited the devices (and pagers) in an attempt to limit in-school communication among students who may have been involved in illegal activities.
By 2009, in fact, nine out of 10 schools had banned cell phones. But that number began to drop as smartphones spread and parents wanted to be able to reach their kids in emergencies. Now that school phone bans are revving up again, questions are resurfacing about how effective they are at boosting test scores and reducing bullying.
The early data suggest the results haven’t been as positive as many expected.
A study from Stanford University’s Institute for Economic Policy Research and the National Bureau of Economic Research, released earlier this year, found virtually no impact on test scores in schools that have enforced bans for the past three years.
That surprised the researchers, all of whom are college professors, says Jason Baron, a co-author of the study and assistant professor of economics at Duke University.
“Our first reaction [when starting the study] was we might see a positive shift in test scores,” he tells Fast Company. “At a first glance, it makes perfect sense. We’re all educators. We have classrooms where we see students on their phones and it makes sense that if we ban their phones, they might pay more attention.”
On reflection, though, the lack of movement wasn’t so surprising. Test scores are difficult to move in general, and removing a phone doesn’t guarantee students will pay attention. They might doodle instead. They might daydream. They might stare longingly at the classmate who barely knows they exist.
That’s something parents and legislators may have overlooked, Baron says.
There’s also little evidence, the authors wrote, that restricting phone usage improved other parts of the school environment. Attendance rates didn’t noticeably change, including chronic absenteeism. Nor was there a statistically significant change in online bullying or classroom attention.
Baron cautions against focusing too heavily on the bullying findings, however. That information came from survey data from a small set of schools and wasn’t as comprehensive as the testing data the team had access to. Still, he conceded, simply taking phones out of the classroom would likely not be enough to end the problem.
“It is plausible that banning phones inside of school will not impact bullying, since students have phones outside of school,” he said.
Despite those findings, there are some potential upsides to school phone bans. The data so far covers just three years, meaning longer-term trends could still emerge. And surveys measuring student well-being found that while disciplinary infractions increased and reported well-being declined in the first year, by year three the number of incidents had returned to pre-ban levels and some students said their well-being had improved.
“If you’re someone that cares only about test results, then you might not be super impressed with these results,” says Baron. “It truly depends on what your goal is with banning phones.”
Baron says the team plans to continue studying schools that have enforced bans, with the next batch of data expected later this year.
While the impact of school phone bans has been negligible so far, support for them remains strong. A Pew Research Center survey in late July found that more than three-quarters of adults supported banning cellphones in classrooms for middle- and high-school students. And for the first time, a majority of adults supported banning the devices for the entire school day.
A growing number of states now have some form of cellphone ban. Just seven states currently have no limits on cell phone usage. More than 30 states ban phones in classrooms, while others impose more limited restrictions.