Banning cell phones in the classroom is increasingly supported by research linking reduced device access to modest but meaningful gains in student achievement, especially for lower-achieving and disadvantaged students. At the same time, the evidence is nuanced, with some studies finding no academic change and others highlighting implementation costs such as increased disciplinary incidents in the first year of a ban. While it might be too early to tell, there appears to be many more positive impacts on learning than negative from keeping smart phones out of the classroom.

Why cell phones hinder learning

A growing body of research shows that personal smartphones in class compete directly with instructional time and working memory, especially for students with lower self-control.

• In a widely cited study of schools in four English cities, banning mobile phones was associated with an average improvement of about 0.06–0.07 standard deviations in high-stakes exam scores, with effects twice as large for students in the lowest prior-achievement quintile and negligible for top performers.
• The authors conclude that low-achieving students appear more vulnerable to distraction, while high achievers can sustain focus regardless of policy, which suggests that unrestricted phone access exacerbates existing achievement gaps.
• A broader review from a policy think tank summarizing multiple studies similarly notes that constant notifications force teachers to compete for attention, reducing on-task behavior and leading to less instructional time.

At a cognitive level, mobile phones facilitate multitasking—messaging, social media, games—activities repeatedly linked with reduced comprehension and poorer note quality during lectures. This helps explain why even silent phones on desks can impair focus and why some scholars describe smartphones as a “background cognitive load” in classrooms.

Evidence that bans improve outcomes

Several quasi-experimental and review studies directly examine how banning phones affects learning outcomes, rather than just correlating use with performance.

• The “Ill Communication” study in England used a difference-in-differences design merging phone-policy surveys with the National Pupil Database; after schools introduced phone bans, student test scores rose by about 6.4 percent of a standard deviation overall, with particularly large gains for low-achieving and disadvantaged students.
• A recent scoping review of schoolwide phone bans identified seven empirical studies on academic achievement and reported that several quasi-experimental analyses found subject-specific gains, such as improved math and English scores for lower-achieving and lower-SES students and higher math and science scores in Spanish regions that adopted bans.
• The same review also notes three studies that found no significant changes in achievement after bans, underscoring that effects depend on context, enforcement, and how much phones were used for nonacademic versus academic purposes before the policy.

Overall, the pattern favors modest average gains and larger benefits for students who struggle academically or behaviorally, suggesting that bans function as a low-cost equity intervention in many settings.

Beyond grades: behavior, attendance, and classroom climate

Banning phones appears to influence more than test scores, affecting behavior, attendance, and social dynamics in ways that may indirectly support learning.

• A 2025 analysis of a large U.S. district’s phone ban found that, after an initial spike in suspensions for phone violations, student test scores improved by about 2–3 percentile points in the second year, when suspension rates had returned to pre-ban levels.
• The same study observed reductions in unexcused absences, which likely contributed to better academic performance, as more consistent attendance increases exposure to instruction and assessments.
• Survey data from a Virginia division that implemented a K–12 phone ban show that 78 percent of teachers supported the policy, with 62 percent reporting improved behavior, improved on-task engagement, and stronger peer interaction as phones were removed from social dynamics during class.

Students themselves frequently report feeling less pressure from constant notifications and more willing to participate in face-to-face interaction, which can foster collaborative learning and a calmer classroom environment. These behavioral and climate shifts may not fully show up in short-term test scores but are likely important for long-term academic trajectories.

Nuances and counter-evidence

The research is not unanimous, and several findings caution against assuming that any ban will automatically improve learning.

• Some school-level studies included in the 2024 review “Evidence for and against banning mobile phones in schools” found no significant differences in achievement between schools with and without bans, suggesting that implementation fidelity, teacher practices, and availability of alternative distractions can mute policy effects.
• One study of elementary students even found that structured smartphone use for information search and learning tasks was positively associated with academic performance, indicating that phones can support learning when tightly integrated into instruction and equitably available. These mixed results imply that the educational value of banning phones depends on baseline use patterns, student age, the quality of digital pedagogy, and whether bans unintentionally remove useful learning tools for some students.

Policy implications and balanced approaches

Taken together, the scholarly evidence suggests that classroom or schoolwide phone bans tend to enhance learning outcomes most reliably when phones are primarily a source of distraction rather than an integrated instructional tool. However, the research also points toward more nuanced policy design rather than one-size-fits-all prohibition.

• For secondary schools, especially those serving many lower-achieving or disadvantaged students, comprehensive bans during instructional time appear to offer a low-cost way to improve test scores and narrow gaps, provided schools manage the initial disciplinary “transition period.”
• For younger students or contexts with strong digital pedagogy, a “restricted use” model—banning personal, unsupervised use while permitting structured, teacher-directed educational use on school-managed devices—may preserve the benefits of technology without the constant distraction.
• Implementation details matter: consistent enforcement, clear communication with families, alternative access to digital resources (e.g., school laptops), and attention to equity are all necessary to translate policy into real gains.

Overall, the current research landscape supports the claim that banning cell phones in classrooms often improves student learning outcomes, particularly for those most at risk of distraction and academic underperformance, while also highlighting the importance of thoughtful, context-sensitive implementation calibrated to local needs and instructional goals.

This article is based, in part, on the following research articles.

Beland, L.-P., & Murphy, R. (2016). Ill Communication: Technology, distraction & student performance. Labour Economics, 41, 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2016.04.004​

Domoff, S. E., Foley, R. P., & Ferkel, R. (2024). Evidence for and against banning mobile phones in schools: A scoping review. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11(3), 20556365241270394. https://doi.org/10.1177/20556365241270394​

Hsieh, Y.-P., & Lin, C.-Y. (2022). The impact of smartphone use on learning effectiveness: A case study of elementary school students. Education and Information Technologies, 27(8), 10943–10965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11430-9​

Paragon Institute. (2026). Banning smartphones in schools: Review of the literature shows widespread gains for student achievement, behavior, and wellbeing. Paragon Health Institute. https://paragoninstitute.org/public-health/banning-smartphones-in-schools/​

Texas Public Policy Foundation. (2025). Smart devices in schools: What the research says (One-pager). Texas Public Policy Foundation. https://www.texaspolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Smart-Devices-in-Schools-One-Pager.pdf​

National Bureau of Economic Research. (2025). The impact of cellphone bans in schools on student outcomes (NBER Working Paper No. 34388). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w34388​

Hafez, A., & others. (2025). The impact of smartphone use on university students’ education.  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1478428.pdf​

Leslie Stebbins is the Director of Research4Ed. She has more than twenty-five years of experience in higher education and K-12 learning. Her clients include Harvard University, the U.S. Department of Education, Tufts University, and the Gates Foundation. She has an M.Ed. from the Technology Innovation & Education Program at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and a Master’s in Library and Information Science from Simmons College. https://www.linkedin.com/in/lesliestebbins/