Many schools ban the use of phones while students are in class. (Robert Kneschke/Shutterstock)
In a nutshell
- School phone bans reduce in-school phone use by about 40 minutes per day, but students make up this time outside of school hours, resulting in no difference in total daily screen time (4-6 hours) between schools with restrictive versus permissive policies
- The first worldwide study of its kind found no significant differences in mental wellbeing, anxiety, depression, sleep, physical activity, or academic performance between students at schools that ban phones and those that don’t
- More time spent on phones and social media was consistently linked to worse mental health outcomes and poorer sleep, physical activity, and classroom behavior – suggesting the need for comprehensive solutions that address phone use both in and out of school
BIRMINGHAM, England — Faced with rising concerns about student mental health and school performance, many schools have reached for a seemingly obvious solution: banning phones during school hours. But the first worldwide study of its kind from the University of Birmingham reveals why this approach might be equivalent to putting a Band-Aid on a broken arm.
In the study, published in The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, researchers examined 30 English secondary schools over a 12-month period ending in November 2023 to evaluate how different approaches to student phone use impacted mental wellbeing and other key outcomes. The study included 1,227 students aged 12-15, providing comprehensive data about smartphone and social media usage alongside various mental health, wellbeing, and educational measures.
“School policies are not the silver bullet for preventing the detrimental impacts of smartphone and social media use,” notes study author Miranda Pallan from the University of Birmingham, in a statement.
Of the schools studied, 20 had restrictive policies while 10 permitted phone use. This 2:1 ratio wasn’t arbitrary; it reflected the broader landscape of school phone policies in England, where the vast majority of schools (1,245) had restrictive policies compared to just 96 with permissive approaches. Among the restrictive schools, 16 required phones to be kept turned off in bags during school hours, while four had stricter measures like storing phones in lockers, special pouches, or the school office, or banning them from campus entirely. The permissive schools either allowed phone use during specific times like lunch breaks or in designated areas (9 schools) or permitted unrestricted use (1 school).
Students at schools with restrictive policies spent about 40 minutes less on their phones and 30 minutes less on social media during school hours compared to students at permissive schools. However, when researchers looked at total daily phone use, including time spent outside school hours and on weekends, they found no significant differences between the two groups.
“We did find a link between more time spent on phones and social media and worse outcomes, with worse mental well-being and mental health outcomes, less physical activity and poorer sleep, lower educational attainment, and a greater level of disruptive classroom behavior,” explains lead author Dr. Victoria Goodyear, associate professor at the University of Birmingham.
Most notably, there were no meaningful differences between the two groups in validated measures of mental well-being, anxiety levels, depression symptoms, sleep patterns, physical activity, academic performance in English and math, or classroom behavior. This held true even when researchers controlled for various demographic and school-related factors.
Regardless of their school’s policy, all students used smartphones an average of 4-6 hours per day. This substantial daily usage showed consistent associations with poorer mental health outcomes, reduced sleep quality, less physical activity, and more behavioral issues in the classroom.
Looking at specific metrics, researchers found that each additional hour spent on phones or social media correlated with decreases in mental well-being scores and increases in anxiety and depression symptoms. More phone time also showed associations with reduced sleep efficiency, less physical activity, and more disruptive classroom behavior.
“This suggests that reducing this time spent on phones is an important focus. But we need to do more than focus on schools alone, and consider phone use within and outside of school, across a whole day and the whole week,” adds Dr. Goodyear.
These findings suggest that while limiting phone use during school hours might seem like an obvious solution, it fails to address the broader challenge of excessive phone use among adolescents. Rather than focusing solely on in-school restrictions, the researchers recommend developing more comprehensive approaches that consider both in-school and out-of-school usage patterns. The research points to a clear conclusion: addressing excessive phone use requires looking beyond school walls to develop solutions that work around the clock.
Paper Summary
Methodology
The study employed a cross-sectional observational approach, collecting data through student surveys, teacher assessments, and wearable activity monitors. Students completed validated questionnaires measuring mental wellbeing, anxiety, depression, and problematic social media use. They also reported their phone and social media usage times both from their devices’ built-in tracking apps and through self-reporting. Teachers provided data on student academic performance and classroom behavior, while accelerometer watches tracked physical activity and sleep patterns over seven consecutive days.
Results
Students in schools with restrictive policies averaged about 10 minutes of phone use during school hours compared to about 60 minutes for students in permissive schools. However, total daily phone use was similar between groups, averaging 4-6 hours. Mental wellbeing scores showed no significant differences between the two groups (average score of 47 out of 70 for both). Similar patterns held true for anxiety, depression, sleep quality, physical activity, and academic performance metrics.
Limitations
The researchers note several important limitations. The cross-sectional design makes it impossible to determine causation. Self-reported phone use data may be subject to reporting bias, particularly in schools with restrictive policies where students might underreport in-school usage. The school response rate was relatively low (8.7% for restrictive schools and 10.4% for permissive schools), which could impact the generalizability of findings.
Discussion and Takeaways
The study suggests that simply restricting phone use during school hours may be an oversimplified approach to a complex issue. While such policies can reduce in-school phone use, they don’t appear to impact overall usage patterns or improve student wellbeing. The researchers recommend developing more holistic approaches that address both in-school and out-of-school phone use, while also considering related factors like sleep habits, physical activity, and social interaction.
Funding and Disclosures
The study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research Programme, Department of Health and Social Care, UK. The researchers declared no competing interests that could have influenced the study’s findings.
Publication Information
The study, titled “School phone policies and their association with mental wellbeing, phone use, and social media use (SMART Schools): a cross-sectional observational study,” was published in The Lancet Regional Health – Europe in 2025. The research was conducted by Victoria A. Goodyear and colleagues at the University of Birmingham and affiliated institutions.
