Executive summary

As mobile phones have become smartphones, and with the rapid expansion of social media and other attention-demanding products, concerns are growing that children’s mobile access in school (and elsewhere) is undermining their academic learning, along with their mental health, social relationships and personal safety. In response, we need researchers to extend the available evidence base to understand children’s digital lives and inform policymaking.

In recent years, schools around the world have been embracing a range of educational technologies (EdTech). In contrast, one in seven countries has recently introduced policies to limit or prevent pupil access to smartphones at school, and more are debating such policies. While these shifts are part of wider societal dilemmas about how best to manage the unfolding digital environment and meet children’s needs, this report focuses on schools’ smartphone policies.

The Digital Futures for Children centre (DFC) supports an evidence base for child rights-based advocacy, facilitates dialogue between academics and policymakers, and amplifies children’s voices. Several children’s rights are at stake in the debate over schools’ smartphone policies, beginning with children’s right to a good quality education, and including their rights to development, safety, privacy, agency and expression, leisure and play, non-discrimination, freedom from commercial exploitation, and the right to be heard on matters that affect them.

Our review of the most up-to-date international evidence regarding the efficacy of smartphone policies that restrict use in secondary school suggests that:

• Despite considerable media attention, remarkably few studies have examined the effects of school smartphone policies on students’ academic performance or other outcomes.
• Despite the word ‘ban’ being widely employed, school smartphone policies vary considerably in content and implementation. Few, if any, schools have implemented outright bans, and research on the views of educators and students shows they favour nuanced policies that allow for certain beneficial uses.
• Several studies show benefits for students’ academic performance when smartphone use is restricted, especially for less advantaged children or children whose performance is suboptimal. However, the results are mixed, with methods being contested and some studies showing no benefits or even harmful effects. With so few studies the evidence is not sufficiently nuanced to say which policies work best for the student body as a whole or for children of different ages.
• In some contexts, schools rely on students’ personal smartphones in (and out of) class for educational purposes. Research suggests that this can bring academic benefits provided the smartphones are carefully incorporated into the curriculum and deliberately supported by educators. However, in many contexts, school-provided laptops or tablets for learning are increasingly taking precedence over ‘bring your own device’ policies.
• Many teachers, parents and students favour restrictions on school smartphone access and use at school. In order to support learning and reduce distraction, ‘phone-free’ schools need to set out the purpose and context of the policies so that devices can support medical needs or learning, and so individuals with good reason to access their phones have flexibility built in.

Three case studies illustrate these points, showing how countries are responding differently to the challenge of balancing the risks and opportunities of student smartphone use at school:

• The UK’s Department for Education (DfE) provides non-statutory guidance to schools on how to create a ‘phone-free environment’ while working towards the universal roll-out of personal devices for learning purposes at school, as part of its EdTech Strategy, and implementation in 2026 of the Online Safety Act, to ensure safer online services. In relation to students’ own smartphones, there is evidence that schools evaluated by the regulator as more ‘successful’ take a stricter approach than other schools in limiting students’ access at school.
• Singapore has promoted the use of students’ personal digital devices at school for educational benefits, while also operating strict school management software (to prevent misuse). To ensure digital inclusion, The Ministry of Education has recently insisting that everyone who is able to pays for their device, but for students who require financial aid, the government will provide subsidies to cover the entire cost of the smart device. Schools also actively promote wide-ranging digital literacy education and teacher training to ensure the benefits are realised. Nonetheless, there is public discussion of the possible need to ‘ban’ student access to their own smartphones at school.
• In Colombia, an association of colleges and schools has determined its own policies for students’ smartphone access at school. The government’s legal framework, however, prioritises students’ right to access digital services, so schools are required to clarify the risks involved in smartphone use at school, as they seek a balance between beneficial and problematic outcomes for children.

Most studies in this field are subject to a degree of methodological criticism, including inconsistency in descriptions of school smartphone policies and implementation. To underpin effective government policies, it would be timely to conduct robust before-and-after evaluations (or experiments on the implementation of contrasting policies) in contexts where policy change is planned.

Eschewing the term ‘ban’ for its top-down and simplifying implications, this research report uses instead the word ‘restriction’ to more precisely delineate both the policies examined in research and the policies called for by many educators and families, as part of a wider rethinking of both the benefits and risks of smartphone technology in children’s lives. We conclude with evidence-based and child rights-respecting suggestions for policymakers and educators.

Download full report