[04] Smartphone Bans and Students Wellbeing

Unknown Speaker

Hello and welcome back to Topics on Digital Education. I’m Elena Ferri, and today we’re diving into the real impacts of smartphone bans in schools, especially looking at new data the Netherlands and the UK. With me as always are Elisabeth Kensington, Jack Iron, and Martin Nottingham. So, let’s start with the big change in the Netherlands. In January 2024, Dutch national guidelines recommended banning smartphones from classrooms and recently did the Italian Ministry of Education (Ministro dell'Istruzione e del Merito). Almost all secondary schools have now complied, but the ways they enforce it vary. Some ask students to leave their phones at home or put them in lockers, while others collect phones at the start of each lesson. It’s a pretty big shift, right?

Jack Iron

Yeah, it’s huge. I mean, in the US, we’ve seen some schools try this, but not at a national level. I’m curious, how did Dutch schools actually adapt to these new rules? Was it smooth sailing?

Martin Nottingham

Not exactly, Jack. There were definitely some bumps. Schools had to figure out logistics—like, do you have enough lockers? What about emergencies? And, you know, some teachers were worried about enforcing the policy, especially newer teachers. Minister Mariëlle Paul actually mentioned that having a national guideline made it easier for teachers to enforce, because before, it was always up for debate in each classroom.

Elisabeth Kensington

And let’s not forget, compliance was really high. Nearly all secondary schools followed the guidelines, but the methods varied. Some schools were stricter than others, but overall, the adaptation was pretty impressive, considering the scale.

Elisabeth Kensington

But it wasn’t all smooth, was it? There was a lot of resistance at first. Teachers, students, and especially parents had concerns. Some worried about not being able to reach their children during the day, or about students feeling disconnected.

Martin Nottingham

Oh, absolutely. I remember a PTA meeting—this was a few years ago, but it could have been yesterday. Parents were really anxious about losing that direct line to their kids. There was shouting, a lot of “what if there’s an emergency?” and “how will I know if my child is okay?” It got pretty heated. But, interestingly, after the policy was in place for a while, most people’s attitudes shifted. The same parents who were worried started to see some benefits.

Jack Iron

That’s kind of classic, right? Big change, big pushback, and then people settle in. Did the students themselves come around, or was it just the adults?

Unknown Speaker

Actually, both. According to the Dutch study, after the initial protests, satisfaction increased across the board. Teachers, students, and parents reported being “pretty happy” with the new atmosphere. It’s a good reminder that sometimes, the fear of change is worse than the change itself.

Jack Iron

So, let’s talk about what actually changed in the classroom. The Dutch study found that 75% of students said their concentration improved after the ban. That’s a big number.

Elisabeth Kensington

It is! And teachers noticed it too. With fewer distractions, classroom discipline improved. Minister Paul pointed out that the national guideline really helped, especially for less experienced teachers who might have struggled to enforce a ban on their own.

Martin Nottingham

I wonder if some subjects benefit more than others. Like, maybe math or science classes, where focus is crucial, see bigger improvements than, say, art or PE. I don’t think the data breaks it down that far, but it’s an interesting question.

Unknown Speaker

That’s a good point, Martin. The study didn’t specify by subject, but overall, the sense was that the learning environment became calmer and more focused. And that’s something we’ve talked about before—how the design of learning spaces, whether physical or digital, can really shape engagement and outcomes.

Unknown Speaker

Another big finding: 59% of students noticed better social interactions. With phones out of the picture, there were fewer secret photos, less online drama, and more face-to-face conversations, especially during breaks.

Jack Iron

That’s kind of amazing. I mean, you take away the phones, and suddenly kids are actually talking to each other again. Who would’ve thought?

Martin Nottingham

And it’s not just about chatting. One Dutch school reported a drop in incidents of online bullying during school hours. When you can’t snap a photo and send it around instantly, there’s less opportunity for that kind of thing. Social safety really did improve.

Elisabeth Kensington

Of course, there’s always a bit more arguing on the playground, but that’s normal. At least it’s happening face-to-face, where teachers can step in if needed. It’s a different kind of social dynamic, but overall, schools and students seemed happier with it.

Elisabeth Kensington

Now, what about academic results? The Dutch study found that 28% of students saw improved academic performance after the ban. That’s not as dramatic as the concentration numbers, but it’s still notable.

Unknown Speaker

Right, and it’s important to say that these improvements weren’t universal. Some schools saw bigger gains than others, and it’s not always clear how they’re measuring academic change. Is it test scores, grades, or just teacher impressions? The data is a bit mixed.

Jack Iron

Yeah, and I think that’s a good reminder that academic performance is influenced by a lot of factors, not just whether kids have their phones. But still, a quarter of students reporting better results is nothing to sneeze at.

Martin Nottingham

And as we saw in the UK SMART Schools study, which we’ll get to in a minute, the link between phone bans and academic outcomes isn’t always straightforward. But in the Dutch context, at least, some students and teachers did notice a positive shift.

Martin Nottingham

It’s also interesting to look at how the ban played out in different types of schools. In special schools, about half reported a positive effect. But in primary schools, only a quarter saw any real change.

Unknown Speaker

That matches what I saw with my niece’s school. They tried a phone-free day, and honestly, it didn’t make much difference. Most primary students weren’t using their phones much during school anyway, so the impact was limited.

Elisabeth Kensington

Exactly. The effect seems to be much stronger in secondary schools, where phone use is more common and more disruptive. In primary settings, the ban is almost a non-issue.

Jack Iron

So, it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. The context really matters.

Unknown Speaker

But this study - picked up by many news outlets in Europe, starting with the Guardian - has a fundamental weakness. As Pier Cesare Rivoltella states in a post on Facebook, 'It is not a scientific article, but a research report. The results come from 317 interviews with school leaders and 12 focus groups with teachers, parents, and students. Interviews and focus groups only provide representations and perceptions: experimental evidence must be recorded differently.' Therefore, it does not consist of experimental evidence recorded following a strict experimental protocol that measures quantitatively relevant effects compared to a control group.

Elisabeth Kensington

You've hit the nail on the head, Elena. Interviewing over 300 school principals reflects the subjective perception of a group of qualified observers, but they can be strongly subject to cognitive biases. Furthermore, for example, recording that 28% of students report an improvement in performance during the observation period seems like an absolutely insignificant figure if not compared to a control group. During the school year, students typically improve their performance - what is school for otherwise? - but it is essential to understand what causes these improvements. There is still much to be done and especially to study with a solid scientific approach.

Martin Nottingham

Let’s shift to the UK for a minute. Here we can analyze a study conducted with very solid scientific standards based on scientific criteria. The sample referred to over 30 schools with two subgroups: 10 permissive schools and 20 restrictive ones with over 1300 students involved (820 from restrictive schools and 482 from permissive schools) In short, a truly well-conducted experimental work.

Jack Iron

Yes, the SMART Schools study looked at 30 English secondary schools—20 with restrictive phone policies and 10 with permissive ones.

Jack Iron

The big finding? There was no significant difference in student wellbeing between the two groups.

Elisabeth Kensington

That’s right. The study used the Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale, and the scores were basically the same, whether the school banned phones or not. Restrictive policies did reduce phone and social media use during school hours, but it didn’t translate into better mental health or academic outcomes.

Martin Nottingham

It’s a bit counterintuitive, isn’t it? You’d think less phone time at school would mean better wellbeing, but the data just didn’t show that. Maybe because students just made up for it outside of school?

Unknown Speaker

That’s a key point. The study found that daily phone use outside of school was similar, regardless of the school’s policy. So, the overall exposure didn’t really change.

Unknown Speaker

And that brings us to a crucial limitation. While in-school restrictions did cut down on phone and social media use during lessons, they didn’t reduce overall screen time. And the study found that more screen time—no matter when it happened—was linked to poorer mental health outcomes, like higher anxiety and depression, and even lower academic attainment.

Jack Iron

But the policy itself didn’t cause those improvements, right? It’s more about the total amount of screen time, not just what happens at school.

Elisabeth Kensington

Exactly. And we should mention, the study relied on self-reported data and was cross-sectional, so we can’t say for sure what causes what. There’s always the risk of bias or confounding factors.

Martin Nottingham

Still, the association is there. More screen time, worse outcomes. But just banning phones at school isn’t enough to move the needle on wellbeing or academic results, at least according to this data.

Martin Nottingham

So, what do we do with all this? The evidence suggests that restricting phones during school hours alone isn’t enough. We need more holistic interventions that address both in-school and out-of-school behaviors.

Elisabeth Kensington

I completely agree. There’s a school in the UK I know of that’s piloting digital literacy workshops for both parents and students. They’re not just banning phones—they’re teaching families how to manage screen time, understand social media, and set healthy boundaries. It’s a much more comprehensive approach.

Unknown Speaker

That’s the direction the research points to. If we want to improve adolescent wellbeing, we have to look at the whole picture—screen time, sleep, physical activity, and family involvement. Just locking up the phones at school isn’t enough.

Jack Iron

And it’s not just about the kids. Parents need support too. It’s tough to set limits when everyone around you is doing something different. Community-wide efforts seem to work better than isolated policies.

Elisabeth Kensington

Looking ahead, governments are starting to issue new advisories—like the Dutch government recommending parents ban social media for under-15s, and some MPs even proposing total smartphone bans in schools. But enforcement is tricky, and experienced teachers play a big role in making these policies work.

Martin Nottingham

Absolutely. And families have to be part of the solution. Policies need to evolve to support adolescent wellbeing in a realistic way, not just by banning devices but by helping young people—and their parents—navigate the digital world responsibly.

Unknown Speaker

It’s a complex issue, and as we’ve seen, there’s no magic bullet. But the research is clear: holistic, community-based approaches are more promising than simple bans. We’ll keep following the evidence as new studies come out.

Jack Iron

Yeah, and I’m sure we’ll be talking about this again soon. There’s always something new in digital education.

Elisabeth Kensington

Thanks for joining us today. Martin, Jack, Elena—always a pleasure.

Martin Nottingham

Thank you all. Looking forward to our next discussion.

Unknown Speaker

Grazie, everyone. Until next time, take care and keep questioning the data.

Jack Iron

Bye, everyone!