Sorry, Wrong Numbers: Early Stats Don't Support School Cellphone Bans

Cellphone bans in schools are all the rage. Recently, New York became the fourth state to embark on one, as part of a budget deal for the coming school year. For many adults, the bans make intuitive sense: Who wants kids distracted on their phones while the teacher is teaching? Maybe getting rid of them could even reduce bullying or improve youth mental health? Phone Free New York founder Raj Goyle, while speaking of New York’s prospective ban, claimed, “If you look at the data in schools that have one ... test scores rise, bullying decreases, depression decreases.” But is that true?

Given acclamations from the schools that have implemented them, you’d think so. Orange County schools in Florida made headlines for being one of the first and most restrictive districts to implement a ban on cellphones.  Florida passed a statewide ban in 2023, but Orange County, with Orlando as its seat, went further, banning phones for the entire school day, not just during classes.  

Within months of Orange County's ban taking effect, educators claimed to see “remarkable change,” including fewer fights and better focus in class. But it’s rare to see any intervention have such a rapid effect. To examine whether school data supported these claims, I put in a public records request for the hard numbers.

The request was for numbers on serious bullying incidents, overall high school and middle school grade point averages, student mental health referrals, and suspensions due to cellphone use. 

Data was provided by the district’s manager of public records. The school district had data only on the most serious bullying incidents, which rose sharply during the year of the ban, from 2 to 12. Certainly, many more minor bullying incidents are missed in this data, but the schools apparently have no data to suggest they decreased. Unfortunately, the district did not have data on assaults, so it is unclear which data support the district’s public statements about fewer fights. Grade-point averages largely remained static (high school GPA improved slightly, going from 2.82 to 2.95, whereas middle school GPA barely budged from 2.84 to 2.88).

But mental health referrals increased rather than decreased. The number of screenings for mental health increased by one hundred, whereas referrals increased by nearly 1500. Disciplinary offenses involving phones increased, perhaps not surprisingly, but – most worrying – this included 662 reported suspensions. Suspensions are well known to be harmful to youth, reducing academic engagement, and are even associated with adult arrests. 

Thus, taken together, these statistics suggest outcomes that are mainly static or negative, including real harm in the form of suspensions. The numbers contrast with the rosy picture portrayed by school officials.

A public-records comparison of Orange County’s ban with Rhode Island’s Providence County turned up similar numbers, with data here provided by City of Providence Public Records. Over the same two-year period, bullying got worse, GPAs remained static, mental health referrals increased, as did cellphone discipline incidents. A caveat is that Providence County school authorities could not pinpoint the start of the ban, so this shouldn’t be considered as neat a pre/post comparison as the internal comparison for Orange County alone.

Schools in Cranston, R.I, which do not have a cellphone ban, and where some schools encourage cellphone use in education, appeared to be a better comparison with Orange County. Records produced by Norma Cole, the assistant superintendent, showed the outcomes were more mixed. Bullying increased, as with the other schools. High school GPAs actually increased (an apparent reflection of the school’s encouragment of cellphone use in education) though middle school GPAs decreased slightly. There were more mental health referrals, but fewer students actually received services. Overall, Cranston schools had somewhat better outcomes.

This is just descriptive data taken from a small number of schools. From such data, it’s not possible to say that cellphone policies are increasing bullying or mental health issues. However, the figures do warn us that increased suspensions could cause harm. We can also see tantalizing clues that cellphone bans, at very least, do not appear to help, though it’s worth noting cellphones may have some value  in emergencies such as shootings or fires. Broad claims of success often made by teachers and school administrators don’t match the data. 

A recent study in Britain found that cellphone bans in schools, including the most restrictive variety, do not improve student grades, behavior, or mental health. A recently published research review from Queensland University of Technology likewise concluded that current evidence is unable to support the effectiveness of cellphone bans. One recent Florida study found that kids with smartphones are actually healthier than those without, albeit teaching kids how to use them wisely is also important. 

As noted two years ago in RealClearPolitics, the evidence linking new technology and smartphones to outcomes such as mental health is weak, so the failure of cellphone bans should not be a surprise. The current public records request data fits those other observations. The cellphone ban debate is a reminder that, often, what we think should be helpful to kids and what actually is helpful can be two very different things. The research review from the Queensland University of Technology ultimately concluded, “Our consolidated findings showed little to no conclusive evidence that ‘one-size-fits-all’ mobile phone bans in schools resulted in improved academic outcomes, mental health and wellbeing and reduced cyberbullying” and recommended media/digital literacy instead to help youth cultivate their online experiences.

 Christopher J. Ferguson is a professor of psychology at Stetson University in Florida and author of "Catastrophe! The Psychology of Why Good People Make Bad Situations Worse."