Early lessons from a statewide cellphone ban

Virginia teachers share their concerns and hopes before and after the implementation of a policy restricting cellphone use in schools.

At a Glance

• Concerns about the effects of social media use have led some states, districts, and schools to set policies limiting or banning student use of cellphones at school.
• The nature of cellphone restrictions varies, with some banning cellphones completely, others forbidding their use during instructional time, and others restricting them in specific situations.
• Virginia implemented a bell-to-bell cellphone ban in January 2025, forbidding the use of cellphones during the school day.
• A survey of teachers in a Virginia district before the ban showed majority support for the policy but concerns about implementation and administrator support.
• After the ban, teachers remained supportive but were frustrated with inconsistent enforcement among colleagues.

Over the last decade, smartphones have become nearly ubiquitous in adolescents’ daily lives. National data indicate that more than 95% of U.S. teenagers own or have access to a smartphone. Close to half of those students acknowledge that they spend more time on social media than they would like (Faverio, Anderson, & Park, 2025).

The increase in social media use is linked to higher rates of anxiety, depression, and sleep loss (Khalaf et al., 2023). The rise of mental health issues in adolescents has become a disturbing trend. According to a 2023 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the percentage of U.S. adolescents reporting persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness increased by 50% between 2011 and 2021. Three in 10 high schoolers now report poor mental health, and about one in five has seriously considered suicide. Pandemic-era school closures and lockdowns exacerbated these trends (Marshall & Pressley, 2024).

New York University professor Jonathan Haidt (2024) has called today’s youth “the anxious generation,” arguing that constant connection through smartphone-based social media has eroded in-person interactions and healthy development. This widespread access has transformed how younger generations communicate, build relationships, and consume information. At the same time, the constant presence of personal devices in schools has sparked significant debate regarding their influence on instruction, learning outcomes, and students’ overall well-being. As a result, policy makers at the state, district, and school levels are exploring or implementing restrictions on student cellphone use during school hours.

Approaches to cellphone restriction

As the debate has intensified, schools and districts have taken different approaches to restricting phones, leading to three main models of cellphone bans.

• Bell-to-bell bans are the most comprehensive, requiring students to keep their phones secured and inaccessible from the start to the end of the school day. This approach maximizes reductions in classroom disruptions and encourages more face-to-face social interaction, though it often demands greater supervision and infrastructure (e.g., pouches or lockers).
• Instructional bans are narrower, limiting device use only during formal teaching periods while allowing access at lunch, between classes, or during recess. These policies are typically easier to implement but may provide fewer benefits for peer interaction and still place responsibility for enforcement largely on individual teachers.
• Targeted restriction bans focus on specific contexts, such as prohibiting phones in gyms to promote physical activity or blocking access during state testing. These policies allow for flexibility but may have limited impact on broader concerns about distraction or mental health.

According to a July 2025 Education Week analysis, 27 states and the District of Columbia had created policies that required each school district and charter school to develop policies restricting cellphones. Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Utah passed legislation that mandated a single policy for all districts (Prothero & Langreo, 2025).

Early results from across the U.S. show that restricting cellphone use in schools can be effective.

Early results from across the U.S. show that restricting cellphone use in schools can be effective. In New York City, bans have been associated with gains in student learning, stronger engagement, and improved mental health (Fox, 2024). Even though restrictions applied only during the school day, one charter school reported a 50% increase in participation in after-school activities, including extracurricular programs and athletics. Similarly, districts in California and Massachusetts that have adopted limitations report fewer classroom disruptions and a stronger focus on instruction (Herz & Armany, 2025; Lambert, Seshadri, & Thornton, 2024).

While much of the conversation about school cellphone policies has understandably focused on its impact on student academics, mental health, and social development, these policies hold the potential to impact teachers as well. A spring 2024 survey by the National Education Association produced telling results. Over 90% of teachers surveyed believed student mental health was a serious issue, and the vast majority shared that students had trouble concentrating at school. When asked specifically what they thought about cellphones, 90% supported banning them during instructional time, and almost 85% supported banning them for the entire school day.

This survey was conducted before most states actually implemented cellphone bans. How do teachers feel after a policy is implemented?

Virginia teachers weigh in

Virginia was one of the earlier states to restrict cellphones in schools. On July 9, 2024, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin issued an executive order establishing cellphone-free education in Virginia’s K-12 public schools (Virginia Department of Education, 2024). The order, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2025, mandated that each school district in the state develop a bell-to-bell cellphone ban.

We partnered with a suburban school district in Virginia to explore teacher perspectives on the implementation of the bell-to-bell cellphone ban. About a month before the ban went into effect, we invited every middle and high school teacher in the district to complete a survey. We asked the teachers about their views on the new policy, including their concerns about classroom implementation. In April 2025, about three months into the ban and just before spring break, we sent a follow-up survey to all middle and high school teachers. Overall, we had a response rate of 28.5% (26% for the first survey administration, 31% for the second administration).

Teachers worried that school administrators would not support them in enforcing the policy if students had their cellphones out during the school day.

Each of the surveys included scales that measured teacher mental health, job satisfaction, burnout, administrative and colleague support, and teacher workload. We also conducted focus groups to allow teachers to share more details about their experiences implementing the cellphone ban.

Before the cellphone ban

Before the policy was formally implemented, 84% of teachers surveyed supported banning cellphones during the school day. A major reason was that over three-fourths of the teachers (76.1%) believed cellphones were a distraction in the classroom.

Though teachers supported the policy, they were concerned about implementation. Specifically, teachers worried that school administrators would not support them in enforcing the policy if students had their cellphones out during the school day. As one teacher shared, “weak administrative support for enforcement of the cellphone policy will only lead to more issues and additional work for teachers.”

A high school teacher told us that she worried about the pushback she might receive from students: “I am mostly concerned about student and parent pushback. Students are generally more argumentative now than they used to be, so enforcing the policy will likely be difficult.” Because of this, teachers wanted the district and the school principal to clearly communicate with parents and students about the new policy going into effect in the middle of the school year. Teachers wanted the consequences to be clearly communicated to all stakeholders prior to implementation: “I believe we need a discipline expectation. What will happen after a violation? A second? A third? This needs to be [universally understood] and explicit.”

Although a majority were in favor of the new policy, some teachers were concerned that relying on school-supplied technology might limit their instructional approaches. As a high school teacher shared, “I believe we must have adequate, state-of-the-art devices to fill the void that banning cellphone use for instructional purposes will create.” Several other teachers noted that they often have students complete activities on their phones when the school’s Wi-Fi is slow or not able to support all devices trying to use it at the same time.

In addition, a small number of high school teachers believed this policy would hinder students’ ability to learn how to self-regulate their cellphone use, a skill they believed would be important for students to have as they prepare for college or the workforce. 

After the cellphone ban

There were three significant changes in teacher perspectives between the fall and spring (see Table 1).

• Teachers shared that cellphones were less distracting in the spring than in the fall.
• Teachers shared that their workloads were less in the spring compared to the fall.
• Teachers felt less supported by colleagues in the spring compared to the fall.

	Fall 2024	Spring 2025	Effect Size	Interpretation
Cell phones are a distraction in my classroom.	4.31	3.48	.564 (Large effect size)	Cellphones were less distracting in the spring than in the fall.
Teacher workload (Pressley et al., 2025)	4.55	4.32	.426 (Medium to large effect size)	Teachers reported reduced workload in the spring.
Colleague support (Pressley et al., 2025)	4.56	4.28	.345 (Medium effect size)	Teachers felt less supported by colleagues in spring compared to fall.

The first two findings make sense, based on the nature of the new cellphone policy; however, the third difference is not as clear-cut. The focus groups (n=10) we conducted in April 2025 shed some light. Participating teachers in some schools told us that not all their colleagues strictly enforced the ban. This could have been a source of frustration for teachers who were implementing the policy with fidelity. However, further research is needed to get a better understanding of this finding.

By April, teachers were heavily in favor of the new cellphone ban, with 78% believing it was appropriate for their school, and 62% reporting noticeable improvements in student behavior. Teachers frequently pointed to stronger classroom engagement, with one sharing, “Students are more focused on learning!” Another teacher explained that without phones, “Student behavior and learning has improved. They are less distracted, and they aren’t texting their friends during and between classes.” In short, many educators observed that removing phones allowed students to direct more attention toward instruction and peer-to-peer interaction. This sentiment was also shared in the focus groups, where teachers hoped the cellphone ban would stay in place long-term.

Teachers also highlighted positive effects on students’ social and emotional development. Several noted that students were “rediscovering basic social and conversational skills,” with more willingness to talk with peers, ask for help, and participate in lessons. Teachers also shared that students were talking to each other in the lunchroom or the hallways rather than staring at their phones. In addition, the number of classroom disruptions appeared to decrease. As one teacher summarized, “Due to the cellphone policy, there is now less distraction in the classroom and less disciplinary issues.”

At the same time, teachers reported challenges. One of the major challenges was resistance from students (53%), while nearly half (46%) cited inconsistent enforcement across classrooms. These inconsistencies undermined the policy’s effectiveness: “When teachers do not enforce the policy equally, students quickly notice, and adherence drops significantly,” one teacher explained. Educators also flagged concerns that students were shifting their attention to school-issued laptops and tablets, making monitoring technology use a persistent issue.

Suggestions for improvement

Teachers in our study overwhelmingly appreciated the ban’s impact on student behavior, engagement, and social interaction. At the same time, they identified very real challenges, from inconsistent enforcement to gaps in instructional technology, that highlight the importance of strong leadership and careful planning.

Our study underscores three key takeaways:

1. Clear communication and consistent enforcement are essential.
2. The rollout is most effective at the start of a school year.
3. Administrators, not individual teachers, must take the lead in holding students accountable.

Perhaps most importantly, the policy reminds us that cellphone debates are not just about devices, but about what kind of school climate we want to create. Teachers consistently noted that when phones disappeared, students reappeared in conversations, in classrooms, and in relationships with peers and adults. That is a result worth protecting and one that should shape the national conversation moving forward.

The results of our study reveal that cellphone bans can work, but only if leaders take responsibility for implementation rather than leaving enforcement to individual teachers. The success or failure of these policies will not hinge on whether phones are prohibited, but on whether schools are prepared to sustain the climate those bans are meant to create. 

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023). Youth Risk Behavior Survey data summary and trends report.

Faverio, M., Anderson, M., & Park, E. (2025, April 22). Teens, social media and mental health. Pew Research Center.

Fox, E. (2024, July 17). NY students banned from using phones first hated, then loved it. KIPP Public Schools.

Haidt, J. (2024). The anxious generation: How the great rewiring of childhood is causing an epidemic of mental illness. Penguin Press.

Herz, M. & Armany, R. (2025, August 28). As lawmakers debate statewide school cellphone ban, one district says it works. GBH News.

Khalaf, A.M., Alubied, A.A., Khalaf, A.M., & Rifaey, A.A. (2023). The impact of social media on the mental health of adolescents and young adults: A systematic review. Cureus, 15 (8), e42990.

Lambert, D., Seshadri, M., & Thornton, L. (2024, August 21). Cellphone bans becoming more common in California schools. EdSource.

Marshall, D.T. & Pressley, T. (2024). Lessons of the pandemic: Disruption, innovation, and what schools need to move forward. The Guilford Press.

National Education Association. (2024, June 20). NEA member polling results: Social media, personal devices, and mental health.

Pressley, T., Marshall, D.T., & Walter, H.L. (2025). The development of brief measures of teacher well-being: Emotional exhaustion, workload, administrative support, and colleague support. Teacher Educator, 60 (4), 461-491.

Prothero, A. & Langreo, L. (2025, July 21). Most students now face cellphone limits at school. What happens next? Education Week.

Virginia Department of Education. (2024, September 16). Guidance for cellphone-free education pursuant to Executive Order 33.

---

This article appears in the Winter 2025 issue of Kappan, Vol. 107, No. 3-4.