No Signal

As one of 64 ninth graders in the inaugural class of the new Cristo Rey Jesuit Seattle High School, in Seattle, Washington, where Katie Seltzer, Ed.M.’22, works and which opened its doors in August 2024, Aniya M. was vaguely aware the school had some sort of cellphone policy. But only after she began texting her mom during lunch — and got what she calls a “very polite” reminder to put her phone away lest it be confiscated — did she understand that phones are banned entirely during the school day. 

“I was kind of shocked,” says Aniya, 14, who says she enrolled at the Seattle school — the newest in the 40-school Cristo Rey network of private, Catholic, college-preparatory schools exclusively serving students from families of limited economic means — because it offers “a ton of opportunities for my future.” [At the school’s request, students are being identified only by their first names and last initials.] 

Shock aside, within a week or so she discovered something unexpected about ditching her phone. “It is definitely helping me focus more in class,” says Aniya, who says she wants to become a psychotherapist someday. “And it’s pushing me to reach out more to my peers instead of relying more on my phone, like I did in middle school. I have a bit of social anxiety so don’t like connecting with people. But the friends I’ve made are great, so I’m kind of glad we have that cellphone policy and we’re encouraged to talk to each other.” 

Her classmate Sofia J., who plans to become a pediatrician, was also unaware of the policy. “Now that I’m actually attending Cristo Rey, I feel the cellphone ban is beneficial,” she says. “I noticed I was participating more and engaging more in the classes I was taking. Even though I love using my phone, it’s not something I need during the school day. My education is more important.” As for making friends? “The in-person interactions are definitely more helpful than being on social media,” she emphasizes. 

Elena J., who plans to become a lawyer, chose Cristo Rey because of its proven success in college acceptance rates and its unique model: students work one day a week at places like Microsoft and the Space Needle through the Corporate Work Study program. “I felt an increase in focus because I don’t have to worry about my phone at all,” she says. She and her friends are so interested in each other and school they don’t miss the devices, she says, adding, “I don’t see the need for [phones] in school for any reason. I read a study once on using phones during class, that it takes up to 20 minutes to focus back on the subject you’re doing in class. I feel like that is true.” 

Cristo Rey student Cole M., who hopes to become a pediatrician, says that while smartphones aren’t a distraction for him personally, they can be for others and so he understands the rule and has easily adjusted to it. And Sincere B., who wants to become a mental health counselor, agrees that phone use during class is detrimental because “you’re not really focused, and you won’t get any work done. At a school like Cristo Rey, you need to be doing the best you can so you can succeed.” Although she wishes they could use phones during breaks, she admits they are a distraction: “Even when I’m not at school, having my phone makes it harder for me to get up and do what I need to do.”

Are other classmates missing their phones, and maybe criticizing the policy? “No, not really,” says Aniya. “It really doesn’t come up that often because we are encouraged to talk to each other more.” 

Of course, the opinions of five highly motivated ninth graders at a single high school hardly make for a scientific survey. But these voices present a point of view not widely explored in media reports about phone bans: those of the students themselves. None of the five interviewed here objects to being without their phones during class. A couple said they would like phone access during lunch, but all evinced being relieved, even happy, to not have to exert self-discipline over a device that’s as attractive (many would say addictive) as a portable mini computer with internet access. 

What the Data Says 

What if you could design a school where students are focused on learning during class, engaging fully with each other during recess and lunch, and free (at least during the school day) from cyberbullying, social media, texts, video games, and other distractions? 

It’s simple: ban smartphones. It’s a widespread and growing trend. 

More than 75% of public schools in the United States banned cellphone use in one form or another in the 2021-22 school year, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. In 2023, Florida became the first state to ban cellphone use during class time, though districts can decide whether to allow it during lunch and breaks. As of August 2024, eight other states — Louisiana, South Carolina, Indiana, Virginia, Ohio, Minnesota, Delaware, and Pennsylvania — have adopted policies or laws to curtail cellphone use in schools, according to The New York Times. New York Governor Kathy Hochul plans to submit legislation in 2025 to ban smartphones at schools, and in August 2024, California Governor Gavin Newsom urged school districts to limit their use in class. Other states, including Oklahoma, Kansas, and Vermont, are considering similar restrictions.

This accelerating approach across the country is spurred not only by the concerns of frustrated educators — 72% of high school teachers say students distracted by cellphones is a major problem, according to a 2024 study by the Pew Research Center — but a persuasive body of research. 

A 2024 report from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health found that among middle schoolers in Norway, a recent cellphone ban “significantly decreased” mental health challenges among girls and improved their grades, and decreased bullying by more than 40% among both boys and girls. These results were even greater for girls from lower socio-economic backgrounds, the report found. 

Just having their phone nearby distracts students during class, according to UNESCO’s 2023 Global Education Monitoring Report, which recommends against technology in classrooms — including smartphones — unless it supports learning outcomes. Indeed, as Elena J. noted in a report she read, it can take up to 20 minutes for a student to refocus on learning once distracted by a phone, while the absence of smartphones improved learning, especially for students who are struggling. 

In his 2024 New York Times bestselling book, The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt advocates for phone-free schools, and argues that kids shouldn’t have smartphones before high school or access to social media before age 16. And in June 2024, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, noting that social media is an “important contributor” to the current mental health crisis among youth, called for a surgeon general’s warning to be applied to social media platforms. He also urged schools to keep social time, in addition to class time, free from phones so that students can interact in person. 

With so much data supporting the benefit of phone-free schools, who’s arguing in favor of them? 

According to a 2024 report by the National Parents Union, 78% of parents think their kids should have access to their cellphones at some points during the school day. In this tragic age of school shootings, many parents and kids feel safer knowing they can get in touch with each other during an emergency at school. 

“Schools regularly experience events that are scary, and parents want to communicate with their children at any time [in order to] make sure they are safe,” says Victor Pereira, faculty co-chair of the Ed School’s Teaching and Teacher Leadership (TTL) Program. For parents, a complete cellphone ban “can be scary,” he says, “so schools have to consider how to alleviate that anxiety” — for example, by assuring parents they can always contact the office to reach their child. 

Others believe that easily available cellphones actually pose a greater danger to students during such a situation. “It shouldn’t be your top priority to use your phone during an emergency,” says Elena J. “We’d just go all crazy calling our parents and we wouldn’t be paying attention to the teachers” trying to keep them safe. 

Another challenge? Students, for whom smartphone use is as pervasive and seemingly natural as breathing, may find it very difficult to do without it. Most teens are on their smartphones more than four hours a day, and they pick up their phones at a median of 51 times per day, with some doing so nearly 500 times a day, according to Common Sense Media. Mental health experts differ on whether overuse of a smartphone is a true addiction, but there’s no question it can be very hard to get kids — or anyone else — to ignore their phones. 

And is anything positive lost by banning phones at school? Can’t they be a learning tool that enhances education? And practically, how can educators institute an effective ban to achieve the results they want? 

One School’s Approach 

The educators who designed Cristo Rey Jesuit Seattle knew they had an opportunity to run an experiment, one they believed would greatly benefit their student body.

In contrast to existing schools trying to implement a new ban among students used to having phones in class and during breaks, “We have a rare opportunity to do things from the start, instead of doing a turnaround with cellphone bans,” says Seltzer, who serves as vice president of the school’s Corporate Work Study program. 

Among the dozens of Cristo Rey schools nationally, 100% of graduates are accepted to four-year colleges, and they graduate from college at two times the rate of their socio-economic peers, Seltzer says, adding, “It’s a proven model and a successful model.” 

But the COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted the educational experience of students everywhere, including the school’s first cohort, who were in elementary school when it hit. 

As school leaders contemplated how to best help them catch up, removing the distraction of phones seemed like low-hanging fruit. 

“[We] need to ensure that our students continue to succeed in their college persistence, knowing they are often tasked with catchup work because they often haven’t had access to high-quality and rigorous education prior to coming to our schools,” Seltzer says. “The impact on learning or productivity in the classroom or workplace is stark when every minute counts, particularly for students that haven’t had the same access to rigorous instruction that some students have access to.” 

The same with socialization. “If as soon as they leave the classroom, they pull out their phones, they’re not there in the hallway with their peers in the same way,” says Seltzer, who is on the school’s executive leadership team that decided to adopt a no-phone policy. (Not all Cristo Rey schools do so.) “As a faith-based school, it is critical to our beliefs that we are a human family and to connect in person is the best way to create community.” A no-phone policy “supports our goal in the uninterrupted focus on our classwork and our professional work in our work-study program.” 

Cristo Rey Seattle students put phones in their lockers in the morning and don’t take them out again until they head home. That means they not only concentrate better in class but build real, in-person relationships during breaks and lunch, school leaders believe. 

“This is rooted in research,” she emphasizes, including the 2024 Norwegian public health report that notes the disproportionate negative impact of smartphones in schools on girls from lower socio-economic backgrounds. 

The school launched in August 2024 with a three-week summer program to introduce students to workplace skills they will use in their corporate placements. Cellphones were excluded. “We got some grumbles,” Seltzer says, with some students expressing they’d like access during lunchtime. Seltzer sees that as a measure of success, “a concession of them realizing, ‘Maybe I don’t need it all day.’” 

Still, school leaders are open to seeing how, as the initial cohort adapts to the policy and then graduates to higher grades, they might adjust the no-phone policy for students who demonstrate an ability to use phones appropriately. Eventually, she says, “as our students grow and mature, we will be building opportunities to decide how to use [the phone] for executive functioning and calendaring.” 

Using Them as Tools

Louis Chugranis, a current student in the Online Master’s in Education Program, would agree with that approach. A teacher since 2006 — today, he’s a technology teacher at South Orangetown Middle School in Blauvelt, New York — Chugranis considers the smartphone “one of humankind’s great inventions,” which, with appropriate use, can be an educational asset. 

Rather than a blanket ban, “I think we need to think more deliberately and intentionally about how to use smartphones in educational settings with our students,” Chugranis says. Although he has ongoing concerns about cyberbullying and other negative aspects, he has also experienced smartphones as a useful tool; for example, for students in design class to photograph structural details in a building that they can model for their own work. 

“If people are saying that smartphones should never be used in schools, I think that would be a myopic perspective,” he says. “The question is, how do we use smartphones in school with students in an educationally appropriate way while preventing all those other uses?” That, he says, we haven’t quite figured out yet.

Chugranis says he hopes to see thought leaders, including educational experts at the Ed School, and neuroscientists, physicians, psychologists, parents, and students, explore how to promote smartphone benefits for kids while minimizing the dangers. 

“I think the real problem is not should we use them or not, but how can we use them safely and appropriately to improve learning for students and to improve teaching, because obviously they can be used as powerful teaching devices,” he says. 

Cole M. agrees that smartphones can be useful in the classroom, especially since school laptops are much slower at accessing educational apps and websites. 

Phones “also pose as a great communication tool between students and teachers,” he says, “like if you want to know what to do on this assignment, or for impromptu class updates.” However, he’s “not quite sure” whether the pros outweigh the cons. 

Pereira also believes that phones, used properly, can be a useful tool given the enormous number of educational apps and assessment tools available. But whatever a school’s policy, it should be consistently and equitably applied, he says. The policy should come from the top, rather than leaving it to individual teachers to administer so that students don’t have different rules in different classes. “That can be challenging for teachers to manage,” he says. 

“We’ve heard over the last two to three years how hard it is for educators, that, ‘We did not choose to give your child a phone and we’re now in position of having to be the arbiter and manage it,’” explains Emily Weinstein, Ed.M.’14, Ed.D.’17, co-founder and executive director of the Ed School’s new Center for Digital Thriving, a research center under Project Zero focused on developing a nuanced view of tech in our lives. “Because of that, a top-down policy can feel to some teachers like a huge relief because they aren’t having to make decisions at the classroom level.” 

She advises administrators to recognize that dilemma and listen to teachers as a constituent group. 

Include the Students

In fact, engaging and listening to stakeholders is key to a successful policy, insist Weinstein and Carrie James, the center’s managing director and co-founder. And on issues of technology and the digital world, they care deeply about what young people think. Too often in these discussions, including the smartphone debate, adults make decisions without understanding the perspectives of a younger generation for whom the digital world is second nature. 

Over the past decade, Weinstein and James have worked with thousands of students and hundreds of educators on digital and tech topics. They are co-authors of Behind Their Screens: What Teens are Facing (and Adults are Missing), which drew on the insights and viewpoints of 3,500 youth, and, in turn, spurred them to launch the center in the fall of 2023. 

For educators considering smartphone and other technology policies, they have strong advice based on their research: make sure to include students. “We’re not for or against cellphone bans — we see a lot of wisdom in these efforts — but we’ve learned that schools that take the time to listen [to students] seem to end up in interesting places,” says Weinstein. 

For one thing, they suggest holding listening sessions before introducing new policies. Survey students and parents about what is working well — or not — with an existing policy and ask what they wish decisionmakers knew about the pros and cons of any new policy, she advises. 

“Carrie and I have found that a youth advisory is truly game changing,” Weinstein says, “because there are blind spots we have as adults.” Without a youth perspective, she says, “so often we end up missing the mark.” 

In their work, they’ve learned from youth “that sometimes adding is as important as subtracting,” Weinstein says. “So, if you’re subtracting cellphones, it’s a natural opportunity to consider what you might need to introduce so you are enriching students’ experiences.” One school added tether ball sets to the playground. “Or you could add board games in the cafeteria, or you may hear what additional supports students need to feel safe” without phones. 

By eliciting community input, educators have the opportunity to understand the reasons for any resistance to new rules; for example, a student may reveal they need a phone because they are the caregiver for a younger sibling. “That doesn’t mean you can’t go to a policy like a cellphone ban, but it means creating ways for communities to give feedback before the ban occurs or at least as you’re gearing up for it,” says Weinstein, who also suggests communicating to parents and students how you are dealing with their concerns. 

Another piece of wisdom they’ve learned: when implementing new tech policies, “consistency in the early weeks of school makes a big difference,” she says — like the gentle reminder Aniya received to put her cellphone away when she was texting her mom as a new student at Cristo Rey. Though the policy has been an adjustment, when asked if she likes her new school, Aniya smiles broadly. “Yes,” she says. “Very much.” 

Elaine McArdle is a writer based in New York. Her story on chronic absenteeism appeared in the spring/summer 2024 issue