n June 18, a day after U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called for a warning label on social media platforms citing negative effects on youth mental health, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced he was backing proposals to limit the use of smartphones in schools.

“The trend seems to be heading in the direction of more schools banning,” said Elizabeth Keren-Kolb, a clinical professor of education technologies and teacher education at the Marsal Family School of Education at the University of Michigan. “I believe this stems from COVID remote learning and how parents and teachers are more concerned now about screentime in schools, and that devices contribute. Further, the average age of obtaining a cellphone 10 years ago was closer to 14 or 15, and now it is closer to 10, so kids are younger and more easily distracted by the devices.”

The scope and rationale behind many of these policy shifts vary. The most often-cited reason is to improve engagement in class, particularly among local educational agencies that only limit cellphone use in the classroom. Nearly three-quarters of high school teachers and a third of middle school teachers reported in a nationally representative survey released by the Pew Research Center in April 2024 that students being distracted by cellphones is a major problem.

LEAs that have instituted more wide-reaching bans often argue that a cellphone-free environment may improve student mental health and reduce cyberbullying and fights on campus by forcing young people to spend less time on social media. For instance, San Mateo-Foster City School District’s superintendent told NBC that prior to the district’s policy update, students were taking videos of fights or in locker rooms on their phones.

It’s important as LEAs craft new policies or update existing ones that they understand not only what challenges they are trying to solve, but if limiting cellphone use alone will realistically address the issues, Keren-Kolb noted.

At the core, “the problems that schools are trying to solve are distractions in school and digital drama in schools,” she noted.

Digital drama refers to a large set of negative feelings or behaviors online including cyberbullying, feelings of missing out, concerns over not getting enough likes or comments, who unfriended or friended whom, microaggressions and more. Ultimately, anything that causes someone to focus their energy in a negative way on something within their device.

“In some schools, it may help with distractions,” Keren-Kolb said. “However, digital drama will continue outside of school. And there are other distractions in schools — such as social drama. So, there will still be some distractions.”

When it comes to mental health, drawing any direct causation to cellphones is nearly impossible because one’s mental health is impacted by so many different factors at any given time. Researchers generally note that while social media can impact young people’s mental health, self-image and more, schools working to support young people should take a more holistic approach that includes wraparound services rather than relying solely on cellphone bans.

Social media interactions have been shown to have both negative and positive effects. For instance, one study found that using social media can lead to weakening friendships, online ostracism and heightened loneliness for some; while others experience increased social capital, the formation of friendships and communities and reduced loneliness. This aligns with other research that has found social media to be a place where LGBTQ teens and others from marginalized groups find supportive and accepting communities.

Some research suggests that limiting smartphone use in the classroom could help students stay focused on their lessons and retain the information presented to them. For example, one study found that dividing attention between an electronic device and the classroom lecture impaired subsequent exam performance. Another study found that students who were not using their mobile phones wrote down 62 percent more information in their notes, were able to recall more detailed information from the lecture, and scored a full letter grade-and-a-half higher on a multiple-choice test than those students who were actively using their cellphones.

Part of the challenge schools face in enforcing the policies they may already have is the incessant urge to check one’s phone. A 2017 study found that even when people are successful at avoiding the temptation to check their phones, their mere presence reduces available cognitive capacity.

Additionally, avoiding the urge to check one’s notifications is getting increasingly difficult. Last year, about 46 percent of teens reported being online “almost constantly” in a Pew Research Center survey — about double the share who said the same thing in 2014–15. About 95 percent of teens ages 13 to 17 said they had access to a smartphone, and about half of those ages 11 to 17 get at least 237 notifications on their phones in a typical day. Of those notifications, about 25 percent arrive during the school day, according to a 2023 report from Common Sense Media.

Against that backdrop, studies on school cellphone bans of various intensities in Spain, England and Norway have found reductions in bullying among teenagers, improved math and science achievement, increases in exam performance among the lowest-achieving students, and slightly higher grade point averages.

California law already allows LEAs to limit the use of smartphones by students while they are at school, with exceptions for emergencies or in response to a perceived threat; when possession or use of the smartphone is required in a student’s individualized education program or is determined as necessary for the health or well-being of a student; or when a teacher or administrator grants permission to a student to possess or use their smartphone.

As of this writing, two bills are supported by Newsom: Assembly Bill 3216 would require LEAs to develop and regularly update policies limiting smartphones in classrooms. Senate Bill 1283 would expand on existing law by authorizing LEAs to either limit or prohibit the use of social media by students while on campus.

CSBA Chief of Communications Troy Flint said such decisions are best made at the local level. “We support legislation such as SB 1283 that empowers school board members to restrict or limit school cellphone usage on campus if that decision makes the most sense for their students and local communities,” he told The Sacramento Bee when the Governor’s support of these bills was announced. “We oppose legislation that would require school districts to prohibit cell phone usage as a blanket measure with no consideration given to the varying demographics, opinions, lifestyles and needs of students and families in different parts of the state.”

Policies implemented in schools vary from students simply being asked to keep devices in their backpacks or lockers during class to not being allowed to bring their phones to school or use them during school hours. To accomplish this, at least 41 LEAs across the country have purchased Yondr pouches — lockable pouches that hold phones, rendering them inaccessible and unusable until the pouch is unlocked at the end of the school day with a specific magnetic device.

In Santa Barbara Unified School District, students must leave cellphones in their backpacks during class time when they’re expected to focus on their lessons, but can use them during lunch or passing periods.

“The ‘Off and Away’ policy was initiated by a discussion with the Santa Barbara Teachers Association regarding the impact of cellphone use on instruction, student engagement and classroom management,” said ShaKenya Edison, the district’s assistant superintendent of student services. “The desired outcome was shared understanding of expectations in learning zones, as well as fair, consistent practices across the district.”

The policy was rolled out in stages beginning in 2022, Edison explained, with posters across campuses, several drop-in informational meetings for parents and guardians to learn about the policy, and sharing resources on mental health and the social impacts of constant smartphone use. Additionally, the district’s Technology Use Committee sought to help change thinking among staff so that they viewed cellphone use among students as an addiction, not merely defiance.

Fresno USD doesn’t have a districtwide ban — only two schools have full-fledged cellphone bans in place, according to school board trustee Keshia Thomas. The first, implemented in a smaller school, went smoothly, she said.

“However, when we tried to do it on one of the larger campuses and we didn’t include community conversations, that’s where the issues started,” Thomas said. “Parents were in an uproar, students were in an uproar” after one high school began using Yondr pouches.

At Fresno’s Roosevelt High School, however, administrators worked with a team of psychology students from Fresno State to develop strategies for getting buy-in from students to make the policy more of a collaborative process. In creating an intervention plan for a ninth-grade class, the research team found that removing students’ physical access to phones in a way they can understand and will benefit from made enforcement smoother. So, the team suggested the teacher ask students to plug their phones into chargers provided during the class period away from the desks — a variation of placing phones in a bin on the teacher’s desk.

In Santa Barbara, the district engaged students and families through informational sessions, online surveys and Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council meetings.

The Technology Use Committee, which included teachers, “recognized that cellphones also play an important role in many aspects of life and did not recommend a total ban. Additionally, the committee wanted to leave some autonomy for teachers to decide how they would support students with the Off and Away expectations,” Edison said. “It was important that this initiative was co-lead with the teachers union, administrators, families and community partners.”

Since the rollout, the district has continued to survey staff, families and students. “In all of the informational sessions, families expressed support,” Edison said, and teachers “were appreciative that this was a districtwide initiative, and not disparate in implementation.”

Ensuring a wide range of stakeholders are involved in making the policy, especially teachers and some students, is vital to developing a plan that works for all needs, Keren-Kolb noted. However, “the most important is leadership buy-in and support for staff,” she continued. “It can be exhausting for staff members to spend all day enforcing cellphone bans. If they don’t have the full support of leadership, and if every staff member is not on board, then it is a losing battle.”

Despite research largely pointing to positive academic outcomes when students are focused on the lessons and not the phone concealed in their lap, there has been significant pushback from students and parents alike when districts propose such a change.

One of the more common concerns, especially in the face of more prohibitive bans: How will children and parents be able to contact one another in case of an emergency, such as a school shooting?

“I believe in [restricting access to smartphones] because I think that kids are so super focused on social media and that’s how a lot of the gossip gets started. I would say probably 80 percent of the confrontations that happen with students are because of social media,” said Fresno USD’s Thomas. “But do I want to take away the possibility of there being a catastrophe and kids need to call their parents or let their parents know that something is happening? That’s where I’m conflicted.”

Ken Trump, president of National School Safety and Security Services, has noted that using a phone during such an emergency can actually distract students from running, hiding or listening to directions from first responders, among other issues.

And while many educators agree that cellphones don’t belong in the classroom, others see the potential for the devices to be teaching tools — be it through the use of educational apps, collaborating with peers on projects or as a means of proactively teaching students about appropriate, respectful smartphone use.

Others have expressed concern about the potential for higher instances of disproportionate and/or exclusionary disciplinary actions when students are caught using phones. “There have been findings that bans tend to punish historically marginalized youth more heavily than white affluent students. Some of this has to do with access and understanding that youth from lower income families may feel more connected to their device if it is the only means of family communication or belonging,” Keren-Kolb said. “This is the type of thing that needs to be taken into account when creating cellphone policies in school. And teachers need more training on how to manage and use devices to promote productivity as well as in digital wellness and mental health impact of cellphones/screens so they can teach this to their students.”

Ultimately, Santa Barbara USD’s Edison noted that no matter the policy an LEA adopts, setting clear expectations and remaining flexible during initial implementation is a must.

“Changing behaviors is not an easy task, nor will a one-size-fits-all strategy work. As a teaching and learning institution, we were fully prepared that we would need to teach the new expectation before holding accountability,” she said. “This is only fair and that is why we started with an information campaign to bring awareness to all stakeholders and allow for feedback.”