At a time when an app like TenTen is panicking the media and teachers, what is the real impact of banning smartphones in schools?
China’s education ministry has banned harmful apps in schools and France has banned the use of smartphones in schools. Mobile phones are currently banned in all Australian public schools. 77% of American schools report banning cell phones at school for non-academic use. This includes banning phones from school premises, handing over phones upon arrival at school, putting phones away, or blocking access to social media on Wi-Fi.
Evidence for the effectiveness of a school cell phone ban remains weak and inconclusive on three key indicators: differences in academic achievement, effects on student mental health, and reductions in school bullying . According to the researchers, a ban doesn’t really make a difference. Mobile phones are used anyway. Students view phone bans as punitive, making the school climate less equal and less positive. Nor does it mean that schools are enforcing the bans. Several school districts in Canada implemented absolute bans and then reversed them because they were too difficult to maintain.
But what would happen if politicians could be trusted? Should we consider with them that the use of applications and smartphones should be prohibited or restricted for the good of learning and learners?
A 2015 study from the London School of Economics found that “in schools where mobiles were banned, the test scores of 16-year-olds improved by 6.4%.” The main variables of this study were on the one hand “distraction” and its impact on the attention of “impressionable” students and on the other hand the “danger” represented by potentially harmful content. A 2023 report from a 14-country study by UNESCO recommends a ban on smartphones in school for students of all ages, and says the data is unequivocal, showing that countries that impose restrictions see improved academic performance and less bullying.
In France, an experiment carried out in a college led to a more radical conclusion: “we couldn’t live without it, now we talk to each other”. Talking to yourself is in this case the indicator chosen to assess the quality of students’ learning (and quality of life).
Talking to yourself or improving test scores are two (very different) indicators of learning achievement. It would be simplistic to attribute better learning outcomes to banning or limiting smartphones. But we all agree that concentration on tasks, the quality of dialogue between students and teachers, and the mental health of students, are essential indicators for designing successful (and enjoyable) learning paths.
This is what I call the “Art of Interaction” – the ability of teachers and students to engage in ongoing, granular conversation during the learning process.
Does this call into question the role of digital innovation in the classroom? Sweden recently announced that schools across the country will remove digital technology from classrooms due to poor student performance.
We have a growing body of data (and indicators) to assess the impact of technology in education. John Hattie has provided a comprehensive framework for analyzing what works in education and the impact of specific technologies appears to be significantly less important than collaborative modes of learning, for example.
The role of technology could be redefined and not canceled with digital tools specifically designed for real interaction and authentic participation between students and with the teacher.
Instead of asking whether “digital de-escalation” is possible, we might ask how classroom interaction can be improved (with or without a smartphone)?
