NYT finds cellphone bans ineffective

School cellphone bans are having a real effect — just not the one politicians and parents were promised. A big new working paper, published Monday through the National Bureau of Economic Research, says strict school-day bans do get phones out of kids’ hands. But the hoped-for payoff in grades and behavior has mostly not shown up yet. That matters because the policy has spread fast, with states across the country treating it like an easy answer to distraction, discipline, and student mental health. ### What did the new study actually look at? This was not a tiny pilot in one district. The researchers — from Stanford, Duke, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Michigan — looked at more than 40,000 schools between 2019 and 2026. The core comparison was between schools using Yondr pouches, which lock students’ phones for the full day, and similar schools with looser rules that still restricted phones but did not lock them away. ### Did the bans reduce phone use? Yes — pretty clearly. The paper says cellphone pings from school grounds fell 30% in the first three years after schools adopted Yondr. Teacher surveys also showed a huge drop in visible, nonacademic phone use during class — to 13% from 61%. So the basic enforcement question has an answer: if schools physically lock the phones, students mostly stop using them. ### So why isn’t that showing up in grades? Basically, because “less phone use” and “better learning” are not the same thing. The paper says the effect on test scores was “close to zero.” That does not mean phones are harmless. It means removing one distraction does not automatically rebuild attention, classroom routines, motivation, or missing academic self. ### What about behavior and discipline? This is where the story gets messier. Early on, suspension rates actually rose after strict bans were introduced. Turns out enforcement can create friction before it creates calm. Teachers still liked the bans because they saw fewer day-to-day distractions, but that is different from a clean improvement in schoolwide behavior metrics. ### Does that mean the bans failed? Not exactly. They succeeded at the narrow thing they directly control — access. That is more than a symbolic win. But the catch is that public debate sold these bans as a multi-tool: better grades, better mental health, less bullying, better attendance, better focus. The new evidence supports the first step in that chain, not the whole chain. ### Why is this landing now? Because the policy wave is already huge. By May 2025, 26 states had passed laws on school cellphone use, with others using statewide rules or recommendations, and the movement has only grown since then. Another study of public schools found that roughly 97% already had some kind of cellphone policy in place for the 2024-25 school year. So this is not a fringe experiment anymore — it is becoming normal school governance. ### What’s the real lesson here? Phones are an easy villain because they are visible. But school problems are usually layered. A ban can clear space. It cannot, on its own, teach self-control, repair weak instruction, or make students feel more connected to school. That is why researchers and educators keep landing in the same place: device rules may help, but they are not a silver bullet. ### Bottom line? The new study does not say schools should give up on phone restrictions. It says people should stop expecting a pouch to do the work of teaching, discipline, counseling, and school culture. The bans can remove the phone. The harder part is everything that comes after.