When the Australian Christian College, a secondary school situated in Melbourne’s Casey suburb, enforced a mobile phone ban, it was driven by numerous factors. There was an escalation in peer conflicts online, students had difficulty maintaining focus, and teachers noticed students engaging in “code-switching on notifications.”
Caleb Peterson, the school’s principal, stated, “When a phone is within arm’s reach, a student’s attention is only half in the room. We aimed to reclaim their full attention.”
Traditionally, cell phone bans in educational institutions necessitate that devices be stored in bags or lockers during class hours, with confiscation upon discovery to be retained in the school office until the day’s end. This month signifies the two-year mark since the introduction of phone bans across many Australian states. Victoria notably pioneered this move by prohibiting mobile phone usage in public primary and secondary schools back in 2020. By the close of the fourth term in 2023, Western Australia, Tasmania, New South Wales, and South Australia implemented similar measures, with Queensland limiting mobile phone use starting early 2024.
The announcement regarding the ban received endorsement from both parents and politicians, many of whom contended that: restricting access to phones enhances focus and minimizes distractions, though some experts expressed doubts concerning its efficacy. Two years later, what has truly transpired within Australia’s phone-free schools?
“The effects have been evident,” Peterson remarked. “Post-ban, we’ve enhanced class beginnings, diminished disruptions, and improved class dynamics. Conflicts related to devices have reduced, and recess and lunch have transformed. We now see games, conversations, and positive interactions among students and staff. That’s the atmosphere young people seek.”
A year following the implementation of the ban, a survey involving nearly 1,000 public school principals, conducted by the NSW Department of Education’s Center for Education Statistics and Evaluation, revealed that 95 percent still advocated for the ban. Furthermore, 81% believed the ban enhanced student learning, 86% indicated improved student interactions, and 87% perceived fewer classroom distractions.
Research from South Australia—released earlier this March—indicated that 70% of educators noticed increased focus and engagement during learning periods, while 64% noted “a reduction in the rate of serious incidents” attributable to device usage.
Lucaya, a graduate from a western Sydney high school in 2024, views the ban as an “overreaction.” Having experienced both unrestricted cell phone use and the ban during her final year, she reports that students still find covert ways to use their devices.
“Teenagers regard cell phones as vital,” she asserts. “It provides them with a sense of safety and security. Denying them something that holds such significance will only exacerbate stress and anxiety, complicating matters for teachers and administrators.” [and] assisting staff in coping.”
Nevertheless, anecdotal evidence from dialogues with students and staff across various public and private institutions suggests a general consensus that the ban has yielded positive outcomes. An anonymous high school teacher noted that simply having mobile phones present in classrooms can prove distracting, even if not actively used. “They simply offer opportunities,” she commented. “You can distinctly notice the difference in their absence.”
Many students believe the ban has created a more equitable learning environment. Amy, a Year 11 student at a public high school in Sydney’s west, remarked that eliminating mobile phones in classrooms has curtailed misbehavior while also fostering social connections for those who spend excess time online.
“Students [feel more at ease] “It fosters a safe environment where we don’t have to stress about people sharing pictures of us,” she stated.
Mariam, a Year 11 student at a public high school in Sydney’s south, felt that the phone ban was “unjust” and claimed that teachers occasionally used it to exert authority, but admitted it positively influenced learning outcomes. Aisha, a Year 11 student from a private Islamic school in Sydney’s west, noted that the phone ban has helped her “maintain attention longer and perform better academically.”
Dr. Tony Mordini, principal of Melbourne High School, a public selective institution, has observed this heightened attention firsthand. His school adopted a no-phone policy in January 2020, following guidelines from the Victorian Department of Education.
“From a professional perspective, this ban has clearly had a beneficial impact,” he stated. “Students exhibit increased focus during lessons and are less sidetracked by online distractions. Furthermore, the absence of phones has significantly curtailed opportunities for cyberbullying and harassment in classrooms.”
However, Mordini acknowledges that the ban also curtails certain student opportunities.
“It’s crucial to recognize what we’ve surrendered,” he remarks. “Mobile phones can serve as powerful educational tools, capable of storing extensive content, assisting with research, capturing photographs, creating videos, and hosting valuable applications. Lacking a mobile phone necessitates reliance on the traditional resources and devices provided by the school.”
After newsletter promotion
Professor Neil Selwyn from Monash University’s School of Education, Culture, and Society, stated, “We’ve been informed that banning phones will curb cyberbullying, enhance concentration in class, and reduce the need for teachers to discipline for phone misuse.” Some politicians promised to boost student learning and mental health, but a significant impetus behind these bans was their popularity.
He suggested that schools might serve as a stand-in for wider concerns about children and their device usage, but questions whether schools serve as the optimal solution.
“Young people spend a significant amount of time outside school, thus parents and families must engage in discussions on regulating their children’s device usage at home,” he emphasizes. “Regrettably, this isn’t a priority for most policymakers, so enacting phone bans in schools feels like an easy way to address the broader issue of excessive digital device use.”
Mr. Selwyn indicated that Australia’s phone ban was not implemented “with the intent of thoroughly investigating its effectiveness” and termed specific research into this field as “not conclusive or particularly rigorous.”
He further asserted that recent government data from New South Wales and South Australia is “not particularly illuminating.”
“The critical concern remains how these bans will affect us over time,” he noted. “Claims suggesting these bans suddenly result in dramatic improvements may sound politically appealing, but the tangible impact of these bans necessitates more comprehensive and ongoing investigation.
“We must go beyond merely asking principals if they believe student learning has enhanced. We need to enter classrooms and engage students and teachers about their varied experiences with the ban, and the potential benefits they foresee moving forward.”
He referenced a recent UK study of 30 schools and over 1,200 students which concluded that “students in schools devoid of smartphones showed no notable differences in mental health, sleep, academic performance in English or mathematics, or even disruptive behavior in class.”
“While some studies imply a connection between phone bans and improved academic performance, they are not deemed to provide reliable evidence of direct causation,” he states. “It would be imprudent to assume a phone ban would singularly and significantly rectify these issues.”
Peterson takes care not to “exaggerate” the ban’s implications but asserts that it aims to “foster conditions conducive to successful learning and friendships.” Despite exempting medical management, disability support, or assistive translation applications, he contends that academic flow is enhanced, conflict is reduced, and social unity is improved. His school’s “health metrics” indicate “lessened psychological distress.”
“Phone bans are not a panacea,” he notes. “However, they are a valuable resource, particularly when paired with digital citizenship, mental health advocacy, and positive playground initiatives.”
Peterson conveyed that numerous students suggested the ban offers them a “reprieve.”
“Phone bans have now simply become the norm, with real and modest benefits that are genuinely worthwhile.”
Source: www.theguardian.com
