The debate over whether cell phones should be allowed in schools has intensified in recent years, with an increasing number of states and districts taking formal positions. Supporters of restrictions argue that phones undermine student focus, academic achievement, and social well-being. At the same time, critics contend that phones can be helpful learning tools and that schools should teach responsible use rather than prohibit them outright. Across the U.S., a patchwork of policies is emerging, with some states mandating phone-free schools and others leaving decisions to local districts.
To better understand the classroom-level realities behind this debate, we spoke with Marie Whybark, a high school math and biology teacher with 19 years of experience. Her insights demonstrate how policy decisions have a direct impact on student engagement and school culture. Wybark is a current high school teacher in the Ann Arbor Public Schools.
A growing policy trend
As of fall 2025, 34 states plus Washington, D.C., have adopted some form of guidance or policy on cell phone use in K–12 schools. These policies vary widely: some ban phones only during instructional time, while others require “bell-to-bell” bans covering the entire school day.
For instance, California passed the “Phone-Free School Act” in 2024, requiring all districts to implement restrictions by 2026. In Virginia, the governor issued an executive order limiting student phone use, effective in 2025. In Michigan, a statewide ban failed earlier this year but is being reworked.
Educators and policymakers cite several key motivations: reducing distractions, curbing cyberbullying, supporting mental health and promoting face-to-face interaction. Research, including findings referenced by Jonathan Haidt in “The Anxious Generation,” has influenced some lawmakers by highlighting the developmental risks associated with excessive smartphone use.
The teacher experience
Whybark points out that in the early years of smartphones, teachers were largely on their own in managing the devices.
“My first attempts were to say, ‘I should never see it or hear it, and if I do, I’ll confiscate it until the end of the day and follow up with your parents.’ I did this for years, and it was very time-consuming and sometimes led to major confrontations during class, which was never a good thing.”
These individual efforts often sparked resistance. Students protested that she was “the only” teacher enforcing such rules, and enforcement consumed valuable class time. Without consistent support, teachers struggled to balance classroom management with instruction.
That changed when her school adopted a building-wide expectation that students place phones in a caddy at the start of class.
Whybark described the shift: “Now that we have a school-wide expectation, it is a game changer! Students are much less distracted. They are more engaged in class activities, and most importantly, they have more face-to-face conversations. Now that our entire school is on board with a consistent set of practices, most students are cooperative, and it is becoming the new norm.”
The impact on student focus
One of the strongest arguments for restricting phones is their impact on student attention. Even when unused, the devices still command students’ mental energy.
Whybark said, “Even when students are not actively using their phones in class, they are subconsciously monitoring them for notifications. Having their phone in their pocket or in their bag means they are alerted throughout class that something is going on, and it pulls their attention away from what is going on in class. When they are fully engaged in class, they ask more questions, have more conversations with classmates, and are less distracted during tests and assessments. It reminds me of teaching before 2010, the good old days before the iPhone!”
Her perspective aligns with research showing that phone restrictions can improve academic performance by reducing cognitive distractions.
Limited educational benefits
While some argue that phones can serve as learning tools, Whybark sees little benefit in her math and science classes.
“There may be, I can’t speak for all subjects. I teach math and science. I cannot think of anything we do for which a cell phone is actually beneficial. On rare occasions, we do use phones. For example, in biology, students learn to make slides of their own cheek cells, and they look at them with a microscope. I encourage them to use their phones to take pictures of their cells because how often do you actually get to see your own cells magnified at 400x!”
Still, she notes that even this use could be replaced with laptops, which her district provides.
“Now that students have laptops issued by the school, there is nothing they need a phone for that cannot be done on a laptop,” she said.
Enforcement challenges
Even with a schoolwide expectation, enforcement requires vigilance. Whybark notes that students sometimes try to skirt the rules.
“Students claim they didn’t bring a phone to school, but really, they did. Students put old out-of-service phones in the caddy instead of the phone they actually use. Last year, I collected three such phones from the same student! A few students try to put their phone case in the caddy instead of their phone, so I have to check them carefully to be sure they are phones.”
Despite these challenges, she emphasizes that consistent expectations across the school make enforcement far easier than when each teacher had to set their own policy.
Social benefits beyond academics
The effects of phone restrictions extend beyond test scores and lesson focus.
Whybark said that she has observed meaningful changes in how students interact with each other.
“Yes, absolutely! I see a lot more personal interactions among students. When they had phones, they would spend any spare moment they could looking at their phone. Now they talk more to each other and to me! They will take time to ask about missing assignments or ask more questions or share a story. The overall vibe of the room is so much more congenial without phones.”
In her classroom, even free time has been reshaped: she encourages students to “look someone in the eye and have a conversation.” What begins as an odd suggestion often becomes a natural practice for students who rediscover face-to-face conversation.
RELATED: 12 STEAM Resources in Ann Arbor
Parent support
Parents, according to Whybark, have been overwhelmingly supportive. “In my experience, parents have been incredibly supportive of my efforts. It makes sense because parents want their kids to learn, and learning isn’t happening when students are using their phones instead of engaging in lessons. There have even been times when parents have requested that I keep a phone overnight to give their kid a break from technology. Parents have often shared that they face some of the same challenges as teachers when trying to manage screentime at home.”
This alignment between teachers and parents strengthens the case for schoolwide or districtwide policies.
The case for consistency
Whybark firmly believes that broader policies, whether at the school, district, or state level, are more effective than leaving decisions to individual teachers. “Leaving it up to teachers means that every teacher is fighting the battle on their own. Having a school-wide policy allows for consistency and shared expectations, which makes it better for both students and staff. According to research shared in ‘The Anxious Generation’ by Jonathan Haidt, the best policy is ‘bell to bell, no cells.’ I agree. When students put their phones away only during class, they spend the rest of their school day trying to catch up online. This means they are engaging with their phone instead of each other. It has been a sad phenomenon to watch over the years.”
Her view mirrors the momentum in several states pushing for universal, statewide bans rather than piecemeal approaches.
A teacher’s advice
For Whybark, the message to colleagues is clear. “Don’t give up! Keep educating others about why you are managing phone use in the classroom. Even if you have a school-wide policy, it is critical for students, families, staff and everyone in the community to understand the significant impact that phones have had on the growth and development of young people. It is a battle worth fighting if we want to help young people grow as learners, develop critical thinking skills, and feel confident in themselves.”
