Survey of mobile phone use in schools

Main findings

While there is variation in how mobile phone use is managed across settings, most respondents reported a formal written policy (66.3%), with smaller proportions reporting written guidance and rules (18.0%) or unwritten guidance (13.2%). Approaches are broadly restrictive, most commonly allowing phones on site but not during the school day (46.3%), though qualitative responses indicate variation in how this is applied in practice (e.g. use of storage versus collection systems at the start of the day or during lessons).

Consistency of enforcement is mixed: 55.7% reported it as very or mostly consistent, while 44.3% reported somewhat or not very or not at all consistent enforcement. Respondents in secondary schools were more than twice as likely as those in primary schools to report consistent enforcement (95.6% compared with 46.0%).

Respondents generally perceived mobile phone restrictions to have positive impacts, particularly for reducing distraction (74.6%), alongside behaviour management (65.0%), reducing bullying or misuse (61.6%) and learner wellbeing (60.8%).

However, perceived impacts were more mixed for staff workload (49.8% positive; 18.5% negative; 31.8% no noticeable change) and attendance and punctuality (39.3% positive; 11.8% negative; 50.0% no noticeable change), with qualitative responses highlighting that implementation can increase workload in some cases.

A range of implementation challenges were identified, most commonly limited support from students (54.1%) and inconsistent enforcement (50.5%), alongside limited support from parents/carers. Qualitative findings highlight issues of non‑compliance, inconsistency within and between schools, and practical challenges such as storage and enforcement.

Evidence on what supports effective implementation highlights the importance of strong rationale/reason for a mobile phone policy (64.1%), consistent messaging (59.3%) and consistent enforcement (53.2%).

There is strong and consistent support for greater national direction, with more than 8 in 10 respondents (82.0%) supporting statutory restrictions. Qualitative responses suggest this is primarily driven by a desire for greater consistency across schools and local authorities, clearer expectations, and reduced conflict with learners and parents. Around 1 in 7 respondents (15.1%) supported the provision of national statutory guidance recommending restrictions, while leaving decisions to settings, governing bodies and local authorities under existing powers. Only 1.5% of respondents felt that no guidance should be provided and that decisions should be left entirely to settings.