A year later, what teens tell us about school cellphone bans

Cellphone restrictions are something of a unicorn in the world of education policy: They have been championed, implemented, and celebrated in recent years by those on the political left and right , in urban and rural settings, and across school types.

手机限制在某种程度上是教育政策领域的独角兽：近年来，手机限制受到了城市和农村地区以及各种学校类型的政治左翼和右翼人士的拥护、实施和庆祝。

The widespread embrace of this policy is a response to mounting research evidence that cellphones, and the social media and AI-powered apps they carry, can harm children’s learning , mental health , and emotional development .

这项政策的广泛接受是对越来越多的研究证据的回应，这些研究证据表明手机及其携带的社交媒体和人工智能应用程序可能会损害儿童的学习、心理健康和情感发展。

Our best evidence so far suggests that these restrictions are having generally positive effects.

迄今为止我们最好的证据表明，这些限制总体上产生了积极的影响。

These studies show that cellphone bans reduce students’ phone use (albeit not to zero), increase academic achievement (although effects vary by age and subject), and after an initial adjustment period, do not increase students’ disciplinary problems.

这些研究表明，手机禁令减少了学生的手机使用（尽管不是零），提高了学业成绩（尽管效果因年龄和学科而异），并且在最初的调整期之后，不会增加学生的纪律问题。

With virtually all students in the country now attending a school with some sort of cellphone restriction, we wondered what challenges schools face in implementing and enforcing these rules, and how students themselves are experiencing cellphone bans.

由于该国几乎所有学生现在就读的学校都有某种手机限制，我们想知道学校在实施和执行这些规则方面面临哪些挑战，以及学生本身如何经历手机禁令。

At the beginning and end of the most recent school year, in October 2025 and May 2026, we asked a nationally representative sample of teens , including those attending public, private, and charter schools, drawn from households in the probability-based Understanding America Study (UAS) panel, about their schools’ cellphone policies and their own experiences with phone rules during the school year.

在最近一个学年的开始和结束时，即 2025 年 10 月和 2026 年 5 月，我们询问了具有全国代表性的青少年样本，包括就读于公立、私立和特许学校的青少年，这些样本来自基于概率的理解美国研究 (UAS) 小组中的家庭，询问了他们学校的手机政策以及他们自己在学年期间使用手机规则的经历。

By foregrounding teens’ own reports, we offer insight into teens’ perceptions of and experiences with their schools’ cellphone restrictions, focusing on how the 2025-2026 school year unfolded with these restrictions in place.

通过突出青少年自己的报告，我们深入了解青少年对学校手机限制的看法和体验，重点关注 2025-2026 学年在这些限制的实施下如何发展。

We also administered a parallel set of surveys to adult UAS panel members who live with a teen (in about 90% of cases, either the teen’s parent or grandparent), allowing us to compare teen and adult reports.

我们还对与青少年住在一起的成年 UAS 小组成员（约 90% 的情况是青少年的父母或祖父母）进行了一组平行调查，使我们能够比较青少年和成人的报告。

After our October survey administration, we reported that stricter cellphone restrictions were associated with reduced phone use in schools.

十月份的调查结束后，我们报告说，更严格的手机限制与学校手机使用的减少有关。

While still true, our more recent data show that the enforcement and effectiveness of these policies waned between October and May.

虽然仍然如此，但我们最近的数据显示，这些政策的执行力和有效性在 10 月至 5 月期间有所减弱。

For example, 28% of teens reported ever using their phone during core classes at the beginning of the year, compared to 42% by the end of the year.

例如，28% 的青少年表示在年初的核心课程中曾使用过手机，而到年底这一比例为 42%。

Perhaps explaining some of these increases, nearly half of teens (44%) reported that their teachers became less strict about enforcing cellphone policies over the year.

近一半的青少年（44%）表示，他们的老师在这一年里对手机政策的执行变得不那么严格，这或许可以解释其中的一些增长。

Notably, adults did not detect this degradation of phone policy enforcement, with just 13% reporting that enforcement became less strict and 60% perceiving no change over the year.

值得注意的是，成年人没有发现电话政策执行情况的恶化，只有 13% 的人报告说，一年来执行力度变得不那么严格，60% 的人认为没有任何变化。

While we can’t know exactly why reported enforcement decreased and usage increased during the year, common-sense hypotheses seem likely: Students may have learned to work around obstacles (e.g., Yondr pouches, locker requirements) or may have taken more risks breaking rules, particularly if they observed light or unevenly enforced consequences.

虽然我们无法确切知道为什么这一年中报告的执法减少和使用增加，但常识性假设似乎是可能的：学生可能已经学会了如何绕过障碍（例如，Yondr 袋子、储物柜要求），或者可能会冒更多违反规则的风险，特别是如果他们观察到轻微或执法不均的后果。

Likewise, teachers may have become less vigilant over the course of the year, as an early-year focus on classroom routines and procedures gave way to a focus on covering content in depth.

同样，教师在这一年中可能变得不那么警惕，因为早年对课堂例行公事和程序的关注被对深入内容的关注所取代。

Cellphone policies vary meaningfully by school.

手机政策因学校而异。

In our data, 56% of teens reported attending a school with a bell-to-bell ban (e.g., no cellphone use at any time during school) while the remaining 44% attended schools with less-strict policies, typically restrictions on use during instructional time but not during lunch, passing periods, and other noninstructional times.

在我们的数据中，56% 的青少年表示就读的学校实行按铃禁令（例如，在校期间任何时间都不得使用手机），而其余 44% 的学校就读政策不太严格，通常限制在教学时间使用手机，但在午餐、过路时间和其他非教学时间不限制使用手机。

Our evidence suggests that policies like bell-to-bell bans persist across the year more than less-strict policies.

我们的证据表明，诸如全面禁令之类的政策比不那么严格的政策更能在一年中持续存在。

For example, under bell-to-bell policies, there was a 10 percentage-point increase in the proportion of teens reporting using their phones during core classes (25% to 35% from October to May; Figure 1).

例如，根据逐项政策，报告在核心课程中使用手机的青少年比例增加了 10 个百分点（从 10 月到 5 月为 25% 至 35%；图 1）。

In schools with less-strict policies, there was an 18 percentage-point increase (from 32% to over 50%).

在政策不太严格的学校，增加了18个百分点（从32%增加到50%以上）。

Although cellphone usage increased across the board by the end of the year, the increase at schools with less-strict policies was nearly double the increase (in terms of percentage points) at schools with stricter policies.

尽管到年底手机使用率全面上升，但政策宽松学校的增幅几乎是政策严格学校增幅的两倍（按百分点计算）。

We asked teens about how their schools’ phone rules affected them this past year, including impacts on their happiness, stress levels, academic performance, relationships with teachers, and more.

我们询问了青少年过去一年学校的电话规则对他们有何影响，包括对他们的幸福感、压力水平、学习成绩、与老师的关系等的影响。

As previously reported , at the beginning of the year, teens reported mostly negative or no impacts of phone restrictions on their overall school experiences and well-being, with nearly half reporting a negative impact on their happiness (Figure 2).

正如之前报道的那样，今年年初，青少年大多表示电话限制对他们的整体学校体验和幸福感产生了负面影响或没有影响，其中近一半的青少年表示对他们的幸福感产生了负面影响（图 2）。

Few reported positive impacts in October, with exceptions for the ability to pay attention in class, for which almost one-third of students perceived a positive impact of phone restrictions.

十月份，很少有人报告有积极影响，但课堂上集中注意力的能力除外，近三分之一的学生认为电话限制带来了积极影响。

By May, opinions had shifted away from a negative impact and toward no impact.

到了五月份，人们的观点已经从负面影响转向没有影响。

The greatest change was observed on the “happiness” question, where the proportion of teens who felt their school’s phone rules were making them unhappy dropped by nearly half, from 48% in October to 27% in May.

最大的变化出现在“幸福”问题上，认为学校的电话规定让他们不开心的青少年比例下降了近一半，从 10 月份的 48% 下降到 5 月份的 27%。

Across all areas we asked about, the proportion of teens who reported their school’s phone policy had no impact on them increased from an average of 56% to 63%, and the proportion who reported a negative impact decreased from 24% to 17%, on average.

在我们询问的所有领域中，报告学校电话政策对他们没有影响的青少年比例从平均 56% 增加到 63%，而报告负面影响的青少年比例从平均 24% 下降到 17%。

This is a big win for school cellphone ban advocates, with teens’ own protests, fears, and perceived need for devices often among the loudest critiques of cellphone restrictions.

对于学校手机禁令倡导者来说，这是一个巨大的胜利，青少年自己的抗议、恐惧和对设备的需求往往是对手机限制最强烈的批评。

Although there was little change in the proportion of teens perceiving a positive impact of their school’s phone policy, with most shifts moving away from negative perceptions toward neutral perceptions, our results are still consistent with teens learning that navigating a day without their phones is not as devastating as they might have imagined.

尽管认为学校电话政策产生积极影响的青少年比例几乎没有变化，大多数人从消极看法转向中性看法，但我们的结果仍然与青少年认识到没有手机度过一天并不像他们想象的那么具有破坏性是一致的。

Of course, some teens’ view that school cellphone policies did not impact their well-being and school experience could reflect the policies’ own weakening over the course of the year.

当然，一些青少年认为学校手机政策不会影响他们的福祉和学校体验，这可能反映出政策本身在这一年中的削弱。

For the most part, our data do not support this hypothesis, as students reporting less teacher enforcement over the year did not show systematic or meaningfully different shifting attitudes compared to students attending schools where enforcement was consistent throughout the year.

在大多数情况下，我们的数据并不支持这一假设，因为与全年执法一致的学校的学生相比，报告一年来教师执法较少的学生并没有表现出系统性或有意义的不同态度转变。

In at least some cases, our data suggest that teens came to appreciate the benefits of these policies between October and May.

至少在某些情况下，我们的数据表明青少年在 10 月至 5 月期间逐渐认识到这些政策的好处。

In open-ended survey responses, we heard sentiments like, “I was able to pay more attention this school year since our phones were locked in pouches.

在开放式调查回复中，我们听到这样的情绪：“由于我们的手机被锁在袋子里，所以本学年我能够更加集中注意力。

There were less distractions” and “Having [a phone] there leads to the desire to use it, which causes distraction.” These teens acknowledged that cellphone restrictions improved facets of their academic lives.

干扰更少”和“拥有[手机]会导致使用它的欲望，从而导致分心。”这些青少年承认，手机限制改善了他们学术生活的各个方面。

One reasonable curiosity is whether school phone restrictions simply displace teen phone use to other parts of the day.

一个合理的好奇心是，学校对电话的限制是否只是将青少年的电话使用转移到一天中的其他时间。

Six in ten of our teen respondents (58%) said their school cellphone policy did not affect their phone use outside school.

十分之六的青少年受访者 (58%) 表示，他们的学校手机政策不会影响他们在校外使用手机。

Another 12% said their school’s policy actually pushed them to use their phone less outside school than they would otherwise, with the remaining 30% reporting using their phone more outside school than they would otherwise.

另外 12% 的人表示，学校的政策实际上促使他们在校外使用手机的次数比平时少，其余 30% 的人表示，学校的政策实际上促使他们在校外使用手机的次数比平时多。

Teens’ parents largely observed the same pattern: 78% reported no change, 5% reported less phone use outside school than otherwise, and 17% reported more.

青少年的父母大多观察到相同的模式：78% 的父母表示没有变化，5% 的父母表示在校外使用手机的次数比其他情况少，17% 的父母表示增加了。

Though it is encouraging that most students’ reported out-of-school phone use was unaffected, those who did report higher out-of-school use sometimes wrote comments about their phone’s addictive properties: “I’m not on it as much [at school] and you crave it [because] its like a drug” and “my body makes me want to get on my phone because of not using it all day…

尽管令人鼓舞的是，大多数学生报告的校外手机使用情况并未受到影响，但那些报告校外手机使用情况较高的学生有时会写下有关手机成瘾特性的评论：“我[在学校]不那么频繁地使用手机，而你渴望它[因为]它就像毒品一样”以及“我的身体让我想使用手机，因为一整天都没有使用它......

it’s not great.”

这不太好。”

On balance, our survey findings support continued implementation and enforcement of phone restrictions, including strong bell-to-bell bans.

总的来说，我们的调查结果支持继续实施和执行电话限制，包括严格的逐铃禁令。

Students used their phones less and reported greater policy enforcement at schools with such policies, and although teens weren’t exactly thrilled about phone restrictions at any point, they were less negative about them by the end of the year than at the beginning.

学生们使用手机的次数减少了，并且报告称，制定此类政策的学校的政策执行力度更大，尽管青少年在任何时候都对手机限制并不感到兴奋，但到年底他们对电话限制的负面情绪比年初要少一些。

These findings also have implications for systems adopting (or considering adopting) even broader restrictions on screen time in classrooms.

这些发现对于采用（或考虑采用）更广泛的课堂屏幕时间限制的系统也有影响。

Our survey data suggest high levels of support for efforts to reduce students’ exposure to screens in elementary classrooms (57% of teens, 62% of adults in favor of “eliminating all screens in classrooms”).

我们的调查数据表明，人们高度支持减少学生在小学教室中接触屏幕的努力（57% 的青少年和 62% 的成年人赞成“消除教室中的所有屏幕”）。

While support wanes for broad restrictions in older grades (e.g., 16% of teens, 41% of adults in favor for high school classrooms), we believe it is reasonable for education leaders making decisions about appropriate classroom technology use to remain undeterred by initial resistance.

虽然对高年级广泛限制的支持逐渐减弱（例如，16% 的青少年、41% 的成年人赞成高中课堂），但我们认为，教育领导者在做出有关适当课堂技术使用的决定时不被最初的阻力所吓倒是合理的。

After all, cellphone restrictions were quite unpopular at the start of the 2025-2026 school year, and by year’s end, they may have been less disruptive, inconvenient, and downright excruciating than students and families initially feared.

毕竟，在 2025-2026 学年之初，手机限制非常不受欢迎，而到年底，这些限制可能不会像学生和家庭最初担心的那样具有破坏性、不方便性和彻头彻尾的痛苦。