The NBER School Phone Ban Study: What the Largest Research Found

Teachers in schools that locked phones in pouches reported that in-class personal phone use fell from 61% of students to 13%. That is the headline number from the largest school phone ban study ever run in the United States, a working paper released by the National Bureau of Economic Research in April 2026 and revised in September. The rest of the results are less tidy. Suspensions rose about 16% in the first year. Student wellbeing dipped, then recovered and turned positive. And average test scores stayed “consistently close to zero.” One of the lead authors called the results “sobering.” Here is what the study measured, what it found year by year, and what it means for a family whose school just bought pouches.

Key Takeaways

• The study, by Allcott, Baron, Dee, Duckworth, Gentzkow and Jacob, covers about 4,600 US schools that adopted lockable phone pouches. It is a working paper and has not yet been peer-reviewed.
• Phone use dropped substantially: in-class personal use fell from 61% to 13% in teacher surveys, and GPS pings during school hours fell about 30% by year three.
• Year one is rough. Suspensions rose about 16% and wellbeing fell slightly. Both effects faded, and wellbeing ended above its starting point.
• Average test-score effects were close to zero. High schools saw modest gains, mostly in math, and middle schools saw small losses.
• The fair reading: a ban reliably reduces phone use, but academic gains, if they come, take longer and depend on what schools do with the recovered attention.

What the NBER School Phone Ban Study Is

The NBER school phone ban study is a national evaluation of lockable phone pouches, titled “The Effects of School Phone Bans: National Evidence from Lockable Pouches” (NBER Working Paper 35132). Its six authors are economists and psychologists at Stanford, Duke, the University of Michigan and the University of Pennsylvania: Hunt Allcott, E. Jason Baron, Thomas Dee, Angela Duckworth, Matthew Gentzkow and Brian Jacob.

The design is what makes it unusual. Most earlier phone-ban research looked at a single district, a single country, or school policies that existed mostly on paper. This study used sales records from the largest pouch provider to identify exactly when each school began locking phones away. According to the Associated Press, the provider is Yondr, and the study covers about 4,600 schools. The AP report did not mention any funding from Yondr, and the NBER abstract describes the company’s records only as a data source.

The researchers then linked those adoption dates to four other data streams:

1. A large national teacher survey.
2. Anonymized GPS pings from phones on school grounds during school hours.
3. Standardized test scores.
4. School administrative records on discipline and attendance.

Because schools adopted pouches in different years, the team used a staggered difference-in-differences design. In plain terms, they compared how outcomes changed in schools that started using pouches against schools that had not started yet, year by year. That approach is strong when adoption timing is close to random, and weaker if the schools that adopt early differ in ways that also affect outcomes. The paper is a working paper, which means it has not yet passed formal peer review.

What the Study Found, Year by Year

Phone use: a large, real drop

Pouches worked at their basic job. In teacher surveys at bell-to-bell schools, the share of students using phones for personal reasons in class fell from 61% to 13%. GPS pings during school hours fell about 30% by the third year. The AP notes two caveats on the pings: they include adults’ phones, and a ping does not always mean someone is actively using the device. The teacher numbers are the more direct measure.

Discipline: worse first, then back to normal

Suspensions, both in-school and out-of-school, rose about 16% in year one. The authors attribute this to short-term disruption as students and staff adjusted. The effect faded in later years. Anyone who has watched a 14-year-old asked to surrender a phone at the door will not be surprised.

Wellbeing: a dip, then a gain

Student wellbeing fell suggestively in year one, then recovered and appears to have turned positive. Thomas Dee told the AP that “within three years, students’ well-being is actually above what it was at baseline.”

Test scores: close to zero on average

This is the result that got the headlines. Average effects on test scores were “consistently close to zero” across the first three years. High schools saw modest positive effects, mainly in math. Middle schools saw small negative effects.

Other outcomes: little change

The authors found little evidence of effects on attendance, and no clear evidence of improvement in students’ self-reported classroom attention or perceived online bullying.

Dee’s own summary was blunt: “I think it’s reasonable to view these results as sobering.” He added that he still believes “getting student phone use down” is “a critical antecedent to realizing their academic potential.” In other words, less phone time may be necessary for learning gains without being sufficient.

For why test-score gains often lag a ban, see our companion piece on why phone bans haven’t raised test scores yet.

The Results in One Table

Outcome	Year 1	Later years	What it likely means for your child
In-class personal phone use	Fell from 61% to 13% (teacher surveys, bell-to-bell schools)	Stayed low	Pouches do what they promise during class
Phone pings during school hours	Falling	About 30% lower by year 3	Less phone activity on campus overall, though pings include adults
Suspensions	Up about 16%	Faded back	Expect friction, especially for kids already in conflict with school rules
Student wellbeing	Slight decline	Recovered, then above baseline	The first months may feel worse before they feel better
Test scores	Close to zero	Close to zero on average; small gains in high school math, small losses in middle school	Don’t expect a grade bump from the ban itself
Attendance	Little change	Little change	No evidence pouches pull kids back to school
Attention, online bullying (self-reported)	No clear change	No clear change	Kids don’t report feeling more focused, at least not yet

How This Study Fits With the Rest of the Evidence

This study does not stand alone, and it partly conflicts with others.

Florida. David Figlio and Umut Özek studied one large Florida district with a strict bell-to-bell ban, in work published in Education Next in May 2026. Scores were flat in year one and up about 3.5 percentiles by the end of year two, and unexcused absences fell. That district is one place, and its comparison relied on differences between high-use and low-use schools, but it suggests gains may arrive in year two. We cover it in detail in Florida’s phone ban and the attendance effect.

England. Beland and Murphy’s 2016 study in Labour Economics, using schools in four English cities, found exam scores rose about 0.07 standard deviations after phone bans, with gains concentrated among the lowest-achieving students.

Teachers’ view. Pew Research Center’s fall 2023 survey found that 72% of US high school teachers called phone distraction a major problem in their classroom. Teachers did not need a working paper to know phones were a problem. The open question has always been what a ban can fix.

Global context. UNESCO’s Global Education Monitoring team counted 79 education systems, about 40% of those tracked, with school smartphone bans by the end of 2024. Policy is moving much faster than evidence.

My read, as an engineer: the pouch is a component, not a system. It removes one input. Whether learning improves depends on the rest of the system, such as teaching, schedules, and what kids do with the attention they get back. A three-year average across 4,600 different schools will blur the schools that used that attention well with the ones that did not.

What Parents Can Do With These Findings

Set expectations for a hard first semester

The data say year one brings more discipline and a small wellbeing dip. Tell your child that up front. Kids handle friction better when an adult has named it in advance, and you will be less likely to read normal adjustment as a sign the policy has failed.

Ask your school how it handles violations

Since suspensions rose 16% in year one, ask the principal how violations are handled. Is a first offense a warning, a confiscation until the end of the day, or a referral? A ban enforced through suspensions removes kids from class, which is the opposite of the goal.

Watch what happens at lunch and between classes

The study’s strongest drop was in class use at bell-to-bell schools. If your school restricts phones only during instruction, ask what students do at lunch. Survey data from USC show phone use at lunch is far lower under bell-to-bell rules.

Judge the ban on more than grades

If you only look at report cards, you may conclude the ban failed. Ask your child different questions instead: Who did you talk to at lunch? Did anything funny happen in the hallway? Those are the outcomes that showed up first in other research and that Haidt and teachers describe.

What not to do

Don’t send a second phone or a smartwatch to get around the rule, and don’t promise your child you’ll fight the policy on their behalf. Both undercut the only effect the study found with confidence, which is less phone use during class.

What to Watch For Over the Next 3 Months

• Week 4: Is your child complaining mostly about inconvenience (normal) or about anxiety from being unreachable (worth a conversation, and worth confirming how the school handles emergencies)?
• Month 2 red flags: A suspension or repeated discipline linked to the phone rule, or your child avoiding school. Talk to the school early. The year-one discipline spike is real, and it affects some students more than others.
• Month 3 self-check: Ask your child whether class feels different. Has lunch gotten louder? Did they make a new friend? Grades are the last thing to change, if they change at all.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the largest school phone ban study find?

The NBER study of about 4,600 US schools found pouches cut in-class phone use from 61% to 13% in teacher surveys. Suspensions rose about 16% in year one, then faded. Wellbeing dipped and later rose above baseline. Average test-score effects were close to zero over three years.

Is the NBER phone ban study peer-reviewed?

Not yet. NBER working papers are released before peer review so other researchers can respond. The study was first posted in April 2026 and revised in September 2026. The authors are well-established researchers, but the findings may change with review.

Was the study funded by Yondr?

The study used Yondr’s sales records to identify when schools adopted pouches. The Associated Press report did not mention any Yondr funding, and the NBER summary describes the company’s records only as a data source. Readers can check the paper’s disclosure section for details.

Do phone bans improve test scores?

On average, not in the first few years, according to this study. A Florida district study found about a 3.5-percentile gain by year two, and an English study found gains for low-achieving students. The evidence is mixed, and effects seem to depend on the school.

Should I support my school’s phone ban?

That is a family decision. The evidence supports bans for reducing phone use during class and suggests wellbeing improves after a hard first year. It does not support promises of quick academic gains. Asking how the school enforces the rule may matter more than whether it has one.

---

About the author

Ricky Flores is the founder of HiWave Makers and an electrical engineer with 15+ years of experience building consumer technology at Apple, Samsung, and Texas Instruments. He writes about how kids learn to build, think, and create in a tech-saturated world. Read more at hiwavemakers.com.

---

Sources

1. Allcott, H., Baron, E. J., Dee, T., Duckworth, A. L., Gentzkow, M., & Jacob, B. (2026). “The Effects of School Phone Bans: National Evidence from Lockable Pouches.” NBER Working Paper 35132 (revised September 2026). https://www.nber.org/papers/w35132
2. Associated Press. (2026). “Largest-ever study of school cellphone bans finds mixed results.” NBC News, May 5, 2026. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/largest-ever-study-school-cell-phone-bans-finds-mixed-results-rcna343761
3. Figlio, D. N., & Özek, U. (2026). “Can Banning Cellphones Save Student Learning? Evidence from Florida.” Education Next, 26(2). https://www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/ednext_26_2_research_figlio_ozek.pdf
4. Beland, L.-P., & Murphy, R. (2016). “Ill Communication: Technology, distraction & student performance.” Labour Economics, 41, 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2016.04.004
5. Pew Research Center. (2024). “72% of U.S. high school teachers say cellphone distraction is a major problem in the classroom.” https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/06/12/72-percent-of-us-high-school-teachers-say-cellphone-distraction-is-a-major-problem-in-the-classroom/
6. UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report. (2023, updated 2025). “Smartphones in school? Only when they clearly support learning.” https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/smartphones-school-only-when-they-clearly-support-learning
7. Saavedra, A., Rapaport, A., & Silver, D. (2026). “Survey: Parents and teens support school cellphone bans and most don’t perceive major downsides.” Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/survey-parents-and-teens-support-school-cellphone-bans-and-most-dont-perceive-major-downsides