Education

The Observer

Schools that ban mobile phones see better

academic results
Effect of ban on phones adds up to equivalent of extra week of
classes over a pupil’s school year

The research also indicated that a ban would

It is a question that keeps some parents awake at night. Should

children be allowed to take mobile phones to school? Now
economists claim to have an answer. For parents who want to
boost their children’s academic prospects, it is no.

The effect of banning mobile phones from school premises adds

up to the equivalent of an extra week’s schooling over a pupil’s
academic year, according to research by Louis-Philippe Beland
and Richard Murphy, published by the Centre for Economic
Performance at the London School of Economics.

“Ill Communication: The Impact of Mobile Phones on Student

Performance” found that after schools banned mobile phones,
the test scores of students aged 16 improved by 6.4%. The
economists reckon that this is the “equivalent of adding five
days to the school year”.

The findings will feed into the ongoing debate about children’s
access to mobile phones. In the UK, more than 90% of teenagers
own a mobile phone; in the US, just under three quarters have
one. The prevalence of the devices poses problems for head
teachers, whose attitude towards the technology has hardened as
it has become ubiquitous.

In a survey conducted in 2001, no school banned mobiles. By

2007, this had risen to 50%, and by 2012 some 98% of schools
either did not allow phones on school premises or required them
to be handed in at the beginning of

However, some schools are starting to allow limited use of the

devices. New York mayor Bill de Blasio has lifted a 10-year ban
on phones on school premises, with the city’s chancellor of
schools stating that it would reduce inequality.

This view is misguided, according to Beland and Murphy, who

found that the ban produced improvements in test scores among
students, with the lowest-achieving students gaining twice as
much as average students. The ban had a greater positive impact
on students with special education needs and those eligible for
free school meals, while having no discernible effect on high
achievers.

“We found that not only did student achievement improve, but
also that low-achieving and low-income students gained the
most. We found the impact of banning phones for these students
was equivalent to an additional hour a week in school, or to
increasing the school year by five days.

“Therefore, de Blasio’s lifting of the ban on mobile phones with

a stated intention of reducing inequalities may in fact lead to the
opposite. Allowing phones into schools will harm the lowest-
achieving and low-income students the most.”

The research was carried out at Birmingham, London, Leicester

and Manchester schools before and after bans were introduced.
It factored in characteristics such as gender, eligibility for free
school meals, special educational needs status and prior
educational attainment. “Technological advancements are
commonly viewed as increasing productivity,” the economists
write. “Modern technology is used in the classroom to engage
students and improve performance. There are, however,
potential drawbacks as well, as they could lead to distractions.”

-------

The Cons of Cell Phones in Schools

According to the National School Safety and Security Offices

(NSSSO), cell phones have been an increasingly negative
disruption in schools: “We have opposed policies allowing or
encouraging students to have cell phones and pagers in school.
On a day-to-day basis, they are disruptive to the educational
environment. This also has been the general position of many
school districts over the years.”

Adding to this, the NSSSO argues that allowing cell phones for
safety reasons is inaccurate. As they explain, “Changing policies
under the guise of cell phones being a crisis tool for student
safety is, in our opinion, a knee-jerk reaction and is not ‘the
answer’ to school crisis preparedness that some may believe it to
be.” In fact, oftentimes school and security officials report that
students falsely call in bomb threats or reports of threats on their
cell phones as an over-reaction or as a prank; in such cases,
these cell phones can force the entire evacuation of a school,
while also making it nearly impossible for security teams to try
and figure out where the call was placed, and which student(s)
made the call.
 Adding to this, in examining the potential distractions that cell
phones pose in schools, “school disruptions can come in a
number of forms. Ringing cell phones can disrupt classes and
distract students who should be paying attention to their lessons
at hand. Text message has been used for cheating. And new cell
phones with cameras could be used to take photos of exams,
take pictures of students changing clothes in gym locker areas,
and so on.”

Ultimately, while phones may provide students with a means for

communication and support, schools and community members
across the country are struggling to find a common ground and
agreement regarding how to best support a positive environment
and experience for all learners in the public school.
---------------------------------
Test Scores Rise After Cell Phones Banned From Schools

 Dan Kedmey
May 12, 2015

A pupil uses his mobile phone for research during a english

lesson at the Ridings Federation Winterbourne International
Academy in Winterbourne near Bristol on February 26, 2015.

Impact of cell phone ban "equivalent to an additional hour a

week in school," study found

Exam scores climbed by as much as 6% in schools that imposed

strict bans on cell phones, according to a new studythat cautions
policymakers to keep strict cell phone policies in the classroom.

Researchers at the University of Texas and Louisiana State

University surveyed cell phone policies across schools in four
English cities since 2001, studying how exam scores changed
before and after the bans were enacted.

“We found the impact of banning phones for these students

equivalent to an additional hour a week in school, or to
increasing the school year by five days,” the study’s
authors wrote on the academic blog, The Conversation.

The authors noted the strongest gains occurred among

underachieving and disadvantaged students, while they observed
almost no measurable impact on the highest scoring students.
“Allowing phones into schools would harm the lowest achieving
and low income students the most,” the authors conclude.
---------------------------
Banning cellphones in schools would have the same benefit
as extending the school year by five days, researchers have
claimed.

They say the prevalence of phones has become 'distracting and

disruptive' for students.

They even say banning them could see a boost in test scores.

Researchers warned warned the prevalence of phones has

become 'distracting and disruptive' for students.

TEENS AND PHONES

Phone ownership among English teens is high - 90.3 percent

owned a mobile phone by 2012.

In U.S. schools 73 percent of teenagers own a mobile phone.

'New technologies are typically thought of as improving
productivity, however this is not always the case,' said Richard
Murphy of the The University of Texas at Austin.

'When technology is multipurpose, such as cellphones, it can be

both distracting and disruptive.'

Murphy and Louis-Philippe Beland, an assistant professor of

economics at Louisiana State University, measured the impact
of mobile phones on student performance by surveying 91
schools in four English cities (Birmingham, London, Leicester
and Manchester) before and after strict cellphone policies were
implemented.

By comparing student exam records and mobile phone policies

from 2001 to 2013, researchers noted a significant growth in
student achievement in classrooms that banned cellphones, with
student test scores improving by 6.41 percent points of a
standard deviation.

This made them 2 percentage points more likely to pass the

required exams at the end of high school, researchers explained.

'We found the impact of banning phones for these students

equivalent to an additional hour a week in school, or to
increasing the school year by five days,' Murphy said.

Low-achieving students benefited most from the ban, with test

scores increasing by 14.23 percent points of a standard deviation
- a gain that was double compared with that of average students
- making them 4 percentage points more likely to pass the
exams.
Likewise, the ban greatly benefitted special education needs
students and those eligible for free school meals, improving
exam scores 10 and 12 percent points of a standard deviation
respectively.

In U.S. schools 73 percent of teenagers own a mobile phone.

However, researchers found that strict cellphone policies had

little effect on both high-achieving students and 14-year-olds,
suggesting that high achievers are less distracted by mobile
phones and younger teens own and use phones less often.

'This means allowing phones into schools would be the most

damaging to low-achieving and low-income students,
exacerbating any existing learning inequalities,' Murphy said.

'Whilst we cannot test the reason why directly, it is indicative

that these students are distracted by the presence of phones, and
high-ability students are able to concentrate.'

Though phone ownership among English teens is high - 90.3

percent owned a mobile phone by 2012 - results are likely to be
significant in U.S. schools where 73 percent of teenagers own a
mobile phone, Murphy said.

'Banning cell phones in schools would be a low-cost way for

schools to reduce educational inequality,' Murphy said.

'However, these findings do not discount the possibility that

mobile phones could be a useful learning tool if their use is
properly structured.

'Regardless, these results show that the presence of cellphones in

schools cannot be ignored.'