Smartphone bans are sweeping through schools — about half of the schools around the world have already banned phones in classrooms. New evidence from Wharton suggests these bans can meaningfully improve learning.
A recent randomized controlled study with nearly 17,000 college students concludes that collecting phones at the start of class leads to higher grades and calmer classrooms. “Once phones are out of reach, classrooms dynamics noticeably shifted,” said Wharton operations, information and decisions professor Alp Sungu, who led the research. “Grades follow.”
Smartphones are widely considered to be distracting but until recently, hard evidence on whether banning them actually boosted learning was scarce. To help fill that gap, Sungu partnered with Pradeep Kumar Choudhury from Jawaharlal Nehru University, and Andreas Bjerre-Nielsen from University of Copenhagen.
Testing Cell Phone Bans With College Students
The researchers conducted a semester-long experiment at 10 higher education institutions in India. Student cohorts were randomly assigned to either a phone ban condition — requiring them to deposit their devices in a box at the start of each lecture — or a business-as-usual control group.
The result? Grades in phone-free classrooms rose by 0.07 standard deviations — a meaningful effect. “That’s comparable to what you’d expect from curriculum reforms or growth-mindset interventions,” Sungu said. “And unlike those programs, phone bans require minimal resources.” The finding offers concrete evidence for policymakers and administrators weighing whether phone restrictions are worth the effort.
But the boost in grades was not evenly shared. According to the paper, “Removing Phones From Classrooms Improves Academic Performance,” college students who were already struggling academically saw the biggest grade uplift — roughly double the average effect.
Sungu said: “Phone bans can cut achievement gaps. By disproportionately lifting outcomes of low-performing students, the policy narrows the gap between stronger and weaker students.”
“Phone bans can cut achievement gaps.”— Alp Sungu
Improving the Classroom Learning Environment
First-year students notched the biggest improvements, suggesting that phone-free classrooms may matter most when students are still forming study habits. The impact varied by discipline too. In science and engineering courses, phone bans had little effect on grades.
Independent observers conducted unannounced classroom visits and found fewer disruptions, less off-topic conversation, and reduced phone use by teachers themselves — even though teachers were not subject to the ban. The study suggests that teachers in phone-free classrooms appear more engaged with educational materials and spend less time managing distractions.
When phones were removed, observers noticed students sometimes became more aware of background noise or minor distractions. Students themselves, however, did not report feeling more distracted overall. “The overall picture is a classroom environment that is calmer and more conducive to learning,” said Sungu.
Do Cell Phone Bans in Classrooms Affect Student Well-Being?
Some critics worry that taking phones away could feel controlling or isolating. But the study finds no evidence that the bans hurt students’ well-being or motivation levels. A related concern is whether restricting phones in class simply shifts phone use — and its risks — to other times. The study finds no increase in overall phone use or online harassment. Notably, however, the study tested lecture-only bans in colleges. The social implications of phone-free school policies, or policies applied to younger students, may be different.
A notable effect was a modest increase in fear of missing out (FOMO). Students reported more anxiety about missing social updates during class. Sungu noted that this effect might diminish under broader bans: “If everyone’s phone is away, there’s less happening to miss.”
“Resistance declines once students experience the benefits firsthand.”— Alp Sungu
Perhaps the most striking finding is that students who experienced the ban became significantly more supportive of it. They perceived the policy as more beneficial, expressed stronger support for phone restrictions, and were less likely to prefer a no-ban classroom. “Resistance declines once students experience the benefits firsthand,” Sungu said. “That suggests initial enforcement can become self-reinforcing.”
For policymakers, the study offers a rare combination: a low-cost intervention with measurable benefits for the students who need them most.
The implications could extend beyond education. The authors argue the findings might be reflective of a broader phenomenon: Phones can disrupt sustained attention not only in lectures but also in everyday activities, such as work, social interactions, driving, and sleep.
“The takeaway is not a culture war about screens; it’s the evidence that a simple policy can deliver real, scalable gains.” Sungu said.
