Education minister Olivia Bailey claims the phone ban issue is already solved — but MPs and parents disagree. Here is the full picture on mobile phones in schools in 2026.
Education minister Olivia Bailey made headlines in early 2026 by asserting that the question of mobile phones in schools had already been solved. The statement came after MPs voted down a House of Lords proposal for a statutory ban on phones in school buildings — a proposal that had attracted significant public support and cross-party sympathy.
The minister's position is that existing DfE guidance, published in February 2024, is sufficient to address the issue. Schools have the power to ban phones. Many have. Problem solved.
Except, of course, it is not. And the evidence says so very clearly.
The research on mobile phones and academic performance is remarkably consistent. A landmark study by the London School of Economics found that banning phones in schools improved test scores by 6.4% overall — and by 14.23% for the lowest-achieving students (Beland and Murphy, 2016). These are not marginal effects. They represent a meaningful and equitable educational gain from a single policy change.
More recent research has reinforced these findings. A 2024 meta-analysis of 22 studies across 11 countries found that phone-free environments consistently improved attention, reduced classroom disruption and increased on-task behaviour — particularly among students with lower academic confidence (UNESCO, 2024).
The mechanisms are well understood. Phones do not have to be actively used to be disruptive. Their mere presence on a desk activates divided attention — the cognitive cost of monitoring notifications and resisting the temptation to check them significantly reduces available working memory (Ward et al., 2017).
The minister's position relies on the assumption that giving schools the power to ban phones is equivalent to actually banning them. This assumption does not survive scrutiny.
School leaders face real pressures that make voluntary implementation difficult. Parents who disagree with phone bans can be vocal and organised. Enforcement requires staff time and creates conflict. Schools in challenging circumstances — where maintaining positive relationships with students and families is already difficult — are understandably reluctant to add another source of friction.
A statutory ban removes the decision from individual schools and places it at the system level. It gives headteachers cover. It normalises phone-free education across the board. And it ensures that the benefits of phone-free learning are not concentrated in well-resourced schools with confident leadership teams and supportive parent bodies.
The academic case for phone bans is strong. The wellbeing case is arguably stronger.
The Children's Commissioner's 2023 report on smartphone use found that 97% of children aged 12 to 15 own a smartphone, and that social media use during school hours — including cyberbullying, social comparison and the constant pressure of online social life — is a significant contributor to the mental health crisis among young people (Children's Commissioner, 2023).
Phone-free schools do not solve this problem entirely. But they create a sanctuary — a space where young people are temporarily released from the relentless demands of their online social lives and can simply be students.
The most effective schools have not waited for legislation. Many have implemented total phone bans — phones off, in bags, from the moment students arrive until they leave the building. Others have adopted phone pouches that students lock their devices into at the start of the day.
The evidence from schools that have implemented these policies is consistently positive. Teachers report higher engagement and easier classroom management. Students report less social anxiety and better concentration. Parents — initially often resistant — frequently become advocates once they see the results.
As educators and as a community we should not need legislation to do what the evidence clearly tells us is right. But if voluntary action continues to leave half of schools without effective phone policies, then legislation is not an overreach — it is a necessity.