Last week the Los Angeles Unified School District took a big step in favor of common sense: It voted to ban the use of mobile phones during school days. Other districts should follow its lead, starting with the largest one in the country: New York City.
Two decades ago, our administration banned mobile phones in all public schools, despite the storm of protests it generated. The ban was one of many policy changes that allowed us to transform the school system in ways that dramatically raised student achievement levels. Although it was undone by our successor, public support for mobile phone bans has grown nationally — and across party lines.
Teachers know all too well how disruptive phones are to learning, with 72 percent of high-school teachers nationwide calling phone use a “major problem.” No wonder: One study found that 97 percent of teenagers use their phones during school hours, receiving a median of 237 push notifications a day. Much of that screen time consists of playing video games, browsing social media and watching pornography — not exactly the three R’s.
Unsurprisingly, this can have devastating effects on learning. A large body of evidence has associated increased phone use with impaired academic performance, including lower test scores, worse grades, reduced long-term retention and wider achievement gaps. Phone-related anxiety is widespread: One study found that students who are glued to their screens can create a cascade of distraction among their peers, while another found that the “mere proximity” of a mobile device is enough to impede focus.
Phones in classrooms can contribute to serious harm outside of school, too. A growing body of evidence suggests a connection between increased use of smartphones and social media and threats to young people’s brains, including a higher risk of depression, poorer cognitive control, chronic sleep deprivation and worse socio-emotional functioning. A recent advisory from the US surgeon general warned that social media is creating a “profound risk of harm to the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents.” Although the data is not conclusive, ignoring it would be crazy.
About three-quarters of US schools report that they prohibit phone use for nonacademic reasons, but without a complete ban — including on flip phones that allow texting — students easily evade the rules. Plus, many schools allow exceptions that can vary from classroom to classroom. Such policies are hard to enforce, impose outsized burdens on teachers and often leave students just as distracted, as their phones buzz and beep in their backpacks all day. Districtwide bans, enforced uniformly throughout the school day, including during lunchtime and breaks, are far more likely to be effective.
Studies suggest that mobile phone bans can do a lot of good, as we saw in New York City. Analyses of previous prohibitions in Europe have found evidence of increased grades and test scores, less bullying, and reduced achievement gaps. That would come as no surprise to high-school teachers.
There is a bill in the US Congress, the focus on learning act, that would provide funds to study the issue, solicit feedback from parents and help schools pay for phone lockers and other equipment. It deserves support, but districts and states should not wait for its passage.
California Governor Gavin Newsom has signaled his support for a statewide ban, as has New York Governor Kathy Hochul. They should move quickly, and other governors should join them — but in the meantime, individual districts should take action on their own.
In New York City, where mobile phone policies vary from school to school, Mayor Eric Adams can help lead the way in adopting a comprehensive and uniform ban.
Of course, some children and parents would complain and argue. My advice to elected officials and school boards is simple: Do not buy it. There is too much at stake.
It is encouraging that more elected leaders are finally acknowledging what teachers have known for years: Mobile phones are a problem that children cannot be expected to manage. Let us do students the great service of taking that problem out of their hands.
Michael R. Bloomberg is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News, UN Special Envoy on Climate Ambition and Solutions and chair of the Defense Innovation Board.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS