
Photo by Stockcake
Mobile phones are set to be prohibited in schools across England as part of the government’s plan to minimise disruption and improve behaviour in classrooms. New mobile phones in schools guidance issued today (19 February 2024) backs headteachers in prohibiting the use of mobile phones throughout the school day, including at break times (UK Department for Education, 19 February 2024)
In this blog, Professor Michael Thomas, Director of the CEN, discusses the UK trend to ban smartphones in secondary schools.
“I am part of a research team that has been investigating the impact of mobile phone use in adolescents in the UK (scampstudy.org). We have been following a sample of 6000 teenagers over several years, examining their phone use, cognitive development, health and wellbeing, and educational outcomes.
Over several studies, we have picked up small negative effects of phone-based activities such as social network site use, on both cognitive skills and wellbeing, particularly for children with heaviest use (5 hours a day or more) [1]. For example, high social network site usage in early adolescence predicts higher rates of depression and anxiety two years later. These associations were partly mediated by sleep problems, suggesting underlying mechanisms may be multi-factorial [2]. One of our studies showed that social network site usage was particularly associated with poorer wellbeing in girls, including using these sites at night [3]. Cause and effect are sometimes hard to pull apart – whether, say, risk of anxiety causes greater social network site usage or vice versa. But it seems safe to say that if there are pre-existing risks in children, social network site use can exacerbate them.
More broadly, my view is that it is important to separate the effects of the technology of mobile phones from issues that would arise in any medium. Bad whatever the medium include bullying, social exclusion, displacement of other activities through excessive usage (e.g., homework, play), and age-inappropriate content. Society needs to develop customs, norms, and expectations to avoid these behaviours as they appear in mobile phone use.
Phones and the internet bring specific new challenges due to their ubiquity, the wide reach of social networks, and the commercially driven optimisation of reward schedules that produces compulsive behaviour. Technology-specific problems include screen time addiction and intolerance of boredom, disruption of sleep, social media bullying, unreliable information, and data protection issues. These will require specific solutions, but moderating amount and timing of smartphone use seems the best first step.
I think it’s important to avoid reactionary positions (i.e., new = bad). All media will have drawbacks to weigh against their benefits. Reading, for example, can be viewed as socially isolating, discouraging physical activity, and providing a visually impoverished stimulus – but in moderation is viewed as a culturally valued activity. Mobile phones have notable benefits in allowing children to maintain friendships over geographic distance (which was very important in the pandemic). They have democratised knowledge in allowing children from poor backgrounds to access a vast range of materials beyond what is available in their local environments (albeit children now need to learn new skills to assess the reliability of information). Their contribution should therefore be viewed in a balanced way.
In terms of the UK’s new guidance on banning mobile phones in school, I would be cautiously in favour – but I also recognise it is a missed opportunity. I am a father to 13-year-old twin boys. Their secondary school has a complete ban on bringing phones into school. This has advantages – children don’t stare at phones but talk to each other more – especially when travelling to and from school; there is less risk of cyber-bullying; and reduced risk of mugging for handsets outside of school. We know that phones can be a distraction – just the presence of a phone in front of you, even if you are not using it, can be distracting [4], and this is just as likely to hold in the classroom. These are proximal effects relating to phones in school hours. But my children’s school still relies on the children having devices at home for homework, for timetabling, and to coordinate sporting activities, so it could not be said to be anti-phone per se. As a parent, it induces anxiety for my children to travel to school on a city transport system without the backup of a phone when things go wrong, which is a resource that even adults rely on. Yet it has produced faster development of confidence, independence, and maturity in my children.
Of course, banning phones during school time cannot influence how teenagers use their phones at home. At least one recent study has shown that school-time bans are not linked to pupils getting higher grades or having higher mental wellbeing, presumably because phone usage continues at home [5]. Thus, the study by Goodyear and colleagues found that spending longer on smartphones and social media overall was linked with poorer student sleep, classroom behaviour and exercise. But school bans did not reduce these problems, nor indeed alter how long the students spent on their phones overall. Schools alone cannot moderate smartphone usage.
I believe banning phones in schools is also a lost opportunity because information technology is a powerful tool to support learning, while school-provided IT systems for computer-based learning risk becoming redundant. They are expensive, cumbersome, require restrictive firewalls, and quickly become out of date. Yet almost every child has a powerful, frequently updated computer device in their own possession. The opportunity is for children to use these in schools, but in some sort of Education Mode analogous to the Airplane Mode we activate on flights [6]. Such a mode used throughout the day would only give access to approved educational software, to support learning but not gaming or social activities that would prove distractions. But this requires governments to engage with commercial providers of phone operating systems, through incentivisation or regulation, and we have yet to make progress in this direction. In absence of such engagement, the trajectory of travel appears to be towards banning phones at school. This avoids the risks but is a missed opportunity.”
- Shen, C., Smith, R. B., Eeftens, M., Thomas, M. S. C., Röösli, M., Spiers, A. D. V., Cheng, L., Booth, E., Elliott, P., Dumontheil, I., Toledano, M. B. (in preparation, 2024). Cognition and behaviours in relation to mobile phone and wireless device use and exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: Evidence from a longitudinal cohort study of adolescents (SCAMP). Manuscript in preparation.
- Shen, C., Serrano, B. M., G., Di Simplicio, M., Spiers, A. D. V., Dumontheil, I., Thomas, M. S. C., Röösli, M., Elliott, P. & Toledano, M. B. (in preparation, 2024). Social networking site use, depression and anxiety in adolescents: Evidence from a longitudinal cohort study (SCAMP). Manuscript in preparation.
- Jenkins, R. H., Shen, C., Dumontheil, I., Thomas, M. S. C., Elliott, P., Röösli, M., & Toledano, M. B. (2020). Social networking site use in young adolescents: Association with health-related quality of life and behavioural difficulties. Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 109, August 2020, 106320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106320.
- Skowronek, J., Seifert, A. & Lindberg, S. The mere presence of a smartphone reduces basal attentional performance. Sci Rep 13, 9363 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36256-4.
- Goodyear, Victoria A. et al. (2025). School phone policies and their association with mental wellbeing, phone use, and social media use (SMART Schools): a cross-sectional observational study. The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, Volume 0, Issue 0, 101211. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(25)00003-1/fulltext
- Thomas, M.S.C., & Rogers, C. (2020). Education, the science of learning, and the COVID-19 crisis. Prospects, 49, 87–90 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09468-z





A significant focus of the training is to debunk common neuromyths—misconceptions about brain function that can hinder effective teaching practices. For instance, the belief that individuals are either left-brained or right-brained learners is a neuromyth that the Hub actively dispels. Similarly, the Hub addresses the widespread belief in learning styles and multiple intelligences, clarifying that these ideas are not supported by current neuroscientific evidence. By correcting such misunderstandings, the Hub empowers teachers with accurate knowledge, enabling them to adopt strategies that align with how the brain genuinely processes information, including the various types of memory involved.
A key element of the training workshops is examining the influence of neuroscience on teaching strategies and embedding these approaches within the curriculum, lesson planning, and daily methodology. The Hub’s approach is grounded in evidence-based practices that adopt insights from brain research to enhance teaching methods. Teachers learn how to apply principles of neuroplasticity, the brain’s ability to reorganise itself by forming new neural connections, which is transformative in enabling them to create more adaptable and responsive learning environments. Practical applications, discussed during the workshops, include strategies such as different modes of retrieval practice, with their lesson planning for improving memory retention, fostering critical thinking skills, and boosting overall student engagement through activities that stimulate cognitive development.
Emotion regulation, metacognitive and self-regulated learning strategies are integrated into daily teaching routines, promoting both cognitive and emotional intelligence, as well as a growth mindset, among students. By incorporating these strategies into their pedagogy, teachers not only help students manage their emotions but also support their development of metacognitive and self-regulated learning skills. When students can manage their emotions, they are better equipped to monitor and adjust their cognitive strategies, leading to improved focus and more effective engagement with learning activities. Self-regulated learning further enhances this by empowering students to set goals, develop strategies, and self-assess their progress, all while managing emotional responses that might otherwise hinder their learning.
During the workshops, I emphasise the crucial role of presenting relevant content and introducing novelty to enhance motivation and engagement, as well as evoking emotions in teaching to improve the retention of information and skills. By adopting cognitive strategies that incorporate emotional engagement, teachers can help students not only remember content more effectively but also develop the self-awareness and self-regulation skills necessary for lifelong learning. This integrated approach ensures that students are not only managing their emotions but also applying metacognitive and self-regulation strategies to achieve more profound and sustained learning outcomes.
Educational Neuroscience focuses on creating awareness of evidence-based approaches, necessitating a change in mindset. This shift fosters engaging and thoughtful discussions, making it a fulfilling experience and a pleasure to positively impact teaching approaches. The insightful questions posed by teachers during these workshops reflect their active engagement and critical reflection on their teaching practices. These interactions highlight the success of the various workshops in promoting a deeper understanding of how neuroscience can inform and improve educational practices. Engaging with experienced educators facilitates a rich exchange of ideas, enhancing the training’s effectiveness and providing newly qualified teachers with new strategies and teaching approaches.




The International Mind Brain and Education Society (IMBES) are thrilled to announce that the 2024 conference will be held from 10 – 12 July in Leuven, Belgium! The meeting will be jointly organised by IMBES and EARLI SIG 22.


