Take Action

Lawmakers

Advocates

Are you a legislator committed to introducing or improving phone-free schools legislation in your state?

‍

  • Email info@phonefreeschoolsreport.org to request a pro bono consultation or to be connected with other legislators and/or citizens in your state committed to advancing policies around devices and technology use in schools.
CLOSE

Are you a caregiver, educator, or concerned citizen inspired to improve student outcomes at the local or state level? 

‍

  • Join an advocacy team and receive training, support, and connections to other advocates in your city, state, and/or across the nation!
CLOSE

Overview

The Report Card is designed to serve as a vital resource for lawmakers and advocates dedicated to strengthening school communities.

A Movement Taking Hold

State Policy Matters

The Report Card Project

Across the country, a rare bipartisan movement has taken hold – one that’s transforming schools faster than almost any recent education reform. Over the past two years, policymakers, educators, and parents united around a simple, powerful idea: schools should be phone-free.
‍

Since 2024, 37 states and the District of Columbia have taken steps to free students from the distraction of personal devices while at school. And where these policies are well-crafted, the results are remarkable.
‍

Classrooms are focused. Lunchrooms are louder. Libraries are busier.
‍

Teachers are rediscovering the joy of their vocation – fewer disruptions, livelier participation, fewer disciplinary issues, and deeper connections. Students feel it too: they’re less stressed, more engaged, and ultimately grateful for the change. Everyone’s benefiting.
‍

This progress reflects a nationwide wave of leadership, from statehouses to classrooms, united around one clear goal: ensuring students are free to learn, connect, and thrive.
‍

*Note: “Phone-free schools” generally refers to any policy limiting personal electronic devices (PEDs) during the school day. The partners of this report advocate that all PEDs be prohibited for the full school day – from the first bell to the last.

CLOSE

Although nearly every state has enacted some form of restrictions on phones, many of the laws fall short of driving meaningful change. Some only apply to the time that students are in class, others simply mandate that districts adopt a policy with no guidance on what it should contain. A majority lack clear implementation or enforcement mechanisms. Alarmingly, some states have yet to pass any legislation at all, or have carved out exemptions for high schools.
‍

The result: uneven access to the benefits of a truly phone-free school day and an inflated sense of progress.
‍

State-level action ensures every student – regardless of zip code or district resources – has access to a healthier, more focused learning environment.
‍

Just as states set uniform standards for safety, wellness, and clean environments in schools, it’s time to do the same for digital health, recognizing that smartphone use poses both public health and educational challenges. 

CLOSE

The Report Card Project offers the first comprehensive assessment of how every statute or executive order measures up against the evidence-based gold standard 2025 Phone-Free Schools Model Bill. Through this analysis, the Report Card:

‍

  • Breaks down each state’s legislation in detail while presenting a clear, national snapshot of progress. 
  • Clarifies key distinctions between types of phone restrictions – distinctions that significantly influence outcomes 
  • Equips policymakers, educators, and families with clear insights and practical resources to drive effective action

‍

The Report Card Project will be published annually with the goal of empowering lawmakers and advocates in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. to pass effective phone-free schools legislation based on the Model Bill.
‍

This initial report evaluates policy design, not implementation. Future editions may expand to measure implementation and real-world impact, enabling states to monitor progress toward learning environments where every student can learn, connect, and grow – free from the unnecessary digital distraction of phones and personal devices.

CLOSE

What the Evidence Indicates

Why Bell-to-Bell is Best

When experts cite the benefits of phone-free schools, they’re primarily referring to bell-to-bell policies that keep students off their phones and personal devices for the entire school day. There is a fast-growing body of evidence supporting that when schools go bell-to-bell – storing devices in secure, inaccessible locations for the entire school day – outcomes advance across several key areas:

Academic Performance Improves

Mental & Physical Health Strengthen

Relationships Deepen

Teacher Satisfaction Increases

Safety & Privacy Improve

Test scores rise as distractions decline – especially among the lowest-performing students, students of color, and boys. Instructional time increases as teachers regain the minutes once lost to managing student’s phones and other personal devices. When classrooms are phone-free, focus and participation climb and learning improves for everyone.

CLOSE

Reducing students’ screen time during the school day significantly lowers their exposure to the well-documented harms of social media and prolonged device use – including anxiety, sleep disruption, and body image concerns. Fewer hours on phones mean healthier, more present students.

CLOSE

Freeing students from the constant pull of their devices restores real, in-person connection. In phone-free schools, students talk and collaborate more with peers and teachers. Incidents of fighting, harassment, and cyberbullying decline. Students’ sense of belonging increases.

CLOSE

Educators can teach, not police. In phone-free classrooms, teachers report less conflict and more connection with students. The stricter the policy, the happier the teacher. Eighty-three percent of educators support a bell-to-bell phone-free policy recognizing that it empowers them to focus on what they do best: teach and inspire students.

CLOSE

When personal devices are out of reach, schools can better protect students from privacy violations, cyberbullying, pornography exposure, and sexual exploitation linked to non-consensual photos and videos. Phone-free environments enhance emergency response by enabling staff to maintain student safety more effectively, minimizing confusion, and concentrating student focus.

CLOSE

This low- or no-cost intervention consistently benefits learning, well-being, and school climate. 
Unfortunately, millions of students are still missing out on those advantages.

Methodology & Criteria Rationale

The criteria used to assess state policies for the Report Card was based on the Phone-Free Schools Model  Bill released in 2025 by the Distraction-Free Schools Policy Project. The Model Bill was written to establish a  gold standard for K-12 schools that is grounded in research on the mental and physical health effects of social media and screens on children, as well as research on child development and learning processes. It was also based on input from legislators, school administrators, and educators – many of whom had already implemented phone-free school policies.

For more information about the 2025 Phone-Free School Model Bill, and to view the enhanced 2026 version,  visit distractionfreeschools.com.

How Grades Were Calculated

State grades were calculated by reviewing each state’s phone-free schools law or executive order passed in 2024 or 2025 against the six criteria outlined in the Model Bill. Point values were assigned to each criterion based on how imperative that criterion is to supporting the best possible outcomes.

‍

States with failed 2025 bills received a flat score of 50 points (F). States where no bill or executive order was introduced received a “0.” Biennium states that introduced bills in 2025 that may pass in 2026, received an Incomplete. Incomplete and failed bills were not reviewed against the Model Bill.

CLOSE

Base Score: Covered Time Period & Storage Requirements

The period of time during which personal electronic devices are prohibited, combined with how those devices are stored, is the strongest predictor of a successful policy. Evidence supports that the stricter the school cell phone policy (i.e. the less time devices can be used and the more inaccessible they are), the better the outcome for student focus and teacher morale.

States with phone-free schools laws were assigned a base score depending on the combination of covered time period and storage, dividing them into four main policy categories:

Bell-to-Bell,


Inaccessible Storage

90 pts

This is the gold standard starting point for personal device-free policies. States with laws that prohibit PEDs from the start of the school day (i.e. the first bell) to the end of the school day (the dismissal bell) are setting their students and educators on the surest path to marked improved outcomes. Bell-to-bell with inaccessible storage is the single, research-backed approach that supports outcomes that every policymaker, educator, and parent wants to see: focused students, engaged classrooms, healthier relationships, and safer schools.

‍

Exact language varies slightly state-to-state, but North Dakota sets a strong example with the following:

‍

“Each school district or applicable governing body shall adopt and implement a policy for schools which: a. Requires all personal electronic communication devices be silenced or turned off, securely stowed away, and inaccessible to students” from the start of the school day until dismissal.

Bell-to-Bell,

Accessible Storage

80 pts

Bell-to-bell is key, but either not explicitly stipulating a secure storage requirement in the law or allowing devices to be stored in places like lockers or backpacks does not properly set students and teachers up for success. Students with the strongest habituation will likely have a very difficult time resisting the physical urge to access their device if it’s in their backpack or locker. Where PEDs are accessible, teachers still end up having to police student use. For these and other reasons, policymakers would do well to leave no ambiguity on this critical point.

Class Instructional

Time Only

70 pts

This type of law recognizes that phones and other personal devices interfere with academic success, but fails to acknowledge the potential social and emotional harms caused by student use of devices during all other times of the school day, as well as the cognitive interference caused by intermittent use between classes. Some states have used the term “instructional time” in their law to mean the entire school day (or “bell-to-bell”). However, this is often misinterpreted and used as a loophole to allow PEDs outside of class time.

Policy Required,

No Mandated Elements

60 pts

Some states merely require that schools have a policy in place but do not offer any additional guidance or information about what those policies must include. Wide variations in the types of policies implemented throughout the state will lead to inconsistent and inequitable student outcomes.

This is the gold standard starting point for personal device-free policies. States with laws that prohibit PEDs from the start of the school day (i.e. the first bell) to the end of the school day (the dismissal bell) are setting their students and educators on the surest path to marked improved outcomes. Bell-to-bell with inaccessible storage is the single, research-backed approach that supports outcomes that every policymaker, educator, and parent wants to see: focused students, engaged classrooms, healthier relationships, and safer schools.

‍

Exact language varies slightly state-to-state, but North Dakota sets a strong example with the following:

‍

“Each school district or applicable governing body shall adopt and implement a policy for schools which: a. Requires all personal electronic communication devices be silenced or turned off, securely stowed away, and inaccessible to students” from the start of the school day until dismissal.

CLOSE

Bell-to-bell is key, but either not explicitly stipulating a secure storage requirement in the law or allowing devices to be stored in places like lockers or backpacks does not properly set students and teachers up for success. Students with the strongest habituation will likely have a very difficult time resisting the physical urge to access their device if it’s in their backpack or locker. Where PEDs are accessible, teachers still end up having to police student use. For these and other reasons, policymakers would do well to leave no ambiguity on this critical point.

CLOSE

This type of law recognizes that phones and other personal devices interfere with academic success, but fails to acknowledge the potential social and emotional harms caused by student use of devices during all other times of the school day, as well as the cognitive interference caused by intermittent use between classes. Some states have used the term “instructional time” in their law to mean the entire school day (or “bell-to-bell”). However, this is often misinterpreted and used as a loophole to allow PEDs outside of class time.

CLOSE

Some states merely require that schools have a policy in place but do not offer any additional guidance or information about what those policies must include. Wide variations in the types of policies implemented throughout the state will lead to inconsistent and inequitable student outcomes.

CLOSE

Additional Provisions

There are additional provisions outlined in the Model Bill that further support the likelihood of success by preserving the integrity of the policy and protect students’ safety, health, privacy, and well-being.

Devices Included

0 - 2 pts

The most effective personal device-use policies include all personal electronic devices. This means smartphones and non-internet-connected phones, smartwatches, Bluetooth earbuds and headphones, gaming devices, personal tablets and laptops, and any other electronic device that is not school-issued. It’s important to keep this definition broad enough to encompass emerging technologies, such as A.I. companion bots and wearables (e.g. smart glasses).

Necessary Legal &


Medical Exception

0 - 2 pts

There are two main exceptions that should be included in every personal device use policy. They are:

‍

  1. Special education exceptions – Individualized Education Plans (IEP) and 504 Plans are legally-binding agreements between schools and students/caregivers that arise out of a formal special education determination process. If a student’s plan requires the use of a personal device, that use must be permitted. 
  1. Student medical needs – if a student has specific mental or physical health needs that have been documented by a licensed medical professional, and which necessitate a personal device, that student’s use of a personal device for that purpose must be permitted.

‍

These exceptions should be narrowly crafted to provide the clearest guidance possible to school personnel. States did not receive full credit for medical exceptions that do not require a determination by a licensed medical professional. 

Prioritizes Safety &

Education Standards

0 - 4 pts

There are a few common loopholes that have made their way into several state laws and serve to undermine the integrity and purpose of the policies, thereby threatening safety and weakening education standards.

‍

  1. Emergency use exception – A number of current laws provide an exception for emergencies, meaning that students may use personal electronic devices in emergency situations. This provision is often rooted in the understandable anxiety that caregivers and students feel about school shootings, but school safety experts are unequivocal on this question: students and school personnel are safer in schools without cell phones.
  1. Educational use exception – This exception is often worked into laws as a catch-all to avoid unintended consequences, however it opens the door for myriad unnecessary uses that are not actually educational. If a teacher needs to show an example of an online “tool,” that can still be done on a screen that is shared with the entire class and controlled by the teacher’s device. Any educational use that necessitates a student’s personal device is, by its nature, inequitable and inappropriate. 

Enforcement Provision

0 - 5 pts

Researchers looked for language that referenced student compliance with the policy. The 2026 Model Bill has been updated to clarify that this provision must prohibit the use of any form of exclusionary discipline (suspension or expulsion) where a violation of the personal device use policy would be the only reason for such discipline.

Data Collection

0 - 5 pts

It is imperative that states require data collection to ensure the law is being implemented properly, to measure outcomes, and to better identify any changes that may need to be made as the policy is implemented.

The most effective personal device-use policies include all personal electronic devices. This means smartphones and non-internet-connected phones, smartwatches, Bluetooth earbuds and headphones, gaming devices, personal tablets and laptops, and any other electronic device that is not school-issued. It’s important to keep this definition broad enough to encompass emerging technologies, such as A.I. companion bots and wearables (e.g. smart glasses).

CLOSE

There are two main exceptions that should be included in every personal device use policy. They are:

‍

  1. Special education exceptions – Individualized Education Plans (IEP) and 504 Plans are legally-binding agreements between schools and students/caregivers that arise out of a formal special education determination process. If a student’s plan requires the use of a personal device, that use must be permitted. 
  1. Student medical needs – if a student has specific mental or physical health needs that have been documented by a licensed medical professional, and which necessitate a personal device, that student’s use of a personal device for that purpose must be permitted.

‍

These exceptions should be narrowly crafted to provide the clearest guidance possible to school personnel. States did not receive full credit for medical exceptions that do not require a determination by a licensed medical professional. 

CLOSE

There are a few common loopholes that have made their way into several state laws and serve to undermine the integrity and purpose of the policies, thereby threatening safety and weakening education standards.

‍

  1. Emergency use exception – A number of current laws provide an exception for emergencies, meaning that students may use personal electronic devices in emergency situations. This provision is often rooted in the understandable anxiety that caregivers and students feel about school shootings, but school safety experts are unequivocal on this question: students and school personnel are safer in schools without cell phones.
  1. Educational use exception – This exception is often worked into laws as a catch-all to avoid unintended consequences, however it opens the door for myriad unnecessary uses that are not actually educational. If a teacher needs to show an example of an online “tool,” that can still be done on a screen that is shared with the entire class and controlled by the teacher’s device. Any educational use that necessitates a student’s personal device is, by its nature, inequitable and inappropriate. 
CLOSE

Researchers looked for language that referenced student compliance with the policy. The 2026 Model Bill has been updated to clarify that this provision must prohibit the use of any form of exclusionary discipline (suspension or expulsion) where a violation of the personal device use policy would be the only reason for such discipline.

CLOSE

It is imperative that states require data collection to ensure the law is being implemented properly, to measure outcomes, and to better identify any changes that may need to be made as the policy is implemented.

CLOSE

Strengths & Opportunities

This section highlights legislative provisions or language that researchers found to be exceptional and wanted to elevate (“Strengths”), as well as recommendations for improvement (“Opportunities”).

Examples

Examples of “Strengths” include prohibiting school personnel from using social media to communicate with students (as Vermont did, setting a national standard) or requiring schools to implement a comprehensive internet safety policy (as North Carolina included in their law). Examples of “Opportunities” may be as clear-cut as states specifying that storage should be inaccessible or ensuring legislation is not limited to K- 8 students and depriving high-schoolers of the benefits of a strong policy (as it is the case with Florida’s and Georgia’s legislation).

CLOSE

Resources

Tools and templates to guide legislators, advocates, and educators at every step of the policymaking process.

Model Legislation

Supporting Evidence

Implementation Guides

Evaluation Tools

Though the 2025 Phone-Free Schools Model Bill served as the basis for evaluating state laws for the Report Card, an enhanced 2026 version is available based on newly available research and evidence.

‍

Package of Model Bills: Distraction-Free Schools Policy Project, supported by the Becca Schmill Foundation and Smartphone Free Childhood US, has developed a package of three coordinated model bills designed to create healthier, more focused learning environments by reducing the impact of smartphones, social media, and distracting schoolissued technology. Each bill targets a different layer of the problem, forming a comprehensive policy framework.

‍

PhoneFree Schools Model Bill

This bill establishes first bell to last bell phonefree school days, requiring students to store all personal electronic devices in secure, inaccessible storage throughout the school day. The goal is to eliminate the constant pull of notifications and digital distractions so students can fully engage academically and socially. This approach reflects best practices identified by educators nationwide.

‍

Social Media-Free Schools Model Bill

This bill restricts schools from communicating with students via social media platforms as well as prevents students from accessing social media sites on school networks and devices.  By removing social media from the school day, the bill supports improved focus, reduces cyberbullying opportunities, and helps restore healthier peer interactions.

‍

Safe School Tech Model Bill

This bill addresses the overuse of schoolissued technology, such as Chromebooks and tablets. It sets standards to ensure that digital tools are used intentionally and sparingly, rather than becoming default substitutes for teaching, social interaction, or hands-on learning. The bill aims to enhance education through proven traditional methods and reduce screen fatigue by encouraging developmentally appropriate tech use.

‍

Why These Bills Matter

Together, these three bills form a goldstandard policy package intended to reduce distraction, improve academic performance, and support student mental health. They offer lawmakers and school leaders a blueprint for creating learning environments where students can thrive without the constant pull of digital devices.  Visit Distraction-Free Schools Policy Project’s  “Take Action Now” page for the updated 2026 version of the Phone-Free School Model Legislation as well as the Social Media Free Schools and Safe School Tech model bills.

CLOSE

Phone-Free Schools on a Budget (webinar with transcript): School administrators share successful, low-budget strategies that have worked – including using manila envelopes. (Sponsored by Becca Schmill Foundation and Smartphone-Free Childhood US, in collaboration with The Anxious Generation Movement).

‍

Addressing Concerns About Emergencies: Podcast: Why School Safety Experts Want Phone Bans and a letter from the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASPRO) in support of bell-to-bell bans as the safest option for students and school personnel.

‍

Phones-in-Focus National Survey: Over 20,000 educators share insights on school cell phone policies. Preliminary results suggest that stricter cell phone policies are linked to fewer distractions and greater teacher satisfaction. (Dr. Angela Duckworth, best-selling author and professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, in collaboration with Stanford University economists Matt Gentzkow and Hunt Allcott).

‍

Governors’ Focus on Distraction-Free Learning Statements from governors and a video from the National Governors Association annual Governors’ Education Policy Advisors Institute.

‍

How to (and How NOT to) Mandate Phone-Free Schools by Deb Schmill: A guide for legislatures looking to make their states’ schools phone-free, and not just during class time.

CLOSE

A Phone-Free Schools Administrator Toolkit: Tools to Implement a Phone-Free School Environment: Includes supporting data, implementation materials (model policy), and guides for stakeholder communications. (Fairplay and Phone-Free Schools Movement).

‍

International Best Practice Model Policy for School Districts: this is a template that Boards of Education, superintendents, or school principals can adopt if the state does not have a law, or the law is not bell-to-bell with inaccessible storage.

CLOSE

Toolkit for Assessing Phones in Schools - TAPS: a free, ready-to-use toolkit designed to help elementary, middle and high schools evaluate their phone policy. (Stanford Social Media Lab and the Tech and Society Lab at NYU Stern).

CLOSE

FAQs

Why are grades based only on passed state legislation or signed executive orders?

While many state, local, and school-level efforts are meaningfully advancing phone-free learning, the Report Card evaluates only enacted state laws and signed executive orders. To be enforceable, equitable, consistent, and durable over time, the evidence-based standards outlined in the Phone-Free Schools Model Bill must be codified into law. State-level policy ensures all students – regardless of district or zip code – benefit from effective phone-free school environments.

CLOSE
Why was the 2025 Model bill used as the baseline?

The 2025 Phone-Free Schools Model Bill was the established gold standard at the time states passed the laws evaluated in this report. It was developed by the Distraction-Free Schools Policy Project with input and evidence from legislators, educators, school administrators, child development experts, and public health researchers, and reflected the strongest available evidence at the time.

‍

As more states pass laws, schools implement policies, and new research emerges, the Model Bill continues to evolve. The enhanced 2026 Model Bill maintains the same core principles while incorporating important updates – such as clearer guidance on enforcement and protections against exclusionary discipline.

CLOSE
How can my state improve its grade?

The goal of the Report Card is to help states identify gaps in their current laws and pass stronger, more effective legislation that promotes thriving schools and successful students. States can improve their grade by enacting a phone-free schools law or executive order that more closely aligns with the criteria in the Model Bill—especially by adopting bell-to-bell policies with secure, inaccessible storage and clear implementation guidance.

CLOSE
Do you provide grades on draft legislation?

No. The Report Card evaluates only passed legislation or signed executive orders. However, lawmakers and advocates are encouraged to use the Model Bill and Report Card criteria proactively when drafting legislation to ensure policies are positioned for the highest possible grade once enacted.

CLOSE
Will the Report Card be released annually?

Yes. The Report Card will be published annually, with future editions assessing new and updated state laws based on the 2026 Phone-Free Schools Model Bill and subsequent versions as the evidence base continues to grow.

‍

However, the Report Card project will be updated throughout the year with any legislative changes or executive orders noted on state reports and updated on the map.

CLOSE
When will states be reassessed each year?

States will be reassessed following each legislative cycle, with updated grades released at the beginning of the following calendar year to reflect laws and executive orders enacted during the prior year.

CLOSE
Can legislators and advocates who want to advocate for stronger legislation receive support?

Yes! Legislators and advocates can request pro bono support, including policy guidance, model bill language, implementation resources, and connections to peers in their state or across the country.. See the “take action” section on the website, review the resources, or email info@phonefreeschoolsreport.org to get started.

CLOSE
Can legislators dispute their grade?

Of course. We welcome disputes, input, or clarifications on the report cards or detailed state assessments. Email info@phonefreeschoolsreport.org with questions or comments.

CLOSE

Partners & Acknowledgements

The Report Card project is a collaboration between The Anxious Generation, Smartphone Free Childhood US, Institute for Families and Technology, and Becca Schmill Foundation. State legislators and advocates were also consulted throughout the report card project.

‍

The project was made possible by the expertise and leadership of Kim Whitman, Researcher and Writer (Smartphone-Free Childhood US); Lina Nealon, Project Lead and Writer (Institute for Families and Technology); Rep. Angela Arsenault - Vermont (Legislative Analyst and Writer), Deb Schmill, Model Law Primary Author and Project Advisor (Becca Schmill Foundation); Casey Mock, J.D., Legislative Advisor (The Anxious Generation); Devin Babcock, Policy Advisor (ExcelinEd); and Michael J. Balzano, designer, Balzanovision.