Why Banning Phones in My University Classroom Transformed Student Engagement

For over ten years, I have taught the same course annually to undergraduate, MBA, medical, and nursing students. Despite maintaining a consistent teaching style and curriculum, last year’s student evaluations were noticeably more positive than ever before.

Students shared feedback such as, “This course taught me more than any other I’ve taken,” and “The best course I have ever experienced.” Such enthusiasm was nearly unanimous, with only a single negative comment.

What changed? I implemented a strict policy banning all cell phones and laptop note-taking during class, except for devices used with an active stylus. Initially met with skepticism and resistance, within weeks students acknowledged better performance—they absorbed and retained information more effectively and enjoyed their classroom time more.

The policy required phones to be switched off and, crucially, kept out of sight on desks. Exceptions were made for students expecting urgent calls, such as those awaiting news about a newborn.

To support all learners, classes were recorded and lecture transcripts made accessible afterward for students requiring accommodations or those wishing to review material.

Drawing on four decades of teaching experience, I believe this change reduced distractions and increased student engagement, enhancing both attention and satisfaction with their learning.

While this correlation is based on my observations, it aligns with research showing that computer note-taking impairs information retention and that even powered-off cell phones diminish the quality of face-to-face interactions.

To introduce the policy, I presented a study demonstrating that students who take handwritten notes retain significantly more information than those using laptops. Since typing speeds allow near-verbatim transcription, students engage less cognitively with content. Conversely, handwriting notes requires processing and summarizing information in real time, which enhances memory encoding.

Research on cellphone distractions is equally compelling. One study involving 520 university students required phones to be silenced during class. Some placed their phones face down on desks, others kept them in bags or pockets, and a third group left phones in another room. Cognitive tests revealed students performed worst when phones were on desks, better when in bags or pockets, and best when phones were absent from the room entirely.

Interestingly, students did not report differences in phone-related thoughts regardless of phone location, suggesting the mere presence of a phone reduces available cognitive capacity, even when unused.

The presence of phones also detracts from in-person social interactions. A study from British Columbia observed diners in restaurants: those with phones on the table were more distracted, less engaged with companions, more bored, and enjoyed their meals less—even without using their devices.

These findings strongly support banning phones and laptops in educational settings—not only in classrooms but also cafeterias and breaks. Reflecting this, by April, eleven U.S. states had enacted laws restricting student phone use in public primary and secondary schools, with others considering similar measures.

However, this movement has yet to gain traction in higher education. My research found only a single small college, Wyoming Catholic College, that prohibits cell phones in classrooms. Although most university students are legal adults, neuroscience reveals their brains are still maturing, particularly the prefrontal cortex responsible for planning, executive function, and risk assessment. This immaturity can lead to impulsive behavior and poor decision-making affecting social and academic outcomes, which is why educators and administrators hold a critical role in guiding students.

Ideally, university classrooms would be treated like sensitive information facilities—similar to SCIFs in government buildings—where phones are banned and securely stored outside the room during class. Students would deposit phones before sessions and retrieve them afterward. Professors could choose whether to apply this policy, especially if mobile devices are integral to course content.

My experience is not unique. I recently learned that other instructors at my university also ban phones. For instance, a philosophy professor enforces a no-phone policy, and a religion course asks students to surrender phones for 30 days as part of a monastic living exercise.

If phone and laptop bans became widespread, students might learn more effectively, participate more openly, feel more comfortable socially, and gain greater satisfaction from their education. Perhaps it’s time to return to a simpler era, nearly two decades ago, when students had flip phones and learned more in class.