Phone Bans in Schools

Analyzing a growing trend with social listening data

With the explosion of smartphones, especially for younger folks like teenagers and adolescents, parents have enjoyed quickly being able to contact their children. However, that connectivity has caused real complications with young people's education. We wrote about kids' relationship with technology last year, with parents buying feature-free phones for their children.

Using Infegy Starscape , our social listening tool, we've been tracking an even broader movement regarding children and technology—a movement led by state governments and educators in the United States to ban smartphones in private and public schools. These phone bans,widely reported on in the press , have a variety of possible implementations. Still, at their core, they severely restrict students' access to their smartphones during the school day. Let's walk you through the stakeholders and show how our AI-enabled personas identification identifies the critical personas within the phone ban discussion. It shows you the players with the most to gain or lose.

Growing Post Volume

If you're a frequent reader, you know our first stop is post volume when we analyze a growing story like this. Post volume generally tells you a particular trend's strength and how quickly it's grown. It's fascinating to compare post volume and news articles. With some trends we examine, social volume predates mainstream news coverage. On the other hand, as appears to be the case with phone bans in schools, mainstream news covered the movement alongside its rise. Looking at Figure 1, we're most surprised by how low the volume was from September 2021 through June 2022. The increase in 2022 came after the publication of the Facebook Papers by the Wall Street Journal, suggesting this growth could have been associated with the increased awareness of the problem related to Instagram access and younger teenagers .

Analyzing The Important Phone Ban Stakeholders

Now that we've validated the phone ban trend's growth, let's look at arguably the most critical aspect underpinning it - the personas of those people contributing most to it. We'll utilize Infegy's new Generative AI Personas tool , which has continued to improve with structured outputs and topic drill-downs since its launch. These widgets work like magic - generating usable outputs in seconds instead of the cumbersome, manual task that used to take hours and days. We'll embed a video of how fast we generate these personas (Figure 3). You'll note that these are the same personas discussed in the next section. Our analytics engine is so fast that it took longer to write this insight brief than it did to generate those personas.

While our tool generated eight different personas, let's take a look at the top 3, arguably the three groups of people with the most significant stake in the discussion:

1. Educators
2. Parents
3. Students

Stakeholder #1 - Concerned Educator

The Concerned Educator persona represents teachers, principals, and other educational professionals who are heavily involved in the phone ban debate. These individuals often have years of classroom or administrative experience, giving them a unique perspective on the challenges and benefits of implementing such policies. While generally supportive of reducing distractions, they frequently express concerns about the practicality of enforcing phone bans, including the logistics of phone storage and emergency communication. Many also raise the issue of balancing the need to limit distractions with the importance of teaching responsible technology use.

Though Concerned Educators tend to be more optimistic about phone bans than the general population, with a 21% positivity rate, they still express significant skepticism. This low sentiment is typical for heated political issues , where negativity often overwhelms the conversation. This group often discusses the potential impact of phone bans on student well-being and learning outcomes, voicing concerns over the loss of access to educational apps and resources. Ultimately, their views reflect a cautious optimism—supportive of phone bans but mindful of the complexities involved in their implementation.

Stakeholder #2 - Concerned Parents

The Concerned Parent persona represents parents and guardians who are deeply involved in the phone ban debate, with their primary focus being their children's safety and well-being. This group often has mixed feelings about phone bans. On the one hand, they appreciate the potential for improved focus and academic performance with reduced smartphone distractions. On the other hand, they are concerned about losing the ability to contact their children during emergencies.

Parents in this group also frequently desire to balance restrictions with the need to teach responsible technology use. Topics like cyberbullying, social development, and family communication are common in their discussions. Some are hopeful that phone bans could alleviate bullying, while others are worried about the negative impact on their children's social interactions. A notable theme is the tension between trust and autonomy, with some parents concerned that phone bans might prevent kids from learning self-control. With a 10% positivity rate toward phone bans, this group is slightly more positive than the general population. Still, it remains skeptical, especially about how such policies affect family logistics and communication.

Stakeholder #3 - Tech-Savvy Student Advocate

The Tech-Savvy Student Advocate persona represents younger individuals, typically students or recent graduates, who strongly oppose phone bans in schools. For this group, smartphones are essential to their education and social lives. Born into a world of constant connectivity, these digital natives find it hard to imagine learning without smartphones, which they see as valuable educational tools. They frequently argue that phones provide access to apps and websites that help them academically succeed while facilitating crucial social connections with peers and parents.

This persona also expresses concerns about the mental health implications of phone bans, citing anxiety and stress caused by being disconnected from their devices. A common argument from this group is that students should be taught responsible phone use instead of having their devices banned outright. They believe integrating technology into their daily lives prepares them for future careers in a digital world. With only a 5% positivity rate toward phone bans, this group is overwhelmingly against such policies, often feeling frustrated by what they see as a generational divide, with older generations not fully understanding the role of technology today.

Takeaways for your brand or agency

Understanding the conversation around phone bans in schools highlights the importance of staying attuned to the perspectives of key stakeholders, including educators, parents, and students. Using tools like Infegy Starscape, brands, and agencies can track evolving trends and sentiment shifts across these diverse groups. Social listening empowers decision-makers to navigate contentious topics, like phone bans, by providing real-time insights into public opinion and identifying emerging narratives essential for adapting messaging, shaping policy responses, or creating marketing strategies that resonate with the audience's true concerns and aspirations.