• Education Ministry yet to discuss matter 
• Medical professionals raise concerns about impact of smart devices on formative childhood period 
• Does SL need an age-appropriate design code for devices, apps, and programmes? 

Despite questions about the effectiveness of such bans, Sri Lanka has become one more nation to join the conversation on prohibiting smartphones by schoolchildren amid concerns over their impact on learning and well-being. 

Child Affairs Minister Saroja Paulraj recently announced that Sri Lanka was planning to introduce a ban on the use of smartphones by schoolchildren under the age of 12. She noted that the Government would take a decision to ensure that no child below 12 years of age was allowed to own or use a mobile phone, a move aimed at protecting children from excessive screen time and exposure to harmful online content. 

Nevertheless, when contacted by The Sunday Morning, Ministry of Education Secretary Nalaka Kaluwewe said he was not aware of the issue, saying that the ministry had neither discussed the matter nor received any instructions regarding it at present. 

According to Minister Paulraj, this move has global precedence. Amidst a growing global effort to address smartphone addiction among children and teenagers, some countries have introduced measures to eliminate phone usage in school.  

UNESCO notes that by the end of 2023, 60 education systems had bans on smartphone use in schools in their laws or policies. By the end of 2024, a Global Education Monitoring (GEM) Report update found that 19 more education systems were banning the use of smartphones in school, bringing the total to 79. 

Detrimental effects

These moves come amid growing evidence of the negative impact of smartphones on academic performance, mental health, and social development. 

UNESCO’s 2023 GEM Report calls for technology to be used in class only when it supports learning outcomes, including the use of smartphones. The report notes that the amount of time children spend on screens is a growing concern for parents as well as for education and health practitioners. 

Various analyses and studies have shown that higher screen time is associated with poorer well-being; less curiosity, self-control, and emotional stability; higher anxiety; and depression diagnoses. Other studies have suggested that increases in screen time negatively affect diet, sleep, mental health, and eye health. 

Moreover, smartphones have also been linked to disrupting learning, with studies finding that just having a mobile phone nearby with notifications coming through is enough to result in students losing their attention. 

According to Colombo North Teaching Hospital, Ragama Senior Registrar in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Dr. Ishani Ariyachandra, limiting screen time for children – those 18 years of age and under – is essential, unless provided under adult supervision for educational purposes, since the brains of children and adolescents are yet to develop sufficient decision-making abilities. 

The developmental stages of children and adolescents make them particularly vulnerable to the ill effects of digital devices, according to Dr. Ariyachandra. 

“Teenagers, due to hormonal changes, are more prone to impulsive behaviour. However, the area of the brain that governs decision-making abilities does not develop until about 25. As such, they are like vehicles without brakes, making them governed by impulse. Moreover, they are prone to adventure-seeking behaviour, where they desire to experiment new things, which can lead to them not considering the consequences of their actions,” she said. 

She also pointed out that increased screen time had developmental impacts. “For children under five years, screen time impacts the development of language and communication skills. Given the rapid brain development that takes place in the first five years, exposure to screen time can have a negative impact.” 

While acknowledging the convenience of digital devices when it came to education, such as e-learning platforms, Dr. Ariyachandra pointed out that children did not understand limits, thus requiring adult supervision. 

She stressed that regulating digital devices became necessary when considering that they led to reduced interpersonal relationships. Moreover, with children measuring their worth in likes and followers on social media, they can fail to realise that these behaviours do not translate practically in real-life. She also pointed out that trends such as monetising content on social media platforms took away the interest in furthering education. 

A further concern is the lack of social awareness leading children to compare reality to digital content, which leads to frustration. The absence of face-to-face communication on social media also creates privacy concerns since children lack awareness of the world and can exchange personal information, leading to dangerous consequences. 

Moreover, Dr. Ariyachandra noted that algorithmic suggestions on social media also increased the propensity for addiction to digital devices, alongside a growing dependence on Artificial Intelligence (AI) for emotional support, supplanting human connections, which research has shown can impact logical thinking and creative abilities.

Pros and cons

However, concerns have been raised about the practicality of such a proposition. 

Parents advocate a mix of control and guidance. A father from Anuradhapura opined that while digital devices were required for educational purposes, there should be a limit to their usage and that they should be used under parental supervision. 

According to University of Colombo School of Computing Senior Lecturer Rasika Dayarathna, banning smartphones would impact households without other devices such as computers and tablets when it came to obtaining digital educational content. He observed that access could be limited through the digital well-being feature on phones, which parents could activate in order to control children’s access to certain sites. 

Dayarathna further noted that while the Government could not do anything to limit usage in technical terms, countries such as the UK had implemented measures such as the Age-Appropriate Design Code.   

Notably, education sector stakeholders remain sceptical about the effectiveness of such a move. Ceylon Teachers’ Union (CTU) General Secretary Joseph Stalin said: “While the Government is deciding to ban smartphones among children, half the modules in the new education reforms contain barcodes. How would children check these modules without smartphones? 

“These are contradictory stances. If smartphone use is problematic, there needs to be a scientific approach to this. The issue needs to be considered deeply before making a decision.” 

Pointing out that a full ban would not be practical, given the widespread use of digital devices for school activities, he noted that a method to limit the use would be more successful. 

Sri Lanka Education Forum Coordinator Sujata Gamage noted that since digital devices were now a regular aspect of everyday life, their usage should be allowed under parental supervision. 

Nevertheless, she pointed out that certain limits on digital devices among children was beneficial, particularly given their ubiquitous usage when it came to activities where children were required to engage with their peers. “We should encourage more interaction with children,” she stressed. 

“We are focusing on the wrong thing: devices and technology should primarily be for teachers so that they can spend more time with children. This is where we should begin.”

Global bans

Nevertheless, studies point to the need for more robust evidence to reach clear conclusions on the impact of smartphones on children. 

For instance, a recent University of Birmingham study, published by The Lancet Regional Health – Europe found that there is no evidence to support the assumption that restrictive school phone policies, in their current forms, have a beneficial effect on adolescents’ mental health and well-being or related outcomes. 

Nevertheless, according to a study cited in the GEM report, removing smartphones from schools in Belgium, Spain, and the UK was found to improve learning outcomes. 

In China, the city of Zhengzhou further restricted the use of phones in primary and secondary schools, demanding that parents provide written consent that a phone was really needed for pedagogical reasons. 

In France, where cellphones have been prohibited in primary and secondary schools since 2018, a further restriction in the form of a ‘digital break’ was suggested in lower secondary schools.  

In the US, many of its 50 states have regulations in place, from the Phone-Free School Act in California to the phone ban for K-12 classrooms in Florida. 

A ban on the non-educational use of smartphones entered into force in the Netherlands in January 2024 for primary and secondary schools, with the Dutch Government saying that smartphones could lead to poor performance and concentration problems among students. 

In Italy, the use of mobile phones in the classroom is banned even for educational purposes between pre-school and secondary school, based on a ministerial decree. 

This year, a bill that bans students from using cellphones in schools was signed into law in Brazil, prohibiting all students in public and private elementary and secondary schools from using portable electronic devices throughout the school day. 

South Korea also officially passed legislation this year, set to take effect in March 2026, banning the use of mobile phones and smart devices during school hours.