Pymble Wise Phone Initiative: Analysis of student and parent data, Phase 1 – February 2025
Pymble Wise Phone initiative: Analysis of student and parent data, Phase 1 - February 2025
The Pymble Wise Phone initiative report provides insights into students’ phone usage patterns and impacts phones have on sleep, friendships, school work and physical exercise. This report is the first generated from data collected from students and parents in early 2025.
DR SARAH LOCH AND VICTORIA ADAMOVICH, PYMBLE INSTITUTE
DR JON SAE-KOEW, CURTIN UNIVERSITY
INTRODUCTION
This research summary focuses on Pymble Ladies’ College’s Wise Phone initiative which offers a school-managed mobile phone with restricted functionality to students between the ages of 9 and 14 (Years 4 to 8). The Pymble Institute is conducting longitudinal research over the pilot year of the project by collecting survey data from Year 4 to 8 students and parents at three points in time over 2025. This report comprises of data from Time 1 (February 2025).
The project is significant in two ways. Firstly, the project is a new initiative which is leading the way in phone management strategies in schools worldwide. The College website (Pymble Ladies’ College, 2025) states the intent of the Wise Phone initiative is, ‘to provide a wiser mobile phone choice for students … [Wise Phones offer] to replace or substitute for smartphones, which research associates with negative impact on our young people’. Secondly, our in-house research aims to collect data which the College can use to immediately improve the program. We are tracking areas of key importance around usage, wellbeing and learning, and are using the findings to both refine the program and create a richer body of evidence to draw upon in future years.
These aims are significant because schools may undertake initiatives relating to phones, but not research them, and academics may seek to use data in schools, but not research the full journey underpinning the work of the school and the experiences of the students and parents over a substantial period of time. The Pymble Institute is committed to supporting College
programs and the wider educational community through researchinformed practice and engaging students in the research process.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• The data in this report assists the College identify reasons for selecting the Pymble Wise Phone and reveals rates of phone usage.
• Data from students and parents reveal that the most substantial impact of phone type in Time 1 of data collection relates to student sleep, with both non-phone users and Wise Phone-only users reporting significantly greater sleep duration and healthier nighttime device habits compared to smartphone users.
• This first phase of research did not demonstrate significant differences in physical activity, perceived friendship quality, schoolwork management, or classroom attention based on phone type, though trends and small variations in preferences and experiences were observed among different groups and these signal areas of further research and inquiry.
• Overall, the findings suggest that limiting smartphone access during the critical years of adolescence may be particularly beneficial for sleep, while other aspects of wellbeing—such as exercise, friendships, and learning—appear less directly influenced by the type of phone used in these early months of the initiative.
WHAT IS THE PYMBLE WISE PHONE INITIATIVE?
The Pymble Wise Phone is a mobile phone with restrictions. It offers an alternative to smartphones which have full access to the internet and social media apps, and was designed with pre-teens and young
adolescents in mind. The phone (colloquially known as a ‘dumb phone’) has features such as tracking, tap to pay, texts and calls but it does not have a browser and offers only a select range of apps. These are centrally managed by the school and are varied according to grade level.
The Pymble Wise Phone was given to each student from Years 3 to 7 in November 2024 as part of a trial program, if parents signed up to receive one. The launch in November 2024 was received with interest and excitement by parents and students. The majority of students in Junior School took up the phone (including new students entering Year 7 2025) with rates close to 100%. As expected, fewer students in Year 7 2024 signed up, with this rate around 40% of the year group.
The Sydney Morning Herald (Baker, 2024) labelled the initiative ‘groundbreaking’, recognising the College’s work in creating a school-managed phone program which aims to manage screen addiction, reduce cyberbullying and enhance girls’ relationships with other people and school results.
RESEARCHING THE PYMBLE WISE PHONE INITIATIVE
The Pymble Institute designed a research program to collect data in the first year of the initiative. Data from students and parents is being used to inform decision making which is influencing change. The research questions used in the first phase of data collection were as follows:
1. What phones are students using and what has influenced this choice?
2. What impact does phone and social media use have on student wellbeing?
The research schedule includes three time periods in 2025: Time 1 (February), Time 2 (June) and Time 3 (October). An online survey was developed for all students and parents in the target year groups of Years 4 to 8. A number of short, pulse check surveys have also been conducted by the Wellbeing team in the intervening periods and a pilot of social labs – a studentdriven, participatory research approach – is commencing for Year 5 students.
Time 1 (February 2025) elicited 1300 survey responses from students and parents in Year 4 to 8. These data have been analysed and discussed within the project team, including with some external experts for their guidance.
LITERATURE REVIEW
What does the literature tell us about schools, students and mobile phones?
Like many schools around the world at this time, Pymble Ladies’ College is concerned with the ubiquitous nature of phone use in the lives of our students and the impact that powerful and instantaneous access to the internet through phone handsets is having on the safety, wellbeing and learning of children and young adolescents. Voices in social media, the political sphere and amongst mental and physical health advocates are increasingly raising awareness to the dangers and risks involved in online representation, online communication and the navigation of relationships and life experiences through the online environment. Research is increasingly drawing attention to the question of who is developing policy and rules around mobile phones for children and
young people and whether the benefits of phone usage, with the attendant social media presence, justifies the costs of young people’s development (Dempsey, Lyons, & McCoy, 2019, p.811).
Complexities and challenges for young adolescents in ‘real life’ can be accelerated and amplified by mobile phones with their instant access to internet browsers, cameras and social media (Orben, Przybylski, Blakemore & Kievit, 2022). Habits around technology begin at a young age as most children are raised with technology and parents frequently model its use in daily interactions. The term ‘technoference’ has been coined to express how parenting styles and children’s experiences are highly influenced by multiple forms of technology, especially mobile phones, which are pervasive in today’s homes and communities (Shao, Zhu, Lei, Jiang, Wang & Zhang, 2024). Global research from the Pew Research Center identifies concern amongst adults around the world regarding the impact of mobile phones on children, notably for potential exposure to inappropriate content, while simultaneously accepting that phones bring benefits for adults and are part of our lives in terms of connectivity, communication and the economy (Silver et al., 2019).
Schools and parents recognise there are some benefits in phone use for older children and adolescents, but research is growing about adverse impacts, especially for younger children. Smartphones with internet access and apps can facilitate access to information which can extend students’ understanding and connect them to support services
to further their resources (Walsh, White & Young, 2009), including their health literacy (Masilamani, Sriram & Rozarlo, 2020). Current research, however, is pointing to ‘significant educational costs’ for children using phones at too young an age, including failing to attain keys milestones in maths and reading (Dempsey, Lyons & McCoy, 2019, p.799). Research amongst the Pymble community (in this report) reveals parents value the services provided by location tracking, communication mechanisms and tap-to-pay features, and many also appreciate music streaming and the camera as tools to enrich their children’s lives.
Research into student learning through mobile devices indicates there are benefits for young people accessing the creative applications of small mobile devices, including phones, as an app such as camera allows them to collect and creatively manipulate images and data, and communicate with others across a range of environments (Information Resources Management Association, 2020). Such elements can form the basis of connection amongst family groups, as well as peer and friendship groups, and also make it challenging for parents to resist or remove phone use.
Research into how mobile phone use amongst children intersects with and detracts from mental health, including through anxiety, depression and suicidality (Kong et al., 2025; Twenge, Joiner, Rogers, & Martin, 2018; Xiong, He & Wei, 2023) and erodes physical health (Hu, Re & Liu, 2024) are areas of growing global focus. The impacts of phones on sleep are a key research area for both children and adults (Correa
et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2017; Sinha et al., 2022; Woods & Scott, 2016), with recognition of the impacts of reduced sleep on adolescent depression (Hökby et al., 2025). Concerns are also being researched in relation to teenagers’ withdrawal from social interactions with others (Fitryasari, Tristiana & Yusuf, 2020). Contemporary research-based evidence about the impact of phone use on school students is presenting a challenge to schools as they are at the intersection between parents’ decisions to provide a phone, students usage and issues which arise for the individual and with groups of students, both at school and within the home, out of school hours.
Children’s first mobile phones
Data from 1,500 parents in the United States indicates that nine percent of children below the age of eight have their own mobile phone, with one in four having their own phone by the age of eight (Mann, Calvin, Lenhart & Robb, 2025). This research by Common Sense Media (Mann, Calvin, Lenhart & Robb, 2025, p.5) also shows that of the children using a smartphone, only nineteen percent use a smartphone with ‘limited or no apps or internet access’ and that the trends have remained stable since the 2020 survey. Looking deeper, the impact of technology (in its many forms) on children’s early years has been found to be ‘associated with poorer childhood well-being’ (Haverson, Paatsch, Anglim & Horwood, 2025, p.20), although these authors note there is currently limited research on what may moderate this impact. Guidelines and parenting recommendations around technological device use and screen time by children are familiar
to current generations of parents (see, for example, Raising Children Network, 2024) but can be difficult to implement. For many children, phones have been part of their early years as calming devices (Lau, 2023), a feature unique to this generation of children. The Australian e-Safety Commissioner (n.d.) recommends children start with a mobile phone which does not have internet access and graduate to a smartphone when the child is ‘mature enough’. Schools recognise that this advice is understood by parents but is extremely difficult to establish in household routines.
The responsibility for mobile phones
In the early years of bring-yourown-device (BYOD) programs in schools, smartphones were considered learning devices (Stavert, 2013) and were promoted as tools for mobile learning (Wishart, 2018). The terrain has been changing as more mobile tablet and laptop options have become available and as phones have become more of a personal essential for students. Managing issues relating to phones has, by necessity, been part of schools’ wellbeing and behaviour management policies for some decades, with a core challenge arising from how devices are managed at home, at school and in the spaces in between, in both face to face and online environments. As parents provide phones to their children, schools traditionally have no say about the devices and how they are used for the majority of the time, but must manage issues occurring during in school time, or between students of the school, and possibly from other schools, in and out of school time (Rose, Gears & Taylor, 2022). This contrasts with
issues arising from laptops and tablets which are typically more tightly managed by schools when provided by the school, or by parents, through school-run BYOD programs.
It is only more recently that restrictions, including bans on smartphones in schools, have been implemented, including in late 2023 by the New South Wales Government (New South Wales Government, 2023). In a joint ministerial statement released by three Australian Federal Government Ministers early this year (February, 2025), comments were made about the positive influence of schools’ mobile phone bans on student behaviour and critical incidents involving social media at the beginning of the new school year. Academics note limited input from young people themselves into the impact of phone restriction policies and the speed at which wide-scale decisions impacting schools have been developed (Third, in press).
How are schools responding?
Media stories are increasingly highlighting ways that more school or local communities are implementing their own bans and restrictions on phones (for examples, see Clayton & Schubert, 2024; Dickson, 2023; Gentleman, 2025). Some interventions are inspired and supported by groups such as Smartphone Free Childhood, based in the United Kingdom, and through research in networks of schools such as the International Coalition of Girls’ Schools (2025). These represent practical interventions in response to matters including, ‘the addictive lure of screens’ (Clayton & Schubert, 2024), time usage, building positive relationships, and
the very serious matter of working with police around the sharing of nude images of underage young people (Gentleman, 2025).
Pymble Ladies’ College’s response has evolved within the same context and time period. Recognising the challenges for families around mobile phone use and the options available, as well as the significant and persistent issues for students in the area of wellbeing, the College initiated a response aimed at interrupting feelings of disempowerment amongst parents and maximising informed decision making about the ages and stages of mobile phone use. In communication with parents and students, College Principal, Dr Kate Hadwen, uses the analogy of teaching children to swim when explaining the steps involved in stepping up to a more powerful phone. She explains, ‘that swimming is an important life skill and vital for children to learn, but we do not teach it by allowing children to enter the rough surf unaided and watching passively while they figure out how to navigate an
environment which can move from fun, to choppy, to treacherous very quickly and often without visible warning’ (Pymble Ladies’ College, 2025). Instead, the learning process for phone use should be gradual and in line with the child’s developmental needs and the environment around them. The Pymble Wise Phones approach is based in this approach alongside ‘a desire to protect the wellbeing of our girls, while empowering them to grow confidently in the digital world’ (Pymble Ladies’ College, 2025).
PYMBLE LADIES’ COLLEGE
RESEARCH PROJECT – TIME 1, FEBRUARY 2025
Data collection
The online survey was sent to all parents of Year 4 to 8 and to all girls in these year groups, except a small number of girls whose parents opted them out of the study. Students completed the surveys under teacher supervision. Parents had the option of completing the survey more than once if they had more than one daughter in the target year groups. Participation was voluntary and responses were
anonymous, with no names or email addresses collected.
Responses
For a summary of the responses to the survey, see Table 1, below.
Survey instrument
The survey was designed by the Pymble Institute team with input from staff involved in the project and staff and students of the Pymble Ethics Committee. The survey included a series of question blocks and branching depending on respondents’ answers. It took around 5-10 minutes to complete. For an overview of the questions, see Table 2, on the following page.
Literature used in question design
We aimed to place our study in a wider context and referred to national data on phone use as much as possible. Insights from the Young Australians Survey (Ray Morgan, 2020), highlighted the strong differences between the Pymble sample and what could be referenced as a national sample. In the Young Australians Survey (Ray Morgan, 2020), 54% of children
Table 1: Participation rates of students and parents, Year 4 to 8
Table 2: Survey instrument content
Demographics: Year Group, Boarder, Siblings/Oldest/Youngest, Parents/Carers in the household, Language at home, Receiving learning support, Experiencing anxiety or bullying
Wise Phone usage: Hours, Reasons, Usage, Behaviour changes, Restrictions, Concerns (* variations of these questions were replicated for each of the phone type groups)
Social Media: Allowed, Restrictions, Platforms, Time, Effects, Concerns
aged 6 to 13 do not own or have access to a mobile phone. At Pymble, only 9% of students in Years 4 to 7 do not own a phone. This is likely due to the high socio-economic status of families, students travelling outside their local area to school, and also due to the College providing Wise Phones (35% of students did not have a phone before the Wise Phone).
A range of academic and grey literature were used to design survey questions to allow for direct comparisons with Australian, validated and published data. Whilst not matching the cohorts of the other studies exactly, as illustrated in Table 2, a useful comparison in many areas is possible. Pymble’s study is grounded in our own school community, reflecting a subset of our Year 4-8 students who are girls aged 9 to 14 from medium to
high socioeconomic backgrounds, many with tertiary educated parents, who are largely aware of and supportive of the initiative. The literature we drew on to design the questions is concerned with large scale, nationwide datasets and, therefore, includes young people in both similar and very different circumstances to the Pymble cohort.
The questions which align with other data sets are as follows:
• Demographics: Two questions about learning support and anxiety and bullying were asked because research shows students who struggle at school, have mental health issues and who are experiencing bullying are more vulnerable in relation to adverse mobile phone and social media use (Daraganova and Joss, 2018; NSW Government, 2024).
• Social media: This section utilised
questions asked in the NSW Government, Have Your Say: Social Media Use and Impacts study (2024) and the Connected Homes and Technology Use study (2018).
• Sleep: using questions from Evans-Whipp and Gasser (2018).
• Physical exercise: using questions from Gasser, Evans-Whipp and Terhaag (2018).
Methods of analysis
Quantitative and qualitative analysis techniques are used in this report. The qualitative analysis uses input from the open-ended comments in the survey, including a final comment section at the end. Following an initial summary of the data, a further level of quantitative analysis was conducted by a research consultant with expertise in biostatistics. This extended analysis involved the use
of statistical tests to explore the relationship between phone use types and key student outcomes.
An overview of the tests is found in Table 3. These include Chi-square goodness-of-fit tests to assess whether the distribution of phone types (Pymble Wise Phone only, smartphone only, or both) varied significantly within each year group. Chi-square tests of independence were used to examine associations between phone type and categorical wellbeing indicators such as sleep duration, physical activity, and whether students kept their phones in their bedroom at night. Kruskal-Wallis H tests were used to investigate whether students’ self-reported ratings of friendship quality, schoolwork management, and classroom attention differed significantly across phone use groups. Where relevant, Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction were used to identify specific group differences. All analyses were also stratified by year level (Years 4–8) where possible, to explore patterns across developmental stages and schooling contexts.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Overall insights
This paper presents data which enables us to answer the research questions;
1. What phones are students using and what has influenced this choice?
2. What impact does phone and social media use have on student wellbeing?
Table 3: Statistical tests used in the report
Statistical Terms
Chi-Square Goodness-of-Fit Test
Chi-square Test of Independence
This test assesses whether the distribution of responses across different categories deviates significantly from what we would expect by chance. It is typically used for single categorical variables to determine if certain responses occur more or less frequently than expected.
This test evaluates whether there is a statistically significant association between two categorical variables. It helps determine if the distribution of one variable differs depending on the categories of another—for example, whether phone type is related to sleep habits or bedroom phone use.
Kruskal-Wallis H tests
Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni Correction
This is a non-parametric test used to compare three or more independent groups on an ordinal or non-normally distributed continuous variable. It tests whether the median ranks differ across groups, such as comparing physical activity levels across different phone user types.
This test compares the distributions of two independent groups when the data are ordinal or not normally distributed. It is used to explore where significant differences lie following a Kruskal-Wallis test. The Bonferroni correction adjusts for multiple comparisons to reduce the risk of false positives.
Statistical Significance
The first part of this section
Mean Ranking
Statistical significance refers to when a data analysis result is likely to be true, rather than by chance. Statistical significance is used to describe confidence in the results. Statistical significance is expressed as a p-value where p = X. A p-value indicates how likely it is that the result happened by chance are expressed as 0.05 (5% chance the result is random), 0.01 (1% chance the result is random), and 0.001 (0.1% chance the result is random).
Used in non-parametric statistical tests like the Kruskal-Wallis H test and the Mann-Whitney U test, mean ranking refers to the average rank assigned to data values within each group. Instead of comparing raw scores (which may not be normally distributed), the data are ranked from lowest to highest across the full sample. The mean rank indicates the relative standing of each group: a higher mean rank suggests generally higher scores on the variable of interest, while a lower mean rank suggests lower scores. or ordinal in nature.
includes both results and analytical comments for phone choice and influence on choice from parent and student perspectives. The second part examines data on the impact of phones and social media apps located within phones on students’ wellbeing. This includes sleep, physical activity, friendships and school work.
The data indicate that parents opted into the Pymble Wise Phone program primarily to support the school’s effort to alter phone usage behaviours and for the benefits of communication and tracking purposes via the phone. Parents hold concerns about excessive screen time, addiction and exposure to inappropriate social media content, and the Wise Phone’s limited functionality offered a solution for school and home. Comments also highlight technical issues, and the preference of some to use smartphones led to some opting out or using both devices. This data has been shared directly with the Pymble Wise Phone team to further improve the Wise Phone experience and has not been included in this report.
Regarding student wellbeing, the data indicate that sleep is the area of wellbeing most highly impacted by phone choice, with clear benefits identified in not using a phone or using the Pymble Wise Phone. The location of the phone overnight (in the bedroom or not) further impacts healthy sleep, with Wise Phone users being less likely to have their phone in the bedroom. Conclusions of positive impacts on physical activity, friendships and school work through using the Pymble Wise Phone were not able to be drawn in this study as sample sizes were too
small in some areas and the time of year (February) meant that students were only a few weeks into the new school year at the time of data collection.
RESEARCH QUESTION 1:
WHAT PHONES ARE STUDENTS USING AND WHAT HAS INFLUENCED THIS CHOICE?
How did parents make the choice to adopt the Pymble Wise Phone?
Reasons for selecting the Pymble Wise Phone or opting to stay with an existing smartphone are varied. Following the communications preceding the launch of the Wise Phone in November 2024, there was much interest from parents, and students themselves began to learn more about the Wise Phone. Year 8 student comments about the choice process reflect degrees of compulsion and interest:
“I used to have a smartphone before the Wise Phone but I started using the Wise Phone because my parents said so.”
“I wanted to see what the Pymble Wise Phone was about.”
Across all surveyed year levels (Years 4- 8), the most frequently cited reasons parents gave for opting in for a Pymble Wise Phone were:
We support the College’s initiative: This was the top reason chosen by parents in Year 4 (43% of responses), Year 5 (36%), Year 7 (37%), and Year 8 (50%), and the second highest in Year 6 (31%). A Year 7 parent commented, “I am supportive of the school’s initiatives to help the girls navigate the risks of social media while they are still young and
impressionable”.
We want to limit our daughter’s smartphone features (such as apps or general usage): This was a significant reason, with percentages ranging from 16% in Year 6 to 40% in Year 8. It was the second most frequent reason in Year 4 (17%) and Year 5 (22%2, and the third most frequent in Year 7 (31%). Many parents, including this Year 6 parent, mentioned the importance of, “limiting the use of unnecessary apps and social apps”.
We want to limit our daughter’s social media usage: This reason was also prominent, selected by 13% in Year 4, 13% in Year 5, 22% in Year 6, and 15% in Year 7. It was the third most frequent reason in Year 6 and Year 7. A Year 5 parent explained their concern for their daughter starting to use social media due to peer pressure to do so: “I was afraid that she would ask to be on social media because her school friends are there. Now that all the girls use wise phone, Im relieved!”
Other reasons parents gave for opting in to the Pymble Wise Phone included wanting to trial it and not wanting their daughters to be left out by not having one. A Year 6 parent commented that their daughter, “Did not previously have a phone but it was made available by the school so we thought we would trial it”.
Students were asked why they thought their parents had opted into the Pymble Wise Phone program. Younger students said it was because of parents wanting to be able to contact them and older students said their parents wanted to limit their usage of the phone
Table 4: Junior School (Year 4-6) student perspectives on the main reasons why their parents opted-in
Other
It was mainly my choice rather than my parents’
Financially, it is good the school is giving us a phone
They want me to trial it
We support the College’s direction in this area
They want to limit my phone use
They don’t want me to be left out if other students were participating
It is an interesting social experiment
They want to limit my social media use
Table 5: Middle School (Year 7-8) student perspectives on the main reasons why their parents opted-in
Other
They want to limit my phone use
They want to limit my social media use
It was mainly my choice rather than my parents’
It is an interesting social experiment
or social media. The large number of ‘other’ responses in Tables 4 and 5 draw from students putting their comments into their own words as to the reasons why, rather than raising additional points.
What phones are students using and why?
The results indicate a difference in phone use according to age and stage. Statistically significant associations between school level group (Junior and Middle School students) and phone use, χ²(2) = 102.68, p < .001 indicated that:
• Junior School students (Years 4–6) were significantly more likely to be using a Pymble Wise Phone only (50% used).
• Middle School students (Years 7–8) were more likely to use a smartphone only (39% used).
• Use of both phone types (Wise + smartphone) was common in both groups (28% in both groups).
Among Junior School students only, use of the Pymble Wise Phone only was significantly more likely to be currently used, while smartphoneonly use was substantially lower (χ²(2) = 117.05, p < .001). Among Middle School students only, use of a smartphone only was significantly more likely to be currently used, followed by Wise Phone only and, lastly, the combination of both the Pymble Wise Phone and the smartphone (χ²(2) = 9.38, p = .009).
A series of statistical tests examined whether the distribution of phone types (Pymble Wise Phone only, smartphone only, and both) differed significantly within each year group. Significant differences in phone use types were observed across all year levels with differences between configurations present.
• Year 4 (χ² (2) = 49.92, p < .001): Use of the Pymble Wise Phone only (71%) was the most prevalent, followed by the combination of both Wise Phone and smartphone (23%) and lastly smartphoneonly use (7%) being the least represented.
• Year 5 (χ² (2) = 61.94, p < .001): Use of the Pymble Wise Phone only (69%) was the prevalent device, followed by the combination of both Wise Phone and smartphone (25%) and lastly smartphone-only (7%) being the least represented.
• Year 6: (χ² (2) = 30.24, p < .001): Both Pymble Wise Phone only (44%) and Wise and smartphone (45%) were similarly prevalent, smartphone-only use (11%) remained the least represented.
• Year 7: (χ² (2) = 58.46, p < .001): Use of the Pymble Wise Phone only (51%) was the most prevalent, followed by the combination of both Wise Phone and smartphone (36%) and lastly smartphone-only (13%) being the least represented.
• Year 8: (χ² (2) = 165.61, p < .001): Smartphone-only use (75%) was the most prevalent followed by the combination of both Pymble Wise Phone and smartphone (20%), with the least representation from the usage of the Wise Phone only (5%).
These findings demonstrate a clear progression in phone use preferences across year levels. In the Junior School years (Years 4–6), the Pymble Wise Phone dominates as the most commonly used device, either alone or in combination with a smartphone. Notably, in Years 4 and 5, over two-thirds of students use the Wise Phone only, indicating strong early adoption of the device and limited exposure to smartphone use. By Year 6, device patterns begin to shift, with usage of both the Wise
Phone and a smartphone becoming equally prevalent, suggesting a transitional phase in students’ device access. In the Middle School years (Years 7 and 8), the trend toward increased smartphone use becomes more pronounced. While the Pymble Wise Phone remains the most common single device in Year 7, the combined use of smartphones and Wise Phones rises substantially. By Year 8, smartphone-only use overwhelmingly dominates, with three-quarters of students reporting this configuration and minimal use of the Wise Phone alone.
Dual phone usage
Using both a Pymble Wise Phone and a smartphone is a feature for 28% of students in Year 4 to 8 who have phones. The reasons for maintaining two phones reflects nuanced use of phones, and the differentiated and sometimes competing desires of parents. Some parents enable smartphone use during holiday time and weekends, including for travel, but prefer the limitations of Wise Phones during the week and school term. A Year 6 parent explained the differentiation between the two devices stating, the “wise phone is to use primarily after school to communicate with parents for pick up”, while the “Smart phone is her fun phone she can do more (chat with groups live)” Similarly, a Year 7 parent rationalised, “a little bit of social media allows her to maintain contact with friends outside of Pymble but also within Pymble”. Parents mentioned some practicalities, including a large number pointing out that they “were an Apple family” and devices were linked, including, “We are a family used to iPhones so we’ve allowed her to keep both until we are completely comfortable she can
use the Wise Phone and doesn’t lose any data/connections that were on her old phone” (Year 7 parent). A Year 6 parent stated the reason for allowing their daughter to keep her smartphone was because she had “worked hard to earn it and taking it away would break a promise.”
In many cases, students were very articulate and specific about different phones for different purposes. The theme of using the Wise Phone on school days, during school hours and while completing homework was persistent across the grade levels. Students recognised the benefits of avoiding distractions, promoting concentration and achieving a balance between work and leisure. This theme was most likely to be expressed by the older students in the study. Year 8 students made the following comments:
“The Pymble Wise Phone is a good learning tool and my parents have more trust in me using it, my smart phone is sometimes used when I go on holiday and go to other countries.”
“When I need to concentrate I use the Pymble Wise Phone because it is less distracting.”
RESEARCH QUESTION 2: WHAT IMPACT DOES PHONE AND SOCIAL MEDIA USE HAVE ON STUDENT WELLBEING?
Rules, boundaries and limitations relating to phone usage
Establishing rules, limitations and good habits around phone usage is a strong feature of the openended text data. The comments indicate that parents - and students
themselves – are already living in environments where boundaries and attempts to create healthier habits are part of life. There is distinct acceptance of negative impacts on student wellbeing and parents already have many efforts in place to mitigate this. The most commonly identified concerns parent hold relate to the risks of potential harms of excessive screen time, becoming addicted to technology, exposure to inappropriate content, exposure to people with bad intentions, cyberbullying and harassment, impact on mental health, distraction from daily life and school work and privacy breaches. A Year 5 parent noted that, “none above happens but all would be my concern, so I keep a close eye on it” and a Year 4 parent shared, “In short, I really don’t like them using phones. Even though I know it’s inevitable and just a matter of time, I still wish she didn’t start experiencing something that feels like adolescence so early”
The Pymble Wise Phone is, in itself, an aid to managing these concerns but, additionally, some students report their parents going further. For example, requiring the Wise Phone to be powered off once home, limiting texting based on importance, restricting who can be called or texted and not allowing the phone to be used while studying. Regarding smartphones, a range of restrictions are also applied, from “hiding it” away, to only allowing use on weekends, to using apps and settings within the phone to restrict it. A notable feature in the student comments was the range of self-awareness and selfmanagement that students deploy or agree to, regardless of their phone type. These comments are from Year 8 students:
“My parents wanted me to only use the pymble wise phone but I made a deal with them to use my regular phone but I can’t use any social media except for insta for a specific amount of time per day.”
“I don’t usually use it [my smartphone] as im only at home past 7:30 everyday. I just use it sometimes to check my timetables.”
“I want to feel like I am in control of what I do to help me make good choices in the future.”
The open-ended comments identify the tensions and stresses parents can experience in managing their daughters’ phone use. Anticipating issues in the near future, a Year 4 parent said of their daughter, “She may want to install the apps that the other girls are talking about. But it seems not an issue so far.”
Issues can affect both the Pymble Wise Phone and smartphones, although there are significantly fewer management issues with the Wise Phone. A Year 5 parent explained, “The Wise phone is good in restricting too much social media during school hours, however ultimately it’s up to the parents to exercise some discipline and rules around social media exposure at home”
Along with rules, of which students are highly conscious, the data also reveal that parents show understanding of, and are sympathetic to, the social dynamics entwined in peer groups and the extent to which phones are part of pre-teen and teenage life. Parents made comments about exclusion in friendship groups due to girls having different phones and the phones
having different communication features. A Year 8 parent expressed, “We find the main difficulty so far is [that] most of her year group did not opt in to the initiative. So our daughter is in the minority and most of the troubles are associated with her friends refusing to communicate with her outside of SnapChat”
Typically, students do not recognise the insight and empathy parents have towards friendship concerns and focus more on the restrictions they set. Data outlined below in the Friendships section point to Middle School smartphone users reporting better friendships which raises important questions about ways the students of the ages in this study communicate, connect and interact. The research process has enabled all data around friendships and peer interactions to be shared with the College’s wellbeing team and this has been a key focus of understanding and action as the Wise Phone initiative has developed.
Time spent on Pymble Wise Phones and smartphones
Both student and parent data report relatively low usage of the Pymble Wise Phone on school days. Parents report that most girls (78%) spend less than an hour on the Wise Phone on school days and 20% report they spend one to two hours. Student data indicates the same, showing less than one hour of Wise Phone usage on school days for most year groups. Notably, 72% of the Year 8 students with Wise Phones report spending less than an hour using their phone on school days. In contrast, smartphone users spend more time on their phones. Fiftyfive percent of parents report their daughters spend less than an hour
on the smartphone during school days, 34% report their daughters spend 1-2 hours on the smartphone and 11% spend more than 2 hours on smartphones on school days.
Time spent on other activities
A majority of students are spending the same amount of time on activities since the Pymble Wise Phone came into their lives, but changes are occurring. Statistical tests explored whether students who use a Pymble Wise Phone (either alone or in combination with a smartphone) reported significantly different patterns in the amount of time spent with family, reading, time on hobbies, playing outdoors, time with friends, time on phone or social media, online gaming, time on other devices, time spent sleeping, and other reasons.
The test results, on average, indicate that Pymble Wise Phone users report spending more time with their family, with friends, on hobbies, reading, sports, playing outdoors and getting sleep, and less time on the phone, social media, online gaming and other devices (see Table 6). These findings were consistent when analysed by Junior or Middle school student cohorts.
Many parents indicate that since their daughters have adopted the Pymble Wise Phone, they are spending less time on phones and social media and more time with family and hobbies. Others call for still greater management of screen time generally, “If the wise phone could manage the screen time it will be better”
Understanding the impacts of phones on sleep
Two considerations are explored
in this section. The amount of sleep students receive and whether phones are kept in the bedroom overnight. These areas are considered through the type of phone students are using and the age of the students. After analysis of the data as a whole, the section is divided into Junior School (Year 4-6) and Middle School (Year 7-8). The Junior School age group revealed a significant difference in impact to the Middle School cohort. The overall results reveal that sleep duration amongst students is affected by the type of phone they are using with no phone and Wise Phone users receiving more sleep per night, than smartphone users. This is especially pronounced in the Junior School years. Data show that smartphone users are more likely to keep their phones in their bedrooms at night which highlights the adverse impacts smartphone use can have on sleep patterns.
Does the type of phone impact the amount of sleep students get at night?
The relationship between phone type and the likelihood of getting nine or more hours of sleep on school nights was analysed using a Chi-square test of independence. The result was statistically significant, χ²(3) = 29.69, p < .001, indicating that sleep duration was associated with phone use type. Students who did not own a phone were the most likely to report adequate sleep, with 50.8% achieving nine or more hours. Among students who used a Pymble Wise Phone only, 41.6% reported sufficient sleep – lower than the no phone group, but still relatively high. In contrast, students who used a smartphone only reported the lowest levels of adequate sleep, with just 21.5% meeting
Table 6:
Wise Phone
users (Year 4-8) time spent on activities
With family
Reading Hobbies
Outdoors or sports
With friends
On phone and social media
the nine hour threshold. Students who used both a Wise Phone and a smartphone had slightly higher rates than smartphone-only users, with 31.6% reporting sufficient sleep, though still markedly lower than those with no phone or a Wise Phone only. Post-hoc comparisons with Bonferroni correction revealed that all phone groups differed significantly from one another, except between smartphone-only and Wise and smartphone (dual) users. Students with no phone were significantly more likely to report nine or more hours of sleep (50.8%) than Wise Phone only users (41.6%), who in turn were significantly more likely than students with smartphones (21.5–31.6%).
Spends less time
Spends more time
Does the location of the phone overnight affect the amount of sleep students get at night?
There were statistically significant associations between phone use type and whether students kept a phone in their bedroom at night, χ²(3) = 56.53, p < .001. The proportion of students keeping their phone in the bedroom varied significantly across phone groups, indicating that phone type may play an important role in shaping digital habits around bedtime. Students who use a smartphoneonly reported the highest rate of keeping their phone in the bedroom, with 51.0% responding “yes.” This was followed by those who used both a smartphone and a Pymble
Wise Phone, with 40.7% reporting that they kept their phone in the bedroom. These two smartphoneaccess groups were not significantly different from one another in post-hoc comparisons. By contrast, students with more limited or no phone access were significantly less likely to keep a phone in their bedroom. Among those who used only a Pymble Wise Phone, 23.9% reported doing so. Students with no phone at all reported the lowest rate, with just 11.9% keeping a phone in their bedroom. Importantly, there was no significant difference between the No Phone and Wise Phone only groups.
Phones, sleep and Junior School (Year 4-6) students
Considering the Year 4 to 6 student data in the survey, the relationship between phone type and the likelihood of getting nine or more hours of sleep on school nights was examined. Statistically significant associations (χ²(3) = 9.995, p = .019) indicated that sleep duration was associated with phone use type in this younger age group. Students who did not own a phone were among the most likely to report adequate sleep, with 54.0% achieving nine or more hours. Similarly, students who used a Pymble Wise Phone only reported a nearly identical rate of sufficient sleep (53.8%), indicating relatively high sleep duration for both groups. In contrast, students who used a smartphone-only reported the lowest levels of adequate sleep, with just 24.0% meeting the nine hour threshold. Students who used both a Wise Phone and a smartphone had a slightly higher rate than smartphoneonly users, with 42.0% reporting sufficient sleep, though still lower than students without smartphones. Additional analyses indicated that smartphone-only users differed significantly from all other phone groups, where other phone type use did not differ significantly from each other. This suggests that having access only to a smartphone is uniquely associated with reduced sleep duration, while having no phone or only a Wise Phone does not appear to impair sleep among Junior School students.
A Chi-square test of independence was used to examine the relationship between phone type and whether students kept their phone in their bedroom at night among Junior School students.
Statistically significant associations (χ²(3) = 20.86, p < .001) indicated that phone storage habits at night varied meaningfully by phone use type. Students who did not own a phone were the least likely to keep a phone in their bedroom, with only 8.0% responding “yes.” Students with a Pymble Wise Phone only had a significantly higher bedroom phone presence, with 22.5% reporting that they kept their device in their room. In contrast, smartphone-only users reported a much higher rate, with 36.0% keeping their phone in the bedroom. Students who used both a Wise Phone and a smartphone reported the highest bedroom phone presence of all groups at 40.9%. Further analyses revealed that smartphone-only and Wise and Smartphone (dual) users were significantly more likely to keep their phones in their bedroom than No Phone and Wise Phone only users. Notably, there was no significant difference between the No Phone and Wise Phone only groups.
Phones, sleep and Middle School (Year 7-8) students
Sleep is crucial at all stages of life, but especially so for adolescents (Chawla et al., 2024). The relationship between phone type and the likelihood of this age group getting nine or more hours of sleep on school nights was explored. Statistical tests revealed nonstatistically significant associations (χ²(3) = 1.669, p = .644) indicating that reported sleep duration did not differ meaningfully by phone type in this age group. This is a reassuring outcome from the data, possibly indicating that parents and their children are very attentive to sleep and that education programs are effective.
Among Middle School students, the highest rates of adequate sleep (nine or more hours) were reported by smartphone-only users (39.7%) and Pymble Wise Phone only users (30.8%). Students who used both a smartphone and a Pymble Wise Phone reported a slightly lower rate (27.4%), while students with no phone at all had the lowest reported rate (2.0%). However, it’s important to note that the number of Middle School students with no phone was extremely small (n = 9), limiting the reliability of that comparison. Further analyses revealed no statistically significant differences between any of the phone groups. While minor variations were observed in sleep rates, the overall pattern suggests that in Middle School, phone type is not strongly associated with differences in sleep duration. This contrasts with patterns observed in Junior School students, where smartphone-only users reported significantly less sleep.
Statistical tests were conducted to examine the relationship between phone use type and whether students kept a phone in their bedroom at night among Middle School students. Statistically significant associations (χ²(3) = 25.34, p < .001) indicated that phone storage habits at night varied significantly by phone type in this age group. Students who used a smartphone only were the most likely to report keeping their phone in the bedroom at night, with 52.0% responding “yes.” This was followed by students who used both a smartphone and a Pymble Wise Phone, at 49.1%. Students who used a Wise Phone only reported a significantly lower bedroom phone presence at 19.0%. Among students with no phone, just 33.3%
kept a phone in their bedroom; however, this finding should be interpreted cautiously due to the small group size (n = 9). Further analyses revealed that smartphoneonly and Wise and smartphone (dual) users were significantly more likely to keep a phone in the bedroom compared to Pymble Wise Phone only users. No Phone users fell in between and did not differ significantly from either group, likely due to the small sample size.
These results suggest that, as with younger students, greater smartphone access among Middle Schoolers is associated with increased likelihood of bedroom phone presence, potentially impacting night-time routines. Parents should also be cognisant of issues relating to privacy and safety which may be more prevalent amongst teenagers. However, the difference between groups was less stark than in the Junior School sample, and students with limited phone access (Wise Phone only) continued to show the lowest rates of night-time, bedroom-based phone storage.
The connections between friendships and phones
Across the three main groups (Wise Phone, dual phones, smartphones), the majority of students reported positive relationships with friends (“My relationship is mostly good with my friends” or “My relationship with my friends is very good”).
• Wise Phones - 87% have good or very good relationships with friends
• Dual phone use - 86% have good or very good relationships with friends
• Smartphone use - 90% have good or very good relationships with friends
Statistical tests were conducted to examine differences in students’ self-rated friendship quality across four phone use groups: No Phone, Pymble Wise Phone only, smartphone only, and Wise Phone and smartphone (dual). The results indicated a statistically significant difference in friendship quality across groups (χ²(3) = 9.76, p = .021). Results indicated that smartphoneonly users reported significantly higher friendship quality than those who used both a Wise Phone and a smartphone (U = 16797.5, p = .007). This was the only statistically significant pairwise difference. All other comparisons,including between No Phone and Wise Phone users,were not statistically significant after correction.
These results suggest that while there is overall variation in friendship quality across phone groups, it is specifically the smartphone-only users in Junior School who reported the strongest peer relationships when compared to their peers with dual device use. Reasons for this could reflect the amount of time smartphone users spend cultivating friendships on the phone and social media, and that their efforts feel effective. It could also be influenced by higher Year 8 usage of smartphones in the participant pool and Year 8s being older and more established in their friendships.
Friendships and phones amongst Junior School (Year 4-6) students
Does friendship quality differ across phone use types among Junior School students? Statistical tests revealed non-statistically significant associations (χ²(3) = 3.71, p = .294) indicating that students’ self-rated friendships were not meaningfully associated with the
type of phone they used. Students with a smartphone only reported the highest mean rank in friendship quality (188.66), followed by those with a Pymble Wise Phone only (164.71), those using both a smartphone and a Wise Phone (156.95), and those with no phone (151.44). However, these differences were not statistically reliable, and may reflect natural variability rather than a true pattern tied to phone use.
Friendships and phones amongst Middle School (Year 7-8) students
The same test was applied to the Middle School cohort with the question asked, does students’ self-rated friendship quality differ by phone type? No statistical significant difference was observed (χ²(3) = 4.45, p = .217) indicating that students’ perceptions of their relationships with friends did not vary meaningfully across phone groups. Students with no phone had the highest mean rank in reported friendship quality (266.89), followed by those with a Pymble Wise Phone only (214.02), smartphone only (222.46), and those using both a Wise Phone and a smartphone (201.28). However, these differences were not statistically reliable, and any variation observed may be due to chance—especially given the small sample size in the no phone group (n = 9). Overall, the findings suggest that phone type was not significantly associated with how Middle School students rated the quality of their friendships.
A research note about phones and friendships
Taken together, these results point to a small but potentially meaningful association between phone use and friendship quality in
the overall sample, driven primarily by smartphone-only users reporting slightly higher peer relationship scores than dual device users. However, the lack of significance in age-specific analyses highlights the need for caution in interpreting these findings as robust. The relationship between phone access and peer connection may be influenced by other factors such as age, context of phone use, or social environment—factors that warrant further investigation in future research with larger stratified samples or longitudinal data.
These subgroup analyses indicate that the observed effect in the full sample may be subtle and more apparent when statistical power is higher (i.e., larger sample size). In the smaller subsamples, the same directional trends were evident in mean ranks but did not reach statistical significance, likely due to reduced group sizes and greater variability—particularly in the no phone group. This suggests that while phone type may have a modest relationship with perceived friendship quality, the association is not consistent across year levels and may be more reflective of general patterns rather than a strong or developmentally stable effect.
Phones and physical exercise
The data do not indicate any meaningful differences in the rate of exercise Pymble students get and their phone type. The Australian recommendation is that children and young people (age 5-17) should have at least sixty minutes of moderate to vigorous activity per day (AIHW, 2020). In 2011-12, national data showed that 23% of Australian children aged 5-14
undertook the recommended sixty minutes of physical activity every day. Pymble student respondents (Years 4 to 8, aged 9-14) were close to the national figures with a range from 17% to 21% meeting the daily recommendation of sixty minutes of exercise.
Examining the total sample, a Chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the relationship between phone use type and whether students across the total sample achieved sixty minutes of daily physical activity on 6–7 days versus 0–5 days in the past week. The result was not statistically significant, χ²(3) = 1.90, p = .595, indicating that phone use type was not associated with students’ likelihood of meeting recommended physical activity levels. Across the sample, 34.6% of students reported achieving daily activity on 6–7 days, with similar proportions across phone groups: 35.6% of students with no phone, 34.2% of Pymble Wise Phone only users, 31.5% of smartphone only users, and 37.9% of students using both a Wise Phone and a smartphone (dual). These differences were not statistically reliable. Overall, the findings suggest that type of phone ownership was not meaningfully related to students’ physical activity engagement across the entire sample.
Self-rated physical activity levels
More in-depth analysis around physical activity was tested to examine whether students’ self-rated physical activity and fitness levels differed by phone use type across the full sample. The result was not statistically significant(χ²(3) = 0.43, p = .933) indicating that phone use type was not meaningfully associated with
how students perceived their own physical activity or fitness. Mean ranks were very similar across all groups, with students who had no phone reporting the highest mean rank (394.28), followed by Pymble Wise Phone only users (384.44), dual device users (384.42), and smartphone only users (375.93). These minimal differences were not statistically reliable. Overall, the findings suggest that phone ownership or access type had no significant relationship with students’ self-perceptions of physical activity and fitness in the total sample.
Physical activity per week in Junior School (Year 4-6)
Focusing on Junior School students, the Chi-square test of independence examined the association between phone use type and whether students achieved sixty minutes of daily physical activity on 6–7 days versus 0–5 days in the past week, among Junior School students. The result was not statistically significant(χ²(3) = 0.875, p = .831), indicating that physical activity levels did not differ meaningfully by phone use group. Across groups, a similar pattern emerged: 44.0% of smartphone-only users met the 6–7 day activity guideline. 36.3% of Wise Phone only users did so, along with 34.0% of those with No Phone, and 38.8% of Dual users (Wise Phone and smartphone). These differences were not statistically significant and may reflect normal variation. Overall, the findings suggest that phone type was not associated with physical activity levels among Junior School students.
Self-rated physical activity levels in Junior School (Year 4-6)
Statistical tests were conducted to examine whether self-rated physical activity and fitness levels differed
across phone use types among Junior School students. The result was not statistically significant(χ²(3) = 1.33, p = .722) indicating that students’ perceived physical activity and fitness levels did not vary meaningfully by phone type. Although smartphone-only users had the highest mean rank, followed closely by Pymble Wise Phone only users, and slightly lower rankings among students with no phone or those using both a Wise Phone and a smartphone, these differences were small and not statistically reliable. Overall, the findings suggest that phone use was not associated with students’ self-perceptions of their physical activity or fitness in this age group.
Physical activity per week in Middle School (Year 7-8)
The relationship between phone use type and whether Middle School students achieved sixty minutes of daily physical activity on 6–7 days versus 0–5 days in the past week was analysed. The result was not statistically significant(χ²(3) = 2.46, p = .482), indicating no meaningful association between phone type and reported physical activity levels in this age group. Across groups, similar patterns emerged: 35.9% of smartphone-only users, 31.0% of students with both a Pymble Wise Phone and a smartphone, 31.9% of Wise Phone-only users, and 44.4% of those with no phone met the 6–7 day activity threshold. These differences were not statistically reliable, and the small number of students in the no phone group (n = 9) limits interpretation. Overall, the findings suggest that phone use type was not significantly related to physical activity engagement among Middle School students.
Self-rated physical activity levels for
Middle School (Year 7-8)
A Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to examine whether self-rated physical activity and fitness levels differed by phone use type among Middle School students. The result was not statistically significant (χ²(3) = 2.91, p = .407) indicating that students’ perceived activity and fitness levels did not vary meaningfully across phone groups. Although students without a phone had the highest mean rank in physical activity, this group was very small (n = 9), limiting the interpretability of that result. Mean ranks were otherwise fairly similar across Pymble Wise Phone users, smartphone users, and those with both device types. Overall, these findings suggest that phone access type was not significantly associated with how active or fit students felt within the Middle School cohort.
Understanding phones and the management of students’ school work
There is minimal variation in responses from the phone user groups to the statement, “Generally I get my schoolwork done”. However, more smartphone and dual phone users report, “I am not always on top of schoolwork”, and “I have difficulty keep up with schoolwork”.
Data collection in Phases 2 and 3 (June and October 2025 respectively) could delve more deeply into this area as schoolwork will be much busier at these times of the year than in mid-February. Reviewing the total sample, statistical tests were conducted to determine whether students’ perceptions of how well they manage their schoolwork differed across phone use types. The result
was not statistically significant (χ²(3) = 2.67, p = .445) suggesting no meaningful differences in perceived schoolwork management between students with no phone, those with a Pymble Wise Phone only, a smartphone only, or both a Wise Phone and a smartphone. Although students with a Wise Phone-only had the highest mean rank in perceived schoolwork management (396.57), and smartphone-only users had the lowest (370.55), these differences were not statistically reliable. The similarity in mean ranks across groups indicates that type of phone ownership was not significantly associated with how students perceived their ability to manage school responsibilities in the overall sample.
Junior School students, phones and the management of school work
Statistical tests were conducted to examine whether Junior School students’ perceptions of how well they manage their schoolwork differed across phone use types. non-statistically significant results (χ²(3) = 4.45, p = .216), indicated that students’ self-rated schoolwork management did not differ meaningfully by phone ownership. While students with a Pymble Wise Phone-only had the highest mean rank (173.61), followed by smartphone-only users (165.76), No Phone users (160.07), and students with both a Pymble Wise Phone and a smartphone (150.27), these differences were small and not statistically reliable. Overall, the findings suggest that phone use type was not associated with how Junior Students perceive their ability to manage their school responsibilities.
Pymble Wise Phone initiative: Analysis of student and parent data, Phase 1 - February 2025
Table 7: Year 4-8 students self-report on schoolwork management
A Pymble Wise Phone
A Pymble Wise Phone and a smartphone
A smartphone (with access to internet and social media)
I have di culty keeping up with school work I am not always on top of school work I manage my time and school work e ectively
Table 8: Year 4-8 student self-report on focus and attention
A Pymble Wise Phone
A Pymble Wise Phone and a smartphone
A smartphone (with access to internet and social media) Often Almost always
Middle School students, phones and the management of school work
Similarly, a statistical tests conducted to assess whether Middle School students’ self-perceptions of schoolwork management differed across phone use types. Non-statistically significant results (χ²(3) = 1.88, p = .598) indicated no meaningful association between phone ownership type and how students rated their ability to manage school responsibilities. Mean ranks were slightly higher among students using both a Wise Phone and a smartphone (224.80), followed by Pymble Wise Phone only users (218.11), smartphone-only users (214.17), and students with no phone (176.33). However, these differences did not reach statistical significance and may reflect random variation. Overall, the findings suggest that phone type was not significantly related to perceived schoolwork management among Middle School students.
Phones, focus and attention
Students were asked to self-assess their quality of focus and attention in class through the question, “To what extent do you agree with the statement, ‘It is hard to pay attention in class’”? The current findings are not surprising as the school’s policy is for no phones to be accessible or used during the school day for the age groups studied. While the overall results indicate no reliable association between phone ownership and self-reported attention challenges in the classroom, they do suggest opportunities for further research in this area and the issue of phones, concentration and learning is a vital question to ask in the school context considering the
impact phones have on attention (Skowronek, Seifert & Lindberg, 2023).
Statistical tests were conducted to examine whether students’ difficulty paying attention in class differed across phone use types. The result was not statistically significant (χ²(3) = 5.42, p = .144) suggesting no reliable association between phone ownership and selfreported attention challenges in the classroom. Although students with a smartphone only had the highest mean rank in agreement with the statement (408.82), indicating greater attention difficulties, this was not significantly different from students using both a Pymble Wise Phone and a smartphone (385.67), or those with no phone (366.41) or a Pymble Wise Phone only (365.41). These small variations may reflect normal fluctuations rather than meaningful differences. Overall, the findings suggest that phone type was not significantly associated with students’ ability to focus in class across the total sample.
Focus and attention in Junior School (Year 4-6)
Statistical tests were conducted to assess whether Junior School students’ self-reported attention difficulties in class varied by phone use type. Non-statistically significant results (χ²(3) = 6.64, p = .084) indicate no significant differences in attention across phone groups. Students who used a smartphone only had the highest mean rank (200.25), indicating greater difficulty paying attention, while students with a Pymble Wise Phone only had the lowest mean rank (154.10), suggesting fewer attention difficulties. Students with no phone (172.75) and those
using both a Wise Phone and a smartphone (170.42) fell between these two extremes. While these differences hint at a possible trend, they did not meet the threshold for statistical significance and should be interpreted cautiously. Overall, no reliable association between phone use type and classroom attention was found among Junior School students.
Focus and attention in Middle School (Year 7-8)
Similar to Junior School, analysis of the statistical tests did not yield a significant result for Middle School students (χ²(3) = 1.70, p = .637) indicating no meaningful difference in attention difficulties based on phone ownership. Mean ranks were fairly similar across groups: students with a Pymble Wise Phone (220.18) and smartphone-only users (220.15) reported slightly higher levels of attention difficulty than students using both a Wise Phone and a smartphone (214.24), while students with no phone had the lowest mean rank (169.28). However, these differences were not statistically reliable and may be due to random variation. Overall, the findings suggest that for Middle School students, phone type was not significantly associated with how often students found it hard to pay attention in class.
CONCLUSION
The first report of the Pymble Wise Phone initiative provides insights into the initiative’s early impacts. The data underscore an association between restricted phone use— whether by relying solely on the Pymble Wise Phone or eschewing phone ownership altogether—and healthier sleep patterns among students. These findings point
toward the potential for higher levels of control around phones to meaningfully support students’ sleep patterns during the important period of adolescent development. As control over phones can be very difficult to manage in the family setting, the research points to the benefits of a school-controlled program such as the Pymble Ladies’ College Wise Phone initiative. While direct impacts over other wellbeing domains, including physical activity, peer relationships, and academic engagement, were not pronounced over the first phase of the study, subtle distinctions between groups suggest a role for longer-term investigation.
An inherent tension exists in phone limitations and management which are played out in the school. Data from parents suggest the Pymble Wise Phone is a useful and welcome tool for managing risk, increasing safety and reducing screen time,
while for some students, but not all, the Wise Phone can represent social limitation and a lack of communication. This tension is situated in a landscape within both the school and wider community: mainstream smartphones cause anxiety in many ways but they can be helpful and are often desirable commodities. This is especially from the point of view of the young adolescent who wants and needs to be connected to friends and family. At the intersection lies an ongoing negotiation between protection and participation, highlighting the need for continued dialogue and context-sensitive policies in schools as, together, students, parents and schools address this pervasive reality in adolescent digital life.
These initial results support the implementation of the Pymble Wise Phone program and study of alternatives to unrestricted smartphone access for children
and young adolescents. As the initiative proceeds, future research should explore whether the observed benefits to sleep persist or strengthen over time, and whether further downstream effects emerge in academic, social, and emotional wellbeing as students and their families adjust to these technology boundaries. Importantly, these findings contribute to ongoing conversations among educators, students, policymakers, and families seeking evidence-based approaches to digital device use in schools. The work at Pymble Ladies’ College emphasises that restrictions in phones may yield specific, measurable benefits without broadly compromising other aspects of student life.
References
Australian Communications and Media Authority. (2020). Kids and mobiles: How Australian children are using mobile phones. https://www.acma. gov.au/publications/2020-12/report/kids-and-mobiles-how-australian-children-are-using-mobile-phones
Baker, J. (2024, November 18). To stop screen addiction, this school will give out phones. But there’s a catch. Sydney Morning Herald. https:// www.smh.com.au/national/to-stop-screen-addiction-this-school-will-give-out-phones-but-there-s-a-catch-20241115-p5kqzn.html
Bancroft, H. (22 April 2025). The results of a town-wide ban on smartphones in primary schools. Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/ bulletin/news/school-phone-ban-social-media-st-albans-b2737111.html
Chawla, J., Lovato, N., Wong, M., Best, J., Chaudry, R., Kevat, A., & Vandeleur, M., (2024). Optimising sleep in adolescents: The challenges. Australian Journal of General Practice, 53(6). doi: 10.31128/AJGP-05-23-6841
Clare, J., Butler, M., & Rowlands, M. (2025, 15 February). School behaviour improving after mobile phone ban and vaping reforms. https:// ministers.education.gov.au/clare/school-behaviour-improving-after-mobile-phone-ban-and-vaping-reforms Clayton, R., & Schubert, S. (2024, 11 September). Parents unite to ban teens from smartphones amid social media minimum age review. ABC News. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-11/social-media-smartphone-pledge-teenageban/104332624
Correa, V. S., Centofanti, S., Dorrian, J., Wicking, A., Wicking, P., & Lushington, K. (2022). The effect of mobile phone use at night on the sleep of pre-adolescent (8-11 year), early adolescent (12-14 year) and late adolescent (15-18 year) children: A study of 252,195 Australian children. Sleep Health, 8(3), 277–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleh.2022.02.004
Daraganova, G., & Joss, N. (Eds.). (2018). Growing up in Australia – The longitudinal study of Australian children, Annual Statistical Report Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Dempsey, S., Lyons, S., & McCoy, S. (2019). Later is better: Mobile phone ownership and child academic development, evidence from a longitudinal study. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 28:8, 798-815, DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2018.1559786
Dickson, L. (2023, 11 October). Mobile phone ban in schools gives students more learning time, ‘freedom away’ from devices. ABC News. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-11/phone-free-schools-hunter-region/102943532
E-Safety Commissioner. (2018). Digital families: Connected homes and technology use. https://www.esafety.gov.au/research/digital-parenting/ digital-families. Australian Government.
E-Safety Commissioner. (2025). Behind the screen: The reality of age assurance and social media access for young Australians. https://www. esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-02/Behind-the-screen-transparency-report-Feb2025.pdf?v=1739988268635
E-Safety Commissioner. (n.d.). Your child’s first smartphone. Are they old enough? https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-06/EC-ESPFirst-Mobile-Phone-Flyer.pdf
Evans-Whipp, T. & Gasser, C. (2018). Are children and adolescents getting enough sleep? In G. Daraganova & N. Joss (Eds.), Growing up in Australia – The longitudinal study of Australian children, Annual Statistical Report. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies. Fitryasari, R., Tristiana, R. D., & Yusuf, A. (2020). Teenagers thought is related to self-control in safe smartphone use during the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Global Pharma Technology, 12(9), 280–286.
Gasser, C., Evans-Whipp, T., & Terhaag, S. (2018). The physical health of Australian children. In G. Daraganova & N. Joss (Eds.)., Growing up in Australia – The longitudinal study of Australian children, Annual Statistical Report. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies. Gentleman, A. (2025,7 May). ‘The crux of all evil’: What happened to the first city that tried to ban smartphones for under-14s? The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/may/07/the-crux-of-all-evil-what-happened-to-the-first-city-that-tried-to-ban-smartphones-forunder-14s
Grigic Magnusson, A., Ott, T., Hård af Segerstad, Y., & Sofkova Hashemi, S. (2023). Complexities of managing a mobile phone ban in the digitalized schools’ classroom. Computers in the Schools, 40(3), 303–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2023.2211062
Harverson, J., Paatsch, L., Anglim, J., & Horwood, S. (2025). Digital technology use and well-being in young children: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108660
Hökby, S., Alvarsson, J., Westerlund, J., Carli, V., & Hadlaczky, G. (2025). Adolescents’ screen time displaces multiple sleep pathways and elevates depressive symptoms over twelve months. PLOS Global Public Health, 5(4), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004262
Hu, S., Ren, L., & Liu, H. (2024). The relationship between primary-school childrens’ moderate to vigorous physical activity, cell phone screen time, and cell phone dependence. Social Behavior and Personality, 52(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.12762
Information Resources Management Association. (Ed.). (2020). Mobile devices in education: Breakthroughs in research and practice. IGI Global. https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/10.4018/978-1-7998-1757-4
International Coalition of Girls’ Schools. (2025). Executive research summary. Screen time, reduced sleep and depression in adolescent girls: Targeting risk factors for girls’ mental health.
Kong, Y., Su, Z., Wang, R., Tan, J., Zhong, Y., Ai, M., Wang, W., Hong, S., Zhang, Q., & Kuang, L. (2025). The effects of parent-child relationship, study stress, and mobile phone use on depressive symptoms among Chinese elementary school students: A moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 16, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1555120
Lau, E. Y. H., Li, J. B., & Chan, D. K. C. (2023). Children infected vs. uninfected with COVID-19: Differences in parent reports of the use of mobile phones to calm children, routines, parent–child relationship, and developmental outcomes. Frontiers in Public Health, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpubh.2023.1114597
Pymble
Lee, J. E., Jang, S.-I., Ju, Y. J., Kim, W., Lee, H. J., & Park, E.-C. (2017). Relationship between mobile phone addiction and the incidence of poor and short sleep among Korean adolescents: A longitudinal study of the Korean Children & Youth Panel Survey. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 32(7), 1166–1172. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2017.32.7.1166
Mann, S., Calvin, A., Lenhart, A., & Robb, M.B. (2025). The Common Sense census: Media use by kids zero to eight, San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.
Masilamani, V., Sriram, A., & Rozarlo, A. M. (2020). eHealth literacy of late adolescents: Credibility and quality of health information through smartphones in India. Comunicar, 28(64), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.3916/C64-2020-08
New South Wales Government. (2023). Mobile phones now banned in all NSW public schools. https://education.nsw.gov.au/news/latest-news/ mobile-phones-now-banned-in-all-nsw-public-schools.
New South Wales Government. (2024). Have your say: Social media use and impacts. Customer Insights, Department of Customer Service: Sydney.
Olsen, I. (2025, 22 April). Quebec committee recommends full ban on cellphones, electronic devices at schools. CBC-Radio Canada. https:// www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/commission-cellphones-school-quebec-1.7515808
Orben, A., Przybylski, A.K., Blakemore, S-J. & Kievit, R.A. (2022). Windows of developmental sensitivity to social media. Nature Communications,13(1), 1649. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-29296-3
Raising Children Network. (2024). Responsible mobile phone use: pre-teens and teenagers, https://raisingchildren.net.au/pre-teens/ entertainment-technology/digital-life/responsible-phone-use
Rose, S. E., Gears, A. & Taylor, J. (2022). What are parents’ and children’s co-constructed views on mobile phone use and policies in school? Children & Society, 36, 1418–1433. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12583
Roy Morgan. (2020). Young Australians survey. https://www.roymorgan.com/products-and-tools/young-australians-survey.
Shao, T., Zhu, C., Lei, H., Jiang, Y., Wang, H., & Zhang, C. (2024). The relationship of parent-child technoference and child problematic smartphone Use: The roles of parent-child relationship, negative parenting styles, and children’s gender. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 17, 2067–2081. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S456411
Silver, L., Smith, A., Johnson, C., Jiang, J., Anderson, M., & Rainie, L. (2019, 7 March). Mobile connectivity in emerging economies: Majorities say mobile phones are good for society, even amid concerns about their impact on children.
Sinha, S., Dhooria, S., Sasi, A., Tomer, A., Thejeswar, N., Kumar, S., Gupta, G., Pandey, R.M., Behera, D., Mohan, A., & Sharma, S.K. (2022). A study on the effect of mobile phone use on sleep. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 155 (3&4), 380-386. 10.4103/ijmr.ijmr_2221_21
Skowronek, J., Seifert, A. & Lindberg, S. (2023). The mere presence of a smartphone reduces basal attentional performance. Scientific Reports 13 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36256-4
Stavert, B. (2013). Bring your own device (BYOD) in schools. Literature review. New South Wales, Department of Education and Communities, T4L Program - Information Technology Directorate. https://education.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/main-education/policy-library/public/relateddocuments/BYOD_2013_Literature_Review.pdf
Third, A. (in press). “On board the social media ‘ban wagon’: Regulatory theatre, the public child and the hyper-enthusiastic state”. In C. Nelson, D. Buiten & J. Death (Eds.)., The public child: Media power, strategic silencing, and children’s rights in Australia. Palgrave MacMillan. Twenge, J. M., Joiner, T. E., Rogers, M. L., & Martin, G. N. (2018). Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-17. https://doi-org. ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/10.1177/2167702617723376
Walsh, S.P., White, K.M. & Young, R.M. (2009). The phone connection: A qualitative exploration of how belongingness and social identification relate to mobile phone use amongst Australian youth. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 19(3), 225-240. https://doi-org. ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/10.1002/casp.983
Wishart, J. (2018). Mobile learning in schools: Key issues, opportunities and ideas for practice. Routledge. Woods, H. C., & Scott, H. (2016). “#Sleepyteens: Social media use in adolescence is associated with poor sleep quality, anxiety, depression and low self-esteem.” Journal of Adolescence, 51, 41–49.
