INTERVIEW – Cell Phone Restrictionsin Real Life

In early 2025, Brazil officially turned into law its national restriction rules on cell phone use during school hours, sparking debates among educators, parents, and policymakers. While some see the move as a necessary step to reduce distractions and reclaim students’ attention, others question how such a policy plays out in diverse educational realities across the country.

To explore the impact of this legislation on everyday teaching, we spoke with three English teachers from both public and private schools in a few different regions of Brazil. In this interview, they share their experiences, challenges, and perspectives on enforcing the ban, and reflect on how it’s reshaping classroom dynamics and student behaviour.

• Troika: Can you please briefly describe the context you work in? (Public or private school, your job title, the region you are based in, the segments you teach, etc.)
• Veronica Cordeiro: I’m a head teacher at a bilingual private school in Brasília, DF, where I teach English, Science, Maker, and Technology to 4th-grade students.

Our curriculum emphasizes bilingual, project-based learning that integrates content and language development. In this immersive environment, English is used beyond language classes, fostering critical thinking and communication. My role involves creating hands-on, interdisciplinary experiences that support both academic and linguistic growth, aligned with our commitment to innovation, inclusion, and meaningful learning.

• Jonatan Tregansin: I am an English teacher at the Public School system in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. I work with both Middle School and High School students.
• Kerley Muniz: I’m based in Recife, Pernambuco, where I teach high school students at private schools. I also work as a bilingual education coordinator for both elementary and high school levels, teaching English for ENEM and developing interdisciplinary projects that include areas like financial literacy and entrepreneurship.
• T: How has the implementation of the cell phone restrictions affected school routine and student engagement during English lessons?
• VC: The restrictions have helped reduce distractions and increased student focus during English lessons. Without cell phones, students are more present, and engagement in classroom discussions, group work, and writing tasks has noticeably improved. It also allowed for deeper interaction and collaboration among peers. With fewer interruptions, the learning flow feels more natural and productive, reinforcing the effectiveness of an immersive, language-rich environment that supports meaningful student participation and cognitive development.
• JT: The school routine wasn’t much affected, because since 2023 our school had already adopted restrictions on the use of cellphones inside the classroom. The teaching staff had already noticed the negative impact that the cellphones brought to the classroom.
• KM: At first, the shift was a bit jarring — for everyone, but especially for students. Cell phones had become so embedded in students’ routines that removing them felt like cutting off a limb. But once the initial resistance passed, I began to notice stronger engagement. Students were more present, more focused, and more inclined to participate in discussions, especially in speaking tasks where peer interaction matters. It helped restore a certain classroom atmosphere that we’d gradually been losing.
• T: What strategies have you or your school adopted to enforce the restrictions? How effective have they been?
• VC: Our school implemented clear policies like no phone zone during school hours, and we involved families through meetings and written communication. We also reinforced digital responsibility through class discussions. These strategies were effective because they focused on education rather than punishment. By explaining the purpose behind the rules and aligning them with our pedagogical values, we created a shared understanding. The community responded positively, and students quickly adapted to the new routine with minimal resistance.
• JT: Our school had installed cabinets in each classroom for students to put their cellphones inside. These boxes are locked at the beginning of the class and opened only when the classes are finished. They are not allowed to remove their cellphones, even during break. This method is very effective, since the students were able to notice their academic improvement after these measures were introduced.
• KM: Our school implemented a clear policy: phones are stored in designated lockers or collected at the beginning of the day. What made the enforcement smoother was that it came with open dialogue — we explained the rationale behind the policy and backed it with real-life examples of how attention and memory are impacted by constant digital interruptions. For English classes specifically, I started offering engaging low-tech alternatives, like card-based vocabulary games, printed QR codes that lead to supervised resources, or even dictation tasks that mirror listening apps. The mix of clarity and creativity aimed at making the transition as smooth and effective as possible.
• T: How did learners and your school community initially respond?
• VC: Younger students and most parents were supportive from the beginning, while some families of older students had concerns about communication. However, once benefits like improved focus and reduced anxiety became clear, acceptance grew. Students adapted well, and the atmosphere became more relaxed and engaging. Overall, the community responded with curiosity and openness, and the shared understanding of the policy’s purpose helped build trust and cooperation across teachers, families, and learners.
• JT: The students were strongly against it, as anticipated. But the school community concluded that it was necessary to improve the students’ concentration levels in the classroom.
• KM: There were practical concerns — how to pay for snacks or contact parents — but those were addressed with new systems like virtual cards and school-based communication. In class, some students resisted at first when we returned to using some paper activities and games. But over time, the benefits became clear, and both learners and families saw the value in what we were aiming for.
• T: What challenges or resistance—if any—have you faced in adapting to this new policy, either from students, parents, or staff?
• VC: The biggest challenge was clarifying that this policy wasn’t anti-technology, but rather pro-learning. Some families and staff initially worried we were limiting educational resources. We had to clearly distinguish between personal phone use and pedagogical technology use, like school issued devices. Through transparent communication and consistent application, we overcame misunderstandings. Building a common understanding took time, but it allowed us to reinforce our educational goals while promoting digital balance and well-being.
• JT: The challenges came through the high school students; they really didn’t want to lock their phone in the cabinet. Still today, some of them bring old cellphones just to put inside the cabinet in place of their regular ones. We must be very careful. On the other hand, the school didn’t have any kind of challenges with the middle school students, they accepted the policy very well.
• KM: Some families were afraid it wouldn’t work, but most of them received the news well, and so did the staff. We held meetings to explain the reasons behind the change. Mental health was a big concern — many students were showing signs of gaming and screen addiction, as well as social withdrawal. Removing smartphones was a hard decision, but a necessary one. The main challenge now is keeping students engaged without falling back into screen dependency, which requires constant planning, energy, and creative classroom strategies.
• T: Have you noticed any changes in student behaviour, learning outcomes, or classroom atmosphere since the restrictions were enforced?
• VC: Yes, students are more attentive, socially engaged, and emotionally present in class. They participate more actively in discussions, show improved collaboration, and display fewer signs of distraction or anxiety. The classroom atmosphere feels calmer and more focused. While long term academic data is still developing, early signs suggest better time management, communication, and critical thinking. These changes align with the broader benefits of minimizing unnecessary screen time and fostering deeper interpersonal and academic engagement.
• JT: I was able to notice that they are more focused in the classes, they contribute even more now, they show more interest in learning. Their grades showed improvement after this. And the atmosphere in the classroom started to feel more “alive”, with a greater number of exchanges of ideas between themselves and the teachers.
• KM: Yes, absolutely. Students are more focused, collaborative, and present. Their attention spans have improved, and they participate more actively. Still, some learners remain unmotivated, possibly due to heavy screen use outside school. Teaching has become more demanding — we need to change interaction patterns constantly to keep students engaged, which adds pressure to our role as educators.
• T: Do you believe there is still a place for responsible cell phone use in language learning? Why or why not?
• VC: Absolutely. When used intentionally, cell phones can support language learning through tools like podcasts, apps, voice recording, and access to authentic texts. The key is guided, purposeful use. The current restrictions create space for us to teach digital literacy and self-regulation. Instead of banning all technology, we should help students develop the skills to use it wisely. Responsible use can enrich language learning, but it must be balanced within a structured, pedagogically sound framework.
• JT: Without a doubt! It’s undeniable that technology can improve our lives in ways we can’t even imagine, but first we need to learn how to use it properly in our favor to achieve academic success, not only to distract our minds from the outside world.
• KM: Yes, I do — just not yet in my current context. Smartphones can support integrated tasks involving reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Tools like podcasts, pronunciation apps, and collaborative writing platforms have real value. But right now, bringing phones back could undermine the progress we’ve made. Eventually, when learners show more balance, we can reintroduce them carefully, always with clear boundaries and educational purpose.

THE INTERVIEWEES: