Two provisions pull against each other. The restriction is not limited to phones but reaches other smart technology with similar functionality, described by capability: sending or receiving messages or notifications over a mobile network, or recording audio or video. Alongside that, the guidance indicates references to mobile phones cover other technology the school has decided to include in its policy, which puts the specific list in local hands. The test therefore supplies a basis for a decision rather than determining it.
| Capability | Smartphone | Children’s smartwatch | Screenless device |
|---|---|---|---|
| Send or receive messages | Yes | Usually | No |
| Record audio or video | Yes | Often | No |
| Reach the internet | Yes | Sometimes | No |
| Display anything | Yes | Yes | No |
| Receive notifications or calls | Yes | Yes | Depends, see below |
Most children’s smartwatches answer yes on several rows, which is why many policies now name them.
The notifications row
A device able to receive an incoming call during the school day is receiving something over a mobile network, and whether that constitutes a notification within the meaning of the guidance is open to interpretation either way. Some devices remove the question. Where a device can be set so that within a defined location, or between defined hours, it will neither raise nor receive a call or alert of any kind, it is not capable of notifying the child of anything during the school day. Yado works this way, and the restriction is enforced by the device rather than by an app setting a child could change. That is the main practical difference between this category and tracker-style devices, which stay live throughout the day and are designed to. Where a device behaves that way the row answers no as a matter of fact. Where it does not, the interpretation question stands and the answer is yours.
Worth asking a supplier
Can the device be silenced for a location or a period, is that silence enforced by the device or only by an app setting, and can the child override it? The answers vary considerably across products sold as child safety devices.
Some things the guidance is often assumed to require and does not. It does not stop a device travelling to and from school, and in fact contemplates lockers so pupils retain access while travelling. It does not reach beyond the school day. It is not a ban on all technology, since learning devices sit under a school’s own policy. And it does not displace duties under the Equality Act 2010 or the Children and Families Act 2014.
Grounds for refusal that do not depend on the test
A device can answer no on every row and still be one a school declines.
- Identification. If staff cannot distinguish it from a banned device at a glance, consistent enforcement becomes difficult, and consistency is what inspectors look at.
- Attention. A device that gets handled, shown around or discussed is a distraction whatever its specification.
- Unresolved safeguarding questions. Declining until a question can be answered is a reasonable position.
- A single rule. A blanket prohibition is simpler to operate and to defend, provided individual adaptations are still considered on their merits.
Yado makes a screenless safety device for children, so we have a commercial interest in this subject. About these pages.
- DfE, Mobile phones in schools, updated January 2026, gov.uk
- Children's Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026, s.36, legislation.gov.uk
- DfE, Searching, screening and confiscation, gov.uk
- August 2026. Rewritten. The earlier version presented the functional test as determining whether a device falls inside a policy. It does not.
- August 2026. First published.