Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

London Oratory complete mobile phone ban even on long commutes

293 replies

Goldie1990 · 01/10/2026 13:40

Interested to hear from any current parents - how can there not be an outcry about this? With an intentionally pan-London intake where many commutes easily exceed an hour, it's the last school that should have this policy. Yet it's one of only a tiny number I can find that doesn't even permit brick phones - and it's deliberately extended to the entire school journey, making it an offense to have so much as a Nokia on hand during a transport emergency.

The head's rationale at the open evening was that there is far more danger on a smartphone these days than there is for an 11-year old crossing London by themselves. While that argument may be debatable, it breaks down completely when applied to brick phones. New guidance from DfE even recommends schools with large commuter populations to consider workarounds like handing in brick phones/keeping them switched off in their bag throughout the day. Even trackers with SOS call buttons are banned - all you're allowed is a basic tracker to see where they are (but with no means of contacting them).

OP posts:
ACynicalDad · 02/10/2026 10:14

My son's school don't allow them, but he switches it off and keeps it at the bottom of his bag. There are two strikes before a detention anyway, so he's presuming he is happy to take the risk at least until then.

Original poster
Goldie1990 · 02/10/2026 09:35

ProudBlackMomma · 02/10/2026 09:24

Frankly the school doesn’t really need to explain or justify its stance. It is a highly oversubscribed school that parents are desperate to access. Put simply, don’t like it then move on.

So you're saying that demand for places itself relieves the institution of the need to justify the rule.

That is the part I'd disagree with most strongly. Oversubscription tells you that the overall package is attractive to more families than there are places. It doesn't demonstrate that every constituent policy is sensible. Nor does it mean parents shouldn't ask why a rule exists - particularly when current statutory guidance now specifically addresses the travel issue.

OP posts:
ProudBlackMomma · 02/10/2026 09:24

Frankly the school doesn’t really need to explain or justify its stance. It is a highly oversubscribed school that parents are desperate to access. Put simply, don’t like it then move on.

Selfseedpoppies · 02/10/2026 08:58

I absolutely wouldn't choose this school. The whole 'we managed before smartphones' is bollocks. The world has changed. There are no phone boxes, very few policemen on the beat, fewer staff at stations, nobody carries an A-Z. Adults wouldn't lend their phone to a teenager for fear of theft. Being able to contact a parent in an emergency is non negotiable. And being able to access online transport information, and use digital tickets is extremely useful /can be cheaper than physical tickets.

There is no reason for a child to have a phone during the school but there are many good reasons to have one on an hour long commute.

Lexibletheflexible · 02/10/2026 08:56

Goldie1990 · 02/10/2026 08:49

Well you can use the air tag for that I think.

Show quote history

Do the school supply them?

If not, how are they going to keep kids safe by having this information?

Because if one of these kids go missing and the police are involved but the school cant even say whether they left there at 315 or 430pm, then a ball is being dropped.

If they have all these things in place (hint you'd need kids to have to swipe in and out with a card that records who uses it, where and when), then maybe they can reasonably ban kids from having contact with parents on their commute. If not, they cannot.

Original poster
Goldie1990 · 02/10/2026 08:49

Lexibletheflexible · 02/10/2026 08:46

How do they monitor when a child has left the building after school? Are you able to ring the school and have them tell you exactly when your child left the premises?

If you cannot do that, then they can't forbid a child some sort of system that allows someone to monitor this. It's basic safeguarding.

Show quote history

Well you can use the air tag for that I think.

OP posts:
Lexibletheflexible · 02/10/2026 08:46

Goldie1990 · 01/10/2026 14:52

It's an interesting perspective because your argument is probably close to the one the school would actually make when challenged. “Children managed before smartphones” is true, but does not establish that removing an available emergency communication method is beneficial. And “it teaches resilience” is a coherent educational argument, but it needs weighing up against the practical value of being able to contact a parent when an 11-year-old's train is cancelled, they get stranded somewhere unfamiliar, or they feel unsafe.

Agree a long commute's not ideal at 11 (our DS would be 12 from September, but the point stands) - this would be our 5th or 6th CAF slot after 4-5 local choices though. :-) It's more the principle that bothers me.

Show quote history

How do they monitor when a child has left the building after school? Are you able to ring the school and have them tell you exactly when your child left the premises?

If you cannot do that, then they can't forbid a child some sort of system that allows someone to monitor this. It's basic safeguarding.

movinghomeadvice · 02/10/2026 08:43

I’m a Middle School teacher and as anti-smart phone as they come, but banning dumb phones is ridiculous.

However, I would choose another school rather than sneak a brick phone into his bag. Schools with policies like this expect ‘buy in’ from the parents and student body, and I don’t think it’s fair to knowingly choose a school when you plan to break a policy like this.

If I absolutely loved the school for him and didn’t have other options, then I’d do the AirTag thing that a PP suggested. However, if there are other, equally good options, then I would probably choose elsewhere.

FWIW, I had a 1-hour train and bus commute from age 12, without a phone because it was 30 years ago, but it wasn’t London. I don’t think I’d feel comfortable with my DC doing that commute without a way to contact me.

Original poster
Goldie1990 · 02/10/2026 08:27

ProudBlackMomma · 02/10/2026 08:19

This is a policy that has been in place for years. Presumably it is working fine. The boys survive and it’s not impacting applications or enrolment. If you don’t like the policy then know there are countless parents in line behind you waiting to snap up your place. It’s a truly exceptional school with a fantastic ethos. But it’s not for everyone.

I don’t doubt that the policy is workable - clearly generations of boys have managed it - or that LOS will continue to fill its places. But neither really answers the question I’m asking.

An oversubscribed school can have a policy that deters some families and remain oversubscribed; indeed, at least one prospective parent on this thread has already said this information may change whether they consider LOS. And “the boys survive” seems a rather low bar for deciding whether a policy is sensible.

I’m strongly in favour of a phone-free school day. What I don’t understand is why that requires prohibiting an 11-year-old with a long journey across London from carrying a basic call/text phone that he cannot access during school, when other very strict schools manage this through brick phones, pouches or handing phones in.

That’s particularly worth asking now because the DfE’s new statutory guidance specifically tells schools to consider the impact on pupils travelling to and from school where not having a phone poses, or is perceived to pose, a risk.
LOS may well have considered all of that and decided its existing policy remains preferable. I’d simply be interested to know its reasoning. “There are plenty of other parents who want the place” explains why the school can maintain the policy; it doesn’t explain why the policy is a good one.

OP posts:
ProudBlackMomma · 02/10/2026 08:19

This is a policy that has been in place for years. Presumably it is working fine. The boys survive and it’s not impacting applications or enrolment. If you don’t like the policy then know there are countless parents in line behind you waiting to snap up your place. It’s a truly exceptional school with a fantastic ethos. But it’s not for everyone.

FrankieCH · 02/10/2026 05:31

AdidasBadidas · 01/10/2026 15:33

If you were to put a switched off Nokia in their bag - only for emergency use - would the school even know?

Yes because they search bags - as do most schools.

FrankieCH · 02/10/2026 05:27

LOS was one of the first schools to introduce a ban on mobile phones, if not the first. It’s been in place since the early 2000s - quite remarkable and very prescient.
How do I know this? Because my children were there from 2002 until the last one left in 2016. And yes, they had a long commute of an hour.
As the head will also have said at the open evening, if you don’t like the rules, don’t send your son to LOS.

Twistingoliver · 02/10/2026 00:56

Our school has now implemented this too OP (Mill Hill County High). It is such an irrational policy and the huge overstep has harmed the school’s relationship with parents. It also goes against what the smartphone free campaign recommends. You cannot be seen out of school hours in uniform with a phone.

Original poster
Goldie1990 · 01/10/2026 23:46

Wonkybaby · 01/10/2026 23:31

So it’s just to have a moan about something that doesn’t affect you in the slightest?
Oratory is a massively over subscribed school. If you don’t like their policies I can’t imagine they give a shit tbh.

Show quote history

Well it does affect me in the slightest because I otherwise may have put them on the CAF. :-)

And I never said I expected them to give a toss about what I think.

OP posts:
ifonlytheydlisten · 01/10/2026 23:41

In my area it’s also more expensive to travel if not using phone ap.
pouches whilst in school

ifonlytheydlisten · 01/10/2026 23:38

Loads do homework on phones during commute. Or use screen as down time.
I’d not be happy as my Dc use the time for own choices

Wonkybaby · 01/10/2026 23:31

Goldie1990 · 01/10/2026 19:15

That may well be what we end up doing, but that's not really the point of the thread.

Show quote history

So it’s just to have a moan about something that doesn’t affect you in the slightest?
Oratory is a massively over subscribed school. If you don’t like their policies I can’t imagine they give a shit tbh.

Original poster
Goldie1990 · 01/10/2026 23:22

ChocHotolate · 01/10/2026 22:59

This in line with at least one other large secondary close to the oratory

If you mean The Fulham Boys School, it indeed has one of the country’s most publicised strict phone policies. But there’s a rather important difference: Fulham Boys explicitly allows certain brick phones capable of calls/texts. Its prohibition is on smartphones.

Indeed, its head has publicly discussed parents’ concerns about children travelling across London without smartphone navigation. So if that’s the school you means, it actually support my distinction: a very strongly phone-free neighbouring boys’ school has concluded that basic call/text phones can coexist with its policy.

And the DfE’s June 2026 case studies explicitly showcase the same principle: one large secondary has pupils put switched-off phones in locked pouches that remain with them, while another school with a general no-phone rule operates exemptions where parents believe a phone is needed for travel.

OP posts:
Original poster
Goldie1990 · 01/10/2026 23:17

ChocHotolate · 01/10/2026 22:59

This in line with at least one other large secondary close to the oratory

Which one is that? And does it have a London-wide intake?

OP posts:
Unexpectedlysinglemum · 01/10/2026 23:15

There aren’t the many phone booths available that there were in the 90s when I was commuting to school on the tube and could call mum with a phone card if I was running late or wanted to go for coffee with friends after school. however, now he could just ask in a shop if emergency- ensure he has parents and school numbers written down even better memorized.
you don’t need an a-z for one commute that is the same every day.
are pagers still a thing so at least you can send them a message? Or are they allowed to check email at the end of the day or email you at lunch time if needed?

ChocHotolate · 01/10/2026 22:59

This in line with at least one other large secondary close to the oratory

Bobbybobbins · 01/10/2026 22:31

I think this is over the top. I am a secondary teacher and we now have lockable phone pouches that are locked am and unlocked on the way out. Inner city school and loads of kids use them for bus pass etc. Not seen a single phone out this year so seems to be working.

YourAmberExpert · 01/10/2026 22:30

RoobarbsCustard · 01/10/2026 18:24

It’s not for tracking, it’s so they have the ability to contact somebody in an emergency or when public transport is cancelled.

Show quote history

If it's really an emergency someone nearby will have a phone and parents can keep an eye on train app for canx. There will be hundreds of other pupils travelling.

fashionqueen0123 · 01/10/2026 21:28

NoBrickPhonesAllowed · 01/10/2026 20:02

For what it's worth, our secondary banned all phones (and smartwatches etc) outright this year. They don't specifically state phones are banned on the commute, but effectively they are, because they are not allowed on the school premises and there is nowhere to hand them in. (I'm completely against this. I think brick phones are a reasonable compromise for commute convenience and should be allowed.)

However, I've assumed part of the reason our school chose this option is that most students live within a couple of miles.

I'm curious where you found the following: "New guidance from DfE even recommends schools with large commuter populations to consider workarounds like handing in brick phones/keeping them switched off in their bag throughout the day." The only guidance I can find states that schools must ensure that students cannot access their phones during the school day, and they would at least need to be in the locked pouches in their bag to achieve that.

I don't blame my school for adopting this policy. I blame the government and think it's up to parents to contact their MP to try to change the government policy to allow brick phones turned off in bags. I can understand the school not wanting to spend money on pouches or lockers, or time on handing phones in and out at the beginning and end of the school day, but instead spend the money and time on learning, especially if they anticipate another government might roll it back in the nearish future. (I'm not even pro or against the current government, I just think this particular policy was rushed through without consideration of its practical consequences for schools, students or parents.)

My best advice is to look for phone boxes along the route, as I have found that now that I look for them, there still are a few around, not on our particular route, but maybe you'll be luckier than us.

Also, I think our school probably also is dealing with it by slightly turning a blind eye to the fact that students might have them switched off in their bags. They aren't actively searching bags or anything, it's just that if phones are seen or heard, they are confiscated and the student gets detention. And so I think many students are just brining phones anyway. Unfortunately, my kid is also one of those who adamantly refuses to do so on the grounds that he feels he should follow the rules, and I can't really argue with that.

I do wonder if sometime something preventable will happen to a child due to the policy and then it will make the news and get reversed.

Edited

Our school allows phones off in bags.

Araminta1004 · 01/10/2026 20:12

I would write a strongly worded legal letter to the head and governors stating that you consider it a safeguarding risk to not allow any means of reasonable emergency communication on a long commuter route in a capital city with heightened criminal and terrorism risks and that they are on notice that if something should happen to your child as a direct result you will be pursuing them personally for negligence for a reasonably foreseeable event. And then see what happens, because none of them will want to take that responsibility anyway and they will have to record receipt of the email. In our school, a grammar, the parents would have done similar ages ago and not played ball to whacko policies for many commuting children.