- Aug 30
- 9 min read
Author – Dr Mary-Ann Preece
What has changed?
UK learners are navigating a post-COVID educational landscape shaped by digital distractions, interrupted routines, and rising anxiety. Evidence points to dramatically shorter attention spans and greater daydreaming, making focused learning increasingly challenging. Research suggests that attention spans of learners in education are decreasing (Marathe and Kanage, 2024). Attention span is an individual’s ability to concentrate without getting distracted and is central to memory, recall and effective learning. Where information is not fully attended to, it is not processed deeply enough and is likely to be forgotten very quickly (Marc, 2021). Over the last 20 years, Gloria Mark has researched attention spans and concluded that our attention spans are decreasing (Mark, 2023). In an original study of office workers, Mark identified the average attention span as being two and a half minutes, but this was prior to smartphones and social media.
Mark has followed up on this research and shows that in 2012, the average attention span had reduced to 75 seconds, and most recently, it was concluded that the average attention span is down to 47 seconds (Mark, 2023). She has also suggested that we have not lost our ability to focus, but that how individuals focus is changing. Regular changeable class activities effectively adapt to these changing attention spans. Teachers are adapting by limiting the time spent on activities. Busby (2023) identified teachers reporting that short attention span traits of fidgeting (57%), boredom (57%), and peer disruptions (55%) are rising. But what has caused these recent changes in attention span?
Digital distraction and hyper-stimulation
Research has attributed this decline in attention spans to excessive social media use. Short-format content on social media such as videos, images, and limited text, affects the ability to concentrate for extended periods (Marathe and Kanage, 2024). Engagement in this type of content “can lead to a state of constant partial attention, where the brain is never fully engaged with any one task, but rather divided between multiple sources of information” (Marathe and Kanage, 2024: p2). With access to so much information online, there is a belief that it can cause the brain to reorganise to adapt to speed rather than depth, thus impacting attention span (Carr, 2010). Ofcom data shows that young people spend over five hours online daily, fuelling digital habits of constant novelty. The NHS recommends no more than 2 hours a day screen time for young people. In my own experience, I have often asked 16 – to18-year-old learners to review their own screen time with it not being unusual for them to report 8 to 10 hours a day of screen time. This comes as the UK government considers setting social media limits for children and young people.
Cognitive factors, mental health and the wider context
There are many cognitive, mental health and external factors that can also impact on an individual’s attention span. Individual differences including anxiety, depression, dyslexia, ADHD, ADD and Autistic Spectrum Disorder can all impact on attention span, as well as factors such as medication, diet and quality of sleep. As teachers we have all seen the faces of individuals alluding to ‘daydreaming’ or ‘zoning out’, which occurs when we have thoughts that distract us from the present. Killingswroth and Gilbert (2010) estimated that on average an individual can daydream up to 50% of the time.
Now, 15 years later we have more information at our fingertips and presented to us consistently through various forms of media that we all know how easy it is for our minds to wander or be consistently thinking about other topics which are off task. I have heard, many times, people refer to their brains operating with a ‘million tabs open at the same time’. This overstimulation of information and interaction inevitably makes it difficult for us to fully concentrate on just one thing at a time. There are many external distractions that we all experience in life, for example: other people, background noise and lighting that can distract us from what we are focussing on.
An additional potential factor to consider in educational environments was identified by Fisher, Godwin, and Seltman (2014) who found that overly stimulating classrooms can impact on learners’ ability to concentrate and could be detrimental to effective learning. Further research also found that classroom displays can limit attention span for those with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (Hanley et al., 2017).
However, it has been explored that this was more problematic for younger learners as older learners’ ability to filter out external distractions develops, they were less impacted. Much research has been done over the last two decades which has investigated the impact on learning of ‘low level disruption’ such as chatting, what is going outside of the classroom and even swinging on a chair. Nevertheless, not all distractions can be completely mitigated but strategies can be adopted to limit their impact on learners’ attention spans and their ability to focus.
Implications for practice and supportive strategies
Planning lessons based on attention span is not a new concept. With both Ebbinghaus’s (1885) Forgetting Curve and, more recently, Sousa’s (2001) retention model exploring the need to consider the ability of the brain to retain information. Both identified the need to keep activities short, within 20 minutes each, and to regularly change activities to maintain focus and attention and retain the information learnt. Considering the factors explained and the recent research concluding the reduction in attention spans, further consideration to planning and classroom delivery is needed.
Introduction of new information
Strategies should include introduction of new information within the first 20 minutes of a lesson, with teachers not engaging in ‘teacher talk’ for any longer than the 20-minute cut off. In my experience often 20 minutes in a long time for learners to fully engage their attention in the current climate. Where this new information is relatable to the learners, they are also more likely to make sense of it and retain it, with my own research identifying that where lesson content related to learner interests and work experiences, learners felt that the information was easier to connect with and remember (Preece, 2023). Eccles and Wigfield (2002) suggest that learners place more value on in-class activities if they are directly linked to success criteria or have clear links to the world outside of the classroom.
Active engagement
Once new information has been introduced learners should have the opportunity to actively engage with the new content as it has been long proven, since Piaget in 1930s, that repetition and having the same information presented in a variety of different ways is key to memory and effective learning. Where learners are engaged in active learning, there is a link to positive learning outcomes (Arthurs and Kreager, 2017). Active learning engages learners in learning through activities and discussions rather than passively listening to the teacher (Freeman et al., 2014). Active learning is considered more effective at developing learners’ higher-order thinking skills (Halpern, 1999) and is beneficial to effective learning. A range of activities in lessons can improve attention by creating an effective pace and keeping learners on task. Each activity should also be relatively short, depending on the learners, to maximise attention.
Teacher movement
Teachers should no longer teach from their desks or be sat at the front of the class; there are many reasons why teachers should move around the classroom as they deliver lessons and facilitate learning. Moving around to teach and being animated have been found to be teaching styles of positive teachers who have the potential to make learning more engaging and enjoyable for learners (Preece, 2023).
Where lessons are engaging and enjoyable learners’ attention is increased. When teachers move around the room the learners are required to maintain a level of concentration on the teacher to follow their movements. The presence of the teacher around the room also minimises distractions, particularly from those learners that sit at the back of the room to limit their own engagement. When a teacher moves around to teach it creates more opportunities to interact with learners during activities and during these interactions with learners, teachers can support them with tasks to give them the support they need to stay focused and engaged.
Limit mobile phone presence
Many schools are now banning mobile phones during school hours; however, this remains an inconsistent pattern across the country. The UK would be following in the footsteps of other countries that are enforcing these rules with Australia banning social media for those under 16 and Denmark banning phones in schools. However, this comes with conflict for many teachers as in older children and young people their mobile phones, when used correctly, can be an effective learning tool. Where schools and colleges are experiencing consistent reductions in budget, they do not have the luxury of purchasing tablets for each learner, however their own mobile devices are being used for learners to engage in interactive learning and assessment on educational platforms such as Kahoot.
The problem occurs when young people are using their phones for non-educational purposes which significantly disrupts their learning and attention span. Research conducted by Mark, et al. (2008) found that it takes on average 23 minutes to regain full attention on a task when interrupted by your phone. I have seen some new technology in place in some schools and colleges which include signal blockers for mobile devices, but learners can hook up to the Wi-Fi. However, the Wi-Fi also has included social media blockers. This technology allows learners to access their mobile devices for learning purposes only which is evidently a step in the right direction.
However, it has been argued for many years that the mere presence of a mobile phone, regardless of use, can impair attention, as it triggers anticipation of notifications and distracts cognitive capacity, with nomophobia now a recognised phobia. Nomophobia is the phobia of being without a mobile phone and is characterised by anxiety, panic and distress and is considered to be most prevalent amongst young people. Research conducted by YouGov (2019) identified that 60% of 18 to 24 year-olds showed symptoms of nomophobia if separated from their phones. I have, for the past 18 years created a classroom in which learners have their own ‘phone homes’ near the door. These were wooden slots, much like a smaller shoe rack, in which individual phones would fit. They decorated them and named them so that they could have ownership over their own ‘phone home’. During lessons they would leave their phones in the ‘phone homes’ and retrieve them for educational engagement, such as an interactive quiz, when instructed to do so. During the first two years of implementing these in my classroom’s learner grades improved on average by two grades, which is the difference between getting a D and a B. When learners realised the purpose of the ‘phone homes’ was in their own interests, they got on board and never needed reminding to place their phones in the ‘phone homes’ as it became a natural act as they entered the classroom. The learners were allowed to retrieve their phones for breaks and lunch periods, bearing in mind this was implemented in a sixth form classroom and consideration should be given to the age and educational environments of different groups of learners.
Final thoughts
UK learners are navigating a post-COVID educational landscape shaped by digital distractions, interrupted routines, and rising anxiety. Evidence points to dramatically shorter attention spans and greater daydreaming, making focused learning increasingly challenging.
By adopting interactive, varied, and mobile-aware pedagogies, and understanding the internal and external drivers of distraction, educators can begin to reverse these trends. Classroom attention spans aren’t fixed; they are responsive to how learning is structured and supported.
References:
Arthurs, L. and Kreager, B. (2017). An integrative review of in-class activities that enable active learning in college science classroom settings. International Journal of Science Education. 39 (15). 2073–2091. DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2017.1363925.
Busby, E. (2023). Children’s attention span is ‘shorter than ever’ in the classroom, teachers say. Available: https://www.irishnews.com/news/uknews/2023/06/06/news/children_s_attention_span_is_shorter_than_ever_in_the_classroom_teachers_say-3329257/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Last accessed 30th July 2025.
Carr, N. (2010). The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology, 1913, original work published. Available: https://web.archive.org/web/20051218083239/http://psy.ed.asu.edu:80/~classics/Ebbinghaus/index.htm Last accessed 30th July 2025.
Eccles, J. S. and Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology. 53 (1). 109–132. DOI:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153
Fisher, A. V., Godwin, K. E., and Seltman, H. (2014). Visual Environment, Attention Allocation, and Learning in Young Children: When Too Much of a Good Thing May Be Bad. Psychological Science. 25 (7). 1362–1370. https://doi.org/10.1177/095679761453380.
Freeman, S. Eddy, S. McDonough, M. Smith, M. Okoroafor, N. Jordt, H. and Wenderoth, M. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 111 (23). 8410–8415. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
Halpern, D. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. 80. 69-74. DOI: 10.1002/tl.8005.
Hanley, M., Khairat, M., Taylor, K., Wilson, R., Cole-Fletcher, R., and Riby, D. M. (2017). Classroom displays—Attraction or distraction? Evidence of impact on attention and learning from children with and without autism. Developmental Psychology. 53 (7). 1265–1275. DOI:10.1037/dev000027.
Killingswroth, M. A., and Gilbert, D. T. (2010). A Wandering Mind Is an Unhappy Mind. Science. 330. 932. DOI:10.1126/science.1192439.
Marathe, A. and Kanage, R. (2024). Decrease in Attention Span due to Short-Format Content on Social Media. Multi-Disciplinary Journal. 1 (1). Available http://www.mahratta.org/CurrIssue/November_2024/1.%20Decrease%20in%20attention%20span%20due%20to%20short%20format%20content%20on%20Social%20Media%20_Marathe_Kanage.pdf.
Marc. (2021). Attention in the Classroom. Available: https://theemotionallearner.com/2021/02/02/attention-in-the-classroom/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Last accessed 1st August 2025.
Mark, G. (2023). Attention Span: A Groundbreaking Way to Restore Balance, Happiness and Productivity. New York: Hanover Square Press.
Mark, G., Gudith, D. and Klocke, U., (2008). The cost of interrupted work: More speed and stress. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. 107–110. DOI:10.1145/1357054.1357072.
Preece, M. A. (2023). Teaching practices that are conducive to supporting the positive emotional well-being of learners in post-compulsory education. Research in Post-Compulsory Education. 28 (3). 390–417. DOI:10.1080/13596748.2023.2221117
Sousa, D (2001). Primacy/regency effect. Available: https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/media/940447/how-the-brain-learns-by-david-sousa.pdf Last accessed 30th July 2025.
YouGov. (2019). Could you live without your smartphone? Available: https://yougov.co.uk/technology/articles/22577-could-you-live-without-your-smartphone Last accessed 1st August 2025.
