New national research finds educators overwhelmingly support the social media ban, even as they warn students will easily bypass it.
Teachers are among the strongest supporters of Australia’s under-16 social media ban, according to new research released by Pureprofile, but they also hold doubts about whether the policy will make a meaningful difference in classrooms.
The study, conducted in October with more than 800 parents, teachers and young Australians, found 84 per cent of teachers support the ban, rising to 91 per cent among high school teachers. Yet only 20 per cent of teachers overall think the ban will actually work, and confidence drops to just 13 per cent among secondary teachers.
Nearly 80 per cent of high school teachers expect students will simply get around the ban, mirroring the lived experience parents reported with device workarounds and VPN use.
Educators remain clear about why they support the ban: the wellbeing of children. More than 70 per cent of Australians believe restricting social media access will encourage young people to spend time with peers face-to-face, be more active, and reduce bullying.
But teachers also understand how quickly tech-savvy young people adapt. Many point to the inevitability of students turning to gaming platforms, alternative apps, or VPNs to stay connected.
Pureprofile CEO Mr Martin Filz said that while all groups share the same goal of protecting children’s emotional, social and mental wellbeing, their views on how to achieve it differ.
“Teachers see their role as guiding rather than policing,” he said, noting that children, parents and educators all identified wellbeing as the common ground.
For teachers, the ban lands in the middle of a broader national conversation about the real harms facing young people online. Half of Australians surveyed say content – harmful algorithms, toxic interactions and inappropriate material – is more damaging than the amount of time children spend online.
Among young adults (16–24), that view is even stronger, with 57 per cent citing content as the main concern. The findings suggest banning access may do little to address the deeper digital design issues teachers grapple with daily, especially as prolonged exposure amplifies harm.
While support for the ban is strong, Australians – including teachers – favour a hybrid approach. Nearly 46 per cent say the best path forward is a combination of rules and autonomy: guardrails, paired with digital literacy education.
The survey also highlights concerns that removing under-16s from social platforms altogether could unintentionally increase isolation for some groups. Respondents fear the ban may reduce access to mental health support communities (42 per cent), affect LGBTQIA+ and neurodiverse children, make students with disabilities more isolated (44 per cent), and disadvantage those in rural and remote areas (47 per cent). Over half worry it will make it harder for children to keep in touch with overseas family.
Teachers echo these concerns in their daily work, where connection, inclusion and belonging are central to student wellbeing.
The findings underscore the complexity facing educators as the ban rolls out. Many expect that class time will increasingly involve helping students navigate alternative online spaces, rather than simply restricting access. Others are already preparing for new conversations with students about privacy, safety and digital citizenship.
Mr Filz said each group in the research defined safety differently – parents emphasising supervision, adolescents wanting to learn self-management, and younger children seeking friendly, secure spaces – but all agreed on the end goal.
“That moral alignment is the ‘common ground’ uniting them,” he said.
With only a small minority of Australians believing responsibility rests solely with government (23 per cent) or platforms (21 per cent), and the majority (42 per cent) naming parents as the frontline, teachers are once again positioned at the intersection of policy, technology and student wellbeing.
