Concerns Rise Over Screen Time in Education

When Lila Byock’s eldest child turned 11, she grew concerned about the amount of time he spent on a school-issued iPad. It felt mandatory for him to have it everywhere, even during physical education class. Byock recalls him being penalized one day for not having the iPad with him. When she questioned the school in central Los Angeles about the extensive digital learning that persisted years after the COVID-19 pandemic, they provided no clear justification. The response was simply that having acquired the devices during the pandemic, it made sense to continue using them.

Motivated by her concerns, Byock spoke with other parents and founded Schools Beyond Screens, an advocacy group initially in Los Angeles but now with members across the U.S. She reports that many parents share her urgent concern, asking, “This is an emergency — what can we do about it?” In response to ongoing advocacy, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) recently decided to limit screen time across all grade levels starting in the fall. There is a particular emphasis on eliminating screen time altogether for elementary students. This decision marks a significant change in policy for the district, which had previously focused on increasing classroom technology use post-pandemic.

State Legislation on Screen Time

The policy change by LAUSD reflects a broader trend across several states. Since January, states including Alabama, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia have enacted legislation to reexamine technology’s role in education, with over ten other states contemplating similar measures. T. Philip Nichols, an associate professor of English education at Baylor University, describes LAUSD’s decision as a “pendulum swing.” Nichols, who studies technology in education, notes that the rapid increase of laptops, tablets, and interactive whiteboards has reshaped thinking and communication in education.

In Vermont, legislation citing Nichols’ research proposes allowing parents to opt their children out of screen time. Nichols highlights his findings that increased computer use has not correlated with higher test scores or improved student achievement. Additionally, the Vermont proposal raises concerns about student data privacy, emphasizing that educational platforms often collect and utilize student data.

Debates Over Technology in Learning

Despite these developments, some experts warn against completely banning technology in schools, citing decades of research on its potential benefits. Tracy Weeks, the senior director of education policy at Instructure, argues against sweeping bans on screen time. Her company provides digital classroom management tools used by about 30% of K-12 students in the U.S.

She states, “When we talk about things like screen time, [it] gets really hard because not all minutes are equal depending on what you’re actually doing.”

Weeks differentiates between passive screen use, like watching videos, and interactive activities used to engage students.

Bipartisan Efforts and Local Policies

Following the LAUSD vote, district administrators face a June deadline to develop an official policy that will take effect in the fall. The specifics remain unclear until then. This mirrors policies being formed in other states, like Utah, where a new law limits screen time starting July 1 with a state education board policy due by the end of the year, though the enforcement timeline is uncertain.

Governor Spencer Cox of Utah emphasizes the goal of fostering healthier tech habits, acknowledging that initial attempts may not be perfect but are steps in the right direction. Missouri similarly passed a House bill on limiting screen time, initially proposed by a Republican lawmaker, which received bipartisan support. Democratic state representative Kathy Steinhoff, although initially skeptical due to rigid stipulations like limited screen time and mandated cursive writing instruction, eventually supported a revised version.

The altered Missouri bill, akin to the LAUSD approach, allows school districts to devise their own screen time policies. However, Steinhoff argues that the 2027 deadline might still be too stringent for implementation.