Research and resources

American Academy of Pediatrics: Screen Time at School

The American Academy of Pediatrics explains that many parents monitor screen time at home but may not know how much technology children use during the school day. The article encourages families and schools to look beyond simple screen-time numbers and ask whether classroom technology use is active, intentional, and truly connected to learning.

Link: American Academy of Pediatrics — Screen Time at School
https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/media-and-children/center-of-excellence-on-social-media-and-youth-mental-health/qa-portal/qa-portal-library/qa-portal-library-questions/screen-time-at-school/

American Academy of Pediatrics: Screen Time Guidelines

The American Academy of Pediatrics has moved away from one universal screen-time limit for all children. Instead, it emphasizes context, quality, content, and healthy habits. This is useful for our conversation because it supports a balanced question: not only “how much screen time,” but also “what kind of screen use, for what purpose, and at what age?”

Link: American Academy of Pediatrics — Screen Time Guidelines
https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/media-and-children/center-of-excellence-on-social-media-and-youth-mental-health/qa-portal/qa-portal-library/qa-portal-library-questions/screen-time-guidelines/

American Academy of Ophthalmology: Screen Use and Children’s Eyes

The American Academy of Ophthalmology explains that extended screen use can contribute to temporary symptoms such as dry eyes, itchy eyes, blurry vision, and headaches. The AAO does not say screens permanently damage children’s eyes, but it recommends healthy visual habits, breaks, and outdoor time.

Link: American Academy of Ophthalmology — Screen Use for Kids
https://www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/screen-use-kids

UNESCO: Global Education Monitoring Report — Technology in Education

UNESCO’s report asks whether technology in education is being used on the right terms. It cautions that technology should be introduced when there is evidence that it improves learning and serves students’ needs, not simply because it is available. 

Link: UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report 2023 — Technology in Education
https://gem-report-2023.unesco.org/

OECD: Students, Computers and Learning

OECD’s report examines the relationship between computer access, classroom computer use, and student performance. It shows that more technology in school does not automatically produce better academic outcomes. The report supports a careful, evidence-based discussion about when digital tools help and when other teaching methods may be more effective.

Link: OECD — Students, Computers and Learning
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/students-computers-and-learning_9789264239555-en.html

Los Angeles Unified School District: Classroom Screen-Time Review

In April 2026, Los Angeles Unified School District approved a measure directing the district to develop grade-appropriate classroom screen-time guidelines. It shows that a large public school district is now reviewing not only phones, but also instructional screen time, school-issued devices, and classroom technology use.

Link: Reuters — Los Angeles schools set limits on classroom screen time
https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/los-angeles-schools-set-limits-classroom-screen-time-2026-04-22/

NPR: States and LA Schools Are Setting Limits on Classroom Screen Time

This NPR article reports that several states and Los Angeles Unified School District are beginning to set limits on screen time in schools. It shows that the conversation is moving beyond cellphone bans and into broader questions about classroom technology, school-issued devices, online instruction, and screen-based assessments.

NPR reports that four states have recently passed legislation to limit teaching and assessments through screens, and that Los Angeles Unified — the second-largest school district in the United States — has also moved to restrict classroom screen time.

Link: NPR — Several states — and the LA public schools — are setting limits on screen time
https://www.npr.org/2026/05/01/nx-s1-5791657/states-schools-restricting-screen-time

Los Angeles Unified School District: District Announcement

LAUSD’s own announcement describes the district’s effort to create developmentally appropriate guardrails for instructional technology. 

Link: LAUSD — Board Approves Screen-Time Limits
https://www.lausd.org/apps/news/article/2190886

Jonathan Haidt / The Anxious Generation

Jonathan Haidt’s work is best known for focusing on smartphones, social media, and youth mental health. More recently, related resources from The Anxious Generation have also begun raising questions about broader screen use in schools, including Chromebooks and one-to-one devices.

Links:
https://www.anxiousgeneration.com/phone-free-schools
https://www.anxiousgeneration.com/pdfs/thought-starters-for-educators.pdf
https://www.anxiousgeneration.com/research
https://truthforteachers.com/truth-for-teachers-podcast/distraction-free-schools-and-the-future-of-childhood-jonathan-haidt/

Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath: U.S. Senate Testimony on Classroom Technology

Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, a neuroscientist and educator, testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in a hearing titled “Plugged Out: Examining the Impact of Technology on America’s Youth.”

His written testimony argues that the rapid expansion of educational technology has changed classrooms significantly, with digital devices now taking up a major share of instructional time, assessment, homework, and student attention. He states that evidence from international assessments, large-scale studies, and meta-analyses suggests that increased classroom screen exposure is generally associated with weaker learning outcomes, not stronger ones, except in narrow cases such as targeted adaptive practice or remediation.

Link: Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath — Written Testimony to the U.S. Senate

https://www.commerce.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/doc/Horvath_Written%20Testimony.pdf

Silicon Valley Parents and Low-Tech Schools

Several reports have noted that some parents working in Silicon Valley, including employees of major technology companies, have chosen low-tech or screen-free schools for their own children. One frequently cited example is the Waldorf School of the Peninsula, where electronic media is introduced later and classrooms emphasize handwriting, movement, books, arts, practical work, and human interaction.

This example raise an important question for school communities: if some families closest to the technology industry are choosing more cautious, lower-screen educational environments, should public schools also have a thoughtful conversation about balance, age-appropriate use, and whether screens are always necessary for learning?

Links:
The New York Times coverage summarized by Waldorf School of the Peninsula
https://www.waldorfpeninsula.org/technology

UC Berkeley School of Information — Morgan Ames on Silicon Valley’s Obsession with Tech-Free Schools
https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/news/2019/morgan-ames-silicon-valleys-obsession-tech-free-schools

Sweden: Books, Handwriting, and Declining Education Outcomes

Sweden had strongly embraced digital tools in schools, but has recently shifted back toward printed textbooks, handwriting, quiet reading, and more teacher-led instruction.

This change followed concerns about educational outcomes. OECD’s PISA 2022 results showed that Sweden’s average performance declined from 2018 to 2022 in mathematics and reading, while science remained about the same. Sweden still scored above the OECD average, but the decline contributed to a national discussion about reading, attention, and foundational skills.

In response, the Swedish government has invested in physical textbooks and more reading time. Karolinska Institutet also raised concerns about early and extensive use of digital tools with young children and called for clearer guidelines.

Links:
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2022-results-volume-i-and-ii-country-notes_ed6fbcc5-en/sweden_de351d24-en.html
https://www.government.se/articles/2024/02/government-investing-in-more-reading-time-and-less-screen-time/
https://apnews.com/article/1dd964c628f76361c43dbf3964f7dbf4

Norway: Reading, Books, and Reduced Screen Time

Norway has begun prioritizing children’s reading again after concerns about declining literacy and heavy school device use. Recent efforts include more physical books, stronger school libraries, daily reading time, reduced screen time for younger children, and national reading campaigns.

This example is useful because it shows that other Nordic countries, not only Sweden, are reconsidering the balance between screens, books, reading, and foundational learning.

Links:
https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/norway-get-kids-reading-again-7rcvm90lm
https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/news/norway-reading-boost-schools

Sophie Winkleman / After Babel: Technology in Schools

This After Babel article, introduced by Jonathan Haidt and written by Sophie Winkleman, argues that screen-based schooling may interfere with attention, reading, handwriting, imagination, and teacher-student connection.

The article asks an important question for schools and families: have we clearly shown that large amounts of screen-based instruction are better for children than books, handwriting, paper, discussion, and direct teacher-led learning?

Link: After Babel — The Most Compelling Argument Against Tech in Schools
https://www.afterbabel.com/p/sophie-winkleman-tech-schools

Protect Young Eyes: Low-Tech Classrooms

Protect Young Eyes created a research summary arguing for a significant decrease in the amount of technology used in learning, especially for younger students. The report brings together research and examples related to reading on paper versus screens, handwriting, attention, student privacy, EdTech effectiveness, PISA results, digital distraction, and the risks of excessive school screen time.

The report emphasizes that print, handwriting, books, teacher-led instruction, and hands-on learning remain important for children’s reading development and academic focus. It also raises concerns about student data privacy, third-party tracking by school apps, and the use of digital products that may include advertising, gamification, or distracting design.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yI93PA8oSqHMdJ6q1rZ-NMkHN2heyjkc/view

Schools Beyond Screens

Schools Beyond Screens is a national coalition of parents and educators advocating for safer, more intentional, and evidence-based classroom technology policies. The organization was founded by LAUSD parents and teachers and focuses on school-issued devices, EdTech accountability, student privacy, AI tools, opt-out pathways, and parent-teacher-student involvement in school technology decisions.

Their “Student Tech Bill of Rights” emphasizes students’ rights to proven learning methods, books and paper, privacy, informed consent, physical and mental health, attention and focus, screen-free zones, embodied learning, and transparency.
https://www.schoolsbeyondscreens.com/

The New York Times: Teachers on Chromebooks and Classroom Distraction

This New York Times article reports on a large survey of teachers about how laptops, Chromebooks, and other classroom devices affect learning. It describes how many teachers see school devices as a source of distraction, off-task behavior, and reduced attention, even when devices are intended for learning.

This source supports an important point for our local conversation: concerns about classroom technology are not only about phones or social media. School-issued devices can also affect focus, classroom management, reading, writing, and student engagement.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/12/upshot/teachers-survey-chromebooks-class.html?unlocked_article_code=1.fVA.z4L0.NSrHanDGNmDb&smid=url-share

Distraction-Free Schools Policy Project

Distraction-Free Schools Policy Project is a coalition of parents, educators, school administrators, and child-advocacy organizations calling for policy changes around smartphones, social media, and school technology. The project is led by the Becca Schmill Foundation and Smartphone Free Childhood U.S.

This resource provides model legislation, advocacy tools, research links, and state-specific action pages. Its Safe School Technology materials focus on student privacy, EdTech accountability, addictive design, AI tools, parent consent, school-issued devices, and whether digital products used in classrooms are safe, effective, and developmentally appropriate.

Link: Distraction-Free Schools Policy Project
https://www.distractionfreeschools.com/

Link: Safe School Technology
https://www.distractionfreeschools.com/copy-of-safe-school-tech

Link: Safe School Tech Advocacy Resources
https://www.distractionfreeschools.com/copy-of-safe-school-tech-1

Link: New Jersey Action Page
https://www.distractionfreeschools.com/new-jersey-action