Nothing moves faster in the education world than technology. Many teachers, schools, and districts are quick to jump on the nearest bandwagon of what’s new. Lately, some large districts, who admittedly were some of the first to jump on, are quickly turning to limit and ban certain technology uses in schools. (Ex: LA Unified bans screen time for students under 2nd grade – article) This causes controversy in many different ways; from people who disagree with the decisions to people who think it’s not enough. Most of these situations are not FULL bans on technology, but limitations or bans on specific pieces, such as generative AI, or limited screen time. EdTech companies have come in defense of these techs (duh) with “research” on what are good uses of educational technology. We might think of it as “quality over quantity,” with the quantity being the limits on screen time. Instead of focusing on these “bans” of specific things, I think it’s more important to look at the purpose (or lack thereof) in purchasing or using specific tools.
I’ve referenced the SAMR model before, but as a reminder, it is basically a guideline to determine the purpose of a technology tool. Ruben Puentedura developed this to guide educators on how and why they should be using a tech tool (Edutopia)
For example, word document software may be considered an “augmentation” for students, as it substitutes writing and adds improvements of spell check, or allowing voice to text for students who have writing limitations. We may consider this “quality” software, but most people aren’t arguing about those types of tools.
Part of the issue, in my opinion, is the wide adoption of online tools to replace teaching or practicing. I’m sure many of these tools have good outcomes individually, but when every subject in elementary is adding a technology tool to teach or support the lessons, we increase student screen time exponentially. No matter the “quality” of these tools, screen time is a hugely increasing problem for child cognitive development. The National Library of Medicine concluded that, when it comes to cognitive abilities, “screens have the potential to enhance education and learning. However, studies have shown that excessive screen time and media multitasking can negatively affect execturive functioning, sensorimotor development, and academic outcomes (NIH). This truly sums up this argument of quality vs quantity. Many educational technology tools were created with the purpose of enhancing learning, but the amount of time being spent may be detrimental, no matter the quality. So why, as educators and professionals, would we defend the growing tech tool world?
There are studies that suggest some of the online game-based learning programs do have positive effects on student learning. I do believe that, while there should be screen time limitation recommendations, intentional screen time can be beneficial to learners. MEDIA screen time is very different from educational screen time, don’t get me wrong. Just because the tool could be helpful, doesn’t mean adding an excessive amount of game time to our school day is productive. If research is starting to show attention, bands, and cognitive development going down during this increase of Screen Time at schools, it feels irresponsible to add to that.
I believe it is important to consider that research on children and students can be tricky, especially in the past decade or so with technology. You can’t really experiment with students’ cognitive development, so you can study and observe what is already happening. The American Association of Pediatrics states that “Unfortunately, there isn’t enough evidence demonstrating a benefit from specific screen time limitation guidelines.” (AAP). While this may seem clear enough to go forward with high integration of EdTech, I think it’s important to consider what the past 15 years have looked like for learners.
Many of us hear a lot of opinions on the literacy crisis, as well as complains about Gen Z. No matter our opinions, here are the facts. Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath testified to the senate that Gen Z is the first generation to not “outsmart” (or have a high cognitive scores) than the generation before it (the digital delusion). He writes a great article explaining the data (read more here!), but I want to touch back to my claim that research on children and students is hard! You can’t experiment in children by purposefully exposing them to only screens. So, we look at correlations. Please remember that correlation does NOT equal causation. So, this claim is not that tech has caused it, but it could be a correlating factor.
I’m a ‘97 baby. I grew up with the big TV, but saw computers being brought into the classroom throughout elementary. My 4th grade class was one of the first in our school to get the SMARTBoard. When I was working in after school care as a teenager, schools had the computer lab for tech use. I saw it all shift throughout my education. The younger Gen Z kids, however, grew up with the boards and computers and 1:1 devices. They lived through the curriculum implementations that adopted technology tools to support their learning. Now, cognitive abilities are down.
The question many districts are asking is, “Do we need more? Better? Less?” It will be interesting to watch what happens in cities where districts are limiting the time on devices, or banning specific tools, such as AI. Personally, I hope the pendulum swing in EdTech makes it way towards the middle (or even less tech).
Sources
Muppalla, S. K., Vuppalapati, S., Pulliahgaru, A. R., & Sreenivasulu, H. (2023, June 18). Effects of excessive screen time on child development: An updated review and strategies for management. National Library of Medicine; Cureus. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10353947/
Seshadri, M. (2026, June 23). Los Angeles Unified bans screen time before second grade under new policy. EdSource. https://edsource.org/updates/los-angeles-unified-approves-screen-time-policy-for-next-school-year
Terada, Y. (2020, May 4). A powerful model for understanding good tech integration. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/powerful-model-understanding-good-tech-integration/
Leave a Reply