Schools Beyond Screens believes in a strong public school system and a high quality education for every student. As our 190+ local chapters around the country advocate for a more intentional approach to technology in our classrooms, many stakeholders have raised the importance of digital equity, ensuring internet and device access for students who need it, and supporting college and career readiness. We emphatically agree with these goals.
However, equity doesn’t mean five year olds on 1:1 laptops when they are still learning to read, and the data shows that reading comprehension is enhanced through paper books, not screens. It doesn’t mean kids getting exposed to “freemium” model games through school-issued devices that require parents to pay for a membership at home to continue playing.
1:1 devices are a modality. They are not an outcome. True digital equity must go beyond simply buying devices and placing them in front of every child. As with all technology, the quality and implementation strategy matters.
In 2026, digital equity means our kids are well prepared for college and future careers, but it also has to mean that devices and online content are introduced in a way that is safe, developmentally appropriate, and intentional, and which operate on business models that don’t exploit children’s data.
We need kids who can pay focused attention to the subjects we want them to learn. Kids who are critical thinkers, who can ask questions about what they see online. Kids who have practice managing human relationships; who understand the scientific method and the difference between correlation and causation. We need our kids to be able to capably use technology, not be used by technology as passive consumers.
A growing body of research indicates that regular use of devices and screens, particularly passive screen time that is not scaffolded by an adult, carries more risk of harm to children’s development than potential benefit to college or career readiness.
“In this systematic review and meta-analysis of data from 42 studies, greater quantity of screen use (ie, hours per day/week) was negatively associated with child language, while better quality of screen use (ie, educational programs and co-viewing with caregivers) were positively associated with child language skills.” Associations Between Screen Use and Child Language Skills
“A total of 33 original studies and reviews were included and encompassed a close to equal distribution in terms of age groups…The results of the studies indicated that excessive screen time was associated with concentration difficulties, which suggests that the associations are bidirectional…Recreational media multitasking in school settings was consistently correlated with inferior learning outcomes, whereas studies on television use and gaming showed inconsistent results.” Associations between screen use, learning and concentration among children and young people in western countries: a scoping review
“First, this study identifies the negative effect that excessive use of EdTech causes on children’s achievement scores, simply naming it ‘the negative effect of EdTech.’ Second, this study additionally identifies the statistical interaction in the positive direction by which effects of using EdTech are differentiated in proportion to children’s achievement scores when using EdTech, naming it ‘the gap-widening effect of EdTech,’ in the sense that it contributes to the widening of the achievement gap between low and high achievers.” Exploring the Negative and Gap-Widening Effects of EdTech on Young Children’s Learning Achievement: Evidence from a Longitudinal Dataset of Children in American K–3 Classrooms
“Using within-student variation in home computer access, and across-ZIP code variation in the timing of the introduction of high-speed Internet service, we also demonstrate that the introduction of home computer technology is associated with modest, but statistically significant and persistent negative impacts on student math and reading test scores. Further evidence suggests that providing universal access to home computers and high-speed Internet access would broaden, rather than narrow, math and reading achievement gaps.” Scaling the Digital Divide: Home Computer Technology and Student Achievement
According to the industry-produced 2026 EdTech Evidence Report, only 40% of the top EdTech platforms had any identified ESSA Evidence level at all.
The risks of AI on learning are even more profound. An MIT study concludes, “Over four months, LLM users consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels. These results raise concerns about the long-term educational implications of LLM reliance and underscore the need for deeper inquiry into AI's role in learning.”
Placing our youngest learners in front of screens with gamified content, designed to be addictive by triggering dopamine release, does not help us achieve any of our shared goals for children’s optimal learning and development. We must prioritize investment in the educators who will provide the necessary support and supervision for high-quality, productive uses of technology in education.
The shift away from screens isn’t limited to K-12 education, which raises doubts about the premise that 1:1 device programs (including as early as kindergarten) will benefit college readiness. Institutions of higher education are rethinking their policies on technology and AI, in response to students’ lower attention spans, reduced capacity to digest information, and reports of increased cheating. University of Chicago Law School has banned phones and laptops for first year law students, to “ensure students actually learn to think critically, strategically and independently without relying on AI.” This is part of a growing trend among college professors, who report better classroom engagement and discussion and less distraction without devices.
Students’ future employers may also value the critical thinking and interpersonal skills that are more developed in screen-free learning environments. Recent data suggests that arts and humanities majors may be in better shape in today’s job market than computer science graduates, who are potentially more at risk of being replaced by AI. Deloitte reports that the need for technology-centered skills will be paired with the need for human-centered skills, including “critical thinking, creativity, and flexibility.” It turns out tech companies may need the humanities. And while there are many productive, creative, and important computer and digital skills that students should build through their education, there is no science or research backed reason for that journey to begin in early elementary school.
The true public school equity investment is in our teachers, our early intervention specialists, our librarians, and our school-based mental health professionals. It’s time to acknowledge the unintended consequences of rapid device roll-out across all grades, and reconsider what it truly means to provide an equitable education that prepares students for a rapidly evolving future.