Join us to lead the conversation on responsible, effective AI integration in elementary education, because the future belongs to those who build it together.
Across elementary schools, classrooms are increasingly filling with glowing screens from computers to smart boards. Supporters argue that technology can make learning more engaging, accessible, and personalized, preparing students for a digital world. Critics, on the other hand, worry that too much screen time at a young age may harm focus, social development, and hands-on learning. The challenge is finding the right balance between innovation and childhood development in order to shape the kind of learning environment we want for the next generation. What do you think: to what extent are screens helping or hurting students?
I personally think this is a complicated question that changes as kids get older. Interaction with media/screens is different and impact children differently at different ages. As a parent, it seems to be that very young children should be exposed less, and as children get older, exposed gradually. Exposure is also varied across passive exposure (watching a movie or TV show on a tablet) and active exposure (interacting with technology – Roblox for example). In terms of active exposure it seems to be very important for a parent or teacher to explain all the pitfalls of technology so that children do not take what is on a screen for granted as the truth. Educators and parents need to explain AI hallucinations, how to check source material, and to encourage learners to read source material and citations for yourself and assess it with your own brain. And then further for things like safety/moderation, for teachers and parents to know that tech companies are across the board not properly moderating and to be hyperaware of the actual dangers of platforms like META, Roblox, and others.
Many of the wealthiest districts in the country have added more and more screens to classrooms, including as early as kindergarten. To my knowledge, these districts have not seen any academic gains, and in fact, many are continuing to slump. There are many factors at play besides the inclusion of screens, but we certainly have not seen an attributable benefit to students. We have, however, seen teachers save time and effort, so it’s no surprise they continue to push for screens in the classroom. We should be taking a data-driven approach to determining the appropriate use of technology, generally, studying what works to actually improve learning. Recently an article came out showing very positive long-term (years!) academic results for children who received a 5 week working memory curriculum, which was delivered as a kind of computer game. This is clearly good. My daughter’s teachers give her daily feedback on her writing assignments through Google Docs — which enables her to learn from her mistakes in real time. This is clearly valuable and would be nearly impossible with written work. All to say, we need to be asking ourselves not IF, but WHY.
I’m a strong proponent of fewer screens. Studies have shown we retain information better reading from a book/packet than scrolled on a screen, and the act of writing (by hand) similarly embeds it better. We need to ask “what problem are we solving?” when bringing screens into the classroom, and then have an evidence based approach to assessing and implementing. As far as I can tell most of what we have is beneficial for the tech companies who can monetize curricula and materials with a yearly subscription model shifting money from the classroom to the boardroom. And, while not causation a steady decline in standardized assessments is coincident with the rise of screens in the classroom. Whether it’s the cause is a matter of debate, that there is no measurable benefit to the learning environment is not, there is clearly none.