Some Australian parents are pushing for a return to “pen-and-paper learning” amid concerns about children’s attention spans and academic achievement. An online petition calling for primary schools to be “device free” has collected more than 24,000 signatures.
Political leaders are also starting to express concerns about the amount of screen use in schools and an over reliance on artificial intelligence (AI) for learning. Federal Education Minister Jason Clare has backed a “digital detox” in classrooms.
This follows some states, such as Victoria, setting up time limits on screen use during the school day.
But before supporting blanket restrictions on screens in classrooms, parents should pause. Is there is evidence to show that limiting screens in schools will benefit children? Could there be unintended consequences?
Read more:
Education ministers are worried about technology use in schools. Should they be?
Anxiety about anxiety
There is no shortage of concerns about what screen use can do to young brains.
Prominent advocates for screen restrictions in children’s lives – such as US psychologist Jonathan Haidt – claim screens are the cause of rising mental illness in young people.
But the research debate is not settled here.
Other psychologists have argued there is no clear evidence to show screens are the direct cause. Children’s lives are changing in many ways at the same time, making it difficult to isolate the effect of screens from other social, educational and economic factors.
The research evidence on the broad academic impacts of screen use in schools is also mixed. Some research shows writing with pens and paper and reading physical books can benefit students. At the same time, there is evidence that shows digital technology can have benefits for learning, engagement and motivation.
Part of the reason for this is it depends how the screen is used. An hour spent scrolling YouTube on your own is not the same an an hour spent in a classroom researching, writing and creating on a laptop, working with teachers and peers.
This is why simply talking about “screen time” can be a particularly blunt measure of technology use in schools. The value depends on the quality of the technology together with how, why and with whom it is used.
How screens can help
We also need to acknowledge teachers’ professional judgement. Blanket bans or requirements limit teachers’ ability to tailor their teaching to the subject and student’s needs.
As part of their training, teachers learn about “safe, responsible and ethical” technology use in the classroom. This doesn’t mean every use of technology is beneficial, but there is international evidence that quality digital tools are used by teachers to provide genuine educational value.
For example, this can include learning robotics or using a search engine to access and evaluate information. It could also include creating a digital story, capturing images of science experiment over time or learning about digital platforms including the impacts on student’s own behaviours and relationships.
Who is missing out in a ban?
If screens are significantly limited or banned in schools, there may be some unintended consequences.
Schools are places where students get the opportunity to develop the digital skills they increasingly need to participate in education, work and society.
These capabilities are not simply knowing how to operate a tablet or a laptop. It involves evaluating information, communicating and creating online, understanding how digital systems shape our lives, managing data and developing the judgement to use technologies appropriately.
The latest test data shows Australian primary and high school students have low levels of digital literacy. These challenges are particularly pronounced among students in rural and remote areas, those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. This highlights long-term, ongoing inequities in students’ opportunities.
So if schools substantially reduce opportunities for children to learn with and about range of technologies, the consequences may not be distributed equally. Children with fewer digital resources and experiences at home will have the most to lose.
This isn’t an either/ or situation
We should be careful not to confuse the education we as adults remember with the education children need in today’s society. The current debate risks turning into a zero-sum choice between screens and pen and paper.
Parents should certainly expect education departments to select and evaluate safe and secure digital tools. They should also expect schools and teachers to integrate them thoughtfully and in ways supported by evidence.
But they should also be cautious about blanket restrictions that reduce children’s opportunities to develop digital knowledge, skills and behaviours. Students need to to learn how to manage their uses of screens now to thrive in the future.
Karley Beckman is a Chief Investigator with the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child.
Tiffani Apps is a Chief Investigator with the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child
