Parents, pundits, politicians, researchers, and educators have for years debated the role of technology in the classroom. While the trend took off in the early 2010s, it became nearly universal during the COVID-19 pandemic when schools were closed and children were forced to sit in front of computer screens all day at home, often without parental supervision.

In the years since, cell phones, laptops, and other electronic equipment have dominated the public schools in particular, with minimal academic progress to show for it and test scores that have continued to slide. The real winners are the tech manufacturers, including laptop makers such as Lenovo and Dell. And according to an April 10 Fortune article, Google has benefitted from sales of its Chromebook laptops to schools, ringing up $14 billion in global sales and capturing 60% of the education market share worldwide.

A Sept. 17, 2024 Newsweek op-ed by Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) senior policy analyst, Clare Morell, acknowledged that data clearly show “[cell] phones inhibit students’ learning, cause and exacerbate discipline issues, and harm students’ mental health.” She added: “While phones may be the worst culprits for distraction from learning during the school day, the ‘educational’ screens many children are using in their classrooms, like Chromebooks, tablets, or laptops, are also hurting academic outcomes.”

But technology in the classroom may be losing its luster. Although some schools have banned cell phones, teachers find students doing the same things on their Chromebooks that they were doing on their phones, such as watching YouTube videos, playing games, and messaging and even bullying each other.

Fortune reported that schools in various states including Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, Virginia, and others, “are rethinking their policies of buying and assigning a laptop to every student and the millions of dollars they spent on them, as studies show implementing technology in schools has reportedly coincided with either decreasing test scores or no progress at all for students.”

While conservatives point to woke curricula, lack of phonics-based reading instruction, and the dearth of traditional math, science, and civics as culprits in the failure of U.S. schools to educate students, they also recognize the negative contribution of in-class technology.

Negative impact of screens

In October 2025, the EPPC published a heavily footnoted report called “Getting Screens Out of Schools,” which showed how “educational technology,” or “EdTech,” is hurting rather than helping students learn. The document cites research from around the world and reaches the general conclusion that, in countries like the U.S. that have invested heavily in classroom technology, screens have hindered rather than benefitted educational progress.

A key finding of the EPPC report is that, while the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to the decline in academic performance, U.S. students’ assessment scores “have been on the decline since 2012.” The report states: “In 2022, math scores for the lowest performing students hit levels last seen in the 1970s, while their reading scores were actually lower than the first year the data was collected, in 1971.”

More recent research by neuroscientists at the Teachers College of Columbia University found evidence that children’s brains process written texts “more deeply when they are presented in print rather than on a digital screen.” Study subjects “were more able to make connections with new concepts” after reading text on a printed page, which increased and enriched comprehension. (Also see Education Reporter, January 2026.)

EPPC researchers found that digital learning not only affects reading ability, but also writing skills. Their report referenced a study that showed when the alphabet is written out rather than typed on a keyboard, children’s ability to recognize the letters is improved. They further discovered that the learning loss caused by an excess of EdTech more heavily impacts “the lowest achieving students, as revealed by three primary global assessments”: the NAEP (National Assessment of Education Progress), the TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study), and the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment).

Editor’s Note: The PISA is an international assessment given every three years by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to evaluate the performance of 15-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science.

The EPPC noted that, similar to student outcomes in the U.S., “countries that have invested heavily in computers have seen ‘no noticeable improvement’ in their results for the PISA tests.”

Rather than providing a laptop to every child, EPPC recommends schools invest in computer labs where students can take computer courses and use after school or during study halls “to conduct research or complete assignments.”

Additionally, EPPC advocates investment in hardback textbooks rather than EdTech, and the use of paper and pencils for testing. “There is strong evidence that students will score better,” researchers explained, “especially in the reading and writing portions of tests, if they are taken on paper instead of a screen.”

EdTech in private schools

An article published in the December 2025 Private School Review provides a look at how private schools are implementing and regulating technology in the classroom. Combined, private and parochial schools serve about 8 million students nationwide.

Ironically, as the downside of EdTech is becoming more evident in government schools, its use is growing in many private and parochial schools, shifting from an “add-on” to a more integral classroom component.

However, many if not most private schools have a long way to go. Just 31% of Catholic schools, for example, have internet access, and many private and parochial schools lack the commitment to implement EdTech for a variety of reasons. Often, it is a financial and/or infrastructure issue as well as a privacy and/or student safety issue.

Some schools have adopted a classical education model, which favors a solid core curriculum over technology as a primary teaching tool. (See A Tale of Two Schools & the Growth of Classical Education in this issue.)

As one proponent of classical education noted, while some classical schools shun the use of technology, not all do. Some use technology “selectively,” but the overarching mission of classical schools is to preserve the human-centered, traditional nature of the curricula.

Excuses, excuses

A November 2024 report critical of EdTech, published by neuroscientist and former teacher, Jared Cooney Horvath, cited an analysis that investigated “the impact of computers on reading performance among K-12 students across the U.S.” The report concluded that “...even small daily amounts (30 min) of use of digital devices in classrooms are negatively related to scores on a reading comprehension test.”

Horvath described “a similar analysis of learning moderators within university settings” which concluded that “...expanding the use of technology at the expense of other forms of instruction is likely to have detrimental effects on achievement. Yet another set of analyses reported that investing in air conditioning has a more beneficial impact on student learning than investing in a laptop for every student (ES = 0.21 vs 0.16).”

Horvath explained that “as enthusiasts can’t lean on empirical data to support the adoption of student facing, internet connected digital devices across education, they frequently turn to three seemingly compelling arguments to excuse the lack of clear evidence of effectiveness. When placed in context, however, these arguments lose a lot of their exculpatory power.” Below are the three “excuses” offered by proponents of classroom technology, followed by snippets of Horvath’s responses.

Excuse #1: Digital devices have so much potential (or “Tech is the future...”) to which Horvath responds: “When people say computers have the potential to drive student learning, they are tacitly acknowledging that these tools are not currently achieving this aim.... I am not arguing against having hope for EdTech; there is a good chance that somebody will someday create a program that outshines even the best teachers in the world. I am simply pointing out that this has not yet happened, and that promissory arguments are not a solid enough foundation upon which to change educational practice at mass scale.”

Excuse #2: Digital devices are ubiquitous (or “They ain’t goin’ nowhere...”) Horvath responds: “When it comes to effective teaching and learning (pedagogy), we should select the tool best suited to the job; not the tool that is most prevalent. Just as power tools are confined to the woodshop and Bunsen burners are confined to the science lab, perhaps student-facing digital devices should be confined to a dedicated computer lab within school....”

Excuse #3: Schools are using digital devices incorrectly (or “It’s all your fault...”) Horvath responds: “... let’s give this excuse the benefit of the doubt. If computers are in fact being used incorrectly in schools, then what is the correct way to use them? As the OECD report states: ‘[Digital technology] is linked to better student performance ... when computer software and internet connections help to increase study time and practice.’ In case you missed it, let me rephrase that: learning improves when students spend more time learning.”

On January 16, 2026, Horvath delivered written testimony about the EdTech threat before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. His testimony disclosed that “Gen Z has become the first generation since cognitive records began in the late 1800s to score lower than the previous generation on measures of attention, memory, literacy, numeracy, problem-solving, and IQ, despite unprecedented access to technology.”

He further stated: “Frequent in-class computer use correlates with significantly lower math and science performance across both high-income and middle-income countries.”

The jury is out as to whether the important evidence gathered by these researchers will curb the technological monster in U.S. schools and around the world, but students are likely to benefit if it does.

Want to be notified of new
Education Reporter content?
Your information will NOT be sold or shared and will ONLY be used to notify you of new content.

Click Here

Return to Home PageEducation Reporter Online - April 2026