Is Technology Destroying Children’s Education And Mental Health?

I will never forget the year that our local school system decided to give every incoming 9th grader in the county a laptop computer for use in and out of school. It was called the “one to one” project and it was promoted by our Superintendent as the greatest thing ever in education. It would make student achievement soar.

There were many in the system that questioned the project since the Superintendent at the time, Karen Salmon, seemed in a hurry to get the program running. Our county, Talbot, was an early adopter of the initiative in Maryland. There were questions about security, distractions for students, making sure students didn’t damage the laptops, and teachers not prepared to effectively use the laptops in class. To each of the questions and suggestions of possible problems, Salmon’s response was to tell staff to keep their eyes on the goals of the program and stop worrying about possible problems on the way.

Not a very smart way to begin such a massive undertaking.

There were problems. Students would often use their laptops for other activities in class, insist on playing games, try to access websites they shouldn’t have been looking at, forget their laptops, damage or lose their laptops, and on and on. Since problems were not proactively solved, they required constant new policies and rules about the computers. It seemed like every week there was some change in procedures.

We had programs installed to monitor student usage during class. We hired extra staff to make sure students weren’t going to inappropriate sites on the internet and to repair damages, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Additional infrastructure had to be installed at very high costs.

Yet, computers and iPads stayed in the schools even when teachers said they were detrimental to learning. In fact, teachers were evaluated as to their usage of the technology. If they didn’t use it, they got marked down on their evaluations.

As a classroom teacher, I had no problem using technology to help me organize my lessons, provide background source information and some content that attracted student attention and motivation. For example, I once showed an interview with a nationally known entrepreneur on how he was able to create his business and which skills he needed to do so.

But, when it came to student work, it was a constant battle keeping students focused on their work, preventing them from plagiarizing or not accurately sourcing their information and monitoring their online activity. When they started accessing non-educational sites, the staff would block those sites. The students would figure out how to get around the blocks and the cycle of access/block continued.

Instead of enhancing learning, technology interrupted it.

In 2020, during the “pandemic” students and teachers relied on these devices to provide the cursory education they had during that time. Unfortunately, no one really knew how to do virtual learning, and it was a disaster.

One issue that never was dealt with before or since the pandemic, but was often brought up by teachers, was the fact that students didn’t actually learn any better with computers. In fact, test scores kept declining and students became less inclined to do their own work. The system removed cursive writing, memorizing math facts, doing research in a library with books, using textbooks etc. Who needed that with a computer at your desk?

Twenty years later, we are finding that those things we have outlawed, along with explicit instruction from a live human being, are critical to human learning. Technology, according to Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, is not only detrimental to human learning but the mental health of our young people.

Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath is a neuroscientist, educator, and author specializing in the science of learning. He is best known for bridging brain research with classroom practice and for his book Stop Talking, Start Influencing: 12 Insights from Brain Science to Make Your Message Stick. His latest book is DIGITAL DELUSION, available at Amazon. In the following videos, he explains the problem:

Here are Dr. Horvath and Mandee Hamann from screenstrong.org in a M4L Academy Session on the topic:

This article below is taken from Horvath’s latest book. It delves more deeply into the reasons why we don’t learn from screens and provides links to test data which supports this fact:

After watching both of these presentations and reading the article, it’s easy to see that technology in education is not the answer for student learning. Several school systems are getting the message and changing how they do things. Here is one:

While the alarms are going out about student screen time, school districts are also struggling to come up with policies that adequately address cellphones and artificial intelligence usage in schools. Here is an MSDE report on cellphone usage in schools. The report lists some of the actions being taken in Maryland districts:

It’s clearly another bureaucratic position that doesn’t really provide practical solutions.

Here is a report on school cell phone policies from FOX 45’s Chris Papst, Project Baltimore:

And a report from CBS on the nationwide trend:

As for artificial intelligence, most systems are approaching the use of artificial intelligence with extreme caution.

And here is a podcast episode about Artificial Intelligence:

This is just one episode of the podcast that covers AI usage in schools. The great thing about this podcast is that it has input from teachers and students who share what happened in their schools with AI and what is currently happening.

Like so much technology in use in schools, there are many inconsistencies between districts, schools and even classrooms. And, as they said in the podcast, school systems have been caught by surprise with the implementation of AI. One person stated, “AI is not easing its way in, it’s crashing the party!”

One other consideration is the question of who owns educational technology, artificial intelligence, and the data gathered from both? Here is a list of some of the companies that provide educational technology and online learning:

Obviously, the company and creators of ed tech and AI have a strong influence on the content presented and certain social and political biases. So, while human teachers may have built in bias, AI and tech may not be much better or even worse.

In fact, technology is biased. Developers use algorithms to create lessons and topics. Technology can only operate based on those algorithms. A developer can prioritize certain viewpoints, perspectives, topics, etc. over others thus embedding bias. For example, a developer can create an algorithm to select one description of history over another, create math and science examples that focus on certain ethnic or socioeconomic situations and groups, and implement social studies content that favors one political view over another. This bias may not be overt but hidden in lessons and exercises.

The only way to combat this bias is teacher/administrative oversight and auditing of technology from a non-biased board or committee. But will that really solve the problem?

Boards and committees have biases as well. Will participants actually be objective?

The other problem with educational technology and artificial intelligence is that it is always collecting date on the students using it. This is something parents may not know about or may not have knowingly agreed to. From ChatGPT, an AI search program that ought to know:

• Academic performance: Test scores, homework submissions, time spent on tasks, error patterns.

• Behavioral data: Clicks, keystrokes, time on page, engagement levels.

• Personal information: Names, age, grade level, sometimes demographic details.

• Learning preferences: Strengths, weaknesses, pace of learning, preferred formats.

• Communication data: Messages between students and teachers on platforms like Google Classroom or Canvas.

• Personalized learning: Adaptive systems (like DreamBox or ALEKS) use data to tailor lessons to each student’s needs.

• Progress tracking: Teachers and parents can monitor growth over time.

• Predictive analytics: Some platforms flag students at risk of falling behind.

• Curriculum improvement: Companies analyze aggregated data to refine instructional materials.

• Operational efficiency: Automating grading, attendance, and feedback saves teachers time.

• Data security: Risk of breaches exposing sensitive student information.

• Commercial use: Some EdTech companies may use anonymized data for product development or marketing.

• Consent & transparency: Parents and schools often worry about whether students (especially minors) understand how their data is used.

• Regulation: In the U.S., laws like FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) and COPPA (Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act) set limits on how student data can be collected and shared.

One of the scariest parts of data collection is the “predictive analytics.” While platforms claim that they are only identifying students who need extra help, the ability to “predict” student problems/needs could lead to focused advertising of products, programs, etc. to parents and even minor children. Social contagion via peers is bad enough. Imagine when a child is bombarded with information about sexuality, gender, etc. via artificial intelligence and targeted messaging on a school laptop? Could AI actually create a student who feels sad and depressed? Check out this article from September 2024 about an “app” being used by schools in Frederick County, Maryland:

When one listens to the podcasts regarding technology and how screentime affects children’s brains and academic growth and mental health, it’s clear that parents need to be informed and take a stand on whether their child will be subjected to six to eight hours a day on a screen in school and at home.

The website screenstrong.org offers many options including guides, books, information, recommendations and connections with other parents about fighting the onslaught of technology as well as social media in our schools and classrooms. One suggestion is to tell your child’s school that you do NOT give them permission to be on a computer, iPad, or any other technology in class but insist that they learn primarily from textbooks.

For too long, parents have seen social media and technology as a given in the lives of their children. It’s time for that to change. Technology should be a tool, not the sole focus of education or a child’s life. They deserve better.

SPECIAL NOTE: This is one area where we feel the Trump Administration may be going down the wrong path in education:

It’s our hope that there will be many guardrails, protections, etc. put on these initiatives, particularly for our younger students and that nothing will be rushed into implementation.

Jan Greenhawk is a former teacher and school administrator for over thirty years. She has two grown children and lives with her husband in Maryland. She also spent over twenty-five years coaching/judging gymnastics and coaching women’s softball.

This article was originally featured on the Easton Gazette.