    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             SCREENTIME IN SCHOOLS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   Before The

                          SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD,
                        ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

                                     OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE
                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                 HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 10, 2025

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 119-18

                                   __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Workforce

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov

                                    __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    62-534 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2026
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE

                        TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Chairman

    JOE WILSON, South Carolina           ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
    VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina            Virginia,
    GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania           Ranking Member
    GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin            JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
    ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
    RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
    JAMES COMER, Kentucky                MARK TAKANO, California
    BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
    LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan            MARK DeSAULNIER, California
    MARY E. MILLER, Illinois             DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
    JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana              LUCY McBATH, Georgia
    KEVIN KILEY, California              JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
    MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
    JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
    ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri       GREG CASAR, Texas
    RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
    MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington      JOHN W. MANNION, New York
    MARK HARRIS, North Carolina          YASSAMIN ANSARI, Arizona
    MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana
    RANDY FINE, Florida

                         R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director
                  Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

      SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

                       KEVIN KILEY, California, Chairman

    MARY E. MILLER, Illinois             SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon,
    GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania           Ranking Member
    BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
    MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
    JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                JOHN W. MANNION, New York
    RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
    MARK HARRIS, North Carolina          ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
    MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana             YASSAMIN ANSARI, Arizona

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on June 10, 2025....................................     1

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

        Kiley, Hon. Kevin, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early Childhood,
          Elementary, and Secondary Education........................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     3
        Bonamici, Hon. Suzanne, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Early
          Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.............     4
            Prepared statement of....................................     6

                                   WITNESSES

        Nye, Dr. Rich, Senior Advisor of Education, Office of the
          Governor, Utah.............................................     8
            Prepared statement of....................................    11
        Gibbins, Dr. Matthew, Assistant Superintendent, Richardson
          Independent School District................................    15
            Prepared statement of....................................    17
        Holcomb-McCoy, Dr. Cheryl, President and CEO, American
          Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE)......    22
            Prepared statement of....................................    24
        Twenge, Dr. Jean, Professor of Psychology, San Diego State
          University.................................................    33
            Prepared statement of....................................    35

                             ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS

        Ranking Member Bonamici:
            Testimony of Kris Perry..................................    94
        Adams, Hon. Alma, a Representative in Congress from the State
          of North Carolina:
            Report dated May 2019, from North Carolina Justice
              Center, titled ``Education Without Barriers: Addressing
              the Needs of North Carolina's English Learning
              Students''.............................................    68
        Owens, Hon. Burgess, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Utah:
            Testimony of Emily B. Cherkin............................    96

                            QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

        Responses to questions submitted for the record by:
            Dr. Cheryl Holcomb-McCoy.................................   102

                             SCREENTIME IN SCHOOLS
                             .
                             Tuesday, June 10, 2025

                                  ----------

                           House of Representatives,

              Subcommittee on Early Childhood,
            Elementary, and Secondary Education
                  Committee on Education and Workforce,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:18 a.m., in
    Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Kevin Kiley
    (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Kiley, Owens, Moylan, Mackenzie,
    Harris, Messmer, Walberg, Bonamici, Lee, Adams, Ansari,
    Stefanik, and Scott.
        Staff present: Vlad Cerga, Director of Information
    Technology; Dara Gardner, Einstein Fellow; Wilson; Amy Raaf
    Jones, Director of Education and Human Services Policy; Libby
    Kearns, Press Assistant; Isaiah Knox, Legislative Assistant;
    Campbell Ladd, Clerk; R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director; Danny
    Marca, Director of Information Technology; R.J. Martin,
    Professional Staff Member; Audra McGeorge, Communications
    Director; Eli Mitchell, Legislative Assistant; Alexis Morgan,
    Intern; Ethan Pann, Deputy Press Secretary and Digital
    Director; Ellison Powell, Intern; Kane Riddell, Staff
    Assistant; Carl Rifino, Intern; Sara Robertson, Press
    Secretary; Brad Thomas, Deputy Director of Education and Human
    Services Policy; Tierney Ambrose, Intern; Anders Vendt,
    Legislative Assistant; Ann Vogel, Director of Operations; Ali
    Watson, Director of Member Services; James Whittaker, General
    Counsel; Samantha Wright, Intern; Ellie Berenson, Minority
    Press Assistant; Sayda Bir, Minority Intern; Nichole Dumlao,
    Minority APAICS Intern; Rashage Green, Minority Director of
    Education Policy & Counsel; Caroline Guo, Minority Intern;
    Andres Hernandez, Minority CHCI Fellow; Christian Haines,
    Minority General Counsel; Patrick Jo, Minority Intern; Emanual
    Kimble, Minority Professional Staff; Samantha Wilkerson,
    Minority Professional Staff; Raiyana Malone, Minority Press
    Secretary; Marie McGrew, Minority Press Assistant; Eleazar
    Padilla, Minority Staff Assistant; Veronique Pluviose, Minority
    Staff Director; Banyon Vassar, Minority Director of IT.
        Chairman Kiley. The Subcommittee on Early Childhood,
    Elementary and Secondary Education will come to order. I note
    that a quorum is present. Without objection, the Chair is
    authorized to call a recess at any time. I am actually going to
    follow the Ranking Member's example here and surrender both of
    my devices, set maybe the sort of example that we want to set
    for our students.
        Good morning and welcome to the Subcommittee on Early
    Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education. This Committee
    has several Members who have been classroom teachers ourselves,
    myself included, but what a teacher faces today is in many ways
    unrecognizable from the classrooms that we all sat in, or even
    the ones that we taught in.
        Screens are now pervasive, mostly in the form of student's
    cell phones drawing attention away from interactive discussion
    and instruction. Too often students spend most of their days
    with their heads down, thumbs scrolling, and only a fraction
    interacting with increasingly discouraged teachers. Students
    spend lunch sitting side by side, but interacting with their
    phones, rather than their peers.
        We know that thoughtful, focused use of education
    technology can be tremendously beneficial for students. For
    example, students can use sensors and apps to gather evidence
    for investigations and do research faster than ever. This very
    Subcommittee, just a couple months ago, examined the use of AI
    and its really unlimited potential to increase student
    achievement.
        I have been a huge advocate for the potential that AI
    offers in our classrooms. We talked about this to some extent
    at that hearing, research shows that there are down sides here
    when it comes to fixating and excessive use of specific
    devices.
        Research shows that students are spending an average of 90
    minutes per school day on their own devices, during
    instructional time. This contributes to the 8 and a half hours
    a day the average high schooler spends on his or her cell
    phone. I mean think about that, 8 and a half hours per day on
    their phone. These are devices, and we are thinking about smart
    phones here that did not exist 20 years ago, and so you have
    that number going from zero to 8 and a half hours within the
    span of a generation.
        Teachers report that students hurry very sloppily through
    assignments, so they can go back to their social media posts,
    or YouTube channels, not engaging in the learning process.
    Students starting in elementary school huddle around phones
    where students share videos with their friends who do not have
    phones, sometimes exposing children to inappropriate content.
        Cyber bullying, originating in schools, is contributing to
    mental health issues among our youth, and cheating has become
    rampant. We must ask ourselves why student achievement has
    declined in our country, and why, for example, only 28 percent
    of our eighth graders are proficient in math, and only 30
    percent are proficient in reading. We have been asking
    ourselves these questions, I think there are many causes, but
    this is certainly one of them.
        It is not just personal cell phones that can cause problems
    in our classrooms. School issued devices are over utilized,
    with middle schoolers spending almost two and a half hours a
    day on school issued screens, creating eerily quiet classrooms
    with little student-to-student or teacher-to-student
    interaction.
        Parents in my district agree that screen time needs to be
    limited. A recent survey revealed that 40 percent of parents
    believed that screen time should be limited to academic use
    only, used strictly for academic work, and personal devices
    should stay off. Another 34 percent of parents surveyed said
    there should be structured device periods where students can
    use any device during a set time.
        The rest of the day being screen free. Less than 3 percent
    of the parents we surveyed said students should have full
    access to devices throughout the school day, so this is an
    issue where parents, I think, are really moving toward the view
    that we need to have some limitations at least in place.
        How can we balance helpful time on screens with strategies
    that have been proven through brain research to increase
    comprehension? Strategies like reading from paper and writing
    notes by hand could help, and rich, Socratic conversations that
    allows students to hear a variety of perspectives, not just a
    feed based on algorithms can also help. We need to listen to
    what the science is telling us about how screens affect brain
    development.
        Not only does too much screen time affect students but
    having to continually compete with cell phones for students'
    attention contributes heavily to teacher stress and burnout.
    Studies show that almost half the cell phone policies that do
    exist are not enforced by school leaders, leading to struggles
    between teachers and non-compliant students.
        The No. 1 issue causing teacher dissatisfaction is student
    behavior and discipline, 55 percent of teachers are thinking of
    leaving the profession earlier than they had planned. If we
    want to keep good teachers in the classroom, we should start by
    supporting efforts to increase classroom engagement.
        Today we want to hear about the status of State and
    district-based restrictions and limitations on phones, and how
    effective those restrictions are. We also want to highlight
    research-based practices of schools that have struck a balance
    between technology and interactive teaching in the interest of
    advancing student learning to create curious learners and
    productive citizens.
        Teachers and parents believe this is a community problem
    that can be solved by having a culture that balances the use of
    technology in the classroom with proven methods of instruction
    that encourage active student engagement, good mental health,
    good relationships and quality instruction.
        We on the Committee agree, and we look forward to hearing
    what steps are being taken to stem the tide of screens
    overtaking our classrooms. With that, I will yield to the
    Ranking Member for an opening statement.
        [The prepared statement of Chairman Kiley follows:]

        Statement of Hon. Kevin Kiley, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early
                 Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

        Good morning, and welcome to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood,
    Elementary, and Secondary Education.
        This Committee has several Members who have been classroom
    educators, myself included. What a teacher faces today isunrecognizable
    from the classrooms that we sat in or even taught in. Screens are
    pervasive, mostly in the form of student cell phones, drawing attention
    away from interactive discussion and instruction. Too often, students
    spend most of their days with their heads down, thumbs scrolling, and
    only a fraction interacting with increasingly discouraged teachers.
    Students spend lunch sitting side-by-side but interacting with their
    phones rather than their peers.
        We know that thoughtful, focused use of educational technology can
    be beneficial for students. For example, students can use sensors and
    apps to gather evidence for investigations and do research faster than
    ever.
        This very Subcommittee has examined the use of AI as a targeted
    tool to increase student achievement. Research shows that students are
    spending an average of 90 minutes per school day on their own devices
    during instructional time. Thiscontributes to the eight and a half
    hours a day the average high schooler spends on his or her cell phone.
        Teachers report that students hurry sloppily though assignments so
    they can go back to their social media posts or YouTube channel, not
    engaging in the learning process. Students, starting in elementary
    school, huddle around phones where students share videos with their
    friends who do not have cell phones, sometimes exposing children
    toinappropriate content. Cyberbullying originating at school is
    contributing to mental health issues among our youth. Cheating has
    become rampant. We ask ourselves why student achievement has declined
    in our country, and why, for example, only 28 percent of our eighth
    graders are proficient in math and only 30 percent are proficient in
    reading. I think we have found one of the reasons.
        It is not just personal cell phones that can cause problems in our
    classrooms. School issued devices are overutilized, with middle
    schoolers spending almost two and a half hours a day on school issued
    screens, creating eerily quiet classrooms with little student-to-
    student or teacher-to-student interaction.
        Parents in my district agree that screen time should be monitored.
    A recent survey revealed that 40 percent of parents believe that screen
    time should be limited to academic use only, used strictly for academic
    work, and personal devices stay off. Thirty-four percent of parents
    surveyed said there should be structured device periods, where students
    can use any device during a set time. The rest of the day would be
    screen-free. Less than 3 percent of parents said students should have
    full access to devices during the school day.
        How can we balance helpful time on screens with strategies that
    have been proven through brain research to increase comprehension?
        Strategies like reading from paper and writing notes by hand can
    help. Rich Socratic conversation that allows students to hear a variety
    of perspectives, not just a feed based on their algorithms, would also
    help. We need to listen to what science tells us about how screens
    affect brain development.
        Not only does too much screen time affect students, but having to
    continually compete with cell phones for students' attention
    contributes heavily to teacher stress and burnout. Studies show that
    almost half the cell phone policies that do exist are not enforced by
    school leaders, leading to power struggles between teachers and non-
    compliant students. The number one issue causing teacher
    dissatisfaction is student behavior and discipline. Fifty-five percent
    are thinking about leaving the profession earlier than had planned. If
    we want to keep good teachers in the classroom, we should start by
    supporting efforts to increaseclassroom engagement.
        Today we want to hear about the status of state and district-based
    restrictions on cell phones and those restrictions' effectiveness. We
    also want to highlight research-based practices of schools that have
    struck a balance between technology and interactive teaching in the
    interest of advancing student learning to create curious learners and
    productive citizens.
        Teachers and parents believe this is a community problem that can
    be solved by having a culture that balances the use of technology in
    the classroom with proven methods of instruction that encourage active
    student engagement, good mental health, good relationships, and good
    instruction. We on the Committee agree, and we look forward to hearing
    what steps are being taken to stem the tide of screens overtaking our
    classrooms.
                                     ______

        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the
    witnesses for being here today. We appreciate your time and
    your expertise. We all want students to grow up and learn in a
    safe and healthy environment, where they are protected from
    harm and equipped with the tools and knowledge they need to
    thrive in a rapidly changing world.
        Now that cell phones, laptops and tablets have become an
    integral part of our everyday lives, schools need to be
    equipped with the latest technology and high-speed internet.
    Being fluent in technology is a necessity, not a luxury,
    especially when students will be entering the workforce in a
    modern, global economy.
        Access to, and use of technology must come with guardrails.
    Research shows that unrestricted or unmonitored screen time is
    likely to have a negative consequence on student's mental
    health, as well as their learning and development.
        I noted the part in the testimony, in the written
    testimony, where there was a study of students studying on
    their laptops, and it took them 6 minutes to go from studying
    to scrolling.
        I told that to my son who is a high school teacher, and he
    said I am surprised it is that much. Most states, including my
    home State of Oregon, are working at the State and district
    level to implement comprehensive policies on this issue.
        For example, Portland Public Schools recently adopted a
    district-wide policy requiring all students to have their
    phones off, and other personal electronics off during school
    hours.
        They made exceptions of course for students with
    disabilities and approved academic activities. Although I
    acknowledge the importance of this topic, and it is important,
    I also note that many of my colleagues on the other side of the
    aisle and officials in the administration often say that the
    Federal Government should not be making decisions for local
    schools.
        As with curriculum decisions, technology policy should be
    managed by State and local officials. In our role as Federal
    officials, we can, and should be supporting that important
    research, which the Chairman mentioned, research-based
    decisions.
        The guidance, the partnerships, professional development on
    this topic, which is especially important to small and rural
    school districts that might not have the staff or the
    resources, or the research they need to draft effective
    policies.
        Again, this is an important topic, but I hope we do not
    lose sight of the other many issues that are clearly within our
    committee's control and jurisdiction, and how they affect
    students as well.
        For example, the Trump administration's actions, coupled
    with several harmful proposals in the congressional
    Republicans, I call the ``Big Bad Ugly Bill,'' opposed
    significant and urgent threat to students' well-being and
    academic achievement.
        The testimony we are going to hear today explains that as
    we have seen an increase in screen time, we have also seen an
    increase in need for behavioral healthcare. Earlier this year,
    and without warning, the Trump administration canceled more
    than 1 billion dollars in funding for student mental health
    services that were funded through the bipartisan Safer
    Communities Act.
        These programs ended without notice to states, and without
    recourse to help students who depend on them. The grants
    provided funding for mental health professionals, for support
    services, for suicide prevention resources, for schools and
    districts that desperately need them.
        Portland Public Schools use these grants to fund 21 school
    psychologists. They provided more than 8,000 mental health
    services to students during the 23-24 school year. Moreover,
    the administration's plans to eliminate the Department of
    Education will have significant consequences for schools and
    public education as we know it.
        It will deepen the inequity and instability we are already
    seeing across our public education system. Also, the Department
    recently have reportedly dismissed all of the employees in the
    Office of Education Technology, among other things, this office
    assisted districts and states in implementing best practices
    for technology, such as how to effectively use screens and
    other devices in schools.
        Last, but perhaps most urgently, this Big Bad Ugly Bill
    that my colleagues across the aisle championed, will gut
    programs that helps kids show up to school ready to learn.
    Programs that provide food, healthcare, stability to millions
    of families, and now they are being squeezed to pay for massive
    tax cuts for billionaires.
        Well, let me say it plainly, students cannot focus on their
    schoolwork if they are hungry. Students cannot reach their full
    potential if they are unable to access medical care, so yes,
    although we are concerned about students' screen time, we
    should also focus on what we can control by asserting our role
    as Members of this Committee who were elected by our
    constituents to engage in oversight of the administration.
        By restoring the bipartisan mental health funding that many
    of us voted to authorize, protecting the Department of
    Education's ability to do that important research, and offer
    guidance to states and local schools about technology, and
    supporting programs that provide children with food,
    healthcare, and a safe supportive school environment.
        I expect we will all agree that states have control over
    screen time, and I appreciate again the expertise and time of
    these witnesses, but I hope we can also work on the urgent
    challenges that are within our power and jurisdiction, so we
    get to the point where every student has the opportunity to
    learn and thrive. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Ranking Member Bonamici
    follows:]

      Statement of Hon. Suzanne Bonamici, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
              Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses for being
    here today. We appreciate your time and your expertise. We all want
    students to grow up and learn in a safe and healthy environment where
    they are protected from harm and equipped with the tools and knowledge
    they need to thrive in a rapidly changing world.
        Now that cellphones, laptops, and tablets have become an integral
    part of our everyday lives, schools need to be equipped with the latest
    technology and high-speed internet. Being fluent in technology is a
    necessity, not a luxury, especially when students will be entering the
    workforce in a modern, global economy.
        Access to and use of technology must come with guardrails. Research
    shows that unrestricted and unmonitored screen time is likely to have
    negative consequences on students' mental health, as well as their
    learning and development. I noted the part in the written testimony
    where there was a study of students studying on their laptops, and it
    took them six minutes to go from studying to scrolling. I told that to
    my son, who was a high school teacher, and he said, ``I am surprised it
    is that much.''
        Most states, including my home state of Oregon, are working at the
    state and district level to implement comprehensive policies on this
    issue. For example, Portland Public Schools recently adopted a
    districtwide policy requiring all students to have their phones off and
    other personal electronic devices off during school hours. They made
    exceptions, of course, for students with disabilities and approved
    academic activities.
        Although I acknowledge the importance of this topic--and it is
    important--I also note that many of my colleagues on the other side of
    the aisle and officials in the Administration often say that the
    federal government should not be making decisions for local schools. As
    with curriculum decisions, technology policies should be managed by
    state and local officials. In our role as federal officials, we can and
    should be supporting that important research, which the Chairman
    mentioned research-based decisions, the guidance, the partnerships, and
    the professional development on this topic, which is especially
    important to small and rural school districts that might not have the
    staff or resources or research needed to draft effective policies.
        Again, this is an important topic, but I hope we do not lose sight
    of the many other issues that are clearly within our committee's
    control and jurisdiction and how they affect students as well. For
    example, the Trump Administration's actions, coupled with harmful
    proposals in the Congressional Republicans' ``Big Bad Ugly Bill,'' pose
    a significant and urgent threat to students' well-being and academic
    achievement.
        The testimony we are going to hear today explains that as we have
    seen an increase in screen time, we have also seen an increase in need
    for behavioral health care. Earlier this year, and without warning, the
    Trump Administration cancelled more than $1 billion in funding for
    student mental health services that were funded through the Bipartisan
    Safer Communities Act. These programs ended without notice to states
    and without recourse to help the students who depend on them.
        The grants provided funding for mental health professionals, for
    support services, and for suicide prevention resources for schools and
    districts that desperately need them. Portland Public Schools used
    these grants to fund 21 school psychologists--they provided nearly
    8,000 mental health services to students during the 2023-2024 school
    year.
        Moreover, the Administration's plans to eliminate the Department of
    Education will have significant consequences for schools and public
    education as we know it. It will deepen the inequity and instability we
    are already seeing across our public education system.
        Also, the Department recently reportedly dismissed all of the
    employees in the Office of Education Technology. Among other things,
    this office assisted districts and states in implementing best
    practices for technology--such as how to effectively use screens and
    other devices--in schools.
        Lastly, but perhaps most urgently, this ``Big Bad Ugly Bill'' that
    my colleagues across the aisle championed will gut the programs that
    help kids show up to school ready to learn. Programs that provide food,
    health care, and stability to millions of families, are now being
    squeezed to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.
        Let me say it plainly: Students cannot focus on their schoolwork if
    they are hungry. Students cannot reach their full potential if they are
    unable to access medical care.
        Yes, although we are concerned about students' screen time, we
    should also focus on what we can control by asserting our role as
    Members of this Committee who were elected by our constituents to
    engage in oversight of the Administration. By restoring the bipartisan
    mental health funding that many of us voted to authorize, protecting
    the Department of Education's ability to do that important research and
    offer guidance to states and local schools about technology, and
    supporting programs that provide children with food, health care, and a
    safe, supportive school environment.
        I expect that we will all agree that states have control over
    screen time, and I appreciate again the expertise and time of these
    witnesses. But I hope we can also work on the urgent challenges that
    are within our power and jurisdiction, so we get to the point where
    every student has the opportunity to learn and thrive.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
                                     ______

        Chairman Kiley. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(c), all
    Members who wish to insert written statements into the record
    may do so by submitting them to the Committee Clerk
    electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m., 14 days
    after this hearing. Without objection, the hearing record will
    remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other
    extraneous material noted during the hearing to be submitted
    for the official hearing record.
        I note for the Subcommittee that some of our Members, who
    are not permanent Members of the Subcommittee, may be waiving
    on for the purpose of today's hearing.
        We will now move on to the introduction of our witnesses.
    To introduce our first witness, I would like to recognize the
    gentleman from Utah, Representative Owens.
        Mr. Owens. Thank you. I would like to introduce Dr. Rich
    Nye, Special Advisor of Education, to Governor Spencer Cox of
    Utah, in Salt Lake City.
        We both represent a remarkable State, No. 2 as best State
    in education, we are going to be No. 1 soon, and No. 1 in child
    online safety, so thank you so much, Dr. Nye, and I look
    forward to your testimony for sure.
        Chairman Kiley. Thanks very much. Our second witness is Dr.
    Matthew Gibbins, the Assistant Superintendent for the
    Richardson Independent School District in Richardson, Texas.
        Our third witness is Dr. Cheryl Holcomb-McCoy, the
    President and Chief Executive Officer for the American
    Association of Colleges for Teacher Education here in
    Washington, DC.
        Our fourth witness is Dr. Jean Twenge, a Professor of
    Psychology at San Diego State University in San Diego,
    California. We thank the witnesses for being here today and
    look forward to your testimony.
        Pursuant to Committee rules I would ask that you each limit
    your oral presentation to a 3-minute summary of your written
    statement, as Committee Members have many questions for you.
    The clock will count down for 3 minutes. However, pursuant to
    Committee Rule 8(d) and Committee practice, we will not cutoff
    your testimony until you reach the 5-minute mark.
        I would also like to remind the witnesses to be aware of
    your responsibility to provide accurate information to the
    Subcommittee. I will first recognize Dr. Nye for your
    testimony.

       STATEMENT OF DR. RICH NYE, SENIOR ADVISOR OF EDUCATION TO
           GOVERNOR SPENCER COX OF UTAH, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH

        Mr. Nye. Thank you. Chairman Kiley, Ranking Member Bonamici
    and Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to
    testify today, and thank you for tackling such an important
    topic. As stated, my name is Rich Nye, and I serve as the
    Senior Advisor for Education Policy to Governor Spencer J. Cox.
        In my previous life I was a superintendent of the Granite
    School District, one of the largest school districts in the
    State of Utah, serving over 60,000 students across 87 schools.
    On one hand, we acknowledge that smart phones offer unperilled
    access to information and can be a valuable learning school.
    However, the overwhelming evidence, as has been noted, points
    to serious downsides.
        Primarily, relentless distraction and detrimental impacts,
    not only in academics, but as well as mental and behavioral
    health. There is overwhelming national data that cannot be
    ignored. Nearly 97 percent of students report using their
    device during the school day. Adolescents, as has been noted,
    spend an average of 8 and a half hours daily on screen-based
    media.
        Some researchers have reported that an average student
    receives 237 daily notifications, and some students, those same
    adolescents, will receive an astounding 498 notifications or
    times that they pick up their phone in a single day. This
    barrage of notifications severely hinders learning, causing
    students to lose classroom focus within moments of even
    arriving to the classroom.
        Our teachers confirm this. It is a major disruption to
    teaching and learning. Beyond distractions, smart phones are
    contributing to serious mental health challenges. They provide
    a pervasive platform for cyber bullying with intensifying
    harassment through anonymity.
        Furthermore, excessive smart phone use and associated
    screen times hinders the development of essential interpersonal
    skills and limits face to face interactions. This can lead to
    social isolation, impaired communication abilities, and
    heightened anxiety. Experts even compare cell phone usage to
    other process addictions, demonstrating how over-use
    compromises academic and general well-being,
        This is why I emphasize that taking phones out of
    classrooms is not enough. If students are allowed to bury their
    heads in phones in the hallways or in the lunchroom, rather
    than engaging with each other, we are missing an opportunity
    for them to develop the interpersonal skills so critical to
    growth and success.
        Recognizing these urgent concerns, Utah has taken decisive
    action. On January 4, 2024, Governor Spencer J. Cox urged every
    school and district leader to remove cell phones from
    classrooms as a first step. We have already seen positive
    impacts in schools that have proactively implemented these
    restrictions. Reporting improved learning, decreased bullying,
    and more meaningful student connections.
        Additional statewide momentum culminated in a followup bill
    this year, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support,
    and which prohibits students from using cell phones, smart
    watches, or emerging technology during classroom hours. It also
    allows for exemptions due to exigent circumstances when
    required by a student's individual education program, the
    familiar IEP, Section 504 plan, or upon a medical necessity.
        My primary message today is that smart phones are an
    enormously destructive force in education, and states should do
    everything they can to support policies that keep them away
    from students, not just in the classroom, but from being used
    at all during the school day. As we say in Utah, from bell to
    bell. We are proud of Utah's leadership in working toward this
    goal.
        As such, Utah has taken a stand, and at the very least,
    students will not have unfettered access to smart phones while
    they are under the care of an educator.
        This new statewide expectation is a collaborative effort to
    recenter student attention on learning, foster healthier,
    inter-personal interactions, and mitigate the documented
    negative consequences of smart phone overuse.
        By addressing this critical issue, we are creating a more
    conducive and supportive setting for all students, ensuring
    their focus remains squarely on their learning and development.
        Furthermore, schools and districts are also analyzing the
    amount of screen time students experience on school provided
    devices, with one district already limiting the amount of
    screen time to an average 30 minutes a day.
        There is a clear commitment to establishing a better
    balance for the use of technology and screen time in Utah's
    classrooms. Again, I thank you for elevating this important
    conversation, and I am happy to answer questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Nye follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. Dr. Gibbins, you are
    now recognized for your testimony.

      STATEMENT OF DR. MATTHEW GIBBINS, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT,
       RICHARDSON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, RICHARDSON, TEXAS

        Mr. Gibbins. Chairman Kiley, Ranking Member Bonamici, and
    Members of the Committee it is an honor to speak with you and
    your colleagues this morning. My name is Dr. Matthew Gibbins. I
    serve as Assistant Superintendent in the Richardson Independent
    School District located in Dallas County, Texas.
        I am grateful for the opportunity to speak with you today
    about a pressing issue affecting schools nationwide, student
    cell phone use, and how our district has taken steps to reclaim
    instruction time, improve school safety, and strengthen student
    well-being through a phone-free learning environment.
        Richardson ISD serves approximately 37,000 students across
    50 campuses, with a student population that is racially and
    economically diverse. In recent years we saw first-hand how
    smart phones were disrupting learning and increasing challenges
    like cyber bullying, classroom distractions and student
    conflict, echoing concerns we know are shared across the
    country.
        In fact, our teachers' surveys identified phone use as the
    No. 1 concern impacting classroom instruction. In response, our
    Superintendent, Ms. Tabitha Branum asked our team to revise and
    update a local policy. Based on these changes, we also
    introduced a practical tool, the Yondr pouch to selected
    campuses. This secure, magnetic pouch stores student's phones,
    smart watches and ear buds during the school day, keeping them
    accessible after school, but out of sight during instruction.
        At our first pilot at a Junior High School the results were
    immediate and profound. 98 percent of teachers reported fewer
    disciplinary issues, and 100 percent reported more
    instructional time. Following that success we expanded to
    several campuses including a high school with nearly 3,000
    students.
        We proactively addressed parents' safety concerns through
    community meetings and clear emergency protocols. The feedback
    and outcomes were encouraging. For example, this year's
    preliminary data shows suspensions at certain campuses dropped
    between 15 percent and 54 percent.
        Classroom engagement improved, and teacher retention at one
    of our Yondr campuses climbed to 94 percent, with many citing
    the phone free environment as a primary reason for staying in
    the profession. Perhaps most importantly, teachers across all
    campuses reported regaining more than 10 minutes of instruction
    per class period, that is over an hour per week per class.
        That is now focused on student learning and connection.
    Here is what our educators say, ``It's not just about phones,
    it's about restoring focus, improving relationships, and
    reclaiming the joy of teaching.'' One principal told us we have
    gone from fights being filmed and shared on social media to
    students talking, reading and laughing together during lunch.
    While there is no one size fits all solution, our experience
    demonstrates that with consistent policy, strong communication
    and the right tools, schools can meaningfully reduce
    distractions and improve the learning climate.
        As this Committee considers issues related to student
    mental health, digital safety and education outcomes, we hope
    our model offers a practical data informed example of how our
    particular district policy changes and focus on instructional
    time in the classroom can support national goals.
        Thank you for your leadership and commitment to America's
    students.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Gibbins follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. Dr. Holcomb-McCoy, you
    are now recognized for your testimony.

      STATEMENT OF DR. CHERYL HOLCOMB-McCOY, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
    EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES FOR TEACHER
                      EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Chair Kiley, Ranking Member Bonamici,
    and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity
    to testify about such an important topic today. I am Cheryl
    Holcomb-McCoy, President and CEO of the American Association of
    Colleges for Teacher Education or better known as AACTE.
        Our organization represents over 500 educator preparation
    programs across the Nation, and we graduate more than 120,000
    new educators annually, encompassing teachers, school leaders,
    school counselors, special educators and other education
    specialists.
        As a former kindergarten teacher myself, and school
    counselor, I am here to discuss really the increasingly urgent
    and complex issue of screen time, and its impact on children's
    academic and social and emotional development. While also
    highlighting the critical role of well-prepared educators and
    addressing this growing challenge.
        You can please refer to my written testimony for a more
    detailed analysis. Technology overall can be a powerful tool
    for teaching and learning. It can personalize instruction,
    provide access to rich content, and support the learning needs
    of students with disabilities. As the mother of a daughter with
    special needs, I have witnessed firsthand how screen-based
    tools like tablets, and communication devices, can be
    positively life changing.
        Excessive screen use, via smart phones, as mentioned by
    other panelists this morning, is harming children's
    development, their mental health and academic progress.
    Children as young as 8 now spend 4 to 6 hours daily on screens,
    teens average nearly 9, and while some screen time is
    instructional, much of it is not, and teachers are reporting
    rising distractions in class, anxiety and disengagement of
    students.
        School mental health providers, counselors, are overwhelmed
    with cases of depression and behavioral challenges, often
    linked to social media, digital comparison, and disrupted
    sleep. Sadly, most educator and counselor preparation programs
    still do not include training in screen time science, digital
    wellness or media literacy, and this I believe is a serious gap
    in the preparation of future educators.
        Today, I come to you to urge you to consider Federal
    leadership in four critical areas that will increase our
    understanding of children's screen time and to better equip the
    educators who interact with our children every day. First,
    investments in educator preparation are needed through Federal
    grant programs, such as TQP, SEED, TSL, Hawkins Centers for
    Excellence and IDEA personnel preparation.
        These grant programs can prioritize outcomes, such as
    digital students, digital wellness, media literacy and tech
    use, but also the evaluation of programs that minimize or limit
    student usage of devices such as cell phones and other devices
    also in schools.
        Second, restoring school based mental health grants is so
    important. These grants created under the bipartisan Safer
    Communities Act enable schools and districts to hire and retain
    counselors, psychologists and social workers.
        Their termination has left districts and teachers and
    principals, and superintendents, without the critical support
    they need for students in crisis, particularly those affected
    by excessive screen time. These funds must be reinstated.
        Third, funding of rigorous research through the Institute
    of Education Sciences, or IES, we need longitudinal term
    studies on the effects of screen time from cell phones versus
    other devices, as well as evidence on effective educator
    training and instructional strategies that result in healthy,
    digital practices.
        As educators, we deserve and need to know what works.
    Finally, the issuing of national guidance through the Office of
    Educational Technology, or OET. OET, in my opinion, should lead
    the development of age-appropriate research informed
    recommendations on screen use. Its capacity has been severely
    diminished, and reinvestment is urgently needed.
        At AACTE, we also support the guidance of ISTE, or the
    International Society for Technology and Education. ISTE's
    research-based standards emphasize digital citizenship,
    empowered learning and responsible media use. Overall, we must
    invest in the educators who prepare and support our children in
    this digital age, ensuring that they are equipped with the best
    research and practices to face the challenges of excessive
    screen time.
        I thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your
    questions and partnership on behalf of all students. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Holcomb-McCoy follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much and now, finally, Dr.
    Twenge, you are recognized for your testimony.

      STATEMENT OF DR. JEAN TWENGE, PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY, SAN
             DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

        Ms. Twenge. Good morning, Chairman Kiley, Ranking Member
    Bonamici and other esteemed Members of the Committee. Thank you
    for the invitation to speak before you today. My name is Jean
    Twenge, and I do research on generational differences and how
    they're caused by technology.
        I also just wrote a book for parents called Ten Rules for
    Raising Kids in a High-Tech World. The first smart phone went
    on sale in 2007. By 2012, the majority of Americans owned one.
    The years since have resembled a vast experiment, especially on
    children and adolescents.
        The results of that experiment have been a disaster. That
    is especially true in schools where most students can use their
    phones during the school day.
        In a large international survey, twice as many students
    report that they feel lonely at school, as did in 2012.
    Loneliness at school has increased the most in countries where
    students spend more time using electronic devices for leisure
    purposes during the school day.
        Academic performance has also suffered. After rising for
    two decades, U.S. student scores on standardized reading and
    math tests declined after 2012. Internationally, scores on
    math, reading and science also began to decline around 2012.
        The declines in academic performance are significantly
    larger in countries where students spend more time using
    electronic devices for leisure purposes, like social media,
    during the school day.
        The mere presence of a smart phone reduces attention
    capacity and cognitive performance. In one experiment, students
    who did not have access to their phones during a lecture scored
    13 percentage points higher on a test than those who kept their
    phones.
        A study of Norwegian middle schools found that smart phone
    bans led to improved academic performance, less bullying, and
    better mental health, especially for girls, and we can put the
    slide down now, thank you.
        Third, students are talking to each other less. When
    students have access to their phones during breaks and lunch
    they are occupied with their devices, instead of interacting
    face to face with each other.
        This is on top of the sharp decline in teens getting
    together with their friends in person outside of school that
    has happened also at the same time that we have had major
    increases in depression, self-harm and suicide among our teens,
    that also began around 2012.
        A commonsense media survey found that one out of four teens
    watched pornography during the school day. Half of those said
    they used a school issued device to do so. That also means
    other students are inadvertently exposed to adult content at
    school. My oldest daughter, who just graduated from high school
    and is now in the Navy, once sat behind a boy watching
    pornography on his phone in the middle of a high school class.
        Fifth, access to phones often leads to bullying, fights and
    unauthorized filming. In a rural district in Colorado, more
    than half of student disciplinary issues were due to phones.
    When the North Adams School District in Massachusetts banned
    phones during the school day, discipline referrals dropped 75
    percent.
        Sixth, teachers find it difficult to teach when students
    are on their phones. Many are quitting in frustration. 72
    percent of high school teachers say that students being
    distracted by their phones in the classroom is a major problem.
    83 percent support banning student phone use during the entire
    school day. ``Every day is a constant struggle against cell
    phone usage,'' said one teacher who quit.
        ``We're competing with Netflix, Face Time, texting, they're
    even watching March Madness,'' said another teacher. In
    conclusion, allowing smart phones in schools has been a
    disaster for our children. For their sake, this vast natural
    experiment must come to an end. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Twenge follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. Under Committee Rule
    9, we will now question witnesses under the 5-minute rule, and
    I will first recognize the Vice Chair of the Full Committee,
    Representative Owens.
        Mr. Owens. Thank you to Chairman Kiley. Thanks for this
    very important hearing on the usage and impact of screens in
    schools. Technology can often be a forced multiplier in the
    workforce. However, we need to better understand the
    implications when we expose our children to digital devices,
    and what the long-term effects might be.
        I am grateful for the witnesses who are here today to talk
    about this topic, and how we can make sure that we are making
    the best decisions for our children. Dr. Twenge, I want, if you
    would not mind repeating, you just shared some percentage of
    children that have viewed inappropriate images on devices at
    schools.
        Can you share that once again? I want to make sure people
    understand the impact that we are having in this particular
    case.
        Ms. Twenge. Right. This was a survey of teens done by
    Common Sense Media, a really respected organization, and they
    found that almost 1 out of 4 teens admitted they had watched
    pornography--inappropriate content during the school day, and
    half of those who have said that they did that, did it on a
    school issued device.
        Mr. Owens. Okay. Thank you so much. Dr. Nye, you work
    closely with Governor Cox, and other State officials, to craft
    and pass legislation in Utah. What role did officials play in
    helping to make the case to the public and stakeholders about
    the need to make these changes?
        Mr. Nye. It was certainly a collaborative effort, right. In
    terms of the officials, you had not only legislators calling
    for it, parents calling for it, teachers calling for it,
    everyone saying something needs to be done. As you know, when
    you are crafting policy, that--statewide policy, that becomes
    very tricky in terms of if it is too prescriptive, then it
    limits or hinders innovation.
        If it is too broad then of course, we are not going to
    accomplish our outcomes. Our local officials and State leaders
    got together and said well, what could this look like for Utah?
    Put together what was a very collaborative bill in this case,
    and through the process we got significant feedback to refine
    it into something that is a step forward.
        Mr. Owens. I gather the parents were also a big part of
    this collaborative effort?
        Mr. Nye. They were, and so much of this policy, too
    originates at the local level, so there is permissive language
    in the bill that allows local control for local circumstances,
    and that is where you will have a school community council
    working with a principal, working with the teachers saying we
    understand the statewide expectation is to reduce or eliminate,
    excuse me, phones in the classroom, but what else needs to be
    true at our school regarding that?
        Then they could have that discussion and that engagement.
        Mr. Owens. Okay. Are districts and schools supporting
    teachers when enforcing these smart phone restrictions, and
    what does that kind of support look like?
        Mr. Nye. I appreciate that. Any good policy, or any good
    rule is only as good as its degree to which it is enforced, and
    for teachers, especially they had called out early saying
    please help us, it would be great to have a law, or a district
    policy to help do that, so we have something to point to.
        That is what they are doing now, and then to the degree
    administration is able to help when a teacher brings up the
    issue, or they are seeking to enforce what is the expectation
    when the administration is there having the conversation with
    the student, having a conversation with the parents, the
    teacher does feel supported in that effort, and is able to, you
    know, across the campus have some uniformity of expectation.
        Mr. Owens. You mentioned the Utah Senate Bill 178 received
    bipartisan support in the State legislation. In what specific
    ways did partners come together to cross the aisle to
    accomplish this?
        Mr. Nye. Yes, I think with the focus being on what is the
    impact of cell phones and screens in schools, the untold
    aspects of that. Everyone recognized that the common
    denominator of it was it is hampering educational outcomes and
    student well-being. When we made that the focus, people can get
    around that. Now, how we get there to addressing it, of course
    there is a legislative process to do that is--but for that
    bipartisan support it was commonly recognized as a statewide
    issue that smart phones and that associated screen time were
    hindering what is occurring in our classrooms.
        Mr. Owens. To say the least the from bill-to-bill policy is
    so Utah. I love the innovation, love the collaboration, and I
    love that we are having this conversation, very, very important
    for our kids and our future, so thank you so much and I yield
    back my time.
        Chairman Kiley. I now recognize the Ranking Member for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that
    this is a critical issue and that it is bipartisan, but I also
    want to reiterate that the Federal Government does not play a
    role in establishing policies. That is up to states and local
    school districts. Our role could be to be an effective partner
    for the states through research and guidance, professional
    development.
        Those are rendered more unlikely if not impossible without
    the Institute of Education Sciences and the Office of Education
    Technology at the Department of Education. We have been talking
    about academic outcomes and mental health, and you know, it is
    pretty clear from all of your testimony that we have a
    critical, serious issue to address with device addiction, and
    why it is so prevalent.
        Also, we need to talk about the risks of access, but also
    what can schools do to address it? We know that this is
    affecting not only students in urban areas, like I mentioned
    with Portland Public Schools and their programs funded through
    the bipartisan Safer Communities Act, but rural districts as
    well.
        A small, rural school district in Oregon saw a significant
    improvement in access to behavioral healthcare for their
    students when they were able to hire additional social workers
    with grant funding from the bipartisan Safer Communities Act. I
    recently learned that that funding is being turned off, leaving
    students without the support and counseling they need.
        Dr. Holcomb-McCoy, what are additional challenges that
    rural communities face, and why is that support through bills
    like the bipartisan Safer Communities Act so important?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Well, thank you for the question and for
    your concern about rural communities. The fact is--is that the
    American School Counselor Association has a recommendation that
    there should be one counselor to every 250 students, which is
    an ambitious ratio.
        In rural districts often counselors have way more than 250
    students because they are covering sometimes an entire county,
    which could be 700, 800, 900 students. The same is true in
    urban districts. Right now, we are just not hiring enough
    counselors that can manage the case load. On top of that,
    school counselors' work is based in school time, and so the
    issue of taking students out of instructional time for mental
    health concerns is also another challenge that there are not
    enough mental health providers in rural areas, also, that are
    close enough to provide the help that many students need there.
        Ms. Bonamici. I appreciate that. I remember having a very
    similar conversation in this very room after Sandy Hook and
    looking at the lack of school counselors and how important they
    are. We have heard pretty overwhelmingly about the positive
    effects of school phone bans and device bans.
        Dr. Holcomb-McCoy, not all studies suggest that a ban is
    going to lead to improvements in student well-being. Why might
    that be? Is there a relation to lack of training among
    educators and administrators, and what would be the
    consequences of the cuts to research and Title II professional
    development funding on this issue?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Well, many as I said, educators need the
    training to understand the challenge, as well as how to use
    technology in a healthy way. Although we are talking about cell
    phone bans which I can understand the harm that is associated
    with that, there are many students that need screen time to
    connect with friends.
        In my daughter's case it was to be able to communicate
    effectively and needing the time. It is important for teachers
    and educators, all educators, leaders in schools to understand
    this balance of how to use, how to create healthy digital use
    of technology.
        Ms. Bonamici. We need to get it right.
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. We need to get it right. It is almost
    like food. It is like we do not want to eat too much, it is
    harmful. Too little could be harmful as well. It is moderation
    that we are seeking for.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. Dr. Twenge, I noticed in your
    testimony something that is--I know it is submitted in your
    written testimony, but I think it is important to talk about
    here, we never take off our parent hats when we are parents of
    kids who are either in school or have been through school.
        You said some of the strongest opposition has come from
    parents who are concerned that they will not be able to contact
    their child if there is an emergency. You know, I noted Sandy
    Hook, but there have been many other instances, for example, of
    gun violence, Uvalde, Parkland, we don't need to list them.
    There are way too many, so how do you respond to that?
        Ms. Twenge. Fortunately, it is a minority of parents who
    are against the smart phone bans during the school day, but the
    vast majority do support them. When concerns are brought up, it
    is very often in that category, what if there is an emergency.
    In particular, a lot of parents want to know that. When I give
    talks at school's, parents will bring that up.
        Principals say they get that question from parents. It
    turns out school safety experts are in agreement that students
    having access to their phones during an active shooter
    situation is actually more dangerous, so that is for a number
    of reasons. For one thing, if they are distracted by their
    phones they may not listen to the instructions about where they
    need to go to keep themselves safe.
        The noise from those devices can alert intruders to where
    students are hiding. If they are using those devices, even you
    would think maybe oh, this is comforting to contact their
    parents, and that causes a bunch of other problems, then the
    parents are going to rush to the school. That is going to block
    access to police and first responders, and it is going to tie
    up bandwidth that those first responders need to respond to the
    situation.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. I know I have gone over, but I
    think it was important to get that on the record. Thank you,
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. The Representative
    from Pennsylvania, Mr. Mackenzie, is recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Mackenzie. Well, thank you Chairman. I appreciate
    everybody being here today. It is an important topic, and one
    that we hear about back in our communities fairly often from
    concerned parents and educators, so very important discussion
    to be had here.
        Ms. Twenge, I would like to go to you first and just
    inquire about what we know and what we have learned, or Dr.
    Twenge, I am sorry, from other countries. Are there leaders in
    this field that we can look to who have kind of maybe taken
    steps more proactively, or faster, and what can we take away
    from those experiences?
        Ms. Twenge. Well, one of the things that I described in
    both my oral and written testimony is a study that us under
    review by myself and my colleagues, looking at the PISA dataset
    which is around the world, and it has measured things like
    loneliness at school, and it also has standardized measures of
    academic performance in math, reading and science.
        There is a clear pattern. There are some countries where
    through restrictions or other means, students are not using
    their devices during the school day for leisure purposes like
    social media and texting as much as in other countries. We see
    a clear pattern that those countries that, where students spend
    less time on those devices for leisure purposes, better
    academic performance.
        Academic performance has not declined as much as it has in
    other countries. It stayed relatively stable, and that there
    has not been as big of an increase in feelings of loneliness at
    school. That gives us the great source of data to look at, yes,
    that there is different ways of doing this, and you are getting
    the best outcomes when students are not watching TikTok during
    class, which I think should not be that surprising.
        Mr. Mackenzie. Thank you. I will go to Dr. Nye or Dr.
    Gibbins, either of you might be able to answer this question.
    When a school district is going about implementing a policy,
    and they have come up with what they think is a best approach,
    they have maybe gone through some hearings with their local
    communities or school board, how should we look at engagement
    with parents, not only in the development of these policies,
    but then also the implementation?
        Mr. Gibbins. Yes, sir, thank you for that question. I think
    as far as our district goes, we have really focused on
    transparency for everything that we do on a daily basis. I
    think the tide has really turned from there being an us against
    them kind of mentality when we are talking about parents and
    their involvement in the student's education.
        For us it was definitely the idea of getting the
    information in front of our parents around what we were doing
    and why we were doing it. As you mentioned, we had several
    board meetings where we proposed the policy, we talked about
    it. We have frequently asked questions on our website.
        We address the parents' concern around safety, all of those
    aspects are all on our website, and we are able to offer that
    information. Second, just good old-fashioned face to face, sit
    down and talk with a parent and be available for them to talk
    through whatever concerns they may have.
        Our high school principals, when we implemented this policy
    were great at that. From a central level, I did not have very
    many conversations with concerned parents because our high
    school principals and our junior high principals took care of
    that, had good conversations, and helped our parents feel at
    ease.
        Mr. Mackenzie. After implementation have you done any
    followup with parents to see what their experience has been? If
    it has been positive for not only themselves, but also their
    students?
        Mr. Gibbins. Yes, sir. This is our third full year of
    implementation. In the first 2 years we sent out a survey to
    our parents and our students, and our staff, and so getting
    that information from our parents it was very clear that they
    understood the policy. They knew the reasoning why.
        There is some general concern around it, which I think we
    have heard from some of our other colleagues here, but every
    year we gather that information and try to adjust and offer
    information, or additional sessions around training if we see
    that there is a spike and some type of a concern, even for a
    particular campus in general.
        Mr. Mackenzie. Great, and just with the remaining time that
    I have. It sounds like you have figured out a great approach
    that works in your local community, but it could be a model for
    other school districts. Is there anything that is being put
    together by either your organization or others that you are
    aware of, that is a model policy, not only in the actual
    policy, but also that whole development and implementation and
    feedback program and approach that you just talked about?
        Mr. Gibbins. Yes, sir, thank you for that question.
    Actually, there is going to be a House Bill 1481 for the State
    of Texas that is going--will be signed by the Governor, or
    should be signed by the Governor that will help all districts
    formulate those types of things so there will be a requirement
    for a standardized policy.
        There will be an understanding of what those need to look
    like from consequences, all those things, and we are going to
    be more than happy to work with our State legislators as needed
    to help with that. Our policy and our process was not perfect,
    and so we are hopeful to help share our fabulous failures as
    well, and what we want to do to make things better.
        As we are moving forward, I think you will see more
    unification from that at the State level.
        Mr. Mackenzie. Sounds great, thank you again, and I yield
    back.
        Chairman Kiley. The Representative from Arizona, Ms.
    Ansari, is recognized.
        Ms. Ansari. Good morning. I want to thank our expert
    witnesses so much for being here today. There is no question
    that technology has dramatically changed our education
    landscape and the lives of youth in this country in some ways
    for the better, and in others for the worst.
        I personally got my first cell phone in the seventh grade,
    and I think often about how grateful I am that smart phones
    were not a thing until college, because growing up is stressful
    enough as it is, and My Space and Facebook were stressful
    enough as it is.
        Very important conversation that we are having today. I
    also do want to note that we are having this conversation while
    the Trump administration is gutting the Department of
    Education, cutting funding for research and teacher education
    grants, and recently announced it was canceling 1 billion
    dollars in grants to school districts to hire mental health
    professionals.
        Since 2010, we have seen a significant rise in mental
    health concerns among children and adolescents, coinciding with
    the rapid expansion of social media and screen time. Anxiety,
    behavioral disorders and depression have become increasingly
    prevalent, with 10 percent of children ages 3 to 17 diagnosed
    with an anxiety disorder in the U.S. as of the 2021 and 2022
    school year.
        In response to this growing issue, the U.S. Preventive
    Services Task Force updated its recommendations in 2022 to
    include anxiety screening for children as young as 8 years old.
    Dr. Holcomb-McCoy, given these trends, what do we know about
    the relationship between screen time and youth mental health,
    and how should educators, parents and policymakers approach
    this issue to better support students?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Well, the research that we have now
    shows that there is a relationship between screen time and
    mental health issues, particularly when we think about a
    noninstructional time on social media such as TikTok and other
    types of bad content. That is what we are really concerned
    about is the content not being instructional and helpful to a
    student, and therefore it can cause mental health issues.
        We are seeing that increase dramatically. We also see what
    we call comparisons, comparing oneself to others on social
    media, that is very, very harmful. The consequences can be vast
    if not treated, and one thing that we are seeing now is that we
    are seeing mental health issues among adolescents increasing
    dramatically, but the lack of treatment and intervention is the
    one that is so bothersome.
        If there are no school counselors available, no school
    psychologists, or if you are in a rural area, and there are no
    mental health providers in your community, then we are talking
    about thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of students being
    graduating from high school with untreated mental health
    issues.
        That is dangerous for many reasons. I could go into what
    that means as far as workforce issues, not being prepared to
    work, not being prepared to go on to stable relationships,
    overall, just not being able to be productive citizens. That
    will damage and be harmful for all of us.
        Ms. Ansari. Thank you. On that note, do you believe that
    canceling 1 billion dollars in Federal grants to hire mental
    health professionals in schools will help or harm these
    efforts?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Harm.
        Ms. Ansari. Thank you. Different students also have
    dramatically different needs and experiences when it comes to
    the use of screens in classrooms. You mentioned this in your
    opening statement.
        As schools increasingly impose limits or outright bans on
    cell phones and other devices, we know that disability
    advocates are increasingly concerned that these policies could
    impede access to much needed assistive technology that students
    with disabilities rely on in the classroom.
        Either technology that is on the student's phone or tablet,
    under the Individuals with Disabilities and Education Act, or
    IDEA, as well as the Americans with Disability Act, and Section
    504 of the Rehabilitation Act, students have a right to access
    assistive technology in the classroom.
        Can you also talk about schools can avoid assisting or--I
    am sorry, avoid restricting the access to assistive technology
    while they are setting policies to limit access to screens and
    devices during school hours?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Yes, I think, you know, I am a
    researcher myself, and I appreciate good research, and the
    research on cell ban, cell phone bans, is one type is on one
    type of device. Like my daughter for instance, with special
    needs and communication disorders, it was imperative that she
    had a tablet during school to be able to communicate with
    others.
        This tablet, the use of this tablet is screen time, but it
    is helpful screen time, so that she can communicate. I think it
    is important for future research to show the differences
    between the different types of devices that are present in
    schools, so that we are not banning all screen time for
    students because it could be helpful to some and harmful to
    others.
        We need more research that will help inform policy, and so
    that is--I mean that is, what is what I hear, the critical
    issue for us to determine in the future is what types of
    devices have the most harm.
        Ms. Ansari. Right.
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. I believe that the research on cell
    phones in schools is it is true and it is distracting. It is
    causing problems and harm to students, but there are other
    devices in schools as well that can be that can enhance
    learning, and so I think we need to look at that very
    carefully.
        Ms. Ansari. Thank you so much. It is incredibly helpful,
    and I think the final note to make sure that we are not just
    implementing one size fits all solutions be important to be
    research based and make decisions that are according to such.
    Thank you.
        Chairman Kiley. I will now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Nye, I want to ask you about some of your experiences and
    successes in Utah, and I have always been a fan of taking notes
    by hand and reading books, rather than on screens. I have
    always kind of felt intuitively that this is a more cognitively
    beneficial way of doing things, and now as we have discussed,
    there is actually a lot of research to bear that out.
        At the same time just a couple months ago we held a hearing
    where I expressed my view that technology, and in particular,
    AI has the potential to close achievement gaps and elevate
    student achievement in ways that we have perhaps never seen
    before.
        I do not actually believe that these two points of view are
    inconsistent. I actually think that one of the benefits of
    emergent technologies is there is the potential to liberate us
    from our screens. I think there is a growing consensus that the
    next major computing platform likely will not be screen based
    but will be more integrated with the real world.
        Even looking at some of the different modalities by which
    AI tools can be advanced now, you have video, you have voice,
    so you can imagine for example, a student that is reading a
    book, or doing a math problem that is able to ask a question
    just by using their voice, and then get an answer that they can
    hear so that they are not forced to go to a screen and look
    something up, and get pulled into something else.
        Have you seen examples of that where you can kind of use
    emerging technologies in a way that actually liberates us from
    screens, and enriches instruction?
        Mr. Nye. Absolutely. Thank you, Chairman Kiley. I mean to
    be clear, to remove technology, or suggest that we do so out of
    the classroom altogether would be a disservice to our students.
    When we are thinking about the appropriate use, what is that
    technology enhanced classroom versus that technology driven
    classroom?
        What we are primarily concerned is what are those--the
    device itself, whether it is a school provided device, or the
    one we carry on us is a smart phone, is only as good as what
    it's intended use is for. The concern, and the thing that we
    are wrestling with in the classroom is when the device is used
    inappropriately, or for means otherwise not associated or
    attributed to the educational and learning progression process,
    right?
        The other aspect of it to your point, that technology
    enhanced classroom absolutely is a place, and our students need
    to be able to identify the appropriate uses of those, as you
    have discussed, as well as the AI integration, and even blended
    classroom opportunities. There is a better balance, clearly,
    not only in the instruction side of it, but of course we are
    working to address all those negative uses of the devices as
    well.
        Chairman Kiley. Yes. Everything is changing so fast that it
    is I think really important for us to be hearing from you about
    what you are seeing in your classrooms, so that we can share
    best practices and respond accordingly.
        Dr. Twenge, I also wanted to ask you about your research on
    brain science, because we have learned a lot about what these
    devices actually do to the developing brain. I think it was Dr.
    Nye who mentioned there is something like 280 notifications the
    average students get a day from their phone, and we have
    learned about sort of the cheap and dopamine hits that things
    like social media provide, and then it kind of gets you into
    this vicious cycle where you need more and more of a hit in
    order, and you know, the reward is actually less, so then you
    are doing it more and more.
        Then it actually sort of undercuts your ability to, you
    know, engage in more fulfilling activities like relationship
    with friends and that sort of thing. Could you kind of just
    expand on how these devices are actually rewiring the
    developing brain?
        Ms. Twenge. Yes, and I want to be clear I am not a
    neuroscientist, so I have not really, you know, done FMRI
    studies, or any of that. What we do know is the effect on
    attention span, and how people end up feeling a compulsion to
    take that phone out every time it buzzes, and adults feel that.
        Then, think about being 10 and having your first smart
    phone, and that trains the brain to have that oh, it is
    buzzing, take it out, and that happens in school all the time,
    which is why that bell to bell policy is much better because if
    they have access to the phone in their pocket, and they are not
    supposed to take it out during class, but they know it is
    there, they know it is going to buzz, and they have that
    response.
        This is one of the biggest challenges I think is that we
    have these devices which have radically shortened the attention
    span to the point where many students cannot make it through a
    book, even a short book, so a lot of high schools in English
    class no longer require students to read books. They have given
    up, they only read essays and short stories.
        Even outside of school. Leisure reading is really important
    for developing empathy, for developing attention span for
    learning things. The number of high school seniors who read
    anything, a book, magazine, newspaper, anything longer form
    every day in the 70's and 80's, it was 60 percent who did that
    every day.
        In more recent years in the big national surveys, it is
    more than 17 percent. We have seen this huge, huge decline in
    reading books and being able to pay attention for that long.
        Chairman Kiley. That is very troubling. Thank you very much
    for sharing your perspective, and I think that, you know, maybe
    at some point later in the hearing if you had any tips as well
    for parents as to kind of little tweaks that you can make.
        Maybe turning off notifications would be a good one, right
    because then you get one, and then you pull out the phone and
    you check your whatever it might be, Instagram message, and
    then oh, here is a reel, and suddenly you are on your phone for
    30 more minutes.
        I would love to hear more about that as well, but my time
    is up, so I will now recognize the Representative from
    Pennsylvania, Ms. Lee.
        Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I mean I would like to
    just start by saying that you know, the prevalence and the
    phenomenon of screen time is I think concerning for all of us.
    There is no doubt that screens are incredibly prevalent in
    classrooms right now, and there is no questioning the need to
    understand like how that technology is affecting students'
    learning and their well-being.
        We know that children and teens' interaction with digital
    devices can lead to depression, to anxiety, and other
    concerning health outcomes, and we need to talk about it. We
    also need to address it, but what my concern is that
    Republicans are just giving lip service to mental health right
    now because the administration is ending grants.
        We have heard grants that over 250 school districts relied
    on to hire school counselors and social workers. It makes me
    wonder how the Republicans are going to ask us to have a
    genuine conversation about harmful effects of screen time in
    schools when they are enabling the administration to dismantle
    the Department of Education, and any support structures that we
    have for schools, program by program, nickel and dime.
        Republicans are asking schools to address students' mental
    health, while leaving them with very little support to actually
    do anything about it. Take the Institute for Education
    Sciences, the Department of Education has cut nearly 900
    million dollars in IES contracts, and a majority of IES
    employees were dismissed.
        This abruptly stopped ongoing research, including an
    evaluation examining whether mental health interventions were
    working. When states, districts, and schools make policies
    around screen time they turn to data and research to understand
    the scope of the problem, and what solutions could actually
    work.
        How are going to ask schools to make evidence-based
    policies around screen time while simultaneously cutting off
    the production of the evidence that they need? Educators are
    already stretched incredibly thin, and now we are going to ask
    them to be data scientists and researchers too.
        Dr. Holcomb-McCoy, why is it so important to invest in the
    Institute of Education Science? What role, and I know we have
    mentioned it in your opener, it has been mentioned, but what
    role specifically does IES data and research play in developing
    policies around using digital devices in school?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Thank you for that question because
    research is so important in education to guide practice, as
    well as policymaking. What IES different, if you compared to
    State level research, IES is/was a setting for--was an
    opportunity for researchers to do longer longitudinal studies,
    multi-State research to look at comparisons across many
    different school districts, many different states.
        It was a center for research that answered some of these
    important questions around practice and policy. For instance,
    when I was at Johns Hopkins University, I was part of an IES
    grant that looked at special education referrals, and it was a
    grant in which we looked at Baltimore schools, but Maryland
    schools in general, and looking at new interventions, and
    really testing those interventions by randomized trials to see
    if it actually had the impact that we hypothesized in the
    beginning.
        The research that comes out of IES was so important to the
    work of educators because it informed. It gave us more rigorous
    evaluation of the policies and the practices, innovative
    practices, that we thought would really work. It is all about
    tell us what works, so that we are not, you know, involved in
    practices anymore because we think they work, we need to know
    that they work through the rigorous evaluation.
        That is what IES gave us. It gave us a center for research,
    for researchers from our member institutions, as a part of
    AACTE, had many IES grants that were canceled that stopped the
    investigation of some of the most innovative practices.
        Ms. Lee. Thank you. In the interest of time I will send in
    my second question to the record, but I want to conclude by
    saying that the bottom line is that as students are facing
    increasing mental health challenges, schools need more, not
    less, support to keep up with the evolving technology that may
    be contributing to the problem.
        This Committee should be working to ensure that schools
    have the funding and the resources they need to understand and
    implement those best practices for the students. The Committee
    should be working to ensure policies around technology and
    schools address the growing digital divide for answers because
    while schools, or some schools are dealing with more and more
    screens, others are fighting for the bare minimal to teach
    students basic digital literacy.
        The Committee could be working to provide adequate
    oversight to add tech companies who are sharing students'
    personal data with third parties. In order for these
    discussions to lead somewhere meaningful, to improve students'
    mental health and learning and safety, we need the Institute of
    Education Services, the Office of Education and Technology, and
    a fully staffed, fully funded Department of Education. Thank
    you so much for your time, and I yield back.
        Chairman Kiley. The Representative from North Carolina, Mr.
    Harris, is recognized.
        Mr. Harris. Well, thank you Mr. Chairman, and thank you to
    all of our panel for your presence here today for this very
    informative hearing, and an issue that I think is extremely
    concerning to parents all across our country. I believe most of
    us, as we have learned today, can agree that when used
    correctly, technology can be an invaluable educational tool
    that can enhance a student's classroom learning experience.
        However, unfortunately, as we have also heard right here
    today every school district in the country has experienced the
    detrimental effects excessive screen time has on our children.
    There is a couple of questions that come to mind I would like
    to ask today.
        Dr. Nye, first of all, while Utah Senate Bill 178 created a
    statewide framework, what flexibility did it provide, or does
    it provide for school districts to adapt the policy to meet the
    unique needs of the communities?
        Mr. Nye. Well, thank you for the question. The bill itself
    has some permissive language in it that would allow a local
    district, while setting a statewide expectation that phones are
    not to be used during instructional time, if a local district
    working with their constituents and all those local boards, and
    patrons of the district were to decide hey, there is this
    element that we need maybe a little more flexibility with.
        As long as they write their policy, and the expectation is
    they do their own policy, that is in keeping with the intent of
    the statewide expectation but also identifies specific
    allowances within their community or within their school. That
    is certainly acceptable under the law.
        Mr. Harris. Super. That will lead to a followup to you, Dr.
    Gibbins. In your experience, how important is it for local
    school districts to have the freedom and support of the State,
    and even the Federal Government to make decisions that are in
    the best interest of their local students?
        Mr. Gibbins. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question. I agree
    with you 100 percent. The autonomy of the local school district
    is really, really important. Every school district is
    different. Every community is different, and they have the
    ability to have meaningful discussions with not only the
    principal of the school for example, but the community that
    surrounds that school is priceless.
        We need to continue with that, whether it be a cell phone
    policy, or you know, other policies that would affect their
    students, we need to have buy in from everyone. You know,
    schools were built around communities, that is the hub of a
    community, and especially in Richardson, Texas, we have schools
    that are the hub of the community.
        If we alienate any part of that community, we cannot be
    transparent and have some type of challenge when it comes to
    trying to do what we think is best, so I agree with you 100
    percent that autonomy and open conversation is really valuable.
        Mr. Harris. Thank you, sir. Well, I have long believed that
    states and school districts, and parents, are the ones best
    suited to address issues directly affecting their students. In
    fact, in my own home State of North Carolina, there are
    currently multiple bills that are working their way through the
    General Assembly that would empower schools to restrict or
    limit phone use within their own schools.
        I believe we have got to get the Federal Government out of
    the way of the states, school districts and parents, and really
    get back to empowering them to make decisions that are in the
    best interest of their students. I will ask one more question,
    Dr. Gibbins. You stated--I enjoyed reading your testimony, that
    teacher retention rates stand between 84 and 94 percent
    following the implementation of the new policy.
        How does that compare to retention rates in previous years?
        Mr. Gibbins. Yes, sir, that is definitely higher as
    compared to different previous years. As a district, I think we
    probably--85 percent retention rate as a district over the last
    several years. It has been higher and lower, it has fluctuated,
    but we have several campuses where it has gone to upper 90's or
    mid-90's.
        We have teachers who have made testimony around they drive
    by 7, 8 schools on their way to the campus in which they are
    teaching at because the policy that the school has in place
    around cell phones and just the comfort that they feel of not
    having to worry about that.
        Yes sir, we have seen an increase in our cell phone policy
    campuses where we have had the ability to really see teachers
    stay, and we know when teachers stay, they build capacity with
    not only their students but as teachers, and we have seen it as
    a really positive thing.
        Mr. Harris. For the record, you are hearing from teachers
    themselves that this is something they want, and this is why
    they are staying there in the retention rate?
        Mr. Gibbins. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Harris. Excellent. Thank you again for your testimony,
    and Mr. Chairman I yield back my time.
        Chairman Kiley. Since we have about 20 seconds, maybe Dr.
    Twenge, did you have any thoughts you wanted to add to my
    earlier question about some good habits, or maybe nudges for
    how use could be limited?
        Ms. Twenge. Well, I mean the first thing for parents is put
    off giving your kid an internet enabled phone, a smart phone,
    as long as possible. It is really tough for parents because
    many of them, their kids say, ``Well, I'm the only one,'' so
    parents are trying to come together to agree that they are not
    going to give their kids a phone until later.
        The rule in my own house is you get your first smart phone
    when you get your driver's license. You have to be at least 16
    and then have that freedom of that driver's license. Before
    that our kids have had flip phones, or phones designed for kids
    that do not allow internet and social media. That also helps
    during the school day, and that phone is not as attractive and
    interesting to pick up.
        There are these really specific things as you mentioned to
    talk to your kids about turning off notifications once they do
    get that smart phone. The other really, really important rule
    is no phones in the bedroom overnight. That is for adults too
    if you possibly can. You will sleep better and longer if that
    phone is not available, and then put those parental controls
    on, so it shuts down at night.
        Even at 16 they cannot download apps because social media
    does not verify age, does not require parental permission. Your
    kid might have TikTok or Instagram, and you may not even know
    it. It happens with even 10 and 11-year-olds, so when they do
    get that phone, having that parental control in place that they
    have to have your permission to download an app is very
    important.
        Chairman Kiley. Yes, great tips. Maybe some of them are
    applicable to adults as well as young people. I now recognize
    the Representative from North Carolina, Ms. Adams.
        Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr., Chairman and thank you to our
    witnesses for joining us today. We all agree that technology is
    transforming education, but we also know that how we use it
    matters. Too much screen time, unstructured or unmonitored can
    have real consequences on students' attention spans, on their
    mental health, and on their academic success.
        At the same time, when integrated thoughtfully, technology
    can open doors. It can personalize learning; it can create
    opportunities for students who might otherwise be left behind.
    Only if we are investing in all of our students, and that is
    where I want to begin.
        Last Congress, this Committee passed a bill that would
    divert public dollars to public schools with no real
    accountability. Private schools do not have to follow the same
    civic rights protections. They are not bound by IDEA. They do
    not face the same transparency standards as our public schools.
        My colleagues on the other side of the aisle will not argue
    with you on that because that is the truth. Dr. Holcomb-McCoy,
    in your view what are the constitutional and civil rights
    concerns that we should keep in mind as we expand school choice
    and privatization, and are there risks in removing the Federal
    protections that ensure that all students, regardless of race,
    background or ability, receive a fair and equal education?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Yes, thank you Dr. Adams for that great
    question. I think yes, there are civil rights concerns around
    the equal access to success and the same technology, the same
    policies that promote success for students. Our constitutional
    right to ensure that every student has access to the same
    opportunities.
        That is really important. You know, as we talk about screen
    time and different schools and different policies, and as we
    are talking today about some schools having success with cell
    phone bans, and others do not, then you wonder whether or not
    some students are not having the same opportunity for success
    than others.
        If you think about the different schools having, and there
    being no Federal oversight as far as having equal access, then
    that could be troubling because we could have more screen
    exposure to some students, and not to others.
        Ms. Adams. Okay. Well, let us move on to screen time and
    mental health. We have heard a lot today about the risks of
    excessive screen time, especially for younger students, but the
    issue is not just how much time students spend on screens, it
    is also how that time is spent, and what kind of learning is
    taking place.
        Dr. Holcomb-McCoy, how can schools better balance the
    integration of technology with the need for social emotional
    growth, and interpersonal connection in classrooms? What does
    that--what does thoughtful, effective integration look like,
    especially with students who are already vulnerable?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Yes, thank you for that question as
    well. I am encouraged that, you know, there are policies that
    are keeping students engaged during school time, but we still
    have out of school time where students are engaging in possibly
    inappropriate exposure to screens and different content through
    their cell phones and other devices.
        When we are thinking about, in your question, as far as how
    to be a healthy citizen, a digital citizen, how to regulate
    yourselves on parents having the information, the tips, to help
    students really understand how to be a citizen that understands
    the pitfalls to too much screen time, and also what works, and
    what will help them, and enhance their livelihood and their
    productivity.
        That is what I would like to see us train teachers to be
    able to help students become healthy, digital citizens.
        Ms. Adams. Okay. Let me get to my next question if I can.
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Okay, all right. All right.
        Ms. Adams. In North Carolina we have more than 100,000
    English learning students, one of the largest populations in
    the country, and I want to clear up a misconception, the vast
    majority are native born, but many attend schools that lack the
    funding, the staffing, or the training, to fully meet their
    needs.
        Mr. Chairman, I want to ask unanimous consent to enter into
    the record a 2019 report from the North Carolina Justice
    Center, which lays out how our students is underfunding the
    limited efficiency, English efficiency allotment.
        Chairman Kiley. Without objection.
        [The information of Rep. Adams follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. Adams. Dr. McCoy, what role can technology play in
    making classrooms more inclusive, and effective for English
    learners, particularly in underfunded states like North
    Carolina?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Well, first I know that English language
    learners, as they are learning English for instance, possibly
    need devices to help them with translations, to help them read
    better, the pausing, the--you know, reading passages. There are
    some best practices in using technology to help them develop
    the language acquisition.
        At the same time, we do not have enough research to know
    the possible pitfalls of the harm that screen time can have.
    Going back to the research piece again, we need to know more
    about what works with English language learners, a population
    in our country that going back to your question around civil
    rights, we want to make sure that we are doing the best, using
    the best educational practices, instructional practices for
    every population of students, so that's really important.
        Ms. Adams. Thank you. I am out of time. Mr. Chairman, I
    yield back.
        Chairman Kiley. I did not hear an objection to your
    unanimous consent request, so that communicated into the
    record. I now recognize the Chair of the Full Committee, Mr.
    Walberg.
        Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the
    panel for being here. I would be remiss as Chairman of the Full
    Committee to not say what we are hearing today is common sense,
    right?
        Simple common sense. The same common sense that Mr. Ziemer,
    my fifth-hour social studies teacher, used when he caught me,
    though, doing the best that I could, to run that earphone up my
    sleeve to my ear, so I could listen on my transistor radio to
    the World Series.
        He understood through common sense that the World Series
    and social studies and the learning of social studies at the
    time did not go well together. He was not opposed to the World
    Series. He was not opposed to me enjoying FX, but he wanted
    more of the opportunity to educate me.
        I think we are talking common sense here. We know, we know
    that cell phones and smart phones are hurting our kids when
    they are not controlled. We know that they are affecting our
    classrooms. We know that our teachers are frustrated with it.
    We know that when we get it right for students, parents and
    teachers, education works.
        I appreciate the school districts here represented that
    have taken the step to say enough already. We understand we are
    in this century, and we are going to have more with AI and
    technology, and we are going to use it for some things that
    helicopter parents and other have to get used to, that their
    kids will do just fine if they are in a classroom where
    education is first and foremost, and not social media.
        We know that research will inform us on that, but we do not
    need some of the research, we have seen it already. I agree
    that we should not have the Federal Government stepping in, but
    we ought to encourage states, and especially local districts,
    and especially parents to step up to the plate and say enough,
    enough. Let us get back to what really works in education.
        Thank you for being here, and thank you for listening to my
    rant. I am Chairman, so I can do that, right, expect it of me.
    No objection. Dr. Twenge, you referenced studies, comparing the
    reading comprehension on screenings versus paper. What do those
    studies show, and why might reading on screens produce
    different outcomes than reading on paper?
        Ms. Twenge. Yes, it is interesting, we have got some of
    those experiments now that show, most of them are with college
    students when they take notes on paper versus taking notes on a
    laptop, they tend to do better, especially on comprehensive
    exams, things that take more thought.
        You know, I think the brain mechanisms behind that are
    still to be explored, but we have a challenge in education
    finding that balance between using technology for what it is
    good for but then making sure that that individual use of
    technology does not interfere with learning.
        Front of room technology, showing a video that everyone is
    seeing or using those types of resources, that clearly has
    benefits, but whether that individual one to one policy of K
    through 12 students having that laptop or tablet with them all
    the time, that does not seem to have had the benefits that
    people were hoping for, given what we have seen in test scores,
    for example.
        Mr. Walberg. Okay, thank you. Dr. Gibbins, you mentioned
    magnetically sealed pouches being used or simply restricting
    the phone usage. Are you seeing any difference in effectiveness
    or compliances between those two approaches? If so, what are
    the reasons?
        Mr. Gibbins. Yes, sir. We are seeing a little bit of the
    difference. You know, as a district we implemented a phone free
    policy, and then offered the opportunity for campuses that were
    interested or felt like it was a need to use the Yondr pouches,
    which are the magnetically sealed pouches.
        From the very beginning we knew that everyone had the same
    expectation, but how they reached that and how they did that
    was up to them.
        When we look at, for example, instructional time on
    campuses, when you look at, and forgive me for simplifying
    this, but when we have our non-Yondr campuses, you know, the
    instructional time that they got back was 9 to 10 minutes for
    our Yondr-campuses, the campuses that were implementing the
    magnetically sealed bag, it was more almost close to 13 to 14
    minutes.
        There are some percentage discrepancies when it comes to
    that. We have seen overall improvement of course, with the
    implementation of the entire policy, but a little bit of
    improvement even farther than that with the Yondr pouch.
        Mr. Walberg. I appreciate that. I see my time is going to
    expire, so if somebody wants to yield me later on, I have got
    another question for Mr. Nye. I yield back.
        Chairman Kiley. I now recognize the Ranking Member of the
    Full Committee, Mr. Scott.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Holcomb-
    McCoy, Virginia recently implemented a policy restricting cell
    phone use in schools. One of the things that has occurred to
    some of us, as there might be some financial barriers. Are
    there any financial barriers in implementing cell phone bans?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. That is a good question. I am not sure
    about the financial burden on parents or students because of
    bans. I think in many cases because the usage of cell phones
    really started with parents wanting to be able to communicate
    with their students. It could be that the financial burden of
    not using something that they have purchased could be a
    possibility, but I am unsure of that question, so I need to get
    back to you on it.
        Mr. Scott. Is there any financial burden on the school
    district?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. With bans?
        Mr. Scott. Right.
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Well, the possibility of how do you
    enforce school cell phone bans could be a possible financial
    obligation on the part of the school district. If you weigh,
    you know, I am thinking about weighing you know, the costs of
    hiring more counselors and mental health professionals, and the
    costs of saving students in comparison to the cost compared to
    hiring to monitor school bans, and what that will do as far as
    disciplinary actions and others.
        I do not know that, but that is really an important
    question, I think, for local school districts to really look at
    very carefully.
        Mr. Scott. You mentioned discipline. Do any school bans
    include sanctions on students who might get them caught up in a
    school to prison pipeline?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Yes. I think that is a real issue that
    should be explored. After the bans have been in place for a
    period of time, to look very carefully at the data of who is
    being disciplined for having a phone anyway. Those are the
    types--those are the datapoints that I think that we do not
    know enough about yet, that really should be examined in the
    future.
        Mr. Scott. Are there any educational aspects of schooling
    that may be improved by having personal devices in classrooms?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Yes. I gave earlier today I talked about
    even my daughter, who has special needs, who has really, her
    education has been enhanced by the use of screen time through
    tablets, not necessarily her cell phone, but by the use of
    tablets and other types of devices.
        When you are calculating screen time, and not just cell
    phone time for her, it was important to have screen time on
    other devices, and that did enhance her ability to learn. That
    is the case for other children with disabilities and other
    different learning styles and needs.
        Mr. Scott. The studies that show that teachers are more
    likely to use education technology if they feel competent in
    its application, but we have cut funding for teacher quality
    partnerships in supporting effective educator development. Why
    is it important for the Federal Government to continue its
    commitment to supporting educator preparation and development
    as we see the rise of technology in the classroom?
        Ms. Holcomb-McCoy. Yes. Well, I am not opposed to policies
    that increase learning, so cell phone bans could be--we might
    see an increase in academic achievement. One thing that we do
    know through our research over many years, is that teachers
    play a critical role. The effectiveness of teachers and teacher
    quality plays an effective role in the academic achievement.
        Training teachers, preparation for teachers and educators
    in this digital age is so important. We have many teachers who
    are not trained to use technology responsibility in a
    classroom. There could be positive screen time that could be
    working to the benefit of students.
        Educator preparation, teacher preparation is still key, it
    is important when we are thinking--when we are talking about
    academic achievement, academic progress, the quality of our
    teachers, their preparation in classrooms is still key, no
    matter what.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Kiley. The Representative from Guam, Mr. Moylan is
    recognized.
        Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Ney, since COVID-
    19 of course, many schools have kept portions of their online
    learning model, and computers and the internet have become
    increasingly integrated into the classroom, and in fact, if you
    do not have one it seems like your school is outdated.
        The students are even learning the usage of these
    electronic devices probably faster than the teachers,
    definitely faster than I can. We have got to get this balance.
    What policies can local school districts and the State
    district--government, rather, the State governments, consider
    where we can place this balance for modern learning, and at the
    same time limiting the non-academic screen time?
        Mr. Ney. Thank you. As far as the policies are concerned,
    really what that instructional progression looks like,
    technology ought to be a part of that in some way. What
    districts are doing right now in Utah, and across several of
    them, they are analyzing the degree that they are incorporating
    the use of those devices, as part of their instruction.
        As much as we are asking students to limit some of their
    screen time, several districts are identifying well, they ought
    to limit some of the use of their screen time because it has
    become overdependent. I had one student that tugged on my
    suitcoat when I was visiting a school and says help. I said
    what is going on? He says well, unfortunately I feel like all
    we do is open up the laptop and we start working, and there is
    little interaction there.
        Clearly that would be inappropriate, and so measures are
    being taken to say well, if that--to that extreme is not
    conducive to learning, then how do we just incorporate that, or
    find that better balance?
        Districts right now, schools right now, parents are asking
    the same questions, students are rising to the front and saying
    well, technology is clearly important in the classroom,
    however, to what degree should it be used?
        That looks, in some cases as has been noted, that varies
    from student to student at times, but in that general tier 1
    instruction, that primary instruction, we do need to find a
    better balance, and those are the questions that we are asking
    in our classrooms.
        Mr. Moylan. I can picture that student, that would be like
    me. I prefer the interaction with the instructor. They are the
    motivating part for me, and one teacher would go a certain way,
    but if I changed my teacher, boy I got a straight A, so there
    is a big difference. Thank you for pointing that out.
        Another question for you please. Our biggest concern about
    limiting access to phones in schools and communicating with
    students during emergencies. How can school districts adapt
    policies that balance the student's safety with proper learning
    environments?
        Mr. Ney. Yes, one of the biggest questions or concerns that
    we receive from parents was to that point. Saying, I would love
    to get ahold of my student during the day, or they need to get
    ahold of me if there is an emergency at the school. What we
    find, even our first responders have suggested, and we have
    experienced where inaccurate information is communicated during
    an emergency that has further complicated our first responder's
    ability to engage for a lot of different reasons.
        There does need to be a better balance there. Our policies
    in Utah do allow for exigent circumstances for students to have
    access to their devices in the case of an emergency. However,
    that balance is tenuous at best because at times it can
    actually hinder our first responders and their efforts to see
    to.
        I am speaking to a large emergency where first responders
    are involved, and maybe it is a situation where our students
    feel like they need to communicate, or parents need to find out
    that the child is safe.
        All those things are very valid, and so we are seeking to
    find a better balance in that.
        Mr. Moylan. I appreciate. That is very important as well,
    the proper information coming on down. Excellent, thank you.
    Dr. Twenge, girls seem to spend a large percentage of their day
    engaged in social media, they are a lot faster than I am with
    their thumbs, they are on the machines too.
        Your research analysis shows a rise in depression, self-
    harm, suicide and other forms of mental health struggle,
    especially in young girls. Could you explain the specific harms
    girls are facing from their exposure to social media, and how
    reducing access during school hours might help support student
    mental health?
        Ms. Twenge. Thank you for that question. We have seen
    extremely concerning rises in depression, it has doubled since
    2012, and that is not diagnosed depression, that is from a
    screening study, so it cannot be due to greater help seeking,
    or changes in diagnoses. That is based on the symptoms of
    depression among adolescents.
        Among girls in particular, we have seen really large
    increases in suicide and in self-harm, so it is just one
    example. The CDC keeps data on emergency room admissions for
    self-harm. Those have quintupled, increased by a factor of
    five, among 10 to 14-year-old girls, so the youngest group.
        There is a number of mechanisms of harm here. First, if you
    are spending 5 hours a day on social media, as the average U.S.
    teen now does, that's a lot less time for sleep, less time for
    interacting with friends and family in person, less time for
    just appreciating what is around you.
        Then there is the specific harms of comparing yourself,
    especially with body image on platforms like Instagram, and the
    competition for likes and followers, seeing what everyone else
    is doing without you, and I could go on, but you get the idea,
    there is really, really severe harms, particularly to girls.
        Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Doctor, thank you Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Kiley. The Representative from Indiana, Mr.
    Messmer is recognized.
        Mr. Messmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you for the
    witnesses for being here. Dr. Nye, I understand as
    Superintendent you have led a pilot program in your district
    that implemented the cell phone restriction. Could you share
    what you observed in that process, and what lessons you have
    taken away from the experience?
        Mr. Nye. A few years ago, before statewide expectations, we
    identified as an issue, and working with the few junior high
    schools, and one high school, we identified what would be a
    bell-to-bell restriction. What we identified there as data is
    very important to track to see what the effect is, right?
        This is the intervention, what are the outcomes? What we
    noticed in that first of all the students for the first 2 weeks
    really struggled, and I visited the school before the
    restriction took place, and I just made a casual observation in
    the lunchroom and heads were buried in the phones, and very
    little interaction was occurring.
        Followup, fast forward, when the restrictions in place I
    was in the lunchroom, students were talking to teach other,
    they are engaging, they are laughing, they are having a much
    better time, more interactive time. I would say as far as the
    data is concerned, over the course of those 3 years we have
    seen an increase in proficiency in ELA, math and science, both
    not only in the proficiency, but in the growth in those
    academic content areas, as well as student discipline
    improving.
        What was once a well, office referrals. I will use this for
    instance, the number of office referrals decreased by 43
    percent. These are the students that, for whatever reason, they
    have engaged inappropriately in a classroom, and they need to
    go take a little--take it to the principal's office, so to
    speak, those have been reduced by 43 percent.
        Wildly favor and parents have adjusted and appreciated it
    as well.
        Mr. Messmer. Thank you. Dr. Gibbins, last year there were
    almost 50,000 teacher positions in your State unfilled or
    filled by someone who was not certified for that position. Do
    you believe the policies restricting cell phone usage could
    play a role in improving the overall classroom environment, and
    therefore incentivize more qualified teachers to join the
    workforce?
        Mr. Gibbons. Yes, sir. I do. The idea of having a
    qualified, certified teacher in a classroom is the best-case
    scenario for any student. Although we do have alternatively
    certified teachers and have a wealth of experience in the
    outside world coming into the classroom, which is beneficial,
    having the certified teacher in the classroom, there is no
    other way to do that.
        The idea of having teachers who want to come to our
    district, for example, because we have a cell phone free
    policy, and because we have maybe less discipline, less
    opportunities for that teacher to have to engage around a
    phone, the better. Any time that we can get a certified teacher
    in a classroom, we are going to be benefiting, both not only
    for the campus, but for the students.
        Mr. Messmer. Thank you. Dr. Twenge, you quoted a headmaster
    in your written testimony saying that students can retreat in
    the short-term safety of their phones, rather than tolerate the
    discomfort that often proceeds finding one's way into a
    conversation. Can you talk about the short-term and--long-term
    dangers of that type of phone dependent coping behavior?
        Ms. Twenge. This is something I hear from my undergraduate
    students a lot as well, that they feel a lot of anxiety in
    social situations, and ironically, some of that anxiety comes
    from their phones that they are used to communicating via text,
    instead of speaking to people in person.
        It also comes from the nervousness that a lot of people,
    particularly on what people feel around something called
    phubbing, which is a combination of phone and snubbing. It is
    where you are talking to someone and they take out their phone.
    Everybody does it, but everybody hates it.
        You never know when you are talking to your friend when he
    or she is going to take out that phone, and then you think
    well, what is going on? Am I boring? What did I say? It is this
    very unhealthy dynamic. It really interferes with that natural
    development of social skills during that crucial time of
    adolescents.
        Student knows this. I had a sophomore at a high school in
    Texas where I was speaking come up to me and say I really want
    to talk to my friends at lunch, but they want to play games on
    their phone.
        What can I do? My heart broke a little bit because what can
    he do, but if his school has that no phones during the school
    day bell to bell policy where they are not allowed to take them
    out during lunch, that problem is instantly solved.
        Mr. Messmer. Excellent. Thank you for all of the answers,
    and Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Kiley. Chair Walberg, do you want to take a shot
    with the last 30 seconds?
        Mr. Walberg. I would love to, thank you. Dr. Ney, you
    mentioned the role of State and local entities in this issue.
    Why was it important for your Governor to pursue a statewide
    approach?
        Mr. Ney. For us, we recognized that it was a statewide
    issue, and while local effort clearly could have taken place
    before that site was statewide expectation, it seemed to be
    slow and sporadic. As we identified just surveying what the
    conditions were across schools throughout Utah, identified that
    there was a lot to be gained through a statewide expectation.
        Mr. Walberg. That push an incentive, okay. Yes, I
    appreciate that. I yield back.
        Chairman Kiley. Thanks very much. Ranking Member Bonamici,
    we have both been without our phones for 2 hours, how are you
    managing?
        Ms. Bonamici. I am doing pretty well actually. I did not
    miss my phones, and I think without a doubt it helped me
    concentrate.
        Chairman Kiley. This is my yield to you for your closing
    statement by the way.
        Ms. Bonamici. I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
    truly have appreciated the discussion today and I learned a lot
    on you know, the effects of screen time on students, but I want
    to reiterate that it is really crucial to recognize that there
    are many other issues within our jurisdiction that demand our
    attention.
        Yes, this is important, but we cannot pretend that
    everything is normal when the recent actions by the Trump
    administration in this proposed what I call the Big Bad Ugly
    Bill present significant threats to the well-being of students
    and the integrity of our public education system.
        The abrupt cancellation of the student mental health
    funding established under the bipartisan--I emphasize
    bipartisan Safer Communities Act has left many school districts
    without funding that provided critical support services, and
    access to behavioral healthcare.
        The proposed elimination, as we have heard, at the
    Department of Education's Office of Educational Technology and
    IES, Institute of Education Sciences, again, would remove vital
    resources for schools that are striving to integrate technology
    efficiently and equitably, but also in light of everything we
    heard today, in a way that is going to really help students be
    more successful.
        It is also very concerning that the proposed cuts to
    Medicaid and SNAP in this Reconciliation Bill would strip away
    critical support for millions of families, including children.
    The programs are not just safety nets. They are lifelines that
    give students the stability they need to succeed academically.
        As we have seen, these issues are not abstract, they have
    real tangible consequences in the lives of students across the
    country, and I know all of the witnesses, I really appreciated
    your testimony today.
        I also want to note that we have heard in this Committee
    room and in public, the administration and Members of this
    Committee, talk about the NAEP scores as a reason why they need
    to get rid of the Department of Education. NAEP scores are
    down, therefore we do not need the Department of Education.
        We should turn everything back to the states. I think what
    we heard today make a case for protecting the Department of
    Education particularly in research, and its research capacity,
    protecting the funding that was provided by Congress for those
    grants to help with mental healthcare access, and I think this
    is a place where we can make the case that it is much more
    complex.
        Why are the NAEP scores down? We heard a lot today about
    how students cannot concentrate, how they cannot focus, how
    they are distracted. I just want to add that because it is a
    complex issue, but the fact that the NAEP scores are down is
    not a reason to eliminate the Department of Education.
        In fact, it is a reason to ask why can we not do better. I
    urge all my colleagues to focus on restoring that funding for
    access to mental health services, protecting the Department of
    Education, especially its research capacity, and focusing on
    policies that will give every child the opportunity to learn
    and thrive.
        Thank you again for your excellent testimony, and I yield
    back. I hope Mr. Chairman, that you will tell us how you are
    doing for the 2 hours without your phone.
        Mr. Kiley. I think I am doing all right, but you do after a
    while just start to say where is my phone, right? It would be
    good if we can get out of those habits. I think it is been a
    great hearing. I want to thank all the witnesses for your
    outstanding testimony and insights, and other than a few
    tangents here and there, it has been mostly bipartisan, which I
    really appreciate as well.
        You know, it has been around 20 years since we had the
    arrival of this miracle where each of us has a supercomputer in
    our pocket that lets us instantly access the world's
    information, and press a button and a car shows up to take you
    wherever you want to go, and maybe meet your future spouse, and
    anything else that you could imagine.
        The adoption was so rapid, and so exciting, and so
    transformative that we never really stopped to pause and
    consider okay, what is the etiquette around this new
    technology, and what is it doing to us as individuals and our
    values as a society, and to our young people?
        I really worry about this generation of young people that
    has grown up never knowing a world without smart phones and
    then having gone through the COVID experience as well, which
    sort of habituated the idea that digital connection is a
    substitute for real world connection.
        I think that we have got some really good takeaways from
    today's hearing. First, is the idea that when it comes to
    instructional time there should be an expectation of no use of
    personal devices. Now how far that policy extends beyond that
    basic idea is subject to some debate, but that seems to be a
    pretty clear takeaway from the testimony and the evidence we
    have considered is that schools do a lot better when they have
    that expectation no personal device use during instructional
    time.
        Then second, when it comes to school issue devices that we
    ought to be strategic in terms of how we deploy them. For
    example, their use should be time limited. They should be used
    for activities where having a device actually adds value.
        For example, you do not need to necessarily have an e-
    reader just to look at a document, maybe read a book, or a
    printout instead, but where the technology adds value, that is
    when you want to utilize it. Then, also we want to use them in
    a way that assists teachers and empowers teachers to do the
    sort of things that only teachers can do as opposed to sort of
    replacing the role of the teacher.
        A third principle to take away is the importance of local
    control. While we have this expectation that we want to set,
    that Utah has set for example on a statewide level, that these
    are really complicated questions, and it is important to have
    an ongoing dialog with parents, with the community, get
    feedback from teachers, administrators and students themselves
    in order to craft the policy in the right way.
        Maybe just as importantly, create the right school culture.
    When you go to a school that is really high performing and that
    has a great school culture, just kind of rules in general are
    sort of self-enforcing because if the students will kind of you
    know, encourage each other to follow the rules because you do
    not want to be out of step with that culture.
        That is the kind of culture I think you want to establish
    around the use of devices as well. Then finally, I think, we
    want to really be thinking seriously about how emerging
    technology gives us opportunities, not just to advance student
    achievement, but also to solve some of our issues related to
    screens.
        I mean we are in a moment that are we able to really be
    just as transformative, if not more so, than the revolution
    with smart phones, and I think we have the opportunity to kind
    of learn from that past experience and think seriously about
    how we can assure that the adoption of new technologies
    actually serves to reinforce our values, and to advance
    education in the right kind of educational environments for our
    young people.
        Thank you again, everyone for your testimony. Without
    objection, there being no further business, the Committee
    stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:04 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

        [Additional submissions from Ranking Member Bonamici
    follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [Additional submissions from Rep. Owens follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [Questions and responses submitted for the record by Dr.
    Cheryl Holcomb-McCoy follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               [all]