[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]