What does a child do when he or she is told “You do not need to use the school laptop anymore” and smiles? That response has become a common place scene in pockets of the country. Schools are getting requests by some families to provide paper packets, printed readings, and handwritten homework as an alternative to assignments sent through Chromebooks and iPads. A parent, Julie Frumin, in the Conejo Valley Unified School District in California, recounted how her middle school boy was excited when she informed him that he could choose not to use his school-supplied device, a choice he had been pleading to make after reporting headaches and frustration in using a newly implemented AI communications chatbot. Frumin said that he was glad they were getting an analog education in the meantime.
The pressure against is not confined to only one classroom or one family preference. Computers are now a given in most districts and almost 9 out of 10 public schools offer a device to every student in middle and high school over 1:1 computer programs, and over 4 in 5 elementary schools do so. The policies hastened throughout the pandemic as schools opened up take-home technology to support remote education- and most systems did not fully switch off when schools reopened. The practical question that teachers and administrators now encounter than it occurred ten years ago is what can be offered to those students whose parents prefer fewer screens on the school day.
The issue at concern is not to ban technology but rather to change the default, as is the case of parents organizing in group chats and email lists. They refer to devices as something that distract during the period of “free choice”, a source of annoyance to some content that they feel is not appropriate at the elementary levels, and a means of growing more than the intended academic effect of the device. Where classes and tests have gone online, families also report having had to be relentless, just to find out whether they can even opt out, at all.
Learning argument, however, is gaining more and more support due to research that concerns the way in which children receive information. A JAMA Network Open cohort study (2025) correlated more screen time at an early age as reported by the parents with poorer performance in elementary school, especially in reading and math. In the research, an extra hour per day of total screen time was linked to 9 percent to 10 percent reduced chances of achieving the subsequent stage in grade reading and math (grade 3) and math (grade 6).
Another aspect to the debate is the research of handwriting. A massive neuroscience review characterizes handwriting as a skill encompassing language, memory, motor planning, and visuospatial processing that uses a wide system of brain areas in a manner that is not similar to typing. Another finding in the review is the way the effort of making letters can sustain more in-depth encoding of information and retention- a factor that leads to the occasional description of benefits found in the development of reading and attention in schools which maintain handwriting instruction.
The schools are not being requested to become “device-free” in every instance. Others permit partial use of laptops such as typing, periodic presentations or guided research. Some are asking to be given print math work or paper reading and at the same time accept the use of the high stakes tests online. A local PTA council in Montgomery County, Maryland has advocated a formal procedure of “non-screen alternatives” in response to an increasing opinion amongst parents that the decision should be made explicitly and not implied.
There is also an awkward intermediate position by teachers. Others allege that computers are necessary to certain jobs- data work, online tests, accessibility assistance but they admit that “the default always just do it on the screen” as one teacher leader in Maryland, David Stein, said, but insists that one should not stop to consider whether a screen is required.
Anti-choice is not a personal workaround of Frumin, but a lever. In my case, opting out is not a goal, but a means to the end, and it was how former teacher Emily Cherkin, who authored an opt-out toolkit and has argued that personal requests could be used as a way to have bigger discussions about what children actually require of classroom technology. The manner in which I interpret it is, you push a conversation. It permits other parents even merely to begin inquiring questions.
