Dear Fellow Arlington Parents, Grandparents, Teachers, and Community Members:
 
If you want Arlington Public Schools to reform its school device use policies and shift to an "ANALOG AS DEFAULT" paradigm, PreK - 12, we ask that you please sign the letter below ASAP. Research confirms that the Ed Tech experiment has failed; we need to prioritize face-to-face learning, writing by hand, and reading physical books -- not the convenience offered by apps and digital curricula. We ask that APS leaders adopt "ATTENTION AS CURRICULUM" in the same stroke. This means deliberately cultivating school environments that act as antidotes to the attention-shattering, shallowing, screen-saturated world beyond the school walls. It means actively working to enhance students’ attention spans – their capacities to focus, tolerate delayed gratification, and do hard things.

✶ If you'd like to better understand APS device usage, check out this webpage, which shows county-wide Lightspeed data. If the site ever changes, you can view the archived version here. Notable findings from a two-week snapshot in 2025: "42% of requested content is education-related" and Youtube (which was just found guilty of negligence and deliberately addicting children) was the #2 most visited domain.

 

 

[Lea una versión en español a continuación: APOYO COLECTIVO PARA “ENSEÑANZA ANÁLOGA” Y PLAN DE ESTUDIO DE ATENCIÓN EN TODAS LAS ESCUELAS DE APS ]

 

✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶

Dear Leaders of Arlington Public Schools,

APS is currently reevaluating how, when, and why educational technology is used in our schools.  As key stakeholders in the community, we, the undersigned, respectfully urge APS to implement an “analog as default” paradigm in all Arlington public schools, K-12.  The research, as outlined below, demands it. We urge you to follow the research and take the following actions:

• As a matter of policy, make face-to-face learning and analog materials the unambiguous default for class time and homework, K-12; device use should be the exception and not the rule and used only for narrow purposes.
• Rescind student-facing AI contracts now. We unleashed smartphones and 1:1 devices on kids before we knew what they would do – before we understood the damage they would cause for young brains. Let’s learn from this instead of repeating the same mistakes and becoming entrenched in something we know is not age appropriate at best, and has led to tragedy at worst.
• Mandate and support “attention” as curriculum. Design pedagogy to enhance students’ attention spans – their capacities to focus, tolerate delayed gratification, and do hard things. Deliberately cultivate school environments that act as antidotes to the attention-shattering, shallowing, screen-saturated world beyond the school walls; protecting students’ developing brains must be central to the curriculum itself.
• Focus on “tech ed” (i.e. popping the hood and teaching how computers / tech works, teaching computer skills) instead of Ed Tech (teaching skills through a computer / apps).
• Provide physical planners for K-12.
• Provide physical textbooks for K-12.
• Prohibit excessive and daily use of videos for instruction, especially PreK-5.
• Limit device use in grades 1-5 to SOLs and direct preparation for the SOLs.
• Shift from 1:1 to carts for grades 1-8 once appropriate logistical adjustments are made. (Other school systems have done this successfully and can share best practices.) Devices, if they are physically stored in classrooms at all, should be a tool, not a “possession” that pulls students away from each other and their teachers and into a world of distraction.
• Mandate a limited “allow” list for sites instead of an ever-growing “block” list.
• Thoroughly support and train teachers throughout the transition; best practices from other school systems can provide guidance.
• Continue to honor and support the distinct needs of students with accommodations who use devices as tools to access their full potential as learners. These cases exemplify technology's great power, when targeted and designed appropriately, to meet a need that requires a transformative tool. 
• Mandate monitoring of all student devices when in use.

Independent research conclusively and overwhelmingly supports these changes, and the stakes are high. We now know that technology, in the attention economy, is designed to exploit the brain's reward system and promote compulsive use; educational technology largely does this too. While educational technology is convenient and emerged years ago with what appeared to be dazzling potential, not only has it failed to improve learning, it has actively contributed to de-skilling instead. We now know that reliance on technology diminishes students’ capacity for critical thinking, meaningful interaction with others, and engagement in productive struggle. We also know that the harms of excessive use fall more heavily on under-resourced students; contrary to common misconceptions, the research shows that Ed Tech actually contributes to the widening of the achievement gap.

Fortunately, it is never too late to change course and choose a different path. We know what we need to do; it is well-documented that humans learn best from other humans, from writing on paper, and from reading physical books. To counter de-skilling and improve the lives and prospects of its students, APS needs to make “Attention as Curriculum” central to its mission for the months and years ahead. Schools must actively and deliberately help students cultivate and preserve their ability to focus and engage in sustained struggle. This is essential for genuine, deep learning now and for the future.  Specifically, this means:

• following the research and going analog the vast majority of the time. 
• not pushing students onto Google Docs (inevitably with fifteen other tabs open and notifications dinging) every time they need to compose something. 
• having students read whole, physical books without distraction, instead of setting them up for skimming digital textbooks or articles while simultaneously texting or gaming. 
• letting students be bored and left alone with their own thoughts if they finish a task early instead of inviting them to play a video-game masquerading as a “learning” app. 
• expecting kids to practice executive function using a physical planner, instead of offloading that skill onto a digital platform that tracks everything for them. 
• prioritizing face-to-face communication and learning and using digital devices sparingly, with a full understanding of the risks they pose to students’ social, emotional, and academic learning.

When we know better, we need to do better. You can choose to lead the change. Thank you for your leadership. 

Sincerely,

 

✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶

En español...

APOYO COLECTIVO PARA “ENSEÑANZA ANÁLOGA” Y PLAN DE ESTUDIO DE ATENCIÓN EN TODAS LAS ESCUELAS DE APS 

Estimados líderes de las Escuelas Públicas de Arlington:

APS está reevaluando actualmente cómo, cuándo y por qué se utiliza la tecnología educativa en nuestras escuelas. Como partes interesadas clave de la comunidad, los abajo firmantes pedimos respetuosamente a APS a implementar un paradigma de “análogo por defecto” en todas las escuelas públicas de Arlington, desde preescolar hasta secundaria. La investigación, tal y como se describe a continuación, así lo exige. Les pedimos que sigan la investigación y tomen las siguientes medidas:

• Como cuestión de política, hagan que el aprendizaje presencial y los materiales análogos sean el estándar inequívoco para el tiempo de clase y los deberes, desde K-12; el uso de dispositivos debe ser la excepción y no la regla, y utilizarse solo para fines específicos.
• Rescindir ahora los contratos de IA dirigidos a los estudiantes. Hemos puesto smartphones/celulares y dispositivos 1:1 en manos de los niños antes de saber lo que harían, antes de comprender el daño que causarían a sus cerebros jóvenes. Aprendamos de esto en lugar de repetir los mismos errores y en vez de aferrarnos a algo que sabemos que, en el mejor de los casos, no es apropiado para su edad y, en el peor, ha llevado a la tragedia.
• Establecer y apoyar la “atención” como parte del plan de estudios. Diseñar una pedagogía que mejore la capacidad de atención de los estudiantes, su capacidad para concentrarse, tolerar la gratificación retrasada y hacer cosas difíciles. Cultivar deliberadamente entornos escolares que actúen como antídotos contra el mundo distraído, superficial y saturado de pantallas que hay más allá de las paredes de la escuela; proteger el desarrollo del cerebro de los estudiantes debe ser un elemento central del plan de estudios.
• Enfocarse en la “educación tecnológica” (es decir, enseñar cómo funcionan las computadoras y la tecnología, enseñar habilidades informáticas) en lugar de la tecnología educativa (enseñar habilidades a través de dispositivos y computadoras).
• Proporcionar agendas físicas para K-12.
• Proporcionar libros de texto físicos para K-12.
• Prohibir el uso excesivo y diario de videos para la enseñanza, especialmente en PreK-5.
• Limitar el uso de dispositivos en los grados 1-5 a los SOL y a la preparación directa para los SOL.
• Cambiar del uso de dispositivos de 1:1, al uso de carritos tecnológicos portátiles para los grados 1-8 una vez que se hayan realizado los ajustes logísticos adecuados. (Otros sistemas escolares lo han hecho con éxito y pueden compartir las mejores prácticas). Los dispositivos, si se almacenan físicamente en las aulas, deben ser una herramienta, no una «posesión» que aleje a los alumnos unos de otros y de sus profesores y los lleve a un mundo de distracciones.
• Establecer una lista limitada de sitios web “permitidos” en lugar de una lista de sitios “bloqueados” que crece constantemente.
• Apoyar y preparar exhaustivamente a los profesores durante la transición; las mejores prácticas de otros sistemas escolares pueden servir de orientación.
• Seguir respetando y apoyando las necesidades específicas de los alumnos con adaptaciones que utilizan los dispositivos como herramientas para acceder a su pleno potencial académico. Estos casos ejemplifican el gran poder de la tecnología, cuando se orienta y diseña adecuadamente, para satisfacer una necesidad que requiere una herramienta transformadora. 
• Requerir la supervisión de todos los dispositivos de los alumnos cuando estén en uso, a través de Apple Classroom o un programa similar. 
• No hay expectativa de privacidad con lápiz y papel en el aula, y los dispositivos no deberían ser diferentes.

Las investigaciones independientes respaldan de manera concluyente y abrumadora estos cambios, y hay mucho en juego. Ahora sabemos que la tecnología, en la economía de la atención, está diseñada para explotar el sistema de recompensa del cerebro y promover el uso compulsivo; la tecnología educativa también lo hace en gran medida. Si bien la tecnología educativa es conveniente y surgió hace años con lo que parecía ser un potencial deslumbrante, no solo no ha mejorado el aprendizaje, sino que ha contribuido directamente a la pérdida de habilidades. Ahora sabemos que la dependencia de la tecnología disminuye la capacidad de los estudiantes para el pensamiento crítico, la interacción significativa con los demás y la participación en el esfuerzo productivo. También sabemos que los daños del uso excesivo recaen con mayor fuerza sobre los estudiantes con pocos recursos; contrariamente a las ideas erróneas comunes, las investigaciones muestran que la tecnología educativa contribuye en realidad a ampliar las disparidades de logros académicos en lugar de cerrarlas.

Afortunadamente, nunca es demasiado tarde para cambiar de rumbo y elegir un camino diferente. Sabemos lo que tenemos que hacer; está ampliamente documentado que los seres humanos aprenden mejor de otros seres humanos, escribiendo en papel y leyendo libros físicos. Para contrarrestar la pérdida de habilidades y mejorar la vida y las perspectivas de sus estudiantes, APS debe enfocarse en la “atención como plan de estudios” como el eje central de su misión para los próximos meses y años. Las escuelas deben ayudar de forma activa y deliberada a los alumnos a cultivar y preservar su capacidad de concentración y de esfuerzo sostenido. Esto es esencial para un aprendizaje auténtico y profundo, tanto ahora como en el futuro.  En concreto, esto significa:

• Seguir la investigación y utilizar medios análogos la mayor parte del tiempo. 
• No obligar a los alumnos a utilizar Google Docs (inevitablemente con otras quince pestañas o ventanas abiertas y notificaciones que no paran) cada vez que necesitan redactar algo. 
• Hacer que los alumnos lean libros físicos completos sin distracciones, en lugar de prepararlos para hojear libros de texto o artículos digitales mientras envían mensajes de texto o juegan. 
• Dejar que los alumnos se aburran y se queden solos con sus propios pensamientos si terminan una tarea antes de tiempo, en lugar de invitarlos a jugar a un videojuego disfrazado de aplicación “educativa”. 
• Esperar que los niños practiquen la función ejecutiva utilizando una agenda física, en lugar de transferir esa responsabilidad a una plataforma digital que controla todo por ellos. 
• Dar prioridad a la comunicación y el aprendizaje cara a cara y utilizar los dispositivos digitales con moderación, con plena conciencia de los riesgos que tiene para el aprendizaje social, emocional y académico de los alumnos.

Cuando sabemos lo que es mejor, debemos hacer lo mejor. Usted tienen la oportunidad de liderar el cambio. Gracias por su liderazgo. 

Atentamente,

 

 

 

✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶✶

Resources and Research on Ed Tech

ED TECH ARTICLES

After Babel, Jared Cooney Horvath, The EdTech Revolution Has Failed
After Babel, Amy Tyson, The False Promise of Device Based Education
Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, The Free Press, We Gave Students Laptops and Took Away Their Brains
The Economist, Ed tech is profitable. It is also mostly useless: Independent research identifies few learning gains
NBC News, Parents are opting their students out of schools laptops, returning them to pen-and-paper
NBC News, Parents say school-issued iPads are causing chaos with their kids
NBC News, Google’s Work In Schools Aims to Create a Pipeline of Future Users
Bloomberg, Kids Spend Hours on A Screen And for What? ​| https://archive.ph/IR6Qj
New York Times, How Much Screen Time Is Your Child Getting at School? We Asked 350 Teachers
New York Times, Kids Rarely Read Whole Books Anymore, Even in English Class
New York Times, The Screen That Ate Your Child’s Education
New York Times, Get Tech Out of the Classroom Before It’s Too Late
Wall Street Journal, Screens Have Taken Over Classrooms. Even Students Have Had Enough. Educators question whether the rapid shift toward more technology has benefited learning
Fortune, The U.S. spent $30 billion to ditch textbooks for laptops and tablets: The result is the first generation less cognitively capable than their parents
Education Next, The 5 Percent Problem: Online mathematics programs may benefit most the kids who need it least
The Atlantic, The Elite College Students Who Can’t Read Books: To read a book in college, it helps to have read a book in high school
The Fordham Institute, The Covid Generation, Best Readers Ever in Fourth Grade, Worst Readers by Twelfth
Substack, Tech-Free January - Teacher’s experience going tech free for a month
The Walled Garden Substack, Andrew Cantarutti, When The Conditions of Childhood Change Schools Must Adapt
The Walled Garden Substack, Andrew Cantarutti, How Attention Becomes Curriculum
Unherd, Why Your Kid Hates Learning Apps: The Popular iReady Platform Dulls Young Minds

AI IN EDUCATION ARTICLES

Current Affairs, AI Is Destroying The University and Learning Itself
New York Times, A.I. Will Destroy Critical Thinking in K-12
NPR, The risks of AI in schools outweigh the benefits, report says
Bloomberg, How Chatbots Are Already Reshaping the Classroom 
Bloomberg, AI Won’t Give American Children the Education They Need
Substack, The Good, The Bad, The Ugly Science of AI In Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education, Stop Pretending You Know How To Teach AI
The Atlantic, Colleges Are Preparing To Self Lobotomize
The MarkUp, His students suddenly started getting A’s. Did a Google AI tool go too far?
Gizmodo, Big Tech Is Funding AI Lesson Plan Seminars that Parents Increasingly Do Not Want
District Administration, AI In Education: Curb Your Enthusiasm (NC superintendent decided to not introduce AI until proven) 
Wall Street Journal, AI Robs My Students of the Ability to Think
Edutopia, Why I’m Banning Student AI Use This Year
Substack, Audrey Watters, Second Breakfast 
Emily Cherkin, Resisting AI In School

 

WHITE PAPERS

The EdTech Law Center, EdTech Exposed

Ben Williamson et al., National Education Policy Center, Time for a Pause: Without Effective Public Oversight, AI in Schools Will Do More Harm Than Good
Faith Bonniger et al., National Education Policy Center, Fit for Purpose? How Today’s Commercial Digital Platforms Subvert Key Goals of Public Education
Mary Burns et al., Brookings Institute, A new direction for students in an AI world: Prosper, prepare, protect
UNICEF, Child Protection in Digital Education
UNESCO, An Ed-Tech Tragedy? UNESCO’s groundbreaking book about changes to education during the COVID-19 pandemic and their implications for the future of learning
After Babel, Jonathan Haidt & Zach Raush, An EdTech Tragedy - summarizes the report
ACLU, Digital Dystopia: The Danger in Buying What the EdTech Surveillance Industry is Selling
Children & Screens, ADHD and Digital Media Use

RESEARCH & ARTICLES DISCUSSING RESEARCH

Stanford AI In Education Research Repository
Handbook of Children And Screens: Digital Media, Development, and Well-Being from Birth Through Adolescence (free PDF download)
Jared Cooney Horvath, The Digital Delusion
includes 64 pages of citations with a ton of studies
Substack, Carl Henrick, How Much Cognitive Damage Does a Phone Notification Do?

 

PODCASTS & WEBINARS

Untangling EdTech: Evidence, Vision & Practice, Jared Cooney Horvath (neuroscientist), Andrew Cantarutti (teacher) and Inge Esping (principal)
From Distraction to Action: How EdTech Harms Kids with ADHD and What Parents Can Do About It - Emily Cherkin, Jared Cooney Horvath, Mike McLeod, Andy Liddell, Meriwether Schas
Your Undivided Attention, Rethinking School In The Age of AI, guests include MaryAnne Wolf and Rebecca Winthrop
The Ezra Klein Show, We Have to Rethink The Purpose of Education, guest Rebecca Winthrop
MIT Teaching Systems Lab, The Homework Machine series
Dr. Karl Johnson, AI Webinar for Distraction-Free Schools

VIDEOS

Hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Jan. 15, 2026 that featured oral and written testimony from leading experts concerning bipartisan legislation aimed at curbing the harms to children caused by technology, including robust discussion of educational technology.

• Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath written testimony
• Emily Cherkin written testimony
• Dr. Jenny Radesky written testimony
• Dr. Jean Twenge written testimony

Sophie Winkelman, The Most Compelling Argument Against Tech In Schools, 
A More Perfect Union, Our Kids’ IQs Are Dropping. Is Big Tech to Blame?
Jared Cooney Horvath, YouTube Channel
Balance Minds Education, Skills Before Screens (a humorous take on the issue)

BOOKS

Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, The Digital Delusion: How Classroom Technology Harms Our Kids’ Learning -- And How To Help Them Thrive Again
MaryAnne Wolf, Reader Come Home
Nicolas Carr, The Shallows