Screen Time Concerns Lead to Backlash Against Edtech Vetting Process

“Among the increasing concern about screen time in school comes a new culprit: the vetting process for school software. A growing group of parents and teachers have spent the last few years fighting against cell phones in the classroom, with some extending that to digital devices as a whole . But the school-issued laptops, and the software accompanying them, have been left largely unscathed. “A lot of the issues with personal devices can move to the district-issued devices,” said Kim Whitman, co-lead for Smartphone Free Childhood US, in a previous interview with EdSurge. Whitman explains if students do not have cellphones, they can still message with friends on their MacBooks, or through Google Docs. “There are definitely issues with school-issued devices as well.” Proposals in three states – Rhode Island, Utah and Vermont – are now tackling that. Better Vetting Processes At the start of this year’s legislative session, all three states concurrently proposed looking at the vetting process of education software. In most districts, it is up to the school board, IT personnel and administrators to choose vendors, often relying on the vendors’ own data to prove its safety and efficacy. “There is nobody right now that is confirming these products are safe, effective and legal,” Whitman said in a previous interview . “It should not fall on the district’s IT director; it would be impossible for them to do it. And the companies should not be tasked with doing it — that would be like nicotine companies vetting their own cigarettes.” The proposed legislation is looking to change that. Vermont Bill: An act relating to educational technology products Status: Passed by the House March 27, on to the Senate Committee on Education This bill , passed by the House, proposes to require that providers of educational technology products register annually with the State. It also requires the Secretary of State to create a certification standard and review process for these products before they can be used by schools Any provider of an educational technology product, specifically student-facing ones that are used for teaching and learning processes in schools, has to register with the secretary of state; pay a registration fee of $100 and provide its most up-to-date terms and conditions and privacy policy. The secretary of state would work with the Vermont Agency of Education to review all edtech provider registrations. That criteria for certification includes: The product’s compliance with state curriculum standards Advantages of using it versus non-digital methods Whether it was explicitly designed for educational purposes Design features, including artificial intelligence, geotracking and targeted advertising While the initial bill proposed that any edtech provider not certified by the state, but continues to operate, could be liable for fines of $50 a day up to $10,000, that language was struck by the final bill passed by the House. If passed by the Senate, the bill would go into effect July 1, 2026. By November 2027, the Agency of Education would submit a written report on which state entities should be involved in the edtech certification and any other recommendations for certification. Utah Bill: Software in Education Status: Passed officially on March 18 The bill requires the Utah Board of Education to conduct a study regarding the use of software and digital practices in public schools, review best practices and give guidance for best, responsible use of software in public schools. The state also passed a Classroom Technology Amendments bill tackling screen time at every grade level, banning it entirely from kindergarten through third grade, save for computer science and assessments. Middle school students must have their parents opt-in to taking devices home from school and high school students will have the default to bring home devices unless parents opt-out. “We’re not anti-technology,” Rep. Ariel Defay [R-UT] said in a statement . She is a sponsor of the Classroom Technology Amendments bill. “We just want to ensure that education technology is used intentionally and actually helps students to learn.” Rhode Island Bill: The Safe School Technology Act of 2026 Status: Passed by the House April 14, currently in the Senate education committee with a companion bill. This bill , proposed by three Rhode Island representatives who are also mothers, is part of a six-bill package focused on protecting children from social media, artificial intelligence and digital platforms. The Safe School Technology Act bill would be enacted this August if approved, banning software providers from activating or accessing any audio or video functions on a device outside of school-related activities. It also bans accessing or using location data. The initial bill lists a litany of concerns that the “lack of regulation” caused, including increased screen time, “marketing commercial products as educational with no accountability; children being given devices without proof of developmental appropriateness and parents being excluded from decisions about their child’s digital exposure.” But the main concern, argued by House Representative June Speakman (D-RI), who sponsored the bill, is that a majority of school districts’ technology policies do not have limits on tracking student devices. She added roughly two-thirds of districts also do not limit school-issued devices’ ability to activate audio and video. “Passing this bill will provide clear, consistent protection across all schools in the state that assures students and their families that their devices cannot be used to invade their privacy or track their activities,” Speakman said in a statement . “They deserve to feel confident that their privacy is protected when they use technology that is required for school,” she added. Tech Pushback Several technology proponents have pushed back against the new state bills. The Software and Information Industry Association spoke out against the Rhode Island bill in March , saying if the bill passed it would cause the state to be one of the most restrictive In an open letter to Joseph McNamara, the chair of the Rhode Island House Education Committee, Abigail Wilson, director of state policy at the Software and Information Industry Association, said while the group shares the legislature’s commitment to student safety, privacy and well-being, the bill “proposes an overly restrictive regulatory framework that will severely disrupt classroom instruction, impose massive unfunded administrative burdens on local schools, and deprive Rhode Island students of critical, evidence-based learning tools.” Keith Krueger, CEO of the nonprofit Consortium for School Networking, told NBS News that the proposed legislation “does keep me up at night.” “I think some well-intentioned policymakers trying to do something are rushing so quickly that they haven’t thought through the implications,” he said.

Summary generated from the RSS feed of EdSurge Tech. All article rights belong to the original publisher. Click through to read the full piece on edsurge.com.