Kids understand and remember more of what they read on paper than on a screen — every time researchers test it.

Why our classrooms need real books, not screens

Reading on a screen makes it easy to skim, get distracted, or click away. Paper doesn't do that. A real book gives a child's brain something to hold onto — the weight of the pages, where an idea sat, how far into the story they are. That's not nostalgia; it's how kids learn best. Our brains build a mental map of what we experience, tying information to where it occurs. On a page, every word and idea has a fixed location, giving the brain a spatial anchor for memory. Screens strip that anchor away as text scrolls and shifts. Location is a powerful part of human memory. That's why we want real books to become a core part of our classrooms and libraries.

See the research

Handwriting lights up brain networks that typing barely touches.

Why handwriting still matters

Handwriting is slower than typing, and that's the point. When kids write by hand, they can't just copy word for word — their brain has to actually process what they're writing, and that's what makes it stick. Typing lets a child's brain coast on autopilot. When children write by hand, they are more actively engaged with what they are learning, helping ideas take hold and strengthening memory. That's why we're asking for more everyday pencil-and-paper work in SPS classrooms: to support stronger memory, better writing, fine-motor skills, and deeper thinking.

Explore the science

More classroom screen time tracks with lower reading, math, and science scores, country after country.

What the research says about screens vs. a real teacher

A neuroscientist recently testified before the U.S. Senate about what years of data show: kids in classrooms with more screen time tend to score lower than kids with less. Looking across hundreds of studies, most classroom technology — especially giving every student their own laptop — doesn't perform as well as a teacher actually teaching the lesson. That doesn't mean technology has no place in school. It means a real teacher, in the room, is still the more effective way to teach.

Read or watch the testimony

Points and badges can quietly kill the very curiosity they're supposed to build.

The gamification trap: how "educational" apps hijack student focus

Streaks, badges, and points feel harmless, but they train a child's brain to chase the reward instead of building real interest in what they're learning. Once the points disappear, so does the motivation — leaving kids with a shallower grasp of the material and a harder time focusing on anything that doesn't ping, buzz, or light up. We think classrooms should lean less on flashy apps and more on learning that holds attention because it's genuinely interesting.

Explore the science

Districts that gave every student their own laptop are now taking them back.

Beyond the Screen: Why 1:1 Chromebooks Are Hurting Classroom Learning

Giving every student their own laptop was supposed to help them learn. In practice, teachers say it's become one of the biggest sources of distraction in the classroom — kids drifting to games, other tabs, and messages instead of their assignment. Districts around the country are already scaling back 1:1 laptop programs after seeing test scores slip. We're asking SPS to do the same: use technology only where it clearly helps, and rely on lower-distraction, high-focus teaching the rest of the time.

Explore the evidence

Students who lean on AI for schoolwork show less brain engagement — and it's already affecting learning outcomes.

The AI shortcut that's quietly costing kids their learning

In the lab: An MIT Media Lab study found that students who used ChatGPT to write essays showed the lowest brain engagement of any group tested, and consistently underperformed compared to students who used no tool at all — with researchers warning that developing brains are at the highest risk.

In real classrooms: A large 2026 study tracking roughly 27,000 students in grades 7–12 found that once students started using generative AI for homework, their exam scores fell over time — even as their homework scores went up. The researchers found no evidence of any learning benefit from AI use, and called the effect a "generative AI learning penalty."

SPS students had accidental open access to generative AI tools for schoolwork through the end of 2025, before the district disabled them. Although unintended, the access persisted for months, and students reported widespread frustration when it was removed—a sign of how quickly AI use had become normalized. We're asking that SPS create a parent-involved group to regularly verify that existing protections and security measures preventing unintended access to AI, inappropriate material, and other harms are working. Too many lapses and loopholes have been discovered after the fact that have affected our schoolchildren.

Explore the research