Treating Every Screen the Same is the Wrong Approach

The following statement in response to remarks today by Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, can be attributed to Sara Kloek, Vice President, Education and Youth Policy, the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA).

The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) shares the commitment to students' well-being and strong teaching found in President Weingarten's address. We also recognize the irreplaceable value of the student-teacher relationship and appreciate AFT's leadership in calling for continuing professional development on the appropriate and effective use of technology, including evidence-based best practices as a component of high-quality instruction.

SIIA believes in evidence-based policy making. The plan outlined today treats all technology as a single threat. It does not distinguish between consumer platforms and purpose-built educational technology that helps students learn.

That distinction is not a technicality. It is the entire policy question. The harms the plan cites-rising anxiety, shrinking attention spans, and the "cognitive offloading" of student thinking-come mostly from personal smartphones and consumer technology built to capture attention. These problems are not caused by curriculum-aligned tools chosen by educators and governed by FERPA, COPPA, ESSA, IDEA, and CIPA. Conflating the two directs the remedy at the wrong target.

We are therefore concerned about proposals such as banning screens for students, regardless of grade, and prohibiting student-facing AI. These proposals fail to draw the needed line between technology types. If applied bluntly, they would strip away tools students depend on most: assistive technology for students with disabilities, adaptive programs teachers use to identify struggling readers early, and-in many rural and low-income communities-access to high-quality, individualized instruction found nowhere else. While the plan acknowledges that some students need these tools, greater precision in policy protects them far better than broad bans with narrow exceptions.

SIIA welcomes the plan's calls for rigorous safety and privacy standards and for independent research; SIIA has long supported both. But the bar for protecting students should be set through open, evidence-based policymaking - not through a binding agreement that would let any single organization decide which providers may serve America's classrooms.

Crucially, there is far more agreement here than disagreement. Educators, parents, researchers, policymakers, and the broader technology community all want technology in schools to support learning, safeguard students, and strengthen rather than replace teachers' work. However, no single voice can settle these questions alone. Getting policy right will require all these stakeholders at the table, working from shared evidence toward these shared goals.

The evidence supports balanced, effective use of technology in education-not retreat. We applaud President Weingarten for the thoughtful considerations of AI's promise and her dedication to America's teacher. We agree that active learning will be critical to the success of our educators and students. Well-implemented blended learning can double typical annual learning gains, and high-performing education systems around the world integrate, not ban, technology. SIIA will continue to advocate for clear distinctions between educational and consumer technology, and for policies driven by evidence, not blanket restrictions. Instead of focusing solely on screen time, we should ask what tools students use, who governs them, and what the evidence shows.