Reframe the Debate

We’ve heard it from district and school leaders, teachers, parents, policy-makers, and others in the EdTech space: adults are worried about the time children and adolescents spend in front of screens. There’s no debate that young people have access to devices – phones, iPads, computers, gaming systems, televisions – throughout the day. However, not all screen time is the same.

For this conversation, we won’t tackle screen time outside the classroom. By narrowing the scope to what happens during the precious time students and teachers spend in classrooms, we can get closer to the real root of the screen time problem: planning for learning.

As one education leader recently put it, “Screen time is not the enemy—purposeless learning is” (Wilcox, 2026). When learning lacks planning and purpose, tools end up filling time rather than transforming it, acting as little more than a substitute for paper and pencil rather than redefining how students engage with their own learning (Kurt, 2023). 

When used intentionally, technology can have a positive effect on education. The shift we need isn’t from “how much time” to “no time.” It’s from “how much time” to “how, when, and why.” And that shift starts well before a device is ever in a student’s hands: it starts with planning.

Plan for Learning

Planning for learning starts with the end in mind: what do the district, school, and teachers actually want students to learn? That might seem obvious given state standards, but not all standards carry equal weight. Districts and schools ultimately have to decide what matters most for students to walk away with: discrete facts and rules, the ability to apply those facts, the big ideas that govern them, or some combination of all three. Wiggins and McTighe’s (2005) Understanding by Design centers teachers on big-picture thinking before activities ever get planned. Starting with activities instead of outcomes, including tech-based activities, reverses that order and inhibits deep learning.

Once outcomes and enduring understandings are set, teachers can plan day-to-day: a mini-lesson, productive talk, practice, frequent check-ins, and a way to gauge what students are learning by the end of class (Gonzalez, 2026). Implementation of  research-based instructional strategies (Fisher et al., 2016) makes the difference between an activity and actual learning. The science and art of teaching is the foundation that everything else, including technology, has to sit on top of.

Integrate Technology with a Purpose

This is where technology finally enters the picture: not as the starting point, but as one tool among many for executing a plan that’s already been built with intention. Used judiciously, technology gives teachers a way to personalize learning, capture formative data, and spot trends that reveal opportunities to reteach or extend learning. It can also put students in the driver’s seat by incorporating their preferences and interests. The tool should take a back seat to the teacher planning.

For over a decade, the SAMR model (Puentedura, 2012) has given educators a way to evaluate not just whether they’re using technology, but how deeply it’s enhancing learning. This is the practical bridge between planning and screen time. Tech used at the redefinition level looks nothing like passive screen time, because it’s in service of a learning goal the teacher already defined.

Rethink Screen Time Policies

None of this happens in a vacuum, though. As teachers work to engage students, maximize class time, and capture authentic learning, state screen time legislation is increasingly shaping what’s even possible. State laws (Rinaldi et al., 2026)  that set specific time limits by grade or age put school boards and district leaders in the position of crafting policies that restrict device access, often without the planning-first lens described above. Leading voices are stepping in to guide principals as they balance student needs, teacher input, and parent relationships (Gabenski, 2025). These time-based policies are well-intended and aimed at protecting kids, but policies focused only on time limits miss the lever that actually matters: purposeful design and planning.

Shift the Conversation

As the public conversation about screen time evolves, we need to keep reframing the conversation: balance, not bans. Deep learning doesn’t happen by happenstance. It happens through thoughtful guidance from states, districts, and schools, paired with intentional teacher planning  with high quality tools and resources. Screens were never really the problem, and time limits alone were never going to be the fix.

Partner with NoRedInk

Driven by research-backed pedagogy, standards-aligned curriculum, interactive lessons, and tailored professional development, NoRedInk’s comprehensive writing platform empowers educators to balance strong classroom instruction with smart technology usage. 

At NoRedInk, we partner with schools and districts to create intentional, high-impact learning experiences that unleash the writer in every student. By understanding your unique priorities, we support your existing framework and adapt implementation to your goals without rigid guidelines or one-size-fits-all plans.

In particular, our teams work with teachers and leaders to increase their capacity to streamline data-driving instruction, ensure personalized feedback, and differentiate for every learner. We help schools and districts redefine what writing and critical thinking can look like in classrooms.

References

Edutopia. (2020, March 20). Deepening learning with Understanding by Design [Video]. George Lucas Educational Foundation. https://www.edutopia.org/video/deepening-learning-understanding-design/

Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hattie, J. (2016). Visible learning for literacy, grades K-12: Implementing the practices that work best to accelerate student learning. Corwin Press.

Gabenski, K. (2025, November 1). A student screen time playbook for school leaders. National Association of Elementary School Principals. https://www.naesp.org/resource/a-student-screen-time-playbook-for-school-leaders

Gonzalez, J. (2026, April 27). The art of classroom timing: 10 ways to fit it all in. Cult of Pedagogy. https://www.cultofpedagogy.com/classroom-timing/

Kurt, S. (2023, September 20). SAMR model: Substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition. Educational Technology. https://educationaltechnology.net/samr-model-substitution-augmentation-modification-and-redefinition/

Puentedura, R. R. (2012, August 23). The SAMR model: Background and exemplars [Presentation slides]. Hippasus. hippasus.com/rrpweblog/…/SAMR_BackgroundExemplars.pdf

Rinaldi, H., Branning, K., Turnquist, A., & Cohen, P. (2026, May 15). Screen time legislation is moving fast. Here’s what’s actually enacted. Whiteboard Advisors. https://whiteboardadvisors.com/screen-time-legislation-is-moving-fast-heres-whats-actually-enacted/

Weeks, T. S., & Sailor, J. (2026, September 23). Screen time and AI: An evidence playbook for school leaders [Webinar]. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/events/webinar/screen-time-and-ai-an-evidence-playbook-for-school-leaders

Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.

Wilcox, C. M. (2026, July 20). Screen time is not the enemy; purposeless learning is [Article]. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/screen-time-enemypurposeless-learning-dr-clayton-m-wilcox-zfbnf/

---