Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Screen Time Resolution topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Best introduces resolution urging evidence‑based screen‑time rules, privacy protections and limits on AI exposure
Summary
Representative Best introduced a resolution calling for grade‑band screen‑time guidelines, audits of technology use, stronger student data protections (citing COPPA), reduced elementary exposure to AI/LLMs, and protections for assistive technology; members requested edits and a public panel on Aug. 19.
Representative Best presented a resolution to the College, Career and Life Readiness Committee urging DC education leaders to balance technology benefits with stronger safeguards for student screen time, privacy, AI exposure and developmentally appropriate instruction.
"This resolution urges DC education leaders to balance the benefits of technology with stronger safeguards around screen time, student privacy, AI exposure, and developmentally appropriate instruction," Best said, then outlined 11 key points: establish evidence-based screen-time policy by grade band; audit technology use and contracts; limit non-instructional digital content (including certain social media and advertising); reduce elementary exposure to AI and large language models; strengthen student data privacy protections (citing COPPA); invest in digital literacy and critical thinking; train educators on effective technology use; protect assistive technologies and legally required accommodations; and engage families and communities.
Committee members generally supported the intent but asked staff to refine the framing to acknowledge existing policies and implementation gaps, ensure the resolution explicitly includes charter LEAs and after‑school programs, and clarify whether auditing one‑to‑one device programs should remain. Representative Thompson urged tempering a universal approach: "anytime you say all is a pretty high hill to climb," and stressed the need to distinguish developmentally appropriate uses and implementation fidelity from policy absence.
Members discussed differences by age band and the importance of ensuring that restrictions do not limit legally required assistive technology for students with IEPs or 504 plans; the proposed resolution includes an explicit carve‑out to protect required accommodations. Staff outlined potential panel guests (district policy representatives such as LAUSD, assistive‑technology advocates, child‑development researchers from groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics or Common Sense Media, and LEA leaders) and a committee member offered to reach out to Utah State Board contacts regarding recently proposed legislation there. The panel is scheduled for August 19; members agreed to mark up the resolution after the panel.
Next steps: Representative Best will circulate an updated draft; staff will coordinate the August panel and provide suggested edits and analytic support ahead of a future markup.
