Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Student Technology Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Policy committee tables student technology-use policy, schedules in-person community forum

Atlanta Public Schools Policy Review Committee · June 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Atlanta Public Schools' policy review committee on June 23 tabled a proposed student technology-use policy to allow more teacher and community input and signaled a special in-person community meeting likely on June 30 to gather broader feedback before a final vote.

The Atlanta Public Schools policy review committee on June 23 delayed action on a proposed student technology-use policy, opting to hold an in-person community meeting before forwarding any recommendation to the full board.

Chairman Alfa Shivy Brooks said the committee’s posture was “not to pass this out of committee today” and that members wanted “more robust community dialogue and opportunity to interface with parents [and] educators” before a final vote. Policy presenter Carolyn Bernett told the committee the draft returns from the May 14 meeting with stakeholder input emphasizing teacher-led instruction, play-based learning and reduced screen time for younger grades.

Committee members raised several issues they said need further evidence or clarification. Dr. Casey Brock said he wanted to “get a better understanding of a day in the life of a first grader” to observe how devices are actually used, and asked the district to invite teachers from different grade levels to give feedback. Members emphasized support needs and transition plans for teachers if time limits are adopted.

Several board members flagged equity and implementation risks. One member warned that an opt-in approach could leave students without home access at a disadvantage and stressed the need to avoid policies that “take that away” from students who rely on school devices. The committee heard that the district has existing device distribution channels — including classroom device pools and prior device purchases — but members noted gaps remain in home connectivity.

Discussion also turned to procurement and software use. Members described a proliferation of licensed apps and urged an audit of software utility and spending so the district can prioritize investments that yield measurable learning outcomes. As one member put it, the focus should be on “screen value” — the educational benefit of technology — not screen time alone.

The committee voted to table the policy to allow staff to assemble additional information and to convene a special community meeting, with Brooks identifying the likely date as June 30. The action was moved and seconded and announced as carried. Next steps identified at the meeting include collecting teacher input, sharing stakeholder feedback with the committee, and publishing details for the public forum.

The committee will revisit the student technology-use policy after those steps; no final text or time limits were adopted at this meeting.