As artificial intelligence and digital tools continue to evolve within the classroom, educators and parents alike are grappling with a fundamental question: how much screen time is too much?
Yet, the answer may not lie in the quantity of screen use, but in its quality. A growing chorus of educators, researchers and school networks is calling for a shift in focus – from screen time to ‘screen value’.
This perspective is echoed by the Network of Experts on the Social Dimension of Education and Training (NESET), an expert advisory network established by the European Commission to provide evidence-based insights into the social dimensions of education. In its 2025 report, NESET emphasises that educational screen use is consistently associated with positive academic outcomes, whereas passive or entertainment-driven use - especially social media and television - is often linked to poorer performance. The conclusion is clear: a blanket focus on limiting screen time overlooks the more nuanced and productive question of screen value - what young people are doing with their screens, and how schools and families can support higher-value engagement.
In other words, not all screen use is created equal - and understanding how technology is used, rather than simply how long it’s used for, is key to delivering meaningful learning outcomes and supporting student wellbeing.
The limitations of screen time as a metric
The rise in digital learning, accelerated during and after the pandemic, led to a sharp increase in children’s screen exposure – up more than 50 per cent between 2020 and 2022. This increase prompted concerns about shortened attention spans, disrupted sleep patterns and reduced physical activity between 2020 and 2022.
However, many experts now argue that screen time is too simplistic a measure for assessing educational risk or value. As highlighted in the European Commission’s NESET report passive screen use, such as video watching or unstructured browsing, offers little educational benefit. In contrast, well-designed digital tools, when used purposefully, can enhance differentiation, accelerate feedback and improve learning outcomes.
The real question, therefore, is not only about how many hours students are spending in front of screens, but whether those hours are contributing to meaningful learning.
A more nuanced conversation
“Parents are right to ask questions about screen use,” says Emily Porter, Group Chief Learning Officer at the International Schools Partnership (ISP). “It’s not simply about screen time versus ‘screen value’ – it’s about making screen time valuable. Parents and educators need support, so they can set healthy boundaries at home and expect purposeful use of technology in school. Technology is inundating every aspect of our lives and navigating it is difficult. Schools and parents need to work together to support children – it’s a conversation we all need to be having.”
ISP has introduced the term ‘screen value’ to shift the conversation away from how long students spend on screens and towards how meaningfully that time is used. This isn't about justifying screen use – it's about redefining it.
Porter is among a growing number of education leaders calling for a more informed and evidence-based approach to digital learning. The school group, which operates over 100 schools in 25 countries, has developed the principle of ‘screen value’ as a key part of its educational technology strategy, prioritising the quality of engagement and the quantity of usage.
Its model reframes the digital debate. Rather than simply increasing screen time as a substitute for innovation, schools integrate new tools only when they demonstrably enhance student learning, teacher effectiveness or classroom experience.
“The goal,” says Porter, “isn’t to reject tech or embrace it blindly – it’s to truly understand its value. In a complex, fast-moving landscape, we’re helping schools, teachers and families navigate with purpose, backed by evidence, not guesswork.”
Measuring what matters
At the heart of ISP’s approach is a research-led testing model. Through its LabSchools initiative, a group of specially selected pilot schools located in multiple regions, AI and EdTech tools are assessed in authentic classroom settings before being scaled across the wider school network.
This evidence-based approach allows the group to gather real-world evidence on what works effectively, not just in theory, but in practice. Only tools that align with ISP’s learning framework, Learning.First™, and demonstrably improve student outcomes, are considered for wider use.
“It’s not about throwing tech at teachers and hoping it sticks,” says Steve Brown, ISP’s Group CEO. “It’s about finding what truly works, testing it rigorously and giving teachers the confidence, knowledge and skills to use it meaningfully.”
One of the common failures in EdTech implementation has been a lack of teacher preparation and input. According to a report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), many educators globally feel unprepared to design and deliver digital learning effectively.
ISP has placed teacher development and input at the centre of its digital strategy. More than 10,000 educators within its global network have undertaken AI-specific training, with 92 per cent already certified. The aim is to ensure that technology supports, rather than replaces, classroom teaching.
“We’ve always known that teachers are the true drivers of innovation,” says Porter, “so at ISP, they’re also our co-designers. In our Lab Schools, we’re working side by side with educators to shape professional development, test tools in real classrooms and understand what really works. Empowering 10,000 teachers and leaders to navigate this moment isn’t something any one person can do alone – but together, we can amplify their impact, support their growth and unlock the true value of AI in education.”
This philosophy is embedded in the tools being adopted and built by the school group itself. AI-powered lesson planning, adaptive feedback and real-time progress tracking are designed not to increase screen time, but to enhance its value, reduce administrative load and allow teachers more time to engage directly with students. Crucially, this also means more space for pastoral care and one-to-one connections – a priority for parents who want to know that wellbeing and mental health are front and centre in a tech-enabled classroom.
The future of screens in education
What emerges is a different vision of the digital classroom. It’s not a classroom merely dominated by devices, but one in which technology is used selectively, purposefully and with measurable impact.
“AI can elevate great teaching,” says Brown, “but only when used with care, purpose and a clear focus on ‘screen value’. It’s not about time on screen, but the quality of learning it enables.”
For school leaders, policymakers and parents, the takeaway is clear: the screen time debate must evolve. Instead of asking how much is too much, the more pressing question is whether each moment spent using technology delivers genuine learning value.
As more schools look to adopt AI and digital tools, the challenge lies not in arbitrarily limiting screen time, but in defining what effective screen time really looks like – time that delivers measurable value, supports student wellbeing and drives strong learning outcomes for students.