Any noted schools with low screen use?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Barely any tech at LAMB. Montessori schools are pretty anti-screen

Hmm they definitely use IXL quite a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 for Brent

Only issue is you will have to find an alternative for MS but my oldest just went to private and is in their freshman year now at Walls. I’m sure others go to a charter for 4th or 5th but I was also concerned about too much tech.

I am also a teacher, I would not send my child to most DC public schools -especially title 1’s. Not because of the teachers but due to DCPS pushing tech on them the most. It’s detrimental to their kids and it’s awful. I work in one and only do the mandated iReady minutes but most of my colleagues are using chromebooks and iPads for a majority of the day.

It is so sad but this is becoming standard. I teach in the suburbs and it kills me to see kindergarten students on iPads. I do think charters have more autonomy, but at our charter it was teacher dependent. Most teachers didn’t heavily use screens but there were one or two through the years that did. Of course there are charters like DCI which are very screen dependent.

Re DCI - I hadn't heard that. Is there a way to find out more? My kid is in one of the feeders, so if this is true then I'd like to look at alternatives.

You hadn't heard that DCI is screen heavy? That's the biggest knock on it by far. Apparently they are dialing it down a bit, but it's 1:1 even in middle where kids bring their chromebooks and use them in every class. When I observed, more than half the class was browsing the internet.

are there any current parents advocating around this, like at some DCPS schools? I think like now is the moment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy has been reducing screen usage over time in response to parents' feedback.

The problem is DCPS pushes screens. Cheaper for them (though worse for students) and gives them control, which they are need for since they don't trust their teachers (which says something about their managerial (in)competence.

This is so depressing. I suspect the DCPS schools that limit screen time (Hardy and I guess Ross) have principals who are strong enough to push back.

It's not strong principals it's hefty budgets. The school community can heavily supplement or replace the screen led curriculum. It's just inequity disguised in another way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy has been reducing screen usage over time in response to parents' feedback.

The problem is DCPS pushes screens. Cheaper for them (though worse for students) and gives them control, which they are need for since they don't trust their teachers (which says something about their managerial (in)competence.

This is so depressing. I suspect the DCPS schools that limit screen time (Hardy and I guess Ross) have principals who are strong enough to push back.

It's not strong principals it's hefty budgets. The school community can heavily supplement or replace the screen led curriculum. It's just inequity disguised in another way.

How would that even work? Let's not start a class riot here.

Im at one of these schools and I don't see how the PTO budget relates in any way to screen time. The one correlation I might draw is that upper income parents tend to be more cautious about screens and open about communicating that to school leadership, so maybe they respond to parents.

I was also at Title 1 school that used screens all day long. This always felt like a leadership choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy has been reducing screen usage over time in response to parents' feedback.

The problem is DCPS pushes screens. Cheaper for them (though worse for students) and gives them control, which they are need for since they don't trust their teachers (which says something about their managerial (in)competence.

This is so depressing. I suspect the DCPS schools that limit screen time (Hardy and I guess Ross) have principals who are strong enough to push back.

It's not strong principals it's hefty budgets. The school community can heavily supplement or replace the screen led curriculum. It's just inequity disguised in another way.

How would that even work? Let's not start a class riot here.

Im at one of these schools and I don't see how the PTO budget relates in any way to screen time. The one correlation I might draw is that upper income parents tend to be more cautious about screens and open about communicating that to school leadership, so maybe they respond to parents.

I was also at Title 1 school that used screens all day long. This always felt like a leadership choice.

Schools can literally purchase additional curriculum, with money they get from PTOs. And they do! Their facilities are nicer and bigger with more outdoor and indoor space to provide recess alternatives.

And, frankly, while not a purely financial issue, there is less diversity of educational levels which means that they don't need as much adaptive tech to create differentiation for students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy has been reducing screen usage over time in response to parents' feedback.

The problem is DCPS pushes screens. Cheaper for them (though worse for students) and gives them control, which they are need for since they don't trust their teachers (which says something about their managerial (in)competence.

This is so depressing. I suspect the DCPS schools that limit screen time (Hardy and I guess Ross) have principals who are strong enough to push back.

It's not strong principals it's hefty budgets. The school community can heavily supplement or replace the screen led curriculum. It's just inequity disguised in another way.

How would that even work? Let's not start a class riot here.

Im at one of these schools and I don't see how the PTO budget relates in any way to screen time. The one correlation I might draw is that upper income parents tend to be more cautious about screens and open about communicating that to school leadership, so maybe they respond to parents.

I was also at Title 1 school that used screens all day long. This always felt like a leadership choice.

Schools can literally purchase additional curriculum, with money they get from PTOs. And they do! Their facilities are nicer and bigger with more outdoor and indoor space to provide recess alternatives.

And, frankly, while not a purely financial issue, there is less diversity of educational levels which means that they don't need as much adaptive tech to create differentiation for students.

Wasn't there also a NW school who did or tried to fundraise for additional teacher aide(s)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy has been reducing screen usage over time in response to parents' feedback.

The problem is DCPS pushes screens. Cheaper for them (though worse for students) and gives them control, which they are need for since they don't trust their teachers (which says something about their managerial (in)competence.

This is so depressing. I suspect the DCPS schools that limit screen time (Hardy and I guess Ross) have principals who are strong enough to push back.

It's not strong principals it's hefty budgets. The school community can heavily supplement or replace the screen led curriculum. It's just inequity disguised in another way.

When title 1 schools are getting millions more with less students? Ok.
And don’t say it’s for the ‘behaviors’ because if you look at dcps school budgets many of them don’t add on many extra social workers or the like. Some of these schools spend it on dumb things like another AP, office staff, more coaches, or the like.

[Anonymous]

Eaton told us that kids on personal devices is capped at 150 mins per week, but we never enrolled so am
Not sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Barely any tech at LAMB. Montessori schools are pretty anti-screen

Hmm they definitely use IXL quite a bit.

Can you share what “quite a bit” means? And does it differ by grade?

Anyone able to share what it’s like at the other Spanish immersion chapters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy has been reducing screen usage over time in response to parents' feedback.

The problem is DCPS pushes screens. Cheaper for them (though worse for students) and gives them control, which they are need for since they don't trust their teachers (which says something about their managerial (in)competence.

This is so depressing. I suspect the DCPS schools that limit screen time (Hardy and I guess Ross) have principals who are strong enough to push back.

It's not strong principals it's hefty budgets. The school community can heavily supplement or replace the screen led curriculum. It's just inequity disguised in another way.

How would that even work? Let's not start a class riot here.

Im at one of these schools and I don't see how the PTO budget relates in any way to screen time. The one correlation I might draw is that upper income parents tend to be more cautious about screens and open about communicating that to school leadership, so maybe they respond to parents.

I was also at Title 1 school that used screens all day long. This always felt like a leadership choice.

Schools can literally purchase additional curriculum, with money they get from PTOs. And they do! Their facilities are nicer and bigger with more outdoor and indoor space to provide recess alternatives.

And, frankly, while not a purely financial issue, there is less diversity of educational levels which means that they don't need as much adaptive tech to create differentiation for students.

All of my child's differentiation at a T1 is via screens, and they push it at home too. They even did this in K, which feels crazy. I heard it gets worse when they start prepping for the cape test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 for Brent

Only issue is you will have to find an alternative for MS but my oldest just went to private and is in their freshman year now at Walls. I’m sure others go to a charter for 4th or 5th but I was also concerned about too much tech.

I am also a teacher, I would not send my child to most DC public schools -especially title 1’s. Not because of the teachers but due to DCPS pushing tech on them the most. It’s detrimental to their kids and it’s awful. I work in one and only do the mandated iReady minutes but most of my colleagues are using chromebooks and iPads for a majority of the day.

It is so sad but this is becoming standard. I teach in the suburbs and it kills me to see kindergarten students on iPads. I do think charters have more autonomy, but at our charter it was teacher dependent. Most teachers didn’t heavily use screens but there were one or two through the years that did. Of course there are charters like DCI which are very screen dependent.

Re DCI - I hadn't heard that. Is there a way to find out more? My kid is in one of the feeders, so if this is true then I'd like to look at alternatives.

You hadn't heard that DCI is screen heavy? That's the biggest knock on it by far. Apparently they are dialing it down a bit, but it's 1:1 even in middle where kids bring their chromebooks and use them in every class. When I observed, more than half the class was browsing the internet.

are there any current parents advocating around this, like at some DCPS schools? I think like now is the moment

Yes - check out this thread and join the group Schools Beyond Screens DC: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1326400.page

The only way this will change is through grassroots parent advocacy. Millions of budget dollars and entrenched ways of post pandemic classroom management are significant obstacles, but the stakes are worth it. If you have time to post in a forum you have time to send an email to your council person, and this group makes it easy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 for Brent

Only issue is you will have to find an alternative for MS but my oldest just went to private and is in their freshman year now at Walls. I’m sure others go to a charter for 4th or 5th but I was also concerned about too much tech.

I am also a teacher, I would not send my child to most DC public schools -especially title 1’s. Not because of the teachers but due to DCPS pushing tech on them the most. It’s detrimental to their kids and it’s awful. I work in one and only do the mandated iReady minutes but most of my colleagues are using chromebooks and iPads for a majority of the day.

It is so sad but this is becoming standard. I teach in the suburbs and it kills me to see kindergarten students on iPads. I do think charters have more autonomy, but at our charter it was teacher dependent. Most teachers didn’t heavily use screens but there were one or two through the years that did. Of course there are charters like DCI which are very screen dependent.

Re DCI - I hadn't heard that. Is there a way to find out more? My kid is in one of the feeders, so if this is true then I'd like to look at alternatives.

You hadn't heard that DCI is screen heavy? That's the biggest knock on it by far. Apparently they are dialing it down a bit, but it's 1:1 even in middle where kids bring their chromebooks and use them in every class. When I observed, more than half the class was browsing the internet.

are there any current parents advocating around this, like at some DCPS schools? I think like now is the moment

Yes - check out this thread and join the group Schools Beyond Screens DC: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1326400.page

The only way this will change is through grassroots parent advocacy. Millions of budget dollars and entrenched ways of post pandemic classroom management are significant obstacles, but the stakes are worth it. If you have time to post in a forum you have time to send an email to your council person, and this group makes it easy!

And teacher advocacy! If parents and teachers really worked together they could not ignore us so easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy has been reducing screen usage over time in response to parents' feedback.

The problem is DCPS pushes screens. Cheaper for them (though worse for students) and gives them control, which they are need for since they don't trust their teachers (which says something about their managerial (in)competence.

This is so depressing. I suspect the DCPS schools that limit screen time (Hardy and I guess Ross) have principals who are strong enough to push back.

It's not strong principals it's hefty budgets. The school community can heavily supplement or replace the screen led curriculum. It's just inequity disguised in another way.

Er, no. Strong principal plus a lot of printing of the on-screen curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 for Brent

Only issue is you will have to find an alternative for MS but my oldest just went to private and is in their freshman year now at Walls. I’m sure others go to a charter for 4th or 5th but I was also concerned about too much tech.

I am also a teacher, I would not send my child to most DC public schools -especially title 1’s. Not because of the teachers but due to DCPS pushing tech on them the most. It’s detrimental to their kids and it’s awful. I work in one and only do the mandated iReady minutes but most of my colleagues are using chromebooks and iPads for a majority of the day.

It is so sad but this is becoming standard. I teach in the suburbs and it kills me to see kindergarten students on iPads. I do think charters have more autonomy, but at our charter it was teacher dependent. Most teachers didn’t heavily use screens but there were one or two through the years that did. Of course there are charters like DCI which are very screen dependent.

Re DCI - I hadn't heard that. Is there a way to find out more? My kid is in one of the feeders, so if this is true then I'd like to look at alternatives.

You hadn't heard that DCI is screen heavy? That's the biggest knock on it by far. Apparently they are dialing it down a bit, but it's 1:1 even in middle where kids bring their chromebooks and use them in every class. When I observed, more than half the class was browsing the internet.

are there any current parents advocating around this, like at some DCPS schools? I think like now is the moment

Yes - check out this thread and join the group Schools Beyond Screens DC: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1326400.page

The only way this will change is through grassroots parent advocacy. Millions of budget dollars and entrenched ways of post pandemic classroom management are significant obstacles, but the stakes are worth it. If you have time to post in a forum you have time to send an email to your council person, and this group makes it easy!

And teacher advocacy! If parents and teachers really worked together they could not ignore us so easily.

Yes you are absolutely correct, I should have also included teachers! Think of the resources we could divert from shoddy tech to providing support to the incredible humans spending all day with our kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 for Brent

Only issue is you will have to find an alternative for MS but my oldest just went to private and is in their freshman year now at Walls. I’m sure others go to a charter for 4th or 5th but I was also concerned about too much tech.

I am also a teacher, I would not send my child to most DC public schools -especially title 1’s. Not because of the teachers but due to DCPS pushing tech on them the most. It’s detrimental to their kids and it’s awful. I work in one and only do the mandated iReady minutes but most of my colleagues are using chromebooks and iPads for a majority of the day.

It is so sad but this is becoming standard. I teach in the suburbs and it kills me to see kindergarten students on iPads. I do think charters have more autonomy, but at our charter it was teacher dependent. Most teachers didn’t heavily use screens but there were one or two through the years that did. Of course there are charters like DCI which are very screen dependent.

Re DCI - I hadn't heard that. Is there a way to find out more? My kid is in one of the feeders, so if this is true then I'd like to look at alternatives.

You hadn't heard that DCI is screen heavy? That's the biggest knock on it by far. Apparently they are dialing it down a bit, but it's 1:1 even in middle where kids bring their chromebooks and use them in every class. When I observed, more than half the class was browsing the internet.

are there any current parents advocating around this, like at some DCPS schools? I think like now is the moment

Yes - check out this thread and join the group Schools Beyond Screens DC: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1326400.page

The only way this will change is through grassroots parent advocacy. Millions of budget dollars and entrenched ways of post pandemic classroom management are significant obstacles, but the stakes are worth it. If you have time to post in a forum you have time to send an email to your council person, and this group makes it easy!

And teacher advocacy! If parents and teachers really worked together they could not ignore us so easily.

Yes you are absolutely correct, I should have also included teachers! Think of the resources we could divert from shoddy tech to providing support to the incredible humans spending all day with our kids.

Sorry was responding to the previous comment about DCI and wondering if there are conversations like this emerging at DCI ?