Key Takeaways
- Assistive technologies—such as speech‑to‑text, audiobooks, and screen‑reading software—are essential tools that enable many students with disabilities to access curriculum and demonstrate their abilities.
- Nationwide moves to ban or severely restrict cellphones and other screens in schools risk unintentionally removing these vital accommodations for students like Soraya Martin, who relies on her phone for note‑taking and emotional regulation.
- While some state‑level screen‑ban legislation includes exemptions for assistive technology, advocates argue these provisions are often vague and insufficient, leaving schools and teachers to interpret compliance on their own.
- Experts warn that rapid, blanket screen restrictions could undermine Universal Design for Learning principles, which advocate flexible, multimodal instruction to meet diverse learner needs.
- Effective policy should involve educators, disability advocates, assistive‑technology providers, and students with disabilities to ensure that accessibility rights are protected while addressing legitimate concerns about screen overuse.
Student Success Through Assistive Technology
Soraya Martin, a ninth‑grader from Concord, California, has dyslexia, a learning difference that makes traditional reading and writing especially challenging. By using speech‑to‑text on her school laptop, listening to audiobooks, and photographing board notes with her phone, she has transformed her academic experience. These tools let her focus on ideas rather than spelling mechanics, leading to markedly improved grades and a newfound confidence in her ability to succeed in school.
The Impact of Technology on Soraya’s Learning
Before adopting assistive tech, Soraya described school as a “really big challenge.” After integrating dictation software and audiobooks into her routine, she began earning straight A’s for the first time. She notes that the technology not only boosted her grades but also allowed her to express herself more deeply, describing the change as making her feel “not stupid” and capable of contributing meaningful work.
Growing Nationwide Push to Limit Screens in Schools
Across the United States, concerns about screen time have prompted more than 30 states to enact cellphone bans in schools, with some proposals seeking to eliminate laptops and tablets entirely. In late May, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released a surgeon general’s advisory warning of the harms of screen use on children’s health and educational outcomes. Parents and policymakers alike argue that screens distract from learning and contribute to mental‑health issues.
Parental Perspectives and the Overlooked Disability Angle
Heather Martin, Soraya’s mother, shares the broader community’s worries about excessive screen exposure but points out a critical gap in the conversation: students with disabilities are rarely considered when screen‑free policies are drafted. She observes that, despite her own reservations about screens, no parent or administrator she has spoken with has raised the issue of how such bans might affect learners who depend on those very devices for accessibility.
Assistive Technology as a Lifeline for Many Students
More than 8 million students in the U.S. have identified disabilities, and many rely on assistive technology to participate fully in classroom activities. Blind or low‑vision students may use screen‑reading or magnification software; students with dyslexia, like Soraya, often depend on speech‑to‑text, audiobooks, or digital note‑taking apps. These tools are not luxuries; they are legally mandated accommodations under Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and Section 504 plans.
State Legislation and the Issue of Blanket Bans
States such as Alabama, Tennessee, and Utah have already passed laws limiting screen use, with some set to take effect as early as July. While many of these statutes include a line exempting “assistive technology,” experts like Lindsay Jones—CEO of the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST)—characterize these exemptions as a “blunt instrument.” The rapid pace of legislation leaves educators and disability communities scrambling to interpret how to apply the rules without inadvertently denying students needed supports.
Risk of Unintended Consequences in the Classroom
At Soraya’s high school, the first year of a policy requiring phones to be locked in pouches for the entire day has already created friction. Although Soraya’s IEP permits her to use her phone for note‑taking, teachers unfamiliar with the accommodation sometimes question her requests to retrieve the device. Soraya describes feeling singled out and anxious, noting that the phone also serves as a safety net for panic attacks. This scenario exemplifies the “unintended consequence” Jones warns about: well‑meaning screen restrictions can undermine the very flexibility that helps students with disabilities thrive.
Universal Design for Learning as a Better Alternative
CAST promotes Universal Design for Learning (UDL), an framework that encourages teachers to present material in multiple ways—through text, audio, visuals, and hands‑on activities—so that all learners can access content regardless of their individual strengths or challenges. For example, a math lesson might incorporate manipulatives, diagrams, and video explanations, while a reading assignment could be offered as both a printed text and an audiobook. UDL inherently supports the use of assistive technology without requiring separate exemptions, creating inclusive environments by design.
The Call for Inclusive Policy‑Making
Jones urges policymakers to involve educators, disability advocates, assistive‑technology providers, and, crucially, students with disabilities themselves when shaping screen‑use policies. She argues that collaborative input will produce rules that balance legitimate concerns about overuse with the imperative to protect access to necessary tools. Such an approach, she contends, will help schools achieve their educational goals without trampling on civil rights.
Soraya’s Personal Growth and Advocacy
Empowered by her assistive tools, Soraya has begun to embrace her dyslexia as part of her identity. She recently completed a research project and series of essays exploring how people with dyslexia learn, and she now enjoys straight A’s for the first time. More importantly, she reports feeling “more confident in myself” and capable of expressing her ideas in a deeper, more meaningful way. Her story underscores the transformative potential of technology when it is viewed as an enabler rather than a distraction.
Conclusion
The debate over screens in schools is complex, balancing genuine worries about distraction and health against the proven benefits of technology for many learners—especially those with disabilities. While limiting unrestricted phone use may have merit, policymakers must ensure that any restrictions preserve access to assistive tools that are essential for equity and academic success. By adopting inclusive, universally designed approaches and consulting the communities most affected, schools can create environments where all students, like Soraya, have the opportunity to thrive.