Chairman Erickson opened the hearing on SB 350.

Tamera Lawrence, Assistant Revisor, Office of the Revisor of Statutes, gave an overview of the bill. (Attachment 1)

Proponents:

Emily Brownlee, Masters in Secondary Education, ScreenStrong Ambassador, Overland Park Parent, said it is negligent to continue to ignore the overwhelming research that exposes how educational technology known as "EdTech" harms learning, cognitive growth, and student well-being. It was stated that Neuroscientist Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath issued a powerful warning saying the rapid rise of technology in education is contributing to a sharp decline in intelligence across key metrics. EdTech tools do not improve learning. In fact, they erode deep thinking, content retention, and classroom engagement. When a computer is used for school, students typically last fewer than six minutes before playing video games, accessing social media, messaging friends and engaging with other digital distractions. EdTech is a threat to student privacy and reinforces addiction pathways. EdTech harms teachers and threatens the teaching profession. (Attachment 2)

Katie Longhauser, founder of The Screen Guardians, stated over the past decade, classroom screen use has increased dramatically. Yet during that same time:

• National reading scores have declined, with 9- and 13- year olds showing some of the steepest drops in decades.
• Research suggests that, on average, students using tablets in "all or most of all" of their classes have reading scores that are the equivalent of a full grade lower on assessments than students who never use tablets in their classrooms.
• Kansas colleges readiness benchmarks have fallen over 44% across core subjects.
• Teens now average more than 7 hours per day of recreational screen use outside of school.
• Nearly half of teens report being online "almost constantly".(Attachment 3)

Gretchen Shanahan, Parent, said surveillance capitalism has captured education. Once a user’s natural inclination to use a digital product is exhausted, tech companies turn to behavioral manipulation to coerce users to spend more time with their products and to direct user attention where it is most profitable to them. An EdTech program has been stealing their personal information for profit. Why is our district and state board of education just now becoming interested in the information?  Normally local and state administration can be trusted for making the best decisions on student education but the fact that the implemented use of devices not designed for children and the classroom leads to mistrust. (Attachment 4)

Erika Sheets, Chapter Chair, Johnson County Moms for Liberty, stated research shows 25% of students spend more than 4 hours daily on school devices and 50% spend between 1-4 hours daily on school devices and 50% spend between 1-4 hours daily. Researchers estimate students drift off-task up to 38 minutes/hour of that time. Cheating has become rampant, Googling has replaced thinking, kids swapped reading for quick searches and copy/paste, students never learned how to vet anything assuming Wikipedia and search results were the truth, writing turned into stitching together internet paragraph chunks, etc. (Attachment 5)

Kim Whitman, Parent, told of when her youngest child entered kindergarten, the district handed her an iPad as part of the district's new 1:1 digital learning initiative. Every K-6 student received an iPad and every 7-12 student a MacBook - despite teachers not being trained to use them effectively. Those devices came loaded with more than 300 applications resulting in children being exposed to inappropriate content because of this open access. And despite all this technology,they have not even been taught how to type. Several addendum findings were explained. (Attachment 6)

Proponent Written:

Holly Biagioli, Parent (Attachment 7)

Matt Brownlee, Parent (Attachment 8)

Debbie Detmer, Parent(Attachment 9)

Claudia Fury-Aguirre, Manager of Kansas Policy and Outreach, Aligned(Attachment 10)

Jami Klenda, Parent (Attachment 11)

Maria Smith, Parent (Attachment 12)

Discussion followed.

Neutral:

Frank Harwood, Deputy Commissioner of Fiscal and Administration Services, Kansas State Department of Education, told the Committee that over the last few minutes, both the Kansas State Board of Education and local boards of education have been studying student screen time during school hours. Although the use of electronic devices have become an integral part of the school day, some school districts have begun to limit screen time, especially at the earlier grades. It is important for the legislature to understand the ramifications a unilateral policy limiting or prohibiting the use of electronic devices will have. Prohibiting or limiting screen time will also require districts to move away from computer based educational interventions including IXL Math. (Attachment 13)

Discussion followed.

Opponent:

Rob Dickson, Chief Information Officer, Wichita Public Schools, USD 259,  spoke on behalf of Blue Valley Schools saying this bill represents a sweeping unfunded mandate that undermines local control, conflicts with current Kansas and national assessment requirements, and overreaches into instructional decision-making best left to locally elected boards of education and professional educators. This bill has unfunded mandates, conflict with assessment and accountability systems, education, not prohibition, equity concerns and a more targeted approach. A more effective solution would be age-verification requirements for social media platforms rather than instructional device restrictions in schools. (Attachment 14) (Attachment 15)

Leah Fliter, Assistant Executive Director, Kansas Association of School Boards (KASB), said this bill conflicts with Kansas Law and KASB policy on local control. Federal law conflicts and compliance risks created by this bill were listed in testimony. It also mandates parental opt-out. Other considerations include the need to adopt an internet safety policy and implement filtering and monitoring measures.(Attachment 16)

Jim Karleskint, United School Administrators, opposes this bill because it imposes rigid statewide mandates on instructional technology that undermines local control, creates substantial unfunded costs, and disrupts effective instructional practice already in place across Kansas school districts. (Attachment 17)

Opponent Written:

Gillian Chapman, Superintendent, Blue Valley School District (Attachment 18)

Timothy R. Graham, Director of Government Relations and Legislative Affairs, Kansas National Education Association (Attachment 19)

Cathy Hopkins and Beryl New, Legislative Liaisons, Kansas State Board of Education (Attachment 20)

Vikkie Mullins, President, Kansas PTA (Attachment 21)

Dr. Michael Schumacher, Superintendent, Shawnee Mission School District (Attachment 22)

Dr. Brent Yeager, Superintendent, Olathe Public Schools (Attachment 23)

Discussion followed.

Chairman Erickson closed the hearing on SB 350.