Scroll for the full story and context.

Jump to:

It started quietly. One mom asked if anyone else’s kid was spending hours on i-Ready. Another shared a screenshot of her son’s screen time report. Then someone dropped a link to Schools Beyond Screens. And suddenly the chats shifted…from venting to organizing.

It might feel hyperlocal. Just a few LA parents comparing notes.

But zoom out… this is part of a much bigger moment.

As we speak, a landmark jury trial in Los Angeles is testing claims that Instagram and Youtube were deliberately designed to addict minors. In the case currently unfolding, a young adult plaintiff says her reliance on the platforms since childhood contributed to depression, anxiety, and other harms, and she’s asking a jury to hold the tech giants accountable.

Executives from these companies have taken the stand, denying they engineered addictive products. But the very fact this is being litigated in court right now gives context to what parents and teachers are seeing in schools—and why the push for intentional screen use matters.

Katie Pace is a parent in LAUSD and the new captain of her middle school’s “Schools Beyond Screens” chapter.

She didn’t start out anti-tech. She started out trying to be a reasonable parent in a system that kept pushing more screens…until she watched her kids change.

She saw it most clearly with her middle schooler.

“The school basically gave her the keys to the castle.”

By that, Katie meant constant access to Youtube and other distractions on her school issued chromebook. At home, her daughter could say she was “doing homework” while bouncing between tabs. At school, she could be pulled off task mid-lesson. And even highly involved parents struggle to monitor it without becoming full time screen detectives.

So Katie turned frustration into action.

As SBS chapter captain, she’s working to grow membership, unify parent voices, and advocate for change at both the school and district level, because in LAUSD, what happens in one classroom is often tied to a bigger policy machine.

She’s:

It’s not anti-technology, it’s pro-intentionality, and it’s catching on.

I decided to reach out directly to my daughter's 8th grade English teacher to ask about i-Ready and screen time in her classroom. I wasn't sure what to expect, maybe a defensive response, or a “my hands are tied”.

Instead, I got one of the most candid, thoughtful emails I've ever received from an educator.

She told me she's also stepping away from screens in her own teaching. She's been reading current research on screen time, literacy development, and the impact of reading apps on actual reading levels, and she's "trying to make sense of it all."

But here's the kicker: She's stuck in a tricky spot.

The district is pushing hard for "personalized instruction" in reading, largely through adaptive digital programs like i-Ready. The idea is that these apps meet kids where they are and adjust the difficulty level in real time. Sounds great, right?

But here's what my daughter's teacher believes: A kid reading a self selected book at their appropriate reading level, for both enjoyment and knowledge, is personalized instruction.

She put it this way: "When students are engaged in meaningful, sustained reading at grade level, that is targeted and responsive teaching. This is the type of reading I support, both personally and as an educator."

My daughter was reading a novel during i-Ready time. Her teacher saw that as far more meaningful than clicking through comprehension questions. But the district tracks i-Ready minutes. Schools are measured on completion rates. And that pressure trickles down.

She didn't just share her opinion, she backed it up with actual studies. Here's what the research is showing:

The teachers know. They're reading the same studies we're sharing in our parenting groups. They're just caught between what the research says and what the district mandates.

And that's exactly why parent advocacy matters.

Katie requested a meeting with her school’s principal to discuss i-Ready, screen overload, and Youtube access. The response? Surprisingly receptive.

Here’s what she learned:

1. Diagnostics vs. lessons
i-Ready diagnostics are mandated for grades 3–12.
The instructional lessons are primarily designed for K–8.
If high schoolers are doing repetitive lessons? That’s worth questioning.

2. The homework myth
According to a recently (Feb 20, 2026) shared LAUSD guidance memo (not yet posted publicly), i-Ready and similar tools are intended as supplemental instructional tools and should not be assigned as homework. The memo also clarifies recommended usage is 30–45 minutes per week per subject.

3. Supplemental vs. replacement
Policy says i-Ready is supplemental.
In practice, it can replace independent reading, or even teaching time.

The principal admitted many teachers were already scaling back. But having parents bring research and formal concerns gave her leverage to address it more directly.

Here's another wait… what?: In LAUSD, the consent forms for Google Workspace and Classroom can also control Youtube access on school devices.

Most of us sign thinking, “My kid needs Google Classroom.” But bundled permissions can open Youtube access on managed devices. To restrict it, parents often need to explicitly revoke certain Google service permissions, not just assume “no Youtube” is implied.

Even the principal was surprised. She’s now working with IT to address it.

And when Katie suggested blocking Youtube district-wide while still allowing teacher-directed instructional use? The principal said she’d explore it.

Update: Schools Beyond Screens is now circulating a district-wide Youtube petition aimed at restricting recreational access on student devices while preserving instructional use.

The Schools Beyond Screens campaign isn't asking schools to toss every device in the dumpster. It's asking for intentionality. Here's the core platform:

It's common sense. But it takes collective parent power to make it happen.

If you're reading this and thinking, "Okay but what do I do?", here's your action plan:

1. Join the conversation. Get into your local parenting groups. Share this article. Talk to other parents. You're not alone.

2. Request a meeting with your principal. Be respectful, bring research, and ask candid questions about i-Ready usage, screen time policies, and Youtube access. Principals are people. Many of them are on our side.

3. Connect with Schools Beyond Screens. Follow their updates, sign petitions, and show up to meetings. Strength in numbers.

4. Opt out where you can. Google workspace, i-Ready at home, unnecessary apps: you have more control than you think.

LAUSD guidance also outlines a formal process for parents who wish to limit digital tools during personalized learning. Schools are required to meet with families, review student data, discuss non-digital alternatives, and document any agreed upon instructional adjustments.

5. Support your kid's teachers. If they're moving toward paper and pen, let them know you appreciate it. Send a quick email. Teachers need to hear that parents want this shift.

Right now, a lot of those decisions are being made by ed-tech companies optimizing for engagement metrics and data collection. But when you talk to actual educators, the ones in the classroom every day, they'll tell you what works: Books. Conversation. Writing by hand. Time to think.

We're not Luddites. We're just parents (and teachers) who've seen enough research, enough glazed over eyes at pickup, and enough "personalized learning" that looks suspiciously like a kid clicking buttons alone to know that something's off.

The good news? We're not powerless. Parent networks are strong, organized, and increasingly loud. Principals are listening. Teachers are ready. And slowly: hoop by hoop, petition by petition: we're taking back the classroom.

So yes, I'm jumping through the hoops. Are you?

• Want to reach local parents? Advertise →

• A writer or community voice? Contribute →

• Hosting something fun? Submit your event →

• Forwarded this email? Subscribe here →