NEW YORK — New York City students returning to class on Thursday found themselves bracing for a bold new world with limited screen time under the Department of Education’s new effort to cut down on younger children’s use of electronic devices.

While most of the debate around Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s education technology policy has so far focused on a one-year pause on student use of artificial intelligence until high school, the rules announced last week also restrict the use of personal devices, such as Chromebooks, through 2nd grade.

Local officials recommended daily limits on screen time of 30 minutes for grades 3 to 5, and 45 minutes for middle schools as well.

Cell phones were already banned in public schools under state law last school year.

On the first day of school, students, parents and teachers broadly agreed with the push for less screen time — but questioned what that means, practically speaking, for the classroom.

“In the past, when we use the computers, it was really fun,” said Yasmina, a sixth grader at P.S./I.S. 206 in Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn. “But my eyes did kind of hurt. I felt tired. And I guess it helps to use devices less so I can focus more.”

Priscilla, her schoolmate, said she also feels the physical signs of too much screen use: “I like to be online, but also I feel like after a little bit, I would start getting headaches,” she said. “I like using it for research and tests, but for reading, I don’t really like it.”

“The actual copy is better, because you can actually feel the book,” added Zay, another one of their peers.

Michael Mulgrew, the president of the United Federation of Teachers, agreed with the limits on ed-tech in the classroom. But he noted that some kids have more access to technology at home than others.

“Our students, we know, are going to be tested on screens. Their standardized tests are on screens. Most of the curriculum that the Department of Ed is supplying to schools, their assessments are on screens,” he said. “They’re not going to do well on the assessment itself if (the technology) is not something they’re comfortable with.”

Mulgrew has already started hearing from elementary school teachers on the issue, he said.

“‘Are we supposed to keep a clock and keep a log on how many minutes each kid’s on the screen?'” Mulgrew asked. “They made an announcement, but the Department of Ed hasn’t come out with actual guidelines towards the schools — so that’s a big problem.”

“If you put a number on this, then you’re telling people they have to monitor the time. That becomes a whole task in itself, and that all takes away from instruction,” Mulgrew added. “That’s what we don’t want.”

Schools Chancellor Kamar Samuels told reporters the daily limits on screen time should be used as a “broad guidepost.”

“There are recommendations, and so, the idea is not to go around and say, ‘You’re at 31 minutes,'” Samuels said. “The idea is: ‘What’s the spirit of (reducing) screen time?’ We have to decrease the number of minutes our young people are on screens, and that’s the purpose of policy.”

Joshua Walshver, a sixth-grade math special education teacher at P.S./I.S. 206, did not expect his lesson plans to be impacted by the new policy. Most of his screen use with students is limited to presentations, required-curriculum workbooks, and diagnostic and supplemental programs for a maximum of 30 minutes per week.

But Walshver supports the push to reduce screen time in the classroom, even if he sometimes wishes it could be extended to the home too.

“Students are at home on their screens probably from the time they leave (school) until who knows what time,” Walshver said. “I’ve asked some students, ‘Could you do your homework?’ (They said) ‘Yeah, I was supposed to do it at 10 o’clock after I finished my Fortnite game, and I fell asleep.'”

Barrett, a fifth grader at P.S. 19 The East Village Community School in Manhattan, is conflicted about screens in the classroom, which he said he used for writing and not for video games.

“You learn a bit faster with them, but it’s sort of mixed because (of the damage to) our eyesight,” Barrett said. “There’s a good side and a bad side. The good side is that it’s a tiny bit more eco-friendly because it’s helping save the trees.”

His mom, Maura, also sees both sides of the argument.

“It’s not a bad idea. I don’t think they overused them last year. I think in some ways, it enables certain kids to go at their own pace, which could potentially be good.”

“Unfortunately, the way of the world is kids are already very adept at screens, and they will continue to need to be,” she said. “But I think certain kids probably need more guardrails than others.”

________

©2026 New York Daily News. Visit at nydailynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.