• In a bid to improve literacy scores, Mesick schools pulled screens from elementary classrooms
• Teachers instead use paper books and other old-school methods to engage children
• Experts say the move comes with risks that could could fall behind in the digital age

---

MESICK — As the rise of artificial intelligence puts technology front and center in most every industry, one Wexford County school district is going analogue, stripping elementary students of Chromebooks and iPads and replacing them with paper books.

Last month, Mesick Elementary School rolled out its “no screens literacy initiative” — among the first in the state to do so — in a bid to improve reading scores. Michigan’s kids fall behind most others in reading and writing proficiency, standardized test scores reveal. 

“When we’re looking at proficiency test scores of 20%, 30% or 40%, sometimes those kinds of drastically low scores need some drastic measures,” Mesick Superintendent Jack Ledford said. “We basically grounded 250 students and took away their devices.”

Last school year, more than 65% of Mesick’s third-, fourth- and fifth-grade students ranked “partially proficient” or “not proficient” in English Language Arts on state standardized tests, state data shows.

The district’s decision to cut screens, which has attracted the attention of neighboring school districts, reflects a growing body of research linking heavy screen use with lower academic performance, mental health challenges and behavioral issues.

RELATED: 

• Whitmer signs classroom smartphone ban for Michigan schools. What to know
• Short staff, Michigan schools use virtual special ed therapy. ‘This is not ideal’
• Michigan experts warn: Your child’s new friend may be an AI companion

“With districts taking away Chromebooks, it’s a big topic that everyone is thinking about, but not as intentional as what Mesick has done,” said Jamey Fitzpatrick, president and CEO of Michigan Virtual, a nonprofit that provides online courses, digital learning tools and professional development to more than 360 Michigan school districts.

The move comes with risk, researchers say.

“Computer literacy is just a necessity today,” said University of Michigan cognitive neuroscientist Ioulia Kovelman, who studies how children’s brains develop as they learn to read. “We can’t go back to the stone age and ask people to write on stone tablets.”

Under Mesick’s new policy, teachers replace some virtual components of daily instruction with hands-on activities and games. The district has allocated $30,000 toward books and teaching materials for educators.

Screens still are used for testing and when allowed by an individualized education plan for special education students.

One month in, Ledford said the response from district teachers and families is mostly positive. While the transition has been difficult for some students, teachers said they are already seeing a difference in the classroom.

“Kids are used to the dopamine part of screens and games, but books stimulate imagination and questions and different things,” Ledford said, “so we’re trying to change some behavior and change some brain patterns in kids. And parents are on board with this, and we’ve heard nothing but good things.”

Abby Monroe, a parent of two Mesick Elementary students, said she hopes the district’s policy will loosen her children’s ties to devices — especially during summer break, when their at-home library goes largely unused.

“I know that my kids aren’t as quick or easy to pick up a book. They want to be on an iPad,” she said. “I feel like it will help if they can pick out books at school. Maybe they’ll pick them more at home, compared to a screen.”

One fourth-grade student, Cooper McGinness, was surprised to learn about the “no screens” initiative. He said that a class discussion and internet research gave him a better understanding.

“Screens are bad for your eyes and it could hurt your eyes, making them red,” he said. “When you read on your Chromebook, you aren’t actually learning anything.”

Mesick Elementary School Principal Elizabeth Kastl provided a more nuanced explanation. Fewer screens could help students become more proficient critical readers and thinkers, she said.

“When you put a story on an iPad for K-5 students, a lot of times it’s narrated with moving pictures,” she said. It’s not a true literature experience where you’re having to create a movie in your mind and understand the characters.”

Back to the basics

Stephanie MacEachern’s second-grade class grabbed books as they returned from recess during the second week under the new policy, getting comfortable at desks or on the rug for quiet reading time. Student Matthew Baxter read an “American Chillers” novel, while another looked for pine cones in an “I Spy” book.

It’s an activity MacEachern is leaning into in spirit of the new initiative, among other games and activities that had been collecting dust in filing cabinets.

“Bringing back those human interactions and learning how to play games together — even learning how to win a game and lose a game appropriately — is important for them,” she said.

MacEachern said Ledford’s announcement of a full return to physical instruction was a surprise to teachers, as about half of all learning was supplemented by technology. As the changes settled in, she said, her colleagues grew to understand it’s a positive and important change.

“I think all the teachers were kind of in shock at the beginning … because we’ve been used to this way of teaching for the past five or six years since COVID hit,” she said. “Things definitely flipped … but I think it’s a good change.”

Students have been talking to each other more since the change, she said. While some of her students were upset about losing electronics, removing devices didn’t lead to any behavior issues.

A debate about screens in schools

Michigan Virtual’s research arm studies online and blended learning and tests new education technologies to improve instruction and policy.

Fitzpatrick said conversations about student screen time have intensified as technology has become embedded in everyday life.

“I’d congratulate Mesick in taking on the tough topic of screen time,” he said. “Let’s face it, tech has become ubiquitous and children are gaining more access to technology than ever before.”

He said students often receive what he calls “digital candy” — entertainment-driven screen time through social media platforms like Snapchat, Instagram and TikTok.

Still, he said, schools alone cannot fully address the issue.

“Educators can’t develop a total solution because kids have access to technology at home,” Fitzpatrick said. “If we want to develop a robust solution, parents need to be a part of the equation.”

Research suggests there are important learning benefits tied to traditional reading and writing practices, said Kovelman, the University of Michigan neuroscientist.

At the same time, she said, the most effective literacy programs often combine traditional reading and writing with carefully structured technology use, rather than relying on one component.

Unlike reading on a screen, which often presents one page at a time, physical books allow students to move back and forth through a text more easily and make connections across pages, she said. That kind of interaction can help readers grasp material more deeply.

“When you’re reading a book, you can grab a couple of pages at the same time. You can go back and forth,” Kovelman said. “That back-and-forth with the material helps you grasp it.”

Handwriting and spelling exercises also activate multiple systems in the brain that support literacy development, she said. Typing or clicking answers on a screen does not build that same connection. 

Kovelman cautioned that computers themselves are not harmful and remain an essential part of modern education. Students who grow up without the experience — like those in low-income households without computers — may be at a disadvantage when entering the workforce. 

Ledford said he is confident the new policy won’t hinder students’ abilities to succeed in the modern age, even if they don’t have a computer in their household. He said the district is planning to adapt their policy to the middle and high school, with a narrowed scope.

“It’s not an issue, but literacy is an issue,” he said. “Kids — they depend on Google, they depend on AI — but they lack foundational skills. What we want to do is get those foundational skills in place so that they can become researchers, so to speak, and independent learners.”

This reporting is made possible by the Northern Michigan Journalism Collaborative, led by Bridge Michigan and Interlochen Public Radio, and funded by Press Forward Northern Michigan.

Thank you to our Education Watch sponsors

Bridge Michigan Education Watch is made possible by generous financial support from our sponsors. Sponsorship supports our independent journalism mission but does not constitute sponsor endorsement of individual articles or editorial content. Bridge Michigan journalism remains fact- and data-driven and independent at all times.

Please visit the About page for more information and to subscribe to Education Watch. Interested in becoming a sponsor? Contact Emma Carr.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under our Republication Guidelines. Questions? Email republishing@bridgemi.com