Clinicians urge review of screen use in schools
More than 150 health professionals say classroom technology needs independent scrutiny for possible effects on children.
More than 150 clinicians have urged ministers to commission an independent review of screen-based learning in schools. Their open letter says children’s physical and developmental health is not being properly considered when schools buy and use education technology.
The letter, reported on Tuesday, is addressed to Education Secretary Lucy Powell and Health Secretary Yvette Cooper. Its signatories include GPs, ophthalmologists, audiologists, paediatricians, and speech and language therapists.
The clinicians say the rapid expansion of classroom technology raises concerns about eyesight, speech and language development, and the position of children with special educational needs and disabilities. Those are claims made by the campaign behind the letter, rather than findings from a government investigation.
The report says the letter estimates that about £900 million a year is spent on education technology in English schools. It also cites analysis suggesting that almost one million children spend nearly every lesson using screens. The figures were presented as part of the campaign’s case for an independent review and have not been independently confirmed in the sources available to The Vector.
The wider evidence is not straightforward. An umbrella review and meta-analysis published this month found associations between digital media use and several health, behavioural and developmental outcomes, including sleep and socio-emotional development. It did not establish that screen-based classroom teaching itself causes those outcomes, or that reducing classroom screen use would produce a particular health benefit.
England already has statutory guidance requiring schools to be mobile-phone-free by default during the school day. The guidance does not prohibit laptops or tablets used for learning, and it allows exceptions where technology is needed for medical or special educational purposes. The government has also said it intends to develop independent safety certification for some technologies used in schools.
The clinicians are asking ministers to assess products before further public money is committed and to examine whether vulnerable pupils are being directed towards screens because of pressures on schools. The sources reviewed do not show that ministers have accepted the request or announced a new restriction. For now, the development is a campaign for scrutiny, not a change in school policy.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- More than 150 clinicians have signed an open letter calling for independent scrutiny of screen-based learning in schools.
- England’s statutory guidance makes schools mobile-phone-free by default but permits laptops and tablets for learning.
- Recent research reports associations between some forms of digital media use and health or developmental outcomes, while not proving that classroom screen use causes them.
Left
Arguments Ministers should apply the precautionary principle and commission an independent review before schools and public bodies expand screen-based learning further. The review should examine whether children with additional needs are being given screens because they are educationally appropriate or because schools lack staff and resources.
Values Public health, equality, child protection and accountability for public spending.
Consequences A review could lead to tighter procurement rules, more face-to-face teaching and better safeguards, although it might slow useful digital innovation and increase costs for schools.
Centre
Arguments The sensible approach is neither a blanket ban nor unrestricted adoption. Schools should retain access to technology that demonstrably improves learning, while products are tested, teachers are trained and health evidence is reviewed as it develops.
Values Proportionality, evidence, institutional responsibility and access for children who benefit from assistive technology.
Consequences Measured standards could reduce avoidable risks without removing tools that support learning, but implementation would require clear criteria and sustained funding.
Right
Arguments Parents and headteachers, rather than campaign groups or central government, should have substantial control over how technology is used. Digital tools can improve education and prepare pupils for modern work, and weak evidence should not justify a costly new bureaucracy.
Values Choice, school autonomy, innovation and scepticism about state overreach.
Consequences A lighter-touch system could preserve flexibility and speed, but critics would fear that harms or unequal practice would remain hidden until after children had been exposed.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Priya Shah — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The article distinguishes clearly between the clinicians’ claims, government policy and published research. No core claim relies on an unverified causal conclusion.
- confirmed More than 150 clinicians signed an open letter to Lucy Powell and Yvette Cooper. — Reported in the current account of the letter. source
- confirmed The clinicians raised concerns about eyesight, speech and language, and children with special educational needs. — These concerns are described in the reported letter. source
- confirmed England’s school mobile-phone guidance became statutory on 29 June 2026 and applies from 1 September 2026. — The Department for Education’s statutory guidance gives both dates. source
- confirmed The government has said it intends to develop independent safety certification for some school technologies. — The June government guidance refers to planned independent safety certification. source
- confirmed A recent umbrella review found associations between digital media use and several health, behavioural and developmental outcomes. — This is the stated conclusion of the October 2026 review; the article does not turn association into causation. source
Editor's note
The certain news is the clinicians’ open letter and its request for an independent review. The health claims and spending estimates are attributed to the campaign; the available evidence supports associations, not a proven causal effect from classroom screens.Sources
- Screens at schools fuelling child health 'crisis', doctors warn — Yahoo News
- New guidance on screen use for children aged 5–16 — Department for Education and Department of Health and Social Care
- Associations of digital media use with health, behavioural and developmental outcomes in children and adolescents: an umbrella review and meta-analysis — eClinicalMedicine
- Understanding the impact of smartphones and social media on children and young people — Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
More on this in other media
- iNews — „screen time”
- BBC News — „screen time”
- The Guardian — „screen time”