New DPI screen guidance stops short of time limits

The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (DPI) has issued its first statewide guidance on how schools should manage screen time on school-issued devices. But the agency’s guidance avoids the hard use-limits lawmakers imposed on students’ personal cell phones in legislation passed a year ago.

The document, released this summer and entitled Guidance for Purposeful Screen Use in Schools, recommends that educators focus on the purpose and structure of device use rather than “relying solely on strict time limits.” 

The guidelines set no maximum screen time for any grade level, instead urging schools to distinguish between “active” screen use — creating, problem-solving, collaborating — and “passive” consumption, such as endless scrolling and background video, which it says should be restricted.

“As technology continues to play an important role in teaching and learning, this guidance encourages schools to move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches to screen time and focus instead on intentional, developmentally appropriate, and purpose-driven use of digital tools,” Matthew Mayo, DPI’s director of digital teaching and learning and school connectivity, said in a LinkedIn post announcing the resource.

The guidance recommends a “gradual release of responsibility” by grade level: adult-guided use in elementary school, shared responsibility in middle school, and student-managed use with accountability in high school. It draws on the American Academy of Pediatrics’ “5 Cs” framework — child, content, calm, crowding out, and communication — and cites research linking unstructured recreational screen use to sleep disruption, reduced attention, and mental health concerns.

Krista Glazewski, executive director of NC State’s Friday Institute for Educational Innovation, praised the framework’s balance. “It doesn’t treat technology as something to embrace uncritically or avoid altogether,” she told EdNC.

“We’re reaching a stage where screen time limits look increasingly necessary,” said Bryce Fiedler, director of the Carolinas Academic Leadership Network at the John Locke Foundation. “We would prefer to see districts take the initiative on their own. Horry County Schools of South Carolina is a good recent example of this. Local action could influence whether lawmakers in Raleigh ultimately see a need to consider statewide legislation.”

The recommendations are non-binding. Notably, the document nowhere references House Bill 959, the Protecting Students in a Digital Age law that Gov. Josh Stein signed July 1, 2025. That law required every school board to adopt policies barring students from using personal wireless devices during instructional time by Jan. 1. But that new law left school-issued laptops and tablets untouched.

Those devices may be the bigger problem. As Carolina Journal previously reported, findings from UNC-Chapel Hill’s North Carolina Phones and Tech in Schools Study saw more students reported being distracted by classmates’ school-issued devices than by personal phones. A third of students said they use workarounds to bypass school content filters, most commonly to reach gaming sites; and 54.5% of teachers reported stress from managing device use in class.

Some lawmakers have signaled they want firmer rules, not frameworks. Sen. Kevin Corbin, R-Macon, suggested bell-to-bell device restrictions at a March legislative oversight hearing, while Rep. Hugh Blackwell, R-Burke, warned school boards could face legal exposure for lax enforcement.

The guidance also lands amid a push to put more technology in classrooms: Lawmakers folded the AI-tutoring pilot from Sen. Michael Lee’s K-12 innovation package into the new budget, with $2.5 million for districts to deploy the tool in grades 6-12.

HB 959’s other mandate arrives this fall: Beginning with the 2026-27 school year, the standard course of study must include instruction on social media’s mental health effects, delivered once in elementary school, once in middle school, and twice in high school.

“New DPI screen guidance stops short of time limits” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.