In 2002, Maine became the first state to implement a statewide laptop program at certain grade levels. Then-Governor Angus King saw the program as a way to bring the Internet to more children who would be able to immerse themselves in information.
By that fall, the Maine Learning Technology Initiative had distributed 17,000 Apple laptops to seventh-grade students in 243 middle schools. By 2016, the number of laptops and tablets distributed to Maine students increased to 66,000.
King’s early efforts have been mirrored throughout the country. In 2024, the US will spend more than $30 billion on installing laptops and tablets in schools. But more than a quarter century later and several evolving models of technology later, psychologists and learning experts see different results than King intended. Instead of empowering the generation with access to more knowledge, technology had the opposite effect.
Earlier this year, in written testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, neuroscientist Jared Cooney Horvath said that despite unprecedented access to technology, Gen Z is less cognitively capable than previous generations. He said Gen Z is the first generation in modern history to score lower than previous generations on standardized tests.
Although the skills measured by these tests, such as literacy and numeracy, are not always indicative of intelligence, they are a reflection of cognitive ability, which Horvath said has been declining over the past decade.
Citing Program for International Student Assessment data and other standardized tests taken from 15-year-olds around the world, Horvath noted not only declines in test scores, but also a strong correlation between scores and time spent on computers at school, such that more screen time was related to worse scores. He accused students of uncontrolled access to technology, which weakened rather than enhanced learning abilities. The arrival of the iPhone in 2007 didn’t help either.
Horvath wrote, “This is not a debate about rejecting technology.” “It is a question of aligning educational tools with how human learning actually works. The evidence indicates that indiscriminate digital expansion has weakened rather than strengthened the learning environment.”
Perhaps the writing was already on the wall. Luck reported in 2017 that Maine’s public school test scores had not improved in the 15 years since the state implemented its technology initiative. Then-Governor Paul LePage called the program a “colossal failure”, even as the state poured money into the contract with Apple.
Gen Z will now have to face the consequences of declining learning abilities. The generation has already been deeply affected by the changes of the other technological revolution of the 21st century: Generative AI.
Preliminary data from a first-of-its-kind Stanford University study published last year found that AI advances have had a “significant and disproportionate impact on entry-level workers in the US labor market.” But Horvath warned that a less able-bodied population means more than just fewer job prospects and fewer promotions; This threatens how humans will be able to overcome existential challenges in the coming decades.
“We face more complex and far-reaching challenges than any other in human history – from overpopulation to rising diseases to moral drift,” he said. Luck. “Now, more than ever, we need a generation that can grapple with nuance, hold multiple truths in tension, and creatively tackle the problems that are troubling today’s greatest adult minds.”
Impact of technology on learning
The use of classroom technology has increased rapidly in recent years. A 2021 EdWeek Research Center survey of 846 teachers found that 55% said they were spending one to four hours per day with educational technology. Another quarter reported using digital devices five hours per day.
Although teachers intend for these tools to be purely educational, students often have different ideas. According to a 2014 study that surveyed and observed 3,000 university students, students engaged in off-task activities on their computers nearly two-thirds of the time.
Horvath attributed this tendency to derail as the main contributor to technology hindering learning. When someone’s attention is interrupted, it takes time to refocus. Task-switching is also linked to poor memory formation and higher rates of error. Tackling a challenging single subject matter is difficult, Horvath said. For optimal learning, this must happen.
“Unfortunately, spontaneity has never been a defining characteristic of learning,” he said. “Learning is effortful, difficult, and at times uncomfortable. But it is the friction that makes learning deep and transferable into the future.”
Jean Twenge, a psychology professor at San Diego State University and author who studies generational differences, argues that sustained attention to any one subject is anathema to how technology is deployed today. 10 rules for raising children in a high-tech world. More screen time is not ineffective in facilitating learning; This is counterproductive.
“Many apps, including social media and gaming apps, are designed to be addictive,” Twenge said. Luck. “Their business model is based on users spending the most time on apps and checking them as frequently as possible.”
A Baylor University-led study published in November 2025 revealed why: By balancing relevant videos with surprising and unexpected content, TikTok requires the least effort to use, even less than Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts.
Concerns over social media addiction have become so severe that 1,600 plaintiffs from 350 families and 250 school districts have filed a lawsuit alleging that Meta, Snap, TikTok and YouTube have created addictive platforms that are causing mental health challenges such as depression and self-harm in children.
Solution to technical crisis
Horvath proposed several solutions to Gen Z’s technology problem, at least as it relates to use in the classroom. He suggested that Congress could enact an efficacy standard to fund research into what digital tools are actually effective in the classroom. The legislature could also require stronger limits on behavior tracking, profiling, and collecting data on minors using technology.
Some schools have taken matters into their own hands. By August 2025, 17 states have banned cellphone use in school, banning the technology during instructional time; And 35 states have laws limiting phone use in the classroom. In fact, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, more than 75% of schools say they have policies banning cellphone use for non-academic purposes, although there has been considerable success in enforcing those restrictions.
Ultimately, Horvath said, the loss of critical thinking and learning skills is less a personal failure and more a policy failure, calling the generation of Americans educated with gadgets the victims of a failed educational experiment.
“Whenever I work with teens I tell them, ‘It’s not your fault. None of you asked to sit in front of a computer throughout your K-12 schooling,'” Horvath said. “It means we’re…fucked – and I really hope Gen Z figures it out soon and goes crazy.”
This story originally appeared on Fortune.com
<a href