On January 15, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a full committee hearing framed broadly around online safety. However, the hearing sent an unmistakable signal to education leaders and edtech providers: the federal conversation about youth technology use is growing more pointed, with schools at the center of the conversation.

What stood out was the level of bipartisan alignment around how technology is affecting student well-being, cognition, and learning.

Many members of the edtech community tuned in for the hearing and published their perspectives on the discourse:

  • Lisa O’Masta, CEO of Learning.com, wrote, “Student safety and well-being must remain the north star. That means clear expectations, age-appropriate guardrails, and helping students build judgment, not dependency. It means equipping educators and families NOW, not waiting for perfect policy clarity.”
  • Tammy Wincup, CEO of Securly, said, “It’s encouraging to see this conversation happening at the national level. But the solution set has to extend beyond just big tech accountability. As it continues, especially around AI, we need to help schools and parents keep student safety and well-being at the forefront.”
  • Edmentum CEO Jamie Candee said, “Active engagement and passive scrolling are not equal. Technology built on pedagogy accelerates learning and amplifies the impact of teachers… Follow the evidence. Prioritize tools that demonstrably improve learning…”

Why This Hearing Matters

Senators from both parties described a similar concern: children and adolescents are spending unprecedented portions of their waking hours on screens. As Chairman Ted Cruz (R-Texas) put it, for today’s teenagers, “more than half of the time that a teenager is awake, [they are] staring at a screen.” Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) echoed the concern, pointing not simply to screen time, but to products “deliberately engineered to hook kids.”

This framing marks an important shift. Policymakers aren’t debating whether technology can support learning, but whether current models—particularly one-to-one devices, algorithmic feeds, and AI-driven tools—are developmentally aligned, educationally effective, or even safe.

Legislative Context: KOSMA, COSTA, and AI Guardrails

Several policy efforts throughout the hearing reflected a spectrum of proposed and existing legislative efforts to enhance children’s online protections and limit harmful technology usage:

  • Kids Off Social Media Act (KOSMA): Would prohibit social media access for children under 13, restrict algorithmic feeds for teens, and block social media access on school networks receiving E-Rate funds.  
  • Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA): This proposal would require online platforms to protect users under 17 by adding privacy safeguards, parental controls, and reporting tools, restricting data use and research on minors, ensuring transparency around algorithms, and enforcing compliance through the FTC and states.
  • Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0): Updates COPPA and expands online privacy protections to cover teens, banning targeted ads and strengthening rules regarding kids’ and teens’ data.
  • AI-specific safeguards: Senators from both parties raised alarm about AI chatbots, “companion” tools, and generative systems interacting with children—often without transparency, consent, or clear boundaries.
  • Bell-to-Bell Cell Phone Bans: This hearing is situated within the ongoing nationwide trend toward bell-to-bell cell phone bans (see W/A’s interactive map on state policies here), enacted in many districts and states, with more to come. 

Looking Ahead

Across party lines, lawmakers are rethinking long-standing assumptions about technology in children’s lives, including in classrooms.

For the education sector, this moment mirrors earlier inflection points around data privacy, accountability, and evidence-based practice. The core question moving forward is not whether technology belongs in education—but under what conditions, at what ages, and with what safeguards to ensure it serves learning rather than undermines it.