The disappointing results in the latest Pisa survey have given new impetus to the debate about screens in schools. Not least the Liberals and Education Minister Simona Mohamsson were quick to diagnose the results as the effect of a "screen epidemic" and argue for further reducing the use of personal computers and tablets in elementary school. While there are of course good reasons to be concerned, especially regarding students' steadily declining reading comprehension, this explanation lacks support in the measurements - both over time and in comparison with other countries.
Although the Pisa survey cannot in itself determine what causes changes in student performance, one thing is worth noting:
The Swedish results from 2018 and 2022 â a period when the digitization of the Swedish school reached its peak at the same time that in principle 100 percent of all children over the age of eleven already during this time used mobile phones on a daily basis â are significantly better than the results reported after the government's investments in a transition "from screen to cover". This makes it difficult to prove that the decline in results was due to increased screen use.
In the Swedish debate, research is rather used in a selective and legitimizing way to justify already made political decisions
At the same time, we see that some of the countries at the top in terms of literacy, such as Japan, South Korea and Estonia, have continued to invest in digital technology for education. The differences in the debate about school digitization in Sweden and Japan were already discussed in connection with the previous Pisa measurement. where Japan also topped the list, but perhaps the comparison with our neighboring country Estonia is closer at hand.
Estonia has a school system that is very similar to the Swedish one, with a nine-year primary school followed by a three-year upper secondary education. They are often highlighted as a leading country in terms of education and their school students have long performed well in international surveys. The country has been particularly talked about for its investments in digitization in the 90s through the so-called Tiger Leap initiative, which provided all schools with Internet connections and computers. And now most recently with the successor AI leap, which wants to repeat the success story â but this time by providing teachers and students with specially developed AI tools and by adapting the education for a society where AI already exists and is used.
Estonia also stands out in the international comparison by not introducing any cell phone ban at school. Education Minister Kristina Kallas believes that teachers themselves must be allowed to decide how and with what means they want to teach. Estonia is also discussing how mobile phones and AI affect concentration, reading ability and learning, but instead of imposing bans from above on technology that is already part of students' everyday life, the focus is on education and professional responsibility.
What above all else distinguishes Estonia from Sweden is perhaps not the view of screens, but the view of teachers. For many years, Swedish schools have been characterized by constant reforms, not least in terms of digitalisation. In just a few years, the pendulum has swung from a one-sided focus on the introduction of digital tools, systems and working methods to an equally extreme de-digitalization.
Those teachers who have invested time and effort in meaningfully integrating digital technology into their teaching are now expected to retool and develop new analog ways of working, while also having to ensure compliance with the new law banning cell phones in the classroom. This kind of cross-casting not only takes time away from teaching, but also contributes to eroding teachers' professional leeway.
Another difference is the knowledge base on which political decisions are made. Estonia's current AI reform is being implemented and evaluated in close cooperation with researchers from the University of Tartu. Among the researchers are both cognitive scientists and critical media researchers. In the Swedish debate, research is rather used in a selective and legitimizing way to justify already made political decisions.
A telling example is the investigation that is the basis for the national mobile phone ban, where the claim that there is "research support that mobile phones can affect students' conditions for learning" is substantiated with references to older popular science statements rather than to primary research published in scientifically reviewed journals. Although the report later mentions some empirical studies that point to more complex causal relationships and an increased workload for teachers, these findings do not seem to have been given much weight when the recommendations for a national ban were formulated.
What is required to reverse the downward trend in knowledge is less political squeamishness
Already in 2023, Sweden's Teachers warned that the amount of administrative tasks and "small opportunities to control the work situation" means that many teachers choose to leave the profession prematurely. There is no sign that the trend is reversing, and teachers and school leaders continue to raise the alarm that insufficient time is being given to implement various reforms.
Whether these reforms are about digitization or de-digitization probably matters less. Rather, the problem is that Swedish schools too often become subject to populist outbursts that teachers are expected to adjust their activities to. What is needed to reverse the downward trend in knowledge is less political finger-pointing, fewer token reforms and more trust in the teaching profession and the collective research on teaching, learning and school development.
Read more articles from DN Debatt:
The Swedish Association for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: "Children with weak theoretical aptitude are unnecessarily medicated for ADHD"
