Digital Beat

The E-Rate Program and Screen Time:
NTIA Listening Session

On June 4, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, seeking comment on “measures the Commission can take…to better protect children when using E-Rate funded networks, including to limit screen time.” In response, the

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) held a virtual listening session, FCC’s E-Rate and Screen Use NPRM, on September 16, 2026. NTIA may “use the feedback received to develop a comment” for the FCC proceeding on the E-Rate program.

The virtual listening session lasted more than two hours. NTIA asked participants to respond to one of three prompts, presented in sequence during the session.

The first solicited comments from parents, teachers, and others about how screens are used during the school day and their knowledge of decision-making in the procurement and use of education technology in schools.
The second called for comments about parents’ experiences requesting an “opt-out” of screen time at schools. This prompt pointed directly to a proposal in the FCC’s E-Rate NPRM that schools should be required to provide such an option to parents as a condition of receiving E-Rate funding.
The third prompt noted that schools must comply with the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) to receive E-Rate subsidies and requested feedback from parents and teachers about school Internet safety policies and the effectiveness of CIPA.

NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth opened the session with brief remarks about the session’s purpose:

“Too often, when the government seeks feedback on federal subsidies, the loudest voices in Washington are the special interests with the most at stake financially. We want to make sure that parents, students, teachers, and child development experts have just as strong a voice in the decisions that affect our children. We're here to listen, learn, and make sure that what we hear today reaches the policymakers making these decisions.”

Administrator Roth also clarified for participants that the FCC is leading the review of E-Rate, rather than NTIA. Emma Llansò, NTIA’s Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy Analysis and Development, elaborated and told attendees to submit their comments directly to the FCC. She said NTIA would use remarks from the listening session and anything sent directly to the agency to inform its work, but it could not forward written comments from participants to the FCC.

What Listening Session Participants Had to Say About E-Rate and Federal Policy

The broad scope of the listening session drew participants with concerns about education technology and screen time, as well as artificial intelligence and societal impacts of technology, so not all comments raised an explicit link to E-Rate or other federal programs.

In response to the first prompt about how screens are used during the school day, two speakers mentioned E-Rate.

Emily Cherkin, a parent and consultant who opposes screen time, placed blame for the current screen-time situation squarely on education technology companies and said the broadband service enabled in schools by the E-Rate program effectively subsidizes the ed tech industry.

“The E-Rate program plays an important role in ensuring students have access to resources and to support school systems, but it must not become a subsidy for multi-billion dollar ed tech companies whose mission is to drive engagement and whose products won't run on anything but ‘premium levels of broadband’ when a lower level would suffice.”

Denise Champney, a speech-language pathologist and screen time activist, identified conflicts of interest with internet service providers (ISPs) and education technology professional organizations that serve teachers and schools, namely the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN) and the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).

“As the largest E-Rate provider in the U.S., Spectrum [Charter Communications] is more than happy to provide that service to schools because it's good for their bottom line, not for students.”

She charged that the claims of any group partnering with or receiving funds from ISPs should be viewed with skepticism.

The second prompt about adding a screen time opt-out for parents as a condition of E-Rate funding produced more participant comments that mentioned the E-Rate program (though some participants still spoke generally about and against screen time in schools). Nearly all who mentioned the E-Rate program in this portion of the listening session supported the opt-out as a program requirement.

Dr. Erin Amini, a parent and pediatrician, argued for the opt-out requirement, saying that “federal dollars can provide our schools with extraordinary connectivity without requiring every child to engage with that technology in the same way.”

Peter Ryan, an activist, stated that children were misusing government-subsidized broadband service in schools:

“I was blown away when I found out that children could use government-subsidized E-Rate internet to watch porn or play video games at school as long as they use their own devices. How is that okay? Parents absolutely should be able to opt out of this absolute mess.”

(Schools that receive E-Rate subsidies must certify that they filter and block inappropriate web content in accordance with the Children’s Internet Protection Act).

Lila Byock, a parent activist, suggested a different approach to address the use of education technology in schools. She called for the Federal Trade Commission to issue guidance under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) on parental notice and consent, for the U.S. Department of Education to require paper-based assessment as an alternative to computer-based assessment, and for product regulation of education technology. Her recommendations for actions not related to the FCC’s review of E-Rate came from differentiating schools’ broadband access from the technologies used in schools:

"We want to emphasize that broadband access in schools is separate from issues relating to educational technology content and applications. Broadband is still essential for many basic school operations, including cybersecurity. If E-Rate is reduced or eliminated, we are concerned that the reduction in federal subsidies will force districts to cut other programs to make up any budget deficit."

In response to the third prompt about CIPA’s effectiveness, participants continued to address the prior prompts, such as supporting an opt-out requirement for the E-Rate program. They raised concerns about how education technology companies use student data, the effectiveness of ed tech tools, and school districts’ technology spending.

For example, Jared Hayden, a policy analyst at the Institute for Family Studies, a non-profit research and public education organization, called for E-Rate funding to “prioritize tech education over ed tech, encourage tech use in schools that leads to better learning outcomes, and policies that are responsive to parents’ concerns.”

Sarah Wickliffe, a parent, proposed that implementing the opt-out requirement would neutralize an argument some schools and districts currently use: that opt-outs are too expensive for schools to manage. She also asked that E-Rate funding be used to provide paper tests.

Erica Richards, a parent and nurse practitioner, offered a differing perspective about technology and the learning experience of children with disabilities. She said that “certain technology isn’t about screen time; it’s about access,” and then listed tools like text-to-speech and audiobooks that made her son’s learning possible. Because all children in the class had the same technology devices, the accessibility accommodations provided to her child did not make him stand out, and all other children could access the same accommodations. She pointed out that when only children with an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) or a Section 504 Plan (associated with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, respectively) have technology in the classroom to support accommodations, they risk being stigmatized because of their differences.

More specifically, regarding CIPA, one participant explained that she had been able to access inappropriate content on her child’s device when it was connected to a school’s broadband network, while another asked for more transparency from schools and districts about CIPA-related filtering and the ability for parents to request blocking of specific content.

Kristen Woelfel, policy counsel at the Center for Democracy & Technology, spoke about concerns with CIPA guidance and privacy. She mentioned that technology vendors are currently selling “AI-powered surveillance” tools to schools that monitor students’ activities and communication, when CIPA itself calls for preventing access to obscene content. She asked the FCC to clarify what CIPA requires for filtering and blocking students’ access to content, as distinct from any monitoring tools.

What Comes Next

NTIA closed the session by reminding participants that they should file comments directly with the FCC if they would like to. NTIA plans to write up a summary of the listening session and post a captioned video of the session.

Comments on the FCC’s NRPM are due October 13, 2026. To date, the docket has already received over 1,900 filings, indicating widespread interest in the NPRM.

Dr. Caroline Stratton is the Director of Research and Grace Tepper is an Editor and Researcher at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society.

The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society is a non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring that all people in the U.S. have access to competitive, High-Performance Broadband regardless of where they live or who they are. We believe communication policy - rooted in the values of access, equity, and diversity - has the power to deliver new opportunities and strengthen communities.

For subscribe/unsubscribe info, please email headlinesATbentonDOTorg

Kevin Taglang
Executive Editor, Communications-related Headlines
Benton Institute
for Broadband & Society
1041 Ridge Rd, Unit 214
Wilmette, IL 60091
847-220-4531
headlines AT benton DOT org

Share this edition: