Screen time and school

Each extra daily hour of screen time in early childhood went with lower reading and maths levels in grades 3 and 6

Researchers in Toronto followed children recruited through family doctors and linked parents' reports of their screen time to the children's later provincial test results. Children whose parents reported more total screen time, and more TV and digital media time, were less likely to reach higher levels in reading and maths in grade 3 and in maths in grade 6. Writing showed no clear link. This is an association, not proof that screens caused lower scores.

What they did

Parents in the TARGet Kids! primary-care cohort in Ontario reported their child's daily screen time (TV and digital media, and video games) between 2008 and 2023. The measurement closest before each test was linked to the child's Ontario standardized test results in reading, writing and maths, graded as below, at or above the provincial standard. Models adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, maternal education, family income, living arrangement, test year, time between measurement and test, and special-education plan status.

Who took part

3,322 children with grade 3 results (average age 8.86 at the test) and 2,084 with grade 6 results (average age 11.86), mostly urban families around Toronto. Screen time was measured at an average age of 5.54 years for the grade 3 group and 7.54 years for the grade 6 group.

What they found

• Each additional hour a day of total screen time went with lower odds of reaching a higher level in grade 3 reading (odds ratio 0.91), grade 3 maths (0.91) and grade 6 maths (0.90), that is 9% to 10% lower odds.
• TV and digital media time showed the same pattern for grade 3 reading and maths and grade 6 maths.
• Any video gaming went with lower grade 3 reading levels (odds ratio 0.77); in the analysis split by sex, this link showed up among girls for grade 3 reading and maths.
• The authors found no evidence that screen time was associated with writing results.
• Average reported screen time was about 1.6 hours a day in the grade 3 group and 1.8 hours a day in the grade 6 group.

Effect size: Odds ratios per extra hour a day of total screen time: 0.91 (grade 3 reading), 0.91 (grade 3 maths), 0.90 (grade 6 maths). Video gaming, any vs none: 0.77 (grade 3 reading).

Limitations

• Observational: the authors say causality cannot be definitively assessed and residual confounding may remain.
• Screen time was reported by parents, which can bring recall and self-report bias.
• No data on what children watched or played, or on social media; TV, computer and handheld use were combined into one measure.
• Mostly urban families recruited through primary care in the Toronto area, so results may not generalise.
• Screen time was measured years before the tests, often only once.

What this means for learners and parents

• For young children, a lot of daily screen time goes with somewhat weaker reading and maths later. It does not show that cutting screens will raise grades.
• What children do on screens was not measured, so this says nothing about whether a short, focused learning activity on a screen is better or worse than none.
• For homework time with 7 to 10 year olds, it is a reasonable argument for keeping the default off-screen: paper, conversation and reading aloud.

Put it into practice (free tools)

• Homework on a tablet or on paper?
• Screen-free AI and audio tools for kids
• What to give a 9-year-old instead of a phone

Citation

Xuedi Li, Charles D. G. Keown-Stoneman, Jessica A. Omand, Katherine Tombeau Cost, Kelly Gallagher-Mackay, Jennifer Hove, Magdalena Janus, Daphne J. Korczak and colleagues (TARGet Kids! Collaboration) (2025). Screen Time and Standardized Academic Achievement Tests in Elementary School. JAMA Network Open 8(10): e2537092. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.37092

Summary by the Ask Poppy team, AI-assisted and checked against the paper. Summarized 21 October 2026. Spotted an error? [email protected] · Editorial policy