Balancing screen time in Pakistani schools: use technology only when it clearly supports learning

Every school ends up having the screen-time argument eventually. Parents worry about children on phones for hours. Teachers worry about attention. Vendors say devices are the future. The debate usually stalls because "screens" covers everything from a phone buzzing in a bag to a teacher projecting a diagram, and treating them as one thing makes every position sound either naive or alarmist. A better approach is to ask a narrower question about each use: what is this screen for, and does it help students learn?

That is close to where UNESCO landed. Its 2023 Global Education Monitoring Report on technology in education says that technology should be used in class only when it clearly supports learning outcomes. The same source notes that by the end of 2023, 60 education systems, or 30 percent, had banned smartphone use in schools, rising to 79, or 40 percent, by the end of 2024, and that evidence from studies cited in the report shows a phone nearby with notifications can be enough to break concentration, with one study finding it can take students up to 20 minutes to refocus. It also cites evidence from Belgium, Spain, and the United Kingdom that removing smartphones improved learning outcomes, particularly for lower-performing students. Those are other countries' findings, but the mechanism, distraction, is the same one teachers everywhere describe.

The GEM Report also offers a useful framing for schools that are being pushed to adopt more technology. It describes three system-wide conditions that need to be met for any technology in education to reach its full potential: access to technology, governance regulation, and teacher preparation. In a Pakistani context, the first is far from universal, since internet penetration was about 45.6 percent at the end of 2025 according to DataReportal. The second means a school needs actual rules. The third means staff need to know what they're doing before students are asked to use anything.

So how should a school think about it? Start by sorting screen uses into three groups. First, teacher-side uses: a teacher preparing lessons, worksheets, or quizzes on a computer, or projecting a diagram to the class. These put a screen in the teacher's hands and paper in the students'. Second, shared classroom uses: a projector, a single device the class gathers around for a short activity, or a video that serves a clear teaching purpose. Third, student-held uses: phones, tablets, or laptops in students' own hands. The third group carries the most distraction risk and needs the clearest rules.

Then apply the test to each use. Would this be worse without a screen? A dynamic diagram of the water cycle may be better on a projector than on a chalkboard. A worksheet of practice questions is usually just as good on paper. Would a screen in the student's hands add something a printed page can't? If not, leave it off. Write the answers into a short rule so teachers don't have to negotiate case by case: for instance, phones away during lessons unless the teacher has set a specific task, teacher-side technology is encouraged, and any new student-facing tool needs the principal's approval and a stated learning purpose.

There's a practical benefit to preferring teacher-side technology. When AI or software reduces a teacher's preparation time, students don't need to touch a device at all, so the classroom stays screen-light while the teacher's workload drops. That combination is easy to defend to a worried parent: the technology is used behind the scenes to free the teacher's time, and children spend lesson time reading, writing, talking, and working together. It also sidesteps the connectivity and device gaps that make student-facing tools unequal from the start.

Muallim is built on that principle, though it's worth being precise. Muallim is made by DIGIT Pakistan for teachers and school admins, and students don't use it or log in. The Lesson Planner, the Worksheet Builder, and Quiz & Assessment export print-ready PDFs, so what students receive is paper. We can't claim that this reduces a school's total screen time, and we haven't measured any effect on learning; what we can say is that our design doesn't add a student-facing screen. Whether a school's overall use is balanced remains a decision for the school.

For a first step, run a one-week audit. Ask each teacher to list, without judgement, where screens appeared in their lessons and what each was for. Sort the list into the three groups above and apply the test. You'll almost certainly find some uses worth keeping, some that can move to paper, and a phone policy that needs tightening. Share the findings with parents in plain language, agree the short rule, and revisit it after a term. A calm, specific policy is usually more effective, and more trusted, than a blanket ban or a blanket welcome.