Five candidates for three open seats on the Croton-Harmon Board of Education found broad agreement on reducing classroom technology reliance, enforcing the state phone ban, and accelerating AI policy development at a Croton Community Collective forum at Saint Augustine's on April 23. The candidates — incumbents Sarah Carrier, Anamika Bhatnagar, and Neal Haber, and challengers Jake Day and Elizabeth Laird — answered six questions selected from more than 120 submitted by the public. The forum was organized by CCC founder Jill Anderson and moderated by teachers Dani Zelliger and Nicole Curran, with Tessa Young keeping time. Unlike the League of Women Voters forum held on May 12, this event was devoted entirely to educational technology. Anderson opened by describing the CCC's mission: keeping smartphones out of childhood, supporting phone-free schools, and shifting community culture around technology. She said the organization has grown to more than 300 members in nine months. Zelliger framed the evening's focus by citing testimony from Dr. Jared Kuni Horvath to the U.S. Senate that increased classroom screen exposure is associated with weaker learning outcomes. EdTech proliferation All five candidates said the district has become overreliant on educational technology, a trend they attributed to the pandemic. Bhatnagar said she discovered her second-grade child's reading instruction was mostly delivered through a computer program, an experience she found distressing. "We dove into this without necessarily thinking about the impacts," she said. Carrier, a nine-year board veteran, said technology use must differ by grade level, with limited screen time for younger students focused on literacy and fine motor skills. Day said the district's technology contracts and platform choices need rigorous review. "The research is pretty clear that these tech companies have a stranglehold on some of our schools, and they've been doing that since the pandemic," he said. He stressed that the approach should be "not a phone ban, not a screen ban" but intentional and mindful use with measured outcomes. Haber, whose children graduated from the district in 2004 and 2008, said he valued the analog education they received and that pen, paper, apps, and protractors are all tools that should be used judiciously. Laird, a trained psychologist whose son is entering second grade at CET, argued that ed tech often creates shortcuts that bypass the productive struggle essential to real learning. She compared it to bringing a forklift to the gym: "If I'm bringing a forklift to the gym, I am missing the entire point of being at the gym." Analog versus digital reading and writing On whether reading and writing should be analog or digital, the candidates favored a strong analog emphasis, particularly in elementary grades. Day said reading should be "nearly all analog," citing research that comprehension and retention improve with physical books and handwriting. He said he could not find a district policy on the balance between analog and digital reading, and that if elected, making one would be a priority. Laird said she would like to see tablets removed from kindergarten through second-grade classrooms entirely, with thoughtful technology use in upper grades — but not as the default. She said parents of older CET students have reported struggling to support homework because so much is delivered through apps without examples, weakening the home-school connection. Bhatnagar said her older children's schoolwork has shifted entirely to digital platforms, eliminating the folders and papers that once kept parents connected to daily learning. She called for published curriculum standards showing what children should know at each grade level, with paper materials coming home so parents can track progress in real time. Haber agreed that foundational reading and writing should be analog as much as possible, but noted that the state has adopted computer science and digital fluency requirements for K-12 that the district must meet. One-to-one device limits All five candidates said they support limiting one-to-one devices in the early elementary grades, pointing to districts like Los Angeles, Baltimore, and others that have removed devices from primary classrooms. Carrier noted that the district's technology committee is already discussing shifting from one-to-one devices to classroom cart systems at CET next year and that devices are no longer sent home with K-5 students. Bhatnagar said she supports device limits and guidelines developed collaboratively, and that the board needs to be clearer about its values and vision for technology use. Day said he supports age-based, thoughtful limits rather than outright bans, and that the board should be actively consulting other districts, teachers, and the community — not micromanaging, but setting strategic policy. Laird said devices should be "titrated to age," with no one-to-one devices in K-2, introduction in grade three for specific purposes like digital literacy, and gradual increase from there. She also said the board should ask teachers what barriers prevent them from reducing technology use, such as a lack of printers or analog materials. Haber said he would support device limits in early elementary grades and a more targeted approach thereafter, while cautioning that the district must not fall behind on state digital fluency standards. Phone ban enforcement On the state's bell-to-bell phone ban, signed into law by Governor Hochul last year, the candidates agreed that implementation at the high school level has been uneven. Haber said he had spent time in the high school observing classrooms and talking with students and teachers. He said the policy was implemented without student discussion or teacher professional development, and that some juniors and seniors use burner phones to circumvent the rules. Laird offered a pointed critique of the district's enforcement, saying the policy has too many exemptions that put teachers in the uncomfortable position of policing phone use rather than teaching. She said other Westchester districts have clearer consequences laid out in their policies. "The law is the perfect analogy for our teachers. They can point to the law and say, sorry, I can't see your phone. It is the law," she said. Day was more direct: "I think it's pretty clear that the policy isn't being implemented effectively. It's pretty clear that it's not being enforced." He said accountability lies with administrators, not teachers, and pointed to other districts like Hastings that use Yonder pouches to secure phones. "Other school districts can get it right. Why can't we?" he said. Bhatnagar, who served on the policy committee that drafted the district's phone policy, said she is not entirely satisfied with it either but noted that the policy was reviewed by the teachers' association and administrative team before adoption. She said the board has requested a compliance report at its May 7 meeting and said CET and PVC have not had significant issues with enforcement. Carrier said the May 7 meeting will be an opportunity to review implementation and tighten the policy, and that anecdotally, phones are being put away in cubbies at the high school with positive effects on engagement. Artificial intelligence All five candidates said the district needs an AI policy and is behind other Westchester districts in developing one. Laird called the need "incredibly urgent" and cited research showing that AI impairs independent performance — scores improve while students use AI but fall sharply when it is removed. She also raised concerns about AI grading, saying it deprives teachers of the formative assessment that comes from reviewing student work. "I want to know that the teacher teaching my children is the one grading the assignment," she said. Bhatnagar said work on revising the academic integrity policy at the high school began three years ago, when AI was already a major topic among students, and that process is still incomplete. She called the delay troubling and said the district should have started by establishing a board-level vision and values framework to guide the discussion. Day said the district needed an AI policy "yesterday" and should be looking to districts like Chappaqua that have already adopted one. Haber, who serves on the policy committee, acknowledged the complexity of creating a policy flexible enough to keep pace with rapidly evolving AI capabilities, and said it must address academic integrity, data privacy, recognizing deepfakes, and understanding AI hallucinations. Carrier said a conservative, cautious approach is needed and that the district should ensure AI is not used for student assessments, does not erode teacher-student relationships, and that older students are taught both AI's benefits and its limitations. Vision and next steps In closing, the candidates outlined their priorities for technology governance. Day called for an EdTech evaluation framework that the board would apply to every new or renewed technology contract — assessing research evidence, cost, measurable outcomes, and success metrics before adoption. "We don't put anything into place without a framework," he said, drawing on his experience managing federal grant programs. Bhatnagar challenged the district culture, saying that questioning by trustees or parents is sometimes received as criticism or micromanagement. She said the board needs to be more willing to admit gaps, consult experts and other districts, and ensure accountability — quoting a friend's motto: "You're only in each grade once. You have to make every year matter." Carrier emphasized data privacy as a critical area needing continuous evaluation. Haber said the district has done things "helter skelter" and needs to focus more strongly on the "why" behind technology choices. Laird said the most important skill schools can develop is critical thinking, which she argued is best taught through foundational skills like reading, writing, and analyzing an unreliable narrator — not through technology itself. She pointed to her own experience learning PowerPoint in high school: the lasting skill was storytelling and compelling presentation, not the software tool. "The tool doesn't matter," she said.