Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

https://undark.org/2026/04/01/sweden-schools-books/

Why Swedish Schools Are Bringing Back Books

Amid declining test scores, the country has pivoted away from screens and invested in back-to-basics school materials.

Undark Magazine

A very similar development is going on in neighboring Finland. There are schools that use almost exclusively paper books (instead of digital ones) again. The overall consensus among parents is that books are way better than screens for kids, all the way up to high school. Hand-writing and free drawing with pen and paper provide many advantages to fixed screens. You cannot open a new tab to Youtube in a book. The significance of these things is finally recognized now. Parents are also worried about the short video brain rot and psychological "capture" of our kids by social media companies.

Naturally, the kids should learn AI and AI workflows also. And personal AI assistants can probably help many kids in their studies. Learning AI should be its own subject but that should not ruin the way kids study other subjects where there are proven old ways to get to great results.

Source: I have 10 Finnish kids

Edit: FYI: an old (2018) link to an article about a finding about the matter: https://yle.fi/a/3-10514984 "Finland’s digital-based curriculum impedes learning, researcher finds"

Finland’s digital-based curriculum impedes learning, researcher finds

A Helsinki University researcher says Finland's current digital and 'phenomenon-based' learning methods used in schools may not be suitable for all students.

News
As much as I would have disagreed as a kid, I very much agree now. Laptops were used more for flash games and reddit than learning in the classroom in my experience. And likely the act of reading physical books and handwriting is better for learning.
I don't see the advantage of learning 'AI workflows'. I am in the US and there seems to be a FOMO plague infecting our school system when it comes to technology. In practice it seems more destructive to the child.

I keep hearing this at work but so far no one has explained what “learning ai” actually means. It seems to just be nonsense like those people selling prompt recipes or claiming to be prompt engineers.

No one needs training in prompting AI. I could understand if they meant a deeper layer of integrating tech with systems but all they ever mean is typing things in to a text box.

Especially since kids these days aren't even very good at using computers:

http://www.coding2learn.org/blog/2013/07/29/kids-cant-use-co...

It seems to me that if someone can read and think critically-- they can RTFM and get much better much quicker at computers and AI than people who spent all their time tapping an ipad to watch the next video.

Kids can't use computers... and this is why it should worry you — Coding 2 Learn

It's not FOMO. The line level people actually educating the children don't give a crap about the technology. They will generally make the best of whatever resources they have and procure wisely. Like everything else in government it's an administrative racket and all the suppliers fan the flames because they make money. Ain't no different than how your local building or environmental inspector finds himself screwing people doing nothing wrong and approving absurd stuff because that's what the rules big business ghost wrote and paid to have the government adopt say he must do.

Kids are using crappy subscription education services for homework and doing all their reading on screens (and educators are toiling away to work with these systems) because the people who make money off the services and screens paid to have the incentives distorted such that buying their products is the least shitty option.

I don't think they need to learn 'AI workflows' (whatever that means). But I think it makes sense to use the LLM's as a resource.

I've used them when studying new languages (human languages not programming languages) and ML algorithms and they've been really useful.

Learning to check the citations it gives you is a useful skill too. I wish many adults were more sceptical about the things they are told.

The same thing is happening in Norway now too. The general attitudes have shifted quite a lot in the last few years. In recent months the Department of Education has committed to reducing screen usage across the board, but particularly in grades 1 to 4.

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/endrer-skolehverdagen-... [link in Norwegian, no English source available]

Endrer skolehverdagen for de yngste

Arbeiderparti-regjeringen varsler store endringer for 1. og 2. klassingene. Redusert skjermbruk blir forskriftsfestet allerede i vår. Samtidig utredes en ny organisering av innhold og struktur for de yngste elevene i norsk skole.

Regjeringen.no

"screens" can be great for research and there is a lot you can learn online.

The main problem mentioned in the article you link to seem to be distraction from what they were supposed to be doing.

Distraction is not always bad and kids can learn a lot by being distracted by something that catches their interest. it depends on the approach and its more of a problem following a fixed curriculum in a classroom. Probably more of a problem for uninterested or younger children.

I think video can be a big problem, particularly given the tendency of sites to try to keep you there.

~20 years later on all the "Digitalisation of Schools" brought us is waning attention spans for children but billions of sells to Big Tech for software, and e-devices that after a few years become electronic waste to be shipped to a poor country stripped for rare earths and finally ending in landfills in Africa or Asia to poison the ground water.

I grew up in a post-Soviet country where schools had zero tech budget, so it was all books and chalkboards by default. Looking back that was probably fine for learning fundamentals. The kids who went on to competitive math and CS didn't need tablets in 3rd grade to get there.

The part nobody talks about is textbook cost. Digital textbooks were supposed to make education cheaper but somehow the subscription model made it more expensive. At least a physical book you buy once and it sits on the shelf for the next kid.

I remember that - even though Steve Jobs promoted the iPad as a replacement to the 'heavy schoolbooks kids had to carry all day' - he never allowed his children to use iPads.

I bet Zuckerberg doesn't allow his children to use social media.

And I assume that Sam Altman won't allow his children to use AI chatbots.

What does that tell us?

That the US and by extension the West is ruled by corrupt individuals that knowingly harm their fellow citizens. However, especially the US, few people will parent their children in a way that will protect and strengthen their kids. The schools, which gave up on success years ago, will continue to harm the children. The community with do nothing since they view the parents and the schools as the guardians of children, not themselves. Almost no one wants to be the childless crank that shows up at a PTA or school board meeting demanding that tech be removed from the daily lives of the children.

So the kids will continue to be harmed. EdTech will get money because this time they will do it right. AI will lead to a new thoughtless generation.

He (Zuckerberg) doesn't. It tells us that they know that kids should not be using any of this technology as it is extremely addictive to kids who are none the wiser.

> What does that tell us?

It tells us three things:

1. Do not give a child access to iPads, social media or ChatGPT until they are old enough.

2. Get them to read books as an alternative.

3. Being unable to restrict access to iPhones, ChatGPT to a child is a parenting skill issue and not the responsibility of the government to impose parental controls on everyone.

Having observed a fair amount of computer based primary school, it seems to me anyway that the biggest problem is that kids just can't focus properly that way. Even if the machine is locked down to prevent open internet access, it's just too easy for them to become distracted by the medium itself. Books, pencils and paper may not be flashy, but isn't that actually desirable, in this context?

Yup. As a kid I could "entertain" (distract is the better word) myself by "drawing shapes" with the cursor, highlighting random things, switching between random cells in Excel, or just like... browsing through the system without any plan or reason.
Procrastination is hell of a drug.

I'm so lucky I didn't have this in the classroom.

> Basic skills — especially reading, writing, and numeracy — must be firmly established first, physical textbooks are often better suited for that purpose.

Reading and writing, maybe, but numeracy? With a computer, you can get instant feedback, immidiately see whether you did the math correctly or not. With a textbook, you have to wait for your teacher.

Tbh the same applies to a lot of subjects if you discuss them with a sufficiently good LLM. You can use the Socratic method pretty much.