One of the most common objections raised against online education today concerns what is commonly called “screen time.” Prospective parents often express concern that enrolling a child in the Classical Liberal Arts Academy will place him in front of a computer for dangerous or unhealthy lengths of time. While these concerns are understandable in a culture already overwhelmed by entertainment technology, the objection itself is often confused because it fails to distinguish between the different uses of computers and other digital devices.
The phrase “screen time” is frequently used as though all time spent in front of a screen was essentially the same. In reality, the moral, intellectual, and physical effects of computer use depend almost entirely upon the purpose, structure, supervision, and habits connected with that use. There is an enormous difference between a child spending six unsupervised hours consuming entertainment, playing games, scrolling through social media, and chatting online, and a student using a computer to submit a written assessment or complete an academic exercise. These activities cannot reasonably be grouped together under a single category merely because both involve a screen.
The modern concern over excessive screen exposure did not arise because children were studying too much. No parent has ever sought medical or educational advice because a child spent too many hours reading Euclid, translating Cicero, solving mathematical problems, or writing essays on Aristotle. The widespread problems associated with modern technology arose from something altogether different: prolonged, passive, unsupervised entertainment consumption. The issue is not the existence of screens themselves, but the misuse of technology.
In most unhealthy cases, children are left alone for long periods of time with unrestricted access to games, videos, social media platforms, streaming entertainment, and endless distractions designed precisely to capture and hold attention. These systems are intentionally engineered to encourage compulsive behavior. The child is not engaged in purposeful labor, disciplined study, or meaningful intellectual effort. Instead, he is immersed in a constant stream of stimulation that weakens attention, fragments memory, and cultivates passivity.
Purposeful academic work differs from this in every important respect. Serious study demands concentration, effort, discipline, memory, judgment, and self-control. It is directed toward an intelligible goal. The student is not merely consuming stimulation but actively pursuing knowledge. This distinction is not minor. It is the distinction between labor and amusement, between discipline and indulgence, between education and entertainment.
At the Classical Liberal Arts Academy, this distinction is carefully maintained. The Academy does not require students to spend countless hours staring at computers, watching videos, playing gamified exercises, etc.. In fact, the overwhelming majority of genuine classical study may take place away from screens entirely. Students may read printed copies of course lesson materials, write notes, memorize lessons, practice languages, solve mathematical exercises, think carefully, and discuss ideas with parents and tutors. The computer functions primarily as a tool for communication, assessment submission, and record-keeping.
In the CLAA, graded quizzes and assessments are the only work that must be completed on a computer. This is an important fact that is often overlooked by critics of online studies. Other online programs, like Khan Academy and IXL, may produce hours and hours of gamified activities, but we do not do that. The CLAA does not structure education around video lectures, interactive games, or constant digital engagement. The essential intellectual labor of the student occurs in reading, thinking, writing, reciting, and studying—activities that existed before modern computers were developed.
To be frank, if students were actually spending thousands of hours completing CLAA coursework entirely on computers, the results would be amazing. Students would rapidly complete entire courses, certificates, and diplomas through such volume of completed academic work. This obviously is not what’s happening, because students are not sitting continuously at screens completing academic tasks. Their actual computer use for CLAA purposes is comparatively limited and task-oriented.
The structure of classical education itself naturally limits unhealthy forms of computer use. Classical learning is slow, reflective, and intellectually demanding. A student cannot meaningfully rush through Latin grammar, logical analysis, Geometry proofs, philosophical reading, or theological study merely by passively staring at a screen. Real learning requires attention, repetition, contemplation, writing, discussion (even if with oneself), and time away from screens for reflection and memory formation.
Another important distinction concerns supervision. Many of the worst effects associated with modern technology emerge when children are isolated from parental oversight. Classical Catholic education assumes precisely the opposite. Homeschooling parents are expected to be actively involved in the child’s studies, schedule, habits, and progress. The computer is not treated as a substitute parent or digital babysitter. It is simply one educational tool among many.
This point deserves emphasis because modern educational critics often confuse the medium with the method. A poorly supervised child with unrestricted internet access will likely suffer harm regardless of whether he is formally enrolled in an online school, a local school, or no school at all. The root problem lies in disorderly habits and lack of parental governance, not in the mere existence of educational software or assessment portals.
Moreover, it is unreasonable to condemn educational technology merely because some technology is misused. Nearly every useful human tool can be misused. When I was a child, adults complain about “kids reading too much”, but books were not the cause of the problem. Food may be abused through gluttony, yet no one concludes that the food is bad. Likewise, computers may be used foolishly or destructively, but this does not make computer use inherently dangerous. It is assumed that humans living reasonably, with ordered schedules and self-control, are using these things. That is what determines whether they are rightly or wrongly used.
The proper question is not whether “screen time” is necessary, but whether that time is purposeful and necessary. Technology becomes harmful when it is misued. That same technology is amazingly useful when directed to reasonable purposes and governed by disciplined habits.
Parents who are rightly concerned about their children’s intellectual and moral development should therefore direct their attention toward the real causes of technological harm: endless entertainment, unsupervised browsing, compulsive gaming, social media addiction, fragmented attention, and passive consumption — in a word, idleness. This is a moral, not mechanical, evil. This has nothing to do with a student using a computer purposefully to study digital texts or complete academic assessments within a structured classical curriculum.
The modern world often speaks about “screen time” as though quantity alone were the decisive issue. In reality, quality, purpose, supervision, and habit matter far more. One hour spent taking a challenging quiz or submitting a written assignment for grading is not morally or intellectually equivalent to one hour spent watching trivial entertainment videos or scrolling endlessly through social media feeds.
Classical education has always sought the cultivation of wisdom, virtue, discipline, and intellectual maturity. It is ultimately an education in virtue. These goals remain unchanged whether a student submits an assessment orally, on paper or online. The essential question is always whether the student is growing in virtue.
There’s a lot more I’d like to say, but the simple truth is that the Classical Liberal Arts Academy makes real classical Catholic education available to Catholic families with the help of modern technology. Your family would not have access to this education if it were not for that modern technology. Computers assist this mission instrumentally and in limited ways. They are not the substance of the education itself. Parents who understand this distinction generally discover that the objection concerning “screen time” dissolves once the actual nature of classical online learning is properly understood and reasonable measures are taken to direct the activity of their children.
The day may come when the work of restoring classical Catholic education is complete and everything can be moved offline, but I do not believe that will happen and it certainly is not true in 2026. The argument that an inferior curriculum is better because it exists on paper is not a reasonable one and we must compare apples with apples if we would make prudent decisions regarding the education we give our children.
God bless,
Mr. William C. Michael, O.P.
Headmaster
Classical Liberal Arts Academy
The sources, goals, method, outline, and direction of this lesson are the work of Mr. William C. Michael, O.P., Headmaster of the Classical Liberal Arts Academy. The written copy has been composed from his materials and instructions with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools, and reviewed and approved by him before publication.
