Gen Z has managed something no modern generation pulled off before. After more than a century of steady academic gains, test scores finally went the other direction. For the first time ever, a new generation is officially dumber than the previous one.
The data comes from neuroscientist Jared Cooney Horvath, who has spent years reviewing standardized testing results across age groups. “They’re the first generation in modern history to score lower on standardized academic tests than the one before it,” Horvath told the New York Post. The declines cut across attention, memory, literacy, numeracy, executive function, and general IQ. That’s not just one weak spot. That’s the whole darn dashboard blinking at once.
Horvath took the same message to Capitol Hill during a 2026 Senate hearing on screen time and children. His framing skipped the generational dunking and focused on exposure. “More than half of the time a teenager is awake, half of it is spent staring at a screen,” he told lawmakers. Human learning, he argued, depends on sustained attention and interaction with other people. Endless feeds and condensed content don’t offer either.
I’m not sure why this article frames this outcome as the fault of Gen Z. It’s not their fault their parents gave them iPads instead of spending time with them, nor for the chronically underfunded educational system.
I am Gen X and our parents plunked us in front of the TV however there were only 3 channels that often had nothing of interest to kids on. But they also kicked us out of the house all day so we had to find other kids to play with and negotiate with, so got more exercise, had adventures without adults managing every minute of our time. We walked to school by ourselves, no buses picking us up at the door. But the parents didn’t really spend more time with us because they were working… sometimes more than one job and daycare did not exist. Now if you did that as a parent, you would get CPS called on you. Also GenX parents went hard the other way being helicopter parents. I was more of a free range parent so had to find other ones to find kids for my son to do things with like ride bikes to the park or drop off to the movies. There has to be a happy medium.
Ironic. The article does not frame the outcome as the fault of Gen Z. It in fact goes to great lengths to point out that the fault almost certainly lies with how they were educated, and the parenting environment they were raised in.
I’ll highlight the framed factors for you and where the blame gets pointed.
Most frustrating for me is not just that many people read this article and take away an emotive framing that is completely counter to the text of the article, but that many people on Lemmy that read this article will just memory-hole it and continue to complain about phone bans in school, and the under-16 social media bans going on around the world that are very likely to have significant positive benefits for children’s learning and go some ways to resolving the problem.
I appreciate the effort you out into highlighting relevant sections 👍
Bans and laws like that might have good intentions, but realistically enforcement is either impossible, or the perfect tracking tool on a country or world wide scale…
Like discord requiring government IDs and face scans; Do you really trust companies & governments to do the right thing, or should we just learn to maybe socialize with our children more?
I understand your complaints entirely; something really should be done. I just hate that it takes government interference with crappy bans, instead of empowering parents with resources (not working 50+ hours a week to survive) and knowledge (hey maybe 14 hours of screentime isn’t very pro-social).
Sidenote: that part about speed over staying power, I felt that myself. At least within the US, everything is always GOGOGO and cramming over real learning. Probably something with the time is money thing, but school and a lot of college felt like memorization over problem solving or skill building.
It doesn’t have to be perfectly enforced to have a significant positive impact though. Just the signal-effect to parents is enormous. If social media is banned for kinds under 15 (or 16, or whatever), it becomes orders of magnitude easier for parents with 10-year olds to not get the their own smartphone, tablet, etc. It becomes a lot easier to not cave to pressure of disabling parental controls on the same units.
Basically, the only way a 7-12 year old is getting addicted to a smartphone is if their parents supply one and don’t lock it down. When they do that, it’s likely due to external pressure of the type “all the other kids have it”, and they don’t want their kid to be the socially awkward one that’s left out. These kind of laws make it easier for parents to collectively agree to hold off on smartphones and social media.
My 7 year old great niece has already learned how to disable the parental controls on her tablet.
I’m in agreement that the privacy grab-bag of age verification services is a big concern, but in my mind the remedy to that is strong privacy laws and protections like GDPR - with harsh punitive penalties for any companies that break them.
Companies already process and control huge amounts of private data so the best approach to increased potential for them gaining more access is strong privacy protections.
I’ll add that the laws that have been implemented in various US states to mandate porn sites validate ID are the ones that have generated this new industry of digital checks and privacy concerns, not the under-16 laws. There are 25 states with these laws now, going back to 2022.
Or that elitist billionaires have been targeting them with propaganda campaigns for over a decade discouraging them from pursuing higher education and becoming part of the educated “elite.”