*|MC:SUBJECT|*

[{"_1":2,"_3":-5,"_4":-5},"loaderData",{"_5":6,"_7":8},"actionData","errors","root",{"_25":26,"_27":28,"_29":30},"routes/newsletter",{"_9":10,"_11":12},"selectedNewsletter",{"_13":14,"_15":16,"_17":18,"_19":20,"_21":22},"newsletters",[],"id","b8b1e8cd-01d7-44d2-b87c-e0aafdd83379","subject","An Interview with LAUSD Board Member Nick Melvoin (District 4)","layout",{"_23":24},"sentAt","2026-03-11T00:11:11.000Z","createdAt","2026-03-12T18:18:50.273Z","center","\n\n\n\n\n*|MC:SUBJECT|*\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌ ͏ ‌

\n\n\n\n\n\n

View this email in your browser

$\"\"$

\n\n

Where They Stand:
Nick Melvoin

District 4

It’s an election year for LAUSD, with preliminary races in three districts—District 2, District 4, and District 6. In order to help you learn where your district’s candidates stand on the tech issues that matter, SBS will be running a series of interviews with all candidates who take the time to respond to our questions.

$\"\"$

\n\n

This week, we spoke with District 4 incumbent Nick Melvoin about his vision for the future of tech in schools. Nick was raised in LA, and he started his career as an English teacher at Markham Middle School. He holds a BA from Harvard University, a Masters in Urban Education from LMU, a law degree from NYU, and a certificate in education finance from Georgetown University. He has served in the Obama White House and the US Attorney’s office. He has been a sitting Board member since 2017, and he also serves as the director of Camp Harmony, a camp for homeless and underserved children.

Please enjoy the following conversation with Nick Melvoin (and make sure to check out our last interview, with District 4 challenger, Ankur Patel).

SBS: You were an instrumental force behind the cellphone ban that recently went into effect across LAUSD. Given that 1:1 devices pose many of the same harms as phones, why has the Board not done more to curb the overuse of screens in school?

We need to do more, and that’s exactly what my new resolution is designed to address. Over the past year, I’ve been working to better understand the research, collaborate with educators and families, and develop a thoughtful plan to recalibrate how technology is used in our schools.

I often think about the difference between March 12, 2020 and March 13, 2020. On the 12th, we were debating the harms of excessive screen time; on the 13th, we told students to be on screens all day. That pivot was necessary in an emergency, but we never fully adjusted back.

When we adopted the cellphone ban, we had over a decade of research clearly documenting the harms of smartphones and social media. Unlike cellphones, classroom technology is deeply tied to instructional practice and teacher autonomy. That means reform can’t be done in a vacuum, but it requires collaboration. I’ve spent months meeting teacher advisors, UTLA, parents, and researchers to ensure we strike the right balance between instructional value and student wellbeing.

My goal is the same as it was with the cellphone policy: to establish clear, research-based guardrails that protect kids while preserving what works in the classroom. I believe this resolution can do for instructional technology what the cellphone ban did for smartphones:help reset norms not just in LAUSD, but across the state and country.

SBS: If re-elected, what concrete steps do you plan to take to reform LAUSD tech policies? Are there any SBS reform proposals that you plan to champion?

Yes. My resolution operationalizes many of the core Schools Beyond Screens proposals and commits LAUSD to systemic reform; I appreciated meeting with SBS parent leaders about this resolution and we’re working collaboratively to amend.

Here are the key areas of alignment:

Research-based screen time limits
- The resolution requires a formal Screen Time Policy with developmentally appropriate daily and weekly limits by grade level, grounded in research and brought to the Board for approval.
Reducing 1:1 device use in early grades
- It directs the District to consider eliminating one-to-one devices for TK–2 during the school day (with limited exceptions like mandated assessments and IEPs), consistent with early childhood best practices.
Differentiating active vs. passive use
- The policy must distinguish between purposeful instructional technology and passive consumption (and unfettered access), with subject-specific guidance (e.g., no device use during PE).
- It also considers prohibiting the use of devices during passing periods, lunch, and recess for elementary and middle school students.
Limiting high-risk platforms
- It requires consideration of prohibiting or restricting platforms like YouTube on student devices, while preserving educator-directed instructional use.
Transparency and parent empowerment
- Districtwide tracking of screen time by grade and application
- Quarterly reporting to the Board
- Regular reports to families
- Granular opt-in/opt-out consent for Google applications, including AI tools
Strengthening privacy and digital safety
- It calls for updates to the Responsible Use Policy and consent processes to be more developmentally appropriate and privacy-protective.
Rebalancing toward offline learning
- It encourages paper-and-pencil instruction and balanced pedagogy.
Family education
- It requires the District to provide resources to families on screen addiction, digital citizenship, and healthy technology habits.

If re-elected, I will focus not only on passing the policy, but on implementation: data transparency, enforcement guardrails, and annual public review.

SBS: What would you say to parents and teachers who are concerned that their schools’ budgets are being spent on costly, ineffective technology while essentials like library services, functional locker rooms, and basic copy supplies fall by the wayside?

I share many of those concerns and we should never be investing in technology at the expense of libraries, safe locker rooms, copy paper, arts programming, or basic facilities. I’ve consistently raised these tradeoffs during budget discussions and have pushed to reduce bureaucratic overhead so more dollars reach classrooms and campuses.

At the same time, in a district where roughly 85% of students come from low-income households, device and internet access matters, both from an equity standpoint and from an instructional one. So the real issue is how we provide access: with guardrails, age-appropriate limits, and a clear focus on learning rather than passive consumption.

Some things I’m advocating for include tracking actual usage and outcomes, avoiding auto renewing expensive tools without evidence of impact/shifting dollars away from ineffective platforms, and ensuring schools have flexibility to prioritize what their communities need. My resolution also calls for a comprehensive and itemized report of tech contracts to better track dollars spent and their impact on student learning

SBS: Internal Google documents recently revealed that the company’s efforts to get their products into schools aim to create a “pipeline of future users.” How would you respond to parents who want to see addictive apps like YouTube completely removed from school-issued devices?

I agree with them that we need easier, clearer opt-out options, transparent consent for specific apps, and stronger default restrictions on addictive or algorithm-driven platforms. I do think there’s a difference between educator-directed instructional use and student-directed consumption. If a teacher chooses a vetted video as part of a lesson, that is very different from students browsing algorithm-driven short-form content. My resolution requires the District to consider restricting or prohibiting platforms like YouTube on student devices while preserving teacher access when appropriate.

We banned smartphones because the research was clear. We should apply similar guardrails to addictive content on school-issued devices. We can, and should, also use our leverage to go after companies causing harm to kids with such practices and support legislation that does more at the state level. Given my background as an attorney, I have been the driver in ensuring the District joins cases to sue Juul, and social media companies, among others, and will continue to seek opportunities to protect kids.

SBS: Silicon Valley parents limit their children’s exposure to the harmful technologies that they develop and opt for schools that prioritize analog learning. There is growing concern that this trend will mean underprivileged students suffering disproportionate deficits in cognition, literacy and attention as a result of excessive tech reliance. How should LAUSD be reimagining the idea of a “digital divide” in 2026 so that the district can ensure equity for all students?

I spoke about this a lot during the cell phone ban passage and implementation: the equity conversation has changed. For years, equity meant access to devices, but increasingly, equity also means protection from overexposure.

Many families in Silicon Valley and affluent communities have chosen schools that minimize device use and I worry that we are unintentionally creating a two-tiered system where low income students receive more screen-heavy instruction.

In 2026, equity must mean access to high-quality instruction, strong literacy foundations, and healthy cognitive development.

Technology should support those goals and not replace them. We need to move from a mindset of “freedom to have technology” to a balanced conversation that includes “freedom from excessive technology,” especially for young children.

SBS: Research has already shown that use of generative AI causes rapid cognitive decline. How do you plan to safeguard LA’s schools against the encroachment of AI tools in academic settings?

Research is raising serious concerns about the cognitive effects of over-reliance on generative AI, particularly when it replaces rather than supports thinking. That means we cannot simply assume AI belongs in classrooms because it is new or widely available.

AI is already embedded in search engines, productivity suites, and classroom software, often without families or even educators fully realizing it. That makes transparency essential. We need clear, public conversations about when and whether tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, and other generative AI systems should be used in academic settings, and for what purposes.

Decisions of this magnitude should not happen quietly through vendor contracts (and again, my resolution requires an audit of these) or default software updates.

Technology should follow educational goals, not dictate them. Human relationships and cognitive development must remain central. If AI is used at all, it should expand educator capacity and support deeper learning, not replace core skill-building or reduce academic work to automated shortcuts.

In LAUSD, that means strong guardrails around AI use, explicit limits on generative AI in core academic tasks, full transparency about where AI is embedded in district tools, and a public process for debating its role in our schools. Above all, we must ensure that reading, writing, math, and critical thinking remain at the core of instruction.

SBS: If reelected, do you plan to recommend the renewal of the iReady contract with LAUSD? Why or why not?

I hear consistent concerns from parents, teachers, and students about overuse of iReady. It’s important to distinguish between three different components that are often conflated: the diagnostic assessment, the weekly MyPath personalized learning lessons, and implementation practices at the school level. When the Board approved the contract, the primary discussion centered on the need for a universal diagnostic assessment tool to create consistent academic benchmarks across the district and limit the number of assessments and time spent completing them. I support that goal. What received less scrutiny at the time was the scope and expectations around theMyPath instructional component, including later guidance that, in my view, contributed to excessive screen time in some schools.

I hear feedback on both aspects: concerns about the length of the assessment itself and concerns about the pace and volume of assigned lessons. My team and I have personally met with iReady representatives and my Teacher Advisory Group to share critical feedback, including about assessment duration and the cumulative time students are expected to spend on the platform. Those design and pacing issues directly affect total screen exposure.

The Superintendent and instructional team credit iReady in part for the district’s recent academic gains, which were recognized by the Governor in his State of the State Address and have reached comparative high marks in recent years. At the same time, concerns about overuse are real (as are concerns that iReady results don’t “transfer” to actual aptitude); that is why my resolution requires tracking screen time by application. We need transparent data to determine whether excessive usage is systemic or isolated, and whether usage aligns with intended guidelines.

If instructional leaders bring forward a renewal, I would expect clear, research-based justification demonstrating positive student outcomes and reasonable usage expectations. I would also push for greater flexibility for schools to select alternatives and guardrails to prevent overuse. This is consistent with my broader advocacy for increased school-level flexibility: particularly for campuses already demonstrating strong student outcomes. Technology should support instruction, not dictate it. Any renewal would need to reflect that principle.

$\"Instagram$

$\"\"$

\n\n

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe

\n\n","siteSettings",{"_139":66,"_140":141,"_142":143,"_144":145,"_146":38,"_147":148,"_149":66,"_150":151,"_152":153,"_154":155,"_156":157,"_158":159,"_160":-5,"_161":-5},"websiteContext",{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":-5},"ENV",{"_31":32},"API_URL","http://api:3000/graphql","website",{"_13":131,"_132":133,"_134":135},"navigationItems",[40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51],"isPreview",false,"previewToken",{"_13":126,"_53":127,"_55":-5,"_56":75,"_57":122,"_59":128},{"_13":120,"_53":121,"_55":-5,"_56":-5,"_57":122,"_59":123},{"_13":114,"_53":115,"_55":-5,"_56":75,"_57":110,"_59":116},{"_13":89,"_53":109,"_55":-5,"_56":-5,"_57":110,"_59":111},{"_13":104,"_53":105,"_55":-5,"_56":-5,"_57":90,"_59":106},{"_13":99,"_53":100,"_55":-5,"_56":75,"_57":90,"_59":101},{"_13":94,"_53":95,"_55":-5,"_56":89,"_57":90,"_59":96},{"_13":87,"_53":88,"_55":-5,"_56":89,"_57":90,"_59":91},{"_13":81,"_53":82,"_55":-5,"_56":-5,"_57":83,"_59":84},{"_13":75,"_53":76,"_55":-5,"_56":-5,"_57":77,"_59":78},{"_13":68,"_53":69,"_55":-5,"_56":-5,"_57":70,"_59":71},{"_13":52,"_53":54,"_55":-5,"_56":-5,"_57":58,"_59":60},"836803e2-b0be-4432-86c2-2db15b587f63","label","Take Action","url","parentId","orderIndex",12,"page",{"_13":61,"_62":63,"_64":54,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"1234480a-2abe-42e3-803e-d0d8403220de","slug","take-action","title","isPublished",true,"systemPageType","6c059560-f854-4658-810c-f62fa8848055","Press",6,{"_13":72,"_62":73,"_64":69,"_65":66,"_67":74},"27cff6f8-7801-4ff5-81a1-c4f4bb414a77","press","PRESS","36a7db17-013a-481f-b668-cc8a7e868700","Resources",4,{"_13":79,"_62":80,"_64":76,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"39140b4e-37bd-444e-a2fe-c4bcab05f18f","res","f7824b26-7b40-41c3-85b4-a611940da116","Student Tech Bill of Rights",3,{"_13":85,"_62":86,"_64":82,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"faddeec8-0086-49b5-b1ca-ad92654a939d","student-tech-bill-of-rights","ad57db16-b234-4439-8b22-6d73ae7c0fe4","FAQ","981ac501-2573-4054-93f7-2ad85bd3ec90",2,{"_13":92,"_62":93,"_64":88,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"39a681fe-6f43-46a0-a284-3626bc3eed39","faq","9d9bf194-f261-4d2a-b69d-588dfb702c07","About Us",{"_13":97,"_62":98,"_64":95,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"6e2cae1d-8c47-4b2f-803e-2724b243cf2e","about-us","95926e91-e9a2-43f5-96e2-7d8fecfe9ff8","Newsletter",{"_13":102,"_62":11,"_64":100,"_65":66,"_67":103},"9fa6c90e-dcd2-40cd-afd0-5ff229dd848e","NEWSLETTERS","9b2c5c61-c56b-4f01-b224-924bf8c1b141","Changes Needed",{"_13":107,"_62":108,"_64":105,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"81718d93-698d-43f1-a890-2554dcd1d263","reform-proposals","About",1,{"_13":112,"_62":113,"_64":109,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"2eefdaa6-d0a2-4f61-b8a4-ed319911c67a","about","d8167c8a-3560-459e-bf00-3a76f22130d0","Watch",{"_13":117,"_62":118,"_64":115,"_65":66,"_67":119},"9c94235f-23a6-4484-b93c-097d852f873e","watch","VIDEOS","41a8af10-4350-4eb7-a25b-126990c5223f","Home",0,{"_13":124,"_62":125,"_64":121,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"dd2b4fa3-16cc-4ff6-92b8-838625b5fb34","home","cdeb3131-8461-4e30-b2bf-86b9e89aaaeb","Useful Resources",{"_13":129,"_62":130,"_64":127,"_65":66,"_67":-5},"f2176a0f-af57-4296-a0fc-a130c22201f5","resources","9e4d91e0-bfd3-454a-8957-048d53d31ca2","siteSlug","www","chapter",{"_13":136,"_137":138},"fc660707-c083-459d-b533-3ec5f4138bb6","name","Schools Beyond Screens National","announcementBarIsVisible","announcementBarText","Want to bring the movement to your district? Start an SBS Chapter!","announcementBarCtaText","Learn More","announcementBarCtaHref","https://forms.gle/wR9eiACmJoGZWYb56","modalIsActive","modalFrequency","DAILY","modalEachPeriod","modalTitle","","modalBody","

i-Ready Town Hall

May 21, 12PT/2CT/3ET

You've heard about the class action lawsuit.

Now, learn about the allegations against Curriculum Associates (makers of i-Ready) directly from the lead plaintiffs Lila Byock & Nicki Petrossi, and attorney Andrew Liddell.

Q&A to follow.

","modalCtaLabel","Register now","modalCtaUrl","https://tinyurl.com/bdfcmaxx","modalVersion","25b97013-b2c5-4a02-a3b8-6b8359a5f4e4","customLogoUrl","customLogoTransparentUrl"]

Where They Stand:Nick Melvoin

District 4

i-Ready Town Hall

May 21, 12PT/2CT/3ET

Where They Stand:
Nick Melvoin