Silicon Valley's Dark Secret - Tech Moguls Ban Screens in Their Own Homes

By Dr. Carrie Mackensen

"Buy what I sell, not what I use for my children."

This could be the unofficial motto of Silicon Valley's tech executives, who are creating addictive digital products for our children while carefully shielding their kids from these same devices.

Last month, I experienced this irony in a deeply personal way. I spent a week at my children's phone-free private school, delivering three one-hour sessions to students in grades 4-8 about how technology overuse harms developing brains.

Meanwhile, unbeknownst to me, my 12-year-old son was secretly playing video games on his laptop during history class. The revelation came only after my week on campus had ended—a powerful reminder that no family is immune.

Let that sink in. The family and child psychologist turned parent coach, who teaches children, parents, and educators about technology's impact on the brain, couldn't prevent her son from falling prey to its allure.

When Even the "Good Kids" Can't Resist

My son is what most would consider a "good kid." He is a straight-A student, participates in sports, has healthy friendships, follows rules, and has a really kind heart. We have clear technology boundaries at home. Yet there he was, making a choice that surprised even him when we later discussed it.

"I don't know why I did it, Mom," he confessed, genuinely confused and feeling bad about what he did. "I knew it was wrong."

This moment of parental humility reinforced something I've observed repeatedly in my 25 years as a psychologist: No child is immune to the pull of technology. Even really good kids are vulnerable.

And this brings me to the most troubling paradox in our technology-saturated educational landscape.

The Silicon Valley Double Standard

Have you ever wondered where tech executives send their children to school? The answer might surprise you.

While Silicon Valley has flooded our public schools with iPads, Chromebooks, and educational apps, many people creating and marketing this technology have chosen a different academic path for their children.

The Waldorf School of the Peninsula, located in the heart of Silicon Valley, has become the educational institution of choice for executives from Google, Apple, Yahoo, eBay, and countless tech startups. What makes this particularly interesting is that Waldorf schools prohibit screen technology until the 8th grade.

No iPads. No laptops. No smartboards.

Instead, you'll find hands-on learning, art, music, physical movement, and face-to-face human connection. These schools emphasize creativity, critical thinking, and deep engagement with material through tangible experiences rather than digital interfaces.

The chief technology officer of eBay sends his children there. So do employees of Google, Apple, Yahoo, and Hewlett-Packard. In fact, the New York Times reported that 75% of students at this particular Waldorf school have parents who work in the tech industry.

This pattern extends to tech executives' home lives as well. When Steve Jobs was asked how his kids liked the new iPad that his company created, he replied, "They haven't used it. We limit how much technology our kids use at home."

Chris Anderson, chief executive of drone tech company 3D Robotics and former editor of Wired magazine, described himself and his wife as "fascists" when it comes to limiting their children's access to technology, adding, "That's because we have seen the dangers of technology firsthand. I've seen it in myself. I don't want to see that happen to my kids."

As Adam Alter, author of "Irresistible: The Rise of Addictive Technology," put it: "It's as if the tech execs are following the well-known drug dealer's credo: 'Never get high on your own supply.'"

The Gamification of Education: A Flawed Approach

Let's talk about what's happening in most other schools—likely the one your child attends.

The "gamification" of education has become a cornerstone of Ed Tech's promise to revolutionize learning. Interactive apps, achievement badges, progress bars, and reward systems have transformed lessons into game-like experiences supposedly designed to increase engagement.

However, these platforms tap into the same neurological reward pathways that make video games compelling— potentially problematic.

At my son's school, laptops are mandatory and protected with GoGuardian® software. Yet, students discovered workarounds.

My son watched from the back row for weeks as his friend, in the row in front of him, secretly played video games during history lessons. Despite our no-gaming policy at home, his developing brain was mesmerized by what he saw. Eventually, he succumbed to the dopamine temptation and peer influence, as many of his friends (all avid gamers) were doing it. His friends taught him how to bypass the security measures, and he became a part of the crew.

This isn't weakness or bad parenting or even just peer pressure. It's neuroscience. When young brains repeatedly observe peers experiencing pleasure from an activity, several things happen:

1. Vicarious dopamine response - The brain begins to anticipate pleasure just from observing others' enjoyment

2. Social reinforcement - The desire to participate in shared experiences becomes increasingly powerful

3. Executive function challenge - The still-developing prefrontal cortex struggles to maintain boundaries when faced with both social and neurological pressure

Interactive screens, particularly in social settings with peers, create powerful influences that can override our best intentions and clear boundaries we set at home.

The Research They're Ignoring

While EdTech companies market their products as educational necessities, research tells a different story:

• A 2019 study from the OECD found that students who used computers more frequently at school had lower reading and math scores.

• Research from MIT demonstrated that students who weren't allowed laptops or tablets in class performed better on exams than those with devices.

• Multiple studies have shown that handwritten notes lead to better conceptual understanding than typed notes.

• A 2021 Cambridge University study found that for each additional hour children spent on devices, their grades fell by the equivalent of two missed weeks of school.

The evidence consistently shows that more technology doesn't equal better learning. Yet EdTech spending in U.S. schools reached $35.8 billion in 2023.

Meanwhile, the tech executives creating these products send their children to schools where blackboards, not smartboards, are the norm.

When Technology Helps vs. When It Hinders

Not all technology use in education is problematic. When technology directly enhances the lesson—like teaching coding or digital design—it serves a clear purpose. Students need to learn these skills on the devices they'll use in the real world.

However, when lessons can be effectively taught without screens, that's consistently the preferable approach. Why? Nothing replaces the value of a human teacher. Teachers are doing God's work, in my humble opinion.

A skilled educator reads facial expressions, notices when a student is confused or overwhelmed, and adjusts instruction accordingly. They build relationships, provide emotional support, and tailor explanations to individual learning styles—all things that even the most sophisticated educational software cannot replicate.

This distinction is crucial for note-taking and testing. Research from Mueller and Oppenheimer shows that students who take notes by hand retain information better than those who type. Similarly, a 2019 Journal of Educational Assessment study found that elementary and middle school students who took tests on paper outperformed peers taking the same tests on screens by an average of 13.5%. The researchers attributed this difference to reduced cognitive load (screens require dividing attention between content and device), decreased eye strain, and better spatial memory formation with physical materials.

The most effective educational environments recognize technology's limitations and deploy it strategically—not as a default or replacement for human instruction.

What Can We Learn From This Contradiction?

As both a psychologist and a parent who has now seen firsthand how influential these devices can be, I've come to several conclusions:

1. Trust the actions, not the marketing: When tech executives choose low-tech education for their children while selling the opposite to ours, we should pay attention to this discrepancy.

2. Understand the neurological reality: Our children's brains are particularly vulnerable to the dopamine-driven engagement of screens. This isn't about willpower—it's about brain development.

3. Advocate for balance: Schools need parents who will question the assumption that more technology automatically means better education.

What You Can Do Today

If you're feeling overwhelmed by this information, you're not alone. Here are some practical steps you can take:

1. Start a conversation with your child's teacher about when and why technology is used in the classroom. Is it enhancing learning or simply replacing traditional methods?

2. Connect with other parents who share your concerns. Schools are more responsive to collective parent voices.

3. Create tech-free learning zones at home where deeper thinking can happen without digital distraction.

4. Advocate for balance at your school. Technology has its place but shouldn't be the default for every learning activity.

5. Model healthy technology use yourself. Our children are watching how we interact with our own devices.

A Final Thought

My son's experience reinforced what I try to explain to parents and educators that even with knowledge, boundaries, and the best intentions, the pull of screens is powerful. If my child—with all the advantages of having a mother who teaches on this topic—couldn't resist, how can we expect children to navigate this on their own?

The tech executives who limit their children's screen time while profiting from ours have shown us something important through their actions. It's time we listen to what they do, not what they sell.

Our children deserve educational environments designed around what truly supports learning and development—not what generates the most profit for technology companies.

Dr. Carrie Mackensen brings 25 years of clinical expertise and real-world experience as a psychologist and mom of two boisterous boys. Through her parent coaching business, Successful Parent, she helps families navigate modern parenting challenges. For additional resources and support, visit www.successfulparent.com to download your free copy of "A Parent's Guide to Better Tech Boundaries."

References

Alter, A. (2017). Irresistible: The rise of addictive technology and the business of keeping us hooked. Penguin Press.

Cambridge University. (2021). Impact of digital device use on academic performance and development—Journal of Educational Psychology.

Clement, J., & Miles, M. (2017). Screen schooled: Two veteran teachers expose how technology overuse is making our kids dumber. Chicago Review Press.

Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159-1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). PISA 2018 results: What students know and can do. OECD Publishing.

Richtel, M. (2011, October 22). A Silicon Valley school that doesn't compute. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silicon-valley-technology-can-wait.html

Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62, 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003

Thompson, K. L., & Davis, R. (2019). Paper versus digital testing in elementary and middle school students: Performance differences and experience factors. Journal of Educational Assessment, 41(3), 214-232.