This week, W/A’s Head of K-12 Communications and editor of What We’re Reading, Thomas Rodgers, is filling in for Ben.

I was five when the first “Toy Story” movie opened in November 1995. Around that time, the most thrilling thing on my grandmother's computer was Math Blaster!, and the latest Compton's Encyclopedia CD-ROM I booted up as if the whole world had just arrived on a single disc.

My grandmother wasn't an outlier. Putting kids in front of screens was the national initiative. That same November, AT&T pledged $150 million to wire more than 100,000 schools to the internet, with free dial-up, software, and 100 hours of usage. Weeks earlier, Bill Gates stood at Georgetown promising free software for every classroom, because, he said, the most important use for information technology is to improve education. President Clinton wanted technological literacy treated like reading and math, and educational software "as compelling and engaging as the best video games."

The assignment in 1995 was simple. Get kids on screens, fast.

Tomorrow, Woody and Buzz return, and this time the villain is a tablet.

In “Toy Story 5,” Bonnie's parents hand their eight year-old a frog-faced tablet named Lilypad (voiced by Greta Lee), and she stops playing with her other toys. The movie's real subject is the quiet disappearance of imaginative play. Director Andrew Stanton doesn't make it a morality tale. "We can't just get away with making tech the villain," he said. But the anxiety under the story is unmistakable.

That anxiety is the mood of the moment. The cellphone bans that swept statehouses over the past two years have opened a wider front, and parents are now going after the one-to-one devices, the Chromebooks and iPads that districts spent a decade and billions of dollars putting in kids' hands. A self-published book, “The Digital Delusion,” which blames falling test scores on classroom tech, has become the movement's handbook. Parents pass it out at school board meetings. AFT president Randi Weingarten called its author a "leading researcher." Richard Culatta, who leads ISTE+ASCD, told NBC News he now fields calls nearly every week from school leaders asking how to respond. “Toy Story 5” didn't start this. It's riding it.

That's the distance we've traveled. In 1995, there was no Google, no Wikipedia, no YouTube, and the frame was access, where more meant better. Now the parents who once lobbied for more screens are buying landlines. Greta Lee, who voices the tablet, told TIME she got one for her two boys and called it "a dam." The mood has flipped from more to less.

Here's the part I can't shake. Pixar exists because someone bet a computer could make art as moving as anything drawn by hand, and it has built its summer tentpole on the idea that the screen is the threat. The same company is selling the opposite. LeapFrog's Explore & Learn Lilypad is a real frog-shaped tablet for ages three to five, with a "Chat With Friends" feature that lets little kids text Woody and Buzz. The movie warns about a child glued to a messaging tablet. Disney will sell you one. We fear the screen and gift-wrap it in the same breath.

For an education audience, that's the cleanest way to mark it. In 1995, the country's leaders worked to get children to spend more time with technology. Three decades later, one of the digital age's own creations is asking whether kids need a little less of it.

But look at what the movie actually fears. Lilypad isn't a tutor; it's an engagement machine, built to hook Bonnie with games and instant friends. That's the line I keep drawing in What We're Reading: the difference between consumer tech designed to capture attention and tools designed to teach. The Digital Delusion lumps it all together. The movie draws the finer line. What it fears is narrower, a screen built to never let go.

So the question for our sector isn't whether the mood has changed. It has. The harder one is whether we can still tell the difference between technology that earns a child's attention and technology engineered to capture it.

This week, the U.S. Department of Education announced four new interagency agreements (IAAs) to continue shifting its non-statutory responsibilities to other agencies. These new partnerships bring the Department’s total number of IAAs to 14 across six federal agencies, and represent some of the most consequential structural changes to the Education Department to date.

One of the new agreements shifts the administration of some special education programming to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)—a long-time plan of the Trump administration finally coming to fruition. The other three agreements are with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), most notably on civil rights enforcement, but also pertaining to student privacy and federal technical assistance.

There are concerns about the IAAs, and the proposed move of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) in particular. There is a reason the "E" in IDEA stands for “Education” and why the law requires Individual Education Plans (IEPs) for students receiving services. It’s an education law.

The Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE) put it this way: “OSERS administers IDEA, an education law, not a health care law. OCR plays a vital role in enforcing IDEA and other education laws. Both should remain in the Department of Education under the leadership of education experts.”

Former Secretary of Education and Bipartisan Policy Center President and CEO Margaret Spellings was equally direct: “[Dismantling] the Department of Education piece by piece and shuffling programs between agencies is not reform. It is an expansion of bureaucracy by requiring two agencies to jointly manage each program, and a distraction from the real and urgent work in front of us.”

Litigation is likely, and Congress will have its own say through the appropriations process. More on those as they develop.

HHS will “support the administration” of several programs under the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS). According to the Education Department, HHS—which oversees Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, Head Start, and other programs that support individuals with disabilities—is uniquely positioned to strengthen the programs and grants offered through OSERs.

Under the IAA, HHS will manage formula and discretionary grants programs authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (Parts B, C, and D), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Vocational Rehabilitation Disability Innovation Fund, among others. 

Office for Civil Rights: DOJ will work more closely with the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to “support the vigorous enforcement” of federal civil rights laws. According to ED, the partnership is not expected to impact students, parents, or families. Individuals who believe they have been discriminated against will still use the OCR Complaint Assessment System, according to the announcement. 

The summary of the IAA released by ED and DOJ indicates that the focus of the partnership will be on leveraging DOJ’s enforcement powers to make civil rights enforcement more efficient. 

Student Privacy Policy Office: Through the third IAA, DOJ will take on a greater role in reviewing privacy violation complaints, conducting related investigations and recommending resolutions to complaints. ED will, however, continue to manage and lead its Student Privacy Policy Office which is tasked with enforcing FERPA and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment. ED will retain final authority over all enforcement decisions.

Training and Advisory Services: Under the fourth IAA, DOJ will now provide technical assistance to school boards, SEAs, LEAs, and schools on the implementation of plans to desegregate schools. ED will continue to manage the Training and Advisory Services program through policy guidance and rulemaking even as DOJ takes on a greater technical assistance role.

Work-based learning is an integral part of early career development and helps bridge the gap between education and career, but there aren't enough opportunities to go around, especially paid ones. 

Whiteboard Advisors is proud to offer a paid, remote-friendly fellowship program open to emerging professionals throughout the U.S. to support their career readiness and invest in their long-term success.

Many of our Whiteboard Advisors colleagues started out as fellows, including W/A Notes Associate Editor Julia Pasette-Seamon and Senior Director Kelly Branning!

The conversation around AI in education is evolving. At a Senate hearing this week, lawmakers and witnesses spent little time debating whether AI should be used in schools. Instead, much of the discussion focused on a different challenge: how schools can distinguish between AI tools designed to support learning and those that may pose risks to student privacy, critical thinking, or well-being. [Education Week, subscription model]

What's happening: Witnesses pointed to a reality that is becoming harder to ignore: AI is already embedded in classrooms. The challenge now is ensuring schools adopt tools that improve teaching and learning while putting appropriate guardrails around products that pose risks to students.

What we're watching: Much of the hearing focused on the need to differentiate between consumer AI products and education-focused tools. Erin Mote, CEO of InnovateEDU, warned that consumer AI systems are often designed for "platform retention and user satisfaction" rather than learning. She argued that schools should focus less on whether a tool uses AI and more on whether it improves student outcomes. That distinction may ultimately shape the next phase of AI policy in schools.

Delaware Secretary of Education Cindy Marten urged lawmakers to focus on outcomes rather than the technology itself, arguing that AI should strengthen teaching rather than replace it. "No tool or curriculum teaches a child," Marten said. "The teacher teaches the child."

Witnesses also repeatedly highlighted the need for teacher training. More than half of schools have not provided professional development on the safe use of AI, according to testimony, even as adoption continues to grow.

At the same time, several speakers acknowledged that policymakers are being asked to make decisions about a technology whose long-term effects remain uncertain. Witnesses called for additional research into AI's impact on student learning, cognition, and development, noting that evidence has not kept pace with adoption.

While lawmakers differed on the role the federal government should play, the hearing revealed broad agreement on one point: artificial intelligence is likely to remain a growing part of American classrooms.

The bottom line: The debate is increasingly focused not on whether schools will use AI, but on how educators, policymakers, and families decide which tools are worthy of students' trust.

The fourth-annual Solutions Summit, co-hosted by Whiteboard Advisors and ISTE+ASCD, takes place Sunday, June 28 in Orlando, Florida, ahead of the co-located ISTELive and ASCD Annual Conference—bringing together education executives, product leaders, philanthropists, and entrepreneurs committed to driving meaningful innovation in teaching and learning. 

This year's programming will look at where AI in education is actually headed (with a keynote on reimagining human connection in the age of AI), feature candid conversations on product impact (including how to talk about evidence with education leaders and an evidence hackathon), and examine the market signals shaping the next era of edtech—funding shifts, compliance pressures, outcomes-based contracting, and what's emerging beyond the U.S. market. 

House Democrats are escalating their opposition to the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape the federal education landscape. Oregon Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D) announced this week that she plans to introduce articles of impeachment against Education Secretary Linda McMahon, arguing that the secretary has exceeded her authority by transferring key Department of Education functions to other federal agencies without congressional approval and making misleading statements to Congress. [POLITICO Pro, subscription model]

The announcement comes as the administration continues to move education responsibilities—including programs serving students with disabilities and certain civil rights enforcement functions—to other federal departments as part of its broader effort to reduce the Department of Education’s role. While the impeachment effort is unlikely to advance in the Republican-controlled House, it reflects growing political and legal tensions over how far the administration can go in reorganizing federal education programs without an act of Congress.

Indiana is the latest state to receive approval from the U.S. Department of Education to consolidate portions of several federal education funding streams into a single, more flexible block grant. The waiver allows the state to combine approximately $50 million from programs supporting teacher development, English learners, student support services, assessments, and after-school programming, with state leaders arguing the move will reduce administrative burden and direct more resources toward students.

The approval also allows Indiana to align its federal and state high school accountability systems, placing greater emphasis on college and career readiness indicators. Supporters say the changes give states more authority over education decisions, while critics argue the waiver could weaken transparency and reduce safeguards designed to ensure underserved student groups receive targeted support.

Indiana joins Iowa and Louisiana as states participating in the Trump administration’s effort to provide greater flexibility over federal education spending under its “Returning Education to the States” initiative. [PBS; WFYI]

Check out W/A Jobs, which features 3,733 career opportunities from 319 organizations across the education industry. A few roles that caught our eye over the past week: