On Harvard College Students’ Technology Habits

With education becoming increasingly digital and AI slowly impeding university classrooms, the Harvard Independent surveyed Harvard College undergraduates to understand student engagement with and opinions on machines of all kinds for our 2025 issue “Reboot.” Over a three-day period, the Independent received responses across grade levels and concentrations. Note that all questions were anonymous and optional, meaning not all respondents answered every inquiry.

Demographics

The Independent first surveyed respondents on key personal identifiers to contextualize later data. The grade level distribution across polled students was relatively balanced. 20% of those surveyed were from the Class of 2029, 40% from the Class of 2028, 21.8% from the Class of 2027, and 18.2% from the Class of 2026. A slim majority of engagement was from undergraduates aged 17 to 19: 55.6%. 44.4% fell between the ages of 20 to 22. 

With respect to gender identity, 64.8% of respondents identified as female, 33.3% as male, and 1.9% as non-binary or preferring not to disclose. 

Among these individuals, approximately 54.5% are pursuing STEM concentrations, 56.4% major in the social sciences (Economics, Sociology, Psychology, Government, etc), and 21.8% concentrate in the arts and humanities (Languages, Philosophy, History, etc). Students were able to check more than one option to account for double, joint, or pre-declaration concentration interests. The majority of respondents, 30.4%, reported GPAs between 3.89 to 3.8. A minority 2.2% disclosed GPAs between 3.49 to 3.4. 

In addition to this distribution of personal identifiers, surveyed undergraduates were also asked to disclose device ownership and affiliation to technology. Among respondents, 100% own a laptop, 100% own a cell phone, 72.7% own an iPad or tablet equivalent, and 27.3% own a video game console.

Out of all respondents, 31.5% are thinking of entering a profession centered around technology post-graduation.

Harvard College Class Profile

Recently, Harvard College has been changing their AI policies to accommodate the increased prevalence of generative technology in academic spaces. Certain subjects are shifting to a prohibitionist mindset, banning the use of advanced algorithms entirely, while others are discovering ways to integrate AI into their curricula. There lacks a universal consensus on what methods of teaching are best—should instruction stay within the confines of pen and paper or revitalize into ones and zeros? Surveyed undergraduates were asked to report on what their professors have decided. 

Currently 69.1% of polled students are in a class deemed technology or laptop free, and 85.5% are in courses that prohibit all AI use. A unique contrast, 69.1% are in classes that encourage AI. Note that Harvard students take, on average, four courses a semester; the same student may have instructors that promote generative technology and professors that discourage the practice. Only 5.6% of students reported experiencing a class with virtual reality headsets.

Akin to fluctuating classroom standards, the Independent observed a range of academic engagement preferences among surveyed undergraduates. 25.5% of Harvard students prefer typing their notes, 38.2% would rather handwrite, and 36.4% favor a mix of both. Survey responses similarly lacked a clear majority with respect to desired learning methods: 11.1% of respondents think they learn better online whereas 38.9% defer to offline. However, 50% reported that their opinions on this distinction depend on the subject. 

Use of Technology

A survey released in October 2024 from the Center for Disease Control’s National Center for Health Statistics found that half of teenagers ages 12 to 17 reported four hours or more of daily screen time. Despite polling an older age group, the Independent found similar results, with a 41.8% majority of students spending four to seven hours a day on a screen. This cohort was followed by 38.2% observing eight to 11 hours of daily screen time, 10.9% reporting 12 to 15 hours, and 7.3% devoting 16 to 19 hours. Only 1.8% of surveyed students disclosed zero to three hours of daily screen time. 

With only 24 hours in a day, 20% of students dedicating over half of that time to devices may seem jarring. But most technology offers screen time limits for users looking to moderate their online practices. 32.7% of surveyed students have such limits turned on via one or more of their devices, 40% do not, and 27.3% used to but no longer do. When asked about how many times they have gone 12 consecutive hours without screen time over the past 30 days, 55.6% of students reported zero. 25.9% disclosed one to two.

In relation to observed screen time practices, sleep quality in the era of pervasive personal devices is of concern. Regardless, 96.4% of surveyed undergraduates spent zero or one hour off-devices before dozing off.

When polling how these digital hours were spent, the Independent saw an even distribution across academic, social media, or communication related endeavors, with 85.5%, 74.5%, and 67.3%, respectively. Note that students could choose more than one option. The minority 29.1% and 10.9% devoted most of their screen time to television and games, respectively.

Social Media and Relationships

With contemporary relationships often buffered by pixels and algorithms, the Independent sought to understand student opinion on social media. 53.7% of polled undergraduates disclosed that they believe communication platforms are affecting our interpersonal relationships. Moreover, 37% of surveyed undergraduates agreed that social media exacerbates mental health crises amongst college-aged populations.

On Artificial Intelligence

Though generative technology is becoming increasingly common, only 29.1% of students reported having a paid ChatGPT or generative AI equivalent membership; 9.1% of respondents used to. AI use, regardless of membership status, was much more common. 20% of polled Harvard College undergraduates reported using AI at least once all seven days of the past week. 23.6% disclosed using such technology five to six times, and 12.7% three to four. 43.6% of respondents reported using AI at least once on only zero to two days over the course of the past week. The majority 52.1% of students use AI for a mix of both personal and academic purposes. However, when observing those who specified between the two, 35.4% use AI for primarily academic work whereas 12.5% for personal.

Student Commentary

Finally, the Independent asked students to provide short-form answers to a series of prompts. Below are some responses from each question.

What do you think are the biggest advantages of an increasingly digital society?

“Access to information. Connection over distance and time.”

“Communicating, finding people who share your niche interests, having a space that can draw attention to important issues around the world.”

What do you think are the biggest disadvantages of an increasingly digital society?

“Less time spend [sic] without technology (e.g., outside, or with a book, etc.). Spread of misinformation and propaganda.”

“Distractions, conflicting and false news, centralized and impersonal social media spaces that prioritize generating ad revenue over having a healthy user experience, lack of concern for ethics and online privacy, unethical usage of technology.”

“People are becoming less socially aware and it’s affecting how people communicate.”

What are your opinions on AI?

“Can be useful but unregulated it harms marginalized people, artists, educational institutions.”

“I love AI. It’s fast and simple.”

“I’ve yet to take a concrete stance of [sic] the ethics of AI.”

What are your thoughts about the place of AI in academia?

“AI cannot possibly replace the experience of academia, it can only support it (when used correctly and moderately).”

“I think it can be used to help with study techniques but should never be submitted as a final response or idea.”

“Complicated! People are going to use it in the real world. The question is more about how much of a traditional bubble we’d like academia to be.”

Sara Kumar ’27 (sjkumar@college.harvard.edu) used to have screen time limits activated but gave up on moderation.