A recent survey published this week from the Pew Research Center reveals some eye-catching statistics about teen online habits. Nearly half of the surveyed teens, aged 13 to 17, report spending almost all their time online, which is up from about 24% just ten years ago.

While parents, teachers, healthcare professionals and politicians have expressed serious concerns about the impact of technology and social media on the mental health of today’s youth, many teens remain digitally more connected than ever. Pew Research Center survey of U.S. teens ages 13 to 17 conducted Sept. 18-Oct. 10, 2024 demonstrates that nearly half of the teens describe that they are online almost constantly.

It is interesting to note that these findings show just how integral the internet has become for this age group, reflecting both its pervasive role and the uncertainties around its impact on mental health. A staggering 96% of these teens claim to use the internet every day, and 95% have access to smartphones. These devices have become almost compulsory tools for socialization, entertainment, and information.

Choice and interest in the various social media platforms has changed for this age group in the last two years, according to Pew. The survey asked about the platforms and regularity of usage.

YouTube remains the most popular but usage has reduced by 5 percent in 2024.

TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat remain widely used among teens. Roughly six-in-ten teens say they use TikTok and Instagram, and 55% say the same for Snapchat.

Facebook and X use have steeply declined over the past decade. Today, 32% of teens say they use Facebook. This is down from 71% in 2014-15, though the share of teens who use the site has remained stable in recent years. And 17% of teens say they use X (formerly Twitter) – about half the share who said this a decade ago (33%), and down from 23% in 2022.

Roughly one-quarter of teens (23%) say they use WhatsApp, up 6 percentage points since 2022.

And 14% of teens use Reddit, a share that has remained stable over the past few years.

The survey asked about Threads, launched in 2023 by Meta, currently shows that only 6% of teens report using it.

How often do teens visit online platforms?

Time that teens (and everyone) spends on social media has been a major concern in the US. This new survey asked teens how often they use five platforms: YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat and Facebook.

Overall, 73% of teens say they go on YouTube daily, making YouTube the most widely used and visited platform we asked about. This share includes 15% who describe their use as “almost constant.”

The share of teens who say they use Instagram almost constantly has increased slightly, from 8% in 2023 to 12% today.  

Relatively few teens report using Facebook daily (20%).

Social Media Usage by Gender and Race/Ethnicity

Additional Data

The Pew Report also offers additional data and other demographics that describe how teens engage with online platforms by gender, race and ethnicity, age, and household income. It also highlights time spent online and teen access to smartphones at home.

Source: Teens, Social Media and Technology, December 12, 2024, Pew Research Center

As technology becomes a major part of our lives, resulting in increasing rates of screen time and digital interactions, there is a growing dialogue around the concept of overload. Many are becoming concerned not just about the volume of information and data that we dealing with but also the lack of sufficient filtering mechanisms to protect us from misinformation and streams of negative information.

A proper term for the impact of these digital interactions has been elected as the Oxford University Press Word of the Year for 2024: “Brain Rot.”

The term “reflects growing concerns over the mental impact of excessive digital content consumption.”

According to Casper Grathwohl, President of Oxford Languages, “Brain rot speaks to one of the perceived dangers of virtual life, and how we are using our free time. It feels like a rightful next chapter in the cultural conversation about humanity and technology. It’s not surprising that so many voters embraced the term, endorsing it as our choice this year.”

What Does Brain Rot Mean?

‘Brain rot’ is defined as “the supposed deterioration of a person’s mental or intellectual state, especially viewed as the result of overconsumption of material (now particularly online content) considered to be trivial or unchallenging”. It is also something characterized as likely to lead to such deterioration.

Oxford experts noticed that ‘brain rot’ gained new prominence this year as a term used to capture concerns about the impact of consuming excessive amounts of low-quality online content, especially on social media.

Source: https://corp.oup.com/word-of-the-year/

According to the study published in Nature Human Behaviour, the relationship between mental health and web-browsing is causal and bi-directional.

Self-guided browsing of negative content online is associated with poorer mental health and continued browsing of negative content. Study results “show that browsing negatively valenced content not only mirrors a person’s mood but can also actively worsen it. This creates a feedback loop that can perpetuate mental health challenges over time.”

Browsing and Mood Symptoms

Approximately 1,000 study participants shared their web browsing history with the researchers and answered questions about their mental health. Using natural language processing methods, the researchers analyzed the emotional tone of the webpages participants visited. Interestingly, perticipants rather than taking a break from negative or depressing content, the study found that participants with worse moods and mental health symptoms were inclined to browse more negative content online, and after browsing, those who browsed more negative content felt worse.

In another study, the researchers manipulated the websites people visited, exposing some participants to negative content and others to neutral content. They found that those exposed to negative websites reported worse moods afterward, demonstrating a causal effect of browsing negative content on mood. Afterwards, when these participants were then asked to browse the internet freely, those who had previously viewed negative websites—and consequently experienced a worse mood—chose to view more negative content.

This finding highlights that the relationship is bi-directional: negative content affects mood, and a worsened mood drives the consumption of more negative content.

Previous research on browsing focused on screen time or quantity of use which let to mixd conclusions. To evaluate if an intervention could change participants web-browsing choices, researchers conducted a further study.

Can an intervention help?

To evaluate if a break in the “negative browsing /negative mood” loop might change things, researchers added content labels to the results of a Google search, which informed participants whether each search result would likely improve their mood, make it worse, or have no impact. Results showed that participants were then more likely to choose the positively-labeled sites deemed likely to improve their mood—and when asked about their mood afterward, those who had looked at the positive websites were indeed in better moods than other participants.

Researchers developed helpful software

In response to the results of their intervention, the researchers have developed a free browser plug-in that adds labels to Google search results, providing three different ratings of how practical a website’s content is, how informative it is, and how it impacts mood.

Co-author Professor Tali Sharot said, “We are accustomed to seeing content labels on our groceries, providing nutritional information such as sugar, calories, protein, and vitamins to help us make informed decisions about what we eat. A similar approach could be applied to the content we consume online, empowering people to make healthier choices online.”

Source:
Kelly, C.A., Sharot, T. Web-browsing patterns reflect and shape mood and mental health. Nat Hum Behav (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02065-6

Traditionally, health professionals across the world have used ultrasound as a means of monitoring the development of unborn babies and assessing the health of patients’ internal organs. Over the decades, its uses have expanded to evaluate blood flow and check for blockages in arteries and veins, assess joint inflammation and metabolic bone disease, help diagnose abnormal growths, blood clots, gallstones, kidney or bladder stones, and more.

As a tool for interventional therapies, ultrasounds can guide needles for biopsies or tumor treatments, and can image the location of a catheter as it’s inserted into a blood vessel.  Ultrasound scans are generally non-invasive and painless, and can take about 30 minutes. There are some limitations however, such as the fact that ultrasound waves can be disrupted by air or gas, and that ultrasound cannot penetrate bone. 

A new article in the journal PLOS Biology, by researchers from Stanford University, the University of Plymouth, and Attune Neurosciences describe that it has now been demonstrated to offer a non-invasive and precise way of targeting specific areas of the human brain.

Using a technique known as transcranial ultrasound stimulation (TUS) offers the potential to help people with conditions ranging from pain, alcoholism, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and Parkinson’s disease, all without the use of drugs or surgery.

Beyond the treatment, the researchers discuss in the new article how the technology can also be used to temporarily test areas before treating them, serving as a sort of “search and rescue tool for the brain”.

This enables them to find the sources of brain-related issues and disorders prior to treating them, which may be an added resource towards personalized treatments.

Challenges

However, the researchers acknowledge there are still a number of complex challenges that need to be addressed before TUS can be rolled out in healthcare settings – and maybe even homes – on a global scale. And while significant advances have been made to the technology, reaching a point where it can still be effective – but also sustainable from a cost perspective – is still some years away.

Currently, the researchers have developed and are testing a TUS device small and simple enough for people to use them at home following a series of clinical assessments, rather than having to continually go into hospitals or other healthcare settings. According to Dr Keith Murphy, co-founder of Attune Neurosciences and researcher at Stanford University School of Medicine, “There are countless reasons people can’t get to a clinic, whether it’s financial strain or simply not having the time. In the past few years, we’ve made substantial progress towards a device that leverages MRI precision guidance but may still be used safely at home. We’ve always believed that portability was a critical step towards making advanced brain therapies accessible to everyone and we’ve made great strides in demonstrating that it works.”

The researchers further discuss how focused ultrasound can also be integrated with other emerging technologies, for example improving the accuracy and effectiveness of interfaces that enable direct communication between the brain and external devices.

Source: Murphy K, Foragnan L. The future of transcranial ultrasound as a precision brain interface. PLoS Biol 22(10): e3002884. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002884

A recent ‘Letter to the Editor’ to MDEdge from a Maine Pediatrician reminds us that our use of technology that consumes so much of our attention is indeed taking a toll on our human interactions. Dr Willkoff describes two scenarios that troubled him but, as he points out, may also be so ubiquitous that perhaps too many of us accept these as the norm. In one scenario, a family is dining at a restaurant but the two teens were immersed texting with their smartphones and little else. The other vignette described a 3-year old playing with his toys in the sand and his father nearby was solidly ‘glued’ to his laptop and hadn’t said a word to his child.

These vignettes describe what is called “technoference,” a word coined by a doctoral student in human development and family studies at Penn State a decade ago “to describe the everyday intrusions and interruptions in couple interactions that take place due to technology devices and their always-on, ever-present nature.” Although, the original research that triggered the coinage was studying couples, clearly this phenomenon occurs whenever people of any age are together in social situations.

Recent Studies in Early Childhood and Adolescence

Early Childhood Studies

Dr W points out that “technoference in recent studies has been associated with decreased parent-child interaction during early childhood” including a reduced ability to notice and attend to children’s needs, less frequent and lower-quality joint play and conversational interactions, including more negative responses to children’s behavior, and higher risk of child injuries.

Adolescent Studies

In adolescence, adolescent-perceived parental technoference is associated with higher levels of parent-child conflict and lower levels of parental emotional support and warmth. When children’s emotional and physical needs are consistently ignored or inappropriately responded to, they are at risk of developing mental health difficulties, underscoring the need to investigate parental technoference as a potential precipitant of the development of mental health difficulties, such as depression, anxiety, hyperactivity, and inattention.

New JAMA Study

A recent study in JAMA Open Network Pediatrics (A Deneault, et al.) highlights the limitations of these previous studies of technoference in both children and adolescents in that this body of research has been primarily cross-sectional, which hinders the ability to understand the directionality of associations (ie, which comes first, parental technoference or child mental health difficulties?)

A. Deneault and colleagues studied over 1300 emerging adolescents aged 9 to 11 years across 3 assessments (anxiety, attention difficulties and hyperactivity) revealing that higher levels of anxiety symptoms were associated with higher levels of perceived parental technoference later in development. Higher levels of perceived parental technoference were associated with higher levels of inattention and hyperactivity symptoms later in development.

Meaning of Results:  Parent digital technology use that interrupts routine parent-adolescent interactions may be instigated by the emerging adolescents’ levels of anxiety, and parent technoference may also have consequences for emerging adolescents’ inattention and hyperactivity.

Conclusions and Relevance  

Higher levels of emerging adolescent anxiety symptoms were associated with higher levels of perceived parental technoference (but not vice versa). Higher levels of perceived parental technoference were associated with higher levels of emerging adolescent inattention and hyperactivity symptoms (but not vice versa). Substantial gender differences were not identified. It is possible that, despite experiencing different levels and onset of mental health difficulties, boys and girls similarly experience the effects of parental technoference.

This study highlights the complex relations between parental technoference and emerging adolescents’ mental health and highlights the need to address parental technology use when considering emerging adolescents’ well-being. The findings speak to the need to discuss digital technology use and mental health with parents and emerging adolescents as a part of routine care.

Citations

Deneault A, Plamondon A, Neville RD, et al. Perceived Parental Distraction by Technology and Mental Health Among Emerging Adolescents. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(8):e2428261. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.28261
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2822421

Wilkoff WG. Technoference. MDEdge. Pediatric News. Sept 2024.Available at :https://www.mdedge.com/pediatrics/article/270630/mental-health/technoference

New studies demonstrate that approximately one in five older British teenagers involved in one study displayed problematic phone use (PSU), which resembles an addiction. This can mean they feel panicky or upset when their phone is unavailable, find it difficult to control their screen time and use their phone to the detriment of other meaningful activities.

“Even if we could wave a magic wand and make all smartphones go away, these kids could still have problems overdoing other stuff.”

Research, from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King’s College London, was published in two studies. One, in the journal Acta Paediatrica, surveyed 657 teenagers aged 16 to 18 at five schools across England. The second analysis, published in BMJ Mental Health, studied a smaller group of teenagers for a month: 62 pupils aged 13 to 16 from two London schools.

Teens with PSU were twice as likely to have anxiety, three times more likely to have depressive symptoms and 64 per cent more likely to be insomniacs. Instagram and TikTok were the social media accounts most strongly linked to PSU.

The studies also showed that that teens were keen to find ways to restrict their phone use. The most effective methods were putting their device on “do not disturb” or “airplane mode”, turning off notifications and keeping smartphones out of the bedroom.

Dr Nicola Kalk, senior author on both studies, said the work “does contribute to an accumulation of evidence that suggests that a proportion of teenagers use their smartphone in a way that is starting to look more and more like an addiction”.

Professor Ben Carter, professor of medical statistics at King’s, said: “By revealing the link between problematic use of smartphones and poorer mental health, and demonstrating that young people are aware of this problem and are eager to manage their use, these studies highlight the need for evidence-based interventions to help adolescents struggling with difficult behaviours around their smartphone use.”

Chris Ferguson, professor of psychology at Stetson University, who is quoted above said: “Even if we could wave a magic wand and make all smartphones go away, these kids could still have problems overdoing other stuff. Ultimately, I think this data suggests we do need to reframe our approach to technology.

“There’s little evidence here, or elsewhere, that restricting technology, putting age limits on social media or banning smartphones in schools is helpful in improving teen wellness or academic performance. Technology overuse is best understood as a new symptom of age-old disorders such as depression, anxiety or ADHD, not a new set of problems.

“Further indulging a moral panic over smartphones and social media is unlikely to help any youth.”

Sources:

Kalk NJ, Downs J, Clark B, Carter B. Problematic smartphone use: What can teenagers and parents do to reduce use? Acta Paediatrica. First published: 31 July 2024. https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.17365
Carter B, Armed, N, Cassidy O, Pearson O, Calcia M, et al. ‘There’s more to life than staring at a small screen’: a mixed methods cohort study of problematic smartphone use and the relationship to anxiety, depression and sleep in students aged 13–16 years old in the UK. BMJ Mental Health. July 2024. https://mentalhealth.bmj.com/content/27/1/e301115.

Smartphones are ubiquitous in modern society. It seems that as soon as we sit down on a bus or wait in a line at the Post Office, the first thing we do is pull out our phones. A number of studies have shown that the average American checks their phones almost 100 times a day and spend more than five hours daily staring at that pocket-sized screen. 

While we may be killing time by scrolling through social media or checking sports scores, a new study published in the Journal of Economic Psychology concludes that our seemingly constant use of the phone may come at a social cost.

The researchers highlight that many adults can remember a time when people taking public transportation or at a gathering would chat or engage others in conversation, whereas now, everyone is “plugged in and looking down.” Generally – no longer socializing.

The Study

For their experiment, they brought groups of six students into a laboratory and had them wait together for 20 minutes.  Some groups were allowed to use phones as usual. For others, they confiscated the phones and made them wait without them. They then broke the students up into pairs to play a simple trust game that gave them the chance to earn more money back by sharing up front—if they trusted the partner to split the final pot rather than pocket it, and if their partner actually did send back money.

Results

Those who didn’t have phones and who also interacted with other people in the waiting room tended to share more up front than those who didn’t interact. Even more significantly, the partners without phones also gave back more than those with phones—and more than they’d received. The researchers attribute this generosity to the trust engendered when people connect with one another. “If you are not looking someone in the eye, you’re almost treating them as less than human—it’s just money,” she says. “But if you’d looked up and smiled and chatted, then you’d developed more of a sense of who this person is. They are no longer a blank slate.”

Conclusions

While our phones undoubtedly connect us to loved ones and others far away, they can also distance us from strangers close at hand, lead researcher Campbell concludes. People might look at their phones in social situations for a number of reasons, including boredom, shyness, or a feeling like others might not want to talk to them. Campbell suggests, however, that by putting away our phones around strangers, we might feel more of a sense of trust that could enrich everyone’s lives.

Children could learn more social skills by giving up their phones during the school day or at summer camp. In a business context, managers might foster a sense of trust by limiting phone usage at certain times, such as orientations, when new hires could be encouraged to drop their phones on the way into the room and pick them up on their way out.

“Obviously, our phones are immensely valuable, but in some situations, it may be more valuable to chat to the person next to you,” she says. “You might be surprised to find they want to chat with you too.”

Source:

Campbell S, Sneezy U. Smartphone use decreases trustworthiness of strangers. Journal of Economic Psychology, Volume 102, June 2024, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2024.102714.

A recent article by Pamela B. Rutledge Ph.D., M.B.A., Professor and Director of the Media Psychology Research Center at Fielding Graduate University, challenges the recent recommendation by Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy who called for warning labels on social media platforms, similar to cigarette packaging.

Dr Rutledge recommends that “digital literacy will protect kids better than fear and restrictions.”

The current mental health crisis among young people is real and few would dispute that many children and adolescents are currently experiencing serious issues dealing with social media. Dr R. highlights that “the emphasis of the proposed warning label emphasizes public concern over empirical evidence, encouraging the troubling trend of ignoring research findings in favor of emotion but most of all, it neglects the preventative power of digital literacy.”

While there is no such thing as the “healthy use of cigarettes.” Social media, however, includes hundreds of platforms with numerous features and widely varying uses (like education, and creating, and sharing content). “Like swimming pools, social media poses a risk when kids don’t know how to use it safely and in healthy ways.”

Placing warning labels on social media is less likely to change teen behavior and may do more harm than good if it results in restrictive regulations that ignore the need to teach kids the skills they need. Kids are far more interested in being social than assessing future risks due to their developmental stage and brain maturity. Social media is an important part of how they connect with others and participate in popular culture; they will find a way to go online. “Our goal should be to provide kids with clear guidance and the necessary skills and understanding to use technology (including social media) well rather than keep them from using it at all.”

Social Media is Here to Stay

Warning labels cannot make social media (or mobile devices) safer. People are afraid and angry. A seemingly easy solution that restricts access and enables lawsuits won’t help. Expecting social media companies to screen users without violating privacy and remove all inappropriate content and misinformation from billions of posts daily is unrealistic. And even if that were possible, there are risks of being online outside social media. All web activity can be subject to personal information collection, and kids can be targets of cyberbullying or hurtful video circulation.

Preparation and Education is Needed

Dr R suggests, if we want to protect kids from the negative impact of digital devices without depriving them of benefits, we must teach them essential skills. “There will be times when restrictions are off, and parents aren’t around. Kids have been able to change attitudes and behavior from classroom digital literacy training. It is important not to underestimate their competence and resolve when kids have been taught digital literacy skills, including:

• The self-awareness to build self-control and accountability and to make healthy choices.
• The ability to identify their personal values, like honesty, empathy, kindness, and respect for others, and apply them to their on and offline actions.
• Conflict resolution and coping skills.
• The ability to think critically about information and evaluate source and content quality.
• An understanding of how persuasive technology can hijack their attention.
• The skills to recognize how content styles, messaging, algorithms, and notifications manipulate their emotions and behavior.
• The confidence and courage to set personal boundaries and protect their privacy.”

Guidance and structure are needed for healthy technology use. “You wouldn’t give your kids the keys to the car without driver’s training nor throw them in the deep end of a pool without teaching them to swim. The goal of parenting should be to prepare kids for the world they will live in.”

Encouraging specialized campaigns for phone-free zones at school are great ways to limit distractions in the classroom. As with all technology in general, it is important to encourage kids to spend more time outside and in offline activities. “Household technology rules are essential, but healthy technology behaviors are for everyone, not just kids, and all family members should be accountable.”

Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/positively-media/202406/why-warning-labels-on-social-media-miss-the-mark

This week in a New York Times Opinion Piece, Dr. Vivek Murthy said that social media is a contributing factor in the mental health crisis among young people. He has called on Congress to require warning labels on social media platforms similar to those now mandatory on cigarette boxes.

Implementing a surgeon general’s warning label, requires congressional action, and would serve to regularly remind parents and adolescents that social media has not been proved safe,” Murthy said. “Evidence from tobacco studies show that warning labels can increase awareness and change behavior.”

Social media use is prevalent among young people, with up to 95% of youth ages 13 to 17 saying that they use a social media platform, and more than a third saying that they use social media “almost constantly,” according to 2022 data from the Pew Research Center.

Last year Dr. Murthy warned that there wasn’t enough evidence to show that social media is safe for children and teens. He said at the time that policymakers needed to address the harms of social media the same way they regulate things like car seats, baby formula, medication and other products children use.

To comply with federal regulation, social media companies already ban kids under 13 from signing up for their platforms — but children have been shown to easily get around the bans, both with and without their parents’ consent.

Other measures social platforms have taken to address concerns about children’s mental health can also be easily circumvented. For instance, TikTok introduced a default 60-minute time limit for users under 18. But once the limit is reached, minors can simply enter a passcode to keep watching.

Murthy believes the impact of social media on young people should be a more pressing concern. He wrote, “Why is it that we have failed to respond to the harms of social media when they are no less urgent or widespread than those posed by unsafe cars, planes or food? These harms are not a failure of willpower and parenting; they are the consequence of unleashing powerful technology without adequate safety measures, transparency or accountability.

Link to NY TImes Article

Published this month, ACM, the Association for Computing Machinery, has joined with the IEEE Computer Society (IEEE-CS) and the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) to develop “Computer Science Curricula 2023” (CS2023). CS2023 provides a comprehensive guide outlining the knowledge and competencies students should attain for degrees in computer science and related disciplines at the undergraduate level.

Educators in technology believe that it is essential to establish uniform curricular guidelines for computer science disciplines to maintain an ongoing vitality of the field and the future success of the students who study it. The availability of a shared global curricula ensures that students develop the knowledge and skills they need to succeed as they graduate to become industry practitioners, researchers, or educators. Additionally, by supporting consistency in the field across the world, the curricular guidelines enable efficient global collaboration—whether among professionals working across borders for an international company, or among academics from different nations coming together for a research project.

Growing importance of artificial intelligence reflected in CS2023 Curricular Guidelines

Traditionally, these guidelines are updated every ten years. CS2023 builds on CS2013, the most recent global curriculum framework developed by ACM and IEEE-CS, the world’s two largest associations of computing professionals. ACM and IEEE-CS have consistently focused on curating content from the world’s foremost experts for the creation of curricular guidelines, and with the rapid expansion of AI since CS2023, the addition of AAAI to the developing body was both essential and welcome.

New and Noteworthy additions of the CS2023 report include:

• The addition of AAAI as a core partner of CS2023 reflects the growing importance of artificial intelligence as a discipline, as well as how AI is disrupting the teaching of computer science.
• Because computing touches so many aspects of personal and public life, CS2023 goes beyond simply outlining technical competencies to include a knowledge unit called Society, Ethics, and the Profession (SEP) and incorporating it in most other knowledge areas to encourages educators and students to consider the social aspects of their work.
• To meet the disciplinary demands of artificial intelligence and machine learning, mathematical and statistical requirements have been increased throughout CS2023, but individually identified for each knowledge area so that educators can accommodate the needs of students with varying levels of mathematical background.
• CS2023 is designed to be a primarily online resource at https://csed.acm.org/, both for utility and so the curricular guidelines can be updated more frequently to keep pace with the rapid changes in the field.

The Committee Chair explained that “So much has changed in computing since we issued the last curricular guidelines in 2013. While the core skills and competencies that we outlined in 2013 form the foundation of this new work, we were painstaking in our effort to make sure that we reflect where computing is today. We also tried to emphasize a whole solution approach in terms of addressing issues of Society, Ethics, and the Profession, and a whole person approach in terms of emphasizing the need for students to develop professional dispositions. Finally, from the outset, we envisioned this report as a living document that will be regularly updated and can be accessed by computer science educators on an ongoing basis.”

The revised Guidelines for the Computer Science Curriculum is designed to be a primarily online resource for easy access and so that the curricular guidelines can be updated more frequently to keep pace with the rapid changes in the field.

Link to the Computer Science Curriculum: https://csed.acm.org/

Source: https://www.acm.org/media-center/2024/june/cs-2023