What the Department of Education’s Guidance Says
In the letter, Baesler argues that, while conversations around the educational value of technology are important, we must also take care to distinguish between educational and recreational device use. Technology versus no technology is the wrong frame. It shouldn’t be a choice between the two, nor should all screen use be considered equal.
Recreational screen time in schools is a legitimate concern. When students are using their phones, browsing the internet or playing games during focused class time, they’re not getting quality instruction. But that should be assessed differently from educational screen use. When educational technology is aligned to clear instructional goals through effective technology integration, it can strengthen and support learning, rather than taking away from it.
“Research and experience have demonstrated that technology is a valuable instructional tool when it supports strong pedagogy and effective teaching practices,” Baesler writes in the letter. “Digital platforms can increase access to rigorous coursework, support differentiated instruction, provide timely feedback through high-quality assessments, and broadly expand opportunities for students.”
With that in mind, the conversation shifts from whether technology should be available to students to which uses of technology improve learning and academic outcomes.
Screen Time Limits and the Impact on Learning
When we talk about the benefits of ed tech, we can’t just ask whether students with laptops learn more or less than those without. We have to look at how instructors design learning around the technology and the outcomes that drives, not just the existence of the hardware itself. The same devices that can distract students when used improperly can enhance learning and instruction when used properly.
Modern classroom technology and network connectivity open doors for students to explore topics more deeply, discover unique perspectives and access education more easily. For example, as Baesler shares in the letter, students in rural schools can access tutoring and instructional opportunities that might not otherwise be available in their communities. Those with learning disabilities can use assistive technologies to make education more accessible, such as text-to-speech or captioning. These tools can be beneficial to all students, whether or not they have an Individualized Education Program.
Implementing Ed Tech Tools: Policy and Evaluation Best Practices
Schools are investing a lot of money and resources into educational technology. To protect those investments and bolster community trust, Baesler recommends that states and districts take a critical look at any technology providers they work with. They can validate their investments by:
- Addressing the differences between recreational and educational technology use in policies
- Evaluating technology for demonstrated learning outcomes and instructional value, not just screen time as a whole
- Requesting evidence of effectiveness from vendors to aid procurement and renewal decisions
- Assessing technology after implementation to ensure it is effectively supporting learning outcomes and instructional goals
- Ensuring that professional learning helps educators implement technology to assist and improve instruction
There is a high expectation that teachers are responsible for guiding digital citizenship and online safety in the classroom. To do that, they must be supported at the state and district levels.
The message of Baesler’s letter is clear: Discussions around proper technology use in K–12 schools must be centered around outcomes, not inputs. The basis of every conversation should be about meeting goals, rather than restricting use. Only by asking the right questions can we ensure that we’re making decisions that put our students’ best interests first.
![[title]Connect IT: Bridging the Gap Between Education and Technology](http://www.edtechmagazine.com/k12/sites/default/files/articles/2014/05/connectit.jpg)
