technology in education disadvantages

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

current events conversation

What Students Are Saying About Tech in the Classroom

Does technology help students be more organized, efficient and prepared for the future? Or is it just a distraction?

By The Learning Network

Is there a problem with screens in schools?

We invited students to weigh in on that question in our Picture Prompt Tech in the Classroom , which was based on an Opinion essay arguing that we should “get tech out of the classroom before it’s too late.”

Is there too much tech in your school day? — we asked students. Would you prefer more screen-free time while you are learning, or even during lunch or free periods?

Below, they share the good, the bad and the ugly about technology use in school.

Thank you to everyone who participated in the conversation on our writing prompts this week!

Please note: Student comments have been lightly edited for length.

Some students saw the value of technology in schools, including its ability to prepare students for the future.

I believe that technology in the classroom is a good thing when it is properly moderated. I think completely taking away screens from a student will not help them develop computer skills which they will most likely need in a world like ours, where most of everything is online. Sometimes phones cannot get the job done, and computers will be needed. If schools completely remove devices from the curriculum, then students will be completely clueless when they take classes involving a computer. Too much screen time can be bad for the student, but if it is well moderated, then screen time won’t be an issue.

— Saheed, GMS

I personally do not mind the amount of technology in the classroom. I personally find typing to be a lot easier instead of writing. On top of that, this amount of technology is used in adults’ day to day lives, too. Writing has become less and less relevant for everyone, because most jobs require a computer nowadays. So I think it’s actually better to have the amount of technology we do in the classroom.

— Timothy, Greenbelt Middle

They said, even though there might be down sides, the good outweighs the bad.

Screens in the classroom allows students to complete work in a more organized manner and use online resources to help them learn. It helps teachers to be able to make sure students turn work in before a certain time. However, having screens in the classroom raises students overall screen time which is bad for their eye health and sleep.

— Emily, Greenbelt Middle

I believe that computers should definitely be used at school because it has more pros than cons. They help with everything. The only problem with them is the people using them. The people using them are often misusing them and not charging them.

— Deegan, California

And they argued that tech is so entrenched in the student experience that taking it away would cause a lot of disruption.

There are no problems with screens in school. I believe without screens, school would be much less productive, produce so much waste of paper, and assignments would be lost a lot. Also when I have paper homework, which is almost never, almost every time I get it I forget because everything is on the iPad. This is important because if there is any change in the iPads we use, it’ll affect everyone drastically. Also it would just be really annoying to get used to a whole new thing.

— August, GBW

But another contingent of students said, “There is definitely a problem with screens in school.” They called them a distraction.

There is definitely a problem with screens in school. While regular technology use in school is highly efficient and much more convenient than using textbooks and paper, I still feel like using technology as the main method for learning is detrimental. There are plenty of students in my classes who are hiding behind their iPads to play games or go on their phones rather than utilizing their technology to enhance their learning experience. So in turn, I think we need to minimize (but not completely take away) the prominence of tech in our classrooms. This matters because it’s so important for students to learn how to completely pay attention and focus in on one task so that they are prepared for the moments in life where they don’t get the opportunity to look at their phone if they’re bored or to text their friends. Trust me, this may seem like I’m one hundred percent anti-phones but the truth is I love my phone and am somewhat addicted to it, so I realize that it’s a major distraction for myself in the classroom. Moreover, staring at an iPad screen for 7 hours a day puts significant strain on our eyes, so for the sake of our health and our attention spans, we need to minimize tech use in school.

— Mary, Glenbard West High School

Tech inside classrooms has had many positive effects and many negative effects. Without technology, it would take forever to find sources/information and it would also take ages to do complex things. With technology, people can easily find information and they can easily do many things but the big downside is that they can easily just search up games and get distracted. On one side, it has provided many different changes to students so they can learn in a fun and entertaining way but in another, people are mostly on their phones scrolling through YouTube or Instagram. Many people don’t have control over their body and have a big urge to go on their cellphones.

— Srikanth, Greenbelt Middle School

In my opinion, yes there is a problem with screens in schools. It distracts kids from focusing on their work. Many students are always on their phone during class, and it is disrespectful as well as sad for them. They will not be able to learn the material that is being taught. Personally, I think that screens should be reduced in class, but I do not think that is possible. Whenever a teacher takes away someone’s phone, they get very mad and say that it is their right to have their phone. In these cases it is very confusing on how to act for the teacher!

— Kadambari, gms

Some reported that their peers use technology to cheat.

It might be a problem depending on what people are doing. If it is used for school, like typing an essay, working on homework, or checking your grades it’s okay, but I know people who abuse this privilege. They go onto YouTube and watch things, listen to music when they aren’t supposed to, and play games. Many people cheat to the point where it takes forever to start a test because people don’t close out their tabs. It helps to be able to do these ‘Quick Writes’ as we call them in my ELA class because I can write faster (I know it’s called typing). It’s harder to access things because of the restriction because people mess around so they block so many useful websites and words from our computer. I like to type on the computer, but I feel people abuse this privilege too much.

— Nina, California

When the teachers assign tests on computers, sometimes teachers have to lock students’ screens to make sure they’re not cheating. Sometimes they do it on paper and they try to cheat while hiding their phones in their laps. And then if another student sees them doing that, they will tell and the student who would have the phone out could start a big argument.

— Taylor, Huntington Beach

Several lamented the sheer number of hours teenagers spend in front of screens.

I feel that we have become too comfortable with using screens for nearly every lesson in school, because it has gotten to the point where we are spending upwards of 4 hours on our laptops in school alone. I understand that it would be hard to switch back to using journals and worksheets, but it would be very beneficial for kids if we did.

— Chase, school

I think we should reduce the tech a little just because most students are going straight to screens when they get home, after a full day of screens … Although I know this would be very difficult to do because everything in the world now seems to go online.

— Jaydin, California

And they even worried about their handwriting in a world full of typing.

I think technology in a class is very helpful, but I think that we should incorporate more writing. Since the pandemic, most of the work has been online and it never gave students the opportunity to write as much. When we came back from lockdown, I almost forgot how to write with a pencil. My handwriting was very different. And now we don’t get much time to write with our hands so I think we should have fewer screens.

— Eric, Greenbelt

Some students said that less time spent on screens in school would give them a break from the always-on digital culture they live in.

Although typing is useful and using the internet is very useful, I think we should go back to how it was about 20-40 years ago when all people used the computer for was to type an essay. Drama didn’t get spread in a millisecond, we didn’t have to worry as much about stereotypes. Now all kids want to do is text each other and watch videos. I’m well aware that I have fallen into this trap and I want out, but our lives revolve around technology. You can’t get away from it. I know this is about schools not using technology, which the world without it would be impossible now, but life would be so much simpler again.

— Ivy, Huntington Beach, CA

I will say that my phone is usually always with me during school hours, but I don’t use it all the time. I may check the time or play a short game as a brain break. But I do see some people absolutely glued to their phones during class time, and it’s honestly embarrassing. You really can’t go without your phone for an hour?? It’s almost like an addiction at this point. I understand using your phone to quickly distract yourself; I do it too. And I also think it’s okay to have your phone/electronic during lunch time or free periods. But using it to the point that you can’t properly pay attention in class is just embarrassing. So, in summary, I do think that schools are having a problem with screens.

— Allison, Greenbelt Middle School

And they named classes in which they think screens do and do not have a place.

I feel like for classes for younger kids, technology is definitely not good. Kids should be playing, using their hands, and actually experiencing things instead of being on tablets in kindergarten. I think using computers in school is good though. It’s a lot more efficient, and we live in a society where fast and efficient things are the trend.

— sarah, maryland

I think screens have their place, and will always have their place, in schools and education. The capabilities of computers will always surpass anything else, and they should not be banned from school environments. Still, I have one exception: English class. Other than final drafts of essays, everything in English should be on paper. You can formulate ideas better and minimize outside influence on your thinking.

— Addie, The Potomac School

Learn more about Current Events Conversation here and find all of our posts in this column .

Classroom Technology: The Good, the Bad, and What's Next

Related Videos

Sign Up for EdWeek Tech Leader

•   Wednesday, May 15, 2024

Future Educators

Helping America's Future Teachers

Pros and Cons of Technology in the Classroom

Student learning is an area with enormous potential to benefit from information technology. Information dissemination is, after all, a core strength of today’s technologies. And digital technology offers versatile platforms to streamline classroom teaching.

While technology unlocks innovation opportunities, blended teaching and learning are not without disadvantages. What are the downsides that come with the powers and benefits of technology?

Debate is still going on concerning potential harm from integrating technology into the classroom. Let’s look at both sides by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of students accessing computers and digital information.

Advantages of Technology in Education

By offering digital tools and learning platforms, technology offers great advantages in school education. Students have more information at their fingertips and build technology skills. Tech can do some tasks equally or better than teachers, including administration, data gathering and supporting self-direct learning. Here are the top five pros to technology in the classroom.

1. Access high-quality, current information

Modern technology is fantastic when it comes to making information available to everyone. In a classroom setting, getting the most up-to-date data helps ensure the best educational experience. Teachers are also able to use or direct students towards trusted sources to ensure accurate information.

Students are also able to assimilate information more efficiently with the interactive presentation that digital technology allows. Instead of reading through text sequentially, the teacher or student can navigate information on a topic using hyperlinks, tabs, accordions, etc. References can be checked immediately as well.

Classroom technology definitely beats paper textbooks for accessing relevant information quickly. The trick is to place structure around activities to maintain focus and ensure the class is covering the same material. The need to keep everyone on the same page so to speak is a limiting factor in the use of technology for gaining information.

2. Gather student performance metrics easily

A clear and powerful advantage of using technology in education is that it allows teachers to perform their job better. The automatic collection of data in digital testing and learning environments has the benefits of: allowing more student performance data to be collected, freeing teachers from repetitive grading exercises, and providing instant feedback to students.

Platforms that yield data analytics can pinpoint the areas where each student is having most difficulty. Performance information allows instructors to quickly adjust teaching strategies and the syllabus according to the data gathered and analyzed.

When a given learning goal can be achieved with technology or traditional methods with about equal effectiveness, the technology-based approach may be preferred just because of the data advantages. Once in this digital environment, the technology and instructional content may be improved over time, leaving traditional instruction techniques further and further behind.

3. Students learn technology skills

Using technology in the classroom naturally increases opportunities for students to learn technology skills. While it’s possible to take all but the simplest IT skills out of a lesson, keeping some technical challenges in there is healthy for student development. After all, we live in a digital world and have things like virtual offices and working online from home .

Children are fast learners when it comes to most things but especially with technology. Given the chance, they’ll quickly build computer operation skills and digital literacy. Examples of skills they’ll learn include keyboard awareness, logging in and password protection, navigating apps, setting preferences, online document sharing, and using standard software such as text editors and spreadsheet workbooks.

Teachers can offer exercises that give pupils the opportunity to test and expand their capabilities. For example, you can give students freedom in how they present project results. The smart ones, who could perhaps become IT professionals in the future, will find and deploy internet resources, such as graphics or charting software, to enhance the presentation.

4. Improved student participation and engagement

Students generally love technology and introducing it is a way to boost engagement. Mixing up traditional instruction styles with technology makes the class less predictable and the learning environment more dynamic.

Examples of how teachers can inject technology are to: direct students to online resources, present short videos, use interactive software, make digital presentations, and ask students to create digital content themselves.

Online platforms are often flexible in allowing you to exercise your creativity. You can, for instance, customize quizzes to make them more engaging and competitive. Any good resources you find online might be useful additions to the lesson. The possibilities are limitless.

You can also apply technology to get more information from reserved students. If you need to ask the opinion of everyone regarding a topic or even a simple question, why not use an online polling platform? This way, even quiet students who normally wouldn’t want to speak in the classroom will participate.

5. Automate repetitive tasks

Teaching can include tedious tasks such as keeping track of attendance, recording quiz scores and noting tasks completed. With the present technology available, such tasks can now be partially or fully automated. This can unlock time teachers are able to divert to substantive teaching endeavors.

Existing technology can be used to help teachers in several areas: planning lessons, assessing students, grading homework, giving feedback and administrative paperwork. Jill Barshay

Implementing technology is not a costless exercise however and the effectiveness depends on how well software is programmed and made easy to use. But, over time, we can expect the work of teachers to become more streamlined. Instructors will have fewer administrative tasks and more time to capitalize on human strengths, such as making connections, inspiring students and creating a sense of shared purpose.

Disadvantages to Technology in the Classroom

The recency of many innovations means we’re still grappling with how best to incorporate technology in schools. Educators may lack the time and knowledge to implement tech effectively. Using technology without sufficient care can produce poorer learning outcomes and cause students to miss out on social interaction. These are key cons of technology in the classroom and online education.

1. Faster but less memorable learning

While the lightning pace with which technology operates may seem like a clear benefit, experienced educators are actually wary of this aspect. Devices and learning apps are able to function faster than the corresponding learning speed of the human mind. Students may gloss over material, missing texture and depth along the way.

Proper and coherent cognitive thought takes time. Otherwise, engagement can be drastically reduced. It’s for this reason experts are suggesting we modify media use, such as how videos are presented , to slow down and allow for more rumination and contemplation.

The simple act of writing something by hand has slowing, stimulatory effects that brain research has shown to aid both learning and memorization. Although efficient, typing is repetitive as each keystroke is almost the same action. Writing by hand is more challenging, intricate and slower, allowing your brain to form more “hooks” to imprint thoughts.

2. Technology can be distracting

Devices such as laptops and tablets in the classroom are bound to become sources of distraction to students. This is especially true if the software doesn’t prevent access to apps unrelated to lessons, quizzes and other educational activities.

A need exists for appropriate restrictive measures on gadgets in education to ensure they further learning goals and aren’t used, for example, to play games or use social media for pure entertainment. You can be sure that some badly behaved students will always try to use technology for fun instead of the intended purpose.

A problem here is that high school students may be more tech savvy than their teachers. One technique students use to access out-of-bounds sites is to go to a proxy site that delivers content from other sites without the student technically visiting those sites. Another method to bypass a school firewall is to use a virtual private network (VPN ) to encrypt browsing data so the student’s internet activities can’t be monitored.

3. Less direct social interaction

The apparent way in which technology excises social interaction is another cause for concern. Students have less need to verbally communicate and interact with their teachers and one another when using technology. Online teaching and learning excludes face-to-face interaction altogether.

To address this, classroom teachers should ensure activities such as oral presentations, recitations and group work happen regularly. There needs to be a mindfulness that we’re trying to prepare well-rounded people for adulthood.

For students addicted to gaming or social media, school might actually be a place where they get some downtime from tech. It’s up to teachers to identify when students are spending too much time with their heads buried in devices. When technology isn’t being used, students should be encouraged or pressed to show some life and interact.

4. Integrating tech is often time consuming

While technology could make the job of a teacher very easy in the future, we are not there yet . Devising effective lessons using digital technology rather than traditional methods can be challenging and time consuming. That’s why it’s important for educators to share their insights on how to effectively teach kids when there is technology in the classroom.

Showing up to your class and teaching by talking and interacting with students doesn’t require special preparation. But when you make extensive use of technology during the lesson, you’re normally going to have to prepare for that. Teachers taking advantage of technology have the same amount of face-to-face instruction time but may need to do more planning, placing an extra strain on their workload.

Online learning when classes are held remotely have shown the limitations of tech. Just trying to corral students, to ensure they’re all logged in and paying attention, is a challenge in itself. The quality of lessons suffers as educators grapple with tech while trying to meet the practical learning needs of students.

6 Tips on How To Engage With Students

30 thoughts on “ pros and cons of technology in the classroom ”.

This was helpfull

My child has been influenced due to the bad technology. He was a nice 9 year old kid before he found out about the thug shaker from technology. He keeps saying “Im bout to blow.” Technology has effected our society. And the thug shaker is a prime example.

OKAY BOOMER!

This comment section be crazy yall.

i think ur over exaggerating

gangsta rap

The amount of privilege in this paragraph is nothing short of nauseating. “Teachers can offer exercises that give pupils the opportunity to test and expand their capabilities. For example, you can give students freedom in how they present project results. The smart ones, who could perhaps become IT professionals in the future, will find and deploy internet resources, such as graphics or charting software, to enhance the presentation.” Oh wow, just wow… “The smart ones”, you mean the ones that sit still, eyes on you, have stable households, technology access at home, maybe even only from this country… Do better future educators, do better….

Everyone in a classroom should be expected to pay attention, no matter their background. You don’t have to be privileged to do it. And every child should be given the opportunity to reach their potential – no ceilings.

chat gpt cookin

Some of us knew how to write before Chat GPT came along.

im a 12 year old sacred heart student and im reading your comments for a debate thank you so much 12\10\2023

Technology is very bad. Technology reminds me of the turbunence, strapping down your seatbelts, thug shaker, and people getting addicted to their phones, whenever i go in public people start doing turbulence, and always yelling out stuff and it influenced our society very big.

Stop being rude.

Travis Scott in da building

Technology can be a distraction for students, making it difficult for them to focus on learning. For example, students may be more interested in checking social media on their devices than paying attention to the lesson. Also when students rely too heavily on technology, they may become less capable of solving problems or completing tasks without it. This can hinder their ability to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

no you are wrong

i think that it is not that it is not that bad to have a phone

Maybe so. However, the use of technology and electronic devices can have negative effects on concentration and the ability to write well-structured sentences. Everyone, including educators, need to find a balance and limit the use of technology to enhance academic performance.

pluh using ai

Technology needs to be included to a certain degree but if we use it in every aspect of learning, you will see more and more children suffering with ADHD, ADD, and other learning issues. I see it now with children as young as 8 years old walking around with smartphones!

The good news is there is no evidence in this study or anything else I’ve read that cell phone use would create ADHD

There are pros and cons to everything, that’s why everything should be used in a controlled way. This is true nothing can replace the conventional method of teaching, but we can make it more interesting and better for students with a little use of tech. Like the use of animation, quiz polls, etc. So everything is cool until it is used in a particular way.

I would like to point out that you’re contradicting yourself on the Pro#4 with the interaction of a student via tech, and with the Con #3, that a student needs to interact with oral participation. The Pro #4 would discourage oral participation, which I believe is huge asset for all students. A student should be encouraged and helped with speaking out on different discussions. Teaches would call on me, even though they knew I didn’t like it, but it helped me get over my shyness. I hated speech in high school, but I did it and thank God for it. It has helped me tremendously.

That’s a good point Billiam. We shouldn’t lose the art of conversation and talking in person. Using technology to engage students is a balancing act.

I think it’s imperative that kids learn technology. Just don’t abandon everything. For example, we don’t use quills and inkpots (or fountain pens for that matter), but we should still teach kids to write with pens and pencils. That includes cursive, which is proven to help kids’ learning. There are grey areas though. One of them is calculators. We don’t teach kids how to use slide rules, but should we abandon calculators for certain situations? Then there are things that have completely been abandoned, but for no good reason. Why can’t kids tell time with non-digital clocks?

I can agree on most of your points. My question would be, when do we introduce students to technology? Call me old fashioned, but I believe that the task of learning simple math (1-3 digit computations), parts of speech, and sentence structure should be taught without the use of any type of technology. As students progress, I think technology is a great thing to interject into education. I do believe, however, this should be minimalized until about fifth grade. Students taking assessment test need to know how to write instead of just clicking on an answer. Calculators were never allowed in school until junior high when I attended. There are many students, in the school where I work, that will not write because they do not know how to form the letters on paper. Many times the students who do know how to write, have horrible handwriting because they do not write every day. Yes, technology is wonderful, but at what age should it be introduced in order for students to be able to succeed before technology is used?

This is how I see technology in the classroom: you have to use a hybrid model because there is no escaping how ingrained technology is in our lives and even more in the students’ lives. I would argue that in some cases the students are ahead of their teachers when it comes to being tech-savvy and understanding where things are headed. However, there are traditional skills that are overlooked far too much including reading from books, writing (printing and cursive), and doing research without a computer. Add these items to your article and I can’t think of any better description of the pros and cons of using technology in classrooms.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

5 letter word with most vowels (wordle words), how to use videos in the classroom, 21 ways of teaching soft skills to students.

19 Major Advantages and Disadvantages of Technology in Education

Although societies have always incorporated technology into the educational experience, modern developments are changing how we picture the classroom of tomorrow. It can be a significant tool that we use to connect the younger generations with the knowledge they need to become tomorrow’s leaders. We use it in the pedagogical methods available to today’s students in a variety of ways.

Instead of using the traditional chalkboard, teachers are now facilitating group instructions by using electronic whiteboards. This tool makes it possible to teach languages, social studies, mathematics, and science in interactive ways to help their students understand concepts more rapidly. Technology flips educational opportunities by using their personal devices to watch lectures or complete work on a school server.

We have grown far beyond the computer lab in the modern school by having affordable technology options available to each student. Videoconferencing, mobile learning, and virtual field trips are just some of the ways that schools are preparing children for tomorrow’s world.

All of this technology comes at a cost which is usually funded by taxpayers, so poor communities may not see these advancements as quickly. The pros and cons of technology in education also cover these additional thoughts.

List of the Pros of Technology in Education

1. It creates active engagement with the learning material. Technology is an interactive resource that teachers can bring into the classroom. It helps students learn new skills or understand the curriculum more effectively because they are using a hands-on approach for research, work, and receiving feedback. This tool makes it possible for students to become more passionate about what they are learning because it allows the classroom to focus on individual engagement while still offering a group setting.

Instead of looking at pictures or listening to a teacher lecture, technology allows for the inclusion of interactive tools, videos, or even games that help to teach core educational concepts.

2. It addresses real-world issues in the classroom. Instead of creating a sheltered environment in the classroom for students, technology brings the real world to them in a meaningful way. The Internet allows students to research current events which are related to the curriculum for the institution at that moment. It gives children an opportunity to further understand the lesson they are learning because there are moments of practical application available to use.

When students have an opportunity to practice what they learn immediately, then they can retain up to 90% of the information that the teacher relayed in the classroom. If the format of learning is lecture-based, then that figure can drop to as low as 10%. That is why having technology in the classroom is such a critical investment for many communities.

3. It provides an opportunity for simulation and modeling. Simulation software allows teachers to bring real activities into their classroom that would be impossible to see without the presence of technology. Specific tools make it possible for kids to see planetary movements, how a tornado develops, or even how past civilizations made a life for themselves on our planet. This tool makes it possible for dinosaurs to become alive, phonetics to become easier to understand, and other dynamic characteristics which are not always possible when using the static models of previous generations.

Humans are visual learners, so technology provides video resources, animation, and other tools that make it possible to bring core learning concepts to life in meaningful ways.

4. It allows students and teachers to continue the discussion outside of the classroom. Through the use of software tools and the Internet, it is possible for students to create online groups that reflect their classroom. Teachers can create web pages and blogs as a way to communicate to parents what they are teaching at school each week. Forums, social media, and virtual communities make it possible for real-time connections so that the discussion which happened inside of the classroom can also occur outside of school hours.

By having more opportunities to hear and read the opinions and experiences of others, it becomes easier for students to start refining how they think. This process creates a foundation where it becomes possible to reach a deeper understanding and higher levels of comprehension over specific subject materials.

5. It doesn’t limit the learning opportunities to what is available in the community. The Internet also makes it possible for students to connect with others from around the world to gain an alternative perspective on what they are learning. It is possible to interact in real-time with international classrooms, teachers, and students to see what other cultures think, say, or do regarding the subject being studied under the current curriculum. Because we are no longer bound by the walls of the classroom or the resources of a single community, technology allows us to understand more about ourselves because we receive more exposure to the diversity of humanity.

6. It provides an opportunity to create working groups. There are times when every student should be in front of a computer, tablet, or other mobile device when technology is brought to the classroom. By having immediate access to this tremendous resource, it is possible to pursue an individualized learning lesson with little difficulty. This benefit allows students to create working groups with one another even if they are not sharing space at the moment. When these groups get together, then it establishes democratic group ideas while encouraging discussions, debates, and activities which tie-in to the lesson for the day.

7. It offers an opportunity to coach students toward success. It would be fair to say that the modern teacher is closer to a coach than an instructor. Instead of being responsible for the delivery of a lesson, it is necessary for today’s classroom to offer support and guidance for every student activity. The role of the teacher is to offer feedback while coaching the class to receive academic training and the appropriate lesson for the curriculum that the school follows.

It is now the role of the teacher to guide their students in the development of research, problem-solving, and decision-making skills.

8. It creates more opportunities for assessment and comparison. Technology in the classroom ensures that students are learning the concepts they need for a robust education well becoming familiar with the tech resources they have at their disposal. Activities typically include critical thinking exercises, problem-solving skills, and personal interactions with software, video, or games to set the stage for development. These tools give teachers constant feedback regarding the progress of each student, making it possible to individualize lessons while still maintaining a group environment.

Teachers can also use the information stored by technology for comparative purposes with other students. This benefit can apply at the local, community, state, or national level. By viewing how successful a child is in relation to their peers, it becomes possible to see where there might be learning gaps to fill.

9. It provides students with a meaningful vocational skill to use later in life. Computers are never going away at this point in time in our culture. We are spending more time in front of this technology for our vocational work then arguably at any other time in our history. By giving students an opportunity to practice their tech skills, typing, coding, and other skills, teachers make it possible for today’s children to be ready for the careers of tomorrow. The tools help students to learn new words, check their spelling, and even save notes for future needs so that the studying experience can replicate what a job feels like later on down the road.

List of the Cons of Technology in Education

1. It is up to the teacher and school administrators to bring technology into the classroom. Nancy Kassebaum once said, “There can be infinite uses of the computer and of new age technology, but if teachers themselves are not able to bring it into the classroom and make it work, then it fails.”

Teachers must know how to use the technology items in their classroom for this set of tools to become useful for their students. If there is a whiteboard present and no one knows how to use it, then the product is a wasted investment. Students still go to school each day with a blank slate because they are ready to learn. That means it is up to each district to ensure that their instructors are up-to-date on their tech training, receive an ongoing education, and have supports in place to facilitate the learning experience in the modern classroom.

2. It still requires teachers to present a structured lesson plan. “Any teacher that can be replaced with a computer deserves to be,” said David Thornburg. Technology does not replace a teacher. It is simply a tool that instructors use to reinforce the lessons that they are offering to their students. Assuming that the Internet can provide children with all of the information they need to be successful in life will almost always create a negative outcome. We must have the skills necessary to integrate technology seamlessly into our current learning environments instead of viewing it as an add-on item to a structure lesson plan so that there is a deeper desire to keep learning.

3. It is a tool that can come at a tremendous cost for some schools. North Iredell Middle School, which is located approximately 60 miles north of Charlotte, gave each of its 650 students a MacBook Air computer to facilitate the learning process in March 2014. The equipment was part of a $20 million federally-funded plan by the school district to issue technology to seven high schools and nine middle schools.

“This is about changing the way we instruct students,” said Patrick Abele to Time Magazine at the time. He served as the Executive Director of the Race to the Top District grant. The project helped to improve student grades and performance, but not every school district in the United States has access to $20 million in funding outside of whatever local funds they receive from property tax levies.

4. It can become a distraction to the learning process. The joke about having a parent’s computer fixed by their child isn’t far from the truth in most families. Kids often know more about technology because it is available to them in the classroom. Since they can understand how to use it at an advanced level, it is possible for some brilliant minds to work around any firewalls or blocks that are in place to facilitate the educational use of this tool. You might find students watching videos that are unrelated to the lesson plan, chatting with their friends on social media, or playing games instead of focusing on the learning lesson.

Parents, teachers, and administrators must work together to identify students who are using technology in an inappropriate manner in the classroom. As with any child who is bored with school, there is an excellent chance that the manipulation of a computer or network reflects the fact that they are not being challenged enough by the curriculum.

5. It can overload the network of the school because of the number of required devices. When you begin to distribute technology to the teachers, students, and other staff of a school, then it becomes very easy for the local network to become overloaded. It is up to each district to ensure that there is a robust design in place that can handle all of the wireless devices that it may need to serve. Many of the schools in the United States use a wireless network infrastructure that was designed for the previous generation of students when online activities were restricted to a single computer lab.

When every classroom has each student on a laptop or tablet to facilitate learning, then the bandwidth levels can deplete severely almost immediately. This disadvantage requires each district to complete a wireless site survey if they plan on making any significant changes to how technology is used in their classroom.

6. It comes with the threat of a safety breach. Most students are not malicious when using technology in the classroom, but they are curious about what they can find online. Most kids look for ways to push the boundaries of the rules just to see if they can. If your network grants them admin access in any way, even if it is not published or widely known, you can bet at least one person is going to figure out that gap to exploit it.

Security is one of the most significant challenges of having technology in the classroom, and it is the reason why many schools have decided against using this tool in the past. It is up to each district to ensure that role-based access controls are in place on every computer so that you always know who, what, when, and how connections to your network occur.

7. It provides students with an opportunity to cheat. Students who wanted to cheat in the past might have listed answers on their arm, created a small piece of paper to reference, or even looked over the shoulder of a smart friend. Thanks to the presence of technology in the classroom, it is easier than ever before to create notes or hidden files on a device that can provide the answers to a test or report. There are even freelance platforms where papers, book reports, and other assignments can be purchased so that the homework can be outsourced.

Thanks to changes in the tools we use with our technology today, this issue is not as prevalent as it once was. Software companies are creating access points where administrators and teachers can see student screens while in the classroom. This disadvantage will continue to evolve as blocks occur, so it is up to everyone to stay on their toes to ensure the learning environment remains healthy.

8. It creates a risk of damage. Kids present a higher risk of damage to the technology in the classroom because they are still learning how to use their bodies. If you have ever seen a child go through a growth spurt and struggle to stay coordinated, then apply that to the first handful of incidents where they receive access to an expensive device. It is imperative that all students receive a quick tutorial on how to use and care for what they receive in the classroom. Investing in durable cases and covers for the product is helpful as well, while all districts will want to consider an insurance policy that can limit the losses that inevitably occur.

This risk includes the potential of losing the device if schools issue a computer to a student that becomes their own to use 24/7. There must be a policy in place that dictates what the response must be should this issue occur, and parents must sign-off that they understand their responsibilities in this area to limit potential losses.

9. It creates a pace of change that can be challenging to meet. Some schools are unable to keep up with the rapid pace of changing technology. Upgrading equipment is a costly chore for districts today, and there are some institutions that may not have the human capital present to manage the shift. Since the average classroom has about 20 students and each device may need work to meet the expectations of the current curriculum, there are times when there just isn’t enough money to go around.

This disadvantage impacts school districts in poor or rural communities most often because they have fewer resources available to them for use. A bring-your-own-device policy doesn’t help here either because every institution has families that cannot afford to purchase computers or tablets for their children.

10. It changes the social dynamics of the classroom. When students are using technology as the primary component of their learning process, then they are not spending as much time with face-to-face interactions. This disadvantage changes how kids interact with each other socially, shifting how relationships and friendships form. It may become more challenging to understand the various non-verbal cues that are present in communication, which means having friends in real life feels different than a virtual friendship.

When technology is used for teaching, students may not take their teacher as seriously if they are learning online since there are fewer methods of discipline available to help maintain a child’s focus. You can’t exactly send a student learning at home with a tablet to the principal’s office.

Conclusion of the Technology in the Classroom Pros and Cons

The rate that technology continues to evolve is remarkable. In less than a generation, we have gone from having a small computer lab in the wealthiest schools to providing students with their own device to encourage learning inside and outside of the classroom. It is possible to connect with teachers in a variety of ways, create interactive lessons, and encourage research skills that will be useful in future careers.

We must work to balance the risks that are present with the use of technology as well. The curiosity of students could lead them down a path toward identity theft, cheating, and other possibly negative outcomes.

The pros and cons of technology in the classroom help us to provide mobility to the learning experience. It allows teachers to create interesting lessons that incorporate a variety of ethnic and cultural perspectives. What this investment provides is access to diversity, which is why it offers the next generation an advantage of strength when those in charge carefully monitor how each item is being used.

Billions are spent on educational technology, but we don’t know if it works

Professor of Reading and Children’s Development, The Open University

Disclosure statement

Natalia Kucirkova receives funding from the Norwegian Research Council and The Jacobs Foundation. She works in WiKIT AS, which is a university spin-off concerned with EdTech evidence. She is affiliated with the University of Stavanger, The Open University and University College London.

The Open University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

During the COVID lockdowns, schools and universities worldwide relied on education technology – edtech – to keep students learning. They used online platforms to give lessons, mark work and send feedback, used apps to teach and introduced students to programs that let them work together on projects.

In the aftermath of school closures, the market for edtech has kept on growing. The value of the sector is projected to rise to US$132.4 billion globally by 2032 (£106 billion).

The problem is that we don’t know very much about how effective many edtech apps or programs are – or if they are effective at all .

And some effects may be negative. Some of the so-called educational apps advertised to families show many adverts to children. They may use manipulative features to keep children on screens without teaching them anything new.

This technology is here to stay and will remain a significant part of how children learn – so knowing whether it works is imperative.

Assessing and addressing the quality of edtech is a significant task, especially when it is already so widely used. For edtech under development, a valuable option is to foster closer collaboration between tech developers and scientists who study learning to embed existing research and knowledge into the design.

Research consultancy firms can carry out swift assessments to provide edtech developers with information on how well what they are offering works. Transparency and integrity in the research process is vital, though, to prevent bias. Ways of ensuring this include pre-registration : reporting that a study is going to take place before it happens.

Partnerships with schools could also provide valuable feedback . However, minimum standards of quality and ethical considerations would need to be assured before technologies are sent to schools.

Setting a standard

When it comes to edtech that is already available, what is really needed is some kind of standardised metric to assess how well it works.

But establishing minimum standards for the effect of edtech is easier said than done. There is, historically, a lack of standardised metrics for assessing educational impact within impact economics – the study of how businesses create financial returns while ensuring positive social or environmental outcomes.

Without standardisation, there are too many ways to assess edtech. A review commissioned by the UK government of evaluation criteria and standards for edtech analysed 74 methods for assessing their quality.

Similarly, I carried out a research study with colleagues on available criteria to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of edtech produced specifically for schools. We found 65 different frameworks for evaluating whether these school-specific offerings work.

The abundance of evaluation possibilities can be confusing for edtech businesses. The multitude of options makes it difficult to ascertain the quality of their products. It is confusing to investors too, especially those who want to prioritise not only edtech’s return on investment but also a return on education and community.

Read more: Schools are using research to try to improve children's learning – but it's not working

A yardstick that establishes the minimum quality requirements for a edtech product to be used in schools is crucial to ensure technology does more good and no harm. The creation of a yardstick needs to take into account both the product quality and the process of using the technology – whether it works for diverse populations and diverse learning environments.

The independent verification of evidence is vital , considering that any company can simply “generate” a study with the data they daily collect on users. In my research work with colleagues, I have argued for a focus on the rigour and validity of various research types.

New initiatives, such as the International Certification of Evidence of Impact in Education , have begun to consolidate the different research approaches, standards and certifications related to evidence of edtech impact globally. Ultimately, the goal is to make it easier for schools and parents to navigate the thousands of educational apps and online platforms available.

Whether individual countries will create the legal and institutional frameworks to enforce any of the standards remains to be seen. Countries will need to select standards that suit both their economic and educational agendas. An important shift is needed so that schools can strategically select edtech they know will help children’s learning.

• Young people
• educational apps
• Keep me on trend

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Communications and Engagement Officer, Corporate Finance Property and Sustainability

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

Suggestions or feedback?

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• Machine learning
• Social justice
• Black holes
• Classes and programs

Departments

• Aeronautics and Astronautics
• Brain and Cognitive Sciences
• Architecture
• Political Science
• Mechanical Engineering

Centers, Labs, & Programs

• Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
• Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
• Lincoln Laboratory
• School of Architecture + Planning
• School of Engineering
• School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
• Sloan School of Management
• School of Science
• MIT Schwarzman College of Computing

What 126 studies say about education technology

Press contact :.

Previous image Next image

In recent years, there has been widespread excitement around the transformative potential of technology in education. In the United States alone, spending on education technology has now exceeded $13 billion . Programs and policies to promote the use of education technology may expand access to quality education, support students’ learning in innovative ways, and help families navigate complex school systems.

However, the rapid development of education technology in the United States is occurring in a context of deep and persistent inequality . Depending on how programs are designed, how they are used, and who can access them, education technologies could alleviate or aggravate existing disparities. To harness education technology’s full potential, education decision-makers, product developers, and funders need to understand the ways in which technology can help — or in some cases hurt — student learning.

To address this need, J-PAL North America recently released a new publication summarizing 126 rigorous evaluations of different uses of education technology. Drawing primarily from research in developed countries, the publication looks at randomized evaluations and regression discontinuity designs across four broad categories: (1) access to technology, (2) computer-assisted learning or educational software, (3) technology-enabled nudges in education, and (4) online learning.

This growing body of evidence suggests some areas of promise and points to four key lessons on education technology.

First, supplying computers and internet alone generally do not improve students’ academic outcomes from kindergarten to 12th grade, but do increase computer usage and improve computer proficiency. Disparities in access to information and communication technologies can exacerbate existing educational inequalities. Students without access at school or at home may struggle to complete web-based assignments and may have a hard time developing digital literacy skills.

Broadly, programs to expand access to technology have been effective at increasing use of computers and improving computer skills. However, computer distribution and internet subsidy programs generally did not improve grades and test scores and in some cases led to adverse impacts on academic achievement. The limited rigorous evidence suggests that distributing computers may have a more direct impact on learning outcomes at the postsecondary level.

Second, educational software (often called “computer-assisted learning”) programs designed to help students develop particular skills have shown enormous promise in improving learning outcomes, particularly in math. Targeting instruction to meet students’ learning levels has been found to be effective in improving student learning, but large class sizes with a wide range of learning levels can make it hard for teachers to personalize instruction. Software has the potential to overcome traditional classroom constraints by customizing activities for each student. Educational software programs range from light-touch homework support tools to more intensive interventions that re-orient the classroom around the use of software.

Most educational software that have been rigorously evaluated help students practice particular skills through personalized tutoring approaches. Computer-assisted learning programs have shown enormous promise in improving academic achievement, especially in math. Of all 30 studies of computer-assisted learning programs, 20 reported statistically significant positive effects, 15 of which were focused on improving math outcomes.

Third, technology-based nudges — such as text message reminders — can have meaningful, if modest, impacts on a variety of education-related outcomes, often at extremely low costs. Low-cost interventions like text message reminders can successfully support students and families at each stage of schooling. Text messages with reminders, tips, goal-setting tools, and encouragement can increase parental engagement in learning activities, such as reading with their elementary-aged children.

Middle and high schools, meanwhile, can help parents support their children by providing families with information about how well their children are doing in school. Colleges can increase application and enrollment rates by leveraging technology to suggest specific action items, streamline financial aid procedures, and/or provide personalized support to high school students.

Online courses are developing a growing presence in education, but the limited experimental evidence suggests that online-only courses lower student academic achievement compared to in-person courses. In four of six studies that directly compared the impact of taking a course online versus in-person only, student performance was lower in the online courses. However, students performed similarly in courses with both in-person and online components compared to traditional face-to-face classes.

The new publication is meant to be a resource for decision-makers interested in learning which uses of education technology go beyond the hype to truly help students learn. At the same time, the publication outlines key open questions about the impacts of education technology, including questions relating to the long-term impacts of education technology and the impacts of education technology on different types of learners.

To help answer these questions, J-PAL North America’s Education, Technology, and Opportunity Initiative is working to build the evidence base on promising uses of education technology by partnering directly with education leaders.

Education leaders are invited to submit letters of interest to partner with J-PAL North America through its  Innovation Competition . Anyone interested in learning more about how to apply is encouraged to contact initiative manager Vincent Quan .

Share this news article on:

Related links.

• J-PAL Education, Technology, and Opportunity Initiative
• Education, Technology, and Opportunity Innovation Competition
• Article: "Will Technology Transform Education for the Better?"
• Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab
• Department of Economics

Related Topics

• School of Humanities Arts and Social Sciences
• Education, teaching, academics
• Technology and society
• Computer science and technology

Related Articles

J-PAL North America calls for proposals from education leaders

J-PAL North America’s Education, Technology, and Opportunity Innovation Competition announces inaugural partners

New learning opportunities for displaced persons

J-PAL North America announces new partnerships with three state and local governments

A new way to measure women’s and girls’ empowerment in impact evaluations

Previous item Next item

More MIT News

Robotic “SuperLimbs” could help moonwalkers recover from falls

Read full story →

3 Questions: Technology roadmapping in teaching and industry

Five MIT faculty elected to the National Academy of Sciences for 2024

Professor Emeritus Jerome Connor, pioneer in structural mechanics, dies at 91

MIT’s Master of Applied Science in Data, Economics, and Design of Policy program adds a public policy track

Astronomers spot a giant planet that is as light as cotton candy

• More news on MIT News homepage →

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA

• Map (opens in new window)
• Events (opens in new window)
• People (opens in new window)
• Careers (opens in new window)
• Accessibility
• Social Media Hub
• MIT on Facebook
• MIT on YouTube
• MIT on Instagram

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

9.3: What are disadvantages to technology in the classroom?

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 111208

• Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students
• Old Dominion University

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Though we generally see progress as a good thing, there are definite disadvantages of technology in the classroom. From distraction to reducing face time, Educational Technology (EdTech) isn’t a magic bullet for every situation. With some awareness, however, most disadvantages can be overcome, like some of the surprisingly old-school thinking that helps with tech disparity. 

Read on for some disadvantages of technology in the classroom (and potential solutions). 

From apps and e-textbooks to organizational platforms and “gamification,” there’s no shortage of technology in the classroom. But, while EdTech tools can make lessons more engaging and useful for students raised on technology, they can equally challenge teachers and lead to suboptimal outcomes for students. How can teachers get the most out of technology without sacrificing efficiency or engagement?

Here are 5 disadvantages of technology in the classroom and how to get past them for your students.

Distracting Students

Smartphones have a bad reputation in classrooms and there have been strong cases for banning them in schools. Research suggests that during class time, when smartphones 42% of the time that students spent on their smartphones in the classroom, it was to text, tweet, or otherwise engage in social media rather than the lesson.

However, bans on devices such as smartphones are unlikely to work as students will inevitably get around them. Also, such bans would be resented by students, who consider the use of technology to be a matter of personal autonomy that should only be regulated when it distracts other students. While teachers can help students learn better self-control methods to help them to regulate their own use of devices, research shows that better lesson plans that promote student engagement have less off-task use of technology.

Therefore, the onus is on instructors to create engaging, inspiring, and stimulating lesson plans that incorporate technology. For example, smartphones can access educational apps that promote learning as well as time management.

Many teachers incorporate digital platforms into lesson plans and find that using social media can actually keep students engaged and encourage classroom participation. Some teachers even create twitter hashtags to encourage comments.

Technology can be used to supplement lesson plans with digital materials, including video, news stories, online discussions, and to encourage participation. Get creative!

Requires Management and Training

The rise EdTech means that being effective in the classroom requires that teachers are effective on the screen and tech platform. Studies show that three-quarters of teachers say the internet and other digital tools have added new demands to their lives and have dramatically increased the range of content and skills about which they must be knowledgeable, with nearly half saying it has increased their workload.

New tech in the classroom also means needing IT professionals to help set it up, maintain it, and support teachers and students in its use. Clear and transparent communications among administration, faculty, and tech vendors that clarify how adopting a particular device, platform, or program will benefit students and teacher alike, can greatly enhance the use of technology in the classroom, to remove the suspicion that such technology is just “bells and whistles” with little actual value. Teachers also need access to training.

Moreover, institutions can help maximize their technical support staff by finding a less resource-intensive solution. 

Leads to Tech Disparity

Tech disparity refers to how much access students have to the necessary devices. The differences in access can be seen between school districts, with more affluent districts having greater resources, but it can also refer to differences among students in the same school, where students from wealthier families having greater access. A recent survey indicates that while 84 percent of American teens have a smartphone, the other 16 percent don’t. Reaching out to that 16 percent is the goal.

Tech disparity also refers to school policymaking and tech management. For example, the above survey also points out that while three-quarters of teachers working in wealthier districts felt that their schools provided adequate training, only half of the teachers in low-income areas agreed. Around 40 percent of teachers in economically disadvantaged areas saw their schools as behind the curve in technology advancement.

Teachers and administrators can take practical steps toward bridging the tech divide. Assuming unequal access to devices, schools can focus on technology that can be shared among classes, for example, shared tablet computers and school computer labs, not to mention school-based Wi-Fi.

Then, there is tech that can be used within the classroom, such as interactive whiteboards and projectors, as well as a digital curriculum that all students can access.

Bridging the tech divide is not easy, but for a fairer society with equal opportunity, it needs to be the focus of all efforts. (But a good start to fighting tech disparity is a computer lab in school.)

Nothing in this world is free, and buying cutting-edge electronics for a classroom is downright expensive. While there’s no way to avoid spending money modernizing a classroom, it is at least possible to maximize the total cost of ownership (TCO) by installing devices with longer lifespans and reduced maintenance. Tech with higher upfront costs might actually save the school money as it will face fewer issues and have less downtime while being easier to use. Schools need to assess TCO carefully before choosing purchasing tech.

Moreover, the use of technology should not be confined to the classroom and in fact can be used to streamline administrative systems, cutting costs, boosting productivity, and reducing time wasted on administrative tasks. Cloud computing, for example, offers substantial opportunities for schools to save money. Switching to a digital curriculum eliminates the need to continuously replace outdated textbooks.

Cloud-based computing also reduces the need to keep expensive hardware on-site, which can save in administrative costs, reduce payroll costs (fewer IT techs), and eliminates that 24-hour air-conditioned server room. Also, sharing materials online rather than printing them out saves costs of printers and ink – substantial costs for schools – not to mention all that hard work spent printing.

In short, while technology has obvious costs attached to it, viewed holistically, it can also provide substantial opportunities for cost reductions that more than compensate.

Less Face Time

No amount of technology in the classroom can replace talented, inspired teachers. As the adage goes, any teacher that can be replaced with a tech device probably deserves to be replaced.

Technology is not the solution to ensuring a healthy vigorous learning culture, it is simply a pedagogical tool that is only as valuable as the instructor who wields it. In fact, while billions of dollars are spent on EdTech, countries that don’t deploy tech often have better educational outcomes than countries that spend heavily.

Face to face interactions between teacher and student can help students not just acquire facts, but to understand, interpret, and apply these facts into useful and interesting knowledge. Through face to face interactions, teachers can help students build self-esteem and confidence and emotional maturity. Particularly in disadvantaged areas, teachers can provide a zone of comfort and security, and everywhere teachers can reduce the cyberbullying that so often accompanies social media.

There are lots of ways to synthesize tech into real-world activities, but sometimes teachers just need to switch off the tech and get down to personal interactions. For example, while so much information can be readily accessed on the Internet, so much of that information is dubious at best and sometimes downright malevolent. Teachers need to guide students on how best to identify useful sources and balance differing viewpoints.

Final Thoughts

Of course there will be challenges along the way as we adopt new technologies in education and improve them to suit student outcomes. But the advantages vastly outweigh the disadvantages of technology in the classroom. It is just always important to remain aware of where the latest tech is coming up short and to adjust course for the best possible learning outcome for the students.

There’s no reason to be afraid of EdTech, but nor should we rush blindly into digital transformation. After all, education is all about learning, and we should all be open to the ongoing process of improvement that comes with it.

https://www.viewsonic.com/library/ed...overcome-them/

Why technology in education must be on our terms

The relationship between technology and education has been a topic of interest for decades. While technology presents remarkable opportunities, it's essential to approach its integration thoughtfully and responsibly. The  2023 Global Education Monitoring (GEM) Report offers valuable insights into how technology has transformed education, its benefits, limitations, and the challenges associated with its implementation.  

The flagship UNESCO report highlights the lack of appropriate governance and regulation, especially amidst rapidly emerging generative artificial intelligence tools. It urges countries to urgently set their own terms for the way technology is designed and used in learning so that it never replaces in-person, teacher-led instruction, and supports quality education for all. Here are some insights from the report. 

What has been the evolution of technology in education?

While the use of technology in education dates back to the emergence of radio in the 1920s, it's the digital technology of the last 40 years that holds the greatest potential for educational transformation. This period has witnessed a revolution in content distribution, learning management systems, testing methods, and language instruction. From augmented reality to personalized tutoring, technology has reshaped our learning experiences. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence have amplified the capabilities of educational technology, even raising questions about the role of human interaction in education.

What is the impact of technology on learning?

Technology undeniably enhances learning in specific contexts. However, it is crucial to recognize that a one-size-fits-all approach does not apply. Digital technology's primary contributions to learning lie in its ability to personalize instruction and extend available learning time. Additionally, it fosters engagement by encouraging interaction and collaboration among learners. Notably, the report highlights that technology need not be cutting-edge to be effective. For instance, in China, providing high-quality lesson recordings to rural students resulted in a 32% improvement in outcomes and a 38% reduction in urban-rural learning gaps.

How do we evaluate technology's effectiveness in education?

The report emphasizes that evaluating technology's impact must focus on learning outcomes rather than the mere implementation of digital tools. Cases such as Peru, where laptops were distributed without integrating them into pedagogy, demonstrate that technology alone doesn't guarantee improved learning. Similarly, exclusive reliance on remote instruction in the United States widened learning gaps. The report further warns against inappropriate or excessive technology use, citing instances of negative links between excessive ICT use and student performance.

How reliable is the evidence?

The rapid evolution of technology often outpaces its evaluation. Evidence primarily comes from affluent countries, raising concerns about generalizability. The report reveals that a mere 7% of education technology companies in the United Kingdom conducted randomized controlled trials, reflecting a lack of rigorous evaluation. The challenge of isolating technology's impact from other factors complicates precise assessment. Additionally, the influence of technology companies on evidence generation poses credibility challenges.

What are the recommendations for effective integration of technology in education?

As artificial intelligence gains prominence, the report emphasizes that not all technological change equates to progress. The adoption of technology must be guided by a learner-centric, rights-based framework, ensuring appropriateness, equity, evidence-based decisions, and sustainability. The report presents a four-point compass for policy-makers:

• Look down: Evaluate the context and learning objectives to ensure technology choices strengthen education systems.
• Look back: Prioritize marginalized groups to ensure that technology benefits all learners and narrows educational disparities.
• Look up: Ensure evidence-based decision-making and consider hidden long-term costs before scaling up technology initiatives.
• Look forward: Align technology integration with sustainable development goals, considering financial implications, children's well-being, and environmental impact.

Technology in education: A tool on whose terms

From 4 to 7 September, UNESCO's  Digital Learning Week will gather policy-makers, practitioners, educators, private sector partners, researchers and development agencies to jointly explore how public digital learning platforms and generative AI can be steered to reinforce and enrich human-centered quality education.

• Download the  2023 GEM Report  
• Read the  press release  
• Join the conversation on social media via  #TechOnOurTerms
• More on the  Global Education Monitoring Report
• More on UNESCO's  Digital Learning Week

Related items

• Artificial intelligence
• Educational technology
• Digital learning week
• Topics: Display
• See more add

More on this subject

Article Media and Information Literacy 14 May 2024

Other recent articles

This site belongs to UNESCO's International Institute for Educational Planning

IIEP Learning Portal

Search form

• issue briefs
• Improve learning

Information and communication technology (ICT) in education

Information and communications technology (ict) can impact student learning when teachers are digitally literate and understand how to integrate it into curriculum..

Schools use a diverse set of ICT tools to communicate, create, disseminate, store, and manage information.(6) In some contexts, ICT has also become integral to the teaching-learning interaction, through such approaches as replacing chalkboards with interactive digital whiteboards, using students’ own smartphones or other devices for learning during class time, and the “flipped classroom” model where students watch lectures at home on the computer and use classroom time for more interactive exercises.

When teachers are digitally literate and trained to use ICT, these approaches can lead to higher order thinking skills, provide creative and individualized options for students to express their understandings, and leave students better prepared to deal with ongoing technological change in society and the workplace.(18)

ICT issues planners must consider include: considering the total cost-benefit equation, supplying and maintaining the requisite infrastructure, and ensuring investments are matched with teacher support and other policies aimed at effective ICT use.(16)

Issues and Discussion

Digital culture and digital literacy: Computer technologies and other aspects of digital culture have changed the ways people live, work, play, and learn, impacting the construction and distribution of knowledge and power around the world.(14) Graduates who are less familiar with digital culture are increasingly at a disadvantage in the national and global economy. Digital literacy—the skills of searching for, discerning, and producing information, as well as the critical use of new media for full participation in society—has thus become an important consideration for curriculum frameworks.(8)

In many countries, digital literacy is being built through the incorporation of information and communication technology (ICT) into schools. Some common educational applications of ICT include:

• One laptop per child: Less expensive laptops have been designed for use in school on a 1:1 basis with features like lower power consumption, a low cost operating system, and special re-programming and mesh network functions.(42) Despite efforts to reduce costs, however, providing one laptop per child may be too costly for some developing countries.(41)
• Tablets: Tablets are small personal computers with a touch screen, allowing input without a keyboard or mouse. Inexpensive learning software (“apps”) can be downloaded onto tablets, making them a versatile tool for learning.(7)(25) The most effective apps develop higher order thinking skills and provide creative and individualized options for students to express their understandings.(18)
• Interactive White Boards or Smart Boards : Interactive white boards allow projected computer images to be displayed, manipulated, dragged, clicked, or copied.(3) Simultaneously, handwritten notes can be taken on the board and saved for later use. Interactive white boards are associated with whole-class instruction rather than student-centred activities.(38) Student engagement is generally higher when ICT is available for student use throughout the classroom.(4)
• E-readers : E-readers are electronic devices that can hold hundreds of books in digital form, and they are increasingly utilized in the delivery of reading material.(19) Students—both skilled readers and reluctant readers—have had positive responses to the use of e-readers for independent reading.(22) Features of e-readers that can contribute to positive use include their portability and long battery life, response to text, and the ability to define unknown words.(22) Additionally, many classic book titles are available for free in e-book form.
• Flipped Classrooms: The flipped classroom model, involving lecture and practice at home via computer-guided instruction and interactive learning activities in class, can allow for an expanded curriculum. There is little investigation on the student learning outcomes of flipped classrooms.(5) Student perceptions about flipped classrooms are mixed, but generally positive, as they prefer the cooperative learning activities in class over lecture.(5)(35)

ICT and Teacher Professional Development: Teachers need specific professional development opportunities in order to increase their ability to use ICT for formative learning assessments, individualized instruction, accessing online resources, and for fostering student interaction and collaboration.(15) Such training in ICT should positively impact teachers’ general attitudes towards ICT in the classroom, but it should also provide specific guidance on ICT teaching and learning within each discipline. Without this support, teachers tend to use ICT for skill-based applications, limiting student academic thinking.(32) To sup­port teachers as they change their teaching, it is also essential for education managers, supervisors, teacher educators, and decision makers to be trained in ICT use.(11)

Ensuring benefits of ICT investments: To ensure the investments made in ICT benefit students, additional conditions must be met. School policies need to provide schools with the minimum acceptable infrastructure for ICT, including stable and affordable internet connectivity and security measures such as filters and site blockers. Teacher policies need to target basic ICT literacy skills, ICT use in pedagogical settings, and discipline-specific uses. (21) Successful imple­mentation of ICT requires integration of ICT in the curriculum. Finally, digital content needs to be developed in local languages and reflect local culture. (40) Ongoing technical, human, and organizational supports on all of these issues are needed to ensure access and effective use of ICT. (21)

Resource Constrained Contexts: The total cost of ICT ownership is considerable: training of teachers and administrators, connectivity, technical support, and software, amongst others. (42) When bringing ICT into classrooms, policies should use an incremental pathway, establishing infrastructure and bringing in sustainable and easily upgradable ICT. (16) Schools in some countries have begun allowing students to bring their own mobile technology (such as laptop, tablet, or smartphone) into class rather than providing such tools to all students—an approach called Bring Your Own Device. (1)(27)(34) However, not all families can afford devices or service plans for their children. (30) Schools must ensure all students have equitable access to ICT devices for learning.

Inclusiveness Considerations

Digital Divide: The digital divide refers to disparities of digital media and internet access both within and across countries, as well as the gap between people with and without the digital literacy and skills to utilize media and internet.(23)(26)(31) The digital divide both creates and reinforces socio-economic inequalities of the world’s poorest people. Policies need to intentionally bridge this divide to bring media, internet, and digital literacy to all students, not just those who are easiest to reach.

Minority language groups: Students whose mother tongue is different from the official language of instruction are less likely to have computers and internet connections at home than students from the majority. There is also less material available to them online in their own language, putting them at a disadvantage in comparison to their majority peers who gather information, prepare talks and papers, and communicate more using ICT. (39) Yet ICT tools can also help improve the skills of minority language students—especially in learning the official language of instruction—through features such as automatic speech recognition, the availability of authentic audio-visual materials, and chat functions. (2)(17)

Students with different styles of learning: ICT can provide diverse options for taking in and processing information, making sense of ideas, and expressing learning. Over 87% of students learn best through visual and tactile modalities, and ICT can help these students ‘experience’ the information instead of just reading and hearing it. (20)(37) Mobile devices can also offer programmes (“apps”) that provide extra support to students with special needs, with features such as simplified screens and instructions, consistent placement of menus and control features, graphics combined with text, audio feedback, ability to set pace and level of difficulty, appropriate and unambiguous feedback, and easy error correction. (24)(29)

Plans and policies

• India [ PDF ]
• Detroit, USA [ PDF ]
• Finland [ PDF ]
• Alberta Education. 2012. Bring your own device: A guide for schools . Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/admin/technology/research.aspx
• Alsied, S.M. and Pathan, M.M. 2015. ‘The use of computer technology in EFL classroom: Advantages and implications.’ International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies . 1 (1).
• BBC. N.D. ‘What is an interactive whiteboard?’ Retrieved from http://www.bbcactive.com/BBCActiveIdeasandResources/Whatisaninteractivewhiteboard.aspx
• Beilefeldt, T. 2012. ‘Guidance for technology decisions from classroom observation.’ Journal of Research on Technology in Education . 44 (3).
• Bishop, J.L. and Verleger, M.A. 2013. ‘The flipped classroom: A survey of the research.’ Presented at the 120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Atlanta, Georgia.
• Blurton, C. 2000. New Directions of ICT-Use in Education . United National Education Science and Culture Organization (UNESCO).
• Bryant, B.R., Ok, M., Kang, E.Y., Kim, M.K., Lang, R., Bryant, D.P. and Pfannestiel, K. 2015. ‘Performance of fourth-grade students with learning disabilities on multiplication facts comparing teacher-mediated and technology-mediated interventions: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Behavioral Education. 24.
• Buckingham, D. 2005. Educación en medios. Alfabetización, aprendizaje y cultura contemporánea, Barcelona, Paidós.
• Buckingham, D., Sefton-Green, J., and Scanlon, M. 2001. 'Selling the Digital Dream: Marketing Education Technologies to Teachers and Parents.'  ICT, Pedagogy, and the Curriculum: Subject to Change . London: Routledge.
• "Burk, R. 2001. 'E-book devices and the marketplace: In search of customers.' Library Hi Tech 19 (4)."
• Chapman, D., and Mählck, L. (Eds). 2004. Adapting technology for school improvement: a global perspective. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.
• Cheung, A.C.K and Slavin, R.E. 2012. ‘How features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis.’ Educational Research Review . 7.
• Cheung, A.C.K and Slavin, R.E. 2013. ‘The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis.’ Educational Research Review . 9.
• Deuze, M. 2006. 'Participation Remediation Bricolage - Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture.' The Information Society . 22 .
• Dunleavy, M., Dextert, S. and Heinecke, W.F. 2007. ‘What added value does a 1:1 student to laptop ratio bring to technology-supported teaching and learning?’ Journal of Computer Assisted Learning . 23.
• Enyedy, N. 2014. Personalized Instruction: New Interest, Old Rhetoric, Limited Results, and the Need for a New Direction for Computer-Mediated Learning . Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.
• Golonka, E.M., Bowles, A.R., Frank, V.M., Richardson, D.L. and Freynik, S. 2014. ‘Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness.’ Computer Assisted Language Learning . 27 (1).
• Goodwin, K. 2012. Use of Tablet Technology in the Classroom . Strathfield, New South Wales: NSW Curriculum and Learning Innovation Centre.
• Jung, J., Chan-Olmsted, S., Park, B., and Kim, Y. 2011. 'Factors affecting e-book reader awareness, interest, and intention to use.' New Media & Society . 14 (2)
• Kenney, L. 2011. ‘Elementary education, there’s an app for that. Communication technology in the elementary school classroom.’ The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications . 2 (1).
• Kopcha, T.J. 2012. ‘Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development.’ Computers and Education . 59.
• Miranda, T., Williams-Rossi, D., Johnson, K., and McKenzie, N. 2011. "Reluctant readers in middle school: Successful engagement with text using the e-reader.' International journal of applied science and technology . 1 (6).
• Moyo, L. 2009. 'The digital divide: scarcity, inequality and conflict.' Digital Cultures . New York: Open University Press.
• Newton, D.A. and Dell, A.G. 2011. ‘Mobile devices and students with disabilities: What do best practices tell us?’ Journal of Special Education Technology . 26 (3).
• Nirvi, S. (2011). ‘Special education pupils find learning tool in iPad applications.’ Education Week . 30 .
• Norris, P. 2001. Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide . Cambridge, USA: Cambridge University Press.
• Project Tomorrow. 2012. Learning in the 21st century: Mobile devices + social media = personalized learning . Washington, D.C.: Blackboard K-12.
• Riasati, M.J., Allahyar, N. and Tan, K.E. 2012. ‘Technology in language education: Benefits and barriers.’ Journal of Education and Practice . 3 (5).
• Rodriquez, C.D., Strnadova, I. and Cumming, T. 2013. ‘Using iPads with students with disabilities: Lessons learned from students, teachers, and parents.’ Intervention in School and Clinic . 49 (4).
• Sangani, K. 2013. 'BYOD to the classroom.' Engineering & Technology . 3 (8).
• Servon, L. 2002. Redefining the Digital Divide: Technology, Community and Public Policy . Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
• Smeets, E. 2005. ‘Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education?’ Computers and Education. 44 .
• Smith, G.E. and Thorne, S. 2007. Differentiating Instruction with Technology in K-5 Classrooms . Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
• Song, Y. 2014. '"Bring your own device (BYOD)" for seamless science inquiry in a primary school.' Computers & Education. 74 .
• Strayer, J.F. 2012. ‘How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation.’ Learning Environment Research. 15.
• Tamim, R.M., Bernard, R.M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P.C. and Schmid, R.F. 2011. ‘What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research. 81 (1).
• Tileston, D.W. 2003. What Every Teacher Should Know about Media and Technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
• Turel, Y.K. and Johnson, T.E. 2012. ‘Teachers’ belief and use of interactive whiteboards for teaching and learning.’ Educational Technology and Society . 15(1).
• Volman, M., van Eck, E., Heemskerk, I. and Kuiper, E. 2005. ‘New technologies, new differences. Gender and ethnic differences in pupils’ use of ICT in primary and secondary education.’ Computers and Education. 45 .
• Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Cox, M., Knezek, D. and ten Brummelhuis, A. 2013. ‘Under which conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? A call to action.’ Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 29 (1).
• Warschauer, M. and Ames, M. 2010. ‘Can one laptop per child save the world’s poor?’ Journal of International Affairs. 64 (1).
• Zuker, A.A. and Light, D. 2009. ‘Laptop programs for students.’ Science. 323 (5910).

Related information

• Information and communication technologies (ICT)

REALIZING THE PROMISE:

Leading up to the 75th anniversary of the UN General Assembly, this “Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all?” publication kicks off the Center for Universal Education’s first playbook in a series to help improve education around the world.

It is intended as an evidence-based tool for ministries of education, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, to adopt and more successfully invest in education technology.

While there is no single education initiative that will achieve the same results everywhere—as school systems differ in learners and educators, as well as in the availability and quality of materials and technologies—an important first step is understanding how technology is used given specific local contexts and needs.

The surveys in this playbook are designed to be adapted to collect this information from educators, learners, and school leaders and guide decisionmakers in expanding the use of technology.  

Introduction

While technology has disrupted most sectors of the economy and changed how we communicate, access information, work, and even play, its impact on schools, teaching, and learning has been much more limited. We believe that this limited impact is primarily due to technology being been used to replace analog tools, without much consideration given to playing to technology’s comparative advantages. These comparative advantages, relative to traditional “chalk-and-talk” classroom instruction, include helping to scale up standardized instruction, facilitate differentiated instruction, expand opportunities for practice, and increase student engagement. When schools use technology to enhance the work of educators and to improve the quality and quantity of educational content, learners will thrive.

Further, COVID-19 has laid bare that, in today’s environment where pandemics and the effects of climate change are likely to occur, schools cannot always provide in-person education—making the case for investing in education technology.

Here we argue for a simple yet surprisingly rare approach to education technology that seeks to:

• Understand the needs, infrastructure, and capacity of a school system—the diagnosis;
• Survey the best available evidence on interventions that match those conditions—the evidence; and
• Closely monitor the results of innovations before they are scaled up—the prognosis.

RELATED CONTENT

Podcast: How education technology can improve learning for all students

To make ed tech work, set clear goals, review the evidence, and pilot before you scale

The framework.

Our approach builds on a simple yet intuitive theoretical framework created two decades ago by two of the most prominent education researchers in the United States, David K. Cohen and Deborah Loewenberg Ball. They argue that what matters most to improve learning is the interactions among educators and learners around educational materials. We believe that the failed school-improvement efforts in the U.S. that motivated Cohen and Ball’s framework resemble the ed-tech reforms in much of the developing world to date in the lack of clarity improving the interactions between educators, learners, and the educational material. We build on their framework by adding parents as key agents that mediate the relationships between learners and educators and the material (Figure 1).

Figure 1: The instructional core

Adapted from Cohen and Ball (1999)

As the figure above suggests, ed-tech interventions can affect the instructional core in a myriad of ways. Yet, just because technology can do something, it does not mean it should. School systems in developing countries differ along many dimensions and each system is likely to have different needs for ed-tech interventions, as well as different infrastructure and capacity to enact such interventions.

The diagnosis:

How can school systems assess their needs and preparedness.

A useful first step for any school system to determine whether it should invest in education technology is to diagnose its:

• Specific needs to improve student learning (e.g., raising the average level of achievement, remediating gaps among low performers, and challenging high performers to develop higher-order skills);
• Infrastructure to adopt technology-enabled solutions (e.g., electricity connection, availability of space and outlets, stock of computers, and Internet connectivity at school and at learners’ homes); and
• Capacity to integrate technology in the instructional process (e.g., learners’ and educators’ level of familiarity and comfort with hardware and software, their beliefs about the level of usefulness of technology for learning purposes, and their current uses of such technology).

Before engaging in any new data collection exercise, school systems should take full advantage of existing administrative data that could shed light on these three main questions. This could be in the form of internal evaluations but also international learner assessments, such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and/or the Progress in International Literacy Study (PIRLS), and the Teaching and Learning International Study (TALIS). But if school systems lack information on their preparedness for ed-tech reforms or if they seek to complement existing data with a richer set of indicators, we developed a set of surveys for learners, educators, and school leaders. Download the full report to see how we map out the main aspects covered by these surveys, in hopes of highlighting how they could be used to inform decisions around the adoption of ed-tech interventions.

The evidence:

How can school systems identify promising ed-tech interventions.

There is no single “ed-tech” initiative that will achieve the same results everywhere, simply because school systems differ in learners and educators, as well as in the availability and quality of materials and technologies. Instead, to realize the potential of education technology to accelerate student learning, decisionmakers should focus on four potential uses of technology that play to its comparative advantages and complement the work of educators to accelerate student learning (Figure 2). These comparative advantages include:

• Scaling up quality instruction, such as through prerecorded quality lessons.
• Facilitating differentiated instruction, through, for example, computer-adaptive learning and live one-on-one tutoring.
• Expanding opportunities to practice.
• Increasing learner engagement through videos and games.

Figure 2: Comparative advantages of technology

Here we review the evidence on ed-tech interventions from 37 studies in 20 countries*, organizing them by comparative advantage. It’s important to note that ours is not the only way to classify these interventions (e.g., video tutorials could be considered as a strategy to scale up instruction or increase learner engagement), but we believe it may be useful to highlight the needs that they could address and why technology is well positioned to do so.

When discussing specific studies, we report the magnitude of the effects of interventions using standard deviations (SDs). SDs are a widely used metric in research to express the effect of a program or policy with respect to a business-as-usual condition (e.g., test scores). There are several ways to make sense of them. One is to categorize the magnitude of the effects based on the results of impact evaluations. In developing countries, effects below 0.1 SDs are considered to be small, effects between 0.1 and 0.2 SDs are medium, and those above 0.2 SDs are large (for reviews that estimate the average effect of groups of interventions, called “meta analyses,” see e.g., Conn, 2017; Kremer, Brannen, & Glennerster, 2013; McEwan, 2014; Snilstveit et al., 2015; Evans & Yuan, 2020.)

*In surveying the evidence, we began by compiling studies from prior general and ed-tech specific evidence reviews that some of us have written and from ed-tech reviews conducted by others. Then, we tracked the studies cited by the ones we had previously read and reviewed those, as well. In identifying studies for inclusion, we focused on experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations of education technology interventions from pre-school to secondary school in low- and middle-income countries that were released between 2000 and 2020. We only included interventions that sought to improve student learning directly (i.e., students’ interaction with the material), as opposed to interventions that have impacted achievement indirectly, by reducing teacher absence or increasing parental engagement. This process yielded 37 studies in 20 countries (see the full list of studies in Appendix B).

Scaling up standardized instruction

One of the ways in which technology may improve the quality of education is through its capacity to deliver standardized quality content at scale. This feature of technology may be particularly useful in three types of settings: (a) those in “hard-to-staff” schools (i.e., schools that struggle to recruit educators with the requisite training and experience—typically, in rural and/or remote areas) (see, e.g., Urquiola & Vegas, 2005); (b) those in which many educators are frequently absent from school (e.g., Chaudhury, Hammer, Kremer, Muralidharan, & Rogers, 2006; Muralidharan, Das, Holla, & Mohpal, 2017); and/or (c) those in which educators have low levels of pedagogical and subject matter expertise (e.g., Bietenbeck, Piopiunik, & Wiederhold, 2018; Bold et al., 2017; Metzler & Woessmann, 2012; Santibañez, 2006) and do not have opportunities to observe and receive feedback (e.g., Bruns, Costa, & Cunha, 2018; Cilliers, Fleisch, Prinsloo, & Taylor, 2018). Technology could address this problem by: (a) disseminating lessons delivered by qualified educators to a large number of learners (e.g., through prerecorded or live lessons); (b) enabling distance education (e.g., for learners in remote areas and/or during periods of school closures); and (c) distributing hardware preloaded with educational materials.

Prerecorded lessons

Technology seems to be well placed to amplify the impact of effective educators by disseminating their lessons. Evidence on the impact of prerecorded lessons is encouraging, but not conclusive. Some initiatives that have used short instructional videos to complement regular instruction, in conjunction with other learning materials, have raised student learning on independent assessments. For example, Beg et al. (2020) evaluated an initiative in Punjab, Pakistan in which grade 8 classrooms received an intervention that included short videos to substitute live instruction, quizzes for learners to practice the material from every lesson, tablets for educators to learn the material and follow the lesson, and LED screens to project the videos onto a classroom screen. After six months, the intervention improved the performance of learners on independent tests of math and science by 0.19 and 0.24 SDs, respectively but had no discernible effect on the math and science section of Punjab’s high-stakes exams.

One study suggests that approaches that are far less technologically sophisticated can also improve learning outcomes—especially, if the business-as-usual instruction is of low quality. For example, Naslund-Hadley, Parker, and Hernandez-Agramonte (2014) evaluated a preschool math program in Cordillera, Paraguay that used audio segments and written materials four days per week for an hour per day during the school day. After five months, the intervention improved math scores by 0.16 SDs, narrowing gaps between low- and high-achieving learners, and between those with and without educators with formal training in early childhood education.

Yet, the integration of prerecorded material into regular instruction has not always been successful. For example, de Barros (2020) evaluated an intervention that combined instructional videos for math and science with infrastructure upgrades (e.g., two “smart” classrooms, two TVs, and two tablets), printed workbooks for students, and in-service training for educators of learners in grades 9 and 10 in Haryana, India (all materials were mapped onto the official curriculum). After 11 months, the intervention negatively impacted math achievement (by 0.08 SDs) and had no effect on science (with respect to business as usual classes). It reduced the share of lesson time that educators devoted to instruction and negatively impacted an index of instructional quality. Likewise, Seo (2017) evaluated several combinations of infrastructure (solar lights and TVs) and prerecorded videos (in English and/or bilingual) for grade 11 students in northern Tanzania and found that none of the variants improved student learning, even when the videos were used. The study reports effects from the infrastructure component across variants, but as others have noted (Muralidharan, Romero, & Wüthrich, 2019), this approach to estimating impact is problematic.

A very similar intervention delivered after school hours, however, had sizeable effects on learners’ basic skills. Chiplunkar, Dhar, and Nagesh (2020) evaluated an initiative in Chennai (the capital city of the state of Tamil Nadu, India) delivered by the same organization as above that combined short videos that explained key concepts in math and science with worksheets, facilitator-led instruction, small groups for peer-to-peer learning, and occasional career counseling and guidance for grade 9 students. These lessons took place after school for one hour, five times a week. After 10 months, it had large effects on learners’ achievement as measured by tests of basic skills in math and reading, but no effect on a standardized high-stakes test in grade 10 or socio-emotional skills (e.g., teamwork, decisionmaking, and communication).

Drawing general lessons from this body of research is challenging for at least two reasons. First, all of the studies above have evaluated the impact of prerecorded lessons combined with several other components (e.g., hardware, print materials, or other activities). Therefore, it is possible that the effects found are due to these additional components, rather than to the recordings themselves, or to the interaction between the two (see Muralidharan, 2017 for a discussion of the challenges of interpreting “bundled” interventions). Second, while these studies evaluate some type of prerecorded lessons, none examines the content of such lessons. Thus, it seems entirely plausible that the direction and magnitude of the effects depends largely on the quality of the recordings (e.g., the expertise of the educator recording it, the amount of preparation that went into planning the recording, and its alignment with best teaching practices).

These studies also raise three important questions worth exploring in future research. One of them is why none of the interventions discussed above had effects on high-stakes exams, even if their materials are typically mapped onto the official curriculum. It is possible that the official curricula are simply too challenging for learners in these settings, who are several grade levels behind expectations and who often need to reinforce basic skills (see Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). Another question is whether these interventions have long-term effects on teaching practices. It seems plausible that, if these interventions are deployed in contexts with low teaching quality, educators may learn something from watching the videos or listening to the recordings with learners. Yet another question is whether these interventions make it easier for schools to deliver instruction to learners whose native language is other than the official medium of instruction.

Distance education

Technology can also allow learners living in remote areas to access education. The evidence on these initiatives is encouraging. For example, Johnston and Ksoll (2017) evaluated a program that broadcasted live instruction via satellite to rural primary school students in the Volta and Greater Accra regions of Ghana. For this purpose, the program also equipped classrooms with the technology needed to connect to a studio in Accra, including solar panels, a satellite modem, a projector, a webcam, microphones, and a computer with interactive software. After two years, the intervention improved the numeracy scores of students in grades 2 through 4, and some foundational literacy tasks, but it had no effect on attendance or classroom time devoted to instruction, as captured by school visits. The authors interpreted these results as suggesting that the gains in achievement may be due to improving the quality of instruction that children received (as opposed to increased instructional time). Naik, Chitre, Bhalla, and Rajan (2019) evaluated a similar program in the Indian state of Karnataka and also found positive effects on learning outcomes, but it is not clear whether those effects are due to the program or due to differences in the groups of students they compared to estimate the impact of the initiative.

In one context (Mexico), this type of distance education had positive long-term effects. Navarro-Sola (2019) took advantage of the staggered rollout of the telesecundarias (i.e., middle schools with lessons broadcasted through satellite TV) in 1968 to estimate its impact. The policy had short-term effects on students’ enrollment in school: For every telesecundaria per 50 children, 10 students enrolled in middle school and two pursued further education. It also had a long-term influence on the educational and employment trajectory of its graduates. Each additional year of education induced by the policy increased average income by nearly 18 percent. This effect was attributable to more graduates entering the labor force and shifting from agriculture and the informal sector. Similarly, Fabregas (2019) leveraged a later expansion of this policy in 1993 and found that each additional telesecundaria per 1,000 adolescents led to an average increase of 0.2 years of education, and a decline in fertility for women, but no conclusive evidence of long-term effects on labor market outcomes.

It is crucial to interpret these results keeping in mind the settings where the interventions were implemented. As we mention above, part of the reason why they have proven effective is that the “counterfactual” conditions for learning (i.e., what would have happened to learners in the absence of such programs) was either to not have access to schooling or to be exposed to low-quality instruction. School systems interested in taking up similar interventions should assess the extent to which their learners (or parts of their learner population) find themselves in similar conditions to the subjects of the studies above. This illustrates the importance of assessing the needs of a system before reviewing the evidence.

Preloaded hardware

Technology also seems well positioned to disseminate educational materials. Specifically, hardware (e.g., desktop computers, laptops, or tablets) could also help deliver educational software (e.g., word processing, reference texts, and/or games). In theory, these materials could not only undergo a quality assurance review (e.g., by curriculum specialists and educators), but also draw on the interactions with learners for adjustments (e.g., identifying areas needing reinforcement) and enable interactions between learners and educators.

In practice, however, most initiatives that have provided learners with free computers, laptops, and netbooks do not leverage any of the opportunities mentioned above. Instead, they install a standard set of educational materials and hope that learners find them helpful enough to take them up on their own. Students rarely do so, and instead use the laptops for recreational purposes—often, to the detriment of their learning (see, e.g., Malamud & Pop-Eleches, 2011). In fact, free netbook initiatives have not only consistently failed to improve academic achievement in math or language (e.g., Cristia et al., 2017), but they have had no impact on learners’ general computer skills (e.g., Beuermann et al., 2015). Some of these initiatives have had small impacts on cognitive skills, but the mechanisms through which those effects occurred remains unclear.

To our knowledge, the only successful deployment of a free laptop initiative was one in which a team of researchers equipped the computers with remedial software. Mo et al. (2013) evaluated a version of the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) program for grade 3 students in migrant schools in Beijing, China in which the laptops were loaded with a remedial software mapped onto the national curriculum for math (similar to the software products that we discuss under “practice exercises” below). After nine months, the program improved math achievement by 0.17 SDs and computer skills by 0.33 SDs. If a school system decides to invest in free laptops, this study suggests that the quality of the software on the laptops is crucial.

To date, however, the evidence suggests that children do not learn more from interacting with laptops than they do from textbooks. For example, Bando, Gallego, Gertler, and Romero (2016) compared the effect of free laptop and textbook provision in 271 elementary schools in disadvantaged areas of Honduras. After seven months, students in grades 3 and 6 who had received the laptops performed on par with those who had received the textbooks in math and language. Further, even if textbooks essentially become obsolete at the end of each school year, whereas laptops can be reloaded with new materials for each year, the costs of laptop provision (not just the hardware, but also the technical assistance, Internet, and training associated with it) are not yet low enough to make them a more cost-effective way of delivering content to learners.

Evidence on the provision of tablets equipped with software is encouraging but limited. For example, de Hoop et al. (2020) evaluated a composite intervention for first grade students in Zambia’s Eastern Province that combined infrastructure (electricity via solar power), hardware (projectors and tablets), and educational materials (lesson plans for educators and interactive lessons for learners, both loaded onto the tablets and mapped onto the official Zambian curriculum). After 14 months, the intervention had improved student early-grade reading by 0.4 SDs, oral vocabulary scores by 0.25 SDs, and early-grade math by 0.22 SDs. It also improved students’ achievement by 0.16 on a locally developed assessment. The multifaceted nature of the program, however, makes it challenging to identify the components that are driving the positive effects. Pitchford (2015) evaluated an intervention that provided tablets equipped with educational “apps,” to be used for 30 minutes per day for two months to develop early math skills among students in grades 1 through 3 in Lilongwe, Malawi. The evaluation found positive impacts in math achievement, but the main study limitation is that it was conducted in a single school.

Facilitating differentiated instruction

Another way in which technology may improve educational outcomes is by facilitating the delivery of differentiated or individualized instruction. Most developing countries massively expanded access to schooling in recent decades by building new schools and making education more affordable, both by defraying direct costs, as well as compensating for opportunity costs (Duflo, 2001; World Bank, 2018). These initiatives have not only rapidly increased the number of learners enrolled in school, but have also increased the variability in learner’ preparation for schooling. Consequently, a large number of learners perform well below grade-based curricular expectations (see, e.g., Duflo, Dupas, & Kremer, 2011; Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). These learners are unlikely to get much from “one-size-fits-all” instruction, in which a single educator delivers instruction deemed appropriate for the middle (or top) of the achievement distribution (Banerjee & Duflo, 2011). Technology could potentially help these learners by providing them with: (a) instruction and opportunities for practice that adjust to the level and pace of preparation of each individual (known as “computer-adaptive learning” (CAL)); or (b) live, one-on-one tutoring.

Computer-adaptive learning

One of the main comparative advantages of technology is its ability to diagnose students’ initial learning levels and assign students to instruction and exercises of appropriate difficulty. No individual educator—no matter how talented—can be expected to provide individualized instruction to all learners in his/her class simultaneously . In this respect, technology is uniquely positioned to complement traditional teaching. This use of technology could help learners master basic skills and help them get more out of schooling.

Although many software products evaluated in recent years have been categorized as CAL, many rely on a relatively coarse level of differentiation at an initial stage (e.g., a diagnostic test) without further differentiation. We discuss these initiatives under the category of “increasing opportunities for practice” below. CAL initiatives complement an initial diagnostic with dynamic adaptation (i.e., at each response or set of responses from learners) to adjust both the initial level of difficulty and rate at which it increases or decreases, depending on whether learners’ responses are correct or incorrect.

Existing evidence on this specific type of programs is highly promising. Most famously, Banerjee et al. (2007) evaluated CAL software in Vadodara, in the Indian state of Gujarat, in which grade 4 students were offered two hours of shared computer time per week before and after school, during which they played games that involved solving math problems. The level of difficulty of such problems adjusted based on students’ answers. This program improved math achievement by 0.35 and 0.47 SDs after one and two years of implementation, respectively. Consistent with the promise of personalized learning, the software improved achievement for all students. In fact, one year after the end of the program, students assigned to the program still performed 0.1 SDs better than those assigned to a business as usual condition. More recently, Muralidharan, et al. (2019) evaluated a “blended learning” initiative in which students in grades 4 through 9 in Delhi, India received 45 minutes of interaction with CAL software for math and language, and 45 minutes of small group instruction before or after going to school. After only 4.5 months, the program improved achievement by 0.37 SDs in math and 0.23 SDs in Hindi. While all learners benefited from the program in absolute terms, the lowest performing learners benefited the most in relative terms, since they were learning very little in school.

We see two important limitations from this body of research. First, to our knowledge, none of these initiatives has been evaluated when implemented during the school day. Therefore, it is not possible to distinguish the effect of the adaptive software from that of additional instructional time. Second, given that most of these programs were facilitated by local instructors, attempts to distinguish the effect of the software from that of the instructors has been mostly based on noncausal evidence. A frontier challenge in this body of research is to understand whether CAL software can increase the effectiveness of school-based instruction by substituting part of the regularly scheduled time for math and language instruction.

Live one-on-one tutoring

Recent improvements in the speed and quality of videoconferencing, as well as in the connectivity of remote areas, have enabled yet another way in which technology can help personalization: live (i.e., real-time) one-on-one tutoring. While the evidence on in-person tutoring is scarce in developing countries, existing studies suggest that this approach works best when it is used to personalize instruction (see, e.g., Banerjee et al., 2007; Banerji, Berry, & Shotland, 2015; Cabezas, Cuesta, & Gallego, 2011).

There are almost no studies on the impact of online tutoring—possibly, due to the lack of hardware and Internet connectivity in low- and middle-income countries. One exception is Chemin and Oledan (2020)’s recent evaluation of an online tutoring program for grade 6 students in Kianyaga, Kenya to learn English from volunteers from a Canadian university via Skype ( videoconferencing software) for one hour per week after school. After 10 months, program beneficiaries performed 0.22 SDs better in a test of oral comprehension, improved their comfort using technology for learning, and became more willing to engage in cross-cultural communication. Importantly, while the tutoring sessions used the official English textbooks and sought in part to help learners with their homework, tutors were trained on several strategies to teach to each learner’s individual level of preparation, focusing on basic skills if necessary. To our knowledge, similar initiatives within a country have not yet been rigorously evaluated.

Expanding opportunities for practice

A third way in which technology may improve the quality of education is by providing learners with additional opportunities for practice. In many developing countries, lesson time is primarily devoted to lectures, in which the educator explains the topic and the learners passively copy explanations from the blackboard. This setup leaves little time for in-class practice. Consequently, learners who did not understand the explanation of the material during lecture struggle when they have to solve homework assignments on their own. Technology could potentially address this problem by allowing learners to review topics at their own pace.

Practice exercises

Technology can help learners get more out of traditional instruction by providing them with opportunities to implement what they learn in class. This approach could, in theory, allow some learners to anchor their understanding of the material through trial and error (i.e., by realizing what they may not have understood correctly during lecture and by getting better acquainted with special cases not covered in-depth in class).

Existing evidence on practice exercises reflects both the promise and the limitations of this use of technology in developing countries. For example, Lai et al. (2013) evaluated a program in Shaanxi, China where students in grades 3 and 5 were required to attend two 40-minute remedial sessions per week in which they first watched videos that reviewed the material that had been introduced in their math lessons that week and then played games to practice the skills introduced in the video. After four months, the intervention improved math achievement by 0.12 SDs. Many other evaluations of comparable interventions have found similar small-to-moderate results (see, e.g., Lai, Luo, Zhang, Huang, & Rozelle, 2015; Lai et al., 2012; Mo et al., 2015; Pitchford, 2015). These effects, however, have been consistently smaller than those of initiatives that adjust the difficulty of the material based on students’ performance (e.g., Banerjee et al., 2007; Muralidharan, et al., 2019). We hypothesize that these programs do little for learners who perform several grade levels behind curricular expectations, and who would benefit more from a review of foundational concepts from earlier grades.

We see two important limitations from this research. First, most initiatives that have been evaluated thus far combine instructional videos with practice exercises, so it is hard to know whether their effects are driven by the former or the latter. In fact, the program in China described above allowed learners to ask their peers whenever they did not understand a difficult concept, so it potentially also captured the effect of peer-to-peer collaboration. To our knowledge, no studies have addressed this gap in the evidence.

Second, most of these programs are implemented before or after school, so we cannot distinguish the effect of additional instructional time from that of the actual opportunity for practice. The importance of this question was first highlighted by Linden (2008), who compared two delivery mechanisms for game-based remedial math software for students in grades 2 and 3 in a network of schools run by a nonprofit organization in Gujarat, India: one in which students interacted with the software during the school day and another one in which students interacted with the software before or after school (in both cases, for three hours per day). After a year, the first version of the program had negatively impacted students’ math achievement by 0.57 SDs and the second one had a null effect. This study suggested that computer-assisted learning is a poor substitute for regular instruction when it is of high quality, as was the case in this well-functioning private network of schools.

In recent years, several studies have sought to remedy this shortcoming. Mo et al. (2014) were among the first to evaluate practice exercises delivered during the school day. They evaluated an initiative in Shaanxi, China in which students in grades 3 and 5 were required to interact with the software similar to the one in Lai et al. (2013) for two 40-minute sessions per week. The main limitation of this study, however, is that the program was delivered during regularly scheduled computer lessons, so it could not determine the impact of substituting regular math instruction. Similarly, Mo et al. (2020) evaluated a self-paced and a teacher-directed version of a similar program for English for grade 5 students in Qinghai, China. Yet, the key shortcoming of this study is that the teacher-directed version added several components that may also influence achievement, such as increased opportunities for teachers to provide students with personalized assistance when they struggled with the material. Ma, Fairlie, Loyalka, and Rozelle (2020) compared the effectiveness of additional time-delivered remedial instruction for students in grades 4 to 6 in Shaanxi, China through either computer-assisted software or using workbooks. This study indicates whether additional instructional time is more effective when using technology, but it does not address the question of whether school systems may improve the productivity of instructional time during the school day by substituting educator-led with computer-assisted instruction.

Increasing learner engagement

Another way in which technology may improve education is by increasing learners’ engagement with the material. In many school systems, regular “chalk and talk” instruction prioritizes time for educators’ exposition over opportunities for learners to ask clarifying questions and/or contribute to class discussions. This, combined with the fact that many developing-country classrooms include a very large number of learners (see, e.g., Angrist & Lavy, 1999; Duflo, Dupas, & Kremer, 2015), may partially explain why the majority of those students are several grade levels behind curricular expectations (e.g., Muralidharan, et al., 2019; Muralidharan & Zieleniak, 2014; Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). Technology could potentially address these challenges by: (a) using video tutorials for self-paced learning and (b) presenting exercises as games and/or gamifying practice.

Video tutorials

Technology can potentially increase learner effort and understanding of the material by finding new and more engaging ways to deliver it. Video tutorials designed for self-paced learning—as opposed to videos for whole class instruction, which we discuss under the category of “prerecorded lessons” above—can increase learner effort in multiple ways, including: allowing learners to focus on topics with which they need more help, letting them correct errors and misconceptions on their own, and making the material appealing through visual aids. They can increase understanding by breaking the material into smaller units and tackling common misconceptions.

In spite of the popularity of instructional videos, there is relatively little evidence on their effectiveness. Yet, two recent evaluations of different versions of the Khan Academy portal, which mainly relies on instructional videos, offer some insight into their impact. First, Ferman, Finamor, and Lima (2019) evaluated an initiative in 157 public primary and middle schools in five cities in Brazil in which the teachers of students in grades 5 and 9 were taken to the computer lab to learn math from the platform for 50 minutes per week. The authors found that, while the intervention slightly improved learners’ attitudes toward math, these changes did not translate into better performance in this subject. The authors hypothesized that this could be due to the reduction of teacher-led math instruction.

More recently, Büchel, Jakob, Kühnhanss, Steffen, and Brunetti (2020) evaluated an after-school, offline delivery of the Khan Academy portal in grades 3 through 6 in 302 primary schools in Morazán, El Salvador. Students in this study received 90 minutes per week of additional math instruction (effectively nearly doubling total math instruction per week) through teacher-led regular lessons, teacher-assisted Khan Academy lessons, or similar lessons assisted by technical supervisors with no content expertise. (Importantly, the first group provided differentiated instruction, which is not the norm in Salvadorian schools). All three groups outperformed both schools without any additional lessons and classrooms without additional lessons in the same schools as the program. The teacher-assisted Khan Academy lessons performed 0.24 SDs better, the supervisor-led lessons 0.22 SDs better, and the teacher-led regular lessons 0.15 SDs better, but the authors could not determine whether the effects across versions were different.

Together, these studies suggest that instructional videos work best when provided as a complement to, rather than as a substitute for, regular instruction. Yet, the main limitation of these studies is the multifaceted nature of the Khan Academy portal, which also includes other components found to positively improve learner achievement, such as differentiated instruction by students’ learning levels. While the software does not provide the type of personalization discussed above, learners are asked to take a placement test and, based on their score, educators assign them different work. Therefore, it is not clear from these studies whether the effects from Khan Academy are driven by its instructional videos or to the software’s ability to provide differentiated activities when combined with placement tests.

Games and gamification

Technology can also increase learner engagement by presenting exercises as games and/or by encouraging learner to play and compete with others (e.g., using leaderboards and rewards)—an approach known as “gamification.” Both approaches can increase learner motivation and effort by presenting learners with entertaining opportunities for practice and by leveraging peers as commitment devices.

There are very few studies on the effects of games and gamification in low- and middle-income countries. Recently, Araya, Arias Ortiz, Bottan, and Cristia (2019) evaluated an initiative in which grade 4 students in Santiago, Chile were required to participate in two 90-minute sessions per week during the school day with instructional math software featuring individual and group competitions (e.g., tracking each learner’s standing in his/her class and tournaments between sections). After nine months, the program led to improvements of 0.27 SDs in the national student assessment in math (it had no spillover effects on reading). However, it had mixed effects on non-academic outcomes. Specifically, the program increased learners’ willingness to use computers to learn math, but, at the same time, increased their anxiety toward math and negatively impacted learners’ willingness to collaborate with peers. Finally, given that one of the weekly sessions replaced regular math instruction and the other one represented additional math instructional time, it is not clear whether the academic effects of the program are driven by the software or the additional time devoted to learning math.

The prognosis:

How can school systems adopt interventions that match their needs.

Here are five specific and sequential guidelines for decisionmakers to realize the potential of education technology to accelerate student learning.

1. Take stock of how your current schools, educators, and learners are engaging with technology .

Carry out a short in-school survey to understand the current practices and potential barriers to adoption of technology (we have included suggested survey instruments in the Appendices); use this information in your decisionmaking process. For example, we learned from conversations with current and former ministers of education from various developing regions that a common limitation to technology use is regulations that hold school leaders accountable for damages to or losses of devices. Another common barrier is lack of access to electricity and Internet, or even the availability of sufficient outlets for charging devices in classrooms. Understanding basic infrastructure and regulatory limitations to the use of education technology is a first necessary step. But addressing these limitations will not guarantee that introducing or expanding technology use will accelerate learning. The next steps are thus necessary.

“In Africa, the biggest limit is connectivity. Fiber is expensive, and we don’t have it everywhere. The continent is creating a digital divide between cities, where there is fiber, and the rural areas.  The [Ghanaian] administration put in schools offline/online technologies with books, assessment tools, and open source materials. In deploying this, we are finding that again, teachers are unfamiliar with it. And existing policies prohibit students to bring their own tablets or cell phones. The easiest way to do it would have been to let everyone bring their own device. But policies are against it.” H.E. Matthew Prempeh, Minister of Education of Ghana, on the need to understand the local context.

2. Consider how the introduction of technology may affect the interactions among learners, educators, and content .

Our review of the evidence indicates that technology may accelerate student learning when it is used to scale up access to quality content, facilitate differentiated instruction, increase opportunities for practice, or when it increases learner engagement. For example, will adding electronic whiteboards to classrooms facilitate access to more quality content or differentiated instruction? Or will these expensive boards be used in the same way as the old chalkboards? Will providing one device (laptop or tablet) to each learner facilitate access to more and better content, or offer students more opportunities to practice and learn? Solely introducing technology in classrooms without additional changes is unlikely to lead to improved learning and may be quite costly. If you cannot clearly identify how the interactions among the three key components of the instructional core (educators, learners, and content) may change after the introduction of technology, then it is probably not a good idea to make the investment. See Appendix A for guidance on the types of questions to ask.

3. Once decisionmakers have a clear idea of how education technology can help accelerate student learning in a specific context, it is important to define clear objectives and goals and establish ways to regularly assess progress and make course corrections in a timely manner .

For instance, is the education technology expected to ensure that learners in early grades excel in foundational skills—basic literacy and numeracy—by age 10? If so, will the technology provide quality reading and math materials, ample opportunities to practice, and engaging materials such as videos or games? Will educators be empowered to use these materials in new ways? And how will progress be measured and adjusted?

4. How this kind of reform is approached can matter immensely for its success.

It is easy to nod to issues of “implementation,” but that needs to be more than rhetorical. Keep in mind that good use of education technology requires thinking about how it will affect learners, educators, and parents. After all, giving learners digital devices will make no difference if they get broken, are stolen, or go unused. Classroom technologies only matter if educators feel comfortable putting them to work. Since good technology is generally about complementing or amplifying what educators and learners already do, it is almost always a mistake to mandate programs from on high. It is vital that technology be adopted with the input of educators and families and with attention to how it will be used. If technology goes unused or if educators use it ineffectually, the results will disappoint—no matter the virtuosity of the technology. Indeed, unused education technology can be an unnecessary expenditure for cash-strapped education systems. This is why surveying context, listening to voices in the field, examining how technology is used, and planning for course correction is essential.

5. It is essential to communicate with a range of stakeholders, including educators, school leaders, parents, and learners .

Technology can feel alien in schools, confuse parents and (especially) older educators, or become an alluring distraction. Good communication can help address all of these risks. Taking care to listen to educators and families can help ensure that programs are informed by their needs and concerns. At the same time, deliberately and consistently explaining what technology is and is not supposed to do, how it can be most effectively used, and the ways in which it can make it more likely that programs work as intended. For instance, if teachers fear that technology is intended to reduce the need for educators, they will tend to be hostile; if they believe that it is intended to assist them in their work, they will be more receptive. Absent effective communication, it is easy for programs to “fail” not because of the technology but because of how it was used. In short, past experience in rolling out education programs indicates that it is as important to have a strong intervention design as it is to have a solid plan to socialize it among stakeholders.

Beyond reopening: A leapfrog moment to transform education?

On September 14, the Center for Universal Education (CUE) will host a webinar to discuss strategies, including around the effective use of education technology, for ensuring resilient schools in the long term and to launch a new education technology playbook “Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all?”

file-pdf Full Playbook – Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all? file-pdf References file-pdf Appendix A – Instruments to assess availability and use of technology file-pdf Appendix B – List of reviewed studies file-pdf Appendix C – How may technology affect interactions among students, teachers, and content?

About the Authors

Alejandro j. ganimian, emiliana vegas, frederick m. hess.

• Media Relations
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review

Stella timotheou.

1 CYENS Center of Excellence & Cyprus University of Technology (Cyprus Interaction Lab), Cyprus, CYENS Center of Excellence & Cyprus University of Technology, Nicosia-Limassol, Cyprus

Ourania Miliou

Yiannis dimitriadis.

2 Universidad de Valladolid (UVA), Spain, Valladolid, Spain

Sara Villagrá Sobrino

Nikoleta giannoutsou, romina cachia.

3 JRC - Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, Seville, Spain

Alejandra Martínez Monés

Andri ioannou, associated data.

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Digital technologies have brought changes to the nature and scope of education and led education systems worldwide to adopt strategies and policies for ICT integration. The latter brought about issues regarding the quality of teaching and learning with ICTs, especially concerning the understanding, adaptation, and design of the education systems in accordance with current technological trends. These issues were emphasized during the recent COVID-19 pandemic that accelerated the use of digital technologies in education, generating questions regarding digitalization in schools. Specifically, many schools demonstrated a lack of experience and low digital capacity, which resulted in widening gaps, inequalities, and learning losses. Such results have engendered the need for schools to learn and build upon the experience to enhance their digital capacity and preparedness, increase their digitalization levels, and achieve a successful digital transformation. Given that the integration of digital technologies is a complex and continuous process that impacts different actors within the school ecosystem, there is a need to show how these impacts are interconnected and identify the factors that can encourage an effective and efficient change in the school environments. For this purpose, we conducted a non-systematic literature review. The results of the literature review were organized thematically based on the evidence presented about the impact of digital technology on education and the factors that affect the schools’ digital capacity and digital transformation. The findings suggest that ICT integration in schools impacts more than just students’ performance; it affects several other school-related aspects and stakeholders, too. Furthermore, various factors affect the impact of digital technologies on education. These factors are interconnected and play a vital role in the digital transformation process. The study results shed light on how ICTs can positively contribute to the digital transformation of schools and which factors should be considered for schools to achieve effective and efficient change.

Introduction

Digital technologies have brought changes to the nature and scope of education. Versatile and disruptive technological innovations, such as smart devices, the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR), blockchain, and software applications have opened up new opportunities for advancing teaching and learning (Gaol & Prasolova-Førland, 2021 ; OECD, 2021 ). Hence, in recent years, education systems worldwide have increased their investment in the integration of information and communication technology (ICT) (Fernández-Gutiérrez et al., 2020 ; Lawrence & Tar, 2018 ) and prioritized their educational agendas to adapt strategies or policies around ICT integration (European Commission, 2019 ). The latter brought about issues regarding the quality of teaching and learning with ICTs (Bates, 2015 ), especially concerning the understanding, adaptation, and design of education systems in accordance with current technological trends (Balyer & Öz, 2018 ). Studies have shown that despite the investment made in the integration of technology in schools, the results have not been promising, and the intended outcomes have not yet been achieved (Delgado et al., 2015 ; Lawrence & Tar, 2018 ). These issues were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced teaching across education levels to move online (Daniel, 2020 ). Online teaching accelerated the use of digital technologies generating questions regarding the process, the nature, the extent, and the effectiveness of digitalization in schools (Cachia et al., 2021 ; König et al., 2020 ). Specifically, many schools demonstrated a lack of experience and low digital capacity, which resulted in widening gaps, inequalities, and learning losses (Blaskó et al., 2021 ; Di Pietro et al, 2020 ). Such results have engendered the need for schools to learn and build upon the experience in order to enhance their digital capacity (European Commission, 2020 ) and increase their digitalization levels (Costa et al., 2021 ). Digitalization offers possibilities for fundamental improvement in schools (OECD, 2021 ; Rott & Marouane, 2018 ) and touches many aspects of a school’s development (Delcker & Ifenthaler, 2021 ) . However, it is a complex process that requires large-scale transformative changes beyond the technical aspects of technology and infrastructure (Pettersson, 2021 ). Namely, digitalization refers to “ a series of deep and coordinated culture, workforce, and technology shifts and operating models ” (Brooks & McCormack, 2020 , p. 3) that brings cultural, organizational, and operational change through the integration of digital technologies (JISC, 2020 ). A successful digital transformation requires that schools increase their digital capacity levels, establishing the necessary “ culture, policies, infrastructure as well as digital competence of students and staff to support the effective integration of technology in teaching and learning practices ” (Costa et al, 2021 , p.163).

Given that the integration of digital technologies is a complex and continuous process that impacts different actors within the school ecosystem (Eng, 2005 ), there is a need to show how the different elements of the impact are interconnected and to identify the factors that can encourage an effective and efficient change in the school environment. To address the issues outlined above, we formulated the following research questions:

a) What is the impact of digital technologies on education?

b) Which factors might affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation?

In the present investigation, we conducted a non-systematic literature review of publications pertaining to the impact of digital technologies on education and the factors that affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation. The results of the literature review were organized thematically based on the evidence presented about the impact of digital technology on education and the factors which affect the schools’ digital capacity and digital transformation.

Methodology

The non-systematic literature review presented herein covers the main theories and research published over the past 17 years on the topic. It is based on meta-analyses and review papers found in scholarly, peer-reviewed content databases and other key studies and reports related to the concepts studied (e.g., digitalization, digital capacity) from professional and international bodies (e.g., the OECD). We searched the Scopus database, which indexes various online journals in the education sector with an international scope, to collect peer-reviewed academic papers. Furthermore, we used an all-inclusive Google Scholar search to include relevant key terms or to include studies found in the reference list of the peer-reviewed papers, and other key studies and reports related to the concepts studied by professional and international bodies. Lastly, we gathered sources from the Publications Office of the European Union ( https://op.europa.eu/en/home ); namely, documents that refer to policies related to digital transformation in education.

Regarding search terms, we first searched resources on the impact of digital technologies on education by performing the following search queries: “impact” OR “effects” AND “digital technologies” AND “education”, “impact” OR “effects” AND “ICT” AND “education”. We further refined our results by adding the terms “meta-analysis” and “review” or by adjusting the search options based on the features of each database to avoid collecting individual studies that would provide limited contributions to a particular domain. We relied on meta-analyses and review studies as these consider the findings of multiple studies to offer a more comprehensive view of the research in a given area (Schuele & Justice, 2006 ). Specifically, meta-analysis studies provided quantitative evidence based on statistically verifiable results regarding the impact of educational interventions that integrate digital technologies in school classrooms (Higgins et al., 2012 ; Tolani-Brown et al., 2011 ).

However, quantitative data does not offer explanations for the challenges or difficulties experienced during ICT integration in learning and teaching (Tolani-Brown et al., 2011 ). To fill this gap, we analyzed literature reviews and gathered in-depth qualitative evidence of the benefits and implications of technology integration in schools. In the analysis presented herein, we also included policy documents and reports from professional and international bodies and governmental reports, which offered useful explanations of the key concepts of this study and provided recent evidence on digital capacity and transformation in education along with policy recommendations. The inclusion and exclusion criteria that were considered in this study are presented in Table ​ Table1 1 .

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the selection of resources on the impact of digital technologies on education

To ensure a reliable extraction of information from each study and assist the research synthesis we selected the study characteristics of interest (impact) and constructed coding forms. First, an overview of the synthesis was provided by the principal investigator who described the processes of coding, data entry, and data management. The coders followed the same set of instructions but worked independently. To ensure a common understanding of the process between coders, a sample of ten studies was tested. The results were compared, and the discrepancies were identified and resolved. Additionally, to ensure an efficient coding process, all coders participated in group meetings to discuss additions, deletions, and modifications (Stock, 1994 ). Due to the methodological diversity of the studied documents we began to synthesize the literature review findings based on similar study designs. Specifically, most of the meta-analysis studies were grouped in one category due to the quantitative nature of the measured impact. These studies tended to refer to student achievement (Hattie et al., 2014 ). Then, we organized the themes of the qualitative studies in several impact categories. Lastly, we synthesized both review and meta-analysis data across the categories. In order to establish a collective understanding of the concept of impact, we referred to a previous impact study by Balanskat ( 2009 ) which investigated the impact of technology in primary schools. In this context, the impact had a more specific ICT-related meaning and was described as “ a significant influence or effect of ICT on the measured or perceived quality of (parts of) education ” (Balanskat, 2009 , p. 9). In the study presented herein, the main impacts are in relation to learning and learners, teaching, and teachers, as well as other key stakeholders who are directly or indirectly connected to the school unit.

The study’s results identified multiple dimensions of the impact of digital technologies on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes; on equality, inclusion, and social integration; on teachers’ professional and teaching practices; and on other school-related aspects and stakeholders. The data analysis indicated various factors that might affect the schools’ digital capacity and transformation, such as digital competencies, the teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development, as well as the school’s leadership and management, administration, infrastructure, etc. The impacts and factors found in the literature review are presented below.

Impacts of digital technologies on students’ knowledge, skills, attitudes, and emotions

The impact of ICT use on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes has been investigated early in the literature. Eng ( 2005 ) found a small positive effect between ICT use and students' learning. Specifically, the author reported that access to computer-assisted instruction (CAI) programs in simulation or tutorial modes—used to supplement rather than substitute instruction – could enhance student learning. The author reported studies showing that teachers acknowledged the benefits of ICT on pupils with special educational needs; however, the impact of ICT on students' attainment was unclear. Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) found a statistically significant positive association between ICT use and higher student achievement in primary and secondary education. The authors also reported improvements in the performance of low-achieving pupils. The use of ICT resulted in further positive gains for students, namely increased attention, engagement, motivation, communication and process skills, teamwork, and gains related to their behaviour towards learning. Evidence from qualitative studies showed that teachers, students, and parents recognized the positive impact of ICT on students' learning regardless of their competence level (strong/weak students). Punie et al. ( 2006 ) documented studies that showed positive results of ICT-based learning for supporting low-achieving pupils and young people with complex lives outside the education system. Liao et al. ( 2007 ) reported moderate positive effects of computer application instruction (CAI, computer simulations, and web-based learning) over traditional instruction on primary school student's achievement. Similarly, Tamim et al. ( 2011 ) reported small to moderate positive effects between the use of computer technology (CAI, ICT, simulations, computer-based instruction, digital and hypermedia) and student achievement in formal face-to-face classrooms compared to classrooms that did not use technology. Jewitt et al., ( 2011 ) found that the use of learning platforms (LPs) (virtual learning environments, management information systems, communication technologies, and information- and resource-sharing technologies) in schools allowed primary and secondary students to access a wider variety of quality learning resources, engage in independent and personalized learning, and conduct self- and peer-review; LPs also provide opportunities for teacher assessment and feedback. Similar findings were reported by Fu ( 2013 ), who documented a list of benefits and opportunities of ICT use. According to the author, the use of ICTs helps students access digital information and course content effectively and efficiently, supports student-centered and self-directed learning, as well as the development of a creative learning environment where more opportunities for critical thinking skills are offered, and promotes collaborative learning in a distance-learning environment. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) found consistent but small positive associations between the use of technology and learning outcomes of school-age learners (5–18-year-olds) in studies linking the provision and use of technology with attainment. Additionally, Chauhan ( 2017 ) reported a medium positive effect of technology on the learning effectiveness of primary school students compared to students who followed traditional learning instruction.

The rise of mobile technologies and hardware devices instigated investigations into their impact on teaching and learning. Sung et al. ( 2016 ) reported a moderate effect on students' performance from the use of mobile devices in the classroom compared to the use of desktop computers or the non-use of mobile devices. Schmid et al. ( 2014 ) reported medium–low to low positive effects of technology integration (e.g., CAI, ICTs) in the classroom on students' achievement and attitude compared to not using technology or using technology to varying degrees. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) found a low statistically significant effect of the use of tablets and other smart devices in educational contexts on students' achievement outcomes. The authors suggested that tablets offered additional advantages to students; namely, they reported improvements in students’ notetaking, organizational and communication skills, and creativity. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported a small positive effect of one-to-one laptop programs on students’ academic achievement across subject areas. Additional reported benefits included student-centered, individualized, and project-based learning enhanced learner engagement and enthusiasm. Additionally, the authors found that students using one-to-one laptop programs tended to use technology more frequently than in non-laptop classrooms, and as a result, they developed a range of skills (e.g., information skills, media skills, technology skills, organizational skills). Haßler et al. ( 2016 ) found that most interventions that included the use of tablets across the curriculum reported positive learning outcomes. However, from 23 studies, five reported no differences, and two reported a negative effect on students' learning outcomes. Similar results were indicated by Kalati and Kim ( 2022 ) who investigated the effect of touchscreen technologies on young students’ learning. Specifically, from 53 studies, 34 advocated positive effects of touchscreen devices on children’s learning, 17 obtained mixed findings and two studies reported negative effects.

More recently, approaches that refer to the impact of gamification with the use of digital technologies on teaching and learning were also explored. A review by Pan et al. ( 2022 ) that examined the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings, reported that gameplay improved students’ performance. Integration of digital games in teaching was also found as a promising pedagogical practice in STEM education that could lead to increased learning gains (Martinez et al., 2022 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). However, although Talan et al. ( 2020 ) reported a medium effect of the use of educational games (both digital and non-digital) on academic achievement, the effect of non-digital games was higher.

Over the last two years, the effects of more advanced technologies on teaching and learning were also investigated. Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) found that AR applications had a medium effect on students' learning outcomes compared to traditional lectures. Similarly, Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) showed that AR had a medium impact on students' learning gains. VR applications integrated into various subjects were also found to have a moderate effect on students’ learning compared to control conditions (traditional classes, e.g., lectures, textbooks, and multimedia use, e.g., images, videos, animation, CAI) (Chen et al., 2022b ). Villena-Taranilla et al. ( 2022 ) noted the moderate effect of VR technologies on students’ learning when these were applied in STEM disciplines. In the same meta-analysis, Villena-Taranilla et al. ( 2022 ) highlighted the role of immersive VR, since its effect on students’ learning was greater (at a high level) across educational levels (K-6) compared to semi-immersive and non-immersive integrations. In another meta-analysis study, the effect size of the immersive VR was small and significantly differentiated across educational levels (Coban et al., 2022 ). The impact of AI on education was investigated by Su and Yang ( 2022 ) and Su et al. ( 2022 ), who showed that this technology significantly improved students’ understanding of AI computer science and machine learning concepts.

It is worth noting that the vast majority of studies referred to learning gains in specific subjects. Specifically, several studies examined the impact of digital technologies on students’ literacy skills and reported positive effects on language learning (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Grgurović et al., 2013 ; Friedel et al., 2013 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ; Chen et al., 2022b ; Savva et al., 2022 ). Also, several studies documented positive effects on specific language learning areas, namely foreign language learning (Kao, 2014 ), writing (Higgins et al., 2012 ; Wen & Walters, 2022 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ), as well as reading and comprehension (Cheung & Slavin, 2011 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Schwabe et al., 2022 ). ICTs were also found to have a positive impact on students' performance in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines (Arztmann et al., 2022 ; Bado, 2022 ; Villena-Taranilla et al., 2022 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). Specifically, a number of studies reported positive impacts on students’ achievement in mathematics (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Hillmayr et al., 2020 ; Li & Ma, 2010 ; Pan et al., 2022 ; Ran et al., 2022 ; Verschaffel et al., 2019 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ). Furthermore, studies documented positive effects of ICTs on science learning (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ; Hillmayr et al., 2020 ; Kalemkuş & Kalemkuş, 2022 ; Lei et al., 2022a ). Çelik ( 2022 ) also noted that computer simulations can help students understand learning concepts related to science. Furthermore, some studies documented that the use of ICTs had a positive impact on students’ achievement in other subjects, such as geography, history, music, and arts (Chauhan, 2017 ; Condie & Munro, 2007 ), and design and technology (Balanskat et al., 2006 ).

More specific positive learning gains were reported in a number of skills, e.g., problem-solving skills and pattern exploration skills (Higgins et al., 2012 ), metacognitive learning outcomes (Verschaffel et al., 2019 ), literacy skills, computational thinking skills, emotion control skills, and collaborative inquiry skills (Lu et al., 2022 ; Su & Yang, 2022 ; Su et al., 2022 ). Additionally, several investigations have reported benefits from the use of ICT on students’ creativity (Fielding & Murcia, 2022 ; Liu et al., 2022 ; Quah & Ng, 2022 ). Lastly, digital technologies were also found to be beneficial for enhancing students’ lifelong learning skills (Haleem et al., 2022 ).

Apart from gaining knowledge and skills, studies also reported improvement in motivation and interest in mathematics (Higgins et. al., 2019 ; Fadda et al., 2022 ) and increased positive achievement emotions towards several subjects during interventions using educational games (Lei et al., 2022a ). Chen et al. ( 2022a ) also reported a small but positive effect of digital health approaches in bullying and cyberbullying interventions with K-12 students, demonstrating that technology-based approaches can help reduce bullying and related consequences by providing emotional support, empowerment, and change of attitude. In their meta-review study, Su et al. ( 2022 ) also documented that AI technologies effectively strengthened students’ attitudes towards learning. In another meta-analysis, Arztmann et al. ( 2022 ) reported positive effects of digital games on motivation and behaviour towards STEM subjects.

Impacts of digital technologies on equality, inclusion and social integration

Although most of the reviewed studies focused on the impact of ICTs on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes, reports were also made on other aspects in the school context, such as equality, inclusion, and social integration. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) documented research interventions investigating how ICT can support pupils with additional or special educational needs. While those interventions were relatively small scale and mostly based on qualitative data, their findings indicated that the use of ICTs enabled the development of communication, participation, and self-esteem. A recent meta-analysis (Baragash et al., 2022 ) with 119 participants with different disabilities, reported a significant overall effect size of AR on their functional skills acquisition. Koh’s meta-analysis ( 2022 ) also revealed that students with intellectual and developmental disabilities improved their competence and performance when they used digital games in the lessons.

Istenic Starcic and Bagon ( 2014 ) found that the role of ICT in inclusion and the design of pedagogical and technological interventions was not sufficiently explored in educational interventions with people with special needs; however, some benefits of ICT use were found in students’ social integration. The issue of gender and technology use was mentioned in a small number of studies. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported a statistically significant positive interaction between one-to-one laptop programs and gender. Specifically, the results showed that girls and boys alike benefitted from the laptop program, but the effect on girls’ achievement was smaller than that on boys’. Along the same lines, Arztmann et al. ( 2022 ) reported no difference in the impact of game-based learning between boys and girls, arguing that boys and girls equally benefited from game-based interventions in STEM domains. However, results from a systematic review by Cussó-Calabuig et al. ( 2018 ) found limited and low-quality evidence on the effects of intensive use of computers on gender differences in computer anxiety, self-efficacy, and self-confidence. Based on their view, intensive use of computers can reduce gender differences in some areas and not in others, depending on contextual and implementation factors.

Impacts of digital technologies on teachers’ professional and teaching practices

Various research studies have explored the impact of ICT on teachers’ instructional practices and student assessment. Friedel et al. ( 2013 ) found that the use of mobile devices by students enabled teachers to successfully deliver content (e.g., mobile serious games), provide scaffolding, and facilitate synchronous collaborative learning. The integration of digital games in teaching and learning activities also gave teachers the opportunity to study and apply various pedagogical practices (Bado, 2022 ). Specifically, Bado ( 2022 ) found that teachers who implemented instructional activities in three stages (pre-game, game, and post-game) maximized students’ learning outcomes and engagement. For instance, during the pre-game stage, teachers focused on lectures and gameplay training, at the game stage teachers provided scaffolding on content, addressed technical issues, and managed the classroom activities. During the post-game stage, teachers organized activities for debriefing to ensure that the gameplay had indeed enhanced students’ learning outcomes.

Furthermore, ICT can increase efficiency in lesson planning and preparation by offering possibilities for a more collaborative approach among teachers. The sharing of curriculum plans and the analysis of students’ data led to clearer target settings and improvements in reporting to parents (Balanskat et al., 2006 ).

Additionally, the use and application of digital technologies in teaching and learning were found to enhance teachers’ digital competence. Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) documented studies that revealed that the use of digital technologies in education had a positive effect on teachers’ basic ICT skills. The greatest impact was found on teachers with enough experience in integrating ICTs in their teaching and/or who had recently participated in development courses for the pedagogical use of technologies in teaching. Punie et al. ( 2006 ) reported that the provision of fully equipped multimedia portable computers and the development of online teacher communities had positive impacts on teachers’ confidence and competence in the use of ICTs.

Moreover, online assessment via ICTs benefits instruction. In particular, online assessments support the digitalization of students’ work and related logistics, allow teachers to gather immediate feedback and readjust to new objectives, and support the improvement of the technical quality of tests by providing more accurate results. Additionally, the capabilities of ICTs (e.g., interactive media, simulations) create new potential methods of testing specific skills, such as problem-solving and problem-processing skills, meta-cognitive skills, creativity and communication skills, and the ability to work productively in groups (Punie et al., 2006 ).

Impacts of digital technologies on other school-related aspects and stakeholders

There is evidence that the effective use of ICTs and the data transmission offered by broadband connections help improve administration (Balanskat et al., 2006 ). Specifically, ICTs have been found to provide better management systems to schools that have data gathering procedures in place. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) reported impacts from the use of ICTs in schools in the following areas: attendance monitoring, assessment records, reporting to parents, financial management, creation of repositories for learning resources, and sharing of information amongst staff. Such data can be used strategically for self-evaluation and monitoring purposes which in turn can result in school improvements. Additionally, they reported that online access to other people with similar roles helped to reduce headteachers’ isolation by offering them opportunities to share insights into the use of ICT in learning and teaching and how it could be used to support school improvement. Furthermore, ICTs provided more efficient and successful examination management procedures, namely less time-consuming reporting processes compared to paper-based examinations and smooth communications between schools and examination authorities through electronic data exchange (Punie et al., 2006 ).

Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported that the use of ICTs improved home-school relationships. Additionally, Escueta et al. ( 2017 ) reported several ICT programs that had improved the flow of information from the school to parents. Particularly, they documented that the use of ICTs (learning management systems, emails, dedicated websites, mobile phones) allowed for personalized and customized information exchange between schools and parents, such as attendance records, upcoming class assignments, school events, and students’ grades, which generated positive results on students’ learning outcomes and attainment. Such information exchange between schools and families prompted parents to encourage their children to put more effort into their schoolwork.

The above findings suggest that the impact of ICT integration in schools goes beyond students’ performance in school subjects. Specifically, it affects a number of school-related aspects, such as equality and social integration, professional and teaching practices, and diverse stakeholders. In Table ​ Table2, 2 , we summarize the different impacts of digital technologies on school stakeholders based on the literature review, while in Table ​ Table3 3 we organized the tools/platforms and practices/policies addressed in the meta-analyses, literature reviews, EU reports, and international bodies included in the manuscript.

The impact of digital technologies on schools’ stakeholders based on the literature review

Tools/platforms and practices/policies addressed in the meta-analyses, literature reviews, EU reports, and international bodies included in the manuscript

Additionally, based on the results of the literature review, there are many types of digital technologies with different affordances (see, for example, studies on VR vs Immersive VR), which evolve over time (e.g. starting from CAIs in 2005 to Augmented and Virtual reality 2020). Furthermore, these technologies are linked to different pedagogies and policy initiatives, which are critical factors in the study of impact. Table ​ Table3 3 summarizes the different tools and practices that have been used to examine the impact of digital technologies on education since 2005 based on the review results.

Factors that affect the integration of digital technologies

Although the analysis of the literature review demonstrated different impacts of the use of digital technology on education, several authors highlighted the importance of various factors, besides the technology itself, that affect this impact. For example, Liao et al. ( 2007 ) suggested that future studies should carefully investigate which factors contribute to positive outcomes by clarifying the exact relationship between computer applications and learning. Additionally, Haßler et al., ( 2016 ) suggested that the neutral findings regarding the impact of tablets on students learning outcomes in some of the studies included in their review should encourage educators, school leaders, and school officials to further investigate the potential of such devices in teaching and learning. Several other researchers suggested that a number of variables play a significant role in the impact of ICTs on students’ learning that could be attributed to the school context, teaching practices and professional development, the curriculum, and learners’ characteristics (Underwood, 2009 ; Tamim et al., 2011 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Archer et al., 2014 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Haßler et al., 2016 ; Chauhan, 2017 ; Lee et al., 2020 ; Tang et al., 2022 ).

Digital competencies

One of the most common challenges reported in studies that utilized digital tools in the classroom was the lack of students’ skills on how to use them. Fu ( 2013 ) found that students’ lack of technical skills is a barrier to the effective use of ICT in the classroom. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) reported that students faced challenges when using tablets and smart mobile devices, associated with the technical issues or expertise needed for their use and the distracting nature of the devices and highlighted the need for teachers’ professional development. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) reported that skills training about the use of digital technologies is essential for learners to fully exploit the benefits of instruction.

Delgado et al. ( 2015 ), meanwhile, reported studies that showed a strong positive association between teachers’ computer skills and students’ use of computers. Teachers’ lack of ICT skills and familiarization with technologies can become a constraint to the effective use of technology in the classroom (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Delgado et al., 2015 ).

It is worth noting that the way teachers are introduced to ICTs affects the impact of digital technologies on education. Previous studies have shown that teachers may avoid using digital technologies due to limited digital skills (Balanskat, 2006 ), or they prefer applying “safe” technologies, namely technologies that their own teachers used and with which they are familiar (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). In this regard, the provision of digital skills training and exposure to new digital tools might encourage teachers to apply various technologies in their lessons (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). Apart from digital competence, technical support in the school setting has also been shown to affect teachers’ use of technology in their classrooms (Delgado et al., 2015 ). Ferrari et al. ( 2011 ) found that while teachers’ use of ICT is high, 75% stated that they needed more institutional support and a shift in the mindset of educational actors to achieve more innovative teaching practices. The provision of support can reduce time and effort as well as cognitive constraints, which could cause limited ICT integration in the school lessons by teachers (Escueta et al., 2017 ).

Teachers’ personal characteristics, training approaches, and professional development

Teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development affect the impact of digital technologies on education. Specifically, Cheok and Wong ( 2015 ) found that teachers’ personal characteristics (e.g., anxiety, self-efficacy) are associated with their satisfaction and engagement with technology. Bingimlas ( 2009 ) reported that lack of confidence, resistance to change, and negative attitudes in using new technologies in teaching are significant determinants of teachers’ levels of engagement in ICT. The same author reported that the provision of technical support, motivation support (e.g., awards, sufficient time for planning), and training on how technologies can benefit teaching and learning can eliminate the above barriers to ICT integration. Archer et al. ( 2014 ) found that comfort levels in using technology are an important predictor of technology integration and argued that it is essential to provide teachers with appropriate training and ongoing support until they are comfortable with using ICTs in the classroom. Hillmayr et al. ( 2020 ) documented that training teachers on ICT had an important effecton students’ learning.

According to Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ), the impact of ICTs on students’ learning is highly dependent on the teachers’ capacity to efficiently exploit their application for pedagogical purposes. Results obtained from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) (OECD, 2021 ) revealed that although schools are open to innovative practices and have the capacity to adopt them, only 39% of teachers in the European Union reported that they are well or very well prepared to use digital technologies for teaching. Li and Ma ( 2010 ) and Hardman ( 2019 ) showed that the positive effect of technology on students’ achievement depends on the pedagogical practices used by teachers. Schmid et al. ( 2014 ) reported that learning was best supported when students were engaged in active, meaningful activities with the use of technological tools that provided cognitive support. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) compared two different pedagogical uses of tablets and found a significant moderate effect when the devices were used in a student-centered context and approach rather than within teacher-led environments. Similarly, Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) and Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) reported that the positive results from the integration of AR applications could be attributed to the existence of different variables which could influence AR interventions (e.g., pedagogical approach, learning environment, and duration of the intervention). Additionally, Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) suggested that the pedagogical resources that teachers used to complement their lectures and the pedagogical approaches they applied were crucial to the effective integration of AR on students’ learning gains. Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) also emphasized that the success of a technology-enhanced intervention is based on both the technology per se and its characteristics and on the pedagogical strategies teachers choose to implement. For instance, their results indicated that the collaborative learning approach had the highest impact on students’ learning gains among other approaches (e.g., inquiry-based learning, situated learning, or project-based learning). Ran et al. ( 2022 ) also found that the use of technology to design collaborative and communicative environments showed the largest moderator effects among the other approaches.

Hattie ( 2008 ) reported that the effective use of computers is associated with training teachers in using computers as a teaching and learning tool. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) noted that in addition to the strategies teachers adopt in teaching, ongoing professional development is also vital in ensuring the success of technology implementation programs. Sung et al. ( 2016 ) found that research on the use of mobile devices to support learning tends to report that the insufficient preparation of teachers is a major obstacle in implementing effective mobile learning programs in schools. Friedel et al. ( 2013 ) found that providing training and support to teachers increased the positive impact of the interventions on students’ learning gains. Trucano ( 2005 ) argued that positive impacts occur when digital technologies are used to enhance teachers’ existing pedagogical philosophies. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) found that the types of technologies used and how they are used could also affect students’ learning. The authors suggested that training and professional development of teachers that focuses on the effective pedagogical use of technology to support teaching and learning is an important component of successful instructional approaches (Higgins et al., 2012 ). Archer et al. ( 2014 ) found that studies that reported ICT interventions during which teachers received training and support had moderate positive effects on students’ learning outcomes, which were significantly higher than studies where little or no detail about training and support was mentioned. Fu ( 2013 ) reported that the lack of teachers’ knowledge and skills on the technical and instructional aspects of ICT use in the classroom, in-service training, pedagogy support, technical and financial support, as well as the lack of teachers’ motivation and encouragement to integrate ICT on their teaching were significant barriers to the integration of ICT in education.

School leadership and management

Management and leadership are important cornerstones in the digital transformation process (Pihir et al., 2018 ). Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) documented leadership among the factors positively affecting the successful implementation of technology integration in schools. Strong leadership, strategic planning, and systematic integration of digital technologies are prerequisites for the digital transformation of education systems (Ređep, 2021 ). Management and leadership play a significant role in formulating policies that are translated into practice and ensure that developments in ICT become embedded into the life of the school and in the experiences of staff and pupils (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). Policy support and leadership must include the provision of an overall vision for the use of digital technologies in education, guidance for students and parents, logistical support, as well as teacher training (Conrads et al., 2017 ). Unless there is a commitment throughout the school, with accountability for progress at key points, it is unlikely for ICT integration to be sustained or become part of the culture (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). To achieve this, principals need to adopt and promote a whole-institution strategy and build a strong mutual support system that enables the school’s technological maturity (European Commission, 2019 ). In this context, school culture plays an essential role in shaping the mindsets and beliefs of school actors towards successful technology integration. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) emphasized the importance of the principal’s enthusiasm and work as a source of inspiration for the school staff and the students to cultivate a culture of innovation and establish sustainable digital change. Specifically, school leaders need to create conditions in which the school staff is empowered to experiment and take risks with technology (Elkordy & Lovinelli, 2020 ).

In order for leaders to achieve the above, it is important to develop capacities for learning and leading, advocating professional learning, and creating support systems and structures (European Commission, 2019 ). Digital technology integration in education systems can be challenging and leadership needs guidance to achieve it. Such guidance can be introduced through the adoption of new methods and techniques in strategic planning for the integration of digital technologies (Ređep, 2021 ). Even though the role of leaders is vital, the relevant training offered to them has so far been inadequate. Specifically, only a third of the education systems in Europe have put in place national strategies that explicitly refer to the training of school principals (European Commission, 2019 , p. 16).

Connectivity, infrastructure, and government and other support

The effective integration of digital technologies across levels of education presupposes the development of infrastructure, the provision of digital content, and the selection of proper resources (Voogt et al., 2013 ). Particularly, a high-quality broadband connection in the school increases the quality and quantity of educational activities. There is evidence that ICT increases and formalizes cooperative planning between teachers and cooperation with managers, which in turn has a positive impact on teaching practices (Balanskat et al., 2006 ). Additionally, ICT resources, including software and hardware, increase the likelihood of teachers integrating technology into the curriculum to enhance their teaching practices (Delgado et al., 2015 ). For example, Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) found that the use of one-on-one laptop programs resulted in positive changes in teaching and learning, which would not have been accomplished without the infrastructure and technical support provided to teachers. Delgado et al. ( 2015 ) reported that limited access to technology (insufficient computers, peripherals, and software) and lack of technical support are important barriers to ICT integration. Access to infrastructure refers not only to the availability of technology in a school but also to the provision of a proper amount and the right types of technology in locations where teachers and students can use them. Effective technical support is a central element of the whole-school strategy for ICT (Underwood, 2009 ). Bingimlas ( 2009 ) reported that lack of technical support in the classroom and whole-school resources (e.g., failing to connect to the Internet, printers not printing, malfunctioning computers, and working on old computers) are significant barriers that discourage the use of ICT by teachers. Moreover, poor quality and inadequate hardware maintenance, and unsuitable educational software may discourage teachers from using ICTs (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Bingimlas, 2009 ).

Government support can also impact the integration of ICTs in teaching. Specifically, Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) reported that government interventions and training programs increased teachers’ enthusiasm and positive attitudes towards ICT and led to the routine use of embedded ICT.

Lastly, another important factor affecting digital transformation is the development and quality assurance of digital learning resources. Such resources can be support textbooks and related materials or resources that focus on specific subjects or parts of the curriculum. Policies on the provision of digital learning resources are essential for schools and can be achieved through various actions. For example, some countries are financing web portals that become repositories, enabling teachers to share resources or create their own. Additionally, they may offer e-learning opportunities or other services linked to digital education. In other cases, specific agencies of projects have also been set up to develop digital resources (Eurydice, 2019 ).

Administration and digital data management

The digital transformation of schools involves organizational improvements at the level of internal workflows, communication between the different stakeholders, and potential for collaboration. Vuorikari et al. ( 2020 ) presented evidence that digital technologies supported the automation of administrative practices in schools and reduced the administration’s workload. There is evidence that digital data affects the production of knowledge about schools and has the power to transform how schooling takes place. Specifically, Sellar ( 2015 ) reported that data infrastructure in education is developing due to the demand for “ information about student outcomes, teacher quality, school performance, and adult skills, associated with policy efforts to increase human capital and productivity practices ” (p. 771). In this regard, practices, such as datafication which refers to the “ translation of information about all kinds of things and processes into quantified formats” have become essential for decision-making based on accountability reports about the school’s quality. The data could be turned into deep insights about education or training incorporating ICTs. For example, measuring students’ online engagement with the learning material and drawing meaningful conclusions can allow teachers to improve their educational interventions (Vuorikari et al., 2020 ).

Students’ socioeconomic background and family support

Research show that the active engagement of parents in the school and their support for the school’s work can make a difference to their children’s attitudes towards learning and, as a result, their achievement (Hattie, 2008 ). In recent years, digital technologies have been used for more effective communication between school and family (Escueta et al., 2017 ). The European Commission ( 2020 ) presented data from a Eurostat survey regarding the use of computers by students during the pandemic. The data showed that younger pupils needed additional support and guidance from parents and the challenges were greater for families in which parents had lower levels of education and little to no digital skills.

In this regard, the socio-economic background of the learners and their socio-cultural environment also affect educational achievements (Punie et al., 2006 ). Trucano documented that the use of computers at home positively influenced students’ confidence and resulted in more frequent use at school, compared to students who had no home access (Trucano, 2005 ). In this sense, the socio-economic background affects the access to computers at home (OECD, 2015 ) which in turn influences the experience of ICT, an important factor for school achievement (Punie et al., 2006 ; Underwood, 2009 ). Furthermore, parents from different socio-economic backgrounds may have different abilities and availability to support their children in their learning process (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ).

Schools’ socioeconomic context and emergency situations

The socio-economic context of the school is closely related to a school’s digital transformation. For example, schools in disadvantaged, rural, or deprived areas are likely to lack the digital capacity and infrastructure required to adapt to the use of digital technologies during emergency periods, such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ). Data collected from school principals confirmed that in several countries, there is a rural/urban divide in connectivity (OECD, 2015 ).

Emergency periods also affect the digitalization of schools. The COVID-19 pandemic led to the closure of schools and forced them to seek appropriate and connective ways to keep working on the curriculum (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ). The sudden large-scale shift to distance and online teaching and learning also presented challenges around quality and equity in education, such as the risk of increased inequalities in learning, digital, and social, as well as teachers facing difficulties coping with this demanding situation (European Commission, 2020 ).

Looking at the findings of the above studies, we can conclude that the impact of digital technologies on education is influenced by various actors and touches many aspects of the school ecosystem. Figure  1 summarizes the factors affecting the digital technologies’ impact on school stakeholders based on the findings from the literature review.

Factors that affect the impact of ICTs on education

The findings revealed that the use of digital technologies in education affects a variety of actors within a school’s ecosystem. First, we observed that as technologies evolve, so does the interest of the research community to apply them to school settings. Figure  2 summarizes the trends identified in current research around the impact of digital technologies on schools’ digital capacity and transformation as found in the present study. Starting as early as 2005, when computers, simulations, and interactive boards were the most commonly applied tools in school interventions (e.g., Eng, 2005 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Moran et al., 2008 ; Tamim et al., 2011 ), moving towards the use of learning platforms (Jewitt et al., 2011 ), then to the use of mobile devices and digital games (e.g., Tamim et al., 2015 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Talan et al., 2020 ), as well as e-books (e.g., Savva et al., 2022 ), to the more recent advanced technologies, such as AR and VR applications (e.g., Garzón & Acevedo, 2019 ; Garzón et al., 2020 ; Kalemkuş & Kalemkuş, 2022 ), or robotics and AI (e.g., Su & Yang, 2022 ; Su et al., 2022 ). As this evolution shows, digital technologies are a concept in flux with different affordances and characteristics. Additionally, from an instructional perspective, there has been a growing interest in different modes and models of content delivery such as online, blended, and hybrid modes (e.g., Cheok & Wong, 2015 ; Kazu & Yalçin, 2022 ; Ulum, 2022 ). This is an indication that the value of technologies to support teaching and learning as well as other school-related practices is increasingly recognized by the research and school community. The impact results from the literature review indicate that ICT integration on students’ learning outcomes has effects that are small (Coban et al., 2022 ; Eng, 2005 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Schmid et al., 2014 ; Tamim et al., 2015 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ) to moderate (Garzón & Acevedo, 2019 ; Garzón et al., 2020 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Talan et al., 2020 ; Wen & Walters, 2022 ). That said, a number of recent studies have reported high effect sizes (e.g., Kazu & Yalçin, 2022 ).

Current work and trends in the study of the impact of digital technologies on schools’ digital capacity

Based on these findings, several authors have suggested that the impact of technology on education depends on several variables and not on the technology per se (Tamim et al., 2011 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Archer et al., 2014 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Haßler et al., 2016 ; Chauhan, 2017 ; Lee et al., 2020 ; Lei et al., 2022a ). While the impact of ICTs on student achievement has been thoroughly investigated by researchers, other aspects related to school life that are also affected by ICTs, such as equality, inclusion, and social integration have received less attention. Further analysis of the literature review has revealed a greater investment in ICT interventions to support learning and teaching in the core subjects of literacy and STEM disciplines, especially mathematics, and science. These were the most common subjects studied in the reviewed papers often drawing on national testing results, while studies that investigated other subject areas, such as social studies, were limited (Chauhan, 2017 ; Condie & Munro, 2007 ). As such, research is still lacking impact studies that focus on the effects of ICTs on a range of curriculum subjects.

The qualitative research provided additional information about the impact of digital technologies on education, documenting positive effects and giving more details about implications, recommendations, and future research directions. Specifically, the findings regarding the role of ICTs in supporting learning highlight the importance of teachers’ instructional practice and the learning context in the use of technologies and consequently their impact on instruction (Çelik, 2022 ; Schmid et al., 2014 ; Tamim et al., 2015 ). The review also provided useful insights regarding the various factors that affect the impact of digital technologies on education. These factors are interconnected and play a vital role in the transformation process. Specifically, these factors include a) digital competencies; b) teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development; c) school leadership and management; d) connectivity, infrastructure, and government support; e) administration and data management practices; f) students’ socio-economic background and family support and g) the socioeconomic context of the school and emergency situations. It is worth noting that we observed factors that affect the integration of ICTs in education but may also be affected by it. For example, the frequent use of ICTs and the use of laptops by students for instructional purposes positively affect the development of digital competencies (Zheng et al., 2016 ) and at the same time, the digital competencies affect the use of ICTs (Fu, 2013 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ). As a result, the impact of digital technologies should be explored more as an enabler of desirable and new practices and not merely as a catalyst that improves the output of the education process i.e. namely student attainment.

Conclusions

Digital technologies offer immense potential for fundamental improvement in schools. However, investment in ICT infrastructure and professional development to improve school education are yet to provide fruitful results. Digital transformation is a complex process that requires large-scale transformative changes that presuppose digital capacity and preparedness. To achieve such changes, all actors within the school’s ecosystem need to share a common vision regarding the integration of ICTs in education and work towards achieving this goal. Our literature review, which synthesized quantitative and qualitative data from a list of meta-analyses and review studies, provided useful insights into the impact of ICTs on different school stakeholders and showed that the impact of digital technologies touches upon many different aspects of school life, which are often overlooked when the focus is on student achievement as the final output of education. Furthermore, the concept of digital technologies is a concept in flux as technologies are not only different among them calling for different uses in the educational practice but they also change through time. Additionally, we opened a forum for discussion regarding the factors that affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation. We hope that our study will inform policy, practice, and research and result in a paradigm shift towards more holistic approaches in impact and assessment studies.

Study limitations and future directions

We presented a review of the study of digital technologies' impact on education and factors influencing schools’ digital capacity and transformation. The study results were based on a non-systematic literature review grounded on the acquisition of documentation in specific databases. Future studies should investigate more databases to corroborate and enhance our results. Moreover, search queries could be enhanced with key terms that could provide additional insights about the integration of ICTs in education, such as “policies and strategies for ICT integration in education”. Also, the study drew information from meta-analyses and literature reviews to acquire evidence about the effects of ICT integration in schools. Such evidence was mostly based on the general conclusions of the studies. It is worth mentioning that, we located individual studies which showed different, such as negative or neutral results. Thus, further insights are needed about the impact of ICTs on education and the factors influencing the impact. Furthermore, the nature of the studies included in meta-analyses and reviews is different as they are based on different research methodologies and data gathering processes. For instance, in a meta-analysis, the impact among the studies investigated is measured in a particular way, depending on policy or research targets (e.g., results from national examinations, pre-/post-tests). Meanwhile, in literature reviews, qualitative studies offer additional insights and detail based on self-reports and research opinions on several different aspects and stakeholders who could affect and be affected by ICT integration. As a result, it was challenging to draw causal relationships between so many interrelating variables.

Despite the challenges mentioned above, this study envisaged examining school units as ecosystems that consist of several actors by bringing together several variables from different research epistemologies to provide an understanding of the integration of ICTs. However, the use of other tools and methodologies and models for evaluation of the impact of digital technologies on education could give more detailed data and more accurate results. For instance, self-reflection tools, like SELFIE—developed on the DigCompOrg framework- (Kampylis et al., 2015 ; Bocconi & Lightfoot, 2021 ) can help capture a school’s digital capacity and better assess the impact of ICTs on education. Furthermore, the development of a theory of change could be a good approach for documenting the impact of digital technologies on education. Specifically, theories of change are models used for the evaluation of interventions and their impact; they are developed to describe how interventions will work and give the desired outcomes (Mayne, 2015 ). Theory of change as a methodological approach has also been used by researchers to develop models for evaluation in the field of education (e.g., Aromatario et al., 2019 ; Chapman & Sammons, 2013 ; De Silva et al., 2014 ).

We also propose that future studies aim at similar investigations by applying more holistic approaches for impact assessment that can provide in-depth data about the impact of digital technologies on education. For instance, future studies could focus on different research questions about the technologies that are used during the interventions or the way the implementation takes place (e.g., What methodologies are used for documenting impact? How are experimental studies implemented? How can teachers be taken into account and trained on the technology and its functions? What are the elements of an appropriate and successful implementation? How is the whole intervention designed? On which learning theories is the technology implementation based?).

Future research could also focus on assessing the impact of digital technologies on various other subjects since there is a scarcity of research related to particular subjects, such as geography, history, arts, music, and design and technology. More research should also be done about the impact of ICTs on skills, emotions, and attitudes, and on equality, inclusion, social interaction, and special needs education. There is also a need for more research about the impact of ICTs on administration, management, digitalization, and home-school relationships. Additionally, although new forms of teaching and learning with the use of ICTs (e.g., blended, hybrid, and online learning) have initiated several investigations in mainstream classrooms, only a few studies have measured their impact on students’ learning. Additionally, our review did not document any study about the impact of flipped classrooms on K-12 education. Regarding teaching and learning approaches, it is worth noting that studies referred to STEM or STEAM did not investigate the impact of STEM/STEAM as an interdisciplinary approach to learning but only investigated the impact of ICTs on learning in each domain as a separate subject (science, technology, engineering, arts, mathematics). Hence, we propose future research to also investigate the impact of the STEM/STEAM approach on education. The impact of emerging technologies on education, such as AR, VR, robotics, and AI has also been investigated recently, but more work needs to be done.

Finally, we propose that future studies could focus on the way in which specific factors, e.g., infrastructure and government support, school leadership and management, students’ and teachers’ digital competencies, approaches teachers utilize in the teaching and learning (e.g., blended, online and hybrid learning, flipped classrooms, STEM/STEAM approach, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning), affect the impact of digital technologies on education. We hope that future studies will give detailed insights into the concept of schools’ digital transformation through further investigation of impacts and factors which influence digital capacity and transformation based on the results and the recommendations of the present study.

Acknowledgements

This project has received funding under Grant Agreement No Ref Ares (2021) 339036 7483039 as well as funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Grant Agreement No 739578 and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus through the Deputy Ministry of Research, Innovation and Digital Policy. The UVa co-authors would like also to acknowledge funding from the European Regional Development Fund and the National Research Agency of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, under project grant PID2020-112584RB-C32.

Data availability statement

Declarations.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Archer K, Savage R, Sanghera-Sidhu S, Wood E, Gottardo A, Chen V. Examining the effectiveness of technology use in classrooms: A tertiary meta-analysis. Computers & Education. 2014; 78 :140–149. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aromatario O, Van Hoye A, Vuillemin A, Foucaut AM, Pommier J, Cambon L. Using theory of change to develop an intervention theory for designing and evaluating behavior change SDApps for healthy eating and physical exercise: The OCAPREV theory. BMC Public Health. 2019; 19 (1):1–12. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7828-4. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arztmann, M., Hornstra, L., Jeuring, J., & Kester, L. (2022). Effects of games in STEM education: A meta-analysis on the moderating role of student background characteristics. Studies in Science Education , 1-37. 10.1080/03057267.2022.2057732
• Bado N. Game-based learning pedagogy: A review of the literature. Interactive Learning Environments. 2022; 30 (5):936–948. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1683587. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balanskat, A. (2009). Study of the impact of technology in primary schools – Synthesis Report. Empirica and European Schoolnet. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://erte.dge.mec.pt/sites/default/files/Recursos/Estudos/synthesis_report_steps_en.pdf
• Balanskat, A. (2006). The ICT Impact Report: A review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe, European Schoolnet. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from:  https://en.unesco.org/icted/content/ict-impact-report-review-studies-ict-impact-schools-europe
• Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT impact report.  European Schoolnet . Retrieved from: http://colccti.colfinder.org/sites/default/files/ict_impact_report_0.pdf
• Balyer, A., & Öz, Ö. (2018). Academicians’ views on digital transformation in education. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 5 (4), 809–830. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/441/295
• Baragash RS, Al-Samarraie H, Moody L, Zaqout F. Augmented reality and functional skills acquisition among individuals with special needs: A meta-analysis of group design studies. Journal of Special Education Technology. 2022; 37 (1):74–81. doi: 10.1177/0162643420910413. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning . Open Educational Resources Collection . 6. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://irl.umsl.edu/oer/6
• Bingimlas KA. Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 2009; 5 (3):235–245. doi: 10.12973/ejmste/75275. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blaskó Z, Costa PD, Schnepf SV. Learning losses and educational inequalities in Europe: Mapping the potential consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of European Social Policy. 2022; 32 (4):361–375. doi: 10.1177/09589287221091687. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bocconi S, Lightfoot M. Scaling up and integrating the selfie tool for schools' digital capacity in education and training systems: Methodology and lessons learnt. European Training Foundation. 2021 doi: 10.2816/907029,JRC123936. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks, D. C., & McCormack, M. (2020). Driving Digital Transformation in Higher Education . Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://library.educause.edu/-/media/files/library/2020/6/dx2020.pdf?la=en&hash=28FB8C377B59AFB1855C225BBA8E3CFBB0A271DA
• Cachia, R., Chaudron, S., Di Gioia, R., Velicu, A., & Vuorikari, R. (2021). Emergency remote schooling during COVID-19, a closer look at European families. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC125787
• Çelik B. The effects of computer simulations on students’ science process skills: Literature review. Canadian Journal of Educational and Social Studies. 2022; 2 (1):16–28. doi: 10.53103/cjess.v2i1.17. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chapman, C., & Sammons, P. (2013). School Self-Evaluation for School Improvement: What Works and Why? . CfBT Education Trust. 60 Queens Road, Reading, RG1 4BS, England.
• Chauhan S. A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education. 2017; 105 :14–30. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, Q., Chan, K. L., Guo, S., Chen, M., Lo, C. K. M., & Ip, P. (2022a). Effectiveness of digital health interventions in reducing bullying and cyberbullying: a meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse , 15248380221082090. 10.1177/15248380221082090 [ PubMed ]
• Chen B, Wang Y, Wang L. The effects of virtual reality-assisted language learning: A meta-analysis. Sustainability. 2022; 14 (6):3147. doi: 10.3390/su14063147. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheok ML, Wong SL. Predictors of e-learning satisfaction in teaching and learning for school teachers: A literature review. International Journal of Instruction. 2015; 8 (1):75–90. doi: 10.12973/iji.2015.816a. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheung, A. C., & Slavin, R. E. (2011). The Effectiveness of Education Technology for Enhancing Reading Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. Center for Research and reform in Education .
• Coban, M., Bolat, Y. I., & Goksu, I. (2022). The potential of immersive virtual reality to enhance learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review , 100452. 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100452
• Condie, R., & Munro, R. K. (2007). The impact of ICT in schools-a landscape review. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://oei.org.ar/ibertic/evaluacion/sites/default/files/biblioteca/33_impact_ict_in_schools.pdf
• Conrads, J., Rasmussen, M., Winters, N., Geniet, A., Langer, L., (2017). Digital Education Policies in Europe and Beyond: Key Design Principles for More Effective Policies. Redecker, C., P. Kampylis, M. Bacigalupo, Y. Punie (ed.), EUR 29000 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 10.2760/462941
• Costa P, Castaño-Muñoz J, Kampylis P. Capturing schools’ digital capacity: Psychometric analyses of the SELFIE self-reflection tool. Computers & Education. 2021; 162 :104080. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104080. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cussó-Calabuig R, Farran XC, Bosch-Capblanch X. Effects of intensive use of computers in secondary school on gender differences in attitudes towards ICT: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies. 2018; 23 (5):2111–2139. doi: 10.1007/s10639-018-9706-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Daniel SJ. Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects. 2020; 49 (1):91–96. doi: 10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Delcker J, Ifenthaler D. Teachers’ perspective on school development at German vocational schools during the Covid-19 pandemic. Technology, Pedagogy and Education. 2021; 30 (1):125–139. doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2020.1857826. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Delgado, A., Wardlow, L., O’Malley, K., & McKnight, K. (2015). Educational technology: A review of the integration, resources, and effectiveness of technology in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Information Technology Education Research , 14, 397. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP397-416Delgado1829.pdf
• De Silva MJ, Breuer E, Lee L, Asher L, Chowdhary N, Lund C, Patel V. Theory of change: A theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council's framework for complex interventions. Trials. 2014; 15 (1):1–13. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-267. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Di Pietro G, Biagi F, Costa P, Karpiński Z, Mazza J. The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets. Publications Office of the European Union; 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elkordy A, Lovinelli J. Competencies, Culture, and Change: A Model for Digital Transformation in K12 Educational Contexts. In: Ifenthaler D, Hofhues S, Egloffstein M, Helbig C, editors. Digital Transformation of Learning Organizations. Springer; 2020. pp. 203–219. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eng TS. The impact of ICT on learning: A review of research. International Education Journal. 2005; 6 (5):635–650. [ Google Scholar ]
• European Commission. (2020). Digital Education Action Plan 2021 – 2027. Resetting education and training for the digital age. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/default/files/document-library-docs/deap-communication-sept2020_en.pdf
• European Commission. (2019). 2 nd survey of schools: ICT in education. Objective 1: Benchmark progress in ICT in schools . Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://data.europa.eu/euodp/data/storage/f/2019-03-19T084831/FinalreportObjective1-BenchmarkprogressinICTinschools.pdf
• Eurydice. (2019). Digital Education at School in Europe , Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/digital-education-school-europe_en
• Escueta, M., Quan, V., Nickow, A. J., & Oreopoulos, P. (2017). Education technology: An evidence-based review. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://ssrn.com/abstract=3031695
• Fadda D, Pellegrini M, Vivanet G, Zandonella Callegher C. Effects of digital games on student motivation in mathematics: A meta-analysis in K-12. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022; 38 (1):304–325. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12618. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fernández-Gutiérrez M, Gimenez G, Calero J. Is the use of ICT in education leading to higher student outcomes? Analysis from the Spanish Autonomous Communities. Computers & Education. 2020; 157 :103969. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103969. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrari, A., Cachia, R., & Punie, Y. (2011). Educational change through technology: A challenge for obligatory schooling in Europe. Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 6964 , 97–110. Retrieved 30 June 2022  https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-642-23985-4.pdf
• Fielding, K., & Murcia, K. (2022). Research linking digital technologies to young children’s creativity: An interpretive framework and systematic review. Issues in Educational Research , 32 (1), 105–125. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://www.iier.org.au/iier32/fielding-abs.html
• Friedel, H., Bos, B., Lee, K., & Smith, S. (2013). The impact of mobile handheld digital devices on student learning: A literature review with meta-analysis. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3708–3717). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
• Fu JS. ICT in education: A critical literature review and its implications. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT) 2013; 9 (1):112–125. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaol FL, Prasolova-Førland E. Special section editorial: The frontiers of augmented and mixed reality in all levels of education. Education and Information Technologies. 2022; 27 (1):611–623. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10746-2. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garzón J, Acevedo J. Meta-analysis of the impact of Augmented Reality on students’ learning gains. Educational Research Review. 2019; 27 :244–260. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garzón, J., Baldiris, S., Gutiérrez, J., & Pavón, J. (2020). How do pedagogical approaches affect the impact of augmented reality on education? A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Educational Research Review , 100334. 10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100334
• Grgurović M, Chapelle CA, Shelley MC. A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning. ReCALL. 2013; 25 (2):165–198. doi: 10.1017/S0958344013000013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haßler B, Major L, Hennessy S. Tablet use in schools: A critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2016; 32 (2):139–156. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12123. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haleem A, Javaid M, Qadri MA, Suman R. Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers. 2022; 3 :275–285. doi: 10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hardman J. Towards a pedagogical model of teaching with ICTs for mathematics attainment in primary school: A review of studies 2008–2018. Heliyon. 2019; 5 (5):e01726. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01726. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hattie J, Rogers HJ, Swaminathan H. The role of meta-analysis in educational research. In: Reid AD, Hart P, Peters MA, editors. A companion to research in education. Springer; 2014. pp. 197–207. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hattie J. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. 2008 doi: 10.4324/9780203887332. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins S, Xiao Z, Katsipataki M. The impact of digital technology on learning: A summary for the education endowment foundation. Education Endowment Foundation and Durham University; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins, K., Huscroft-D’Angelo, J., & Crawford, L. (2019). Effects of technology in mathematics on achievement, motivation, and attitude: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 57(2), 283-319.
• Hillmayr D, Ziernwald L, Reinhold F, Hofer SI, Reiss KM. The potential of digital tools to enhance mathematics and science learning in secondary schools: A context-specific meta-analysis. Computers & Education. 2020; 153 (1038):97. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103897. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Istenic Starcic A, Bagon S. ICT-supported learning for inclusion of people with special needs: Review of seven educational technology journals, 1970–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2014; 45 (2):202–230. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12086. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jewitt C, Clark W, Hadjithoma-Garstka C. The use of learning platforms to organise learning in English primary and secondary schools. Learning, Media and Technology. 2011; 36 (4):335–348. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2011.621955. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• JISC. (2020). What is digital transformation?.  Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/digital-strategy-framework-for-university-leaders/what-is-digital-transformation
• Kalati, A. T., & Kim, M. S. (2022). What is the effect of touchscreen technology on young children’s learning?: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies , 1-19. 10.1007/s10639-021-10816-5
• Kalemkuş, J., & Kalemkuş, F. (2022). Effect of the use of augmented reality applications on academic achievement of student in science education: Meta-analysis review. Interactive Learning Environments , 1-18. 10.1080/10494820.2022.2027458
• Kao C-W. The effects of digital game-based learning task in English as a foreign language contexts: A meta-analysis. Education Journal. 2014; 42 (2):113–141. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kampylis P, Punie Y, Devine J. Promoting effective digital-age learning - a European framework for digitally competent educational organisations. JRC Technical Reports. 2015 doi: 10.2791/54070. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kazu IY, Yalçin CK. Investigation of the effectiveness of hybrid learning on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Progressive Education. 2022; 18 (1):249–265. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2022.426.14. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Koh C. A qualitative meta-analysis on the use of serious games to support learners with intellectual and developmental disabilities: What we know, what we need to know and what we can do. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education. 2022; 69 (3):919–950. doi: 10.1080/1034912X.2020.1746245. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• König J, Jäger-Biela DJ, Glutsch N. Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure: Teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career teachers in Germany. European Journal of Teacher Education. 2020; 43 (4):608–622. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2020.1809650. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lawrence JE, Tar UA. Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integration of ICT in teaching/learning process. Educational Media International. 2018; 55 (1):79–105. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2018.1439712. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee, S., Kuo, L. J., Xu, Z., & Hu, X. (2020). The effects of technology-integrated classroom instruction on K-12 English language learners’ literacy development: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 1-32. 10.1080/09588221.2020.1774612
• Lei, H., Chiu, M. M., Wang, D., Wang, C., & Xie, T. (2022a). Effects of game-based learning on students’ achievement in science: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research . 10.1177/07356331211064543
• Lei H, Wang C, Chiu MM, Chen S. Do educational games affect students' achievement emotions? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022; 38 (4):946–959. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12664. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liao YKC, Chang HW, Chen YW. Effects of computer application on elementary school student's achievement: A meta-analysis of students in Taiwan. Computers in the Schools. 2007; 24 (3–4):43–64. doi: 10.1300/J025v24n03_04. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li Q, Ma X. A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review. 2010; 22 (3):215–243. doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9125-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu, M., Pang, W., Guo, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). A meta-analysis of the effect of multimedia technology on creative performance. Education and Information Technologies , 1-28. 10.1007/s10639-022-10981-1
• Lu Z, Chiu MM, Cui Y, Mao W, Lei H. Effects of game-based learning on students’ computational thinking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 2022 doi: 10.1177/07356331221100740. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinez L, Gimenes M, Lambert E. Entertainment video games for academic learning: A systematic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 2022 doi: 10.1177/07356331211053848. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayne J. Useful theory of change models. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 2015; 30 (2):119–142. doi: 10.3138/cjpe.230. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moran J, Ferdig RE, Pearson PD, Wardrop J, Blomeyer RL., Jr Technology and reading performance in the middle-school grades: A meta-analysis with recommendations for policy and practice. Journal of Literacy Research. 2008; 40 (1):6–58. doi: 10.1080/10862960802070483. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD. (2015). Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection . PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved from: 10.1787/9789264239555-en
• OECD. (2021). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/oecd-digital-education-outlook-2021_589b283f-en
• Pan Y, Ke F, Xu X. A systematic review of the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings. Educational Research Review. 2022; 36 :100448. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100448. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pettersson F. Understanding digitalization and educational change in school by means of activity theory and the levels of learning concept. Education and Information Technologies. 2021; 26 (1):187–204. doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10239-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pihir, I., Tomičić-Pupek, K., & Furjan, M. T. (2018). Digital transformation insights and trends. In Central European Conference on Information and Intelligent Systems (pp. 141–149). Faculty of Organization and Informatics Varazdin. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from https://www.proquest.com/conference-papers-proceedings/digital-transformation-insights-trends/docview/2125639934/se-2
• Punie, Y., Zinnbauer, D., & Cabrera, M. (2006). A review of the impact of ICT on learning. Working Paper prepared for DG EAC. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: http://www.eurosfaire.prd.fr/7pc/doc/1224678677_jrc47246n.pdf
• Quah CY, Ng KH. A systematic literature review on digital storytelling authoring tool in education: January 2010 to January 2020. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 2022; 38 (9):851–867. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2021.1972608. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ran H, Kim NJ, Secada WG. A meta-analysis on the effects of technology's functions and roles on students' mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms. Journal of computer assisted learning. 2022; 38 (1):258–284. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12611. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ređep, N. B. (2021). Comparative overview of the digital preparedness of education systems in selected CEE countries. Center for Policy Studies. CEU Democracy Institute .
• Rott, B., & Marouane, C. (2018). Digitalization in schools–organization, collaboration and communication. In Digital Marketplaces Unleashed (pp. 113–124). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Savva M, Higgins S, Beckmann N. Meta-analysis examining the effects of electronic storybooks on language and literacy outcomes for children in grades Pre-K to grade 2. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022; 38 (2):526–564. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12623. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmid RF, Bernard RM, Borokhovski E, Tamim RM, Abrami PC, Surkes MA, Wade CA, Woods J. The effects of technology use in postsecondary education: A meta-analysis of classroom applications. Computers & Education. 2014; 72 :271–291. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.11.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schuele CM, Justice LM. The importance of effect sizes in the interpretation of research: Primer on research: Part 3. The ASHA Leader. 2006; 11 (10):14–27. doi: 10.1044/leader.FTR4.11102006.14. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwabe, A., Lind, F., Kosch, L., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2022). No negative effects of reading on screen on comprehension of narrative texts compared to print: A meta-analysis. Media Psychology , 1-18. 10.1080/15213269.2022.2070216
• Sellar S. Data infrastructure: a review of expanding accountability systems and large-scale assessments in education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. 2015; 36 (5):765–777. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2014.931117. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stock WA. Systematic coding for research synthesis. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, editors. The handbook of research synthesis, 236. Russel Sage; 1994. pp. 125–138. [ Google Scholar ]
• Su, J., Zhong, Y., & Ng, D. T. K. (2022). A meta-review of literature on educational approaches for teaching AI at the K-12 levels in the Asia-Pacific region. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence , 100065. 10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100065
• Su J, Yang W. Artificial intelligence in early childhood education: A scoping review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2022; 3 :100049. doi: 10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100049. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sung YT, Chang KE, Liu TC. The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students' learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education. 2016; 94 :252–275. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Talan T, Doğan Y, Batdı V. Efficiency of digital and non-digital educational games: A comparative meta-analysis and a meta-thematic analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2020; 52 (4):474–514. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2020.1743798. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational research, 81 (1), 4–28. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from 10.3102/0034654310393361
• Tamim, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Pickup, D., Bernard, R. M., & El Saadi, L. (2015). Tablets for teaching and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from: http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/1012/2015_Tamim-et-al_Tablets-for-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf
• Tang C, Mao S, Xing Z, Naumann S. Improving student creativity through digital technology products: A literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2022; 44 :101032. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101032. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tolani-Brown, N., McCormac, M., & Zimmermann, R. (2011). An analysis of the research and impact of ICT in education in developing country contexts. In ICTs and sustainable solutions for the digital divide: Theory and perspectives (pp. 218–242). IGI Global.
• Trucano, M. (2005). Knowledge Maps: ICTs in Education. Washington, DC: info Dev / World Bank. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496513.pdf
• Ulum H. The effects of online education on academic success: A meta-analysis study. Education and Information Technologies. 2022; 27 (1):429–450. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10740-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Underwood, J. D. (2009). The impact of digital technology: A review of the evidence of the impact of digital technologies on formal education. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/10491
• Verschaffel, L., Depaepe, F., & Mevarech, Z. (2019). Learning Mathematics in metacognitively oriented ICT-Based learning environments: A systematic review of the literature. Education Research International , 2019 . 10.1155/2019/3402035
• Villena-Taranilla R, Tirado-Olivares S, Cózar-Gutiérrez R, González-Calero JA. Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review. 2022; 35 :100434. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100434. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Voogt J, Knezek G, Cox M, Knezek D, ten Brummelhuis A. Under which conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? A call to action. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2013; 29 (1):4–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00453.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., & Cabrera, M. (2020). Emerging technologies and the teaching profession: Ethical and pedagogical considerations based on near-future scenarios  (No. JRC120183). Joint Research Centre. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC120183
• Wang LH, Chen B, Hwang GJ, Guan JQ, Wang YQ. Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education. 2022; 9 (1):1–13. doi: 10.1186/s40594-022-00344-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wen X, Walters SM. The impact of technology on students’ writing performances in elementary classrooms: A meta-analysis. Computers and Education Open. 2022; 3 :100082. doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100082. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zheng B, Warschauer M, Lin CH, Chang C. Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of Educational Research. 2016; 86 (4):1052–1084. doi: 10.3102/0034654316628645. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• Admission Process
• Enrollment Benefits
• Enroll at Allison Academy
• Incentives for the Best
• Education in the US
• Application requirements
• Why study in the USA?
• Advantages and disadvantages of studying abroad
• Facts and Figures
• Inquire Online
• Mission and Vision
• Principal’s Welcome
• Academic Calendar
• Policy and Regulations
• Accreditation
• The highest LINK edu Alliance standards
• Questions and Answers
• Report Misconduct
• What Others Say About School?
• Summer School at Allison Academy
• The school bulletin
• Video Gallery
• 21st Century Learning Skills
• Future-ready School
• Middle School Curriculum
• High School Curriculum
• The best proven educational model
• STEM concept
• Online learning at Allison Academy
• Google apps for education
• Student Development
• College Advising
• Guitar school
• Basketball club
• Robotics club
• Learning and Motivation
• Student Council
• Community Service
• School Uniforms
• International and Field Trips
• Athletics and sports
• Prevention of Bullying
• LINK kidZ & Youth WBCC
• Why Allison Academy?
• What’s Trending?
• For Students
• For Parents
• College tips
• Register Online

Home / Students / Education / Technology in education / Advantages and disadvantages of technology in education

Advantages and disadvantages of technology in education

Although the education system has always been strongly influenced by innovations, the explosion of new technologies caused tectonic shifts in the way the teaching process is carried out in school. 

Many technology enthusiasts believe that changes in the education system can only go forward due to an incredible growth in the number of inventions that are continuously changing the description of existing professions. In this regard, many believe that abandoning traditional classroom education altogether is almost certain in the near future, noting that traditional education will not be able to adequately prepare students for the new challenges and demands of the real world. 

However, sceptics often argue that we should be careful with the immediate implementation of modern technologies in the classroom, primarily because of the potential consequences, such as widening of an existing social gap, an increased number of individuals who suffer from mental illness, and the regression of children’s cognitive and academic development that may prove irreversible.  

Taking into account the arguments of both sides, we will present a list of advantages and disadvantages of technology in education below, and explain how it impacts today’s students. 

Advantages of technology in education

Looking back over the last hundred years, introducing technology into the classroom has been a blessing only for younger students and teachers. In other words, with a sudden introduction of a wide range of devices and the Internet, students got the opportunity to make the learning process much easier and more interesting. Key benefits of technology in education include: 

Provides a better interactive experience during the learning and teaching process 

With the introduction of mobile phones, tablets and computers, students are now able to do something they should have been able to do long ago – to learn actively and productively. For the first time, students can access a subject/teaching unit with enthusiasm thanks to applications, videos, simulations and digital books that make the learning process much more engaging. Moreover, having the opportunity to dig deeper into an area that interests them allows them to potentially recognize their interests and talents, and maybe even their future profession.  

Provides access to an unlimited amount of current information and data from a variety of sources 

In addition to the fact that students approach learning with more enthusiasm and productivity, they also have the opportunity to access the most current topics and research, which is something their ancestors could only dream about. Instead of going from library to library, dragging a pile of books with them, they are just a few clicks and well-defined queries away from accessing information that can give them additional insight into the topics they are covering at school. So, this practice not only enables students to have a modern education, but it also teaches them how to approach the search for information and read complex professional literature. 

Teaches them digital literacy 

We all know that young people cannot acquire the level of skill demanded by today’s corporate world in computer science classes. By implementing technology as an integral part of education, students are given the opportunity to keep up with learning trends and acquire technological/digital skills that are highly sought after in the 21st century . This form of learning is most helpful for students who don’t have access to modern technology at home, which could also potentially reduce the social gap between digitally literate and illiterate people.   

Reduces educational costs  

With the introduction of technology in education, resources have become more accessible, which resulted in declining tuition fees, the need for books and their price, as well as the reduced need for school supplies. The introduction of e-books has made things easier for low-income families, and helped students to approach learning on equal terms with their peers, without parental pressure for high performance arising from large investments into their child’s education. 

In addition, another positive side-effect of using e-books in education is the fact that they indirectly contribute to the reduction of deforestation, which is one of the major environmental problems.  

Provides better insight into student performance thanks to metrics 

In the past, teachers had to spend considerable time evaluating the overall academic performance of each student, which proved to be very impractical, especially in large classes with over 20 students. Unfortunately, many students never succeed in correcting the wrong steps in learning that can help them improve their performance , and potentially discover their talents of affinities. 

However, with the introduction of digital technologies and the Internet in the classrooms, a teachers’ job of analyzing student performance and providing guidelines and advice has become much easier, which is a win-win situation both for teachers and students. Specifically, thanks to platforms that collect data on student performance in class, tests, and assignments, teachers have clear insight into the areas students struggle with, or excel at. Moreover, teachers are now able to modify lessons based on insights into the performance of individual students, or class as a whole. 

They can choose between real-time learning or learning at their own pace 

Technology in education has allowed students to gain control over their learning, but it also provided flexibility to teachers in transferring knowledge to students. Namely, this practice is only possible in schools that support hybrid (blended) learning , i.e. a combination of synchronous real-time learning, and asynchronous learning where students can listen to a lecture when they choose.

Listening to a teacher giving a lesson in real time provides students with a stronger sense of belonging, and allows them to socialize with their peers, same as face-to-face interaction with the teacher . On the other hand, more independent students who are confident in their own time management and commitment management skills can learn whenever they feel like it.

Enroll Now!

At our school in North Miami Beach, we are committed to using technology in education in a way that maximizes its benefits and minimizes its drawbacks, providing your child with a well-rounded education.

Disadvantages of technology in education

It is great to be optimistic and believe in the continuous advancement of technology, however, it is equally important to not lose sight of the negative sides of technology in education, and how it can cause long-term problems for young people. Namely, many sceptics from the domain of social sciences and humanities often point out several potential disadvantages of technology in education, and how it can negatively affect certain aspects, and the quality of children’s life and development: 

It is distracting both in the classroom and outside of it 

Proponents of technology in education often forget that students continue to use their mobile phones and tablets throughout the day, long after they’ve completed their school activities. Namely, with the daily dosage of social media and video games, children’s brains are accustomed to entertaining, intensive, and short-term content that can quickly stimulate their dopamine system. 

The biggest problem here is the fact that daily interaction with technological devices reduces attention span, and research shows that the attention span of children from Generation Z is about 8 seconds .  Although teachers may have good intentions, the use of applications that have nothing to do with the teaching process itself should be restricted, and technology should be used in class only when absolutely necessary.  

Potentially diminishes cognitive development and reduces problem-solving skills 

Technology always has a good intention, to reduce the time and make it easier to perform certain mechanical activities. However, technology has automated almost all school activities. Why would a child need to learn the basics of math, when they can use a calculator on their phone, or why would they need to learn spelling, when they have autocorrect software? 

So, what was originally a positive intention has led to the situation that new generations will be unable to perform everyday cognitive activities without technology. In addition, it should be noted that when children use technology to solve every problems at school, they gradually lose their problem-solving abilities, which is a highly sought-after set of skills. The only solution to this problem is to have teachers and educational institutions as a whole impose restrictions on the use of technology in education. 

Reduces direct peer interaction 

Although digital technologies have been shown to improve student advancement, and project collaboration, they, however, disregard our biological need for interaction in real time. Namely, we have lived as social beings for over tens of thousands of years, and we now think that we can trick our genetic predisposition so easily. 

Although young people interact with their parents, teachers and peers, the percentage of adolescents with a diagnosis of some form of depression has been growing, and has now reached a staggering 20%. The only solution that teachers and educational institutions can offer is to encourage young people to engage in face-to-face interaction with others. 

Maintaining modern technology is very expensive 

The cost of upgrading or maintaining technology is often overlooked. In a world where new innovations in the field of digital technologies appear almost every month, and where upgrading software and applications continuously requires more powerful devices, relying on the belief that technology in education is the only solution sounds overly confident. 

Namely, teaching and learning can be done without technology, but the question is – how useful the acquired specific skills will be after a few generations of technological backwardness. So, in order to not regret the purchase of new technology, educational institutions are obligated to estimate the actual long-term costs of that investment, and how it will reflect on tuition fees that students and their parents need to pay. 

It is easier to cheat in exams 

A huge problem that teachers face is cheating on exams, and not having an insight into student knowledge of a lesson. This is also the biggest problem with online tests, because teachers often don’t know if students have access to another device while taking the test. This problem could have long-term consequences, primarily due to the inability of educational institutions to guarantee that the student actually possesses the knowledge needed for higher levels of education, or to do their job.  

Reduced number of teachers due to automation and reduced salaries 

With the introduction of technology in the curriculum, the role of the teacher as an authority figure and mediator is slowly fading. It should be noted that automation in education and the introduction of certain applications has led to a decrease in the number of teachers in modern schools. However, the remaining teachers have even more responsibilities than before, and their income is not increasing in proportion with their responsibilities, so many have had to give up their job. 

As we said earlier, describing the advantages of technology in education, children have the opportunity to access a wide spectrum of information that makes lessons more engaging, but the question is, how long does it take to prepare and integrate that content into a meaningful whole? So, increased responsibilities mostly refer to the preparations for class, the importance and complexity of which are underestimated by many, primarily because it is not visible to parents. 

The problem that needs to be addressed is that educational institutions should stop approaching teachers as manual laborers, and the first step toward that goal is increasing their salary and treating them with the respect they deserve, otherwise, we will have unmotivated teachers who don’t care about transferring knowledge to their students, and the consequence is a generation of individuals incapable of becoming useful members of society.   

Final thoughts on the pros and cons of technology in education

Different people have different opinions on the introduction of these changes in the education system, especially if it’s done so suddenly and in such a short time. However, one should be realistic, because the advantages still far outweigh the disadvantages. 

So, a continuous insistence on disadvantages should not be seen as a desire to return to traditional education, but as a reason for caution and the possibility to better see the holes in the technologies and methods used in education. It is up to educational institutions and teachers to analyze the disadvantages in the next revision, and improve the quality of teaching both in their digital and physical classrooms.

Related Posts

22 Advantages and Disadvantages of Technology in Education

The modern classroom has taken several steps forward in its evolution of the learning environment in the past 25 years. Many of the benefits that we have seen in this setting are due to the introduction of new technology options for students. Instead of having a single computer for a class to use or a laboratory environment for the entire school placed in one room, we can now help students learn at their table or desk with items issued to them directly.

Our development of the Internet since 1989 has helped us to include more technological access to information in the modern classroom as well. If you grew up as an 80’s kid, then you had the A/V cart come into your class to watch educational videos and maybe have a snack. Now students get to play interactive learning games, compete against other students, and have their educational statistics tracked in real-time data to know where their point of focus should be.

Introducing technology to students in a classroom setting can certainly help the educational environment, but it also requires equal access for all students to ensure that everyone receives the same opportunities to success. That is why each school district, teacher, and parent should periodically review the advantages and disadvantages of technology in education settings.

List of the Advantages of Technology in Education

1. Technology helps children to stay motivated during the learning process. Most students don’t like to go to school if they feel like they are wasting their time. When there is technology allowed in the classroom, then teachers have an opportunity to let kids work at a pace which suits them the best without disturbing others. They can look up additional information about a subject they are learning about that day, play educational games that reinforce the lesson, or work on advanced material using a program like Zearn.

Because many of today’s technology options allow students to see how well they are doing compared to the average of all users, it gives them a chance to push harder for themselves and their education. Many of the programs that encourage learning also issue rewards or award certificates, which helps to make the lessons fun as well.

2. It encourages more communication between teachers and parents. When there is technology in the classroom, then there are more opportunities for parents and teachers to connect with each other. Using a blog for the classroom can help parents get to see what their children are learning each day. Apps and software options allow teachers to instantly report on a child’s behavior to let parents know in real-time what is happening throughout the day. There are options for chat boxes, instant messaging, and other forms of communication as well.

Let’s not forget about email here either. Since the 1990s when this technology option came into the classroom, it created more reliability in messaging between teachers and parents should there be a need to talk.

3. Technology options in the classroom are very affordable. Although the cost of having technology in the classroom can be significant if you are introducing new options to an entire district, the cost of student computers, tablets, and class essentials is minimal. Most student computers cost less than $200 each, and there are several grants available on local, state, and national levels that help to offset these costs to local taxpayers.

“The Internet is the first technology since the printing press which could lower the cost of a great education and, in doing so, make the cost-benefit analysis much easier for most students,” said John Katzman. “It could allow American schools to serve twice as many students as they do now, and in ways that are both effective and cost-effective.”

4. It creates new ways to learn for today’s student. There are three critical forms of intelligence that we see in children today: emotional, creative, and instructional. The traditional classroom environment, which typically encourages lecture-based lessons, focuses more on the latter option. Standardized tests and similar ranking tools do the same. When kids have access to technology today, then those who excel outside of the standard learning setup can still achieve their full potential.

Technology allows children to embrace their curiosity in multiple ways. They can try new things without embarrassment because their tech access gives them a level of anonymity. This process allows kids to work, through trial-and error if they wish, to see if a different strategy helps them to learn more effectively.

5. Technology allows us to give students access to data from a single location. Do you remember when a research project meant a visit to the library so that you could pull 4-5 books to read, have access to an encyclopedia, and even microfilm to view so that you had enough resources to finish your assignment? Technology allows a student to access every item they need for a project from a central resource. Instead of spending all of that time searching for something specific or waiting for your library to order it, you can run a few queries on Google and find what you need.

6. It gives us better access to behavioral data on students. The various apps, software choices, and technological platforms collect data on students that can show attendance patterns, learning issues in specific subjects, and how they react in particular situations. This information leads to the creation of a profile where teachers, schools, and parents can work together to identify places where additional learning may be necessary. Technology can even help a school district find their highly capable students to keep pushing them toward more challenging work so that they remain engaged with the learning environment.

7. Technology helps to prepare students for their future world. Even if there are warnings from medical providers about the amount of screen time that students receive in their classroom environment, the reality of the modern educational system is that we must have technology exposure now to prepare our children for the world they will face as adults. This sector will continue to evolve. If they are not prepared to use these items today, then tomorrow could be a struggle for them.

That means some traditional subjects might not be as important to teach for some schools or teachers. Is it more important to have a student learn how to write in cursive or know how to type without using the two-finger chicken-pecking method? Is coding more of a critical skill than learning how to cook? Should kids know how to put a chair together in woodshop or have the ability to put together their own computer?

These are the questions we need to be asking when looking at the advantages and disadvantages of technology in the classroom.

8. The introduction of technology allows for the teaching of needed vocational skills. Although there are regions of extreme poverty and isolation which do not have Internet access in the United States right now, over 90% of Americans have a home connection to online resources. By introducing technology to students from an early age, we can teach them the critical vocational skills that are necessary for success in a digital world. That is why writing continues to be a top priority in the K-4 grades, formatting guidelines and software use after, and knowing how to research efficiently is approached as an essential skill.

9. Technology in the classroom encourages collaboration. Students retain very little of the information they receive when a teacher lectures from a textbook. When there are interactive lessons on a chalkboard or whiteboard, kids can remember about 20% of what they were taught. If a teacher encourages a small group discussion, that percentage can quadruple.

Technology gives us an easy way to develop collaboration skills for students using online tools that encourage them to work together in safe ways. If kids can then practice what they were taught immediately, there is very little that they will forget.

10. It encourages students to stay engaged with their learning environment. Kids get bored very easily when they feel like they already know what is being taught in their classroom. Some children will transform into mentors or leaders in this situation to help their fellow students, but there are many more who disengage because they lack stimulation. By introducing technology to the classroom, there are fewer places where repetitive learning must take place. Teachers can introduce new subjects, try new techniques, or use different projects to encourage ongoing learning, which creates more overall engagement.

11. Teachers have more credibility when they use technology in the classroom. Teachers are sometimes hesitant to use technology in the classroom because they are unsure of what a student might have at home. Giving homework assignments that require computer access to a student without that technology at home would be a waste of time. There can also be pushback from parents who are uncomfortable giving their kids additional screen time for learning. When you can introduce these elements to the classroom and have children learn there, then you can overcome the socioeconomic barriers that are sometimes in place for low-income families.

List of the Disadvantages of Technology in Education

1. The presence of technology can be distracting to students. When kids play video games, they can find themselves reacting with addiction-like behaviors. Their focus is on the entertainment they receive more than anything else. If the educational environment uses reward-based games to encourage learning, then the child might be more concerned with what they receive through the software or app instead of what they are learning.

Although correct answers can be an indication of knowledge, there might not be as much information retention as hoped. Teachers must set and enforce healthy boundaries when using technology in the classroom to ensure healthy results are possible.

2. Technology can make it easier to cheat. Remember the TV shows and movies where kids would break into a teacher’s classroom, steal the answer key to a test, and then write down everything on their wrist, shoe, or a slip of paper? Now a student can send themselves a text with that information. They can send that data to anyone else with a phone. Email can relay this info too. There must also be strict rules in place about the use of technology during quizzes or tests when an exact measurement of student knowledge is needed to evaluate their overall progress.

3. Using tech can cause some students to disconnect from the classroom. Interacting online with others is a different experience than when you collaborate over the Internet with someone. Being behind a screen provides you with a layer of anonymity that you don’t receive with a face-to-face conversation. Learning how to work with one another using technology is an essential skill, but it cannot be the other option that teachers introduce to their classroom. We must encourage social interactions that accurately communicate thoughts, feelings, or emotions so that when a child is offline, they can still make a better life for themselves.

4. Some students may not know the difference between reliable and unreliable resources. There is a lot of information on the Internet today that is fake or exaggerated in some way, but it masquerades as being real. According to research published by New York Magazine, less than 60% of web traffic today is actually human-based searches or content interaction. Up to half of the traffic on YouTube each year are bots that masquerade as people. Not only is the content sometimes fake, but then also the users might not be real too. Teachers must show students how to access real information, show them how to verify its validity, and then encourage them to use it appropriately.

5. Technology is a resource that not all families can afford. Whether technology is in the classroom or at home, there is the issue of affordability to worry about in today’s world. Some households cannot afford to purchase computers for their kids to manage their school work. There are school districts that don’t have enough money to pay their salaries each year, much less add new tech components for learning.

When we emphasize having technology in the classroom, then we place those at the lowest end of the wage scale at a significant disadvantage. Students with greater access can learn more and have access to lessons more often, which means they have additional information exposure that can increase their opportunities to succeed.

6. Some technologies could replace the teacher in some classrooms. Interactive learning lessons are so effective today that the software or app can become the teacher instead of having someone present to help a student. One of the best examples of this potential disadvantage is ABC Mouse, which provides clear instructions to students as young as 3 so that they can start learning when they are ready.

Instead of being in a hands-on role, technology makes the teacher more of an observer. New tech automates the learning process while adapting to changing student needs.

7. There are privacy concerns to consider with technology in the classroom. Over 15 million people each year experience identity theft in some way. It is a criminal empire that costs the economy over $16 billion per year. Since 2011, over $100 billion in losses have happened because of this issue. One of the reasons why it is becoming more prevalent is because more people have greater access to technology today.

When we introduce technology to the classroom, we are placing the identity of our children at risk every day. Even when apps, computers, mobile devices, and operating systems have advanced privacy filters that reduce the threat of identity loss, there is no way to guarantee that all risks are gone unless the equipment never goes online. If we take this step, then we end up losing many of the advantages of having technology in the classroom in the first place.

8. Technology in the classroom could create medical problems for some kids. Eye strain occurs when you look at a computer screen for too long. Symptoms of this issue include back pain, eye pain, neck pain, feelings of tiredness, blurred vision, and problems with focus. Continuous heavy computer usage may lead to issues with early myopia, with a prevalence rate of more than 60% for those older than the age of 12. For some people, the impact of this health issue is cumulative, which means the time they spend in front of a phone, tablet, and television can contribute to eye health issues as well.

9. Kids often lose track of time when using technology in the classroom. Although kids can adapt to changing environments without much of a second thought, their idea of normal is often defined by what they experience in the classroom. Teachers and schools have as much, if not more, time with children than their parents throughout the day, which means the classroom becomes an influential part of life for each student. Encouraging the use of tech might help to create more learning opportunities, but it can also lead to a lifestyle that is more sedentary.

When children sit for too long during the day, then they face the same health challenges that adults do when not getting enough exercise. There can be problems with obesity, hyperactivity, muscle fatigue, sleeping problems, and metabolism issues with prolonged sitting. That is why any school that introduces technology to the classroom should also encourage at least 30 minutes of moderate physical activity whenever possible.

10. Many classrooms place limits on technology access. Because of the awareness that schools have with the potential disadvantages that technology can cause in the classroom, there are limits placed on the use of items under the guise of child protection. Although firewalls and site blockers can prevent most dangerous content from reaching the eyes of children, it is not unusual to see this issue taken a step further by restricting computer work to word processing and basic research. Students come home with assignments to use tech of their own, at a library, or through a loan program to place this responsibility on the parents instead.

If we force limits on children instead of teaching them how to make wise choices, then is that really giving them a learning environment?

11. Technology can create dependencies for information recall. If you cannot recall a piece of information instantly, then what is your next step to find an answer? Most people would say that they would look online for the data they want or ask a virtual assistant, like Alexa, to give them the answer. Having access to a treasure-trove of resources is wonderful, but it can also create a dependency because of its presence. If we do not teach students how to recall info by themselves without the use of a smart device or computer, then the next generation of students may be unable to function unless there is technology for them to access.

Verdict on the Advantages and Disadvantages of Technology in the Classroom

These advantages and disadvantages of technology in the classroom indicate that students and teachers can be more effective in their roles with its presence. Although there can be varying levels of comfort based on the amount of exposure each person has to computers, electronic whiteboards, and other items, an introduction of new tech is an investment that can offer ongoing dividends.

There are times when technology can provide new experiences to a student. Teachers can use apps and software to reach kids that might normally disconnect from the classroom.

Technology in the classroom opens more doors, introduces new experiences, and creates more opportunities for self-discovery. The positive aspects that occur with school integration typically outweigh any of the issues that a district might encounter.

• Interactive Display
• Accessories
• myViewBoard
• Multi-touch Series
• Professional - VP Series
• Business - VG Series
• Home and Office - VA Series
• USB-C Series
• Home Entertainment
• Sports Viewing
• Installation
• Presentation Displays
• Direct View LED Display
• Pen Display
• ViewSonic Education Solutions
• Touch Screen Solutions
• ViewSonic Library & Blog
• myViewBoard Resources
• Case Studies
• Solution Briefs
• White Papers
• Press Center
• Knowledge Base
• Product Warranty
• Deutsch ( German )
• Français ( French )
• Türkçe ( Turkish )

Education  |  Feb 25 2020

5 Disadvantages of Technology in the Classroom (And How to Overcome Them)

Though we generally see progress as a good thing, there are definite disadvantages of technology in the classroom. From distraction to reducing face time, EdTech isn’t a magic bullet for every situation. With some awareness, however, most disadvantages can be overcome, like some of the surprisingly old-school thinking that helps with tech disparity. 

So read on for some disadvantages of technology in the classroom (and potential solutions). 

From apps and e-textbooks to organizational platforms and “gamification,” there’s no shortage of technology in the classroom . But, while EdTech tools can make lessons more engaging and useful for students raised on technology, they can equally challenge teachers and lead to suboptimal outcomes for students. How can teachers get the most out of technology without sacrificing efficiency or engagement?

Here are 5 disadvantages of technology in the classroom and how to get past them for your students.

Distracting Students

Smartphones have a bad reputation in classrooms and there have been  strong cases for banning them in schools . Research suggests that during class time, when smartphones 42% of the time that students spent on their smartphones in the classroom, it was to text, tweet, or otherwise engage in social media rather than the lesson.

However, bans on devices such as smartphones are unlikely to work as students will inevitably get around them. Also, such bans would be resented by students, who consider the use of technology to be a matter of personal autonomy that should only be regulated when it distracts other students. While teachers can help students learn better self-control methods to help them to regulate their own use of devices, research shows that better lesson plans that promote student engagement have less off-task use of technology.

Therefore, the onus is on instructors to create engaging, inspiring, and stimulating lesson plans that incorporate technology. For example, smartphones can access educational apps that promote learning as well as time management.

Many teachers incorporate digital platforms into lesson plans and find that using social media can actually keep students engaged and encourage classroom participation. Some teachers even create twitter hashtags to encourage comments.

Technology can be used to supplement lesson plans with digital materials, including video , news stories, online discussions, and to encourage participation. Get creative!

Requires Management and Training

The rise of EdTech means that being effective in the classroom requires that teachers are effective on the screen and tech platform. Studies show that three-quarters of teachers say the internet and other digital tools have added new demands to their lives and have dramatically increased the range of content and skills about which they must be knowledgeable, with nearly half saying it has increased their workload.

New tech in the classroom also means needing IT professionals to help set it up, maintain it, and support teachers and students in its use. Clear and transparent communications among administration, faculty, and tech vendors that clarify how adopting a particular device, platform, or program will benefit students and teacher alike, can greatly enhance the use of technology in the classroom, to remove the suspicion that such technology is just “bells and whistles” with little actual value. Teachers also need access to training.

Moreover, institutions can help maximize their technical support staff by finding a less resource-intensive solution. Read 10 Reasons Education IT Administrators Love Interactive Touch Screen Displays .

Leads to Tech Disparity

Tech disparity refers to how much access students have to the necessary devices. The differences in access can be seen between school districts, with more affluent districts having greater resources, but it can also refer to differences among students in the same school, where students from wealthier families having greater access. A recent survey indicates that while 84 percent of American teens have a smartphone, the other 16 percent don’t. Reaching out to that 16 percent is the goal.

Tech disparity also refers to school policymaking and tech management. For example, the above survey also points out that while three-quarters of teachers working in wealthier districts felt that their schools provided adequate training, only half of the teachers in low-income areas agreed. Around 40 percent of teachers in economically disadvantaged areas saw their schools as behind the curve in technology advancement.

Teachers and administrators can take practical steps toward bridging the tech divide. Assuming unequal access to devices, schools can focus on technology that can be shared among classes, for example, shared tablet computers and school computer labs, not to mention school-based Wi-Fi.

Then, there is tech that can be used within the classroom, such as interactive whiteboards and projectors, as well as a digital curriculum that all students can access.

Bridging the tech divide is not easy, but for a fairer society with equal opportunity, it needs to be the focus of all efforts. (But a good start to fighting tech disparity is a computer lab in school .)

ViewSonic Education

Learning Solutions For the Future

Nothing in this world is free, and buying cutting-edge electronics for a classroom is downright expensive. While there’s no way to avoid spending money modernizing a classroom, it is at least possible to maximize the total cost of ownership (TCO) by installing devices with longer lifespans and reduced maintenance. Tech with higher upfront costs might actually save the school money as it will face fewer issues and have less downtime while being easier to use. Schools need to assess TCO carefully before choosing purchasing tech.

Moreover, the use of technology should not be confined to the classroom and in fact can be used to streamline administrative systems, cutting costs, boosting productivity, and reducing time wasted on administrative tasks. Cloud computing, for example, offers substantial opportunities for schools to save money. Switching to a digital curriculum eliminates the need to continuously replace outdated textbooks.

Cloud-based computing also reduces the need to keep expensive hardware on-site, which can save in administrative costs, reduce payroll costs (fewer IT techs), and eliminates that 24-hour air-conditioned server room. Also, sharing materials online rather than printing them out saves costs of printers and ink – substantial costs for schools – not to mention all that hard work spent printing.

Less Face Time

No amount of technology in the classroom can replace talented, inspired teachers. As the adage goes, any teacher that can be replaced with a tech device probably deserves to be replaced.

Technology is not the solution to ensuring a healthy vigorous learning culture, it is simply a pedagogical tool that is only as valuable as the instructor who wields it. In fact, while billions of dollars are spent on EdTech, countries that don’t deploy tech often have better educational outcomes than countries that spend heavily.

Face to face interactions between teacher and student can help students not just acquire facts, but to understand, interpret, and apply these facts into useful and interesting knowledge. Through face to face interactions, teachers can help students build self-esteem and confidence and emotional maturity. Particularly in disadvantaged areas, teachers can provide a zone of comfort and security, and everywhere teachers can reduce the cyberbullying that so often accompanies social media.

There are lots of ways to synthesize tech into real-world activities, but sometimes teachers just need to switch off the tech and get down to personal interactions. For example, while so much information can be readily accessed on the Internet, so much of that information is dubious at best and sometimes downright malevolent. Teachers need to guide students on how best to identify useful sources and balance differing viewpoints.

Final Thoughts

Of course there will be challenges along the way as we adopt new technologies in education and improve them to suit student outcomes. But the advantages vastly outweigh the disadvantages of technology in the classroom. It is just always important to remain aware of where the latest tech is coming up short and to adjust course for the best possible learning outcome for the students.

There’s no reason to be afraid of EdTech, but nor should we rush blindly into digital transformation. After all, education is all about learning, and we should all be open to the ongoing process of improvement that comes with it.

Want to learn more about implementing EdTech? Check this out:  Technology in the Classroom: The Complete Guide . Or go directly to ViewSonic’s technology solutions for education .

RELATED ARTICLES

Education  |  Mar 14 2024

Introducing Multimedia Learning Design in Education – By Owen Matson, Ph.D.

Owen Matson, Ph.D. introduces multimedia learning in education and offers educators strategies to incorporate it into their teaching methods.

Professional Development  |  Jan 26 2024

Why Every Teacher Needs Their Community

Discover how teacher communities provide opportunities to learn, collaborate, and grow on an educational journey with like-minded peers.

Professional Development  |  Jan 18 2024

The Power of the ViewSonic Education Ecosystem

The ViewSonic Education Ecosystem blends hardware, software, and services to empower educators, enhance learning, and streamline operations.

Technology in the Classroom  |  Dec 08 2023

Online Whiteboarding vs. Whiteboarding Apps: Which Is Better for the Classroom?

Explore digital whiteboarding in education, weighing the pros and cons of online vs. native apps to find the class setup they are best for.

SELECT YOUR REGION

Asia pacific & africa.

New global data reveal education technology’s impact on learning

The promise of technology in the classroom is great: enabling personalized, mastery-based learning; saving teacher time; and equipping students with the digital skills they will need  for 21st-century careers. Indeed, controlled pilot studies have shown meaningful improvements in student outcomes through personalized blended learning. 1 John F. Pane et al., “How does personalized learning affect student achievement?,” RAND Corporation, 2017, rand.org. During this time of school shutdowns and remote learning , education technology has become a lifeline for the continuation of learning.

As school systems begin to prepare for a return to the classroom , many are asking whether education technology should play a greater role in student learning beyond the immediate crisis and what that might look like. To help inform the answer to that question, this article analyzes one important data set: the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), published in December 2019 by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Every three years, the OECD uses PISA to test 15-year-olds around the world on math, reading, and science. What makes these tests so powerful is that they go beyond the numbers, asking students, principals, teachers, and parents a series of questions about their attitudes, behaviors, and resources. An optional student survey on information and communications technology (ICT) asks specifically about technology use—in the classroom, for homework, and more broadly.

In 2018, more than 340,000 students in 51 countries took the ICT survey, providing a rich data set for analyzing key questions about technology use in schools. How much is technology being used in schools? Which technologies are having a positive impact on student outcomes? What is the optimal amount of time to spend using devices in the classroom and for homework? How does this vary across different countries and regions?

From other studies we know that how education technology is used, and how it is embedded in the learning experience, is critical to its effectiveness. This data is focused on extent and intensity of use, not the pedagogical context of each classroom. It cannot therefore answer questions on the eventual potential of education technology—but it can powerfully tell us the extent to which that potential is being realized today in classrooms around the world.

Five key findings from the latest results help answer these questions and suggest potential links between technology and student outcomes:

• The type of device matters—some are associated with worse student outcomes.
• Geography matters—technology is associated with higher student outcomes in the United States than in other regions.
• Who is using the technology matters—technology in the hands of teachers is associated with higher scores than technology in the hands of students.
• Intensity matters—students who use technology intensely or not at all perform better than those with moderate use.
• A school system’s current performance level matters—in lower-performing school systems, technology is associated with worse results.

This analysis covers only one source of data, and it should be interpreted with care alongside other relevant studies. Nonetheless, the 2018 PISA results suggest that systems aiming to improve student outcomes should take a more nuanced and cautious approach to deploying technology once students return to the classroom. It is not enough add devices to the classroom, check the box, and hope for the best.

What can we learn from the latest PISA results?

How will the use, and effectiveness, of technology change post-covid-19.

The PISA assessment was carried out in 2018 and published in December 2019. Since its publication, schools and students globally have been quite suddenly thrust into far greater reliance on technology. Use of online-learning websites and adaptive software has expanded dramatically. Khan Academy has experienced a 250 percent surge in traffic; smaller sites have seen traffic grow fivefold or more. Hundreds of thousands of teachers have been thrown into the deep end, learning to use new platforms, software, and systems. No one is arguing that the rapid cobbling together of remote learning under extreme time pressure represents best-practice use of education technology. Nonetheless, a vast experiment is underway, and innovations often emerge in times of crisis. At this point, it is unclear whether this represents the beginning of a new wave of more widespread and more effective technology use in the classroom or a temporary blip that will fade once students and teachers return to in-person instruction. It is possible that a combination of software improvements, teacher capability building, and student familiarity will fundamentally change the effectiveness of education technology in improving student outcomes. It is also possible that our findings will continue to hold true and technology in the classroom will continue to be a mixed blessing. It is therefore critical that ongoing research efforts track what is working and for whom and, just as important, what is not. These answers will inform the project of reimagining a better education for all students in the aftermath of COVID-19.

PISA data have their limitations. First, these data relate to high-school students, and findings may not be applicable in elementary schools or postsecondary institutions. Second, these are single-point observational data, not longitudinal experimental data, which means that any links between technology and results should be interpreted as correlation rather than causation. Third, the outcomes measured are math, science, and reading test results, so our analysis cannot assess important soft skills and nonacademic outcomes.

It is also worth noting that technology for learning has implications beyond direct student outcomes, both positive and negative. PISA cannot address these broader issues, and neither does this paper.

But PISA results, which we’ve broken down into five key findings, can still provide powerful insights. The assessment strives to measure the understanding and application of ideas, rather than the retention of facts derived from rote memorization, and the broad geographic coverage and sample size help elucidate the reality of what is happening on the ground.

Finding 1: The type of device matters

The evidence suggests that some devices have more impact than others on outcomes (Exhibit 1). Controlling for student socioeconomic status, school type, and location, 2 Specifically, we control for a composite indicator for economic, social, and cultural status (ESCS) derived from questions about general wealth, home possessions, parental education, and parental occupation; for school type “Is your school a public or a private school” (SC013); and for school location (SC001) where the options are a village, hamlet or rural area (fewer than 3,000 people), a small town (3,000 to about 15,000 people), a town (15,000 to about 100,000 people), a city (100,000 to about 1,000,000 people), and a large city (with more than 1,000,000 people). the use of data projectors 3 A projector is any device that projects computer output, slides, or other information onto a screen in the classroom. and internet-connected computers in the classroom is correlated with nearly a grade-level-better performance on the PISA assessment (assuming approximately 40 PISA points to every grade level). 4 Students were specifically asked (IC009), “Are any of these devices available for you to use at school?,” with the choices being “Yes, and I use it,” “Yes, but I don’t use it,” and “No.” We compared the results for students who have access to and use each device with those who do not have access. The full text for each device in our chart was as follows: Data projector, eg, for slide presentations; Internet-connected school computers; Desktop computer; Interactive whiteboard, eg, SmartBoard; Portable laptop or notebook; and Tablet computer, eg, iPad, BlackBerry PlayBook.

On the other hand, students who use laptops and tablets in the classroom have worse results than those who do not. For laptops, the impact of technology varies by subject; students who use laptops score five points lower on the PISA math assessment, but the impact on science and reading scores is not statistically significant. For tablets, the picture is clearer—in every subject, students who use tablets in the classroom perform a half-grade level worse than those who do not.

Some technologies are more neutral. At the global level, there is no statistically significant difference between students who use desktop computers and interactive whiteboards in the classroom and those who do not.

Finding 2: Geography matters

Looking more closely at the reading results, which were the focus of the 2018 assessment, 5 PISA rotates between focusing on reading, science, and math. The 2018 assessment focused on reading. This means that the total testing time was two hours for each student, of which one hour was reading focused. we can see that the relationship between technology and outcomes varies widely by country and region (Exhibit 2). For example, in all regions except the United States (representing North America), 6 The United States is the only country that took the ICT Familiarity Questionnaire survey in North America; thus, we are comparing it as a country with the other regions. students who use laptops in the classroom score between five and 12 PISA points lower than students who do not use laptops. In the United States, students who use laptops score 17 PISA points higher than those who do not. It seems that US students and teachers are doing something different with their laptops than those in other regions. Perhaps this difference is related to learning curves that develop as teachers and students learn how to get the most out of devices. A proxy to assess this learning curve could be penetration—71 percent of US students claim to be using laptops in the classroom, compared with an average of 37 percent globally. 7 The rate of use excludes nulls. The United States measures higher than any other region in laptop use by students in the classroom. US = 71 percent, Asia = 40 percent, EU = 35 percent, Latin America = 31 percent, MENA = 21 percent, Non-EU Europe = 41 percent. We observe a similar pattern with interactive whiteboards in non-EU Europe. In every other region, interactive whiteboards seem to be hurting results, but in non-EU Europe they are associated with a lift of 21 PISA points, a total that represents a half-year of learning. In this case, however, penetration is not significantly higher than in other developed regions.

Finding 3: It matters whether technology is in the hands of teachers or students

The survey asks students whether the teacher, student, or both were using technology. Globally, the best results in reading occur when only the teacher is using the device, with some benefit in science when both teacher and students use digital devices (Exhibit 3). Exclusive use of the device by students is associated with significantly lower outcomes everywhere. The pattern is similar for science and math.

Again, the regional differences are instructive. Looking again at reading, we note that US students are getting significant lift (three-quarters of a year of learning) from either just teachers or teachers and students using devices, while students alone using a device score significantly lower (half a year of learning) than students who do not use devices at all. Exclusive use of devices by the teacher is associated with better outcomes in Europe too, though the size of the effect is smaller.

Finding 4: Intensity of use matters

PISA also asked students about intensity of use—how much time they spend on devices, 8 PISA rotates between focusing on reading, science, and math. The 2018 assessment focused on reading. This means that the total testing time was two hours for each student, of which one hour was reading focused. both in the classroom and for homework. The results are stark: students who either shun technology altogether or use it intensely are doing better, with those in the middle flailing (Exhibit 4).

The regional data show a dramatic picture. In the classroom, the optimal amount of time to spend on devices is either “none at all” or “greater than 60 minutes” per subject per week in every region and every subject (this is the amount of time associated with the highest student outcomes, controlling for student socioeconomic status, school type, and location). In no region is a moderate amount of time (1–30 minutes or 31–60 minutes) associated with higher student outcomes. There are important differences across subjects and regions. In math, the optimal amount of time is “none at all” in every region. 9 The United States is the only country that took the ICT Familiarity Questionnaire survey in North America; thus, we are comparing it as a country with the other regions. In reading and science, however, the optimal amount of time is greater than 60 minutes for some regions: Asia and the United States for reading, and the United States and non-EU Europe for science.

The pattern for using devices for homework is slightly less clear cut. Students in Asia, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), and non-EU Europe score highest when they spend “no time at all” on devices for their homework, while students spending a moderate amount of time (1–60 minutes) score best in Latin America and the European Union. Finally, students in the United States who spend greater than 60 minutes are getting the best outcomes.

One interpretation of these data is that students need to get a certain familiarity with technology before they can really start using it to learn. Think of typing an essay, for example. When students who mostly write by hand set out to type an essay, their attention will be focused on the typing rather than the essay content. A competent touch typist, however, will get significant productivity gains by typing rather than handwriting.

Would you like to learn more about our Social Sector Practice ?

Finding 5: the school systems’ overall performance level matters.

Diving deeper into the reading outcomes, which were the focus of the 2018 assessment, we can see the magnitude of the impact of device use in the classroom. In Asia, Latin America, and Europe, students who spend any time on devices in their literacy and language arts classrooms perform about a half-grade level below those who spend none at all. In MENA, they perform more than a full grade level lower. In the United States, by contrast, more than an hour of device use in the classroom is associated with a lift of 17 PISA points, almost a half-year of learning improvement (Exhibit 5).

At the country level, we see that those who are on what we would call the “poor-to-fair” stage of the school-system journey 10 Michael Barber, Chinezi Chijoke, and Mona Mourshed, “ How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better ,” November 2010. have the worst relationships between technology use and outcomes. For every poor-to-fair system taking the survey, the amount of time on devices in the classroom associated with the highest student scores is zero minutes. Good and great systems are much more mixed. Students in some very highly performing systems (for example, Estonia and Chinese Taipei) perform highest with no device use, but students in other systems (for example, Japan, the United States, and Australia) are getting the best scores with over an hour of use per week in their literacy and language arts classrooms (Exhibit 6). These data suggest that multiple approaches are effective for good-to-great systems, but poor-to-fair systems—which are not well equipped to use devices in the classroom—may need to rethink whether technology is the best use of their resources.

What are the implications for students, teachers, and systems?

Looking across all these results, we can say that the relationship between technology and outcomes in classrooms today is mixed, with variation by device, how that device is used, and geography. Our data do not permit us to draw strong causal conclusions, but this section offers a few hypotheses, informed by existing literature and our own work with school systems, that could explain these results.

First, technology must be used correctly to be effective. Our experience in the field has taught us that it is not enough to “add technology” as if it were the missing, magic ingredient. The use of tech must start with learning goals, and software selection must be based on and integrated with the curriculum. Teachers need support to adapt lesson plans to optimize the use of technology, and teachers should be using the technology themselves or in partnership with students, rather than leaving students alone with devices. These lessons hold true regardless of geography. Another ICT survey question asked principals about schools’ capacity using digital devices. Globally, students performed better in schools where there were sufficient numbers of devices connected to fast internet service; where they had adequate software and online support platforms; and where teachers had the skills, professional development, and time to integrate digital devices in instruction. This was true even accounting for student socioeconomic status, school type, and location.

COVID-19 and student learning in the United States: The hurt could last a lifetime

Second, technology must be matched to the instructional environment and context. One of the most striking findings in the latest PISA assessment is the extent to which technology has had a different impact on student outcomes in different geographies. This corroborates the findings of our 2010 report, How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better . Those findings demonstrated that different sets of interventions were needed at different stages of the school-system reform journey, from poor-to-fair to good-to-great to excellent. In poor-to-fair systems, limited resources and teacher capabilities as well as poor infrastructure and internet bandwidth are likely to limit the benefits of student-based technology. Our previous work suggests that more prescriptive, teacher-based approaches and technologies (notably data projectors) are more likely to be effective in this context. For example, social enterprise Bridge International Academies equips teachers across several African countries with scripted lesson plans using e-readers. In general, these systems would likely be better off investing in teacher coaching than in a laptop per child. For administrators in good-to-great systems, the decision is harder, as technology has quite different impacts across different high-performing systems.

Third, technology involves a learning curve at both the system and student levels. It is no accident that the systems in which the use of education technology is more mature are getting more positive impact from tech in the classroom. The United States stands out as the country with the most mature set of education-technology products, and its scale enables companies to create software that is integrated with curricula. 11 Common Core State Standards sought to establish consistent educational standards across the United States. While these have not been adopted in all states, they cover enough states to provide continuity and consistency for software and curriculum developers. A similar effect also appears to operate at the student level; those who dabble in tech may be spending their time learning the tech rather than using the tech to learn. This learning curve needs to be built into technology-reform programs.

Taken together, these results suggest that systems that take a comprehensive, data-informed approach may achieve learning gains from thoughtful use of technology in the classroom. The best results come when significant effort is put into ensuring that devices and infrastructure are fit for purpose (fast enough internet service, for example), that software is effective and integrated with curricula, that teachers are trained and given time to rethink lesson plans integrating technology, that students have enough interaction with tech to use it effectively, and that technology strategy is cognizant of the system’s position on the school-system reform journey. Online learning and education technology are currently providing an invaluable service by enabling continued learning over the course of the pandemic; this does not mean that they should be accepted uncritically as students return to the classroom.

Jake Bryant is an associate partner in McKinsey’s Washington, DC, office; Felipe Child is a partner in the Bogotá office; Emma Dorn is the global Education Practice manager in the Silicon Valley office; and Stephen Hall is an associate partner in the Dubai office.

The authors wish to thank Fernanda Alcala, Sujatha Duraikkannan, and Samuel Huang for their contributions to this article.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Safely back to school after coronavirus closures

How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better

DejaOffice Blog

7 Disadvantages of Technology in Education

Technology has developed a lot within the last century. It has influenced many fields, including the health sector, finance, transport, communication, and even education. Technology has various benefits for the education system, which are quite common. However, the rise of technology in learning has also carried some disadvantages with it, some of which might be overlooked. A survey of the top education apps shows the following items that we have highlighted.

Learning Is Becoming More Expensive

Times have changed a lot in terms of education. Students only used to require simple writing tools such as pens and books to get their education. However, the introduction of technology in education has introduced a lot more devices that students need. Currently, every student in college is advised to at least own a laptop since the era of paper is being substituted for digital learning.

Students have to spend extra money on software for their devices and even in maintaining these technological devices. Universities have to charge more for tuition because they offer access to new forms of technologically advanced resources for their students. Instead, a lot of the money spent here could be useful in another aspect of a student’s life.

Do you need Photoshop for school? Adobe gives a photoshop student discount for educational purposes if you are a teacher or student.

Insufficient Teaching Methods

Tutors used to be well equipped with only information to pass down to students. It was a system that worked. However, the integration of MDM technology into teaching means that some of these professors have to become tech-savvy, which takes time.

Educators are finding it challenging to implement mechanization while teaching. On the other hand, students are good at using technology but also find trouble learning from it.

ExamSnap can help you study with tons of online practice exams on a variety of topics.

Misguiding Information

Websites have become more focused on getting better rankings than actually providing the information they need to. Many sites are putting up misleading information online to earn more visits, even if the information is not accurate.

As a student, you are likely to stumble upon some of these sites that provide false details or wrong information. Other sites copy content from other websites without authenticating the information. Either way, the readers are misled, which is bad for students.

Extra Distractions for Students

Technology has led to the rise of a lot of devices that can access the internet. Students are having a hard time trying to focus most of the time. Like an essay writer at write-my-paper-for-me.com , students have to fight off some distractions to focus on their work. Devices such as laptops and smartphones don’t help the case.

In the U.S, at least 60% of students are provided with laptops by their schools. The problem comes in when pupils are using these machines for social media. Individuals take the time to check updates from various social media sites, even during classes. So, it’s hard to focus in general. Phones have also become very addictive , and students rarely spend more than 10 minutes without checking their phones.

Inefficient Learning by Students

Students can find any information they need from anywhere in the click of a few buttons. They don’t have to work for it anymore. Furthermore, the fact that students can go and get information from various websites means that they don’t need to attend classes frequently. They become inattentive when in course.

Then, there are various educational software for students , for example, spelling and grammar checkers. Students currently don’t even have to learn good grammar or correct spelling anymore because of these tools. There are also tools for solving mathematical equations, meaning students are becoming over-reliant on technology.

Technology Sometimes Fails

A lot of innovations, especially gadgets, tend to experience some errors. For example, many servers experience problems and have downtime, inconveniencing learning. Connection problems are also quite common. These challenges take time to be fixed. Consequently, learning gets delayed. Using training video software for your organization can help overcome the difficulties in communication for hybrid and remote workers when they are first hired.

Consider hiring a nearshore development team to avoid technical hassle by leaving it to the experts.

Makes Cheating Easier

Cheating used to be a lot harder when phones could not be used to access the internet during tests. Students have taken advantage of new technological advancements to outsmart the system. It has become harder to detect pupils are cheating, and even proving it becomes more challenging (although teachers can use this free tool to identify content written by ChatGPT and other AI programs). So, a good number of students get away with it and acquire their degrees. They go on to become actual professionals in the fields without being deserving of these positions academically.

Final Thoughts

Technology will always keep growing, and new inventions will keep being discovered. For the most part, growing technology is a sign of progress from our society. But enhancements in technology should not dictate the path of education. Instead, it should improve education while still upholding the core values associated with learning.

Jennifer Walter is a psychology professor, an independent researcher, writer, and contributor. He is the guru to hundreds of students, the author of hundreds of analysis studies, and the voice behind most liked articles on content creation and strategy at privatewriting.com .

Jennifer Walter is a psychology professor, an independent researcher, writer, and contributor. He is the guru to hundreds of students, the author of hundreds of analysis studies, and the voice behind most liked articles on content creation and strategy at privatewriting.com

• Removal Guides
• APN Settings
• Social Media

Disadvantages Of Technology In Education | Top 9 Highlights

We were forced to enter the age of innovation and technology as the sword of Covid -19 swung over our heads. Because attending schoo l is no longer an option, technology in education significantly impacts our educational patterns. This article will discuss some of the disadvantages of technology in education.

These are the main drawbacks of online learning and classroom technology.

• Quicker but less lasting learning
• Technology may be a hindrance.
• Less direct engagement with others
• It takes a lot of time to integrate technology.

Technology has become a luxury in education, but after the Covid epidemic, it became necessary especially the education software development services . It offers advantages, like hiring lab report writers for homework assistance, but it also has disadvantages. However, it is essential to consider both advantages and disadvantages when implementing technology in education.

Table of Contents

Disadvantages Of Technology In Education

Here is a list of Disadvantages of Technology in Education:

Keep Face-to-Face Contact To A Minimum

As technology changes, the classroom loses some of its humanistic elements. When everyone has their phones or laptops in school , they never have the opportunity to learn humanistic traits like sharing, assisting, making friends, learning about new cultures, etc.

Furthermore, in this lockdown environment and with parents’ ongoing busy lives, the school was the only location where kids made friends and could engage with their peers their age. Because of the demand for time, online schools have reduced this privilege by ten. Plus, the students are constantly distracted since there is minimum face-to-face contact .

Unreliable Learning Resources

Students who are expected to compete for their Python assignments, for example, without direction, may encounter untrustworthy information sources.

Yes, there is much of this stuff on the internet. Because accurate information costs money, pupils are likelier to choose a free source and flourish on incorrect information. This has led to significant disadvantages of technology in education.

Substitute The Teacher

It’s a far shot but recorded curricula and lectures can be used to substitute for an actual teacher.

See Also: Best French Learning App 

Difficult Curriculum Planning

As a teacher, you must stay up with the latest trends and terminology. And, most crucially, current events in every education sector when creating a curriculum .

Because of this, it’s impossible to keep up with everything going on.

Medical Problems

Medical difficulties are the most crucial element to consider as one of the disadvantages of technology in education.

Screen time increases when using the screen for learning and refreshment, such as after a long lecture on your laptop and taking notes on your tablet. And you retire to bed to unwind and look at your phone while scrolling through your social media accounts. You go to the kitchen, get a bite, and eat it in front of the TV when you’re tired.

Every student in quarantine follows this path on average. Kids should limit their screen time and engage in healthy activities to counteract this harmful tendency.

Children’s obesity is at an all-time high, and the main reason for this is too much reliance on electronics rather than physical activity. Parents don’t mind their children playing games because many teach them anything. The outside play used to be a fantastic exercise, but today it’s all about online games.

Due to a lack of fresh air and opportunities to release energy, many allergies and aberrant hormones have arisen in today’s children , resulting in tantrums and anger. This has also led to one of the disadvantages of technology in education.

Reliance On Rapid Internet Searches Rather Than Reading A Book

When you’re experiencing a problem in class, the solution is available online and is just a single click away; you don’t have to read a whole paper or book to get the necessary information. 

Yes, reading the problem’s background took a long time, but it taught us a lot and helped us develop our vocabulary and attention span.

Being Costly

Here’s the rub: if you want to use all the benefits of technology in the classroom, you’ll have to open your wallet a lot since technology is expensive.

And because it has become a must, it is a costly requirement.

Possibility Of Cheating

Students are more technologically advanced than teachers. Because being born and raised around technology has given them such power, they can manipulate using everyday cheating hacks or, for example, students can use essay writing websites or grammar checkers to get the highest grade. Click here to find the best article-writing software for yourself.

Teachers are usually unaware of such hacks. This leads the system to be unfair.

What are the five disadvantages of technology in education?

The most crucial disadvantage in daily life is that it disconnects people’s face-to-face communication, and it may distract students from their own lives and becomes obsessed with what they see on the internet.

Is technology good or bad for kids?

Though technology possesses many advantages for kids, it is primarily disadvantageous. If, it can distract the students from their studies and take away their valuable childhood by looking into a virtual world.

How technology affects our life?

Technology has helped in improving the quality of lifestyle and made our lives much more accessible and opportunities. But at the same time, It possesses many disadvantages, so it is necessary to balance everything.

How does technology affect sleep?

The time in which people go to sleep is greatly affected by technology; it leads to delays in sleep and changes in sleep patterns.

Everything has both positive and negative elements. Fortunately, we can mitigate the disadvantages of technology in education.

Aren’t we all aware that diamonds cut diamonds? So, using that metaphor, we may limit screen time. We install apps and software that monitor your screen time and remind you to look away from it or turn it off according to a schedule.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions

share this!

May 13, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

written by researcher(s)

Billions are spent on educational technology, but we don't know if it works

by Natalia Kucirkova, The Conversation

During the COVID lockdowns, schools and universities worldwide relied on education technology—edtech—to keep students learning. They used online platforms to give lessons, mark work and send feedback, used apps to teach and introduced students to programs that let them work together on projects.

In the aftermath of school closures, the market for edtech has kept on growing. The value of the sector is projected to rise to US$132.4 billion globally by 2032 .

The problem is that we don't know very much about how effective many edtech apps or programs are—or if they are effective at all .

And some effects may be negative. Some of the so-called educational apps advertised to families show many adverts to children. They may use manipulative features to keep children on screens without teaching them anything new.

This technology is here to stay and will remain a significant part of how children learn—so knowing whether it works is imperative.

Assessing and addressing the quality of edtech is a significant task, especially when it is already so widely used. For edtech under development, a valuable option is to foster closer collaboration between tech developers and scientists who study learning to embed existing research and knowledge into the design.

Research consultancy firms can carry out swift assessments to provide edtech developers with information on how well what they are offering works. Transparency and integrity in the research process is vital, though, to prevent bias. Ways of ensuring this include pre-registration : reporting that a study is going to take place before it happens.

Partnerships with schools could also provide valuable feedback . However, minimum standards of quality and ethical considerations would need to be assured before technologies are sent to schools.

Setting a standard

When it comes to edtech that is already available, what is really needed is some kind of standardized metric to assess how well it works.

But establishing minimum standards for the effect of edtech is easier said than done. There is, historically, a lack of standardized metrics for assessing educational impact within impact economics —the study of how businesses create financial returns while ensuring positive social or environmental outcomes.

Without standardization, there are too many ways to assess edtech. A review commissioned by the UK government of evaluation criteria and standards for edtech analyzed 74 methods for assessing their quality.

Similarly, I carried out a research study with colleagues on available criteria to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of edtech produced specifically for schools. We found 65 different frameworks for evaluating whether these school-specific offerings work.

The abundance of evaluation possibilities can be confusing for edtech businesses. The multitude of options makes it difficult to ascertain the quality of their products. It is confusing to investors too, especially those who want to prioritize not only edtech's return on investment but also a return on education and community.

A yardstick that establishes the minimum quality requirements for a edtech product to be used in schools is crucial to ensure technology does more good and no harm. The creation of a yardstick needs to take into account both the product quality and the process of using the technology— whether it works for diverse populations and diverse learning environments.

The independent verification of evidence is vital , considering that any company can simply "generate" a study with the data they daily collect on users. In my research work with colleagues, I have argued for a focus on the rigor and validity of various research types.

New initiatives, such as the International Certification of Evidence of Impact in Education , have begun to consolidate the different research approaches, standards and certifications related to evidence of edtech impact globally. Ultimately, the goal is to make it easier for schools and parents to navigate the thousands of educational apps and online platforms available.

Whether individual countries will create the legal and institutional frameworks to enforce any of the standards remains to be seen. Countries will need to select standards that suit both their economic and educational agendas. An important shift is needed so that schools can strategically select edtech they know will help children's learning.

Provided by The Conversation

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Tiger beetles fight off bat attacks with ultrasonic mimicry

5 hours ago

Machine learning model uncovers new drug design opportunities

9 hours ago

Astronomers find the biggest known batch of planet ingredients swirling around young star

How 'glowing' plants could help scientists predict flash drought

New GPS-based method can measure daily ice loss in Greenland

10 hours ago

New candidate genes for human male infertility found by analyzing gorillas' unusual reproductive system

11 hours ago

Study uncovers technologies that could unveil energy-efficient information processing and sophisticated data security

Scientists develop an affordable sensor for lead contamination

12 hours ago

Chemists succeed in synthesizing a molecule first predicted 20 years ago

New optical tweezers can trap large and irregularly shaped particles

Relevant physicsforums posts, is "college algebra" really just high school "algebra ii", physics education is 60 years out of date, plagiarism & chatgpt: is cheating with ai the new normal, physics instructor minimum education to teach community college.

May 11, 2024

Studying "Useful" vs. "Useless" Stuff in School

Apr 30, 2024

Why are Physicists so informal with mathematics?

Apr 29, 2024

More from STEM Educators and Teaching

Related Stories

Malawi's school kids are using tablets to improve their reading and math skills

Rise of ChatGPT shows why Australia needs a clearer approach to technology in schools

Feb 16, 2023

Global evidence for how EdTech can support pupils with disabilities is 'thinly spread'

Mar 25, 2021

As more biometric data is collected in schools, parents need to ask these 10 questions

Nov 30, 2022

'Edtech' boom transforms how Indian kids learn

Mar 31, 2019

White paper urges governance for AI school grading technologies

Nov 16, 2022

Recommended for you

Investigation reveals varied impact of preschool programs on long-term school success

May 2, 2024

Training of brain processes makes reading more efficient

Apr 18, 2024

Researchers find lower grades given to students with surnames that come later in alphabetical order

Apr 17, 2024

Earth, the sun and a bike wheel: Why your high-school textbook was wrong about the shape of Earth's orbit

Apr 8, 2024

Touchibo, a robot that fosters inclusion in education through touch

Apr 5, 2024

More than money, family and community bonds prep teens for college success: Study

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

Exposing children from neighbourhoods with socio-economic disadvantages to Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and vocational paths

In a dynamic collaboration between academia and young minds, 12 enthusiastic children from a school in Delft recently embarked on an enriching journey into the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). This event was part of the project “ Bliksmestage ” of JINC organisation. Community Engagement programme of the Communications department of the TU Delft has established a partnership with JINC and Bliksemstage project is part of the agreement. The project aims to expand the horizons and opportunities of young student in targeted areas. ‘JINC’ works with schools in different cities in the Netherlands and offers a range of programmes, in their efforts to ensure that ‘’your postcode does not define your future”. At the Electrical Engineering, Mathematics, and Computer Science (EEMCS) buildings, this half-day outreach programme served as a gateway to ignite curiosity and passion for these pivotal disciplines. It is important to mention that next to professions associated with the research disciplines of the faculty, the students got the opportunity to get acquainted with the research facilities and labs!

The expedition started with a warm welcome at the entrance of EEMCS, where the young visitors were guided through the buildings of our campus, including visiting lecture halls and even the HyperLoop site. Next to the tour, the children delved deeper into the heart of computer science, exploring the renowned INSIGHT Lab. Here, they witnessed firsthand the world of robotics, engaging with Pepper robot and acquainting themselves with other fascinating robots like NAO .

Transitioning into the world of Electrical Engineering, the young learners experienced  the Tellegen Hall. Through a blend of theory and practice, they solved the mysteries of electric circuits, delving into concepts such as electric charge, current, voltage, resistance, and the transformative power of piezoelectricity. They experimented and witnessed the tangible effects of mechanical strain on resistance and the fascinating interplay between creativity and scientific principles.

This event offered the young visitors the change to get a full experience of the university world, inside a very cool lecture room during a Lego Optimization Game. The participants eagerly collaborated in small groups, trying to find the optimal solution. As part of the gameplay, a lecturer unveiled the mathematical underpinnings behind the game, showcasing the pathways towards optimization and cutting-edge software solutions.

As the day drew to a close, the children departed with newfound knowledge, endless possibilities, and a tangible reminder of their extraordinary journey—a goodie bag with a diploma of participation and a thought-provoking brochure entitled "Why should I study math?". Young students asked many targeted questions and stayed engaged and curious through all the phases of the event. Their reactions at the end of this day and especially when interacting with robots showed that the day was a success!

Deel deze pagina: