When to Avoid Using Classroom Technology

After 13 years of teaching, I banned all phones and laptops in my classroom, and got the best reviews I’ve ever received! Hard to believe students gave me BETTER reviews after I made them put away their digital lifelines? Let me explain. Initially, students were skeptical. But after a couple weeks, they were more engaged, absorbed information better, and actually enjoyed class time. The research backs this up: students who take handwritten notes retain significantly more information than those typing on computers. And the mere presence of smartphones (even when turned off) reduces cognitive capacity and makes social interactions less engaging. While 11 states have enacted statewide phone bans in K-12 schools, this trend hasn't quite caught on at colleges and universities where it's desperately needed. Yes, 18-year-olds are legal adults, but they still need structure to optimize their learning – their prefrontal cortices aren't fully developed yet. We can't turn back time to the flip phone era, but we can preserve our classrooms as sacred spaces for genuine teaching and learning. More thoughts in my The New York Times piece, linked in the comments below. #HigherEducation #StudentLearning #TechInClassroom

Back to Basics: Why Sweden’s Shift Away from Screens Deserves Attention Recent discussions about schools in Sweden moving away from excessive screen use and returning to books, handwriting, and direct instruction raise an important educational question: Have we confused digital access with deep learning? Technology is powerful. But it is a tool — not a pedagogy. Scenario 1 – When Screens Dominate (The Drawback) A Grade 5 classroom relies heavily on tablets. Students type all assignments, read from digital texts, and complete assessments online. At first glance, engagement looks high — devices are open, screens are bright. However:    •   Students struggle to sustain attention beyond short tasks.    •   Reading comprehension drops when texts are long.    •   Writing lacks structure because autocorrect and predictive text compensate for weak spelling and grammar foundations.    •   Handwriting fluency declines, affecting cognitive processing and memory retention. Over time, teachers notice that while students are digitally fluent, their depth of thinking, patience, and analytical writing skills weaken. Research increasingly suggests that handwriting activates different neural pathways linked to memory consolidation and conceptual understanding. Scenario 2 – Balanced Traditional Foundations (The Merit) Now imagine another classroom where:    •   Students read physical books.    •   They annotate margins.    •   They write summaries by hand before drafting digitally.    •   Discussions happen face-to-face before any device is used. In this setting:    •   Students build stamina for deep reading.    •   Writing by hand strengthens retention and cognitive clarity.    •   Classroom dialogue improves communication and critical thinking.    •   Technology is used intentionally — not constantly. The result? Students are not anti-technology. They are digitally competent AND cognitively strong. This conversation is not about rejecting innovation. It is about protecting foundational skills: - Deep reading - Structured writing - Focus and sustained attention - Cognitive endurance - Human interaction Perhaps the question is not “Digital or Traditional?” The real question is: Are we using technology to enhance thinking or replace it? As educators and leaders, balance is not a trend. It is a responsibility.

On his podcast this week, Ezra Klein says, "If you made me choose between sending my kids to a school that has no screens at all and one that is trying the latest AI technology, I would send them to the school with no screens in a second." I'm founding an AI-native school, and yet I entirely agree. At The Rock Creek School, we think there is a third way though: a barbell approach to technology, where we use less and more tech than the typical school. Less tech when it undermines agency, social connection, or the teacher’s role: * No phones or smart devices during the school day * No gamified edtech apps * No outsourced online curriculum platforms More tech when it deepens inquiry or expands agency: * Students learn to wield professional-grade tools as thinkers, creators, and analysts * From AI tools to spreadsheets, video editing software to Wolfram Alpha, students are taught to be the ones directing the tools, not their objects We're not choosing between screens and no screens, we're choosing agency. That means saying no to most school tech—and yes to the tools that offer real leverage in the real world.

𝐄𝐝𝐓𝐞𝐜𝐡’𝐬 𝐁𝐫𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐞: 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐒𝐚𝐲𝐬 A recent piece in The Economist offers a sobering reckoning with five decades of classroom technology. The story of McPherson Middle School in Kansas, which recently rolled back laptop-centric learning after disappointing results, mirrors what rigorous research has been warning for years. Despite bold claims of “personalization” and “adaptive learning,” large-scale evidence remains thin. A 2024 meta-analysis of 119 studies on early-literacy technologies led by researchers at Stanford University found, at best, marginal test score gains. Many interventions showed no effect or even negative outcomes. Neuroscientist reviews covering tens of thousands of studies reach a blunt verdict: 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 𝘳𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘵. And yet spending continues to surge. American schools now spend around $30 billion annually on edtech within a $165 billion global industry. Adoption has been driven less by evidence than by marketing, free pilots, and the administrative appeal of dashboards and automation. Teachers often report not liberation, but added surveillance, compliance work, and fragmented attention. The most troubling signal is longitudinal. National reading and subject scores in the US rose steadily until around 2012–15, precisely when in-class screen use accelerated. Since then, performance has declined. Cross-national data show a consistent pattern: heavier classroom computer use correlates with lower achievement, while classrooms with minimal or no device use tend to perform best. Why? Distraction is only the surface problem. Many platforms privilege gamification over concept mastery, short feedback loops over sustained thinking, and screen mediation over human interaction. Digital drills can help in narrow domains like spelling, arithmetic, or specific learning disabilities. But transfer beyond the app environment remains weak. Researchers increasingly argue for age-sensitive restraint. For younger children, peer and teacher interaction matters more than any interface. For older students, technology works only when its use is limited, intentional, and clearly subordinate to pedagogy. More than a decade ago, Bill Gates suggested it would take ten years to know whether edtech really works. Hundreds of billions later, the answer is clearer than the marketing suggests. Perhaps the most unsettling question raised by the article is this: 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐟 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐚 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐠𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬, 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐦𝐬, 𝐥𝐢𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐝? #EdTech #EducationResearch #EvidenceBasedPolicy #LearningSciences #TeachingAndLearning #ClassroomPractice #DigitalEducation

The biggest mistake students will make using AI It’s not using AI, it’s depending on it too early. AI can explain anything in seconds - give answers instantly, and even complete assignments. And that’s exactly where the problem starts, because learning is not just about getting the answer. It’s about struggling enough to understand it. When students skip that struggle: → Concepts feel clear in the moment, but don’t stay → Problem-solving ability becomes weak → Confidence becomes dependent on tools, not thinking AI makes things easy, but real understanding is built through effort. The smartest students won’t be the ones who use AI the most. They’ll be the ones who know when not to use it. Use AI to revise, use it to test yourself, and use it to simplify after you’ve tried. But don’t let it replace your thinking, because the goal is not to finish faster. The goal is to think better. And the students who protect their thinking will always stay ahead!!

📊 More Help, Worse Results: The Hidden Failure of AI in Learning 📚 Study snapshot 🧠 A pre-registered randomised controlled experiment tested whether using an LLM helps secondary students learn from reading, compared with note-taking or combining both: 405 students aged 14–15 in seven schools in England studied two history passages during a learning session and completed comprehension/retention tests three days later, with LLM access provided via a private Azure-hosted instance of OpenAI’s GPT-3.5 turbo; the study aimed to quantify learning effects and understand student experiences, finding note-taking performed best, LLM+Notes next, and LLM-only worst despite most students preferring the LLM; the work was conducted by researchers from Cambridge University Press & Assessment and Microsoft Research. 🔍 5 Key findings 🧩 #Overreliance on AI reduces deep cognitive processing, weakening critical thinking and long-term knowledge retention. ⚖️ #AI #feels #easier, encouraging avoidance of productive struggle essential for durable learning outcomes. 📝 #Copying #AI #output into notes #undermines generative note-taking and reduces conceptual synthesis. 🔀 #Conversational #AI #can #distract learners, competing with focused engagement on core reading materials. ✅ #Unchecked AI errors may persist, fostering misunderstandings and unwarranted confidence among students. 🧭 5 Policy recommendations 📖 #Require #independent #reading and note-taking before any AI assistance is permitted during lessons. 🎯 #Teach #structured #AI use focused on questioning, explanation, and verification rather than content generation. 🧰 #Design #school #AI #tools with constraints that limit distraction and discourage direct copy-paste behaviors. 🧠 #Train #teachers to integrate AI as a metacognitive support, not a substitute for student thinking. 📏 #Evaluate AI use with delayed assessments to ensure genuine comprehension and long-term retention. Cite: Kreijkes, Pia and Kewenig, Viktor and Kuvalja, Martina and Lee, Mina and Vitello, Sylvia and Hofman, Jake and Sellen, Abigail and Rintel, Sean and Goldstein, Daniel G. and Rothschild, David M. and Tankelevitch, Lev and Oates, Tim, Effects of LLM Use and Note-Taking On Reading Comprehension and Memory: A Randomised Experiment in Secondary Schools (January 13, 2025). Available at SSRN: https://lnkd.in/dxxj9B-P or https://lnkd.in/dW-ca_sF

Some U.S. schools are starting to move away from constant laptop use and bring back something much simpler. Pen and paper. After years of giving students laptops and tablets for almost everything, some teachers say the screens became more distracting than helpful. So classrooms are changing. Printed books are coming back. Handwritten notes are coming back. Worksheets are coming back. And some teachers say students are paying more attention, participating more and engaging more deeply with lessons. Research has also found that paper can have advantages in certain situations, especially for reading comprehension and note-taking. That does not mean laptops are disappearing completely. But more schools are starting to question whether every lesson really needs a screen. For years, classrooms raced to become more digital. Now some of them are discovering that one of the best upgrades might be going back to basics.