I found myself on a parent thread on my Raising Digital Leaders account, where a few parents shared that they are calling for the abolition of Educational technology, citing a video called, The most compelling argument against Ed Tech in the Classroom presented by Sophie Winkelman. If I didn’t have a strong background in media literacy and reasoning, or a plethora of lived experiences that are in direct contradiction to what was shared, I may in fact have found it to be compelling. In actuality, the video expresses an extreme point of view with several logical fallacies in her argument. Using my media literacy lens, I first asked myself, Who Made This and Why? To answer the first, Alliance for Responsible Citizenship: an international organisation whose aim is to unite conservative voices and propose policy based on traditional Western values (Wikipedia). Alrighty then. The purpose? To instil outrage in you so you will create a revolution at your child’ school (this is clearly stated in the last few minutes of the video).
I am going to admit my cognitive bias while watching this video. I feel like this is yet another fear mongering and extremist narrative that is trying to use one brush to paint a picture that requires extreme texture and nuance. I have spent over a decade advocating for digital leadership. I have also thoughtfully implemented educational technology in my own school and have presented and keynoted various technology conferences. I am of the firm belief that for some students, technology has made learning possible and for me as a teacher, I have been able to provide my students with opportunities I could never have imagined.
Many of the parents I speak to are feeling an increasing amount of guilt and shame because, and I quote a parent conversation here: “My kids already have phones so I don’t need a guilt-trip and a lecture, I need strategies to support my kids to have a healthy relationship with tech.”
I strongly believe that parents and schools need to work together to support kids to develop the skills they need to thrive socially, emotionally, and mentally in a world that increasingly requires human AND technology skills.
The compelling arguments
The video begins with an anecdote about a young couple on the bus simultaneously swiping dating apps instead of falling in love with each other right there on the subway. “They were side by side, both seeking companionship or love, but they didn’t even register each other’s existence”. This story draws upon our emotional response because it invites us to imagine that their phones are standing in the way of true love and supports the opinion that if only smartphones didn’t exist, the world would be a wonderful place again. I don’t seem to recall a time in my youth when I sat beside a stranger on a subway and had a conversation with them.
Here is my own anecdote (also based on a true story; actually countless true stories). Over the years, I have witnessed students who never had the confidence to utter one single word in class, contribute to an electronic wall (Padlet, Jamboard, Canva Whiteboard). As a teacher I was able to validate that student’s words and voice in a way that helped them to feel more confident and helped me, as a teacher, to be able to identify their prior knowledge on a topic. I was also able to use Google Sheets and conditional formatting to identify which students required more support.
Winkelman quotes startling statistics about suicide rates up to 2020, but instead of citing notable research reports, draws from Johnathan Haidt’s book. Am I horrified by the statistics? Absolutely. The problem is that what Haidt does in his book is completely oversimplify a very nuanced and complex issue. This article by the director of NAMLE, in particular resonated with me but there are many more sources out there calling into question some of the cause/effect claims being made in that text. Common Sense Media’s frequent Research tells a much better picture of screen time and its impact on mental health and well-being.
Winkleman poses the following questions: Why is cutting and pasting some information from Google into a PowerPoint Superior to reading a passage in a well-researched textbook and handwriting a response? Why is homework listed on Microsoft teams better than jotted down? in a paper homework diary? Why is digitally transporting a child to the Egyptian pyramids better than that child imagining it? This kind of jazz hands immersion as an engagement tool doesn’t work; it negates the need to imagine rendering the pupil a passive rather than active?
I agree with her questions and agree that none of those examples are better for kids; this is yet another simplification and a generalization. An effective teacher would blend online and in person activities, focus on critical thinking and creativity, and prioritize relationships and collaboration over passive learning.
She further calls into question the safety of interactive smartboards in classrooms citing radiation, but I could find no evidence that this has ever been a concern.
She urges a parental revolution and cites a private school (which ironically has an Instagram account showcasing the faces of pupils who attend) as a model of what a tech-free education can look like without acknowledging that the students who attend these schools are from affluent families whose parents can afford to give their children the gift of travel, museums, art galleries, live theatre, etc…. She also lauds the Michaela Community School which is focuses on rote learning, strict discipline, and controlled environments (which was in the news in 2024 for not allowing a Muslim student to pray during Ramadan)
Winkelman quotes David James Deputy head of a leading Independent School “[who] says the most powerful learning tool in the classroom is an excellent teacher (actually John Hattie said this) and the most effective way to ensure children progress is to teach them to read and write effectively.” Agreed. I don’t think any teacher will disagree here.
She states that a healthy childhood should involve lots of free fun—drawing, running, reading, writing stories, make-believe, kicking a football around, even just staring out of the window and wondering.” No argument there and yet, a post hoc logical fallacy. This makes the assumption that school is kids on tech all day every day which is simply not the case.
Winkelman adds this imperative close to the end of her speech: “[W]e must employ Tech as our slave rather than our Master our use of it has to be intentional specific and moderate” which I also completely agree with. Do you know why? That is exactly what TEACHERS are trying to do.
I do agree that we need to evaluate tech tools coming into our schools and that we need to figure out how AI will support learning.
Teachers use ed tech when it serves the learning goals. I challenge you to find one entry in this blog (which goes back to 2013) where I have advocated for the use of technology that wasn’t in the service of learning. I am not a unicorn; instructional coaches, teacher-librarians, and educators use technology to support student learning when it serves a pedagogical purpose. Period. We do not use technology for tech’s sake. This is an important lesson I have shared with my pre-service teachers as well.
Uses of Educational Technology this talk does not take into account:
-The ability for parents whose language is not English access materials to be able to translate them and support kids at home
-The ability for students who are multi-language learners to be able to translate information to their own language
-the ability for student to provide feedback on design thinking projects to other students around the world
-The ability for teachers to change the lexile level of reading materials so all students, regardless of reading level, could access the same information while maintaining their dignity
-The ability for students who don’t process information as quickly as others to be able to refer back to lessons posted on an LMS
-The ability for students of any socio-economic class to create artifacts demonstrating their learning that they could be proud of (vs the beautiful physical creations of kids who had the parental support and means to do so)
-The ability for students who are introverted and who normally do not have a voice in school to share their thoughts and ideas on an electronic whiteboard or online platform
-Connecting students to authors AND other classes reading the same books (Global Read Aloud)
-using AR and VR to inspire wonder and curiosity in a variety of different formats so they can wonder, create solutions, and empathize with others around the world
-The ability for students who are not as strong verbally or in writing to be able to demonstrate learning in non-traditional ways
-the speed at which physical textbooks become outdated and need to be replaced and the incredible cost (both monetary and environmental)
-An increase in readership of print books (which I have seen evolve in my high school Library) as a result of BookTok
-access to TED Ed Club-a student centered club that helps students craft a TED talk and share it with others around the world
I recently facilitated a Digital Leadership Day design thinking challenge for students in Nebraska. We used an electronic student notebook for students to share their ideas, students got feedback from one another in person as well as in Breakout rooms in Zoom as well as a collaborative padlet. All of their thinking was done in person and the implementation of whatever plan they chose was also done in person at their schools. We are coming together again to share.
The Global Student Chat, an initiative I co-founded in 2017, brings student leaders together to talk about important issues. They develop the questions and then come together to share their thinking. We could not have a student from Dubai, India, two students from Ontario, and two students from Alaska, in addition to various student guests AND stream it to any students around the world without using technology.
I can go on and on… In fact, please let me know in the comments what I missed.
Look to the World Economic Forum or any other source predicting skills students need for the future. These include human skills (critical thinking, creativity, communication)AND tech skills; paper, pencil, and physical textbooks only go so far. If teachers are not using tech intentionally, then I agree with Winkelman that we should invest in teacher learning to prioritize thinking and creativity. I use the Harvard Zero project thinking routine resources myself and have introduced them to my pre-service teachers as well.
Keep doing what you’re doing my ed tech teacher friends and let’s SHARE the meaningful and intentional ways we are using ed tech in our classrooms on Instagram, LinkedIn, BlueSky!
