educational technologist

Request More Info

Fill out the form below and a member of our team will reach out right away!

" * " indicates required fields

What is Educational Technology? [Definition, Examples & Impact]

What is Educational Technology? [Tools & Media]

What is educational technology [theory & practice], careers in educational technology [value of a master’s degree].

From the ancient abacus to handheld calculators, from slide projectors and classroom film strips to virtual reality and next-generation e-learning, educational technology continues to evolve in exciting new ways — inspiring teachers and students alike.

Technology is continually changing the way we work and play, create and communicate. So it’s only natural that advancements in digital technology are also creating game-changing opportunities in the world of education.

For teachers, technology is opening up new possibilities to enrich and stimulate young minds. Today, there is growing excitement around the potential for assistive technology, virtual and augmented reality, high-tech collaboration tools, gamification, podcasting, blogging, 3D printing, artificial intelligence, personalized learning and much more.

Here, we’ll explore some of the most promising examples of educational technology and some specific edtech tools and trends. But first let’s take a closer look at what we mean when we talk about “educational technology,” because the discussion can refer to both:

• The theory and practice of educational approaches to learning, as well as
• The technological tools that assist in the development and communication of knowledge

One important definition of educational technology focuses on “the technological tools and media that assist in the communication of knowledge, and its development and exchange.”

Take augmented reality and virtual reality , for example. Writing about the “Top 6 Digital Transformation Trends In Education” in Forbes.com, technology innovation specialist Daniel Newman discusses using AR and VR to “enhance teacher instruction while simultaneously creating immersive lessons that are fun and engaging for the student.” He invites us to imagine using virtual reality to transport students to ancient Greece.

Gamification combines playing and learning by utilizing gaming as an instructional tool, according to Newman, who explains that incorporating gaming technology into the classroom “can make learning difficult subject matter more exciting and interactive.”

Regarding artificial intelligence , Newman notes that a university in Australia used IBM’s Watson to create a virtual student advisory service that was available 24/7/365. Apparently Watson’s virtual advisors fielded more than 30,000 questions in the first trimester, freeing up human advisors to handle more complex issues.

ProwdigyGame.com, whose free curriculum-aligned math game for Grades 1-8 is used by millions of students, teachers and parents, offers specific tips for leveraging educational technology tools in a report titled “25 Easy Ways to Use Technology in the Classroom.” Their ideas include:

• Running a Virtual Field Trip : Explore famous locations such as the Empire State Building or the Great Barrier Reef; or preview actual field trips by using technology to “visit” the locations beforehand.
• Participating in a Webquest : These educational adventures encourage students to find and process information by adding an interesting spin to the research process. For example, they could be placed in the role of detective to solve a specific “case,” collecting clues about a curriculum topic by investigating specified sources and web pages.
• Podcasting : Playing relevant podcasts — or assisting students in creating their own — can be a great way to supplement lessons, engage auditory learners and even empower students to develop new creative skills.

Educational technology strategist David Andrade reports in EdTechMagazine.com ( “What Is on the Horizon for Education Technology?” ) that current tools and trends include online learning and makerspaces, “with robotics and virtual reality expected to be widely adopted in the near future.” Peeking a little further into the future, Andrade says studies indicate that “artificial intelligence and wearable technology will be considered mainstream within four to five years.”

In practice, future innovation will come from the hearts and minds of the teachers who develop the knowledge and skills needed to discover the most engaging, effective ways to use educational technology strategies in classrooms, and virtual classrooms, far and wide.

Another essential definition of educational technology focuses on the theory and practice of utilizing new technology to develop and implement innovative educational approaches to learning and student achievement.

Behind all the high-tech tools, the digital bells and whistles, are the teachers who possess the skill — and the inspiration — to use these new technologies to expand the educational universe of their students.

According to a report by the International Society for Technology in Education ( “11 Hot EdTech Trends to Watch” ), “the most compelling topics among educators who embrace technology for learning and teaching are not about the tech at all, but about the students.”

Benefits for students include expanded opportunities for personalized learning , more collaborative classrooms and new strategies such as so-called “flipped learning,” in which students are introduced to the subject material outside the classroom (often online), with classroom time then being used to deepen understanding through discussion and problem-solving activities with peers.

For teachers who aspire to make an impact in this discipline, earning a master’s in educational technology is obviously about learning new tools, strategies and practices, but it’s also about understanding the supporting structures that must be in place to ensure the most successful outcomes. These include:

• Policy and legal issues
• Ethical issues (student privacy, etc.)
• Funding, grants and budgets
• Real-world applications (the world of work, partnership opportunities, etc.)
• Networking basics, hardware, learning management software
• Equity (community/school access and assets, student access)
• Ability to complete a school or district needs assessment/site tech survey analysis

Therefore, for educators who are inspired by the immense potential of educational technology, the value of a master’s degree cannot be overstated.

“We need technology in every classroom and in every student and teacher’s hand,” says education technology pioneer David Warlick, “because it is the pen and paper of our time, and it is the lens through which we experience much of our world.”

In recent years, rising interest in educational technology has led to the emergence of new advanced degree programs that are designed to prepare educators to shift into an innovator’s mindset and become transformative technology leaders in their classroom, school or district.

The best programs are structured to impart a comprehensive understanding of the tools used in educational technology, the theories and practices, and critically important related issues (budgeting, legal/ethical considerations, real-world partnership opportunities, educational equity, etc.) that are essential for such technology-enhanced programs to deliver on their potential to inspire student learning, achievement and creativity.

For example, the University of San Diego, well-known for its innovative, online Master of Education program, is launching a new specialization. The program is designed to prepare teachers to become effective K-12 technology leaders and coaches, virtual educators and instructional innovators who embrace technology-influenced teaching practices to empower student learning.

The program’s fully online format — in which students learn from expert instructors who possess deep experience in the field, while also interacting with fellow teachers from across the country — enables busy education professionals to complete their master’s degree in 20 months while working full time.

Be Sure To Share This Article

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

Top 11 Reasons to get Your Master of Education Degree

Free 22-page Book

• Master of Education

Related Posts

• Pennsylvania
• Reciprocity
• Associate's
• Ed Specialist
• Early Childhood Ed
• Elementary Ed
• Secondary Ed
• All Specialties
• Early Childhood
• High School
• All Careers

Teacher Certification Degrees » Teaching Career Center » Educational Technology Specialist Career Guide

Educational Technology Specialist Career Guide

• Author: Audrey Stoffle
• Expert Reviewer: Megan Bartlett, M.S.Ed.
• Editorial Process

Educational technology specialists, also known as instructional technology specialists or EdTech specialists, collaborate with teachers and school administration to facilitate the use of technology in classrooms and the school as a whole. This guide provides further information on what educational technology specialists do, how to become one, and their salary and job outlook.

Table of Contents

• How to Become
• Job Description
• Salary & Job Outlook

Additional Resources

Frequently asked questions, how to become an educational technology specialist.

Qualifying for a job as an instructional technology specialist typically requires a minimum of a master’s degree , preferably in educational technology or a related subject. Many schools also look for certification in instructional technology or industry-related IT certifications. Depending on the employer and job scope, a teaching certificate may also be a requirement. In states that offer educational technology certification or endorsement, such as Texas, New York, and Georgia, the EdTech program completed should hold approval from the state board of education. Typically, the steps to become an educational technology specialist at a public school are:

• Earn a bachelor’s degree in educational technology, education, or another related subject.
• Complete a school-based internship.
• Take your state’s tests for teacher certification and become licensed, if required.
• Earn a master’s, specialist, or doctoral degree in educational technology, instructional technology, or a related degree such as curriculum and instruction.
• Take your state’s licensing exam for educational/instructional technology and get an endorsement, if necessary.
• Apply to educational technology specialist positions.

Coursework in curriculum assessment and development, classroom learning support/development, data research/interpretation, and leadership development will form the core of most educational technology programs. Through courses such as these as well as supplemental training, prospective educational technology professionals will learn how to source and implement emerging classroom technologies across different media.

Educational Technology Specialist Job Description

Educational technology specialists (ETS) or instructional technology specialists often work in elementary, middle, and secondary schools (private or public), colleges or universities, government agencies, or in corporations and non-profits. They play a key role in identifying appropriate educational technology for all types of classroom applications. EdTech specialists frequently collaborate with educators and administrators in curriculum design by sourcing or creating new technologies to be used in classroom instruction. Using past program data and outcomes, they assist school administrators in identifying and correcting problems and deficiencies within current technology-based programs. Educational technology specialists frequently train teachers and others on using hardware and software in the teaching process.

Instructional technology specialists also implement and maintain computer networks as well as technology-based learning hardware and applications. An important aspect of an EdTech specialist’s job in a school setting is to foster both appreciation for and understanding of how technology can impact learning and in turn, each student’s future.

Requirements, Skills, and Common Tasks

Educational technology specialists may be certified teachers and/or hold an endorsement in educational technology or administration, and commonly have one of the following degrees:

• Master’s degree in education technology
• Master’s degree in education (M.Ed. or EdM)
• Educational Specialist (EdS) degree
• Doctor of Education (EdD)

An instructional technology specialist should be technologically savvy, organized, and possess excellent communication skills. These specialists should also have strong problem-solving, research, and planning skills. Some schools prefer instructional technology specialists to have programming or coding experience. Prior teaching experience is also helpful for EdTech specialists to build their understanding of classroom management and how technologies are used in a classroom setting. While not a requirement in all school districts, many schools look for ETS candidates who can write software or website modules to support classroom activities, so courses or certifications in software coding can also be helpful for this career.

Knowledge of technology including computer-based training software, web page creation and development software, and photo and video creation and editing software will be helpful for prospective instructional technology specialists. ETS candidates should be able to instruct both teaching staff and students in the use of technology-based learning tools. They may also work with teachers to enhance and update class curricula. In addition, ETSs assist teachers and students with technology and apps during student assessments. Part of an educational technology specialist’s job may be in technical support, such as troubleshooting and maintaining computer hardware and software. Some ETS professionals may also be involved in budget planning for their school or district.

Possible Job Titles for This Career

• Educational technology specialist
• Instructional technology specialist
• Instructional coordinator
• Instructional technologist
• Education design specialist
• Learning development specialist

Educational Technology Specialist Salary and Job Outlook

The work that educational technology specialists do is similar to that of instructional coordinators, who made a median annual salary of $66,490 as of 2022 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 1 The job outlook for instructional coordinators is bright, with a job growth rate of 7% projected through 2031, which is about the same as the average for all jobs. 2 ETS candidates can find career opportunities in elementary, middle, and secondary schools as well as in universities and in private and government organizations that offer classroom-based training. Licensed teachers are often ideal candidates and can advance their careers by completing an educational technology specialist program.

• Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) : An association that works to provide professional development for educators and administrators focused on instruction through technology.
• International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) : A member-driven organization that seeks to improve education through technology and student-involved teaching methods.
• School Technology Blogs : Our list of the innovative school technology blogs for educators.

EdTech Career Interviews

• Instructional Coach, Marisa Kaplan
• Learning and Technology Consultant, Tony Vincent
• Lead Technology Facilitator, Jon Bergmann

Question : Do I need certification to become an educational technology specialist?

Answer : Many states do have teaching certification or administrator certification requirements for educational technology specialists, particularly if the specialist will have a role in classroom instruction. It’s best to check with your state department of education or a local ETS program for guidelines specific to your state. If you are planning to work in a private school or at a corporation or other business, you may not need certification. You may also be interested in our guides to traditional and alternative teacher certification .

Question : Where can I work with a degree in educational technology?

Answer : In addition to working directly with school districts, educational technology specialists find work with private companies that design and develop instructional materials, such as multimedia textbook publishers and new media instruction companies. ETS professionals also work for not-for-profit and government organizations.

Question : Can I earn a degree in educational technology online?

Answer : Yes! Many schools offer undergraduate and master’s degree programs in educational technology online that can prepare you for this career on a flexible schedule.

References: 1. Bureau of Labor Statistics May 2022 Occupational Employment and Wages, Instructional Coordinators: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes259031.htm 2. Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, Instructional Coordinators https://www.bls.gov/ooh/education-training-and-library/instructional-coordinators.htm

Become an Insider

Sign up today to receive premium content.

What Is Educational Technology (Ed Tech), and Why Should Schools Invest in It?

Alexandra Shimalla is a freelance journalist and education writer.

Long gone are the days of overhead projectors and handwritten papers. Today’s teachers have robust technology at their disposal, and students have grown up in an  increasingly digital world . But, with so many software applications, devices and other technologies on the market, it’s easy for teachers to become overwhelmed with  the array of opportunities  available to them.

K–12 schools used, on average,  2,591 ed tech tools  during the 2022-2023 school year, according to a Statista survey. This is a 1.7 percent increase from the 2021-2022 school year and a nearly 190 percent increase from the 2018-2019 school year, when districts used an average of 895 tools.

With all the technologies available, K–12 IT leaders and administrators need to ensure they’re selecting the right tools for their users. The best way to ensure educational technology is being used is to invest in software and hardware that are valuable to both students and teachers.

Click the banner   to learn how to optimize your school’s device lifecycle.

What Is Ed Tech in K–12 Schools?

Educational technology, or ed tech, encompasses a wide variety of applications, software, hardware and infrastructure components — from online quizzes and learning management systems to  individual laptops for students  and the  access points  that enable Wi-Fi connectivity.

Interactive panels are a popular tool, and schools have recently implemented learning management systems that allow parents to connect with teachers. Even  virtual and augmented reality  can be found in some classrooms, says Rachelle Dené Poth, who teaches Spanish and STEAM (science, technology engineering, art and math) classes at  Riverview School District . An International Society for Technology in Education–certified educator, Poth is also an attorney and author.

“AR and VR transform how students are learning by immersing them in a different environment, giving them a more hands-on, authentic and meaningful experience,” says Poth. “This enables them to better connect with the content in a way that they understand and can build upon, leveraging the new with the knowledge they already have.”

MORE ON EDTECH:   Emerging technologies for modern classrooms steal the spotlight.

What Is the Value of Educational Technology Today?

Even if the district doesn’t have the latest VR tech, educational technology still plays a vital role in the classroom.

“I think ed tech is necessary in the sense that it allows us to do things that, if we were to go back, I could not imagine doing,” says David Chan, director of instructional technology for Evanston Township High School .

Before Chan  joined the administrative team  10 years ago, he spent a decade in the classroom — an experience that he believes allows him to do his job better. Having been in the teachers’ position, he can make more informed decisions from the perspective of how technology can impact, benefit or burden the hundreds of teachers in his school.

“First and foremost, the ed tech should support the teaching and learning,” he says.

Certain ed tech, such as quizzes in the middle of class, can  collect and analyze valuable data  for teachers in real time, Chan adds. Online quizzes provide snapshots of where students are in the moment, allowing teachers to capitalize on crucial learning opportunities rather than reviewing and grading a handwritten quiz later when that opportunity has passed.

“We have always been able to personalize learning for our students pre-technology; it just took more time, and we had fewer resources,” Poth says. “With the different tools available today, especially with artificial intelligence and robust LMS platforms, it helps us have a better workflow and reduces the amount of time it takes to move between tools.”

The average number of educational technologies K–12 districts used during the 2022-2023 school year

Incorporating technology into the classroom can also highlight potential career paths for students. Through coding, creating a podcast, taking apart a drone or learning graphic design, students can explore various technologies that will likely  play a role in their future .

“Technology allows students to get a bit more authentic with projects,” says Chan. “It makes them feel like it’s more than just a school project. It could be something they see themselves doing outside of school.”

What Is the Impact of Educational Technology?

When researching a new educational tool, the first thing to answer is the question of impact: How does this impact and provide value to teachers and students?

“We always want to focus on the why and the how, not the ‘wow’ factor,” says Poth. “Why should we use it, and how is it going to enhance or transform student learning? Because it worked for someone else’s class doesn’t guarantee that it’s going to have the same impact on other students. Always focus on the pedagogical value before purchasing the technology.”

DIVE DEEPER:   Planning and administrator support are necessary to sustain devices.

Tech that’s difficult to use presents a significant obstacle to adoption. Narrow the potential list to solutions that don’t require complicated setup for educators, or ensure that the proper training and support are in place. “The best compliment I get from teachers is that they didn’t have to call my team  to learn how to use it ,” Chan says.

It’s also crucial to consult  the privacy policy  of any new technology. Verify that it aligns with  the necessary laws and regulations , as well as your school’s own policies.

Tips for K–12 Schools Investing in Ed Tech

Chan’s advice for all ed tech purchases — from trying something new to renewing an existing license — is to be slow and intentional. One of the biggest mistakes schools can make is to jump in too quickly.

“Piloting allows us to scale up in a responsible way,” he says.

After doing the research to ensure a new device or software aligns with the school environment, do a pilot run with a few licenses or devices. Ask teachers and students who participate for feedback. Having those conversations can aid IT teams with the full launch or with other technologies in the future.

Rachelle Dené Poth Spanish and STEAM Teacher, Riverview School District

A helpful tip, shares Chan, is setting up a standard workflow so the IT department is carefully reviewing every item the school pays for before it’s renewed. These checks are opportunities to review existing data from companies to see if the ed tech is being used at the volume expected. If not, don’t be afraid to cut the cord with services, particularly if teachers are unhappy with them, which impacts  the return on investment .

Poth suggests enabling  single sign-on , which streamlines access and prevents roadblocks to adoption. “It’s super helpful for students and teachers, especially when trying to bring different tools into the classroom.”

Ultimately, ed tech is here to stay, and its presence in the classroom will only increase. Administrators and IT leaders can start by analyzing the tools they currently have, then begin having conversations with teachers and students about ways to improve.

DISCOVER:   District sets out to learn how its teachers are using technology.

• Personalized Learning
• Collaboration
• Digital Transformation
• Procurement
• Return on Investment

Related Articles

Unlock white papers, personalized recommendations and other premium content for an in-depth look at evolving IT

Copyright © 2024 CDW LLC 200 N. Milwaukee Avenue , Vernon Hills, IL 60061 Do Not Sell My Personal Information

• Become a Member
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computational Thinking
• Digital Citizenship
• Edtech Selection
• Global Collaborations
• STEAM in Education
• Teacher Preparation
• ISTE Certification
• School Partners
• Career Development
• ISTELive 24
• 2024 ASCD Annual Conference
• Solutions Summit
• Leadership Exchange
• 2024 ASCD Leadership Summit
• Edtech Product Database
• Solutions Network
• Sponsorship & Advertising
• Sponsorship & Advertising

Dream Big. Transform Teaching. Empower Learners.

Scale to new learning heights at the edtech event of the year. Over 1,000+ sessions provide something for every educator to impact every student.

ISTE U Courses ISTE U’s research-based courses put pedagogy first to help you transform your practice. The Summer courses are open for enrollment now through July 8. Enroll today! Learn More Learn More

ISTE Certification ISTE Certification focuses on pedagogy, not on apps or devices for all educators. This program challenges you to stretch yourself and be an expert among your colleagues. Learn More Learn More

Advancing Edtech Evaluation and Selection Discover reliable tools for evaluating and selecting quality edtech products, including the new Teacher Ready Evaluation Tool, ISTE Seal and the EdSurge Product Index. Learn More Learn More

The Trusted Standard

Focused on pedagogy, not tools, the ISTE Standards are a framework that guides educators in using technology to create high-impact, sustainable and scalable learning experiences for all students.

The ISTE Standards

Popular Topics

ISTE has a library of thousands of blog posts, podcasts, courses, books, journals, expert webinars and topic guides. Browse by topic or job role to find everything you need.

You want to attend ISTELive 24 , the edtech event of the year, but money is tight. Here are 6 ways to save money and fund your conference experience. 

Find out how focusing on the “skills of learning” can make education more inclusive, equitable and empathetic – and prepare students for the future – with educator Jason Trinh.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer the stuff of the future; today's students can expect to interact with AI in both their personal and professional lives. To prepare students for success, educators need to understand how AI technologies can be leveraged to facilitate learning and solve real-world problems.

Create the Learning Tools of the Future

Edtech providers leverage ISTE’s expertise and network to develop, identify and scale quality learning solutions. From the Edtech Solutions Network to the Learning Technology Directory , we help solution providers find their people.

Year-Round Mission Sponsors

• artificial intelligence

How technology is reinventing education

Stanford Graduate School of Education Dean Dan Schwartz and other education scholars weigh in on what's next for some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom.

Image credit: Claire Scully

New advances in technology are upending education, from the recent debut of new artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots like ChatGPT to the growing accessibility of virtual-reality tools that expand the boundaries of the classroom. For educators, at the heart of it all is the hope that every learner gets an equal chance to develop the skills they need to succeed. But that promise is not without its pitfalls.

“Technology is a game-changer for education – it offers the prospect of universal access to high-quality learning experiences, and it creates fundamentally new ways of teaching,” said Dan Schwartz, dean of Stanford Graduate School of Education (GSE), who is also a professor of educational technology at the GSE and faculty director of the Stanford Accelerator for Learning . “But there are a lot of ways we teach that aren’t great, and a big fear with AI in particular is that we just get more efficient at teaching badly. This is a moment to pay attention, to do things differently.”

For K-12 schools, this year also marks the end of the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funding program, which has provided pandemic recovery funds that many districts used to invest in educational software and systems. With these funds running out in September 2024, schools are trying to determine their best use of technology as they face the prospect of diminishing resources.

Here, Schwartz and other Stanford education scholars weigh in on some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom this year.

AI in the classroom

In 2023, the big story in technology and education was generative AI, following the introduction of ChatGPT and other chatbots that produce text seemingly written by a human in response to a question or prompt. Educators immediately worried that students would use the chatbot to cheat by trying to pass its writing off as their own. As schools move to adopt policies around students’ use of the tool, many are also beginning to explore potential opportunities – for example, to generate reading assignments or coach students during the writing process.

AI can also help automate tasks like grading and lesson planning, freeing teachers to do the human work that drew them into the profession in the first place, said Victor Lee, an associate professor at the GSE and faculty lead for the AI + Education initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning. “I’m heartened to see some movement toward creating AI tools that make teachers’ lives better – not to replace them, but to give them the time to do the work that only teachers are able to do,” he said. “I hope to see more on that front.”

He also emphasized the need to teach students now to begin questioning and critiquing the development and use of AI. “AI is not going away,” said Lee, who is also director of CRAFT (Classroom-Ready Resources about AI for Teaching), which provides free resources to help teach AI literacy to high school students across subject areas. “We need to teach students how to understand and think critically about this technology.”

Immersive environments

The use of immersive technologies like augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality is also expected to surge in the classroom, especially as new high-profile devices integrating these realities hit the marketplace in 2024.

The educational possibilities now go beyond putting on a headset and experiencing life in a distant location. With new technologies, students can create their own local interactive 360-degree scenarios, using just a cell phone or inexpensive camera and simple online tools.

“This is an area that’s really going to explode over the next couple of years,” said Kristen Pilner Blair, director of research for the Digital Learning initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning, which runs a program exploring the use of virtual field trips to promote learning. “Students can learn about the effects of climate change, say, by virtually experiencing the impact on a particular environment. But they can also become creators, documenting and sharing immersive media that shows the effects where they live.”

Integrating AI into virtual simulations could also soon take the experience to another level, Schwartz said. “If your VR experience brings me to a redwood tree, you could have a window pop up that allows me to ask questions about the tree, and AI can deliver the answers.”

Gamification

Another trend expected to intensify this year is the gamification of learning activities, often featuring dynamic videos with interactive elements to engage and hold students’ attention.

“Gamification is a good motivator, because one key aspect is reward, which is very powerful,” said Schwartz. The downside? Rewards are specific to the activity at hand, which may not extend to learning more generally. “If I get rewarded for doing math in a space-age video game, it doesn’t mean I’m going to be motivated to do math anywhere else.”

Gamification sometimes tries to make “chocolate-covered broccoli,” Schwartz said, by adding art and rewards to make speeded response tasks involving single-answer, factual questions more fun. He hopes to see more creative play patterns that give students points for rethinking an approach or adapting their strategy, rather than only rewarding them for quickly producing a correct response.

Data-gathering and analysis

The growing use of technology in schools is producing massive amounts of data on students’ activities in the classroom and online. “We’re now able to capture moment-to-moment data, every keystroke a kid makes,” said Schwartz – data that can reveal areas of struggle and different learning opportunities, from solving a math problem to approaching a writing assignment.

But outside of research settings, he said, that type of granular data – now owned by tech companies – is more likely used to refine the design of the software than to provide teachers with actionable information.

The promise of personalized learning is being able to generate content aligned with students’ interests and skill levels, and making lessons more accessible for multilingual learners and students with disabilities. Realizing that promise requires that educators can make sense of the data that’s being collected, said Schwartz – and while advances in AI are making it easier to identify patterns and findings, the data also needs to be in a system and form educators can access and analyze for decision-making. Developing a usable infrastructure for that data, Schwartz said, is an important next step.

With the accumulation of student data comes privacy concerns: How is the data being collected? Are there regulations or guidelines around its use in decision-making? What steps are being taken to prevent unauthorized access? In 2023 K-12 schools experienced a rise in cyberattacks, underscoring the need to implement strong systems to safeguard student data.

Technology is “requiring people to check their assumptions about education,” said Schwartz, noting that AI in particular is very efficient at replicating biases and automating the way things have been done in the past, including poor models of instruction. “But it’s also opening up new possibilities for students producing material, and for being able to identify children who are not average so we can customize toward them. It’s an opportunity to think of entirely new ways of teaching – this is the path I hope to see.”

Education Technology: What Is Edtech? A Guide.

Edtech, or education technology, is the combination of IT tools and educational practices aimed at facilitating and enhancing learning.

What Is Edtech?

Edtech, or education technology, is the practice of introducing information and communication technology tools into the classroom to create more engaging, inclusive and individualized learning experiences.

Today’s classrooms have moved beyond the clunky desktop computers that were once the norm and are now tech-infused with tablets, interactive online courses and even robots that can take notes and record lectures for absent students.

The influx of edtech tools are changing classrooms in a variety of ways. For instance, edtech robots , virtual reality lessons and gamified classroom activities make it easier for students to stay engaged through fun forms of learning. And edtech IoT devices are hailed for their ability to create digital classrooms for students, whether they’re physically in school, on the bus or at home. Even machine learning and blockchain tools are assisting teachers with grading tests and holding students accountable for homework.

The potential for scalable individualized learning has played an important role in the edtech industry’s ascendance . The way we learn, how we interact with classmates and teachers, and our overall enthusiasm for the same subjects is not a one-size-fits-all situation. Everyone learns at their own pace and in their own style. Edtech tools make it easier for teachers to create individualized lesson plans and learning experiences that foster a sense of inclusivity and boost the learning capabilities of all students, no matter their age or learning abilities.

And it looks like technology in the classroom is here to stay. In a 2018 study , 86 percent of eighth-grade teachers agreed that using technology to teach students is important. And 75 percent of the study’s teachers said technology use improved the academic performance of students. For that reason, many would argue it’s vital to understand the benefits edtech brings in the form of increased communication, collaboration and overall quality of education.

Related Reading 13 Edtech Examples You Should Know

How Does Edtech Help Students and Teachers?

Benefits of edtech for students.

An influx of technology is opening up new avenues of learning for students of all ages, while also promoting collaboration and inclusivity in the classroom. Here are five major ways edtech is directly impacting the way students learn.

Increased Collaboration

Cloud-enabled tools and tablets are fostering collaboration in the classroom. Tablets loaded with learning games and online lessons give children the tools to solve problems together. Meanwhile, cloud-based apps let students upload their homework and digitally converse with one another about their thought processes and for any help they may need.

24/7 Access to Learning

IoT devices are making it easier for students to have full access to the classroom in a digital environment. Whether they’re at school, on the bus or at home, connected devices are giving students Wi-Fi and cloud access to complete work at their own pace — and on their own schedules — without being hampered by the restriction of needing to be present in a physical classroom.

Various apps also help students and teachers stay in communication in case students have questions or need to alert teachers to an emergency.

“Flipping” the Classroom

Edtech tools are flipping the traditional notion of classrooms and education. Traditionally, students have to listen to lectures or read in class then work on projects and homework at home. With video lectures and learning apps, students can now watch lessons at home at their own pace, using class time to collaboratively work on projects as a group. This type of learning style helps foster self-learning, creativity and a sense of collaboration among students.

Personalized Educational Experiences

Edtech opens up opportunities for educators to craft personalized learning plans for each of their students. This approach aims to customize learning based on a student’s strengths, skills and interests.

Video content tools help students learn at their own pace and because students can pause and rewind lectures, these videos can help students fully grasp lessons. With analytics, teachers can see which students had trouble with certain lessons and offer further help on the subject.

Instead of relying on stress-inducing testing to measure academic success, educators are now turning to apps that consistently measure overall aptitude . Constant measurements display learning trends that teachers can use to craft specialized learning plans based on each student’s strengths and weaknesses or, more importantly, find negative trends that can be proactively thwarted with intervention.

Attention-Grabbing Lessons

Do you remember sitting in class, half-listening, half-day dreaming? Now, with a seemingly infinite number of gadgets and outside influences vying for a student’s attention, it’s imperative to craft lesson plans that are both gripping and educational. Edtech proponents say technology is the answer. Some of the more innovative examples of students using tech to boost classroom participation include interacting with other classrooms around the world via video, having students submit homework assignments as videos or podcasts and even gamifying problem-solving .

Benefits of Edtech

• Personalized education caters to different learning styles.
• On-demand video lectures allow classroom time to focus on collaboration.
• Gamified lessons engage students more deeply.
• Cloud computing with 24/7 access lets students work from anywhere.
• Automated grading and classroom management tools help teachers balance responsibilities.

Benefits of Edtech for Teachers

Students aren’t the only group benefitting from edtech. Teachers are seeing educational tech as a means to develop efficient learning practices and save time in the classroom. Here are four ways edtech is helping teachers get back to doing what they do — teaching.

Automated Grading

Artificially intelligent edtech tools are making grading a breeze. These apps use machine learning to analyze and assess answers based on the specifications of the assignment. Using these tools, especially for objective assignments like true/false or fill-in-the-blank assessments, frees up hours that teachers usually spend grading assignments. Extra free time for teachers provides more flexibility for less prep and one-on-one time with both struggling and gifted students.     

Classroom Management Tools

Let’s face it, trying to get a large group of kids to do anything can be challenging. Educational technology has the potential to make everything — from the way teachers communicate with their students to how students behave — a little easier. There are now apps that help send parents and students reminders about projects or homework assignments, as well as tools that allow students to self-monitor classroom noise levels. The addition of management tools in the classroom brings forth a less-chaotic, more collaborative environment.

Read Next Assistive Technology in the Classroom Is Reimagining the Future of Education

Paperless Classrooms

Printing budgets, wasting paper and countless time spent at the copy machine are a thing of the past thanks to edtech. Classrooms that have gone digital bring about an easier way to grade assignments, lessen the burden of having to safeguard hundreds of homework files and promote overall greener policies in the classroom.   

Eliminating Guesswork

Teachers spend countless hours attempting to assess the skills or areas of improvement of their students. Edtech can change all of that. There are currently myriad tools, data platforms and apps that constantly assess student’s skills and needs, and they relay the data to the teacher.

Sometimes harmful studying trends aren’t apparent to teachers for months, but some tools that use real-time data can help teachers discover a student’s strengths, weaknesses and even signs of learning disabilities, setting in motion a proactive plan to help.

64 Edtech Companies Changing the Way We Learn

The growing edtech industry creates adaptive interfaces, classroom engagement boosters, education-specific fundraising sites, and more.

Can AI Help People Overcome Dyslexia?

Is your interview technique stuck in a rut.

What Role Should AI Play in College Admissions?

Is an MBA Worth It?

18 Online Learning Platforms Transforming Education

16 machine learning in education examples.

What Are Children Learning When They Learn to Code?

Press Tab to Accept: How AI Redefines Authorship

What I Learned From Pushing Redis Cluster to Its Limits

4 Online Learning Platforms to Pique Your Curiousity

7 ways tech is changing for the better in 2020.

Based on our reporting from every major U.S. tech hub, there’s a strong case for optimism in an uncertain year.

15 Washington, D.C., Edtech Companies Making Learning More Efficient

Great companies need great people. that's where we come in..

Educational Technology: An Overview

Educational technology is a field of study that investigates the process of analyzing, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating the instructional environment and learning materials in order to improve teaching and learning. It is important to keep in mind that the purpose of educational technology (also referred to as instructional technology) is to improve education. We must define the goals and needs of education first and then we use all our knowledge, including technology, to design the most effective learning environment for students.

Instructional technology can also be seen as a process of solving educational problems and concerns, which might include motivation, discipline, the drop-out rate, school violence, basic skills, critical thinking, and the whole list of educational concerns. First, the problem is identified, an analysis of the factors of the problem is made, and possible solutions to the problem are presented. Then, the student population and the curriculum are analyzed. The next step is to select the most appropriate instructional strategies for the particular situation. Next, instructional materials and resources are selected that are suitable for the curriculum and the mode of instruction chosen. Finally, the program is implemented, evaluated, and revised as needed in order to meet the stated goals for school improvement.

The learning materials today have greatly expanded because of the various technological advances. Instructional materials include more conventional materials, such as the blackboard, overhead projectors, televisions, VCRs, overhead projectors, slide projectors, and opaque projectors, as well as newer materials, such as the computer, various software applications, LCD projectors, camcorders, digital cameras, scanners, the Internet, satellite, interactive TV, audio and video conferencing, artificial intelligence, and so on.

Teachers in the public schools and faculty at universities need to understand what types of materials are available, how to use them, why they should be used, when they should be used, and how to integrate them into the teaching/learning environment in order to meet the ultimate goal of improving education. Teachers also need to seriously consider how these newer materials can affect what and how we learn and teach.

The issue of what these materials are and how to use them is a first step. But we must quickly begin to discuss how these materials should be used and how they affect the curriculum and instruction in our schools. Technology can be used to perpetuate a teacher-led, knowledge-based learning approach or it can be used to help us implement a student-centered, constructivist, and progressive approach. We need to help teachers to understand the bigger picture of how technology can revolutionize education. Just teaching teachers how to use the technology will lead to enhancing a knowledge-level educational system. Teaching them the real potentials of technology will lead to promoting higher-level thinking, independent learning, and life-long learning.

The skills and issues that need to be addressed by teachers are vast. To help in understanding what these skills and issues are, the Coordinator of Educational Technology at UNCA has created a list of items regarding educational technology. These are items that the faculty at the universities need to understand so that they can incorporate them into their own teaching and thus help preservice teachers understand them so that they can more effectively utilize technology in their own teaching as well.

Remember, in all of these areas of educational technology that the goal of improving a specific aspect of teaching and learning comes first. The technology is selected to help us meet these goals.

For more information on Instructional Technology, click here .

Software Tools

Word processing, database, spreadsheet, telecommunications, presentation, authoring, graphic paint programs. Teachers need to know how to use them, how to teach them to students, and how and why to use them in the classroom.

Software Types

Drill and practice, tutorials or computer-based instruction, and simulations. Teachers need to know what these are as well as why, when, and how to incorporate them into their teaching.

Integrated Learning Systems

Also known as computer-managed instruction. Teachers need to know what this is, how to use it, when to use it, with what grade levels and subject areas to use it, with what students to use it, and its role in the educational process.

Equipment Use

Digital camera, scanner, camcorder, CD-writer, computer, modem, printer, VCR, LCD projector, laser-disc player, and others. Teachers need to know how to use them and how they can be used in the classroom.

Multimedia Integration

Create and find graphics, images, audio files, video files, and animations. Import these multimedia objects into their presentations and learning materials. Understand how and why the integration of multimedia helps them to teach and how it helps students to learn.

Audio and Video Conferencing

Understand what these are and how to incorporate them into the educational process. Understand various teaching methods that best utilize these tools. Understand how these can affect how we learn.

Distance Education

Understand what it is, types of instructional delivery systems and media to be used (i.e., self-instructional manuals, slides, satellite, videotaped instruction, interactive TV, and the Internet), how to design courses using distance education, the differences in this type of learning and teaching, techniques for delivering instruction in this method, and why and how this approach can be used at various grade levels.

Classroom Configurations

How to best equip and utilize technology in the classroom. How to use the technology in the classroom. Classrooms need multimedia technology in each classroom. Teachers need access to teaching computers, LCD projectors, scanners, and other equipment in the classroom. Teachers need to be able to quickly use this equipment and access software when needed. Teachers need to be able to access and display the Internet and know how to utilize the Internet, software programs, presentation software, videotapes, and so on, in their teaching methods. Classrooms also need software and equipment available to their students.

How to use it, how to set up discussion groups for students, how to post assignments and readings, and how to use it for students to post their assignments. Teachers need to understand how and why this technology can affect their teaching approach.

How to create web pages, how to use them in their teaching, and why they should use them. Web pages can have many functions for displaying information and creating student interaction. Web pages can also be used for helping students be more independent learners.

The Internet

What it is, how to use it, and how to incorporate it into the teaching/learning process. Teachers need to know how to search for information, how to critically analyze and evaluate this information, how to use FTP (file transfer protocol), telnet, email, mailing lists, and newsgroups. Teachers need to know how this powerful system can affect what is learned and how learning can best occur.

Software Review and Evaluation

How to select appropriate software for specific grade levels and content areas, how to evaluate the effectiveness of this software, and what types of software are available. Teachers need to be thoroughly familiar with many of the software options available and understand when and how to use them in the classroom.

Integration of Technology

Teachers need to understand the three technological configurations available – additive, integrated, and independent. They need to understand which configuration that they would like to implement, why this one is best for them and their students, and how to implement this method of integration. Teachers need to know how, when, and why to use any technology in the classroom. Teachers need to be able to modify how they teach in order to incorporate this technology.

Design and Create Instructional Materials

How to design and create various instructional materials for learners. Teachers need to understand design principles, how to create instructionally effective materials, what types of materials to create to best meet the learner needs, and how they can utilize these materials in their teaching. Instructional materials that teachers need to know how to create range from bulletin boards and transparencies to PowerPoint, HyperStudio, and web-based materials.

Moral, Legal, and Ethical Issues

Teachers need to understand these issues and how they might affect what and how they teach. These issues might be copyright and fair use issues to issues involving access to information. Teachers need to be aware of society’s view on the use of technology and how these issues might affect what they can do in the classroom.

New Software and Hardware

Teachers need to keep up with what types of instructional materials and tools that are being developed and how these new materials might be useful to them as teachers. They need to learn how to use these new materials and how to incorporate them into their teaching.

Philosophical Questions and Issues

What is the role of technology in education? How should technology be used for teaching and learning? When should it be used? What types of learners (learning styles, ages, ability levels, gender, etc.) can best benefit from what types of technology? How does technology affect what and how we teach? How does technology affect our lifestyles and our whole educational system? Should we reconstruct education because of technology? What should the educational system look like in the next few years because of these advancements in technology?

I am a professor of Educational Technology. I have worked at several elite universities. I hold a PhD degree from the University of Illinois and a master's degree from Purdue University.

Similar Posts

How to design a course.

This article includes tips on designing and building a course. Allow enough time to carefully plan and revise content for a new course. Careful planning will make teaching easier and more enjoyable. Talk…

Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

What is Problem-Based Learning (PBL)? PBL is a student-centered approach to learning that involves groups of students working to solve a real-world problem, quite different from the direct teaching method of a teacher…

Inclusive Teaching Strategies

What is inclusive teaching and education? Inclusivity in the classroom is a key issue, as students come from a diverse range of backgrounds and bring a variety of learning styles, abilities, and experience…

Open Source Learning Management Systems (LMS)

Learning Management Systems (LMSs) are becoming a vital part of classrooms in the 21th Century. This is a list of open source learning management systems. By open source we mean that source code of…

Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Write Effective Learning Objectives: The ABCD Approach

Bloom’s Taxonomy offers a framework for categorizing educational goals that students are expected to attain as learning progresses. Learning objectives can be identified as the goals that should be achieved by a student at…

Definitions of Instructional Design

What is instructional design? Instructional design can be defined as the creation of instructional materials, modules or lessons. The instructional design process consists of  determining the needs of the learners, defining the end…

What Does an Educational Technologist Do?

Find out what an Educational Technologist does, how to get this job, salary information, and what it takes to succeed as an Educational Technologist.

An Educational Technologist operates at the intersection of technology and learning, focusing on integrating digital tools and innovative educational practices into the teaching and learning process. This role involves a deep understanding of both pedagogy and technology, aiming to enhance educational experiences and outcomes. By researching and implementing new technologies and methodologies, the Educational Technologist supports educators and institutions in creating engaging, inclusive, and effective learning environments. Their efforts are geared towards optimizing educational strategies through the thoughtful application of technology, thereby facilitating accessible and dynamic learning experiences for a diverse range of learners.

Educational Technologist Job Duties

• Design and develop digital learning environments, incorporating multimedia and interactive elements to enhance student learning experiences.
• Evaluate and recommend educational technology tools and platforms to faculty, ensuring alignment with pedagogical goals and learning outcomes.
• Train educators and staff on the effective use of technology in the classroom, including the integration of specific software, learning management systems, and digital resources.
• Collaborate with faculty to integrate technology into curriculum planning and instruction, ensuring that digital tools are used to facilitate active learning and engagement.
• Manage the implementation of educational technology projects, coordinating between stakeholders, managing timelines, and ensuring resources are allocated efficiently.
• Assess the effectiveness of technology-enhanced learning initiatives through data analysis and feedback collection, making adjustments as necessary to improve student outcomes.
• Provide technical support and troubleshooting assistance for educational technology tools and platforms to educators and students.
• Research emerging educational technologies and pedagogical strategies, proposing innovative solutions to enhance teaching and learning within the institution.

Educational Technologist Salary & Outlook

Factors influencing an Educational Technologist’s salary include experience level, the complexity of technology used, the scale of projects managed, and the type of institution (public vs. private, K-12 vs. higher education). Specialization in emerging educational technologies or significant contributions to e-learning strategy development can also elevate salary potential.

• Median Annual Salary: $69,825 ($33.57/hour)
• Top 10% Annual Salary: $122,000 ($58.65/hour)

The employment of educational technologists is expected to grow at an average rate over the next decade.

This growth is driven by an increasing integration of technology in educational settings, necessitating skilled professionals to develop, implement, and manage digital learning tools and platforms, and to train educators in their effective use, aligning with evolving pedagogical approaches and the digital transformation of education.

Educational Technologist Job Requirements

Education: An Educational Technologist typically holds a Master’s Degree in Educational Technology, Instructional Design, or a related field, with a significant portion also possessing Bachelor’s Degrees in Education, Technology, or similar areas. Advanced roles may require a Post-Master’s Certificate, focusing on specialized technology integration in education. Relevant coursework includes instructional design, curriculum development, educational theory, and technology application in educational settings. Majors often encompass education, computer science, or instructional technology, preparing individuals for the multifaceted demands of this profession.

Experience: Educational Technologists typically possess a blend of practical experience in both educational settings and technology integration. Ideal candidates have a background in developing and implementing technology-based educational programs, with hands-on experience in classroom technology applications. On-the-job training, often through specific educational technology roles, and participation in professional development programs are crucial. Experience with instructional design, e-learning platforms, and digital content creation is highly valued, alongside skills in project management and collaboration with educators to enhance learning outcomes.

Certifications & Licenses: Certifications and licenses are not typically required for the role of Educational Technologist.

Educational Technologist Skills

Learning Management Systems: Deployment, customization, and management of online platforms are core competencies for educational technologists, enabling the creation of dynamic, accessible learning environments. These environments support diverse educational needs through the integration of multimedia content, interactive activities, and assessments, fostering an engaging and comprehensive online learning experience.

Instructional Design: The development of engaging, effective learning experiences hinges on a profound understanding of pedagogical principles and the target audience’s needs. It involves the strategic use of technologies and methodologies to design, develop, and evaluate instructional materials that achieve specific learning objectives.

Digital Literacy: The evaluation, implementation, and instruction in the use of new digital tools and resources are critical for enhancing learning environments. Educational technologists must be able to critically assess digital content for credibility, relevance, and educational value, ensuring that technology integration supports curriculum objectives and addresses the diverse needs of learners.

Curriculum Development: A deep knowledge of educational theory and the latest technological tools is essential for designing, developing, and evaluating curricula that meet diverse learner needs and align with educational standards. This process involves blending theoretical and practical aspects to create effective learning experiences.

Educational Data Analysis: Tailoring educational content and methodologies to improve learning efficiency and effectiveness is facilitated by analyzing student performance metrics and learning outcomes. Utilizing statistical tools and educational theories to interpret data allows for informed strategic decisions and innovations in curriculum design and instructional technology.

Multimedia Production: The creation of dynamic and interactive educational content through the integration of video, audio, graphics, and text enhances the digital learning experience. This capability allows for the production of materials that cater to various learning styles and preferences, enriching the educational journey.

Educational Technologist Work Environment

Educational Technologists often find themselves in dynamic environments, where the blend of traditional educational settings meets the cutting edge of technology. Their workspace is typically equipped with computers, interactive whiteboards, and various digital learning tools, reflecting the tech-centric nature of their role. This setting not only demands proficiency in technology but also an adaptability to various learning management systems and software.

The nature of their work allows for a degree of flexibility in work hours, often accommodating project deadlines rather than a strict nine-to-five schedule. This flexibility extends to dress code, which tends to be more casual, mirroring the innovative and creative atmosphere of their field.

Interaction with educators, students, and other stakeholders is a constant, necessitating strong communication skills and a collaborative spirit. The pace can be fast, driven by the academic calendar and the implementation of new technologies or programs. Despite the potential for high demand periods, there’s a strong emphasis on professional development, ensuring that Educational Technologists remain at the forefront of educational innovation.

Advancement Prospects

Educational Technologists can advance their careers by transitioning into senior roles such as Chief Learning Officer or Director of Educational Technology, where they oversee the integration of technology in educational settings and strategize on innovative learning solutions. To achieve these positions, demonstrating a successful track record in implementing technology-based learning programs and showing leadership in educational projects is crucial.

Another path involves specializing in instructional design or e-learning development, focusing on creating engaging and effective digital learning materials. This specialization requires a deep understanding of both educational theories and digital tools, making a portfolio showcasing successful projects a key asset.

For those interested in research and development, pursuing a career in academia or with educational research institutions offers the opportunity to explore the cutting edge of educational technology. This path typically requires a strong publication record and contributions to the field’s body of knowledge.

In all cases, staying abreast of the latest technological trends and their applications in education is essential for advancement, highlighting the importance of continuous engagement with the educational technology community and professional development opportunities.

What Does a Disability Analyst Do?

What does a credit union teller do, you may also be interested in..., what does a dollar general cashier do, what does a pipeline supervisor do, what does a chipotle general manager do, what does an insurance accountant do.

Explore Greyhound Nation

• Loyola Today
• Virtual Visits & Info Sessions
• Request Information

What is Educational Technology and Why is it Important?

What is Educational Technology?

Why is educational technology in education important.

Educational technology in education is important because it helps today’s teachers to integrate new technologies and tools into their classroom. Teachers are able to upgrade and improve the learner-centeredness of their classroom. It enables teachers to engage their students in unique, innovative, and equitable ways. Teachers are also able to expand their network and connect with other teachers and educators nationally and globally.

What can I do with a Master’s in Educational Technology degree?

Many teachers pursue a Master’s degree in Educational Technology because they want to improve their use of educational technology—they want to learn how to more effectively integrate the use of 1:1 devices, or how to teach in a hybrid or fully online setting, or how to improve student engagement and achievement with technology. Not only do they learn all of these skills and more, they also learn how to integrate research-supported strategies to improve their teaching and how to coach their peers to do the same. 

Graduates of a Master’s in Educational Technology degree have gone on to become:

• National Board-Certified Teachers
• School Administrators
• Technology Facilitators and Coordinators
• Personnel at Ed Tech Start Ups
• Instructional Designers (both within and outside of education)
• Online preK-12 Teachers
• STEM Teachers and Coordinators
• Professional Learning Leaders and Liaisons
• Curriculum Developers

Here are some of the recent promotions that 2020 graduates of Loyola University Maryland’s Master’s in Educational Technology program have accepted:

• Technology Teacher and Musician Joanna Edwards accepted a new position as Technology Teacher at Elizabeth Seton High School.
• With her MEd in Educational Technology, Julia Goffredi started a new position as Coordinator of Educational Technology at Notre Dame Preparatory School.
• Michele Baskin recently accepted a position at Great Minds to be a Digital Curriculum Developer on their PhD Science program.

What are the Top 5 Advantages of Loyola’s Educational Technology Program? 

• Create engaging and transformative online instruction
• Learn multimedia design for the classroom
• Become a technology leader in your school
• Understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of technology, and how to address both in the classroom.
• Active professional networking with other teachers and educators nationally and globally.

Learn more about Loyola University Maryland’s fully online M.Ed. in Educational Technology program.

LET US HELP

Welcome to Capella

Select your program and we'll help guide you through important information as you prepare for the application process.

FIND YOUR PROGRAM

Connect with us

A team of dedicated enrollment counselors is standing by, ready to answer your questions and help you get started.

• MS in Education
• Instructional Design and Educational Technology

Instructional Design & Educational Technology Master of Science in Education

Learn how to use ever-changing digital tools with agility to create more engaging, innovative and equitable learning experiences.

The MS in Education, Instructional Design and Educational Technology from Capella University will help you learn how to leverage technology to meet the diverse needs of all students and empower them to have a voice and choice in their learning.

By combining instructional design best practices with leading-edge technology, you’ll learn how to develop high-quality content, pedagogy and meaningful assessment.

Professional relevance

Learn through curriculum that incorporates ed tech best practices based off the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards.

Personalized learning

Incorporate technology and multimedia tools to provide learning experiences that engage and empower students.

Expertise you can apply

Learn how to use instructional design theory in real-world learning situations as part of your coursework.

This program is currently not approved for federal financial aid by the U.S. Department of Education (ED).

Apply today with no application fee.

At a glance

• 4 Core courses
• 5 Specialization courses
• 1 Elective course
• 1 Capstone course
• 46 Total quarter credits (12 Max transfer)

With Capella Tuition Cap, you won’t pay more than $12,000* in tuition costs for your degree.

*Eligibility rules and exclusions apply. Connect with us for details.

Courses and skills

Explore instructional design & educational technology courses.

• This degree requires a total of 46 quarter credits
• You’ll need to complete four core courses, five specialization courses, one elective course and one capstone

View all courses in catalog

What you'll learn

The Master of Science in Education, Instructional Design and Educational Technology provides students with the knowledge and skills necessary to leverage 21st century digital tools and resources to maximize learning at all levels of education.

The program focus on using technology to promote innovation and change in school settings and provides students with opportunities to apply their new learning to classroom. School-based interventions and instruction engage students and positively impacts their learning.

Recognized theory and best practice meets practical application in a collaborative environment to enhance students’ abilities to excel as practitioners in their chosen specializations.

On successful completion of this program, you should be able to:

• Develop standards-based content, appropriate pedagogy and meaningful assessment using 21st century technology skills and multimedia tools
• Create opportunities for student voice, choice and ownership of their learning
• Use qualitative and quantitative data to make decisions about current and authentic instructional design and delivery
• Apply formative and summative assessments to improve instruction to meet the needs of all students
• Model the knowledge, skills and dispositions to work successfully with diverse students, their families and other professionals
• Manage instructional design projects
• Integrate ethical standards in all instructional design and development activities

Review the Capella career exploration guide to learn more about this program and career paths to explore. 

Tuition and learning format

How much does the ms in education cost.

The total cost of your degree will depend on academic performance, transfer credits, scholarships and other factors. See GuidedPath cost information below.

A structured learning format with an active peer community and faculty guidance. We’ll set the schedule, you meet the deadlines.

• Based on the quarter system; 1–3 courses per 10-week quarter
• 1 semester credit = 1.5 quarter credits
• Weekly assignments and courseroom discussions
• Pay for what you take, price varies by courseload or quarter

$470 per credit, $150 resource kit fee, 46 total quarter credits, 12 max transfer credits

*This is only an estimate, effective July 8, 2024, and is subject to change. Your price will vary depending on your specialization, transfer credits, and tuition discounts. Books, supplies, and other fees are not included in this estimate. GuidedPath prices show the tuition you would pay if you brought in an average number of transfer credits or the maximum allowed transfer credits. New or recently revised program estimates are based on comparable programs.

Capella is committed to transparency in its tuition and pricing. In addition to tuition, you will be responsible for additional costs, which may include an application fee, travel expenses, and practicum costs. A resource kit fee of $50-$200, charged quarterly or per billing session, covers the cost of required books, software, and other course materials. Click here to review program-specific fee amounts in our University Catalog .

Find out more about financing and payment options  to help you complete your program. Federal aid also is available to help manage the costs of higher education. Learn more about  financing your education .

Questions about cost?

Contact an enrollment counselor.

94% of education alumni agree that their faculty were well qualified and did a good job.

Alumni Outcomes Survey, 2022–2023

“The field of education is constantly changing, so as a teacher, I need to constantly be learning as much as I can to stay on the top of my game, and then give my students the best education that I can.”

Michelle Emerson* – Master of Education graduate

*Actual FlexPath graduate compensated for appearing in Capella promotional materials.

Scholarships and savings

Are there scholarships available for master's degrees.

Your education is an investment in your future. There are  more ways to save  than you might think.

Transfer credits

Get the credits you deserve. You may be able to save time and money on your Capella degree by transferring credits from an accredited university.

Employer and association discounts

If your employer or organization is a partner with Capella, you may be eligible for a tuition discount.  Search to see if your employer is a partner.

$12K Capella Tuition Cap

Know your costs from the start. With the Capella Tuition Cap , $12,000* is the maximum tuition amount you’ll pay for your MS in Education degree. *Eligibility rules and exclusions apply. Connect with us for details.

Accredited and recognized

Capella is accredited by the higher learning commission..

Accreditation and recognitions provide evidence that we meet standards for quality of faculty, curriculum, learner services, and fiscal stability. See all our  accreditations  and  recognitions .

How to apply

What are the ms in education admission requirements.

Applicants to the Master of Science in Education program focused on Instructional Design and Educational Technology must provide the following information for admission:

• A bachelor’s degree from an institution accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, or from an internationally recognized institution
• Your official bachelor’s transcripts, with a minimum grade point average of 2.3 on a 4.0 scale
• Admission application – no application fee required
• A valid, government-issued form of photo identification

GRE and GMAT are not required for admission.

International student requirements

If you live outside the U.S. or aren’t a U.S. citizen, you may be considered an international student.

To meet the requirements for Capella admission, you must:

• Earn the minimum score on an acceptable test for proof of English proficiency
• Attended an internationally recognized institution
• Provide transcripts for evaluation

Learn more about international student admissions .

Faculty and support

What support does capella offer online students.

Our programs are designed to meet the unique needs of a master’s student. We’ve structured the experience in manageable pieces to help you earn your degree with support from faculty, staff and online resources.

Our courses are taught by distinguished faculty members who hold top credentials and have real-world expertise in their fields.

Enrollment counselors

Our enrollment counselors can help set you up for success. They’ll help you find the right degree and program and answer all your questions about Capella. They can also help you with the admission process.

Academic coaches

Once you enroll, these specialists can help tailor a program to your goals and experiences and help you stay on track to meet program requirements.

Learn more about support from Capella

Articles and resources

Expand your perspective on academic and career topics with articles and resources from Capella University.

Explore our education programs

Gain skills to help pursue your professional goals by learning the latest teaching theories and strategies.

Career exploration

What can you do with an ms in education, instructional design and educational technology degree.

Your education can help you pursue your professional and personal goals. While Capella cannot guarantee that a graduate will secure any specific career outcome, such as a job title, promotion, or salary increase, we encourage you to explore potential jobs and employment settings. Here are some ideas and examples for a graduate with an MS in Education, Instructional Design and Educational Technology.

Job titles to explore* **

• Curriculum specialist
• Instructional coach
• Instructional designer
• Instructional technologist
• Learning specialist**

Employment settings to explore*

• Colleges, universities and professional schools
• Community colleges
• Elementary and secondary schools
• General government support
• Libraries and archives

*These are examples intended to serve as a general guide. Some positions may prefer or even require previous experience, licensure, certifications and/or other designations along with a degree. Because many factors determine what position an individual may attain, Capella cannot guarantee that a graduate will secure any specific job title, a promotion, salary increase or other career outcome. We encourage you to research requirements for your job target and career goals.

**This position may require licensure, certification, endorsement or other professional designations. The instructional design and educational technology specialization does not lead to license, endorsement or other professional credential.

Take the first step toward earning your degree and achieving your goals. {page-tel}

Are you sure you want to cancel?

Advertisement

Educational technology: what it is and how it works

• Original Article
• Published: 03 April 2021
• Volume 37 , pages 155–166, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

• Jon Dron   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6521-7302 1  

4043 Accesses

24 Citations

44 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This theoretical paper elucidates the nature of educational technology and, in the process, sheds light on a number of phenomena in educational systems, from the no-significant-difference phenomenon to the singular lack of replication in studies of educational technologies. Its central thesis is that we are not just users of technologies but coparticipants in them. Our participant roles may range from pressing power switches to designing digital learning systems to performing calculations in our heads. Some technologies may demand our participation only to enact fixed, predesigned orchestrations correctly . Other technologies leave gaps that we can or must fill with novel orchestrations, which we may perform more or less well . Most are a mix of the two, and the mix varies according to context, participant, and use. This participative orchestration is highly distributed: in educational systems, coparticipants include the learner, the teacher, and many others, from textbook authors to LMS programmers, as well as the tools and methods they use and create. From this perspective, all learners and teachers are educational technologists. The technologies of education are seen to be deeply, fundamentally, and irreducibly human, complex, situated and social in their constitution, their form, and their purpose, and as ungeneralizable in their effects as the choice of paintbrush is to the production of great art.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The emerging pedagogy of MOOCs, the educational design of technology and practices of study

An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy—Technology Dichotomy

Educational design research: grappling with methodological fit

Andrews TM, Leonard MJ, Colgrove CA, Kalinowski ST (2011) Active learning not associated with student learning in a random sample of college biology courses. CBE-Life Sci Educ 10(4):394–405. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-07-0061

Article   Google Scholar  

Aristotle, Whalley G (1997) Aristotle’s Poetics: translated and with a commentary by George Whalley (Whalley G, Trans.). McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal

Google Scholar  

Arthur WB (2009) The nature of technology: what it is and how it evolves, Kindle. Free Press, New York

Baldwin J, Brand S (1978) Soft-tech. Penguin, New York

Bijker WE, Hughes TP, Pinch TJ (eds) (1989) The social construction of technological systems. MIT Press, Cambridge

Bloom BS (1984) The 2 sigma problem: the search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educ Res 13(6):4–16. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1175554

Bloom H (2000) Global brain: the evolution of mass mind. Wiley, Toronto

Boden M (1995) Creativity and unpredictability. Stanford Human Revi 4(2):123–139. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=212171&CFID=34973622&CFTOKEN=46572978

Boyd GM (1996) Emancipative educational technology. Canadian J Educ Commun 25:179–186

Brand S (1997) How buildings learn. Phoenix Illustrated, London

Brand S (2008) The clock of the long now: time and responsibility. Basic Books, New York

Changizi M (2013) Harnessed: how language and music mimicked nature and transformed ape to man. BenBella Books, Dallas

Chen P-SD, Lambert AD, Guidry KR (2010) Engaging online learners: the impact of Web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Comput Educ 54(4):1222–1232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.008

Clark A (2008) Supersizing the mind: embodiment, action, and cognitive extension: embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Clark RC, Mayer RE (2011) e-Learning and the science of instruction: proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning, 3rd edn. Pfeifer, San Francisco

Coffield F, Moseley DVM, Ecclestone K, Hall E (2004) Learning styles and pedagogy: a systematic and critical review. Learning and Skills Research Council, London

Cooley M (1987) Architect or bee? The human price of technology. The Hogarth Press, London

Daniel J, Kanwar A, Uvalić-Trumbić S (2009) Breaking higher education’s iron triangle: access, cost, and quality. Change Mag Higher Learn 41(2):30–35

Davis B, Sumara DJ (2006) Complexity and education: inquiries into learning, teaching, and research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

De Bruyckere P, Kirschner PA, Hulshof CD (2015) Urban myths about learning and education. Academic Press, London

Derribo MH, Howard K (2007) Advice about the use of learning styles: a major myth in education. J Coll Reading Learn 37:2

Dewey J (1916) Democracy and education. Macmillan, New York. http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/projects/digitexts/dewey/d_e/contents.html . Accessed 21 May 2001

Dron J (2006) Any color you like, as long as it’s Blackboard®. In: Proceedings from E-Learn 2006, Hawaii

Dron J (2007) Control and constraint in e-learning: choosing when to choose. Idea Group International, Hershey. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-390-6

Book   Google Scholar  

Dron J (2013) Soft is hard and hard is easy: learning technologies and social media. Form@re 13(1):32–43. Retrieved from http://www.fupress.net/index.php/formare/article/view/12613

Dron J, Anderson T (2014) Teaching crowds: learning & social media. AU Press, Athabasca. Retrieved from http://teachingcrowds.ca

Dubos R (1969) American Academy of Allergy 25th anniversary series: the spaceship earth. J Allergy 44(1):1–9

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Franklin UM (1999) The real world of technology, kindle. House of Anansi Press, Concord

Franklin UM (2014) Ursula Franklin speaks: thoughts and afterthoughts. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal

Freire P (1972) Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Herder, New York

Frisch M (1994) Homo faber. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston

Gibson JJ (1977) The theory of affordances. In: Shaw R, Bransford J (eds) Perceiving, acting, and knowing: toward an ecological psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 67–82

Goel AK, Polepeddi L (2019) Jill Watson: a virtual teaching assistant for online education. In: Dede C, Richards J, Saxberg B (eds). Routledge, New York, pp 120–143

Haraway D (2013) Simians, cyborgs, and women: the reinvention of nature. Routledge, New York

Hattie J (2013) Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Taylor & Francis, London

Heyes C (2018) Cognitive gadgets: the cultural evolution of thinking. Harvard University Press, Harvard

Huntrods R, Dron J (2017) Engagement with robots: building a social, self-paced, online robotics course. Proc E-Learn World Conf E-Learn Corporate Government Healthcare Higher Educ 2017:365–372

Husmann PR, O’Loughlin VD (2019) Another nail in the coffin for learning styles? Disparities among undergraduate anatomy students’ study strategies, class performance, and reported VARK learning styles. Anat Sci Educ 12(1):6–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1777

Kauffman S (2008) Reinventing the sacred: a new view of science, reason and religion. Basic Books, Philadelphia

Kauffman SA (2019) A world beyond physics: the emergence and evolution of life. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Kelly K (2010) What technology wants (Kindly ed.). Viking, New York

Lakhana A (2014) What is educational technology? An Inquiry into the meaning, use, and reciprocity of technology. Canadian J Learn Technol 40(3). Retrieved from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/823/399

Laurillard D (1993) Rethinking University Teaching—a framework for the effective use of educational technology. Routledge, London

Makel MC, Plucker JA (2014) Facts are more important than novelty: replication in the education sciences. Educ Res 43(6):304–316. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14545513

McDonough EF, Kahn KB (1996) Using ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ technologies for global new product development. R&D Manag 26(3):241–253. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.1996.tb00959.x

McLuhan M, McLuhan E (1992) Laws of media: the new science. University of Toronto Press, Toronto

Means B, Toyama Y, Murphy R, Baki M (2013) The effectiveness of online and blended learning: a meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teach Coll Rec 115(3):1–47

Moore MG (1993) Theory of transactional distance. In: Keegan D (ed) Theoretical principles of distance education. Routledge, London, pp 23–38

Norman DA (1993) Things that make us smart: defending human attributes in the age of the machine. Perseus Publishing, Cambridge

Nye DE (2006) Technology matters: questions to live with. MIT Press, Cambridge

Olson JK (2013) The purposes of schooling and the nature of technology: the end of education. In: Clough MP, Olson JK, Niederhauser DS (eds) The nature of technology. Sense, Rotterdam, pp 217–248

O’Neill RV, DeAngelis DL, Waide JB, Allen TFH (1986) A hierarchical concept of ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton

Page SE (2011) Diversity and complexity. Princeton University Press, Princeton

MATH   Google Scholar  

Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R (2008) Learning styles: concepts and evidence. Psychol Sci Public Interest 9(3):105–119

Pei L, Wu H (2019) Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ Online 24(1):1666538. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1666538

Plato, Jowett B (1993) Symposium and Phaedrus (Jowett B, Trans.). Dover Publications, New York

Polanyi M (1966) The tacit dimension. Routledge, London

Postman N (2011) The end of education: redefining the value of school. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, New York

Read LE (1958) I, pencil. Imprimis 8(12):32–37. Retrieved from https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/I-PENCIL-My-Family-Tree-as-Told-to-June-1992.pdf

Rheingold H (2012) Mind amplifier: can our digital tools make us smarter? In: Kindle (ed) TED Books. New York

Ridley M (2010) The rational optimist: how prosperity evolves. HarperCollins e-books, London

Riener C, Willingham D (2010) The myth of learning styles. Change Mag Higher Learn 42(5):32–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2010.503139

Russell TL (1999) The no significant difference phenomenon: as reported in 355 research reports, summaries and papers. North Carolina State University, North Carolina

Saba F, Shearer RL (1994) Verifying key theoretical concepts in a dynamic model of distance education. Am J Distance Educ 8(1):36–59

Tamim RM, Bernard RM, Borokhovski E, Abrami PC, Schmid RF (2011) What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning. Rev Educ Res 81(1):4–28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310393361

Technology (n.d.). In: Oxford University Press, Oxford Dictionary of English. Retrieved 11 December, 2012, from http://www.oxfordreference.com

Turkle S, Papert S (1992) Epistemological pluralism and the revaluation of the concrete. J Math Behav 11(1):3–33. Retrieved from http://papert.org/articles/EpistemologicalPluralism.html

Williams WC (1969) The Wedge. In: Selected essays of William Carlos Williams. New Directions, NY, p 256

Wilson EO (2012) The social conquest of earth, Kindle. Liveright Pub. Corporation, New York

Download references

Acknowledgements

I give thanks to Terry Anderson and Gerald Ardito for their insightful feedback and suggestions to improve this work.

Athabasca University.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Science & Technology, Athabasca University, Athabasca, AB, Canada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon Dron .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Dron, J. Educational technology: what it is and how it works. AI & Soc 37 , 155–166 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01195-z

Download citation

Received : 03 December 2020

Accepted : 18 March 2021

Published : 03 April 2021

Issue Date : March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01195-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Distributed cognition
• Coparticipation
• Educational technology
• Participation
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Health & Nursing

Courses and certificates.

• Bachelor's Degrees
• View all Business Bachelor's Degrees
• Business Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Healthcare Administration – B.S.
• Human Resource Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Information Technology Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Marketing – B.S. Business Administration
• Accounting – B.S. Business Administration
• Finance – B.S.
• Supply Chain and Operations Management – B.S.
• Accelerated Information Technology Bachelor's and Master's Degree (from the School of Technology)
• Health Information Management – B.S. (from the Leavitt School of Health)

Master's Degrees

• View all Business Master's Degrees
• Master of Business Administration (MBA)
• MBA Information Technology Management
• MBA Healthcare Management
• Management and Leadership – M.S.
• Accounting – M.S.
• Marketing – M.S.
• Human Resource Management – M.S.
• Master of Healthcare Administration (from the Leavitt School of Health)
• Data Analytics – M.S. (from the School of Technology)
• Information Technology Management – M.S. (from the School of Technology)
• Education Technology and Instructional Design – M.Ed. (from the School of Education)

Certificates

• View all Business Degrees

Bachelor's Preparing For Licensure

• View all Education Bachelor's Degrees
• Elementary Education – B.A.
• Special Education and Elementary Education (Dual Licensure) – B.A.
• Special Education (Mild-to-Moderate) – B.A.
• Mathematics Education (Middle Grades) – B.S.
• Mathematics Education (Secondary)– B.S.
• Science Education (Middle Grades) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Chemistry) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Physics) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Biological Sciences) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Earth Science)– B.S.
• View all Education Degrees

Bachelor of Arts in Education Degrees

Educational Studies – B.A.

Master of Science in Education Degrees

• View all Education Master's Degrees
• Curriculum and Instruction – M.S.
• Educational Leadership – M.S.

Education Technology and Instructional Design – M.Ed.

Master's Preparing for Licensure

• Teaching, Elementary Education – M.A.
• Teaching, English Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Mathematics Education (Middle Grades) – M.A.
• Teaching, Mathematics Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Science Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Special Education (K-12) – M.A.

Licensure Information

• State Teaching Licensure Information

Master's Degrees for Teachers

• Mathematics Education (K-6) – M.A.
• Mathematics Education (Middle Grade) – M.A.
• Mathematics Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• English Language Learning (PreK-12) – M.A.
• Endorsement Preparation Program, English Language Learning (PreK-12)
• Science Education (Middle Grades) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Chemistry) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Physics) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Biological Sciences) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Earth Science)– M.A.
• View all Technology Bachelor's Degrees
• Cloud Computing – B.S.
• Computer Science – B.S.
• Cybersecurity and Information Assurance – B.S.
• Data Analytics – B.S.
• Information Technology – B.S.
• Network Engineering and Security – B.S.
• Software Engineering – B.S.
• Accelerated Information Technology Bachelor's and Master's Degree
• Information Technology Management – B.S. Business Administration (from the School of Business)
• View all Technology Master's Degrees
• Cybersecurity and Information Assurance – M.S.
• Data Analytics – M.S.
• Information Technology Management – M.S.
• MBA Information Technology Management (from the School of Business)
• Full Stack Engineering
• Web Application Deployment and Support
• Front End Web Development
• Back End Web Development

3rd Party Certifications

• IT Certifications Included in WGU Degrees
• View all Technology Degrees
• View all Health & Nursing Bachelor's Degrees
• Nursing (RN-to-BSN online) – B.S.
• Nursing (Prelicensure) – B.S. (Available in select states)
• Health Information Management – B.S.
• Health and Human Services – B.S.
• Psychology – B.S.
• Health Science – B.S.
• Healthcare Administration – B.S. (from the School of Business)
• View all Nursing Post-Master's Certificates
• Nursing Education—Post-Master's Certificate
• Nursing Leadership and Management—Post-Master's Certificate
• Family Nurse Practitioner—Post-Master's Certificate
• Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner —Post-Master's Certificate
• View all Health & Nursing Degrees
• View all Nursing & Health Master's Degrees
• Nursing – Education (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Leadership and Management (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Nursing Informatics (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Family Nurse Practitioner (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S. (Available in select states)
• Nursing – Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S. (Available in select states)
• Nursing – Education (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Leadership and Management (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Nursing Informatics (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Master of Healthcare Administration
• MBA Healthcare Management (from the School of Business)
• Business Leadership (with the School of Business)
• Supply Chain (with the School of Business)
• Back End Web Development (with the School of Technology)
• Front End Web Development (with the School of Technology)
• Web Application Deployment and Support (with the School of Technology)
• Full Stack Engineering (with the School of Technology)
• Single Courses
• Course Bundles

Apply for Admission

Admission requirements.

• New Students
• WGU Returning Graduates
• WGU Readmission
• Enrollment Checklist
• Accessibility
• Accommodation Request
• School of Education Admission Requirements
• School of Business Admission Requirements
• School of Technology Admission Requirements
• Leavitt School of Health Admission Requirements

Additional Requirements

• Computer Requirements
• No Standardized Testing
• Clinical and Student Teaching Information

Transferring

• FAQs about Transferring
• Transfer to WGU
• Transferrable Certifications
• Request WGU Transcripts
• International Transfer Credit
• Tuition and Fees
• Financial Aid
• Scholarships

Other Ways to Pay for School

• Tuition—School of Business
• Tuition—School of Education
• Tuition—School of Technology
• Tuition—Leavitt School of Health
• Your Financial Obligations
• Tuition Comparison
• Applying for Financial Aid
• State Grants
• Consumer Information Guide
• Responsible Borrowing Initiative
• Higher Education Relief Fund

FAFSA Support

• Net Price Calculator
• FAFSA Simplification
• See All Scholarships
• Military Scholarships
• State Scholarships
• Scholarship FAQs

Payment Options

• Payment Plans
• Corporate Reimbursement
• Current Student Hardship Assistance
• Military Tuition Assistance

WGU Experience

• How You'll Learn
• Scheduling/Assessments
• Accreditation
• Student Support/Faculty
• Military Students
• Part-Time Options
• Virtual Military Education Resource Center
• Student Outcomes
• Return on Investment
• Students and Gradutes
• Career Growth
• Student Resources
• Communities
• Testimonials
• Career Guides
• Skills Guides
• Online Degrees
• All Degrees
• Explore Your Options

Admissions & Transfers

• Admissions Overview

Tuition & Financial Aid

Student Success

• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Military and Veterans
• Commencement
• Careers at WGU
• Advancement & Giving
• Partnering with WGU

EDUCATION CAREER GUIDES

Instructional Technologist Career

What is an instructional technologist.

An instructional technologist is first and foremost a trainer. They use their research and wealth of knowledge in a specific curriculum to develop training and materials for teachers and education systems. Their work can be in development and in assessment, as they sometimes audit school systems to ensure federal and state education standards are being met.  

Instructional technologists are at the forefront of integrating technology in the classroom. They assist teachers with technology support in independent classrooms, and are sometimes directors of technology for a school, overseeing computer labs, technology learning spaces, etc. They can also be in charge of online education programs, online courses, and any virtual learning experience at a school or university.

These technologists thrive in a dynamic role, oftentimes mentoring, researching, developing, and overseeing simultaneously.

RESPONSIBILITIES

What Does an Instructional Technologist Do?

Instructional technologists utilize technology tools to improve a student’s learning experience and to usher education systems into the world of efficient virtual learning. Their day to day can consist of varied responsibilities surrounding education, especially depending on the education level they specialize in. An instructional technologist for a small school system may focus on developing technology labs and introducing tech assistance into the classroom, while an instructional technologist at a university may be more focused on streamlining virtual learning courses. 

Some possible responsibilities include: 

• Integrating technology into the curricula of various classrooms and grade levels, from pre–K to university.  
• Developing and overseeing training for teachers and administrators, supporting them in introducing technology into the classroom. 
• Developing technology programs for specific student needs, whether that be advanced learning, tailoring courses for those with learning disabilities, or developing options for ESL students. 
• Developing curricula and selecting textbooks as needed to introduce technology principles. 
• Auditing educational programs and school systems to ensure they are meeting federal and state regulations. 
• Overseeing virtual learning courses and virtual learning platforms. 
• Maintaining all reporting and analyzing statistics for online learning programs and related technology tools.

EDUCATION & BEST DEGREES

How do i become an instructional technologist, instructional technologists typically hold a bachelor’s degree in education, education technology, or a related field. it is most common for instructional technologists to hold a master’s degree and to be a continuous learner, always seeking to stay up-to-date on the latest developments and resources in technology learning. .

A  master's degree in education technology and instructional design  is the most popular advanced degree in education technology. The program encompasses instructional design, research, education, and technology integration. WGU designs its programs to be relevant and practical for the present workforce, as well as the workforce developments to come.  

Best Degrees for an Instructional Technologist

These online, non-licensure educational studies degrees prepare you to...

These online, non-licensure educational studies degrees prepare you to make a difference in a field that interests you.

Based on your career goals and interests, you can choose an educational studies program in one of 10 content areas that meets your needs while working toward employment in school settings, corporate training, or instructional design. These programs do not lead to a teaching license.

• Time:  Completion time varies depending on the specialty track you choose.
• Tuition:  $3,825 per 6-month term.
• This bachelor's degree allows students to learn about education but does not include student teaching and it does not lead to a teaching license.

Focus areas of this educational studies degree program include:

• Elementary Education
• Elementary and Special Education
• Mild to Moderate Special Education
• Secondary Biology Science Education
• Secondary Chemistry Science Education
• Secondary Earth Science Education
• Secondary Physics Education
• Middle Grades Science Education
• Secondary Mathematics Education
• Middle Grade Mathematics Education

The M.Ed. in Education Technology and Instructional Design from WGU is for...

The M.Ed. in Education Technology and Instructional Design from WGU is for instructional designers tasked with creating engaging and immersive virtual learning experiences that can substitute for on-ground instruction.

No teaching license required.

• Time: 62% of students finish this program in 10 months.
• Tuition:  $3,975 per 6-month term
• Courses:  12 total courses in this program.

This program includes two tracks for students to choose from:

• The K-12 pathway
• The Adult Learner pathway

Skills for your résumé included in this program:

• Learning Experience Design
• Assessment and Learning Analytics
• Learning Technology
• Research Methodology

Develop training and instruction expertise to help you in the classroom, in educational settings, or in corporate world.

How Much Does an Instructional Technologist Make?

In 2021, instructional technologists made an average of  $57,375  per year, according to Payscale. Level of education, certifications, and years of experience are the most common factors in those that experienced higher annual pay. Some public schools require that their instructional technologists be licensed teachers, and those who hold that credential may experience higher pay. 

What Is the Projected Job Growth?

The job outlook for instructional technologists is excellent, and getting better all the time. The era of COVID-19 catapulted virtual learning into many school systems, homes, and curriculums, in environments that may have previously been resistant. Those who understand the complexities of education technology are in demand in nearly every learning space. Many school systems will continue to integrate distance learning, and other technology options into their long-standing curriculums, presenting a need for instructional technologist teams.

What Skills Does an Instructional Technologist Need?

If you are interested in pursuing an instructional technologist role, it is crucial to have a foundational understanding of education, an interest in technology and computers, and a balance of soft skills that allow you to train and mentor your students and colleagues. Some commonly listed skills in instructional technologist job descriptions include: 

• Highly organized, with an ability to keep records and assess incoming data 
• Problem-solving skills with an ability to lead, instruct, work harmoniously in diverse environments
• An ability to work effectively in a team environment
• Excellent communication skills 
• An interest in research and implementing new technologies
• High professional integrity and respect for confidentiality 
• A commitment to education and the bettering of your students 

Our Online University Degree Programs Start on the First of Every Month, All Year Long

No need to wait for spring or fall semester. It's back-to-school time at WGU year-round. Get started by talking to an Enrollment Counselor today, and you'll be on your way to realizing your dream of a bachelor's or master's degree—sooner than you might think!

Next Start Date {{startdate}}

Interested in Becoming an Instructional Technologist?

Learn more about degree programs that can prepare you for this meaningful career.

The University

For students.

• Student Portal
• Alumni Services

Most Visited Links

• Business Programs
• Student Experience
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Student Communities

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

• Share full article

Advertisement

Subscriber-only Newsletter

Jessica Grose

Every tech tool in the classroom should be ruthlessly evaluated.

By Jessica Grose

Opinion Writer

Educational technology in schools is sometimes described as a wicked problem — a term coined by a design and planning professor, Horst Rittel, in the 1960s , meaning a problem for which even defining the scope of the dilemma is a struggle, because it has so many interconnected parts that never stop moving.

When you have a wicked problem, solutions have to be holistic, flexible and developmentally appropriate. Which is to say that appropriate tech use for elementary schoolers in rural Oklahoma isn’t going to be the same as appropriate tech use in a Chicago high school.

I spent the past few weeks speaking with parents, teachers, public school administrators and academics who study educational technology. And while there are certainly benefits to using tech as a classroom tool, I’m convinced that when it comes to the proliferation of tech in K-12 education, we need “ a hard reset ,” as Julia Freeland Fisher of the Christensen Institute put it, concurring with Jonathan Haidt in his call for rolling back the “phone-based childhood.” When we recently spoke, Fisher stressed that when we weigh the benefits of ed tech, we’re often not asking, “What’s happening when it comes to connectedness and well-being?”

Well said. We need a complete rethink of the ways that we’re evaluating and using tech in classrooms; the overall change that I want to see is that tech use in schools — devices and apps — should be driven by educators, not tech companies.

In recent years, tech companies have provided their products to schools either free or cheap , and then schools have tried to figure out how to use those products. Wherever that dynamic exists, it should be reversed: Districts and individual schools should first figure out what tech would be most useful to their students, and their bar for “useful” should be set by available data and teacher experience. Only then should they acquire laptops, tablets and educational software.

As Mesut Duran — a professor of educational technology at the University of Michigan, Dearborn, and the author of “Learning Technologies: Research, Trends and Issues in the U.S. Education System” — told me, a lot of the technology that’s used in classrooms wasn’t developed with students in mind. “Most of the technologies are initially created for commercial purposes,” he said, “and then we decide how to use them in schools.”

In many cases, there’s little or no evidence that the products actually work, and “work” can have various meanings here: It’s not conclusive that tech, as opposed to hard-copy materials, improves educational outcomes. And sometimes devices or programs simply don’t function the way they’re supposed to. For example, artificial intelligence in education is all the rage, but then we get headlines like this one, in February, from The Wall Street Journal: “ We Tested an A.I. Tutor for Kids. It Struggled With Basic Math. ”

Alex Molnar, one of the directors of the National Educational Policy Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder, said that every school should be asking if the tech it’s using is both necessary and good. “The tech industry’s ethos is: If it’s doable, it is necessary. But for educators, that has to be an actual question: Is this necessary?” Even after you’ve cleared the bar of necessary, he said, educators should be asking, “Is doing it this way good, or could we do it another way that would be better? Better in the ethical sense and the pedagogical sense.”

With that necessary and good standard in mind, here are some specific recommendations that I’ve taken away from several discussions and a lot of reading. It’s unrealistic — and considering that we’re in a tech-saturated world, not ideal — to get rid of every last bit of educational technology. But we’re currently failing too many children by letting it run rampant.

At the State and Federal Levels: Privacy Protections and Better Evaluation

A complaint I heard from many public school parents who responded to my March 27 questionnaire and wanted a lower-tech environment for their kids is that they’re concerned about their children’s privacy. They couldn’t opt out of things like Google Classroom, they said, because in many cases, all of their children’s homework assignments were posted there. Molnar has a radical but elegant solution for this problem: “All data gathered must be destroyed after its intended purpose has been accomplished.” So if the intended purpose of a platform or application is grading, for example, the data would be destroyed at the end of the school year; it couldn’t be sold to a third party or used to further enhance the product or as a training ground for artificial intelligence.

Another recommendation — from a recent paper by the University of Edinburgh’s Ben Williamson, Molnar and the University of Colorado, Boulder’s Faith Boninger outlining the risks of A.I. in the classroom — is for the creation of an “independent government entity charged with ensuring the quality of digital educational products used in schools” that would evaluate tech before it is put into schools and “periodically thereafter.” Because the technology is always evolving, our oversight of it needs to be, as well.

At the District Level: Centralize the Tech-Vetting Process

Stephanie Sheron is the chief of strategic initiatives for the Montgomery County Public Schools, the largest district in Maryland, and all the district’s technology departments report to her. She likened the tech landscape, coming out of the Covid-19 pandemic remote school period, to the “Wild West.” School districts were flooded with different kinds of ed tech in an emergency situation in which teachers were desperately trying to engage their students, and a lot of relief money was pouring in from the federal government. When the dust settled, she said, the question was, “Now what do we do? How do we control this? How do we make sure that we’re in alignment with FERPA and COPPA and all of those other student data privacy components?”

To address this, Sheron said, her district has secured grant funding to hire a director of information security, who will function as the hub for all the educational technology vending and evaluate new tech. Part of the standardization that the district has been undergoing is a requirement that to be considered, curriculum vendors must offer both digital and hard-copy resources. She said her district tried to look at tech as a tool, adding: “A pencil is a tool for learning, but it’s not the only modality. Same thing with technology. We look at it as a tool, not as the main driver of the educational experience.”

At the Classroom Level: Ruthlessly Evaluate Every Tool

In my conversations with teachers, I’ve been struck by their descriptions of the cascade of tech use — that more tech is often offered as a solution to problems created by tech. For example, paid software like GoGuardian, which allows teachers to monitor every child’s screen, has been introduced to solve the problem of students goofing off on their laptops. But there’s a simple, free, low-tech solution to this problem that Doug Showley, a high school English teacher in Indiana I spoke to, employs: He makes all his students face their computer screens in his direction.

Every teacher who is concerned about tech use in his or her classroom should do a tech audit. There are several frameworks ; I like the worksheet created by Beth Pandolpho and Katie Cubano, the authors of “Choose Your Own Master Class: Urgent Ideas to Invigorate Your Professional Learning.” In the chapter “Balancing Technology Use in the Classroom,” they suggest that teachers list every tech tool they are using and evaluate its specific functions, asking, “Are these novel or duplicative?” They also encourage teachers to write out a defense of the tool and the frequency of use.

I like these questions because they make clear that the solutions are not going to be one size fits all.

Students Deserve Authentic Connection

As I close out this series, I want to return to what Fisher said about the importance of student connection and well-being. Of course academic outcomes matter. I want our kids to learn as much about as many different topics as they can. I care about falling test scores and think they’re an important piece of data.

But test scores are only one kind of information. A key lesson we should have learned from 2020 and ’21 is that school is about so much more than just academics. It’s about socialization, critical thinking, community and learning how to coexist with people who are different from you. I don’t know that all of these are things that can be tracked in a scientific way, which brings me back to the idea of tech in schools as a wicked problem: These aren’t easily measurable outcomes.

Jeff Frank, a professor of education at St. Lawrence University, expresses a sense that I’ve had very well in a paper , “Sounding the Call to Teach in a Social Media Age: Renewing the Importance of Philosophy in Teacher Education.” He says students are “hungry for experiences that make them feel alive and authentically connected to other people and to deeper sources of value. Though filtering and managing life through technologies offers safety, predictability and a sense of control, it also leads to life that can feel extremely small, constraining and lonely. Teaching can offer a powerful way to pierce this bubble.”

Ultimately, I believe the only way kids will be able to find that deeper meaning is through human relationships with their peers and teachers, no matter how shiny an A.I. tutor appears to be at first blush.

Jessica Grose is an Opinion writer for The Times, covering family, religion, education, culture and the way we live now.

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

MIT faculty, instructors, students experiment with generative AI in teaching and learning

Press contact :.

Previous image Next image

How can MIT’s community leverage generative AI to support learning and work on campus and beyond?

At MIT’s Festival of Learning 2024, faculty and instructors, students, staff, and alumni exchanged perspectives about the digital tools and innovations they’re experimenting with in the classroom. Panelists agreed that generative AI should be used to scaffold — not replace — learning experiences.

This annual event, co-sponsored by MIT Open Learning and the Office of the Vice Chancellor, celebrates teaching and learning innovations. When introducing new teaching and learning technologies, panelists stressed the importance of iteration and teaching students how to develop critical thinking skills while leveraging technologies like generative AI.

“The Festival of Learning brings the MIT community together to explore and celebrate what we do every day in the classroom,” said Christopher Capozzola, senior associate dean for open learning. “This year's deep dive into generative AI was reflective and practical — yet another remarkable instance of ‘mind and hand’ here at the Institute.”   

Incorporating generative AI into learning experiences 

MIT faculty and instructors aren’t just willing to experiment with generative AI — some believe it’s a necessary tool to prepare students to be competitive in the workforce. “In a future state, we will know how to teach skills with generative AI, but we need to be making iterative steps to get there instead of waiting around,” said Melissa Webster, lecturer in managerial communication at MIT Sloan School of Management. 

Some educators are revisiting their courses’ learning goals and redesigning assignments so students can achieve the desired outcomes in a world with AI. Webster, for example, previously paired written and oral assignments so students would develop ways of thinking. But, she saw an opportunity for teaching experimentation with generative AI. If students are using tools such as ChatGPT to help produce writing, Webster asked, “how do we still get the thinking part in there?”

One of the new assignments Webster developed asked students to generate cover letters through ChatGPT and critique the results from the perspective of future hiring managers. Beyond learning how to refine generative AI prompts to produce better outputs, Webster shared that “students are thinking more about their thinking.” Reviewing their ChatGPT-generated cover letter helped students determine what to say and how to say it, supporting their development of higher-level strategic skills like persuasion and understanding audiences.

Takako Aikawa, senior lecturer at the MIT Global Studies and Languages Section, redesigned a vocabulary exercise to ensure students developed a deeper understanding of the Japanese language, rather than just right or wrong answers. Students compared short sentences written by themselves and by ChatGPT and developed broader vocabulary and grammar patterns beyond the textbook. “This type of activity enhances not only their linguistic skills but stimulates their metacognitive or analytical thinking,” said Aikawa. “They have to think in Japanese for these exercises.”

While these panelists and other Institute faculty and instructors are redesigning their assignments, many MIT undergraduate and graduate students across different academic departments are leveraging generative AI for efficiency: creating presentations, summarizing notes, and quickly retrieving specific ideas from long documents. But this technology can also creatively personalize learning experiences. Its ability to communicate information in different ways allows students with different backgrounds and abilities to adapt course material in a way that’s specific to their particular context. 

Generative AI, for example, can help with student-centered learning at the K-12 level. Joe Diaz, program manager and STEAM educator for MIT pK-12 at Open Learning, encouraged educators to foster learning experiences where the student can take ownership. “Take something that kids care about and they’re passionate about, and they can discern where [generative AI] might not be correct or trustworthy,” said Diaz.

Panelists encouraged educators to think about generative AI in ways that move beyond a course policy statement. When incorporating generative AI into assignments, the key is to be clear about learning goals and open to sharing examples of how generative AI could be used in ways that align with those goals. 

The importance of critical thinking

Although generative AI can have positive impacts on educational experiences, users need to understand why large language models might produce incorrect or biased results. Faculty, instructors, and student panelists emphasized that it’s critical to contextualize how generative AI works. “[Instructors] try to explain what goes on in the back end and that really does help my understanding when reading the answers that I’m getting from ChatGPT or Copilot,” said Joyce Yuan, a senior in computer science. 

Jesse Thaler, professor of physics and director of the National Science Foundation Institute for Artificial Intelligence and Fundamental Interactions, warned about trusting a probabilistic tool to give definitive answers without uncertainty bands. “The interface and the output needs to be of a form that there are these pieces that you can verify or things that you can cross-check,” Thaler said.

When introducing tools like calculators or generative AI, the faculty and instructors on the panel said it’s essential for students to develop critical thinking skills in those particular academic and professional contexts. Computer science courses, for example, could permit students to use ChatGPT for help with their homework if the problem sets are broad enough that generative AI tools wouldn’t capture the full answer. However, introductory students who haven’t developed the understanding of programming concepts need to be able to discern whether the information ChatGPT generated was accurate or not.

Ana Bell, senior lecturer of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and MITx digital learning scientist, dedicated one class toward the end of the semester of Course 6.100L (Introduction to Computer Science and Programming Using Python) to teach students how to use ChatGPT for programming questions. She wanted students to understand why setting up generative AI tools with the context for programming problems, inputting as many details as possible, will help achieve the best possible results. “Even after it gives you a response back, you have to be critical about that response,” said Bell. By waiting to introduce ChatGPT until this stage, students were able to look at generative AI’s answers critically because they had spent the semester developing the skills to be able to identify whether problem sets were incorrect or might not work for every case. 

A scaffold for learning experiences

The bottom line from the panelists during the Festival of Learning was that generative AI should provide scaffolding for engaging learning experiences where students can still achieve desired learning goals. The MIT undergraduate and graduate student panelists found it invaluable when educators set expectations for the course about when and how it’s appropriate to use AI tools. Informing students of the learning goals allows them to understand whether generative AI will help or hinder their learning. Student panelists asked for trust that they would use generative AI as a starting point, or treat it like a brainstorming session with a friend for a group project. Faculty and instructor panelists said they will continue iterating their lesson plans to best support student learning and critical thinking. 

Panelists from both sides of the classroom discussed the importance of generative AI users being responsible for the content they produce and avoiding automation bias — trusting the technology’s response implicitly without thinking critically about why it produced that answer and whether it’s accurate. But since generative AI is built by people making design decisions, Thaler told students, “You have power to change the behavior of those tools.”

Share this news article on:

Related links.

• MIT Open Learning Residential Education team
• Video: "2024 Festival of Learning: Opening Remarks and Panel Discussion with MIT Faculty and Instructors"
• Video: "Generative AI in School and Work: A Panel Discussion with MIT Students and Alumni and Closing Remarks"
• MIT Open Learning
• Office of the Vice Chancellor

Related Topics

• Special events and guest speakers
• Artificial intelligence
• Education, teaching, academics
• K-12 education
• Office of Open Learning
• Vice Chancellor
• Human-computer interaction
• Online learning
• Innovation and Entrepreneurship (I&E)
• Labor and jobs
• Technology and society
• Electrical Engineering & Computer Science (eecs)
• MIT Sloan School of Management
• School of Humanities Arts and Social Sciences

Related Articles

A revolutionary, bold educational endeavor for Belize

How free online courses from MIT can “transform the future of the world”

“A whole world of potential learners and potential knowledge to gain”

Festival of Learning 2023 underscores importance of well-designed learning environments

Innovation in the classroom

Previous item Next item

More MIT News

Offering clean energy around the clock

Read full story →

Now corporate boards have responsibility for cybersecurity, too

An AI dataset carves new paths to tornado detection

Julie Shah named head of the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Remembering Chasity Nunez, a shining star at MIT Health

Exploring the history of data-driven arguments in public life

• 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

New Data Reveal How Many Students Are Using AI to Cheat

• Share article

AI-fueled cheating—and how to stop students from doing it—has become a major concern for educators.

But how prevalent is it? Newly released data from a popular plagiarism-detection company is shedding some light on the problem.

And it may not be as bad as educators think it is.

Of the more than 200 million writing assignments reviewed by Turnitin’s AI detection tool over the past year, some AI use was detected in about 1 out of 10 assignments, while only 3 out of every 100 assignments were generated mostly by AI.

These numbers have not changed much from when Turnitin released data in August of 2023 about the first three months of the use of its detection tool, said the company’s chief product officer, Annie Chechitelli.

“We hit a steady state, and it hasn’t changed dramatically since then,” she said. “There are students who are leaning on AI too much. But it’s not pervasive. It wasn’t this, ‘the sky is falling.’”

The fact that the number of students using AI to complete their schoolwork hasn’t skyrocketed in the past year dovetails with survey findings from Stanford University that were released in December. Researchers there polled students in 40 different high schools and found that the percentage of students who admitted to cheating has remained flat since the advent of ChatGPT and other readily available generative AI tools. For years before the release of ChatGPT, between 60 and 70 percent of students admitted to cheating, and that remained the same in the 2023 surveys, the researchers said.

Turnitin’s latest data release shows that in 11 percent of assignments run through its AI detection tool that at least 20 percent of each assignment had evidence of AI use in the writing. In 3 percent of the assignments, each assignment was made up of 80 percent or more of AI writing, which tracks closely with what the company was seeing just 3 months after it launched its AI detection tool .

Experts warn against fixating on cheating and plagiarism

However, a separate survey of educators has found that AI detection tools are becoming more popular with teachers, a trend that worries some experts.

The survey of middle and high school teachers by the Center for Democracy and Technology, a nonprofit focused on technology policy and consumer rights, found that 68 percent have used an AI detection tool, up substantially from the previous year. Teachers also reported in the same survey that students are increasingly getting in trouble for using AI to complete assignments. In the 2023-24 school year, 63 percent of teachers said students had gotten in trouble for being accused of using generative AI in their schoolwork, up from 48 percent last school year.

Despite scant evidence that AI is fueling a wave in cheating, half of teachers reported in the Center for Democracy and Technology survey that generative AI has made them more distrustful that their students are turning in original work.

Some experts warn that fixating on plagiarism and cheating is the wrong focus.

This creates an environment where students are afraid to talk with their teachers about AI tools because they might get in trouble, said Tara Nattrass, the managing director of innovation and strategy at ISTE+ASCD, a nonprofit that offers content and professional development on educational technology and curriculum.

“We need to reframe the conversation and engage with students around the ways in which AI can support them in their learning and the ways in which it may be detrimental to their learning,” she said in an email to Education Week. “We want students to know that activities like using AI to write essays and pass them off as their own is harmful to their learning while using AI to break down difficult topics to strengthen understanding can help them in their learning.”

Shift the focus to teaching AI literacy, crafting better policies

Students said in the Stanford survey that is generally how they think AI should be used: as an aid to understanding concepts rather than a fancy plagiarism tool.

Nattrass said schools should be teaching AI literacy while including students in drafting clear AI guidelines.

Nattrass also recommends against schools using AI detection tools. They are too unreliable to authenticate students’ work, she said, and false positives can be devastating to individual students and breed a larger environment of mistrust. Some research has found that AI detection tools are especially weak at identifying the original writing of English learners from AI-driven prose.

“Students are using AI and will continue to do so with or without educator guidance,” Nattrass said. “Teaching students about safe and ethical AI use is a part of our responsibility to help them become contributing digital citizens.”

AI detection software actually uses AI to function: these tools are trained on large amounts of machine- and human-created writing so that the software can ideally recognize differences between the two.

Turnitin claims that its AI detector is 99 percent accurate at determining whether a document was written with AI, specifically ChatGPT, as long as the document was composed with at least 20 percent of AI writing, according to the company’s website.

Chechitelli pointed out that no detector or test—whether it’s a fire alarm or medical test—is 100 percent accurate.

While she said teachers should not rely solely on AI detectors to determine if a student is using AI to cheat, she makes the case that detection tools can provide teachers with valuable data.

“It is not definitive proof,” she said. “It’s a signal that taken with other signals can be used to start a conversation with a student.”

As educators become more comfortable with generative AI, Chechitelli said she predicts the focus will shift from detection to transparency: how should students cite or communicate the ways they’ve used AI? When should educators encourage students to use AI in assignments? And do schools have clear policies around AI use and what, exactly, constitutes plagiarism or cheating?

“What the feedback we’re hearing now from students is: ‘I’m gonna use it. I would love a little bit more guidance on how and when so I don’t get in trouble,” but still use it to learn, Chechitelli said.

Sign Up for EdWeek Tech Leader

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

• Campus Partnerships
• Campus News
• Film & Fine Arts
• Music & Dance
• Architecture
• Politics & Social Science
• Biotechnology
• Children’s Health
• Public Health
• Engineering
• Computer Science & Technology
• Water & Environment
• News in Brief
• UWM in the News
• Faculty/Staff Announcements
• Student Announcements
• Photography
• Public Events
• For Faculty & Staff
• Submissions

News from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

Teaching Professor in Information Technology Management, 04/29/2024

Teaching Professor in Information Technology Management Dial-in by phone +1 414-253-8850,,353325551# United States, Milwaukee Find a local number Phone conference ID: 353 325 551# For organizers: Meeting options | Reset dial-in PIN, 11:00 am Purpose of Meeting: review final candidates after final in-person interviews. Contact: Suha Abdalla Omari, [email protected] , (414) 251-6995. This meeting may go into closed session, per state statute: Wis. Stat. sec. 19.85(1)(c) Considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility., Wis. Stat. sec. 19.85(1)(f) Considering financial, medical, social or personal histories or disciplinary data of specific persons, preliminary consideration of specific personnel problems or the investigation of charges against specific persons.

This meeting will reconvene in open session.

• Zilber faculty member selected for Fulbright award By Kathy Quirk April 25, 2024
• Forbes names UWM a top employer for diversity By John Schumacher April 25, 2024
• 414 for UWM Giving Days raises $1.3 million By Kari Pink April 23, 2024
• Alum working to improve Clarke Square area By Kathy Quirk April 23, 2024
• Milwaukee Film Festival features works by UWM alumni, faculty and students By John Schumacher April 19, 2024
• Several UWM programs land high in U.S. News graduate school rankings By John Schumacher April 12, 2024
• $1.3 million gift moves UWM closer to new research vessel By Kari Pink April 2, 2024
• UWM grad student chosen for National Teachers Hall of Fame By Kathy Quirk April 11, 2024

Top Stories

Best Global Universities for Mechanical Engineering in Russia

These are the top universities in Russia for mechanical engineering, based on their reputation and research in the field. Read the methodology »

To unlock more data and access tools to help you get into your dream school, sign up for the  U.S. News College Compass !

Here are the best global universities for mechanical engineering in Russia

Tomsk polytechnic university.

See the full rankings

• Clear Filters
• # 74 in Best Universities for Mechanical Engineering
• # 879 in Best Global Universities  (tie)

Edgar Tomeyan

Ruby on rails developer.

Web developer with abilities to design, implement, deploy, test and debug Ruby on Rails applications.

• Phone: +79773030311
• Email: [email protected]
• GitHub:  github.com/just-ed
• Ruby, Ruby on Rails
• Git, GitHub
• Heroku, VPS
• Russian - Proficiency
• English - Upper-Intermediate
• Armenian - Beginner
• Self-development
• Playing guitar
• Android ROMs

More From Forbes

Make 2024 the year of dispelling technology leadership myths.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

What keeps you from moving forward with your dreams?

Despite an increase in 2022 of women in technology, the statistic comes on the heels of a significant decline in female representation in the industry in ‘21 after years of slight incremental growth.

While one segment of tech continues to see an increase in women year over year - specifically development - it adds little to the constant reality of women making up 50% of the workforce yet only 22% of the tech C-suite are white women and, even more dastardly, 6% are women of color.

Couple the technology C-suite reality with the fact that in 2023, one in three United Kingdom women shared their plan to leave the tech industry in reaction to lack of retention efforts and/or support of better work-life balance.

Why do our numbers as women in the technology workforce continue to plague us?

Beyond education, bias and opportunity impediments, could it be as simple of lack of clarity surrounding what leading in technology truly means?

Outdated assumptions about who you have to be, how you need to act, and how to juggle the day-to-day (and worse, night-to-night) responsibilities must be addressed. Today’s necessities for managing a technology leadership role might come as a welcome surprise.

Google Issues Critical Chrome Update For All Windows Users

New ios 18 ai security move changes the game for all iphone users, world war i tactics make a comeback as a ukrainian gunner in the back of a propeller plane shoots down a russian drone, the magician.

Decades ago, the most common technology leader came across as acronym-laden, willfully perplexing, and power rich, service poor. Technology basics were delivered with such purposeful sweat, tears and far out timelines that the end results felt almost magical and other-worldly.

“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” boomed Oz.

The magical Oz as a puppeteer, seemed so big, yet the role was, once uncovered, far less wizard-like. Yesterday, everything felt much more complex than it does today - and rightfully so. Improvements, automations, and widely available education has led to a clearer, cleaner industry.

In a world where users know what they want and what it takes to get it, the seat at the table historically saved for the magician’s savior-like ego now is open to a more collaborative, transparent type of leader.

Zero work/life balance

Gone are the days of software, hardware, and general technology solutions keeping entire teams up all night. When everything was hand-coded and manually configured, if a system down alert came through, yes, chances are some skilled technician was going to be working on getting it back up and running if it took all night.

With more than 90% of today’s organizations embracing the cloud , solutions today tend to be either managed or, at a minimum, more easily manageable. As cloud usage and managed systems-as-services increase, time for life and wellness increases.

Technology as a career today competes with all other industries for balance. There is time to lead technology and raise a family, sleep through the night, enjoy uninterrupted time away from the office.

The complexity of technology

Given the increased accessibility to technology news and knowledge, one might think technology complexity has lessened.

From low-code to no-code options, what the general population doesn’t understand is ‘less’ means increased complexity ‘under the hood’.

Not unlike a wireless environment requiring more wires than wired to work correctly, tech that appears simpler is typically the opposite of that.

That said, today’s reality in our, “Let me Google that!” era empowers us to focus less on technical conversations and more on what matters today - service, support, and increased outcomes-based communication.

In a nutshell

Maybe technology leadership options of yesteryears would have been a terrible idea for you? But today it’s a perfect fit!

Unless you thrive in an environment where every buck stops with you and there is no room for collaboration, technology leadership is a solid career goal, choice, consideration for the foreseeable future.

Technology needs all different flavors of leaders. There is always room for your expertise and style at the table as long as your know your strengths, embrace your weaknesses, and fortify your team with colleagues strong in your areas of weakness.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions