essay about electronic devices in school

ChatGPT for Teachers

Trauma-informed practices in schools, teacher well-being, cultivating diversity, equity, & inclusion, integrating technology in the classroom, social-emotional development, covid-19 resources, invest in resilience: summer toolkit, civics & resilience, all toolkits, degree programs, trauma-informed professional development, teacher licensure & certification, how to become - career information, classroom management, instructional design, lifestyle & self-care, online higher ed teaching, current events, debating the use of digital devices in the classroom.

While many parents allow children free reign of the internet at home, it’s a common debate in education circles on how —and if —digital devices should be allowed at school.

Supporters of technology in the classroom say that using laptops, tablets, and cellphones in the classroom can keep students engaged. Technology is what they know. Most students today don’t even remember a time without the internet.

But critics say it’s yet another distraction in the classroom. From social media to texting, allowing digital devices could hinder a student’s performance in the classroom.

Read on to discover the main arguments surrounding the global debate on digital devices and their place in our schools.

Pros of digital devices in the classroom

• Peace of mind:  Cellphones and smartphones can offer parents a little more peace of mind when their children are at school. Parents know that in an emergency the student can contact them, or vice versa. In addition, more and more cellphones and smartphones contain GPS devices that can be tracked if necessary.
• Instant answers:  Access to the internet provides instant answers for the curious. This is the search-and-learn environment kids are involved in today. Now, when they want to know “Why do leaves change color,” they are only a search away from an answer. This also gives students the ability to get an answer to a question they may feel uncomfortable asking in class. If a teacher uses a term they don’t understand, they can find the answer discretely, and without interrupting the class.
• Wider access to information:  With internet access, children can be exposed to a world of creative ideas outside of their bubble. They can learn other languages, teach themselves how to draw, knit, or play chess. They have access to an endless array of options available to help them learn, and gain skills they might not otherwise be exposed to. All of this can be accomplished through a  smartphone, which can be a valuable learning tool , if used correctly.
• Access to video:  Electronic devices in the classroom can enhance the learning experience by providing instant video access. Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech is not just something to read about. Man’s first step on the moon, early flight, presidential speeches, bridges being built—they all are made more real and easier to digest in the form of instant video availability.
• Wide range of music available:  Sure, you might think of kids listening to their pop, hip-hop, and rap music on digital devices, but remember that all music is available. This gives students access to classical, jazz, big band, and early rock ‘n’ roll. Students could have the opportunity to compare and discuss the differences in these styles in a way that is familiar to them.
• Social learning: Social media can have a negative connotation when you link it to kids. However, there can be an educational aspect. Social learning is a great way for students to share information, thoughts, and ideas on a subject. Properly focused, quieter, and shyer students may blossom in a social learning situation made possible by digital devices.
• Teacher advancement:  Finding ways to effectively utilize digital devices in the classroom provides teachers with an opportunity to advance their skillset and grow with their students. Many teachers are taking their digital literacy to the next level by earning an  master’s degree in education technology .

Cons of digital devices in the classroom

• Harmful effects of digital devices:  There are concerns from the EPA about long-term exposure to wireless devices and computer screens . While there is no direct evidence of harmful effects, the EPA discourages too much exposure for students who have video screens in front of their faces or computers in their laps. If students frequently use these devices at home, additional exposure at school could be viewed as harmful.
• Inappropriate materials:  While schools can limit the availability of websites that can be viewed on their network, students may find links that slipped through the system. There will also be times that students will not be accessing the internet through a monitored network.
• Distraction from schoolwork:  With the temptation of social media and texting in their hands, students may focus solely on their social life instead of the lesson plan.
• Child predators:  Child predators are a problem everywhere. Using digital devices at school creates just that much more exposure and potential danger for students.
• Cyberbulling : This is an increasing issue that’s grown exponentially in recent years. Permitting use of digital devices in the classroom could potentially lead to more of it.
• Provide a disconnect:  While some believe digital devices make for greater connections for students, there are also those who believe too much time with digital devices disconnects students from face-to-face social activities, family communications, and nature. Digital devices in the classroom could lead to an even greater disconnect.
• Could widen the gap : Technology spending varies greatly across the nation. Some schools have the means to address the digital divide so that all of their students have access to technology and can improve their technological skills. Meanwhile, other schools still struggle with their computer-to-student ratio and/or lack the means to provide economically disadvantaged students with loaner iPads and other devices so that they can have access to the same tools and resources that their classmates have at school and at home.

Should schools permit digital devices?

Some school districts have seen great improvements by allowing digital devices in the classroom. One thing is clear: if digital devices are permitted, there should be guidelines and rules in place .

Students need to be taught online safety, the use of judgment in determining good quality sources of information, and restraint from personal use in the classroom. In other words, they need to learn all about digital literacy and  digital citizenship .

There are many resources for teaching these concepts, and a great place to start is the International Society for Technology in Education  (ISTE). Their   comprehensive standards  focus on  the skills and qualities students should have in order to be successful in the digital world. ISTE also teamed up with Google and developed an online digital citizenship game called  Interland . It educates kids about digital citizenship in interactive ways. Students learn how to be good digital citizens as well as how to combat hackers, phishers, oversharers, and bullies.

If a school is going to allow and/or encourage the use of digital devices in the classroom, then teachers also need proper support in terms of training, professional development, and curriculum. They can start with curriculum and PD resources such as those provided by   Common Sense Media , but in order to fully utilize them, teachers need time to plan and collaborate. Digital devices should only be used when there are specific goals in mind, focusing on student safety, digital citizenship, critical thinking, collaboration, advancement, and equity.

You may also like to read

• How to Incorporate Digital Stories in the Classroom
• Teaching Via Tech: Digital Advancements in the Classroom
• Google Docs for Teachers: Classroom and Lesson Plan Management
• Five Skills Online Teachers Need for Classroom Instruction
• 3 Examples of Innovative Educational Technology
• How Assistive Learning Technology has Impacted the Disabled

Categorized as: Tips for Teachers and Classroom Resources

Tagged as: Educational Technology ,  Educational Technology Leadership ,  Social Media

• Master's in Trauma-Informed Education and Car...
• Degrees and Certificates for Teachers & Educa...
• Online Associate's Degree Programs in Educati...

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Learning & Tech

Laptops and phones in the classroom: yea, nay or a third way.

Anya Kamenetz

"If something on their desk or in their pocket dings, rings or vibrates — they will lose focus."

"Students are doing so much in class, distraction and disruption isn't really something I worry about."

How should teachers — both K-12 and college — deal with the use of computers and phones by students in class?

On one hand, those sleek little supercomputers promise to connect us to all human knowledge. On the other hand, they are also scientifically designed by some of the world's top geniuses to feel as compelling as oxygen.

So where does that leave teachers? Should you ban these devices in the classroom? Let students go whole hog? Or is there a happy medium?

This seemingly simple topic ends up being what one professor and pedagogy expert calls "a Rorschach test for so much that's going on in education."

Recently, the California state teachers pension fund weighed in — as a large investor in Apple, the makers of the iPhone. In an open letter, along with another activist shareholder, it called on the company to study digital distraction among youth and to make it easier to limit young people's use.

The letter cited a national survey that found two-thirds of K-12 teachers said the number of students who are negatively distracted by digital technologies in the classroom is growing. Of those teachers surveyed, 75 percent said students' ability to focus on educational tasks has decreased.

Attention, Students: Put Your Laptops Away

Research at the college level backs that up; a small, 2017 study at Michigan State University found students in an introductory psychology course spent up to a third of class time surfing the Web to nonacademic sites — even though they knew that the researchers were tracking their computer use.

Sounds ominous. But the debate over devices in the classroom has many more perspectives. I spoke with four professors, a high school teacher, a psychiatrist and a technologist to get a range of different views.

No way, no how

Allia Griffin teaches in the Department of Ethnic Studies at Santa Clara University in California. Her policy is simple: "Phones/devices must be turned off and not visible during class time."

Her reason is simple too: "Phones are distracting. My experience has been that no matter how invested a student may be in a class discussion or lecture, if something on their desk or in their pocket dings, rings or vibrates — they will lose focus."

How To Get Students To Stop Using Their Cellphones In Class

And she worries about missed opportunities to socialize face-to-face. "Beyond being distracting, students also use phones/laptops/devices as objects to hide behind to avoid participating in class or interacting with their peers."

Frequently, Griffin adds, "I will walk into a classroom on the first day of the quarter and will find 30 students sitting silently in their seats and individually texting or Instagramming on their phones. This is a tragic scene. The college classroom is ... a unique space to exchange ideas and thoughts and develop the ability to communicate with a variety of people."

"Candy" is unhealthy

Katherine Welzenbach teaches high school chemistry in Overland Park, Kan. She, too, bans cellphones — and even backpacks, where phones often hide — in her classes.

These devices are worse than distracting, she says. They can connect teens to cyberbullying, hate speech, sexting and other "unhealthy" experiences.

Welzenbach is vocal about her stance, despite what she calls "shaming" of teachers like herself who take a hard line. "Teachers who see cellphones as distractions are often labeled as being 'unengaging,' " she says.

She understands the argument that teens need to learn to use the Internet appropriately. But she uses healthy eating as an analogy: Don't give kids unlimited access to "Halloween candy and Christmas cookies while they are still learning to eat a balanced diet."

Distraction has an upside

What you're really talking about when you talk about laptop bans, says Jesse Stommel, is student freedom.

"Ultimately, I see strict laptop policies (and especially blanket bans) as a form of control," explains Stommel, who directs the Division of Teaching and Learning Technologies at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Va.

And that, he tells NPR, is a bad thing. "I don't think the attention of students is actually something teachers can or should control."

Stommel, who has been engaged in many debates over laptop bans on Twitter, calls the issue "weirdly divisive" but also, in the end, "a red herring."

Instead of an "authoritarian approach," he suggests a conversation.

"We can talk to students about attention and have them talk to us about how attention works for them," Stommel says. "This is the kind of metacognitive work that is the stuff of learning."

Distraction, he adds, can actually be a gateway to learning. It can be necessary for "peak experiences like making connections, having epiphanies, understanding abstract concepts."

There may also be times, he says, that the phone or computer can be an in-class tool. "We can also ask students to use their devices in ways that help them and the rest of the class, looking up a confusing term, polling their friends on Facebook about a topic we're discussing or taking collaborative notes in an open document."

On the other hand, says Stommel, there may be times and places to shut it down, too: "We can ask students to close their laptops at particular moments, recognizing that it is useful to learn different things, at different times, in different ways."

Embrace diversity

Catherine Prendergast, a professor of English at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, also believes that blanket bans are a bad idea. But her concern is a little different than Stommel's. She is thinking about students with special needs.

"Federal law, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, extends to protect students' classrooms," she tells NPR. "If a student needs to use a laptop as an accommodation, they have a right to do so."

But making the student ask to bring a laptop could be seen as an invasion of privacy, Prendergast says. Better to allow them for all: "The ADA enjoins us to affirmatively seek to remove barriers to education and to make our classrooms more inclusive, not less."

Some students need to be device-free

Victoria Dunckley, a Los Angeles-based psychiatrist and the author of Reset Your Child's Brain, has a different perspective. She prescribes strict limits on screen time to young people who are suffering from a variety of psychological ills. She says she has encountered "pushback" when trying to shield her patients from using devices at schools that have integrated them into the classroom.

If your students are distracted, then improve your teaching

Derek Bruff is a mathematician and director of the Center for Teaching at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.

He says research finds that note-taking by hand can lead to better recall than note-taking by typing on a computer. The reason is that when you write more slowly by hand, you have to think through what you're hearing and put down only the most important bits; touch-typers tend to transcribe what a person is saying without doing much processing of what they're hearing.

However, Bruff adds, comparing those two scenarios misses a point that's backed up by even more research: Lecturing while someone takes notes is not a very engaging or effective mode of teaching to begin with.

"If you're going to spend 80 to 100 percent of your class time lecturing, phones are going to be distracting to students," he says.

What works much better? Getting students to collaborate and debate in small groups, for one thing. He has also seen anecdotally that "if you give students something productive and on-topic to do with their devices," it reduces idle browsing. He calls this the "Google jockey" approach.

The Two-Way

France moves to ban students from using cellphones in schools.

Like Stommel, he believes there is a time and a place for laptops and phones, but also a time and place to exclude them. "Sometimes you want three students around a piece of paper."

Fight technology with technology

Alanna Harvey is the co-founder and marketing director of Flipd, a phone app that limits the use of your phone. You can set a timer to lock yourself out of all functions except basic texts and phone calls.

Not long after launch, the company noticed that college students were among its biggest user base, so it began aiming the app at educators.

"Our research and discussions with customers have consistently found that digital distractions are negatively impacting the learning experience for students and educators," she says.

Harvey argues that Flipd offers a fresh, not coercive approach. Rather than instituting a ban, the company encourages professors to offer extra credit for installing the app and using it during class.

Highly engaging lesson plans, as Bruff advocates, are all well and good, but they're no match for the latest game or social network, Harvey says.

"Some of the most engaging professors I know are Flipd customers," she says. "Which I believe suggests that the problem isn't the professor, it may not even be the students, but it's the devices we know that are designed to influence and manipulate our behavior in many ways."

Bring policies in line with values

John Warner, who teaches English at the College of Charleston in South Carolina, has been on both sides of the device divide.

As recently as four years ago he had a policy of "no laptops in class, except for specific, designated activities," and banned cellphones except for emergencies. But after engaging in debates online with Stommel and others, his position shifted.

He sees himself as "more of a catalyst for learning, rather than a conduit of information." To live up to that value, he in turn needed his students to be what he calls "self-governing" over technology.

Warner says it has been working well. He has small writing classes, with about 20 students, and he almost never asks them to simply sit and take notes. "Students are doing so much in class," he says, "distraction and disruption isn't really something I worry about. They're too busy."

Correction April 11, 2018

A previous version of this story incorrectly said a student laptop study was done at the University of Michigan. It was actually done at Michigan State University.

• distraction

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Elementary-school students’ use of digital devices at home to support learning pre- and post-covid-19.

1. Parents Descriptions of Elementary-School Students’ Use of Digital Devices at Home to Support Learning

1.1. the use of digital devices to support children’s learning, 1.2. the use of digital devices at home during covid-19, 1.3. the present study.

• What digital devices do children have access to at home and how often do children use these devices to support their reading, mathematics, writing, and science learning? Are there any differences in device use based on academic subject or grade? (Study 1)
• What are parents’ views regarding children’s use of digital devices for reading, mathematics, writing, and science? (Study 1)
• Do parents report that their child’s use of digital devices at home has changed since the onset of COVID-19? (Study 2) We hypothesize that reports of children’s digital use will have increased.
• Do parents report a change in their confidence to assist their children with digital devices since the onset of COVID-19? (Study 2)

2.1. Method

2.1.1. participants, 2.1.2. measures, 2.1.3. procedure, 3. results and discussion, 3.1. children’s access to and use of devices for learning, 3.2. parents’ views on use of devices for learning, 5.1. participants, 5.2. measure, 5.3. procedure, 6. results and discussion, 6.1. children’s access to and use of devices for learning, 6.2. children’s use of digital devices since the start of covid-19, 6.3. parents’ confidence in using digital devices since the start of covid-19, 7. general discussion, 8. conclusions and application, limitations, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Ryan, C. Computer and Internet Use in the United States: 2016 ; American Community Survey Reports-39; United States Census Bureau: Washington, DC, USA, 2018. Available online: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2018/acs/ACS-39.pdf (accessed on 13 June 2022).
• National Center for Education Statistics. Children’s Internet Access at Home. Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. 2022. Available online: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cch (accessed on 13 June 2022).
• Walsh, J.J.; Barnes, J.D.; Cameron, J.D.; Goldfield, G.S.; Chaput, J.P.; Gunnell, K.E.; Ledoux, A.A.; Zemek, R.L.; Tremblay, M.S. Associations between 24 hour movement behaviours and global cognition in US children: A cross-sectional observational study. Lancet Child Adolesc. Health 2018 , 2 , 783–791. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Sonnenschein, S.; Stites, M.L. The effects of COVID-19 on young children’s and their parents’ activities at home. Early Educ. Dev. 2021 , 32 , 789–793. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Eutsler, L.; Antonenko, P.D.; Dawson, K. How parent perceptions relate to elementary children’s portable technology use by gender and grade Level. Comput. Sch. 2018 , 35 , 302–323. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Radesky, J.S.; Eisenberg, S.; Kistin, C.J.; Gross, J.; Block, G.; Zuckerman, B.; Silverstein, M. Overstimulated consumers or next-generation learners? Parent tensions about child mobile technology use. Ann. Fam. Med. 2016 , 14 , 503–508. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Stevenson, O. From public policy to family practices: Researching the everyday realities of families’ technology use at home. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2011 , 27 , 336–346. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pew Research Center. Parenting Children in the Age of Screens. 2020. Available online: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/07/28/parenting-children-in-the-age-of-screens/ (accessed on 13 June 2022).
• Sonnenschein, S.; Stites, M.; Ross, A. Home learning environments for young children in the U.S. during COVID-19. Early Educ. Dev. 2021 , 32 , 794–811. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cheung, A.C.K.; Slavin, R.E. Effects of educational technology applications on reading outcomes for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Read. Res. Q. 2013 , 48 , 277–299. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zucker, T.; Moody, A.; McKenna, M. The effects of electronic books on pre-kindergarten-to-grade 5 students’ literacy and language outcomes: A research synthesis. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2009 , 40 , 47–87. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Q.; Ma, X. A Meta-analysis of the Effects of Computer Technology on School Students’ Mathematics Learning. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2010 , 22 , 215–243. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Slavin, R.E.; Lake, C. Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A Best-evidence synthesis. Rev. Educ. Res. 2008 , 78 , 427–515. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• D’Angelo, C.; Rutstein, D.; Harris, C. Learning with STEM simulations in the classroom: Findings and trends from a meta-Analysis. Educ. Technol. 2016 , 56 , 58–61. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/44430495 (accessed on 13 June 2022).
• Hussein, M.H.; Ow, S.H.; Cheong, L.S.; Thong, M.K.; Ale Ebrahim, N. Effects of digital game-based learning on elementary science learning: A systematic review. IEEE Access 2019 , 7 , 62465–62478. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wollscheid, S.; Sjaastad, J.; Tømte, C. The impact of digital devices vs. Pen(cil) and paper on primary school students' writing skills: A research review. Comput. Educ. 2016 , 95 , 19–35. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kucirkova, N.; Wells Rowe, D.; Oliver, L.; Piestrzynski, L.E. Systematic review of young children’s writing on screen: What do we know and what do we need to know. Literacy 2019 , 53 , 216–225. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Rideout, V. The Common Sense Census: Media Use by Kids Age Zero to Eight. Common Sense Media. 2017. Available online: https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/research/report/csm_zerotoeight_fullreport_release_2.pdf (accessed on 13 June 2022).
• Domina, T.; Renzulli, L.; Murray, B.; Garza, A.N.; Pere, P. Remote or removed: Predicting successful engagement with online learning during COVID-19. Socius Sociol. Res. Dyn. World 2021 , 7 , 1–15. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dong, C.; Cao, S.; Li, H. Young children’s online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: Chinese parents’ beliefs and attitudes. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2020 , 118 , 105440. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Stites, M.L.; Sonneschein, S.; Galczyk, S.H. Preschool parents’ views of distance learning during COVID-19. Early Educ. Dev. 2021 , 32 , 923–939. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sustainable Development Goals. 2019. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal14 (accessed on 5 January 2023).
• Tkáčová, H.; Pavlíková, M.; Tvrdoň, M.; Jenisová, Z. The use of media in the feld of individual responsibility for sustainable development in schools: A proposal for an approach to learning about sustainable development. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 4138. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Blum-Ross, A.; Livingstone, S. Families and Screen Time: Current Advice and Emerging Research ; Media Policy Brief 17; The London School of Economics & Political Science: London, UK, 2016; Available online: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/66927/1/Policy%20Brief%2017-%20Families%20%20Screen%20Time.pdf (accessed on 11 June 2022).
• Huber, B.; Highfield, K.; Kaufman, J. Detailing the digital experience: Parent reports of children’s media use in the home learning environment. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2018 , 49 , 821–833. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ortiz, R.W.; Green, T.; Lim, H.J. Families and home computer use: Exploring parent perceptions of the importance of current technology. Urban Educ. 2011 , 46 , 202–215. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hoover-Dempsey, K.V.; Walker, J.M.T.; Sandler, H.M.; Whetsel, D.; Green, C.L.; Wilkins, A.S.; Closson, K. Why do parents become involved? Research findings and implications. Elem. Sch. J. 2005 , 106 , 105–130. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hadlington, L.; White, H.; Curtis, S. “I cannot live without my [tablet]”: Children’s experiences of using tablet technology within the home. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019 , 94 , 19–24. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Ronimus, M.; Lyytinen, H. Is school a better environment than home for digital game-based learning? The case of GraphoGame. Hum. Technol. 2015 , 11 , 123–147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haskova, A.; Gadusova, Z.; Havettova, R. Methodological aspects of online forms of teaching. J. Educ. Cult. Soc. 2021 , 12 , 139–152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oliemat, E.; Ihmeideh, F.; Alkhawaldeh, M. The use of touch-screen tablets in early childhood: Children’s knowledge, skills, and attitudes towards tablet technology. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2018 , 88 , 591–597. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sonnenschein, S.; Grossman, E.R.; Grossman, J.A. U.S. parents’ reports of assisting their children with distance learning during COVID-19. Educ. Sci. 2021 , 11 , 501–515. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cannon, J.; Ginsburg, H.P. “Doing the math”: Maternal beliefs about early mathematics versus language learning. Early Educ. Dev. 2008 , 19 , 238–260. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Maloney, E.A.; Ramirez, G.; Gunderson, E.A.; Levine, S.C.; Beilock, S.L. Intergenerational effects of parents’ math anxiety on children’s math achievement and anxiety. Psychol. Sci. 2015 , 26 , 1480–1488. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Berkowitz, T.; Schaeffer, M.W.; Maloney, E.A.; Peterson, L.; Gregor, C.; Levine, S.C.; Beilock, S.L. Math at home adds up to achievement in school. Science 2015 , 350 , 196–198. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Kaya, S.; Lundeen, C. Capturing parents’ individual and institutional interest toward involvement in science education. J. Sci. Teach. Educ. 2010 , 21 , 825–841. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Archer, K.; Savage, R.; Sanghera-Sidhu, S.; Wood, E.; Gottardo, A.; Chen, V. Examining the effectiveness of technology use in classrooms: A tertiary meta-analysis. Comput. Educ. 2014 , 78 , 140–149. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bell, P.; Lewenstein, B.; Shouse, A.; Feder, M. Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits ; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Science Teachers Association. Parent Involvement in Science Learning [Position Statement]. 2009. Available online: https://static.nsta.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_ParentInvolvement.pdf (accessed on 13 June 2022).
• Sonnenschein, S.; Gursoy, H.; Stites, M. Elementary school children’s home learning environments: Mathematics, reading, science, written language. Educ. Sci. 2022 , 11 , 303–318. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hirsh-Pasek, K.; Zosh, J.M.; Golinkoff, R.M.; Gray, J.H.; Robb, M.B.; Kaufman, J. Putting education in “Educational” apps. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 2015 , 16 , 3–34. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]

Share and Cite

Sonnenschein, S.; Stites, M.L.; Gursoy, H.; Khorsandian, J. Elementary-School Students’ Use of Digital Devices at Home to Support Learning Pre- and Post-COVID-19. Educ. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020117

Sonnenschein S, Stites ML, Gursoy H, Khorsandian J. Elementary-School Students’ Use of Digital Devices at Home to Support Learning Pre- and Post-COVID-19. Education Sciences . 2023; 13(2):117. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020117

Sonnenschein, Susan, Michele Lee Stites, Hatice Gursoy, and Jeniffer Khorsandian. 2023. "Elementary-School Students’ Use of Digital Devices at Home to Support Learning Pre- and Post-COVID-19" Education Sciences 13, no. 2: 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020117

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

24/7 writing help on your phone

To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”

The Impact of Electronic Devices on Student Performance and Habits

Save to my list

Remove from my list

Distracting Consequences in the Classroom

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

Stella timotheou.

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

Ourania Miliou

Yiannis dimitriadis.

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

Sara Villagrá Sobrino

Nikoleta giannoutsou, romina cachia.

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

Alejandra Martínez Monés

Andri ioannou, associated data.

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

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

Methodology

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Impacts of digital technologies on equality, inclusion and social integration

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

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

Impacts of digital technologies on teachers’ professional and teaching practices

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Factors that affect the integration of digital technologies

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

Digital competencies

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

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

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

Teachers’ personal characteristics, training approaches, and professional development

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

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

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

School leadership and management

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

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

Connectivity, infrastructure, and government and other support

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

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

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

Administration and digital data management

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

Students’ socioeconomic background and family support

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

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

Schools’ socioeconomic context and emergency situations

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

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

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

Factors that affect the impact of ICTs on education

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

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

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

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

Conclusions

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

Study limitations and future directions

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

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

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

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

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

Acknowledgements

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

Data availability statement

Declarations.

Publisher's note

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

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

Should Students Bring Their Own Technology Devices to School?

• Share article

I am at the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) conference in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in my capacity as a Classroom Fellow with the US Department of Education . At our exhibitor booth, we are discussing the National Education Technology Plan and the Connected Online Community of Practice .

While it’s important to examine technology from a national and policy perspective, from my school based experience, I’m still thinking about the recent regulations that my large, forward thinking, school district has released for students to bring their own technology devices to school.

These district guidelines are essential for educators who advocate for more technology integration in classrooms because the nitty gritty technology infrastructure and legal details are addressed. For example, does a school have adequate bandwidth capacity and access points for all the potential hundreds or thousands of devices to hit the network? How will the students access the Internet? What regulations guide their use of the Internet and other technology resources? What exactly are the student’s and school’s responsibility for personally owned devices?

These are the kinds of details that ensure that technology is maximized for student learning. Too often, some educators promote technology policies without thinking about the details, which potentially result in confusion, failure, and frustration.

A lot of work from a lot of different specialists must have gone into these district guidelines for students to bring their own technologies, but I think the harder work is ahead of us.

As much as I’ve discussed the potential of more technology in classrooms (such as the ideal technology device , promoting choice , and technology use ), as a technology specialist at the school based level, I wonder what will happen if such policies became commonplace in schools.

Here are some hypothetical scenarios based on some experiences:

The Wealthy Private School My first teaching experience was as a high school English literature teacher at an elite international private school. If students could bring their own technology, hypothetically, I would still be fair in my technology expectations and request that all the students have a first generation iPad for class. However, upon hearing these out-of-date requirements, my bright, intelligent, motivated, and privileged students would show up to class with the iPad 2 and Macbook Airs. The parents would also donate a MacPro for classroom and student use to create content for the iPads. (This is not wishful technology dreaming- anyone who has worked at these elite schools understands the level of parent support.) This could all be lot of fun!

Potential Result: Our classes will continue to be on the fast track of all the learning and creative opportunities that these devices could offer.

The Well-Funded and Well-Led Public School As a new special education teacher in public school many years ago, my principal took all the new teachers to a bookstore at the beginning of the school year and told us to buy whatever we needed. In all, about a half dozen of us spent over $10,000 in books. My principal remarked, “We have a supportive PTA and excellent business partnerships!”

If students could bring their own technology, many could bring some level of technologies through cell phones, iPods, etc. There would be a wide range in the power and capacity of these technologies.

But, to ensure a minimum level of equity, the wise, savvy, and well-connected principal would form multiple partnerships with local businesses, the PTA, and write grants to ensure that every student had access to a minimum level of technology.

Potential Result : Our classes will be on their way to the learning and creative opportunities that these devices could offer.

The Diverse Socio-Economic Public School

I’ve also taught at these types of schools:

High Level Free & Reduced Lunch Student Population: Many of these families and students lack technology at home, and certainly do not have the discretionary funds to buy technologies for school use. As a teacher, even with a district policy of allowing student technology, I could not have any expectation of students bringing any devices to school.

Potential Result: A policy of allowing student technology would have no effect.

Mid Level Free & Reduced Lunch Student Population: This type of population is the most challenging. Why? Because these schools serve both the wealthy and needy student population in the same building, and teachers in these schools must have the instructional expertise to meet all levels student challenges. If students could bring their own technology in this type of school, the results could be all over the place. Some students might bring various brands of cell phones and MP3 players. Some students may bring old laptops. Some students with more family resources may bring netbooks or iPads. And, some students won’t bring anything.

And, to further complicate this understanding of how student devices could impact learning, we have to remember that public schools are evaluated on test scores. So, another level of analysis would be to understand if student technology would be used for test preparation or for projects that require real world problem solving and creativity... Of course, the answer is “yes”, but that’s too much to talk about in this post...

Potential Result: A policy of allowing student technology would have multiple results and technological support challenges.

So, in this potential era of student devices, we could see classes in some schools where all students are focused on a single platform and organized for using technology for higher levels of thinking. We could see mixed classrooms with hodgepodges of technology where a teacher could potentially struggle to support multiple devices and software/operating system formats. And, we could see classrooms not using technology at all.

What happens next once students start bringing their technology to schools?

I think a little of everything. This will be painful progress. The ubiquitous access and power of these devices in the classrooms will force us to address the difficult questions of what a quality education should look like in this century. These devices will force us to re-examine the definitions of teaching and learning and interactions between student and teacher.

And, perhaps, these devices will force us to confront the impact of inequity in these times.

So are we ready for some students to start bringing their technology to our schools and classrooms?

The opinions expressed in Leading From the Classroom are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Effects of Electronic Gadgets in the Academic Perfomance of Senior High School Students

23 Pages Posted: 2 Apr 2021

Lowie Borlado Balbaguio

DepEd-Ardemil National High School, Ardemil, Sara, Iloilo, Philippines

Kenneth Ron Articulo

Ardemil national high school, department of education, mary may bantillo, noli john magabolo, ella borres, marlon capuslanan, renaleen jabagat, jerson m. panes, mary rose panes, vincent ian b. muyco.

Date Written: November 24, 2020

Technology has played a vital role in educational innovations, providing both teachers and learners options and flexibility in their teaching and learning practice. This descriptive research was designed to find out the effect of electronic gadgets on the academic performance of senior high school (SHS) learners, study habit and level of proficiency in the use of electronic gadgets. This was conducted at four small implementers of SHS in the municipality of Sara, Iloilo. Eighty (80) randomly selected SHS responded on questionnaire-checklist. Mean, Pearson-r and t-test were used to analyze data. Results of the study showed that the effect of electronic gadgets on academic performance of SHS learners was very effective, level of proficiency on use of electronic gadgets was highly proficient, study habit of SHS learners was very good. There were no significant differences in effect of electronic gadgets on the academic performance, level of proficiency on the use of electronic gadgets and study habit of SHS. There was no significant relationships between the effect of electronic gadgets, level of proficiency in the use of electronic gadgets and study habit on the academic performance. Learners are aware on effects, yet responsive and educated about ill effects of gadgets. Educational use of gadgets develops a foundation of good/strong/progressive and effective citizens in the future. Electronic gadgets are beneficial in the schools. Therefore, the principals/school heads should allow learners and teachers use gadgets in class. However, constant reminder should be instigated in the various negative effects of these gadgets.

Keywords: Academic Performance, Educational Innovations, Electronic Gadgets, Senior High School Learners, Study Habit, Teaching and Learning Practice

JEL Classification: I21, I26, I30

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Lowie Borlado Balbaguio (Contact Author)

Deped-ardemil national high school, ardemil, sara, iloilo, philippines ( email ).

Brgy. Ardemil Sara, Iloilo, Philippines Iloilo City, Iloilo 5014 Philippines

Philippines

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, pedagogy ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Psychology Research Methods eJournal

Developmental psychology ejournal, educational & school psychology ejournal.

The Average Guy Network

News, reviews, product updates and conversation, all for the Average Guy!

10 Benefits and Uses of Electronic Gadgets in Learning

In the age of technology and connectivity, electronic gadgets have graced their way into the learning process of students in the classroom. These gadgets have been used to continually improve and expound methods through which students can learn. The gadgets mostly used by students are tablets, mobile phones and cameras.

Also, the growing demand in terms of requirements from students is assisted by these electronic gadgets. Tasks and collaboration are done easier using technology available for educational purposes.

However, there are debates concerning the advantages and disadvantages of electronic gadgets usage inside the classroom. This blog article focuses on the advantages it can bring students.

So what are the benefits and uses exactly that gadgets contribute to student learning?

Also See: The Desktop Dilemma: Do we even need them and Navigating the Tech Landscape in 2024

1. Improves overall student performance.

According to the study of Behnke, Gilliland, Schneider and Singer in 2005, the usage of gadgets such as tablets in class can contribute to improved student performance, it also can contribute to the decrease in the number of students who perform poorly in class.

Not only that, gadgets also help improve the efficiency of teaching methods and learning capacities of students using tablets in class.

Overall, the usage of electronic gadgets has made activities conducted in classrooms more flexible. The various features and functions of gadgets in class also play a part to efficiently transform teaching and learning methods, because of this, different senses of students are activated through the use of these gadgets.

Also see Transforming Education with Electronic Gadgets: Improving Student Performance and Enhancing Teaching Methods

2. Enables student-centered learning.

Traditionally, learning is dependent on teacher-centered strategies. But with the transformations in the teaching methodologies and the availability of gadgets in the classroom, learning has deviated away from this focus.

According to the study of Nah, Lim, and Yih in 2012 , electronic gadgets help facilitate and expound student-centered learning through providing additional functions that enable students’ active role in the classroom. Their independence and ability to control their learning pace using these gadgets have fostered personalized participation.

Also see Empowering Students through Electronic Gadgets: How Student-Centered Learning is Revolutionizing Education

3. Enhances knowledge-retention.

Retention is one crucial factor in determining whether students are successfully learning in class. Correlatively, the activation of students’ multiple senses while using electronic gadgets in class, may help with their knowledge retention.

For instance, according to the study of Krause, Mogalle, Pohl and Williams in 2015, social gamification can help increase knowledge-retention among students.

Also see The Power of Gamification in Education: Boosting Motivation, Engagement, and Knowledge Retention

4. Enhances presentation and illustration of lectures.

Content is no longer presented through traditional methods such as the usage of boards, hardcopy drawings, and old school black and white projectors, through the usage of gadgets in the classroom, audio-visual and media presentations became not only available but portable for students.

Both students and teachers can also customize the ways through which information can be presented in class using electronic gadgets. These ways usually improve participation inside the classroom.

Also see Revolutionizing Education: The Impact of Gadgets on Multimedia Content in the Classroom

5. Enhances collaboration.

Due to the personalized and multiple functions of gadgets in class, collaboration consequently increases among students especially in terms of classroom participation and engagement.

As mentioned earlier, the usage of gadgets makes learning flexible. In the same way that collaboration becomes more voluntary as opposed to traditional learning methods due to the features and accessibility of gadgets. This is most apparent in virtual classrooms, online discussions and online activities.

Also see: The Power of Technology in Education: The Collaborative Benefits of Gadgets in the Classroom

6. Can be used for research purposes.

This is the most widely known use of using gadgets in the classroom. No longer do students have to physically go to libraries and browse hardcopy books for simple research or homework. Information is within their grasp in matters of seconds.

Also, researching online is not only limited to Google or Google Scholar. Schools often also provide access to paid research scholarly digital database such as Ebsco and Jstor . These database platforms are no longer confined within library computers but can also be accessible through tablets and mobile phones of students.

Also see: The Impact of Gadgets on Student Research Skills and Habits

7. Can be used for easier access to materials and easier storage of information.

No longer do students traditionally take notes but they can store books and notes through pdf or e-book copies or through taking pictures of lecture notes. They can also record audios and videos of lectures and discussions for as long as it is permitted by the lecturer or professor. Also, anytime they need materials, these materials can be accessible through the most portable gadgets such as mobile phones.

Also, according to the study of Behnke, Gilliland, Schneider and Singer in 2005, the usage of gadgets such as tablets create increase in the information received by students.

8. Can be used by students to verify information.

Due to the easier access to information, students can practice initiative to verify among themselves the data presented to them. Hence, improving their information fluency and critical thinking.

Speaking of critical thinking, wondering how you can improve critical thinking in writing? Here are 5 Tips on How to Improve Critical Thinking Skills in Academic Writing

According to the study of Mada in 2017, gadgets can help develop learning skills such as assembling, evaluating and utilizing information.

While according to the study of Thomas, O’Bannon and Bolton in 2013, since students can verify information themselves through the internet, this increases communication, collaboration and cooperative problem solving amongst students and even teachers.

9. Can be used for easier communication.

Students and also teachers no longer have to disseminate information through text messages or emails individually, but with electronic gadgets, platforms for portable and easier sharing of necessary school-related information is possible such as Facebook groups, Google classroom and other learning management systems such as Schoology .

Also, collaboration is easier between students and teachers given the instructional features most gadgets have that can be utilized for learning.

Also See: Revolutionizing Education: How Technology is Enhancing Learning through Collaborative Spaces, Learning Management Systems, and Social Media

10. Can be used for virtual classroom or virtual learning.

A virtual classroom is a platform through which learning is conducted online. Inside the virtual classroom, mechanisms such as video conference, online whiteboard and chat boxes are used by students and teachers.

This is essentially useful for learning flexibility and maximizing the benefits of technology in education. According to the study of McBrien and Jones , virtual classroom is a platform that can increase students’ engagement and participation due to the digital tools and mechanisms that students can use.

Also see: Maximizing the Potential of Virtual Classrooms: Advantages, Research, and Actionable Steps for Institutions

There you go! We have gone through all the 10 benefits and uses of allowing electronic gadgets in classrooms. However, these benefits can only be maximized if there is supervision in the usage of these gadgets. For instance, social media applications should be minimized or banned during discussions unless needed and related to ongoing classroom activities. Other educationally unrelated use of these gadgets should also be minimized. Otherwise, the usage of electronic gadgets in classrooms may cause distraction and hence be counterproductive for students.

Charm Jayme is a Marketing Executive at Inkmypapers   in Singpore. She loves books, coffee and breakfast.

Ellis-Behnke, R., Gilliland, J., Schneider, G. E., & Singer, D. (2003). Educational benefits of a paperless classroom utilizing tablet PCs. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts-USA .

Krause, M., Mogalle, M., Pohl, H., & Williams, J. J. (2015, March). A playful game changer: Fostering student retention in online education with social gamification. In Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM conference on Learning@ Scale (pp. 95-102).

Mada, A. (2017). The Perception of Students and Lecturers on the Benefits, Opportunities and Challenges of the Use of ICT Gadgets During Lectures. The Fountain: Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies , 1 (1), 108-132.

McBrien, J. L., Cheng, R., & Jones, P. (2009). Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning , 10 (3).

Nah, E. A., Lim, T. H., & Yih, B. (2012). Enhancing student-centered learning through usage of television commercials via wiki. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 67 , 144-155.

Thomas, K. M., O’Bannon, B. W., & Bolton, N. (2013). Cell phones in the classroom: Teachers’ perspectives of inclusion, benefits, and barriers. Computers in the Schools , 30 (4), 295-308.

14 thoughts on “ 10 Benefits and Uses of Electronic Gadgets in Learning ”

• Pingback: 5 Best Gadgets to Reduce Your Household’s Carbon Footprint – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: 5 Gadget and Design Ideas to Transform Your Outdoor Enjoyment – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: Top 10 Posts for TheAverageGuy.tv 2022 – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: Transforming Education with Electronic Gadgets: Improving Student Performance and Enhancing Teaching Methods – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: Empowering Students through Electronic Gadgets: How Student-Centered Learning is Revolutionizing Education – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: The Power of Gamification in Education: Boosting Motivation, Engagement, and Knowledge Retention – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: Revolutionizing Education: The Impact of Gadgets on Multimedia Content in the Classroom – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: The Power of Technology in Education: The Collaborative Benefits of Gadgets in the Classroom – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: The Impact of Gadgets on Student Research Skills and Habits – The Average Guy Network
• Pingback: Revolutionizing Education: How Technology is Enhancing Learning through Collaborative Spaces, Learning Management Systems, and Social Media – The Average Guy Network

nice content also get info at

That’s great news and thanks for letting me know though the work I needed

Great Post, thank you so much for sharing this with us i really like,

• Pingback: The Rise of Personal AI Assistants: How Everyday Users Are Benefiting – The Average Guy Network

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Site Powered By MapleGrove Hosting – Hosting plans start are as low at $10 per month for site and media hosting! Click for more details

Most Recent Podcast

Recent posts.

• Jay Franze with Listener Emails, HVAC Options, StreamYard Replacements and NiceHash – HGG621 Sat September 7, 2024
• TJ Huddleston with Smart Lighting, Garden Irrigation and His Home Automation Journey – HGG620 Sat August 31, 2024
• The Rise of Personal AI Assistants: How Everyday Users Are Benefiting Tue August 27, 2024
• Mike Wieger with Generator Interlock Kits, Meshtastic and LocalSend – HGG619 Sat August 24, 2024
• Weathering the Storm: Lessons in Home Backup Power from a Major Power Outage – HGG618 Sat August 10, 2024
• Mark Robson with the Big BBQ and Grill Show for Summer 2024 – HGG616 Sat July 27, 2024
• Gavin Campbell with the Meater Block, 3D Printing and Smart Toilets via the Finger Bot – HGG615 Sun July 21, 2024
• Jay Mattison with Cameras, Audio and the Future of ARM Computing – HGG614 Sun July 14, 2024
• Ed Sullivan with the new iPad Pro M4, Macs, and Productivity: Finding the Right Tools – HGG613 Sat June 29, 2024
• Adam Hickman with X3 Strength Training and Hydration Innovations with ionbottles – HGG612 Sat June 22, 2024

Want to Subscribe to the Home Gadget Geeks Podcast?

Connect on social, support the network.

Podcast Reviews

I love how they go in detail in every episode of the show, didn't know I would enjoy home gadget info so much.

One of the best shows for the home pc enthusiast. I've been listening to it each week for over two years and I'd highly recommend it. Jim and team are very professional and the show is very informative.

This is one podcast you dont want to miss. They may talk alot of tech but they make it so anyone can understand it. Dont get lost in the tech jungle list to what they say and do your research. Subscribe and be treated to a ton of knowlage.

Jim is a nut! A tech nut! Great show for folks looking to scratch their tech itch.

so sorry, seems i left a review under my husband's name of pytheas2.0! LOL! well, now he is subscribed :) but thanks for hosting a great show with a variety of information! I'm a photographer and no where near knowing about techy stuff, so maybe i'll learn a thing or two and impress my husband ;)

Just wanted to let you guys know that this is a good podcast to subsribe to, to get the latest news on the tech scene :) Networking, Phones, Servers. All you need. And they do host giveaways of exciting products every now and then :)

Easily a winner when it comes to knowing their stuff!! These guys always seem to know what I am thinking, and just put the info out there! Keep up the great work, Hands down, the friendliest bunch around!

If you have a connected home, you owe it to yourself to listen to this podcast. The tips, tricks and news save me tons of time from browsing a ton of websites constantly.

Pretty Tech savvy. Thanks!

Very informative and also entertaining - keep up the good work!

Band 6+: Today children are surrounded by electronic devices such as personal computers, tablet computers, and smart phones, and they learn to use them at a very early age. What are advantages and disadvantages of this situation?

Modern children live in a digital era. This has its own benefits as the drawbacks. Gadgets can ease learning process for pupils and give them an access to necessary information. On the other hand, they can distract children from their tasks and lead to worse grades in school. In this essay I will argue that modern electronic devices bring more benefits if they are used in a proper way.

There are several concerns from parents about using electronic devices by their offspring. One of them is that gadgets are only about leisure activities but performing home and house tasks. Another is that children who spend much time playing videogames or watching services, such as YouTube and TikTok, have worse performance in school. According to some data, teenagers in the USA who play videogames more than 4 hours per day have lower school grades in comparison with adolescents who do not. Hence, gadgets can influence children in a negative way if the amount of time for using electronic devices is not controlled by parents.

However, gadgets also give children a unique educational opportunity. By using gamification process these devices can be very appealing for children in the form of nudging them to discover new information. For example, this technology is successfully used in many language learning apps, such as Duolingo, because this way of learning foreign languages is more interesting for teenagers than a traditional one. Moreover, playing videogames is not as bad for young people as it may seem to be. Recent study performed in the UK shows that children who regularly play computer games have better reaction time and quicker performance in math task than those who do not. Hence, electronic devices can be helpful for younger population if content and time which they spend are controlled by adults.

In conclusion, while I admit that electronic devices have some disadvantages, I believe that this technology give children new perspectives and opportunities.

Check Your Own Essay On This Topic?

Generate a band-9 sample with your idea, overall band score, task response, coherence & cohesion, lexical resource, grammatical range & accuracy, essays on the same topic:, today children are surrounded by electronic devices such as personal computers, tablet computers, and smart phones, and they learn to use them at a very early age. what are advantages and disadvantages of this situation.

Many kids these days have been spending most of their time with advanced technology gadgets like: smartphones, tablets, and computers at an early age. It has both negative and positive and negative side, which will discussed in the upcoming paragraph. There are several advantages of utilizing technology devices in childhood such as access to educational […]

Other Topics:

In some countries owning a home rather than renting one is very important for people. why might thus be the case do you think this is a positive trend.

Crowds in many countries would prefer to buy a home rather than rent one. Having properties always safeguard people from being drastically homeless and make them feel more confident. It is my personal opinion that it might be always positive to have an asset. My positions are as follows. Researchers indicate that landlords have more […]

In the modern world University education is essential in order to get a rewarding job and earn a high salary to what extent do you agree or disagree

Without a shadow of doubt, the keynote of a University education is essential in order to get a rewarding job and earn a high salary and it is a matter of discussion in their age. Personally, I partially agree with the given statement and I will shed some views on it in the upcoming paragraphs […]

Some people believe that it is better to live and work in a vertical city with multiple tall buildings, as compared to a horizontal city with fewer tall buildings. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

In today’s time, few of us believe that living and working in a city where there are high rising buildings is better then living in places with small buildings or houses. In this essay, I will be discussing both views and share my preference. Firstly, Tall buildings are majorly part of the city that are […]

Nowadays, some nations tax sugar more heavily to help citizens eat healthily. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

In this modern day, some countries impose a higher tax on sugar in order to encourage people to consume healthier food. Personally, I think that this approach has more disadvantages than advantages. On the one hand, some beneficial effects of heavy tax on sugar are undeniable. Firstly, taxing sugar at a higher level will help […]

Is learning a new language limited to living in a foreign country?

Some people believe that the purpose of learning a different language, is to travel or have a job in another nation; while, other people do not limit it to only this purpose. I think that there can be several reasons for learning another language and it’s different from person to person. On the one hand, […]

A person should never make an important decision alone. Do you agree or disagree with this following statement?

Some people say you should not decide on something very important all by yourself. I believe this is not true. Consequences of all decisions concerning a given person will be faced only by this person, and only this person knows all circumstances he or she is in better than anyone else. Discussing your situation with […]

Plans & Pricing

Advantages and disadvantages of electronic devices

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Fully explain your ideas

To get an excellent score in the IELTS Task 2 writing section, one of the easiest and most effective tips is structuring your writing in the most solid format. A great argument essay structure may be divided to four paragraphs, in which comprises of four sentences (excluding the conclusion paragraph, which comprises of three sentences).

For we to consider an essay structure a great one, it should be looking like this:

• Paragraph 1 - Introduction
• Sentence 1 - Background statement
• Sentence 2 - Detailed background statement
• Sentence 3 - Thesis
• Sentence 4 - Outline sentence
• Paragraph 2 - First supporting paragraph
• Sentence 1 - Topic sentence
• Sentence 2 - Example
• Sentence 3 - Discussion
• Sentence 4 - Conclusion
• Paragraph 3 - Second supporting paragraph
• Paragraph 4 - Conclusion
• Sentence 1 - Summary
• Sentence 2 - Restatement of thesis
• Sentence 3 - Prediction or recommendation

Our recommended essay structure above comprises of fifteen (15) sentences, which will make your essay approximately 250 to 275 words.

Discover more tips in The Ultimate Guide to Get a Target Band Score of 7+ » — a book that's free for 🚀 Premium users.

• Check your IELTS essay »
• Find essays with the same topic
• View collections of IELTS Writing Samples
• Show IELTS Writing Task 2 Topics

All parents want the best opportunities for their children. There are some people who think that schools should teach children skills but others think having a range of subjects is better for a children’s future.Discuss both sides and give your opinion

In most of the countries, people prefer to rent their homes rather than buying them. do the advantages overweigh disadvantages of renting a home, some university student want to learn about other subjects in addition to their main subjects. other believes it is more important to give all their times and attention to studying for a qualification. discuss both these views and give your own opinion., some people say it is important to keep your home and your workplace tidy, with everything organised and in the correct place. what is your opinion about this, in the past, people lived in one place for a long time , but now they can live in many different places what are the reasons is this positive or negative development .