Educators and school administrators love digital devices that studies show mostly have a negative impact on learning, harming lower performing students the most
Educators love digital devices, but there's little evidence they help children—especially those who most need help. Tweets: @alexlindsay , @naomikritzer , @drewharwell , @e_mln_e , @onlinecrslady , @davecormier , @justinparmenter , and @techreview Tweets: @alexlindsay : A technology is built but only sub-standard items are added to it. Then, we decide the technology doesn't work. When actual learning tools and platforms arrive, that transcend old ways of learning... we will look back and wonder why it took so long. https://www.technologyreview.com/ ... Naomi Kritzer / @naomikritzer : This article is hair-raising and really worth reading. I also wonder at what point students will start to deal with surveillance by buying a second phone for the spyware and some student will make extra cash by carrying a sack of classmates' phones along to class. https://twitter.com/... Drew Harwell / @drewharwell : College officials say tracking students' location and movement helps boost “student success.” But some called it another way to surveil and infantilize adults. One student told me, “Have a basic respect for our privacy. We don't need hall passes anymore” https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Dr Emeline Brul / @e_mln_e : This article is problematic on so many levels. 1) Citations and critical reviews of the research: some arguments refer to specific studies, without looking at meta-studies or into the methodology of said study. The issue is bad design, not that tech in learning is inherently bad. https://twitter.com/... Laura Gibbs / @onlinecrslady : you do not—I repeat: YOU DO NOT—need AI to get students excited about learning. so, before you buy the snake-oil algorithms, think about humanizing your class... it won't get you a shiny NYTimes puff piece, but hey: your students will thank you! https://brocansky.com/... @brocansky https://twitter.com/... Dave Cormier / @davecormier : Me: You realize that CoolMath isn't a math website Daughter: We use it at school Me: Does it actually teach you math? Daughter (giving me a look): of course not, when we use it we don't have to do math https://twitter.com/... Justin Parmenter / @justinparmenter : I do not share the “near-universal enthusiasm for technology” taking more and more of our class time. We're allowing ed tech companies to redefine what teaching and learning look like so they can line their pockets by selling us unvetted crap. #nced https://www.technologyreview.com/ ... @techreview : Why digital learning tools like laptops and iPads are actually holding students back. https://www.technologyreview.com/ ... Expand More For Next Unexpand More For Next
Context & Ripple Effects
This piece lands mid-arc in a slow reversal on classroom technology. A year earlier, Silicon Valley executives were pulling their own children out of screen-based schooling even as US public schools doubled down on devices — a divergence that presaged exactly the equity problem this review documents. The evidence here is that devices don't just fail to help, they actively harm the lowest-performing students most.
First-order effects
- Districts that invested in one-to-one iPad and Chromebook programs now face research showing negative learning effects concentrated among their weakest students — the population those programs were sold as helping.
- Educators quoted defending the tools, like Alex Lindsay's argument that only 'sub-standard' implementations have been tried so far, are put on the defensive against a growing body of null-to-negative results.
Second-order effects
- Parent and political pushback hardens: by 2025, parents were pressuring LA Unified to cut mandatory screen time on school-issued iPads and Chromebooks, turning a pedagogy debate into a procurement and contract fight.
- Device makers and the technologists who championed school laptop spending lose their evidentiary cover — [[a:883710|Bloomberg later tied billions in school laptop spending directly to worsening test scores and social skills]], shifting the burden of proof onto vendors.
Third-order effects
- The one-to-one device era inverts into a new digital divide: affluent families opt for low-screen schooling while under-resourced public schools remain the captive market for classroom hardware.
- Policy follows the evidence internationally — UNESCO's call for a global smartphone ban in schools signals regulators treating intensive classroom technology as a documented performance risk rather than an unproven bet.
The trend: Classroom computing is moving from uncritical adoption toward evidence-driven retrenchment, with the students devices were meant to help most driving the backlash.