6 Things We’re Getting Wrong About Tech Integration

When schools closed during the pandemic in 2020, technology was suddenly the only game in town.

But the quick, nationwide pivot to on-demand services like Zoom and Google Classroom wasn’t just a matter of giving students access to new tools—the shift posed lasting questions about systems, supports, and pedagogical strategies. Emerging from the pandemic, decisions needed to be made: What software had improved learning and should be retained, and what constituted emergency measures that could be safely discarded? Years later, too many schools have yet to wrestle with these questions and are stuck with a shiny set of tech tools that are of dubious value.

New survey data confirms the dizzying speed of the changes to the K–12 technology landscape and points to lingering waste in the system. In 2018, before anyone had heard of Covid-19, school districts used an average of 841 edtech tools during the school year, according to a report by Instructure. By 2021–22, that number had jumped over 170 percent, to 2,300 tools in active circulation, before slowing and settling in at an average of 2,739 tools per district during the 2023–24 school year. On average, only half of those tools were accessed on a monthly basis, “indicating [that] districts are not using a consistent set of edtech tools” throughout the school year.

Unsurprisingly, a plan for sustainable tech integration in classroom remains beyond the reach of many educators. A national survey of 8,500 administrators and teachers found that while 87 percent of principals believe effective use of technology is crucial to their school’s mission, only 18 percent say they’d consider their teachers “very proficient” at using edtech. This proficiency gap isn’t surprising given the obstacles teachers reported, from unreliable tech support (72 percent) and a lack of professional learning opportunities (52 percent) to the need for guidance on how to manage classrooms packed with distracting devices (42 percent).

See your district reflected in this data? While meaningful systemic change takes time and commitment, some measurable improvements can be made. In search of course corrections, we spoke to technology integration specialists and facilitators, edtech coaches, principals, and classroom teachers to identify what schools are still getting wrong about tech integration—and the changes they can make this year to start getting back on track.

SOFTWARE WITHOUT SUPPORT

Many districts spend money on tools and platforms without allocating time and funds to adequately test the software and train the educators, says Michelle Manning, an instructional technology integration specialist. “There’s a lack of investment in training the teachers, so schools aren’t getting a return on their investment because the teachers aren’t utilizing the products.”

An onboarding period for new tools—and plenty of opportunities for staff development—are both a must, but they need to be ongoing and can take multiple forms. Eliciting feedback throughout the process is crucial, as well, Manning says: “OK, you had a month to play with the tool. Let’s follow up and revisit it: What’s working and what’s not?”

Training doesn’t always mean pulling teachers out of the classroom. Technology integration specialist Tim Needles creates short tech tool tutorial videos to share with staff weekly so they can explore at their own pace. At his superintendent’s request, Needles presented to over 800 teachers before the school year began, showcasing the district’s available tools and potential use cases as well as outlining how he could support teachers’ development—like demoing a tool for a small group or coming into the classroom and co-teaching a lesson where students and the teacher learn a new tool together.

SILOED SPENDING DECISIONS

When it comes to tech purchasing, “not involving the right stakeholders from the beginning” can be a costly mistake, San Antonio district’s chief information technology officer, Eva Mendoza, tells EdWeek. But joining instructional staff and IT teams together in the vetting process can cause some tension, admits Victoria Thompson, an educational technologist: “Educators feel as though IT teams don’t understand their instructional challenges, and IT teams feel that educators struggle to understand the gravity of cybersecurity and data privacy initiatives.”

Rather than a top-down system where tools are purchased without teacher input, committee-style discussions allow teachers to explain their needs, administrators to outline budgetary limits, IT specialists to consider data privacy and security, and edtech specialists to serve as intermediaries.

In educational technology specialist Kathi Kersznowski’s district, the assistant superintendent recently created a Digital Vetting Committee. Each month, the group—including high-level administrators representing all grade levels, edtech specialists, teacher representatives, and department supervisors—meet to assess all purchased edtech platforms and tools, cost, frequency of use, and where resources could be better allocated. These types of conversations also help calibrate adoption patterns, steering schools clear of chasing trends or flashy applications that simply capture student attention, and ensuring that spending aligns with instructional goals. “You’ve got admin saying, ‘Here’s our budget,’ and teachers saying, ‘Here’s what we want,’” she says. “Then you’ve got people like me in the middle who can say, ‘I think there’s a tool that can do both, and if we cut out these three tools, the one that I’m suggesting will still serve all of our needs.’”

TECH FOR TECH’S SAKE

It’s shiny-new-thing syndrome: Adopting “any and all technology” to support student learning became the mantra during the pandemic, explains Kate Lund, an assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction at Glastonbury Public Schools in Connecticut. She now fears that “we’re at a point where maybe we leaned too far.” High school English teacher Marcus Luther feels the squeeze inside his classroom: “In almost every school, there’s some sort of device that students are almost expected to use in any given lesson.”

Without clearly articulated guidelines around when technology can help—or hurt—a lesson, many teachers feel rudderless. Building a collaborative decision-making process can create consistency across classrooms while relieving teachers of the responsibility of making the calls alone.

When educators question whether they need tech for a lesson, Kersznowski starts by asking a few simple questions: 

• What’s your objective? 
• What do you want your students to learn? 
• How are they going to demonstrate learning? 

Software is not always the answer. “If students need to take a test because you have to be on to a benchmark by next week, then maybe we’re going to go with pencil and paper,” says Kersznowski. “But if you’ve got time to put them on a creative task to demonstrate learning, those are great opportunities for students to use something like Canva, Adobe, or even Google Slides.”

TOOLS WITHOUT RULES

Integrating technology into classrooms can sometimes feel like mixing oil and water—often because schools prioritize implementation before establishing clear expectations and effective routines with students.

Before kids ever touch a device, “what really should come first is classroom management,” says instructional coach Alyssa Faubion. “We really need to set our students up for success, and that starts before they ever use a tech tool. You have to define clear expectations around when to use it, when not to use it, and how to use it. Otherwise, students can easily open a computer up and have that instant distraction.”  

Skip these fundamentals and even the most thoughtfully planned lesson can implode, leaving you wondering whether using technology with students has any potential for success.

A consistent set of verbal and nonverbal cues ensures that students know what to expect. For example, Faubion emphasizes that when she is talking, students should focus on her and their devices need to be in “shark mode,” meaning closed most of the way but still ajar so they don’t inadvertently log out. And though it might seem like overkill, multigrade teacher Megan Ryder follows the same daily routine with devices, verbally reminding students of each step. This repetition allows processes to become “so routine that they’re stored in students’ long-term memory,” Debra Jacoby, a computer science and educational technologist, told me.

Highlighting acceptable device use (and the consequences for improper care or misuse) is a nonnegotiable, regardless of grade level, adds Julie Daniel Davis, an adjunct professor at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Key areas to emphasize include device care and storage, safeguarding important information, and the consequences for improper care or misuse. Don’t forget to explore with a student’s experience in mind, writes Crystal Uhiren, an instructional technology educator: “Note how many clicks it takes to reach assignments in a learning management system. If it takes too many, students can lose their path or struggle to find what they need.”

UNUSED DEVICES, UNPREPARED STUDENTS

Laptops, tablets, and Chromebooks are increasingly cited as sources of distraction in classrooms; some teachers are drawing a line in the sand and shelving the tech entirely. Devices “eat up so much class time, with kids having internet issues, needing to charge their Chromebook and having to look for their charger,” an educator wrote on the social media platform X. “I had my kids do their warm-up and exit questions on paper today. It was much more efficient.”

But a balanced approach is essential; shunning classroom tech entirely can backfire, worsening the digital divide schools aim to close. A 2018 study of 46,000 eighth-grade students at 2,200 schools across 14 countries concluded that “young people do not develop sophisticated digital skills just by growing up using digital devices.” Students need help developing digital competencies, explains Dirk Hastedt, executive director of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, which released the analysis. The idea of the “digital native” is a myth, he says, and we can’t keep assuming that students will pick up technology skills purely through osmosis. 

That’s especially worrisome as schools shift toward computer-based assessments, Kersznowski explains. “When we get a result from a child on a test, does the result truly reflect their understanding the same way a paper-and-pencil test would, or did they not know that they could scroll up and down that page?” she asks, reflecting on the equity implications of tech restrictions in classrooms. “Did they not know that that button up top said they could flag that question and come back to it later? Did they not know that they had more time and they didn’t have to hit the submit button at the 45-minute mark? Helping students navigate these digital tests so that they reflect an accurate picture of the child—that’s part of digital literacy, too.”

CONSUMPTION OVER CREATION

The final bell doesn’t just signal the end of the school day—it’s the spark that ignites an explosion of digital expression as students share their thoughts and opinions through rapidfire posts, striking photography, original music, and snippets of video that can go viral by midnight.

Inside the classroom, these opportunities are noticeably absent, replaced by passive tech applications where students merely consume rather than create, explains Matt Miller, edtech expert and author of Ditch That Textbook: “We’re going to watch videos, we’re going to fill in documents, we’re going to do digital worksheets, and I’m going to make my slides on it. And a lot of it becomes consume, consume, consume.”

A path forward doesn’t involve simply recognizing the creative potential of technology, but “the full creative potential of your students,” says Mitchel Resnick, professor of learning research at the MIT Media Lab. Challenge students to experiment with video and explore novel ways to show what they know—summarizing key points from a lesson and highlighting important takeaways from assigned reading.

Design platforms like Canva and Bookcreator give students the ability to create visually appealing and content-rich posters or step-by-step tutorial books they can use to teach a new concept to their peers. Students can produce their own mini podcasts—from retelling how they solved a particularly challenging math problem to narrating their lab work from hypothesis to final findings—or use a recording app like Apple’s default Voice Memos to bring their written short stories to life, infusing them with emotion and personality.

“One of my favorite activities is using Adobe Express—they have a new AI-powered animation tool,” Needles says. “I pushed into the art teacher's classroom, and I gave students in fourth and fifth grade an opportunity to create a short animation. Every student had a positive interaction—they were creating their own stories, and even pushing their teachers to use the tools in different ways.”