Giving Compass’ Take:
• Thomas Arnett argues that edtech not only influences student outcomes directly, but also has a potential indirect impact by enabling shifts in teachers’ practices in this opinion piece from the Christensen Institute.
• How can this article help those in support of edtech be successful in their use of it? What can teachers take away from this piece?
• To read what broad edtech trends mean for your school district, click here.
Does adaptive learning software improve test scores? Does a 1:1 device initiative improve learning? Is screen time good for students? Questions like these are regulars in debates about edtech. But whether you’re an edtech advocate or a critic, if you’re asking questions like these, you’re missing the mark.
All of these questions stand atop an inaccurate edtech paradigm that more or less resembles the first diagram below. According to this paradigm, a school’s resources—edtech and teacher practices being two prime examples—each contributes to student outcomes. Therefore, improved student outcomes result from investing in the resources with the largest direct impact on student outcomes.
With this paradigm as a starting point, edtech critics look for evidence that technology’s impact is small or negative and therefore doesn’t warrant its cost. Meanwhile, edtech proponents, operating from the same paradigm, want to show that edtech is a student learning gamechanger that deserves space on a school’s schedule and budget.
Read the full article about the way people think about edtech by Thomas Arnett at Christensen Institute.
Interested in learning more about Tech for Good? Other readers at Giving Compass found the following articles helpful for impact giving related to Tech for Good.
Are you ready to give?
If you are looking for opportunities to take action and give money to Tech for Good, here are some Giving Funds, Charitable Organizations and Projects aggregated by Giving Compass where you can take immediate action.