Technology has transformed nearly every part of our lives, including our classrooms. But as schools continue to put laptops, Chromebooks, educational apps, and now artificial intelligence in front of students, we need to ask a very basic question: Is all this technology actually helping our children learn?
Neuroscientist and former teacher Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath believes it may be doing the opposite.
In his book The Digital Delusion, Horvath argues that the dramatic expansion of educational technology has coincided with troubling declines in student performance. He points out that beginning around 2000, IQ scores in many Western countries began declining after generations of improvement. International academic scores have also fallen.
Horvath believes increased reliance on educational technology deserves much closer scrutiny.
The shift accelerated dramatically during COVID. Schools moved instruction online. It was an emergency solution to an unprecedented problem. But when students returned to classrooms, much of the technology remained. According to Horvath, 88% of U.S. school districts, including Dysart, now provide students with one-to-one computers.
The question is whether we ever stopped to determine how much technology was actually beneficial.
Horvath points to results from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). In surveys conducted alongside testing in 2012, 2015 and 2018, students reported how much time they spent using digital devices during the school day. Horvath notes that students reporting more than six hours of computer use per day scored, on average, 66 points lower than students reporting no computer use.
That certainly deserves our attention.
The conversation should not be about eliminating technology from education. Technology can be an incredibly valuable tool. The question should be when, where, how and at what age we use it.
If elected to the Dysart Governing Board, one of the first things I want to address is how much time our students are spending on school-issued Chromebooks.
How many hours does a kindergarten student spend looking at a screen during the school day? What about a third grader? A sixth grader? A high school student?
Are Chromebooks replacing textbooks when a textbook might be the better learning tool? Are students writing enough by hand? Are younger children developing the reading, writing, math and critical-thinking foundations they need before we put technology between them and their teachers?
We should also ask whether the technology we purchase is producing measurable academic benefits. Schools spend significant amounts of taxpayer money on devices, software, subscriptions and digital curriculum. Parents and taxpayers deserve to know whether those investments are improving student outcomes.
This does not need to become an argument between “technology” and “no technology.” We need a thoughtful, age-appropriate approach.
For younger students especially, I believe we should prioritize teachers, books, pencils, paper, handwriting, conversation and hands-on learning. As students get older, technology can gradually become a larger part of their education and prepare them for college and the workforce.
The goal should never be to put a Chromebook in front of a student simply because we have one available.
Technology should serve education. Education should not serve technology.
It is time for parents, teachers and school boards to start asking some important questions: How much screen time is too much? At what age should screens become a regular part of classroom instruction? And most importantly, is the technology we are using helping—or hurting—our students?
