I wrote about this last year in this post.
https://relevantdata.substack.com/p/the-dashed-dreams-of-digitized-learning
I am happy to see the movement away from Technology-First education formats and the skepticism of Big Tech's Benevolence in Education. -
Parents, educators and even many students across the country have been celebrating the transition to phone free schools thanks to the work ofJonathan Haidt’s The Anxious Generation and organizations such as the Phone Free Schools Movement.
In one school district that recently went phone-free, a middle schooler expressed his relief that he no longer had to worry about being photographed by another classmate in the bathroom.
Middle school is challenging- just imagine having to worry about something like this!
As an educator, I applaud the phone-free movement.
Clearly it is having an incredibly positive impact in schools all around the country. Even entire states such as California are declaring a commitment to keeping phones out of the classroom.
We are taking a step in the right direction to help regain control of children's lives from the grasp of big tech.
When movements like this occur, there often is a ripple effect that spurs positive change in the same direction. One such ripple is from Emily Cherkin, also known as the Screen Time Consultant, who has created an Unplug EdTech Toolkit for parents who recognize the harms of technology in education and guides them on how to opt their child out of the use of a 1:1 device in school. Emily and her daughter are blazing trails that are much needed in the battle against the overuse of technology in schools.
Unfortunately, those who swim against the tide are faced with a captured education system.
Technology has been creeping into schools for decades but that accelerated after the introduction of the Common Core Standards in 2010. These standards, funded largely by tech philanthropist Bill Gates, allowed the flood “Gates” of edtech to open.
It is well reported that test scores for reading and math have been dropping for over a decade, starting around the same time that the 1:1 initiative (meaning a device such as a chrome book or iPad for every child) and edtech boom started.
We all know the debacle that Covid policies created in schools.
In March 2020, school districts across the country raced to provide a device for every child in their district (including preschool). Google profited significantly as many districts acquired more Chromebooks for “virtual” learning.
Now that every child has a device, no one seems to question whether the pivot to more online curriculum materials or edtech is actually good for learning - the tech companies would like us to just believe that it is.
The article, Big Tech Hubris And Greed Behind Digital Education Failure, highlights how the tech industry has profited from the rise of “educational” technology in tandem with the decline in national test scores and mental health of children.
In another article,The EdTech Revolution Has Failed, Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath articulates the neuroscience behind multitasking and its harms to learning. It should come as no surprise that test scores are dropping when students are spending so much time in front of a screen while at school.
In an ideal world, a student would only be able to access the online program that they are working on. In reality, students (much like adults) have multiple tabs open and often idly toggle between random websites (and games). Often this is even required for them to complete their work. Since developing brains are more susceptible to the addictive designs of these sites, they need to be continuously redirected, leading to many students lashing out. Just ask any educator, the increase in emotional outbursts in schools is extremely concerning.
School districts will attempt to stop students from accessing other websites while they should be working by purchasing products like Go Guardian. The reality is that these sites don’t necessarily curb the constant wandering to different sites.
These sites present another opportunity for students to be surveilled.
Even when phones are not present during the school day, students often have a device open in front of them which steals their attention and deteriorates their learning. Students I work with often report that during classes they email friends, watch YouTube videos, play games or scroll random websites. They creatively find ways around sites that might be blocked or simply find ones that are not.
Many adults do the same, yet we give these devices to kids, and become upset when they are caught off-task.
On top of multitasking and decreased attention, there are numerous studies that demonstrate the negative impact on reading comprehension when instruction is completed online versus on paper. This study which was published last year, suggests that cognitive engagement is higher in children when reading printed books versus digital media and that “Children’s attention is overloaded when exposed to screens.”
Another such study in 2018 found that there was higher functional connectivity in the brain when reading from print versus a decrease while reading from a screen. And yet another research review highlights “Paper-based reading yields better comprehension outcomes than digital-based reading.”
Other studies are also revealing the harms of excessive screen time on brain development. More alarmingly is new research that is showing changes in brain structure of children with higher screen time use (see here). More research is also showing that there is a physiological and psychological effect as well. This research review found “Excessive digital media use by children and adolescents appears as a major factor which may hamper the formation of sound psychophysiological resilience”.
These shifts in education create passive learners that are unable to persist through long and challenging texts. In fact, many professors from elite colleges are noticing this change too. A recent article discusses how college students no longer have the stamina to read multiple books during a semester, The Elite College Students Who Can’t Read Books. Clearly there is a need for more research into the impact of technology, but what we already know about learning along with the trends that have been identified begs to question when can common sense be applied?
What more do we need to demonstrate the harms of educational technology in schools?
Moving away from the use of technology in schools seems like a herculean task, especially since big tech has embedded itself into our current education system. When Gates introduced the 1:1 initiative in 2012 there was a sense of excitement and awe around the role that technology could play in education. It seems that excitement may have clouded our vision.
Sadly, even our youngest learners in preschool are being bombarded with edtech. It is no wonder that curriculum developers have shaped their programs to conveniently fit this model. Curriculum programs such as StudySync and iReady Math push modules that require a device to implement lessons and provide supposed “personalized” learning programs. These programs are also used to “progress monitor” students' academic growth using computer adaptive tests. The data from these programs are then used to evaluate a teacher's performance. It is such a tangled web we have weaved.
Not only has funding from Bill Gates influenced the development of the Common Core Standards created in 2010 and in 2015 the organization EdReports, which identifies which curriculum is considered high quality, a label that is used to determine which curriculum school districts can use, he is also funding the tools that are pushed for progress monitoring. In a nutshell, Gates significant funding has influenced the following:
2010: The Federally mandated Common Core Standards in education
2015: The creation of EdReports, an organization that evaluates and identifies high quality curriculum materials(HQCM) that follow those Common Core Standards
2018: The creation of NWEA, which developed the MAP accelerator, a process used to measure student progress which then recommends which curriculum products (HQCM’s) to use based on a students performance
It really is a genius move.
It should not go without mentioning that the profits from edtech are outstanding. Just check out the market trends here which highlights that in 2023 “The globaleducation technology market size was estimated at USD 142.37 billion”.
While it may be obvious that tech companies profit from their products, organizations that are designed to create policies or monitor what's best for children have also been captured. Organizations such as National Association of State Boards of Education, American Library Association, and AASA (The School Superintendents organization) all receive significant funding from philanthropic foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others with ties to the tech industry.
If technology was the cure, why are students in the United States continuing to decline on the global stage? In fact, the Unesco report released in 2023 found that technology had little positive impact on student performance. At this point in time, it seems clear that the negative impact on education with technology outweighs the pros. However, the tech industry would like you to believe that more tech must be needed in order to fix it.
There is currently another battle happening in the health industry that is starting to brew. Recent attention has been given to the plight of Dr. Casey Means and her brother Calley. They have begun to take on the food industry and big pharma, highlighting the profits of keeping Americans unhealthy. I recently listened to them speak on Joe Rogan's podcast and their message resonated so strongly with me.
Just as the US FDA has allowed over 10,000 ingredients and chemicals into our food supply that is creating poor health, our education system has allowed thousands of unvetted EdTech products into our schools that are not making students smarter and are in fact dumbing down their education.
Using the format that Dr. Casey Means has outlined to improve physical health by addressing the food industry and pharmaceutical capture, education needs to follow suit. There are three simple goals we need to follow:
Remove the conflicts of interest in our education system, we can no longer allow supposed “philanthropists” such as Bill Gates and others with big tech interests to dictate how we educate our children.
Focus on producing uncompromised evidence based research that sets education standards and focuses on educating the entire child. Companies that profit from tech cannot be funding the research to prove its supposed “benefits”.
Reverse the trend of the tech epidemic in schools and remove harmful technology and poorly research digital curricula while bringing back more traditional methods (much like the schools that big tech executives send their kids to) such as books, paper and pencils.
While educators and parents might have agency and can push back against the harms created by tech, they can only do so much. We need a larger plan to work against the pockets and profits of the tech industry. It may often feel like sticking fingers in a dam, but if banned together, maybe we can build a new one.
It is time to restore childhood and reinvest in the real tools that support learning.
