A new report released by the American Psychological Association synthesizes evidence from a range of digital learning apps and presents 10 evidence-based recommendations to ensure technology promotes meaningful learning, according to an Education Week article.
“The real test of learning happens after the app is closed,” says the report. “Students may perform well within a tool but fail to retain or apply what they learned elsewhere.”
Education and tech communities are recommended to take these steps:
- Identify learning goals and outcomes using ed tech, and judge apps by those metrics instead of the level of student engagement or enjoyment;
- Evaluate what other forms of learning technology are being replaced;
- Choose tools built on research-based learning strategies; and
- Adult involvement must play a significant role in implementation—ed tech is most effective when supported by human relationships.
Nicole Barnes, APA’s executive lead psychologist for education, was interviewed by Education Week on ed tech, what APA recommends, and the effectiveness of screen-time limits in schools. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
What’s APA’s take on the screen-time conversations happening in schools right now?
Screen time alone cannot tell us whether a child is using that time to solve a problem or reading deeply. It also can’t tell us whether that child is just passively watching something or switching around among distractions.
What steps should schools consider taking?
Schools need ask the harder questions. It’s really easy to put a ban on something, but the more important questions are: What is this technology doing? When is it being used?
Is it replacing something important to learning and development like discussion, peer interaction, play, sustained reading, hands-on learning, or sleep?
What is the biggest takeaway from this report?
In the science, we know that there is a big difference between engagement and learning, and we need to stop conflating the two.
An ed tech product can hold a student’s attention. It can generate impressive usage numbers, and it can still fail to produce the knowledge and skills that will last.
What is the message schools should deliver to product developers?
I’m hoping that as a community we are going to start demanding [answers] from these educational technology companies. Not just: Did this student like it? Did they succeed while using it in that app?
But more importantly: Can they remember? Can they explain? And can they apply what they’ve learned after this tool is taken away or after we put the screen down?
How should districts evaluate these products?
They need to look for the “show-me” moment. Success may only be showing that the student has learned to navigate the platform, and the real test is whether they can transfer what they’ve learned inside that platform to something else. That is when I will be convinced that there is evidence of learning.
Why is the distinction between ed tech apps and general-purpose ones important?
We can’t treat all technology that is used in an educational setting as an educational technology tool. We are asking companies that promote some type of learning gain to prove, through external validation, that those learning outcomes are in fact what they say they are, because we’re not protecting our youth if we don’t.
Are school communities and parents making these distinctions?
There are a lot of ed tech tools out there that are great, and it’s not fair that they are put in the same bucket as those that are not. The lack of regulation has allowed a marketplace where companies that are not doing it well are allowed to compete at the same level. That’s not in the service of protecting our youth, which is what we should be about.
Where does AI fit into the conversation?
AI banning is not capturing the nuance that’s really required. The goal here is to keep the student doing the thinking.
AI needs to be used to strengthen learning. AI is a powerful learning tool when it helps you retrieve information from memory, when it helps you revisit material over time, when it gets you to explain your reasoning or compare related problems, or when it tailors feedback in the way that is the most helpful, or apply knowledge in new contexts.
How should educators ensure that tech companies produce the outcomes that they say they do?
Having a heightened sense of awareness and intentionality with what students are being asked to do, and how they are spending their time when they’re on these apps would be a really great first start that schools can easily do and would not require them to go much outside what they already do in their fiduciary responsibility to educate students.
A necessary second step—I don’t think this will be taken by any one particular school, this will occur probably more at the state and district level—is to contain the Wild, Wild West that’s going on right now. There does need to be a sheriff in town coming up with what those standards are going to look like across the industry, what the procurement rubrics or criteria are going to look like.
Education Week
