Tag: Technology

  • The time to prepare young people for a future shaped by computer science is during middle school

    The time to prepare young people for a future shaped by computer science is during middle school

    by Jim Ryan, The Hechinger Report
    January 19, 2026

    The future of work will demand fluency in both science and technology. From addressing climate change to designing ethical AI systems, tomorrow’s challenges will require interdisciplinary thinkers who can navigate complex systems and harness the power of computation. 

    And that is why we can’t wait until high school or college to integrate computer science into general science. 

    The time to begin is during middle school, that formative period when students begin to shape their identities, interests and aspirations. If schools want to prepare young people for a future shaped by technology, they must act now to ensure that computer science is not a privilege for a few but a foundation for all. 

    The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics forecasts more than 300,000 computer science job openings every year through 2034 — a rate of growth that far outpaces most other sectors. Yet despite this demand, in 2024, only about 37 percent of public middle schools reported offering computer science coursework. 

    This gap is more than a statistic — it’s a warning sign that the U.S. technology sector will be starved for the workforce it needs to thrive.  

    Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education. 

    One innovative way to close this gap is by integrating computer science into the general science curriculum at every middle school. This approach doesn’t require additional class periods or separate electives. Instead — by using computational thinking and digital tools to develop student understanding of real-world scientific phenomena — it reimagines how we teach science. 

    Science and computer science are already deeply interconnected in the real world. Scientists use computational models to simulate climate systems, analyze genetic data and design experiments. And computer scientists often draw inspiration from biology, physics and chemistry to develop algorithms and solve complex problems, such as by modeling neural networks after the brain’s architecture and simulating quantum systems for cryptography. 

    Teaching these disciplines together helps students see how both science and computer science are applicable and relevant to their lives and society.  

    Integrating computer science into middle school science instruction also addresses long-standing equity issues. When computer science is offered only as a separate elective, access often depends on prior exposure, school funding and parental advocacy. This creates barriers for students from underrepresented backgrounds, who may never get the chance to discover their interests or talents in computing.  

    Embedding computer science into core science classes helps to ensure that every student — regardless of zip code, race or gender — can build foundational skills in computing and see themselves as empowered problem-solvers. 

    Teachers must be provided the tools and support to make this a reality. Namely, schools should have access to middle school science curriculums that have computer science concepts directly embedded in the instruction. Such units don’t teach coding in isolation — they invite students to customize the sensors that collect data, simulate systems and design coded solutions to real-world problems. 

    For example, students can use computer science to investigate the question: “Why does contact between objects sometimes but not always cause damage, and how can we protect against damage?”  

    Students can also use sensors and programming to develop solutions to measure the forces of severe weather. In doing so, they’re not just learning science and computer science — they’re learning how to think like scientists and engineers. 

    Related: The path to a career could start in middle school 

    Integrating general science with computer science doesn’t require more instructional time. It simply requires us to consider how we can use computer science to efficiently investigate the science all students already study. 

    Rather than treating computer science as an add-on, we can weave it into the fabric of how students investigate, analyze and design.  

    This approach will not only deepen their understanding of scientific concepts but also build transferable skills in logic, creativity and collaboration. 

    Students need to start learning computer science earlier in their education, and we need to start in the science classroom by teaching these skills in middle school. To ensure that today’s students grow into tomorrow’s innovators and problem-solvers, we must treat computer science as foundational, not optional. 

    Jim Ryan is the executive director of OpenSciEd. 

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected]. 

    This story about computer science in middle school was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter. 

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/high-school-college-computer-science-lessons/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

    <img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=114382&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/high-school-college-computer-science-lessons/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • We built evaluation for accountability–now it’s time to build it for growth

    We built evaluation for accountability–now it’s time to build it for growth

    Key points:

    Teacher evaluations have been the subject of debate for decades. Breakthroughs have been attempted, but rarely sustained. Researchers have learned that context, transparency, and autonomy matter. What’s been missing is technology that enhances these at scale inside the evaluation process–not around it. 

    As an edtech executive in the AI era, I see exciting possibilities to bring new technology to bear on these factors in the longstanding dilemma of observing and rating teacher effectiveness.

    At the most fundamental level, the goals are simple, just as they are in other professions: provide accountability, celebrate areas of strong performance, and identify where improvement is needed. However, K-12 education is a uniquely visible and important industry. Between 2000 and 2015, quality control in K-12 education became more complex, with states, foundations, and federal policy all shaping the definition and measurement of a “proficient” teacher. 

    For instance, today’s observation cycle might include pre- and post-observation conferences plus scheduled and unscheduled classroom visits. Due to the potential for bias in personal observation, more weight has been given to student achievement, but after critics highlighted problems with measuring teacher performance via standardized test scores, additional metrics and artifacts were included as well.

    All of these changes have resulted in administrators spending more time on observation and evaluation, followed by copying notes between systems and drafting comments–rather than on timely, specific feedback that actually changes practice. “Even when I use Gemini or ChatGPT, I still spend 45 minutes rewriting to fit the district rubric,” one administrator noted.

    “When I think about the evaluation landscape, two challenges rise to the surface,” said Dr. Quintin Shepherd, superintendent at Pflugerville Independent School District in Texas. “The first is the overwhelming volume of information evaluators must gather, interpret, and synthesize. The second is the persistent perception among teachers that evaluation is something being done to them rather than something being done for them. Both challenges point in the same direction: the need for a resource that gives evaluators more capacity and teachers more clarity, immediacy, and ownership. This is where AI becomes essential.”

    What’s at stake

    School leaders are under tremendous pressure. Time and resources are tight. Achieving benchmarks is non-negotiable. There’s plenty of data available to identify patterns and understand what’s working–but analyzing it is not easy when the data is housed in multiple platforms that may not interface with one another. Generic AI tools haven’t solved this.  

    For teachers, professional development opportunities abound, and student data is readily available. But often they don’t receive adequate instructional mentoring to ideate and try out new strategies. 

    Districts that have experimented with AI to provide automated feedback of transcribed recordings of instruction have found limited impact on teaching practices. Teachers report skepticism that the evolving tech tools are able to accurately assess what is happening in their classrooms. Recent randomized controlled trials show that automated feedback can move specific practices when teachers engage with it. But that’s exactly the challenge: Engagement is optional. Evaluations are not. 

    Teachers whose observations and evaluations are compromised or whose growth is stymied by lost opportunities for mentoring may lose out financially. For example, in Texas, the 2025-26 school year is the data capture period for the Teacher Incentive Allotment. This means fair and objective reviews are more important than ever for educators’ future earning potential.

    For all of these reasons, the next wave of innovation has to live inside the required evaluation cycle, not off to the side as another “nice-to-have” tool.

    Streamlining the process

    My background at edtech companies has shown me how eager school leaders are to make data-informed decisions. But I know from countless conversations with administrators that they did not enter the education field to crunch numbers. They are motivated by seeing students thrive. 

    The breakthrough we need now is an AI-powered workspace that sits inside the evaluation system. Shepherd would like to see “AI that quietly assists with continuous evidence collection not through surveillance, but pattern recognition. It might analyze lesson materials for cognitive rigor, scan student work products to detect growth, or help teachers tag artifacts connected to standards.”

    We have the technology to create a collaborative workspace that can be mapped to the district’s framework and used by administrators, coaches, support teams, and educators to capture notes from observations, link them to goals, provide guidance, share lesson artifacts, engage in feedback discussions, and track growth across cycles. After participating in a pilot of one such collaborative workspace, an evaluator said that “for the first time, I wasn’t rewriting my notes to make them fit the rubric. The system kept the feedback clear and instructional instead of just compliance-based.”

    As a superintendent, Shepherd looks forward to AI support for helping make sense of complexity. “Evaluators juggle enormous qualitative loads: classroom culture, student engagement, instructional clarity, differentiation, formative assessment, and more. AI can act as a thinking partner, organizing trends, highlighting possible connections, identifying where to probe deeper, or offering research-based framing for feedback.”

    The evaluation process will always be scrutinized, but what must change is whether it continues to drain time and trust or becomes a catalyst for better teaching. Shepherd expects the pace of adoption to pick up speed as the benefits for educators become clear: “Teachers will have access to immediate feedback loops and tools that help them analyze student work, reconsider lesson structures, or reflect on pacing and questioning. This strengthens professional agency and shifts evaluation from a compliance ritual to a growth process.”

    Real leadership means moving beyond outdated processes and redesigning evaluation to center evidence, clarity, and authentic feedback. When evaluation stops being something to get through and becomes something that improves practice, we will finally see technology drive better teaching and learning.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Managing Technology Infrastructure to Anticipate the Future

    Managing Technology Infrastructure to Anticipate the Future

    Hundreds of things that can go wrong with technology. Here’s our recipe for keeping your educational solution stable, secure, and scalable. 

    Your edtech product roadmap depends on infrastructure that just works. But when was the last time you thought about what ‘just works’ actually requires? It means orchestrating a complex symphony of services, security measures, and continuous monitoring and analysis. Here’s what really goes into keeping these mission-critical systems running smoothly.

    The Infrastructure Pie

    Modern cloud infrastructure provides managed database services, scalable storage, server-less computing capabilities, secure API gateways, and content delivery networks that ensure fast load times everywhere.

    What does it take to maintain the myriad of moving parts that constitute edtech infrastructure? We recently analyzed where our infrastructure and engineering teams invest time across a typical year. The results reveal just how multifaceted this work really is: 

     

    Feature Management (36% of effort): Building new capabilities, enhancing existing features, addressing accessibility, and planning feature definitions represents nearly a third of our work. This isn’t just about adding functionality—it’s about architecting solutions that scale, perform, and integrate securely with the broader system. When edtech infrastructure is architected thoughtfully from the start, features ship faster because they’re built on solid foundations rather than working around technical debt. 

    Maintenance and Operations (20% of effort): This category happens behind the scenes—bug fixes, scaling and performance optimization, refactoring code for maintainability, testing and quality assurance, and managing the dependency upgrades, DevOps processes, and required migrations that keep systems current and secure. This effort is what prevents the 2:00 am emergency calls that derail your release schedule. It’s what keeps your product stable during peak back-to-school season. Consistent maintenance means predictable performance. 

    Security, Monitoring, and Support (21% of effort): Security and compliance work combines with systems monitoring, penetration testing and vulnerability scans, incident research and analysis, and client support to ensure systems remain secure and responsive. This is what protects your company’s revenue and reputation. A single data breach can sink an edtech company—just ask any VP who’s had to notify districts that student data was compromised. This investment keeps you compliant with evolving regulations, maintains customer trust, and ensures your sales team never has to answer uncomfortable security questions they can’t address confidently. 

    Strategic Investments (23% of effort): Stability and scalability investments as well as sunsetting obsolete features represent the forward-thinking work that prevents problems before they occur. This is your insurance policy against the “success disasters” that plague growing edtech companies. When that large district or statewide deal gets signed, and suddenly you have 50,000 users hitting your system simultaneously, this investment is why your platform doesn’t buckle. It’s also what allows you to confidently enter RFPs that require specific performance guarantees. 

    Security and Privacy: Non-Negotiable Priorities

    In K-12 education, we’re not just managing technology—we’re safeguarding sensitive student data. This responsibility shapes every aspect of our approach. 

    Processes First: Cybersecurity isn’t just about firewalls and encryption. It’s about building robust processes that become second nature—regular security audits, patch management protocols, access control reviews, and incident response plans. Every system update, every configuration change, and every new integration goes through our internal security review process. 

    Data Privacy by Design: Educational applications must comply with dozens of federal and increasingly complex state-level privacy laws. We help clients navigate and comply with Data Privacy Agreements required by their customers, translating legal requirements into technical controls and operational procedures. This isn’t a one-time checkbox—it’s an ongoing partnership that evolves as regulations change. For example, in our work with Family Engagement Lab, we spent a sprint implementing robust logging of security events such as user logins and admin masquerade to comply with one large customer’s requirements.

    Automation, Monitoring, and the Pursuit of Performance

     

    Manual infrastructure management doesn’t scale, and it introduces risk. That’s why automation is woven throughout our operations—from configuration management that ensures deployments are identical and repeatable to automated backup processes that provide reliable recovery points. Our DevOps practices enable us to deploy updates safely and efficiently. 

    But automation is only part of the equation. Continuous monitoring provides the situational awareness needed to maintain healthy systems. We track performance metrics, server health, application errors, and security events in real time. We measure infrastructure and application performance telemetry, and network traffic to alert us when something deviates from expected norms. This allows us to respond quickly, before issues affect the user experience. 

    Meeting performance standards isn’t aspirational; it’s operational. We methodically evaluate and choose the right tool for the job. For one database-intensive application, we deployed an auto-scaling database to handle traffic ebbs and flows. But we didn’t stop there—we implemented an automated database bump to warm it up for the US school day. Then, at the end of the day when traffic is lower, we saved the client money by scaling it down. The effort we invest in scaling and performance optimization ensures applications remain responsive as usage grows and evolves. 

    The Work You Don’t See

    The best edtech infrastructure is invisible—systems that work so reliably that users don’t think about them at all. That invisibility, however, requires visible expertise, constant vigilance, and a commitment to getting hundreds of small things right every single day. 

    Behind every smooth user experience, every fast page load, and every secure transaction are many distinct areas of effort our team manages continuously. Some, like feature development, are obvious. Others, like system monitoring or scaling, work precisely because they’re invisible to end users. 

    But here’s what makes this work truly strategic: every one of these efforts isn’t just about maintaining today’s systems—it’s about building infrastructure that’s ready for tomorrow’s challenges. When we invest in refactoring code, we’re creating a foundation that can adapt to new requirements. When we perform vulnerability assessments and install security patches, we’re taking proactive steps to protect client data. When we document our systems and automate our processes, we’re ensuring knowledge doesn’t become a bottleneck as teams and technologies evolve. 

    The educational technology landscape never stands still. New compliance requirements emerge, usage patterns shift, pedagogical approaches evolve, and technology capabilities expand. Infrastructure that merely maintains the status quo becomes a liability. Infrastructure that anticipates change becomes a competitive advantage. 

    Ready to talk about edtech infrastructure that adapts and anticipates your needs? Let’s discuss how your product roadmap could benefit from partnership with our team. We handle today’s complexity while building tomorrow’s capability, allowing your customers to focus on what matters most: helping students learn and grow.

    Source link

  • 3 reasons to switch to virtual set design

    3 reasons to switch to virtual set design

    Key points:

    If you’ve attended a professional show or musical recently, chances are you’ve seen virtual set design in action. This approach to stage production has gained so much traction it’s now a staple in the industry. After gaining momentum in professional theater, it has made its way into collegiate performing arts programs and is now emerging in K-12 productions as well.

    Virtual set design offers a modern alternative to traditional physical stage sets, using technology and software to create immersive backdrops and environments. This approach unlocks endless creative possibilities for schools while also providing practical advantages.

    Here, I’ll delve into three key benefits: increasing student engagement and participation, improving efficiency and flexibility in productions, and expanding educational opportunities.

    Increasing student engagement and participation

    Incorporating virtual set design into productions gets students excited about learning new skills while enhancing the storytelling of a show. When I first joined Churchill High School in Livonia, Michigan as the performing arts manager, the first show we did was Shrek the Musical, and I knew it would require an elaborate set. While students usually work together to paint the various backdrops that bring the show to life, I wanted to introduce them to collaborating on virtual set design.

    We set up Epson projectors on the fly rail and used them to project images as the show’s backdrops. Positioned at a short angle, the projectors avoided any shadowing on stage. To create a seamless image with both projectors, we utilized edge-blending and projection mapping techniques using just a Mac® laptop and QLab software. Throughout the performance, the projectors transformed the stage with a dozen dynamic backdrops, shifting from a swamp to a castle to a dungeon.

    Students were amazed by the technology and very excited to learn how to integrate it into the set design process. Their enthusiasm created a real buzz around the production, and the community’s feedback on the final results were overwhelmingly positive.

    Improving efficiency and flexibility

    During Shrek the Musical, there were immediate benefits that made it so much easier to put together a show. To start, we saved money by eliminating the need to build multiple physical sets. While we were cutting costs on lumber and materials, we were also solving design challenges and expanding what was possible on stage.

    This approach also saved us valuable time. Preparing the sets in the weeks leading up to the show was faster, and transitions during performances became seamless. Instead of moving bulky scenery between scenes or acts, the stage crew simply switched out projected images making it much more efficient.

    We saw even more advantages in our spring production of She Kills Monsters. Some battle scenes called for 20 or 30 actors to be on stage at once, which would have been difficult to manage with a traditional set. By using virtual production, we broke the stage up with different panels spaced apart and projected designs, creating more space for performers. We were able to save physical space, as well as create a design that helped with stage blocking and made it easier for students to find their spots.

    Since using virtual sets, our productions have become smoother, more efficient, and more creative.

    Expanding educational opportunities

    Beyond the practical benefits, virtual set design also creates valuable learning opportunities for students. Students involved in productions gain exposure to industry-level technology and learn about careers in the arts, audio, and video technology fields. Introducing students to these opportunities before graduating high school can really help prepare them for future success.

    Additionally, in our school’s technical theater courses, students are learning lessons on virtual design and gaining hands-on experiences. As they are learning about potential career paths, they are developing collaboration skills and building transferable skills that directly connect to college and career readiness.

    Looking ahead with virtual set design

    Whether students are interested in graphic design, sound engineering, or visual technology, virtual production brings countless opportunities to them to explore. It allows them to experiment with tools and concepts that connect directly to potential college majors or future careers.

    For schools, incorporating virtual production into high school theater offers more than just impressive shows. It provides a cost-effective, flexible, and innovative approach to storytelling. It is a powerful tool that benefits productions, enriches student learning, and prepares the next generation of artists and innovators.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Resilient learning begins with Zero Trust and cyber preparedness

    Resilient learning begins with Zero Trust and cyber preparedness

    Key points:

    The U.K.’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) recently warned of a surge in cyberattacks from “insider threats”–student hackers motivated by dares and challenges–leading to breaches across schools. While this trend is unfolding overseas, it underscores a risk that is just as real for the U.S. education sector. Every day, teachers and students here in the U.S. access enormous volumes of sensitive information, creating opportunities for both mistakes and deliberate misuse. These vulnerabilities are further amplified by resource constraints and the growing sophistication of cyberattacks.

    When schools fall victim to a cyberattack, the disruption extends far beyond academics. Students may also lose access to meals, safe spaces, and support services that families depend on every day. Cyberattacks are no longer isolated IT problems–they are operational risks that threaten entire communities.

    In today’s post-breach world, the challenge is not whether an attack will occur, but when. The risks are real. According to a recent study, desktops and laptops remain the most compromised devices (50 percent), with phishing and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) cited as top entry points for ransomware. Once inside, most attacks spread laterally across networks to infect other devices. In over half of these cases (52 percent), attackers exploited unpatched systems to move laterally and escalate system privileges.

    That reality demands moving beyond traditional perimeter defenses to strategies that contain and minimize damage once a breach occurs. With the school year underway, districts must adopt strategies that proactively manage risk and minimize disruption. This starts with an “assume breach” mindset–accepting that prevention alone is not enough. From there, applying Zero Trust principles, clearly defining the ‘protect surface’ (i.e. identifying what needs protection), and reinforcing strong cyber hygiene become essential next steps. Together, these strategies create layered resilience, ensuring that even if attackers gain entry, their ability to move laterally and cause widespread harm is significantly reduced.

    Assume breach: Shifting from prevention to resilience

    Even in districts with limited staff and funding, schools can take important steps toward stronger security. The first step is adopting an assume breach mindset, which shifts the focus from preventing every attack to ensuring resilience when one occurs. This approach acknowledges that attackers may already have access to parts of the network and reframes the question from “How do we keep them out?” to “How do we contain them once they are in?” or “How do we minimize the damage once they are in?”

    An assume breach mindset emphasizes strengthening internal defenses so that breaches don’t become cyber disasters. It prioritizes safeguarding sensitive data, detecting anomalies quickly, and enabling rapid responses that keep classrooms open even during an active incident.

    Zero Trust and seatbelts: Both bracing for the worst

    Zero Trust builds directly on the assume breach mindset with its guiding principle of “never trust, always verify.” Unlike traditional security models that rely on perimeter defenses, Zero Trust continuously verifies every user, device, and connection, whether internal or external.

    Schools often function as open transit hubs, offering broad internet access to students and staff. In these environments, once malware finds its way in, it can spread quickly if unchecked. Perimeter-only defenses leave too many blind spots and do little to stop insider threats. Zero Trust closes those gaps by treating every request as potentially hostile and requiring ongoing verification at every step.

    A fundamental truth of Zero Trust is that cyberattacks will happen. That means building controls that don’t just alert us but act–before and during a network intrusion. The critical step is containment: limiting damage the moment a breach is successful.  

    Assume breach accepts that a breach will happen, and Zero Trust ensures it doesn’t become a disaster that shuts down operations. Like seatbelts in a car–prevention matters. Strong brakes are essential, but seatbelts and airbags minimize the harm when prevention fails. Zero Trust works the same way, containing threats and limiting damage so that even if an attacker gets in, they can’t turn an incident into a full-scale disaster.

    Zero Trust does not require an overnight overhaul. Schools can start by defining their protect surface – the vital data, systems, and operations that matter most. This typically includes Social Security numbers, financial data, and administrative services that keep classrooms functioning. By securing this protect surface first, districts reduce the complexity of Zero Trust implementation, allowing them to focus their limited resources on where they are needed most.

    With this approach, Zero Trust policies can be layered gradually across systems, making adoption realistic for districts of any size. Instead of treating it as a massive, one-time overhaul, IT leaders can approach Zero Trust as an ongoing journey–a process of steadily improving security and resilience over time. By tightening access controls, verifying every connection, and isolating threats early, schools can contain incidents before they escalate, all without rebuilding their entire network in one sweep.  

    Cyber awareness starts in the classroom

    Technology alone isn’t enough. Because some insider threats stem from student curiosity or misuse, cyber awareness must start in classrooms. Integrating security education into the learning environment ensures students and staff understand their role in protecting sensitive information. Training should cover phishing awareness, strong password practices, the use of multifactor authentication (MFA), and the importance of keeping systems patched.

    Building cyber awareness does not require costly programs. Short, recurring training sessions for students and staff keep security top of mind and help build a culture of vigilance that reduces both accidental and intentional insider threats.

    Breaches are inevitable, but disasters are optional

    Breaches are inevitable. Disasters are not. The difference lies in preparation. For resource-strapped districts, stronger cybersecurity doesn’t require sweeping overhauls. It requires a shift in mindset:

    • Assume breach
    • Define the protect surface
    • Implement Zero Trust in phases
    • Instill cyber hygiene

    When schools take this approach, cyberattacks become manageable incidents. Classrooms remain open, students continue learning, and communities continue receiving the vital support schools provide – even in the face of disruption. Like seatbelts in a car, these measures won’t prevent every crash – but they ensure schools can continue to function even when prevention fails.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Preserving critical thinking amid AI adoption

    Preserving critical thinking amid AI adoption

    Key points:

    AI is now at the center of almost every conversation in education technology. It is reshaping how we create content, build assessments, and support learners. The opportunities are enormous. But one quiet risk keeps growing in the background: losing our habit of critical thinking.

    I see this risk not as a theory but as something I have felt myself.

    The moment I almost outsourced my judgment

    A few months ago, I was working on a complex proposal for a client. Pressed for time, I asked an AI tool to draft an analysis of their competitive landscape. The output looked polished and convincing. It was tempting to accept it and move on.

    Then I forced myself to pause. I began questioning the sources behind the statements and found a key market shift the model had missed entirely. If I had skipped that short pause, the proposal would have gone out with a blind spot that mattered to the client.

    That moment reminded me that AI is fast and useful, but the responsibility for real thinking is still mine. It also showed me how easily convenience can chip away at judgment.

    AI as a thinking partner

    The most powerful way to use AI is to treat it as a partner that widens the field of ideas while leaving the final call to us. AI can collect data in seconds, sketch multiple paths forward, and expose us to perspectives we might never consider on our own.

    In my own work at Magic EdTech, for example, our teams have used AI to quickly analyze thousands of pages of curriculum to flag accessibility issues. The model surfaces patterns and anomalies that would take a human team weeks to find. Yet the real insight comes when we bring educators and designers together to ask why those patterns matter and how they affect real classrooms. AI sets the table, but we still cook the meal.

    There is a subtle but critical difference between using AI to replace thinking and using it to stretch thinking. Replacement narrows our skills over time. Stretching builds new mental flexibility. The partner model forces us to ask better questions, weigh trade-offs, and make calls that only human judgment can resolve.

    Habits to keep your edge

    Protecting critical thinking is not about avoiding AI. It is about building habits that keep our minds active when AI is everywhere.

    Here are three I find valuable:

    1. Name the fragile assumption
    Each time you receive AI output, ask: What is one assumption here that could be wrong? Spend a few minutes digging into that. It forces you to reenter the problem space instead of just editing machine text.

    2. Run the reverse test
    Before you adopt an AI-generated idea, imagine the opposite. If the model suggests that adaptive learning is the key to engagement, ask: What if it is not? Exploring the counter-argument often reveals gaps and deeper insights.

    3. Slow the first draft
    It is tempting to let AI draft emails, reports, or code and just sign off. Instead, start with a rough human outline first. Even if it is just bullet points, you anchor the work in your own reasoning and use the model to enrich–not originate–your thinking.

    These small practices keep the human at the center of the process and turn AI into a gym for the mind rather than a crutch.

    Why this matters for education

    For those of us in education technology, the stakes are unusually high. The tools we build help shape how students learn and how teachers teach. If we let critical thinking atrophy inside our companies, we risk passing that weakness to the very people we serve.

    Students will increasingly use AI for research, writing, and even tutoring. If the adults designing their digital classrooms accept machine answers without question, we send the message that surface-level synthesis is enough. We would be teaching efficiency at the cost of depth.

    By contrast, if we model careful reasoning and thoughtful use of AI, we can help the next generation see these tools for what they are: accelerators of understanding, not replacements for it. AI can help us scale accessibility, personalize instruction, and analyze learning data in ways that were impossible before. But its highest value appears only when it meets human curiosity and judgment.

    Building a culture of shared judgment

    This is not just an individual challenge. Teams need to build rituals that honor slow thinking in a fast AI environment. Another practice is rotating the role of “critical friend” in meetings. One person’s task is to challenge the group’s AI-assisted conclusions and ask what could go wrong. This simple habit trains everyone to keep their reasoning sharp.

    Next time you lean on AI for a key piece of work, pause before you accept the answer. Write down two decisions in that task that only a human can make. It might be about context, ethics, or simple gut judgment. Then share those reflections with your team. Over time this will create a culture where AI supports wisdom rather than diluting it.

    The real promise of AI is not that it will think for us, but that it will free us to think at a higher level.

    The danger is that we may forget to climb.

    The future of education and the integrity of our own work depend on remaining climbers. Let the machines speed the climb, but never let them choose the summit.

    Laura Ascione
    Latest posts by Laura Ascione (see all)

    Source link

  • How AI is streamlining special education

    How AI is streamlining special education

    Key points:

    Districts nationwide are grappling with increased special education demands amid persistent staff shortages and compliance pressures. At the intersection of technology and student support, Maura Connor, chief operating officer of Better Speech, is leading the launch of Streamline, an AI-powered special education management platform designed to ease administrative burdens and enhance service delivery.

    In this Q&A, Connor discusses the realistic, responsible ways AI can empower educators, optimize workflows, and foster stronger connections between schools and families.

    1. Many districts are experiencing an increase in special education caseloads while struggling with staff shortages and retention. From your perspective, where can AI most realistically help relieve pressure on special educators without compromising their quality of service?

    AI is most impactful when it handles time-intensive, repetitive tasks that don’t require nuanced human judgment. For example, AI can assist in drafting initial progress or intervention notes and tracking intervention outcomes to help identify students who may need additional support. By automating these administrative tasks, special educators and service providers can spend more time delivering direct instruction or therapy, collaborating with colleagues, and planning individualized support for students.

    Importantly, AI is a tool that augments, not replaces, human expertise. It can relieve pressure in the special education ecosystem while allowing educators to maintain the high-quality services students need.

    2. Special education leaders need to balance efficiency with compliance when it comes to IEP evaluations and goals. How can AI help schools and districts with this?

    AI can standardize data collection and analysis, ensuring evaluations capture all legally required components while reducing the manual burden. Advanced AI analytics can also flag potential compliance gaps before they become serious risks and help identify patterns across a student’s performance.

    For case managers and providers, especially those new to special education, AI can accelerate skill-building by helping draft legally-defensible, evidence-based IEP goals and recommendations. Rather than spending hours on formatting and documentation, this allows educators and administrators to focus on meaningful decision-making, personalized student support, and family engagement.

    3. Beyond easing paperwork, what are some practical ways school and district leaders can use AI to reallocate staff time toward more student-facing work?

    AI can help leaders identify trends and bottlenecks across their special education programs, such as caseload imbalances, scheduling inefficiencies, budget planning, or capacity in high-demand intervention areas. By surfacing these insights, districts can make data-informed staffing adjustments, prioritize coaching and professional development, and streamline workflows so teachers and service providers are freed up for individual instruction, small-group interventions, and collaborative planning.

    Essentially, AI can turn administrative time into actionable intelligence that translates directly into better targeted student support.

    4. When it comes to parent engagement, how can AI support stronger, more transparent communication between schools and families?

    Parent engagement in the special education process can be a sensitive experience for districts and families alike. And, it’s a critical challenge we often hear about from leaders and teachers.

    AI relieves some of the pressure by generating clear, real-time updates on student progress. In this way, AI can increase transparency and communication, helping families stay informed and engaged without overwhelming staff through repetitive outreach. For example, automated notifications about milestones, progress toward IEP goals, or upcoming meetings can ensure families receive timely, understandable information.

    AI can also assist in translating materials for non-English-speaking families, creating more equitable access to information and empowering parents to be active partners in their child’s education.

    5. Given the growing availability and use of generative AI tools, how can school and district leaders set guardrails to ensure educators use these tools ethically and securely?

    Responsible and ethical use of AI in education starts with districts setting clear policies and engaging in targeted professional development. Leaders should define boundaries around student data privacy, clarify when AI outputs require human review, and provide training on responsible AI use. AI should always enhance staff capacity without compromising student safety or the integrity of decision-making. Since AI can “hallucinate,” it is absolutely critical that educators and providers use their own professional and clinical judgment in reviewing and approving any recommendations generated by AI. Districts should also consider using a proprietary, evidence-based LLM engine instead of open-source AI tools to lessen this risk.

    Establishing guardrails also means monitoring usage, maintaining transparency with families, and fostering a culture where AI is a support, not a replacement, for professional and clinical judgment.

    6. Overall, what role can AI-powered analytics play in helping school and district leaders make more data-driven, proactive decisions?

    AI-powered analytics can transform reactive management into proactive planning. By aggregating and analyzing multiple data points–from academic performance to intervention outcomes–leaders can identify trends and potential compliance issues before they become legal risks. District leaders can also allocate resources more strategically and design targeted programs for students who need the most support or readily plan for coverage or extra resources when settings need to increase capacity.

    Overall, AI’s predictive capability can help districts move beyond compliance toward strategic continuous improvement, ensuring every decision is informed by actionable insights rather than intuition alone.

    Maura Connor is Chief Operating Officer of Better Speech, where she leads the launch of Streamline, an AI-powered special education management platform that reduces administrative burden and empowers schools to better support students and families. With extensive leadership experience across education and healthcare technology, she specializes in scaling organizations, driving innovation, and advancing solutions that improve outcomes for children and communities.

    Laura Ascione
    Latest posts by Laura Ascione (see all)

    Source link

  • Can AI Keep Students Motivated, Or Does it Do the Opposite? – The 74

    Can AI Keep Students Motivated, Or Does it Do the Opposite? – The 74

    Imagine a student using a writing assistant powered by a generative AI chatbot. As the bot serves up practical suggestions and encouragement, insights come more easily, drafts polish up quickly and feedback loops feel immediate. It can be energizing. But when that AI support is removed, some students report feeling less confident or less willing to engage.

    These outcomes raise the question: Can AI tools genuinely boost student motivation? And what conditions can make or break that boost?

    As AI tools become more common in classroom settings, the answers to these questions matter a lot. While tools for general use such as ChatPGT or Claude remain popular, more and more students are encountering AI tools that are purpose-built to support learning, such as Khan Academy’s Khanmigo, which personalizes lessons. Others, such as ALEKS, provide adaptive feedback. Both tools adjust to a learner’s level and highlight progress over time, which helps students feel capable and see improvement. But there are still many unknowns about the long-term effects of these tools on learners’ progress, an issue I continue to study as an educational psychologist.

    What the evidence shows so far

    Recent studies indicate that AI can boost motivation, at least for certain groups, when deployed under the right conditions. A 2025 experiment with university students showed that when AI tools delivered a high-quality performance and allowed meaningful interaction, students’ motivation and their confidence in being able to complete a task – known as self-efficacy – increased.

    For foreign language learners, a 2025 study found that university students using AI-driven personalized systems took more pleasure in learning and had less anxiety and more self-efficacy compared with those using traditional methods. A recent cross-cultural analysis with participants from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Spain and Poland who were studying diverse majors suggested that positive motivational effects are strongest when tools prioritize autonomy, self-direction and critical thinking. These individual findings align with a broader, systematic review of generative AI tools that found positive effects on student motivation and engagement across cognitive, emotional and behavioral dimensions.

    A forthcoming meta-analysis from my team at the University of Alabama, which synthesized 71 studies, echoed these patterns. We found that generative AI tools on average produce moderate positive effects on motivation and engagement. The impact is larger when tools are used consistently over time rather than in one-off trials. Positive effects were also seen when teachers provide scaffolding, when students maintain agency in how they use the tool, and when the output quality is reliable.

    But there are caveats. More than 50 of the studies we reviewed did not draw on a clear theoretical framework of motivation, and some used methods that we found were weak or inappropriate. This raises concerns about the quality of the evidence and underscores how much more careful research is needed before one can say with confidence that AI nurtures students’ intrinsic motivation rather than just making tasks easier in the moment.

    When AI backfires

    There is also research that paints a more sobering picture. A large study of more than 3,500 participants found that while human–AI collaboration improved task performance, it reduced intrinsic motivation once the AI was removed. Students reported more boredom and less satisfaction, suggesting that overreliance on AI can erode confidence in their own abilities.

    Another study suggested that while learning achievement often rises with the use of AI tools, increases in motivation are smaller, inconsistent or short-lived. Quality matters as much as quantity. When AI delivers inaccurate results, or when students feel they have little control over how it is used, motivation quickly erodes. Confidence drops, engagement fades and students can begin to see the tool as a crutch rather than a support. And because there are not many long-term studies in this field, we still do not know whether AI can truly sustain motivation over time, or whether its benefits fade once the novelty wears off.

    Not all AI tools work the same way

    The impact of AI on student motivation is not one-size-fits-all. Our team’s meta-analysis shows that, on average, AI tools do have a positive effect, but the size of that effect depends on how and where they are used. When students work with AI regularly over time, when teachers guide them in using it thoughtfully, and when students feel in control of the process, the motivational benefits are much stronger.

    We also saw differences across settings. College students seemed to gain more than younger learners, STEM and writing courses tended to benefit more than other subjects, and tools designed to give feedback or tutoring support outperformed those that simply generated content.

    There is also evidence that general-use tools like ChatGPT or Claude do not reliably promote intrinsic motivation or deeper engagement with content, compared to learning-specific platforms such as ALEKS and Khanmigo, which are more effective at supporting persistence and self-efficacy. However, these tools often come with subscription or licensing costs. This raises questions of equity, since the students who could benefit most from motivational support may also be the least likely to afford it.

    These and other recent findings should be seen as only a starting point. Because AI is so new and is changing so quickly, what we know today may not hold true tomorrow. In a paper titled The Death and Rebirth of Research in Education in the Age of AI, the authors argue that the speed of technological change makes traditional studies outdated before they are even published. At the same time, AI opens the door to new ways of studying learning that are more participatory, flexible and imaginative. Taken together, the data and the critiques point to the same lesson: Context, quality and agency matter just as much as the technology itself.

    Why it matters for all of us

    The lessons from this growing body of research are straightforward. The presence of AI does not guarantee higher motivation, but it can make a difference if tools are designed and used with care and understanding of students’ needs. When it is used thoughtfully, in ways that strengthen students’ sense of competence, autonomy and connection to others, it can be a powerful ally in learning.

    But without those safeguards, the short-term boost in performance could come at a steep cost. Over time, there is the risk of weakening the very qualities that matter most – motivation, persistence, critical thinking and the uniquely human capacities that no machine can replace.

    For teachers, this means that while AI may prove a useful partner in learning, it should never serve as a stand-in for genuine instruction. For parents, it means paying attention to how children use AI at home, noticing whether they are exploring, practicing and building skills or simply leaning on it to finish tasks. For policymakers and technology developers, it means creating systems that support student agency, provide reliable feedback and avoid encouraging overreliance. And for students themselves, it is a reminder that AI can be a tool for growth, but only when paired with their own effort and curiosity.

    Regardless of technology, students need to feel capable, autonomous and connected. Without these basic psychological needs in place, their sense of motivation will falter – with or without AI.

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Source link

  • Funding technology initiatives in uncertain times

    Funding technology initiatives in uncertain times

    Key points:

    Recent policy shifts have caused significant uncertainty in K-12 education funding, especially for technology initiatives. It’s no longer business as usual. Schools can’t rely on the same federal operating funds they’ve traditionally used to purchase technology or support innovation. This unpredictability has pushed school districts to explore creative, nontraditional ways to fund technology initiatives. To succeed, it’s important to understand how to approach these funding opportunities strategically.

    How to find funding

    Despite the challenges, there are still many grants available to support education initiatives and technology projects. Start with an online search using key terms related to your project–for example, “virtual reality,” “virtual field trips,” or “career and technical education.”

    Explore national organizations like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation or Project Tomorrow and consider potential local funding sources. Local organizations such as Rotary or Kiwanis clubs can be powerful allies in helping to fund projects. The local library and city or county government may also offer grants or partnership opportunities. Schools should also reach out to locally-headquartered businesses, many of which have community outreach or corporate social responsibility goals that align with supporting local education.

    Colleges and universities are another valuable resource. They may be conducting research that aligns with your school’s technology project. Building relationships with these institutions and organizations can put your school “in the right place at the right time” when new funding opportunities arise.

    Strategies to win the grant

    Once potential funding sources are identified, the next step is crafting a compelling proposal. Consider the following strategies to strengthen your application.

    1. Focus on the “how and why,” not just the “what.” If your school is seeking funds to buy hardware, don’t simply say, “Here’s what we want to buy.” Instead, frame it as, “Here’s how this project will improve student learning and why it matters.” Funders want to see the impact their support will have on outcomes. The more clearly a proposal connects technology to learning gains, the stronger it will be.

    2. Highlight the research. Use evidence to validate your project’s value. For example, if a school plans to purchase virtual reality headsets, cite studies showing that VR improves knowledge retention, engagement, and comprehension compared to traditional instruction. Demonstrating that the technology is research-backed helps funders feel confident in their investment.

    3. Paint a picture. Bring the project to life. Describe what students will experience and how they’ll benefit. For example: “When students put on the headset, they aren’t just reading about ancient civilizations, they’re walking through them.” Vivid descriptions help reviewers visualize the impact and believe in your vision.

    Eight questions to consider when applying for a grant

    Use these guiding questions to sharpen your proposal and ensure a strong foundation for implementation and long-term success.

    1. What is the goal? Clearly define what students will be able to do as a result of the project. Use action-orientated language: “Students will be able to…”
    2. Is the technology effective? Support your proposal with evidence such as whitepapers, case studies, or research that can demonstrate proven impact.
    3. How will the technology impact these specific students? Emphasize what makes your school or district unique, whether it’s serving a rural, urban, or high-poverty community and how this technology addresses those specific needs.
    4. What is the scope of the application? Specify whether the project involves elementary school, secondary school, or a specific subject or program like a STEM lab.
    5. How will success be measured? Too often schools reach the end of a project without a plan to track results. Plan your evaluation from the start. Track key metrics such as attendance, disciplinary data, academic performance, or engagement surveys, both before and after implementation to demonstrate results.
    6. What are your budgetary needs? Include all associated costs, including professional development and substitute coverage for teacher training.
    7. What happens after the grant is over? If you plan to use the technology for multiple years, apply for a multi-year grant rather than assuming future funding will appear. Sustainability is key.
    8. How will success be celebrated and communicated to stakeholders? Share results with the community and stakeholders. Host events recognizing teachers, students, and partners. Invite local media and highlight your funding partners–they’re not just donors, but partners in student success.

    Moving forward with confidence

    Education funding will likely remain uncertain in the years ahead. However, by being intentional about where to look for funds, how to frame proposals, and how to measure and share impact, schools can continue to implement innovative technology initiatives that elevate teaching and learning.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Cellphone bans can help kids learn — but Black students are suspended more as schools make the shift

    Cellphone bans can help kids learn — but Black students are suspended more as schools make the shift

    Thirty states now limit or ban cellphone use in classrooms, and teachers are noticing children paying attention to their lessons again. But it’s not clear whether this policy — unpopular with students and a headache for teachers to enforce — makes an academic difference. 

    If student achievement goes up after a cellphone ban, it’s tough to know if the ban was the reason. Some other change in math or reading instruction might have caused the improvement. Or maybe the state assessment became easier to pass. Imagine if politicians required all students to wear striped shirts and test scores rose. Few would really think that stripes made kids smarter.

    Two researchers from the University of Rochester and RAND, a nonprofit research organization, figured out a clever way to tackle this question by taking advantage of cellphone activity data in one large school district in Florida, which in 2023 became the first state to institute school cellphone restrictions. The researchers compared schools that had high cellphone activity before the ban with those that had low cellphone usage to see if the ban made a bigger difference for schools that had high usage. 

    Indeed, it did. 

    Related: Our free weekly newsletter alerts you to what research says about schools and classrooms.

    Student test scores rose a bit more in high cellphone usage schools two years after the ban compared with schools that had lower cellphone usage to start. Students were also attending school more regularly. 

    The policy also came with a troubling side effect. The cellphone bans led to a significant increase in student suspensions in the first year, especially among Black students. But disciplinary actions declined during the second year. 

    “Cellphone bans are not a silver bullet,” said David Figlio, an economist at the University of Rochester and one of the study’s co-authors. “But they seem to be helping kids. They’re attending school more, and they’re performing a bit better on tests.”

    Figlio said he was “worried” about the short-term 16 percent increase in suspensions for Black students. What’s unclear from this data analysis is whether Black students were more likely to violate the new cellphone rules, or whether teachers were more likely to single out Black students for punishment. It’s also unclear from these administrative behavior records if students were first given warnings or lighter punishments before they were suspended. 

    The data suggest that students adjusted to the new rules. A year later, student suspensions, including those of Black students, fell back to what they had been before the cellphone ban.

    “What we observe is a rocky start,” Figlio added. “There was a lot of discipline.”

    The study, “The Impact of Cellphone Bans in Schools on Student Outcomes: Evidence from Florida,” is a draft working paper and has not been peer-reviewed. It was slated to be circulated by the National Bureau of Economic Research on Oct. 20 and the authors shared a draft with me in advance. Figlio and his co-author Umut Özek at RAND believe it is the first study to show a causal connection between cellphone bans and learning rather than just a correlation.

    The academic gains from the cellphone ban were small, less than a percentile point, on average. That’s the equivalent of moving from the 50th percentile on math and reading tests (in the middle) to the 51st percentile (still close to the middle), and this small gain did not emerge until the second year for most students. The academic benefits were strongest for middle schoolers, white students, Hispanic students and male students. The academic gains for Black students and female students were not statistically significant.  

    Related: Suspended for…what? 

    I was surprised to learn that there is data on student cellphone use in school. The authors of this study used information from Advan Research Corp., which collects and analyzes data from mobile phones around the world for business purposes, such as figuring out how many people visit a particular retail store. The researchers were able to obtain this data for schools in one Florida school district and estimate how many students were on their cellphones before and after the ban went into effect between the hours of 9 a.m. and 1 p.m.

    The data showed that more than 60 percent of middle schoolers, on average, were on their phones at least once during the school day before the 2023 ban in this particular Florida district, which was not named but described as one of the 10 largest districts in the country. (Five of the nation’s 10 largest school districts are in Florida.) After the ban, that fell in half to 30 percent of middle schoolers in the first year and down to 25 percent in the second year.

    Elementary school students were less likely to be on cellphones to start with and their in-school usage fell from about 25 percent of students before the ban to 15 percent after the ban. More than 45 percent of high schoolers were on their phones before the ban and that fell to about 10 percent afterwards.

    Average daily smartphone visits in schools, by year and grade level

    Average daily smartphone visits during regular school days (relative to teacher workdays without students) between 9am and 1pm (per 100 enrolled students) in the two months before and then after the 2023 ban took effect in one large urban Florida school district. Source: Figlio and Özek, October 2025 draft paper, figure 2C, p. 23.

    Florida did not enact a complete cellphone ban in 2023, but imposed severe restrictions. Those restrictions were tightened in 2025 and that additional tightening was not studied in this paper.

    Anti-cellphone policies have become increasingly popular since the pandemic, largely based on our collective adult gut hunches that kids are not learning well when they are consumed by TikTok and SnapChat. 

    This is perhaps a rare case in public policy, Figlio said, where the “data back up the hunches.” 

    Contact staff writer Jill Barshay at 212-678-3595, jillbarshay.35 on Signal, or [email protected].

    This story about cellphone bans was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Proof Points and other Hechinger newsletters.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link