The conversations among school leaders about how to integrate AI into education so it supports and enhances the quality of learning—instead of eroding it—feel eerily similar to the conversations about technology use in schools that we had back in 2010.
When smartphones ushered in a new era of technology where devices were readily available and edtech tools flooded the market, people grappled with the role that technology should play in classrooms. The main argument centered on the reality that students would need to be proficient users of technology to succeed in life beyond school. In response, many school and district leaders invested significant resources in purchasing devices, boosting the WiFi infrastructure to support them, and training teachers on how to use the very devices that students would have access to.
The results were disappointing.
So why didn’t the investment yield the transformation that so many in education advocated for? The fundamental failing is in the way most systems ask educators to use technology. Devices and educational apps are treated as add-ons; they don’t disrupt traditional teaching methods. As Alan November noted in Who Owns the Learning (2012, Solution Tree), computers became little more than “thousand-dollar pencils.” They weren’t transforming anything.
The Need to Commit to Transformation
Leaders who want technology to truly improve learning need to champion a shift in instructional practices. Teachers need to give students greater autonomy over their learning and offer content that interests and engages them using materials that are accessible and honor student preferences as learners. Instead of teacher-led lessons that position students for long stretches as passive listeners and consumers of information, we need to integrate technology tools that put students at the center of the learning experience—and that free teachers to do the work that technology cannot. This is the uniquely human work of teaching: listening, observing, responding, coaching, and building relationships that make learning meaningful and responsive.
Instead of teacher-led lessons that position students as passive listeners and consumers of information, we need to integrate technology tools that put students at the center of the learning experience.
The fact is, technology is great at information transfer. Think about the last thing you learned informally. Maybe your dishwasher broke, and you had to figure out how to fix it. Perhaps you’re raising a moody teenager and looking for parenting advice. Where do you turn to learn? I’d bet, to a video on YouTube, a book, an online article, a podcast series, or an AI chatbot. If what technology does really well is make information available in a variety of formats that appeal to a range of learning preferences, then why are we insisting that the best use of our teachers’ time is to stand at the front of a classroom and talk at increasingly diverse groups of students? Why aren’t we arming them with a more robust instructional toolbelt, with a range of teaching models and learning strategies that strategically use technology to differentiate and personalize learning? That way, they can spend their finite time and energy focusing on the aspects of this work that they’re uniquely capable of. We have a shot at doing so—if school leaders make it a priority in professional learning and instructional practice.
So Why the Pushback?
In an industry focused on learning and cultivating lifelong learners, teacher resistance to continuing to develop our skill set with technology feels contradictory to everything we’re asking of our students. We expect them to sit in spaces of productive struggle, stretch, take risks, and fail. As the educators in the equation, we need to be modeling those very things for our learners.
Teachers regularly lament online that technology is simply a distraction that they wish would disappear from classrooms. In many cases, teachers are correct: technology is a distraction because it’s not being used to explore, discover, or create. This isn’t a teacher problem. It’s a design and implementation problem that leaders have the power to solve.
The question is, will AI elevate learning, or will we repeat the missteps of past technology rollouts?
Too often, technology is used to isolate learners. It’s little more than a vehicle to distribute and collect digital work, a way to show videos, or a space for individual practice with a computer program or adaptive software. Teachers are not using it to connect learners, encourage interaction, or position students to lead aspects of the learning process. It’s not driving critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity.
The computer isn’t adding much value in the classroom. Students are using computers to take notes, which research has shown is better to do by hand. Much of the digital work they complete in isolation they could do offline. And given that many of these tasks aren’t relevant or engaging, should we really be surprised that so many students use their devices to escape? We do the same when we’re bored. We pull out our phones to distract ourselves.
It’s Up to School Leaders
Here we are, years later, having similar conversations about how technology—in this case, AI—can transform education. The question is, will AI elevate learning, or will we repeat the missteps of past technology rollouts?
That depends on school leaders. Will they prioritize professional learning that helps educators teach students how to work with AI in a responsible and resourceful way? That helps them teach students how to develop their critical thinking skills, become more flexible and agile learners, and approach problem solving and complex tasks from a place of curiosity and confidence?
The fact is, school leaders must articulate a clear value proposition for technology use that prioritizes student thinking, agency, and meaningful engagement. They also need to invest in professional learning and accountability systems that support teachers in translating that vision into daily instructional practice. Without that clarity and without the systems in place to make that vision a reality, devices default to little more than places to complete tasks rather than platforms for meaningful engagement.
I’m hoping we’ll learn from the failings of the large-scale technology roll-outs of the past. If not, we’re bound to repeat them with AI.
