The counter arguments
Blame the teachers. The argument for the continued use of technology in schools is usually centered around how educators need to get better at using it. It is often stated that only effective use of the technology will help students—just using it will not. Research shows isolated examples of technology creating some gains in learning over traditional methods, however such gains never appear at scale, suggesting a problem with mass implementation, rather than the technology itself.
Assuming we're able to get all teachers trained in effective use of tech in the areas that show some promise, is that worth the expense? Is that enough to overcome the negative pressures on learning? There is always room for some ed tech usage in schools, similar to when the teacher rolled in the TV cart in the 80s and 90s, but there is no need for it to dominate learning.
Gotta get em ready. Preparing for the new digital reality is often cited as the need for ed tech in schools to prepare them for the future, though no direct research on this area supports this. Some evidence suggests that as devices proliferate at schools, digital literacy among students is on the decline as students simply trust whatever the device tells them.
But it's engaging: Since their attention is on the screens, doesn't that mean they are learning? There is no evidence of a casual correlation between a student's "engagement" and their actual learning that sticks. (Ever spend an hour flipping through Instagram or TikTok and try to remember all the things you saw?)
