As I write this, my email inbox is full of numerous ed tech companies’ advertisements about the latest and greatest tools, programs, and platforms that will supposedly transform learning. Teachers and administrators alike are relentlessly bombarded with these messages every day. These resources are usually presented as tools for project-based learning, fostering creativity, and helping students master 21st-century skills. And technology use has become synonymous with innovation, differentiation, and engagement.
Teachers are often lauded when they build their classrooms around digital-based tools. We are told students learn differently than they used to, and traditional methods of instruction are no longer effective (see Bennett et al., 2008). I have even seen teachers receive poor ratings on their evaluations because they do not use enough technology. As many educators rush to implement digital programs and tools, we must consider if our “new” methods are truly effective for helping kids learn.
What good teaching looks like
During a recent professional development session on the topic of effective instruction, I began by asking everyone to think back on their best teachers. However, I did not want them to focus just on the relationships these teachers built with them but on how they taught and directed their classrooms.
The quality that came up most often in participants’ responses was high expectations. Their best teachers challenged students and pushed them beyond what they thought they could do. Other frequent responses included modeling, providing examples, making students take written notes, engaging students in lots of practice, breaking down abstract concepts, providing clear instructions, asking thought-provoking questions, and maintaining a structured classroom environment.
I then asked the group if current educators (themselves included) employed similar strategies. Many admitted that while they were trained to use those strategies and used to use them, they had gotten away from them. Why was this? They pointed to the fact that we have created an overwhelming dependency on technology, and not just dependency but a fabricated need. Digital technology has pervaded education, causing many educators to hit the override button on what we know is effective teaching.
We have been hoodwinked into believing that digital technology is a magic wand that teachers need to help students learn. Unfortunately, many teachers are spending more time trying to figure out how to use online programs than they are planning instruction. These teachers had found that their students, because of too much screen time, lacked the stamina to read a book, were unable to focus and listen during a lesson, and only wanted to be entertained.
A balance between the old and new
While technology has certainly opened doors for opportunity, creativity, and efficiency, it cannot replace the art of good teaching. As Mike Schmoker (2018) reminds us, effective instruction is not composed of fancy bells and whistles but of only a few basic components like modeling, guided practice, and formative assessment — all strategies that the teachers in the PD session mentioned. We know what strategies work best but have gotten bogged down in the digital options at our fingertips. To navigate this digital age effectively, we must find a balance between leveraging technology and adhering to proven teaching strategies.
Digital technology has provided enormous benefits. We can store, sort, and organize teaching materials, assessments, textbooks, and student data like never before. We can provide online instruction through live video calls or pre-recorded lectures. Students have online access to personalized learning materials and web-based simulations that provide experiences students could not have otherwise. Yet integrating technology into the classroom does not mean abandoning traditional teaching methods. In fact, effective classrooms often leverage the strengths of both (Magliaro, Lockee, & Burton, 2005; McKnight et al., 2016).
Tech for direct instruction
Take, for example, the often criticized, yet highly effective teaching method of direct instruction (Adam & Engelmann, 1996). This method involves some form of presentation by the instructor with lots of modeling, examples, and checks for student understanding. The teacher provides opportunities for guided and independent practice while providing specific feedback to the class and individual students. The entire lesson is anchored in a specific learning objective and clearly defined success criteria.
Using direct instruction, a teacher might use an interactive whiteboard to present new concepts reinforced with short video clips and interactive exercises, such as multiple-choice questions the students can respond to on mini whiteboards or their own devices, so teachers can see and anonymously display them in real time. The responses serve as a formative assessment, allowing the teacher to adjust and provide feedback during the lesson.
The teacher may transition to a guided or independent practice session using an app or online platform that offers personalized or teacher-directed practice exercises and questions. During this phase, the teacher continues to provide targeted feedback and monitor student work through real-time data.
Finally, the lesson concludes with a review where the teacher addresses misconceptions and reinforces key concepts. This approach ensures that technology enhances, rather than replaces, the elements of direct instruction.
Tech for student practice
Teachers can also take advantage of online programs to engage students in retrieval practice, sometimes referred to as spiraling. A wealth of research has shown the power that retrieval practice, bringing learned information to mind from long-term memory, can have on learning (Roediger & Butler, 2011).
In retrieval practice, students take ongoing practice “tests” in spread-out intervals covering material they’ve been taught. These tests should not be for a grade. The same programs a teacher might use to design independent practice at the end of a lesson also can be used to design supplementary practice sessions composed of varying types of questions, such as multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank, and flashcards, all of which reinforce key concepts through varied forms of retrieval.
Teachers can create practice sessions on specific topics, or they can mix topics — a technique known as interleaved practice. When I taught science, I usually just added new questions from the current topic to a previously created quiz, thereby allowing students to always spiral back to previously learned material. These sessions could be a weekly or monthly routine. In either case, the technology serves a very specific purpose and is highly effective for learning.
By thoughtfully blending digital programs with established teaching methods like direct instruction and retrieval practice, teachers and students benefit from the strengths of both approaches. The key to success is that these programs are teacher-directed and applied through the lens of proven instructional practices.
Why it matters
So much of education has been plagued by frenzied change driven not by sound educational research but by trends (Carpenter, Shelton, & Schroeder, 2023; Shelton, Schroeder, & Curcio, 2020). As technology continues to rapidly evolve, we feel the pressure to conform to the latest digital innovations, often without sufficient evidence of their effectiveness in the classroom.
For example, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has unleashed many possibilities and potential challenges. On one hand, AI offers solutions to enhance efficiency for teachers, like automating grading, generating lesson plans, and tracking student progress. On the other hand, it raises questions about its impact on student originality and academic integrity.
One English teacher I spoke to who was initially excited about the potential use of AI in her classroom later recanted her view, stating that AI has not enhanced learning but only hijacked students’ creativity and originality. While grading student essays, she was hit with the reality that a handful of the essays were clearly not written by the students themselves but by generative AI. She now advocates banning its use in schools.
While her reaction may represent an extreme view, there is a lot of truth in her observation of students using AI. I have seen this repeatedly. Students, on their own, will often resort to using AI to complete their assignments for them, instead of using it as a thinking partner and tool. For this reason, many schools are now implementing policies that classify the use of AI for writing and similar tasks as a form of plagiarism.
While the fads will continue to spread, nothing is more imperative for the success of students’ futures than good teaching. We have a responsibility as educators to teach students to use technology tools appropriately, however, it is not possible to do that for every new technology advancement and ensure that students learn the essential concepts of reading, writing, math, and science at high levels. We should not dare jeopardize the short amount of time we have with them for the sake of “the next big thing.”
As I reflect on some of the great teachers I had growing up, I am reminded that learning can be fun, engaging, and challenging without any fancy devices and programs. All it takes is a teacher who cares deeply for the students, has high expectations, and is willing to regularly use sound teaching practices. By focusing on these time-tested instructional fundamentals, we can ensure that when we choose to implement technology, it will only bolster students’ skills and knowledge, not hinder it.
References
Adams G. & Engelmann S. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Educational Achievement Systems.
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The “digital natives” debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (5), 775-786.
Carpenter, J.P., Shelton, C.C., & Schroeder, S.E. (2023). The education influencer: A new player in the educator professional landscape. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55 (5), 749-764.
Magliaro, S.G., Lockee, B.B., & Burton, J.K. (2005). Direct instruction revisited: A key model for instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53 (4), 41-55.
McKnight, K., O’Malley, K., Ruzic, R., Horsley, M.K., Franey, J.J., & Bassett, K. (2016). Teaching in a digital age: How educators use technology to improve student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48 (3), 194-211.
Roediger, H.L., III, & Butler, A.C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15 (1), 20-27.
Schmoker, M.J. (2018). Focus: Elevating the essentials to radically improve student learning (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Shelton, C., Schroeder, S., & Curcio, R. (2020). Instagramming their hearts out: What do edu-influencers share on Instagram? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 20 (3).
This article appears in the Summer 2025 issue of Kappan, Vol. 106, No. 7-8, pp. 68-70.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Kendall Naceanceno
Kendall Naceanceno is the K-12 director of academics at Jackson Christian School in West Tennessee.
