: Teaching in a Technological World: A response to Recommendation 1 and 2 of the EEF’s Using Digital Technology to Improve Learning “Miss, how come there are photos of the Titanic when they didn’t have mobile phones?”

“Miss, how come there are photos of the Titanic when they didn’t have mobile phones?“

This question, posed right in the middle of a history lesson left me momentarily stumped. It took a moment to realize that for many children today, a camera only exists as a component of a smartphone. After a recent AI training session, I was already brimming with ideas on how to use technology to enthuse and relate to pupils, but this interaction was a ​“lightbulb moment”. I became adamant that a better, steady use of technology was the key to bridging the gap between pupils’ today and the past.

However, turning to the EEF’s ​“Using Digital Technology to Improve Learning” guidance was the reality check I needed. Recommendations 1 and 2 put into perspective just how naively optimistic I was being:

Recommendation 1: Carefully consider how technology is going to improve teaching and learning

Before embracing AI or any new tool, Recommendation 1 forces us to consider the pedagogical rationale. Am I creating a ​“solution in search of a problem”?

The guidance acknowledges that whilst tech is exciting, it delivers little benefit if it is merely a substitute for explicit teaching. To ensure technology isn’t a gimmick, we must ask:

• What is the specific learning problem I am seeking to address? (e.g., Is it a lack of historical context, or a struggle with abstract concepts?
• How tightly does the technology proposed link to this problem?
• How will it affect teaching and learning outcomes?

As the EEF case studies outline, technology offers hope that it may be the ​“active ingredient” for improving outcomes of struggling pupils, but the research make clear that the content delivered is always more important than the method of delivery. In order to ensure that technology isn’t a crutch or lifeline, we are forced to ask ourselves, do we truly have a sound knowledge of the subject we need to teach?

Recommendation 2: Technology can be used to improve the quality of explanations and modelling

In reading Recommendation 2, it is startling to realise that, despite how commonplace it has become, there is surprisingly little evidence that technology inherently improves pupil outcomes. I remember the novelty of the first interactive whiteboards and the excitement of the laptop trolley being wheeled into the room. Yet, the EEF lays out that even the interactive whiteboard, now a completely commonplace feature of the modern classroom, had limited evidence regarding its impact on actual attainment and improvement of pupils’ experiences.

For technology to move beyond novelty and actually improve modelling, it must be used to:

1. Make abstract concepts concrete (perhaps helping that pupil visualise a world containing pre-mobile phone cameras, or visualising the reality of ancient Egypt in an interactive medium).
2. Scaffold high-quality explanations without increasing cognitive load.

The Verdict: True Integration

So, is technology a potentially unnecessary expense? Not necessarily, but the EEF recommendations make it clear that for technology to be beneficial, three key things must happen:

1. Staff Buy-in: Teachers must believe in the tool’s value.
2. Careful Integration: It must be implemented by staff specifically trained in its use.
3. Comparative Impact: We must ask: Will this have a greater impact than alternative, non-tech provisions?

Ultimately, even a well-designed tool can fail if it doesn’t serve a clear pedagogical purpose. As I look back at my history lesson, I realize the goal isn’t just to use AI because it’s available; it’s to ensure that whatever tool I choose helps bridge the gap between a pupil’s modern understanding and the historical past more effectively than a traditional explanation could.