For years, the conversation around educational technology centered on one question: How can we get more technology into classrooms? Today, we’re facing a different challenge related to excessive screen time.
But in my latest article, I argue that it’s time to move beyond debates about screen time and start thinking more intentionally about when technology leads to deeper learning and when it simply leads to greater screen dependence.
I’m a Reluctant Techie
I was never supposed to be a techie. Growing up, we had a computer (a Tandy we bought from Radio Shack) but I never had much of an interest in learning to code. I wasn’t much of a gamer, either. Instead, I spent hours using a word processing program and crafting my own stories and essays and then gluing together articles to craft make believe newspapers. In middle school, I did a massive History Day project where I typed everything by hand (on a typewriter) and made slides with a camera and film. I recorded my voice in a radio studio and spliced together the reel to reel tape using a razor blade and Scotch tape.
As long as I could remember, I would daydream about making media. I wanted to produce documentaries and maybe create my own animated show. I would dream up books I wanted to write and imagine them as movies. I thought it would be cool to have a radio show and talk about ideas and interview interesting people.
Then, in high school, I joined the journalism team. I didn’t take the class but I often wrote articles and editorials on the side. Suddenly, I was using the brand new computer lab and learning the dark art of newspaper layout. And for me, when I saw the physical newspapers printed out and distributed to the whole school, it felt like magic. In college, I learned how to code, not for the love of coding, but because I wanted to make a “weblog” and a website where I would share what I was learning as a student teacher. The weblog became a blog called Musings from a Not-So-Master Teacher, and this is a continuation of that process.
Looking back on it, you might think I was a techie. I learned about audiovisual equipment, computer coding, video editing software, and photography. But I never felt like a techie. I didn’t join the AV club but instead learned about it through theater. For me, the audio-visual technology was part of the creative magic of making a musical. Coding was okay, but the real magic was in sharing my writing with a larger audience.
In other words, I have never really nerded out on technology. For me, it’s always been about the creative and connective capacity of technology. I had a childhood dream of writing books. I can do that in a way that was never possible when a few large publishers were the gatekeepers. I wanted a radio show. I get to have my podcast. And, yes, I have had the chance to interview some of the smartest experts on so many subjects. I loved doing journalism but now I have a blog. And while I might not be an animator, I have sketch videos that have had millions views all around the world.
But it’s more than that. Technology platforms have allowed me to find true community that would never have been possible otherwise. I have deep but also silly conversations with long-term friends on Instagram. I have a mastermind group I connect with via Voxer. So, when I think about the role of technology in my life, I actually feel really grateful for the opportunities technology tools have created.
And the same is true as an educator. I am currently crafting asynchronous courses that will allow teacher candidates to access content in a previously unimaginable way. I’ve already seen how certain marginalized teacher candidates are getting into the profession and making a difference because they could take courses on their own terms. I’ve been able to connect with rural teacher candidates in the courses I teach via Zoom. And, again, we have connected to experts and built community despite our physical distance. That’s pretty awesome.
As a middle school teacher, I think about Social Voice Media that my students ran. They had blogs, podcasts, and videos that they published to both the local and larger community. We crafted documentaries that we screened in front of a larger audience. They interviewed experts via Skype (remember that?) and eventually Google Hangouts and then Zoom. We did a really cool long-distance apprenticeship project and some fascinating global collaboration projects.
So, when I think about this idea of low tech learning, I want to be clear. I love technology. I see it as a powerful tool for creativity, connection, and deeper learning. But I also love technology enough to be critical of it and to recognize the dangers inherent in technology dependence. For years, we fought for access. Now, we’re fighting a different battle.
In my latest article, I describe the journey toward gaining more access as well as the current tech-lash we are witnessing.
A More Nuanced Approach
Low Tech Learning isn’t a nostalgic call for the past. It doesn’t require desks in rows, with students spending hours doing worksheets. Nor is it an anti-technology rejection of all devices or apps. Instead, it’s a different approach that recognizes the power of technology for both positive and negative outcomes.
Low Tech Learning goes beyond simply auditing screen time by focusing on making more intentional technological decisions. It avoids the two traps of techno-futurism (where you use technology to drive the learning process) and low tech nostalgia (where you block all technology and go back to desks in rows). Low Tech Learning combines both the quantitative element of screen time with the qualitative element of deeper learning.
In terms of the quantity, it’s not just minutes in front of a device but also how screen-dependent the learning is. Think about two classrooms that each use devices for twenty minutes. In one, students create a podcast after spending days discussing, sketching, debating, and building ideas together. In the other, the device is required for reading, writing, discussion, feedback, and assessment. The screen time is identical, but the level of screen dependency is completely different. The goal isn’t simply fewer minutes on screens. It’s creating classrooms where technology fades into the background, and students spend more time interacting with ideas, materials, and one another.
If we do think about time using technology, many of us are wondering what the ideal ratio is. I’m not sure there is a magical number so much as a range – and this range should follow human development. Certainly younger students should have minimal time on screen. I’d love to see something close to a ban for K-3, but when they do use technology, I want it to be creative and connective. I actually think middle school and high school can allow more screen time, and certain subject areas lend themselves better to it. Also, some projects are going to be more screen-dependent (filming a documentary) while others can be entirely non-tech (an in-person low-tech simulation).
We definitely need to reduce screen time in schools and, thankfully, quantity is easy to measure. But ultimately, quality is critical. Schools often default to measuring minutes because they’re easy to count, while the more meaningful question is, “What happened during those minutes?” Here’s where the qualitative element of deeper learning comes in.
The Low-Tech Learning Matrix
The Low Tech Learning framework recognizes the importance of both the quantity of technology use (screen time) and the quality of technology integration (deeper learning).
The Low Tech Learning Matrix is built around two simple questions. First, how much does the learning depend on screens? This isn’t just about the number of minutes students spend on devices (though that plays a part). It’s about whether technology is one tool among many or whether it has become the default environment for learning.
Second, how deep is the learning? Some activities focus on surface learning, where students acquire foundational knowledge and skills. Others emphasize deeper learning, where students analyze, create, solve problems, collaborate, and transfer their understanding to new contexts. Neither axis is inherently good or bad. Instead, they provide a way to think more intentionally about instructional design.
When these two dimensions intersect, they create four distinct instructional spaces. We want to spend most of our time in the upper-left quadrant, where students engage in deep learning with low screen dependence. The lower-left quadrant represents foundational learning with low screen dependence. This is a vital part of the learning process, and it’s often where we see schools use digital worksheets, where low-tech options work best.
The upper-right quadrant represents a high-tech trade-off, where technology supports deeper learning but also increases screen dependence. There are times when this trade-off is worthwhile, like the aforementioned documentary or podcast projects. The lower-right quadrant, however, is where technology is often misplaced. Here, students spend more time on screens without gaining the benefits of deeper learning. These are often digital substitutions for activities that could be just as effective, or even more effective, without a device.
Read the Full Article
You can find the full article here. If you find it helpful, please consider sharing it on social media.
Listen to the Podcast
You can also listen to my latest podcast episode by subscribing to the Creative Classroom Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. The feed might take a moment to update, so if this episode isn't showing up, I promise it will!
If you enjoy my podcast, would you consider leaving a review?
Let's Work Together!
I would love to work with your school, district, or conference! You might be interested in keynotes or workshops on intentional tech integration (including AI), deeper learning, PBL, and empowering students. I've also been doing some work connected to this latest series on Low Tech Learning and intentional tech integration.
I still have some availability in September and October. I'd also love to do something more in-depth throughout the school year. My workshops include access to my self-paced courses so participants can continue their professional learning after the day's event.
Please reach out to me at john@spencereducation.com or fill out the form on my speaking page, and I'll get back to you as soon as possible. I can send you a PD catalog with all the details.
