Key Takeaways:
- The proposed legislation in Utah, HB273, aims to limit technology use in classrooms, which could have negative consequences for student learning and digital citizenship.
- Restricting technology in classrooms could widen the digital divide and limit access to digital tools for lower-income and rural students.
- Digital tools are essential for meeting the needs of a diverse student population, including English language learners and students with disabilities.
- The goal of education should be to cultivate digital citizens who use technology thoughtfully, ethically, and creatively to solve real-world problems.
- Limiting technology use in classrooms could hinder student growth and preparation for a future defined by tech integration and AI partnership.
Introduction to the Issue
The state of Utah is at a crossroads when it comes to technology use in classrooms. On one hand, the state prides itself on being future-ready, but on the other hand, current legislative priorities, such as HB273, aim to limit technology use in classrooms. This proposed legislation, also known as the BALANCE Act, mandates a return to a paper-and-pencil-only era for K-3 classrooms and prohibits the 1:1 device ratios that allow for personalized learning. Additionally, it imposes more technology constraints for grades 4-12, prioritizing an "analog-first" classroom environment. This approach may seem nostalgic, but it is a step backward for Utah, which could have negative consequences for student learning and digital citizenship.
The Importance of Technology in Classrooms
Technology is not just a tool, but an essential part of modern education. It provides students with access to a wealth of information, enables personalized learning, and helps teachers to meet the diverse needs of their students. By removing access to digital tools, we lose our best chance to model and teach responsible digital citizenship. As a parent and educator, the author has seen the benefits of technology in classrooms and believes that implementing technology bans in primary grades and tightening restrictions through high school is a regressive move that ignores the realities of modern education. The author argues that instead of banning technology, we should be empowering families and communities to transform passive screen time into active, intentional learning.
The Digital Divide
One of the most significant concerns about limiting technology use in classrooms is that it could widen the digital divide. Higher-income families can provide digital literacy at home, but for many Utah students, the classroom is often the only place they have access to a reliable device or high-speed internet. By severely limiting classroom technology, we are intentionally widening the digital divide and telling lower-income and rural students that they don’t deserve the same head start as their peers. The author, who serves as a board member of the Utah Coalition for Educational Technology, believes that digital tools are essential for meeting the needs of a diverse student population, including English language learners and students with disabilities.
The Impact on English Language Learners
For emerging English learners, a paper worksheet can be a significant barrier to learning. However, access to a device with real-time translation can be a bridge to understanding and participation. The author shares a personal anecdote about a student who was able to connect with his peers and participate in class after being given access to a device with translation tools. By mandating paper-first classrooms, we are not just widening the achievement gap, but also removing the tools that help our kids build relationships and learn to navigate a digital world.
Preparing Students for the Future
Our kids are graduating into a future defined by tech integration and AI partnership. To be truly future-ready, we should not limit student growth with learning practices from the 1980s while the adults are busy building the 2050s. The goal of education should be to cultivate digital citizens who use their agency to solve real-world problems. As Richard Culatta, CEO of the International Society for Technology in Education, argues, we must stop treating technology as a list of "don’ts" and start treating it as a toolkit for "dos." By doing so, we can empower students to use technology thoughtfully, ethically, and creatively to make a positive impact in the world.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the proposed legislation in Utah, HB273, is a step in the wrong direction. Instead of limiting technology use in classrooms, we should be empowering families and communities to transform passive screen time into active, intentional learning. Digital tools are essential for meeting the needs of a diverse student population, and by removing access to these tools, we are widening the digital divide and limiting student growth. It’s time to stop legislating our classrooms into tech deserts and start treating them as places where students engage with technology thoughtfully, ethically, and creatively. By doing so, we can prepare our students for a future defined by tech integration and AI partnership and cultivate digital citizens who use their agency to solve real-world problems.
