impact of technology student essay

Essay on Impact of Technology on Society

Students are often asked to write an essay on Impact of Technology on Society in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Impact of Technology on Society

Introduction.

Technology has greatly influenced society. It has changed how we communicate, learn, and even how we live our daily lives.

Communication

In education, technology has made learning more accessible. Online classes and educational apps have made it possible to learn from anywhere.

Everyday Life

In our daily lives, technology helps us do tasks more efficiently. For example, we use GPS for navigation and apps for shopping.

250 Words Essay on Impact of Technology on Society

The technological revolution has dramatically reshaped society, impacting various sectors such as communication, education, health, and business. The advent of technology has brought about significant changes, both positive and negative, that are reshaping our world.

Positive Impacts

Technology has undeniably improved our lives, providing unprecedented convenience and efficiency. In the realm of communication, digital platforms have bridged geographical gaps, fostering global connectivity and collaboration. In education, e-learning tools have democratized access to knowledge, enabling lifelong learning irrespective of location or socio-economic background. In healthcare, advanced medical technologies have improved diagnostic accuracy and treatment efficacy, enhancing patient outcomes and quality of life.

Negative Impacts

However, the pervasive influence of technology also poses challenges. The digital divide, a disparity in access to technology, exacerbates social inequalities. The over-reliance on technology can lead to sedentary lifestyles, contributing to physical and mental health issues. Moreover, the rise of digital platforms has increased the risk of cybercrimes, privacy breaches, and misinformation, posing threats to personal safety and societal harmony.

In conclusion, the impact of technology on society is multifaceted, bringing both benefits and drawbacks. It is crucial for society to harness the positive potential of technology while mitigating its negative implications. This balance requires thoughtful policy-making, education, and a collective commitment to using technology responsibly and ethically.

500 Words Essay on Impact of Technology on Society

Technology has undoubtedly become an integral part of our daily lives, influencing every sector from communication to health, education to entertainment. The advent of technology has significantly transformed society, shaping the way we interact, learn, work, and live. While the benefits of technology are numerous, it has also raised several concerns that demand careful consideration.

Enhanced Communication and Information Access

Moreover, the internet has democratized information access. Online resources and digital libraries have made it possible for anyone with internet access to learn almost anything. This has significantly reduced the barriers to education and knowledge, fostering a global culture of continuous learning.

Technology and Work

The way we work has been radically transformed by technology. Automation and artificial intelligence have replaced many traditional jobs, leading to fears of job loss. However, they have also created new roles that didn’t exist before, such as data analysts, AI specialists, and digital marketers.

Moreover, technology has facilitated remote work, allowing people to work from anywhere, thereby promoting work-life balance. However, this also blurs the line between work and personal life, leading to potential burnout.

Healthcare Advancements

Social implications.

Technology has significantly influenced our social interactions. On the one hand, it has enabled us to stay connected with friends and family, no matter where they are. On the other hand, excessive use of technology can lead to isolation and mental health issues.

Environmental Impact

Technology also plays a crucial role in addressing environmental challenges. Innovations like renewable energy technologies, precision agriculture, and digital twins are helping us combat climate change and promote sustainable development. However, the production and disposal of electronic waste also pose significant environmental threats.

In conclusion, the impact of technology on society is multifaceted, bringing both opportunities and challenges. As we continue to innovate and evolve, it is crucial to foster a culture of responsible technology use, ensuring that technological advancements contribute to societal well-being and sustainable development.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

One Comment

Thank you so much this helped a lot for my essay writing I got the idea on how I’m gonna write my essay.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

How Has Technology Changed Education?

Technology has impacted almost every aspect of life today, and education is no exception. Or is it? In some ways, education seems much the same as it has been for many years. A 14th century illustration by Laurentius de Voltolina depicts a university lecture in medieval Italy. The scene is easily recognizable because of its parallels to the modern day. The teacher lectures from a podium at the front of the room while the students sit in rows and listen. Some of the students have books open in front of them and appear to be following along. A few look bored. Some are talking to their neighbors. One appears to be sleeping. Classrooms today do not look much different, though you might find modern students looking at their laptops, tablets, or smart phones instead of books (though probably open to Facebook). A cynic would say that technology has done nothing to change education.

However, in many ways, technology has profoundly changed education. For one, technology has greatly expanded access to education. In medieval times, books were rare and only an elite few had access to educational opportunities. Individuals had to travel to centers of learning to get an education. Today, massive amounts of information (books, audio, images, videos) are available at one’s fingertips through the Internet, and opportunities for formal learning are available online worldwide through the Khan Academy, MOOCs, podcasts, traditional online degree programs, and more. Access to learning opportunities today is unprecedented in scope thanks to technology.

Opportunities for communication and collaboration have also been expanded by technology. Traditionally, classrooms have been relatively isolated, and collaboration has been limited to other students in the same classroom or building. Today, technology enables forms of communication and collaboration undreamt of in the past. Students in a classroom in the rural U.S., for example, can learn about the Arctic by following the expedition of a team of scientists in the region, read scientists’ blog posting, view photos, e-mail questions to the scientists, and even talk live with the scientists via a videoconference. Students can share what they are learning with students in other classrooms in other states who are tracking the same expedition. Students can collaborate on group projects using technology-based tools such as wikis and Google docs. The walls of the classrooms are no longer a barrier as technology enables new ways of learning, communicating, and working collaboratively.

Technology has also begun to change the roles of teachers and learners. In the traditional classroom, such as what we see depicted in de Voltolina’s illustration, the teacher is the primary source of information, and the learners passively receive it. This model of the teacher as the “sage on the stage” has been in education for a long time, and it is still very much in evidence today. However, because of the access to information and educational opportunity that technology has enabled, in many classrooms today we see the teacher’s role shifting to the “guide on the side” as students take more responsibility for their own learning using technology to gather relevant information. Schools and universities across the country are beginning to redesign learning spaces to enable this new model of education, foster more interaction and small group work, and use technology as an enabler.

Technology is a powerful tool that can support and transform education in many ways, from making it easier for teachers to create instructional materials to enabling new ways for people to learn and work together. With the worldwide reach of the Internet and the ubiquity of smart devices that can connect to it, a new age of anytime anywhere education is dawning. It will be up to instructional designers and educational technologies to make the most of the opportunities provided by technology to change education so that effective and efficient education is available to everyone everywhere.

You can help shape the influence of technology in education with an Online Master of Science in Education in Learning Design and Technology from Purdue University Online. This accredited program offers studies in exciting new technologies that are shaping education and offers students the opportunity to take part in the future of innovation.

Learn more about the online MSEd in Learning Design and Technology at Purdue University today and help redefine the way in which individuals learn. Call (877) 497-5851 to speak with an admissions advisor or to request more information.

REALIZING THE PROMISE:

Leading up to the 75th anniversary of the UN General Assembly, this “Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all?” publication kicks off the Center for Universal Education’s first playbook in a series to help improve education around the world.

It is intended as an evidence-based tool for ministries of education, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, to adopt and more successfully invest in education technology.

While there is no single education initiative that will achieve the same results everywhere—as school systems differ in learners and educators, as well as in the availability and quality of materials and technologies—an important first step is understanding how technology is used given specific local contexts and needs.

The surveys in this playbook are designed to be adapted to collect this information from educators, learners, and school leaders and guide decisionmakers in expanding the use of technology.  

Introduction

While technology has disrupted most sectors of the economy and changed how we communicate, access information, work, and even play, its impact on schools, teaching, and learning has been much more limited. We believe that this limited impact is primarily due to technology being been used to replace analog tools, without much consideration given to playing to technology’s comparative advantages. These comparative advantages, relative to traditional “chalk-and-talk” classroom instruction, include helping to scale up standardized instruction, facilitate differentiated instruction, expand opportunities for practice, and increase student engagement. When schools use technology to enhance the work of educators and to improve the quality and quantity of educational content, learners will thrive.

Further, COVID-19 has laid bare that, in today’s environment where pandemics and the effects of climate change are likely to occur, schools cannot always provide in-person education—making the case for investing in education technology.

Here we argue for a simple yet surprisingly rare approach to education technology that seeks to:

• Understand the needs, infrastructure, and capacity of a school system—the diagnosis;
• Survey the best available evidence on interventions that match those conditions—the evidence; and
• Closely monitor the results of innovations before they are scaled up—the prognosis.

RELATED CONTENT

Podcast: How education technology can improve learning for all students

To make ed tech work, set clear goals, review the evidence, and pilot before you scale

The framework.

Our approach builds on a simple yet intuitive theoretical framework created two decades ago by two of the most prominent education researchers in the United States, David K. Cohen and Deborah Loewenberg Ball. They argue that what matters most to improve learning is the interactions among educators and learners around educational materials. We believe that the failed school-improvement efforts in the U.S. that motivated Cohen and Ball’s framework resemble the ed-tech reforms in much of the developing world to date in the lack of clarity improving the interactions between educators, learners, and the educational material. We build on their framework by adding parents as key agents that mediate the relationships between learners and educators and the material (Figure 1).

Figure 1: The instructional core

Adapted from Cohen and Ball (1999)

As the figure above suggests, ed-tech interventions can affect the instructional core in a myriad of ways. Yet, just because technology can do something, it does not mean it should. School systems in developing countries differ along many dimensions and each system is likely to have different needs for ed-tech interventions, as well as different infrastructure and capacity to enact such interventions.

The diagnosis:

How can school systems assess their needs and preparedness.

A useful first step for any school system to determine whether it should invest in education technology is to diagnose its:

• Specific needs to improve student learning (e.g., raising the average level of achievement, remediating gaps among low performers, and challenging high performers to develop higher-order skills);
• Infrastructure to adopt technology-enabled solutions (e.g., electricity connection, availability of space and outlets, stock of computers, and Internet connectivity at school and at learners’ homes); and
• Capacity to integrate technology in the instructional process (e.g., learners’ and educators’ level of familiarity and comfort with hardware and software, their beliefs about the level of usefulness of technology for learning purposes, and their current uses of such technology).

Before engaging in any new data collection exercise, school systems should take full advantage of existing administrative data that could shed light on these three main questions. This could be in the form of internal evaluations but also international learner assessments, such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and/or the Progress in International Literacy Study (PIRLS), and the Teaching and Learning International Study (TALIS). But if school systems lack information on their preparedness for ed-tech reforms or if they seek to complement existing data with a richer set of indicators, we developed a set of surveys for learners, educators, and school leaders. Download the full report to see how we map out the main aspects covered by these surveys, in hopes of highlighting how they could be used to inform decisions around the adoption of ed-tech interventions.

The evidence:

How can school systems identify promising ed-tech interventions.

There is no single “ed-tech” initiative that will achieve the same results everywhere, simply because school systems differ in learners and educators, as well as in the availability and quality of materials and technologies. Instead, to realize the potential of education technology to accelerate student learning, decisionmakers should focus on four potential uses of technology that play to its comparative advantages and complement the work of educators to accelerate student learning (Figure 2). These comparative advantages include:

• Scaling up quality instruction, such as through prerecorded quality lessons.
• Facilitating differentiated instruction, through, for example, computer-adaptive learning and live one-on-one tutoring.
• Expanding opportunities to practice.
• Increasing learner engagement through videos and games.

Figure 2: Comparative advantages of technology

Here we review the evidence on ed-tech interventions from 37 studies in 20 countries*, organizing them by comparative advantage. It’s important to note that ours is not the only way to classify these interventions (e.g., video tutorials could be considered as a strategy to scale up instruction or increase learner engagement), but we believe it may be useful to highlight the needs that they could address and why technology is well positioned to do so.

When discussing specific studies, we report the magnitude of the effects of interventions using standard deviations (SDs). SDs are a widely used metric in research to express the effect of a program or policy with respect to a business-as-usual condition (e.g., test scores). There are several ways to make sense of them. One is to categorize the magnitude of the effects based on the results of impact evaluations. In developing countries, effects below 0.1 SDs are considered to be small, effects between 0.1 and 0.2 SDs are medium, and those above 0.2 SDs are large (for reviews that estimate the average effect of groups of interventions, called “meta analyses,” see e.g., Conn, 2017; Kremer, Brannen, & Glennerster, 2013; McEwan, 2014; Snilstveit et al., 2015; Evans & Yuan, 2020.)

*In surveying the evidence, we began by compiling studies from prior general and ed-tech specific evidence reviews that some of us have written and from ed-tech reviews conducted by others. Then, we tracked the studies cited by the ones we had previously read and reviewed those, as well. In identifying studies for inclusion, we focused on experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations of education technology interventions from pre-school to secondary school in low- and middle-income countries that were released between 2000 and 2020. We only included interventions that sought to improve student learning directly (i.e., students’ interaction with the material), as opposed to interventions that have impacted achievement indirectly, by reducing teacher absence or increasing parental engagement. This process yielded 37 studies in 20 countries (see the full list of studies in Appendix B).

Scaling up standardized instruction

One of the ways in which technology may improve the quality of education is through its capacity to deliver standardized quality content at scale. This feature of technology may be particularly useful in three types of settings: (a) those in “hard-to-staff” schools (i.e., schools that struggle to recruit educators with the requisite training and experience—typically, in rural and/or remote areas) (see, e.g., Urquiola & Vegas, 2005); (b) those in which many educators are frequently absent from school (e.g., Chaudhury, Hammer, Kremer, Muralidharan, & Rogers, 2006; Muralidharan, Das, Holla, & Mohpal, 2017); and/or (c) those in which educators have low levels of pedagogical and subject matter expertise (e.g., Bietenbeck, Piopiunik, & Wiederhold, 2018; Bold et al., 2017; Metzler & Woessmann, 2012; Santibañez, 2006) and do not have opportunities to observe and receive feedback (e.g., Bruns, Costa, & Cunha, 2018; Cilliers, Fleisch, Prinsloo, & Taylor, 2018). Technology could address this problem by: (a) disseminating lessons delivered by qualified educators to a large number of learners (e.g., through prerecorded or live lessons); (b) enabling distance education (e.g., for learners in remote areas and/or during periods of school closures); and (c) distributing hardware preloaded with educational materials.

Prerecorded lessons

Technology seems to be well placed to amplify the impact of effective educators by disseminating their lessons. Evidence on the impact of prerecorded lessons is encouraging, but not conclusive. Some initiatives that have used short instructional videos to complement regular instruction, in conjunction with other learning materials, have raised student learning on independent assessments. For example, Beg et al. (2020) evaluated an initiative in Punjab, Pakistan in which grade 8 classrooms received an intervention that included short videos to substitute live instruction, quizzes for learners to practice the material from every lesson, tablets for educators to learn the material and follow the lesson, and LED screens to project the videos onto a classroom screen. After six months, the intervention improved the performance of learners on independent tests of math and science by 0.19 and 0.24 SDs, respectively but had no discernible effect on the math and science section of Punjab’s high-stakes exams.

One study suggests that approaches that are far less technologically sophisticated can also improve learning outcomes—especially, if the business-as-usual instruction is of low quality. For example, Naslund-Hadley, Parker, and Hernandez-Agramonte (2014) evaluated a preschool math program in Cordillera, Paraguay that used audio segments and written materials four days per week for an hour per day during the school day. After five months, the intervention improved math scores by 0.16 SDs, narrowing gaps between low- and high-achieving learners, and between those with and without educators with formal training in early childhood education.

Yet, the integration of prerecorded material into regular instruction has not always been successful. For example, de Barros (2020) evaluated an intervention that combined instructional videos for math and science with infrastructure upgrades (e.g., two “smart” classrooms, two TVs, and two tablets), printed workbooks for students, and in-service training for educators of learners in grades 9 and 10 in Haryana, India (all materials were mapped onto the official curriculum). After 11 months, the intervention negatively impacted math achievement (by 0.08 SDs) and had no effect on science (with respect to business as usual classes). It reduced the share of lesson time that educators devoted to instruction and negatively impacted an index of instructional quality. Likewise, Seo (2017) evaluated several combinations of infrastructure (solar lights and TVs) and prerecorded videos (in English and/or bilingual) for grade 11 students in northern Tanzania and found that none of the variants improved student learning, even when the videos were used. The study reports effects from the infrastructure component across variants, but as others have noted (Muralidharan, Romero, & Wüthrich, 2019), this approach to estimating impact is problematic.

A very similar intervention delivered after school hours, however, had sizeable effects on learners’ basic skills. Chiplunkar, Dhar, and Nagesh (2020) evaluated an initiative in Chennai (the capital city of the state of Tamil Nadu, India) delivered by the same organization as above that combined short videos that explained key concepts in math and science with worksheets, facilitator-led instruction, small groups for peer-to-peer learning, and occasional career counseling and guidance for grade 9 students. These lessons took place after school for one hour, five times a week. After 10 months, it had large effects on learners’ achievement as measured by tests of basic skills in math and reading, but no effect on a standardized high-stakes test in grade 10 or socio-emotional skills (e.g., teamwork, decisionmaking, and communication).

Drawing general lessons from this body of research is challenging for at least two reasons. First, all of the studies above have evaluated the impact of prerecorded lessons combined with several other components (e.g., hardware, print materials, or other activities). Therefore, it is possible that the effects found are due to these additional components, rather than to the recordings themselves, or to the interaction between the two (see Muralidharan, 2017 for a discussion of the challenges of interpreting “bundled” interventions). Second, while these studies evaluate some type of prerecorded lessons, none examines the content of such lessons. Thus, it seems entirely plausible that the direction and magnitude of the effects depends largely on the quality of the recordings (e.g., the expertise of the educator recording it, the amount of preparation that went into planning the recording, and its alignment with best teaching practices).

These studies also raise three important questions worth exploring in future research. One of them is why none of the interventions discussed above had effects on high-stakes exams, even if their materials are typically mapped onto the official curriculum. It is possible that the official curricula are simply too challenging for learners in these settings, who are several grade levels behind expectations and who often need to reinforce basic skills (see Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). Another question is whether these interventions have long-term effects on teaching practices. It seems plausible that, if these interventions are deployed in contexts with low teaching quality, educators may learn something from watching the videos or listening to the recordings with learners. Yet another question is whether these interventions make it easier for schools to deliver instruction to learners whose native language is other than the official medium of instruction.

Distance education

Technology can also allow learners living in remote areas to access education. The evidence on these initiatives is encouraging. For example, Johnston and Ksoll (2017) evaluated a program that broadcasted live instruction via satellite to rural primary school students in the Volta and Greater Accra regions of Ghana. For this purpose, the program also equipped classrooms with the technology needed to connect to a studio in Accra, including solar panels, a satellite modem, a projector, a webcam, microphones, and a computer with interactive software. After two years, the intervention improved the numeracy scores of students in grades 2 through 4, and some foundational literacy tasks, but it had no effect on attendance or classroom time devoted to instruction, as captured by school visits. The authors interpreted these results as suggesting that the gains in achievement may be due to improving the quality of instruction that children received (as opposed to increased instructional time). Naik, Chitre, Bhalla, and Rajan (2019) evaluated a similar program in the Indian state of Karnataka and also found positive effects on learning outcomes, but it is not clear whether those effects are due to the program or due to differences in the groups of students they compared to estimate the impact of the initiative.

In one context (Mexico), this type of distance education had positive long-term effects. Navarro-Sola (2019) took advantage of the staggered rollout of the telesecundarias (i.e., middle schools with lessons broadcasted through satellite TV) in 1968 to estimate its impact. The policy had short-term effects on students’ enrollment in school: For every telesecundaria per 50 children, 10 students enrolled in middle school and two pursued further education. It also had a long-term influence on the educational and employment trajectory of its graduates. Each additional year of education induced by the policy increased average income by nearly 18 percent. This effect was attributable to more graduates entering the labor force and shifting from agriculture and the informal sector. Similarly, Fabregas (2019) leveraged a later expansion of this policy in 1993 and found that each additional telesecundaria per 1,000 adolescents led to an average increase of 0.2 years of education, and a decline in fertility for women, but no conclusive evidence of long-term effects on labor market outcomes.

It is crucial to interpret these results keeping in mind the settings where the interventions were implemented. As we mention above, part of the reason why they have proven effective is that the “counterfactual” conditions for learning (i.e., what would have happened to learners in the absence of such programs) was either to not have access to schooling or to be exposed to low-quality instruction. School systems interested in taking up similar interventions should assess the extent to which their learners (or parts of their learner population) find themselves in similar conditions to the subjects of the studies above. This illustrates the importance of assessing the needs of a system before reviewing the evidence.

Preloaded hardware

Technology also seems well positioned to disseminate educational materials. Specifically, hardware (e.g., desktop computers, laptops, or tablets) could also help deliver educational software (e.g., word processing, reference texts, and/or games). In theory, these materials could not only undergo a quality assurance review (e.g., by curriculum specialists and educators), but also draw on the interactions with learners for adjustments (e.g., identifying areas needing reinforcement) and enable interactions between learners and educators.

In practice, however, most initiatives that have provided learners with free computers, laptops, and netbooks do not leverage any of the opportunities mentioned above. Instead, they install a standard set of educational materials and hope that learners find them helpful enough to take them up on their own. Students rarely do so, and instead use the laptops for recreational purposes—often, to the detriment of their learning (see, e.g., Malamud & Pop-Eleches, 2011). In fact, free netbook initiatives have not only consistently failed to improve academic achievement in math or language (e.g., Cristia et al., 2017), but they have had no impact on learners’ general computer skills (e.g., Beuermann et al., 2015). Some of these initiatives have had small impacts on cognitive skills, but the mechanisms through which those effects occurred remains unclear.

To our knowledge, the only successful deployment of a free laptop initiative was one in which a team of researchers equipped the computers with remedial software. Mo et al. (2013) evaluated a version of the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) program for grade 3 students in migrant schools in Beijing, China in which the laptops were loaded with a remedial software mapped onto the national curriculum for math (similar to the software products that we discuss under “practice exercises” below). After nine months, the program improved math achievement by 0.17 SDs and computer skills by 0.33 SDs. If a school system decides to invest in free laptops, this study suggests that the quality of the software on the laptops is crucial.

To date, however, the evidence suggests that children do not learn more from interacting with laptops than they do from textbooks. For example, Bando, Gallego, Gertler, and Romero (2016) compared the effect of free laptop and textbook provision in 271 elementary schools in disadvantaged areas of Honduras. After seven months, students in grades 3 and 6 who had received the laptops performed on par with those who had received the textbooks in math and language. Further, even if textbooks essentially become obsolete at the end of each school year, whereas laptops can be reloaded with new materials for each year, the costs of laptop provision (not just the hardware, but also the technical assistance, Internet, and training associated with it) are not yet low enough to make them a more cost-effective way of delivering content to learners.

Evidence on the provision of tablets equipped with software is encouraging but limited. For example, de Hoop et al. (2020) evaluated a composite intervention for first grade students in Zambia’s Eastern Province that combined infrastructure (electricity via solar power), hardware (projectors and tablets), and educational materials (lesson plans for educators and interactive lessons for learners, both loaded onto the tablets and mapped onto the official Zambian curriculum). After 14 months, the intervention had improved student early-grade reading by 0.4 SDs, oral vocabulary scores by 0.25 SDs, and early-grade math by 0.22 SDs. It also improved students’ achievement by 0.16 on a locally developed assessment. The multifaceted nature of the program, however, makes it challenging to identify the components that are driving the positive effects. Pitchford (2015) evaluated an intervention that provided tablets equipped with educational “apps,” to be used for 30 minutes per day for two months to develop early math skills among students in grades 1 through 3 in Lilongwe, Malawi. The evaluation found positive impacts in math achievement, but the main study limitation is that it was conducted in a single school.

Facilitating differentiated instruction

Another way in which technology may improve educational outcomes is by facilitating the delivery of differentiated or individualized instruction. Most developing countries massively expanded access to schooling in recent decades by building new schools and making education more affordable, both by defraying direct costs, as well as compensating for opportunity costs (Duflo, 2001; World Bank, 2018). These initiatives have not only rapidly increased the number of learners enrolled in school, but have also increased the variability in learner’ preparation for schooling. Consequently, a large number of learners perform well below grade-based curricular expectations (see, e.g., Duflo, Dupas, & Kremer, 2011; Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). These learners are unlikely to get much from “one-size-fits-all” instruction, in which a single educator delivers instruction deemed appropriate for the middle (or top) of the achievement distribution (Banerjee & Duflo, 2011). Technology could potentially help these learners by providing them with: (a) instruction and opportunities for practice that adjust to the level and pace of preparation of each individual (known as “computer-adaptive learning” (CAL)); or (b) live, one-on-one tutoring.

Computer-adaptive learning

One of the main comparative advantages of technology is its ability to diagnose students’ initial learning levels and assign students to instruction and exercises of appropriate difficulty. No individual educator—no matter how talented—can be expected to provide individualized instruction to all learners in his/her class simultaneously . In this respect, technology is uniquely positioned to complement traditional teaching. This use of technology could help learners master basic skills and help them get more out of schooling.

Although many software products evaluated in recent years have been categorized as CAL, many rely on a relatively coarse level of differentiation at an initial stage (e.g., a diagnostic test) without further differentiation. We discuss these initiatives under the category of “increasing opportunities for practice” below. CAL initiatives complement an initial diagnostic with dynamic adaptation (i.e., at each response or set of responses from learners) to adjust both the initial level of difficulty and rate at which it increases or decreases, depending on whether learners’ responses are correct or incorrect.

Existing evidence on this specific type of programs is highly promising. Most famously, Banerjee et al. (2007) evaluated CAL software in Vadodara, in the Indian state of Gujarat, in which grade 4 students were offered two hours of shared computer time per week before and after school, during which they played games that involved solving math problems. The level of difficulty of such problems adjusted based on students’ answers. This program improved math achievement by 0.35 and 0.47 SDs after one and two years of implementation, respectively. Consistent with the promise of personalized learning, the software improved achievement for all students. In fact, one year after the end of the program, students assigned to the program still performed 0.1 SDs better than those assigned to a business as usual condition. More recently, Muralidharan, et al. (2019) evaluated a “blended learning” initiative in which students in grades 4 through 9 in Delhi, India received 45 minutes of interaction with CAL software for math and language, and 45 minutes of small group instruction before or after going to school. After only 4.5 months, the program improved achievement by 0.37 SDs in math and 0.23 SDs in Hindi. While all learners benefited from the program in absolute terms, the lowest performing learners benefited the most in relative terms, since they were learning very little in school.

We see two important limitations from this body of research. First, to our knowledge, none of these initiatives has been evaluated when implemented during the school day. Therefore, it is not possible to distinguish the effect of the adaptive software from that of additional instructional time. Second, given that most of these programs were facilitated by local instructors, attempts to distinguish the effect of the software from that of the instructors has been mostly based on noncausal evidence. A frontier challenge in this body of research is to understand whether CAL software can increase the effectiveness of school-based instruction by substituting part of the regularly scheduled time for math and language instruction.

Live one-on-one tutoring

Recent improvements in the speed and quality of videoconferencing, as well as in the connectivity of remote areas, have enabled yet another way in which technology can help personalization: live (i.e., real-time) one-on-one tutoring. While the evidence on in-person tutoring is scarce in developing countries, existing studies suggest that this approach works best when it is used to personalize instruction (see, e.g., Banerjee et al., 2007; Banerji, Berry, & Shotland, 2015; Cabezas, Cuesta, & Gallego, 2011).

There are almost no studies on the impact of online tutoring—possibly, due to the lack of hardware and Internet connectivity in low- and middle-income countries. One exception is Chemin and Oledan (2020)’s recent evaluation of an online tutoring program for grade 6 students in Kianyaga, Kenya to learn English from volunteers from a Canadian university via Skype ( videoconferencing software) for one hour per week after school. After 10 months, program beneficiaries performed 0.22 SDs better in a test of oral comprehension, improved their comfort using technology for learning, and became more willing to engage in cross-cultural communication. Importantly, while the tutoring sessions used the official English textbooks and sought in part to help learners with their homework, tutors were trained on several strategies to teach to each learner’s individual level of preparation, focusing on basic skills if necessary. To our knowledge, similar initiatives within a country have not yet been rigorously evaluated.

Expanding opportunities for practice

A third way in which technology may improve the quality of education is by providing learners with additional opportunities for practice. In many developing countries, lesson time is primarily devoted to lectures, in which the educator explains the topic and the learners passively copy explanations from the blackboard. This setup leaves little time for in-class practice. Consequently, learners who did not understand the explanation of the material during lecture struggle when they have to solve homework assignments on their own. Technology could potentially address this problem by allowing learners to review topics at their own pace.

Practice exercises

Technology can help learners get more out of traditional instruction by providing them with opportunities to implement what they learn in class. This approach could, in theory, allow some learners to anchor their understanding of the material through trial and error (i.e., by realizing what they may not have understood correctly during lecture and by getting better acquainted with special cases not covered in-depth in class).

Existing evidence on practice exercises reflects both the promise and the limitations of this use of technology in developing countries. For example, Lai et al. (2013) evaluated a program in Shaanxi, China where students in grades 3 and 5 were required to attend two 40-minute remedial sessions per week in which they first watched videos that reviewed the material that had been introduced in their math lessons that week and then played games to practice the skills introduced in the video. After four months, the intervention improved math achievement by 0.12 SDs. Many other evaluations of comparable interventions have found similar small-to-moderate results (see, e.g., Lai, Luo, Zhang, Huang, & Rozelle, 2015; Lai et al., 2012; Mo et al., 2015; Pitchford, 2015). These effects, however, have been consistently smaller than those of initiatives that adjust the difficulty of the material based on students’ performance (e.g., Banerjee et al., 2007; Muralidharan, et al., 2019). We hypothesize that these programs do little for learners who perform several grade levels behind curricular expectations, and who would benefit more from a review of foundational concepts from earlier grades.

We see two important limitations from this research. First, most initiatives that have been evaluated thus far combine instructional videos with practice exercises, so it is hard to know whether their effects are driven by the former or the latter. In fact, the program in China described above allowed learners to ask their peers whenever they did not understand a difficult concept, so it potentially also captured the effect of peer-to-peer collaboration. To our knowledge, no studies have addressed this gap in the evidence.

Second, most of these programs are implemented before or after school, so we cannot distinguish the effect of additional instructional time from that of the actual opportunity for practice. The importance of this question was first highlighted by Linden (2008), who compared two delivery mechanisms for game-based remedial math software for students in grades 2 and 3 in a network of schools run by a nonprofit organization in Gujarat, India: one in which students interacted with the software during the school day and another one in which students interacted with the software before or after school (in both cases, for three hours per day). After a year, the first version of the program had negatively impacted students’ math achievement by 0.57 SDs and the second one had a null effect. This study suggested that computer-assisted learning is a poor substitute for regular instruction when it is of high quality, as was the case in this well-functioning private network of schools.

In recent years, several studies have sought to remedy this shortcoming. Mo et al. (2014) were among the first to evaluate practice exercises delivered during the school day. They evaluated an initiative in Shaanxi, China in which students in grades 3 and 5 were required to interact with the software similar to the one in Lai et al. (2013) for two 40-minute sessions per week. The main limitation of this study, however, is that the program was delivered during regularly scheduled computer lessons, so it could not determine the impact of substituting regular math instruction. Similarly, Mo et al. (2020) evaluated a self-paced and a teacher-directed version of a similar program for English for grade 5 students in Qinghai, China. Yet, the key shortcoming of this study is that the teacher-directed version added several components that may also influence achievement, such as increased opportunities for teachers to provide students with personalized assistance when they struggled with the material. Ma, Fairlie, Loyalka, and Rozelle (2020) compared the effectiveness of additional time-delivered remedial instruction for students in grades 4 to 6 in Shaanxi, China through either computer-assisted software or using workbooks. This study indicates whether additional instructional time is more effective when using technology, but it does not address the question of whether school systems may improve the productivity of instructional time during the school day by substituting educator-led with computer-assisted instruction.

Increasing learner engagement

Another way in which technology may improve education is by increasing learners’ engagement with the material. In many school systems, regular “chalk and talk” instruction prioritizes time for educators’ exposition over opportunities for learners to ask clarifying questions and/or contribute to class discussions. This, combined with the fact that many developing-country classrooms include a very large number of learners (see, e.g., Angrist & Lavy, 1999; Duflo, Dupas, & Kremer, 2015), may partially explain why the majority of those students are several grade levels behind curricular expectations (e.g., Muralidharan, et al., 2019; Muralidharan & Zieleniak, 2014; Pritchett & Beatty, 2015). Technology could potentially address these challenges by: (a) using video tutorials for self-paced learning and (b) presenting exercises as games and/or gamifying practice.

Video tutorials

Technology can potentially increase learner effort and understanding of the material by finding new and more engaging ways to deliver it. Video tutorials designed for self-paced learning—as opposed to videos for whole class instruction, which we discuss under the category of “prerecorded lessons” above—can increase learner effort in multiple ways, including: allowing learners to focus on topics with which they need more help, letting them correct errors and misconceptions on their own, and making the material appealing through visual aids. They can increase understanding by breaking the material into smaller units and tackling common misconceptions.

In spite of the popularity of instructional videos, there is relatively little evidence on their effectiveness. Yet, two recent evaluations of different versions of the Khan Academy portal, which mainly relies on instructional videos, offer some insight into their impact. First, Ferman, Finamor, and Lima (2019) evaluated an initiative in 157 public primary and middle schools in five cities in Brazil in which the teachers of students in grades 5 and 9 were taken to the computer lab to learn math from the platform for 50 minutes per week. The authors found that, while the intervention slightly improved learners’ attitudes toward math, these changes did not translate into better performance in this subject. The authors hypothesized that this could be due to the reduction of teacher-led math instruction.

More recently, Büchel, Jakob, Kühnhanss, Steffen, and Brunetti (2020) evaluated an after-school, offline delivery of the Khan Academy portal in grades 3 through 6 in 302 primary schools in Morazán, El Salvador. Students in this study received 90 minutes per week of additional math instruction (effectively nearly doubling total math instruction per week) through teacher-led regular lessons, teacher-assisted Khan Academy lessons, or similar lessons assisted by technical supervisors with no content expertise. (Importantly, the first group provided differentiated instruction, which is not the norm in Salvadorian schools). All three groups outperformed both schools without any additional lessons and classrooms without additional lessons in the same schools as the program. The teacher-assisted Khan Academy lessons performed 0.24 SDs better, the supervisor-led lessons 0.22 SDs better, and the teacher-led regular lessons 0.15 SDs better, but the authors could not determine whether the effects across versions were different.

Together, these studies suggest that instructional videos work best when provided as a complement to, rather than as a substitute for, regular instruction. Yet, the main limitation of these studies is the multifaceted nature of the Khan Academy portal, which also includes other components found to positively improve learner achievement, such as differentiated instruction by students’ learning levels. While the software does not provide the type of personalization discussed above, learners are asked to take a placement test and, based on their score, educators assign them different work. Therefore, it is not clear from these studies whether the effects from Khan Academy are driven by its instructional videos or to the software’s ability to provide differentiated activities when combined with placement tests.

Games and gamification

Technology can also increase learner engagement by presenting exercises as games and/or by encouraging learner to play and compete with others (e.g., using leaderboards and rewards)—an approach known as “gamification.” Both approaches can increase learner motivation and effort by presenting learners with entertaining opportunities for practice and by leveraging peers as commitment devices.

There are very few studies on the effects of games and gamification in low- and middle-income countries. Recently, Araya, Arias Ortiz, Bottan, and Cristia (2019) evaluated an initiative in which grade 4 students in Santiago, Chile were required to participate in two 90-minute sessions per week during the school day with instructional math software featuring individual and group competitions (e.g., tracking each learner’s standing in his/her class and tournaments between sections). After nine months, the program led to improvements of 0.27 SDs in the national student assessment in math (it had no spillover effects on reading). However, it had mixed effects on non-academic outcomes. Specifically, the program increased learners’ willingness to use computers to learn math, but, at the same time, increased their anxiety toward math and negatively impacted learners’ willingness to collaborate with peers. Finally, given that one of the weekly sessions replaced regular math instruction and the other one represented additional math instructional time, it is not clear whether the academic effects of the program are driven by the software or the additional time devoted to learning math.

The prognosis:

How can school systems adopt interventions that match their needs.

Here are five specific and sequential guidelines for decisionmakers to realize the potential of education technology to accelerate student learning.

1. Take stock of how your current schools, educators, and learners are engaging with technology .

Carry out a short in-school survey to understand the current practices and potential barriers to adoption of technology (we have included suggested survey instruments in the Appendices); use this information in your decisionmaking process. For example, we learned from conversations with current and former ministers of education from various developing regions that a common limitation to technology use is regulations that hold school leaders accountable for damages to or losses of devices. Another common barrier is lack of access to electricity and Internet, or even the availability of sufficient outlets for charging devices in classrooms. Understanding basic infrastructure and regulatory limitations to the use of education technology is a first necessary step. But addressing these limitations will not guarantee that introducing or expanding technology use will accelerate learning. The next steps are thus necessary.

“In Africa, the biggest limit is connectivity. Fiber is expensive, and we don’t have it everywhere. The continent is creating a digital divide between cities, where there is fiber, and the rural areas.  The [Ghanaian] administration put in schools offline/online technologies with books, assessment tools, and open source materials. In deploying this, we are finding that again, teachers are unfamiliar with it. And existing policies prohibit students to bring their own tablets or cell phones. The easiest way to do it would have been to let everyone bring their own device. But policies are against it.” H.E. Matthew Prempeh, Minister of Education of Ghana, on the need to understand the local context.

2. Consider how the introduction of technology may affect the interactions among learners, educators, and content .

Our review of the evidence indicates that technology may accelerate student learning when it is used to scale up access to quality content, facilitate differentiated instruction, increase opportunities for practice, or when it increases learner engagement. For example, will adding electronic whiteboards to classrooms facilitate access to more quality content or differentiated instruction? Or will these expensive boards be used in the same way as the old chalkboards? Will providing one device (laptop or tablet) to each learner facilitate access to more and better content, or offer students more opportunities to practice and learn? Solely introducing technology in classrooms without additional changes is unlikely to lead to improved learning and may be quite costly. If you cannot clearly identify how the interactions among the three key components of the instructional core (educators, learners, and content) may change after the introduction of technology, then it is probably not a good idea to make the investment. See Appendix A for guidance on the types of questions to ask.

3. Once decisionmakers have a clear idea of how education technology can help accelerate student learning in a specific context, it is important to define clear objectives and goals and establish ways to regularly assess progress and make course corrections in a timely manner .

For instance, is the education technology expected to ensure that learners in early grades excel in foundational skills—basic literacy and numeracy—by age 10? If so, will the technology provide quality reading and math materials, ample opportunities to practice, and engaging materials such as videos or games? Will educators be empowered to use these materials in new ways? And how will progress be measured and adjusted?

4. How this kind of reform is approached can matter immensely for its success.

It is easy to nod to issues of “implementation,” but that needs to be more than rhetorical. Keep in mind that good use of education technology requires thinking about how it will affect learners, educators, and parents. After all, giving learners digital devices will make no difference if they get broken, are stolen, or go unused. Classroom technologies only matter if educators feel comfortable putting them to work. Since good technology is generally about complementing or amplifying what educators and learners already do, it is almost always a mistake to mandate programs from on high. It is vital that technology be adopted with the input of educators and families and with attention to how it will be used. If technology goes unused or if educators use it ineffectually, the results will disappoint—no matter the virtuosity of the technology. Indeed, unused education technology can be an unnecessary expenditure for cash-strapped education systems. This is why surveying context, listening to voices in the field, examining how technology is used, and planning for course correction is essential.

5. It is essential to communicate with a range of stakeholders, including educators, school leaders, parents, and learners .

Technology can feel alien in schools, confuse parents and (especially) older educators, or become an alluring distraction. Good communication can help address all of these risks. Taking care to listen to educators and families can help ensure that programs are informed by their needs and concerns. At the same time, deliberately and consistently explaining what technology is and is not supposed to do, how it can be most effectively used, and the ways in which it can make it more likely that programs work as intended. For instance, if teachers fear that technology is intended to reduce the need for educators, they will tend to be hostile; if they believe that it is intended to assist them in their work, they will be more receptive. Absent effective communication, it is easy for programs to “fail” not because of the technology but because of how it was used. In short, past experience in rolling out education programs indicates that it is as important to have a strong intervention design as it is to have a solid plan to socialize it among stakeholders.

Beyond reopening: A leapfrog moment to transform education?

On September 14, the Center for Universal Education (CUE) will host a webinar to discuss strategies, including around the effective use of education technology, for ensuring resilient schools in the long term and to launch a new education technology playbook “Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all?”

file-pdf Full Playbook – Realizing the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all? file-pdf References file-pdf Appendix A – Instruments to assess availability and use of technology file-pdf Appendix B – List of reviewed studies file-pdf Appendix C – How may technology affect interactions among students, teachers, and content?

About the Authors

Alejandro j. ganimian, emiliana vegas, frederick m. hess.

• Media Relations
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy

We serve the public by pursuing a growing economy and stable financial system that work for all of us.

• Center for Indian Country Development
• Opportunity & Inclusive Growth Institute

Monetary Policy

• Banking Supervision
• Financial Services
• Community Development & Outreach
• Board of Directors
• Advisory Councils

Work With Us

• Internships
• Job Profiles
• Speakers Bureau
• Doing Business with the Minneapolis Fed

Overview & Mission

The ninth district, our history, diversity & inclusion.

• Region & Community

We examine economic issues that deeply affect our communities.

• Request a Speaker
• Publications Archive
• Agriculture & Farming
• Community & Economic Development
• Early Childhood Development
• Employment & Labor Markets
• Indian Country
• K-12 Education
• Manufacturing
• Small Business
• Regional Economic Indicators

Community Development & Engagement

The bakken oil patch.

We conduct world-class research to inform and inspire policymakers and the public.

Research Groups

Economic research.

• Immigration
• Macroeconomics
• Minimum Wage
• Technology & Innovation
• Too Big To Fail
• Trade & Globalization
• Wages, Income, Wealth

Data & Reporting

• Income Distributions and Dynamics in America
• Minnesota Public Education Dashboard
• Inflation Calculator
• Recessions in Perspective
• Market-based Probabilities

We provide the banking community with timely information and useful guidance.

• Become a Member Bank
• Discount Window & Payments System Risk
• Appeals Procedures
• Mergers & Acquisitions (Regulatory Applications)
• Business Continuity
• Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility
• Financial Studies & Community Banking
• Market-Based Probabilities
• Statistical & Structure Reports

Banking Topics

• Credit & Financial Markets
• Borrowing & Lending
• Too Big to Fail

For Consumers

Large bank stress test tool, banking in the ninth archive.

We explore policy topics that are important for advancing prosperity across our region.

Policy Topics

• Labor Market Policies
• Public Policy

Racism & the Economy

Student essay contest winner: an analysis of the impact of technology on income inequality.

September 30, 2015

This spring the Minneapolis Fed held its 27th Annual Student Essay Contest, which is open to all high school students in the Ninth Federal Reserve District. The contest drew 269 essays from schools throughout the district. The winning essay is published here. Other top essays can be found at minneapolisfed.org under the Student Resources section of the Community & Education tab.

Thirty finalists each received $100. The third-place winner received an additional $200, and the second-place winner an additional $300. The first-place winner, Solomon Polansky of the Blake School in Minneapolis, received an additional $400 and was offered a paid summer internship at the Minneapolis Fed.

Solomon Polansky The Blake School Minneapolis, Minn.

Luddite (n.): “broadly, one who is opposed to especially technological change.” 1 Luddite finds its origin from a certain Ned Ludd, who smashed two knitting machines in early 19th century England to protest the developing frontier of technology and its effect on the workforce. 2 The Luddites’ concerns are not without merit and remain relevant today in the United States. Over the past 30 years, U.S. productive output has soared while the number of labor hours has remained constant. 3 During this same time period, the top 1 percent of income earners doubled their percentage of income, while the bottom 90 percent fell from 70 percent to 60 percent. 4 Ongoing technological advances enable these productive strides, but also drive increasing income inequality by spawning two very distinct groups of winners and losers: those who benefit from technology, such as inventors of technology and workers whose productivity is enhanced by technological advance, and those who are negatively impacted through substitution of labor by technology. 5

Inventors of new technology are the first to benefit from that new technology. In a free market, individuals are compensated based on the economic output of their factors of production. These factors of production include physical holdings (land, money) as well as intangibles (labor time, creativity). If an entrepreneur or inventor can successfully develop and market a desirable invention, the market will reward him/her by offering tremendous profits. Note that this unequal distribution of income is not necessarily a bad thing for the economy—in fact, the U.S. government openly supports new innovation by offering patents through the Patent and Trademark Office, thereby granting a (time-limited) legal monopoly (and the monopoly profits that follow). 6 But once an inventor earns these large incomes, the wealth inequality over others is unlikely to dissolve easily. There is a “snowballing effect on wealth distribution: top incomes are being saved at high rates, pushing wealth concentration [further] up,” perpetuating the cycle of inequality. 7 While by no means will every inventor “strike gold” with his/her invention (in fact, most do not succeed), a skilled and lucky few will reap tremendous income; thus, propelling them into the highest echelon of income. 8 In short, “the people who benefit most are those with the expertise and creativity to use these advances.” 9 And that drives both the incentive to invent and income inequality.

Skilled employees who use technology as a “tool” to increase their productivity also benefit. Consider highly skilled hedge-fund managers: These managers are already making a good income and would not be replaced with a computer (as of current technology) because they use human judgment to select investments. However, they become much more productive (and profitable for the firm) with the addition of computerized data and the skill to use it. Thus, their marginal revenue has increased, and the price the firm will be willing to pay, in salary, will also increase. These traders’ incomes therefore increase with the addition of technology. 10 As technology is applied to skilled jobs (which are already high paying), the productivity of those workers increases and their income increases too, further extending the income inequality between skilled and unskilled laborers. 11

However, not everyone benefits from advances in technology; laborers whose jobs can be substituted by technology are negatively affected. Businesses, by investing in capital such as new technology, will increase outputs while decreasing labor inputs (e.g., automation where purchasing a robot will replace a human worker). The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that manufacturing employees’ real output per hour increased from 51.2 units (which is proportional to dollars) per hour in 1990 to 110.3 in 2013; businesses produced 42 percent more output in 2013 than 1998. 12 However, the total number of manufacturing workers actually decreased from 17.4 million in 1990 to 12.1 million in 2013. 13 A few skilled, knowledgeable employees are required to operate these advanced, high producing machines—in contrast to the hordes of unskilled laborers they replace. 14 In the early phases of technological development, it was largely simple manufacturing work being replaced by technology, as manufacturing firms sought to cut costs. 15 But now, with the advent of “big data” and analytical tools, even clerical work and professional services (both traditionally secure, white collar jobs) are being rendered obsolete by technology. 16 Technology leads companies to, inevitably, eliminate the workers whose labor has been replaced by a more efficient process in order to remain competitive in their markets. Thus, these workers’ income has dropped to zero, forcing them into other lower-skill industries, such as food and restaurant services, that already have an ample supply of workers and thus driving wages downward. 17 Additionally, rapid globalization, enabled by advances in technology in transportation and communication, has opened up cheaper foreign labor markets for U.S. companies, further eroding the domestic manufacturing base. 18

Applying technology to the economy thus creates both “winners” and “losers.” It enables entrepreneurs and inventors, people with natural creativity and determination, to have the chance for great profits. It also increases the productivity (and therefore, income) of those whose “jobs are enhanced by machines”; these groups are the “winners.” 19 However, technology eliminates the jobs of less-skilled (already lower-paid) workers by providing a more productive, albeit less “human,” alternative and forcing workers into lower-paying service jobs; these workers are the “losers.” 20 There is a clear schism widening between those benefiting and those being harmed by technology, and it is reflected in increasing income inequality. Ned Ludd was right to be concerned, and there is no easy answer to closing the gap.

1 Merriam-Webster.com. Accessed Nov. 23, 2014. merriamwebster.com/dictionary/luddite

2 Porter, Eduardo. 2014. “Tech Leaps, Job Losses and Rising Inequality.” New York Times, April 15. nytimes.com/2014/04/16/business/economy/tech-leaps-job-losses-and-rising-inequality.html?_r=0

3 Sprague, Shawn. 2014. “What Can Labor Productivity Tell Us About the U.S. Economy?” Beyond the Numbers 3 (12). Bureau of Labor Statistics. bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-3/what-can-labor-productivity-tell-us-about-the-us-economy.htm

Workers in U.S. businesses worked the same number of labor hours (194 billion) in 2013 as in 1998, yet productive output increased 42 percent over that same time frame.

4 Saez, Emmanuel, and Gabriel Zucman. 2014. “Wealth Inequality in the United States Since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data.” Working Paper 20625. National Bureau of Economic Research. gabriel-zucman.eu/files/SaezZucman2014.pdf

5 This paper will address income inequality primarily. However, income inequality goes hand in hand with wealth inequality, as excess income allows one to invest in other capital, such as stocks and bonds, leading to the accumulation of wealth.

6 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Accessed Nov. 21, 2014. uspto.gov/about/index.jsp

7 Rotman, David. 2014. “Technology and Inequality.” MIT Technology Review. Oct. 21. technologyreview.com/featuredstory/531726/technology-and-inequality/

8 For a real world example of the potential for inventors, consider Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft. Rotman refers to these individuals as technology “superstars” who invent new technologies or generate new ideas for creative uses of technology.

9 See Saez and Zucman.

10 The Economist. 2012. “Who Exactly Are the 1%?” Jan. 21. economist.com/node/21543178

11 Acemoglu, Daron. 2003. “Technology and Inequality.” NBER Reporter. National Bureau of Economic Research. nber.org/reporter/winter03/technologyandinequality.html

12 See Sprague.

13 See Sprague.

14 See Acemoglu.

15 Katz, Richard, Robert Z. Lawrence and Michael Spence. 2011. “Manufacturing Globalization: The Real Sources of U.S. Inequality and Unemployment.” Foreign Affairs. Council on Foreign Relations. November/December. foreignaffairs.org/articles/north-america/2011-11-01/manufacturing-globalization

16 See Rotman.

17 See Sprague. While the number of manufacturing jobs has decreased from 1990 to 2013, the number of food and restaurant service workers has increased from 6545.3 to 10487.1 (in thousands) during that same time period.

18 Reich, Robert B. “How to Shrink Inequality.” The Nation. May 26. thenation.com/article/179715/how-shrink-inequality

19 See Porter.

20 See Porter.

Related Content

Inaccurate data could hinder broadband access in Indian Country

Across the Fed, a mindful exploration of AI is underway

Inquiring minds: Q&A with Lukas Althoff

Sign up for news and events.

Essay on Technology

Here we have shared the Essay on Technology in detail so you can use it in your exam or assignment of 150, 250, 400, 500, or 1000 words.

You can use this Essay on Technology in any assignment or project whether you are in school (class 10th or 12th), college, or preparing for answer writing in competitive exams. 

Topics covered in this article.

Essay on Technology in 150-250 words

• Essay on Technology in 300-400 words

Essay on Technology in 500-1000 words

Technology has become an integral part of our daily lives, revolutionizing the way we live, work, and communicate. It encompasses a wide range of tools, devices, and systems that enhance productivity, efficiency, and convenience. From smartphones and computers to advanced medical equipment and smart home devices, technology has transformed every aspect of our world.

The impact of technology is evident in various sectors, including education, healthcare, transportation, and communication. It has improved access to information, enabling faster and more efficient learning. In healthcare, technology has revolutionized diagnosis, treatment, and patient care, saving lives and improving outcomes. Transportation has become more efficient and safer with the advent of smart vehicles and navigation systems. Communication has transcended physical boundaries, connecting people across the globe instantly.

While technology brings numerous benefits, it also presents challenges. Concerns about privacy, cybersecurity, and the impact of technology on employment and social interactions have emerged. It is essential to harness technology responsibly and ethically to mitigate these challenges.

In conclusion, technology has transformed our lives, providing us with unprecedented convenience, efficiency, and connectivity. It continues to evolve and shape the world around us. As we embrace technology, we must also navigate the associated challenges and ensure that it is utilized for the betterment of society. The responsible and ethical use of technology is key to harnessing its full potential and creating a positive impact on individuals and communities.

Essay on Technology in 300-450 words

Technology has become an inseparable part of our modern lives, revolutionizing the way we live, work, and communicate. It encompasses a vast array of tools, systems, and devices that have transformed every aspect of our world. From smartphones and computers to artificial intelligence and advanced robotics, technology has brought about significant advancements and improvements in various fields.

One of the most significant impacts of technology is in the realm of communication. The advent of the internet and social media platforms has connected people from all corners of the world, enabling instant communication and global collaboration. The ability to share information, ideas, and experiences has fostered cultural exchange, expanded educational opportunities, and promoted social interactions on an unprecedented scale.

Technology has also revolutionized the business world, enhancing efficiency, productivity, and profitability. Automation and digitalization have streamlined processes, increased accuracy, and reduced human error. Organizations can now analyze vast amounts of data to make informed decisions, target specific markets, and personalize customer experiences. E-commerce platforms have opened new avenues for entrepreneurs and small businesses to reach a global customer base.

Education has also been greatly influenced by technology. Digital learning tools and online platforms have expanded access to education, making it more inclusive and flexible. Students can now engage in interactive and personalized learning experiences, access a wealth of educational resources, and collaborate with peers from around the world. Virtual reality and augmented reality technologies have also transformed the way we perceive and engage with educational content, bringing subjects to life and making learning more immersive and interactive.

The healthcare sector has witnessed remarkable advancements with the aid of technology. Medical devices, imaging technologies, and telemedicine have improved diagnosis, treatment, and patient care. Electronic health records and data analytics have enhanced efficiency and accuracy in medical processes. Moreover, wearable devices and mobile applications have enabled individuals to monitor their health, promote wellness, and access medical information easily.

While technology brings numerous benefits, it also poses challenges and concerns. Privacy and security issues have become more prevalent, as personal data is increasingly stored and shared digitally. The rapid pace of technological advancements has also raised concerns about job displacement and the widening digital divide. Moreover, over-reliance on technology can lead to sedentary lifestyles, social isolation, and addiction.

In conclusion, technology has become an integral part of our society, transforming the way we live, work, and communicate. It has brought numerous advancements and benefits across various sectors, enhancing efficiency, connectivity, and accessibility. However, it is crucial to address the challenges associated with technology, such as privacy and security concerns, job displacement, and the need for digital literacy. By harnessing technology responsibly and ethically, we can ensure that it continues to bring positive changes and improves the lives of individuals and communities around the world.

Title: Technology – The Evolution and Impact on Society

Introduction :

Technology has become an integral part of our modern lives, permeating every aspect of society. From communication and transportation to education and healthcare, technology has revolutionized the way we live, work, and interact with the world around us. This essay explores the evolution of technology, its impact on various sectors, and the challenges and opportunities it presents.

Evolution of Technology

The journey of technology can be traced back to the early inventions of the wheel, the printing press, and the steam engine. However, the rapid advancement of technology in the 20th and 21st centuries has transformed the world at an unprecedented pace. The invention of computers, the internet, and mobile devices have laid the foundation for the digital age we live in today.

The Impact of Technology on Communication

Technology has revolutionized communication, making the world more interconnected than ever before. The advent of the internet and social media platforms has transformed the way we communicate, allowing for instant global connectivity. Individuals can connect with friends, family, and colleagues across the globe through video calls, messaging apps, and social networks. Moreover, technology has facilitated the exchange of information and ideas on a global scale, fostering cultural exchange, promoting social activism, and increasing awareness of global issues.

Impact on Education

Technology has reshaped the landscape of education, providing new opportunities for learning and knowledge sharing. Digital learning tools, online platforms, and educational apps have expanded access to education, making it more flexible and inclusive. Students can engage in interactive and personalized learning experiences, access a wealth of educational resources, and collaborate with peers from different backgrounds. Additionally, technology has enabled remote learning, allowing individuals to pursue education regardless of geographical constraints. Virtual reality and augmented reality technologies have also enhanced the learning experience, bringing subjects to life and making education more immersive and engaging.

Impact on Healthcare

The healthcare sector has experienced significant advancements with the aid of technology. Medical devices, imaging technologies, and telemedicine have revolutionized diagnosis, treatment, and patient care. Electronic health records and data analytics have improved efficiency and accuracy in medical processes. Moreover, wearable devices and mobile applications have empowered individuals to monitor their health, promote wellness, and access medical information easily. The integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning has the potential to revolutionize healthcare further, enabling predictive analytics, personalized medicine, and improved patient outcomes.

Challenges and Concerns

Despite the numerous benefits of technology, it also poses challenges and concerns. Privacy and security issues have become more prevalent as personal data is increasingly stored and shared digitally. Cyberattacks, data breaches, and identity theft are growing concerns. The rapid pace of technological advancements also raises concerns about job displacement and the widening digital divide. As automation and artificial intelligence continue to advance, certain job roles may become obsolete, impacting employment rates and economic inequality. Additionally, over-reliance on technology can lead to sedentary lifestyles, social isolation, and addiction. Striking a balance between utilizing technology for its benefits while mitigating its negative impacts is crucial.

Conclusion :

Technology has transformed society, bringing unprecedented advancements and opportunities. It has revolutionized communication, education, healthcare, and various other sectors. However, it is essential to address the challenges and concerns associated with technology, such as privacy, job displacement, and the need for digital literacy. By harnessing technology responsibly and ethically, we can ensure that it continues to bring positive changes and improve the lives of individuals and communities worldwide. Technology should be seen as a tool to enhance human capabilities and foster human connections, while always striving for a balance between innovation and the preservation of humanity’s core values.

Related Posts

• Essay on Pollution
• Essay on “Impact of Social Media on Youth”

Essential Elements of Valid Contract (Explained With Examples)

What is World Population? Main Causes, Effects, Top 20 Countries

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

The Impacts of Technology Integration

Chloe D'Angelo

Chloe D’Angelo ( [email protected] ) University of Ontario Institute of Technology

As the education system and workforce evolve to become more technology inclusive, it is important for students to keep up with modern digital trends while still obtaining a deep understanding of course content. Implementing technology into the curriculum provides instructors with an invaluable opportunity to enhance student engagement and academic success. Students are able to collaborate with peers using digital platforms, explore creativity through technological features, engage in higher-order thinking processes, participate in inquiry-based learning, synthesize information from multiple sources and establish a sense of online social presence. While implementing technology into the curriculum shifts the learning environment to being more student-centered, instructors play an integral role in guiding understanding, offering assistance and taking the necessary steps to ensure that students are present and reaching their learning goals. Overall, students and teachers have positive attitudes towards technology integration and feel that is has positive impacts on learner satisfaction, promotes engagement and facilitates academic success. Edmodo is an example of an educational social media platform that operates to enhance the learning process, allow students to become more familiar with technology, meet learning goals and collaborate with peers and instructors after school hours. It is one of the many technological applications that can be implemented into multiple areas of the curriculum to enhance the teaching and learning process.

Keywords: academic achievement, connectivism, curriculum, Edmodo, engagement, technology

Introduction

For many years, researchers and educators have placed much focus into understanding different methods and strategies for optimizing the student learning environment. As time progresses and the education system continues to advance, teachers dedicate ample time into developing new ways to communicate course material effectively and in a way that benefits all learners. With technology becoming more prevalent in modern society, methods for effectively implementing digital applications into the classroom has become a major focus in the educational community. This chapter discusses ways in which technology can be implemented into the curriculum to enhance student engagement and success. Focus is placed on how a specific technological application, Edmodo, can be used in the classroom to achieve learning goals.

Background Information

Information communications and technology (ICT) literacy has profound implications for social capital whether that be in the form of educational institutions, relationships between people in society, or universal communication around the rest of the world (Mignone & Henley, 2009). In an educational setting, technology can facilitate more flexible and democratic styles of teaching and learning, provide students with more autonomy and control over their learning, and encourage the development of cognitive competencies and understanding (Buckingham , 2003).  Incorporating digital technologies into the classroom can lead to profound advances in student engagement and learning which can ensure that students are keeping up with the demand of a technology based world. Instructors play an integral role in ensuring that students are engaging with technology effectively.

Links to Connectivism

While it is well understood that human interactions can promote motivation and deep learning, interacting with machines and digital artifacts can provide valuable outlets for learning as well. Researchers suggest that learning rests in diversity of opinion and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning (Wang, Chen & Anderson, 2014 ). If students were encouraged to share ideas through online networks and research what other students have shared about a specific topic, optimal learning would take place.

Technology in the Classroom

Numerous studies have supported the idea that implementing technology into the classroom facilitates meaningful learning, greater use of prior knowledge, hierarchical cognitive structure, elaboration, greater depth of processing and innovative practice (Hillman, 2014). This integration shifts the focus of the learning environment to being more student-centered and allows for them to develop autonomy and control over their learning (Mo, 2011).

When introducing a technological application into a classroom, it is important to consider whether the features of that technology are suited to meet task outcomes. It is preferred that the technology is designed in such a way that it is easy to use for both the instructor and students and possesses all the features necessary to promote student learning.

  Instructors’ Perspectives on Technology . Educators generally have positive attitudes towards the implementation of technology into the classroom. Educators feel that when they are provided with appropriate training on professional digital competencies, they can use technological tools in the classroom to enhance the learning process for students (Kirkscey, 2012). Examples of professional competencies that educators feel should be included in training are technology-handling abilities, curriculum inclusion, technology infusion into educational activities, providing evaluative feedback, encouraging collaborative exercises with technology and responding positively to the inclusion of technology in the classroom (Guzman & Nussbaum, 2009).

Students’ Perspectives on Technology . It is important to consider how students will receive technology when implementing it into into the classroom. When students perceive that the attributes of a given technology are engaging and beneficial to their learning, they are likely to adopt that technology and use it to enhance their understanding of course content (Sun, Lee, Lee & Law, 2016). Some features that make technology more appealing to students are flexibility, accessibility, ease-of-use and overall engagement. In general, studies show that students report high levels of satisfaction with the use of educational technology as it allows them to interactively engage in learning (Miller, Milholland & Gould, 2012). Students also believe that technology facilitates a greater understanding of course content, contributes to higher academic achievement and better prepares them for the technology-dependent workforce (Schindler, Burkholder, Morad & Marsh., 2017).

The Impact of Technology on Student Engagement

Numerous studies have supported the idea that overall student motivation and engagement in learning is enhanced by the implementation of instructional technology (Mo, 2011). More specifically, technology engages students behaviourally (more effort and time spent participating in learning activities); emotionally (positively impacting attitudes and interests towards learning); and cognitively (mental investment to comprehend content). Whether technology is integrated during class time or after school hours, students are given more opportunities to interact with instructors, collaborate with peers and engage themselves in the learning process. Specific technology examples that have been shown to enhance student engagement include web-conferencing software, blogs, wikis, social networking sites and digital games (Schindler et al., 2017).

  The Impact of Technology on Academic Success

Incorporating the use of several technological applications allows for students to participate in higher-order thinking, enhance communication, engage in collaborative problem-solving activities and discussions, critically reflect on content and expand digital competencies (Schindler et al., 2017 ). Studies have compared differences in academic achievement between students who have been taught with technological enhancement (i.e. lecture recordings and podcasts) and those who been taught without it. The results demonstrated that students who learned academic content in the technology enhanced classroom outperformed those who learned the content without technology (Carle, Jaffee & Miller, 2009 ). Performance was greater in the intervention group in all objectively graded assessments which include papers, midterm/final exam scores and individual assignments. Other research has demonstrated that implementing technology into the classroom enhances student motivation to understand and complete tasks (Mistler-Jackson & Songer, 2000).

Barriers to Implementation

Studies have revealed that instructors believe there is insufficient time in class to deliver content and teach digital competencies to students (Kirkscey, 2012). While many instructors feel they they have adequate training and are comfortable with teaching students to use technology, there is simply not enough time to do so. Other barriers to technology implementation within the classroom are limited technical ability of students, lack of funding, feelings of isolation when learning, difficulty connecting with peers, distraction with other applications and setting boundaries between class and personal life (Sun et al., 2016 ). However, with mindful pedagogical strategies, instructors can overcome these barriers and use technology to enhance student engagement and success.

Applications

Integration into the Curriculum

Technology can be widely integrated into several aspects of the curriculum. As discussed, numerous studies have emphasized that students and instructors hold positive views towards a technology infused curriculum. Students are able to benefit from the use of technology in most subject areas within the curriculum to enhance overall engagement and understanding of content. Instructors can integrate technology into class lessons, after-school activities, assignments and assessment methods. With the dozens of educational technology resources and applications offered, instructors can customize lesson plans that will not only facilitate higher academic achievement for students, but also prepare them for a technology-based workforce. One specific technological application that can be used in the classroom to enhance student engagement and success is Edmodo  (Edmodo, 2008). What is Edmodo? Edmodo is a technological learning platform that can be used to facilitate online discussions, share content, distribute various forms of assessment and promote student-teacher communication (Purnawarman et al., 2016). It is a user friendly application that is compatible with various electronic devices including desktops, laptops, tablets and smartphones. Edmodo provides the opportunity for students to ask questions, review content, communicate with peers and have continuous contact with their instructors after school hours.  Teachers are also able to post information that may have been missed in class, send out announcements and upload academic content. Edmodo can be used for multiple subject areas to capture various curriculum expectations. It is recommended that this application be used for students who are familiar with the using technology (i.e. Intermediate-Senior divisions).

Uses in the Classroom Research suggests that there is a positive relationship between teacher immediacy and clarity, and students’ cognitive interest and engagement (Mazer, 2012). The features of Edmodo allow for students to feel a sense of connection with their instructor and fellow classmates after school hours. The application permits students to create their own profile, upload pictures and include a biography to increase the perception of social presence. It is also accessible in that students can log on from any location that has internet access and have immediate contact with their instructor and peers. Student are able to maintain social relationships with their classmates, interact on an ongoing basis, discuss topics covered in class and review course material. In essence, Edmodo establishes a sense of community among teachers and students from a distance. Achieving social presence through a technological application like Edmodo has numerous benefits for learners. Some of these benefits include supporting cognitive and affective learning objective, promoting engagement, facilitating intrinsic motivation, creating positive group interactions and enhancing self-efficacy (Aragon, 2003).

Overall, students feel that Edmodo enables them to feel connected with the members of their classroom and have their learning needs met even from home (Yunkul & Cankaya, 2017). Studies have shown that students’ perceptions towards Edmodo are positive as it is user friendly and facilitates effective communication and learning (Al-Said, 2015). Students also report that the application allows for them to feel connected with their instructor and peers while having their academic needs met. When analyzing the overall layout of Edmodo, users identify its striking resemblance to the social media network Facebook. Since many students in both elementary school and high school have a Facebook account, learners find the features of Edmodo relatable and easy to use (Cruz & Cruz, 2013).

Criticisms of Edmodo . Although integrating the use of technology into the curriculum has been shown to enhance student engagement and success, there are some limitations. While the majority of students report high levels of satisfaction with Edmodo, some report that the application is initially overwhelming due to its many features (Al-Said, 2015). There is also the argument that students are not given the opportunity to take breaks and temporarily disengage from their academics since the application sends frequent class notifications. Since this may result in some frustration for students, it is recommended that instructors suggest time frames for using the application after school hours.

Conclusions and Future Recommendations

As technology becomes increasingly prevalent in the education system and workforce, it is important for students to become familiarized with various digital applications. Integrating technology into the curriculum not only provides students with the opportunity to expand their skills and succeed academically, it also prepares them for the real-world upon graduation. While educational technology shifts the learning environment from being teacher-centered to student-centered, it is important that teachers carefully think through effective methods of implementation. Since there are hundreds of technological applications out there, each with distinguishing features, it is important that teachers guide students in the process of learning about these technologies to prevent them from becoming overwhelmed. It is recommended that teachers also provide continuous feedback to students throughout their experiences with using technology. Future recommendations would include developing more research pertaining to methods of effectively implementing technology into the curriculum. While this chapter has focused on the impact that technology has on student engagement and success, research could be done to understand methods educators can use to facilitate this process.   

Al-Said, K. M. (2015). Students’ perceptions of Edmodo and mobile learning and their real barriers towards them. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology , 14 (2).

Aragon, S. R. (2003). Creating social presence in online environments. New directions for adult  and continuing education , 2003 (100), 57-68.

Buckingham, D. (2003 ). Media Education: Literacy, Learning and Contemporary Culture , Polity Press, Cambridge

Carle, A. C., Jaffee, D., & Miller, D. (2009). Engaging college science students and changing academic achievement with technology: A quasi-experimental preliminary investigation. Computers & Education , 52 (2), 376-380.

Cruz, M. B., & Cruz, S. B. B. (2013). The use of internet-based social media as a tool in enhancing student’s learning experiences in biological sciences. Higher Learning Research Communications , 3 (4), 68-80.

Edmodo. (2008). Retrieved from https://partnerships.edmodo.com

Guzman, A., & Nussbaum, M. (2009). Teaching competencies for technology integration in the classroom. Journal of computer Assisted learning , 25 (5), 453-469.

Hillman, T. (2014). Finding space for student innovative practices with technology in the classroom. Learning, Media and Technology , 39 (2), 169-183

Kirkscey, R. (2012). Secondary school instructors’ perspectives on the integration of information and communication technologies (ICT) with course content. American Secondary Education , 17-33.

Mazer, J. P. (2013). Associations among teacher communication behaviors, student interest, and engagement: A validity test. Communication Education , 62 (1), 86-96.

Mignone, J., & Henley, H. (2009). Impact of information and communication technology on social capital in aboriginal communities in Canada. Journal of Information, Informatio n   and Organizations, 4 , 127-145

  Miller, J. P., Milholland, E. S., & Gould, S. M. (2012). Determining the attitudes of students toward the use of a classroom response in hospitality courses. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education , 24 (2-3), 73-79.

Mistler-Jackson, M., & Songer, N. B. (2000). Student motivation and Internet technology: Are students empowered to learn science? Journal of research in science teaching, 37(5), 459-479.

Mo, S. (2011). Evidence on instructional technology and student engagement in an auditing course. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal , 15 (4), 149.

Purnawarman, P., Susilawati, S., & Sundayana, W. (2016). The use of Edmodo in teaching writing in a blended learning setting. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics , 5 (2), 242-252.

Schindler, L. A., Burkholder, G. J., Morad, O. A., & Marsh, C. (2017). Computer-based technology and student engagement: a critical review of the literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education , 14 (1), 25.

Sun, S., Lee, P., Lee, A., & Law, R. (2016). Perception of attributes and readiness for educational technology: Hospitality management students’ perspectives. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education , 28 (3), 142-154.

Wang, Z., Chen, L., & Anderson, T. (2014). A framework for interaction and cognitive engagement in connectivist learning contexts. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning , 15 (2). Technology, and Organizations , 4 , 127-145.

Yunkul, E., & Cankaya, S. (2017). Student’s attitudes towards Edmodo, a social learning network: A scale development study. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education(TOJDE) , 18 (2).

Technology and the Curriculum: Summer 2018 Copyright © 2018 by Chloe D'Angelo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

On The Site

Teaching About Technology in Schools Through Technoskeptical Inquiry

June 3, 2024 | victorialynn | Harvard Educational Review Contributors , Voices in Education

By Jacob Pleasants, Daniel G. Krutka, and T. Philip Nichols

New technologies are rapidly transforming our societies, our relationships, and our schools. Look no further than the intense — and often panicked — discourse around generative AI , the metaverse , and the creep of digital media into all facets of civic and social life . How are schools preparing students to think about and respond to these changes?

In various ways, students are taught how to use technologies in school. Most schools teach basic computing skills and many offer elective vocational-technical classes. But outside of occasional conversations around digital citizenship, students rarely wrestle with deeper questions about the effects of technologies on individuals and society.

Decades ago, Neil Postman (1995) argued for a different form of technology education focused on teaching students to critically examine technologies and their psychological and social effects. While Postman’s ideas have arguably never been more relevant, his suggestion to add technology education as a separate subject to a crowded curriculum gained little traction. Alternatively, we argue that technology education could be an interdisciplinary endeavor that occurs across core subject areas. Technology is already a part of English Language Arts (ELA), Science, and Social Studies instruction. What is missing is a coherent vision and common set of practices and principles that educators can use to align their efforts.

To provide a coherent vision, in our recent HER article , we propose “technoskepticism” as an organizing goal for teaching about technology. We define technoskepticism as a critical disposition and practice of investigating the complex relationships between technologies and societies. A technoskeptical person is not necessarily anti-technology, but rather one who deeply examines technological issues from multiple dimensions and perspectives akin to an art critic.

We created the Technoskepticism Iceberg as a framework to support teachers and students in conducting technological inquiries. The metaphor of an iceberg conveys how many important influences of technology lie beneath our conscious awareness. People often perceive technologies as tools (the “visible” layer of the iceberg), but technoskepticism requires that they be seen as parts of systems (with interactions that produce many unintended effects) and embedded with values about what is good and desirable (and for whom). The framework also identifies three dimensions of technology that students can examine. The technical dimension concerns the design and functions of a technology, including how it may work differently for different people. The psychosocial dimension addresses how technologies change our individual cognition and our larger societies. The political dimension considers who makes decisions concerning the terms, rules, or laws that govern technologies.

To illustrate these ideas, how might we use the Technoskeptical Iceberg to interrogate generative AI such as ChatGPT in the core subject areas?

A science/STEM classroom might focus on the technical dimension by investigating how generative AI works and demystifying its ostensibly “intelligent” capabilities. Students could then examine the infrastructures involved in AI systems , such as immense computing power and specialized hardware that in turn have profound environmental consequences. A teacher could ask students to use their values to weigh the costs and potential benefits of ChatGPT.

A social studies class could investigate the psychosocial dimension through the longer histories of informational technologies (e.g., the printing press, telegraph, internet, and now AI) to consider how they shifted people’s lives. They could also explore political questions about what rules or regulations governments should impose on informational systems that include people’s data and intellectual property.

In an ELA classroom, students might begin by investigating the psychosocial dimensions of reading and writing, and the values associated with different literacy practices. Students could consider how the concept of “authorship” shifts when one writes by hand, with word processing software, or using ChatGPT. Or how we are to engage with AI-generated essays, stories, and poetry differently than their human-produced counterparts. Such conversations would highlight how literary values are mediated by technological systems . 

Students who use technoskepticism to explore generative AI technologies should be better equipped to act as citizens seeking to advance just futures in and out of schools. Our questions are, what might it take to establish technoskepticism as an educational goal in schools? What support will educators need? And what might students teach us through technoskeptical inquiries?

Postman, N. (1995). The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School. Vintage Books.

About the Authors

Jacob Pleasants is an assistant professor of science education at the University of Oklahoma. Through his teaching and research, he works to humanize STEM education by helping students engage with issues at the intersection of STEM and society.

Daniel G. Krutka is a dachshund enthusiast, former high school social studies teacher, and associate professor of social studies education at the University of North Texas. His research concerns technology, democracy, and education, and he is the cofounder of the Civics of Technology project ( www.civicsoftechnology.org ).

T. Philip Nichols is an associate professor in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Baylor University. He studies the digitalization of public education and the ways science and technology condition the ways we practice, teach, and talk about literacy.

They are the authors of “ What Relationships Do We Want with Technology? Toward Technoskepticism in Schools ” in the Winter 2023 issue of Harvard Educational Review .

• Gift Guides
• Voices in Education

Advertisement

Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review

• Published: 21 November 2022
• Volume 28 , pages 6695–6726, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Stella Timotheou 1 ,
• Ourania Miliou 1 ,
• Yiannis Dimitriadis 2 ,
• Sara Villagrá Sobrino 2 ,
• Nikoleta Giannoutsou 2 ,
• Romina Cachia 3 ,
• Alejandra Martínez Monés 2 &
• Andri Ioannou   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3570-6578 1  

63k Accesses

51 Citations

4 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Digital technologies have brought changes to the nature and scope of education and led education systems worldwide to adopt strategies and policies for ICT integration. The latter brought about issues regarding the quality of teaching and learning with ICTs, especially concerning the understanding, adaptation, and design of the education systems in accordance with current technological trends. These issues were emphasized during the recent COVID-19 pandemic that accelerated the use of digital technologies in education, generating questions regarding digitalization in schools. Specifically, many schools demonstrated a lack of experience and low digital capacity, which resulted in widening gaps, inequalities, and learning losses. Such results have engendered the need for schools to learn and build upon the experience to enhance their digital capacity and preparedness, increase their digitalization levels, and achieve a successful digital transformation. Given that the integration of digital technologies is a complex and continuous process that impacts different actors within the school ecosystem, there is a need to show how these impacts are interconnected and identify the factors that can encourage an effective and efficient change in the school environments. For this purpose, we conducted a non-systematic literature review. The results of the literature review were organized thematically based on the evidence presented about the impact of digital technology on education and the factors that affect the schools’ digital capacity and digital transformation. The findings suggest that ICT integration in schools impacts more than just students’ performance; it affects several other school-related aspects and stakeholders, too. Furthermore, various factors affect the impact of digital technologies on education. These factors are interconnected and play a vital role in the digital transformation process. The study results shed light on how ICTs can positively contribute to the digital transformation of schools and which factors should be considered for schools to achieve effective and efficient change.

Similar content being viewed by others

A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning

Key factors in digital literacy in learning and education: a systematic literature review using text mining

Exploring Teachers’ Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence as a Tool to Support their Practice in Estonian K-12 Education

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Digital technologies have brought changes to the nature and scope of education. Versatile and disruptive technological innovations, such as smart devices, the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR), blockchain, and software applications have opened up new opportunities for advancing teaching and learning (Gaol & Prasolova-Førland, 2021 ; OECD, 2021 ). Hence, in recent years, education systems worldwide have increased their investment in the integration of information and communication technology (ICT) (Fernández-Gutiérrez et al., 2020 ; Lawrence & Tar, 2018 ) and prioritized their educational agendas to adapt strategies or policies around ICT integration (European Commission, 2019 ). The latter brought about issues regarding the quality of teaching and learning with ICTs (Bates, 2015 ), especially concerning the understanding, adaptation, and design of education systems in accordance with current technological trends (Balyer & Öz, 2018 ). Studies have shown that despite the investment made in the integration of technology in schools, the results have not been promising, and the intended outcomes have not yet been achieved (Delgado et al., 2015 ; Lawrence & Tar, 2018 ). These issues were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced teaching across education levels to move online (Daniel, 2020 ). Online teaching accelerated the use of digital technologies generating questions regarding the process, the nature, the extent, and the effectiveness of digitalization in schools (Cachia et al., 2021 ; König et al., 2020 ). Specifically, many schools demonstrated a lack of experience and low digital capacity, which resulted in widening gaps, inequalities, and learning losses (Blaskó et al., 2021 ; Di Pietro et al, 2020 ). Such results have engendered the need for schools to learn and build upon the experience in order to enhance their digital capacity (European Commission, 2020 ) and increase their digitalization levels (Costa et al., 2021 ). Digitalization offers possibilities for fundamental improvement in schools (OECD, 2021 ; Rott & Marouane, 2018 ) and touches many aspects of a school’s development (Delcker & Ifenthaler, 2021 ) . However, it is a complex process that requires large-scale transformative changes beyond the technical aspects of technology and infrastructure (Pettersson, 2021 ). Namely, digitalization refers to “ a series of deep and coordinated culture, workforce, and technology shifts and operating models ” (Brooks & McCormack, 2020 , p. 3) that brings cultural, organizational, and operational change through the integration of digital technologies (JISC, 2020 ). A successful digital transformation requires that schools increase their digital capacity levels, establishing the necessary “ culture, policies, infrastructure as well as digital competence of students and staff to support the effective integration of technology in teaching and learning practices ” (Costa et al, 2021 , p.163).

Given that the integration of digital technologies is a complex and continuous process that impacts different actors within the school ecosystem (Eng, 2005 ), there is a need to show how the different elements of the impact are interconnected and to identify the factors that can encourage an effective and efficient change in the school environment. To address the issues outlined above, we formulated the following research questions:

a) What is the impact of digital technologies on education?

b) Which factors might affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation?

In the present investigation, we conducted a non-systematic literature review of publications pertaining to the impact of digital technologies on education and the factors that affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation. The results of the literature review were organized thematically based on the evidence presented about the impact of digital technology on education and the factors which affect the schools’ digital capacity and digital transformation.

2 Methodology

The non-systematic literature review presented herein covers the main theories and research published over the past 17 years on the topic. It is based on meta-analyses and review papers found in scholarly, peer-reviewed content databases and other key studies and reports related to the concepts studied (e.g., digitalization, digital capacity) from professional and international bodies (e.g., the OECD). We searched the Scopus database, which indexes various online journals in the education sector with an international scope, to collect peer-reviewed academic papers. Furthermore, we used an all-inclusive Google Scholar search to include relevant key terms or to include studies found in the reference list of the peer-reviewed papers, and other key studies and reports related to the concepts studied by professional and international bodies. Lastly, we gathered sources from the Publications Office of the European Union ( https://op.europa.eu/en/home ); namely, documents that refer to policies related to digital transformation in education.

Regarding search terms, we first searched resources on the impact of digital technologies on education by performing the following search queries: “impact” OR “effects” AND “digital technologies” AND “education”, “impact” OR “effects” AND “ICT” AND “education”. We further refined our results by adding the terms “meta-analysis” and “review” or by adjusting the search options based on the features of each database to avoid collecting individual studies that would provide limited contributions to a particular domain. We relied on meta-analyses and review studies as these consider the findings of multiple studies to offer a more comprehensive view of the research in a given area (Schuele & Justice, 2006 ). Specifically, meta-analysis studies provided quantitative evidence based on statistically verifiable results regarding the impact of educational interventions that integrate digital technologies in school classrooms (Higgins et al., 2012 ; Tolani-Brown et al., 2011 ).

However, quantitative data does not offer explanations for the challenges or difficulties experienced during ICT integration in learning and teaching (Tolani-Brown et al., 2011 ). To fill this gap, we analyzed literature reviews and gathered in-depth qualitative evidence of the benefits and implications of technology integration in schools. In the analysis presented herein, we also included policy documents and reports from professional and international bodies and governmental reports, which offered useful explanations of the key concepts of this study and provided recent evidence on digital capacity and transformation in education along with policy recommendations. The inclusion and exclusion criteria that were considered in this study are presented in Table 1 .

To ensure a reliable extraction of information from each study and assist the research synthesis we selected the study characteristics of interest (impact) and constructed coding forms. First, an overview of the synthesis was provided by the principal investigator who described the processes of coding, data entry, and data management. The coders followed the same set of instructions but worked independently. To ensure a common understanding of the process between coders, a sample of ten studies was tested. The results were compared, and the discrepancies were identified and resolved. Additionally, to ensure an efficient coding process, all coders participated in group meetings to discuss additions, deletions, and modifications (Stock, 1994 ). Due to the methodological diversity of the studied documents we began to synthesize the literature review findings based on similar study designs. Specifically, most of the meta-analysis studies were grouped in one category due to the quantitative nature of the measured impact. These studies tended to refer to student achievement (Hattie et al., 2014 ). Then, we organized the themes of the qualitative studies in several impact categories. Lastly, we synthesized both review and meta-analysis data across the categories. In order to establish a collective understanding of the concept of impact, we referred to a previous impact study by Balanskat ( 2009 ) which investigated the impact of technology in primary schools. In this context, the impact had a more specific ICT-related meaning and was described as “ a significant influence or effect of ICT on the measured or perceived quality of (parts of) education ” (Balanskat, 2009 , p. 9). In the study presented herein, the main impacts are in relation to learning and learners, teaching, and teachers, as well as other key stakeholders who are directly or indirectly connected to the school unit.

The study’s results identified multiple dimensions of the impact of digital technologies on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes; on equality, inclusion, and social integration; on teachers’ professional and teaching practices; and on other school-related aspects and stakeholders. The data analysis indicated various factors that might affect the schools’ digital capacity and transformation, such as digital competencies, the teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development, as well as the school’s leadership and management, administration, infrastructure, etc. The impacts and factors found in the literature review are presented below.

3.1 Impacts of digital technologies on students’ knowledge, skills, attitudes, and emotions

The impact of ICT use on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes has been investigated early in the literature. Eng ( 2005 ) found a small positive effect between ICT use and students' learning. Specifically, the author reported that access to computer-assisted instruction (CAI) programs in simulation or tutorial modes—used to supplement rather than substitute instruction – could enhance student learning. The author reported studies showing that teachers acknowledged the benefits of ICT on pupils with special educational needs; however, the impact of ICT on students' attainment was unclear. Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) found a statistically significant positive association between ICT use and higher student achievement in primary and secondary education. The authors also reported improvements in the performance of low-achieving pupils. The use of ICT resulted in further positive gains for students, namely increased attention, engagement, motivation, communication and process skills, teamwork, and gains related to their behaviour towards learning. Evidence from qualitative studies showed that teachers, students, and parents recognized the positive impact of ICT on students' learning regardless of their competence level (strong/weak students). Punie et al. ( 2006 ) documented studies that showed positive results of ICT-based learning for supporting low-achieving pupils and young people with complex lives outside the education system. Liao et al. ( 2007 ) reported moderate positive effects of computer application instruction (CAI, computer simulations, and web-based learning) over traditional instruction on primary school student's achievement. Similarly, Tamim et al. ( 2011 ) reported small to moderate positive effects between the use of computer technology (CAI, ICT, simulations, computer-based instruction, digital and hypermedia) and student achievement in formal face-to-face classrooms compared to classrooms that did not use technology. Jewitt et al., ( 2011 ) found that the use of learning platforms (LPs) (virtual learning environments, management information systems, communication technologies, and information- and resource-sharing technologies) in schools allowed primary and secondary students to access a wider variety of quality learning resources, engage in independent and personalized learning, and conduct self- and peer-review; LPs also provide opportunities for teacher assessment and feedback. Similar findings were reported by Fu ( 2013 ), who documented a list of benefits and opportunities of ICT use. According to the author, the use of ICTs helps students access digital information and course content effectively and efficiently, supports student-centered and self-directed learning, as well as the development of a creative learning environment where more opportunities for critical thinking skills are offered, and promotes collaborative learning in a distance-learning environment. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) found consistent but small positive associations between the use of technology and learning outcomes of school-age learners (5–18-year-olds) in studies linking the provision and use of technology with attainment. Additionally, Chauhan ( 2017 ) reported a medium positive effect of technology on the learning effectiveness of primary school students compared to students who followed traditional learning instruction.

The rise of mobile technologies and hardware devices instigated investigations into their impact on teaching and learning. Sung et al. ( 2016 ) reported a moderate effect on students' performance from the use of mobile devices in the classroom compared to the use of desktop computers or the non-use of mobile devices. Schmid et al. ( 2014 ) reported medium–low to low positive effects of technology integration (e.g., CAI, ICTs) in the classroom on students' achievement and attitude compared to not using technology or using technology to varying degrees. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) found a low statistically significant effect of the use of tablets and other smart devices in educational contexts on students' achievement outcomes. The authors suggested that tablets offered additional advantages to students; namely, they reported improvements in students’ notetaking, organizational and communication skills, and creativity. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported a small positive effect of one-to-one laptop programs on students’ academic achievement across subject areas. Additional reported benefits included student-centered, individualized, and project-based learning enhanced learner engagement and enthusiasm. Additionally, the authors found that students using one-to-one laptop programs tended to use technology more frequently than in non-laptop classrooms, and as a result, they developed a range of skills (e.g., information skills, media skills, technology skills, organizational skills). Haßler et al. ( 2016 ) found that most interventions that included the use of tablets across the curriculum reported positive learning outcomes. However, from 23 studies, five reported no differences, and two reported a negative effect on students' learning outcomes. Similar results were indicated by Kalati and Kim ( 2022 ) who investigated the effect of touchscreen technologies on young students’ learning. Specifically, from 53 studies, 34 advocated positive effects of touchscreen devices on children’s learning, 17 obtained mixed findings and two studies reported negative effects.

More recently, approaches that refer to the impact of gamification with the use of digital technologies on teaching and learning were also explored. A review by Pan et al. ( 2022 ) that examined the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings, reported that gameplay improved students’ performance. Integration of digital games in teaching was also found as a promising pedagogical practice in STEM education that could lead to increased learning gains (Martinez et al., 2022 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). However, although Talan et al. ( 2020 ) reported a medium effect of the use of educational games (both digital and non-digital) on academic achievement, the effect of non-digital games was higher.

Over the last two years, the effects of more advanced technologies on teaching and learning were also investigated. Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) found that AR applications had a medium effect on students' learning outcomes compared to traditional lectures. Similarly, Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) showed that AR had a medium impact on students' learning gains. VR applications integrated into various subjects were also found to have a moderate effect on students’ learning compared to control conditions (traditional classes, e.g., lectures, textbooks, and multimedia use, e.g., images, videos, animation, CAI) (Chen et al., 2022b ). Villena-Taranilla et al. ( 2022 ) noted the moderate effect of VR technologies on students’ learning when these were applied in STEM disciplines. In the same meta-analysis, Villena-Taranilla et al. ( 2022 ) highlighted the role of immersive VR, since its effect on students’ learning was greater (at a high level) across educational levels (K-6) compared to semi-immersive and non-immersive integrations. In another meta-analysis study, the effect size of the immersive VR was small and significantly differentiated across educational levels (Coban et al., 2022 ). The impact of AI on education was investigated by Su and Yang ( 2022 ) and Su et al. ( 2022 ), who showed that this technology significantly improved students’ understanding of AI computer science and machine learning concepts.

It is worth noting that the vast majority of studies referred to learning gains in specific subjects. Specifically, several studies examined the impact of digital technologies on students’ literacy skills and reported positive effects on language learning (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Grgurović et al., 2013 ; Friedel et al., 2013 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ; Chen et al., 2022b ; Savva et al., 2022 ). Also, several studies documented positive effects on specific language learning areas, namely foreign language learning (Kao, 2014 ), writing (Higgins et al., 2012 ; Wen & Walters, 2022 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ), as well as reading and comprehension (Cheung & Slavin, 2011 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Schwabe et al., 2022 ). ICTs were also found to have a positive impact on students' performance in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines (Arztmann et al., 2022 ; Bado, 2022 ; Villena-Taranilla et al., 2022 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). Specifically, a number of studies reported positive impacts on students’ achievement in mathematics (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Hillmayr et al., 2020 ; Li & Ma, 2010 ; Pan et al., 2022 ; Ran et al., 2022 ; Verschaffel et al., 2019 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ). Furthermore, studies documented positive effects of ICTs on science learning (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ; Hillmayr et al., 2020 ; Kalemkuş & Kalemkuş, 2022 ; Lei et al., 2022a ). Çelik ( 2022 ) also noted that computer simulations can help students understand learning concepts related to science. Furthermore, some studies documented that the use of ICTs had a positive impact on students’ achievement in other subjects, such as geography, history, music, and arts (Chauhan, 2017 ; Condie & Munro, 2007 ), and design and technology (Balanskat et al., 2006 ).

More specific positive learning gains were reported in a number of skills, e.g., problem-solving skills and pattern exploration skills (Higgins et al., 2012 ), metacognitive learning outcomes (Verschaffel et al., 2019 ), literacy skills, computational thinking skills, emotion control skills, and collaborative inquiry skills (Lu et al., 2022 ; Su & Yang, 2022 ; Su et al., 2022 ). Additionally, several investigations have reported benefits from the use of ICT on students’ creativity (Fielding & Murcia, 2022 ; Liu et al., 2022 ; Quah & Ng, 2022 ). Lastly, digital technologies were also found to be beneficial for enhancing students’ lifelong learning skills (Haleem et al., 2022 ).

Apart from gaining knowledge and skills, studies also reported improvement in motivation and interest in mathematics (Higgins et. al., 2019 ; Fadda et al., 2022 ) and increased positive achievement emotions towards several subjects during interventions using educational games (Lei et al., 2022a ). Chen et al. ( 2022a ) also reported a small but positive effect of digital health approaches in bullying and cyberbullying interventions with K-12 students, demonstrating that technology-based approaches can help reduce bullying and related consequences by providing emotional support, empowerment, and change of attitude. In their meta-review study, Su et al. ( 2022 ) also documented that AI technologies effectively strengthened students’ attitudes towards learning. In another meta-analysis, Arztmann et al. ( 2022 ) reported positive effects of digital games on motivation and behaviour towards STEM subjects.

3.2 Impacts of digital technologies on equality, inclusion and social integration

Although most of the reviewed studies focused on the impact of ICTs on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes, reports were also made on other aspects in the school context, such as equality, inclusion, and social integration. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) documented research interventions investigating how ICT can support pupils with additional or special educational needs. While those interventions were relatively small scale and mostly based on qualitative data, their findings indicated that the use of ICTs enabled the development of communication, participation, and self-esteem. A recent meta-analysis (Baragash et al., 2022 ) with 119 participants with different disabilities, reported a significant overall effect size of AR on their functional skills acquisition. Koh’s meta-analysis ( 2022 ) also revealed that students with intellectual and developmental disabilities improved their competence and performance when they used digital games in the lessons.

Istenic Starcic and Bagon ( 2014 ) found that the role of ICT in inclusion and the design of pedagogical and technological interventions was not sufficiently explored in educational interventions with people with special needs; however, some benefits of ICT use were found in students’ social integration. The issue of gender and technology use was mentioned in a small number of studies. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported a statistically significant positive interaction between one-to-one laptop programs and gender. Specifically, the results showed that girls and boys alike benefitted from the laptop program, but the effect on girls’ achievement was smaller than that on boys’. Along the same lines, Arztmann et al. ( 2022 ) reported no difference in the impact of game-based learning between boys and girls, arguing that boys and girls equally benefited from game-based interventions in STEM domains. However, results from a systematic review by Cussó-Calabuig et al. ( 2018 ) found limited and low-quality evidence on the effects of intensive use of computers on gender differences in computer anxiety, self-efficacy, and self-confidence. Based on their view, intensive use of computers can reduce gender differences in some areas and not in others, depending on contextual and implementation factors.

3.3 Impacts of digital technologies on teachers’ professional and teaching practices

Various research studies have explored the impact of ICT on teachers’ instructional practices and student assessment. Friedel et al. ( 2013 ) found that the use of mobile devices by students enabled teachers to successfully deliver content (e.g., mobile serious games), provide scaffolding, and facilitate synchronous collaborative learning. The integration of digital games in teaching and learning activities also gave teachers the opportunity to study and apply various pedagogical practices (Bado, 2022 ). Specifically, Bado ( 2022 ) found that teachers who implemented instructional activities in three stages (pre-game, game, and post-game) maximized students’ learning outcomes and engagement. For instance, during the pre-game stage, teachers focused on lectures and gameplay training, at the game stage teachers provided scaffolding on content, addressed technical issues, and managed the classroom activities. During the post-game stage, teachers organized activities for debriefing to ensure that the gameplay had indeed enhanced students’ learning outcomes.

Furthermore, ICT can increase efficiency in lesson planning and preparation by offering possibilities for a more collaborative approach among teachers. The sharing of curriculum plans and the analysis of students’ data led to clearer target settings and improvements in reporting to parents (Balanskat et al., 2006 ).

Additionally, the use and application of digital technologies in teaching and learning were found to enhance teachers’ digital competence. Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) documented studies that revealed that the use of digital technologies in education had a positive effect on teachers’ basic ICT skills. The greatest impact was found on teachers with enough experience in integrating ICTs in their teaching and/or who had recently participated in development courses for the pedagogical use of technologies in teaching. Punie et al. ( 2006 ) reported that the provision of fully equipped multimedia portable computers and the development of online teacher communities had positive impacts on teachers’ confidence and competence in the use of ICTs.

Moreover, online assessment via ICTs benefits instruction. In particular, online assessments support the digitalization of students’ work and related logistics, allow teachers to gather immediate feedback and readjust to new objectives, and support the improvement of the technical quality of tests by providing more accurate results. Additionally, the capabilities of ICTs (e.g., interactive media, simulations) create new potential methods of testing specific skills, such as problem-solving and problem-processing skills, meta-cognitive skills, creativity and communication skills, and the ability to work productively in groups (Punie et al., 2006 ).

3.4 Impacts of digital technologies on other school-related aspects and stakeholders

There is evidence that the effective use of ICTs and the data transmission offered by broadband connections help improve administration (Balanskat et al., 2006 ). Specifically, ICTs have been found to provide better management systems to schools that have data gathering procedures in place. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) reported impacts from the use of ICTs in schools in the following areas: attendance monitoring, assessment records, reporting to parents, financial management, creation of repositories for learning resources, and sharing of information amongst staff. Such data can be used strategically for self-evaluation and monitoring purposes which in turn can result in school improvements. Additionally, they reported that online access to other people with similar roles helped to reduce headteachers’ isolation by offering them opportunities to share insights into the use of ICT in learning and teaching and how it could be used to support school improvement. Furthermore, ICTs provided more efficient and successful examination management procedures, namely less time-consuming reporting processes compared to paper-based examinations and smooth communications between schools and examination authorities through electronic data exchange (Punie et al., 2006 ).

Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported that the use of ICTs improved home-school relationships. Additionally, Escueta et al. ( 2017 ) reported several ICT programs that had improved the flow of information from the school to parents. Particularly, they documented that the use of ICTs (learning management systems, emails, dedicated websites, mobile phones) allowed for personalized and customized information exchange between schools and parents, such as attendance records, upcoming class assignments, school events, and students’ grades, which generated positive results on students’ learning outcomes and attainment. Such information exchange between schools and families prompted parents to encourage their children to put more effort into their schoolwork.

The above findings suggest that the impact of ICT integration in schools goes beyond students’ performance in school subjects. Specifically, it affects a number of school-related aspects, such as equality and social integration, professional and teaching practices, and diverse stakeholders. In Table 2 , we summarize the different impacts of digital technologies on school stakeholders based on the literature review, while in Table 3 we organized the tools/platforms and practices/policies addressed in the meta-analyses, literature reviews, EU reports, and international bodies included in the manuscript.

Additionally, based on the results of the literature review, there are many types of digital technologies with different affordances (see, for example, studies on VR vs Immersive VR), which evolve over time (e.g. starting from CAIs in 2005 to Augmented and Virtual reality 2020). Furthermore, these technologies are linked to different pedagogies and policy initiatives, which are critical factors in the study of impact. Table 3 summarizes the different tools and practices that have been used to examine the impact of digital technologies on education since 2005 based on the review results.

3.5 Factors that affect the integration of digital technologies

Although the analysis of the literature review demonstrated different impacts of the use of digital technology on education, several authors highlighted the importance of various factors, besides the technology itself, that affect this impact. For example, Liao et al. ( 2007 ) suggested that future studies should carefully investigate which factors contribute to positive outcomes by clarifying the exact relationship between computer applications and learning. Additionally, Haßler et al., ( 2016 ) suggested that the neutral findings regarding the impact of tablets on students learning outcomes in some of the studies included in their review should encourage educators, school leaders, and school officials to further investigate the potential of such devices in teaching and learning. Several other researchers suggested that a number of variables play a significant role in the impact of ICTs on students’ learning that could be attributed to the school context, teaching practices and professional development, the curriculum, and learners’ characteristics (Underwood, 2009 ; Tamim et al., 2011 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Archer et al., 2014 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Haßler et al., 2016 ; Chauhan, 2017 ; Lee et al., 2020 ; Tang et al., 2022 ).

3.5.1 Digital competencies

One of the most common challenges reported in studies that utilized digital tools in the classroom was the lack of students’ skills on how to use them. Fu ( 2013 ) found that students’ lack of technical skills is a barrier to the effective use of ICT in the classroom. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) reported that students faced challenges when using tablets and smart mobile devices, associated with the technical issues or expertise needed for their use and the distracting nature of the devices and highlighted the need for teachers’ professional development. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) reported that skills training about the use of digital technologies is essential for learners to fully exploit the benefits of instruction.

Delgado et al. ( 2015 ), meanwhile, reported studies that showed a strong positive association between teachers’ computer skills and students’ use of computers. Teachers’ lack of ICT skills and familiarization with technologies can become a constraint to the effective use of technology in the classroom (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Delgado et al., 2015 ).

It is worth noting that the way teachers are introduced to ICTs affects the impact of digital technologies on education. Previous studies have shown that teachers may avoid using digital technologies due to limited digital skills (Balanskat, 2006 ), or they prefer applying “safe” technologies, namely technologies that their own teachers used and with which they are familiar (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). In this regard, the provision of digital skills training and exposure to new digital tools might encourage teachers to apply various technologies in their lessons (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). Apart from digital competence, technical support in the school setting has also been shown to affect teachers’ use of technology in their classrooms (Delgado et al., 2015 ). Ferrari et al. ( 2011 ) found that while teachers’ use of ICT is high, 75% stated that they needed more institutional support and a shift in the mindset of educational actors to achieve more innovative teaching practices. The provision of support can reduce time and effort as well as cognitive constraints, which could cause limited ICT integration in the school lessons by teachers (Escueta et al., 2017 ).

3.5.2 Teachers’ personal characteristics, training approaches, and professional development

Teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development affect the impact of digital technologies on education. Specifically, Cheok and Wong ( 2015 ) found that teachers’ personal characteristics (e.g., anxiety, self-efficacy) are associated with their satisfaction and engagement with technology. Bingimlas ( 2009 ) reported that lack of confidence, resistance to change, and negative attitudes in using new technologies in teaching are significant determinants of teachers’ levels of engagement in ICT. The same author reported that the provision of technical support, motivation support (e.g., awards, sufficient time for planning), and training on how technologies can benefit teaching and learning can eliminate the above barriers to ICT integration. Archer et al. ( 2014 ) found that comfort levels in using technology are an important predictor of technology integration and argued that it is essential to provide teachers with appropriate training and ongoing support until they are comfortable with using ICTs in the classroom. Hillmayr et al. ( 2020 ) documented that training teachers on ICT had an important effecton students’ learning.

According to Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ), the impact of ICTs on students’ learning is highly dependent on the teachers’ capacity to efficiently exploit their application for pedagogical purposes. Results obtained from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) (OECD, 2021 ) revealed that although schools are open to innovative practices and have the capacity to adopt them, only 39% of teachers in the European Union reported that they are well or very well prepared to use digital technologies for teaching. Li and Ma ( 2010 ) and Hardman ( 2019 ) showed that the positive effect of technology on students’ achievement depends on the pedagogical practices used by teachers. Schmid et al. ( 2014 ) reported that learning was best supported when students were engaged in active, meaningful activities with the use of technological tools that provided cognitive support. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) compared two different pedagogical uses of tablets and found a significant moderate effect when the devices were used in a student-centered context and approach rather than within teacher-led environments. Similarly, Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) and Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) reported that the positive results from the integration of AR applications could be attributed to the existence of different variables which could influence AR interventions (e.g., pedagogical approach, learning environment, and duration of the intervention). Additionally, Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) suggested that the pedagogical resources that teachers used to complement their lectures and the pedagogical approaches they applied were crucial to the effective integration of AR on students’ learning gains. Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) also emphasized that the success of a technology-enhanced intervention is based on both the technology per se and its characteristics and on the pedagogical strategies teachers choose to implement. For instance, their results indicated that the collaborative learning approach had the highest impact on students’ learning gains among other approaches (e.g., inquiry-based learning, situated learning, or project-based learning). Ran et al. ( 2022 ) also found that the use of technology to design collaborative and communicative environments showed the largest moderator effects among the other approaches.

Hattie ( 2008 ) reported that the effective use of computers is associated with training teachers in using computers as a teaching and learning tool. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) noted that in addition to the strategies teachers adopt in teaching, ongoing professional development is also vital in ensuring the success of technology implementation programs. Sung et al. ( 2016 ) found that research on the use of mobile devices to support learning tends to report that the insufficient preparation of teachers is a major obstacle in implementing effective mobile learning programs in schools. Friedel et al. ( 2013 ) found that providing training and support to teachers increased the positive impact of the interventions on students’ learning gains. Trucano ( 2005 ) argued that positive impacts occur when digital technologies are used to enhance teachers’ existing pedagogical philosophies. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) found that the types of technologies used and how they are used could also affect students’ learning. The authors suggested that training and professional development of teachers that focuses on the effective pedagogical use of technology to support teaching and learning is an important component of successful instructional approaches (Higgins et al., 2012 ). Archer et al. ( 2014 ) found that studies that reported ICT interventions during which teachers received training and support had moderate positive effects on students’ learning outcomes, which were significantly higher than studies where little or no detail about training and support was mentioned. Fu ( 2013 ) reported that the lack of teachers’ knowledge and skills on the technical and instructional aspects of ICT use in the classroom, in-service training, pedagogy support, technical and financial support, as well as the lack of teachers’ motivation and encouragement to integrate ICT on their teaching were significant barriers to the integration of ICT in education.

3.5.3 School leadership and management

Management and leadership are important cornerstones in the digital transformation process (Pihir et al., 2018 ). Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) documented leadership among the factors positively affecting the successful implementation of technology integration in schools. Strong leadership, strategic planning, and systematic integration of digital technologies are prerequisites for the digital transformation of education systems (Ređep, 2021 ). Management and leadership play a significant role in formulating policies that are translated into practice and ensure that developments in ICT become embedded into the life of the school and in the experiences of staff and pupils (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). Policy support and leadership must include the provision of an overall vision for the use of digital technologies in education, guidance for students and parents, logistical support, as well as teacher training (Conrads et al., 2017 ). Unless there is a commitment throughout the school, with accountability for progress at key points, it is unlikely for ICT integration to be sustained or become part of the culture (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). To achieve this, principals need to adopt and promote a whole-institution strategy and build a strong mutual support system that enables the school’s technological maturity (European Commission, 2019 ). In this context, school culture plays an essential role in shaping the mindsets and beliefs of school actors towards successful technology integration. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) emphasized the importance of the principal’s enthusiasm and work as a source of inspiration for the school staff and the students to cultivate a culture of innovation and establish sustainable digital change. Specifically, school leaders need to create conditions in which the school staff is empowered to experiment and take risks with technology (Elkordy & Lovinelli, 2020 ).

In order for leaders to achieve the above, it is important to develop capacities for learning and leading, advocating professional learning, and creating support systems and structures (European Commission, 2019 ). Digital technology integration in education systems can be challenging and leadership needs guidance to achieve it. Such guidance can be introduced through the adoption of new methods and techniques in strategic planning for the integration of digital technologies (Ređep, 2021 ). Even though the role of leaders is vital, the relevant training offered to them has so far been inadequate. Specifically, only a third of the education systems in Europe have put in place national strategies that explicitly refer to the training of school principals (European Commission, 2019 , p. 16).

3.5.4 Connectivity, infrastructure, and government and other support

The effective integration of digital technologies across levels of education presupposes the development of infrastructure, the provision of digital content, and the selection of proper resources (Voogt et al., 2013 ). Particularly, a high-quality broadband connection in the school increases the quality and quantity of educational activities. There is evidence that ICT increases and formalizes cooperative planning between teachers and cooperation with managers, which in turn has a positive impact on teaching practices (Balanskat et al., 2006 ). Additionally, ICT resources, including software and hardware, increase the likelihood of teachers integrating technology into the curriculum to enhance their teaching practices (Delgado et al., 2015 ). For example, Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) found that the use of one-on-one laptop programs resulted in positive changes in teaching and learning, which would not have been accomplished without the infrastructure and technical support provided to teachers. Delgado et al. ( 2015 ) reported that limited access to technology (insufficient computers, peripherals, and software) and lack of technical support are important barriers to ICT integration. Access to infrastructure refers not only to the availability of technology in a school but also to the provision of a proper amount and the right types of technology in locations where teachers and students can use them. Effective technical support is a central element of the whole-school strategy for ICT (Underwood, 2009 ). Bingimlas ( 2009 ) reported that lack of technical support in the classroom and whole-school resources (e.g., failing to connect to the Internet, printers not printing, malfunctioning computers, and working on old computers) are significant barriers that discourage the use of ICT by teachers. Moreover, poor quality and inadequate hardware maintenance, and unsuitable educational software may discourage teachers from using ICTs (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Bingimlas, 2009 ).

Government support can also impact the integration of ICTs in teaching. Specifically, Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) reported that government interventions and training programs increased teachers’ enthusiasm and positive attitudes towards ICT and led to the routine use of embedded ICT.

Lastly, another important factor affecting digital transformation is the development and quality assurance of digital learning resources. Such resources can be support textbooks and related materials or resources that focus on specific subjects or parts of the curriculum. Policies on the provision of digital learning resources are essential for schools and can be achieved through various actions. For example, some countries are financing web portals that become repositories, enabling teachers to share resources or create their own. Additionally, they may offer e-learning opportunities or other services linked to digital education. In other cases, specific agencies of projects have also been set up to develop digital resources (Eurydice, 2019 ).

3.5.5 Administration and digital data management

The digital transformation of schools involves organizational improvements at the level of internal workflows, communication between the different stakeholders, and potential for collaboration. Vuorikari et al. ( 2020 ) presented evidence that digital technologies supported the automation of administrative practices in schools and reduced the administration’s workload. There is evidence that digital data affects the production of knowledge about schools and has the power to transform how schooling takes place. Specifically, Sellar ( 2015 ) reported that data infrastructure in education is developing due to the demand for “ information about student outcomes, teacher quality, school performance, and adult skills, associated with policy efforts to increase human capital and productivity practices ” (p. 771). In this regard, practices, such as datafication which refers to the “ translation of information about all kinds of things and processes into quantified formats” have become essential for decision-making based on accountability reports about the school’s quality. The data could be turned into deep insights about education or training incorporating ICTs. For example, measuring students’ online engagement with the learning material and drawing meaningful conclusions can allow teachers to improve their educational interventions (Vuorikari et al., 2020 ).

3.5.6 Students’ socioeconomic background and family support

Research show that the active engagement of parents in the school and their support for the school’s work can make a difference to their children’s attitudes towards learning and, as a result, their achievement (Hattie, 2008 ). In recent years, digital technologies have been used for more effective communication between school and family (Escueta et al., 2017 ). The European Commission ( 2020 ) presented data from a Eurostat survey regarding the use of computers by students during the pandemic. The data showed that younger pupils needed additional support and guidance from parents and the challenges were greater for families in which parents had lower levels of education and little to no digital skills.

In this regard, the socio-economic background of the learners and their socio-cultural environment also affect educational achievements (Punie et al., 2006 ). Trucano documented that the use of computers at home positively influenced students’ confidence and resulted in more frequent use at school, compared to students who had no home access (Trucano, 2005 ). In this sense, the socio-economic background affects the access to computers at home (OECD, 2015 ) which in turn influences the experience of ICT, an important factor for school achievement (Punie et al., 2006 ; Underwood, 2009 ). Furthermore, parents from different socio-economic backgrounds may have different abilities and availability to support their children in their learning process (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ).

3.5.7 Schools’ socioeconomic context and emergency situations

The socio-economic context of the school is closely related to a school’s digital transformation. For example, schools in disadvantaged, rural, or deprived areas are likely to lack the digital capacity and infrastructure required to adapt to the use of digital technologies during emergency periods, such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ). Data collected from school principals confirmed that in several countries, there is a rural/urban divide in connectivity (OECD, 2015 ).

Emergency periods also affect the digitalization of schools. The COVID-19 pandemic led to the closure of schools and forced them to seek appropriate and connective ways to keep working on the curriculum (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ). The sudden large-scale shift to distance and online teaching and learning also presented challenges around quality and equity in education, such as the risk of increased inequalities in learning, digital, and social, as well as teachers facing difficulties coping with this demanding situation (European Commission, 2020 ).

Looking at the findings of the above studies, we can conclude that the impact of digital technologies on education is influenced by various actors and touches many aspects of the school ecosystem. Figure  1 summarizes the factors affecting the digital technologies’ impact on school stakeholders based on the findings from the literature review.

Factors that affect the impact of ICTs on education

4 Discussion

The findings revealed that the use of digital technologies in education affects a variety of actors within a school’s ecosystem. First, we observed that as technologies evolve, so does the interest of the research community to apply them to school settings. Figure  2 summarizes the trends identified in current research around the impact of digital technologies on schools’ digital capacity and transformation as found in the present study. Starting as early as 2005, when computers, simulations, and interactive boards were the most commonly applied tools in school interventions (e.g., Eng, 2005 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Moran et al., 2008 ; Tamim et al., 2011 ), moving towards the use of learning platforms (Jewitt et al., 2011 ), then to the use of mobile devices and digital games (e.g., Tamim et al., 2015 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Talan et al., 2020 ), as well as e-books (e.g., Savva et al., 2022 ), to the more recent advanced technologies, such as AR and VR applications (e.g., Garzón & Acevedo, 2019 ; Garzón et al., 2020 ; Kalemkuş & Kalemkuş, 2022 ), or robotics and AI (e.g., Su & Yang, 2022 ; Su et al., 2022 ). As this evolution shows, digital technologies are a concept in flux with different affordances and characteristics. Additionally, from an instructional perspective, there has been a growing interest in different modes and models of content delivery such as online, blended, and hybrid modes (e.g., Cheok & Wong, 2015 ; Kazu & Yalçin, 2022 ; Ulum, 2022 ). This is an indication that the value of technologies to support teaching and learning as well as other school-related practices is increasingly recognized by the research and school community. The impact results from the literature review indicate that ICT integration on students’ learning outcomes has effects that are small (Coban et al., 2022 ; Eng, 2005 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Schmid et al., 2014 ; Tamim et al., 2015 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ) to moderate (Garzón & Acevedo, 2019 ; Garzón et al., 2020 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Talan et al., 2020 ; Wen & Walters, 2022 ). That said, a number of recent studies have reported high effect sizes (e.g., Kazu & Yalçin, 2022 ).

Current work and trends in the study of the impact of digital technologies on schools’ digital capacity

Based on these findings, several authors have suggested that the impact of technology on education depends on several variables and not on the technology per se (Tamim et al., 2011 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Archer et al., 2014 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Haßler et al., 2016 ; Chauhan, 2017 ; Lee et al., 2020 ; Lei et al., 2022a ). While the impact of ICTs on student achievement has been thoroughly investigated by researchers, other aspects related to school life that are also affected by ICTs, such as equality, inclusion, and social integration have received less attention. Further analysis of the literature review has revealed a greater investment in ICT interventions to support learning and teaching in the core subjects of literacy and STEM disciplines, especially mathematics, and science. These were the most common subjects studied in the reviewed papers often drawing on national testing results, while studies that investigated other subject areas, such as social studies, were limited (Chauhan, 2017 ; Condie & Munro, 2007 ). As such, research is still lacking impact studies that focus on the effects of ICTs on a range of curriculum subjects.

The qualitative research provided additional information about the impact of digital technologies on education, documenting positive effects and giving more details about implications, recommendations, and future research directions. Specifically, the findings regarding the role of ICTs in supporting learning highlight the importance of teachers’ instructional practice and the learning context in the use of technologies and consequently their impact on instruction (Çelik, 2022 ; Schmid et al., 2014 ; Tamim et al., 2015 ). The review also provided useful insights regarding the various factors that affect the impact of digital technologies on education. These factors are interconnected and play a vital role in the transformation process. Specifically, these factors include a) digital competencies; b) teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development; c) school leadership and management; d) connectivity, infrastructure, and government support; e) administration and data management practices; f) students’ socio-economic background and family support and g) the socioeconomic context of the school and emergency situations. It is worth noting that we observed factors that affect the integration of ICTs in education but may also be affected by it. For example, the frequent use of ICTs and the use of laptops by students for instructional purposes positively affect the development of digital competencies (Zheng et al., 2016 ) and at the same time, the digital competencies affect the use of ICTs (Fu, 2013 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ). As a result, the impact of digital technologies should be explored more as an enabler of desirable and new practices and not merely as a catalyst that improves the output of the education process i.e. namely student attainment.

5 Conclusions

Digital technologies offer immense potential for fundamental improvement in schools. However, investment in ICT infrastructure and professional development to improve school education are yet to provide fruitful results. Digital transformation is a complex process that requires large-scale transformative changes that presuppose digital capacity and preparedness. To achieve such changes, all actors within the school’s ecosystem need to share a common vision regarding the integration of ICTs in education and work towards achieving this goal. Our literature review, which synthesized quantitative and qualitative data from a list of meta-analyses and review studies, provided useful insights into the impact of ICTs on different school stakeholders and showed that the impact of digital technologies touches upon many different aspects of school life, which are often overlooked when the focus is on student achievement as the final output of education. Furthermore, the concept of digital technologies is a concept in flux as technologies are not only different among them calling for different uses in the educational practice but they also change through time. Additionally, we opened a forum for discussion regarding the factors that affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation. We hope that our study will inform policy, practice, and research and result in a paradigm shift towards more holistic approaches in impact and assessment studies.

6 Study limitations and future directions

We presented a review of the study of digital technologies' impact on education and factors influencing schools’ digital capacity and transformation. The study results were based on a non-systematic literature review grounded on the acquisition of documentation in specific databases. Future studies should investigate more databases to corroborate and enhance our results. Moreover, search queries could be enhanced with key terms that could provide additional insights about the integration of ICTs in education, such as “policies and strategies for ICT integration in education”. Also, the study drew information from meta-analyses and literature reviews to acquire evidence about the effects of ICT integration in schools. Such evidence was mostly based on the general conclusions of the studies. It is worth mentioning that, we located individual studies which showed different, such as negative or neutral results. Thus, further insights are needed about the impact of ICTs on education and the factors influencing the impact. Furthermore, the nature of the studies included in meta-analyses and reviews is different as they are based on different research methodologies and data gathering processes. For instance, in a meta-analysis, the impact among the studies investigated is measured in a particular way, depending on policy or research targets (e.g., results from national examinations, pre-/post-tests). Meanwhile, in literature reviews, qualitative studies offer additional insights and detail based on self-reports and research opinions on several different aspects and stakeholders who could affect and be affected by ICT integration. As a result, it was challenging to draw causal relationships between so many interrelating variables.

Despite the challenges mentioned above, this study envisaged examining school units as ecosystems that consist of several actors by bringing together several variables from different research epistemologies to provide an understanding of the integration of ICTs. However, the use of other tools and methodologies and models for evaluation of the impact of digital technologies on education could give more detailed data and more accurate results. For instance, self-reflection tools, like SELFIE—developed on the DigCompOrg framework- (Kampylis et al., 2015 ; Bocconi & Lightfoot, 2021 ) can help capture a school’s digital capacity and better assess the impact of ICTs on education. Furthermore, the development of a theory of change could be a good approach for documenting the impact of digital technologies on education. Specifically, theories of change are models used for the evaluation of interventions and their impact; they are developed to describe how interventions will work and give the desired outcomes (Mayne, 2015 ). Theory of change as a methodological approach has also been used by researchers to develop models for evaluation in the field of education (e.g., Aromatario et al., 2019 ; Chapman & Sammons, 2013 ; De Silva et al., 2014 ).

We also propose that future studies aim at similar investigations by applying more holistic approaches for impact assessment that can provide in-depth data about the impact of digital technologies on education. For instance, future studies could focus on different research questions about the technologies that are used during the interventions or the way the implementation takes place (e.g., What methodologies are used for documenting impact? How are experimental studies implemented? How can teachers be taken into account and trained on the technology and its functions? What are the elements of an appropriate and successful implementation? How is the whole intervention designed? On which learning theories is the technology implementation based?).

Future research could also focus on assessing the impact of digital technologies on various other subjects since there is a scarcity of research related to particular subjects, such as geography, history, arts, music, and design and technology. More research should also be done about the impact of ICTs on skills, emotions, and attitudes, and on equality, inclusion, social interaction, and special needs education. There is also a need for more research about the impact of ICTs on administration, management, digitalization, and home-school relationships. Additionally, although new forms of teaching and learning with the use of ICTs (e.g., blended, hybrid, and online learning) have initiated several investigations in mainstream classrooms, only a few studies have measured their impact on students’ learning. Additionally, our review did not document any study about the impact of flipped classrooms on K-12 education. Regarding teaching and learning approaches, it is worth noting that studies referred to STEM or STEAM did not investigate the impact of STEM/STEAM as an interdisciplinary approach to learning but only investigated the impact of ICTs on learning in each domain as a separate subject (science, technology, engineering, arts, mathematics). Hence, we propose future research to also investigate the impact of the STEM/STEAM approach on education. The impact of emerging technologies on education, such as AR, VR, robotics, and AI has also been investigated recently, but more work needs to be done.

Finally, we propose that future studies could focus on the way in which specific factors, e.g., infrastructure and government support, school leadership and management, students’ and teachers’ digital competencies, approaches teachers utilize in the teaching and learning (e.g., blended, online and hybrid learning, flipped classrooms, STEM/STEAM approach, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning), affect the impact of digital technologies on education. We hope that future studies will give detailed insights into the concept of schools’ digital transformation through further investigation of impacts and factors which influence digital capacity and transformation based on the results and the recommendations of the present study.

Data availability statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Archer, K., Savage, R., Sanghera-Sidhu, S., Wood, E., Gottardo, A., & Chen, V. (2014). Examining the effectiveness of technology use in classrooms: A tertiary meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 78 , 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Aromatario, O., Van Hoye, A., Vuillemin, A., Foucaut, A. M., Pommier, J., & Cambon, L. (2019). Using theory of change to develop an intervention theory for designing and evaluating behavior change SDApps for healthy eating and physical exercise: The OCAPREV theory. BMC Public Health, 19 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7828-4

Arztmann, M., Hornstra, L., Jeuring, J., & Kester, L. (2022). Effects of games in STEM education: A meta-analysis on the moderating role of student background characteristics. Studies in Science Education , 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2057732

Bado, N. (2022). Game-based learning pedagogy: A review of the literature. Interactive Learning Environments, 30 (5), 936–948. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1683587

Balanskat, A. (2009). Study of the impact of technology in primary schools – Synthesis Report. Empirica and European Schoolnet. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://erte.dge.mec.pt/sites/default/files/Recursos/Estudos/synthesis_report_steps_en.pdf

Balanskat, A. (2006). The ICT Impact Report: A review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe, European Schoolnet. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from:  https://en.unesco.org/icted/content/ict-impact-report-review-studies-ict-impact-schools-europe

Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT impact report.  European Schoolnet . Retrieved from: http://colccti.colfinder.org/sites/default/files/ict_impact_report_0.pdf

Balyer, A., & Öz, Ö. (2018). Academicians’ views on digital transformation in education. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 5 (4), 809–830. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/441/295

Baragash, R. S., Al-Samarraie, H., Moody, L., & Zaqout, F. (2022). Augmented reality and functional skills acquisition among individuals with special needs: A meta-analysis of group design studies. Journal of Special Education Technology, 37 (1), 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643420910413

Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning . Open Educational Resources Collection . 6. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://irl.umsl.edu/oer/6

Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5 (3), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75275

Blaskó, Z., Costa, P. D., & Schnepf, S. V. (2022). Learning losses and educational inequalities in Europe: Mapping the potential consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of European Social Policy, 32 (4), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287221091687

Bocconi, S., & Lightfoot, M. (2021). Scaling up and integrating the selfie tool for schools’ digital capacity in education and training systems: Methodology and lessons learnt. European Training Foundation . https://doi.org/10.2816/907029,JRC123936 . Accessed 30 June 2022.

Brooks, D. C., & McCormack, M. (2020). Driving Digital Transformation in Higher Education . Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://library.educause.edu/-/media/files/library/2020/6/dx2020.pdf?la=en&hash=28FB8C377B59AFB1855C225BBA8E3CFBB0A271DA

Cachia, R., Chaudron, S., Di Gioia, R., Velicu, A., & Vuorikari, R. (2021). Emergency remote schooling during COVID-19, a closer look at European families. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC125787

Çelik, B. (2022). The effects of computer simulations on students’ science process skills: Literature review. Canadian Journal of Educational and Social Studies, 2 (1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.53103/cjess.v2i1.17

Chapman, C., & Sammons, P. (2013). School Self-Evaluation for School Improvement: What Works and Why? . CfBT Education Trust. 60 Queens Road, Reading, RG1 4BS, England.

Chauhan, S. (2017). A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education, 105 , 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005

Chen, Q., Chan, K. L., Guo, S., Chen, M., Lo, C. K. M., & Ip, P. (2022a). Effectiveness of digital health interventions in reducing bullying and cyberbullying: a meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse , 15248380221082090. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380221082090

Chen, B., Wang, Y., & Wang, L. (2022b). The effects of virtual reality-assisted language learning: A meta-analysis. Sustainability, 14 (6), 3147. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063147

Cheok, M. L., & Wong, S. L. (2015). Predictors of e-learning satisfaction in teaching and learning for school teachers: A literature review. International Journal of Instruction, 8 (1), 75–90.

Cheung, A. C., & Slavin, R. E. (2011). The Effectiveness of Education Technology for Enhancing Reading Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. Center for Research and reform in Education .

Coban, M., Bolat, Y. I., & Goksu, I. (2022). The potential of immersive virtual reality to enhance learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review , 100452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100452

Condie, R., & Munro, R. K. (2007). The impact of ICT in schools-a landscape review. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://oei.org.ar/ibertic/evaluacion/sites/default/files/biblioteca/33_impact_ict_in_schools.pdf

Conrads, J., Rasmussen, M., Winters, N., Geniet, A., Langer, L., (2017). Digital Education Policies in Europe and Beyond: Key Design Principles for More Effective Policies. Redecker, C., P. Kampylis, M. Bacigalupo, Y. Punie (ed.), EUR 29000 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://doi.org/10.2760/462941

Costa, P., Castaño-Muñoz, J., & Kampylis, P. (2021). Capturing schools’ digital capacity: Psychometric analyses of the SELFIE self-reflection tool. Computers & Education, 162 , 104080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104080

Cussó-Calabuig, R., Farran, X. C., & Bosch-Capblanch, X. (2018). Effects of intensive use of computers in secondary school on gender differences in attitudes towards ICT: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 23 (5), 2111–2139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9706-6

Daniel, S. J. (2020). Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects, 49 (1), 91–96.

Delcker, J., & Ifenthaler, D. (2021). Teachers’ perspective on school development at German vocational schools during the Covid-19 pandemic. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30 (1), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1857826 . Accessed 30 June 2022.

Delgado, A., Wardlow, L., O’Malley, K., & McKnight, K. (2015). Educational technology: A review of the integration, resources, and effectiveness of technology in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Information Technology Education Research , 14, 397. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP397-416Delgado1829.pdf

De Silva, M. J., Breuer, E., Lee, L., Asher, L., Chowdhary, N., Lund, C., & Patel, V. (2014). Theory of change: A theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council’s framework for complex interventions. Trials, 15 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-267

Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Costa, P., Karpiński, Z., & Mazza, J. (2020). The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets (Vol. 30275). Publications Office of the European Union.

Google Scholar  

Elkordy, A., & Lovinelli, J. (2020). Competencies, Culture, and Change: A Model for Digital Transformation in K12 Educational Contexts. In D. Ifenthaler, S. Hofhues, M. Egloffstein, & C. Helbig (Eds.), Digital Transformation of Learning Organizations (pp. 203–219). Springer.

Eng, T. S. (2005). The impact of ICT on learning: A review of research. International Education Journal, 6 (5), 635–650.

European Commission. (2020). Digital Education Action Plan 2021 – 2027. Resetting education and training for the digital age. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/default/files/document-library-docs/deap-communication-sept2020_en.pdf

European Commission. (2019). 2 nd survey of schools: ICT in education. Objective 1: Benchmark progress in ICT in schools . Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://data.europa.eu/euodp/data/storage/f/2019-03-19T084831/FinalreportObjective1-BenchmarkprogressinICTinschools.pdf

Eurydice. (2019). Digital Education at School in Europe , Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/digital-education-school-europe_en

Escueta, M., Quan, V., Nickow, A. J., & Oreopoulos, P. (2017). Education technology: An evidence-based review. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://ssrn.com/abstract=3031695

Fadda, D., Pellegrini, M., Vivanet, G., & Zandonella Callegher, C. (2022). Effects of digital games on student motivation in mathematics: A meta-analysis in K-12. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38 (1), 304–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12618

Fernández-Gutiérrez, M., Gimenez, G., & Calero, J. (2020). Is the use of ICT in education leading to higher student outcomes? Analysis from the Spanish Autonomous Communities. Computers & Education, 157 , 103969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103969 . Accessed 30 June 2022.

Ferrari, A., Cachia, R., & Punie, Y. (2011). Educational change through technology: A challenge for obligatory schooling in Europe. Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 6964 , 97–110. Retrieved 30 June 2022  https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-642-23985-4.pdf

Fielding, K., & Murcia, K. (2022). Research linking digital technologies to young children’s creativity: An interpretive framework and systematic review. Issues in Educational Research , 32 (1), 105–125. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://www.iier.org.au/iier32/fielding-abs.html

Friedel, H., Bos, B., Lee, K., & Smith, S. (2013). The impact of mobile handheld digital devices on student learning: A literature review with meta-analysis. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3708–3717). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Fu, J. S. (2013). ICT in education: A critical literature review and its implications. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 9 (1), 112–125.

Gaol, F. L., & Prasolova-Førland, E. (2022). Special section editorial: The frontiers of augmented and mixed reality in all levels of education. Education and Information Technologies, 27 (1), 611–623.

Garzón, J., & Acevedo, J. (2019). Meta-analysis of the impact of Augmented Reality on students’ learning gains. Educational Research Review, 27 , 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001

Garzón, J., Baldiris, S., Gutiérrez, J., & Pavón, J. (2020). How do pedagogical approaches affect the impact of augmented reality on education? A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Educational Research Review , 100334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100334

Grgurović, M., Chapelle, C. A., & Shelley, M. C. (2013). A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning. ReCALL, 25 (2), 165–198. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344013000013

Haßler, B., Major, L., & Hennessy, S. (2016). Tablet use in schools: A critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32 (2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12123

Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3 , 275–285.

Hardman, J. (2019). Towards a pedagogical model of teaching with ICTs for mathematics attainment in primary school: A review of studies 2008–2018. Heliyon, 5 (5), e01726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01726

Hattie, J., Rogers, H. J., & Swaminathan, H. (2014). The role of meta-analysis in educational research. In A. D. Reid, P. Hart, & M. A. Peters (Eds.), A companion to research in education (pp. 197–207). Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge . https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332

Higgins, S., Xiao, Z., & Katsipataki, M. (2012). The impact of digital technology on learning: A summary for the education endowment foundation . Education Endowment Foundation and Durham University.

Higgins, K., Huscroft-D’Angelo, J., & Crawford, L. (2019). Effects of technology in mathematics on achievement, motivation, and attitude: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 57(2), 283-319.

Hillmayr, D., Ziernwald, L., Reinhold, F., Hofer, S. I., & Reiss, K. M. (2020). The potential of digital tools to enhance mathematics and science learning in secondary schools: A context-specific meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 153 (1038), 97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103897

Istenic Starcic, A., & Bagon, S. (2014). ICT-supported learning for inclusion of people with special needs: Review of seven educational technology journals, 1970–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45 (2), 202–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12086 . Accessed 30 June 2022.

Jewitt, C., Clark, W., & Hadjithoma-Garstka, C. (2011). The use of learning platforms to organise learning in English primary and secondary schools. Learning, Media and Technology, 36 (4), 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2011.621955

JISC. (2020). What is digital transformation?.  Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/digital-strategy-framework-for-university-leaders/what-is-digital-transformation

Kalati, A. T., & Kim, M. S. (2022). What is the effect of touchscreen technology on young children’s learning?: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies , 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10816-5

Kalemkuş, J., & Kalemkuş, F. (2022). Effect of the use of augmented reality applications on academic achievement of student in science education: Meta-analysis review. Interactive Learning Environments , 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2027458

Kao, C.-W. (2014). The effects of digital game-based learning task in English as a foreign language contexts: A meta-analysis. Education Journal, 42 (2), 113–141.

Kampylis, P., Punie, Y., & Devine, J. (2015). Promoting effective digital-age learning - a European framework for digitally competent educational organisations. JRC Technical Reports . https://doi.org/10.2791/54070

Kazu, I. Y., & Yalçin, C. K. (2022). Investigation of the effectiveness of hybrid learning on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Progressive Education, 18 (1), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2022.426.14

Koh, C. (2022). A qualitative meta-analysis on the use of serious games to support learners with intellectual and developmental disabilities: What we know, what we need to know and what we can do. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 69 (3), 919–950.

König, J., Jäger-Biela, D. J., & Glutsch, N. (2020). Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure: Teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career teachers in Germany. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43 (4), 608–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1809650

Lawrence, J. E., & Tar, U. A. (2018). Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integration of ICT in teaching/learning process. Educational Media International, 55 (1), 79–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2018.1439712

Lee, S., Kuo, L. J., Xu, Z., & Hu, X. (2020). The effects of technology-integrated classroom instruction on K-12 English language learners’ literacy development: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1774612

Lei, H., Chiu, M. M., Wang, D., Wang, C., & Xie, T. (2022a). Effects of game-based learning on students’ achievement in science: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research . https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211064543

Lei, H., Wang, C., Chiu, M. M., & Chen, S. (2022b). Do educational games affect students’ achievement emotions? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning., 38 (4), 946–959. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12664

Liao, Y. K. C., Chang, H. W., & Chen, Y. W. (2007). Effects of computer application on elementary school student’s achievement: A meta-analysis of students in Taiwan. Computers in the Schools, 24 (3–4), 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v24n03_04

Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22 (3), 215–243.

Liu, M., Pang, W., Guo, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). A meta-analysis of the effect of multimedia technology on creative performance. Education and Information Technologies , 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10981-1

Lu, Z., Chiu, M. M., Cui, Y., Mao, W., & Lei, H. (2022). Effects of game-based learning on students’ computational thinking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research . https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221100740

Martinez, L., Gimenes, M., & Lambert, E. (2022). Entertainment video games for academic learning: A systematic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research . https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211053848

Mayne, J. (2015). Useful theory of change models. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 30 (2), 119–142. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.230

Moran, J., Ferdig, R. E., Pearson, P. D., Wardrop, J., & Blomeyer, R. L., Jr. (2008). Technology and reading performance in the middle-school grades: A meta-analysis with recommendations for policy and practice. Journal of Literacy Research, 40 (1), 6–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862960802070483

OECD. (2015). Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection . PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en

OECD. (2021). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/oecd-digital-education-outlook-2021_589b283f-en

Pan, Y., Ke, F., & Xu, X. (2022). A systematic review of the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings. Educational Research Review, 36 , 100448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100448

Pettersson, F. (2021). Understanding digitalization and educational change in school by means of activity theory and the levels of learning concept. Education and Information Technologies, 26 (1), 187–204.

Pihir, I., Tomičić-Pupek, K., & Furjan, M. T. (2018). Digital transformation insights and trends. In Central European Conference on Information and Intelligent Systems (pp. 141–149). Faculty of Organization and Informatics Varazdin. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from https://www.proquest.com/conference-papers-proceedings/digital-transformation-insights-trends/docview/2125639934/se-2

Punie, Y., Zinnbauer, D., & Cabrera, M. (2006). A review of the impact of ICT on learning. Working Paper prepared for DG EAC. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: http://www.eurosfaire.prd.fr/7pc/doc/1224678677_jrc47246n.pdf

Quah, C. Y., & Ng, K. H. (2022). A systematic literature review on digital storytelling authoring tool in education: January 2010 to January 2020. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 38 (9), 851–867. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1972608

Ran, H., Kim, N. J., & Secada, W. G. (2022). A meta-analysis on the effects of technology’s functions and roles on students’ mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms. Journal of computer assisted learning, 38 (1), 258–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12611

Ređep, N. B. (2021). Comparative overview of the digital preparedness of education systems in selected CEE countries. Center for Policy Studies. CEU Democracy Institute .

Rott, B., & Marouane, C. (2018). Digitalization in schools–organization, collaboration and communication. In Digital Marketplaces Unleashed (pp. 113–124). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Savva, M., Higgins, S., & Beckmann, N. (2022). Meta-analysis examining the effects of electronic storybooks on language and literacy outcomes for children in grades Pre-K to grade 2. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38 (2), 526–564. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12623

Schmid, R. F., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Surkes, M. A., Wade, C. A., & Woods, J. (2014). The effects of technology use in postsecondary education: A meta-analysis of classroom applications. Computers & Education, 72 , 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.11.002

Schuele, C. M., & Justice, L. M. (2006). The importance of effect sizes in the interpretation of research: Primer on research: Part 3. The ASHA Leader, 11 (10), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.FTR4.11102006.14

Schwabe, A., Lind, F., Kosch, L., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2022). No negative effects of reading on screen on comprehension of narrative texts compared to print: A meta-analysis. Media Psychology , 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2022.2070216

Sellar, S. (2015). Data infrastructure: a review of expanding accountability systems and large-scale assessments in education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36 (5), 765–777. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.931117

Stock, W. A. (1994). Systematic coding for research synthesis. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis, 236 (pp. 125–138). Russel Sage.

Su, J., Zhong, Y., & Ng, D. T. K. (2022). A meta-review of literature on educational approaches for teaching AI at the K-12 levels in the Asia-Pacific region. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence , 100065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100065

Su, J., & Yang, W. (2022). Artificial intelligence in early childhood education: A scoping review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3 , 100049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100049

Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Liu, T. C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94 , 252–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008

Talan, T., Doğan, Y., & Batdı, V. (2020). Efficiency of digital and non-digital educational games: A comparative meta-analysis and a meta-thematic analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52 (4), 474–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1743798

Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational research, 81 (1), 4–28. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310393361

Tamim, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Pickup, D., Bernard, R. M., & El Saadi, L. (2015). Tablets for teaching and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from: http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/1012/2015_Tamim-et-al_Tablets-for-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf

Tang, C., Mao, S., Xing, Z., & Naumann, S. (2022). Improving student creativity through digital technology products: A literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 44 , 101032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101032

Tolani-Brown, N., McCormac, M., & Zimmermann, R. (2011). An analysis of the research and impact of ICT in education in developing country contexts. In ICTs and sustainable solutions for the digital divide: Theory and perspectives (pp. 218–242). IGI Global.

Trucano, M. (2005). Knowledge Maps: ICTs in Education. Washington, DC: info Dev / World Bank. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496513.pdf

Ulum, H. (2022). The effects of online education on academic success: A meta-analysis study. Education and Information Technologies, 27 (1), 429–450.

Underwood, J. D. (2009). The impact of digital technology: A review of the evidence of the impact of digital technologies on formal education. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/10491

Verschaffel, L., Depaepe, F., & Mevarech, Z. (2019). Learning Mathematics in metacognitively oriented ICT-Based learning environments: A systematic review of the literature. Education Research International , 2019 . https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3402035

Villena-Taranilla, R., Tirado-Olivares, S., Cózar-Gutiérrez, R., & González-Calero, J. A. (2022). Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35 , 100434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100434

Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Cox, M., Knezek, D., & ten Brummelhuis, A. (2013). Under which conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? A call to action. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29 (1), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00453.x

Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., & Cabrera, M. (2020). Emerging technologies and the teaching profession: Ethical and pedagogical considerations based on near-future scenarios  (No. JRC120183). Joint Research Centre. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC120183

Wang, L. H., Chen, B., Hwang, G. J., Guan, J. Q., & Wang, Y. Q. (2022). Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 9 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00344-0

Wen, X., & Walters, S. M. (2022). The impact of technology on students’ writing performances in elementary classrooms: A meta-analysis. Computers and Education Open, 3 , 100082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100082

Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C. H., & Chang, C. (2016). Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 86 (4), 1052–1084. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316628645

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project has received funding under Grant Agreement No Ref Ares (2021) 339036 7483039 as well as funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Grant Agreement No 739578 and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus through the Deputy Ministry of Research, Innovation and Digital Policy. The UVa co-authors would like also to acknowledge funding from the European Regional Development Fund and the National Research Agency of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, under project grant PID2020-112584RB-C32.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

CYENS Center of Excellence & Cyprus University of Technology (Cyprus Interaction Lab), Cyprus, CYENS Center of Excellence & Cyprus University of Technology, Nicosia-Limassol, Cyprus

Stella Timotheou, Ourania Miliou & Andri Ioannou

Universidad de Valladolid (UVA), Spain, Valladolid, Spain

Yiannis Dimitriadis, Sara Villagrá Sobrino, Nikoleta Giannoutsou & Alejandra Martínez Monés

JRC - Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, Seville, Spain

Romina Cachia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andri Ioannou .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest, additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Timotheou, S., Miliou, O., Dimitriadis, Y. et al. Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review. Educ Inf Technol 28 , 6695–6726 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11431-8

Download citation

Received : 04 May 2022

Accepted : 27 October 2022

Published : 21 November 2022

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11431-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Digital technologies
• Digital capacity
• Digital transformation
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

IMPACT OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY ON THE STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION

• August 2020

• Gitarattan International Business School

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Shahrooz Farjad
• Nahid Hosseini

• Int J Educ Manag

• Kunal Sharma

• P G Cabanatan
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

• ACADEMIC ADVICE
• INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

How Does Technology Impact Student Learning?

• June 3, 2022

Table of Contents

Use of technology in modern education, putting students’ knowledge into action, sharpening students’ critical thinking, increased collaboration, better communication, personalized learning opportunities, enriching the classroom with technology, better comprehension, interactivity and class engagement, exploring complex matters, time-saving: effective learning, combined learning methodologies, will technology prevail over traditional learning, final thoughts.

Traditional face-to-face classes have served as an effective method of learning and teaching for the longest time. It has produced visible and satisfactory results and hasn’t been questioned until the world faced a common enemy, the CoVid-19 pandemic that stopped everyone from attending the traditional in-person classes.

That situation proved that technology could be sufficient and deliver the same, if not better, results in the learning process. Technology clearly impacts education in various ways. If you are curious to learn more about this impact, read this guide as it answers the question ”How does technology impact student learning?”

In today’s day and age, technology has incorporated itself into every aspect of our lives, including the education field. It is a tool that helps us complete complex tasks quickly and efficiently.

However, it is necessary to keep in mind that technology is a tool for education, but it can’t solve the problems itself. The usefulness of educational technology lies in what educators do with it and how they use it to best meet the needs of their students.

The appropriate use of digital learning tools in the classroom can boost student engagement, assist teachers in improving lesson plans, and enable personalized learning. It also helps students to develop critical thinking skills.

Virtual classrooms, augmented reality (AR), videos, different robots, and other technology tools can not only make the class more interesting, but they can also develop more inclusive practices that foster cooperation and intellectual curiosity while also allowing teachers to collect data on student performance.

Benefits of Technology in Education

We all use technology in some form or another in our daily activities. As time passes, it has become more important in our lives, changing the way we consume and process information.

The influence of technology can be seen in every area of our lives; however, the impact of technology on education has been the most noticeable in recent years. Schools are incorporating more and more technology into the classroom to keep up with technological advances in hopes of preparing students for the rapidly changing world of technology. It has also become pivotal in helping teachers develop their teaching classes based on student’s learning styles .

One of the most significant benefits of using technology in education is putting students’ knowledge and skills into action. Students earn beneficial knowledge through online classes and interactions with their teachers and other peer students. However, it is very important to put these new skills into practice and action.

Technology enables students to put their earned knowledge into practice through different applications. The incorporation of technology into the classroom helps teachers to easily assign various tasks and assignments that allow students to put their knowledge and experience into action and develop the ability to apply their knowledge to create a solution to a situation, problem, or event.

Technology will have an impact on students’ critical thinking skills depending on a variety of elements, including the type of technology used and the context in which it is used.

It is a well-known fact that the use of technology in the classroom can make activities and the learning process more engaging. Technology has the ability to engage multiple senses and can increase students’ investment in the material.

Appropriate classroom technology boosts students’ academic achievement, self-confidence, motivation in class, and attendance. Technology facilitates students’ transition from sitting attentively and listening to more hands-on learning.

In addition, technology influences critical thinking by assisting students in applying what they’ve learned to real-life situations and developing problem-solving skills, both of which are essential components of critical thinking.

Collaboration can be aided by educational technology. Teachers can communicate with students during lessons, but students can also interact with one another. Students collaborate to solve problems through online classes and educational games.

Students can share their ideas and thoughts and encourage one another in collaborative activities. Simultaneously, technology allows for one-on-one interaction with teachers. Students can ask questions about the classroom and receive additional assistance with the difficult-to-understand subject matter. Students can upload homework from home, and teachers can access and view submitted assignments on their devices.

Numerous studies have found that implementing instructional technology improves overall student motivation and engagement in learning. More specifically, technology engages students behaviorally, emotionally, and cognitively. Whether technology is used in class or after school, students have more opportunities to communicate with instructors, collaborate with peers, and participate in the learning process.

Web-conferencing software, blogs, wikis, social networking sites, and digital games are specific examples of technology that have been shown to improve student engagement and communication.

Students can use technology to connect with people in their classrooms and around the world. Learning how to collaborate on projects using digital tools prepares students for almost any career.

Connecting with students across the globe promotes cultural learning and actually teaches how to collaborate with people who are different from them. While the internet can be an unpleasant place full of hate at times, it can provide a tremendous sense of community and support when used wisely.

Classroom websites can benefit students of all ages. They frequently foster student connections and provide a space for them to collaborate on team projects. They also help learners by instilling a sense of belonging and community in them.

Websites, which are typically filled with student work, classroom updates, and assignments, simulate the experience of being a member of an online forum or group. Students are able to gain experience designing, editing, and uploading files to the site.

It has become difficult and critical to expand your skillset with hectic schedules and demanding lifestyles. This is where technology comes in. Education is more convenient than ever, with virtual lessons gradually replacing traditional lectures.

Students can plan their time and learn at a convenient time for them. They can also pursue subjects and courses outside of their course curriculum to broaden their knowledge.

Technology enables continuous access to information and knowledge. Classes can be completed entirely online using a laptop or mobile device. Learning that is hybrid combines the use of technology from almost anywhere with regular in-person classroom sessions. It is possible to use technology to tailor learning plans for each student in both scenarios. Lessons can be designed based on student interests and strengths.

Another advantage is that students can learn at their own pace. Students can rewatch videos in the lesson plan when they need to review class material to better understand key concepts. In addition, teachers can use the data generated by these online activities to see which students struggled with certain subjects and offer extra help and support.

The Impact of Technology on Student Learning

The use of technology has helped students and teachers create practical and easily-accessible teaching and learning environment.

A very important technological impact on education is increased interactivity and class engagement. In addition, better overall comprehension, practical learning, time management, and combined learning methodologies are just some of the impacts that technology has had on student learning.

✅ Request information on BAU's programs TODAY!

Choosing the right technology to incorporate into the classroom can be challenging. However, defining your learning objectives can assist you in determining which tools will be most beneficial.

It is true that not all schools can afford a one-to-one device ratio in the classroom. In situations where there are many more students than teachers, digital tools can assist in providing personalized guidance to each student. While teachers meet in private with other students, personalized digital applications can guarantee that the rest of the students are using their devices to work on their particular areas of improvement.

Through the use of technology, every student basically has the world in their hands. With just a few clicks, students can easily access all the information and materials they need in order to comprehend different topics better and succeed in the process.

In certain situations, every student can face problems dealing with specific topics, and thanks to technology, this is no longer a problem since they can quickly look it up in different search engines or even ask for more explanation from their instructors. Thanks to the use of technology, instructors are always an email away, making it easier for students to connect with them and get all the necessary help.

When technology is seamlessly and carefully incorporated into the classroom, students not only become more engaged but also begin to take more control over the learning process.

Effective technology integration alters the dynamics of the classroom, stimulating student-centered project-based learning. When using technology during the learning process, students are able to engage with their teachers and other students quickly and easily without wasting class time through chat rooms and other available applications.

As mentioned previously, during the learning process, students will inevitably face obstacles and different difficulties. In addition, they may be required to explore matters that are complex and challenging for them.

However, the incorporation of technology into the learning process has made it easy for students as well as teachers to access all the materials and sources that would help to explore and solve complex matters they may encounter during the learning and teaching process.

It is clear that both teachers and students make the most of what technology has to offer. One of the most significant advantages of using technology in the classroom is that it saves a lot of time.

A number of apps are available to assist teachers in taking attendance so that the task does not consume too much of their time. Even if the teacher is busy getting ready for class, students can sign their names on a tablet as they walk in.

In addition, the use of technology can completely eliminate numerous different problems; for instance, when students can access their assignments online, photocopying and stapling are no longer required.

Furthermore, with technological platforms that instantly interpret test answers on a large scale, grading is a piece of cake. Many apps provide teachers with status reports, allowing them to view each student’s progress. These reports also highlight opportunities for improvement, allowing teachers to identify learning difficulties earlier in the school year. Technology not only makes grading more accessible for teachers, but it also helps students get the help and attention they require.

Technology allows teachers to adapt every style of learning. Whether students learn best through listening to lectures , reading, illustrations, or recordings, technology has the ability to accommodate every type of learning that students use and prefer.

Students can learn at their convenience by using online videos, audiobooks, interactive online games, and other resources. And, because online material is typically updated, teachers and students can always get the most up-to-date information. In addition, teachers can combine different learning methodologies while using technology in order to best fit everybody’s needs.

Modern technology has completely transformed the educational system. The internet-enabled classrooms have made education available to anyone who wants to learn anywhere in the world, at any time, on any subject.

In contrast to the traditional face-to-face classrooms, which have a limited capacity of students, virtual classrooms can accommodate any number of students. And, when it comes to learning, there is an infinite amount of information available for free or at a reasonable cost.

There’s no denying that we’re becoming a more technologically oriented society. Understanding how to use technology, from digital menus to self-driving cars, helps prepare students for the future. Early learning of technology skills can help students to grow in their careers and personal lives. Therefore, whether technology will prevail over traditional learning or not, it is very beneficial for students to be up-to-date with the latest educational methods.

While education technology is generally viewed as a threat, and it does have limitations, incorporating it into your classroom practices provides students with a new way to better interact and engage with course material. Thanks to the use of technology tools, education is no longer restricted to the four walls of your classroom. The internet and social media do not have to be a source of distraction. After finding out how technology helps students learn, as a teacher, you can integrate it into lesson plans and help both yourself and students to create improved learning outcomes.

Bay Atlantic University

Leave a reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You May Also Like

• 6 minute read

Externship vs. Internship: Key Differences

• July 28, 2022
• 4 minute read

A Guide to Different Types of Higher Education Institutions in the U.S.

• July 17, 2020
• 30 shares 30 0 0
• 5 minute read

Full-Time vs. Part-Time Student: What Are the Differences?

• October 18, 2022

Non-Profit vs. For-Profit Colleges: Main Differences

• January 31, 2023

What Are the Best 6 Entry Level Cyber Security Jobs?

• June 5, 2020
• 3 minute read

How to Become a Computer Support Specialist: Education & Skills

• September 9, 2020

Navigate the Levels of English as a Second Language

• April 24, 2024

Learning English as A Second Language: A Comprehensive Guide

Mastering esl teacher skills: a comprehensive guide to success, esl vs. efl: what is the difference, request information on bau's programs today.

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Listen to the essay, as read by Antero Garcia, associate professor in the Graduate School of Education.

As a professor of education and a former public school teacher, I’ve seen digital tools change lives in schools.

I’ve documented the ways mobile technology like phones can transform student engagement in my own classroom.

I’ve explored how digital tools might network powerful civic learning and dialogue for classrooms across the country – elements of education that are crucial for sustaining our democracy today.

And, like everyone, I’ve witnessed digital technologies make schooling safer in the midst of a global pandemic. Zoom and Google Classroom, for instance, allowed many students to attend classrooms virtually during a period when it was not feasible to meet in person.

So I want to tell you that I think technologies are changing education for the better and that we need to invest more in them – but I just can’t.

Given the substantial amount of scholarly time I’ve invested in documenting the life-changing possibilities of digital technologies, it gives me no pleasure to suggest that these tools might be slowly poisoning us. Despite their purported and transformational value, I’ve been wondering if our investment in educational technology might in fact be making our schools worse.

Let me explain.

When I was a classroom teacher, I loved relying on the latest tools to create impressive and immersive experiences for my students. We would utilize technology to create class films, produce social media profiles for the Janie Crawfords, the Holden Caulfields, and other literary characters we studied, and find playful ways to digitally share our understanding of the ideas we studied in our classrooms.

As a teacher, technology was a way to build on students’ interests in pop culture and the world around them. This was exciting to me.

But I’ve continued to understand that the aspects of technology I loved weren’t actually about technology at all – they were about creating authentic learning experiences with young people. At the heart of these digital explorations were my relationships with students and the trust we built together.

“Part of why I’ve grown so skeptical about this current digital revolution is because of how these tools reshape students’ bodies and their relation to the world around them.”

I do see promise in the suite of digital tools that are available in classrooms today. But my research focus on platforms – digital spaces like Amazon, Netflix, and Google that reshape how users interact in online environments – suggests that when we focus on the trees of individual tools, we ignore the larger forest of social and cognitive challenges.

Most people encounter platforms every day in their online social lives. From the few online retail stores where we buy groceries to the small handful of sites that stream our favorite shows and media content, platforms have narrowed how we use the internet today to a small collection of Silicon Valley behemoths. Our social media activities, too, are limited to one or two sites where we check on the updates, photos, and looped videos of friends and loved ones.

These platforms restrict our online and offline lives to a relatively small number of companies and spaces – we communicate with a finite set of tools and consume a set of media that is often algorithmically suggested. This centralization of internet – a trend decades in the making – makes me very uneasy.

From willfully hiding the negative effects of social media use for vulnerable populations to creating tools that reinforce racial bias, today’s platforms are causing harm and sowing disinformation for young people and adults alike. The deluge of difficult ethical and pedagogical questions around these tools are not being broached in any meaningful way in schools – even adults aren’t sure how to manage their online lives.

You might ask, “What does this have to do with education?” Platforms are also a large part of how modern schools operate. From classroom management software to attendance tracking to the online tools that allowed students to meet safely during the pandemic, platforms guide nearly every student interaction in schools today. But districts are utilizing these tools without considering the wider spectrum of changes that they have incurred alongside them.

Antero Garcia, associate professor of education (Image credit: Courtesy Antero Garcia)

For example, it might seem helpful for a school to use a management tool like Classroom Dojo (a digital platform that can offer parents ways to interact with and receive updates from their family’s teacher) or software that tracks student reading and development like Accelerated Reader for day-to-day needs. However, these tools limit what assessment looks like and penalize students based on flawed interpretations of learning.

Another problem with platforms is that they, by necessity, amass large swaths of data. Myriad forms of educational technology exist – from virtual reality headsets to e-readers to the small sensors on student ID cards that can track when students enter schools. And all of this student data is being funneled out of schools and into the virtual black boxes of company databases.

Part of why I’ve grown so skeptical about this current digital revolution is because of how these tools reshape students’ bodies and their relation to the world around them. Young people are not viewed as complete human beings but as boxes checked for attendance, for meeting academic progress metrics, or for confirming their location within a school building. Nearly every action that students perform in schools – whether it’s logging onto devices, accessing buildings, or sharing content through their private online lives – is noticed and recorded. Children in schools have become disembodied from their minds and their hearts. Thus, one of the greatest and implicit lessons that kids learn in schools today is that they must sacrifice their privacy in order to participate in conventional, civic society.

The pandemic has only made the situation worse. At its beginnings, some schools relied on software to track students’ eye movements, ostensibly ensuring that kids were paying attention to the tasks at hand. Similarly, many schools required students to keep their cameras on during class time for similar purposes. These might be seen as in the best interests of students and their academic growth, but such practices are part of a larger (and usually more invisible) process of normalizing surveillance in the lives of youth today.

I am not suggesting that we completely reject all of the tools at our disposal – but I am urging for more caution. Even the seemingly benign resources we might use in our classrooms today come with tradeoffs. Every Wi-Fi-connected, “smart” device utilized in schools is an investment in time, money, and expertise in technology over teachers and the teaching profession.

Our focus on fixing or saving schools via digital tools assumes that the benefits and convenience that these invisible platforms offer are worth it.

But my ongoing exploration of how platforms reduce students to quantifiable data suggests that we are removing the innovation and imagination of students and teachers in the process.

Antero Garcia is associate professor of education in the Graduate School of Education .

In Their Own Words is a collaboration between the Stanford Public Humanities Initiative  and Stanford University Communications.

If you’re a Stanford faculty member (in any discipline or school) who is interested in writing an essay for this series, please reach out to Natalie Jabbar at [email protected] .

How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Do you wish to explore the use of information technology in daily life? Essays like the one below discuss this topic in depth. Read on to find out more.

Introduction

Technology in communication, technology in healthcare, technology in government, technology in education, technology in business, negative impact of technology.

Technology is a vital component of life in the modern world. People are so dependent on technology that they cannot live without it. Technology is important and useful in all areas of human life today. It has made life easy and comfortable by making communication and transport faster and easier (Harrington, 2011, p.35).

It has made education accessible to all and has improved healthcare services. Technology has made the world smaller and a better place to live. Without technology, fulfilling human needs would be a difficult task. Before the advent of technology, human beings were still fulfilling their needs. However, with technology, fulfillment of needs has become easier and faster.

It is unimaginable how life would be without technology. Technology is useful in the following areas: transport, communication, interaction, education, healthcare, and business (Harrington, 2011, p.35). Despite its benefits, technology has negative impacts on society. Examples of negative impacts of technology include the development of controversial medical practices such as stem cell research and the embracement of solitude due to changes in interaction methods. For example, social media has changed the way people interact.

Technology has led to the introduction of cloning, which is highly controversial because of its ethical and moral implications. The growth of technology has changed the world significantly and has influenced life in a great way. Technology is changing every day and continuing to influence areas of communication, healthcare, governance, education, and business.

Technology has contributed fundamentally in improving people’s lifestyles. It has improved communication by incorporating the Internet and devices such as mobile phones into people’s lives. The first technological invention to have an impact on communication was the discovery of the telephone by Graham Bell in 1875.

Since then, other inventions such as the Internet and the mobile phone have made communication faster and easier. For example, the Internet has improved ways through which people exchange views, opinions, and ideas through online discussions (Harrington, 2011, p.38). Unlike in the past when people who were in different geographical regions could not easily communicate, technology has eradicated that communication barrier. People in different geographical regions can send and receive messages within seconds.

Online discussions have made it easy for people to keep in touch. In addition, they have made socializing easy. Through online discussions, people find better solutions to problems by exchanging opinions and ideas (Harrington, 2011, p.39). Examples of technological inventions that facilitate online discussions include emails, online forums, dating websites, and social media sites.

Another technological invention that changed communication was the mobile phone. In the past, people relied on letters to send messages to people who were far away. Mobile phones have made communication efficient and reliable. They facilitate both local and international communication.

In addition, they enable people to respond to emergencies and other situations that require quick responses. Other uses of cell phones include the transfer of data through applications such as infrared and Bluetooth, entertainment, and their use as miniature personal computers (Harrington, 2011, p.40).

The latest versions of mobile phones are fitted with applications that enable them to access the Internet. This provides loads of information in diverse fields for mobile phone users. For business owners, mobile phones enhance the efficiency of their business operations because they are able to keep in touch with their employees and suppliers (Harrington, 2011, p.41). In addition, they are able to receive any information about the progress of their business in a short period of time.

Technology has contributed significantly to the healthcare sector. For example, it has made vital contributions in the fields of disease prevention and health promotion. Technology has aided in the understanding of the pathophysiology of diseases, which has led to the prevention of many diseases. For example, understanding the pathophysiology of the gastrointestinal tract and blood diseases has aided in their effective management (Harrington, 2011, p.49).

Technology has enabled practitioners in the medical field to make discoveries that have changed the healthcare sector. These include the discovery that peptic ulceration is caused by a bacterial infection and the development of drugs to treat schizophrenia and depressive disorders that afflict a greater portion of the population (Harrington, 2011, p.53). The development of vaccines against polio and measles led to their total eradication.

Children who are vaccinated against these diseases are not at risk of contracting the diseases. The development of vaccines was facilitated by technology, without which certain diseases would still be causing deaths in great numbers. Vaccines play a significant role in disease prevention.

Technology is used in health promotion in different ways. First, health practitioners use various technological methods to improve health care. eHealth refers to the use of information technology to improve healthcare by providing information on the Internet to people. In this field, technology is used in three main ways.

These include its use as an intervention tool, its use in conducting research studies, and its use for professional development (Lintonen et al, 2008, p. 560). According to Lintonenet al (2008), “e-health is the use of emerging information and communications technology, especially the internet, to improve or enable health and healthcare.” (p.560). It is largely used to support health care interventions that are mainly directed towards individual persons. Secondly, it is used to improve the well-being of patients during recovery.

Bedside technology has contributed significantly in helping patients recover. For example, medical professionals have started using the Xbox computer technology to develop a revolutionary process that measures limb movements in stroke patients (Tanja-Dijkstra, 2011, p.48). This helps them recover their manual competencies. The main aim of this technology is to help stroke patients do more exercises to increase their recovery rate and reduce the frequency of visits to the hospital (Lintonen et al, 2008, p. 560).

The government has utilized technology in two main areas. These include the facilitation of the delivery of citizen services and the improvement of defense and national security (Scholl, 2010, p.62). The government is spending large sums of money on wireless technologies, mobile gadgets, and technological applications. This is in an effort to improve their operations and ensure that the needs of citizens are fulfilled.

For example, in order to enhance safety and improve service delivery, Cisco developed a networking approach known as Connected Communities. This networking system connects citizens with the government and the community. The system was developed to improve the safety and security of citizens, improve service delivery by the government, empower citizens, and encourage economic development.

The government uses technology to provide information and services to citizens. This encourages economic development and fosters social inclusion (Scholl, 2010, p.62). Technology is also useful in improving national security and the safety of citizens. It integrates several wireless technologies and applications that make it easy for security agencies to access and share important information effectively. Technology is widely used by security agencies to reduce vulnerability to terrorism.

Technologically advanced gadgets are used in airports, hospitals, shopping malls, and public buildings to screen people for explosives and potentially dangerous materials or gadgets that may compromise the safety of citizens (Bonvillian and Sharp, 2001, par2). In addition, security agencies use surveillance systems to restrict access to certain areas. They also use technologically advanced screening and tracking methods to improve security in places that are prone to terrorist attacks (Bonvillian and Sharp, 2001, par3).

Technology has made significant contributions in the education sector. It is used to enhance teaching and learning through the use of different technological methods and resources. These include classrooms with digital tools such as computers that facilitate learning, online learning schools, blended learning, and a wide variety of online learning resources (Barnett, 1997, p.74). Digital learning tools that are used in classrooms facilitate learning in different ways. They expand the scope of learning materials and experiences for students, improve student participation in learning, make learning easier and quick, and reduce the cost of education (Barnett, 1997, p.75). For example, online schools and free learning materials reduce the costs that are incurred in purchasing learning materials. They are readily available online. In addition, they reduce the expenses that are incurred in program delivery.

Technology has improved the process of teaching by introducing new methods that facilitate connected teaching. These methods virtually connect teachers to their students. Teachers are able to provide learning materials and the course content to students effectively. In addition, teachers are able to give students an opportunity to personalize learning and access all learning materials that they provide. Technology enables teachers to serve the academic needs of different students.

In addition, it enhances learning because the problem of distance is eradicated, and students can contact their teachers easily (Barnett, 1997, p.76). Technology plays a significant role in changing how teachers teach. It enables educators to evaluate the learning abilities of different students in order to devise teaching methods that are most efficient in the achievement of learning objectives.

Through technology, teachers are able to relate well with their students, and they are able to help and guide them. Educators assume the role of coaches, advisors, and experts in their areas of teaching. Technology helps make teaching and learning enjoyable and gives it meaning that goes beyond the traditional classroom set-up system (Barnett, 1997, p.81).

Technology is used in the business world to improve efficiency and increase productivity. Most important, technology is used as a tool to foster innovation and creativity (Ray, 2004, p.62). Other benefits of technology to businesses include the reduction of injury risk to employees and improved competitiveness in the markets. For example, many manufacturing businesses use automated systems instead of manual systems. These systems eliminate the costs of hiring employees to oversee manufacturing processes.

They also increase productivity and improve the accuracy of the processes because of the reduction of errors (Ray, 2004, p.63). Technology improves productivity due to Computer-aided Manufacturing (CAM), Computer-integrated Manufacturing (CIM), and Computer-aided Design (CAD). CAM reduces labor costs, increases the speed of production, and ensures a higher level of accuracy (Hunt, 2008, p.44). CIM reduces labor costs, while CAD improves the quality and standards of products and reduces the cost of production.

Another example of the use of technology in improving productivity and output is the use of database systems to store data and information. Many businesses store their data and other information in database systems that make accessibility of information fast, easy, and reliable (Pages, 2010, p.44).

Technology has changed how international business is conducted. With the advent of e-commerce, businesses became able to trade through the Internet on the international market (Ray, 2004, p.69). This means that there is a large market for products and services. In addition, it implies that most markets are open 24 hours a day.

For example, customers can shop for books or music on Amazon.com at any time of the day. E-commerce has given businesses the opportunity to expand and operate internationally. Countries such as China and Brazil are taking advantage of opportunities presented by technology to grow their economy.

E-commerce reduces the complexities involved in conducting international trade (Ray, 2004, p.71). Its many components make international trade easy and fast. For example, a BOES system allows merchants to execute trade transactions in any language or currency, monitor all steps involved in transactions, and calculate all costs involved, such as taxes and freight costs (Yates, 2006, p.426).

Financial researchers claim that a BOES system is capable of reducing the cost of an international transaction by approximately 30% (Ray, 2004, p.74). BOES enables businesses to import and export different products through the Internet. This system of trade is efficient and creates a fair environment in which small and medium-sized companies can compete with large companies that dominate the market.

Despite its many benefits, technology has negative impacts. It has negative impacts on society because it affects communication and has changed the way people view social life. First, people have become more anti-social because of changes in methods of socializing (Harrington, 2008, p.103). Today, one does not need to interact physically with another person in order to establish a relationship.

The Internet is awash with dating sites that are full of people looking for partners and friends. The ease of forming friendships and relationships through the Internet has discouraged many people from engaging in traditional socializing activities. Secondly, technology has affected the economic statuses of many families because of high rates of unemployment. People lose jobs when organizations and businesses embrace technology (Harrington, 2008, p.105).

For example, many employees lose their jobs when manufacturing companies replace them with automated machines that are more efficient and cost-effective. Many families are struggling because of the lack of a constant stream of income. On the other hand, technology has led to the closure of certain companies because the world does not need their services. This is prompted by technological advancements.

For example, the invention of digital cameras forced Kodak to close down because people no longer needed analog cameras. Digital cameras replaced analog cameras because they are easy to use and efficient. Many people lost their jobs due to changes in technology. Thirdly, technology has made people lazy and unwilling to engage in strenuous activities (Harrington, 2008, p.113).

For example, video games have replaced physical activities that are vital in improving the health of young people. Children spend a lot of time watching television and playing video games such that they have little or no time for physical activities. This has encouraged the proliferation of unhealthy eating habits that lead to conditions such as diabetes.

Technology has elicited heated debates in the healthcare sector. Technology has led to medical practices such as stem cell research, implant embryos, and assisted reproduction. Even though these practices have been proven viable, they are highly criticized on the grounds of their moral implications on society.

There are many controversial medical technologies, such as gene therapy, pharmacogenomics, and stem cell research (Hunt, 2008, p.113). The use of genetic research in finding new cures for diseases is imperative and laudable. However, the medical implications of these disease treatment methods and the ethical and moral issues associated with the treatment methods are critical. Gene therapy is mostly rejected by religious people.

They claim that it is against natural law to alter the gene composition of a person in any way (Hunt, 2008, p.114). The use of embryonic stem cells in research is highly controversial, unlike the use of adult stem cells. The controversy exists because of the source of the stem cells. The cells are obtained from embryos. There is a belief among many people that life starts after conception.

Therefore, using embryos in research means killing them to obtain their cells for research. The use of embryo cells in research is considered in the same light as abortion: eliminating a life (Hunt, 2008, p.119). These issues have led to disagreements between the science and the religious worlds.

Technology is a vital component of life in the modern world. People are so dependent on technology that they cannot live without it. Technology is important and useful in all areas of human life today.

It has made life easy and comfortable by making communication faster and travel faster, making movements between places easier, making actions quick, and easing interactions. Technology is useful in the following areas of life: transport, communication, interaction, education, healthcare, and business. Despite its benefits, technology has negative impacts on society.

Technology has eased communication and transport. The discovery of the telephone and the later invention of the mobile phone changed the face of communication entirely. People in different geographical regions can communicate easily and in record time. In the field of health care, technology has made significant contributions in disease prevention and health promotion. The development of vaccines has eradicated certain diseases, and the use of the Internet is vital in promoting health and health care.

The government uses technology to enhance the delivery of services to citizens and the improvement of defense and security. In the education sector, teaching and learning processes have undergone significant changes owing to the impact of technology. Teachers are able to relate to different types of learners, and the learners have access to various resources and learning materials. Businesses benefit from technology through the reduction of costs and increased efficiency of business operations.

Despite the benefits, technology has certain disadvantages. It has negatively affected human interactions and socialization and has led to widespread unemployment. In addition, its application in the healthcare sector has elicited controversies due to certain medical practices such as stem cell research and gene therapy. Technology is very important and has made life easier and more comfortable than it was in the past.

Barnett, L. (1997). Using Technology in Teaching and Learning . New York: Routledge.

Bonvillian, W., and Sharp, K. (2011). Homeland Security Technology . Retrieved from https://issues.org/bonvillian/ .

Harrington, J. (2011). Technology and Society . New York: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

Hunt, S. (2008). Controversies in Treatment Approaches: Gene Therapy, IVF, Stem Cells and Pharmagenomics. Nature Education , 19(1), 112-134.

Lintonen, P., Konu, A., and Seedhouse, D. (2008). Information Technology in Health Promotion. Health Education Research , 23(3), 560-566.

Pages, J., Bikifalvi, A., and De Castro Vila, R. (2010). The Use and Impact of Technology in Factory Environments: Evidence from a Survey of Manufacturing Industry in Spain. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology , 47(1), 182-190.

Ray, R. (2004). Technology Solutions for Growing Businesses . New York: AMACOM Div American Management Association.

Scholl, H. (2010). E-government: Information, Technology and Transformation . New York: M.E. Sharpe.

Tanja-Dijkstra, K. (2011). The Impact of Bedside Technology on Patients’ Well-Being. Health Environments Research & Design Journal (HERD) , 5(1), 43-51.

Yates, J. (2006). How Business Enterprises use Technology: Extending the Demand-Side Turn. Enterprise and Society , 7(3), 422-425.

• Mobile Phones and True Communication
• You Cannot Live Without Mobile Phones
• Future in Marketing using the Mobile Phone
• Inventions That the World Would Do Without
• Technology and Its Impact in the World
• The Evolution of the Automobile & Its Effects on Society
• How Computers Affect Our Lives
• Evolution of Power Production
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, July 2). How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/

"How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." IvyPanda , 2 July 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay'. 2 July.

IvyPanda . 2018. "How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." July 2, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

1. IvyPanda . "How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." July 2, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." July 2, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

• Open access
• Published: 12 June 2024

An integrative review of the impact of allied health student placements on current staff’s knowledge and procedural skills in acute and primary care settings

• Mohammad Hamiduzzaman   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6027-1564 1 ,
• Sarah Miles   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0007-5574-3409 1 ,
• Sarah Crook 1 ,
• Lewis Grove 1 ,
• Jennie Hewitt   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2736-005X 1 ,
• Frances Barraclough   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9230-7277 1 ,
• Peter Hawkins 1 ,
• Erika Campbell 1 ,
• Nicola Buster 1 ,
• Kate Thomson   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9661-299X 2 ,
• Christopher Williams   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8896-0978 1 &
• Vicki Flood   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5310-7221 1  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  657 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

164 Accesses

Metrics details

Staff shortages limit access to health services. The bidirectional benefits of allied health clinical placements are understood in the domains of student learning, health service delivery, and future workforce development. Still, the benefits to current workforce outcomes remain unknown. This review provides insights into the effects of allied health student placements in acute and primary care settings, particularly on healthcare staff's knowledge and procedural skills.

This search was based on the integrative review process established by Whittemore and Knafl in 2005. In October 2023, the first author (MH) searched five major electronic databases: Medline-EBSCO, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus. The CLUSTER model was used to track additional references. The first three authors (MH, SM, and SC) were involved in screening, quality appraisal, and synthesis of the studies. Data were thematically synthesised and analysed.

MeSH headings and keywords were used in key search areas: health education, health professional training, clinical placements, and allied health professions. The systematic search yielded 12 papers on allied health student placements across various healthcare settings in rural and metropolitan areas, with no high-quality methodologies measuring student placements' impact on staff knowledge and skills. Four main themes were identified from the analysis: meaningful student integration in service delivery, targeted educational support to healthcare staff, development of staff procedural skills and confidence, and the mechanisms of why student placements work in this aspect.

Conclusions

This review suggests that offering allied health student placement could be a promising approach to supporting rural healthcare staff in performing patient assessments and treatments proficiently and collaboratively. However, this requires further investigation to confirm.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Healthcare staff shortages limit access to health services [ 1 ]. Four key areas for immediate attention in the Australian health context are food and nutrition, dementia care, the use of restrictive practices, and palliative care [ 2 ]. Allied health professionals have an important role to play in each of these areas. However, there is a critical shortage of allied health professionals and a higher turnover rate among allied health workers across Australia [ 2 , 3 ]. This shortage becomes more pronounced as the number of healthcare staff decreases with increasing remoteness [ 3 ]. Health service disparities persist between rural and metropolitan areas in Australia, with a gap in life expectancies (78 years compared to 82.5 years), a prevalence of chronic disease (21% vs 18% per 100,000 population), and potentially avoidable death rates (775.9 deaths vs 587.9 deaths per 100,000 population) [ 1 , 4 ]. Current funding and employment models have led to issues with recruitment and retention of allied health professionals and a shortage of staff [ 5 , 6 ]. For example, in 2018–19, only 29% of Australians used allied health services [ 7 ]. An additional challenge to upskilling healthcare staff is a lack of professional development opportunities [ 8 , 9 ]. Student placements have been identified as a potential approach for health workforce capacity building and support of health services delivery, especially in rural areas [ 9 , 10 , 11 ].

Various clinical training placement models exist to facilitate learning opportunities for medicine, nursing, and allied health students by integrating them into health service delivery for patients [ 12 ]. These placement models include practice-based learning [ 13 ], experiential learning [ 14 ], service-learning [ 15 ], work-integrated learning [ 16 ], and integrated clinical placements [ 17 ]. Clinical placements benefit students, educational institutions, and healthcare organisations in different ways, including personal growth and professional experience for students, academic rigour and service to the community for universities, and a workforce fit to practice in healthcare organisations. Evidence shows that clinical placements of students with exposure to acute and primary healthcare contexts are associated with better impacts in terms of students’ intellectual transformation [ 18 , 19 , 20 ], workforce capacity building [ 21 , 22 , 23 ], and patient health outcomes [ 24 , 25 ]. There remains a notable gap in research on allied health student placements that builds staff capability.

Educational and training resources designed for clinical supervision of allied health students during their placements can also serve as professional learning opportunities for healthcare staff. Professional development is imperative for healthcare staff to stay up to date with knowledge and technical skills and create innovative treatment planning. Complex and infrequently used clinical skills often deteriorate among health professionals, as confirmed in a systematic review by Main and Anderson [ 25 ] in Australia [ 26 ]. The National Health Workforce Strategy advocates for continuing professional education and training for health professionals so that professionals “maintain, improve, and broaden their knowledge, expertise, and competence, and develop the personal and professional qualities throughout their professional lives” [ 27 ]. Healthcare professionals have reported that ongoing education and training opportunities have improved their knowledge and procedural skills in client (e.g., patients, residents in aged care homes) care [ 28 ]. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, access to online professional development modules and training has improved [ 29 ]. However, a lingering question persists: can the co-creation of training programs and educational modules effectively contribute to the knowledge and skills development of both allied health students and healthcare staff?

A compelling association exists between student placements, health workforce capacity and capability building [ 30 ]. As noted earlier, student placements contribute to workforce recruitment and retention in rural and metropolitan areas by immersing them in health and social care settings. Throughout placements, students benefit from access to tutorials and clinical supervision [ 12 , 15 , 16 ]. Additionally, students and healthcare staff from different disciplines work collaboratively in a team during placements [ 31 ]. Pedagogical frameworks, including social learning theory [ 32 ], social constructivism [ 33 ], interprofessional learning [ 34 ], and community of practice [ 35 ] suggest that individuals working together learn with and from one another. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety in 2021 recommends strengthening allied health services [ 2 ], particularly in rural areas; therefore, a review of existing literature is important to inform how and why the placements work to enhance the capability of healthcare staff in service delivery.

Aims of the study

This review aims to synthesise the effects of allied health student placements on healthcare staff's knowledge and procedural skills in acute and primary care settings.

Two main questions guided this review:

Q1: How do the studies describe the integration of allied health students in services design and delivery in acute and primary care settings? Q2: How do these studies describe the effectiveness of allied health student placements for current healthcare staff’s knowledge and procedural skills in acute and primary care settings?

This review adhered to the five steps of an integrative review process as its foundation, established by Whittemore and Knafl in 2005 [ 36 ]. These steps included problem identification, literature search, data evaluation, data analysis, and presentation. We systematically searched the literature and employed the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) to assess the quality and rigour of the selected papers [ 37 ]. The extracted data were then analysed and presented thematically.

Search strategy

The systematic search for published documents was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines [ 38 ]. In October 2023, the first author (MH) searched five electronic databases: Medline-EBSCO, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and SCOPUS. A combination of MeSH headings and relevant concepts was used in crucial search areas: health education, health professional training, clinical placements, and allied health professions (the full search strategy is available in Table  1 ). The CLUSTER model was also employed to track sibling studies and citations for supplementary references.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The clinical placements are typically designed to immerse health students in real-life experience in acute and primary care settings with the aim of future workforce recruitment. Given the specific focus of this review on the impact of allied health student placements on the knowledge and procedural skills of existing healthcare staff, medical and nursing professions were not included in the search. The search was also limited to certain allied health disciplines based on the discussion with allied health clinicians and health service providers, such as physiotherapy, occupational therapy, dietetics, speech pathology, exercise physiology, social work, optometry, podiatry, psychology, and osteopathy. The inclusion criteria were articles and reports published in English, publication year 2001 to the present, descriptions of actual allied health student placements, and the placements aimed at enhancing the capacity and capabilities of current healthcare staff. Aligning with this review’s objectives and considering the scarcity of studies conducted in rural locations, the search was not restricted solely to rural placements. While the primary outcomes of allied health student placements predominantly centred on student learning, patient health and wellbeing, and workforce recruitment and retention, the studies that explored these aspects as their primary focus were not excluded when they identified the placements’ contribution to healthcare staff. Two reviewers, MH and HG independently screened the records retrieved by title, abstract, and full text. Discrepancies were discussed with a third reviewer, SM.

Quality appraisal

The MMAT criteria were used to assess the quality of studies, using a scale that spanned from 0, indicating no criteria met, to 5, indicating all criteria met, as detailed by Hong et al. in 2018. [ 37 ] To evaluate the studies, two reviewers, MH and HG, conducted separate assessments, allocating scores out of 5 (0—Unclear/No and 1: Yes). Through a consensus-driven process, it was determined that the papers included in this review exhibited a quality level that ranged from moderate (with a score of 3) to high (with a score of 5), as indicated in Table  2 .

Data extraction and analysis

Three reviewers, MH, SM, and SC, read the papers meeting the inclusion criteria multiple times to extract data. The extracted data were recorded separately by these three reviewers into Excel spreadsheets, with any discrepancies carefully cross-checked (Table  2 ). The extracted data included the study characteristics (author, year, country of origin, study design, study participants); characteristics of allied health student placements (placement setting, focus, participants, type of placement, the level of student involvement in service delivery); outcome data for existing healthcare staff’s knowledge and skills, as well as the limitations of these placements. Given that the selected studies were heterogeneous in methodologies, a thematic data synthesis was deemed the most appropriate approach [ 45 ]. The categories and sub-themes were independently identified by the reviewers, MH, SM, and SC, and were subsequently deliberated upon during review team meetings to determine the final themes and validate interpretations.

Figure  1 illustrates the selection process of the studies reviewed. Twelve papers that met the inclusion criteria represented the highest number over the past decade. Among these, eight studies used mixed methods for evaluating the placements, while two were qualitative and two were quantitative methodologies. The selected placements were mainly in Australia (10), with all papers originating from high-income countries, including the USA (1) and Canada (1). The healthcare settings were diverse across the placements; half were in residential aged care homes, while the rest were in hospitals, community health services, clinical skills centres, patient training centres, and non-government health organisations. The study participants included students, patients/residents, healthcare staff, health service managers, clinical educators, and relevant key stakeholders like family members and community organisations. Rural placement was reported in the majority of studies (7), but no studies compared the effects of different locations.

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram of systematic search and selection process

All twelve studies focused on either allied health student learning outcomes or service delivery across a range of settings by placing students. Most placement programs narrowly focused on the professional development of existing healthcare staff, while exclusive focus on this aspect was identified in four placement programs facilitated in hospitals, residential aged care homes, and community health services [ 39 , 47 , 49 , 50 ]. Undergraduate and postgraduate students from different allied health disciplines participated in the placements, including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, nutrition and dietetics, social work, and speech pathology. Some studies featured the collaboration between medicine, nursing, and allied health students [ 40 , 46 , 47 , 50 ]. Various types of placements were discussed, such as clinical placement [ 41 , 48 ]; work-integrated learning [ 42 ]; interprofessional team placement [ 40 , 43 , 49 ]; service-learning placement [ 39 , 44 , 47 , 50 ]; and simulated learning [ 51 ]. Interprofessional education was reported in most of the studies (8), and four studies provided information on the duration of placements, which ranged from four to ten weeks; in addition to detailing the types and focuses of the placements, the synthesis of outcome data revealed four key themes.

Meaningful student integration in service delivery

The integration of allied health students in health service delivery for patients was identified as a powerful and essential part of all placement programs. Student involvement in health service delivery was described by their engagement in a wide range of activities, from administration tasks and priority assessments to developing and implementing treatment plans and evaluating interventions. Eight studies reported direct engagement of students in developing treatment plans and designing and delivering services. Examples included person centred exercise programs, developing a sensory garden, implementing craft and cooking sessions for residents with dementia and training and upskilling care staff [ 39 , 40 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 ]. In contrast, four placement programs were restricted to organisations’ priority assessments [ 41 , 42 , 51 ]; shadowing a care worker and spending time with residents [ 43 ]; and planning and evaluation of interventions [ 41 , 42 , 51 ]. Student involvement in delivering direct health services to patients was identified in both urban and rural healthcare settings.

The extent of students’ involvement in delivering health services to patients was somewhat related to the degree to which the placement supported the capacity and capability building of existing healthcare staff. Integrating students in administrative tasks, priority assessments, and evaluation of the treatments contributed to staffing management and timely task completion, as well as a cultural shift towards collaboration among the staff [ 41 , 42 , 43 , 51 ]. Direct engagement of students in treatment plans and patient/resident care management was highly beneficial to a healthcare staff’s reflection and clinical reasoning [ 39 , 40 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 50 ]. Of note, none of the studies measured the causal relationships between the level of student integration in service delivery and the professional development of healthcare staff.

Targeted education support to healthcare staff

All studies reported that the placements led to an increase in knowledge, or had the potential to do so, for both students and healthcare staff. During these placements, various learning activities were offered to students, which, in turn, enhanced the knowledge of healthcare staff. For instance, learning activities like Grand Rounds and interprofessional education were implemented [ 44 , 46 , 47 , 50 , 51 ]. Key areas of learning for healthcare staff were identified in one evaluation study of interprofessional team placement in residential aged care homes [ 50 ], including mealtime positioning, post-stroke positioning, and medication management in palliative care. Additionally, one qualitative study described how the placements allowed healthcare staff to reorient themselves with the theories and methods behind the treatments [ 46 ]. Attending education and training sessions also helped the rural healthcare staff become familiar with the roles and responsibilities of other health disciplines [ 44 ].

Three studies reported that students generated new data and knowledge based on local evidence during their placements [ 41 , 42 , 50 ]. Two of the studies included rural placement of students [ 41 , 50 ], but all the studies confirmed that the students provided healthcare staff with current and innovative knowledge. This new knowledge supported the staff in strategic planning and prioritising patient assessments and treatments.

Development of staff procedural skills and confidence

Eight studies highlighted that allied health student placements were useful in developing procedural skills among healthcare staff. In four of these placements, student training sessions enhanced the healthcare staff’s efficiency in service delivery by reorienting them with the standards and procedures of the treatments [ 39 , 46 , 49 , 50 ]. Healthcare skills development various skills, including critical reflection, clinical reasoning, patient flow management, timely assessment and treatment of patients, continuity of care, clinical communication, patient safety, and evidence-based practice. The Delphi study conducted by MacBean et al. [ 43 ] in inpatient training centres in Australia provided insights into how the placements broaden the healthcare staff’s scope of practice in speech pathology, which was further complemented by the qualitative study of Kemp et al. [ 41 ] in Australian community health services. [ 42 , 51 ] Healthcare staff also gained confidence in performing clinical tasks during the student placements, with their abilities being questioned and affirmed [ 46 , 47 , 50 ]. Interprofessional team placements were found to be effective in two studies for team skills development [ 49 , 50 ]. Both rural and urban healthcare staff benefited equally from student placements in healthcare settings.

Why do student placements work? Insights into the mechanisms

This review identified the mechanisms underlying how the allied health student placements supported the professional development of healthcare staff in seven studies. While a cross-sectional study indicated non-statistically significant disadvantages of student placements in regional and rural residential aged care homes [ 48 ], six studies, spanning various healthcare settings, reported functional improvements in health service delivery attributed to student placements [ 39 , 40 , 42 , 46 , 49 , 50 ], regardless of the locations. These functional improvements in service delivery were because of additional training and resources, as well as active engagement in teaching, facilitating, and managing students within healthcare settings, which were identified as supportive for healthcare staff’s professional development [ 40 , 46 , 50 ]. Collaborative practice was found to be instrumental in reducing hierarchical culture among healthcare staff [ 43 , 49 ]. Additionally, the placements contributed to early patient readiness for discharge, providing staff with flexibility in using client care modalities, and questions from students increased staff awareness of evidence-based practice [ 39 , 50 ].

In order to facilitate discussions, the findings of this review are positioned within a general system theory framework (Fig.  2 ), enabling the assessment of inputs, transformational processes, outputs, and the environment within acute and primary healthcare settings.

Integration of allied health students in healthcare settings and its impact within a system theory framework

The role of allied health student placements in fostering professional development of healthcare staff is promising, with most of the studies in this review showing positive evidence. Service-based placements, with a meaningful integration of students in health service delivery, show the most potential. Service-based placements might work by offering Grand Rounds and interprofessional education sessions to healthcare staff in critical areas of client care, generating new knowledge that can form powerful local evidence, and enhancing healthcare staff's understanding of other health professionals and service providers that can promote the collaborative practice. Regardless of the locations, active engagement in supervising and educating students and increasing awareness of training sessions have proved to be beneficial for healthcare staff in developing their professional knowledge and skills in client care.

There is a strong evidence base for the integration of allied health students into various aspects of client care, but engagement has varied. Student involvement in service delivery can be particularly powerful as it primarily emphasises the improvement of patient accessibility and utilisation of health services that are otherwise not accessible to them, especially in rural communities [ 52 , 53 ]. In the studies included in this integrative review, students played vital roles in the development of treatment plans, treatment of patients, and evaluation of interventions, and this integration was found to be beneficial to current health workforce capacity and capability building. Previous placement programs involving medical and nursing students corroborate the positive outcomes, citing the development of confidence and proficiency in both students and healthcare staff [ 54 , 55 ]. These programs recognised the bi-directional benefits of clinical placements. Since 2021, the Rural Health Multidisciplinary Training (RHMT) in Aged Care Program has supported University Departments of Rural Health (UDRHs) in Australia to expand their capacity to facilitate health student placements in aged care settings. This review is timely to inform clinical educators by providing insights to design education sessions that meet the learning needs of students and staff.

Within the limited number of studies available for review , education sessions during student placements appear to be important for developing professional knowledge and skills of healthcare staff. This review strengthens the previous study findings in medicine and nursing placements in acute care settings, stating that Grand Rounds and interprofessional education opportunities increased healthcare staff and students’ awareness of different aspects of client care and expertise of their own and other professions [ 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. These ongoing sessions cover various aspects of client care and are likely to equip staff with theories behind the treatments. Rural healthcare staff often have limited access to professional development opportunities, as well as supervision of students that has the potential to add a new perspective to the staff workloads [ 11 , 59 , 60 ]. Rural healthcare staff in community settings may also have limited time to engage with professional learning opportunities in their normal work routine, so embedding opportunities for ongoing education in the workplace through student placements may be beneficial. Opportunities must be explored in collaboration with healthcare and community partners to ensure professional development and training is co-designed and co-delivered to meet their staff’s unique needs. Creating ongoing learning opportunities for staff and engaging them in student supervision is vital to the success of placements.

In terms of creative learning, the student placements’ contribution to generating new and local evidence emerges with some supporting findings. Many studies explored how students are engaged in reciprocal learning relationships with peers and healthcare staff in the domains of clinical knowledge and procedural skills [ 58 , 61 ]. Students bring new or different perspectives, up-to-date knowledge of evidence-based practice, do not have the workload expectations, and are not restricted by funding requirements. This allows students to bring a different perspective. Students often have more time to complete projects and create resources, and when co-designed with staff and patients, such resources can enhance both staff learning and patient outcomes. However, these bi-directional learning benefits receive less attention from educators and rural health service providers. It may be unclear what students could add to the knowledge and skills of staff who are already registered and experienced in delivering services. Evidence is limited on how to design education sessions for different learner groups.

The review suggests that active engagement of healthcare staff is often absent in student placements. While clinical educators currently take the responsibility for student supervision and management, a potential improvement could involve active engagement of healthcare staff in these aspects during placements, which may help address the two remaining questions. First, whether it is important to create collaborative learning environments before offering student-led education of staff. This could enhance understanding and knowledge of both staff and student roles, increasing collegiality and co-design of learning and knowledge. A second question is whether adding a co-supervision role for healthcare staff in the allied health student placements (by adapting the models of medicine and nursing placements in rural communities) is a viable option to enhance staff engagement. This role could upskill the current health workforce in rural areas, increasing the capacity to take student placements. This role may combine rural knowledge with an understanding of student models and seek to implement changes in practices developed from student placements.

Limitations

Developing the search strategy was challenging because of the diversity in placements, disciplines, settings, and associated terminology. This resulted in a search that yielded only 12 eligible studies for review. Since allied health student placements in rural healthcare settings have expanded across high-income countries in recent years, there will likely be articles under review about unsuccessful placements that could have provided additional insights. Further rigorous investigations are required to strengthen the evidence surrounding student placements’ contribution to improving rural health staff knowledge and procedural skills in client care. These investigations could delve into the unique workforce outcomes associated with individual allied health disciplines and consider the different levels of study among students (undergraduate vs postgraduate).

This review is the first synthesis of the impact of allied health student placements on the professional development of our current health workforce. To enhance staff knowledge and skills and address shortages, particularly in rural and remote communities, this review indicates the importance of student integration in the delivery of health services. A collaborative learning approach to increase the knowledge of students and staff and improve staff engagement in placements that promote interprofessional learning is key to the professional development of current staff in any healthcare setting. While there is little evidence of the generation of new knowledge by students during their placements, there is no indication that these placements disadvantage healthcare staff in relation to their professional development. Clinical educators may consider establishing co-supervision roles for rural healthcare staff to foster interactions between staff and students and to enhance positive learning experiences for both parties. Individually tailored and co-designed professional development opportunities could be important, for instance, to assist rural healthcare staff in reducing adverse events and ensuring adequate health services and the quality of integrated care.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Rural and remote health. Cat. no. PHE 255. Canberra: AIWH. 2023. Available at https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/rural-remote-australians/rural-and-remote-health

Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. A Summary of Final Report. Final Report Volume 1. 2022. Available at https://agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-03/final-report-executive-summary.pdf

Savy P, Warburton J, Hodgkin S. Challenges to the provision of community aged care services across rural Australia: perceptions of service managers. Rural Remote Health. 2017;17(2):1–1.

Article   Google Scholar  

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Older Australians. Health – Selected conditions. Canberra: AIWH. 2023. Available at https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/older-people/older-australia-at-a-glance/contents/health-functioning/health-disability-status

Calderone L, Bissett M, Molineux M. Understanding occupational therapy practice in residential aged care facilities under the aged care funding instrument: a qualitative study. Aust Occup Ther J. 2022;69(4):447–55.

National Rural Health Alliance. 2021–2022 Pre-budget submission. Canberra: NRHA. 2021. Available at https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-05/171663_national_rural_health_alliance.pdf

National Rural Health Alliance. Media Release. Number don’t lie: increased investment in rural health care urgently needed. Canberra: NRHA. 2023. Available at https://www.ruralhealth.org.au/sites/default/files/media-files/mr-2023-09-11-response-aihw-data-release.pdf

Adams M. Education to prepare health professionals for rural practice: a scoping review. Aust Int J Rural Educ. 2023;33(1):17–40.

Brown LJ, Wakely L, Little A, Heaney S, Cooper E, Wakely K, May J, Burrows JM. Immersive place-based attachments in rural australia: an overview of an allied health program and its outcomes. Educ Sci. 2022;13(1):2.

Greenhill JA, Walker J, Playford D. Outcomes of Australian rural clinical schools: a decade of success building the rural medical workforce through the education and training continuum. Rural Remote Health. 2015;15(3):100–13.

Google Scholar  

Held FP, Roberts C, Daly M, Brunero C. Learning relationships in community-based service-learning: a social network analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):1.

Thistlethwaite JE. Practice-based learning across and between the health professions: a conceptual exploration of definitions and diversity and their impact on interprofessional education. Int J Pract-based Lear Health Soc Care. 2013;1(1):15–28.

Yardley S, Teunissen PW, Dornan T. Experiential learning: AMEE guide No. 63. Med Teach. 2012;34(2):e102–15.

Jones D, McAllister L, Lyle D. Interprofessional academic service-learning in rural Australia: exploring the impact on allied health student knowledge, skills, and practice. A qualitative study. Int J Pract-Based Lear Health Soc Care. 2015;3(2):1–6.

Billett S. Learning through work: workplace affordances and individual engagement. J Work Learn. 2001;13(5):209–14.

Roberts C, Daly M, Held F, Lyle D. Social learning in a longitudinal integrated clinical placement. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2017;22:1011–29.

Ulenaers D, Grosemans J, Schrooten W, Bergs J. Clinical placement experience of nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;99:104746.

Greenlees NT, Pit SW, Ross LJ, McCormack JJ, Mitchell LJ, Williams LT. A novel blended placement model improves dietitian students’ work-readiness and wellbeing and has a positive impact on rural communities: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):1–2.

Walsh SM, Versace VL, Thompson SC, Browne LJ, Knight S, Lyle DM, Argus G, Jones M. Supporting nursing and allied health student placements in rural and remote Australia: a narrative review of publications by university departments of rural health. Med J Aust. 2023;219:S14–9.

Thackrah RD, Thompson SC. Learning from follow-up of student placements in a remote community: a small qualitative study highlights personal and workforce benefits and opportunities. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):1–9.

Woolley T, Gupta TS, Stewart RA, Hollins A. A return-on-investment analysis of impacts on James Cook University medical students and rural workforce resulting from participation in extended rural placements. Rural Remote Health. 2021;21(4):1–1.

Coe S, Marlow A, Mather C. Whole of community facilitators: an exemplar for supporting rural health workforce recruitment through students’ professional experience placements. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(14):7675.

Moran A, Nancarrow S, Cosgrave C, Griffith A, Memery R. What works, why and how? A scoping review and logic model of rural clinical placements for allied health students. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:1–8.

Pigott A, Patterson F, Birch S, Oakley P, Doig E. The health service impact of an occupational therapy practice placement model: Student-resourced service delivery of groups. Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-Disciplinary Journal. 2022;23(2):21–34.

Main PA, Anderson S. Evidence for continuing professional development standards for regulated health practitioners in Australia: a systematic review. Hum Resour Health. 2023;21(1):1–6.

APHRA & National Boards. Continuing professional development. 2023. Accessed on 15 November 2023: https://www.ahpra.gov.au/Registration/Registration-Standards/CPD.aspx

Aleo G, Pagnucci N, Walsh N, Watson R, Lang D, Kearns T, et al. The effectiveness of continuing professional development for the residential long-term care workforce: a systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2024;137:106161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2024.106161 .

NSW Productivity Commission. New thinking on continuing professional development. Discussion Paper. 2022. Accessed on 15 November 2023: https://www.productivity.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/20221215-new-thinking-on-continuing-professional-development.pdf

Attrill S, Foley K, Gesesew HA, Brebner C. Allied health workforce development for participant-led services: structures for student placements in the National Disability Insurance Scheme. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):1–3.

Lauckner HM, Rak CN, Hickey EM, Isenor JE, Godden-Webster AL. Interprofessional and collaborative care planning activities for students and staff within an academic nursing home. J Interprofessional Educ Pract. 2018;13:1–4.

Horsburgh J, Ippolito K. A skill to be worked at: using social learning theory to explore the process of learning from role models in clinical settings. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):1–8.

Hayes C. Explaining approaches in pedagogic practice for healthcare assistants. British J Healthc Assistants. 2014;8(8):398–405.

Steinert Y. Learning together to teach together: interprofessional education and faculty development. J Interprof Care. 2005;19(sup1):60–75.

Ranmuthugala G, Plumb JJ, Cunningham FC, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Braithwaite J. How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):1–6.

Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005;52(5):546–53.

Hong QN, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, Dagenais P, Gagnon MP, Griffiths F, Nicolau B, O’Cathain A, Rousseau MC. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Educ Inf. 2018;34(4):285–91.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:71.

Clarke V, Braun V, Hayfield N. Thematic analysis. Qual Psychol: Pract Guide Res Methods. 2015;3:222–48.

Buchanan J, Jenkins S, Scott L. Student clinical education in Australia: a University of Sydney scoping study. Sydney: The University of Sydney; 2014.

Johnston C, Newstead C, Walmsley S, MacDonald L. Allied health student clinical placements in residential aged care facilities: staff opinions, attitudes, and support needs. Internet J Allied Health Sci Pract. 2014;12(4):11.

Kemp C, van Herwerden L, Molloy E, Kleve S, Brimblecombe J, Reidlinger D, Palermo C. How do students offer value to organisations through work integrated learning? A qualitative study using Social Exchange Theory. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2021;26:1075–93.

Longman JM, Barraclough F, Swain LS. The benefits and challenges of a rural community-based work-ready placement program for allied health students. Rural Remote Health. 2020;20(3):1–7.

MacBean N, Theodoros D, Davidson B, Hill AE. Simulated learning environments in speech-language pathology: An Australian response. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2013;15(3):345–57.

Campbell N, Stothers K, Swain L, Cairns A, Dunsford E, Rissel C, Barker R. Health services in northern Australia depend on student placements post COVID-19. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2020;44(6):521.

Mu K, Chao CC, Jensen GM, Royeen CB. Effects of interprofessional rural training on students’ perceptions of interprofessional health care services. J Allied Health. 2004;33(2):125.

Nguyen KH, Seaman K, Saunders R, Williams E, Harrup-Gregory J, Comans T. Benefit–cost analysis of an interprofessional education program within a residential aged care facility in Western Australia. J Interprof Care. 2019;33(6):619–27.

Nisbet G, Thompson T, McAllister S, Brady B, Christie L, Jennings M, Kenny B, Penman M. From burden to benefit: a multi-site study of the impact of allied health work-based learning placements on patient care quality. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2023;28(3):759–91.

Reid C, Barbaro R. Student placements in rural health services: developing an interdisciplinary model. National Rural Health Alliance. 2019. Available at https://www.ruralhealth.org.au/15nrhc/sites/default/files/D8-3_Reid%2C%20Barbaro.pdf

Seaman KL, Williams E, Saunders R, Harrup-Gregory J, Pratt K, Loffler H, Hallsworth A. Evaluating the outcomes for interprofessional education programs in residential aged care. Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre, Brightwater Care Group. 2016. Available at https://cdpc.sydney.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/IPE_consumer_report_final.pdf

Seaman KL, Bulsara CE, Saunders RD. Interprofessional learning in residential aged care: providing optimal care for residents. Aust J Prim Health. 2015;21(3):360–4.

Campbell N, Moore L, Farthing A, Anderson J, Witt S, Lenthall S, Petrovic E, Lyons C, Rissel C. Characteristics of nursing and allied health student placements in the Northern territory over time (2017–2019) and placement satisfaction. Aust J Rural Health. 2021;29(3):354–62.

Molloy E, Lew S, Woodward-Kron R, Delany C, Dodds A, Lavercombe M, Hughson J. Medical student clinical placements as sites of learning and contribution. Melbourne: University of Melbourne; 2018.

ANMJ Staff. Student nurses drawn to primary healthcare. Australian Nursing and Midwifery Journal. 2022. Available at https://anmj.org.au/student-nurses-drawn-to-primary-healthcare/

Furr S, Lane SH, Martin D, Brackney DE. Understanding roles in health care through interprofessional educational experiences. British J Nur. 2020;29(6):364–72.

Rizk N, Jones S, Shaw MH, Morgan A. Using forum theater as a teaching tool to combat patient bias directed toward health care professionals. MedEdPORTAL. 2020;16:11022.

Al-Jayyousi GF, Abdul Rahim H, Alsayed Hassan D, Awada SM. Following interprofessional education: health education students’ experience in a primary interprofessional care setting. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2021;14:3253–65. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S318110 .

Spaulding EM, Marvel FA, Jacob E, Rahman A, Hansen BR, Hanyok LA, Martin SS, Han HR. Interprofessional education and collaboration among healthcare students and professionals: a systematic review and call for action. J Interprof Care. 2021;35(4):612–21.

Mangiameli J, Hamiduzzaman M, Lim D, Pickles D, Isaac V. Rural disability workforce perspective on effective inter-disciplinary training—a qualitative pilot study. Aust J Rural Health. 2021;29(2):137–45.

Spiers MC, Harris M. Challenges to student transition in allied health undergraduate education in the Australian rural and remote context: a synthesis of barriers and enablers. Rural Remote Health. 2015;15(2):176–92.

Cosgrave C, Maple M, Hussain R. An explanation of turnover intention among early-career nursing and allied health professionals working in rural and remote Australia-findings from a grounded theory study. Rural Remote Health. 2018;18(3):1–7.

Ferns J, Hawkins N, Little A, Hamiduzzaman M. The escape room experience: exploring new ways to deliver interprofessional education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2022:1–12.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Harry Gaffney who contributed to the review process.

Not funded.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University Centre for Rural Health (UCRH), School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine & Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, NSW, Australia

Mohammad Hamiduzzaman, Sarah Miles, Sarah Crook, Lewis Grove, Jennie Hewitt, Frances Barraclough, Peter Hawkins, Erika Campbell, Nicola Buster, Christopher Williams & Vicki Flood

School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

Kate Thomson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

MH, SM, SC synthesised and analysed the data regarding the impact of allied health student placements and prepared initial draft of the manuscript. LG, JH, FB, PH, EC, NB, KT, CW, and VF contributed to the conceptualisation and was a major contributor in writing the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Hamiduzzaman .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Hamiduzzaman, M., Miles, S., Crook, S. et al. An integrative review of the impact of allied health student placements on current staff’s knowledge and procedural skills in acute and primary care settings. BMC Med Educ 24 , 657 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05632-7

Download citation

Received : 05 February 2024

Accepted : 05 June 2024

Published : 12 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05632-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Clinical training placements
• Aged care staff
• Procedural skills
• Collaborative learning
• Rural health

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Media Center 6/17/2024 1:00:00 PM Corbin McGuire

Former DIII swimmer leaves lasting impact of inclusion on campus

Anna slominski aims to continue advocacy work beyond college sports.

Anna Slominski left a lasting mark on the Illinois Institute of Technology in several ways.

A former Division III women's swimming and diving student-athlete, Slominski was a standout in and out of the pool. 

A four-year team member, Slominski, who uses the pronouns "they" and "them," qualified for the Division III championship in 2020 and 2023. As a senior, they were named Swim and Dive MVP, Women's Winter Athlete of the Year and Women's Athlete of the Year at their school.

Slominski also holds multiple records, including the Liberal Arts Championship records in the 100-yard breaststroke, 200-yard breaststroke and 200-yard individual medley, as well as team records in seven individual events and two relays. They also were recognized with first-team Scholar All-America honors by the College Swimming & Diving Coaches Association of America in 2023.

What Slominski is most proud of, however, is the impact they left on the campus community through their advocacy for LGBTQ+ inclusion.

"As my leadership not only on the swim team but across campus grew, … I have come to realize the impact by being unapologetic about being out," Slominski said. "Being seen advocating for myself and others on queer issues and curating events to include queer identities allow for the campus to become a safer place for all."

Coming out as bisexual in middle school, Slominski always has been outspoken about queer issues. They have been openly nonbinary since their sophomore year on the college swim team, finding support from coaches and teammates. One of many examples Slominski noted was how coach Billy Bafia helped get their pronouns listed on swimcloud.com, a popular website for swimmers. 

"In my time, the swim team has seen many of our student-athletes feel safe enough to come out. In being an older member, I hope that I have been a positive force in creating an inclusive environment," Slominski said. "It is important for me to be a part of making the spaces I inhabit as inviting as possible for everyone."

Slominski's impact has extended far beyond the pool. 

They graduated with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering and a master's in transportation. Their academic pursuits were complemented by a commitment to environmental sustainability, demonstrated by co-founding the school's environmental engineering club. 

As the president of the club, Slominski organized events that fostered inclusivity, such as a panel featuring queer professionals in science, technology, engineering and math. This event provided a platform for queer students to engage with and learn from older queer professionals, reinforcing the importance of visibility and representation. 

In recognition of their contributions, Slominski received the  2023 Division III LGBTQ Student-Athlete of the Year Award . This award, which acknowledges the achievements and contributions of LGBTQ student-athletes in Division III, was particularly meaningful for Slominski. 

"This award means so much to me, to be honored by the NCAA as well as just an athlete in general," Slominski said. "I've been swimming since the age of 12. Every award that I've received up until now has been specific to the women's team, so it's really impactful to be able to receive this award as authentically as myself, as a nonbinary person."

Slominski's advocacy for inclusivity extends beyond their own experience. They are passionate about making STEM fields more welcoming for LGBTQ+ individuals.

"Being queer is such a personal part of one's life, especially in academics and in athletics," Slominski said. "It can be hard to integrate yourself into nonqueer communities, so one of the biggest things that I do in terms of inclusion is just being so authentically out and being a safe space for people to be out." 

While their college swimming career is over and they are now working for the U.S. Department of Transportation as a general engineer, Slominski plans to continue being involved in sports and advocating for more inclusive environments.  

Slominski plans to continue their athletic career through triathlons and becoming a masters swimmer. They are also eager to join queer-friendly athletic teams in their future communities, continuing to advocate for inclusivity in sports. Beyond athletics, Slominski aims to extend LGBTQ+ inclusion into the workplace, bringing awareness to the diverse identities within the queer community. 

"I have so many goals postgraduation in terms of extending LGBTQ inclusion, not just in athletics but outside of it," Slominski said. "I want to bring light to the many different faces that queer people can take. I'm just one face of the many voices that deserve to be seen."

Thanks for visiting !

The use of software that blocks ads hinders our ability to serve you the content you came here to enjoy.

We ask that you consider turning off your ad blocker so we can deliver you the best experience possible while you are here.

Thank you for your support!