The U.S. Department of Education has issued new federal guidance urging school leaders to assess education technology by its capacity to improve instruction and learning, rather than by screen time alone.
Guidance centres on evidence and instructional purpose
In an Aug. 20 Dear Colleague Letter authored by Kirsten Baesler, assistant secretary of the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, the federal agency called on districts to prioritise the instructional value of digital tools and to demand greater transparency from vendors. The guidance frames the essential question for schools as whether tools are "selected, implemented and evaluated in ways that advance specific education goals."
The letter acknowledges growing public concern about excessive screen exposure for students but draws a clear distinction between recreational technology — such as social media browsing, television viewing and non-educational video games — and technology deliberately integrated into instruction.
"The question before education leaders is not whether technology can support learning, but whether individual tools are selected, implemented and evaluated in ways that advance specific education goals," Kirsten Baesler wrote.
Examples and rationale presented by the department
The department highlighted instances where educational technology has supported instruction and expanded access. Examples cited include connecting rural learners with advanced coursework, enabling students with disabilities to access curriculum through assistive tools, and furnishing educators and families with timely information about student progress.
The guidance does not dismiss concerns about screen time but insists those concerns require a careful separation between recreational and instructional uses of devices. The aim is to ensure technology use is measured by whether it furthers clearly defined educational objectives and is part of effective implementation strategies.
Stakeholder reaction
Jean-Claude Brizard, president and CEO of the nonprofit Digital Promise, welcomed the emphasis on distinguishing instructional technology from recreational use, noting heightened criticism of technology in schools. In the source material, he said,
"There's been so much vitriol and so many things happening when it comes to education technology," Brizard said.
The department’s letter underscores the need for continuous evaluation: schools are encouraged to determine whether ed-tech products meet district goals over time and to require vendors to be more transparent about how their tools work and what evidence supports their effectiveness.
- Instructional alignment: Ed-tech tools should be judged by whether they advance explicit learning objectives.
- Evidence of effectiveness: Districts should seek proof that tools improve teaching and learning.
- Vendor transparency: Schools are advised to demand clearer information from product providers.
Implications for schools and classrooms
By shifting the focus from device time to demonstrable instructional impact, the department’s guidance encourages school systems to adopt processes for procurement, implementation and evaluation that centre student learning. That includes establishing criteria for selecting tools, monitoring use against specific outcomes and revisiting choices when products fail to meet goals.
While the guidance addresses federal concerns and public debate in the United States, its principles are relevant to any jurisdiction wrestling with how to integrate digital tools responsibly. Districts looking to balance concerns about screen exposure with the potential benefits of technology may find the department’s approach useful: distinguish recreational from instructional uses, anchor decisions in pedagogical goals and expect robust, ongoing evaluation.
| Focus area | Department recommendation |
|---|---|
| Selection | Choose tools tied to clear instructional goals |
| Implementation | Integrate purposefully into teaching practice |
| Evaluation | Continually assess effectiveness against district aims |
The department’s letter makes clear that technology itself is not inherently beneficial or harmful; its value depends on how it is used. For school leaders, the guidance signals a move toward more evidence-driven decision-making and stronger expectations of vendors — steps intended to ensure that digital tools serve students’ learning needs.
