Topic

EdTech & Innovation

1,548 stories

Digital Hall Passes Automate Hallway Oversight

Paper hall passes have been around forever. But they aren’t always the best tool for the job. “A conventional hall pass basically just says that this student has permission to leave the classroom. That’s where the information stops,” says Tyler Shaddix, co-founder and chief innovation officer at GoGuardian. Modernized tools can do a lot more. With digital hall passes, schools can support student safety, track trends around how spaces are used and automate permissions for who can be in the hall, when and where. Click the banner below to learn how CDW and GoGuardian support safer, more…

17 Jun 2026

THE Journal (K12 EdTech)

Why Title III Is Lacking in Today's Multilingual, Technology-Enhanced Classrooms

When Congress strengthened Title III in the early 2000s, the focus was helping students acquire English and access academic content. That goal remains important, but the classrooms of 2026 look very different from those of 2001.

17 Jun 2026

EdWeek Technology

Momentum Builds to Expand Coding Education to Learning About AI 'Under the Hood'

CodeAI CEO talks about artificial intelligence and the future of computer science education.

17 Jun 2026

EdTech Magazine Higher Ed

Data Governance Is Just the Beginning: Why University IT Leaders Must Also Master These Data Disciplines

In addition to CIOs establishing themselves as leaders when it comes to a unified data strategy and university leadership understanding that data governance is the foundation of AI readiness, there is a growing understanding that data governance is a required discipline, essential to data-centric transformation on campuses. However, there are other data considerations to be mindful of, as well. Click the banner below to explore how to build a foundation for scalable AI at your higher ed institution.

Key points: A successful summer program can’t focus solely on assessment scores 5 ways to make reading click for teens Why schools and public libraries must unite–in summer and all year long For more news on summer literacy, visit eSN’s Innovative Teaching hub In 2023, Bob Bolduc, the founder of Hope for Youth and Families, identified a gap in our student’s reading success here in Springfield, Massachusetts. He sought to identify a solution that would specifically support middle school students reading below grade level, and in 2024 partnered with Storyshares and HILL for Literacy to create an intensive, four-week summer literacy program. That summer, students who completed the program showed twice as much growth in their MAP scores as their peers had shown during the entire school year. The next summer, students showed the same impressive growth. Here are the essential lessons that school districts can learn from our experience of creating a summer literacy program that makes an enormous difference in the lives of students and families. Connecting with families Our program typically includes between 120 and 150 students recruited from schools throughout our community. Most of our families speak two languages, so we have a Spanish speaker on staff to help us cross the language barrier. We first connect with families by holding open houses and online meet-and-greets multiple times throughout the year. We let families know that our program supports academics and gives students a safe place to be–and they can enroll at no cost. This makes a big difference in Springfield, which is one of the poorest cities in the state. Small groups working at a ‘perky pace’ Our program is modeled on high-intensity tutoring delivered in a small-group class setting. In each classroom, we have about 15 students with two to three adults who are trained in all of the materials, pedagogy, and skills. We aim for a 5:1 student to teacher ratio, and we achieve this by combining licensed educators with interns who are interested in youth development and literacy education. The Literacy Intervention for Teens (LIFT) curriculum we use is built specifically to provide high intensity and scaffolded instruction, while also keeping what Dr. Anita Archer calls “perky pace.” This means teachers may spend 20 minutes on direct instruction, then incorporate practice and choice after that. Choice is key: Students in this program tend to have low confidence because they’ve repeatedly been told that they’re not good at reading, and teachers build their confidence both by offering them materials that they can read and want to read. Age-appropriate printed materials Our program serves students in grades 4 to 8, and over the years we have built a library of ebooks and printed books that are content-appropriate for that wide range of ages. We don’t ask our older struggling readers to read books about butterflies and The Cat in the Hat . Instead, we offer them stories about kids like them who are going through the dilemmas of being a pre-teen or a teen, and that helps them establish a connection with the reading materials. We print all our materials for our students who prefer physical books over ebooks, and this year for the first time, we are using paper workbooks to show students’ progress. Using workbooks also allows students to stay organized and to look back and see the results of the work they’ve done. Strategic assessments In addition to the workbooks, we also track students’ growth with traditional assessments. In the past, we have used CORE and DIBELS to assess students’ reading speed, fluency, and comprehension. Because our program is short, we try to do the initial assessment on the first day of programming and the final assessment as close to the end of the last week as possible. Pairing reading with creative writing A successful summer program can’t focus solely on assessment scores. It has to be fun, too. Our students relish the opportunity to be creative, so our program pairs reading with creative writing. Many of our students look forward to creative writing because they can write whatever they want in response to a teacher’s prompt. Writing is engaging because it’s not graded and it allows them to put into practice what they’re learning about reading. Students’ creative writing may not be finished by the end of class, or it may be a little wandering, but they’re proud of it, and they’re so excited for that opportunity. I’ve often had students run up to me and say, “Look what I wrote!” This shows them that reading can lead to powerful personal connections. Providing local role models Many of our interns are from the area. Our students see themselves in these near peers, and they believe that “if you can do this, I can do it too.” It’s often easier to relate to somebody who’s close to your age, so our interns become role models for our students making those near-peer connections and fostering a positive culture in the classroom. For schools and districts considering launching a summer literacy program, I can say from experience that it takes hard work and organization, but it’s worth every second you put in. When middle schoolers can read proficiently, they have so many more options for the next chapter of their lives. I remember one student who was in the program the first summer. He was going into 9th grade and was reading very close to grade level, but he wasn’t quite there. We worked extensively on his reading comprehension and stamina. When I visited his school in the fall, he said to me, “I want you to know I’m out of remedial English. And because of that, I got to choose an elective, and I’m in Junior ROTC. I love it! I never thought I’d be able to do something like that.”

17 Jun 2026

The Scholarly Kitchen

Attribution, Provenance, Reference, Citation, and AI for Research Applications – Understanding the Differences

Building robust citation and attribution into generative AI systems are foundational to usage, credit and trust. We need to expect more from AI. The post Attribution, Provenance, Reference, Citation, and AI for Research Applications – Understanding the Differences appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen .

17 Jun 2026

Educause Review

Hotline: Cybersecurity and Privacy | June 2026

"Hotline: Cybersecurity and Privacy" tackles the philosophical, moral, strategic, and organizational quandaries related to higher education cybersecurity, privacy, and data. This month, Mike answers your questions about unnecessary complexity, the myth of perfection, and the danger of documentation without controls.

Artificial Intelligence is forcing Learning and Development to confront a difficult reality: creating learning content is no longer enough. As AI automates many traditional L&D activities, organizations are shifting their focus from learning delivery to workforce capability and business performance. This post was first published on eLearning Industry .

16 Jun 2026

eLearning Industry

Subject Matter Expert Does Not Mean Trainer

Being an expert in a job does not automatically mean being able to teach it effectively. This article explores why organizations need to better support SMEs with facilitation and Instructional Design skills to create training that builds real capability, not just transfers information. This post was first published on eLearning Industry .

16 Jun 2026

Digital Promise

Hearing from Students: Three Years of Interviewing Learners About AI in Education

The post Hearing from Students: Three Years of Interviewing Learners About AI in Education appeared first on Digital Promise .

16 Jun 2026

Campus Technology

The AI Literacy Gap No One Expected

While Gen Z may be advanced at generating quick outputs or using free LLMs for surface-level tasks, they need to develop critical thinking, communication, and analysis skills.

16 Jun 2026

CoSN

EdTech Innovation in an Era of Tight Budgets and Tough Questions

Across the country, districts are navigating tighter budgets, increased scrutiny around technology spending, and growing concerns about screen time and student device usage. After years of enthusiasm surrounding large-scale edtech adoption, many schools are now operating in a very different environment. One where priorities are shifting and the definition of innovation itself is evolving. But if the pendulum is swinging away from edtech hype, CoSN’s EdTech Innovation Committee members discussed in a recent virtual meeting that there’s a shift that needs to happen with innovation: Centering the “why” of our work, prioritizing communication, and becoming even more intentional with when innovating. Throughout the conversation, members explored a central challenge facing school systems today: how do education leaders continue driving meaningful innovation when budgets are shrinking, priorities are shifting, and communities are asking harder questions about technology’s role in schools? Prioritizing Purpose One theme to emerge from the discussion was the value of communication and storytelling in purposeful edtech innovation. CoSN Board Chair and committee member Stacy Hawthorne, CETL ( EdTech Leaders Alliance, Ohio) shared that districts must begin with curriculum, pedagogy, and instructional purpose before deciding where technology belongs. Rather than focusing on devices themselves, she explained that schools should focus on whether technology meaningfully supports teaching and learning outcomes. “This isn’t a tech conversation that we’re in at this point in time, this is a trust conversation that we’re in,” said Hawthorne. “And in the absence of us sharing what is working well with technology in schools, people have filled the narrative and filled the void on our behalf.” Earning Trust, Acknowledging Mistakes, and Moving Forward Committee members agreed with Hawthorne, noting that many current tensions around technology are not simply about screens or devices — they are about trust. Committee member Holly Doe (MSAD #11, Maine) shared that part of her district’s recent technology planning work involved acknowledging where technology implementation may not have always been effective. As part of revising the district’s technology plan, her team examined screen time usage in middle schools and considered how instructional practices could evolve moving forward. “Sometimes building trust is just acknowledging with our administrators and with other people in our districts that we have made some mistakes, but [also explaining] how we move forward with purpose and do better,” said Doe. Responding to Growing Community Concerns Committee Co-Chair Ryan Cox ( Osseo Area School District ISD 279 , Minnesota) said that a number of Minnesota districts have seen a growing parent interest in screen time and device use in schools , with books such as The Anxious Generation and Digital Delusion sparking conversations in many communities in Minnesota and beyond. Rather than dismissing those concerns, committee members discussed the importance of engaging families directly and proactively communicating the “why” behind instructional technology decisions. Committee member Micah Miner, CETL (Beach Park School District #3, Illinois), suggested that districts have an opportunity to address issues through board-level conversations, educational outreach, and stronger communication around instructional goals. “Part of the ways in which we can manage it is to make sure that we’re proactive with our boards … to make sure we manage the conversation before it manages us,” said Miner. Remember: Tech Use Today Prepares the Workforce for Tomorrow Committee member Rajesh Adusumilli (Arlington Public Schools, Virginia) raised concerns about reducing conversations to simple screen time metrics while overlooking the growing need to prepare students for an AI-driven workforce. He spoke about how infrastructure, digital literacy, and access remain essential components of future-ready learning environments. “It’s very clear that the colleges are expecting that students come prepared with an understanding of what AI means, how to manage it, how to ethically use it, and how to kind of operate in that realm,” said Adusumilli. Committee Co-chair David Jarboe, CETL (D2 Harrison Schools, Colorado), expanded on the connection between innovation and workforce expectations, noting that career and technical education is becoming a major driver in K-12 decision-making. “Many of the conversations around innovation and technology are being shaped by evolving workforce demands and economic priorities,” Jarboe noted. “Understanding those trends can help schools better prepare students for future opportunities.” Jarboe also noted that innovation in education is often shaped by factors beyond the classroom, including decisions made by legislators, governors, and policymakers. “Educators are frequently adapting to new initiatives and requirements as they emerge,” he shared. “Recognizing industry as a driver could provide valuable perspective and support.” Rethinking Devices, Access, and Safety The group also discussed operational shifts that districts are already making in response to financial pressures and changing community expectations. Theresa McSweeney, CETL (Boise School District, Idaho), suggested that classroom-based device models, rather than take-home programs, may help reduce some family concerns around excessive screen usage. “I would wonder if families might feel more in control over their own screen time without worrying as much about what’s happening in the classroom if the devices were staying behind at school all day, instead of also going home,” McSweeney said. Districts should carefully consider how at-school-only device policies align with their digital equity objectives and the needs of their students and families, with local leadership best positioned to make those determinations. CoSN believes this is a local control issue. Miner and Andy Fekete, CETL (Community Consolidated School District 93, Illinois), shared that both of their districts are having conversations about moving toward classroom-based devices due to challenges related to device damage, liability, and non-academic device use at home. While the committee members talked about access, safety concerns also remained central to the discussion. CoSN CEO Keith Krueger highlighted the growing pressure districts face around filtering inappropriate content and ensuring student safety on school-issued devices. “I don’t think it’s just about access, but it’s about access to inappropriate materials [on school devices], at least in the news coverage that is gaining traction,” said Krueger. He added: “The one thing we can firmly say is that if you have the choice between a child on a school device and a school network versus a personal device, they’re much less likely to be safe in a personal device.” Innovation Is Evolving, Not Disappearing Despite the challenges discussed throughout the EdTech Innovation Committee meeting, members returned to the idea that innovation in education is not going away, it is simply entering a new phase: One less defined by devices alone and more focused on intentionality, instructional value, transparency, and trust. CoSN’s EdTech Innovation Committee meets virtually every month to develop resources on CoSN’s Driving K-12 Innovation Top Topics and other timely trends that have the potential to significantly impact K-12 education. 2026 Advisory Board Transition Year CoSN’s Driving K-12 Innovation initiative is entering an exciting new phase designed to create deeper collaboration, stronger implementation-focused insights, and expanded engagement opportunities for Advisory Board members and the broader community. As part of a transition to a new annual project timeline launching in 2027, the 2026 Part 2 Advisory Board will focus on the development of the new Driving K-12 Innovation in Action Report , focused on showcasing how districts are operationalizing innovation trends in practice. Rather than revisiting trends already identified in the 2026 report, this cycle’s Advisory Board members will collaborate to showcase how districts are operationalizing innovation in practice around the Top Topics in 2026. This work will include strategic discussion, synchronous engagement opportunities, and case study development designed to provide districts with concrete examples and actionable insights. The publication will be released during a webinar in November 2026 highlighting innovation stories, implementation strategies, and lessons learned from international edtech changemakers. Join us! AUTHOR: Stephanie King, Writer and Communications Manager, CoSN’s EdTech Innovations Committee and Driving K-12 Innovation Published on June 16, 2026 CoSN is vendor neutral and does not endorse products or services. Any mention of a specific solution is for contextual purposes.

16 Jun 2026

eLearning Industry

Skills-Based Learning: Our 5-Step Blueprint To Make The Shift And Unlock Your Talent

Unlock the real advantages of skills-based organizations, empowering talented people to think beyond their role. This is our 5-step skills-based learning blueprint. This post was first published on eLearning Industry .

16 Jun 2026

eSchool News

With students tuning out, it’s time to rethink the classroom

Key points: Students are constantly evaluating what deserves their attention Room to grow: Creating a classroom built for success Research highlights the importance, challenges of K-12 student engagement For more news on student disengagement, visit eSN’s Innovative Teaching hub Across classrooms right now, many educators are noticing the same shift: Students are even harder to reach than they were just a short time ago. In a recent survey , teachers pointed to rising disengagement as a growing concern, with more students opting out of learning in both loud and quiet ways. Sometimes disengagement looks like misbehavior, with jokes or side conversations. Just as often, it’s quieter, with students doing only what’s required to get through the day, exhibiting minimal effort, or acting withdrawn. All forms signal the same underlying challenge. It’s easy to attribute this trend to phones or shortened attention spans. But in many ways, students are demonstrating something more complex: They are constantly evaluating what deserves their attention. For some students, there may also be challenging experiences or trauma impacting their attention, but educators are increasingly observing this pattern of disengagement across a wide range of students. Outside of school, they’re used to environments at home or online that are interactive, flexible, and tailored to their interests with instant gratification. The contrast with more traditional classroom structures can feel stark. For middle and high school students in particular, questions of relevance come up quickly. Beyond completing tasks, they want to understand the purpose behind them. When that sense of purpose isn’t clear, it can be difficult to sustain engagement. What may be interpreted as a lack of motivation is often a reflection of that disconnect. In response, schools may opt for tighter controls, more rules, fewer distractions, and increased emphasis on compliance. While structure has a place, these approaches don’t always address the root issue. Disengagement is often less about student behavior and more about how the learning experience is designed. Revisiting that design can open up new possibilities. Classrooms that rely heavily on listening and passive participation are competing with experiences that feel far more dynamic. Students respond differently when they are actively working through problems, collaborating with peers, and applying ideas in meaningful contexts. Approaches such as project-based learning, inquiry-driven instruction, and career-connected pathways can help bridge the gap between content and real-world relevance. Student voice and choice also play an important role. When students have opportunities to make decisions about their learning–whether through topics, formats, or how they demonstrate understanding–they tend to show greater investment. Even small moments of autonomy can make a difference in how connected they feel to the work. The physical classroom environment is another significant factor that can further support engagement but is too often overlooked. As opportunities for in-person connection outside of school have decreased for many students, the classroom is taking on a larger role as a social space. Environments that allow for conversation, movement, and collaboration can help students feel more connected to their peers and to the learning itself. Traditional layouts, with desks in rows facing a single point of instruction, were historically designed during the industrial age for efficiency and order to prepare students for the workforce. But they can also reinforce the idea that learning is something students are required to complete rather than actively participate in. Adjustments don’t need to be large-scale to be meaningful. Flexible seating, spaces for small-group work, and movable furniture can encourage interaction and make it easier for students to engage with one another. These kinds of changes also support the broader sense of belonging that students often lack outside of school. There’s also a growing push to “defront” the classroom, moving away from a single focal point of instruction and toward a more active format for learning. In subjects like math, approaches where students work collaboratively on write & wipe surfaces show that even students who typically withdraw are more likely to engage when they’re given a role and choice in how to complete the work. It’s also worth noting how closely engagement and behavior are linked. When students feel disconnected, that can show up as disruption or withdrawal. Addressing only the surface behavior without examining the underlying experience produces limited results. If the structure of the learning experience stays the same, disengagement often reappears in a different form. A helpful starting point may be a simple question: What would make this worth a student’s attention? Schools that explore that question through more collaborative environments, relevant learning experiences, and opportunities for student agency are beginning to see shifts in how students show up. Student disengagement isn’t a new issue, but it is becoming more visible. As classrooms continue to evolve, aligning learning environments more closely with how students experience the world may be one of the most important steps toward reengaging them.

16 Jun 2026

Educause Review

The Current State of Play: AI in Higher Education and the Road Ahead

Artificial intelligence is reshaping higher education, exposing weaknesses in assessment, curriculum, and institutional strategy. Ten critical challenges reveal why incremental change will not suffice and why colleges and universities must rethink their strategy, culture, and purpose.

16 Jun 2026

Educause Review

How the University of the Western Cape Layers a Chatbot Into Its Mental Health Support Ecosystem

Artificial intelligence–based counseling apps can address unmet mental health needs and also help those who need in-person support feel more comfortable seeking it.

16 Jun 2026

Education Review AU

‘Eyes up, screens down’: New device rules in Vic

All Victorian students must have planned ‘device-free time’ each day in strict new rules announced by the education minister on Monday. The device restrictions aim to intentionally remove students from devices in classrooms from Term 1, 2027. Teachers could instead use whiteboards or paper, or organise group debates, practical experiments or performances, a statement from Education Minister Ben Carroll said. The minister estimated high school students would spend no longer than two hours a day on devices, although details will be released after consultation with schools. Previously announced policies also limit Year 3 to 6 students to 90 minutes of screen time per day from 2027. Students in Prep to Year 2 will have minimal exposure to devices. “There shouldn’t be any more than two hours. We want eyes up, screens down. A full reset in the classroom is so important – for behaviour, for calmness, for the students’ own mental health – the focus needs to be on the most important adult in the classroom, and that’s the teacher, and that’s why we are moving down this with a relentless focus on excellence inside every classroom,” Mr Carroll said. Melbourne school principal Lorna Beegan said learning must be at the core of the policy. Picture: Supplied. “The big tech giants, their algorithms, they do not have these young people’s best interests at heart. They’re focused on eyeballs, and we’re focused on their minds and their hearts for the future.” Principal of Strathcona Girls' Grammar in Melbourne Lorna Beegan, said reducing screen time is not at odds with innovation. More on this story: A revolution is happening in ed-tech | Parents asked to delay smartphone use in kids | Vic appoints first minister for boys “I see it as a deliberate prioritisation of human capabilities that will define the future,” she said. “I applaud the move if learning is at the core. With information overload instantly accessible, giving our students time to stop, to think, to judge, to wrestle with ideas, to adapt, to explore, to imagine becomes essential to shaping skilled, confident, creative and critical thinkers who can navigate life’s complexities with resilience and purpose. Our students need to know how to use technology and when to turn it off. “The quality of a student’s thinking will soon carry greater weight than the quantity they can recall, convincing schools to respond by deliberately limiting screen time in favour of sustained attention, curiosity and active engagement for the new types of assessment and life skills that are emerging.” Neurodiverse students who need technology to learn would be exempt from the rule, as would students studying science and technology. Victoria has also banned mobile phones, smart watches and wireless earbuds in all schools.

16 Jun 2026

EdWeek Technology

Are Ed Tech's Academic Benefits at Odds With Its Social and Emotional Downsides?

An EdWeek Research Center survey asked educators how tech is shaping students' school experiences.

A new study by Yale’s Digital Ethics Center proposes a novel “copyleft” licensing framework that would require AI models trained on open-source software to remain fully transparent.

15 Jun 2026

Yale News - Science & Technology

Yale researchers propose ‘copyleft’ rules for generative AI

A new study by Yale’s Digital Ethics Center proposes a novel “copyleft” licensing framework that would require AI models trained on open-source software to remain fully transparent.

15 Jun 2026

eLearning Industry

AI Pricing Strategies: How Smart SaaS Companies Price AI Features

AI has gone from being a premium product feature to a normal add-on. Everything is AI-powered nowadays, and customers are asking for such possibilities. But how do companies charge for these capabilities? And how can you charge for your own AI features? Let's discover everything together. This post was first published on eLearning Industry .

15 Jun 2026

The Conversation US Education

AI schools like Alpha promise efficiency, but can’t replicate the messy process that helps kids learn

Students often learn best when they take risks and struggle to get it right, including on the playground. Jeff Gritchen/MediaNews Group/Orange County Register via Getty Images A child at a playground tries to climb, jump or negotiate with a peer, and their attempt does not work. They fall, get left out of a game or reach another impasse. Then they try again. Failure, conflict and frustration might look like a struggle, but this is often how children learn. I have spent 20 years studying digital literacy and how technology reshapes learning. My work turns on a simple question: What do people gain, and what do they lose, as society largely moves from traditional print to online learning? With this in mind, I believe that this question is growing more urgent as artificial intelligence-driven schooling gains ground. AI-powered educational programs like Alpha School , a growing private network of schools, replace much of the school day with adaptive software that adjusts lessons to each student’s pace and abilities . The pitch is personalized learning : Give each student the right material at the right moment, and they will succeed academically. The deeper you look at how children learn, the clearer it becomes that this growing brand of alternative schools might remove the discomfort that often comes with learning – taking away what matters most as kids develop. MacKenzie Price, left, the co-founder of Alpha School, meets with U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and Alpha students at the Alpha School’s campus in Austin, Texas, in September 2025. Rick Kern/Getty Images for Alpha School Welcome to Alpha Alpha School was launched in 2014 by the tech entrepreneur MacKenzie Price and the private equity billionaire Joseph Liemandt . It is perhaps the most well known of the growing list of AI K-12 schools operating in the United States. Alpha represents a particular vision of education reform – one that has caught the attention of the Trump administration. Education Secretary Linda McMahon toured its Austin, Texas, campus in 2025, and first lady Melania Trump invited an Alpha student as her guest to the State of the Union address in 2026. Alpha operates more than a dozen campuses across major cities like New York and Miami. Annual tuition ranges from about US$40,000 to $75,000 per year , depending on the school’s location. Students learn core subjects like math, reading, science and social studies from adaptive AI software for one to two hours a day. Students spend the rest of their time in workshops on topics like public speaking, coding, outdoor education and other projects. Their sessions are led by adults – typically not accredited teachers – whom the school calls guides. There are other similar schools, including Unbound Academy , a tuition-free Arizona charter; and Novatio , a virtual private school. These are separate from Alpha in name, but they share overlapping leadership and online programs. The Alpha model promises parents that they can get the right material to the right student at the right moment, confirm mastery and move on to other things that might have more relevance in the real world. But delivering content efficiently is not the same as understanding how learning happens. Decades of research suggests that effective learning is not always efficient. Alpha says its students received higher standardized test scores than their peers attending non-AI schools. Those numbers come from Alpha’s own internal data and have not been independently verified. A 2026 investigation by the independent 404 Media news organization found that the school’s AI-generated lesson plans were poorly constructed and often illogical, raising questions about student growth. But the deeper problem may not be whether the numbers are accurate; it is what the numbers cannot reflect. What struggle is for Cognitive psychologist Robert Bjork studies how when a student struggles to recall an answer before being instantly given the answer, this learning helps cement their knowledge. Developmental psychologist Jean Piaget described something similar. Children learn when the world does not behave as they might expect . So when a child, certain that a tall, thin glass holds more water than a short, wide one, pours the liquid back and forth and discovers their misjudgment, this helps them gain a clear understanding of what is happening before their eyes. School is also where children learn who they are and what they are passionate about and believe in, often with the help of other people. Psychologist Lev Vygotsky argued that a child’s development is fundamentally social . A student’s understanding of particular subjects forms in collaboration with teachers, peers and the daily friction of being one mind among many. Alpha’s students spend time with adult guides and other students on collaborative projects, but the bulk of the academic learning itself happens largely alone at a screen. Child psychoanalyst Erik Erikson mapped childhood as a sequence of stages in which children work out not just what they know, but who they are as people. These are not lessons you complete in an app. They are learned among friends and classmates. AI-powered schools offer parents and students the promise that they can condense their learning into short windows of time, with a tailored approach that meets their needs. Krongkaew/iStock Photos/Getty Images What an app cannot teach The limits of AI learning have shown up in one of the most ambitious recent attempts to have kids learn from an AI tutor. In 2023, Khan Academy, a nonprofit online site that offers free learning, launched Khanmigo . This AI chatbot is designed not to hand students answers, but to coach them toward understanding. Its founder, Sal Khan, initially described the goal as giving every student access to something like a personal tutor . But Khan Academy describes Khanmigo in more modest terms than it once did . Khan Academy now says Khanmigo is meant to be used with adult supervision. An AI bot can prompt, explain and guide, but it cannot replace human teachers who notice confusion on a student’s face. Chatbots see when a student answers a question incorrectly. But curiosity, resilience, belonging and the slow work of figuring out who you are cannot show up on a dashboard. The risk is not that these schools are bad at producing high test scores and other metrics. It is that they optimize for the part of childhood that fits on a chart and let the rest become an afterthought. When critics raise these concerns , AI schools counter that a human adult is present as students complete lessons with an AI bot. But presence is not participation. What this model may lack is the thing those humans are supposed to provide. Conversation, challenge and being known by others are what makes school more than a place to absorb content. A tool is not a school None of this means AI can’t help children learn. But a child on a playground learns because she falls and tries again and again, in front of people who notice. That may not be something an AI model can deliver in two hours a day. A question worth sitting with is not whether these schools work, but what people are willing to trade for the parts of AI learning that might work well. W. Ian O'Byrne receives funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation as part of the AI Cyberpathways grant. He is Director of the Initiative for Literacy in a Digital Age.

15 Jun 2026

eSchool News

Maybe we have too much teacher training

This piece originally ran on LinkedIn and is republished here with permission. Key points: It’s critical for districts to examine what kind of teacher training they’re buying Tips, tools, and truths: Making PD meaningful in today’s classrooms A new PLC model that builds collective efficacy and fights teacher burnout For more on teacher development, visit eSN’s Educational Leadership hub “Maybe we have too much teacher training.” That headline is a sentence I never thought I’d write, given that I run a company built around supporting teachers’ professional growth. But it has been sitting with me since I read the latest Education Scorecard report. The Education Scorecard is a research project led by economists at Dartmouth, Harvard, and Stanford. Their latest release cuts against the conventional story about American student achievement. The decline in student achievement did not start with the pandemic. It started around 2013. NAEP reading and math scores in grades 4 and 8 gained roughly two grade levels from 1990 to 2015, then began to unwind. By the time COVID hit, the slide was already underway. The report points at two possible causes: the rollback of federal accountability after No Child Left Behind and the rise of social media use among school-aged children. The researchers are careful. They do not claim either is a proven cause. The Scorecard is mostly a diagnostic, not a prescription. But here is what struck me: During the period the data shows decline, U.S. school districts did not pull back on professional development spending. Estimates from TNTP and others have put district PD investment at roughly $18,000 per teacher per year. The training calendar did not shrink. The funding for federal PD programs like Title II-A held, at least in nominal terms. We spent more on developing teachers over the past decade, and student outcomes fell anyway. To be certain, I am not suggesting that PD caused the decline. But the facts do raise an uncomfortable question: If more training money did not move the needle, what kind of training were we buying? Here is what I think the answer is: The K-12 field defaulted, over a long time, to a training-event model of professional development. Workshop days. Summer institutes. Conference attendance. Online modules that teachers complete in a tab they do not return to. None of those are bad in themselves. But none of them are the thing that actually changes what happens in a classroom. Research on PD effectiveness has been remarkably consistent on this point for decades. Joyce and Showers showed in the 1980s that workshop training, by itself, transfers to classroom practice somewhere around 5 percent of the time. Add structured follow-up conversations about the teaching practice in classrooms (a.k.a. a “coaching conversation”), and that number climbs to roughly 90 percent. The variable that matters is not whether the training happened. It is whether anything happened after the training. I want to be careful here. I am not pointing a finger at any specific district. Most district and instructional leaders are working inside real constraints like shrinking budgets, federal funding uncertainty, and state-level cuts. And within those constraints, leaders are making the best decisions they can. The pattern I am describing is a field-wide default, not a leadership failure. We collectively built a training-event system because it was scalable and measurable in the metrics we had. It just was not the same thing as teacher learning. This is part of why the current fight over Title II-A matters. Title II-A is the federal program that represents the only direct federal investment in educator professional learning, at roughly $2.19 billion annually. The current administration’s budget proposes to consolidate and cut it. Learning Forward and more than 100 education organizations are pushing Congress instead to increase Title II-A by 10 percent. I support that push. The argument should not be whether to fund teacher development. We absolutely should. The argument should focus on what kind of development we are funding. The most actionable part of the Scorecard is not the diagnosis. It is the recovery section. Roughly 108 districts have posted real gains in both math and reading since 2022. The Scorecard authors wrote a case study on District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) , which is one of them. DCPS reading achievement for grades 3 through 8 now exceeds 2018 levels by about half a grade level. Two specific levers stood out in that case study: (1) DCPS adopted a proprietary K-5 English curriculum, and (2) DCPS paid teachers stipends to complete specialized literacy training. I want to be honest about what the DCPS case can and cannot teach us. DCPS has a budget that allows for meaningful teacher stipends. Most districts I know do not. That is a real constraint, and I do not want to skip over it. The replicable lesson is not DCPS’s budget. It is the principle underneath it. Investing in what happens after the initial training is the variable that matters. DCPS bought it the way it could afford to. Most districts will have to find a different way. Here is the part I think is genuinely new. For the first time, that different way of investing in regular, ongoing support is available to any district. We are at a point with AI-enabled PD tools where ongoing, between-session support for every teacher is becoming possible at a sustainable cost. I’m not talking about another workshop, webinar, or asynchronous course that gets opened once. I’m talking about actual coaching infrastructure that is reflective, structured, continuous, and available without requiring every school to add more coaches to a budget that does not have room for one. That shift to using AI systems within PD is going to take some adjustment for our field. We have spent decades optimizing for in-person training events because that is what scaled. Now something else does. The question for district and instructional leaders is which side of that shift to be on, and what to start protecting in your existing PD budget so the next dollar funds learning rather than another event. So back to where I started. Maybe we do not have too much teacher training. Maybe we have too much of the wrong type of teacher training. Either way, the field’s default has been events. The recovering districts are showing what happens when that default changes. The encouraging news is that the change is now affordable in ways it was not five years ago. What is the lever you have in your district to flip the ratio?

15 Jun 2026

Getting Smart

Some Student Data Should Never Become Digital

13 Jun 2026

Página/12 Sociedad

Una mujer denunció a OpenAI porque ChatGPT indujo al suicidio a su hija

La IA puede ser un arma de doble filo.

12 Jun 2026

Al Jazeera English

Mother sues OpenAI in US after daughter’s death linked to ChatGPT use

The lawsuit accuses OpenAI of failing to intervene despite warning signs in daughter's ChatGPT conversations

12 Jun 2026

EdTech Magazine Higher Ed

How Ventura College Scaled Faculty AI-Readiness Through Communities of Practice

Artificial intelligence promises big gains for faculty in higher education, including greater efficiencies and elevated learning outcomes. To realize the wins, professors need to get up to speed on the tools. While many are experimenting on their own, some institutions are taking steps to accelerate that learning. At Ventura College, a California community college, leaders recently stood up communities of practice around AI use. A CoP brings together individuals with a shared interest in a topic or technology; in this case, AI. The group then works together to learn more about the topic or…

12 Jun 2026

EdTech Magazine K-12

Deepfakes in Education: Cyberbullying in the Age of AI

In a K–12 setting, deepfakes hold a lot of power. These falsified images or videos, virtually impossible to identify with an untrained eye, can be wielded to harm educators’ reputations, cyberbully vulnerable students, and blackmail individuals and schools. With artificial intelligence image generation, the problem is growing rapidly. Super-realistic images can be created quickly and deployed easily, creating a concerning scalability. Faced with the malicious use of AI-generated images — both of students and school officials — leaders must redouble their efforts around deepfake detection,…

12 Jun 2026

EdTech Magazine K-12

CTEM Offers a Better Way to Manage Cyber Risk in K–12

Lately, school-related data breaches seem to keep coming. PowerSchool and Canvas made major headlines this year. Countless smaller incidents may not hit the news, but they disrupt instruction and expose sensitive student data just the same. For K–12 IT leaders, threats to their district are inevitable. The question is whether their teams will be ready when those threats materialize. After years of conducting maturity assessments, working alongside district security teams and witnessing the aftermath of incidents, we can say with confidence that most districts aren’t there yet — not because…

12 Jun 2026

eLearning Industry

Thought Leader Q&A: Exploring Decision Discipline, Accountability, And High-Pressure Leadership With Ray Resendez IV

This Thought Leader Q&A features ELB Learning's Ray Resendez IV, who offers insights on how organizations can cultivate sustainable leadership transformation with measurable outcomes. This post was first published on eLearning Industry .

12 Jun 2026

Higher Ed Dive Online Learning

Colleges hit in cyberattack by group behind Canvas breach, Google says

Dive Brief: Dozens of higher education institutions may have been hit by another attack from the cybercrime group behind the May hack against Canvas, according to the Google Threat Intelligence Group and cybersecurity firm Mandiant. From May 27 and June 9, the group ShinyHunters potentially gained access to the systems of over 100 organizations by targeting the Oracle PeopleSoft software suite . A majority of them are based in the U.S., and 68% are within the higher education sector, GTIG and Mandiant said in a post Thursday. ShinyHunters twice gained unauthorized access to Instructure’s Canvas learning management system last month , disrupting final exam season at colleges nationwide . Dive Insight: Oracle's PeopleSoft is a wide-ranging software suite that organizations often use for human resources management and financial operations. GTIG and Mandiant, both of which are Google units, said several institutions targeted by ShinyHunters successfully blocked the hack or fixed the vulnerabilities in Oracle's software. But others had their data stolen and published on the group's website. The University of Nottingham, in England, confirmed the following day it had suffered a cybersecurity breach during which a threat actor accessed "a significant amount of data in our student record system." In an email to students, the university said it was still working to assess which data had been accessed. But it was "operating on the precautionary assumption" that the breach included names, email addresses, university IDs and students' course information, as well as some financial and insurance information, according to a copy of the email published by Politics UK. ShinyHunters has claimed credit for the hack. Some of the breached organizations have since received extortion demands , according to tech website Bleeping Computer. On June 10, Oracle released a security alert about the vulnerability ShinyHunters exploited, but the company did not confirm if any of its software users had already been breached. Oracle did not immediately respond to questions Friday. Colleges are a prime target for cybercriminals, both because they hold vast troves of student and employee data and because their systems typically have a massive number of users that turn over regularly. In the Oracle and Instructure hacks, ShinyHunters gained access to data through system vulnerabilities at companies with whom colleges contracted — another big risk facing higher education. The Canvas breaches affected hundreds of institutions and exposed personal information such as users’ names, email addresses, student ID numbers and messages, ShinyHunters alleged . The hack came at the tail end of the spring semester and forced many colleges to take Canvas offline amid finals and grading. ShinyHunters set a May 12 deadline for Instructure to reach an agreement with the group or risk the data being leaked. The day before the deadline , Instructure announced it struck a deal to have the stolen data returned . According to cybersecurity experts, the company’s deal appears to involve a ransomware payment, against the guidance of the FBI . Instructure CEO Steve Daly later acknowledged th e "enormous" effects the abrupt loss of Canvas access had on colleges and K-12 schools . The goal moving forward is "to develop a clear playbook for how we collectively secure our environments and, should something happen that affects system availability, have a redundant ecosystem that our community can rely on," he said in a May 26 statement.

12 Jun 2026

Campus Technology

Microsoft Discovery Platform Brings Agentic AI to Scientific Research

Microsoft has moved its Discovery platform into general availability, calling the service a production-ready environment for scientists and researchers that want to apply AI agents.

12 Jun 2026