We've long assumed that newer technology means faster, better learning — but that assumption deserves a closer look.
We support educational technology that is:
Grounded in evidence.
Built around child development.
Matched to age and stage.
Safe by design.
Over the past decade, screens have moved into classrooms faster than schools could evaluate their impact. Devices and apps were adopted by districts on the promise of engagement and personalization, often without rigorous evaluation of whether they actually improved learning. Little attention has been paid to what children may lose when much of the school day involves screen time.
Now we know more. A growing body of research — from cognitive science, developmental psychology, and education — points in a consistent direction:
Attention is the foundation of learning.
Much educational software is built on the same engagement mechanics as consumer apps: points, streaks, autoplay, and rewards that fragment attention rather than build it.
Productive struggle matters.
When a program instantly scaffolds, hints, or gamifies away every difficulty, it can short-circuit the very cognition the assignment was meant to build.
Handwriting, deep reading on paper, and effortful recall strengthen the mind.
These practices measurably build memory, comprehension, and the neural development that advanced learning depends on.
Young children are not small adults.
What is developmentally appropriate for a junior in high school differs enormously from what's appropriate for a first grader — yet screen-based curriculum is often deployed uniformly across grades.
Creativity depends on knowledge.
To create something new, students need a foundation of independent knowledge to draw on and genuine ownership over their own work.
Commercial incentives shape design.
Ed tech is a multi-billion-dollar industry, and engagement metrics, data collection, and subscription renewals often drive product decisions — not children's development.
Technology has a place in our schools but it's place should be earned, not assumed, and always be intentional — chosen deliberately by educators and families, for specific learning goals, with evidence behind it.
“Technology should never be treated as neutral or inevitable — each new tool carries with it a program, an agenda, and a philosophy that may or may not be life-enhancing and therefore requires scrutiny, criticism, and control.”
Neil Postman, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology
What we mean by “intentional”
Critical thinkers, not passive consumers.
We aim to raise citizens who critically evaluate sources, question what they read, and create their own work — not children conditioned to passively consume gamified content designed to capture their attention.
Evidence before adoption.
The burden of proof belongs on the technology, not on the child’s preferences or engagement. Digital curriculum and devices should be rigorously evaluated for learning effectiveness and age-appropriateness before they enter the classroom — not after.
Friction is a feature of learning.
Struggle, boredom, and effortful practice are not obstacles to learning; they are often an essential part of the learning process. When a tool removes all friction, it often removes cognition too.
A voice of their own.
Kids need to learn to think and write in their own voice — drafting, revising, and wrestling with ideas — before they outsource composition to autocomplete, templates, or AI.
"Extraneous" activities build the brain.
Practices that can look old-fashioned or even pointless — cursive handwriting, mental math, reading on paper, memorization develop fine motor skills, working memory, and neural pathways that underpin advanced learning. They deserve protection, not elimination.
Skills to navigate technology, not just use it.
True digital citizenship means developing the cognitive and ethical skills to navigate a digital world — attention management, source evaluation, privacy awareness, healthy skepticism of persuasive design — built age-appropriately at every grade. Many of the skills our children need to develop in order to navigate digital landscapes thoughtfully can be better developed independently of screens.
Tech companies and ed tech developers are not neutral partners.
Many forces shaping educational technology are commercial ones that do not have children's developmental interests at heart. Our district — not vendors — should define what our children need.
Five goals for intentional technology in AUSD
We're asking our district to adopt a clear, sustainable, approach to educational technology based on definitive research on how children's brains and minds actually develop — created collaboratively with teachers, administrators, the school board, families, and students.
1. A district-wide philosophy of intentional technology.
Adopt a written statement of educational philosophy that defines the role of digital tools in our classrooms based on how children's brains and minds actually develop — so every future technology decision is measured against a shared vision of learning.
2. A burden of proof before adoption.
Establish a rigorous evaluation process — considering learning evidence, age-appropriateness, data privacy, and non-digital alternatives — that any device, program, or digital curriculum must pass before it is implemented in classrooms.
3. Age-appropriate digital citizenship goals for every grade, K-12.
Define clear, developmental skill goals for what a digital citizen should know and be able to do at each grade level — from foundational attention and literacy skills in early elementary to source evaluation, media literacy, and responsible usage in upper grades.
4. A sustainable framework for ongoing evaluation, adoption, and retirement of ed tech.
Create a written framework describing the how — who evaluates based on what evidence, on what cycle, with community input — so the process outlasts any single tool and stays useful for years as individual products come and go.
5. Transparency and partnership with families and teachers.
Provide parents and teachers with visibility into what digital tools are in use, how much screen-based instructional time students experience, and what data is collected — and a genuine seat at the table when decisions are made.
Check out the research
Want to get involved?
About Us
Albany Families for Intentional Technology (AFIT) is a parent-led group working alongside teachers, administrators, the school board, students, and families to make sure every screen, program, and digital assignment in Albany’s K–12 classrooms is intentional, backed by research, and matched with what we know about how children learn and develop.