Despite the fact that we tend to think of “technology” as “computers”, the dictionary defines technology as “the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry.” Technology revolutionizing learning certainly isn’t something new. The printing press made texts widely accessible for the very first time, eventually giving us the textbook. Overhead projectors became widely used in the 1960s, allowing teachers to present and annotate diagrams for a whole class, and write on a transparency without worrying about the chalkboard. The ball-point pen, invented in the 40s, changed how we write on paper. The television and recording devices allowed for immersive content, while the optical mark reader changed the ways students were assessed, and SMART boards changed how we think about chalkboards. This section is a very brief and abbreviated history of digital learning. It is by no means comprehensive, but this brief infographic goes in to more detail. This history also doesn’t include the history of the Internet at large, where inventions such as the web browser, DVD and LaserDisc players, and other technologies have had significant impacts on education.

In the early 1920s, schools were looking at using radio to create “schools of the air” to provide distance learning opportunities, to augment traditional curricula, and to provide additional content to rural areas. In a similar vein, television programs almost immediately embraced educational programming; while filmstrips, slides, audio recordings, and video tapes allowed for content and courses to be distributed widely and allowed for asynchronous learning. As these technologies penetrated home markets (and as the ZIP code system increased efficiency in postal mail), schools and universities were able to send content to students via postal mail allowing students to consume content at home, complete assignments, and mail everything back to the school.

The history of “teaching machines” goes back to the early 20th century. Audrey Watters has created an interactive timeline of the evolution of teaching machines, complete with citations. Harvard professor B.F. Skinner is often credited with creating one of the first “teaching machines” focusing on personalized learning in 1954, creating one of the first models of programmed instruction and personalized learning pathways.

In 1960, Donald Bitzer and his team and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign created the first interactive tutor, called PLATO (Programmed Logic for Automatic Teaching Operations). PLATO was the first online courseware system - the tool had instructional content, questions, and answers that could deliver content to students and provide immediate feedback. This system sent data from the ILLIAC-1 mainframe to a single television terminal. This was one of the first graphical user interfaces for computers, which had traditionally used punch-card based operations before. By the early 70s, the PLATO-IV unit controlled hundreds of terminals and included innovations such as educational gaming, discussion forums and message boards, email messaging, in addition, PLATO birthed pedagogical innovations such as interactive fiction, online newspapers and intelligent tutoring systems that could assess students and prescribe instructional pathways. PLATO also spawned technical innovations such as screen savers, touchscreen panels, and the plasma display screen (which earned Dr. Bitzer and his team an Emmy Award in 2002). Dr. Bitzer now works as a Distinguished Research Professor at NC State. The book The Friendly Orange Glow chronicles the history of PLATO and the connection to modern cyberculture.

In 1980, Seymour Papert published his book Mindstorms: Children, Computing, and Powerful Ideas. In this book, Papert argued that computer literacy is an essential skill for modern children, and computers through languages such as the LOGO Turtle that he invented, allows students to concretely represent abstract concepts in ways that they can more easily understand. He articulated the first concepts of computational thinking - the importance of understanding how algorithms work and learning through debugging and iteration. He also argued that students learn by completing projects where the teacher serves as a facilitator, supporting the connection of new content to existing knowledge. This theory, building on Piaget’s theory of constructivism, was called constructionism, and is a core theory of modern digital-age learning and the maker movement. LEGO Mindstorms robotics kits are named in honor of this work.

In 1985, Apple Computer launched the “Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow” project. This project aimed to conduct research on how providing every student in three schools with a desktop computer at home and at school changed learning outcomes. There were several unexpected results in the evaluation, including:

• General software (such as word processors) proved to be very beneficial in the learning process, in some cases, over educational “drill-and-practice” software.
• Cooperative use of computers and task-related co-use of computers was beneficial.
• Participating schools did not see significant differences in test scores, despite additional time learning to use the computer and project-based tasks using the computers.
• Students were more positive about being in school.
• “The greatest student advances occurred in classes where teachers were beginning to achieve a balance between the appropriate use of direct instruction strategies and collaborative, inquiry-driven knowledge-construction strategies. In those classes, interaction among students was ordinary and purposeful; children were seen as learners and as expert resources; and students were challenged by problems that were complex and open-ended. In assessing students’ work, teachers looked for evidence of deeper understanding—statements of relationships, synthesis, and generalization of ideas to new domains. And, of course, students had opportunities to use a variety of tools to acquire, explore, and express ideas” (Dwyer, 1994).

There were also several barriers noted, including difficulties matching teacher expectations of students with student expectations in the program, matching systemic needs with the opportunities afforded by ACOT, and how to leverage ACOT while preparing students for their next grade/school without the technology tools. ACOT was one of the foundational works in 1:1 computing, and was repeated again in 2007.

In 2000, the state of Maine launched the Maine Learning Technology Initiative which provided Apple laptops and, for a time, home Internet access, to all students in grades 7 and up. This program has undergone many challenges and changes in the past two decades, including device switches and funding cuts, but is still running today. The Maine initiative has become a template for future statewide rollouts. Research is pretty clear that the impacts of technology in the classroom but, as expected, the strength of the implication and the quality of the professional learning provided will make or break this effort.

Throughout the 90s and 2000s, schools began to recognize the power of technology in the classroom, making desktops available, replacing overheads for SmartBoards, etc. Watch this old news clip from CNN:

However, technology faced an affordability problem. The OLPC project aimed to fix this, by creating a laptop that cost $100 and was designed for places with limited access to connectivity and electricity. While this device failed, it led the development of devices such as Netbooks and Chromebooks which eventually made technology more affordable (Moore’s law is also a huge driver of costs in education):

Arguably, COVID-19 represented one of the most dramatic shifts to the landscape of education from enhancements in digital learning to changes in public school enrollment. We know that the edtech software landscape has changed, and that there remain equity gaps that need to be addressed in terms of technology and Internet access gaps. The shifts caused by COVID are still being felt and will be felt in a significant way this fall as historic amounts of Federal funding runs out.

While we know that learning remotely isn’t anything new (North Carolina has had distance learning efforts dating back 30+ years), there is likely to be some pushback against remote learning, leading some to create a taxonomy of remote learning:

• Traditional Instruction: This describes in-school, synchronous classes, as most of us were used to before COVID-19. This term is not used pejoratively, simply as a way to define our baseline. It is not referring to any type of particular methodology here (i.e. lecture vs. project-based learning).

• Distance Learning/Virtual Learning/Online Courses: These three terms may be used interchangeably and refer to courses intentionally designed from the beginning to be delivered online. It was never intended for these courses to ever meet in-person, and students were never intended to work on these assignments in the same space. Distance learning courses are typically designed to be asynchronous and may include synchronous elements such as class meetings. This course is an example of this.

• Remote Learning: By contrast to the intentional online-first format of distance learning, Remote Learning refers to a class that intends to meet face-to-face in a traditional format, but may be transitioned (or started) online due to unforeseen circumstances. For example, in North Carolina, school districts have implemented remote learning during the COVID-19 crisis, but also at least once for an extended period over the previous five years due to hurricanes or other inclement weather. Some schools, such as the Northeast Academy of Aerospace and Advanced Technologies in Elizabeth City, plan for Remote Learning and even build practice days into their calendar so that they are ready to transition to Remote Learning at a moment’s notice. The ability to plan ahead is what differentiates Remote Learning from Emergency Remote Learning (ERL) where we transition to Remote Learning with no advance notice or preparation (as many of us did in the Spring of 2020).

• Hybrid Learning refers to any situation where one or more of the above models are used. Many schools used this format as COVID numbers reduced, where school will use a traditional format part of the time and will be remote another part of the time in order to promote social distancing. Some schools have also decided that they will create more virtual learning opportunities for students to be completely online.

• Blended learning refers to a combination of synchronous and asynchronous activities, whether physical or virtual.