How to Teach with Technology: A Research-Supported Overview
This page is the starting point for a practical series on teaching with technology for K–20. The goal is to help you align tools to learning goals, plan at the unit and lesson level, and choose low-cost and accessible options first. Deeper how-to guides are linked below. This page does not attempt to cover every tool or every context. It provides a clear framework, a short decision flow, and research anchors that guide responsible choices.
What this page covers
Clarity on purpose. A short, reusable flow for planning. Concrete, low-cost examples that map to unit design, lesson activities, engagement, assessment, and critical thinking. Links to focused guides, including teaching with AI.
Key principles from the research
Technology improves learning when pedagogy leads the selection of tools. Evidence across meta-analyses shows that effects rise when tasks target higher order thinking and when students actively generate, organize, and evaluate ideas. See ICAP for active learning distinctions and TPACK for how content, pedagogy, and technology interact in design.
Chi and Wylie (2014) describe deeper learning when students move from passive to active, constructive, and interactive modes. Mishra and Koehler (2006) argue that strong integration sits at the intersection of pedagogy, content, and technology knowledge. Formative assessment remains the highest leverage practice for improving learning, and digital tools can make it faster and more visible, as shown in Black and Wiliam (1998). For a broad synthesis of technology effects, see the updated Visible Learning evidence base at Visible Learning MetaX.
Simple decision flow
Step 1. Define the learning result. Name the concept, skill, or product. Use precise verbs from your standards or goals. If the target is analysis, evaluation, or creation, plan for student production and reflection rather than tool consumption.
Step 2. Choose an activity pattern. Pick a research-aligned pattern such as retrieval practice, explanatory writing, concept mapping, peer feedback, or guided inquiry. See TeachThought on pedagogy and critical thinking.
Step 3. Match the lowest cost tool. Favor tools that are free or already available. Examples follow for quick wins.
Step 4. Build in evidence. Use exit tickets, brief rubrics, or short oral checks. Small data, frequent cycles.
Low-cost, concrete examples
Unit planning. Backward design with a shared doc or slide deck. Write transfer goals and performance tasks first, then list the tech that will help students research, draft, revise, and present. See Wiggins and McTighe for backward design. A simple starter workflow is Google Docs for planning, a class folder for resources, and a single slide deck per unit for exemplars and models. See TeachThought on pedagogy.
Lesson activities. Use collaborative documents for think pair share with named comment threads. Use a one-question poll at the open, a three minute silent write in the middle, and a gallery walk of student explanations at the end using a single slide deck where each student has one slide. This sequence supports the ICAP move from active to constructive and interactive. See Chi and Wylie (2014).
Student engagement. Replace long whole-class talk with short prompts and visible production. Jamboard alternatives now include Slides with draggable shapes, shared whiteboards in your LMS, or a low-bandwidth option such as a table in Docs that students populate in real time. Tie each visible product to a short explanation requirement to protect cognitive engagement.
Assessment. For formative checks use a two item Google Form after key segments. Ask one retrieval item and one self-explanation item. Auto export to a sheet, scan for patterns, and address two common errors in the next lesson. For summative work collect short artifacts in a foldered portfolio. Ask students to attach a 100 word process note that documents feedback used and revisions made. See Black and Wiliam (1998).
Critical thinking. Use claim, evidence, reasoning frames in a shared doc. Ask students to generate two weak AI answers, critique them, and then write an improved response with citations. This keeps the task in evaluation and creation. Link to TeachThought on critical thinking and inquiry.
Where AI fits, briefly
Use AI to diversify examples, generate alternative explanations, and support feedback. Require disclosure statements and visible revision to protect integrity and thinking. For the full research brief and classroom strategies, see Teaching with AI.
Works Cited
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Visible Learning MetaX. https://www.visiblelearningmetax.com/
For more on tools and examples see TeachThought Education Technology.