Digital technology gives children instant access to a vast range of multimodal resources — videos, interactive apps, e‑books, simulations and full online courses — so learning is no longer confined to printed textbooks or the classroom schedule. That variety lets learners choose formats that match their needs (visual, auditory, hands‑on), pursue topics beyond the curriculum, and follow adaptive or self‑paced pathways. It also supports informal and lifelong learning: children can encounter new ideas outside school hours, revisit difficult material on demand, and combine sources (teacher instruction plus tutorial videos plus practice apps) for deeper understanding.

For an overview of how computers and digital resources expand content and access, see OECD, Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, 2015.

Multimodal resources—videos, interactive apps, audio, text, and images—matter because they present information in multiple sensory and representational forms, making content more accessible and meaningful to diverse learners. Different modes support different cognitive processes: visuals aid pattern recognition, audio supports language learning, interactive elements enable experimentation, and text allows reflection and deep reading. Together they increase engagement, accommodate varied learning styles and needs (including learners with disabilities), and enable richer, context-sensitive understanding than single-mode materials.

References: OECD, Students, Computers and Learning (2015); New London Group, A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies (1996).

Digital technology has expanded what it means to be literate. Beyond reading, writing, and numeracy, children now need:

• Digital literacy: ability to use devices, navigate apps, and operate digital tools reliably and safely.
• Information evaluation: critical skills to locate, assess credibility, and synthesize vast online information (fact-checking, source awareness, recognizing bias).
• Coding and computational thinking: familiarity with basic programming, algorithms, and problem decomposition—skills that support logical reasoning and creative problem-solving.
• Media creation: competence in producing and communicating via multimodal texts (images, video, audio, interactive media), including understanding media conventions and ethics.

These “new literacies” are interdependent and culturally situated: they reshape how students learn, collaborate, and demonstrate knowledge. The New London Group’s “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies” argues that pedagogy must therefore broaden to teach these competencies alongside traditional literacy and numeracy so learners can participate effectively in digitally mediated societies. (New London Group, 1996)

Digital technology can lower traditional barriers to education—offering remote lessons, adaptive software, and vast learning resources—but it also risks widening existing inequalities. The “digital divide” manifests in unequal access to devices, reliable internet, and safe learning environments. Even where hardware and connectivity exist, uneven teacher training and lack of culturally relevant content can prevent students from benefiting. Without coordinated policies and investment in connectivity, affordable devices, teacher professional development, and inclusive content, technology tends to amplify wealth, geographic, and social disparities rather than eliminate them (see UNICEF reports on digital inclusion and education).

Digital tools—automated quizzes, interactive exercises and learning-analytics dashboards—give learners and teachers rapid, concrete information about what a child understands and where they struggle. This immediate formative feedback supports moment-to-moment adjustment: students can correct misconceptions while the material is still fresh, and teachers can target instruction or interventions faster than with delayed paper-based tests. Automated scoring also frees teacher time for higher-value tasks (explanations, scaffolding), while analytics reveal patterns (common errors, pacing, engagement) across many learners so interventions can be prioritized.

These points reflect core principles of formative assessment articulated by Black and Wiliam: assessment should feed back into teaching and learning to improve it, be timely, and inform next steps. Digital technology amplifies those principles by making assessment continuous, actionable, and scalable (see Black & Wiliam, 1998, “Assessment and Classroom Learning”).

Increased screen time and frequent switching among apps, tabs, and media fragments reshape how children pay attention and study. Research and commentary (e.g., Nicholas Carr, The Shallows) argue that constant exposure to rapidly changing digital stimuli trains the brain for brief, surface-level engagement rather than long, sustained concentration. Empirical studies on media multitasking find that juggling multiple streams of information reduces the ability to filter distractions, lowers working-memory performance, and makes deep, uninterrupted learning harder.

Practical consequence: traditional study routines that assume long, focused sessions become less effective. Educators must adopt new pedagogical strategies—shorter focused tasks, structured breaks, explicit training in cognitive control and metacognitive strategies, and classroom designs that reduce irrelevant digital distractions—to rebuild the capacity for sustained attention and promote deeper learning (examples in cognitive psychology and education research).

References: Nicholas Carr, The Shallows (2010); empirical literature on media multitasking and attention (e.g., Ophir, Nass & Wagner, 2009; subsequent replication and follow-ups in cognitive psychology).

Digital interactive tools — such as simulations, coding environments, and educational games — shift learning from passive reception to active construction. They invite learners to experiment, test hypotheses, and iteratively refine ideas (exploration). For example, learners manipulate variables in a simulation to see real-time consequences, debug code to make a program behave as intended, or design and complete projects in a game-like environment. These activities emphasize problem-solving, reflection, and creating tangible products or explanations, aligning with constructivist principles: knowledge is built through doing, not merely received.

Seymour Papert’s Mindstorms argues that technologies like the Logo programming language enable “thinking tools” that let children model ideas, pursue projects meaningful to them, and form deep conceptual understanding through construction and play (Papert, 1980). Empirical and theoretical work on constructivist and constructionist learning supports that such active engagement improves transfer, motivation, and deeper conceptual learning compared with rote memorization (see Papert, 1980; Bruner, 1966; Harel & Papert, 1991).

References:

• Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books.
• Harel, I., & Papert, S. (1991). Constructionism. Ablex Publishing.
• Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Harvard University Press.

Digital tools—online forums, video calls, and shared documents—extend Vygotsky’s idea that learning is fundamentally social. They create many more, and more varied, opportunities for interaction: peers can collaborate in real time on projects across distances using shared documents; video calls allow synchronous scaffolding and guided discovery from teachers or more knowledgeable peers; and forums and messaging let learners ask questions, receive feedback, and observe modelled problem-solving asynchronously. These technologies widen the “zone of proximal development” by making expert help, peer tutoring, and diverse perspectives more accessible, promoting co-construction of knowledge, language development, and internalization of cognitive skills (Vygotsky, 1978). They also diversify social roles (peer tutor, collaborator, critic), supporting motivation and deeper learning through dialogue and joint activity.

References: Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes.

Digital learning software collects data on a child’s responses, speed, and error patterns and uses that information to adjust instruction in real time. By changing the pace, varying task difficulty, and providing targeted feedback, adaptive systems meet each learner where they are rather than forcing all students through one fixed curriculum. This supports differentiated instruction by allowing stronger students to advance and offering extra practice or corrective scaffolding for those who struggle. Meta-analytic work (e.g., Kulik & Fletcher) finds that well-designed computer-based and adaptive instruction can improve learning outcomes, particularly when it provides immediate feedback, repeated practice, and sequence adjustments based on performance.

References: Kulik, J. A., & Fletcher, J. D. (meta-analyses on computer-based instruction).

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many teachers rapidly developed digital competencies they previously had limited need to use. This professionalization involved three principal areas:

• Online pedagogy: Teachers learned how to design lessons specifically for remote delivery — pacing, chunking content, using synchronous and asynchronous methods, and maintaining student engagement at a distance. They adopted strategies like flipped lessons, frequent formative checks, and clearer scaffolding to compensate for reduced in-person cues.

• Multimedia instruction: Educators became proficient in creating and curating multimedia resources (video mini-lessons, interactive slides, educational apps, and digital assessments). These materials supported diverse learning styles, enabled repeated review, and allowed instruction to be more student-centered and self-paced.

• Digital classroom management: Teachers acquired skills to manage behavior, participation, and assessment in virtual spaces — using breakout rooms, chat moderation, digital norms, online assessment integrity practices, and tools for tracking participation and progress.

Together, these gains changed teaching practice: many teachers integrated digital tools into regular instruction after returning to classrooms, leading to more blended learning models, greater use of formative data, and increased flexibility in how and where students learn. Evidence: UNESCO and OECD reports on COVID-19 education responses document widespread teacher upskilling in digital pedagogy (UNESCO, 2020; OECD, 2021).

The shift to remote and hybrid learning during COVID reduced routine, in-person peer interaction, which weakened opportunities for social-emotional learning (turn-taking, reading facial cues, conflict resolution) and curtailed natural classroom discourse (spontaneous discussion, group problem-solving). In response, teachers adopted new strategies to recreate social and formative practices online: structured breakout groups, explicit teaching of remote communication norms, short synchronous check-ins, digital discussion boards, and frequent low-stakes formative assessments (polls, quizzes, shared documents) to monitor engagement and understanding. These adaptations partially restored interaction and assessment but often required deliberate scaffolding, clear norms, and tech access to be effective; without those supports, some students experienced lasting gaps in conversational fluency, collaborative skills, and classroom participation.

Selected sources: research on pandemic learning and social-emotional development (e.g., OECD, 2021; UNESCO, 2020) and studies on online formative assessment practices (Black & Wiliam, 1998; more recent reviews of digital formative tools).

Digital technology—and especially the pandemic-driven shift to remote learning—dramatically broadened what children can learn and who they can learn with. Students gained access to a vast range of multimedia content, niche subject matter, and experts via recorded lessons, virtual guest speakers, and international resources that were previously unavailable in many classrooms. Video conferencing and collaborative platforms also made it easier for pupils to work with classmates and mentors across regions and cultures, fostering broader perspectives and new forms of group work.

At the same time, this expansion exposed and amplified existing inequalities. Where households or schools lacked reliable devices, broadband, or quiet study spaces, students missed out on the very resources and collaborations that extended learning for others. The result was a widening of achievement gaps: some children benefited from richer, more varied learning opportunities, while others fell further behind because the necessary technology and supports were absent.

References: OECD, “Education responses to COVID-19: Embracing digital learning and online collaboration” (2020); UNICEF, “COVID-19: Are children able to continue learning during school closures?” (2020).

Educational apps, adaptive programs, and digital assessments let instruction respond to each child’s needs in real time. By tracking performance on tasks, these tools adjust difficulty and pacing so learners practice just beyond their current ability; they also deliver immediate, specific feedback that helps students correct errors and reinforce concepts right away. During COVID-driven remote learning, such technologies became more central, compensating for reduced teacher contact by maintaining individualized practice, monitoring progress, and guiding next steps. The result is greater differentiation (students work at varied speeds and on tailored content), more frequent formative assessment data for teachers and parents, and faster cycles of correction and mastery than many traditional one-size-fits-all approaches allowed.

References: Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 Sigma Problem; OECD (2015). Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection; Pane, J. F., et al. (2015). Continued Progress: Promising Evidence on Personalized Learning.

During COVID-driven remote learning, responsibility for day-to-day schooling shifted partly from teachers to parents and caregivers. Parents took on practical roles—managing schedules, supervising lessons, troubleshooting technology—and pedagogical ones, such as guiding practice, clarifying instructions, and reinforcing classroom expectations. This redistribution of responsibility meant learning became more distributed across home adults and digital platforms rather than concentrated in the classroom.

At the same time, video calls and home-based assignments made students’ living situations more visible to teachers and peers. Teachers gained new insight into family resources, routines, language use, and distraction levels, which sometimes helped tailor support but also exposed socioeconomic inequalities and privacy concerns. The combined effect was that education grew more collaborative with families, but also more contingent on home conditions and parental capacity—amplifying both engagement where supports existed and disadvantage where they did not.

References:

• UNESCO, “Education: From disruption to recovery” (2020)
• Dorn, H., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J., & Viruleg, E., “COVID-19 and learning loss — disparities grow and students need help” (McKinsey, 2020)

Dorn et al. (2020) was chosen because it provides clear, timely evidence about the pandemic’s measurable academic impacts and highlights inequities amplified by remote learning. The report synthesizes early empirical estimates of learning loss across grades and subjects, translates those losses into concrete trajectories (e.g., projected months of lost learning), and links outcomes to socioeconomic disparities. That combination of accessible data, policy-relevant framing, and emphasis on the need for targeted remediation makes it a useful, actionable source for understanding how COVID-driven reliance on technology affected student achievement and widened gaps.

Reference: Dorn, H., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J., & Viruleg, E. (2020). COVID-19 and learning loss — disparities grow and students need help. McKinsey & Company.

During COVID-19 and the broader digital shift, children increasingly took responsibility for the timing, pacing, and resources of their learning. Recorded lessons, learning platforms, and searchable online materials let students review content on-demand rather than only in real time. That fostered several changes: learners practice time-management and planning (deciding when to watch lectures, complete assignments, and seek help); they develop metacognitive skills (monitoring understanding and choosing which resources to revisit); and they use a wider variety of supports—videos, forums, adaptive apps, and searchable texts—so learning can be tailored to their level and interests. Asynchronous formats also reduce reliance on teacher-led schedules, enabling spaced review and self-paced mastery, though they can increase the need for motivation, digital literacy, and external scaffolding (parental guidance, teacher check-ins) to prevent gaps.

References: research on remote schooling during COVID (e.g., Dorn et al., 2020; OECD reports on digital learning) and literature on self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 2002).

Remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic moved whole cohorts of students and teachers into virtual spaces, accelerating practices that were already emerging and making both blended (mix of in-person and online) and fully online instruction routine. This normalization changed three interlinked areas of classroom practice:

• Video lessons: Educators began creating and curating short recorded lectures, demonstrations, and walkthroughs that students could pause, rewatch, and study asynchronously. This shifted some instructional time from live, synchronous explanation to flexible, self-paced content delivery, which supports differentiated pacing but also requires students to manage attention and time independently. (see Hodges et al., 2020; K-12 research on instructional videos)

• Learning Management Systems (LMS): Schools adopted or scaled LMS platforms (e.g., Google Classroom, Canvas, Schoology) as central hubs for distribution of materials, grading, communication, and tracking student progress. The LMS turned course organization into a visible, persistent structure, enabling greater transparency and data collection on participation and achievement. It also changed teacher workflows toward more digital curriculum design and assessment. (see Trust & Whalen, 2020; EDUCAUSE)

• Digital assignments: Paper worksheets and in-class activities were replaced by online quizzes, interactive modules, collaborative documents, and multimedia projects. Digital tasks can provide instant feedback, automate grading for some item types, and incorporate rich media, but they also raise concerns about equitable access, screen time, and the need to design tasks that promote higher-order thinking rather than rote clicking. (see OECD, 2021; Reich et al., 2020)

In short, COVID-driven remote learning entrenched a technology-mediated pedagogy: instruction became more modular, asynchronous, and data-driven, with opportunities for personalization and scalability but also challenges in student engagement, equity, and the social dimensions of learning.

Selected references:

• Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review.
• Trust, T., & Whalen, J. (2020). K-12 teachers’ experiences and challenges with online teaching during COVID-19.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2021). Learning remotely when schools close: How well are students and schools prepared?
• Reich, J., et al. (2020). Remote learning guidance from state education agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic: A first look.