AI and the best use of technology in K–12 education

The pace of technological change continues to accelerate. Believe it or not, the first computer I used loaded programs through a cassette drive. Then came the days when computing power was tied to your device’s processor (286, Pentium, etc.). With the shift to online content, your connection speed became the key factor. Now we have generative AI, which promises to impact nearly every aspect of our lives.

Educational technology has experienced a similar pattern of innovation and change—although some developments have been far more impactful than others. I recently came across a timeline of instructional design with the following dates and milestones:

• 1983: Computer use on the rise in education
• 1985: Computers to change everything
• 2000: Internet as a tutor, guide
• 2008: Online education rapidly expanding

Notice how, more than a decade before the COVID-19 pandemic, lofty promises were made about the power of online education and digital tutors. Yet, when we leaned heavily into online learning beginning in 2020, the results were far less than transformative.

What lessons might this hold about the integration of AI into K–12 education?

Evolution of technology in education: Factors for success

In this context, I’ve found myself thinking about companies and technologies that sprang onto the scene, dominated for a period of time, and then faded away. The history of edtech is full of such flashes in the pan.

For example, consider the interest in the early 2000s in classroom response technologies. These handheld devices allowed teachers to pose questions to their students and see immediate responses. At Renaissance, we produced the Renaissance Classroom Response System, but it was hard to compete against Turning Technologies. At education conferences, their booth was mobbed. They dominated.

Founded in 2002, Turning Technologies captured a massive 78 percent market share. In 2007, Entrepreneur magazine ranked Turning Technologies among the fastest-growing small businesses in the US, while Inc. magazine named it the fastest growing privately held US software company.

Yet, Turning Technologies barely exists today, and the once popular ExamView software reached “end of life” in 2024.

This example raises two essential questions:

1. To what degree does edtech live up to its promises?
2. What does it take for a company or a technology to endure?

Technology built for teachers and students

There are many examples of technology companies overpromising and underdelivering. When this occurs, some blame the setting, claiming that K–12 schools are slow to change and resistant to “disruptive” innovation. Others find fault with the technology itself, noting that it either wasn’t truly beneficial to teachers and students or was unable to scale up to support widespread use.

Yet, while many technologies and software applications have faded away, some have endured and flourished.

At Renaissance, we take great pride in the long history of our Accelerated Reader program. Originally released in 1986, Accelerated Reader is one of the most enduring programs in edtech, used by millions of students and supported by decades of research demonstrating its efficacy. (For a helpful summary, see the recent book by Professor Keith Topping.)

It’s nearly impossible to name another piece of software used in 1986 that’s still widely used today. Back then, the choices were WordPerfect and Word Star for word processing. For spreadsheets, the popular choice was Lotus 1-2-3. For presentations, it was Harvard Graphics. None of these remain in widespread use today, but Accelerated Reader endures.

Similar statements apply to our Star Assessments. Star Reading was introduced in 1996, followed several years later by Star Math and Star Early Literacy. Today, these are the most widely used computer-adaptive assessments in K–12 education. Their reliability, validity, and other performance elements are objectively documented through ratings from the National Center on Intensive Intervention. These are clearly applications with staying power.

So, what does it take for a technology or a company to flourish? In a market where many education technology companies are only a flash in the pan, how has Renaissance thrived for nearly forty years?

The answer is simple: our principles.

A commitment to the best use of technology in education

It’s relatively easy for me to write about Renaissance’s history and core values. I was a young teacher growing in the profession as Renaissance grew as a company. I followed Renaissance closely as I first implemented its products in my own classroom, and then oversaw their implementation school- and districtwide.

While I’ve now been a Renaissance employee for 20 years, my associations with the company as both a customer and an advisor go back much further. Terry Paul, one of the company’s founders, was a friend and crucial mentor.

It was Terry who drafted the first version of our Renaissance mission statement, “To accelerate learning for all.” This mission still directs our efforts today. He also drafted a set of educational principles that continue to encapsulate Renaissance as a company and the beliefs we hold about education.

Chief among these principles is our pledge to only develop products that represent the best use of technology. To this end, we have avoided programs that attempt to completely take over instruction. We believe that teachers should be at the center of the classroom. This is why our mantra is, “Support teachers, don’t supplant them.”

Keeping teachers at the center of K–12 classrooms

At the heart of this principle is an unquestionable acknowledgement of the teacher’s critical role, which is particularly notable considering that it comes from a technology company. For some in the tech industry, the emphasis is solely on the technology, with the humans who use it treated as an afterthought.

Consider Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg’s widely quoted mantra, “Move fast and break things.” Writing in the Harvard Business Review, Hemant Taneja notes that this sentiment “aptly captures how entrepreneurs regard disruption: more is always better.” Other phrases like “fail hard/fail fast/fail often” echo the same sentiment. Some in the tech industry even claim success when they launch a “minimum viable product” (MVP) into the market to see how users react to it.

These phrases clearly come from folks who don’t understand daily life in schools. Educators’ daily work is a constant flurry of activity. It’s also highly consequential. Educators aren’t using apps for some casual purpose. They’re using technology to manage instruction and practice, collect essential data, and keep students engaged, all while the school bell schedule marches on.

Under these pressures, “moving fast” to the point of “breaking things” is intolerable. “Failing hard” and “failing often” is clearly not an option.

These are key points to keep in mind as we consider the potential benefits and drawbacks of integrating emerging AI tools into edtech.

AI chatbots vs. teacher expertise: The importance of “human in the loop”

Of course, some edtech companies are steaming full speed ahead. They’re attempting to inject AI into every aspect of teaching and learning, without ensuring these applications represent the best use of technology.

Yes, AI can do many things. But can it truly do them as well as or better than a human being?

Part of the answer is clear to us when we look at images or read texts and know, intuitively, that they’re AI-generated. It’s obvious there was not a human in the loop to ensure accuracy, quality, or—in some cases—simple coherence.

Natalie Wexler recently provided a memorable example. As an experiment, she asked ChatGPT to rewrite the Gettysburg Address at a third-grade reading level, and she received this output:

Four score and seven years ago, our country was started with the idea that all people are equal. Now we are in a big fight, and many people have died to keep our country safe.

We are here today to remember them. We want to honor the people who fought and died for our freedom. But we know that just saying words is not enough. We must make sure that the country they fought for stays strong and free.

As Wexler notes, “this version preserves the basic meaning of the original…although ChatGPT seems unaware that most third-graders would be stumped by the phrase ‘four score and seven years ago.’” She adds that ChatGPT “omits a lot of nuance,” leaving students wondering why the Address is considered an iconic text.

Clearly, teachers’ expertise, knowledge of their students, and ability to make history come alive continue to matter greatly.

A second example: In the evenings, I sometimes turn on a Roku “Zen” channel with an AI-generated video of a tropical fish tank. At first glance, it’s quite realistic. But I can soon see the obvious “tells,” as fish abruptly appear and vanish from the screen, like ghosts. Once again, AI approaches reality but falls noticeably short.

These may seem like small points, but they’re worth considering in this context. If “four score and seven years ago…” is presented to third-graders as text they should readily understand, and if fish are allowed to appear and vanish at random from their environment, are we truly ready to unleash AI tutors and chatbots on our children? Some edtech companies already have.

Don’t get me wrong. At Renaissance, we view AI with tremendous optimism, seeing the ways it can help teachers and leaders to make informed decisions quickly to support students in the classroom. But we recognize that this requires a thoughtful approach that builds on our longstanding commitment to the best use of technology.

As a result, we don’t simply talk about how we’re incorporating AI into our products. Instead, our dialogue centers on responsible AI use in education. As a company, we only apply AI in ways that keep a human fully in the loop, and we will continue to do so until AI-based applications are conclusively shown to have the same or better accuracy than humans.

Renaissance Next: Responsible use of AI to support teaching and learning

What does this commitment look like in practice? Our Renaissance Next platform provides two key examples:

1. Renaissance Next for Teachers brings together assessment, practice, and instruction data, along with lesson and skill practice recommendations for individual students, small groups, and whole classes.

   The platform includes an AI-powered precision search feature to help teachers locate the most relevant lessons and activities based on a specific skill, standard, and/or grade level. They then decide which lessons and activities to assign to students, keeping teachers at the center of decision making.

2. Renaissance Next for Leaders helps administrators to more easily understand students’ performance and growth, and to monitor the use of Renaissance solutions school- and districtwide.

   Renaissance Next for Leaders includes an AI-powered Explain It feature, which generates plain language explanations of key data points and trends, including Student Growth Percentile (SGP). This helps busy administrators to generate summaries and suggested next steps for their own use and to share with stakeholders.

I invite you to learn more about Renaissance Next by downloading our new eBook. (This blog is an expanded version of the eBook’s introduction.) The eBook walks you through the teacher and leader experiences, and it shows you how two districts are using Renaissance Next to improve learning outcomes and empower students’ futures.

I also invite you to explore the new AI Lesson Generator in our Nearpod platform. This powerful feature creates dynamic Nearpod lessons tailored to specific standards and instructional needs. Teachers can then easily refine and customize a lesson before using it with students—keeping a human in the loop and ensuring that technology continues to work in the service of teaching and learning.