Either watch the full video above or download listen to the audio-only below.
Anyone who has been around the block in edtech has heard the phrase “Digital Divide.” But how about the “Digital Design Divide?”
According to a report released this month by the State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA), teachers increasingly have access to technology but lack the time, resources, and training to integrate it effectively into their instruction.
In this week’s conversation, Julia and Ji Soo break down the challenge succinctly, and offer advice.
The timing of Improving Professional Learning Systems to Better Support Today’s Educators: How Title II, Part A Offers a Model for State and Local Leadership is particularly critical as AI tools flood into classrooms. According to Gallup, a majority of U.S. educators have used AI to some degree in their daily work. However, a RAND study found that half of districts have not provided any professional learning on artificial intelligence — despite teachers asking for it.
This from the SETDA release:
The guide, developed in partnership with FullScale, ISTE+ASCD, and Learning Forward, and supported by Google.org, draws on national research with 24 state education agencies and 76 local education agencies. It provides evidence-based strategies for leveraging Title II-A and other funding streams to support sustained, high-quality professional learning focused on technology and AI integration.
The research reveals significant gaps in current practice. In 2022-23, while more than 60% of Title II-A funds were spent on professional development, much of it took the form of short-term workshops rather than sustained strategies. Only nine states prioritized these funds for technology training, and fewer than 40% of local education agencies used them to advance technology-related professional learning.
Key research findings from this report include:
- Definitions of quality are inconsistent and incomplete. Few state and local agencies have a formal definition of student-centered instruction enabled through technology, and even fewer have a clear picture of how professional learning can support this instruction.
- Funding patterns default to tool training over instructional strategy. Many state and local leaders described using Title II-A dollars for short-term training on specific platforms rather than building durable educator capacity through frameworks such as the ISTE Standards for Educators or Universal Design for Learning.
- Evaluation focuses on compliance rather than improvement. While state and local agencies track fund usage, monitoring often emphasizes compliance with laws and regulations rather than using evidence to understand impact and refine practices.
- The field lacks well-documented models. State and local leaders can point to broad categories of effective work–coaching, professional learning communities, inquiry cycles–but struggle to name specific, well-documented programs with evidence of success.
With billions in federal education dollars already flowing to states and districts annually through Title II-A, SETDA’s message is clear: the money is there. The question is whether educational leaders will look at it with fresh eyes and deploy it to meet the urgent professional learning needs of today’s educators.
In this snippet, the digital design divide is defined:
In this snippet, the conversation delves into busting allowable use myths and fresh approaches:
And in this final snippet, the discussion is around measuring beyond compliance and building human relationships.
