The impact of using EdTech on children's learning

Executive summary

We conducted a scoping review of meta-studies assessing the impact of using EdTech on children's learning. The review aimed to answer the following research questions: (1) what kinds of research have been conducted on the learning outcomes of EdTech used in schools, and (2) what does the available evidence tell us about whether and how the use of EdTech is linked to children’s learning outcomes? (3) what are the implications of these findings?

This scoping review is part of our project Better EdTech futures for children.

Better EdTech Futures

Our related blog post on the impact of EdTech on children's learning is available on Media@LSE.

EdTech learning blog

We selected 56 meta-analyses for detailed examination, which, in total, encompass empirical findings from 2,111 studies involving many thousands of children worldwide; only about 1% of the primary studies were conducted in the UK.

Access the scoping review

What kinds of research have been conducted on the learning outcomes of EdTech used in schools?

The tools studied disproportionately focused on emerging technologies, such as virtual technologies, AI and robotics, with less recent research on the impacts of everyday EdTech used in schools and infrastructural technologies long embedded in schools.

The benefits of EdTech covered in the literature are currently measured primarily based on academic performance rather than a fuller account of children’s learning, skills and development.

The children studied in the included meta-analyses encompass those in primary and secondary school, as well as preschoolers. Notably, few meta-analyses included children with special learning needs and disabilities or compared findings by gender or for children from diverse socio-economic backgrounds, refugee children or any other minority status.

What does the available evidence tell us about whether and how the use of EdTech is linked to children’s learning outcomes?

The evidence supports a cautious interpretation that EdTech can lead to measurable learning outcomes for schoolchildren. These gains are realised in certain contexts and under specific implementation conditions, notably when EdTech implementation, product design and pedagogical integration are adapted to the subject matter and to children’s particular needs and development. Any learning effect appears to depend on how technology is deployed, used and by whom, rather than on the technology in isolation.

Three interlinked and cross-cutting factors consistently shaped the magnitude of effects across the evidence base:

Age and development: EdTech must meet children’s developmental, cognitive, physical and social needs to be effective. The evidence shows that effects vary substantially by age group across EdTech types.
Design features: The compatibility of design features with the learning domain, the pedagogical approach used, and children’s cognitive abilities drives much of the differences in learning outcomes. The findings also suggest that learning domain fit matters more than technological sophistication.
Pedagogical approach: EdTech produces its strongest effects when embedded in active, collaborative and contextually grounded pedagogical approaches. Technology use alone, without pedagogical alignment, does not reliably improve outcomes, indicating that EdTech’s efficacy depends on teachers’ competence and skills to integrate the technology meaningfully.

When findings are disaggregated by children with different needs, ages and abilities, the measured impact varies greatly. For the most vulnerable groups, evidence remains sparse, with most findings from non-UK samples examined under experimental conditions that may or may not apply to everyday classrooms.

For children with SEND, the evidence varies according to the nature of the need or disability. There is evidence that EdTech can support learning when it reduces the cognitive load or enables children to bypass functional barriers.

What are the implications of these findings?

For educators and schools, the evidence suggests that EdTech procurement and deployment decisions should be guided by compatibility between technology design, children’s cognitive development and the pedagogical approach being used rather than by assumptions that any particular technology will automatically improve learning outcomes for schoolchildren. The evidence also suggests that EdTech works best when it supports rather than supplants the teacher, and where children can take an active role in their learning.

For policymakers, the findings highlight that positive learning outcomes are not an inherent feature of EdTech; they depend on technologies being designed and implemented in developmentally, cognitively and pedagogically appropriate ways. The evidence reflects predominantly non-UK samples under conditions with limited ecological validity. Investment is needed in well-powered UK-based trials with longer follow-up periods and outcomes spanning both academic and non-academic dimensions of children’s learning.

For researchers, the findings point to several priorities for strengthening the evidence base. First, the terminology and categorisation of EdTech requires standardisation, so that effects can be compared meaningfully across studies. Second, during the period included in this scoping review, research attention has disproportionately been paid to emerging technologies and should more fully address infrastructural EdTech that makes up the bulk of school children’s EdTech. Broadening outcomes beyond short-term academic performance should also be a priority, including identifying potential adverse effects of EdTech on children’s wellbeing, privacy and rights. Disaggregating findings by gender, socio-economic background, minority status and disability is particularly important as currently the evidence is the weakest for the most vulnerable children.