Running Head: TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 1

Technology in the Classroom and its Effect on Children’s

Social-Emotional Development

Daniel R. Loutzenhiser

ETD 624 Fall 2020

Saginaw Valley State University

TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 2

Abstract

Technology has become the new normal in classroom’s across the world. Children have been

immersed in technology and digital content at very young ages. There has been a body of

research conducted on the impact this may have on a child’s social-emotional development and

overall growth. Through the research, there have been both positive and negative impacts. The

purpose of this paper is to highlight some of these impacts that children, teachers, and parents are

facing as they are immersed in virtual classrooms in our ever changing world.

Keywords: s​ ocial/emotional development, mental-health, emotional intelligence,

anti-social behavior, educational technology, hand held devices

TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 3

Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………... 2

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..4

Social-Emotional Development: What is it?…………………………………………........5

Technology in the Classroom……………………………………………………………..6

Prosocial, Nonsocial, and Antisocial Behavior…………………………………………...9

Mental Health…………………………………………………………………………….10

Emotional Intelligence…………………………………………………………………...13

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….14

References………………………………………………………………………………..16
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 4

Introduction

The current situation with education today is a very technology-driven field. Because of a

global pandemic many schools have been forced into a scenario where digital curriculum has

been pushed to the forefront. Many school districts have provided or are providing one-to-one

technology to their students in order to give support in the event of another school shutdown.

With this virtual learning plan in place, classrooms across the globe began using more digital

curriculum than ever before. Students found themselves in front of a screen for the majority of

their school day. This begs the question: What impacts has this use of technology had on the

growth of students across the world? Some of the impacts that are highlighted in this paper are

socialization, stress, attention span, behavior, and other health concerns.

TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 5

Social-Emotional Development: What is it?

“Social-emotional development includes the child’s experience, expression, and

management of emotions and the ability to establish positive and rewarding relationships with

others” (Cohen and others, 2005). Social-emotional development began in the early stages of

life where from the ages of children under the age of three are very reliant on parent response

and interaction. “Child-adult relationships have more significant impact on a child’s learning

than educational toys or pre-school curricula” (Aviles, et al., 2006). Children began to have

responses that were appropriate to a situation based on these interactions with adults. When a

child becomes of school age these relationships become more peer and teacher based, so the

child becomes more reliant on these relationships for their growth and development.

Some may argue that social-emotional growth did not occur without the interaction and

guidance of a teacher or mentor. Many supported Vygotsky’s “More Knowledgeable other”,

According to Vygotsky’s well-known theories, social interaction with guidance is a

quintessential element of children’s cognitive development. Meaningful learning occurs

when they interact with teachers, or a More Knowledgeable Other (MKO), who can

model and offer guidance for solving problems when the children are in the zone of

proximal development (ZPD). “In this learning process, the children are not passive

subjects absorbing particular content or information. Instead, they become active

participants who build their learning with the assistance of an MKO (Lee & Tu, 2016).
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 6

On the other hand many teachers and school districts argued that the teacher is still

providing guidance within the technology rich classroom, therefore Vygotsky’s theory would

still be in place.

The establishment of a solid social-emotional base helped all students not only today but

in the future as well. “Social, emotional, and cognitive development are deeply intertwined in

the brain and in behavior and together influence school and life outcomes including higher

education, physical and mental health, economic well-being, and civic engagement” (Jones, et

al., 2019). Children form their social-emotional base at home in their early years, and this was

reinforced in school by teacher student relationships. Now more than ever schools must look at

how these relationships impacted learning, and how technology in the classroom played a part in

those relationships.

Technology in the Classroom

School districts across the world became more and more technologically advanced and

prepared. “The ratio of students to computers in schools, a common metric for indicating

students’ access to computing devices, shows this precipitous change since 1983, when an

average of 125 U.S. students shared a single computer (125:1). By 2011, U.S. students’ access

increased more than 40-fold, with 3 students per computing device (3:1) and nearly 100% of

U.S. classrooms connected to the internet” (Bebell, et al., 2014). That number has not slowed

down over the course of the last decade. Many schools found themselves in a (1:1) scenario.

“Schools are spending billions on technology, even as they cut budgets and lay off teachers, with

little proof that the approach is improving basic learning” (Bebell, et al., 2014). In many

classroom settings children spend the majority of their day sitting behind a device, while a
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 7

teacher pushes out material through a learning management system. This became more prevalent

since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic where many schools were forced to close and their

content was delivered remotely.

Parents felt the pressure to start their children on devices even prior to their kids

becoming old enough to go to school. “The only reason we’ve ever introduced it is because we

fear that it’s going to be a primary learning device in the future.... As a parent, you never want to

go ahead and put your son or daughter at any disadvantage in a group setting” (Radensky, et al.,

2016). The early technological start can be viewed in both the positive and the negative light.

On one hand children are coming in prepared for the use of technology in the classroom. On the

other hand the value of the technology could be tarnished by children who have been

overstimulated at an early age.

In a study completed in South Africa by the University of South Africa, two classes of

students ages 12-13 were given a lesson. The first group used a smart board and other

technology. The second group of students were given the same lesson without the use of

technology.

In this investigation the average attention of learners exposed to technology during a

lesson was significantly higher compared to a group not exposed to technology. This was

the case in each of the three learning areas. It appears that technology succeeds in

capturing and maintaining the attention of learners during a lesson. Implementing

technology creates a more interactive learning environment which enables learners to use

multi-modalities resulting in better attention and concentration for a longer period of

TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 8

time. It is not surprising because children today are visual learners having grown up with

technology. Teachers should capitalise on this phenomenon (Bester & Brand, 2013).

Children who were visual learners thrived in technology rich classrooms, but where did

that leave children with different learning styles? This showed the importance of teacher

awareness about their students' individual learning styles and needs.

Did the fact that students had to work on devices all day affect their growth? “To

examine the impact of 1:1 initiatives on teaching and learning, we need first to understand how

1:1 devices are being used and how this use plays a role in teaching and learning in a complex

social context” (Valiente, 2010). Quality was the key with using technology at home or within

the classroom. Researching what has been successful and what worked for students was a great

way to ensure that students will have growth in a classroom. “It had been found that well

designed games can provide positive experiences that foster children’s learning and development

whereas poorly designed toys can be time- wasting activities that do not do much to contribute to

their learning and development” (Slutsky, et al., 2013).

A baseline trial was done with children who were ages (4-6) completed a puzzle of the

tower of hanoi. There were two options, one was a 3d physical version that the kids needed to

construct, and the other was a 2d version on a touchscreen. The study was done to see if the

touchscreen puzzle that they worked on translated to knowledge about constructing the 3d model

of the same tower. They then took data on time per move and extra moves. “The results showed

similar levels of effectiveness of 2D and 3D practice: both groups showed downward trends in

the number of excess moves and time per move” (Huber, et al., 2016). This is a good example of

a student who showed a connection between technology and the real world. Students who

cannot differentiate technology from real life may struggle with forming real life connections.
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 9

Huber, et al., 2016 also states that, “We conclude that, at least with respect to certain activities,

children are quite capable of transferring learning from touchscreen devices. This result

highlights the limitations of generalizing across screen-based activities in discussing the effects

of media on young children’s development.”

In a study done on the NAEP standardized test in 2001 it was found, “In terms of the

quantity of time spent with computers, the results appear to be mixed. The more time students

used computers for schoolwork outside school, the higher they were likely to score on the NAEP

history assessment. The more time they used computers in school, however, the lower they were

likely to score on the NAEP” (​Wenglinsky, 2005​). Would schools benefit from creating

homework material that was more technology based, and save the classroom for more discussion

and paper and pencil instruction?

Prosocial, nonsocial, and antisocial behaviors

Throughout a child’s day in school there were many opportunities to have social

interaction with other students. The fear with using devices in the classroom was that students

became less likely to interact with their peers. This in theory caused a negative impact on their

social growth. In a study done in a preschool classroom in Vancouver, British Columbia. Five

children (ages 3-4) were put through an observational study where i-Pads were used for reading

interventions. The study found that when used appropriately the students engaged in social

interaction throughout the study. “Prosocial behaviours included all of the positive sharing

events in which the children would share” (Ralph & Petrina, 2018). “Nonsocial behaviours

occurred throughout the activity and were exhibited when the children worked independently”

(Ralph & Petrina, 2018), “Antisocial behaviours observed were: pushing another’s hand side
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 10

and pulling an item away” (Ralph & Petrina, 2018). “Antisocial behaviours have a negative

connotation and sometimes the children would work alone, not to be antisocial or isolated, but

rather to work independently” (Ralph & Petrina, 2018). Through this study it was noted that

there was still plenty of time for social interaction, and the observers thought that most of the

antisocial behavior was in fact just nonsocial independent work. “​Social information processing

(SIP) theory and a large body of associated research has shown that children with elevated levels

of antisocial behavior show biased patterns of social cognitions in response to social conflicts,

such as hostile attribution of intent” (Malti, 2020).

How much nonsocial time was too much? Did students spend too much time in a

nonsocial state? In a study conducted in the San Francisco Bay Area, five teachers piloted an

iPad based learning program to see its impact on their brains and emotional wellbeing. “Four out

of five pilot teachers are using the iPads 50-75% of class time, that’s an additional two or more

hours of screen time per day, and at least six hours more of screen time per week in school”

(Deweese 2014).

While there was educational value in the technology used within the classroom it was

very important to monitor the amount of time used. There needed to be a balance between

technological use and time for socialization. “Children with strong social skills are more likely

to make and sustain friendships, initiate positive relationships with teachers, participate in

classroom activities, and be positively engaged in learning” (Denham, 2006).

Mental Health

One of the fears about having children in front of a device all day was how it impacted

their mental health, and mental wellbeing. Teachers and administration had been put in a tough
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 11

position to set limitations within the school day for technology use. “Statistics from the United

States suggest that youth between the ages of 8 and 18 spend on average seven and a half hours

per day engaging with media content” (Rideout et al., 2010). The numbers had steadily

increased year after year, and with the growth of technology in classrooms this number

continued to rise. “Parents and guardians, as well as education and child health professionals,

may be uncertain as to how to structure children’s screen time and how this should factor into

their daily lives, as well as how to interpret the latest literature on these topics” (Gottschalk,

2019).

One of the effects that was concerning was a students attention span when it came to

learning through technology, both positive and negative. “Interactive materials including

animations benefited students if the interactions involve making sense of relevant information,

but interactions with electronic games and films often draw attention to irrelevant information as

well” (Brand, 2010). Children in general found it difficult to concentrate on things they do not

understand. Technology can serve as a tool to bridge the gap between the question and

understanding. According to (Brand, 2010) the research showed “Learners pay more attention

when technology is present in a lesson.”

Many universities banned the use of laptops within the classroom setting because of the

constant distraction and interruptions. Classrooms at all levels of learning have seen an impact

on their student participation and attention span. “Educators are discovering that students are

more interested in online resources, such as Facebook, game sites, chat, and YouTube, than

classroom lectures and textbook chapters about computer science and other subjects” (Goundar,

2014).
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 12

In younger children there had been studies showing a connection between

social-emotional difficulties and the use of technology as a calming tool. A study done by the

Boston University Medical Center institutional review board surveyed 144 English or Spanish

speaking parents of healthy children ranging from 15-36 months of age. The parents were asked

if they used devices as a calming tool for their child. The children were then screened using the

“Validated Baby or Preschool Pediatric Symptom Checklist” (​Radesky et al., 2016​). Of the

children with social-emotional difficulties, 51.5% were somewhat or very likely to give them a

device to calm them down. 47.6% of the children were given a device for peace and quiet in the

house. “This cross-sectional analysis showed significant associations between increased

social-emotional difficulties in toddlers and the tendency of low-income parents to use mobile

technology to calm their children or keep them quiet” (​Radesky et al., 2016​).

It had been suggested that internet usage be categorized and researched as a clinical

disorder. With a classification of a clinical disorder, it allowed for more focus on the topic as

well as a larger body of research. “Young (1996) was one of the first to suggest that internet

compulsion should be categorized as a clinical disorder. In her research Young found an

association between problematic internet use and a number of mental health issues, including

depression, anxiety, social isolation, shyness, low self-esteem, and lack of social and emotional

skills.” (Young, 1996 as cited in Kruisselbrink, 2013)

In response to the mental health of students who have constant access to virtual material,

support for the children both in school and online needed to be prevalent. An online survey was

given to 900 professionals in the health, mental health, and education setting. “Responding to

one of the suggestions provided in the questionnaire, several professionals referred to the need
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 13

for reliable online resources and mental health information for young people themselves to

access” (Clarke, 2017).

Emotional Intelligence

Howard Gardner had a theory of multiple intelligences, every person is made up of these

several intelligences, bodily kinesthetic, musical, spatial, logical-mathematical linguistic,

interpersonal and intrapersonal. (Gardner, 1983) Interpersonal and intrapersonal together was

combined to later become the term Emotional Intelligence. “Emotional Intelligence (EI), was

coined by Salovey and Mayer in 1990. They defined emotional intelligence as “a set of skills

hypothesized to contribute to the accurate appraisal and expression of emotion in oneself and in

others, the effective regulation of emotion in self and others, and the use of feelings to motivate,

plan and achieve in one’s life” (Deweese, 2014). Students need relationships with other

students to have social growth. This had been done through daily conversations, interactions,

and experiences. “Those who are against the use of technology in the classroom say excessive

use can promote antisocial situations. These individuals were afraid that students will lose their

ability to communicate in a social situation because of their constant use of technology. Students

needed interpersonal skills, and when given technological devices in school, this limited the time

they got to spend interacting with their peers, therefore condoning antisocial behavior”

(Yakubova, 2018).

Students who did not have any down time from their devices were in a constant state of

virtual stimulation. “Constantly being in the electronic world, the student carries out

educational, professional, socio-cultural activities, communicates with their own kind, spends

free time, and expands information. They perceived reality itself through the digital world, and

contact with it was mediated. The emergence of electronic dependence was not recognized by
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 14

the individual, since the main amount of real time was associated with the virtual world and is

perceived as the norm” (Bayanov, 2019).

There was commonly a blurred line with students who struggled with differentiating

between virtual and reality. When this happened students were unable to regulate their emotions.

“We know that technology itself is not to blame. Instead, our focus should be on children’s

inexperience, naive, and curiosity about the power they wield on those networked platforms and

sprawling public spaces” (​Steiner-Adair, 2015​). “As students text or post or hang out online,

often working on school assignments together, they are sending messages and content that they

would never share at school, often using language that they would never say to someone’s face”

(​Steiner-Adair, 2015​). The ability to do this for some kids damaged their ability to grow and

develop socially. They had not had purposeful or tough conversations with their peers face to

face.

Conclusion

Technology impacted the social-emotional development of children significantly. Studies

had shown that there was some benefit to a child’s want to learn, and the ability to hold their

attention through daily activities. Technology had made things more exciting and more

accessible. Concerns with consistent technology use include attention issues, anxiety, and stress.

There was not a definitive answer on the risk and reward of technology in the classroom.

Teachers and parents alike needed to monitor the time and usage of devices in their classrooms

and at home. If administered correctly there were many benefits to the use of technology in the

classroom, if used incorrectly it came at a cost. Teachers had a responsibility to create a learning
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 15

environment that was best for all of their students. This included being aware of technology

usage, and its impact both good and bad on their students.
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 16

References

Aviles, A. M., Anderson, T. R., & Davila, E. R. (2006). Child and adolescent social-emotional

development within the context of school. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 11(1),

32-39.

Bayanov, D. I., Novitskaya, L. Y., Panina, S. A., Paznikova, Z. I., Martynenko, E. V., Ilkevich,

K. B., ... & Allalyev, R. M. (2019). Digital technology: Risks or benefits in student

training. Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques, 7(4), 659-663.

Bebell, D., Clarkson, A., & Burraston, J. (2014). Cloud Computing: Short Term Impacts of 1:1

Computing in the Sixth Grade. Journal of Information Technology Education:

Innovations in Practice, 13, 129–152.

Bester, G., & Brand, L. (2013). The effect of technology on learner attention and achievement in

the classroom. South African Journal of Education, 33(2).

Brand, L. M. (2010). The effect of technology on attention and concentration within the

classroom context (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Africa).

Clarke, A. M., Chambers, D., & Barry, M. M. (2017). Bridging the Digital Disconnect:

Exploring the Views of Professionals on Using Technology to Promote Young People’s

Mental Health. School Psychology International, 38(4), 380–397.

Cohen, J., and others. 2005. ​Helping Young Children Succeed: Strategies to Promote Early

Childhood Social and Emotional Development​ . Washington, DC: National

Conference of State Legislatures and Zero to Three.

DeWeese, K. L. (2014). Screen Time, How Much Is Too Much? The Social and Emotional Costs

of Technology on the Adolescent Brain [Online Submission]. In Online Submission.

TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 17

Denham, S. A. (2006). Social-emotional competence as support for school readiness: What is it

and how do we assess it? Early Education and Development, 17(1), 57–89.

doi:10.1207/s15566935eed1701_4

Gardner, H., (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic

Gottschalk, F. (2019), "Impacts of technology use on children: Exploring literature on the brain,

cognition and well-being", OECD Education Working Papers, No. 195, OECD

Publishing, Paris,​https://doi.org/10.1787/8296464e-en​.

Goundar, S. (2014). The distraction of technology in the classroom. Journal of Education &

Human Development, 3(1), 211-229.

Hoemann, K., Xu, F., & Barrett, L. F. (2019). Emotion words, emotion concepts, and emotional

development in children: A constructionist hypothesis. Developmental psychology,

55(9), 1830.

Huber, B., Tarasuik, J., Antoniou, M. N., Garrett, C., Bowe, S. J., & Kaufman, J. (2016). Young

children’s transfer of learning from a touchscreen device. Computers in Human Behavior,

56, 56–64. ​https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.010

Jones, S. M., McGarrah, M. W., & Kahn, J. (2019). Social and emotional learning: A principled

science of human development in context. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 129-143.

Kruisselbrink Flatt, A. (2013). A Suffering Generation: Six Factors Contributing to the Mental

Health Crisis in North American Higher Education. College Quarterly, 16(1).

Lee, L., & Tu, X. (2016). Digital Media for Low-Income Preschoolers’ Effective Science

Learning: A Study of iPad Instructions with a Social Development Approach. Computers

in the Schools, 33(4), 239–252.

TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 18

Malti, T. (2020). Children and Violence: Nurturing Social-Emotional Development to Promote

Mental Health. Social Policy Report, 33(2), 1-27.

Radesky, J. S., Peacock-Chambers, E., Zuckerman, B., & Silverstein, M. (2016). Use of mobile

technology to calm upset children: Associations with social-emotional development.

JAMA pediatrics, 170(4), 397-399.

Radesky, J. S., Eisenberg, S., Kistin, C. J., Gross, J., Block, G., Zuckerman, B., & Silverstein, M.

(2016). Overstimulated consumers or next-generation learners? Parent tensions about

child mobile technology use. The Annals of Family Medicine, 14(6), 503-508.

Ralph, R., & Petrina, S. (2018). Social Learning with Mobile Devices in Preschool Classrooms.

European Journal of STEM Education, 3(3).

Rideout, V. et al. (2010), Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8-to 18-Year-Olds, Kaiser

Family Foundation.

Slutsky, R., Slutsky, M., & DeShelter, L. M. (2014). Playing with Technology: Is It All Bad?

Dimensions of Early Childhood, 42(3), 18–23.

Steiner-Adair, C. (2015). The Big Disconnect: Your Student in Class vs. Your Student Online.

Independent School, 74(2)

Valiente, O. (2010), "1-1 in Education: Current Practice, International Comparative Research

Evidence and Policy Implications", OECD Education Working Papers, No. 44, OECD

Publishing, Paris,​https://doi.org/10.1787/5kmjzwfl9vr2-en​.

Wenglinsky, H. (2005). Technology and achievement: The bottom line. Educational Leadership,

63(4), 29.
TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM 19

Yakubova, H. R., Nazarova, S. T., & Umrzakova, M. F. (2018). PROS AND CONS OF

TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM. СТАНОВЛЕНИЕ И РАЗВИТИЕ НОВОЙ

ПАРАДИГМЫ ИННОВАЦИОННОЙ НАУКИ В, 78.