📖5 min read · 988 words
This is the plain-language version. Same content, written for a quick read.
A lot of teaching now runs through a screen: a reading app that sets its own level, a math program that picks the next practice set, an online lesson, a page of digital problems, a learning game. When a para is assigned to support a student on one of these, the technology is doing part of the teaching, and the para's job is to make sure the student is really learning from it, not just moving through it.
This is a different job from the two other kinds of technology a para supports. It is **not** assistive or access technology: the pencil grip, the speech-to-text, the device that removes a barrier so the student can take part; that has its own brief and its own scope lines (see 10.04). And it is **not** a communication device. AAC is its own body of work (see 10.02). Instructional technology is technology that *teaches or gives practice*, and the questions it raises for a para are about learning, staying engaged, and honest use.
Instructional technology is any tool whose job is to deliver instruction or practice:
The line that matters: if the tool's job is to *teach or practice a skill*, it belongs here. If its job is to *remove an access barrier* (read text aloud, let a non-writer type), that is assistive technology (10.04). If its job is to *let the student communicate*, that is AAC (10.02). The same tablet can run all three; what you are supporting depends on what the tool is doing in that moment.
Three things sit squarely in a para's role:
Instructional technology fails quietly in a few common ways, and a para is usually the person set up to catch them:
Many programs report progress: scores, time on task, levels, skills mastered. A para is often the one who sees these numbers first. Note what you see and pass it to the teacher (see 06.06 on digital data tools, 06.01 on observational data), including the honest context the number alone hides: that the student guessed through it, or needed a lot of help, or breezed it. What you do **not** do is treat the program's readout as a diagnosis, or change the student's level or program because of it. That is the teacher's call (see 06.05 on progress monitoring).
You support the tool the teacher assigned, at the level they set. You do not choose the app, change its difficulty or settings, or swap in one of your own. Raise it with the teacher, quickly and specifically, when:
The move is the one that runs through the whole role: notice it, describe what you actually saw, and hand it to the team (see 13.06 on scope of practice). You are the accurate eyes on whether the technology is teaching what it claims to. The people who chose it decide what to do next.
**Instructional technology**
**Cross-references**
Why this brief
A lot of instruction now runs through a screen: a reading app that levels itself to the student, a math program that assigns the next practice set, an online lesson, a set of digital problems, a learning game. When a para is assigned to support a student on one of these, the technology is doing part of the teaching, and the para's job is to make sure the student is actually learning from it, not just moving through it.
This is a different job from the two other kinds of technology a para supports. It is **not** assistive/access technology: the pencil grip, the speech-to-text, the device that removes a barrier so the student can participate; that has its own brief and its own scope lines (cross-ref 10.04). And it is **not** a communication device. AAC is its own body of work (cross-ref 10.02). Instructional technology is technology that *teaches or gives practice*, and the questions it raises for a para are about learning, engagement, and honest use.
1\. What counts as instructional technology
Instructional technology is any tool whose job is to deliver instruction or practice:
Practice and skill apps: reading, math, phonics, or fluency programs that assign tasks and track progress.
Adaptive software: programs that change what they give the student based on right and wrong answers.
Digital lessons and assignments: online lessons, a teacher's slides the student works through, digital worksheets, learning games tied to a skill.
The line that matters: if the tool's purpose is to *teach or practice a skill*, it belongs here. If its purpose is to *remove an access barrier* (read text aloud, let a non-writer compose), that is assistive technology (10.04). If its purpose is to *let the student communicate*, that is AAC (10.02). The same tablet can run all three; what you are supporting depends on what the tool is doing in that moment.
2\. Your job with the tool
Three things sit squarely in a para's role:
Get them in and on task. Logged in, in the right activity at the right level the teacher assigned, and actually working, not stuck on a menu or drifting into a different app or site.
Know the skill behind the screen. Before you can support the learning, you have to know what the activity is teaching: is this about decoding, about fluency, about a math fact? Ask the teacher if you are not sure; "what is this program working on for them?" is exactly the right question. Without it you can only supervise clicking.
Keep the student thinking, then fade. Prompt, hint, and encourage the way you would on any task, and step back as they take it over (cross-ref 04.03 on prompt fading). The goal is a student doing the thinking the program is asking for, not a student watching you do it.
3\. The traps
Instructional technology fails quietly in a few predictable ways, and a para is usually the person positioned to catch them:
The app as babysitter. The screen holds the student's attention, so the adult disengages. Engagement with a screen is not the same as learning; your attention is still the active ingredient.
Doing it for them. To get through the assignment, or to keep a frustrated student calm, the para taps the answers or feeds them the responses. The task gets "finished," and nothing is learned. This is the same over-help trap as any other support (cross-ref 04.07 on promoting independence).
Gaming the program. Students learn quickly that random or rapid answers still advance the game or fill the bar. When you see it, that is worth noticing and flagging. The progress the program reports is no longer real.
4\. Reading and relaying what the tool reports
Many instructional programs report progress: scores, time on task, levels, skills mastered. A para is often the one who sees these numbers first. Note what you see and pass it to the teacher (cross-ref 06.06 on digital data tools, 06.01 on observational data), including the honest context the number alone hides: that the student guessed through it, or needed heavy help, or breezed it. What you do **not** do is treat the program's readout as a diagnosis, or change the student's level or program based on it. That is the teacher's call (cross-ref 06.05 on progress monitoring).
5\. Scope, and when to flag
You support the tool the teacher assigned, at the level they set. You do not choose the app, change its difficulty or settings, or swap in one of your own. Raise it with the teacher, promptly and specifically, when:
The activity is clearly too hard or too easy: the student is guessing, shut down, or coasting.
It's broken or not working: crashing, won't load the right assignment, locked out.
It isn't helping: the student uses it but the skill isn't coming, or the tool seems to get in the way.
The reported progress isn't real: gaming, guessing, or heavy adult help behind the numbers.
The move is the one that runs through the whole role: notice it, describe what you actually saw, and hand it to the team (cross-ref 13.06 on scope of practice). You are the accurate eyes on whether the technology is teaching what it claims to. The people who chose it decide what to do next.
6\. Resources
Instructional technology
CAST: UDL Guidelines: udlguidelines.cast.org: The Universal Design for Learning framework; a useful lens for judging whether a digital tool is actually supporting learning.
Common Sense Education: commonsense.org/education: Independent reviews and guidance on classroom learning technology.
Cross-references
Brief 04.03: Prompt Fading: this library
Brief 06.01: Data Types Overview: this library
Brief 06.06: Digital Data Tools: this library
Brief 10.04: Assistive Technology Overview: this library
Brief 13.06: Scope of Practice: this library
Reading is useful, but recall is where it sticks. Three short scenarios, low-stakes, no scoring. About 3 minutes. You can stop any time.
Start the practice set →You do instructional work all day — and you need a clear line between supporting and teaching, with…
Prompting is most of what you do — and the difference between skilled and well-intentioned prompting…
You prompt students through skills they can't yet do alone — and fading those prompts is where actua…
You run programs that another adult also runs — and consistency between you is the difference betwee…