This post is part of a series exploring how technology, pedagogy, and system-level decisions shape classroom learning. In this entry, the focus shifts to a distinction that often gets overlooked: the difference between students consuming information and producing understanding. Previous Post
When conversations about technology in classrooms come up, they often sound like this:
“Kids are on screens too much.”
“Students don’t think like they used to.”
“Technology has ruined learning.”
These statements reflect genuine concern, but they don’t dig deep enough. The problem is not technology itself. The problem is how students are asked to engage with learning when technology is involved.
To move this conversation forward, especially with the general public, we need a shared language. One of the most important distinctions we can make is between consumption and production.
What Is Consumption?
When I talk about consumption, I’m referring primarily to passive learning experiences. These are activities where students receive information or interact with content in limited ways, often without having to explain or construct their thinking.
Examples include:
- Watching a video and answering surface-level questions
- Clicking through digital practice or assessments
- Playing educational games that reward speed or completion
- Navigating programs where the main task is selecting answers
Consumption isn’t inherently bad. Students need exposure, modeling, and opportunities to practice skills. The issue arises when consumption becomes the default – especially because technology makes it easy to assign, track, and justify. And with the load on teachers’ plates, it is understandable.
Students can look busy. They can even look engaged. But that doesn’t always mean learning is happening.
Engagement Is Not the Same as Learning
A student can be entertained, compliant, or focused on a screen without deeply understanding the content. Learning requires effort. It requires retrieval, reasoning, explanation, and sometimes productive struggle.
This is where production matters and why it’s crucial.
What Is Production?
Production-based learning asks students to create something that makes their thinking visible.
That “something” might be:
- A written explanation
- A visual model or representation
- A verbal explanation
- A collaborative document
- A screencast or short video
For example:
- A student creates a short video explaining how to add two-digit numbers using expanded form
- Students read, collaborate on shared notes, and write synthesized paragraphs (such as in a Cyber Sandwich)
- Students explain why a strategy works, not just apply it
These tasks require more than clicking through DOK 1-type questions. Students must organize ideas, make decisions, and communicate clearly.
And contrary to popular belief, production does not always require more time.
Production Doesn’t Mean More Work
Many teachers already build production into their classrooms, often without labeling it that way:
- Asking students to explain answers to a partner
- Requiring written justification
- Having students represent ideas visually
These are small shifts, not massive overhauls.
Technology can support this work, but only when it’s used intentionally. Which leads to a critical question educators must constantly ask:
How is this technology enhancing the learning goal?
Not:
“I have this tool, now how can I use it?”
That distinction is subtle but powerful. I admit, there were times when I asked myself, “How can I use this tool?”
Revisiting an Old Idea: SAMR
Years ago, many educators used the SAMR model (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition) to think about technology integration. Over time, I’ve noticed it has faded from conversation, but its central idea still matters: technology should enhance or transform learning, not simply digitize existing tasks.
But frameworks alone don’t change practice.
For many teachers, there is little time or support to deeply learn new pedagogy alongside new tools. Professional learning is often brief, optional, or disconnected from classroom realities. Teachers are expected to “innovate” while managing full classrooms, mandates, and shifting expectations.
As in the early Chromebook rollout, teachers are once again left to figure it out on their own.
The Reality Teachers Are Working In
This conversation cannot happen without acknowledging the conditions teachers work under.
Teachers navigate:
- District-adopted programs and initiatives
- Pacing guides and curriculum mandates
- State testing and accountability pressures
- Constant shifts in platforms and expectations
At the same time, teachers are frequently blamed for:
- Low student motivation
- Declining reading levels
- Weak math fluency
- Poor reasoning skills
Teachers have students for six to seven hours a day. They do not control screen time outside of school. They cannot undo every societal influence within a single classroom.
Yet they are often expected to do precisely that.
Understanding consumption versus production is not about criticizing teachers’ choices. It’s about recognizing that many of those choices are/were made within tight constraints, often without the time or support needed to explore better alternatives.
Technology as an Enhancer, Not a Requirement
Production does not require technology. In many cases, paper and pencil work beautifully. Research consistently supports the cognitive benefits of writing and drawing by hand.
Take MathReps as an example. I often prefer students to write their thinking on paper or use plastic sleeves with whiteboard markers. Writing, revising, and representing ideas physically supports understanding.
Once students are familiar with the routine, technology can enhance the experience.
Tools like Snorkl allow students to demonstrate and explain their thinking while receiving immediate feedback. Used intentionally, perhaps a few times a week, it can amplify learning rather than replace it.
The goal still remains the same:
- Show your thinking
- Explain your reasoning
- Make understanding visible
Technology is one pathway, not the destination.
Starting With the Right Question
Whether using technology or not, the most important question is always:
What is the learning goal?
Only then should we ask:
- Can technology enhance this?
- Does it deepen thinking or just speed things up?
- Are students producing, or merely responding?
Consumption and production are not enemies. Both have a place. But when consumption dominates, we risk mistaking activity for understanding.
As we continue navigating teaching in a digital age, the challenge is not choosing between technology and tradition. It’s choosing practices that can meld the two.
I leave you with this question:
When you think about the learning experiences students spend the most time on, inside or outside the classroom, would you describe them as primarily consumptive or productive? And what slight shift might move the balance? If you see balance already, what does it look like?
Coming next: Post 3 explores what learning science really says about technology and student thinking without hype or oversimplification.
Nowa Techie 