The Digital Access Divide

For all learners to have the deep, complex, active learning experiences described above, states and districts must focus on closing one other key divide—the digital access divide. This divide has historically been defined as providing equitable access to reliable, high-speed connectivity, hardware, and digital resources. Accessibility and digital health, safety, and citizenship are also key to closing the access divide. While school systems have made great strides in closing the digital access divide since the publication of the 2017 NETP, pernicious problems such as geographic barriers and local skill capacity require swift action at all levels to realize the design and use visions laid out above. This section outlines the recommendations and examples of learning environments designed (or re-designed) to close that divide and enable “everywhere all-the-time learning.”

Recommendations for Closing the Access Divide

1. Develop a “Portrait of a Learning Environment” to set expectations around habits and abilities no matter what the space. (States, District)
2. Establish and maintain a cabinet-level edtech director to ensure the wise and effective spending of edtech funds. (States, Districts) 
3. Conduct regular needs assessments to ensure technology properly supports learning. (States, Districts, Building-Level Administrators)
4. Develop model processes and guidelines for device refresh policies based on local funding structures. (States, Districts)
5. Leverage state purchasing power or regional buying consortia when purchasing edtech hardware, software, and services. (States, Districts)
6. Develop learning technology plans in consultation with a broad group of stakeholders and according to established review cycles. (States, Districts, Building-Level Administrators)
7. Leverage public/private partnerships and community collaboration to bring broadband internet access to previously under-connected areas and ensure student access to everywhere, all-the-time learning. (States, Districts, Building-Level Administrators)
8. Develop processes and structures that ensure the inclusion of accessibility as a component of procurement processes. (States, Districts, Building-Level Administrators)
9. Plan for and incorporate skills and expectations across all grade levels and subject areas for Digital Health, Safety, and Citizenship, and Media Literacy. (States, Districts, Building-Level Administrators)

Begin with the End Goal in Mind: Design Portraits of Learning Environments

Just as states and school systems can find value in developing Profiles of a Learner/Graduate and Profiles of an Educator, they can also build a common vision through the development of Portraits of Learning Environments. Setting such expectations for the qualities of all learning spaces—physical and digital—can help ensure equity of access, consistency of experience, and clear expectations of functionality and interoperability when procuring/developing new resources. Designing a Portrait of a Learning Environment can ensure all learning environments have the capacity and resources necessary to shift and meet the needs of all learners and learning goals. In developing such portraits, states, and districts might begin with the questions like those below.

Technology Questions in the Development of Profiles of Learning Environments:

1. What aspects of environmental design are necessary to make realizing the system’s Profile of an Educator and Profile of a Graduate/Learner possible?
2. How might learning environments be designed to accommodate current and anticipated technological needs, e.g., power supplies, projection capabilities, broadband speeds, and auditory assistance?
3. What standards or certifications of accessibility and interoperability will be required as part of procurement processes to ensure accessibility?
4. How might learning environments be flexibly designed to allow educators and learners to move between the whole group, small group, and individual learning experiences afforded by technology?
5. How can all learning environments be designed with adaptability for varying learner needs and abilities?

For examples of other considerations when setting expectations for learning environments, consider UDL Tips for Designing an Engaging Learning Environment, The Third Teacher, or Seven Principles for Classroom Design: The Learning Space Rating System. While these and other resources can assist in thinking through the totality of the learning environment, closing the digital access divide will be a key component in those environments being able to support learners fully.

Defining the Digital Access Divide

The digital access divide refers to the unequal distribution of access to digital technologies, such as computers, the internet, and other digital tools, between historically marginalized learners and their peers. It is closely related to digital equity, which aims to address and overcome this divide to ensure all individuals and communities have the information technology capacity necessary for full participation in the society and economy of the United States.¹⁰⁷ The digital access divide often both mirrors and exacerbates existing educational inequalities. Students without adequate access to digital resources struggle to participate fully in online learning, access educational materials, collaborate with peers, or develop the digital skills and literacies needed for post-graduation success. These disparities can impact a student’s ability to participate fully and benefit from digital learning opportunities often taken for granted by their historically better-resourced peers.^{108 109 110 111 112}

Digital Access Divide Components

Accessibility: Accessible learning materials include print- and technology-based educational materials—textbooks and related core materials—designed or enhanced in a way that makes them usable across the widest range of learner variability, regardless of format (e.g., print, digital, graphic, audio, video). Accessible learning materials can include a wide range of features to support user needs, such as text-to-speech, closed captioning, magnifying screen content, ALT-text, and speech recognition. Many of these features are helpful for all users, not just those with disabilities. For instance, text-to-speech tools are beneficial not only for students with dyslexia but for students who wish to listen to complete readings while in transit. Digital learning technologies can be either the gateway to learning opportunities for individuals with disabilities or a gatekeeper blocking them from accessing the same quality of learning experiences as their peers. Too often, digital learning materials fall into the latter category instead of the former.

Digital Infrastructure (inside and outside of school): Access to reliable internet connectivity and broadband services in different geographical areas varies greatly, especially in economically disadvantaged communities. State and federal government support has made significant progress in providing reliable, high-speed internet access to school buildings. According to Education Superhighway, 99.3 percent of America’s schools have a reliable, high-speed broadband connection.¹¹⁴ However, many students still lack access to reliable, high-speed internet at home, hindering their ability to participate in ”everywhere, all-the-time learning,” first described in the 2017 NETP. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 13 percent of American households have no broadband internet subscription.¹¹⁵  Some students may have limited home internet access (via cellular or satellite), likely inadequate for educational purposes due to data caps, inconsistent or low-quality connectivity, and slow speeds. Other students may only be able to access the internet while at the homes of friends or other family members or in public locations such as restaurants. Still others may share their connection with other members of the household. 

Digital Learning Devices: The availability and quality of digital learning devices available to students varies from district to district and even school to school. Some students and teachers may have access to school system-issued devices at school but not at home. Some students may have personally owned devices they can use for learning, while others may not. Other students may only have access to old or outdated equipment at school or home, limiting their ability to participate in digital learning experiences. In some cases, students may have to share devices with other children or adults in the family, making it difficult to complete homework and continue their learning outside school hours.

Digital Health, Safety, and Citizenship: Digital Health, Safety, and Citizenship refers to the ability of individuals to maintain a healthy and empowered relationship with technology and the digital world while using technology appropriately, responsibly, and safely. It encompasses digital literacy, defined as ‘the skills associated with using technology to enable users to find, evaluate, organize, create, and communicate information; and developing digital citizenship and the responsible use of technology.’¹¹⁶ Knowledge and skill inequities in this area can negatively impact student ability to navigate and use digital tools effectively, potentially impacting their readiness for the workforce and post-graduation success. Digital health, safety, and citizenship skills empower students to use technology meaningfully and safely. 

Cultural Responsiveness: When selecting and implementing edtech tools, schools and districts can often overlook whether those tools are culturally relevant, responsive,¹¹⁷ and sustaining for all intended users. This can include the design, development, and implementation of educational tools, resources, and platforms that grow from and are tailored to the cultural backgrounds, identities, and experiences of diverse learners. A 2021 report from the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, Cultivating Interest and Competencies in Computing: Authentic Experiences and Design Factors, made the following set of recommendations for the development of computing programs:

1. Program designers should be intentional in the design and implementation of programs offering authentic learning experiences that build interest and competencies for computing.
2. Practicing teachers in schools and facilitators in out-of-school time settings should seek out opportunities and materials that suggest how to incorporate effective practices for creating authentic learning experiences in computing within an existing program that includes utilizing problem and project-based learning strategies, allowing learner choice among activities, and which takes into consideration learners’ contexts outside of school time.
3. Preservice and in-service teacher educators and trainers of out-of-school time facilitators should ensure that educators and facilitators are equipped to engage learners in personally authentic learning experiences in computing. This includes providing ongoing opportunities for educators to learn and practice using inclusive pedagogical approaches, as well as having access to materials and resources that build on learners’ interests, identities, and backgrounds.
4. School leaders should consider a variety of ways to provide access to authentic learning experiences for computing. These include (1) addressing challenges (e.g., lack of instructional time and teacher expertise) associated with integrating authentic computing experiences into instruction in a variety of subjects, (2) increasing access to stand-alone computing courses, and (3) ensuring schools have adequate resources such as equipment, reliable broadband internet, and time.
5. Program providers in out-of-school settings should increase efforts to expand access to authentic learning experiences for computing through growth of opportunities and active program promotion within underserved communities and in rural areas. This includes considering ways to reduce barriers to participation such as time, cost, and transportation. It also includes offering programs multiple times or during the evening and weekends, reducing program costs or offering financial assistance, and subsidizing transportation.
6. Program evaluators should develop and apply robust models of evaluation that take into account the distinctive features of authentic learning experiences in computing. More specifically, this includes attending to personal and professional authenticity, considering connections across settings, and to the extent possible, disaggregating findings and examining differences between and within groups (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, socio-economic status) for computing outcomes as a central part of model building and evaluation.
7. There should be a broad-based effort to cultivate a network of opportunities, as well as supports for learners to navigate between them both in and out of school to increase access and opportunities for sustained engagement with computing.¹¹⁸

The report defines authentic as “close approximations to the work that a…professional would engage in” and “…connected to real-world problems learners’ care about and the challenges they face.” In addition to this full report, systems working to ensure edtech and teaching practices are culturally responsive, relevant, and sustaining might find resources like the Kapor Center’s Culturally Responsive-Sustaining CS Framework helpful as they begin this work. While both examples focus more narrowly on computing and computer science, the principles and frameworks on which they are built are applicable to technology use across disciplines. 

Educator Support & Training: As highlighted in the previous section, the ability of educators to design powerful learning experiences supported by technology varies greatly between school systems, school buildings, and classrooms. Educators need consistent, reliable access to ongoing technical support (to ensure technology is functioning and available) and ongoing, personalized professional learning to help them design effectively with digital tools. This professional learning should meet educators where they are, no matter their current technological skill level. Some systems rely on vendors for technical support and training; however, the availability and quality of technical support and professional development opportunities, which vary greatly between edtech vendors, are factors school systems should consider as part of the procurement process. Such considerations may include asking vendors how they can help educators understand how new products might interact with or support previous purchases or adoptions or how included training may go beyond initial startup and into learning design.

Closing the digital access divide requires careful planning and funding to address infrastructure gaps in order to provide equitable access to internet connectivity both in and outside of school. Sustainability planning is essential as devices purchased with pandemic-related federal and state funding reach end-of-life and need replacement. Without planning for sustainability, the digital access divide—which narrowed due to these one-time funding sources—will again begin to widen. In this section, we’ll discuss how districts can address these challenges.

Closing the digital access divide requires careful planning and funding to address infrastructure gaps in order to provide equitable access to internet connectivity both in and outside of school. Sustainability planning is essential as devices purchased with pandemic-related federal and state funding reach end-of-life and need replacement. Without planning for sustainability, the digital access divide—which narrowed due to these one-time funding sources—will again begin to widen. In this section, we’ll discuss how districts can address these challenges.

Deeper Dive: Accessibility

Accessibility refers to designing and developing educational materials, resources, and technologies in a way that enables equal access and participation for all students, including students with disabilities. It also involves creating inclusive learning environments that accommodate students with diverse needs and ensuring that all students can effectively participate in educational activities. 

Accessibility Features: Features which afford a person with a disability the opportunity to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as a person without a disability, in an equally effective and equally integrated manner, with substantially equivalent ease of use.¹²¹

Assistive Technology (AT): Technology designed to address specific barriers learners with disabilities may face when they interact with their materials. Examples of assistive technology include text-to-speech, screen readers, and speech recognition.¹²²

Accessible Educational Materials (AEM): Print- and technology-based educational materials, including printed and electronic textbooks and related core materials that are designed or enhanced in a way that makes them usable across the widest range of learner variability, regardless of format (e.g., print, digital, graphic, audio, video, braille).¹²³

Physical Accessibility

Features allowing individuals with mobility impairments to access or control computers or mobile devices without relying on traditional keyboards and mice

Visual Accessibility

Features that accommodate individuals with visual impairments

Auditory Accessibility

Features that accommodate individuals with hearing impairments

Cognitive Accessibility

Features that help improve the clarity of information for all individuals including those with cognitive disabilities or learning differences

Digital Accessibility

Features ensuring that technologies, digital tools, and educational materials are accessible to students with disabilities

Language Accessibility

Features supporting individuals

Six types of accessibility: physical, visual, auditory, cognitive, digital, and lingual.

Although technology can increase and enhance educational access for learners, it can also create barriers for learners with disabilities. For example, students with visual impairments who cannot modify the font size of a digital tool or who do not have the option to have the text read aloud to them might be unable to engage with the material. A student with a hearing impairment might be unable to access the content in an uncaptioned video or engage with tools that include meaningful sounds. A student who uses a screen reader might be unable to read a pdf document if it lacks proper structure, headings, alternative text for images, or logical reading order. In addition, a student with disabilities may physically need AT to access digital tools (for example, using an external switching device and scanning software instead of a mouse and keyboard.) For learners to meaningfully participate in their education, they must be able to access and engage with their educational materials.

Key aspects of accessibility in educational tools can include:

1. Physical accessibility: Edtech developers should design platforms and materials so students with physical disabilities can navigate them. For example, some students may need to use alternative input devices. These devices allow individuals with mobility impairments to access or control computers or mobile devices without relying on traditional keyboards and mice. Examples can include sip-and-puff switches, eye-gaze tracking systems, and specialized keyboards.
2. Visual accessibility: Edtech tools and materials should accommodate students with visual impairments. Examples include compatibility with screen magnification software and screen reader software, high contrast settings that enhance visibility, or descriptions of visual elements within educational materials. 
3. Auditory accessibility: Several features can make educational tools accessible to students with hearing impairments. Examples include captions, American Sign Language or transcripts for audio or video content, visual aids such as slides, diagrams, or visual illustrations, which can supplement spoken information and enhance understanding, and speech-to-text software. Classroom amplification systems can help students better understand spoken classroom instruction.
4. Cognitive accessibility: Cognitive accessibility features help improve the clarity of information for all students, including those with cognitive disabilities or learning differences. Examples include text-to-speech and voice recognition software, text highlighting tools, graphic organizers, language simplification tools that provide alternative versions of complex language or text with reduced vocabulary or simpler syntax, and interactive and multisensory learning opportunities.
5. Digital accessibility: Digital accessibility ensures that edtech, digital tools, and educational materials are accessible to students with disabilities. Educational institutions should adopt user interfaces that are compatible with assistive technologies, adhere to web accessibility standards (such as WCAG 2.2), ensure mobile applications are accessible to individuals with disabilities, and provide customization and personalization options.
6. Language Accessibility: Accessible language accommodates people with Limited English Proficiency, defined as individuals who do not speak English as their primary language and who have a limited ability to read, speak, write, or understand English.¹²⁴ Examples include providing multilingual versions of digital content, the ability to raise or lower the readability level of content, and creating audio and video content that accommodates users with limited literacy skills.

Achieving the goal of truly inclusive and accessible learning environments requires the participation of and input from a wide range of stakeholders—including the instructional technology, curriculum, special education, and information technology teams. Often, these departments are siloed and do not regularly work together to ensure all students’ needs are met. As a result, situations like the following may arise:

• An Individualized Education Program (IEP) Team completes a functional evaluation and determines that a student needs a specific screen reader software. The IEP Team Chair puts in a request for the software, and the district purchases it. When the learner tries to use the software with their district-provided laptop, it does not work because no one ensured that the software was compatible with the operating system installed on student laptops or because the software is internet dependent, and the student doesn’t have home internet access.
• A general education teacher finds a digital resource purchased by the district that uses videos and games to teach math skills. The teacher assumes the technology is accessible since the district purchased it but quickly finds the videos do not provide closed captioning or transcripts for students. As a result, it doesn’t support learners who are deaf and hard of hearing and those with specific learning disabilities. The teacher is frustrated and uncertain about how to support these students.
• A caregiver with a visual disability is trying to access the list of after-school programs on their child’s school website. When they reach the website, the after-school programs are listed as images with no additional information or alternative text. The caregiver cannot use their text-to-speech program to review the list and learn what opportunities are available for their child.

School systems must break down these silos when planning, implementing, and evaluating technology purchases. It’s also important to include learners with disabilities and their families in these conversations to ensure the technology purchased meets the needs of the students who need it most. This is especially important for learning technologies students use outside of school hours. The more knowledgeable caregivers are about how specific technologies can support their child, the better prepared they will be to support their child’s learning at home.

Another key consideration is to provide educators with the time and training needed to understand the various accessibility features of digital learning tools and how to leverage them. Many accessibility features can benefit all students, not only those with specific disabilities. For example, digital textbooks and e-books can give students flexible access to course materials. Features like searchable text, interactive multimedia, highlighting, digital note-taking capabilities, adjustable font sizes, and captioning can facilitate learning for all students.

Physical Learning Spaces

Another important consideration is the organization of physical learning space. While the guidelines below refer to on-campus learning spaces, it’s also important to consider the role of off-campus learning spaces (such as the students’ homes). Considerations include:

• Are on-campus learning spaces accessible to students with physical disabilities? For example, are there accessible ramps or elevators and a proposed number of accessible restrooms for student use?
• Are the design and layout of the physical space dynamic and flexible enough to accommodate different learning activities? Can a space where educators deliver whole-class instruction be modified to facilitate individual or small-group activities? For example, flexible furniture, movable partitions, and modular setups can support easy classroom reconfiguration.
• Can physical learning spaces facilitate both individual and collaborative work? Are there areas designed explicitly for group work and collaboration, such as breakout rooms or collaborative workstations? Are there quiet areas or zones for students who need fewer auditory distractions for individual study? 
• Are learning spaces equipped with the necessary technology infrastructure to support the desired learning environment(s)? Examples include Wi-Fi access points, A/V equipment, and laptop storage/charging carts. Does this extend to different classroom contexts, such as providing Wi-Fi access for outdoor classrooms? 

For more information and tools for aligning physical spaces, visit the Blended Learning Universe.

For digital devices and tools to be effective, usable, and meaningful, they must be accessible to all. The following strategies can help school systems ensure the accessibility of their digital infrastructure:

• Develop a procurement team including IT staff, assistive technology specialists, special and general education staff, curriculum leaders, procurement directors, and EL specialists to create an accessibility rubric the district must use before procurement.
• When possible, hire an AT specialist who can support the evaluation, procurement, training, and implementation of AT, IT, or AEM or work with an organization (such as an Education Service Agency) to do so. If this is not possible, work with the State AT Act program or community partners (e.g., Easter Seals and local groups) to contract the appropriate AT specialist or EL specialist.
• When needed, hire an EL specialist who can support the evaluation, procurement, training, and implementation of technology tools to support students and families/caregivers no matter their home language.
• Ensure all educators have the knowledge, time, and capacity to ensure all educational materials are accessible—including websites, classwork and homework, and communications to staff and families.
• Accessible materials should be available both internally and externally for all constituents. Consider the accessibility training modules from the U.S. Department of Education’s AEM Center and the digital accessibility video series from the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights.
• Provide opportunities for various experts and specialists (e.g., IT, special educators, EL specialists, general educators, and related service providers) to discuss and collaborate on evaluating, implementing, and using edtech and AT in the classroom.
• Partner with State AT Act Programs, which provide free AT loans for learners with disabilities before purchasing. For more on AT, see the AT section below.
• Develop an easily findable and searchable directory with all district technology resources and their accessibility features (including language translation services) and all available district assistive technology.
• Ensure all district and school forms, event registrations, and meetings include areas for participants and attendees to indicate accessibility needs before events and meetings. Translate school communications into multiple languages, reflecting the needs of students and families in specific communities.¹²⁶
• When discussing their needs and services, include potentially impacted individuals in all teams, committees, and meetings.
• Form standing groups inclusive of caregivers, students with disabilities, parents, or family members of students with disabilities, and ELs to advise on issues of accessibility and technology procurement and provision. Wherever possible, create specific structured connections between these and all professional groups mentioned above.

Accessibility Resources

By considering accessibility in educational tools, educators and developers can create inclusive learning experiences that address the needs of all students, promoting equal opportunities for participation, engagement, and achievement. For more on accessibility, consider resources such as the following:

• OET Digital Accessibility Webpage: OET launched a new landing page for accessibility resources and funding opportunities available in the U.S. Department of Education.
• Digital Accessibility Video Series: The U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights created 20 brief videos on the importance of accessibility and how to create digitally accessible materials.
• Accessibility Guide for Creating Materials: The National Research and Training Center on Blindness and Low Vision developed simple how-to guides to ensure your documents, QR codes, and surveys are accessible.
• Accessibility Resources for Developers & Document Authors: The Social Security Administration shares resources they use to create accessible digital content, including a web accessibility testing tool, how to add alternative text, and accessibility checklists.
• The Office of Special Education Programs, part of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, is dedicated to improving results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities ages birth through 21 by providing leadership and financial support to assist states and local districts. Resources include Tools for Your Toolbox and information about Section 508 Accessibility. 
• OCR Digital Accessibility Web Page: The U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights provides a landing page for guidance and technical assistance about educational institutions’ legal obligations with respect to digital accessibility.

By considering the accessibility of educational tools, educators and developers can create inclusive learning experiences that address the needs of all students, promoting equal opportunities for participation, engagement, and achievement.

Deeper Dive: Digital Infrastructure

Digital infrastructure refers to the resources that make digital systems possible, as well as how individuals and organizations access and use these resources.¹²⁷ It includes various components and networks supporting the transfer, storage, and communication of data and digital resources. In education, digital infrastructure can include: 

• Hardware and devices: These include computers, laptops, tablets, and other devices that provide access to digital learning materials and platforms.
• Reliable, high-speed internet connectivity: This is defined by the federal government as 100 megabits per second (Mbps) symmetrical network capacity.¹²⁸
• Learning Management Systems (LMS): Learning Management Systems are online platforms for managing and delivering course materials, assignments, assessments, and educational content.  
• Online Content and Resources: These can include e-books, interactive multimedia resources, educational videos, online tutorials, and virtual simulations.
• Communication & Collaboration Tools: These tools, such as video conferencing and shared document editing platforms, support positive relationship building between students and educators.
• Assessment and Feedback Systems: These systems are used for online assessments, quizzes, and exams and may include tools for automated grading. 
• Data Management and Analytics Systems: These systems collect, manage, and analyze data related to student performance, engagement, and learning outcomes.
• Cybersecurity and Privacy Protections: These include hardware and software tools such as web filtering, firewalls, encryption, and secure authentication.

Digital infrastructure sets the stage for educational design, which empowers students and educators to leverage technology for effective teaching and learning. On-campus access to these resources and tools is not enough; students and educators also need access when off-campus to fully realize the potential of “everywhere, all-the-time” learning. This vision is shared by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which announced its Learn Without Limits initiative in June 2023¹²⁹ to support off-campus access. In 2023, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Technology began releasing a series of technical assistance briefs to provide technical assistance to state and district leaders. These briefs, in addition to those resources provided by the Student Privacy Policy Office and the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency offer robust assistance to ensure preparedness of educational digital infrastructure.

Digital Infrastructure Beyond Schools

Despite significant growth in school technology use, many learners, families/caregivers, and communities still lack access to reliable, high-speed broadband and technology tools. In the United States, more than 18 million households continue to face challenges gaining access to reliable, high-speed broadband, and households earning less than $30,000 per year are significantly less likely to have a computer than households making more than $100,000.¹³⁰ While 40 percent of K-12 learners identify as Black, Hispanic, or Native American, a disproportionately greater percentage of unconnected learners (54 percent) identify as Black, Hispanic, or Native American. Furthermore, Black and Hispanic learners are less likely to have a computer at home compared to white peers.¹³¹ Overall, an estimated 15–16 million K-12 learners do not have sufficient access to reliable, high-speed broadband and technology tools for learning.¹³²

Although the inequity of digital access has been a long-standing problem for United States school systems and communities, the COVID-19 pandemic brought these challenges to the forefront when educators were forced to implement emergency remote learning. Many students did not have access to personal computers, laptops, or tablets at home, making it challenging to participate in online classes and complete assignments. Students with limited or unreliable home internet access had difficulty accessing educational resources and participating in high-bandwidth activities such as videoconferencing. Other factors contributing to inequitable learning experiences included inadequate professional learning and technical support; and home environment challenges such as insufficient space, noise distractions, or lack of a suitable study/teaching area. Students with disabilities faced additional challenges accessing online content not properly designed for accessibility.¹³³ The severity of these issues varied based on factors such as socioeconomic status, geographical location, and the resources available in individual school systems. These challenges existed before the pandemic and continue to contribute to educational inequities.

The causes of the digital divide are nuanced and complex but can be categorized into three components of access: availability, affordability, and adoption.

Availability:

Is There Sufficient Infrastructure and Coverage to Deliver Reliable, High-Speed Wired or Wireless Broadband Service and Technology Tools for Learning?

Availability refers to the level and sufficiency of coverage in delivering reliable, high-speed wired or wireless broadband services and the sufficiency of technology tools for learning. Barriers and strategies related to availability align with typical understandings of “access,” focused on whether learners and their families/caregivers can connect to reliable, high-speed broadband through a device, and the necessary physical infrastructure from home and in their communities. Research shows that the quality and type of home broadband access directly impacts learner school participation,¹³⁴ performance outcomes, and digital literacy.¹³⁵ Learners with insufficient access are also less likely to plan for postsecondary education, affecting their lifetime potential for high earnings.¹³⁶

Access to devices suitable for learning, such as laptops, Chromebooks, and tablets, is another critical consideration for school systems. Lower-income families are less likely to own personal devices appropriate for learning; Pew research found that a quarter of low-income teens lack access to a computer at home.¹³⁷ Even if there is a computer in the home, it may have to be shared by multiple family members, including other school-age children. In addition, while many digital tools are web-based, they may not work equally well on all devices—for example, an educational tool might work in a computer web browser but not on a tablet. School systems purchasing digital tools need to ensure they will work on a wide range of devices (including smartphones) and are compatible with devices provided by the school system. If school systems provide students with devices to take home, they must budget for device replacement cycles (generally every 3-5 years),¹³⁸ repairs, and technical support.

While there is no single solution to address the internet and device availability challenges many students face, school systems and states are finding creative solutions appropriate for their specific context. Advancing Digital Equity for All highlights some of these solutions in detail. Examples include providing digital devices and wireless hotspots for learners, installing wireless networks on school buses, partnering with internet service providers (ISPs) to provide community internet access, and leveraging community partnerships to provide internet access in public spaces.

In the long term, bringing reliable, high-speed broadband to underserved areas requires infrastructure development, policy initiatives, and cooperative efforts among various stakeholders. Collaboration between governments (local, state, federal, and tribal), ISPs, community agencies, nonprofit organizations, chambers of commerce, industry and trade associations, and other stakeholders is crucial for successful broadband deployment. Public-private partnerships can leverage private-sector investment in broadband infrastructure to benefit larger communities.

Affordability:

Can Learners and Families/Caregivers Pay for the Total Cost of Maintaining Reliable, High-Speed Broadband Service and Technology Tools for Learning?

Affordability refers to the ability to pay for the cost of installing and maintaining a reliable, high-speed broadband connection and technology tools for learning.¹³⁹ High internet service costs disproportionately impact low-income families, who may struggle to allocate funds for internet service while meeting basic needs such as food, gas, shelter, and electricity. This barrier also exists at the community level, particularly for Tribal communities.¹⁴⁰ In addition, a lack of competition between providers in many areas results in higher prices and lower-quality service.

The cost of devices suitable for learning also challenges families. Lower-cost devices like Chromebooks or refurbished computers can meet the needs of some students but are not suitable for all learners and may need to be shared by multiple family members. Older machines that use operating systems that have reached end-of-life or have limited memory or processor speeds may be unable to run newer applications. Learners with disabilities might have access to assistive technology and devices at school but not at home due to cost. Challenges like these can make it difficult for students to participate in “everywhere, all-the-time” learning. 

Initiatives and partnerships at the federal, state, and local levels can help mitigate the affordability barriers to internet access. In December 2021, Congress authorized the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), a $14B program, to ensure all households can afford broadband for education, employment, and more. The ACP allows qualifying households to reduce their internet costs by up to $30/month ($75/month on Tribal lands). Under the White House’s Get Internet initiative, several companies further committed to offering ACP-eligible households at least one high-speed plan for $30/month or less, with no additional fees and no data caps. Similarly, state and local initiatives have partnered with ISPs to provide services and devices at a lower cost.¹⁴¹

Although programs like those described above can help address affordability issues, more resources and expanded eligibility for affordable broadband programs are still needed. Even with subsidies, devices, and reliable, high-speed internet, plans are still unaffordable for many families. The low-cost broadband plans available may not be robust enough to meet the needs of learners, especially when multiple family members need to use the connection simultaneously. Eligibility restrictions such as immigration and refugee status may also prevent families from participating. Credit checks, deposit requirements, and long-term contract requirements may also pose barriers. In addition, these programs do not address the challenges of homeless or migrant students or students who move frequently. Highly mobile learners need reliable, high-speed broadband connections that do not require them to be in a specific location. Some programs like ACP protect consumers by allowing eligible households to access the benefit regardless of credit status, past due balances, or prior debt.¹⁴²

Adoption:

Do Learners and Families/Caregivers Have the Information, Support, and Skills to Obtain Regular, Adequate Access to Reliable, High-Speed Broadband Service and Technology Tools for Learning?

Adoption refers to the process by which an individual obtains broadband access at the necessary speed, quality, and capacity; and the digital skills necessary to participate online, on a personal device, and using a secure and convenient network. Barriers and strategies related to adoption tend to focus on human-level challenges and strategies. They go beyond whether reliable, high-speed broadband is available and affordable to focus on whether the necessary information, support, and skill-building opportunities are provided.¹⁴³

Providing students with the devices and high-speed internet needed for learning outside school hours is not enough. Focusing on family/caregiver digital inclusion and skills development is equally important. For example, communication between schools and families often relies heavily on digital tools such as email, online portals, or messaging apps. When families/caregivers lack digital literacy skills, it becomes more challenging for schools and teachers to effectively communicate important information, updates, or individual student progress. This gap in skills can hinder parental engagement, making it difficult for schools to establish strong home-school partnerships and build trust. In addition, families/caregivers without digital literacy skills may not know how to help educate their children about digital health, safety, and citizenship. Without family guidance, students may be at a higher risk of encountering online dangers or engaging in inappropriate online behavior. (See Digital Health, Safety, and Citizenship for more information.)

Digital equity and adoption are intersectional issues. The most successful strategies involve dialogue with various stakeholders, including government agencies, community anchor institutions, community-based organizations, tribes, private companies, impacted community members, families/caregivers, and students.

Similar to the cultural sensitivity required in selecting edtech tools mentioned above, building trust is a key component of digital adoption and literacy education. Members of historically marginalized communities often do not trust federal and state governments and private companies. Factors such as immigration status and a history of discrimination against LGBTQI+ individuals may cause families/caregivers to be wary of sharing information. Some Indigenous communities distrust government agencies and systems due to past and current exclusionary practices.¹⁴⁷ Families/caregivers who had negative experiences with low-cost connectivity programs in the past (such as poor service, unexpected fees, or required credit checks) may also be reluctant to apply for them again. Language and cultural barriers can also pose challenges to adoption.

Accurate data is another important component of digital adoption. At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many school systems did not have accurate information about home internet connectivity and use, making it difficult to know which learners might have trouble participating reliably in emergency remote learning and why. For instance, surveys about home internet access and devices must be carefully worded and administered to ensure the accuracy of the data collected. A household might report access to devices and the internet, but that connectivity might be limited to a single phone.

Electronically administered surveys requiring an internet connection may actually exclude the people needing the most help. While many school systems use Free and Reduced Lunch eligibility as a proxy indicator for poverty, it may not provide an accurate picture of home internet connectivity and use unless combined with survey data. Through qualitative research, district leaders have reported that some families prioritize internet access despite income level, and vice versa.¹⁴⁸ Inaccurate data can lead to funding and program decisions which widen the digital divide.

Supporting digital adoption among families/caregivers is a complex, multifaceted challenge that requires multi-stakeholder collaboration and iterative processes to address. However, the benefits to learners and their families and the opportunity to build school/home relationships make it worthwhile.

Deeper Dive: Digital Health, Safety, and Citizenship

In the early days of digital connectivity, the internet was called the “information superhighway”—an apt metaphor for considering digital health, safety, and citizenship for students and educators. Like a highway, internet access can take users to many places. Some provide tremendous opportunities for learning, community building, socialization, and exploration. Others are potentially harmful or dangerous. In the same way young drivers must learn the rules before getting behind the wheel, districts should plan to build digital health, safety, and citizenship skills before providing access to connectivity and devices.

In addition to in-school concerns about digital health, safety, and citizenship, schools face increased concerns with out-of-school access. Although school and district networks use content filtering per federal requirement, 94 percent of 8-18-year-olds have a smartphone¹⁴⁹ provided by their families, not by a school or district, often with unfiltered, 24/7 internet access. Students often use digital devices long before they set foot on a school campus and from a very young age. The 2023 U.S. Surgeon General’s advisory on social media and youth mental health, the American Psychological Association’s health advisory on social media use in adolescence, and news headlines discussing the challenges of student phone use in schools have raised key concerns about social use of technology distracting from schooling or contributing to negative peer dynamics. Schools face growing pressure to attend to the larger context of student technology use and concerns surrounding it, even outside of school hours and on commercial digital platforms.

Students and families can benefit from guidance in navigating the safe and healthy use of digital platforms and devices, both in and out of school. According to a 2022 report from Common Sense Media, 43 percent of children ages 8-12 have a smartphone. Nearly 40 percent use social media even though age 13 is generally the required minimum age used by social media platforms in the U.S.¹⁵⁰

Digital Healthy: The ability of individuals to maintain a healthy and balanced relationship with technology and the digital world.

Digital Safety: Protecting individuals from online risks and ensuring their privacy and security while using digital technologies.

Digital Citizenship: Appropriate, responsible behavior when using technology.

Despite being concerned over their children’s social and recreational technology use, many adults admit to not setting the best example. More than 3 out of 5 (62 percent) parents surveyed by MyVision said their tech use influences their children, and 72 percent feel it’s a negative influence.¹⁵¹ A majority of parents report that their phone can get in the way of spending quality time with their children; roughly seven in ten parents (68 percent) say they are at least sometimes distracted by their smartphone, with 17 percent saying this happens often.¹⁵² The MyVision survey found that 65 percent of parents do not monitor their screen time use,¹⁵³ and research found a significant association between parental phubbing (the act of snubbing a physically present person in favor of a mobile phone) and student academic performance.¹⁵⁴ Given the challenges adults face managing digital device use,¹⁵⁵ it is essential for schools and parents to work together to help students develop these critical digital health, safety, and citizenship skills. 

Students may already be “driving” before they get to school, but without having the necessary knowledge and skills to do so safely and wisely. Just as parents and families play a significant role in student academic achievement, they also play a significant role in the development of student technology habits, making it all the more important that schools and families work together to benefit students. 

As community organizations, schools are uniquely positioned to help bridge this gap in understanding and may need guidance in seeking to communicate about out-of-school activities and habits. The National Center on Safe, Supportive Learning Environments cites the Dual Capacity-Building Framework for Family-School Partnerships to support the development of family engagement strategies, policies, and programs. The framework outlines the challenges, essential conditions, policy and program goals, and capacity outcomes for building family-school partnerships. While the framework was designed for building family-school partnerships more broadly, it is well suited for digital health, safety, and citizenship capacity building among educators, families, and students. Key to the framework is an understanding that both schools and families/caregivers have areas of growth in building their capacities to communicate and collaborate in supporting student learning.

By approaching digital health, safety, and citizenship education holistically and engaging families as partners, school districts can build the capacity of both parents and students to use technology wisely. There has been considerable research on the importance of parent/caregiver involvement and the importance of fostering school-family partnerships to enhance the academic, social, and emotional learning for children and adolescents.¹⁵⁶ Bringing parents/caregivers into the conversation about digital health, safety, and citizenship can support students while building the school-family relationships critical for academic success. Conversely, by helping students and families differentiate between productive and non-productive online activities and engaging them in more nuanced conversations about digital health, safety, and citizenship, educators can build the capacity of their entire school community to use technology meaningfully and wisely.

Digital Health

Digital Health and well-being refers to the ability of individuals to maintain a healthy and balanced relationship with technology and the digital world. It recognizes the benefits of technology and the potential negative impacts of excessive or unhealthy technology use, including strategies to help promote physical, mental, and emotional well-being in digital usage. Some aspects of digital health include:

• Mindful Technology Use: Technology serves many different purposes. It can support formal learning (such as students using synchronous editing software to collaborate with others on a class project) and interest-driven informal learning (such as the student who learns how to knit from YouTube and online forums). It can also be used casually or socially (such as playing video games or scrolling through social media). Mindful technology users are thoughtful and intentional about how they use technology. They know how digital interactions impact mental and emotional well-being and are intentional about the volume and content of their digital media engagement. 
• Setting Digital Boundaries: Setting boundaries is an important aspect of technology use. Roughly six in ten parents say they spend too much time on their smartphones, while a third say they spend too much time on social media.¹⁵⁷ Similarly, a students working on homework assignments can easily get distracted by social media notifications and quickly find themselves off task. Learning to manage and limit these distractions and balancing online and offline activities is a valuable collection of skills and habits. Educating parents about strategies such as creating family media plans, device-free family dinners, and plugging in devices in a centralized location at night can help build the capacity of the entire family to engage appropriately with digital media.
• Maintaining Healthy Sleep Routines: Research shows that the light emitted by digital devices can interfere with sleep, especially before bedtime.¹⁵⁸ Digital health emphasizes the importance of maintaining a healthy sleep routine, including avoiding screens for at least an hour before sleep and keeping electronic devices out of the bedroom to improve sleep quality and overall well-being. Healthy sleep routines can play a key role in academic success.¹⁵⁹

Research in this area is ongoing. The Digital Wellness Lab, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health, and the Harvard Center for Digital Thriving are resources updated regularly with the latest evidence and recommendations.

Digital Safety

Digital safety focuses on protecting individuals from online risks and ensuring their privacy and security while using digital technologies. Following our safe driving metaphor, digital safety is akin to understanding the “rules of the road.” It involves adopting measures to safeguard personal information, avoiding cyber threats, and preventing unauthorized access to sensitive data. Digital safety also encompasses educating individuals about online dangers, such as phishing scams, identity theft, cyberbullying and online harassment, and promoting responsible digital citizenship.

Key elements of digital safety include:

• Privacy: Students should understand how to protect their personal information online and the importance of doing so. They should understand the risks of sharing sensitive information online, such as their full name, address, phone number, or financial information. Districts should also be transparent with students and families about activity monitoring on school system-owned devices and communicate the context and justification behind monitoring systems. As mentioned previously, emerging artificial intelligence technologies can pose privacy concerns as large language models feed on the information shared with them and should only be utilized in education systems when data privacy and anonymity can be assured and verified.
• Cybersecurity: Students should understand the risks of malware, phishing, hacking, and other cyber threats. Examples of good cyber hygiene include:
  • Teaching students how to create secure passphrases for online accounts (and not to share them with others).
  • Knowing how to recognize phishing emails and suspicious links and what to do when encountering them.
  • Being aware of social engineering techniques and thinking critically before sharing information with others.
  • Not downloading files from unknown sources.
  • Keeping personal devices updated with security patches
• Cyberbullying: Cyberbullying is bullying that takes place over digital devices like cell phones, computers, and tablets. It can occur through SMS, text, and apps, or online in social media, forums, or gaming where people can view, participate in, or share content. Cyberbullying includes sending, posting, or sharing negative, harmful, false, or mean content about someone else. It can include sharing personal or private information about someone else, causing embarrassment or humiliation.¹⁶⁰
• Online Harassment: Online harassment and abuse include various harmful and sometimes illegal behaviors perpetrated through technology. Online harassment and abuse take many forms, including the non-consensual distribution of intimate digital images; cyberstalking; sextortion; doxing; malicious deep fakes; gendered disinformation; rape and death threats; the online recruitment and exploitation of victims of sex trafficking; and various forms of technology-facilitated intimate partner abuse.¹⁶¹

Digital Citizenship

Digital citizenship is appropriate, responsible behavior when using technology.¹⁶² It encompasses the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to navigate the digital world respectfully and responsibly. Good digital citizens engage positively and constructively in online communities and possess good digital literacy and critical thinking skills. Key elements of good digital citizenship include:

• Responsible Online Behavior: Digital citizenship emphasizes the importance of respectful and responsible online behavior, including treating others with kindness and empathy, being mindful of the impact of one’s words and actions in digital spaces, and adhering to ethical standards. Good digital citizens understand the consequences of cyberbullying, harassment, and sharing inappropriate or harmful content.
• Managing One’s Digital Footprint and Reputation: Good digital citizens realize that everything we do online leaves a digital footprint. They understand the importance of managing and curating one’s digital presence and are mindful of the potential impact of online actions on personal and professional reputation. They understand the long-term consequences of sharing and posting personal content online.
• Media Literacy: Media literacy includes the skills associated with using technology to enable users to find, evaluate, organize, create, and communicate information; and developing digital citizenship and the responsible use of technology.¹⁶³ Good digital citizens can effectively and critically navigate digital spaces. They possess the ability to find, evaluate, and use information from online sources and understand how to communicate, collaborate, and create content using digital tools.
• Understanding Copyright and Intellectual Property: Digital citizenship promotes respect for copyright laws and intellectual property rights. It encourages proper citation and attribution when using or sharing the work of others and discourages plagiarism or copyright infringement. It also teaches students to understand their rights as content creators.
• Algorithmic Literacy: AI has exponentially increased the need for students to understand and be able to critically analyze algorithms and how they impact our online and offline lives. Algorithmic literacy includes knowledge of the underlying principles, processes, and biases that shape algorithms¹⁶⁴ and their implications for individuals, society, and decision-making. It also includes understanding how to interact effectively with AI and the ethical implications of using generative AI tools such as ChatGPT.

Teaching children and teens digital citizenship skills can help prevent cyberbullying and its negative effects. When children learn positive online behaviors, they can use social media in productive ways.

Ten questions schools and districts can ask to help support students’ digital health and safety:

1. Does your school or district have a clearly articulated vision of digital health and safety for students at all levels and does it account for possible risks related to student demographics?
2. How are you collecting data and evidence to better understand the digital health and safety needs of students, families, and employees within your district or schools (e.g., needs assessments, climate surveys, incident reports)?
3. What measurable goals have you established for the digital health, safety, and mental well-being of students?
4. How might students and families be included in assessing needs, setting district and school goals, and designing learning opportunities?
5. What supports are necessary and do you have in place to ensure key staff (e.g., administrators, school counselors, social workers, educators) have an adequate understanding of and capacity to respond to the unique needs involving support of student digital health and safety?
6. What emergency resources, procedures, and supports are in place to support in moments of crisis regarding digital health and safety?
7. What curricular, extra-, or co-curricular inclusion supports can be or have been established to support student digital health and safety?
8. What external relationships can be or have been established to augment school and district capacity to support student digital health and safety?
9. How do you plan to build community awareness and support of these needs, goals, and efforts?
10. What ongoing funding sources (e.g., Title II, Title IV grants) can or will you leverage to support these efforts?¹⁶⁵

Planning, implementing, and evaluating the curricular components of question seven above requires planning that answers key questions such as those below:

• What are key expectations for digital health, safety, and citizenship actions and understandings at each grade level?
• Where will instruction in digital health, safety, and citizenship live within curricula as well as the academic day and year?

The ubiquity of social media and digital tools presents the challenge and opportunity for schools and districts to partner with families and caregivers to make sure all students have what they need to maintain their digital health and safety. By integrating digital health tools, fostering digital safety practices, and nurturing digital wellness habits, students can leverage the benefits of technology while safeguarding their physical and mental health.

Protecting Student Data Privacy

In addition to teaching students how to protect their privacy online, school officials, families, and software developers should be mindful of how data privacy, confidentiality, and security practices affect students. Schools and districts should tell students and parents what kind of student data the school or third parties (e.g., online educational service providers) are collecting and how the data can be used, and in which contexts the data can be further disclosed without their consent. In addition to any and all applicable requirements under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), education leaders should develop policies that identify who can access student data and communicate to families their rights and responsibilities concerning data collection. These policies should include formal adoption processes for online educational services and click-wrap agreements. Click-wrap agreements appear when users are asked to accept the provider’s terms of service before using a website or software application. Click-wrap agreements enter the developer and the user (in this case, the school or district) into a contractual relationship akin to signing a contract. Districts should ensure district employees understand the implications of district policies governing the use of such agreements.

Several federal statutes apply to student privacy in schools. More information on each is below.

Federal Privacy Laws and K-12 Education

FERPA (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) affords parents and “eligible students” the right to inspect and review, seek to amend, and exercise some control over the disclosure of student education records maintained by educational agencies (e.g., school districts) and institutions (i.e., schools) to which funds have been made available under any program administered by the Secretary of Education. (Under FERPA, an “eligible student” is a student who has reached 18 years of age or is attending a postsecondary school at any age.) Among other things, for instance, FERPA generally requires educational agencies and institutions to obtain prior written consent from parents and eligible students before disclosing PII from education records. However, one exception to FERPA’s general written consent requirement permits an educational agency or institution to disclose, without consent, PII from education records to a third party to whom the educational agency or institution has outsourced institutional services or functions, as long as certain conditions are met. Under this exception, the third party must be determined by the educational agency or institution to constitute a school official who has a legitimate educational interest in the education records under the criteria set forth in its annual notification of FERPA rights; perform an institutional service or function for which the educational agency or institution would otherwise use employees; be under the direct control of the educational agency or institution with respect to the use and maintenance of the education records; and be subject to the FERPA requirements governing the use and redisclosure of PII from education records found in 34 CFR § 99.33. For more guidance on FERPA, visit the U.S. Department of Education’s FERPA resources.

COPPA (the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act) governs the online collection of personal information from individuals under 13 years of age. Before a commercial website or online service directed towards individuals under 13 years of age can collect any personal information from such individuals, the operator of such website or service must obtain “verifiable parental consent”. Verifiable parental consent is also required if an operator has actual knowledge that it is collecting personal information from an individual under 13 years of age. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which enforces COPPA, has said that school officials can, in certain situations, provide consent on behalf of the parents as long as that consent is limited to the educational context—where an operator collects personal information from students for the use and benefit of the school, and no other commercial purpose. For more information on COPPA, please visit the FTC’s COPPA FAQ website.

IDEA (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) includes confidentiality requirements to protect the privacy interests of children with disabilities from birth until age 21 who are referred for services under the IDEA. IDEA protects PII in the records of children referred to IDEA. IDEA requires that a parent provide prior written consent before PII is disclosed to a third party and that the parental consent is informed. There are some specific exceptions that may apply to the general rule of parental consent.

CIPA (the Children’s Internet Protection Act) imposes several requirements on schools or libraries that receive E-Rate discounts for internet access. Schools and libraries must certify that they have technologies in place to block or filter internet access to content that is obscene, pornographic, or harmful to minors, and schools must also monitor the online activities of minors. The FCC’s CIPA Guide offers a more in-depth understanding of CIPA requirements.

PPRA (the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment) protects the rights of parents and students in a number of ways, some of which are summarized below. (These rights transfer from a parent to a student when the student turns 18 years old or is an emancipated minor under applicable state law.) PPRA requires that a local educational agency (as defined in PPRA) that receives funds under a program administered by the U.S. Department of Education develop and adopt local policies, in consultation with parents, on specifically enumerated privacy issues. A couple of such required local policies are summarized below. PPRA requires that such a local educational agency develop and adopt a policy, in consultation with parents, that affords parents the right to inspect, upon request, among other things, instructional materials, excluding academic tests or academic assessments, used by the local educational agency as part of the educational curriculum for a student. PPRA also requires that such a local educational agency develop and adopt a policy, in consultation with parents, regarding the collection, disclosure, or use of personal information collected from students for the purpose of marketing or for selling that information (or otherwise providing that information to others for that purpose), including arrangements to protect student privacy that are provided by the agency in the event of such collection, disclosure, or use. PPRA also requires that such a local educational agency directly notify parents of students who are scheduled to participate in activities involving the collection, disclosure, or use of personal information collected from the students for the purpose of marketing or sale (or otherwise providing that information to others for that purpose) and give parents the opportunity to opt the students out of these activities. One important exception to the foregoing PPRA requirement is that neither parental notice and the opportunity to opt-out nor the development and adoption of local policies are required for such local educational agencies to use students’ personal information for the exclusive purpose of developing, evaluating, or providing educational products or services for, or to, students or schools.

HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) sets national standards and requirements for, among other things, the privacy of protected health information (PHI) and the security of electronic PHI. The HIPAA Privacy Rule does not apply to records that are protected by FERPA. For a better understanding of the intersection between HIPAA and FERPA, see the jointly published guidance from the US Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Education.

Of the three digital divides, the United States has made the most progress in closing the digital access divide over the past decade. Millions more students now have access to high-speed internet and devices suitable for learning at school and at home. Educators are faced with digital ecosystems teaming with thousands of digital learning resources. In most spaces, the immediate edtech playing field is leveling. As is ever the case, overcoming these access challenges leads states, districts, and schools to more complex issues. Here, too, progress is being made. New state student data privacy laws have prompted the development of capacity-building resources to support school systems. The importance of supporting student Digital Health, Safety, and Citizenship—in and out of the classroom—is receiving national attention. Accessible and assistive technologies continue to evolve. States and districts have long recognized closing the digital access divide is an essential condition if they hope to improve the design of learning supported by technology to ensure all students are active, analytical learners.

National Educational Technology Plan (Back to Main)

Introduction

The Digital Use Divide

The Digital Design Divide

The Digital Access Divide

Conclusion

---

Appendices / Acknowledgments