Holi, Soy Anita. 

Last time, the checklist was about you, whether a new AI actually earns a seat in your workflow, or just quietly steals your evening. 

BUT, there’s a second, quieter question hiding behind every classroom technology decision and it’s the one that actually matters to the person sitting in the desk, not the one standing at the front of it : does this thing make the learning better, or does it just make the lesson look better? 

Those are not the same question, and mixing them up is how perfectly good classrooms and up with a drawer full of tablets nobody opens till the end of the year. 

Quick answer, if you are skimming: before bringing any new classroom technology (AI or otherwise)  into your teaching, check whether it’s actually serving real learning objectives (not just impressing you in the demo), whether it fits the classroom you actually have and not the one on the marketing page, and whether it’s genuinely more engaging than what it’s replacing, rather than a shinier version of the same worksheet. Those three alone will save you from most bad adoptions.

1. Are you starting with the learning objective, or with the tool? 

Here’s a confession that applies to more teachers than will admit it out loud: sometimes we fall in love with a tool first and go looking for a lesson to justify it afterward. It’s an easy trap, especially when the demo is genuinely fun to watch. 

The better order is boring but it works: decide what you want students to be able to do by the end of the lesson, first. Then ask whether the tool serves that outcome, or whether it’s just technology for technology’s sake. Ask this to yourself before you roll it out to 30 kids. “ This helps students learn to _______ better than they would without it.” 

2. Does it fit the classroom you actually have? 

Not the classroom on the product’s landing page, with every student holding their device on stable Wi-Fi. The one you actually teach in where maybe there’s one shared cart of tablets, or a connection that drops every time it rains, or students who don’t have a device at home to finish anything assigned there. 

A tool can be genuinely excellent and still be the wrong choice for your room, this year with your setup. That’s not a failure of the tool or of you. It’s just a fit problem, and fit problems are much cheaper to catch before adoption than after. 

3. Is it actually more engaging, or just a nicer-looking worksheet? 

This is the one that separates real technology integration from expensive digitizing. If a tool takes a paper worksheet and turns it into the exact same worksheet on a screen, with the same one right answer, the same passive filling-in-blanks experience - you haven’t upgraded the learning. You’ve upgraded the font. 

Genuine engagement usually looks like something the paper version genuinely couldn’t do: instant feedback that changes what the student tries next, a game-like structure that makes retrying feel low-stakes instead of embarrassing, or a way for a shy student to participate without raising their hand in front of the whole room. If none of that is present, ask honestly whether “digital” is doing any real work here or just looking modern. 

And then there are few more questions 

The rest I’m holding back aren’t more complicated. They are the ones that matter after the excitment of adoption wears off, and they’re easy to overlook in the moment you’re deciding whether to say yes to something new. I am covering those, along with a printable version of the full five-question checklist, in the newsletter with The Shine Lab. 

If the 3 above already changed how you’re looking at something you were about to adopt, that’s exactly the kind of shift I want to keep sending your way. 

Subscribe to get the rest of the checklist →

— Anita