My Edtech Litmus Test
I have a rule: if a digital tool takes longer to set up than the learning it produces, it doesn't make the cut. I've sat through enough PD sessions where someone demos a shiny platform that looks incredible in a conference room and falls apart in a classroom of thirty-two seventh graders with varying levels of tech access. So when I say a tool "works," I mean it passes the real test — students actually learn more because of it, not in spite of it.
For Collaborative Writing: Google Docs (Still)
I know it's not exciting, but Google Docs remains my workhorse. The commenting feature alone is worth it. I teach students to use suggestions mode for peer editing, and suddenly revision becomes a conversation instead of a chore. I've built entire peer feedback protocols around the comment-and-resolve cycle, and it's transformed how my students think about drafting.
For Reading Engagement: Actively Learn and CommonLit
Both of these platforms let me embed questions directly into texts, which is a game-changer for close reading. I can see in real time where students are getting stuck, which means I can adjust my instruction the same day — not after I've graded a stack of exit tickets at 10 PM. CommonLit's paired text sets are also incredible for building thematic units quickly.
For Vocabulary and Language Play: Gimkit and Quizlet
Look, sometimes learning needs to feel like a game. Gimkit's live mode gets my students fired up about vocabulary in a way that no worksheet ever has. I use it strategically — not as a daily thing, but as a reward loop that reinforces terms we've been working with all week.
The Bottom Line
Technology should make good teaching easier, not replace it. I'm not interested in tools that do the thinking for students. I want tools that give me better data, create more authentic collaboration, and free up my time so I can do what actually matters: sit beside a student and talk about their writing. That's the work no app can replicate.