Written by VSTE Professional Services member Barbara Valenzuela 

A recent study of an AI lesson-planning tool offers educators an important reminder: saving time and improving learning are both valuable goals, but they are not the same measure of success.

Educational technology is often introduced with two promises: it will make teachers’ work more efficient, and it will improve students’ learning experiences. Sometimes it may accomplish both. But when evaluating a digital tool, it is important to be clear about which outcome the evidence actually supports.

A tool that reduces planning time can provide meaningful relief for educators. It may create more space for feedback, collaboration, reflection, and connection with students. However, increased efficiency does not automatically demonstrate improved student learning. That requires different evidence—and a different question.

A Recent Trial Offers a Useful Example

In October 2026, the Education Endowment Foundation published the results of a randomized controlled trial examining Aila, an AI-powered lesson-planning assistant developed by Oak National Academy.

The trial involved 464 teachers across 108 primary schools. Teachers encouraged to use Aila spent approximately 24% less time planning lessons and preparing resources than those in the comparison group—an average savings of about 49 minutes per week. The quality of the lesson plans was not found to be lower.

However, the findings also tell a more complex story. Use of the tool declined during the ten-week trial, and fewer than one in five teachers reported that it meaningfully influenced their teaching and planning. The study evaluated planning time and lesson-plan quality, but it did not measure whether students learned more.

Read the EEF summary of the Aila evaluation.

Two Different Measures of Value

The Aila findings highlight an important distinction. When technology saves teachers time, we are measuring efficiency. When technology helps students understand more deeply, practice more effectively, receive better feedback, or access learning in new ways, we are measuring instructional impact.

Both outcomes matter, but they answer different questions:

Saving time can support better teaching, especially when educators intentionally reinvest that time in feedback, instructional decisions, and relationships with students. But the time saved is an opportunity—not evidence by itself that learning has improved.

Looking Beyond Speed

EEF’s broader guidance, Using Digital Technology to Improve Learning, recommends identifying how technology will improve teaching and learning before introducing it. A new platform should respond to a clearly defined educational need rather than become a solution in search of a problem.

This does not mean that every technology must directly teach students. A tool may still have significant value when it improves assessment, reduces administrative demands, or gives educators more time to provide feedback and support. The important step is to identify the intended benefit and then look for evidence that the tool is actually producing it.

Explore EEF’s guidance on using digital technology to improve learning.

A Question Worth Asking

As schools explore AI and other emerging technologies, success should not be defined only by how quickly a task can be completed. Educators and school leaders also need to consider what the saved time makes possible—and whether students experience a meaningful benefit.

Before adopting or evaluating a digital tool, it may be useful to ask:

Technology that saves time can be valuable. Technology that improves learning can be transformative. The strongest choices are made when educators know which goal they are pursuing and evaluate the results accordingly.

How is technology helping you save time or improve learning? Share your experiences with the VSTE community using #VSTEinAction.

Applications are Now Open for the VSTE Certified Coach Program!

Join the fastest-growing network of certified coaches in Virginia! The VSTE Certified Coach program (#VCC) is now accepting registrations for our upcoming Spring 2027 cohort, as well as pre-registrations for the 2027–2028 school year.

Created by VSTE, this program provides a custom professional learning experience that allows instructional leaders and educators to collaborate in cohorts while learning the art of coaching. The VCC curriculum is aligned with the ISTE standards for coaching and has been developed in partnership with Forward Edge, an Ohio-based company specializing in instructional coaching. The VCC program is open to all instructional technology coaches, instructional coaches, aspiring coaches, and educators across Virginia.

All coaches who complete the VCC program will:

Cohort Pathways and Scheduling:

• Spring 2027 Cohort: Running from January through May 2027, this cohort meets twice each month. It brings together current coaches, aspiring coaches, and instructional leaders into one unified learning community to learn and grow together.

• 2027–2028 Pre-Registration: Looking ahead to next school year? You can now pre-register for our upcoming Fall 2027 (semester) or Full-Year (2027–2028) cohorts.

Registration & Key Details

Interested participants will need to fully understand the expectations of the VCC program and obtain approval from a direct supervisor. Participating educators are expected to commit to all scheduled meeting times and actively engage during sessions.

To support candidates, supervisors must be aware of and approve the required program cost of $400.00 per participant.

Divisions interested in hosting a custom division-wide cohort should contact the VSTE Certified Coaching Coordinator at VCC@vste.org.

Written by VSTE Professional Services member Dr. Caitlin Hayes

Imagine a science classroom where students are programming devices to respond to environmental changes. One student designs a sound-based alarm. Another programs flashing LED lights to communicate the same information. Across the room, students program a drone using coding commands displayed in their preferred language.

The learning objectives remain consistent, but the pathways to participation look different.

As educators, we often associate accessibility with accommodations provided after a barrier has been identified. What if we considered those barriers before instruction began?

Educational technology offers opportunities to remove obstacles, expand participation, and create learning experiences where more students can succeed.

Accessibility and Inclusive Design: Understanding the Difference

Although frequently used interchangeably, accessibility and inclusive design address related but distinct considerations.

Accessibility focuses on removing barriers for individuals with disabilities, including sensory, physical, cognitive, and learning disabilities. Accessible technologies may include screen readers, captions, alternative input devices, and assistive reading tools.

Inclusive design takes a broader approach, considering differences in language, background, abilities, experiences, and learning preferences when developing learning environments.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) provides a framework for addressing these differences through multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression (CAST, 2024).

The following five EdTech examples demonstrate how educators can apply these principles while maintaining meaningful academic expectations.

BBC micro:bit: Designing for Sensory Accessibility

The Micro Educational Foundation provides resources supporting students with disabilities, including Deaf and hard-of-hearing learners.

The BBC micro is a programmable microcontroller featuring sensors, buttons, and an LED display. Educators can adapt sound-based activities to communicate information visually, providing an alternative to auditory signals.

The foundation also offers guidance addressing hearing, vision, and mobility-related barriers, encouraging educators to consider accessibility throughout the design process (Micro Educational Foundation, n.d.).

Try It Tomorrow: Challenge students to create a notification system using a micro. One design might produce an audible alert, while another displays flashing LED symbols. Have students compare how each design communicates information and identify who might benefit from alternative outputs.

Resource: https://microbit.org/accessibility/

Robolink: Supporting Linguistic Inclusion Through Coding

Language can become an additional barrier when students encounter unfamiliar programming terminology alongside new computer science concepts.

Robolink's Blockly environment for CoDrone EDU supports visual block-based programming and offers language options including English, Spanish, Korean, Japanese, French, Dutch, Hungarian, Romanian, and Bulgarian. Updates throughout 2026 expanded the platform's multilingual capabilities (Robolink, 2026).

Multilingual interfaces can support inclusive instruction by allowing students to explore programming concepts using familiar terminology while developing computational thinking skills.

This creates opportunities for collaboration between computer science and world language educators, reinforcing both technical vocabulary and communication skills.

Although multilingual interfaces are not substitutes for disability-specific accessibility features, they demonstrate how inclusive design can address broader barriers to participation.

Try It Tomorrow: Have students identify five programming commands in two languages. Working collaboratively, challenge them to plan a simple autonomous drone flight and compare how programming concepts are represented across languages.

Resource: https://docs.robolink.com/docs/CoDroneEDU/Blockly/Blockly-Changelog/

Microsoft: Supporting Reading and Writing Accessibility

Traditional reading and writing assignments can create barriers for students with dyslexia, learning disabilities, and other accessibility needs.

Microsoft offers tools such as Immersive Reader, which supports reading through text-to-speech and adjustable presentation options. Dictation tools also provide alternatives to typing (Microsoft, n.d.).

These features allow educators to distinguish between the academic content being assessed and the mechanics of accessing or communicating that content.

Try It Tomorrow: Before assigning a digital science reading, demonstrate Immersive Reader. Allow students to explore read-aloud options and text-display settings, then reflect on which features support comprehension.

Resource: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/accessibility-tools-for-learning

Google: Discovering Accessibility Tools Already Available

Many classrooms already have access to assistive features through Chromebooks.

Built-in accessibility options include ChromeVox screen reader, Live Caption, screen magnification, dictation, and alternative input methods (Google for Education, n.d.).

These features support students with visual, hearing, motor, and other accessibility needs without necessarily requiring additional software.

However, providing access to accessibility tools is only the first step. Students must also understand when and how to use them.

Try It Tomorrow: Facilitate a five-minute Chromebook accessibility exploration. Ask students to investigate two accessibility features and explain how each could remove a barrier to completing an academic task.

Resource: https://edu.google.com/our-values/accessibility/chromebooks-accessibility/

Book Creator: Expanding Opportunities for Student Expression

Accessibility also involves providing students with meaningful opportunities to communicate what they know.

Book Creator supports multimedia publishing through text, images, audio, and video. Its accessibility features include compatibility with assistive technologies, keyboard navigation, and tools supporting accessible digital content (Book Creator, n.d.).

When the learning objective permits, students can demonstrate understanding through different formats while being assessed against consistent academic criteria.

Try It Tomorrow: Following a science lesson, invite students to demonstrate understanding through an illustrated explanation, audio-supported digital book, or multimedia presentation. Use a common rubric emphasizing content accuracy and reasoning. Require appropriate captions and image descriptions.

Resource: https://bookcreator.com/accessibility/

Three Strategies to Implement Immediately

Educational technology becomes more effective when accessibility and inclusive design guide instructional decisions.

1. Identify barriers before selecting technology.

Consider whether an activity requires students to hear audio, interpret small text, manipulate equipment, or understand unfamiliar language. Determine which requirements are essential and which can be adapted.

2. Offer multiple pathways to participation.

Provide captions, visual supports, multilingual resources, accessible navigation, and flexible response formats when appropriate. These strategies reflect UDL's emphasis on reducing barriers while supporting learner agency (CAST, 2024).

3. Include students in accessibility decisions.

Invite students to explore available tools, communicate preferences, and provide feedback. Their experiences can help educators identify barriers that might otherwise go unnoticed.

Moving From Access to Belonging

No single technology guarantees accessibility. A visual coding platform may still present barriers for students with visual impairments, just as a multilingual interface may not address every language-related challenge.

Meaningful inclusion requires ongoing reflection, appropriate accommodations, and intentional instructional design.

As Virginia educators continue integrating technology across disciplines, we should move beyond asking whether students can use a particular tool.

Instead, ask:

When accessibility and inclusive design become part of instructional planning rather than an afterthought, technology can support not only access to learning but also a stronger sense of belonging.

References

Book Creator. (n.d.). Accessibility. https://bookcreator.com/accessibility/

CAST. (2024). CAST Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/

Google for Education. (n.d.). Chromebook accessibility. https://edu.google.com/our-values/accessibility/chromebooks-accessibility/

Micro Educational Foundation. (n.d.). Accessibility. https://microbit.org/accessibility/

Microsoft. (n.d.). Accessibility tools for learning. Microsoft Support. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/accessibility-tools-for-learning

Robolink. (2026). Blockly changelog. Robolink Documentation. https://docs.robolink.com/docs/CoDroneEDU/Blockly/Blockly-Changelog/

Transparency Statement

AI assistance was used to support image creation aligned with VSTE branding. Product information was reviewed using publicly available documentation. The author has a professional affiliation with Robolink, which is included alongside other educational technology examples. These references illustrate instructional applications and do not constitute product endorsements by VSTE.

Written by VSTE Professional Services member Barbara Valenzuela 

A new report from the American Psychological Association invites educators to look beyond what technology can do and consider what students actually need to learn.

Technology can generate an answer, personalize an activity, capture a student’s attention, collect data, or replace a task that once required human interaction. But the ability to do something does not automatically mean that it belongs in a learning experience.

A tool may help a student complete an assignment more quickly—but did the student develop the intended skill? An app may keep students highly engaged—but does that engagement continue after they leave the platform? Technology may replace a conversation, a productive struggle, or time spent thinking independently—but should it?

These questions are at the center of a new resource from the American Psychological Association. Published in September 2026, Children’s and Adolescents’ Learning With Educational Technology examines what research tells us about when educational technology supports learning, when it does not, and what educators should consider before deciding to use it.

Capability Is Not the Same as Educational Value

The APA report emphasizes that educational technology is not inherently beneficial or harmful. Its value depends on what the tool asks students to do, how adults integrate it, the age and needs of the learner, and what the technology replaces.

This distinction matters because technical performance can be mistaken for learning. A student may produce a stronger answer with an AI chatbot, score points in an engaging app, or complete more activities on a digital platform without developing understanding that transfers beyond the tool.

Among its recommendations, the report encourages educators and school leaders to:

Begin with clearly defined learning goals and outcomes.

Evaluate learning rather than relying only on engagement or enjoyment.

Consider what a technology-supported activity is replacing.

Select tools grounded in research-based learning strategies.

Use generative AI with age-appropriate guidance and caution.

Preserve meaningful adult involvement and human relationships.

Protect student data and privacy.

Together, these recommendations reinforce the central message: what technology can accomplish tells us about its capabilities; whether it should be used depends on its educational purpose, evidence, and impact on learners.

A Timely Resource for Virginia Educators

The report also has a connection to the Commonwealth. One of its contributors is Daniel T. Willingham, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia and a researcher known for translating cognitive science into practical guidance for educators.

For Virginia teachers, coaches, and education leaders, the report offers a timely reminder that thoughtful technology integration begins with professional judgment. New features and emerging tools may create valuable opportunities, but innovation alone is not evidence of learning.

The report is especially relevant as schools consider increasingly powerful technologies, including generative AI. Rather than asking only whether a tool can make a task faster, easier, or more engaging, educators are encouraged to consider whether it supports the intended learning, meets students’ developmental needs, protects their information, and preserves the human relationships that help learning occur.

Before Saying Yes to the Next Tool

The next time a new platform, feature, or AI capability appears, its possibilities may be impressive. But possibility should begin a conversation—not end one.

Before adopting it, consider the learning goal, the available evidence, the students who will use it, the information it will collect, and the experience it may replace. Sometimes technology will offer a meaningful improvement. At other times, a simpler or more human approach may better serve learners.

That is the distinction at the heart of the title: technology’s ability to perform a task does not, by itself, justify its place in education.

Explore the APA’s complete report, recommendations, and downloadable resource: Children’s and Adolescents’ Learning With Educational Technology.

The better question is not simply, “Can technology do this?” It is “Should it—and what will students gain from it?”

Written by VSTE Professional Services member Sarah Nicol 

Digital Citizenship week is October 19-23, 2026. It was started by Common Sense Education in 2010 alongside Harvard’s Project Zero. Each year, teachers use this week to empower students to think critically, behave ethically, and use digital devices and now AI safely. Digital Citizenship may be celebrated during a week in October but it should also be integrated into classroom lessons on a regular basis. Students need the information reiterated all year long. Below you will find a collection of resources you can use for Digital Citizenship lessons for K-12 students.

Common Sense Media - full lesson plans, resources, and activities. Elementary students love the characters!

• Some of my favorites:

• • Using Tech to Learn New Things featuring “Head and the Mystery of the Flying Penguins” (K-2)

  • Media & Our Emotions (3-5)

  • What is Critical Ignoring? (6-8)

  • Is AI a Choice or a Necessity? (9-12)

Nearpod - a blog post from last year that has links to lots of great Nearpod lessons!

• Some of my favorites:

• • 21st Century Readiness - An additional subscription on top of a Nearpod subscription but has great resources!

  • Digital Citizenship & Responsibility Time to Climb (6-8)

  • Dealing with Cyberbullying (3-5)

  • Teen Voices: Who Are You on Social Media (9-12)

Wayground

• Some of my favorites:

• • Rings of Responsibility Interactive Video (5-8)

  • Digital Citizenship Quiz (8-12)

  • Being a Good Digital Citizen Quiz (1-5)

  • Internet Safety & Digital Citizenship Choice Boards

NetSmartzKids - printable activities, e-books, and Cloud Quest- an online interactive safety adventure

• Some of my favorites:

• • Webster’s Gecko Goof - e-book about finding factual sources online

  • “Into the Cloud” videos

iKeepSafe

• Some of my favorites:

• • Faux Paw the Techno Cat

  • Be Kind Online Videos & Worksheets

Google’s Be Internet Awesome - Curriculum for educators, including an AI literacy guide, as well as activities for students.

• Some of my favorites:

• • Printable Classroom Activities

  • Coloring Book

  • Partnership with Highlights

Daily Activity Ideas

Day 1: Canva Link (screen-reader friendly)

Day 2: 

Day 3: 

Day 4: 

Day 5: 

Written by VSTE Professional Services member Barbara Valenzuela 

With new digital tools appearing every day, how can educators make sure technology serves learning—not the other way around? Explore two resources that support more intentional, equitable, and learning-centered technology decisions.

New digital tools appear constantly, each promising to save time, increase engagement, personalize learning, or transform the classroom. With so many options available, it can be easy to begin with the tool instead of the need it is supposed to address.

That raises an important question: Are we intentionally choosing technology, or are trends, convenience, and availability making the decision for us?

A Tool on Whose Terms?

The UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report, Technology in Education: A Tool on Whose Terms?, offers a valuable resource for educators and school leaders considering this question. Rather than assuming that more technology automatically produces better learning, the report examines educational technology through the lenses of relevance, equity, scalability, and sustainability.

One of its central messages is that technology should serve learners and support human interaction—not replace it. UNESCO also encourages decision-makers to look beyond access to devices and consider whether a technology responds to an actual educational need, has evidence of effectiveness, includes all learners, and can be sustained over time.

These considerations matter at every level, from districtwide purchases to the tools educators select for a single lesson. A platform may be innovative and visually impressive, but that does not necessarily mean it is the right choice for a particular group of students or learning goal.

→ Explore UNESCO’s Technology in Education: A Tool on Whose Terms? report

From Reflection to Classroom Practice

For educators who want to connect this broader reflection to classroom practice, the Triple E Framework offers another useful resource. Developed by Dr. Liz Kolb, the framework invites educators to consider whether technology supports engagement in learning goals, enhances the learning experience, and extends learning beyond what would otherwise be possible. Its emphasis remains on the learning goal rather than on the novelty of the tool.

→ Explore the Triple E Framework 

Consider this…

Neither resource suggests that technology is inherently beneficial or harmful. Instead, both encourage intentional decision-making. Sometimes technology can provide access, connection, creativity, or learning opportunities that would not otherwise exist. At other times, a simpler approach may serve students more effectively.

Before adopting the next platform, application, or digital feature, it may be worth pausing to ask:

Written by VSTE Professional Services member Sarah Nicol 

Looking for something fresh to use this fall with your students? Take a look at the collections below! You will find lessons and activities that cover the changing of the leaves all the way to Thanksgiving. Note: Some of these items may be behind a paywall if you or your district do not have a subscription.

TeachersFirst

A free online learning community created by experienced educators that provides K-12 teachers with peer-reviewed lesson plans, digital tools, and professional development.

eMediaVA

Virginia’s premier digital media content library for educators and students, providing access to thousands of free, relevant, SOL-aligned digital learning resources for your classroom.

Go Open VA

A Virginia based Open Educational Resource (OER) hub with vetted resources where teachers are empowered to support personalized learning for all their students by creating, using, and sharing openly-licensed digital resources. 

Nearpod

an interactive instructional platform that helps teachers create active learning experiences for students through digital lessons and presentations. 

Other Resources:

VSTE will recognize and honor Virginia Educators, Technology Coaches and Leaders who are VSTE members or at least 30 days prior to nomination and who have demonstrated outstanding achievement and leadership in implementing technology to improve education. Award recipients will be selected from a pool of nominations submitted by VSTE members from around Virginia.

Nominations will be accepted from June 1 - September 21, 2026. Nominations will be reviewed by the VSTE Awards Committee and past winners. Select nominators will be contacted in early October to provide additional evidence and documentation. Nominators are encouraged to work with the nominee to gather this additional information.

Decisions will be made prior to the VSTE Annual Conference. Award winners will be recognized during a general session at the annual conference. They are also provided with a complimentary conference registration and three nights of hotel accommodations for the annual conference. This year's conference will be held December 6-8, 2026, in Virginia Beach, VA.

The Awards Committee uses the VSTE certified coach standards developed with ForwarEdge as the basis for judging the Outstanding Technology Coach awards. Please review the appropriate standards when preparing nomination materials. Nominees are rated solely using criteria identified in the rubric.

Please use this nomination form to nominate a technology coach for this award.

More information about the ForwardEdge Core of Coaching, ISTE Standards for Educators, ISTE Standards for Education Leaders.

Questions should be addressed to awards@vste.org.

The finish line is finally in sight, but let’s be real your “teacher battery” is probably sitting at about 2%. You’ve done the heavy lifting all year; now it’s time for some easy wins. We’ve rounded up a collection of plug-and-play templates and resources to help you glide through the final stretch without breaking a sweat.

From Matt Miller at Ditch That Textbook

From Eric Curts at Control Alt Achieve

• • Door A, B or C? Using AI for Interactive Choose Your Own Adventure Stories
  • Making Graphic Novels with Gemini and NotebookLM
• Spelling Snake- Using AI to Code Educational Games

From Tyler Tarver at Tarver Academy

From Dr. Catlin Tucker

From Edutopia

From We Are Teachers

School Appropriate Videos

(Don’t forget to include questions for students to answer.)

Month of the Military Child | April

April is recognized as the Month of the Military Child, a time to recognize students whose lives are shaped by constant change. In the military, transition is expected. New environments, new expectations, new friends and experiences. That same reality follows many students into our classrooms.

For educators in Virginia, this reality is not abstract. It is part of our daily classroom experience.

Hampton Roads is known around the world for its distinguished military presence, with 19 installations, including Naval Station Norfolk, the world’s largest naval base. The region is home to over 100,000 active-duty service members and one of the largest concentrations of armed forces in the United States (Hampton Roads Alliance, n.d.).

When including families, retirees, and support personnel, that number expands to hundreds of thousands of individuals that are connected to the military community. This means that in many of our classrooms, a significant number of students are navigating transitions tied directly to military life.

In many schools, military-connected students are easy to overlook, not because they don’t stand out, but because they adapt quickly. New classroom, new routines, new faces. They figure it out. That ability to adjust is often seen as a strength, but it does not mean the process is easy for our students.

Organizations such as the Military Child Education Coalition emphasize that while these students demonstrate resilience, they also experience frequent disruptions in continuity, relationships, and academic expectations (Military Child Education Coalition [MCEC], n.d.).

Frequent moves, shifting expectations, and time away from deployed family members create a level of uncertainty that does not stay at home. It follows them into school. After years in a system where structure and consistency matter, it is clear how much those same elements matter for students navigating these changes.

As educators, we may not be able to control the unique circumstances of the military, but we can control the environment students walk into each day. That is where STEM can play an important role.

Understanding STEM as a Consistent Framework

For educators who may not have a military background or familiarity of the lifestyle, it is important to understand that stability is not just helpful for these students, it is essential. Students who experience frequent transitions benefit from predictable and consistent learning structures (Military Child Education Coalition [MCEC], n.d.).

STEM, which refers to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, provides a framework where this desirable consistency naturally exists. Across these disciplines, students engage in similar processes such as asking questions, analyzing information, solving problems, and refining their thinking. While content may vary from classroom to classroom, the way students learn within the framework of STEM remains largely the same.

Science encourages students to investigate and make sense of the world through observation and evidence.

Technology supports problem solving and creation through digital tools and systems.

Engineering focuses on designing and improving solutions through structured processes.

Mathematics provides the foundation for reasoning, patterns, and precision.

Together, these disciplines create a learning environment where expectations are clear and transferable.

Across schools, STEM learning often reflects practices outlined in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013), where students ask questions, test ideas, solve problems, and revise their thinking. These processes do not change from one classroom to another.

For a student who has just arrived at a new school, that consistency lowers the barrier to entry. Instead of spending weeks learning how things work, they can begin engaging right away.

STEM Builds Connection and Predictability

STEM also supports connection in ways that are immediately accessible.

When students are working together on a challenge, the focus shifts from social uncertainty to shared purpose. A new student does not need a long history with peers to contribute meaningfully. They can participate, problem solve, and collaborate from the start. This creates opportunities for belonging that do not rely on familiarity or time.

In addition, the structure of STEM learning provides a sense of predictability that many students need.

Clear processes such as the NASA engineering design process (National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA], n.d.), which includes identifying a problem, developing a plan, testing solutions, and making improvements, give students a roadmap for learning.

These same iterative practices are reinforced through experiences such as science fair projects, where students revisit ideas, refine their approach, and improve outcomes over time. When that structure is consistent, students can focus on thinking and creating rather than trying to interpret expectations in a new environment.

STEM Reinforces Resilience and Belonging

Failure is part of the process. Designs do not always work. Code requires revision. Ideas evolve. Through this, students learn that progress comes through persistence.

For military-connected students, this aligns with the adaptability they already demonstrate, but within a supportive and structured environment.

Beyond the classroom, STEM opportunities such as robotics teams, coding clubs, engineering challenges, drone programs, and science competitions extend that sense of connection. These environments often foster a strong sense of teamwork and shared purpose, similar to the camaraderie that is a familiar part of military life.

Educators can play an important role by encouraging participation and creating pathways for students to get involved early. These experiences provide continuity through shared practices and familiar structures, giving students a place to belong and something they can carry with them as they transition between schools.

What This Looks Like in Practice

To translate this into everyday instruction, small, intentional choices can make a meaningful difference.

1. Establish consistent routines quickly: Begin class with a predictable structure such as a warm-up, clear agenda, and defined transitions.
2. Use structured problem-solving protocols: Provide a consistent framework such as the engineering design process or inquiry-based labs.
3. Design for immediate participation: Incorporate tasks where all students can contribute right away.
4. Leverage collaborative roles: Assign clear roles such as facilitator, recorder, tester, or materials manager to support team integration.

These strategies are not new, but when applied intentionally, they create environments where military-connected students can engage, connect, and succeed from the start.

A Reminder for Educators

The Month of the Military Child is a reminder to be intentional in how we support students whose lives are shaped by constant transition (DoDEA, n.d.).

Many educators are familiar with this recognition through school-based traditions such as Purple Up Day, where students and staff wear purple to show support for military-connected children. Schools often incorporate spirit days, recognition events, and classroom discussions that highlight the resilience and contributions of these students.

In regions like Hampton Roads, where a significant portion of the population is connected to the military community, this responsibility is not occasional. It is constant.

Support does not always come from large programs or initiatives. Often, it is found in consistent, everyday practices. Predictable structures. Clear expectations. Opportunities to contribute without delay.

STEM classrooms offer a unique opportunity to provide this kind of environment.

When learning is structured, collaborative, and centered on problem solving, students are given more than academic content. They are given stability, connection, and a sense of belonging.

Military-connected students arrive ready to adapt.

As educators, we can meet them with environments that allow them to step in, engage, and move forward with confidence.

Sometimes, that begins with something as simple as giving them a place to build, solve, and belong.

References

Hampton Roads Alliance. (n.d.). Military presence in Hampton Roads. https://hamptonroadsalliance.com/military/

Military Child Education Coalition. (n.d.). Military-connected children and youth: A population overview. https://www.militarychild.org

U.S. Department of War Education Activity. (n.d.). Month of the Military Child. https://www.dodea.edu/month-military-child

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. National Academies Press. https://www.nextgenscience.org

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (n.d.). Engineering design process. https://www.nasa.gov/stem