Should tomorrow’s classrooms embrace technology – or protect space away from it?

Six speakers took opposing sides in a Future Forum debate about the role of technology in education. The arguments revealed more common ground than the result might suggest.

Technology can help teachers personalise lessons, reduce administration and reach students who might otherwise miss out. It can also distract, encourage shallow attention and displace the human relationships that make learning possible.

Those competing concerns shaped a lively Debate Mate session at Future Forum on the motion: This House Believes the Future Classroom Must Embrace Technology.

Scarlett McCabe, Founder and CEO of Debate Mate Training, moderated a debate in which participants were assigned positions they did not necessarily personally hold.

FOR: Teach children to use the world they inhabit

Robin Walker, Director and Head of Education, Cardew Group, argued that good teachers remain irreplaceable, but useful technology can amplify their impact. Schools, he suggested, should help students understand both the power and the limitations of AI rather than treating it as something that can simply be excluded.

Esha Amin, a former Debate Mate student, emphasised access. Young people already encounter digital tools outside the classroom, and a structured school environment can teach them how to question AI’s outputs and use technology responsibly.

Closing for the proposition, Emmanuel Areoye argued that well-designed technology could expand opportunities for students who lack additional resources or professional networks.

AGAINST: Don’t confuse using technology with embracing it

Jess Butcher MBE, CEO of ScrollAware, challenged assumptions about educational technology’s benefits, warning that excessive screen use could undermine attention, independent thought and childhood experiences.

Entrepreneur Daniel Priestley agreed that classrooms should change, but argued that the change should focus on debate, performance, physical skills and independent thinking. A memorable analogy separated the tool from the talent: understanding a microphone does not make someone a great singer.

Elissa Abbara, Senior Associate for Debate Mate Training, closed for the opposition, drawing a distinction between teaching about technology and allowing it to become the default medium for every lesson. She favoured deliberate, limited use rather than screens throughout the school day. What the vote revealed

The audience contributed questions about inequality, access, climate impact and what the word ‘classroom’ should mean. After a closely contested voice vote, the moderator declared the opposition the winner.

In brief reflections afterwards, several speakers acknowledged more nuance than the formal debate allowed. Support for teachers, critical thinking and careful use of digital tools were widely shared priorities.

The central question was not whether young people should ever use technology. It was which experiences education should protect as technology becomes more pervasive – and how schools can help every learner benefit without sacrificing the human skills they will need.