There is a quiet scandal unfolding in our schools, quiet not because it is small, but because it has been normalized. Walk into many institutions today and you will find carefully locked cupboards, secure storerooms, and well-guarded offices.
Inside them lie tablets, laptops, and digital devices purchased at great public expense. Outside those rooms sit learners; curious, capable, and increasingly disconnected from the very tools meant to transform their education. The contradiction is stark. The nation invested in technology to light up minds, yet the devices remain boxed, and the minds remain in darkness.
This is the EdTech paradox in its most troubling form: abundance without access, investment without impact, promise without practice.
The vision behind digital learning was bold, necessary, and forward-looking. In a century defined by information, connectivity, and innovation, equipping learners with digital tools is no longer optional. Technology has the potential to democratize education, bringing high-quality resources to the most remote corners of the country. It can individualize instruction, allowing learners to progress at their own pace. It can shift classrooms from passive listening spaces to active, inquiry-driven environments. It can connect students to a global knowledge economy. That was the promise. That was the justification for the massive investments made.
But somewhere between procurement and pedagogy, something went wrong.
In one school, a headteacher made a decision that, at first glance, appeared responsible. Faced with a consignment of tablets, he chose to keep them locked away in a secure room. His reasoning was rooted in fear—fear of theft, fear of damage, fear of being held accountable for loss. Year after year, the devices remained untouched. Three full years passed without a single learner interacting with them. Dust gathered. Batteries deteriorated. Software became outdated. Meanwhile, learners continued with chalk and talk, unaware that just beyond a locked door lay tools that could have transformed their learning experience.
In another school, a different story unfolded. The headteacher, confronted with the same risks, chose a different path. He released the devices to teachers and learners. The beginning was not perfect. Some devices malfunctioned. A few were mishandled. Teachers struggled initially to integrate technology into their lessons. But over time, confidence grew. Learners became more engaged, more inquisitive, more collaborative. Lessons became more dynamic. Information became more accessible. Technology moved from being an abstract concept to a practical tool for learning.
The difference between these two schools was not funding. It was leadership.
ALSO READ;
Across many institutions, fear has quietly become the invisible barrier to progress. It is a fear reinforced by a system that often prioritizes asset protection over educational outcomes. Headteachers are acutely aware that if devices are lost or damaged, questions will be asked. Audits will be conducted. Accountability will be enforced. In such an environment, the safest option is often the least productive one: keep the devices locked away.
But education cannot thrive in a culture of fear.
Risk is inherent in any meaningful learning process. Books get lost. Desks get worn out. Chalk breaks. Laboratories incur damage. Yet we do not respond to these realities by locking away books or shutting down laboratories. We accept that wear and tear is part of usage, and usage is essential for learning. The same logic must apply to digital devices. Their value lies not in their preservation, but in their utilization.
What we are witnessing is not merely a logistical failure; it is a conceptual one. Technology is being treated as an asset to be safeguarded rather than a tool to be deployed. This shift in perspective has profound consequences. When devices are seen primarily as items of inventory, their educational purpose becomes secondary. The focus moves from how they can enhance learning to how they can be protected from loss.
The result is a system that celebrates distribution while neglecting usage.
Billions may be spent on procurement, but procurement alone does not educate a child. A tablet in a box has zero instructional value. A laptop locked in an office does not improve literacy, numeracy, or critical thinking. Technology becomes transformative only when it is integrated into the daily practices of teaching and learning.
This raises uncomfortable but necessary questions. How many of the distributed devices are actually being used in classrooms? How often are they incorporated into lesson plans? How confident are teachers in using them effectively? How many schools have the infrastructure—electricity, connectivity, technical support—to sustain digital learning? Without clear answers to these questions, we risk mistaking activity for progress.
ALSO READ;
Meru medic urges youth to embrace sports as alternative path to employment
Teacher preparedness is a central piece of this puzzle. Technology, no matter how advanced, cannot replace the role of a teacher. It can only enhance it. But enhancement requires competence and confidence. Many teachers have received minimal training, often limited to brief workshops that focus on basic operations rather than pedagogical integration. As a result, even when devices are available, they may remain underutilized because teachers are unsure how to incorporate them meaningfully into their lessons.
Continuous professional development is therefore not optional—it is essential. Teachers need ongoing support, practical guidance, and opportunities to share experiences. They need to see technology not as an additional burden, but as an ally that can make their work more effective and engaging.
Infrastructure is another critical factor. Digital learning cannot thrive in environments where electricity is unreliable or internet access is inconsistent. Devices require maintenance, updates, and technical support. Without these, even the most well-intentioned initiatives can falter. The success of EdTech is not determined by devices alone, but by the ecosystem that supports their use.
Yet perhaps the most significant shift required is in how we define accountability.
At present, accountability often centers on the physical condition of devices—how many are intact, how many are accounted for, how many are secure. While these considerations are important, they are not sufficient. True accountability should focus on impact. Are learners benefiting? Are teachers using the tools effectively? Are learning outcomes improving?
If a school keeps every device in perfect condition but never uses them, can that truly be considered success? Conversely, if a school experiences minor losses or damages but significantly enhances learning through active use, should that not be recognized and supported?
We must move from an accountability framework that rewards caution to one that rewards meaningful engagement.
Government and education authorities have a pivotal role to play in driving this shift. Monitoring and evaluation systems must evolve to capture not just distribution metrics, but usage patterns and educational outcomes. Data on device utilization, teacher engagement, and student performance should inform policy decisions. Schools that demonstrate effective use of technology should be highlighted as models, while those that struggle should be supported, not punished.
At the same time, school leaders must embrace their role as agents of change. Leadership in education is not about avoiding risk at all costs; it is about making informed decisions that prioritize learners. It is about creating an environment where innovation is encouraged, where mistakes are treated as learning opportunities, and where the ultimate goal is not the preservation of equipment, but the advancement of education.
Parents and communities also have a voice in this matter. They have a right to know how resources allocated to their children’s education are being used. They have a responsibility to ask questions, to demand transparency, and to support schools in embracing change. Community engagement can reinforce accountability and ensure that the focus remains on learners.
The cost of inaction is immense. Every day that devices remain unused is a day of lost opportunity. It is a day when a learner could have accessed a wider world of information, developed digital skills, or engaged in more interactive learning. Over time, these missed opportunities accumulate, widening the gap between those who are digitally empowered and those who are not.
In a global context where digital literacy is increasingly essential, this gap has far-reaching implications. It affects not only individual learners, but the nation as a whole. A workforce that lacks digital skills is less competitive. An education system that fails to integrate technology effectively is less relevant. The stakes are high, and the consequences are real.
ALSO READ;
Kilifi Teachers League finals take place tomorrow, organisers promise showdown
The irony is difficult to ignore. At a time when the world is embracing artificial intelligence, online learning platforms, and digital collaboration, some of our learners are still waiting—not for devices to be delivered, but for them to be unlocked. The tools are there. The need is clear. The potential is immense. And yet, progress is stalled by hesitation and fear.
This is why the situation must be confronted directly. It is not enough to acknowledge the problem; we must act on it. The devices must move from storage to classrooms. Teachers must be empowered through sustained training. Infrastructure must be strengthened. Accountability must be redefined. Leadership must be bold.
Above all, we must remember why these investments were made in the first place. They were not made to fill storerooms or satisfy procurement targets. They were made to improve learning, to expand opportunities, and to prepare learners for the future.
Technology was never meant to sit idle. It was meant to be used—to challenge, to inspire, to transform.
Until that happens, we will continue to live with the uncomfortable reality of devices in boxes and minds in darkness. A reality that is visible, persistent, and entirely within our power to change.
This is not a hidden failure. It is a scandal in plain sight. And the longer we ignore it, the greater the cost—not just in wasted resources, but in lost potential.
The way forward is clear. Unlock the devices. Trust the teachers. Empower the learners. Measure what matters. Shift from fear to purpose, from storage to use, from intention to impact.
Because at the end of the day, education is not about the tools we acquire, but about how we use them. And if we fail to use them, we fail the very learners they were meant to serve.
By Hillary Muhalya
You can also follow our social media pages on Twitter: Education News KE and Facebook: Education News Newspaper for timely updates.
>>> Click here to stay up-to-date with trending regional stories
>>> Click here to read more informed opinions on the country’s education landscape
