The issue in my mind isn't about whether the tech gadget is getting better and/or cheaper, the issue is why education technology (including paper/pencil/books/crayons, etc. as well as computer based) hasn't progressed much in many many years.
I doubt a case could be made for Moor's law applying to this problem, but we should be seeing progress of some kind.
I was an original Plato author, and have developed for that platform many years ago. I found it to be an amazing tool that could be used for many educational objectives. The high cost of Plato terminals limited the distribution of educational software developed for it. Newer lower-cost hardware can help that, but still doesn't answer why the software today seems to be worse and with fewer features than what was available 30 or 40 years ago.
I am currently researching how to use educational games to enhance learning, engagement and student interest in science and technology. I think the key to improving our educational system is to use proven methodologies to evaluate whether any potential new technology actually IMPROVES LEARNING. This is the key point, not whether kids like the cool new widget, but did the cool new widget actually get them to learn more than a control cool new widget.
Educational research is complicated by the fact that controlled studies are hard to do as the kids change, the teachers change, and doing large scale studies costs a lot of $$. Getting statistically significant results is difficult, and then doing follow-up studies to show that the results can be replicated in other school districts, etc. is often not done. But in the end I think our kids and our society need better education, so it is worth spending some $$ to improve outcomes.