Issues
Keeping edutech in check By Samantha Schofield Vice President
No doubt many conversations held during 2020 and into 2021 about providing educational activities and connections during this pandemic have been around how to connect with students, parents and teachers, particularly in a digital space. Given the speed and ferocity of this pandemic, it is not surprising that thorough and scrupulous assessment of digital platforms, content or providers has been unable to be undertaken. How many of us have done a quick check and tick on the terms and conditions due to the extensive and often convoluting text? How many of our parents and students fully comprehend the terms and conditions of digital platforms or how, where and why their data will be stored and used now and into the future? Most terms and conditions agreements require acceptance to access the product or service and drawing on the fear of missing out culture, lure and lock us into the product or service. While digital products and platforms existed prior to the pandemic, the rise of these during the pandemic is exponential. The speed at which teachers, school leaders and TAFE lecturers globally have been required to provide blended, and in some instances entirely digital, models of teaching is unprecedented. Without pausing now to consider why, what and how we use digital technology to support our teaching and learning, we run the risk of having the technology become the centrepiece, rather than using technology as another tool in our repertoire. “Technology has always been a part of a teachers’ work; a chalkboard is also technology. But whether technology is a chalkboard, an over-head projector, a computer, a robot or artificial intelligence, it is a means, not an end. It is part of the pedagogical repertoire” (On Education and Democracy, page 92, bit.ly/2w4kNvW). 18
Western Teacher February 2021
“Technology has always been a part of a teachers’ work; a chalkboard is also technology. But whether technology is a chalkboard, an over-head projector, a computer, a robot or artificial intelligence, it is a means, not an end. It is part of the pedagogical repertoire” (On Education and Democracy, page 92, bit.ly/2w4kNvW).
It’s also time to question the motivation of digital providers. With an unregulated technology and digital industry, where many companies and organisations are for profit and publicly listed, it’s hard to believe that they can be entirely philanthropic in their provision of services or products in education. A brief look at the data that is collected through a digital platform or service and you have to wonder why they need to store or keep this information and where and who is this information going to? What’s really in it for the technology organisation/company/provider/vendor? Reflect for a moment of what products, apps, digital devices your school/ worksite uses. How many of these are promoted through official school/TAFE communications to your communities? Without active consideration, we risk becoming brand ambassadors for products, companies, to our school communities and beyond.
While many of us do this unwittingly or without mal-intent, it’s worth considering how easily good intention and the desire to provide the best educational opportunities for students can be manipulated and turned into marketing opportunities for tech companies. A 2017 New York Times article profiled American teacher Kayla Delzer, who incorporates technology into her classroom so innately that tech companies have started to partner with her to use their products in her class, which she in turns promotes online via social media. “Ms Delzer is a member of a growing tribe of teacher influencers, many of whom promote classroom technology. They attract notice through their blogs, social media accounts and conference talks. And they are cultivated not only by start-ups like Seesaw, but by giants like Amazon, Apple, Google and Microsoft, to influence which tools are used to teach American schoolchildren,” the article read. “Their ranks are growing as public schools increasingly adopt all manner of laptops, tablets, math teaching sites, quiz apps and parent-teacher messaging apps. The corporate courtship of these teachers brings with it profound new conflict-ofinterest issues for the nation’s public schools. “Moreover, there is little rigorous research showing whether or not the new technologies significantly improve student outcomes. “More than two dozen education startups have enlisted teachers as brand ambassadors. Some give the teachers inexpensive gifts like free classroom technology or T-shirts. Last year, TenMarks, a math-teaching site owned by Amazon, offered Amazon gift cards to teachers who acted as company advisers, and an additional $80 gift card for writing a post on its blog, according to a TenMarks online forum.
