This piece raises an important question about the increasing privatisation of public education through educational technology. I appreciate that education wasn’t always free of such associations, but there’s a marked difference between the relatively straightforward relationship between schools and textbook publishers and the newer dependencies on commercial offerings that require recurring subscriptions, proprietary platforms, student data collection, and growing reliance on corporations whose interests don’t necessarily align with educational outcomes.
What I find particularly troubling is the distinction between engagement and learning. Gamified platforms can produce impressive metrics for student participation, but what evidence do we have that they’re improving critical thinking or the capacity for sustained attention? Meanwhile, teachers risk becoming facilitators of commercially produced content rather than professionals exercising their own pedagogical judgement.
The article is particularly timely given the rush to integrate generative AI into classrooms. This isn’t necessarily an argument against educational technology, but it does raise fundamental questions about who controls curricula and who benefits financially, and whether schools are increasingly being organised around the capabilities of technology rather than the educational needs of children.
I’d be interested to hear from teachers and parents whether this reflects their experiences, and what meaningful evidence of improved learning outcomes they’ve seen from these platforms.
[OP] charliepscott | 4 hours ago
This piece raises an important question about the increasing privatisation of public education through educational technology. I appreciate that education wasn’t always free of such associations, but there’s a marked difference between the relatively straightforward relationship between schools and textbook publishers and the newer dependencies on commercial offerings that require recurring subscriptions, proprietary platforms, student data collection, and growing reliance on corporations whose interests don’t necessarily align with educational outcomes.
What I find particularly troubling is the distinction between engagement and learning. Gamified platforms can produce impressive metrics for student participation, but what evidence do we have that they’re improving critical thinking or the capacity for sustained attention? Meanwhile, teachers risk becoming facilitators of commercially produced content rather than professionals exercising their own pedagogical judgement.
The article is particularly timely given the rush to integrate generative AI into classrooms. This isn’t necessarily an argument against educational technology, but it does raise fundamental questions about who controls curricula and who benefits financially, and whether schools are increasingly being organised around the capabilities of technology rather than the educational needs of children.
I’d be interested to hear from teachers and parents whether this reflects their experiences, and what meaningful evidence of improved learning outcomes they’ve seen from these platforms.