Edtech

The debate over whether ed-tech is "good or bad" is a false choice, as the real problem is poor implementation, not the technology itself. This perspective argues that schools are confusing bad pedagogy with bad technology and should focus on intentional, balanced, and purposeful use rather than outright bans.

Artificial intelligence and other advanced technologies are the future of education, offering personalized, adaptive, and innovative learning experiences that will improve student outcomes. Proponents envision AI tutors that are "always patient, always available," positioning ed-tech as a cornerstone of future educational objectives.

Current ed-tech has become a tool for corporate control, making education impersonal, inflexible, and managed through mega-platforms rather than human interaction. This critique argues that students are locked into uninspiring software and monitored via dashboards, a system more akin to managing hospital patients than nurturing development.

The widespread frustration with ed-tech quality and cost can be addressed by shifting to outcome-based contracting, which ties vendor payment to measurable results. This approach forces companies to stand behind their products and provides a direct, practical response to concerns about efficacy.

The intense focus on ed-tech's efficiency and scalability is a distraction from the fundamental, unanswered question of what education is for. This perspective argues that by prioritizing the "means" of technology, the educational community has forgotten to define the "ends" or ultimate purpose of learning.

The widespread use of digital devices in classrooms harms student learning and mental health, so schools should pause ed-tech rollouts and return to more traditional methods. This growing backlash is driven by celebrities, parents, and policymakers demanding that schools limit screen time and get laptops out of classrooms.

The backlash against ed-tech is not just about the technology itself but is a moral panic that serves as a proxy for broader societal anxieties about screens, AI, and social media's effect on children. This view suggests that policy is being made in a panic, without a nuanced understanding of the issues.