Z JLP CRde LV WK

Students rarely haveprivileges in ed-tech. Food for though

I’ve spoken frequently in the past about gender and education technology. I often point to culture of Silicon Valley – the subtleand not-so-subtle misogyny – as well as the demographics of the technology sector. 70% of Google employees are male, forexample. 61% are white and 30% Asian. Of Google’s “technical” employees. 83% are male. 60% of those are white and 34% areAsian. And I’ve argued that this culture, these bodies shape what gets built; they shape, even how the “problem” of education getsframed and gets “fixed.” I should add something here, however, particularly in light of an article in the business of technologypublication Fast Company last week suggesting that ed-tech is “where women are starting to buck the tech world’s sexist trends.”The ideologies of education technology – its connection to hierarchy, surveillance, stratification, discipline, power – are notundone just by having more women in education entrepreneurialism

ntegrity.

questions

ed-tech solutionism

In the ... working-class schools, work is following the steps of a procedure. The procedure is usually mechanical,involving rote behavior and very little decision making or choice. The teachers rarely explain why the work is beingassigned, how it might connect to other assignments, or what the idea is that lies behind the procedure or gives itcoherence and perhaps meaning or significance. ...Most of the rules regarding work are designations of what thechildren are to do; the rules are steps to follow. These steps are told to the children by the teachers and often writtenon the board. The children are usually told to copy the steps as notes. These notes are to be studied. Work is oftenevaluated not according to whether it is right or wrong, but according to whether the children followed the right steps

There are no teachers in the learning labs; there are teachers’ aides – an arrangement that Rocketship boasts saves ithundreds of thousands of dollars per school per year. The schools focus solely on literacy and math – that’s what the standardizedtests focus on, after all

hat students in affluentschools are more likely to use computers for creative and experimental projects; students in low income schools are more likely touse computers for drill-and-kill exercises.

Papert argued that by giving each child a computer that she or he could program, that instead “the child programs the computer.And in teaching the computer how to think, children embark on an exploration about how they themselves think. The experiencecan be heady: Thinking about thinking turns the child into an epistemologist, an experience not even shared by most adults.

negative impacts on student math and reading test scores.

For instance, a seventeen year-old whose most educated parent has a bachelor’s degree is more than five times as likely to register as a seventeenyear-old whose most educated parent has a high school diploma

we cannot confuse “access” with equity

education technology is to be progressive, equitable

80% of K–12 schools report that their Internet access is insufficient to meet their current needs.

What assumptions are we making about “home”?

89% of those with a college degree have broadband athome; 57% of high school graduates and 37% of those without a high school diploma do

“digital divide” has long served to undermine the sweeping proclamations about technology as thegreat equalizer.

One way MOOCs have changed education is by increasing access

will close the opportunity gap. Education technologywill revolutionize; education technology will democratize. Or so we are told. That's the big message at this week's ASU-GSVSummit, where education technology investors and entrepreneurs and politicians have gathered (registration: $2995) to talk about"equity." (Equity and civil rights, that is; not equity as investing in exchange for stock options and a seat on the Board ofDirectors, I should be clear. Although I'm guessing most of the conversations there were actually about the latter.

dominant narrative

Algebra through computer game

igital learningprimarily takes place in computerprogramming or other technologyclasses.

The rapidly growingeSports leagues, where schoolssponsor teams to compete in onlinegames like Overwatch and League ofLegends, can provide opportunitiesfor students to connect their interestsin gaming to career opportunities inprogramming, marketing, communi-cations, and other fields. Networkedtechnologies can play a powerful rolein connecting kids’ interests outsideof school with learning opportunitiesin schools, after-school programs,and other third spaces

often avoided assigning projects thatinvolved technology usage outside ofclass—learning experiences that arecommon in more affluent schools

What I discovered, interestingly, isthat the former concern typically ledto more limited tech usage in class-rooms:

pedagogicalproclivities

As technologytransforms civic life, the trades, pro-fessions, industries, and academicdisciplines, it becomes increasinglydifficult to prepare students for anetworked future without equitablyengaging them in networked learningin schools.

Technologyadoption can accelerate inequalitieswithin individual schools

kids who engagedin similar activities were viewedmore negatively by adults

MOOC

most teachers need to go through adevelopmental process of professional learning to achievemore ambitious transformations of teaching throughtechnology. Yet most teachers do not do so. I statethis as an empirical observation and not nec-essarily as a criticism.Second, the teachers who dodevelop innovative uses oftechnology are more commonly in learning environmentsthat serve affluent and advantaged students.

when teachers get access tonew technologies, they typically use them toextend existing practices.