Is Educational Investment in Technology Useful or Limited in Scope?

UNESCO has published the 2023 Global Education Monitoring Report entitled “Technology in Education: A tool on whose terms?” This study reports global findings on how technology has served as an educational resource but reveals that the sector’s needs are not always considered.

The purpose of disseminating this information is for policymakers to find, from their perspectives, if the integration of educational technologies addresses contextual learning needs adequately. The report also guides the understanding that technology adds to teaching but does not replace it, and, when implemented, it should contribute to sustainable development.

The report’s presentation occurred at a congress in Montevideo, Uruguay, presented in conjunction with the Ministry of Education and Culture of Uruguay and the Ceibal Foundation. Fifteen ministers of education worldwide attended. This was the first Latin American launch, which occurred there because Uruguay is renowned for its pioneering stance on technology in education.

Manos Antoninis, Director of the Global Education Monitoring (GEM) Report, noted, “We need to learn about our past mistakes when using technology in education so that we do not repeat them in the future. We need to teach children to live both with and without technology; to take what they need from the abundance of information, but to ignore what is not necessary; to let technology support, but never supplant human interactions in teaching and learning.”

The report indicates that technology’s transformation of education, as many claim, is debatable. This is because its digital use varies per the community and the determined socioeconomic context, the willingness and preparation of teachers, and the country’s educational level or income. It also explained that computers or devices are not used as learning support in the classroom on a massive scale except in technologically advanced countries. Additionally, it revealed that 92% of the open educational resources found in the OER Commons digital library are content available in English.

Evidence on the impact of educational technology can be conflicting, the study establishes. Little evidence exists that it adds value to education because it evolves faster than the opportunity to assess its scope. EdTech (educational technology) products change approximately every 36 months. Most of the evidence comes from more developed and privileged countries. For example, a survey of 17 states in the United States found that only 11% of faculty and staff requested peer-reviewed testing before adopting a new technology. Notably, the source of much of the evidence is produced by those who sell EdTech.

However, technology does not have to be the most advanced to be impactful. The report mentions that it best enables teaching and learning processes when contextual and comprehensively supported. The main focus is to be contextually specific, as in the case of the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) program, which provided computers without the need for extensive connectivity; they came preloaded with open educational resources for students. The program turned out to be unsuccessful due to overly ambitious cost plans, unsustainability in local contexts, and inadequate integration into pedagogical processes.

Peru had the most extensive program, with 900,000 laptops distributed to disadvantaged rural students, but research determined that the program did not positively impact mathematics or languages, and 40% of students did not bring their computers home. While teachers received hardware and software training, they were unprepared to incorporate it into the classroom. Students learned to copy notes from the blackboard and perform some creative activities, but the strategy lacked pedagogical work.

The study expressed that those who promote the use of technology in the classroom are often accused of seeing it as the solution to any educational problem. In addition, incorporating these resources can limit learning priorities by targeting the most commercially explored areas, and there is the possibility of encouraging a highly individualistic approach that discredits collaboration and civic engagement.

Additionally, the report explains that inadequate or excessive use of technology harms students. The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) conducted a wide-ranging international assessment that the overuse of information and communication technologies negatively affected academic performance. In 14 countries, proximity to a mobile device distracted the student. However, fewer than one in four countries have banned their use in schools.

Despite the above, the text describes that combining technology and applying it correctly can provide positive learning experiences. One example is data analytics, which helps guide and personalize student pathways, even providing immediate and more helpful feedback. Also, the data generated improves the systems’ efficiency to meet the student body’s educational needs.

The UNESCO report highlights the importance of learning to live with or without digital technology, with the essential thing being to focus on learning outcomes and not digital inputs. The relationship between education and technology is delicate, and understanding when and how to use it to contribute to educational goals is a critical competency necessary for educational leaders in the twenty-first century.

Reflections for Educational Leaders and Regulatory Bodies

The report calls for the members of the Government to consider different aspects through four questions to verify:

1. Is this use of educational technology appropriate for both national and local contexts? That is, to certify that EdTech adds value and aligns with learning objectives. It should ensure that technology is contextual, resources are available to students, and teacher training and curricular focus are on developing skills to manage digital tools.
2. Is the use of educational technology leaving students behind? The digitalization of education sometimes benefits students who are already privileged and further marginalizes others; therefore, the objective should be that technology contributes to equity. Establish national guidelines to strengthen meaningful connectivity and promote digital public goods in education.
3. Is this use of educational technology scalable? The variety of educational technology products can be overwhelming, and the speed of implementing a solution could influence decisions without sufficient evidence of long-term benefits and costs. Establishing bodies with different actors who collaboratively assess educational resources is essential. Also, pilot projects should have transparent public spending on assessing the performance and operability of these solutions.
4. Does this use of technology support a sustainable educational future? Digital technology should not be seen as a short-term project but one that accommodates different technologies, considering data protection and privacy and ensuring ethical and responsible use legislation. For this, it is relevant to consider the implications of its application in the short and long term.

The report also suggests that technology in education is “a means of delivery, a skill, and a planning tool, and provides a social and cultural context.” Its central premise is that “technology should serve people and that technology in education should put students and teachers at the center.” Given this, one understands that much technology has not necessarily been designed for education; therefore, it is vital to demonstrate its suitability before integrating it.

In addition, the report warns that decision-makers and others involved in the sector must consider that educational technology must be designed to respect the needs of a diverse population and support teaching. Likewise, it explains that the commercial environment and the common good sometimes pull in opposite directions. The common good must be a priority. For this, it is necessary to understand the underlying interests behind the use of digital technology in education.

Ultimately, the report clarifies that attributing specific learning outcomes to hardware or software is challenging. The positive impact of EdTech tools depends on strong pedagogical alignment and the contribution of teaching staff.

Translation by Daniel Wetta

Nohemí Vilchis EdTech Specialist in Observatory for the Institute for the Future of Education (nohemi.vilchis@tec.mx)

Share

This article from Observatory of the Institute for the Future of Education may be shared under the terms of the license CC BY-NC-SA 4.0