Module 7: The Politics and Political Economy of Educational Technology: Political Foundations

Although education can provide the competencies and skills to improve people’s lives, how can it be a priority in the third world countries where basic necessities such as clean drinking water and waste disposal takes priority. Or does education provide the platform through which these countries can emerge and participate in the global market?

We learn from Kahn and Kellener’s (2007) article that education should empower those who receive it, and from the video Intel Education Service Corps that education ‘opens doors’ to options that one might not have had before. But in third world countries, making education a priority would remain a real challenge, because one cannot learn if one is sick. The reality is that many of those in power are not willing to share that power, which is why it is even more difficult for the less fortunate to receive the education they need to succeed. Only through the efforts of those who are willing to donate their time and money to support those who are less fortunate can education slowly become a priority in third world countries. Once people in third world countries receive the education they need, they will then be able to emerge and participate in the global market.

Reference

Kahn, R. & Kellener, D. (2007). Paulo Freire and Ivan Illich: Technology, politics and the reconstruction of education. Policy Futures in Education, 5(4).

Technology has taken on the leading role in the reconstruction of education, do you feel that this is a fair assumption? What role do politics play in this assumption?

I think it is a natural process in the evolution of humankind, because we have always relied on technological innovation to move us forward. Sadly, technology companies are the one making money off of this and not the government that funds education, so there is no escaping in having tech giants from having their share in shaping the future of education.

From the 2012 State of the Union Address video, we learn that the U.S. is looking to companies to help alleviate some of the issues that the state is having in education. I do not think there is anything majorly wrong with this approach, for now, because students are essentially being trained so that they will have the skills they need to work in high tech companies when they graduate, which would yield them a suitable income for living that the current education has trouble offering. The problems I do see are the replacement of teachers and their roles by tech company instructors, and how the state will allow tech companies to determine the contents of the curriculum.

Please examine the website created by Discourse Leadership Group #7 members for more information on the topic.