In his critique of technological solutionism Evgeny Morozov (Chapter 6), distinguishes the restrictive/prohibitive technological design solutions and those which instead offer a broader range of choices.
1. What examples of the restrictive and the choice broadening types of solutions you know from your professional and learning experiences, or have encountered while working with educational technologies?
An example that I can speak to in terms of educational technology is the restrictiveness of some instructors with the use of cellphones in class versus those instructors who are lenient and even promote this usage. Armed with the knowledge that most students nowadays own a cellphone, and access data from their mobile devices frequently, instructors would do well to wield this information to their advantage. If students can use their cellphones in class, and if instructors aren’t policing every aspect of their use, I believe that students will use their devices properly. They will not look at their cellphones as instruments of inappropriate searches or “cheating”, but rather as a useful educational tool (and just as an aside, is it really cheating if information is at our fingertips anyway? If we can easily look it up, perhaps we shouldn’t be promoting this type of questioning to begin with?). If there are rules, restrictions and/or banishment of cellphones at the onset of class, the students will be more likely to, for example, “sneak” their cellphone into class, perhaps use it for texting (or any other inappropriate use deemed by school authorities), and then this restrictive philosophy becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. If we take the mystery out of using cellphones in class, students are less likely to use them inappropriately – or, if they are given permission to use them in class, perhaps they won’t use them and opt for a laptop or other piece of technology instead. As per the Situational Crime Prevention example in the article, if an instructor’s back is turned, what is stopping the student from sneaking the cell phone? What if the instructor steps out in the hall with another student? With the removal of barriers (the instructor not in the physical classroom), what is to stop the student from engaging in other inappropriate behaviours? If we always approach learning in a restrictive way, we will often get what we ask for. If we foster a transparent and honest environment, along with understanding and compromise, we will more likely garner a positive rapport with students, as there will be a perception/realization of trust, and not suspicion. We simply cannot “police” students at all times, nor should we. We need to loosen the reins and give them a chance to make a conscious decision to act appropriately – and not just because we place barriers on them to corral them into doing so. Often a hard stance on cell phone usage stems from the fact that instructors may see them as a distraction, and disruption of class time, therefore, inefficient. So, a “no cell phone” policy takes effect. I have seen countless classroom ideas, one being a “cell phone jail”, where students deposit their cell phones in jail(cell) at the beginning of class, and collect them at the conclusion of class (this would pertain more to intermediate and secondary aged pupils). In elementary schools, often students are instructed to surrender their cell phones to the office for pickup at the end of the day (as fewer elementary-aged pupils use cell phones). This is all in the name of efficiency. However, if you look at it from another perspective, cell phone usage can actually increase efficiency in class, as it is a personal mobile device for the student, thereby making information retrieval a quick process, as they know their interface well. They may simply require digital citizenship lessons (lessons that the teacher should be instructing on regardless of cell phones, as it pertains to any device, in school and out).
2. The promise of technological straight-jacket is efficiency. Consider sharing an example of situation or a decision in educational context which result is/was better than just efficient?
I would venture the idea of an LMS as being somewhat of a technological straight-jacket in that it is a “walled garden”. They are most definitely efficient in terms of maintaining one space for classroom and learning management. The main purpose of an LMS, it can be argued, is the fact that it is a “one-stop shop” for the teacher and students, thereby decreasing the amount of time it would take to have the students visit multiple websites, multimedia, etc. that may be scattered in various platforms. All information could be provided within the LMS, with links out to further information outside of the platform should the project/activity call for it. Some may argue that this may stifle the students’ creativity, and effectively “stop” some students from seeking out additional information that may not be provided by the teacher. However, according to some students, the Internet can be overwhelming, and if they are not well-versed in searching methods, this may effectively “stop” the students from seeking out information. So, it may be better to work within an LMS where the information is readily available in one place, and is organized for the student in such a way that it promotes learning and higher order thinking, since mental reserves are not wasted searching outside the realm of the LMS.

• cellphones
• Digital Citizenship
• LMS
• Mobile Learning
• multimedia