Education does not exist in a vacuum, but rather functions within the society of which it is a part. Given the ways in which the modern world has changed, definitions of society as a larger construct and from personal perspective have become increasingly muddy and uncertain. Indeed, within Canada over the last several months, questions of nation and nationship are increasingly unclear, and for many, uncomfortable to answer. Ed-tech itself, a subset of the field of education, is experiencing a sort of crisis of self, where its potential revolutionary way forward must itself be regarded through the lens of influence and privilege. Whose revolution does one speak of? According to Selwyn (2021), “[M]ost ed-tech endeavours are rooted in a shared sense of continuing progress” (para. 4). Whose progress is centered and valued?  What voices have been shared?  He goes on to claim, “Most areas of education research share a ‘redemptive’ commitment to improving the lives of learners and teachers, or else righting perceived wrongs in the provision of education (Ball, 2020 as cited in Selwyn, 2021, para. 5). If Ed-tech attempts to move forward in this redemptive mission of improving lives and righting wrongs, it is doomed to failure if it has not considered what wrongs are being righted, whose lives are in need of improvement, and what definition of improvement has been agreed upon.


Selwyn, N., Pangrazio, L., Nemorin, S., & Perrotta, C. (2020). What might the school of 2030 be like? an exercise in social science fiction. Learning, Media and Technology45(1), 90–106.