Harmonious with the statement that Martin Weller brought out in his introduction of the book “25 Years of Ed Tech”, the field of Educational Technology( Ed Tech) is constantly looking toward the future (Weller, 2020). Ed Tech is defined as the use of technological tools and programs to enhance instruction and learning, such as using the Internet for Online Learning environments (Kohler et al., 2022). It comes with the charismatic goal of globalizing education, which aligns with one of UNESCO’s (n.d) list of human rights, which is “The right to Education,” a fundamental piece in levelling the playing field and fostering sustainable development for both men and women. Ed Tech, coupled with online learning has made great strides in increasing human development, primarily through the introduction of the Internet and the World Wide Web (Weller, 2020). As promising as its future looks, it may be essential to take a bird’s eye view of some of the potential implications of Ed Tech as the years progress. This essay will explore some of the multifaceted dimensions of Ed Tech as I express what I believe the future of Educational Technology will look like in 2030.
In recent times, with the rise of Ed Tech buzz words such as “ Machine Learning” and “Artificial intelligence,” a field that intends to “build intelligent entities,” I have heard others comment that the future looks bleak for educators (Russell & Norvig, 2010). Some claim that educators will no longer be needed as students can just learn from machines. As far-fetched as this may sound, I believe that future 2030 students, particularly those learning online, will have fewer virtual human interactions and more contact with AI.
Since the introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) between 1950- 1956, the multi-faceted field has made great strides. AI is used in an educational context in different forms, such as in post-secondary institutions’ online or blended programs, Teaching Robots, free web-based distance programs called Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and online teaching assistance that help with tasks such as grading short answers and multiple choice questions (2016 Report, n.d.). According to the 2016 Report on “A Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence,” AI allows for bigger classroom sizes of up to ten thousand students or more and allows students to “move through school quickly” as it can increase the pace for fast learners (n.d).
In spite of all these advantages, there are human aspects that are still desired by students and teachers when employing AI in an online learning environment (2016 Report, n.d.). One study in China where students and teachers used an AI learning platform called Smart-Learning Partner (SLP) showed that even though students and teachers both benefited from the use of AI, both groups expressed “the need for social interaction chatting groups,” indicating a need for human interactions (Niu et al., 2022). Employing AI can take away some of the much-needed human interactions that facilitate the social aspects of learning, which were highlighted by Kozma (1994). Maintaining group chats and virtual human meetings with fellow students and teachers on these platforms can help maintain that much-needed human connectivity that is crucial for learning.
As I foresee a growing gap between human educators and students in the online learning environment, I expect a more significant global access gap among various socio-economic groups to an online learning environment. As highlighted in the article by Maughan, there are many factors and barriers that different socioeconomic groups face globally merely based on aspects such as the location where someone is born (2018). One may be born into a more advantaged home with easy access to the latest technologies and opportunities. At the same time, another student may face tremendous obstacles to accessing the same resources, while others never have access to them at all.
Internet access may potentially repeat or even strengthen current patterns of social and economic inequality as developing countries such as Zimbabwe lack essential paraphernalia to execute online education through Ed Tech(Nyathi & Mathwasa, 2022; Van Deursen & Van Dijk, 2014). Populations within low to middle-income countries may lack crucial resources such as computers, electricity, sufficient bandwidth, and computer operational knowledge. In Zimbabwe, less than a third of the population has access to the Internet, and as such, only a tiny percentage is able to access Ed Tech resources and further their education online, with those in rural areas being the most affected (Kemp, 2022). Online learning platforms, especially those created in Zimbabwe, barely cater to learners with diagnosed or undiagnosed disabilities, making it difficult or impossible for them to learn (Nyathi & Mathwasa, 2022).
Rural learners are also faced with challenges of meeting more basic physiological needs in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs that top-tier need attainment is usually secondary (Mcleod, 2023). When food is a basic need, finding a good internet connection becomes less critical. Most learners in rural settings end up remaining below the poverty line or moving to urban cities to access the internet and opportunities, making the digital gap even more significant between the socio-economic groups. There are fewer human resources left in rural settings to help digitally strengthen these areas. Despite the fantasy of the ability of online learning to increase globalization, in actuality, it has the potential to increase the socio-economic divide and digital divide by 2030 unless governments put in measures to reduce this gap. As suggested by Nyathi & Mathwasa (2022), the government of Zimbabwe can implement policies that favour online learning and increase the electrification of rural areas. In alignment with Kozma’s suggestion, online education institutions in Zimbabwe must be regulated, and they must consider the overall impact of the online learning environments that they create to include all learners, particularly those with disabilities (1994).
As bleak as this futuristic assumption may sound, there can be ways to mitigate or lessen the potential adversities looming in EdTech and online learning by bridging the socio-economic gaps and maintaining human interactions in order to preserve a brighter future for all. It takes immediate action by governments and stakeholders to create an inclusive, interactive future for generations to come. As mentioned by the famous French writer Simone de Beauvoir, “Change your life today. Don’t gamble on the future; act now, without delay” (Grimes, 2021).
References
2016 report. (n.d.). One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence (AI100). http://ai100.stanford.edu/2016-report
Grimes, A. (2021, December 7). Act now, without delay. – Adrienne Grimes – Medium. Medium. https://medium.com/@adriennegrimes/act-now-without-delay-e3e8ed471d3d
Kemp, S. (2022, February 16). Digital 2022: Zimbabwe — DataReportal – Global Digital Insights. DataReportal – Global Digital Insights. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-zimbabwe
Kohler, E. A., Elreda, L. M., & Tindle, K. (2022). Teachers’ definitions of successful education technology implementation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(5), 895–916. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2054036
Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning: Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19
Maughan, T. (2018). The future of ed tech is here, it’s just not evenly distributed. Medium. https://medium.com/futures-exchange/the-future-of-ed-tech-is-here-its-just-not-evenly-distributed-210778a423d7
Mcleod, S. (2023). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html
Niu, S. J., Luo, J., Niemi, H., Li, X., & Lu, Y. (2022). Teachers’ and students’ views of using an AI-Aided educational platform for supporting teaching and learning at Chinese schools. Education Sciences, 12(12), 858. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12120858
Nyathi, V. S., & Mathwasa, J. (2022). Educational Preparedness for Virtual Teaching and Learning during COVID-19 Lockdowns: Implication for Policy Innovation. Randwick International of Education and Linguistics Science Journal, 3(2), 210–220. https://doi.org/10.47175/rielsj.v3i2.473
Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial intelligence a modern approach. London.
UNESCO (n.d). Building Peace through Education, Science and Culture, communication and information. https://www.unesco.org/en
Van Deursen, A. J. a. M., & Van Dijk, J. A. (2014). Internet skill levels increase, but gaps widen: a longitudinal cross-sectional analysis (2010–2013) among the Dutch population. Information, Communication & Society, 18(7), 782–797. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2014.994544