Image created using: AI Image Generator (free, no sign-up, unlimited)
While the world is currently experiencing immense technological, economic, political, and environmental change, I remain cautiously optimistic about the future. As I continue to work through the course readings, I keep returning to the question, “What happens to the learner?” Closely connected to that question is, “What happens to the educator?” While technology and AI will undoubtedly continue to transform education, the human need for connection suggests that relationships, mentorship, and community will remain central to meaningful learning experiences.
My emerging vision of education in 2035 aligns with Veletsianos et al.’s (2024) call for educational technology scholarship that is “imaginative,” hopeful, and centered on justice-oriented perspectives. Rather than viewing technology as something that will replace educators, I see it as a tool that can expand opportunities for learning while also introducing new challenges that require thoughtful educational design and strong digital literacy skills.
More specifically, middle school learners in 2035 will likely live in a world where technology is embedded in work, communication, and daily life. However, as Selwyn (2021) argues, educational technology should be valued not for efficiency alone but for its ability to genuinely support learning in ways that would otherwise not be possible. This perspective has shifted my thinking toward a future where successful educational technology is not defined by how much of it we use, but by how effectively it supports inclusion, accessibility, equity, and meaningful human learning.
Footnote: Copilot was used to refine the language in the final draft. All concepts and ideas are my own.
References:
Selwyn, N. (2021). Ed-tech within limits: Anticipating educational technology in times of environmental crisis. E-Learning and Digital Media, 18(5), 496-510. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530211022951
Veletsianos, G., Houlden, S., Ross, J., Sakinah, A., & Dickson-Deane, C. (2024). Higher education futures at the intersection of justice, hope, and educational technology. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00475-0
Selwyn et al. (2020) paint, for me, a creepy and sad futuristic picture of a system of strain and drain of creative freedoms in which both educator and learners are all disconnect from each other. By the end of the 3rd vignette Laura and her students including Manus, Soraya, Isabelle, and Lin come alive as they connect and discuss Lord of the Flies with each other. It’s so ironic that William Golding’s (1954) themes of order, authority, and social breakdown mirror the vignette’s tightly controlled school. Your question is a good question, what DOES happen to the learner in 2035? And the answer you provide at the end: supportive, inclusive, accessible, equitable, and full of meaning…is full of hope.
Reference
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 Technology, 45(1), 90-106.
Hi Jenn,
Your question “what happens to the learner?” really stayed with me. As a nurse who taught patients face-to-face for many years, I agree that relationships and trust are what make learning stick. Technology can share information, but it can’t always tell whether someone truly understands.
Your focus on middle schoolers also caught my attention, since my son is right around that age. He’s the dinosaur expert I wrote about in my blog post, and I worry about learners like him being measured by tools rather than known by the people teaching them.
I liked that you brought in Selwyn (2021). His idea of pairing ed-tech back to what’s truly ‘non-negotiable’ fits so well with your focus on connection. If middle schools in 2035 had to choose only a few essential uses of technology, which ones do you think would make the cut?