The COVID-19 pandemic led to a serious and unprecedented disruption in education. It was marked by large-scale school closures and an abrupt shift towards online modes of teaching and learning. While educational technology was already being adopted by several national systems at various levels, the pandemic led to an accelerated and uninhibited use of technology-based solutions to ensure educational continuity. Japan is an interesting case study in this regard. Since the 1970s, Japan's education had been based on Piaget's theory of learning and gave priority to the child's spontaneous actions and everyday experiences (Takizawa, 1996). Centred on the relationship between the child and its environment, the adoption of digital technologies in Japan's schools was minimal before the pandemic (MEXT, 2011). Joshi, Pan, Murakami, and Narayanan (2010) establish in their research that most educators in Japan were sceptical of the use of computers for teaching-learning, especially in early childhood classrooms. Even in the early months of the pandemic, the focus was on reopening schools rather than providing live online classes, something Vickers attributes to the emphasis accorded to group socialisation in Japanese public education (Vickers, 2020). Yet, as a result of the pandemic, Ed-tech has made inroads in Japan, too. The accelerated implementation of the Japanese government's Global and Innovation Gateway for All (GIGA) program has resulted in an increased deployment of online learning tools in Japan's classrooms, although so far their uptake remains patchy and selective; Japanese teachers apparently remain somewhat wary of the digital tools now available to them.
Beyond Japan, use of digital technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in education systems around the world, a phenomenon whose repercussions require urgent investigation. An ed-tech tragedy? and COVID-19 and education in India present exhaustive and much-needed investigations into the widespread use of educational technologies during the pandemic and its consequences. They alert readers against an uncritical adoption of tech-based approaches to learning and emphasise the humane dimension of education. An ed-tech tragedy? presents the meticulous research conducted by Mark West and his team on the unhindered adoption of technology for educational use in the face of school closures. Against the euphoria around digital technology and its promising future in education, West portrays a more sombre picture, describing deepening inequalities, adverse effects on students' physical and mental health, deterioration of educational experiences, and commercialisation and privatisation in education. Similar to West's caution against digital technology, COVID-19 and Education in India, edited by Satvinderpal Kaur and Pradeep Kumar Choudhury, focuses on the Indian educational landscape to analyse the massive digital divide in the face of online education. The book adopts a critical perspective towards the strategies and measures used during the pandemic that sharpened the existing socio-economic inequalities and catalysed the already existing neo-liberal forces in educational spaces.
Apple (1991) drew a connection between school curriculum, corporate interests and the use of technology in education. He predicted that a reliance on packaged software would lead to deskilling and depowering of teachers and turn school into a “lucrative market” for mass-produced commodities (p.50). Almost three decades later, his scepticism stands relevant. His arguments are echoed in the two publications as the researchers put forth a critical reflection on the educational decisions made during the pandemic and pursue an in-depth evaluation of the prospects of widespread use of ed-tech. By unravelling the gap between the heightened expectations from digitalised education and its deficiency in delivering on those promises, they emphasise the idea of education as a public good with an indispensable human dimension.
Promises vs reality
The promises of ed-tech and digital futures have generated more enthusiasm than critical reflection. An Ed-tech Tragedy? marks a refreshing break in the celebratory attitude towards technology-driven education. West unpacks the term “ed-tech” at the outset to contend that the term prioritises technology over education and wrongly assumes that technology can successfully provide education. He addresses a significant research gap by critically analysing the use of ed-tech and exposing the tragic reality of large-scale ed-tech deployment during the pandemic.
The publication is an outcome of the relentless efforts of West and his team of 20 researchers from UNESCO spanning almost three years. It challenges the euphoria around ed-tech and scrutinises its use during the pandemic based on newspaper articles, government reports, publications by international organisations, scholarly research and qualitative observations of multiple media sources to bring in the lived experiences. The theatrical organisation of the publication divides it into three acts, making the 600-plus-page document approachable for the reader. Act 1 focuses on the question of why different countries adopted technology as their primary approach; Act 2 delves into what did and did not happen with the switch to remote learning; and the final Act discusses the possibilities of a balanced use of technology in education while retaining its human character. This division lends clarity to the publication while opening space for a broad range of issues to be discussed.
“Technology solutionism” had been around for a long time, promising to overcome the flaws of schooling and offering “fast, here-and-now fixes to vexing problems that plagued many schools and school systems” (p. 47). Based on a comprehensive theoretical review, West points towards the presence of enthusiasm around technology and personalised learning through computer-based programmes long before the pandemic. By opting for a historical lens to understand the excitement around technology as a viable investment, West offers a noteworthy analysis to explain the world-wide switchover to technology as the first step amidst school closures.
The publication offers crucial insights into the combination of forces and interest groups that have propelled digital “solutions” to the centre of educational experiences. Rather than viewing ed-tech in isolation, it unpacks the interplay of power in the accelerated use of technology in education and its physical, psychological, socio-economic, political and educational ramifications. West argues that ed-tech was not a mere short-term mitigation strategy adopted during the pandemic. On the contrary, the pandemic was the long-awaited moment that provided an opportunity for the digital overhaul of education and a move towards a desirable tech-based future. However, technology-centric education did not live up to the high expectations.
Countering the lofty promises, West uses a series of scholarly research and media testimonies to underline the reality of ed-tech as grim and devastating for most. Act 2 is the focal point of the conceptual framing of the publication. The “tragedy” is analysed in minute detail to disperse the mist of optimism around ed-tech. West's analysis is reminiscent of Postman's (1998) claim of technological change as a “Faustian bargain” in which “technology giveth and technology taketh away.” West describes several fronts where technology has taken away, such as widening inequalities, disengagement of learners, impoverishing education, tolls on mental and physical health, environmental devastation, commercialisation of education, and increased surveillance and control. He extends the implications of ed-tech beyond issues of access and widening existing socio-economic divisions by delving deeper into pedagogical, curricular and political ramifications. He centre-stages the lesser discussed dimensions of digitalisation such as homogenisation and automation of educational experiences, use of behaviourist pedagogies and loss of pedagogical choices for teachers. West, furthermore, decodes the alliance between business interests and tech-mediated education that turns education into a commercial good. These concerns are reverberated in Gupta's (2025) auto-ethnographic research that unpacks the pedagogical use of digital technologies for reinforcing behaviourist tendencies in the classroom and granting an easy entry point to ideological forces.
The consequences analysed by West evoke doubts about projecting ed-tech as a beacon of hope that would purge education of its existing problems. He uncovers the ugly face of digitalising education that is dehumanising, disempowering and devastating. In the last Act, West underlines the need for social and human transformations to strengthen education and advocates careful and moderate deployment of technology that serves the best interests of teachers and students rather than corporate groups. He brings back the centrality of teachers to educational discourses who have been marginalised by tech-based changes, and sternly defends their autonomy and professional identity. He dismisses online learning platforms as “de-territorialized and placeless” that detaches learning from territory, people, knowledge and culture (p.490). Against the threats posed by the digital present and future, West asserts holistic, in-person learning and preservation of educational diversity as the basis of humanising education. The publication critically examines ed-tech as the primary interface of education and opens a spectrum of possibilities for contextualised research and country-specific analysis.
Deepening inequalities in India
COVID-19 and education in India, edited by Satvinder Kaur and Pradeep Kumar Choudhury, is a compilation of research articles that build on West's critique of “technological solutionism” and focus on the consequences of online pedagogy in the Indian context. In the foreword, Kumar writes that, after the pandemic, “the entire system chose to consign the experience of sickness and fear to oblivion” (p. xvii). This publication is important for its reflection on the memories and experiences of the pandemic before moving on to educational planning for the future. The systemic weaknesses that surfaced prominently during the pandemic are discussed across three parts constituting nine chapters focusing on unequal access, exclusionary tendencies of technology-based education and the pursuit of a neo-liberal agenda during the pandemic. The arguments put forth in the book resonate with Vickers' (2020) assertion that the pandemic exposed the existing social fragmentation in education and the increased use of ICT during prolonged school closures had severe consequences for the poor, rural and migrant communities, especially girls and women.
The diverse regional focus of the constituent chapters and the wide range of issues discussed lend geographical and thematic breadth to the volume. In the first chapter, Sinha highlights a worrisome increase in child marriages during school closures in the state of Telangana. The disturbing effects of the pandemic on education are described extensively in chapter five with a particular focus on the northern Indian state of Punjab. Kaur presents a survey of socially and economically disadvantaged children from the state and argues that most of them did not have access to devices to access online education. The thread of digital learning induced exclusion continues in chapter 8. Kaur and Dutt's study with children living in the slums of Chandigarh reproduces testimonies of children who struggled to access learning. They present a heart-wrenching account of the impact on girls who endured “the dual burdens of domestic violence and labour” (p.169). The last chapter on school-going children in rural areas of north-western Indian states by Gill, Narwana and Singh argues that, in addition to the digital divide, the pandemic led to commodification of education evident from the increase in the incidence of private tuition.
The publication also raises pertinent epistemological questions around tech-driven education. In addition to widening gaps and alienating disadvantaged children from learning, technology has consequences for knowledge production as well as its transmission. Sharma, Sharma and Mir put forth a philosophical analysis to argue that computerized learning affects what qualifies as “legitimate knowledge” (p. 105). Computerised learning can turn into an instrument of control that commodifies knowledge and transforms learning environments into a transaction between producer and consumer. Ed-tech companies, driven by their profit interests, cashed in on this opportunity and facilitated the neo-liberal trends in education. These arguments resonate with West's analysis describing increased surveillance and control through data collected by ed-tech companies during the pandemic and the increasingly tightening grip of technology corporations over educational spaces.
The medium and the message
According to Kumar (2022), any technological change affects and shapes social, economic and political relations. The two publications reviewed in this article deconstruct technology in education, not in silos, but as embedded in a specific socio-economic and political context. By drawing connections between neo-liberal forces and the widespread push for ed-tech, West pushes the readers to re-examine their faith in digital technologies. Following his research, the volume by Kaur and Choudhury examines the deployment of ed-tech in India. Both publications are meaningful contributions that critically analyse the over-reliance on technology amidst the messy politics of education. They open possibilities for research in educational contexts where technology has made inroads, as in the case of Japan.
The reflections and arguments put forth in the publications are relevant beyond the timeframe of the pandemic. They stress on the social and humane elements of education which, in recent times, have been overcome by the shiny allure of ed-tech. Placing technology under a critical lens, they are a welcome beginning to question the hopes of salvation through digital solutions. McLuhan (2006) contended that “the medium is the message” and the message of any medium “is the change of scale or pace or pattern that it introduces into human affairs” (p. 108). The two publications offer newer pathways for research by examining technology as a medium whose message goes beyond its content and reshapes work, social relations and education.
