Which Ed-Tech Tools Truly Work? New Project Aims to Tell Why No One Seems Eager to Find Out in The Chronicle of Higher Ed on 7/1/2016

The bottom line: Investments in Ed tech are often made without any research or evidence about the efficacy of the product and (perhaps therefore) many ed tech companies don’t see a need to conduct research about their product.

Ed tech developers and investors pay little attention to whether or not their products are effective. They “don’t see a financial payoff in spending their time or their limited financial resources on academic studies” to learn whether or not their products have the effects they claim. If research is done, it may never see the light of day if the ed tech company doesn’t like the results, “Most ed-tech studies that are now undertaken at schools of education tend to be performed as consulting projects, an approach that allows the companies that sponsor them to treat the output as proprietary information that may never get published”

UVA put together the Jefferson Education Accelerator, an ed tech incubator that brings together professors, business leaders, ed administrators, and policy makers. These individuals will spend the next year investigating the “political, financial, and structural barriers that keep companies and their customers from conducting and using efficacy research when creating or buying ed-tech products.”

After looking through the website, the outcome and goals of the Jefferson Education Accelerator project remains unclear. According to the “About Us” page, the Accelerator plans to “establish a network of educators, researchers, entrepreneurs and investors who believe in the potential of education technology, are dedicated to improving educational outcomes, and understand the rigors of testing implementations in the real-world.” How bringing these people together will improve educational outcomes is murky and raises the question: what sort of improved “educational outcomes” are we talking about? If part of the the focus is on developing a network, its important to note that the “Who We Are” section lists a group of ten individuals who range from higher ed administrators, tech investors, CEOs, former governors, and start-up founders and is notably devoid of professors or minorities (7 white men and 3 white women).

While I usually find focuses on efficacy as sign of pervading neoliberalism in higher education (which pertains here, too) it is important to understand what student’s are getting from these ed tech tools. If the tools “personalize” learning using some adaptive software,  does this lead to better student outcomes? More over what is an “improved outcome”?  A better grade? Is that the only measurement of success? Is success the ability to get “the right answer”? The ability to synthesize information? The ability to solve a real-world problem using the knowledge and skills gained in school?

Moreover, since they are the ones using it, how do students feel about the technologies that are supposed to be improving their education? Do they enjoy learning on these platforms? What affordances do student’s perceive in these educational technologies? If we are going to talk about efficacy, its equally important to talk about students’ perceptions and uses of these technologies.