Author: maddylindberg

Video Summary

Neil Selwn, an expert in digital technology, education and society, critiques the complexity of edtech and its growing popularity. He challenges the belief that technology will automatically solve all educational problems and highlights the overlooked socio-technical issues. Neil stresses the importance of considering the wider environmental and ethical implications of edtech, urging stakeholders to adopt a reflective and critical approach.

He points out that digital technologies are costly and consume vast amounts of energy and resources. We are in a world of abundance and excessive edtech use. Neil raises concerns about the growing e-waste problem and the need for sustainable alternatives in the design and implementation of edtech solutions. He advocates for a shift towards clean, green edtech that prioritizes eco-friendly practices.

Neil emphasizes the importance of collective responsibility in addressing environmental challenges rather than placing the burden solely on individuals. He explores the potential of low-tech, land-based, and Indigenous perspectives in shaping the future of edtech, favoring simplicity and sustainability.

Overall, Neil Selwyn’s discussion encourages a more critical and responsible stance towards edtech. Neil wants educators, policymakers, and technology developers to consider the ecological and ethical implications of their choices. His goal is to foster a cleaner, more equitable future in the realm of education technology by initiating open conversations and informed decision-making.

The Impact of Digital Technologies

Digital technologies, including digital education, have both positive and negative impacts on climate change. The positive impacts include reducing physical resources and enhancing climate awareness. Through utilizing online resources, the need for paper and pens diminishes significantly. Additionally, digital platforms facilitate remote work and minimize travel, consequently reducing carbon emissions. This extends across online courses and meetings. An added benefit of digital technologies is the ease with which anyone with internet access can access climate change information, fostering public awareness that prompts individuals to reflect on their practices and corporations’ conduct. However, little attention is given to the environmental consequences of increased digitalization.

The production and use of digital devices, data centers, and other digital infrastructure require significant amounts of energy, often sourced from fossil fuels, giving rise to greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, the rapid obsolescence of electronic devices contributes to the growing problem of electronic waste, further adding to the environmental burden.

Educational institutions are unequivocally responsible for assessing their environmental footprint. Numerous measures can be adopted to minimize this impact. Examples include adopting eco-friendly procurement practices and eliminating superfluous online tasks. Neil mentioned in the seminar that his elementary school son has numerous online assignments. His statement prompted my reflection on the abundance of online tools used in elementary schools. I believe that reducing technology usage at the elementary level could be relatively easier than other ages, offering various alternative physical activities for classes. Regardless of age, educational institutions can advocate sustainability and educate students and staff about the consequences of electronic waste.

Reflection

I chose this activity to gain insight into the negative impacts of educational technology. Though I was already familiar with its advantages, I wanted to learn the downsides of growing edtech so that I can make more informed judgments when evaluating the suitability of an online activity.

I joined the MOOC titled “Crypto and Cryptocurrencies” offered by Princeton University on Coursera. This topic is organized into 11 weeks with lecture videos, quiz questions and assignments. This is a familiar structure that I have seen in other in-person and online classes that I have taken. The lecture videos contain various professors talking beside PowerPoint presentations, making its approach similar to those of ‘traditional’ courses. Each video is between 5-30 min long and is followed by a one-question quiz which I had the option to skip. All quizzes and assignments are participatory because this is a free course that does not offer a certificate per Princeton University policy. There are 3 major programming assignments each weighing 33.33% of your course grade. You must receive a minimum of 60% in order to pass the assignments. Assignments are deemed mandatory but can be treated as participatory because again, there is no certificate. The major difference in this course in comparison to other courses that I have done is the lack of peer connection. This course is entirely asynchronous and self-directed, which means that it would best suit individuals with self-discipline and perseverance. The information shared throughout the course is highly valuable. Furthermore, this MOOC would be considered an xMOOC because all of the course materials are posted online in a structured setting. The course’s pedagogy followed a cognitive-behaviourist approach, with the belief that students would learn directly from their instructors.

Through this assignment, I achieved my learning goals, as it introduced me to the world of MOOCs and their accessibility. I was pleasantly surprised at the ease of registration and navigation, and the vast array of free courses available to anyone with internet access. Discovering MOOCs has opened up a wealth of opportunities for me to expand my knowledge and skills in diverse areas.