With the rise of digital technology governing our daily lives, new forms of commodification have emerged to shape learning environments. In a past sociology class, I learned that the process of commodification is the creation of market commodities for profit extraction (“Commodification”, 2021). Regarding new educational technologies (EdTech), user data from educational digital platforms have become the most valuable commodity (Selwyn et al., 2019). This commodity is then sold to corporate actors that fuel EdTech algorithms (Selwyn et al., 2019). Moreover, since users of educational platforms create and engage with content, they are both consumers and producers in the process of creating capital. (“Prosumer”, 2021).  In this class, I learned that algorithms utilize students’ data pertaining to their tests scores, keystrokes, and racial groups, which perpetuates a stratified student population (Regan & Jesse, 2019). With racial bias embedded into the EdTech algorithms, is there a way to achieve equity and equality? 

With corporate actors having all the power in the process of E-Learning, the content that gets offered will always be filtered towards their profit interests. This can be connected to digital redlining, which is the process of digital tools, data analytics, and filters to restrict and regulate access to information (Gilliard, 2016). Moreover, the process of constrained learning can be connected to the EdTech trend that emerged in 2004, the learning management system (Weller, 2018) The learning management system is an e-learning technology that provided a collection of tools such as a content management system and centered web pages for institutions (Weller, 2018). However, we can see that the management system has been created with the capitalists’ interest in mind.

Inequalities in the education system is not a new phenomenon, and it stems from systemic racism. Racism is systemic since inequalities in economic, political, and social resources among various racial groups are directly linked to the laws, rules, and norms of our social system (“Institutional Racism”, 2021). The norms in our social system is based on racialized assumption that youth of colour are deviant, constraining educational opportunities (“School-to-Prison Pipeline”,2021). This can be highlighted through the school to prison pipeline concept, which has been used to describe the one-way path that youth of colour are guided towards, as a result of “zero tolerance policies” and police presence at schools (“School-to-Prison Pipeline”, 2021). When Black youth are stripped away from opportunities in education, they are the last ones who benefit from digital education. Selwyn et.al. (2019) solidify this line of thought by highlighting that digital education is most likely to benefit those who are well-funded and have strong backgrounds in education. 

According to the definition of open learning, educational resources should be available and acceptable to all (“Open Learning,” 2021). The definition of open learning is not congruent with the realities of our capitalistic and racialized society which increases student stratification. I have shown that the main factor of inequity in open education is systemic racism. In an open learning context, will eliminating systemic racism establish equity and equality? 

Photocreds:https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/o3ivsg/equality_equity_and_justice_explained_better/

References

Commodification. (2021, November 23). in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commodification&oldid=1056806464

Gilliard, C. (2016). Digital Redlining, Access, and Privacy. [Weblog]. Retrieved from https://www.commonsense.org/education/articles/digital-redlining-access-and-privacy

Institutional Racism. (2021, December 3). in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Institutional_racism&oldid=1058447238

Open Learning (2021, September 27). in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Open_learning&oldid=1046723524

Prosumer. (2021, November 19). in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prosumer&oldid=1056085011

Regan, P. & Jesse, J. (2019). Ethical Challenges of Edtech, Big Data and Personalized Learning: Twenty-First Century Student Sorting and Tracking. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 167-179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9492-2

School-to-Prison Pipeline. (2021, November 6). in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=School-to-prison_pipeline&oldid=1053893197

Selwyn, N., Hillman, T., Eynon, R., Ferreira, G., Knox, J., Macgilchrist, F., & Sancho-Gil, J. M. (2019). What’s Next for Ed-Tech? Critical Hopes and Concerns for the 2020s. Learning, Media and Technology, 1–6. https://edtechuvic.ca/edci339/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2020/03/What-s-next-for-Ed-Tech-Critical-hopes-and-concerns-for-the-2020s.pdf

Weller, M. (2018, August). Twenty Years of Edtech. EDUCAUSE Review, 53(4). Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/7/twenty-years-of-edtech