The Four EdTech Fallacies: Debunking Myths in Educational Technology
By Stella Lee
Educational Technology (EdTech) has promised a revolution in the L&D landscape – improved user engagement, elevated job performance, and an overall enhancement in learning. But how often do these promises materialize? By examining the frequent assumptions associated with EdTech, we can separate the myths from reality and gain a more nuanced understanding of its potential and limitations.
1. Engagement Fallacy: If You Build It, They Will Come (Or Will They?)
One of the most celebrated promises of EdTech is its potential to engage learners. However, having an EdTech solution in place does not automatically mean learner engagement. A shiny new platform or a feature-rich application may look appealing, but without a coherent strategy that addresses learners' needs, preferences, and context, it can remain grossly underutilized. There are many instances of organizations adopting a new, state-of-the-art Learning Management System (LMS) with a plethora of functions, with the assumption that the advanced interface, gamified features, and snazzy dashboards would naturally draw learners in. However, very little thought had gone into creating content strategy, to tailor content according to the right knowledge level of, and usefulness for, the learners, and to provide orientation and ongoing support in interacting with the system.
The age-old saying of “If you build it, they will come” is flawed in this context. True engagement stems from the intersection of compelling content, thoughtful instructional design, positive user experience, and genuine learning needs.
2. Productivity Fallacy: EdTech as the Ultimate Performance Booster
Many view EdTech as a magic bullet that automatically increases productivity, especially with tools that promise performance support and performance improvement. While it's true that the right tools can provide tremendous support, technology, in isolation, cannot solve intrinsic problems like lack of motivation, inadequate training, cultural issues, or systemic organizational challenges. For example, using a chatbot to provide on-the-spot information to boost sales training might sound promising, but in order for the chatbot to be useful, there needs a process in which experienced sales professionals within the organization train the chatbot with relevant scenarios and proven sales techniques.
Simply integrating an EdTech tool into the workflow does not translate to improved performance. It is more likely to be successful when technology is combined with a thorough understanding of the learning and performance process, complemented by continuous feedback and improvement.
3. Cost Saving Fallacy: The Hidden Expenses of EdTech
Investments in EdTech can be substantial. Stakeholders may be lured by the promise of long-term cost savings or increased efficiency, but these benefits are not guaranteed or meaningful. When technology is not aligned with actual learning needs, the spending can end up diverting crucial resources away from more impactful initiatives.
In fact, a misaligned EdTech purchase can do more harm than good, wasting budget, staff time, and other resources that could have been channeled into meeting the real needs of the learners. Before you procure an EdTech product, make sure you conduct your organization’s learning needs analysis, research the EdTech product marketplace, and factor in all the costs (including opportunity costs) associated with EdTech implementation such as data migration, staff training, and technical support.
4. Disruption Fallacy: Technology as the Panacea
The term 'disruption' has been used so frequently in the context of technology that it's easy to assume that any tech intervention is inherently superior. However, this is a misleading notion. Just because a solution is tech-driven doesn't mean it is automatically the best option. In fact, there are many instances in which EdTech products fail to show impact on learning, or that they lack evidence about how the product actually improves learning effectiveness. For example, many companies are drawn to the excitement of Virtual Reality (VR) for training while ignoring the limitation of the hardware such as how cumbersome it is to wear a headset comfortably, and many people experience disorientation and nausea. Sometimes, a simple explainer video or text-based discussion can be more effective than spending time in an immersive environment, not to mention that VR content is pricey to develop and maintain. Just because VR was a 'disruptive' technology didn't mean it was the best choice for every subject and skill. The trick is to find the right balance, integrating technology where it truly adds value and not merely for the sake of being 'modern' or 'innovative.'
Conclusion
EdTech holds immense promise, but it's essential to approach it with a clear-eyed perspective. By recognizing and questioning these fallacies, L&D professionals, executives, and learners can make informed decisions, ensuring that technology serves as a genuine enhancer for learning and performance support, rather than an expensive distraction.