Conference Agenda

This paper will examine the discourses of Information and Communication Technology-based educational technologies (henceforth referred to as EdTech) in contemporary Indian and Chinese policyscape and how ambitious narratives of future are built on the backbone of EdTech-based educational reforms. The paper will be a conceptual analysis conducted using Jasanoff’s concept of sociotechnical imaginaries and Bacchi’s WPR approach.

Background

From being another tool in the pedagogue’s arsenal to a revolutionary force which could cure ills endemic to educational systems, educational policies in many nation-states now routinely deem EdTech as the driver of socioeconomic transformation and global domination. It has simultaneously generated and has been accompanied by a rich discourse on knowledge economy/information society and an ever increasingly hyperconnected world shaped by supranational policy advocacy organisations, mega tech corporations, and philanthrocapitalists.

These globally circulating ideas become sedimented in different national contexts in the form of what Jasanoff and Kim term as sociotechnical imaginaries, i.e., “collectively imagined forms of social life and social order reflected in the design and fulfilment of nation-specific scientific and/or technological projects.” Such visions, and the policies built upon them, have the power to influence technological design, channel public expenditures, and justify the inclusion or exclusion of citizens with respect to the benefits of technological progress.

It is interesting to note that states with vastly different political and social systems can have very similar sociotechnical imaginaries and the projected ideal futures–which is to say, that these states may assign similar roles or weightages to edtech in order to realise futures with common characteristics such as global domination, economic prosperity, national strength, and a stable society. Recent educational policy developments in China and India are a very good example.

As two nations gaining independence from hostile rule at roughly the same time, China and India have evolved with very different political and economic systems, social organisation, and foreign engagement. Both have struggled through geopolitical instability, economic sanctions, and social unrest to become among the largest economies in the world. As the centennial anniversary of both nations’ independence (China in 2049, India in 2047) draws closer, it is natural that they have lofty ambition of becoming global powers. In 2012, Xi Jinping set the goal for China in 2049 to become "strong, democratic, civilised, harmonious, and modern socialist country." More recently in August 2022, Narendra Modi announced the goal of India as a developed country in 2047 along with “removing traces of colonial mindset, unity and a sense of duty among the citizens.”

Central to the realisation of these goals is reform and development of education, and recently, EdTech. The linking of use of EdTech with the overarching goal of national development can be investigated with the concept of sociotechnical imaginaries. Policies on education and/or EdTech thus provide unique sites for exploring the role of political culture and practices in stabilising particular imaginaries, as well as the resources that must be mobilised to represent technological trajectories as being in the “national interest.” Bacchi’s concept of problematisation can help us examine the specific manner in which the ‘problem’ of rural education is defined and how EdTech is proposed as the solution.

Research question

How is rural education problematised in contemporary Indian and Chinese policy discourses on EdTech?

Digital transformation in education became a topic which a great deal of reflection due to experiences in COVID-19 related school closures. The sudden change to online education prompted a number of research in different national education systems (Russia: Koroleva, Naushirvanov, 2021; Hungary: Czirfusz et al, 2020; Horváth et al, 2021). Previous research focused on teachers’ digital competence, technology readiness, technology acceptance or generally on the processes of the emergence and diffusion of digital educational innovations (Badri et al, 2014; El Alfy et al, 2017; Halász, 2018; Horváth, 2017; Horváth et al, 2020).

Despite the global trend and the commonality of the digitalization task, the applied policies of different countries are an excellent example of the diversity of strategies for the transformation of national educational systems. This diversity is possible also because of the specific cultural context (Voogt J. et al., 2017; Klievink B. et al., 2017). Cultural and state-level characteristics determine readiness to embrace and integrate modern technologies, as well as set the direction of the modernization process in education. Digital technologies in turn lead to changes in the culture of communication, policy implementation, and daily routine practices (Selwyn, 2012). Investigation of the impact cultural patterns have on digitalization of education, and how new technologies change cultural attitudes and practices in different countries can be seen as one of the explanatory models.

Few studies take into consideration the cultural patterns that could influence successful digital transformation in education systems. The main aim of our paper is to provide a comparative perspective by examining factors related to successful digital transformation in Russian and Hungarian education systems. By conducting a joint study on teachers’ technology readiness, attitudes towards educational technologies and cultural values in both countries we provide a deeper understanding of the underlying cultural patterns that could influence processes of digital transformation.

Digital transformation of the educational systems and implementation of digital technologies in the educational process can be still considered as an innovation for many teachers. Taking into account the socio-cultural specifics of these processes, on the one hand, expands the understanding of individual factors stimulating or blocking the course of transformation for each teacher individually. In order to facilitate transformational processes here we can talk about targeted support strategies for teachers with different attitude profiles regarding the use of technology. On the other hand, differences or similarities among socio-cultural patterns at the country level can form the basis that may inform national and supranational digitalization strategies. Here the discussion on possibilities for globalized solutions in the diverse cultural contexts of Europe.

A comparative perspective of two countries (Russia and Hungary) allows a deeper understanding of digitalisation processes as well as identifying the universal and specific relationships between individual and organizational level factors. Those two cases can be seen as two different frames with which it is convenient to compare. The selection of specific cultural characteristics from a known model (Hofstede’s cultural dimensions model) as well as individual characteristics measured by known instruments (Technology readiness index, Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology) makes it possible to define an approach that is easily replicable in other countries.