Technical agonism: embracing democratic dissensus in the datafication of education

ABSTRACT

This paper interrogates whether technical democracy is well-suited to contend with possible technical controversies, including the increasing prevalence of EdTech in public schooling. Drawing across Habermasian ‘deliberative democracy’ that seeks consensus-derived resolution, as well as more agonistic approaches that embrace conflict as the means for pursuing pluralistic values, we use this paper to problematise technical democracy for its potential to produce agonistic and pluralistic im/possibilities. Drawing on case studies developed from our previous research into digital platforms and infrastructures, we consider what an alternative to technical democracy might offer towards realising democratic ideals through what we call technical agonism. Using these thinking tools, we argue that a move towards technical agonism would centre dissension and scepticism as fundamental features of liberal democratic institutions, while also providing opportunities for schooling to be reimagined in ways that are more democratic and ethical.

KEYWORDS:

• Technical democracy
• EdTech
• technical agonism
• datafication
• T-TESS

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Callon, Lascoumes, and Barthe (2009) are critical of some features of Habermasian and Rawlesian models of deliberative democracy, though the foundational premise and goals of technical democracy, in our view, still align most consistently with the work of these thinkers.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [grant no DE190101140]: Jessica Holloway. This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [grant no DE190101141]: Steven Lewis.