2,611
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

In/equalities in digital education policy – sociotechnical imaginaries from three world regions

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, & show all
Pages 122-132 | Received 18 Nov 2022, Accepted 13 May 2023, Published online: 01 Aug 2023

References

  • Akkari, A., and T. Lauwerier. 2015. “The Education Policies of International Organizations: Specific Differences and Convergences.” Prospects 45: 141–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-014-9332-z.
  • Appadurai, A. 2013. The Future as Cultural Fact. Essays on the Global Condition. London and New York: Verso Books.
  • Bacchi, C. 2009. Analysing Policy: What's the Problem Represented to be?. Australia: Pearson.
  • Bacchi, C. 2012a. “Introducing the ‘What’s the Problem Represented to be?’ Approach.” In Engaging with Carol Bacchi. Strategic Interventions and Exchanges, edited by Angelique Bletsas, and Chris Beasley, 21–24. University of Adelaide Press.
  • Bacchi, C. 2012b. “Why Study Problematizations? Making Politics Visible.” Open Journal of Political Science 2 (1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2012.21001.
  • Ball, S. 1993. “What is Policy? Texts, Trajectories and Toolboxes.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 13 (2): 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0159630930130203.
  • Benítez Larghi, S., M. Lemus, and N. Welschinger Lascano. 2014. “La inclusión masiva de tecnologías digitales en el ámbito escolar. Un estudio comparativo de la apropiación de TIC por estudiantes de clases populares y clases medias en el marco del Programa Conectar Igualdad en el Gran La Plata.” Propuesta Educativa (42): 86–92.
  • Chan, Anita Say. 2014. Networking Peripheries: Technological Futures and the Myth of Digital Universalism. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Cuban, L. 2001. Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom. Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvk12qnw.
  • During, S. 2020. “The Global South and Internationalism: The Geographies of Post-Subjectivity.” Postcolonial Studies 23 (4): 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2020.1745995.
  • Dussel, I. 2014. “Programas educativos de inclusión digital. Una reflexión desde la Teoría del Actor en Red sobre la experiencia de Conectar Igualdad (Argentina).” Estudios de Comunicación y Política (34): 39–56. http://version.xoc.uam.mx.
  • Dussel, I. 2020. “Educational Technology as School Reform: Using Actor-Network Theory to Understand Recent Latin American Educational Policies.” In Handbook of Education Policy Studies, edited by G. Fan, and T. S. Popkewitz, 35–53. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8343-4_2.
  • Dussel, I., P. Ferrante, and J. Sefton-Green. 2013. “Changing Narratives of Change: (Un)intended Consequences of Educational Technology Reform in Argentina.” In The Politics of Education and Technology Conflicts, Controversies, and Connections, edited by Neil Selwyn, and Keri Facer, 127–145. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137031983_7.
  • Dussel, I., and F. Williams. 2023. “Los imaginarios sociotécnicos de la política educativa digital en México (2012-2022).” Profesorado, Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado 27 (1): 39–60. https://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.v27i1.26247.
  • Galison, P. 2016. “Limits of Localism: The Scale of Sight.” In What Reason Promises. Essays on Reason, Nature, and History, edited by Wendy Doniger, Peter Galison, and Susan Neiman, 155–170. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • García Canclini, N. 2018. Ciudadanos reemplazados por algoritmos. CALAS. http://www.calas.lat/sites/default/files/garcia_canclini.ciudadanos_reemplazados_por_algoritmos.pdf.
  • Hargittai, E., ed. 2021. Handbook of Digital Inequality. Cheltenham (UK) and Northhampton (US): Elgar Handbooks on Inequality.
  • Hargittai, Eszter, and Yuli Patrick Hsieh. 2013. “Digital Inequality.” In The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies, edited by William H. Dutton; online edn, 129–150. Cheltenham (UK) and Northhampton (US): Oxford Academic, Accessed 30 March 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199589074.013.0007.
  • Helsper, E. 2021. The Digital Disconnect. The Social Causes and Consequences of Digital Inequalities. London: Sage Publications.
  • Higginson, J., J. McLeod, and F. Rizvi. 2019. “Globally Mobile Middle-Class Lives in Government Secondary Schools.” Discourse-Studies in The Cultural Politics of Education 40 (5): 633–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2019.1573887.
  • Hof, B., and R. Bürgi. 2021. “The OECD as an Arena for Debate on the Future Uses of Computers in Schools, Globalisation, Societies and Education.” https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2021.1878015.
  • Jasanoff, S., and S.-H. Kim. 2015. Dreamscapes of Modernity. Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
  • Kuhn, C., S. M. Khoo, L. Czerniewicz, et al. 2023. “Understanding Digital Inequality: A Theoretical Kaleidoscope.” Postdigital Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-023-00395-8.
  • Macgilchrist, F. 2021. “Theories of Postdigital Heterogeneity: Implications for Research on Education and Datafication.” Postdigital Science and Education 3 (3): 660–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00232-w.
  • Macgilchrist, F., J. Potter, and B. Williamson. 2021. “Shifting Scales Ofresearch on Learning, Media and Technology, Learning.” Media and Technology 46 (4): 369–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1994418.
  • Meinck, S., J. Fraillon, and R. Strietholt. 2022. “The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Education: International Evidence from the Responses to Educational Disruption Survey (REDS).” UNESCO and IEA. Available at https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380398.
  • Morozov, E. 2014. To Save Everything, Click Here. The Folly of Technological Solutionism. PublicAffairs.
  • Ong, A., and S. Collier. 2005. “Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems.” https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470696569.
  • Rafalow, M. 2020. How Schools Create Inequality in the Tech Era. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
  • Ragnedda, M. 2020. Enhancing Digital Equity. Connecting the Digital Underclass. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49079-9.
  • Rahm, L. 2018. “The Ironies of Digital Citizenship: Educational Imaginaries and Digital Losers AcrossThree Decades.” Digital Culture & Society 4 (2): 39–61. https://doi.org/10.14361/dcs-2018-0204.
  • Rahm, L. 2023. “Educational Imaginaries: Governance at the Intersection of Technology and Education.” Journal of Education Policy 38 (1): 46–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2021.1970233.
  • Rufer, M. 2010. “La temporalidad como política. Nación, formas de pasado y perspectivas poscoloniales.” Memoria y Sociedad 14 (28): 11–31.
  • Selwyn, N. 2021. “Ed-Tech Within Limits: Anticipating Educational Technology in Times of Environmental Crisis.” E-Learning and Digital Media 18 (5): 496–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530211022951.
  • Selwyn, N., and K. Facer. 2013. The Politics of Education and Technology Conflicts, Controversies, and Connections. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Sismondo, S. 2020. “Sociotechnical Imaginaries: An Accidental Themed Issue.” Social Studies of Science 50 (4): 505–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312720944753.
  • Strathern, M. 1996. “Cutting the Network.” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2 (3): 517–535. https://doi.org/10.2307/3034901.
  • Sturken, M., D. Thomas, and S. J. Ball Rokeach. 2004. Technological Visions: The Hopes and Fears That Shape New Technologies. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
  • Tedesco, J. C. 1991. “Estrategias de Desarrollo y Educación: el desafío de la gestión pública.” In Proyecto principal de Educación en América Latina y el Caribe. UNESCO OREALC. Boletín 25. Santiago, Chile.
  • Therborn, G. 2013. The Killing Fields of Inequality. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Tsing, A. L. 2005. Friction. An Ethnography of Global Connection. New Jersey and Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press.
  • Wakunuma, K. 2019. “Power as an Ethical Concern in the Global South’s Digital Transformation.” Journal on Technology Assessment in Theory and Practice (TATuP) 28 (2): 29–34.