Reconfiguring Teaching Practice in Online Contexts: A Sociotechnical and Interpretivist Analysis of EdTech

 

Abstract

The normalisation of online teaching has prompted renewed attention to the role of educational technology (EdTech) in shaping teaching practice. However, much of the existing literature frames EdTech as a set of tools that support instructional delivery, rather than as a constitutive force in the reorganisation of teaching itself. This paper advances a sociotechnical and interpretivist analysis that repositions online teaching as an emergent practice shaped by the interaction among technological infrastructures, institutional expectations, and teacher–learner relationships. Focusing explicitly on implications for the teaching profession, the paper examines how EdTech redistributes pedagogical responsibility, obscures design assumptions, and mediates professional judgement through data. Drawing on recent literature (2020–2025) and conceptually aligned with qualitative inquiry into neurodiverse learners, the analysis argues that online teaching demands a redefinition of teacher expertise. The paper contributes to Teaching and Teacher Education by offering a practice-oriented conceptualisation of EdTech that foregrounds teacher decision-making, professional agency, and inclusive pedagogy in digitally mediated environments.

Keywords: online teaching, EdTech, teacher practice, interpretivism, sociotechnical systems, neurodiversity, teacher education

1. Introduction

Online teaching has transitioned from an emergent or exceptional mode to an established component of contemporary educational practice. Nevertheless, prevailing discourse often positions EdTech as external to pedagogy, viewing it primarily as a tool for teachers rather than as a force that fundamentally reshapes teaching itself.

This distinction holds significant implications for teacher education. When EdTech is conceptualised instrumentally, professional development emphasises proficiency with tools. Conversely, if EdTech is recognised as reconfiguring teaching practice, attention shifts to how teachers interpret, adapt, and enact pedagogy within sociotechnical environments.

This paper adopts the latter perspective, contending that online teaching should be conceptualised as a sociotechnical practice in which teacher roles, responsibilities, and forms of professional judgement are redistributed. Rather than focusing on how teachers can use EdTech effectively, the analysis addresses the following questions:

• How does EdTech reshape what it means to teach?
• What new forms of expertise are required?
• How are inclusive practices enabled or constrained in online contexts?

These questions are especially pertinent in the context of neurodiverse learners, whose experiences reveal the limitations of standardised assumptions embedded within digital platforms.

2. Conceptual Framework: Teaching as Sociotechnical Practice

This paper draws on sociotechnical theory to conceptualise teaching as a co-constructed activity arising from the interaction between human and technological elements (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011). In online environments, teaching is mediated by:

• Platform architectures (e.g., LMS structures, interface design)
• Institutional templates and policies
• Data systems that track and evaluate participation

From an interpretivist perspective, these elements do not directly determine practice. Instead, they shape the conditions within which teachers make decisions and learners engage. Teaching becomes a process of situated interpretation, rather than the implementation of predefined methods.

This framing aligns with TATE’s emphasis on teaching as a complex, context-dependent practice requiring professional judgement (Biesta, 2015). It also provides a foundation for examining how EdTech influences not just support teacher work.

3. Redistribution of Pedagogical Work

A central effect of EdTech in online teaching is the redistribution of pedagogical work between teachers, learners, and systems.

3.1 Shifting Boundaries of Teacher Responsibility

In digital environments, key aspects of teaching are partially delegated to platforms:

• Sequencing of content is structured by the LMS design
• Feedback is supplemented or automated through AI tools
• Interaction is channelled through predefined formats (forums, quizzes, video calls)

Although these features may enhance efficiency, they can also constrain pedagogical enactment. Teachers are required to operate within platform logics that may not correspond with their pedagogical intentions.

3.2 Increased Demand for Design Expertise

Online teaching requires teachers to anticipate learner needs in the absence of real-time cues. This shifts emphasis to:

• Instructional design
• Clarity of communication
• Anticipation of misunderstanding

However, this design work frequently remains under-recognised within teacher preparation programmes, resulting in a gap between expected competence and the support provided.

3.3 Implications for Teacher Education

For teacher education, this redistribution suggests a need to move beyond technical training toward:

• Critical engagement with platform design
• Understanding of how technologies shape participation
• Development of adaptive, context-sensitive pedagogies

 

4. The Problem of Invisible Design

One of the most significant challenges for teachers in online environments is that the constraints shaping practice are often invisible.

4.1 Platform Logics as Pedagogical Structures

Digital platforms embed assumptions about:

• What counts as engagement (e.g., frequency of posts)
• How learning progresses (e.g., linear modules)
• What forms of expression are valid (e.g., written text over multimodal responses)

These assumptions operate as implicit pedagogies, shaping teaching practice without explicit acknowledgement.

4.2 Teacher Agency Under Constraint

Teachers retain responsibility for student outcomes, yet their ability to modify underlying structures is limited. This creates tension between:

• Professional judgement
• Platform-imposed constraints

For example, a teacher may value exploratory discussion, but the platform may incentivise short, frequent posts that prioritise visibility over depth.

4.3 Making Design Visible in Teacher Education

Teacher education programmes must equip teachers to:

• Recognise embedded assumptions in EdTech.
• Critically evaluate platform affordances.
• Adapt or work around constraints where possible.

This necessitates a shift from merely using technology to critically interrogating its underlying assumptions and affordances.

5. Datafication and the Transformation of Professional Judgement

The integration of learning analytics and AI introduces new forms of data into teaching practice, reshaping how teachers interpret student engagement and progress.

5.1 Data as Partial Representation

Analytics systems translate complex learning behaviours into measurable indicators. While useful, these indicators are inherently reductive. They capture:

• Activity, not understanding
• Patterns, not intentions

Teachers are therefore required to interpret data with caution, recognising its inherent limitations.

5.2 Algorithmic Influence on Decision-Making

AI-driven tools increasingly provide recommendations, alerts, and feedback. These systems can support teachers but also influence professional judgement by:

• Prioritising certain behaviours
• Framing some students as “at risk”
• Encouraging intervention based on data patterns

This raises questions about the balance between human judgment and algorithmic suggestion.

5.3 Implications for Teacher Professionalism

Rather than replacing teachers, these systems reconfigure their role. Teachers must develop:

• Data literacy
• Critical awareness of algorithmic processes
• Capacity to integrate data with contextual knowledge

This development constitutes an expansion rather than a reduction of professional expertise.

6. Neurodiversity and Inclusive Teaching in Online Contexts

Neurodiversity provides a critical lens for examining how EdTech shapes inclusion in online teaching.

6.1 Revealing Hidden Assumptions

Neurodiverse learners often encounter difficulties where systems assume:

• Consistent attention and pacing
• Preference for text-based communication
• Ability to manage multiple tasks independently

These assumptions are rarely explicit but are embedded in platform design and course structure.

6.2 Rethinking Inclusive Practice

Inclusive online teaching requires more than providing access. It involves:

• Offering multiple ways to engage and demonstrate learning
• Reducing unnecessary cognitive load
• Providing clear, consistent structures without over-reliance on self-management

This approach aligns with broader initiatives in teacher education advocating for responsive and adaptive pedagogy.

6.3 Implications for Teacher Learning

Teacher education must prepare teachers to:

• Recognise variability in learner needs.
• Design for flexibility without creating ambiguity
• Interpret learner behaviour beyond surface-level indicators.

In this context, neurodiversity should be regarded not as a specialised concern but as a foundational principle for inclusive teaching practice.

7. Repositioning Online Teaching in Teacher Education

The analysis presented in this paper indicates that online teaching should not be regarded as a distinct or secondary skill set. Rather, it should be integrated into broader conceptions of teaching practice.

7.1 From Tool Use to Practice-Based Understanding

Teacher education programmes often emphasise:

• How to use specific tools
• How to integrate technology into lessons

While this focus is important, it remains insufficient. Teachers must also develop an understanding of:

• How technology shapes interaction
• How it redistributes responsibility
• How it influences inclusion and exclusion

7.2 Developing Adaptive Expertise

Online teaching environments are dynamic and context-dependent. Teachers require adaptive expertise—the ability to:

• Respond to unexpected challenges.
• Modify approaches based on learner feedback.
• Navigate tensions between institutional expectations and pedagogical values.

7.3 Bridging Research and Practice

There is a need for stronger integration between research on EdTech and teacher education practice. Interpretivist qualitative research, particularly studies focusing on learner experience, can provide valuable insights into:

• How teaching is experienced
• Where design assumptions fail
• How practices can be improved

8. Conclusion

EdTech has not merely extended teaching into digital spaces; it has fundamentally reshaped the nature of teaching itself. Through the redistribution of pedagogical work, the embedding of implicit assumptions, and the introduction of data-mediated forms of judgement, online teaching environments reconfigure the criteria for effective teaching.

For the teaching profession, this transformation necessitates a redefinition of expertise. Teachers are not solely implementers of pedagogy but also interpreters of sociotechnical systems. Their responsibilities include navigating constraints, exercising informed judgment, and designing inclusive learning experiences within complex environments.

In the field of Teaching and Teacher Education, the principal contribution of this paper is the reframing of EdTech as a matter of teaching practice rather than mere technological adoption. This perspective underscores the necessity for teacher education programmes to prioritise critical engagement, adaptive expertise, and inclusive design.

Ultimately, the central question is not whether teachers should use EdTech, but how professional agencies can be exercised within systems that increasingly shape the conditions of teaching and learning.

References

Baxter, G., & Sommerville, I. (2011). Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering. Interacting with Computers, 23(1), 4–17.

Biesta, G. (2015). What is education for? On good education, teacher judgement, and educational professionalism. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 75–87.

Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V. I., & Händel, M. (2021). Emergency remote teaching in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1–24.

Gibson, S. (2023). Neurodiversity and digital inclusion. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(2), 123–138.

Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education. Center for Curriculum Redesign.

Ifenthaler, D., & Yau, J. Y. K. (2020). Learning analytics and student success. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1), 1–17.

Schwandt, T. A. (2014). The Sage dictionary of qualitative inquiry (4th ed.). Sage.

Selwyn, N. (2022). Education and technology (3rd ed.). Bloomsbury.

Williamson, B. (2023). Big data in education. Sage.