Why Educators and Learners “Need” EdTech: A Sociotechnical and Interpretivist Analysis of Contemporary Educational Practice

Abstract

The rapid expansion of educational technology (EdTech) has transformed teaching and learning across global contexts, yet the question of why educators and learners “need” EdTech remains insufficiently theorised. This paper adopts an interpretivist paradigm to examine how this perceived need emerges from the interaction of pedagogical, cognitive, institutional, and political-economic forces. Drawing on recent empirical and conceptual literature (2020–2026), the paper argues that EdTech is not merely a set of tools but a sociotechnical infrastructure that reshapes educational practice, labour, and meaning-making. While EdTech enables differentiation, cognitive scaffolding, and expanded access, it also introduces new tensions around equity, teacher labour, datafication, and platform dependency. The analysis demonstrates that the “need” for EdTech is constructed through systemic pressures rather than arising solely from pedagogical necessity. Implications are discussed for critical EdTech research and for qualitative inquiry into educators’ and learners' lived experiences in digitally mediated environments.

Keywords: educational technology, interpretivism, sociotechnical systems, teacher labour, digital equity, AI in education

1. Introduction

Over the past decade—and particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic—educational technology (EdTech) has shifted from a peripheral enhancement to a central component of educational systems worldwide. Investment in EdTech has surged, with global spending increasing dramatically during the pandemic and continuing to grow in subsequent years. At the same time, schools, universities, and policymakers increasingly frame EdTech as essential to modern education.

However, this perceived inevitability conceals a more fundamental question: what underlies the perceived “need” for EdTech among educators and learners?

This paper challenges reductionist narratives that present EdTech as inherently beneficial or necessary. Adopting an interpretivist perspective, it examines how the perceived “need” for EdTech is constructed through the lived experiences of educators and learners within broader sociotechnical systems. The analysis draws on recent research that highlights tensions among pedagogical aspirations, institutional pressures, and the economic logics embedded in EdTech ecosystems.

The central argument is that EdTech should be understood not as a neutral tool but as a sociotechnical infrastructure that reorganises teaching, learning, and educational labour.

2. Theoretical Positioning: An Interpretivist Sociotechnical Lens

This study is grounded in an interpretivist paradigm, which assumes that reality is socially constructed through human experience and meaning-making. Within this framework, the “need” for EdTech is not treated as an objective fact but as a perceived and negotiated phenomenon shaped by context, discourse, and practice.

Interpretivism is particularly suited to EdTech research because digital technologies do not operate independently of human interpretation. Instead, their meaning and impact emerge through:

• Teacher practices
• Student experiences
• Institutional expectations
• Cultural narratives about technology

Recent critical EdTech scholarship emphasises that educational technologies must be understood within their technical, political, cultural, and economic dimensions. This aligns with sociotechnical perspectives, which view technology and society as mutually constitutive.

Moreover, political economy analyses highlight how EdTech systems are shaped by platform capitalism, data extraction, and commercialisation processes. These dynamics are central to understanding why EdTech adoption often exceeds evidence of its pedagogical effectiveness.

3. Pedagogical Drivers: Differentiation and Responsiveness

One of the most commonly cited reasons for EdTech adoption is its potential to support differentiated instruction. Digital tools enable teachers to tailor content, pacing, and assessment to diverse learner needs—an aspiration long central to educational theory.

AI-powered systems, such as intelligent tutoring platforms, can provide personalised feedback and adaptive learning pathways, addressing gaps in students' understanding. These tools are particularly valuable in large or resource-constrained classrooms, where individualised instruction is difficult to achieve.

However, the pedagogical promise of EdTech must be interpreted cautiously. Evidence suggests that many EdTech investments are driven less by demonstrated learning outcomes than by factors such as scalability, cost-efficiency, and ease of implementation.

Therefore, although EdTech can enhance pedagogical responsiveness, its adoption is often driven by logistical and economic priorities rather than solely by educational considerations.

4. Cognitive Dimensions: Distributed and Extended Learning

EdTech also responds to evolving understandings of cognition. Digital tools increasingly function as cognitive extensions, enabling learners to externalise and scaffold thinking processes.

Applications include:

• Writing tools that support drafting and revision
• Simulations that visualise complex concepts
• AI systems that prompt reflection and metacognition

Research on AI in education suggests moderate effectiveness in enhancing learning outcomes, particularly through personalised feedback and adaptive systems. These tools can support learners in developing higher-order skills when used appropriately.

However, concerns are emerging about overreliance on digital systems. Critics argue that excessive reliance on AI tools may undermine critical thinking, memory, and deep learning processes.

From an interpretivist perspective, this tension underscores that EdTech not only enhances cognition but also reconfigures the very processes of thinking and learning.

5. Teacher Labour and Professional Identity

A critical but often underexplored dimension of EdTech adoption is its impact on teacher labour.

EdTech is often promoted as a solution to teacher workload, automating tasks such as grading, lesson planning, and data analysis. In practice, however, research suggests that these technologies often reconfigure rather than reduce labour.

Teachers are increasingly required to:

• Manage multiple platforms
• Interpret learning analytics
• Adapt to rapidly changing tools.
• Provide technical support to students.

Recent studies on AI in education highlight a disconnect between developers’ focus on technical performance and educators’ concerns about broader pedagogical and relational impacts.

Additionally, the widespread adoption of EdTech during the pandemic has contributed to technological fatigue and resistance, as educators struggle with constant change and insufficient training.

From an interpretivist standpoint, these shifts reshape teachers’ professional identities by positioning them as technology mediators rather than autonomous pedagogical agents.

6. Institutional Pressures and Policy Contexts

The perceived need for EdTech is also driven by institutional and policy dynamics.

Educational institutions face increasing pressure to:

• Demonstrate measurable outcomes
• Integrate digital competencies
• Competing in global education markets.
• Respond to innovative narratives.

As a result, EdTech often functions as:

• A compliance mechanism for accountability systems
• A symbol of modernisation
• A strategic investment in institutional competitiveness

Notably, recent analyses indicate that decision-making around EdTech adoption frequently prioritises cost, scalability, and usability over proven learning impact.

This indicates that the perceived “need” for EdTech is partially constructed through policy and organisational imperatives, rather than arising solely from pedagogical necessity.

7. Equity and the Digital Divide

EdTech is frequently framed as a tool for expanding educational access and promoting equity. Digital platforms can provide flexible learning opportunities, connect learners globally, and offer resources beyond traditional classroom constraints.

However, empirical research reveals a more complex reality. The expansion of EdTech has both reduced and exacerbated inequalities. Students in low-income or marginalised contexts often face barriers related to:

• Device access
• Internet connectivity
• Digital literacy
• Learning environments

These structural constraints limit the effectiveness of EdTech and may widen existing achievement gaps.

Furthermore, the assumption that all learners are equally prepared to engage with digital tools has proven unrealistic in many contexts.

Therefore, EdTech’s role in promoting equity should be regarded as ambivalent and context-dependent, rather than inherently transformative.

8. Datafication and Platform Economies

A defining feature of contemporary EdTech is its integration into platform-based economic systems.

Educational technologies increasingly rely on:

• Data collection and analytics
• Subscription models
• Scalable digital infrastructures

Critical research highlights how student data has become an asset within EdTech ecosystems, raising concerns about surveillance, privacy, and commercialisation.

At the same time, the rapid growth of the EdTech market, valued at hundreds of billions of dollars, reflects the strong economic incentives driving adoption.

These dynamics contribute to a form of structural dependency in which educational institutions become embedded in platform ecosystems that shape their practices and priorities.

From an interpretivist perspective, this implies that the “need” for EdTech is not merely experienced but is actively produced through economic and technological infrastructures.

9. Post-Pandemic Acceleration and Normalisation

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a critical turning point in the adoption of EdTech. Emergency remote teaching normalised the use of digital platforms, transforming expectations around teaching and learning.

What was once optional became essential:

• Learning management systems
• Video conferencing tools
• Online assessment platforms

Even as in-person education has resumed, many institutions have retained hybrid and digital models, embedding EdTech into core educational practices.

However, this rapid adoption has also revealed significant challenges, including:

• Declining trust in digital systems
• Concerns about academic integrity
• Persistent equity gaps

These developments underscore that the perceived “need” for EdTech is, in part, a product of historical contingency and crisis-driven transformation.

10. Discussion: Rethinking “Need” in EdTech

The analysis presented in this paper suggests that the “need” for EdTech is neither singular nor stable. Instead, it emerges from the interaction of multiple forces:

• Pedagogical aspirations for personalisation and engagement
• Cognitive shifts toward distributed and tool-mediated learning
• Institutional pressures for efficiency and accountability
• Economic incentives embedded in platform ecosystems

This complexity challenges deterministic narratives that depict EdTech as either inherently beneficial or inherently problematic. Is it inherently beneficial or inherently problematic?

Instead, the findings support a more nuanced conclusion:

Educators and learners do not inherently require EdTech; rather, they require the capabilities and conditions that EdTech is frequently positioned to deliver.

These include:

• Adaptivity
• Accessibility
• Efficiency
• Relevance

The extent to which EdTech fulfils these needs depends on its design, implementation, and the ways it is experienced in practice.

11. Implications for Research and Practice

11.1 Implications for Interpretivist Research

Future research should prioritise:

• Lived experiences of educators and learners
• Context-specific meanings of technology use

• Investigating the lived experiences of educators and learners is essential for interpretivist research in EdTech.
•  By focusing on how individuals interact with technology in educational settings, researchers can gain deeper insights into the real impacts, challenges, and opportunities presented by EdTech.
• This approach emphasises understanding the perspectives, attitudes, and day-to-day realities of both teachers and students, which can reveal critical factors that influence the success or limitations of technology integration in practice.

11.2 Implications for Educational Practice

Educators and institutions should:

• Critically evaluate the pedagogical value of EdTech tools.
• Invest in teacher professional development.
• Prioritise equity and inclusion in technology implementation.
• Maintain a balance between digital and non-digital learning.

11.3 Implications for Policy

Policymakers should:

• Emphasise evidence-based adoption
• Address digital infrastructure gaps.
• Regulate data privacy and platform accountability.
• Support sustainable and ethical EdTech ecosystems.

12. Conclusion

This paper has argued that the perceived need for EdTech is best understood as a sociotechnical construction, shaped by the interplay of pedagogical, cognitive, institutional, and economic factors.

Although EdTech presents significant opportunities to enhance teaching and learning, it also introduces challenges related to equity, labour, and data governance. Therefore, its role in education should be critically examined rather than accepted without scrutiny.

Ultimately, the central question is not whether educators and learners need EdTech, but rather:

What kinds of educational futures are being constructed through its use—and for whom?

 

References

Harvey, E., Koenecke, A., & Kizilcec, R. (2025). Don’t forget the teachers: Educator-centered harms of LLMs.

Jandrić, P., et al. (2026). EdTech and the environment: A research program.

Kim, D., Borowiec, K., & Wortham, S. (2024). A new era in EdTech.

Kucirkova, N., et al. (2025). Evaluating EdTech impact.

Macgilchrist, F., et al. (2025). Future challenges for critical EdTech research.

Memari, M., & Ruggles, K. (2025). AI in STEM education: A systematic review.

Shimabukuro, J. (2025). EdTech issues in higher education.