New Educational Technology?
My good friend, colleague, co-author Pedro De Bruyckere published a blog showcasing something that he found on Kottke.org, of 9 criteria that Wendell Berry wrote down in his essay in 1987 Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer. I tried to translate the 9 criteria to the educational setting.
The new technology should:
1. be more affordable than the one it replaces. Educational technology should reduce financial pressure—not only for schools and districts, but also for students and families who may be expected to provide devices or connectivity. Affordability supports equity and ensures that access to learning tools is not limited by income.
2. be at least as small in scale as the one it replaces. Tools should work well at the level of the individual classroom, student, teacher, or family and not just as part of a large institutional system. Scalable, modular tools allow educators and students to take ownership without being locked into one-size-fits-all platforms.
3. clearly and demonstrably improve teaching and learning. New technology should result in real, observable benefits: better learning outcomes (more, deeper, quicker learning), deeper engagement, or more effective instruction. Families and students should be able to see that the tool meaningfully supports educational goals, not just adds a digital gloss.
4. use less energy than the one it replaces. Energy-efficient tools lower costs for schools and households while reducing environmental impact. Devices and platforms that consume less power are not only more sustainable, they’re also more reliable in low-resource settings or during energy interruptions.
5. minimise energy consumption and support sustainability goals. The technology should align with broader commitments to environmental responsibility. Tools that require little power, require fewer device replacements, or support renewable energy sources help schools and families contribute to a more sustainable future.
6. be fixable by a person of ordinary intelligence, with the right tools. Whether at school or at home, the technology should be repairable by non-experts (teachers, parents, or students) without needing proprietary parts or exclusive service contracts. This encourages digital literacy, reduces waste, and keeps technology in use longer.
7. be available and serviceable close to home. Schools and families benefit from local access to technology and technical support. When devices can be purchased, repaired, or replaced nearby, downtime is reduced and communities retain more control over their tools.
8. come from a vendor or shop that provides ongoing service and stands by its product. Choose tools sold by partners – not just providers – who are invested in long-term relationships with schools and families. Local or mission-driven vendors who offer repair, maintenance, and responsiveness build trust and ensure continuity.
9. not replace or disrupt what’s already good, especially relationships, routines, and community. Technology should strengthen, not weaken, the social fabric of learning and schools. If a technology isolates students, displaces meaningful teacher–student interactions, or adds stress to family life, then it does more harm than good. Respecting the value of relationships must be part of any responsible tech adoption.
