Embedded Files
Banner image: © 2008 by Wonderlane is licensed under CC BY 2.0
Overview: A review of Neil Selwyn's concept of 'digital degrowth'. This section also looks at two further degrowth strategies: digital sobriety and minimal computing.
Section aims:
To understand the concept of 'digital degrowth'
To explore further degrowth strategies in education
Time: 45 mins
Resource: Padlet; Google form
Has EdTech become the problem?
In 2011, Denis Hylnka likened technological consumption to food consumption; too much of either can lead to obesity. Hlynka introduced the concept of 'Technological Obesity' by drawing a parallel with Jamie Oliver's argument about physical obesity in American school lunch programs. Oliver contended that excessive consumption of unhealthy food, especially sugar and fat, was leading to an obesity epidemic and Hlynka extended this idea metaphorically to technology, particularly in education.
Hlynka posed some important questions:
What if our population is becoming technologically obese?
Is society over-dependent on technology?
Are we addicted to technology?
Focusing on schools, he asked:
Are schools bulging with technology that is unnecessary, expensive and useless?
Is technology making our schools sick?
A key aspect of 'Technological Obesity' is the lack of improved educational outcomes despite the significant financial investment in technology . Hlynka (2011) stated that "research continually confirms that when one examines the educational results from new technologies, there is seldom an improved return on investment. Evidence that students learn better is sporadic at best. Only the cost increases. Schools become technologically obese.'
Furthermore, Hlynka (2011) pointed out the issue of electronic waste, suggesting that this "non-essential technology" ends up as junk, often shipped to developing countries, which he argued is not what globalization should mean.
Section 2 Activity 1:
What are your thoughts on the points presented here by Denis Hlynka? Given that the article being referenced here was written in 2011, do you consider his arguments valid today? Has tech become a problem?
Here is a short YouTube clip on the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goal 4.
Sustainable educational goals adopted by countries around the world have largely been shaped by the United Nations (UN) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The UN emphasizes the importance of education in fostering values, attitudes, and behaviours that promote environmental, social, and economic sustainability (UN, 2025). The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4) aims to ensure inclusive, equitable quality education and lifelong learning opportunities by 2030.
The OECD's approach to sustainable education is often linked to its focus on economic development and social well-being; providing data, analysis, and policy recommendations to help countries improve the effectiveness of their sustainable education efforts (OECD, 2025).
Does making education a priority equal more technology?
What roles will EdTechs play in realising UN's 2030 goal?
'The SGD 4 targets confidently foreground digital technology as a key area of skill development, as well as a means of equitable delivery, and a system-wide planning and monitoring' (Selwyn, 2024, pp.2).
Selwyn (2024) referenced UN's Sustainable Development Goal 4 within the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: 'ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.’ He questions whether digital transformation necessarily aligns with broader sustainable goals since other SDG goals focus on responsible consumption and climate action. Selwyn et al. (2020) proposed that sustainability in educational technology must be prioritised by shifting away from excessive consumption towards ecologically mindful approaches that acknowledge resource constraints, following movements like 'Computing Within Limits’ and ‘Frugal computing’ to develop leaner digital solutions for education. Arguing that digital education perpetuates existing inequalities, and policy efforts to address these have focused on technology access and skills, Selwyn (2020) asserts that it is necessary to fundamentally rethink how technology interacts with social structures to create genuinely equitable educational futures. This rethinking of the very structure of education and talking about how to do it differently is what Selwyn (2024) contended that ‘degrowth’ is about.
‘Degrowth agitates for the adoption of new practices, relations and institutions that work towards progressive social change and values of ecological integrity and social justice’ (Selwyn, 2024, pp. 4).
Now watch these videos on degrowth.
The first part of this OER highlighted some of the growing concerns around EdTech in education. Selwyn takes these a step further to suggest that the 'application of digital technology in education has widened educational inequalities, entrenched the privatisation of public education, facilitated corporate control over key educational processes, and further exacerbated oppressive conditions of individualisation, standardisation and surveillance (Selwyn, 2024, pp. 187).
Some of the key points raised by Selwyn (2024) include:
Digital education isn't a simple solution to sustainability: The argument that increasing digital technology in education will solve environmental problems is flawed.
Digital technology has a significant environmental cost: The production, use, and disposal of digital devices contribute to resource depletion, energy consumption, and pollution. Technologies like AI and augmented reality worsen these problems.
The focus on digital education ignores the material impact: We need to consider the physical consequences of digital technology on the planet, not just its perceived benefits.
Continued excessive use of digital technology in education is unsustainable: The current trend of increasing digitalization in education is environmentally damaging.
Digitalization can exacerbate existing inequalities: It risks further disadvantaging vulnerable groups and increasing corporate control over education.
We need to rethink digital technology in education: Instead of blindly pursuing more digitalization, we should aim for a more sustainable and equitable approach.
Next , consider these two questions asked by Selwyn (2024):
How might we develop forms of EdTech provision that fulfil communally-defined goods and social justices?
How can we anticipate these different forms of EdTech in an era when our engagements with digital technologies are increasingly constrained by the effects of climate change, environmental instability, and the precarity of natural resources and manufactured infrastructure?
To Radically Rethink EdTech
To radically rethink EdTech, Selwyn (2024, pp. 189) proposed four main points:
Digital Sobriety
According to Péréa et al. (2023) the concept of 'digital sobriety' falls in line with degrowth approaches, citing environmental concerns from the demand for energy and resources required for IT, and the ecological consequence of data storage through cloud computing as major pollutants. Demands for IT are increasing the demand for energy and the corresponding demand for the finite resources available for their production. Amidst environmental concerns of climate change and global warming, unequal access to education, and call for reduction in energy consumption, digital sobriety aligns with a techno-sceptical perspective of the effects of IT and challenges the claim that digital systems remain sustainable (Péréa et al., 2023).
Following their research, Péréa et al. (2023, pp. 4) identified a development process for a digital sobriety approach using three stages:
Raise awareness
Rationalise the procedure of digital sobriety
Frame this into a digital sobriety strategy
With applicable benefits for primary education through advocating for more responsible and thoughtful use of technology, digital sobriety practices can also address issues related to the digital divide where organisations are able to prioritise the essential use of technology (Péréa et al., 2023, pp. 7).
Minimal Computing
In their paper, Risam and Bessette (2024) challenged the notion that EdTech companies have the solutions to educational problems stating that from their own experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, EdTech companies were producing technology crisis that they could then solve with their 'nifty' software. The current hype around AI and its integration into EdTech tools further exemplifies their argument.
They proposed ‘minimal computing’ as an alternative approach to EdTech by prioritising problems before solutions and asking four questions:
What do we need?
What do we have?
What must we prioritise?
What are we willing to give up?
This focuses on the utilisation of local solutions to learning challenges and places student learning at the heart of EdTech decision making.
Section 2: Activity 3
Selwyn (2024) argues that education technology needs to be reimagined along "radically different lines." Do you agree with this assessment? Why or why not?
Please use the Padlet on the side to present your response. Click on the plus sign at the bottom right corner to add your response.
Section 2 - Copyright and Licenses
"Why Quality Education Matters - Sustainable Development Goal 4." Youtube, uploaded by United Nations, October 10, 2019.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKip3rpuEvY&ab_channel=UnitedNations. Licensed under terms of the standard YouTube license; https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms and copyright © United Nations
Question mark graphic: Designed by Freepik; image created by @starline. https://www.freepik.com/
Question mark graphic: Designed by Freepik; image created by @jemastock. https://www.freepik.com/
"Modul University research Series - Degrowth and Technology." Youtube, uploaded by Modul University Vienna, December 13, 2018.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cIeQAeTRIY&t=2s&ab_channel=ModulUniversityVienna. Licensed under terms of the standard YouTube license https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms and YouTube API Terms of Service and copyright © Modul University Vienna
"The Case for Digital Degrowth." Youtube, uploaded by Truthdig, December 22, 2024, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/493BLRX4Y7A. Licensed under terms of the standard YouTube license; https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms and copyright © Truthdig
Infographic: 'To Radically Rethink EdTech'. Content of the infographic remain the intellectual property of Neil Selwyn. Adapted here using Canva for Education. Canva designs for education are licensed free for school or university projects. Use of the resource created and exported from Canva is bound by the terms of this Content License Agreement, the Canva Privacy Policy and Canva’s Terms of Use
Padlet - Visitors are able to remake, download, and export this board's content.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse