Technology Integration in Education: Addressing Biases for Sustainable Learning

• In Event: Roundtable Session 1
  In Refereed Roundtable Session: Issues in education: Climate change, AI ethics, funding and future directions

Proposal

This roundtable will examine technology in education, highlighting how biases in technological design reinforce existing inequalities. It explores the intersection of technology and hegemony and its implications for sustainable future-ready learning. Based on a recent book chapter, this roundtable presentation aligns with the CIES 2025 theme, "Envisioning Education in a Digital Society," addressing the challenges and opportunities posed by digital advancements in education, particularly in development contexts.

Theoretical Framework
The uncritical adoption of technology in education, as endorsed by international agencies like UNESCO, the World Bank, and USAID, can perpetuate inherently biased technological structures (Silverstone et al., 1992). McLuhan’s (1964) concept, “the medium is the message,” argues that technologies are not neutral; they shape our perceptions, behaviors, and understanding of the world. This influence embeds specific values within technology, reinforcing cultural and communication priorities that align with dominant hegemonic powers (Bird, 2003).
Several scholars have also critiqued the notion of “whiteness” in technology – where racial and identity biases are embedded within digital environments. Technological institutions also control the distribution of these systems, embedding their racial biases into society. As a result, the tech industry is built on white, male-centric values and the deterministic idea that these technologies serve everyone equally – which rarely holds true (O’Neil, 2016).
Using data feminism (D’Ignazio & Klein, 2020), we agree with Benjamin’s (2019) "New Jim Code,” which shows how emerging technologies reflect and reproduce existing inequities while being promoted as progressive. Google’s algorithms, for instance, aggregate and perpetuate racially biased patterns from user data, creating feedback loops or “echo chambers” that reinforce prejudices (Amoore, 2020). These biases, often embedded unintentionally in source code, are difficult to detect but can amplify societal inequalities. In education, policies regulating student engagement with technology further exacerbate these issues, controlling information access and determining how data is collected and shared with third parties, reinforcing colonialistic practices and perpetuating vulnerabilities.

What Can International Education Practitioners Do?
Our work argues that policymakers, practitioners, and implementers should do more to incorporate inclusive design practices from project origination. We advocate for User Interface/User Experience (UI/UX) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles to address biases proactively and to create more adaptable learning environments, tailored to diverse student needs (Costanza-Chock, 2020). This includes a call for curriculum reform to combat structural oppression through diversity and holistic education (Tan et al., 2017). For educators, we encourage the use of the TPACK and SAMR models to integrate technology effectively, not just as substitutes but as transformative tools (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Our presentation will provide tools for combating digital structural oppressions and feature two real-world case studies to demonstrate design examples of what to do and not do.

Contribution
This will contribute to the existing body of literature discussing sustainable education beyond agriculture, emphasizing sustainability in media and digital technologies as a growing branch of socially just and equitable education. We believe it is a vital discussion to hold within the CIES community of scholars and practitioners.

Authors

• Kate Maloney Williams, University of Maryland College Park

• Jade J. Halawani, George Mason University