The False Idolatry of Ed-Tech Hero-Worship

The views expressed in this Substack series are those of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.

Christopher Lubienski

We love our smart phones, smart watches, and smart appliances. I just had to replace my washing machine, and now my clothes are being cleaned by AI (the need for this is not exactly clear to me). But while we might be enamored with these conveniences, we are enthralled by the smart men — yes, usually it’s men — taking credit for bringing us these digital conveniences. And the Gateses, Jobs, and Zuckerbergs of the IT sector are also happy to shed their wisdom on the problems facing schools. In fact, IT luminaries have become ed-tech heroes. But perhaps such hero-worshipping is problematic.

Certainly, popular culture obsesses over Elon Musk’s latest tweet (or latest “X”?), Bill Gates’ philanthropy and philandering, and Jack Dorsey’s diet. Such figures are not only in the news and late-night TV monologues, but are now also focusing their efforts on education. Zuckerberg was venerated when he announced his $100 million investment to reform Newark’s public schools on the Oprah Show. Gates and Laurene Powell Jobs (Steve’s widow) are acclaimed for their investments to “disrupt” education.

But it’s not just the ultra-wealthy who “give” their way into influencing education. Up-and-coming tech idealists also get the hero’s welcome. The BBC published a fawning story of a “22-year-old 3D-printing schools.” On Forbes magazine’s famous “30 under 30” list for education, 24 of the honorees are involved in education technologies such as developing education apps, online tutoring or consulting tools, or virtual learning.

The reasons for ed-tech hero worship are complex, but certainly harken back to previous adulation of the “self-made” elites of previous generations. While the Carnegies, Fords, Rockefellers and their ilk were both admired and detested for their ability to capitalize on the technologies of their time, often through predatory strategies, they were also largely content with establishing their foundations and funding their pet projects. Edison was a gifted innovator but did not try to re-shape society around his ideals. Indeed, the wealthy have always had inordinate influence in social and political circles, but the wisdom of the elites, including those self-made strivers, was not generally thought to then mean they were sages on all policy issues.

However, the current fetishization of ed-tech heroes takes the respect extended to self-made strivers, adds outsized appreciation for innovation and disruption associated with IT, and extends their assumed brilliance to all areas of life. If tech bros can disrupt the taxi or hotel sectors, think what they might do for schools! Indeed, the idolized and vilified corporate raiders and workforce slashers of the 1980s (the fictitious Gordon Gecko and the very real Jack Welch) are replaced by self-made heroes we associate with streaming movies into our homes, and cat photos to our phones. If they built tech empires from the humble origins of a garage/basement (at least in popular imagination), how could we not beg for their insights and innovation in improving schools?

Not just media outlets like Forbes and Wired, but schools, education policymakers, philanthropies and investors have responded with fawning hero-worship. Of the big eight education philanthropies and “donor-advised funds” in education reform, half — Gates, Dell, Chan-Zuckerberg, and Emerson (Apple) — made their fortunes in IT before turning to education. Other tech-turned-education disrupters, such as Reed Hastings (Netflix) and Patrick Byrne (online sales) have also put education in their sights. Investors and venture philanthropists are on the lookout for education start-ups. GSV seeks to leverage venture capital into making education a profit center around the world, largely by infusing technology and business models into education. Higher education had its MOOCs thanks substantially to its Silicon Valley partners, who are also pushing schooling online in universities, homeschooling and K-12 schools. Cheered on by tech-friendly media outlets, policymakers defer to technology barons for policy guidance on issues such as the Common Core State Standards and virtual schooling, and tap into their political and social networks to advance tech-friendly agendas such as charter schools.

Why are successful businesspeople cast as polymath techno-prophets who can save schooling? The mythology of the “self-made” hero is appealing, although perhaps not be as accurate as it seems. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were not inventors themselves so much as innovative businesspeople who helped shape and promote products in a world that increasingly tilted toward technology. In fact, the internet, computer chips, browsers, and other fixtures of the IT revolution on which they capitalized were all the result of taxpayer investment. These tech and now education “disrupters” (several of whom disrupted their own schooling by dropping out) successfully harnessed evolving social forces in building private wealth even as they were often dependent on public largess. Despite their founders’ libertarian ideals, favorable tax schemes taxpayer-funded R&D and subsidies nurtured Tesla and PayPal.

But even then, couldn’t they do the same for education, drawing on the changing technological landscape together with favorable government regulations and financial backing to bring schools into the 21^st century? Being wise or lucky in one field does not necessarily transfer into another. These businessmen saw quite clearly how to make a buck off a tech sector seeded by taxpayers. They thrived in a world of start-ups and profit-driven investors, poaching developers and outsourcing production. But seeing the education sector as a business neglects the public good aspects of public schooling. For many young kids, including from immigrant and working families, public education is the only chance for social and economic mobility. So public education cannot be just another market opportunity that would thrive and fail based on the boom-and-bust economy of Silicon Valley and Nasdaq.

Nonetheless, tech heroes are not waiting to disrupt schooling. Gates brought his good intentions and business acumen in pushing the idea of smaller schools, only to see no return on his $2 billion investment. After moving aggressively to implement market-based school policies and ignoring local educators, Zuckerberg and his political allies watched their investment toward revamping Newark’s troubled school district fizzle while consultants made a lot of money. Such efforts indicate that business brilliance does not automatically translate into solutions to the deep-seated societal issues facing schools. Instead, the initiatives oftentimes serve simply to burnish the tech hero image

Elon Musk may know how to build electric cars (actually, he himself probably doesn’t), but that doesn’t mean he is a genius in all fields, as demonstrated by his track record in government. Let’s hope those tech bros begin to appreciate their limited expertise when it comes to fixing schools. (BTW, my old washing machine was also a “smart” machine, and in perfect working order, except the “smart” function fizzled at made the whole machine inoperable.)