ABSTRACT
Perhaps the only thing we know for certain about the future of ICT is that we do not know what will happen! One of the guiding principles of this book has been that teachers should not be driven by the need to master a particular technology, but instead should examine what it has to offer in developing effective pedagogy. Indeed, there is a fundamental question about whether the future in education should be led by technology (technological determinism) or whether teachers (and pupils) should lead the development of technology? There is a problem in advocating the second, even if it is infinitely preferable, in that the driving force behind much technology is the needs or industry or society. This leads us to consider the view of Facer and Sandford (2010, p76) who propose that ‘researching the future cannot simply be a case of producing a set of predictions of what “will happen” as though this were beyond the intervention of individuals or societies. Nor can it simply be a case of discussing what we “want” or “will make” happen, as though there were no prior contexts to shape our actions’. They continue to cite Bell’s (1997, p.73) options of ‘possible, probable, and preferable’ futures: ‘what can or could be (the possible), what is likely to be (the probable), and what ought to be (the preferable)’. Within these options, it is probable that the technological needs of industry will continue to drive the development of technology, but this does not mean that it is preferable. Indeed, this is one of a series of such dilemmas that could affect the future of ICT in education and even education itself – you only need to consider the on-going debate about the content of the curriculum or the current debate about ‘Free’ schools. This does not mean, however, that ICT developments driven by industry are a bad thing. Many devices, particularly the IWB, have their roots in industrial settings and have been successfully adopted in education. For the remainder of this chapter, however, we will consider what might be possible.
