Beyond the tech hype: Why educational technology needs a reality check
By Precious Ebere-Chinonso Obi
I recently came across a compelling piece, “Not a quick fix: edtech needs context, co-creation, and continuous adaptation” by Marwa Zahr, 2024 Yidan Prize for Education Development Laureate. Her insights on educational technology implementation resonated deeply with my own observations from my over four years of edtech product design work in Nigeria and across West Africa. But it also got me thinking about where we go from here, especially in emerging markets where the stakes are often highest.
The problem with “solutionism”
The article raises a crucial point that I’ve witnessed repeatedly across West African tech education ecosystems: our tendency to treat technology as a magic wand for educational challenges. As someone who leads DO Take Action, a civic startup focused on mobilizing collective action through educational technology I’ve seen how this “solutionism” mindset can derail even well-intentioned initiatives.
War Child’s approach of starting with context rather than code is refreshing, but it shouldn’t be revolutionary, it should be standard practice. Yet here we are, still needing to remind ourselves that understanding the problem comes before building the solution.
My take: In Nigeria, I’ve observed countless edtech initiatives that failed because they prioritized flashy features over fundamental issues like unreliable electricity, expensive data costs, and cultural resistance to digital learning. The most successful projects I’ve worked on started with months of community engagement, understanding not just what people needed, but how they actually lived and learned.
The co-creation challenge
The emphasis on building “with communities, not for them” strikes at the heart of what’s broken in much of today’s edtech landscape. But through my work developing frameworks for long-term behavioral and institutional change, I’ve learned we need to go even further.
True co-creation isn’t just about involving stakeholders in the design process, it’s about fundamentally shifting who holds the power to define problems and solutions. This means:
- Starting with local definitions of success: In my experience working on gender equity in STEM education, what constitutes “success” varies dramatically between communities. Western metrics often miss culturally significant indicators of progress.
- Building capacity, not just products: At DO Take Action, we’ve found that sustainable impact comes from empowering local educators and community leaders to adapt and iterate solutions themselves, rather than creating dependency on external tech teams.
- Recognizing that resistance often signals wisdom: When communities push back against proposed solutions, they’re usually identifying real barriers that external designers missed. I’ve learned to treat resistance as valuable data, not an obstacle to overcome.
Where I see things differently
While I appreciate War Child’s three-pillar approach (context, co-creation, continuous adaptation), I think we’re missing a fourth critical element: systemic sustainability.
As someone with a background in Social and Public Policy, I’ve seen too many edtech initiatives that address symptoms rather than root causes.
We need solutions that don’t just work within existing systems, they need to actively transform the structural barriers that perpetuate educational inequity. This is particularly crucial in emerging markets where resource constraints aren’t just technical challenges, they’re manifestations of deeper systemic issues around governance, infrastructure, and economic policy.
The research-practice gap
The article touches on the challenge of making research actionable, something I’ve grappled with throughout my work in West African tech ecosystems. The reality is that most educators and administrators don’t have time to wade through academic papers to extract practical insights.
But the solution isn’t just better translation of research. We need:
- Locally-generated evidence: Through DO Take Action, I’ve learned that the most compelling data comes from within communities themselves. When local educators document their own successes and challenges, it carries more weight than external research studies.
- Rapid feedback loops: In resource-constrained environments, we can’t afford long research cycles. I’ve developed frameworks that allow for real-time data collection and immediate iteration based on user feedback.
- Recognition of different types of expertise: My CISA training has taught me to value systematic auditing and verification, but I’ve also learned that grandmother’s wisdom about how children learn in her community is equally valid data that needs to inform our design decisions.
Moving forward: What this means for emerging market edtech
In my work across West African tech education ecosystems, these principles translate to:
1. Design for intermittent infrastructure, not perfect conditions: Rather than assuming reliable internet and electricity, we build solutions that work offline-first and sync when connectivity allows. This isn’t just technical adaptation, it’s acknowledging the reality of our users’ daily lives and designing dignity into the experience.
2. Measure impact through behavioral change, not just usage metrics: At DO Take Action, we track whether people are actually taking meaningful action in their communities, not just how many times they opened an app. This requires longer-term engagement and more nuanced success metrics.
3. Build financial sustainability from day one: In emerging markets, we can’t rely on external funding indefinitely. Every solution needs a clear path to financial sustainability that doesn’t exploit users or perpetuate dependency. This often means innovative revenue models that align business success with social impact.
The human element
War Child’s closing thought about “rehumanizing” technology in education is powerful. But I’d add that we need to be honest about the human challenges within the systems we’re trying to improve.
In Nigeria, I’ve learned that technology often amplifies existing inequalities rather than solving them. If we don’t address issues like gender bias in STEM education, corruption in educational institutions, and the urban-rural digital divide, our beautiful apps just become more efficient ways to exclude people. The human element isn’t just about user experience, it’s about power, privilege, and justice.
Looking ahead
The conversation at the Yidan Prize Conference clearly highlighted that we’re at a crossroads in educational technology. The question isn’t whether technology can transform learning, it’s whether we’re mature enough as a field to use it responsibly.
My vision through DO Take Action is to mobilize 1 billion+ people taking meaningful action in their communities. But that’s only possible if we build technology that serves people’s actual needs rather than our assumptions about what they should need. As I continue developing adaptable business models for educational technology in emerging markets, I’m convinced that the future belongs to solutions that are locally owned, financially sustainable, and designed for the realities of the communities they serve.
The path forward isn’t just about better technology, it’s about better relationships, deeper humility, and a commitment to justice that goes beyond good intentions.
