The ‘Digital’ as Problem and Purpose in Education Policy
In this chapter, Duggan extends previous work into the announcement of ‘coding in schools’ policy in Australia since 2015. Drawing on Federal Hansard records, he examines the critical debate around innovation and training, and its embedding of computer coding as a key ‘literacy of the future’ in the Australian educational landscape. This chapter provides a critical analysis of parliamentary debates, media releases, and engagements by Government and Opposition Federal Ministers to consider how the re/articulation and embedding of innovation and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education takes up an idealised notion of ‘the future’ as tech-enabled and in need of policy response to ‘the new’. The analysis highlights three lines of debate that have emerged in operationalising and responding educational policy in the wake of digital labour market disruption: first, the rise and reach of networked infrastructures into traditional modes of life and work; second, the future value of existing and proposed programmes of study; and third, the implications for resourcing in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis and uneven economic recovery. Combined, this chapter argues that whilst a policy focus on technical and instrumental skills such as computer coding may help young people to interact with dominant technologies of the present, they also risk weakening a more substantive conversation around educational participation and purpose in the present, and for the future.
KeywordsFutures Networked infrastructures Digital labour market
- Ball, Stephen J. 2004. Education for Sale! The Commodification of Everything. King´s Annual Education Lecture 2004, 1–29. http://sys.glotta.ntua.gr/Dialogos/Politics/CERU-0410-253-OWI.pdf.
- Ball, Stephen J., Carolina Junemann, and Diego Santori. 2017. Edu.Net: Globalisation and Education Policy Mobility. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Chakravorti, Bhaskar, Christopher Tunnard, and Ravi Shankar Chaturvedi. 2015. Where the Digital Economy Is Moving the Fastest. Harvard Business Review, February 2015. https://hbr.org/2015/02/where-the-digital-economy-is-moving-the-fastest.
- Code.org. 2013. What Most Schools Don’t Teach, 2013.Google Scholar
- ———. 2019. Examining Digital Disruption as Problem and Purpose in Australian Education Policy. The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives 18 (1): 111–127. https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/index.php/IEJ.Google Scholar
- Hay Newman, Lily, and Chris Kirk. 2016. It’s Apple’s 40th Anniversary. How Much Money Have You Given Them Over the Years? Slate, April 2016. http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/04/01/apple_s_40th_anniversary_how_much_old_products_cost_in_2016_dollars.html.
- Lynch, Matthew. 2018. Coding as a Literacy for the 21st Century. Education Week, January 2018. http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/education_futures/2018/01/coding_as_a_literacy_for_the_21st_century.html.
- OECD. 2016. Innovating Education and Educating for Innovation: The Power of Digital Technologies and Skills. Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264265097-en.
- Peters, Michael Adrian, Petar Jandrić, and Alexander Means. 2019. Introduction: Technological Unemployment and the Future of Work. In Education and Technological Unemployment, ed. Michael Adrian Peters, Petar Jandrić, and Alexander Means, 1–12. Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6225-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- ———. 2016. Is Technology Good for Education? Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Shorten, Bill. 2015. Budget Reply Speech 2015, 15 May Parliament of Australia. Canberra, ACT. http://www.billshorten.com.au/budget-reply-2015.
- Srnicek, Nick. 2017. Platform Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- Standing, Guy. 2016. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. 2nd ed. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
- Vivian, Rebecca, Katrina Falkner, and Nickolas Falkner. 2014. Addressing the Challenges of a New Digital Technologies Curriculum: MOOCs as a Scalable Solution for Teacher Professional Development. Research in Learning Technology 22 (September 2017). https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.24691.