Search

The Chameleon Educational Policy Reforms' (CEPR) 25th anniversary was celebrated at the Global General Assembly with the 2075 Decennial Analysis of Schooling (DecAS) announcement of the attainment of a benefit-cost ratio of >1.0. The attainment of a global positive net value of education is directly linked to the educational reforms established to 'provide the right access to the right education for all people' (CEPR, 2050). The Chameleon reforms, informed by The Algorithm, produce policies that instantly adapt to the learning environment and needs of students. Barriers that effect students' learning are removed, in stark contrast to historic processes that viewed students as the barrier to be removed from learning environments. The case studies presented in this paper are guided by three questions: 'Where are we now?', 'How did we get here?', and 'Are we there yet?'. Questioning the 'here and now', directs a look back from educational engagement currently governed by the CEPR to key moments and movements in the attainment of past grand policy announcements that no child be left behind to live in poverty. And 'yet', leads to critical consideration of the ongoing engagement with The Algorithm. Artifacts detailing the 2045 commencement of annual donations from the richest two percent to fully fund global education remain sealed. The results of the annual donations are, however, publicly available; and some would say exploited (Gerve, 2072). Achieving self-sustainable economic cost-benefit status for the CEPR may release the Donators from those agreements and untether society from the Donators.

In this article, we reveal the nature and effects of data infrastructures on the authorisation of data that represent students and educational practitioners, including how such data can misrepresent and govern educational policy and practices in sometimes problematic ways. To better understand the governance capacities of data infrastructures, we draw upon notions of discursive practices and materiality, and apply these to a specific school management system, "OneSchool," in Queensland, Australia. We show how data infrastructures both promote and impede educational practitioners' use of data in decision making and daily practices. This includes precluding information about students' (positive) behaviours and omitting important enrolment information about students' Indigenous languages. By doing so, we show how data infrastructures govern in ways that authorise the preclusion and omission of data, thereby representing students and schooling.

Data infrastructures are suffused with stories of their past, present, and future that govern their use. This article draws on research into 'OneSchool', the state schooling data infrastructure used to manage student data in Queensland, Australia. The political, social, and technical histories of OneSchool's development are shown to govern its current use. In interviews, users from across Queensland's education system shared stories of the ways OneSchool developed to both impede and create problematic truths about students, teachers and systems. The ways in which OneSchool became known as the single point of truth are used to illustrate how the narratives that accompany data infrastructures govern data, those who record the data, and those who are represented within the data. Identifying the governance of stories that travel with data infrastructures facilitates the development of protective and productive data behaviours for educational practitioners globally who are negotiating the discourse of digital educational governance.

In this article, we reveal the nature and effects of data infrastructures on the authorisation of data that represent students and educational practitioners, including how such data can misrepresent and govern educational policy and practices in sometimes problematic ways. To better understand the governance capacities of data infrastructures, we draw upon notions of discursive practices and materiality, and apply these to a specific school management system, OneSchool, in Queensland, Australia. We show how data infrastructures both promote and impede educational practitioners' use of data in decision making and daily practices. This includes precluding information about students' (positive) behaviours and omitting important enrolment information about students' Indigenous languages. By doing so, we show how data infrastructures govern in ways that authorise the preclusion and omission of data, thereby representing students and schooling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data infrastructures are suffused with stories of their past, present, and future that govern their use. This article draws on research into 'OneSchool', the state schooling data infrastructure used to manage student data in Queensland, Australia. The political, social, and technical histories of OneSchool's development are shown to govern its current use. In interviews, users from across Queensland's education system shared stories of the ways OneSchool developed to both impede and create problematic truths about students, teachers and systems. The ways in which OneSchool became known as the single point of truth are used to illustrate how the narratives that accompany data infrastructures govern data, those who record the data, and those who are represented within the data. Identifying the governance of stories that travel with data infrastructures facilitates the development of protective and productive data behaviours for educational practitioners globally who are negotiating the discourse of digital educational governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]