Search

While ChatGPT has recently become very popular, AI has a long history and philosophy. This paper intends to explore the promises and pitfalls of the Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) AI and potentially future technologies by adopting a speculative methodology. Speculative future narratives with a specific focus on educational contexts are provided in an attempt to identify emerging themes and discuss their implications for education in the 21st century. Affordances of (using) AI in Education (AIEd) and possible adverse effects are identified and discussed which emerge from the narratives. It is argued that now is the best of times to define human vs AI contribution to education because AI can accomplish more and more educational activities that used to be the prerogative of human educators. Therefore, it is imperative to rethink the respective roles of technology and human educators in education with a future-oriented mindset.

This paper explores a possible future of postdigital education in 2050 using the means of social science fiction. The first part of the paper introduces the shift from 20th century primacy of physics to 21st century primacy of biology with an accent to new postdigital--biodigital reconfigurations and challenges in and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The second part of the paper presents a fictional speech at the graduation ceremony of a fictional military academy in a fictional East Asian country in 2050. This fictional world is marked by global warfare and militarization, and addressed graduates are the first generation of artificially evolved graduates in human history. The third part of the paper interprets the fictional narrative, contextualizes it into educational challenges of today, and argues for a dialogical, humanistic conception of new postdigital education in a biotech future.

This paper is a complete student-led, student-edited collective writing project (CWP) conducted virtually in Spring 2022 throughout the course Knowledge Socialism taught by professor Michael Peters for the Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal university. The CWP involves 4 international, 5 domestic Ph.D. students, and 2 senior Western scholars as reviewers, revealing their thoughts, arguments, understanding, and criticisms towards the creative economy status in East Asian countries (Japan and China mostly) higher education as reflected in the knowledge socialism narratives. Xiyuan as the lead author, co-editing with Woraport and Stefan, assigned each section to other authors and successfully devoted themself to organizing, proofreading, and revising the paper. Through a month of collective work, the final version of the paper elaborates on the contribution of East Asian creative universities and the economy as a whole to the knowledge socialism through co(labor)ation, with implications to the creative labors cultivation and shifted roles of students.

Taking credit for digitalization and platformization, China has initiated its open science infrastructure implementation and made an effort to focus on open access (OA) journals and data sharing over the past two decades. With the continuous development need, issues and concerns have caught in attention, including data accessibility, research transparency, general population awareness and communication of science, public trust in science, and scientific research and innovation efficiency. This paper has unfolded the maze of open science stance in China and elaborated on its current economy, openness and freedom extents, and future innovation potential towards a global open science community, within depth and scope of both the Chinese and Western scholars' interpretations.

This article explores ways in which higher education (HE) slogans, together with related frameworks and policies, increasingly invade the personal, cultural and positional values of individual staff and students. After a quick exploration of examples of embedded university values that are expected to be 'lived', the article outlines some epistemic implications in areas including epistemic positioning, epistemic injustice, epistemic space, data epistemologies, epistemic dominance and epistemic violence. Concluding that epistemologies are always lived, the article explores slogans at the intersections of biology, information and society using the case of excellence. Finally, the article briefly opens up the question of consent. Slogans, frameworks and policy texts exist as all other data assemblages that are subject to regulation. Should they also need to conform to such, or similar, regulations?

This article develops a post-determinist and a post-instrumentalist understanding of education and educational research through the lens of postdigital theory. We begin with historicizing current postdigital research by showing its intellectual ancestry and recognizing its rapidly changing nature. We move on to current state of the art, which we present in three wide themes. The first theme is the great convergence of various lower-level techno-scientific convergences, such as analogue--digital, physics-biology, and biology--information, which results in new epistemologies, ontologies and practices. The second theme is some consequences of the great convergence for education and pedagogy, which result in new postdigital ecopedagogies. The third theme is postdigital research, which is reconfigured by the great convergence towards a closer collaboration between traditional scientific fields and disciplines. We briefly outline four such reconfigurations (multidisciplinary, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and antidisciplinarity) and their implications. The article concludes with a brief list of directions for future work in the field.

The figure of the public intellectual and the act of public pedagogy are fairly central to varieties of critical pedagogy. Public intellectuals have historically been those who speak truth to power and challenge dominant ways of thinking, and critical pedagogy argues that academics have to take up this call, leaving the ivory towers and entering the public sphere. Critical pedagogues are not alone in their concern about the retreat of intellectuals or academics from public life, yet to what extent are these notions of the public intellectual tied to a pre-digital age, and how might the digital age undermine these notions? In this paper, we argue that the digital has facilitated the death of the traditional public intellectual as the means of intellectual production have been dispersed throughout society. Turning to Paolo Virno's writing on potential and history, we examine the pedagogy of the public intellectual and present a new configuration of learning and studying that emphasizes the infinite potentiality of history and the present. Whereas most scholarship defines learning as the actualization of potential, we show that potential is never fully actualized. Such a configuration introduces the need to historically saturate political acts with meaning, which we argue is the new task of public intellectuals in the postdigital age. In order to do this, however, academics who wish to contribute to social movements must embed themselves and operate within social movements, joining the leadership of organic intellectuals and professional revolutionaries, and even viewing their own critical work not as the production of new knowledge but rather the amplification of existing knowledges generated through these struggles, shifting the educational register from epistemology to ontology, and the educational mode of operation from teaching to collective studying.

Purpose: This paper aims at exploring politics of contemporary knowledge cultures and possible directions for responding to the postdigital challenge. Design/Approach/Methods: This paper researches history and present of several prominent strands and readings of the knowledge economy. Following Caruso's work (2016), it examines more closely the differences between the managerial paradigm and the cognitive capitalism paradigm. Recognizing the postdigital nature of contemporary knowledge cultures, it points towards a postdigital merger between the managerial paradigm and the cognitive capitalism paradigm. Findings: The paper identifies individual and social tensions between industrial and post-industrial modes of production and rapidly changing dynamic of social development. It examines the relationships between knowledge cultures and digital technologies. Based on recent insights by the father of the World Wide Web Tim Berners-Lee and his non-determinist views to digital technologies, it identifies knowledge cultures as sites of political struggle against various (material and non-material, technological and non-technological) closures over access to information and knowledge. Finally, it briefly outlines possible directions for responding to the postdigital challenge of knowledge cultures. Originality/Value: The paper provides an original contribution to theory of knowledge cultures and its relationships to the postdigital condition.

This article starts with a brief analysis of what it means to be an intellectual within the US tradition of critical pedagogy. Pointing toward important socio-technological transformations which have taken place in the past few decades, the article situates the concept of the intellectual into the contemporary postdigital context. The article looks into two main areas of intellectual work which seem to have undergone significant transformations--automation and post-truth. It develops possible responses to recent challenges in these areas and shows that contemporary intellectuals working in the tradition of critical pedagogy need to take technology seriously. Heading toward the conclusion, the article promotes Greta Thunberg as an important example of a postdigital intellectual. Our analyses show that critical pedagogy has an important role in the development of contemporary intellectual work. Aiming at constantly transforming challenges, however, old theories require constant reconceptualization in and for our postdigital context. Within this mash-up of questions and answers old and new, we identify a starting point for this reconceptualization in the notion of critical praxis.

This is a collective writing project that is part of the larger design of Infantologies, Infanticides and Infantilizations; a quartet that explores the philosophy of infants from thematic perspectives, that puts infants at the centre of our reflections, and that encourages a different academic style of thinking.

This paper explores relationships between environment and education after the Covid-19 pandemic through the lens of philosophy of education in a new key developed by Michael Peters and the Philosophy of Education Society of Australasia (PESA). The paper is collectively written by 15 authors who responded to the question: Who remembers Greta Thunberg? Their answers are classified into four main themes and corresponding sections. The first section, 'As we bake the earth, let's try and bake it from scratch', gathers wider philosophical considerations about the intersection between environment, education, and the pandemic. The second section, 'Bump in the road or a catalyst for structural change?', looks more closely into issues pertaining to education. The third section, 'If you choose to fail us, we will never forgive you', focuses to Greta Thunberg's messages and their responses. The last section, 'Towards a new (educational) normal', explores future scenarios and develops recommendations for critical emancipatory action. The concluding part brings these insights together, showing that resulting synergy between the answers offers much more then the sum of articles' parts. With its ethos of collectivity, interconnectedness, and solidarity, philosophy of education in a new key is a crucial tool for development of post-pandemic (philosophy of) education.

This paper examines relationships between learning and technological change and argues that we urgently need new ways to approach what it means to learn in the context of a global Fourth Industrial Revolution. It briefly introduces the postdigital perspective, which considers the digital 'revolution' as something that has already happened and focuses to its reconfiguration. It claims that what we access, how we access it, what we do with it, and who then accesses what we have done, are important elements of a postdigital world worthy of closer examination. Focusing to recent debates about postdigital collective intelligence, we develop the concept of postdigital we-learn by showing that it might help us, amongst other things, to counter the idea of a lone human accessing education primarily for future individual, economic profit, as prescribed by the neoliberal learning economy. Building on new schools of thought emerging in response to the expansion of non-human (algorithmic) agency, we refine the concept of postdigital we-learn as a gathering between humans and machines. The consequences of this gathering are uncomfortable, as they imply unlearning elements of both capitalism and critical pedagogy. However, such unlearning is inherent to 'a critical pedagogy of becoming' and positions postdigital we-learn as a suitable framework for understanding and development of emancipatory, critical learning in our postdigital reality.

Critical pedagogy is in crisis. To address this crisis, this paper reinvents Paulo Freire's concept of utopia in and for our age of the Anthropocene. Understood as a system, postdigital critical utopia provides us with normative foundations and returns agency from invisible data and algorithms to human beings. Understood as a process, postdigital critical utopia unmasks the myth of neutrality and adds an important element of myth, religion, ritual, and faith. Understood as an orientation, postdigital critical utopia needs to be balanced by dystopia, integrate environmental considerations, and act with a combination of epistemical curiosity and hope. Theoretical and practical attempts at introducing advanced technology to reimagine new utopias now take place in media theory, hacking, activism, and small pockets of the academia. To transcend its own crisis and remain relevant, contemporary critical pedagogy movement must urgently join these attempts. However, catching up with technological development is only the tip of a much larger iceberg. In order to take the lead in processes of modernization, critical pedagogy movement needs to actively develop utopian visions and techno-administrative systems which may support these visions.

This paper is an experiment in collective writing conducted in Autumn 2019 at the Faculty of Education at Beijing Normal University. The experiment involves 12 international masters' students reading the course based on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), their professor Michael Peters, visiting professor Petar Jandric, and a mix of senior Chinese and Western scholars. To successfully complete the course, the students were required to produce a 3000-word paper of publishable quality. As part of this writing process we decided to engage in the experiment of collective writing where we aimed to produce a single paper consisting of the abstracts. This collective paper was developed in 7 steps: (1) students submitted their 250-word abstracts; (2) students were introduced into the methodology of collective writing, and 2 student-editors -- Ogunniran Moses Oladele and Benjamin Green -- volunteered to work on the paper; (3) Michael Peters wrote the introduction; (4) abstracts were expanded to 500 words and integrated into a single document; (5) Petar Jandric began to edit the paper and write a conclusion; (6) students presented their abstracts in the class, where Michael Peters and Petar Jandric provided direct feedback; (7) revised abstracts were again integrated into a single document by student editors, and proofread / copy-edited in several exchanges with the instructors; and (8) the paper was subject to the process of open review, and the reviewer's comments were included in the paper. Resulting from months of collective work, the final paper provides a wide range of views ad perspectives to the question of education as a part of the BRI initiative.

This article focuses on the early stages of an international project on gamifying national identity. It examines the production of the content required for developing a sophisticated and engaging approach to pedagogical innovation in education, through game-based learning. This will encourage individuals to think about both European and national identity, specifically within the context of the European Union (EU). At a time when the EU faces significant challenges, a better understanding and appreciation of the role of national and supra-national identity and belonging in Europe is clear. RU EU? -- an Erasmus+ funded project -- aims to develop an innovative online game to help students and others enhance their understanding of their own national and European identities and challenge attitudes and prejudices. The content development of the game has brought together experts with socio-political knowledge, pedagogical understanding and technical expertise. This article discusses the early stages in the content development process, during which we amassed material from literature reviews, academic interviews and student focus groups and surveys. We sought to ensure that the content of the game reflected the issues raised within the game development lifecycle and our article describes our engagement with this material and its integration into game content.

This paper explores relationships between knowledge production and academic publication and shows that the current political economy of mainstream academic publishing has resulted from a complex interplay between large academic publishers, academics, and hacker-activists. The process of publishing is a form of 'social production' that takes place across the economy, politics and culture, all of which are in turn accommodating both old and new technology in our postdigital age. Technologies such as software cannot be separated from human labour, academic centres cannot be looked at in isolation from their margins, and the necessity of transdisciplinary approaches does not imply the disappearance of traditional disciplines. In the postdigital age, the concept of the margins has not disappeared, but it has become somewhat marginal in its own right. We need to develop a new language of describing what we mean by 'marginal voices' in the social relations between knowledge production and academic publication. Universities require new strategies for cohabitation of, and collaboration between, various socio-technological actors, and new postdigital politics and practice of knowledge production and academic publishing.

This paper reviews two main historical approaches to creativity: the Romanticist approach, based on the culture of the irrational, and the Enlightenment approach, based on the culture of the objective. It defends a paradigm of creativity as a sum of rich semiotic systems that form the basis of distributed knowledge and learning, reviews historical ideas of the university, and identifies two conflicting mainstream models in regards to understanding of the university as a public good: the 'Public' University circa 1960-1980, and the 'post-historical' university. Based on practical experiences, and on previous works by Peters and Jandric, it develops the new model of 'the creative university as digital public university,' and argues that it provides a useful philosophical goal for directing present and future practices of the contemporary university.

Building on Peters' and Jandric's previous work on curriculum as 'text' and 'discourse' (Peters, M. A., & Jandric, P. (2018b). The curious relationships between discourse, genre and curriculum. "Open Review of Educational Research," 5(1).), this article seeks to refresh and extend the central metaphor of 'curriculum as text' that is adopted as the organizing metaphor of William Pinar's 2006 book "Understanding Curriculum: An Introduction to the Study of Historical and Contemporary Curriculum Discourses." We undertake this analysis by referring to five theoretical notions: Jorge Luis Borges' 'The garden of forking paths' (1941), Roland Barthes' structuralism (1977), Julia Kristeva's intertextuality (1966/1986), Ted Nelson's hypertextuality (1965), and Gilles Deleuze's and Felix Guattari's extratextuality (2004/1980). In conclusion, we show that the text is neither simply an artefact nor is it simply a sequence of uttered sounds. The text does not solely reside within the domain of the reader and cannot be considered as the exclusive domain of the author. Looking at relationships between text, textuality, curriculum, and technology, we show that the metaphor of 'curriculum as text' is inherently postdigital and that it requires development of a new postdigital language of inquiry and new postdigital forms of textual and non-textual expressions of that language in the years to come.

This paper explores the central metaphors of curriculum as 'text' and 'discourse' that are adopted as the organizing metaphors for William Pinar's 2006 book "Understanding Curriculum: An Introduction to the Study of Historical and Contemporary Curriculum Discourses." Using the works of Michel Foucault, the paper explores relationships between discourse and curriculum as procedures of exclusion. Moving on to genre as a literary form, the paper analyses the pedagogical form of the essay and the rise of the article as one of the most pervasive forms that underlie academic culture. In our postdigital age, however, both the article and journal have significantly changed. This paper shows that a historicizing of the curriculum, understood as an approach to curriculum studies, is a process of denaturalization of commonly accepted assumptions about the curriculum. Therefore, problematizing the concepts of 'discourse', 'genre', and 'text' enables us to understand the historical and constructed notion of the curriculum and to examine its contemporary postdigital forms.

In the year that George Ritzer publishes the ninth edition of "The McDonaldization of Society," moving his famous theory firmly "Into the Digital Age," critical educator Petar Jandric and sociologist Sarah Hayes invited George to a dialogue on the digital transformation of McDonaldization and its critical application to Higher Education. In this article, George first traces for us the origins of his theory that has endured for four decades. A key dimension of McDonaldization is the 'iron cage' of control, via rationalization. Once contained within physical sites of bricks and mortar, now, we encounter a 'velvet cage' in sites of digital consumption, at the hands of non-human technologies, that threaten human labor and autonomy. Whilst the concept of the McUniversity is not without some critique, this interview provides compelling reasons to open new dialogue about McDonaldization in augmented settings such as Higher Education. With the rise of prosuming machines such as blockchain and bitcoin, that can both produce and consume without intervention from human 'prosumers', universities cannot afford to ignore the challenges of prosumer capitalism, which George concludes, will explode into unprecedented and unpredictable directions in the years to come.

Peer review is central to academic publishing. Yet for many it is a mysterious and contentious practice, which can cause distress for both reviewers, and those whose work is reviewed. This paper, produced by the Editors' Collective, examines the past and future of peer review in academic publishing. The first sections consider how peer review has been defined and practised in changing academic contexts, and its educational significance in the development of scholarship. The paper then explores major historical and contemporary issues around identity, diversity, anonymity, and the review process, and the related power of editors versus reviewers in academic publishing. Finally, the paper discusses the case of new scholars as reviewers engaging in neoliberal labour, before concluding with some brief recommendations based on our analysis.

This conversation between Peter McLaren and Petar Jandric brings about some of the most recent and deepest of McLaren's insights into the relationship between revolutionary critical pedagogy and liberation theology, and outlines the main directions of development of McLaren's thought during and after "Pedagogy of Insurrection." In the conversation, McLaren reveals his personal and theoretical path to liberation theology. He argues for the relevance of liberation theology for contemporary social struggles, links it with social sciences, and addresses some recent critiques of "Pedagogy of Insurrection." McLaren identifies the idolatry of money as the central point of convergence between liberation theology and Marxism. Developing this thought further, he asserts that Jesus was a communist. McLaren analyses the revolutionary praxis of liberation theology in Latin America, and concludes that the struggle needs to avoid violence and endure without losing tenderness. He analyzes the international politics of liberation theology and shows that liberation theology was demonized by the US administration because it works for the poor. McLaren then expands experiences from Latin America towards a global ethics of solidarity, criticizes Church positions on various matters, and insists on a critical approach to Church dogmas. He explores theoretical and practical dissonances between Marxism and Christianity, and expands them towards a more general dichotomy between the material and the spiritual. He explores the Christian eschaton--the arrival of the Kingdom of God--and links it to Marx's prophecy of the future socialist society. Finally, he explores ecumenical opportunities of liberation theology and firmly links it with the arrival of the socialist society.

Dewey was perhaps the foremost theorist and advocate of participatory democracy as an ethical ideal based on a belief and faith in human experience as a general theory of education that would generate the requisite aims and methods for what he called "organized intelligence" and what we might call today "collective intelligence"--that is, as he says, "faith in democracy is all one with faith in experience and education". In this paper we revisit Dewey's "Democracy and Education. An introduction to the philosophy of education" (1916/2001) in order to evaluate the growth and development of democracy against the decline of social democracy in the West. We identify the three turns which separate democracy of Dewey's times and democracy of today--the global, the ecological, and the digital turn--and relate them to changing notions of citizenship. We analyse complex interplay between the turns, and show that they cannot be understood and/or analysed in separation. While the identified turns have indeed significantly changed circumstances in which Dewey produced his understanding of democracy, we conclude that his work still carries a lot of value and call for its reinvention in and for the age of digital reason.

This article results from a collaborative investigation into Antipodean theory in education by members of the Editors' Collective (www.editorscollective.org.nz). The Prologue contains a brief personal account of the South Project (www.southernperspectives.net), as an example of the contemporary projects and activities falling under the banner of "Antipodean" ways of working and thinking. The Introduction briefly reviews the history of (mainly Western) ideas about the Antipodes, from classical Greek philosophy through to the contemporary globalised era. This is followed by a synopsis of the motivations, purposes and benefits of Antipodean theory, with more detailed examinations of equality, indigeneity, replication and creation as some of its central elements. We consider the role of Antipodean thinking as a located critical theory for education, and a way to defend our aspirations for equality and social justice against the incursions of neoliberalism, today and in the future.

This conversation explores unschooling through theory and personal experience of Astra Taylor, who examines deschooling alongside the continua of Freedom/Oppression, Personal Control/Personal Autonomy, Solitude/Boredom, Privilege/Social Reproduction, Socialisation/Democracy. Taylor reveals complex relationships between the main strands of her work: film-making and activism. She analyses the dual nature of the contemporary university, and defines it as a place of oppression and freedom. Taylor explains own preference for activism over academic work, talks about her involvement in Occupy Wall Street Movement, and describes her experience as one of the founders of the Rolling Jubilee campaign. Taylor moves on to argue that there is a need to augment traditional trade unions in the US, and introduces an alternative organization called the Debt Collective. In her analyses Taylor pays particular attention to digital media, which serve as important vehicles for her activism. It is here that she develops a sophisticated theory of cultural work in the digital context, the rising tensions between amateurs and professionals, market-oriented platforms for social networking, and political economy of digital work including but not limited to personal branding. Finally, Taylor shows that contemporary social movements have a lot to learn from their historical counterparts, links the past and the present of activism, and asserts that the contemporary left is going to have to refight some old battles on the new networked terrain.

This article is concerned with developing a philosophical approach to a number of significant changes to academic publishing, and specifically the global journal knowledge system wrought by a range of new digital technologies that herald the third age of the journal as an electronic, interactive and mixed-media form of scientific communication. The paper emerges from an Editors' Collective, a small New Zealand-based organisation comprised of editors and reviewers of academic journals mostly in the fields of education and philosophy. The paper is the result of a collective writing process.

In this interview Guy Standing outlines the main links between the precariat and the universal basic income. He briefly comments on the relationships of his work to traditional Marxism, and expands his critique of the precariat towards information and communication technologies. He identifies common features of the global precariat, and links them to creation of a common global class identity. Moving on to transformative potentials of the universal basic income, he dismisses ancient labels and frameworks as unnecessary and potentially misleading, and calls for reinvention of the contemporary language of progress. Finally, he seeks critical emancipation of the precariat in urgent decommodification of all aspects of education and information.

This conversation focuses on a book published in 1983 that examined "animism," the tendency to regard non-living entities as living and sentient. "The Intimate Machine" suggested that animism will be fully exploited by artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics, generating artefacts that will engage the user in "social" interactions so that eventually people will form close and beneficial social relationships with artificial "companion systems." The author of the book, clinical psychologist Neil Frude, is asked to reflect on his book and, although he admits that his techno-optimism in the 1980s was exaggerated, it is clear that he still holds to his major thesis. He considers "virtual pets," such as "Tamagotchi," "Furby" and "Sony's Aibo," and considers why they did not evolve into more sophisticated social artefacts. Frude identifies three vital elements needed for a successful artificial companion--animism, artistry and AI--and acknowledges that the last of these has been the weak link. However, even simple AI programs can make an impressive impact when skilfully implemented. He emphasizes the relevance of characterization, pointing to examples in recent computer-generated animations. In the context of interactive technology, the addition of character and artificial personality will generate companion machines that are highly engaging and exceptionally appealing. Insights into the likely nature and roles of artificial companions, and how people will relate to them, are available in the science fiction corpus, and this literature has also examined relevant ethical and social issues. Finally, he considers some of the possible clinical applications of such systems in both physical health and mental health and he also reflects on some of the potential dangers of the kind of artefact that he is envisioning.

In this article, Larry Cuban discusses his ideas about the topic of this Special Issue of E-learning and Digital Media "Networked Realms and Hoped-For Futures: A Trans-Generational Dialogue" with one of its co-editors, Petar Jandric. The conversation explores the historical relationships between education and information and communication technologies and draws lessons for present and future. The first part of the conversation explores methodological issues pertaining to historical thinking about schools and computers in the network society. It identifies a continued need to recognize historical patterns, including those in thought experiments, and shows that Rogers' theory of diffusion of innovations should be supplemented by more nuanced approaches to the historical relationships between schools and computers. The second part of the conversation presents an attempt to explain historical patterns using the ancient notion of magical thinking. It explores why teachers use computers in their private lives much more than in their professional lives, and "school anarchy" caused by student usage of personally owned devices in classrooms. It creates a baseline for comparison between desktop / laptop computers and various hand-held devices, and dismantles the quest for deschooling as another example of magical thinking. The third part of the conversation examines the ideological role of information and communication technologies in contemporary school reform and explores their potential for democracy. It analyses the contemporary transformations of traditional publishing formats such as books, journals and newspapers, and their reflections in the world of academia. It examines the changing role of teachers as public intellectuals, and the role of information and communication technologies in their public exposure. The last part of the conversation analyses the process of "educationalizing" various social and economic problems, and links it to contemporary technologies. It revisits Larry Cuban's predictions from "Teachers and Machines: Classroom Use of Technology Since 1920" (1986), and reminds us that accurate predictions are rare, while inaccurate ones are not only common but often memorable. Finally, it examines why it is so hard to balance education with information and communication technologies.

This conversation is the first systemic attempt to capture Peter McLaren's ideas about the relationships between critical revolutionary pedagogy and virtuality. It introduces the main problems with educational postmodernism, explains Peter's return towards the Marxist-humanist trajectory, and addresses contemporary challenges to Marx's dialectical thought. It analyses global changes in the structure of production, and juxtaposes the mass society shaped by one-way media such as television with the network society shaped by bi-directional communication powered by the Internet. The conversation reveals critical potentials of ecopedagogy at the intersections between education and information and communication technologies and analyses the main messages from Ivan Illich. It explores the main features of the emerging digital cultures, identifies underlying values and ideologies, and links them to the divisions between the global South and the global North. It analyses distinct features of contemporary youth movements and revisits the emerging transformations of the concept of the state. It looks into the relationships between information and power, explores algorithmic regulation through technological innovation, and analyses various challenges pertaining to "big data". Finally, it provides a brief insight into Peter McLaren's modus operandi and his personal thoughts and feelings about information and communication technologies.

This article reflects on the position of people in, against and beyond information and communication technologies. Firstly, using Jandric and Kuzmanic's work on digital postcolonialism, Raymond Williams's work on residual and emergent cultures, and Deleuze and Guattari's insights into the dynamics between territorialization, de-territorialization and re-territorialization, it develops a theoretical framework for inquiry into the hybrid identity of the contemporary university. Then, through critical discourse analysis (CDA), the article moves on to analyse the ways in which technology discourse resides in the dominating ideology of technological determinism and co-opts with neoliberal agendas by omitting humans from explicit mention in UK policy documents. It shows that true counter-hegemonic practice against dominating social practices is possible only through reinvigorating the central position of human beings in regards to information and communication technologies. Within the developed theoretical framework, it seeks openings to intervene subversively into current relationships between technologies, people, and (higher) education, and to identify opportunities for building a non-determinist identity of the contemporary university that reaches beyond the single-minded logic of techno-scientific development. In the process, it situates Paulo Freire's insights into critical pedagogy in the context of the network society, and places the relationships between human beings, language and information and communication technologies amongst central questions of today's (higher) education and society at large.

This article explores contemporary potentials for Illich's 1971 proposal to replace institutional schooling with non-institutional large-scale educational infrastructure, and shows that his visions of deschooling through technology could be embodied on the internet in the form of deschooling virtuality. This conclusion is methodologically restricted in three ways. First, the concept of deschooling heavily depends on one's views to human nature. Second, deschooling society is dialectically intertwined with the concept of conviviality, while deschooling virtuality is based on non-convivial technologies which lead directly to radical monopoly. Third, even the most developed deschooling virtuality might never transform into deschooling society. Despite those restrictions, the article concludes that Illich's deschooling has graduated from mere vision to the real opportunity. Realization of this opportunity will depend on future scientific and social developments and, ultimately, on collective human decision.

This paper explores the philosophical background of one of the most widespread Web based sources used in contemporary education--Wikipedia. Theoretical part consists of the basic notions of anarchist philosophy of education such as human nature, work and society. Through Chomsky's prism of visions and goals, it provides the frame for further analysis. The practical part shows that Wikipedia creates a virtual anarchist society: open, ludic engagement in this society is fully interwoven with the specific kind of education of all its members. Offering an insight into the often neglected area of social and political ideas underlying the use of technology in education, this paper offers a conceptual bridge between contemporary Digital Immigrant educators and their predominantly Digital Native patrons, thus contributing to the better understanding of education in and for the third millennium. (Contains 1 figure.)

The diversity of the EU is both a strength and a weakness, with Issues of National and European identity contributing to division, marginalization and exclusion. Many European citizens have very firmly entrenched, but frequently simplistic, views about the value of the European Union as good (pro EU) or bad (anti EU). To promote a culture of increased tolerance and inclusion, EU citizens need to develop a more mature and nuanced understanding of National and European identity that considers the validity of others' points of view. Serious Games are increasingly recognised as active and effective methods for tackling complex social problems. Therefore, the RU EU? (are you EU?) project developed a game to increase players' awareness of the complexity of European identity and values, to help players develop a more detailed understanding of European identity and promote critical thinking about their own views, the views of others, and the wider societal consequences. In this paper we describe the RU EU? Game as a case study explaining the thinking behind the game design. We outline the early design tasks that led to development of the multicomponent model of European identity that we used in the game, the adoption of the journalist narrative and the tools that assisted the player in his goal of compiling and publishing a set of articles about European identity. We discuss the potential of the game tools and mechanics to be used more widely to promote social understanding and inclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]