Salta al menu principale di navigazione Salta al contenuto principale Salta al piè di pagina del sito
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articoli

N. 1 Special Issue (2025)

Re-assembling the Digital World, or the Public Sociology of Digital Education Platforms

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/erpoa1SI-2025oa19373
Inviata
10 febbraio 2025
Pubblicato
18-11-2025

Abstract

In the contemporary educational landscape, digital technologies have become an obligatory passage point, often appearing neutral, to the extent that they are rarely put under scrutiny and discussion. However, these are necessary steps in order to eventually reimaging them to attune to specific educational discursive frames. This article moves from the assumption that there is a need for educational researchers, educators and other relevant educational subjects to coalesce in a collective mobilisation that brings at the centre of public and policy debate the politics of digital education technology through a work of collective problematisation and reinvention. In order to contribute to this urgency, this article thus presents the theoretical and methodological underpinnings, and the results, of an experiment in what we call a public sociology of educational technology. Drawing on Michael Burawoy's plea for a Public Sociology (2004), our aim was to design and play with a methodology apt to carry out a work of creative and affirmative critique. The experiment was carried out by the L@bed Collective during the second edition of the Reclaim the Tech (RTT) Festival, held in Bologna in May 2024. During the workshop we invited our public to engage in a conversation about the design of the UNICA platform and its performative effects. We did this through a combination of two methods, walkthrough and a/r/tography, aimed respectively to playfully dis- and re-assemble materially the UNICA platform. We present some preliminary considerations on the insights which we gathered from such an experiment in public sociology of educational technology, with a specific reference to both the potential and limits of our methodology and the insights of such a collective work of denaturalisation, problematisation and reinvention.

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. Albrecht, C., Aversa, E., Bassett, K., Bounegru, L., Chun, W., & Dhavan, N. (2019). Research Persona as Digital Method. -- https://wiki.digitalmethods.net/Dmi/SummerSchool2019ResearchPersonaAsDigitalMethod.
  2. Akrich, M. (1992). The De-Scription of Technical Objects. In W.E. Bijker & J. Law (eds.). Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (pp. 205-225). Cambridge: MIT Press.
  3. Biesta, G. J. (2015). Beautiful risk of education. London-New York: Routledge.
  4. Biesta, G. (2017). What If?: Art Education beyond Expression and Creativity. In Ch. Naughton, G.J.J. Biesta & D. Cole. Art, artist and pedagogy (pp. 11-20). London, New York: Routledge.
  5. Burawoy, M. (2004). For Public Sociology. American Sociological Review, 70, pp. 4-28.
  6. Cahnmann-Taylor, & Siegesmund, R. (eds.) (2018). Arts-Based Research in Education Foundations for Practice. London-New York: Routledge.
  7. Decuypere, M., Grimaldi, E., & Landri, P. (2021). Introduction: Critical Studies of Digital Education Platforms. Critical Studies in Education, 62(1), pp. 67-81.
  8. Dernikos, B.P., Lesko, N., McCall, S.D., & Niccolini, A.D. (2020). Feeling education. In: B.P. Dernikos, N. Lesko, S.D. McCall, & A.D. Niccolini. Mapping the affective turn in education (pp. 3-27). London-New York: Routledge.
  9. Dewey, J. (2005). Art as experience. London: Penguin.
  10. Eco, U. (1971). Opera aperta. Milano: Bompiani.
  11. Eisner, E.W. (1997). Promise and Perils of Alternative Forms of Data Representation. Educational Researcher, 26(6), pp. 4-10.
  12. Gorur, R., Dey, J. (2021). Making the User Friendly: The Ontological Politics of Digital Data Platforms. Critical Studies in Education, 62(1), pp. 67-81.
  13. Gorur, R., Landri, P., & Normand, R. (eds.) (2024). Rethinking Sociological Critique in Contemporary Education: Reflexive Dialogue and Prospective Inquiry. London-New York: Routledge.
  14. Grimaldi, E., Landri, P., & Taglietti, D. (2020). Una sociologia pubblica del digitale a scuola. Scuola democratica, Early Access. DOI: 10.12828/97096.
  15. Hickey-Moody, A. (2013). Little Public Spheres. In J. Burdick, J.A. Sandlin & M.P. O’Malley (eds.). Problematizing Public Pedagogy (pp. 117-129). London: Routledge.
  16. Hodgson, N., Vlieghe, J., Zamojski, P. (2018). Manifesto for a Post-Critical Pedagogy punctum books. Santa Barbara (CA): punctum books. DOI: 10.21983/P3.0193.1.00.
  17. Irwin, R. L. (2013). Becoming a/r/tography. Studies in art education, 54(3), pp. 198-215.
  18. Leavy, P. (2020). Method Meets Art: Arts-based Research Practice. New York: Guilford publications.
  19. Lefebvre, H. (1974). La Production de l’espace. Paris: Anthropos.
  20. Light, B., Burgess, J., & Duguay, S. (2018). The Walkthrough Method: An Approach to the Study of Apps. New media & society, 20(3), pp. 881-900.
  21. Oliverio, S. (2020). ‘Post-critiquiness’ as Nonviolent Thing-centredness. On Education. Journal for Research and Debate, 3(9). DOI: 10.17899/on_ed.2020.9.6.
  22. Selwyn, N. (2024). The Critique of Digital Education: Time for a (Post) Critical Turn. In R. Gorur, P. Landri & R. Normand (eds.), Rethinking Sociological Critique in Contemporary Education (pp. 48-62). London-New York: Routledge.
  23. Springgay, S., Irwin, R.L., & Kind, S.W. (2005). A/r/tography as Living Inquiry through Art and Text. Qualitative inquiry, 11(6), pp. 897-912.
  24. Thomson, P. (2024). Why Bother with Arts Education in Schools?. The Australian Educational Researcher, pp. 1-21.
  25. Webb, P. T., Sellar, S., & Gulson, K. N. (2020). Anticipating Education: Governing Habits, Memories and Policy-futures. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), pp. 284-297.
  26. Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials. The Sociological Review, 38(1suppl.), pp. 58-99.
  27. Wright, P., Down, B., & Rankin, S. (2021). Youth Participatory Arts, Learning and Social Transformation. Leida: Brill.