The Hidden Reality of EdTech Work

What becomes possible when you start designing learning as infrastructure rather than intervention?

As I look ahead to the new year, I'm stepping back from traditional "edtech coaching" goals toward something that feels more authentic to the work I actually do, and what's most needed in my schools: building collaborative infrastructure/capacity.

I think many of us in EdTech struggle with an unspoken identity crisis. We're hired as "edtech coaches," "digital learning specialists," or any 70+ similar titles, and too often nobody else in the building really understands what we do beyond being one of the "IT people who helps with technology."

What I see is that every "technology integration" initiative is actually a complex stakeholder alignment project where success depends not just on technical implementation, but on managing the conflicts that arise when people's expectations, values, and working assumptions collide given scarce resources like time and attention.

Most of us doing this work possess strategic insights about learning ecosystems that we've never been taught or allowed to articulate. We see patterns that others miss because of where we sit—we understand the gap between a school's aspirations and daily reality because we live in that gap.

Here's an example: It has been roughly two decades since almost all of the most familiar models of technology integration in education arose: SAMR, TIM, TPACK, etc.

In the three K-12 schools I was hired to support digital transformation in the last decade, none of these tools addressed the key component each of the frameworks take completely for granted—a clear, well understood system of collaboration between Admin/IT/teachers/edtech integrationists to enable these collaborative conversations to happen consistently, or frankly—at all.

The result? Technology that can seem to function like a leaf blower: making a lot of noise but often just moving problems from one place to another; in effect creating as many problems as it solves.

Our challenge is particularly complex because while we're trying to create conditions for focused, collaborative learning, we're simultaneously navigating systems designed to fragment attention, extract data and monetize distraction.

To me, no matter what AI "FOMO" has everyone feverish, or "new directions" are shouted from administrative mountaintops, the sides of the mountain—how are people oriented and supported towards collaboration?—is the real need.

So, my goal is to reframe my work toward building collaborative capacity alongside individual skills. Instead of asking "How do I coach people to use tools better?" I'm asking "How do I help all of my stakeholders align their expectations and work through inevitable conflicts toward shared outcomes?"

By moving from training delivery to facilitating collaborative design processes, we co-create solutions that honor actual workflows and constraints. This kind of collaboration aims for a win-win outcome where all parties involved (Admin, IT, teachers) find a solution that satisfies each their needs, while compromise involves each party giving something up to reach a mutually acceptable solution, often resulting in a lose-lose scenario.

Given your current collaborative capacity and constraints, what becomes possible when you start designing learning as infrastructure rather than intervention?