Reflection #1 

“Technology will never replace great teachers, but in the hands of great teachers, it’s transformational”

When I first considered the statement "Technology will never replace great teachers, but in the hands of great teachers, its transformational", I immediately thought about how dependent education has become on digital technology. From online learning like during covid to the new developments in artificial intelligence, technology can make information more accessible and learning more engaging. However, after engaging with the readings I have come to realise that technology itself is not what transforms education, rather it is how teachers use it to support learning. 

During my process of using Gibbs reflective cycle (The University of Edinburgh, 2024), I initially viewed technology quite positively. As a student, i regularly use technology to research information, communicate and complete university work such as this. This ultimately made me assume that students are naturally comfortable and capable with digital technology also known as "Digital Natives" (Prensky, 2001). However, Krischner and De Bruychere challenged this assumption by questioning the concept of the "Digital Native", they argue that being familiar with technology does not automatically mean that students possess the skills to use it effectively for learning. This made me reconsider the role of the teacher, students may have acess to enormous amounts of information, but teachers remain important in helping students interpret and evaluate information. 

My evaluation of technology also became more critical when considering the evidence surrounding its educational impact. The reading "Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors
influencing schools’ digital capacity and transformation" picks ideas that the impact of digital technologies is influenced by factors including teacher capability, school infrastructure and the way technology is integrated into teaching. This suggests that simply placing technology into a classroom does not guarantee better learning outcomes. The teacher's pedagogical decisions remain central (Timotheou et al., 2022). A similar view is evaluated in the reading "Evaluating the evidence of educational technology: part 2 - enabling learning" which encourages consideration of whether technology genuinely enables learning rather than assuming that newer technology is automatically better (Spotlights, 2025). 

The concept of the digital divide further changed my perspective. (McElroy, 2021) highlights the inequalities in student's access to technology and reliable internet. I realised that describing technology as a universal solution can overlook students who do not have equal access to digital sources. A great teacher however can be found anywhere, and must understand not only what technology can do but also its limitations and its potential to disadvantage some learners. 

Reflecting on these ideas, I now interpret the driving question differently. Technology does not diminish the importance of teachers, instead it can extend what effective teaching can look like. For example, digital tools can provide alternative ways for students to collaborate, communicate and demonstrate their understandings as well as accessing resources. However, these benefits depend on the teacher intentionally selecting technology that aligns with learning goals. 

As a future teacher, my action plan is to use technology purposefully rather than simply because it is available. I want to ask myself "does this technology improve the learning experience and will it benefit them superiorly compared to if the lesson plan was taught without it?" Ultimately, this reflection has reinforced my belief that technology is most transformational when it is guided by strong meaningful relationships with teachers who understand their students. Technology may change the classroom but the teacher remains the person who gives that technology a educational purpose.