Every year on 11th November, in honour of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s visionary idea of free, quality education to all, India celebrates National Education Day. But in 2025, the debate has changed substantially. We’re no longer just talking about access. We’re posing a more disturbing question: With technology becoming the core of our learning, who is in control?
If you happen to look at any classroom today, you’ll find students engrossed in smart screens. EdTech platforms suggest courses. Algorithms determine what content you see next. AI tutors adjust to your learning pace. It sounds like a great solution, even a breakthrough. But the fact is: we gave control to the machines without really thinking about where they are taking us.
The Early Promise of Technology in Education
Remember when technology in education was just an exciting add-on? Computer labs felt futuristic. Digital textbooks seemed like progress. Then came the pandemic, and suddenly, technology wasn’t optional anymore. It became the only option.
EdTech companies jumped at the opportunity. Tailored learning experiences, immediate response, and education that could be easily carried in one’s pocket were among the many features promised. The whole thing appeared to be a solution perfectly suited to the needs of students who had to manage several commitments at the same time. The end of uniform teaching methods was at hand. There was no need to wait for the slowest learner in class any longer. Your education, your pace, your choices.
Except, were they really your choices?
The Quiet Push of Technology in the Classroom
Here’s what most students don’t realise: those “personalised recommendations” aren’t neutral. Every time you click on a course, spend time on a topic, or skip a lesson, the algorithm is learning. Not learning to help you grow, necessarily, but learning to keep you engaged. To keep you clicking. To keep you subscribed.
The system decides what you should learn next based on patterns from millions of other users. For example, it could be that an algorithm for educational content on a platform could influence you to take easier courses rather than more difficult ones. It may also suggest that you consume small pieces of content, as this is the way to retain users on the platform, even though you would be better off with deep, sustained engagement with challenging material.
And the scariest part? You probably won’t even notice. The technology is designed to feel helpful, supportive, even intuitive. But helpful to whom?
When Learning Becomes a Data Game
Let’s talk about something most people prefer to ignore: you’re not the customer in most EdTech platforms. You’re the product. Your learning patterns, your strengths, your weaknesses, your time spent on different topics, all of it becomes data. That information is analyzed, packaged, and sometimes sold.
AI is already being used by universities and employers to screen candidates. Think of a world where your learning data from multiple online courses follow you everywhere. A machine decides you are not good at math because you had difficulty with calculus in your second year. Opportunities are being filtered out for you before you even know they exist.
The students today are being monitored, quantified, and classified, which is something completely different from what their predecessors experienced. Most of them do not know what is in their digital file.
The Teacher Problem
Teachers were not meant to be substituted by technology. On the contrary, it was meant to be their aid. But budget-conscious institutions saw an opportunity. Why hire more educators when you can buy a subscription to an AI teaching platform? Why invest in training teachers when an algorithm can deliver the same curriculum more efficiently?
The result? Teachers are increasingly getting pushed to the sidelines. The scope of their work is being gradually diminished, from that of an educator to that of a facilitator. From someone who challenges and inspires to someone who just monitors screens and troubleshoots tech issues.
Meanwhile, students are missing out on something essential: the human connection that is the basis of any learning. A teacher of quality is not only the one who passes the information. They interpret the atmosphere, notice when someone is emotionally struggling, besides the academic problems. They challenge you when they know it’s necessary and comfort you when they see you need it.
“Empathy, communication, creativity, adaptability, and emotional intelligence cannot be coded into an algorithm; they are cultivated through interaction, reflection, and real-world experience,” says Gaurav Jain, Director of Business Development at SP Jain London. No algorithm is capable of such a feat. It can imitate it, definitely. But imitation is not the same as real understanding.
Who Benefits?
Try to follow the money, and you’ll see the picture becoming clearer. The global EdTech market is a multi-billion-dollar industry. Companies are competing to be the leader in this area, supported by investors seeking returns. The focus is on growth rather than educational outcomes.
Such a situation brings about strange incentives. Platforms judge success by engagement numbers, not by how much students learn. They design courses to feel easy and rewarding because tougher ones get lower ratings and fewer sign-ups.
At the same time, conventional educational institutions are going through hard times to be able to compete. They have to take up technology not because it is better for learning, but because students want it.
Taking Back Control From Technology
So what’s the answer? Total rejection of technology is neither feasible nor desirable. The problem is not with the tools themselves. But the issue is who runs them and what they are optimised for.
“If we allow technology to quietly dictate the pace, content, and direction of our learning, we risk surrendering one of humanity’s greatest strengths, the freedom to think, to question, and to create.”, says Gaurav Jain. Students need to ask tougher questions. Know how your data is used before you sign up for any learning platform. Realise that “personalised learning” is in most cases, “learning that keeps you engaged with our platform”. Don’t settle for just the courses that make you feel good. Instead, pick ones that really challenge you.
Schools have to re-commit themselves to their mission. The use of technology should be the means to the end of learning. It is a mistake to let technology dictate the learning goals. Hire teachers who can use technology well in their teaching instead of cutting staff and relying on tech alone.
Furthermore, lawmakers should not remain inactive. The regulations that ensure the safety of the students’ data are what we need the most. We need it so that the decision-making process of algorithms is transparent. Also, we must be very cautious so that even if we introduce technology into education, it should not be another way for the wealthy to get more advantages.
On this National Education Day, Maulana Azad’s idea of education as a means to liberation seems to be more appropriate than ever. However, liberation requires independence. It entails knowing the structures that influence our decisions. It also involves asking difficult questions about who really has the power.
If we are not careful, we may find ourselves in a situation where our education system no longer serves us. Instead, it will be serving those algorithms that determine what we should learn, when we should learn it, and who we should be.
That is not education. That is programming.
