So, we are now moving to the last debate!!
The topic here was “Technology has led to a more equitable society” with the video about the agreeing side’s opening statement, linked here. The agreeing side began with one of the debaters expressing that the digital divide represents a significant barrier to equitable education. It further elucidates that the principles of equitable use of technology outline several important principles for its application. Cost-effectiveness while using digital tools is necessary to contemplate before the money is spent.
There are 5 things that Darmian specifies are necessary for equitable distribution of technology. Among them, accessibility to the tools is paramount. Various formats for the same content and accommodation for different learning styles should be kept in mind. Separability is the ability to distinguish one type of learning module from another. Content must be separated before it is provided to the students. Full utility allows students to make full use of available tools. She also inculcated avoiding pitfalls into the video which could be that we view learners as mere consumers of technology and fail to consider cultural perspectives. She also warned against reinforcing unwanted practices and ignoring learners’ autonomy. Local perspectives and social backgrounds are important to look at when technology is being integrated and it needs to address educational inequalities post-covid era. The article from Li et al. (2024) emphasizes the need for change and the closing of learning gaps.
The disagreeing side had many arguments on their end. They started with the argument that technology has many implementation problems and it causes the digital divide. The haves and the have-nots are divided on both sides of the digital divide, with a distinct division when urban and rural populations are compared. Between the government, the private sector, and society, the divide is widening. Even if there is a device that is available for the child, connectivity or teacher training can be a problem. Various issues that are created by mega giants like Facebook, and Tiktok create divisions, and hence, the thought of an equitable society is limited. They finished their video with discussions from previous debaters about how technology is not equitable.

There were several articles attached to each side. The first one  from Damarin(2000) explains how the digital divide is evident in most countries. There are categories of people that have technology and a working device. Then some do not have the device but do not have a working connection to the internet. The next are those who neither have a proper device nor a connection but they are familiar with the workings of the internet and device and last are those who do not know about technology.
The next article from Li & Liang (2024) is about improving education for a more equitable world. This article focuses on current challenges and their solutions. Various factors exacerbate these inequalities and there is a need to add reforms at the grassroots level to ensure a more productive and equitable society.
The article from Alvarez and Dickson-Deane (2018) examines the integration of technology with cultural perspective and warns against pitfalls like failing to respond to cultural influences. It looks toward a more inclusive and effective learning environment.

The two articles added by Taranpreet were about how a technological scenario aims for a more equitable and sustainable Europe by 2040. It highlights the support of technological advances to create a more healthier and sustainable future.
The last article on the agreed side was about how innovation will create a sustainable model with opportunities influence to change in core behavior. Though this article touched more on business, it is relevant to technology, not necessarily educational.

The disagreeing side’s first article was about how technology is influencing behavior that is typically colonist and promoting false ideas about the web. The article contends that mega-giant companies are establishing certain norms that cannot be ruled out and the users who use these platforms are affected by these rules. This article discusses how this discourse shapes how young people view technology and digital culture.
The next article here too was about the digital divide and it speaks similar information to the one discussed earlier on my page. (About the haves and the have-nots)
The last article on their side is a documentary that discusses the three challenges of the digital divide and explains how schools are finding it difficult to fund technology. It also speaks about the support of big foundations like Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to schools with technological issues.

The debate in itself was engaging with both sides expressing their views concisely. The agreed side spoke about the digital divide and how technology can help overcome this disparity. The disagreeing team, meanwhile, explained that there are not enough computers or there are connectivity issues that cause this divide and it is not so simple to address this problem. They also quoted resources that there is no foundation for the statement that technology is indeed creating opportunities for socio-economically diverse societies. They are not only sharing resources but also devices. The agreeing side also posed the question of engaging students with technology and not having any support from Teacher Assistants etc. They also talked about how technology has caused the simplification of tasks. The disagreeing side gave various examples about how the reach of the internet gets disrupted and then, the use of technology cannot be called equitable. Various students also put their point as to how technology can be made more equitable.
In the closing statement, the agreeing side expressed that we view Damarin’s article about the principles necessary for the equitable use of technology. They also expressed about how technology is used in class to make education more equitable. They finished by saying that we need to create more support systems to enhance learning.
The disagreeing side specified that access is offered but is not mandatory. They also specified the Habitus that is developed by social media companies and how youth are getting pulled into it.
In conclusion, I think that technology needs to be equitable for each student and individual associated with its application. I also believe that since we have come so far in these few years, we will still have problems and solutions to these problems shortly. But if I am looking at an equitable society worldwide, that is only going to take place sometime in the not-so-near future.