Part 3, Putting New Technologies in Schools
Why do districts keep buying new technologies when the evidence for success is so paltry? The political and psychological explanations offered in Part 2 offer plausible reasons for non-rational behavior. But plausible is a long stretch from being convincing
I doubt very much whether I can persuade readers that “resource dependence” theory and “inattentional blindness”–even in combination–can explain all of those scarce budget dollars flowing to vendors even when little evidence supports such purchases. Behavioral economics combines research on economics and psychological blind spots of individuals (their political and social biases and “rules of thumb”) to show again and again that people have “bounded rationality” in solving problems. Surely, there are other explanations that readers can offer. And some have in their comments to Parts 1 and 2.
Eliminating non-rational decisions in complex organizations is a fool’s errand. Think about the hasty, ideologically-driven decision to invade Iraq because Hussein supposedly had weapons of mass destruction or the greed-driven proliferation of “collateral derivatives” or bundled sub-prime mortgages that triggered financial panic and the Great Recession of 2008. Post-mortem analyses of these decisions can lead to greater understanding among decisionmakers about their hidden beliefs particularly when key evidence-driven questions are asked publicly. Yes, I do believe that policymakers can make better decisions, especially when they examine openly
