There is a lot of jargon when education and technology are combined, especially when there is a sales opportunity in the offing.
I have noticed that the combination of assumptions around ICT/technology and the jargon of the sales pitch are about creating a 'club' those who are in and the rest are out. To create the club you need to pick your market - and then play to the 'self image' of those you want to market to - part of this strategy is to also create a group of outsiders/others. This strategy requires neither facts nor context - it works on stereotypes and picking one identity to play off against others.
"While 50 is the average age of IT secondary school teachers in this country, most are already well and truly on the back foot and have long since surrendered."
This plays on the stereotype that increasing physical age is correlated with decreasing intellectual ability and an inability to manage change - on this basis if you are over 30...35 ? you can't 'do technology'.
The market here is younger teachers, primary teachers and maybe the secondary teacher who has refused to be insulted by the quote above. The identity of teaching professional is divided into the identities of primary teachers and secondary teachers.
“I think we want to be very clear what we’re not trying to– we don’t want kids coming in thinking they’re going to school. With the staff and team we’ve developed, we want them to wonder and to ponder."
Here is the stereotype that school aka the compulsory education system is not about wonder or pondering - or in fact learning. 'Those kids' the 'genius' and 'entrepreneurial' kids will not find learning opportunities at school. Here the promoter is seeking funding support, a failing system narrative can be highly profitable for education technology business.
The* Last week a similar interview was reported slightly differently* in Computer World (they skipped the ageist quote):
"While the real world of business and industry has adapted, adopted or disappeared in the face of technological advances and disruption, the high school learning experience has become stuck, unprepared for the students who are about to throw the legacy education model into disarray."
Still looking for business funding here - a bit of jargon - 'legacy education model', earlier the reference was to primary children as a "formidable force of young change agents who have never experienced a traditional class" (what's a traditional class?). Compulsory education is divided into two identities - good primary schooling, bad secondary schooling.
What this and articles like it illustrate is that facts are not required. Generalisation is easy, context can be ignored and so can evidence, especially if you are an 'entrepreneur'.
Interviews are of course at risk of generalisation and a lack of depth - the interviewer doesn't always have the opportunity to say: where's the evidence? what experience of teaching and learning do you have? what is your background? why do you say that? is your observation supported by the data? what is the context? ...
When it comes to teaching and learning we have compelling evidence that always and most importantly it is relationships that matter.
When it comes to technology in education the OECD sums it up as "technology alone will not enhance learning, but using it as part of good teaching practice can open new doors to learners and teachers".
It would be nice if making a buck in education included an approach that publicly supported teaching and learning. Working together for all our students. It might be harder to make headlines from the facts (evidence informed, not carefully selected anecdote), from acknowledging differing schooling and education contexts, and from good news stories, but it would be more honest.
*see comment below - the Computer World article was last week (21 August 2015) the Mind Lab interview was in 2013.