“The Digital Backlash is a Phase of Disillusionment”

The term digital backlash has become a defining topic across the EdTech sector. But should we really be concerned that digital technologies might soon disappear from classrooms? And who benefits from the ongoing debate and the blanket rejection of digital tools in education? We spoke with Jannie Jeppesen, Chair of the European EdTech Alliance and CEO of the Swedish EdTech Industry. She advocates neither black-and-white thinking nor sugar-coating the challenges.

What does the term “digital backlash” mean in education?

The digital backlash is a phase of disillusionment driven by several factors. One is the “COVID shock” – a reaction to the lower-quality emergency remote teaching during the pandemic. Another is growing concern about algorithm-driven media, particularly the justified criticism of the constant distraction and intrusive nature of modern social media. At the same time, politicians often use these concerns to create black-and-white narratives, deliberately equating educational tools such as maths apps with genuinely addictive forms of digital media.

What lessons can other countries learn from Sweden’s approach?

Despite the widespread belief that Swedish schools are fully digital, the reality is different. Sweden follows what I call the 80/20 rule: for decades, the learning materials market has consistently consisted of roughly 80% print and 20% digital resources. Digitalisation should always depend on the context. The goal is to choose the best tool for a specific learning objective, rather than using digital technology for its own sake.

Which criticism of digital education is justified – and when does it become blanket rejection?

It is entirely legitimate to question the effectiveness and educational value of digital tools. We should also acknowledge that paper is often better suited for deep reading, and we need to recognise that technological optimism can sometimes be naïve. However, criticism turns into blanket rejection when political actors claim that everything digital is harmful or attempt to remove digital competences and AI literacy entirely from national education strategies.

How does this affect startup strategies and product development?

The backlash makes customers – teachers, school leaders and municipalities – more critical and more demanding. As a result, startups and entrepreneurs need to shift their focus away from concepts such as traction and stickiness towards evidence-based outcomes. They should also communicate their educational frameworks and design principles transparently, while clearly demonstrating how their products reduce teachers’ administrative workload or solve specific learning challenges.

Which narratives dominate the current debate, and who is shaping them?

The discussion is currently dominated by fear-based narratives around screen time and the negative effects of social media. These narratives are primarily shaped by politicians who use the “screen time debate” to advance more conservative education reforms.

What does this mean for the EdTech sector?

When political decisions are driven by public sentiment rather than evidence, teachers and students risk being left without clear guidance for using complex technologies such as AI. Furthermore, banning digital technologies in schools could widen existing socio-economic inequalities. Children whose parents already understand AI and digital technologies would continue developing these skills, while others would be left behind.

Have EdTech providers also contributed to the backlash?

Yes. Poor implementation has certainly played a role. When digital tools are introduced in ways that interrupt or even hinder learning, they naturally fuel criticism. And like every industry, the EdTech sector also includes companies offering low-quality products, which can damage the reputation of the entire ecosystem.

What should startups and entrepreneurs do – adapt or resist?

I recommend professionalism and adaptation rather than aggressive resistance. Startups should specialise and focus on becoming exceptionally good at one thing instead of trying to cover everything. They also need to understand that they are only one part of a much broader educational toolkit that still includes printed books, pens and many other learning resources. Most importantly, they should be able to explain how their product naturally supports the way people learn.

Is the current backlash ultimately healthy for the sector, or does it threaten educational innovation in Europe?

It can be both. On the one hand, it is a healthy corrective if it encourages the industry to focus more strongly on quality and evidence. On the other hand, it becomes a structural threat if the debate remains one-sided and oversimplified, leading to policies that pretend the digital world does not exist. In that case, children will not be adequately prepared for the future.

Read next: How Christian Orgler, CEO of the Austrian parental control app Ohana, views the digital backlash.