Mutations: Good or Bad for EdTech?

Head in the Research

A lot of my time at the moment has been spent with my head in artificial intelligence and EdTech. One of the reoccurring themes from the conversations I've been having is about the professional development teachers need with technology and AI. Something I've come across a few times whilst exploring the best ways to implement this is lethal mutations.

Lethal mutations are not only a biological phenomenon, but also a term used in education to describe the situation when evidence-based practices are distorted or diluted to the point of losing their effectiveness or even becoming harmful. The term was coined by Ed Haertel (Brown and Campione, 1996) and popularised by Dylan Wiliam (2011), who warned that teachers need to understand the principles behind evidence-based practices and adapt them to their own contexts without compromising their core features.

Technology and Pedagogy

Technology has become an integral part of education in the 21st century. But what is the evidence that technology enhances student learning? According to some researchers, technology can improve learning outcomes when it is used to individualise students' pace of learning, to provide access to high-quality digital resources, and to scale and sustain effective instructional practices. However, the evidence is not conclusive, and there are many factors that influence how technology impacts student learning, such as the type of technology, the context, the assessment, and the pedagogy.

Pedagogy is the art and science of teaching and learning. It involves not only the methods and strategies that teachers use to facilitate student learning, but also the underlying principles and theories that inform their practice. Pedagogy is constantly evolving as new research, technologies, and social contexts emerge. Therefore, it is essential for teachers to keep abreast of the latest developments and innovations in their field.

Technology for teachers has enabled easier access to and dissemination of various sources of evidence to develop and support their pedagogy. However, educators face numerous challenges in evaluating, integrating, and using evidence from online sources to inform their teaching practices. They must be able to assess the quality and credibility of the evidence they encounter online, which may come in different formats and from various sources. Additionally, educators must balance the use of evidence with their own professional judgement and contextual knowledge, and collaborate and communicate with other stakeholders using technology to share and co-create evidence. To address these challenges, educators may need to develop skills in digital literacy and critical thinking, seek out diverse perspectives and sources of evidence, and engage in ongoing professional development to stay informed about best practices in evidence-based teaching.

However, many teachers face challenges in finding enough time to revisit and learn pedagogy. Some of these challenges include:

• Heavy workload and administrative tasks that reduce the time available for professional development and reflection.
• Lack of support and resources from school leaders and policymakers to provide adequate opportunities and incentives for teachers to engage in pedagogical learning. This is one reason teachers can plateau in their practice.
• Insufficient collaboration and communication among teachers and other stakeholders to share best practices and feedback on pedagogical issues.
• Resistance to change and innovation from some teachers who may feel comfortable with their existing methods or fear losing their autonomy or authority in the classroom.
• Misalignment between the curriculum and assessment standards and the pedagogical approaches that are most effective for student learning.

Recognising Lethal Mutations in EdTech Practice

To make the concept of lethal mutations more concrete, it helps to examine specific examples of how evidence-based practices become distorted when technology is introduced without sufficient pedagogical understanding. Dylan Wiliam's work on formative assessment provides perhaps the clearest illustration. Formative assessment, when implemented faithfully, involves using evidence of student learning to adapt instruction in real time. The core principle is responsiveness -- the teacher gathers information about what students understand and adjusts their teaching accordingly.

However, when schools adopt digital quiz platforms and label the resulting data as "formative assessment," a lethal mutation often occurs. The technology may automate the data collection, but if teachers simply record scores without using them to inform their next instructional move, the practice has been stripped of its defining feature. The technology looks modern and efficient, but the pedagogy has been hollowed out.

Similarly, consider the use of AI-powered tutoring systems. The evidence base for one-to-one tutoring is robust -- the Education Endowment Foundation rates it as one of the most effective interventions available. But when an AI chatbot is positioned as a "tutor," the relational and adaptive qualities that make human tutoring effective may be absent. The label remains the same, but the practice has mutated.

Recognising these mutations requires teachers to have a deep understanding of the principles behind effective practices, not just familiarity with their surface-level features. This is precisely where professional development must focus -- not on how to use new tools, but on why particular pedagogical approaches work and what must be preserved when adapting them.

Comparing Faithful and Mutated EdTech Implementation

The following table illustrates how the same evidence-based practice can look very different depending on whether technology is integrated with pedagogical fidelity or in a way that produces a lethal mutation:

Mutations can have different effects on organisms, ranging from neutral to harmful to beneficial. In this context, a human might say that advantageous mutations are those that increase an organism's chances of surviving or reproducing in a given environment. In education, advantageous mutations could be understood as changes in the way of teaching or learning that improve the outcomes or experiences of students or teachers. For example, some studies have suggested that incorporating technology, such as online platforms or interactive games, into education can enhance student engagement, motivation and performance.

I believe this is what we are currently experiencing with the use of technology in the classroom and will continue to experience with AI in education. Just as organisms undergo a process of natural selection to determine which traits are most beneficial for their survival and reproduction, teachers are experimenting with different forms of technology in the classroom to determine which tools are most effective for enhancing student learning. Through trial and error, teachers are able to test out various technological tools and approaches, keeping those that are successful and discarding those that are not. Over time, this process of experimentation and adaptation can lead to the development of more refined and effective teaching practices that are better suited to the needs and preferences of individual students.

What happens to the technology if we keep getting the pedagogy wrong?

Safeguarding Against Lethal Mutations

The answer to that question is not to abandon technology but to invest far more seriously in the pedagogical understanding that underpins its effective use. In my experience working with schools internationally, the institutions that integrate technology most successfully are those that treat professional development as a non-negotiable priority, not an afterthought.

Concretely, this means training teachers not just in how to use a new platform, but in the learning science that justifies its use. When a school adopts an adaptive learning platform, for instance, the professional development should focus as much on the principles of spaced practice, retrieval, and interleaving as on the platform's interface. Teachers who understand why a tool works are far less likely to mutate its implementation into something ineffective.

The OECD's PISA 2022 findings on technology in education reinforce this point. Countries where students used technology moderately and purposefully in education outperformed those where technology use was either very high or very low. The critical variable was not the amount of technology, but the quality of its pedagogical integration. Technology without pedagogy is, at best, a distraction and, at worst, a lethal mutation of the very practices it was meant to enhance.

Conclusion

The metaphor of lethal mutations offers a powerful lens through which to evaluate EdTech adoption. As educators, our responsibility is not simply to embrace or reject new technologies, but to interrogate how they interact with established evidence about learning. When we get the pedagogy right, technology can amplify effective teaching in remarkable ways. When we get it wrong, we risk not only wasting resources but actively undermining the practices that evidence tells us work best. The question is not whether to use technology in education, but whether we have the professional knowledge to use it wisely.