My purpose in this paper is to argue that Jacques Ellul, a 20th century French technology critic, provides important theoretical perspectives for educational researchers as we critically examine AI. In this conceptual paper, I introduce two key concepts from Ellulian thought, his definition of technique and his skepticism of facts, and illustrate their relevance through examples of how they might guide consideration of AI technologies in education. Each of these concepts is accompanied by multiple brief examples as well as an extended (if necessarily incomplete) consideration of one specific issue. I demonstrate how Ellul’s writing on technique invites us to consider broader and more interconnected phenomena than just a single artificial intelligence tool; likewise, I show how his skepticism of facts can be used to evaluate epistemological assumptions and be more critical about media. While Ellul is not unknown in the literatures on education, AI, or the convergence of the two, many references to his work only engage with him and his ideas in passing. In contrast, I provide an extended demonstration of how sustained engagement with Ellul’s thinking can inspire and shape our critical consideration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in education.

Peters and Peters (2018) concede that most (or all) religions are dependent on media but affirm that “the Mormon tradition in particular incorporates media” (p. 17). The mediated nature of Mormonism invites conversation with Jacques Ellul in two ways. First, to the extent that Mormonism is unusually mediated, Ellul may prove useful for organizing thinking about Mormonism and media. Second, Feller (2023) suggests that Mormonism is a helpful example for exploring “the evolving relationship between technology and religion” (p. vii)—and, thus, offering new readings of Ellul.

Jacques Ellul, a 20th century French academic, is best known for his writing on technique, understood as both individual means to ends and an all-encompassing system that prioritizes efficient solutions to problems. While Ellul’s terminology is not necessarily familiar in contemporary educational technology research, it represents traditional understandings of individual tools as a subset of instructional systems and captures the field’s emphasis on finding more efficient and efficacious means of teaching and learning. However, Ellul’s writing on technique is largely skeptical, creating an opportunity for educational technology researchers to turn a more critical eye towards our emphasis on solutions to problems. This essay argues that while an increased emphasis problems over things is welcome, Ellul’s writing invites more careful consideration of what it means to solve problems. In particular, I draw on Ellul to ask three provocative questions: which problems should we solve, who should solve those problems, and is solving problems always good?