The notion of diversity is widely, if not only, received as a positive value, as a marker and driver for societal and cultural change. In this understanding, it refers to socio-political aspects such as „ethnicity, disability, gender and sexuality, […] and intersectionality“ (cf. the call to ECER 2023). The symposium is rather investigating problematic aspects of diversity in reference to various dimensions of what we understand as „educational capitalism“ (Peters 2012) and its (digital and other) technologies of knowledge production and learning.

In the context of current capitalist relations in general, 'diversity' has long since developed into a marketable slogan and, in the form of "diversity management," has been customized as a technology of corporate management (Krell 2015). In the political arena, such a logic of diversity, compatible with capital relations, corresponds to a dominant liberal anti-racism that - cynically speaking - resigns itself to the equal exploitation of all (Roldán Mendívil & Sarbo 2022: 34). More recently, extended versions bundling diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) (Owyoung 2022) have entered the scene.

However, even more generally, the capitalist market promises a diversity of product range and thus a customized, identity-awarding consumption experience. This is contrasted with capitalism's tendency toward monopolization and thus a collapse of diversity among market participants. This movement is abundantly clear in the global market of large tech corporations: a few corporations incorporate the external diversity of the market and transform it into an internal 'diversity' by buying up start-ups and competing companies.

Similarly, these digital capitalist actors are pushing into the educational technology sector, seeking to install mono-cultures of digital infrastructures of teaching and learning (Dander, Hug, Sander & Shanks 2021). At the same time, their products – learning applications, platforms, environments etc. – promise to be adaptive to individual learners, or even to be ‚learning‘ themselves. Alike, systems like these are claimed to, as ‚instruments‘ or ‚tools‘,contribute to equitable learning in an age of heterogeneity and diversity. At the same time, attributed difference of learners is being naturalized and individualized. In this manner the societal dimension of ‚doing diversity‘ is rendered invisible (Stoltenhoff 2022).

While these systems are proclaimed to offer learners a wide diversity of educational materials and media, the understanding of learning that is being hard-wired within the systems, mostly represents instrumental concepts of learning and educational technology (e.g. Seemann et al. 2022). Similarly, educational policy making, funding structures, and uncritical research in the field of educational technology largely follow such concepts that are, at best, ignorant of capitalist modes of colonization (Braun et al. 2021).

To work towards a diversification of scholarly knowledge and political practices in the field between capitalism, education, digital technologies, and diversity in its widest sense, the symposium addresses the following questions, from theoretical and empirical perspectives with contributions from Austria, Germany, Italy and Scotland:

• How are today’s globalized assemblages of educational capitalism relevant to issues of diversity?

• What kind of ideas and values are underpinning the concept and where do they come from?

• Which goals, methods and forms of critical media education are important to strengthen democratic and sustainable development paths in media development, in the use and design of digital media?

• What is the role of media educational research for designing for knowledge diversity and viable futures of education?

Braun, T., Büsch, A., Dander, V., Eder, S., Förschler, A., Fuchs, M., Gapski, H., Geisler, M., Hartong, S., Hug, T., Kübler, H.-D., Moser, H., Niesyto, H., Pohlmann, H., Richter, C., Rummler, K., & Sieben, G. (2021). Positionspapier zur Weiterentwicklung der KMK-Strategie ‹Bildung in der digitalen Welt›. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/00/2021.11.29.X Dander, V., Hug, T., Sander, I., & Shanks, R. (2021). Digital Capitalism, Datafication, and Media Education: Critical Perspectives. Editorial. Seminar.Net, 17(2), Art. 2. https://doi.org/10.7577/seminar.4493 Krell, G. (2015). Kritik an Gender und Diversity – Gender und Diversity als Kritik: Das Beispiel Betriebswirtschaftslehre. In E. Hanappi-Egger & R. Bendl (Hrsg.), Diversität, Diversifizierung und (Ent)Solidarisierung (87–107). Springer Fachmedien.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08606-0_5 Owyoung, C. (2022). All are welcome : how to build a real workplace culture of inclusion that delivers results. McGraw Hill. Peters, M. A. (2012). Postmodern Educational Capitalism, Global Information Systems and New Media Networks. Policy Futures in Education, 10(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2012.10.1.23 Roldán Mendívil, E., & Sarbo, B. (Hrsg.). (2022). Die Diversität der Ausbeutung. Zur Kritik des herrschenden Antirassismus (2. corr. edition). Dietz. Seemann, M., Macgilchrist, F., Richter, C., Allert, H., & Geuter, J. (2022). Konzeptstudie Werte und Strukturen der Nationalen Bildungsplattform. Wikimedia Foundation e.V.https://www.wikimedia.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Konzeptstudie-Werte-und-Strukuren-der-Nationalen-Bildungsplattform.pdf Stoltenhoff, A.-K. (2022). Naturalisierung und Verengung von Heterogenität, Diversität und Inklusion im Spezialdiskurs um die Digitalisierung der Hochschullehre. MedienPädagogik,48, 30–39. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/48/2022.06.05.X