Abstract (English)

Educational technology (EdTech) implementation is commonly explained through technological affordances, pedagogical alignment, institutional readiness, stakeholder acceptance, and implementation fidelity. These perspectives illuminate important conditions, yet they insufficiently explain how institutions come to know, or fail to know, why an implementation has become troubled. This conceptual article develops the Triadic Epistemic Failure Framework (TEFF), which theorizes the epistemic void as an institutionally produced condition in which relevant knowledge about implementation difficulties is absent, inaccessible, fragmented, weakly integrated, or narratively displaced. TEFF integrates organizational silence, epistemic injustice, sociotechnical systems, organizational learning, and narrative theory around three recursively related mechanisms: institutional silencing, contested causality, and narrative reconstruction. The article uses conceptual framework analysis and theory synthesis, supplemented by 25 supplied stakeholder and institutional extracts as illustrative materials. The analysis shows how silencing restricts the pool of admissible knowledge; how stakeholder position generates technically, pedagogically, organizationally, and politically differentiated causal accounts; and how official narratives stabilize selected explanations through external attribution, distributed responsibility, temporal reframing, passive agency, and narrative deletion. A contrasting extract demonstrates epistemic recovery through multi-stakeholder evidence comparison, explicit treatment of unresolved claims, delayed rollout, and accountable inquiry. Four research questions and seven theoretical propositions connect the framework’s mechanisms to organizational learning. The article argues that EdTech implementation capacity includes an epistemic dimension: the ability to surface discrepant knowledge, adjudicate without forcing false consensus, preserve causal traces, and translate reconstructed accounts into governance changes. The framework offers a research agenda and a practical protocol for stakeholder-inclusive post-implementation inquiry.