This paper interrogates whether technical democracy is well-suited to contend with possible technical controversies, including the increasing prevalence of EdTech in public schooling. Drawing across Habermasian 'deliberative democracy' that seeks consensus-derived resolution, as well as more agonistic approaches that embrace conflict as the means for pursuing pluralistic values, we use this paper to problematise technical democracy for its potential to produce agonistic and pluralistic im/possibilities. Drawing on case studies developed from our previous research into digital platforms and infrastructures, we consider what an alternative to technical democracy might offer towards realising democratic ideals through what we call technical agonism. Using these thinking tools, we argue that a move towards technical agonism would centre dissension and scepticism as fundamental features of liberal democratic institutions, while also providing opportunities for schooling to be reimagined in ways that are more democratic and ethical.