Category: Civic Participation

Does the Move Towards Online Teaching at Universities Exacerbate Existing Inequalities? 

28/04/2024 

Background

The Covid-19 pandemic accelerated a digital shift within all aspects of life, including the education sector. This trend was already noticeable before the 2020 pandemic, with online learning being the fastest-growing market in the education industry; a 900% growth rate globally since the year 2000 (Oxford Learning College, 2022). During the pandemic, schools and universities had to adapt quickly to online teaching practices and offer their services digitally. Universities adapted well to the digital shift, moving most of their courses and exams into the online sphere with relative ease (El Refae et al., 2021). Instead of shifting back to the traditional lecture and seminar formats, post-pandemic life has seen universities embracing new learning formats, with many offering a hybrid of online and face-to-face teaching (FE News, 2022). Digital literacy is now a significant factor when considering higher education and further exploration is needed into how digital education impacts and relates to different student demographics at universities.

Universities shifting to online education may exacerbate underlying inequalities and this can be understood through the lack of digital and technological capital within certain groups. The terms digital and technological capital are frequently associated with a Bordieuan framework. In short, Bourdieu was a sociologist who developed a cultural reproduction theory (1977), according to which individuals gain different levels of capital, through familial transmission, and such differences in acquired capital can explain socio-economic inequality in academic achievement (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1990). The central concepts of the Bordieuan framework have since been developed to analyse technological inequality. Digital capital can be understood as digital competencies (Drabowicz, 2017), where the continuous experience somebody has of digital technology is a result of both the availability of technology and the user’s ability to benefit from it (Ruiu, Ruiu, and Ragnedda, 2021). Therefore, digital capital is a necessary prerequisite for someone enjoying the benefits of using digital technologies (Calderon, 2021). Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital has been used by Czerniewicz and Brown (2013) in the objectified form to explain the physical representation of technological goods, such as mobiles and computers, along with embodied cultural capital being used to explain competencies and self-image when it comes to using technology.

This research brief outlines the impact the digital shift in higher education has had on different student groups, with a particular focus on students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, students with disabilities, and mature and international students. Existing research suggests that these groups often have lower levels of digital literacy than the average student. This article will analyse whether the move to online learning hinders or enables these groups.

Mature Students

Younger generations have been dubbed ‘digital natives’ and a ‘Google generation’, highlighting the significance of technologies for the lives of young people (Gibbons, 2007). There is a perception that mature students express more concerns and anxieties about using technology as part of their learning journey (Staddon, 2020), whereas younger people exhibit higher levels of internet self-efficacy (Helsper and Eynon, 2010). This section focuses on age within higher education and explores how the shift towards online learning has impacted mature students.

Mature students in the UK are individuals over the age of 21 in undergraduate study or over the age of 25 during postgraduate study (Higher Education Statistics Agency, 2020). Mature students are more likely to drop out of education and have poorer degree outcomes compared to younger students who have transitioned straight from other forms of education (Higher Education Statistics Agency, 2020).

Such disparity in outcomes has been linked to a lack of digital skills and capital. It has been argued that communication on the internet is a challenge for adult learners (Nor, 2011). As part of a systematic review, Kara et al (2019) concluded that students aged 50 and over are more likely to have difficulty participating in collaborative activities via the internet due to insufficient technical skills. Kara et al also discussed the lack of technological support and feelings of isolation as key challenges for mature students who were learning via the internet.

Homer (2022) highlights that “whilst there is a perception that mature students are more concerned about using technology in their learning”, we should be cautious in making overly simplistic arguments about their ability to learn via technology (Laming et al., 2019; Pearce, 2017). Zembylas (2008) found that anxiety was high at the beginning of the course, yet this gradually decreased as learners became used to online communication. This demonstrates that digital capital can be acquired and accumulated throughout the learning journey.

The option to learn online instead of enrolling in face-to-face teaching has been praised for allowing mature students to flexibly access content when it suits them, which has “clear benefits for those with competing demands on their time” (Homer, 2022). While this report does not cover gender differences, previous research has suggested that female mature students face greater challenges as they often have to balance multiple responsibilities such as childcare and household work (Selwyn, 2011). Hence, a case can be made that the flexibility of online teaching can benefit mature female students who juggle different responsibilities alongside a university education.

International Students

The next section will discuss the experience of online and blended teaching among international students. International students are defined as students from outside the UK who come to study in educational institutions in the UK (Office For Students, 2022). The research outlined below mostly focuses on students from countries outside of Europe where language barriers are likely to be more significant.

 Xiaojing Liu et al’s (2010) research highlights how cultural differences can negatively impact the student’s participation in university education. In a similar vein, Hughes (2013) identified several barriers international students face, such as trouble engaging with unfamiliar information sources, academic practice, and language and learning methods.

Hughes (2013) also outlined the importance of well-developed literacy to maximise the full potential of online resources and found that international students displayed underdeveloped literacy skills when searching for information online. In addition to issues of skills, a briefing paper by The Office for Students showed that international students experience significant difficulties in accessing digital learning technologies off-campus compared to UK-domiciled students (2022). Four factors were highlighted. (1) International students lacked suitable computer and mobile devices, and were unsure of which type or operating system would be most useful. (2) A large number of international students felt that they lacked a safe area to work off-campus. (3) Many students reported that they had trouble accessing online systems and lacked the support needed for their learning off-campus. (4) A significant number of international students cannot access a reliable wifi connection off-campus, and this was particularly evident among postgraduate students.     

Disability and Cognitive Impairments

Disability is a term that covers a wide range of issues, from physical to mental/cognitive impairment. The number of students in higher education with a known disability is increasing. In 2019/20, 17.3% of all home students in higher education had a disability (Hubble and Bolton, 2021). Some research seems to suggest that students with disabilities are more likely to drop out over the course of education, leading to decreased rates of graduation and course completion (Fichten et al., 2020).

Kent (2015) discusses how disability is manifested differently online, with visual, cognitive, and hearing impairments making it more difficult to navigate online learning compared to in-person teaching. For example, individuals who are deaf and normally rely on sign language are known to struggle with finding technical information online due to such limitations (Botelho, 2021).

Kaarakainen et al (2023) found that cognitive abilities are as important as physical ones when it comes to accessing digital learning. This study drew on a comparable Swedish study by Johansson et al (2021), which found that those with disabilities enjoy less access to devices and feel less included in a digital society. Here we can see that those with disabilities have less digital capital, which negatively impacts the likelihood of full digital participation.

Another important issue pertains to students who have disabilities but do not feel comfortable disclosing them. Kent (2015) highlighted how students with disabilities can become invisible online and may choose not to disclose their disability for fear of discrimination and stigma. This may mean they do not get the support they need and may slip through the gaps, thus experiencing increased digital exclusion.

Although online learning can be a significant barrier for students, it can also make learning more accessible for some. For example, students with physical disabilities, such as wheelchair users, often find significant benefits to online learning compared with in-person teaching (Kent, 2015). Online teaching can provide increased access to resources and greater flexibility (Kent, Ellis, and Giles, 2018). Heiman et al’s (2020) study showcases the positive contribution information and communication technologies (ICTs) can make to students with disabilities. The study further reflects on the importance of well-designed systems so that disabled students can access these resources effectively and easily.

Socioeconomic Status

Digital inequalities have been linked to socioeconomic status and social class, in that wider socioeconomic poverties can exacerbate digital poverty, and vice versa (Helsper and Eynon 2009).

Passaretta and Gil-Hernandez (2023) utilise Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital to showcase that access to and usage of ICTs do not guarantee that younger people develop their digital skills. The study highlights the importance of family background as it often correlates with students’ digital skills. Furthermore, Czerniewicz (2013) used a Bordieuan framework to discuss the phenomenon of ‘digital strangers’ among students; that is, students lacking both experience of and opportunities to engage with ICTs. The author discussed the importance of not just having access to computers, but having a digital skillset that helped students know how to use them. The development of such digital skillsets was impacted by the subject’s family and home environment, thus showing how students’ socioeconomic backgrounds shape the development of digital capital

Conclusion

This article surveyed four demographics of students in higher education and their relationship to online learning, drawing partly on Bourdieu’s framework of cultural capital. Concerns have been raised that these groups may be at risk of experiencing digital exclusion, meaning that they may struggle to access online teaching at a university level. However, it should simultaneously be emphasised that digital technologies may aid in removing some of the barriers to education currently faced by these groups. While the shift to digital teaching needs to be managed with an understanding that some groups will struggle more with online learning, appropriate guidance and support can significantly reduce key barriers to online learning.

Policy Recommendations

• Device Accessibility: We need to encourage universities to provide loaner devices or offer affordable ones to students in need (Edygrad, 2023). This may involve universities partnering with other organisations. The University Centre Rotherham, alongside Rotherham College, North Notts College, and Dearne Valley College offered several hundred free laptops to its students to access online learning throughout the pandemic (UCR, 2021). 
   
  
• Ensure Sufficient Off-Campus Connectivity: Following the advice by Jisc, Kirkless Council expanded Eduroam outside traditional campus boundaries, including leisure centres, libraries, care homes, council offices, etc (Jisc, 2023). This model should be adopted by other councils across the UK. 
   
• Involve Key Stakeholders in the Higher Education Accessibility Community: As a paper by Seale et al (2020) highlighted, it is crucial to involve a wide range of key stakeholders when considering accessibility practices: disability support officers, lecturers, educational designers, staff in procurement services, legal representatives, etc. The issue of inclusiveness in higher education is multifaceted and will require a range of expertise and perspectives.  

References

Botelho, F. (2021). Accessibility to digital technology: Virtual barriers, real opportunities. Assistive Technology, 3: 27-23.

Bourdieu, P. (1977a). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1977b). Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction. In J. Karabel & A. H. Halsey (Eds.). Power and Ideology in Education. London: Sage, 487-511.

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.C. (1990). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (Vol. 4). London: Sage.

Calderón. G. (2021). The third digital divide and Bourdieu: Bidirectional conversion of economic, cultural, and social capital to (and from) digital capital among young people in Madrid. New Media & Society, 23(9): 2534-2553. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820933252

Czerniewicz, L., and Brown, C. (2013). The habitus of digital “strangers” in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44: 44-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01281.x 

Drabowicz, T. (2017). Social theory of internet use: Corroboration or rejection among the digital natives? Correspondence analysis of adolescents in two societies. Computers and Education, 105: 57-67.

Edygrad. (2023). Addressing the Digital Divide in Higher Education. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/addressing-digital-divide-higher-education-edygrad-1-zpobf/  

El Refae G. A., Kaba A., and Eletter, S. (2021). Distance learning during COVID-19 pandemic: Satisfaction, opportunities and challenges as perceived by faculty members and students. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 18(3): 298–318. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0128

Friday, Catherine. (2022). Three Ways Higher Education Can Keep Digital Transformation Going.  FE News. Available at: https://www.fenews.co.uk/exclusive/three-ways-higher-education-can-keep-digital-transformation-going-2/ 

Fichten, C., Olenik-Shemesh, D.,  Asuncion, J., Jorgensen, M., and Colwell, C. (2020). Higher Education, Information and Communication Technologies and Students with Disabilities: An Overview of the Current Situation. In J. Seale (Ed.). Improving Accessible Digital Practices in Higher Education. London: Palgrave Pivot, 21-44.

Gibbons, S. (2007). Redefining the roles of information professionals in higher education to engage the net generation. Paper presented at EDUCAUSE Australia, Melbourne (April).

Heiman, T., Coughlan, T., Rangin, H., and Deimann, M. (2020). New designs or new practices? Multiple perspectives on the ICT and accessibility conundrum. In J. Seale (Ed.). Improving Accessible Digital Practices in Higher Education. London: Palgrave Pivot, 99-115.

Helsper, E.J., and Eynon, R., 2010. Digital natives: where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3): 503-520.

Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2020). Definitions: Students. Available at: https://www.hesa.ac.uk/support/definitions/students 

Homer, D. (2022). Mature Students’ Experience: A Community of Inquiry Study During a COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 28(2): 333-353. https://doi.org/10.1177/14779714221096175

Hubble, S., and Bolton, P. House of Commons Library. (2021). Support for disabled students in higher education in England. House of Commons Library. Available at: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8716/CBP-8716.pdf 

Hughes, H. (2013). International students using online information resources to learn: Complex experience and learning needs. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 37(1): 126-146.

Jisc. (2022). Jisc – written evidence (DCL0022). https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/118996/html/   

Johansson, S., Gulliksen, J., and Gustavsson, C. (2021). Disability digital divide: the use of the internet, smartphones, computers and tablets among people with disabilities in Sweden. Universal Access in the Information Society, 20(1): 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00714-x2

Kaarakainen, MT., and Saikkonen, L. (2023). Remark on digital accessibility: educational disparities define digital inclusion from adolescence onwards. Universal Access in the Information Society, 22: 1279–1292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00908-5

Kara, M., Erdogdu, F., Kokoç, M., and Cagiltay, K. (2019). Challenges faced by adult learners in online distance education: A literature review. Open Praxis, 11(1): 5-22.

Kent, M. (2015). Disability and eLearning: Opportunities and barriers. Disability Studies Quarterly, 35(1).

Kent, M., Ellis, K., and Giles, M. (2018). Students with disabilities and eLearning in Australia: Experiences of accessibility and disclosure at Curtin University. TechTrends, 62(6): 654-663.

Laming M. M., Morris A., and Martin-Lynch, P. (2019). Mature-age Male Students in Higher Education. Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.
 
Liu, X., Liu, S., Lee, S.H., and Magjuka, R.J. (2010). Cultural differences in online learning: International student perceptions. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3): 177-188.

Nor, N. M. M. (2011). Understanding older adult learners in distance education: The case of Universiti Sains Malaysia. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 12(3): 229–340. Available at: http://dergipark.gov.tr/tojde/issue/16905/176282 

Office for Students. (2022a). Learning more about international students. Available at: https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/learning-more-about-international-students/ 

Office for Students, (2022b). Comparing international and UKdomiciled student responses in Jisc’s digital experience insights (DEI) survey. Available at: https://repository.jisc.ac.uk/9469/1/comparing-international-and-UK-domiciled-student-responses-in-jiscs-digital-experience-insights-survey.pdf 

Oxford Learning College. (2022). Online Education and E-Learning Statistics UK. Available at: https://www.oxfordcollege.ac/news/online-education-statistics/  

Passaretta, G., and Gil-Hernández, C.J. (2023). The early roots of the digital divide: socioeconomic inequality in childrens ICT literacy from primary to secondary schooling. In J. Skopek (Ed.) Research Handbook on Digital Sociology. Edward Elgar Publishing, 307-327.

Pearce, N. (2017). Exploring the learning experiences of older mature undergraduate students. Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, 19(1): 59–76. https://doi.org/10.5456/WPLL.19.1.59

Ruiu, M.L., Ruiu, G., and Ragnedda, M. (2021). Conceptualizing the techno-environmental habitus. First Monday, 26(11).
 
Seale, J., King, L., Jorgensen, M., Havel, A., Asuncion, J., and, Fichten, C. (2020). Engaging Ignored Stakeholders of Higher Education Accessibility Practice: Analysing the experiences of an international network of practitioners and researchers. Journal of Enabling Technologies. Available at: https://oro.open.ac.uk/69867/3/69867.pdf   

Selwyn, N. (2011). ‘Finding an appropriate fit for me’: examining the (in) flexibilities of international distance learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 30(3): 367–383.

Staddon, R. V. (2020). Bringing technology to the mature classroom: age differences in use and attitudes. International Journal Education Technology Higher Education, 17(1): 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00184-4

University Centre Rotherham. (2021). Tackling the Digital Divide With Free Laptops. Available at: https://ucr.rotherham.ac.uk/tackling-the-digital-divide-with-free-laptops/ 

Zembylas, M. (2008). ‘Adult learners’ emotions in online learning’. Distance Education, 29(1): 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910802004852