The long-term goal for universities – Quality blended learning

In South Africa, switching to online teaching and learning has in some instances presented anxiety and uncertainty among academics and students. Academics in some well-resourced institutions have adapted quickly and with the necessary support have been able to learn new skills, adopt new technologies and explore new platforms. Students at these institutions, equipped with the relevant devices, access to data, learning management systems and the relevant learning material and resources, are also able to participate in online learning.

Like all adverse events, COVID-19 disproportionately affects poor, marginalised and vulnerable people in society. The consequences of the pandemic have illuminated and amplified the existing inequalities in South African society, with the poor, marginalised, precarious and under-resourced disproportionally experiencing its fallout. It is thus important to be cognisant of the different learning environments of students and their access to learning resources, appropriate devices and data.

Tackling educational and digital inequality

Access to digital resources is unequally distributed and educational inequality is likely to be deepened as a result of the move to online learning. So, how should universities respond in the face of the digital inequality of their students? There are generally two extreme positions, which are both untenable and a form of indifference.

The first is to push for a ‘business as usual’ approach as quickly as possible. This utilitarian tactic hopes to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number (Florian, 2015), but it will exacerbate existing educational inequalities. Those on the educational margins, like students with disabilities, students with caring and employment commitments and poor students, will inevitably fall behind. Those already privileged will emerge from the crisis poised to leverage their educational advantage in a post-COVID world.

The second position argues that it is unjust to offer online learning until all students have access to the digital and other resources they need to participate. This is an argument for equality of treatment – that no-one should have something until everyone can have it.

Nicky Roberts of the University of Johannesburg says on Twitter: “Remote learning is neither viable nor equitable here [in South Africa]... School learning must just wait.” School learning has the benefit of 12 years to make up for lost time. University learning does not. South African students already take longer than expected to complete their degrees (Walton, Bowman and Osman, 2015). Those who do complete their degrees have a chance at employment and enhanced opportunities of changing not just their life chances but also those of other family members.

A middle way

Higher education institutions must think through alternative approaches in managing digital inequalities. Universities are spaces of innovation, hope and care, especially in times characterised by uncertainty and fear. If we act collectively as a sector now, our actions could lessen the digital inequalities for the future.

Being mindful of the fundamental challenges facing higher education, we have an opportunity in this moment to question what we do, why we do what we do, and how we do what we do. The COVID-19 crisis has shown the failure of the development project in South Africa and elsewhere. It has sharpened a focus on the structural inequalities in educational provision – inequalities the education sector cannot resolve on its own.

More effort, more resources and more connected thinking are needed between government, universities and the private sector to address digital inequality as a national priority. The current crisis offers opportunities to influence national policy and planning on technology and its role in equalising educational provisioning in the future.

Rittel and Webber (1973) talk of a “wicked problem”. They address the challenge of finding the best level at which a problem should be addressed. They caution against tackling the problem symptomatically, or at “too low a level”, with the expectation that “small steps” will systematically contribute to “overall improvement”.

We suggest that the various intervention programmes that universities offer to ameliorate digital inequalities represent valiant attempts to cure the symptoms of an unequal society, but that their impact is necessarily limited. In Rittel and Webber’s (1973) schema, the problem of inequitable digital access is rooted in “higher level” systems. What is needed is a momentous intervention on a large scale. It is worth the effort.

Education systems are complex systems (Walton, Andrews and Osman, 2019). As such they will learn and transform, form new connections and adapt to environmental stressors (like COVID-19) that cause disequilibrium. Enabling change in complex education systems has two requirements (Engelbrecht and Muthukrishna, 2019). The first is leadership that supports self-organisation and professional judgment of its members. The second is networking. Links need to be formed with actors and agents within and beyond organisations to enable and sustain change for the future.

Towards blended learning

We need to rethink what we teach and who we teach. Uploads of material that would have been the focus of face-to-face classes do not equate to distance learning. Now is the opportunity to think about, and implement, a holistic post-COVID orientated approach to education which makes the boundaries between face-to-face and online or distance teaching more permeable.

The current emergency measures of providing tablets and internet connectivity are necessary but not sustainable. The long-term goal must be good-quality hybrid or blended learning.

Contact universities cannot continue to deliver education in the way that it has always been done. Education has been one of the big losers of the pandemic. The emergency response has focused on technology and digital inequality, but there is now an opportunity to digitise quality education for all higher education students, in an environment that is technologically enabled for all. It is an opportunity to fundamentally reshape the relationship between teacher, student and content.

The swift change to online learning has posed significant challenges to universities. Digitising for all represents an even greater challenge. But hesitating to move on this now at the national policy and planning level will be detrimental not just to the project of education, but also to the overall development project of countries and continents.

Ruksana Osman is the deputy vice-chancellor: academic at the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) in South Africa, former dean of the faculty of humanities and a personal professor of education. She serves as the convenor of the UNESCO Research Chair in Teacher Education for Diversity and Development and has extensive teaching and research experience in the field of teacher education and higher education.

Elizabeth Walton is an associate professor in the School of Education at the University of Nottingham, United Kingdom. She teaches MA courses in special and inclusive education as well as supervising postgraduate research in aspects of inclusive education. She is a member of the forum of the UNESCO Chair in Teacher Education for Diversity and Development and is also a visiting associate professor at the Wits School of Education.