Marginalization, Technology Access and Study Approaches of Undergraduate Distance Learners during Covid-19 Pandemic in India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v25i2.7718Keywords:
marginalization, technology access, online learning, approaches to study, distance students, open and distance learningAbstract
The Covid-19 pandemic, for the past years, had led to disruption of classroom activities and adoption of online teaching-learning in almost all parts of the globe, including India. Sudden switch over from the classroom blackboard to the laptop screen may have influenced study approaches of students especially when there were challenges for access to technology and non-readiness for online learning among the Indian students. Since different social and economic factors bring differences in students’ learning, an online survey was conducted with 296 randomly selected undergraduate distance learning (DL) students of Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) to examine how technology access during the pandemic has influenced study approach of Indian DL students belonging to different marginalized and non-marginalized groups. The research results showed that marginalized students had lower access to technology than their non-marginalized counterparts, although no gender differences were found in access to technology in both the groups. Lower access to technology was found associated with more surface approach to study in the DL students in general and the marginalized students in particular. The marginalized females were found at risk in terms of both, access to technology and approaches to study. The findings, as discussed, are intended to further enrich our understanding of the role of technology vis-à-vis study approach of distance learning students during the pandemic, and formulate appropriate teaching-learning strategies for the future.
References
Bhandari, A. (2019). Gender inequality in mobile technology access: The role of economic and social development. Information, Communication & Society, 22(5), 678–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1563206
Bhuria, M., Mangalesh, S., Dudani, S., & Malik, A. (2021). Learning approaches adopted by Indian medical students during distance learning: The revised two-factor study process questionnaire. BLDE University Journal of Health Sciences, 6(2), 150. https://doi.org/10.4103/bjhs.bjhs_104_20
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Australian Council for Educational Research. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=eD308201
Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. (2001). The revised two‐factor study process questionnaire: R‐SPQ‐2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158433
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis in the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum.
Ellis, R. A., Ginns, P., & Piggott, L. (2009). E‐learning in higher education: Some key aspects and their relationship to approaches to study. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(3), 303–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360902839909
Entwistle, N., & Waterston, S. (1988). Approaches to studying and levels of processing in university students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58(3), 258–265. https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1988.tb00901.x
Fryer, L. K., Ginns, P., Walker, R. A., & Nakao, K. (2012). The adaptation and validation of the CEQ and the R‐SPQ‐2F to the Japanese tertiary environment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 549–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02045.x
Gignac, G. E., & Szodorai, E. T. (2016). Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069
Goode, J. (2010). The digital identity divide: How technology knowledge impacts college students. New Media & Society, 12(3), 497–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809343560
Harper, G., & Kember, D. (1986). Approaches to study of distance education students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 212–222.
Herrmann, K. J., Bager-Elsborg, A., & McCune, V. (2017). Investigating the relationships between approaches to learning, learner identities and academic achievement in higher education. Higher Education, 74(3), 385–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-9999-6
Jeong, J. S., González-Gómez, D., Conde-Núñez, M. C., & Gallego-Picó, A. (2019). Examination of Students’ Engagement with R-SPQ-2F of learning approach in flipped sustainable science course. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(6), 880-891. https://dx.doi.org/10.33225/jbse/19.18.880
Kimble-Hill, A. C., Rivera-Figueroa, A., Chan, B. C., Lawal, W. A., Gonzalez, S., Adams, M. R., Heard, G. L., Gazley, J. L., & Fiore-Walker, B. (2020). Insights gained into marginalized students access challenges during the COVID-19 academic response. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(9), 3391–3395. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00774
Kumar, D. J. (2021). Marginalized communities and higher education: The way forward. In M.J. Vinod & S.Y.S Kumar (Eds.), Empowering marginalized communities in India: The impact of higher education (pp 255-267). Sage India.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I—Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x
Mathur, P., & Sharma, R. (2021). Addressing gender parity in higher education: Challenges and concerns. In Vinod, M. J. & Kumar S. Y. S. (Eds.), Empowering marginalized communities in India: The impact of higher education (pp 239-251). Sage India.
McBurnie, C., Adam, T., & Kaye, T. (2020). Is there learning continuity during the COVID-19 pandemic? A synthesis of the emerging evidence. Journal of Learning for Development, 7(3), 485–493. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1280661
Morgan, A. R., Gibbs, G., & Taylor, E. (1980). Students’ approaches to studying the social science and technology foundation courses: Preliminary studies. Institute of Educational Technology, Open University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED197639
Mishra, L., Gupta, T., & Shree, A. (2020). Online teaching-learning in higher education during lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, 100012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100012
Muthuprasad, T., Aiswarya, S., Aditya, K. S., & Jha, G. K. (2021). Students’ perception and preference for online education in India during COVID-19 pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 3(1), 100101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100101
National Education Policy. (2020). Ministry of human resource development. Government of India. https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf
Neroni, J., Meijs, C., Gijselaers, H. J., Kirschner, P. A., & de Groot, R. H. (2019). Learning strategies and academic performance in distance education. Learning and Individual Differences, 73, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.04.007
Nsibirano, R. (2009). “Him and her”—gender differentials in ICT uptake: A critical literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 5(5), 33–42. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/42192/
Olayemi, O. M., Adamu, H., & Olayemi, K. J. (2021). Perception and readiness of students towards online learning in Nigeria during COVID-19 pandemic. Perception, 3(1), 4-21. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/5051?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Flibphilprac%2F5051&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
Panda, S. (2022). Pedagogy and teaching-learning strategies. In B. Das, S. Panda & V. Parthasarthi (Eds), Pedagogy in practice: Project-based learning in media policy and governance (pp. 36-66). Bloomsbury.
Pande, R., & van der Weide, T. (2012). Gender symbolism and technology uptake: A literature review. In R. Nsibirano, C. Kabonesa & A. Madanda (Eds), Globalization, technology diffusion and gender disparity: Social impacts of ICTs (p. 120–127). IGI Global.
Pask, G. (1976). Styles and strategies of learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(2), 128–148. https://pangaro.com/pask/pask-styles-and-strategies-of-learning.pdf
Quinn, F. C. (2009). Learning in first-year biology: Approaches of distance and on-campus students. Research in Science Education, 41(1), 99–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9148-7
Ramsden, P. (1979). Student learning and perceptions of the academic environment. Higher Education, 8(4), 411–427. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/bf01680529
Richardson, J. T. (1994). Cultural specificity of approaches to studying in higher education: A literature survey. Higher Education, 27(4), 449–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01384904
Richardson, J. T. (2000). Researching student learning: Approaches to studying in campus-based and distance education. Open University Press.
Richardson, J. T. (2005). Students’ perceptions of academic quality and approaches to studying in distance education. British Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 7–27.
Richardson, J. T. (2013). Approaches to studying across the adult life span: Evidence from distance education. Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 74–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.04.012
Richardson, J. T., Morgan, A., & Woodley, A. (1999). Approaches to studying in distance education. Higher Education, 37(1), 23–55. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003445000716
Siddiqi, N. (2021). Gender inequality as a social construction in India: A phenomenological enquiry. Women’s Studies International Forum, 86(May, June), 102472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2021.102472
Stes, A., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2013). Examining the cross-cultural sensitivity of the revised two-factor study process questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) and validation of a Dutch version. PloS One, 8(1), e54099. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054099
Ullah, R., Richardson, J. T., Malik, R. A., & Farooq, S. (2016). Perceptions of the learning environment, learning preferences, and approaches to studying among medical students in Pakistan. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 50, 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.07.001
Vaghishwari, S. P. (2021). Locating women in India’s higher education. In Vinod, M.J. & Kumar S. Y. S (Eds.), Empowering marginalized communities in India: The impact of higher education, (pp. 239–251). Sage.
Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Relations between student learning patterns and personal and contextual factors and academic performance. Higher Education, 49(3), 205–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10734-004-6664-2
Vinod, M. J., & Kumar, S. S. (Eds.). (2021). Empowering marginalized communities in India: The impact of higher education. Sage India.
Word Bank. (2020). Digital development. Retrieved January 11, 2023, from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/digitaldevelopment/overview
Yin, H., González, C., & Huang, S. (2018). Undergraduate students’ approaches to studying and perceptions of learning context: A comparison between China and Chile. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(7), 1530–1544. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1494142
Yin, H., Wang, W., & Han, J. (2016). Chinese undergraduates’ perceptions of teaching quality and the effects on approaches to studying and course satisfaction. Higher Education, 71(1), 39–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9887-5
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. The copyright of all content published in IRRODL is retained by the authors.
This copyright agreement and use license ensures, among other things, that an article will be as widely distributed as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific and/or scholarly archive.
You are free to
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
