eLearning and the Digital Divide

12.2 percent of respondents from households making under $25,000 annually said they were not able to supply their children with digital devices, while 9.8 percent said the same for internet access. Growing up in poverty translates into other issues, which often mean low-income families are forced to choose food over the highest quality of education their child can get, which in this day and age means having the ability to go online. In fact, one in four children living in poverty and famine are seldom or never able to access the internet.

Education disparities worsened further with the COVID-19 pandemic, as Black, Hispanic, and Asian students are around fifteen percentage points more likely than white students to be in a “remote-only” school district. This problematizes rapidly when we look at the strong correlation between access to online education and race. 13.2 percent of Black respondents in Los Angeles said they rarely or never had a learning device, while just 0.1 percent of White respondents in Los Angeles said the same. In other regions of the U.S. such as Detroit, this phenomenon affects one in five Black households. When students of color aren’t able to have in-person learning, while also not having access to learning devices, it jeopardizes their chance at a stable education and continues cycles of inequality that constantly push minorities to the bottom without giving them an equal playing field to their white counterparts. Latinx, AI/AN (American Indian/Alaska Native), and Black students are disproportionately more likely to face other remote learning challenges through pre-existing household risk factors that are exacerbated by COVID-19. For example, an American Community Survey over four years found that sixteen percent of AAPI (Asian American and Pacific Islander )students are linguistically isolated, in comparison to the one percent of white students that face similar challenges. The problem is compounded when eLearning fails to have accessibility features, such as translators for students with language barriers. The survey also found that 28% of Latinx students and 27% of AI/AN students live in crowded conditions, in comparison to the seven percent of white students in the same situation, making it harder to focus and perform at their best.

eLearning can also be difficult for children with disabilities, which is especially true for those who are from economically disadvantaged families. For small children, this often means the need for constant monitoring to stay focused. However, many working-class parents don’t have the privilege of working from home to be there for them. They cannot arrange for $50 an hour tutors or specialists that can ensure their children get the best quality care and education possible while they aren’t there. Meanwhile, other children with disabilities do not have digital literacy or the online learning skills needed to engage with curriculum and testing in eLearning. Other accessibility arrangements that can easily be made in person are much more difficult and often aren’t done in eLearning, such as adjusted timing to complete assignments and material in accessible formatting like Braille. Many instructors in virtual learning are also unequipped to meet the needs of students with disabilities and execute strategies for online teaching which work effectively for each individual.

With greater access to eLearning, it has the potential to be utilized for reducing disparities. eLearning can be used as a catalyst to improve graduation rates and higher education outcomes for historically marginalized students. For example, many low-income families are not able to afford the same quality of education that private schools, one-on-one classes, and personalized learning plans offer. eLearning could be a tool to solve that by using automated bots and computer programs that require no external instructor or operator, so that it is free but still offers the same quality of education and advice. For tools like this to be prioritized in developing and distributing, teaching institutions must first acknowledge the disparities that exist between their student populations, and begin to adopt strategies that are actively working to reduce them. Digital tools should have clear instructional guides and content that are accessible in various languages and formats for students with disabilities. Online learning environments should also be engaging and welcome students of different cultural, social, and economic backgrounds through sensitivity training for instructors and support forums for students who need it. eLearning can also truly benefit from collaborative environments that not only build community but also enhance the learning experience and encourage students to gain respect and empathy for one another. In this way, incremental changes can be made to better the online learning experience of marginalized students and promote growth. However, the most pressing and complex issue being the lack of internet access in many homes is one that requires a more complex solution. Ongoing developments in LMS (Learning Management Systems) are being done so that content can reach populations who have limited or unstable access to the internet. Other teaching establishments need to keep pushing and providing greater assistance to students with limited technological resources at home. Overall, these developments are critical in continuing to fight the systemic inequalities that we see in education, and how that translates into higher education and job disparities.