Equity and the Use of Communications and Information Technology in Higher Education

Executive Summary

Access

Use

Support

Conclusions

This report outlines an investigation of student access and equity issues associated with the use of communications and information technology at the University of Technology, Sydney. Specifically, the study sought to identify any differences in access to, and use of, communications and information technology (CIT) between students from DETYA defined equity groups and a control group. The aims of carrying out the investigation were to identify the key issues in this area which are of significance to policy makers at an institutional and federal level, and to develop a reliable methodology by which these issues can be further pursued in other university settings.

On the basis of previous research in the area, and current understandings of quality management in education, a conceptual framework for the project was developed. In brief, this framework recognises that productive use of CIT by students is achieved through the interaction of convenient and reliable access to ‘front end’ infrastructure, appropriate use (both by the student and the academic) of CIT which is part of a broader learning design, and reasonable support for this use by the staff, systems, infrastructure and processes of the University.

The research was conducted in two phases. In Phase One, a series of focus groups —including students from all equity groups and the control group—was conducted. This allowed the research team to canvass a range of issues significant to these students’ experiences of CIT in their studies, in order to develop the most appropriate research instrument to apply to a larger sample of students. Twenty-seven students participated in this phase of the research.

In Phase Two, a structured questionnaire was developed to target a range of issues, including:

Current use of computers and ideal use of computers;
Current access to computers and preferred access to computers;
Difficulties associated with computer use;
Current use of other technologies (including telephone, audio-tapes, fax, radio, and videoconferences); and
Ease of access to, and perceived benefit, of other technologies.

From a sample of 1696 students, 1323 completed the survey, with an overall response rate of 78 percent. All faculties and levels of study were represented in the sample.

A number of key issues emerged from the study. These are explained with reference to the ‘access, use and support’ framework described above.

Top

Access

The need for consistent and reliable access to computer facilities emerged as a key theme. In particular, the need for accessible and reliable on-campus facilities was a recurring issue.

As a whole group, respondents reported that the most accessible locations for computer use at present were home facilities, and computers at work, while the least accessible were personal laptops and Internet cafes. Women were less likely to have access at work than men. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students were less likely to have access to a computer at home than students from the control group. Students of low socio-economic status were less likely than the control group to have computer access at work. Students over 40 had less ease of access to UTS computer labs, but greater access to computers at work, than students under 40 years old.

The study found that there are a range of factors—physical, experiential, economic, and institutional—which inhibit computer access for students from equity groups. These include: lack of reliable on-campus access for students who have no other access options; lack of modified equipment and enabling software in mainstream labs for students with particular disabilities; the cost of purchasing and upgrading home computer equipment for students of low socio-economic status; the cost of remote connection for rural and isolated students, students of low socio-economic status, and students from non-English speaking backgrounds; poor levels of information literacy leading to lack of confidence to access available resources, for older students, students of low socio-economic status, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, and rural and isolated students; culturally inappropriate computing environments inhibiting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and students from non-English speaking backgrounds.

In addition to issues which affected students from equity groups, the study found that students with family commitments, women, and older students face access barriers which affect their use of CIT. These include access to technological training at convenient times, and limited information literacy.

With regard to other technologies, access to fax machines off campus was less easy for students of low socio-economic status than the control group. Access to telephones off campus was lower for students of non-English speaking backgrounds than the control group. Ease of access to fax machines on campus was greater for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and students from non-English speaking backgrounds.

Top

Use

UTS students are employing CIT in a wide range of activities, including: emailing staff and fellow students; producing assignments, downloading course material, accessing the library and online resources, studying from home, undertaking assessment, contacting social groups, contacting administrative/support services.

The appropriate use of CITs is generally perceived as educationally beneficial by students. Computers are recognised as central learning tools, and there is a general preference for greater access to online resources and administrative services than is currently available, or known to be available, to students. At the same time, there is some concern within the student body that the proliferation of CIT use not reduce access to face to face teaching and learning experiences, and personal interaction with the university community.

There are clear gender differences in current computer use, with men on the whole reporting using computers more frequently than women to carry out a range of activities and, in particular, for recreational purposes.

Students from non-English speaking backgrounds are using computers more frequently than the control group to email staff and fellow students, read course notes, and find out what subjects are available. Women from non-traditional areas of study use computers more frequently than students from the control group to undertake a broad range of activities, which is indicative of the fact that students in this group at UTS are studying in ‘technologically dependent’ disciplines. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students are less likely than the control group to use email to contact staff or fellow students, which may be reflective of access and technological literacy problems reported qualitatively by some students from this group.

In terms of ideal use of computers, there were very few significant differences between students from equity groups and the control group. One notable exception to this was that students from non-English speaking backgrounds have a higher preference for contacting social groups or other students via computer. This is perhaps suggestive of their proportionately greater sense of social isolation within the University community, or their preference for online communication as a means of supplementing face to face communication.

The results suggest that CITs offer specific benefits to students from some equity groups. The findings support theoretical literature which suggests that online resources benefit students from non-English speaking backgrounds, as they allow them to consider and review course content, and thus to translate new ideas into knowledge. Further, students with particular disabilities view CITs as important enabling tools which make education more accessible.

While students identified a variety of benefits associated with the use of CITs in learning, there were a range of factors which limited use, many of which affected students from equity groups to a higher degree. These factors included: lack of reliable access to on-campus facilities, which affected all groups and, particularly, students of low socio-economic status; poor levels of information literacy, which affected women, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, and students of low socio-economic status; lack of access to technological training, which affected women, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, and students of low socio-economic status; lack of access to culturally appropriate technological training, which affected Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and students from non-English speaking backgrounds; absence of personal networks to assist with technical support, which affected students of low socio-economic status, rural and isolated students, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students; particular disabilities not conducive to some types of CIT use; attendance patterns not allowing for high levels of computer use when on campus, which affected Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, students with family responsibilities, and students with particular types of disabilities.

With regard to other technologies, women indicated that they were using audio tapes for study more frequently than men. Students of low socio-economic status reported that they were using fax machines for study purposes less frequently than the control group, which correlates with these groups’ reported access to this technology.

The data suggest that there is a preference for audio tapes and fax machines amongst older students, a number of whom cited their lack of confidence with computer technologies as the reason for their preferences. In addition, some students cited the greater accessibility of these technologies compared to computer facilities as a justification for their preference.

Top

Support

Access to, and knowledge of appropriate support services and networks affect students’ experiences of CIT and its benefits. Women reported lack of awareness of what support is available, lack of information on how to use computers to assist learning, lack of training on how to use relevant computer applications, and no support to address problems when they occur as greater inhibitors to computer use than did men. Students of low socio-economic status identified lack of support to address computer problems when they occur as a greater difficulty than students from the control group.

Knowledge of existing services and facilities is an issue of general concern to students, as is access to technological training at times which cohere with part time studies and/or parenting responsibilities. The need for more responsive technical support in computer labs was also identified as a general issue.

Support issues which differentially impact upon students from equity groups include: lack of knowledge of existing services and facilities, and lack of access to technological training at times when on campus, which affected Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students on block release programs; absence of personal technical support networks, which affected students of low socio-economic status, and rural and isolated students (including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students from remote communities); lack of confidence to access existing services and facilities, which affected women, and older students; lack of targeted support within mainstream facilities for students with particular disabilities; culturally inappropriate technological training, and lack of information literacy support within the Indigenous support unit, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.

Top

Conclusions

The key issues and implications emerging from this study can be summarised as follows:

It is the interaction of appropriate and feasible CIT access, use and support that provides the greatest potential educational benefit.
If issues of appropriate access, use and support of CIT are not pro-actively addressed, equity group students will be further marginalised.
Differential levels of access to CIT, especially to computer assisted learning, have emerged as a key problem for DETYA-defined equity groups, particularly for students of low socio-economic status.
As yet there are few reliable studies on the appropriate use of many CIT tools, especially studies which investigate their use in combination with other learning strategies and resources as part of a comprehensive learning programme.
If new forms of CIT are to be used, then students, especially those from designated equity groups, need support if such use is to be effective.
Low socio-economic status is a key underpinning source of disadvantage in the area of CIT access, use and support.
The validity of the measure of low socio-economic status used by universities and policy makers to determine levels of particular support is critical if specific assistance in the area of CIT is to be appropriately targeted.
The approach universities take to CIT needs to be focused on improving learning outcomes, and not on seeing CIT as an end in itself.
There is a need for parallel studies to explore CIT access, use and support issues for rural and isolated students and postgraduate research degree students, as the former group is underrepresented in the UTS population, while the latter was not sufficiently represented in the current study as a result of the methodological approach employed.
CIT access, use and support issues are also being experienced by other groups not covered by current DETYA equity definitions, including women, older students, and students with family responsibilities, and strategies developed in response to this study need to incorporate their specific needs.

The report identifies a number of issues and implications arising from the research, including:

Issues relating to CIT policy formation in higher education, including the need for development of policy and incentives to encourage good practice; the need to establish national-level monitoring mechanisms; and the need for additional research to identify issues and concerns for specific groups of students under-represented in this study.
Resourcing issues, including need for a more strategic management of CIT resources and the need for additional resources to customise CIT to enhance access for equity students.
Access considerations, including the need to take proactive measures to ensure access for equity group students; ensuring student access to commercially operated facilities and services; accommodating the specific access needs of students with a disability, low socio-economic status students, rural and isolated students, and students with family responsibilities and part-time / alternative attendance pattern students; and issues pertaining to student access to CIT in the workplace.
Issues relating to the effective use of CIT, including the need for a more evidence-based approach to CIT use; the need for further research on the impact of CIT on the educational experiences of equity group students; the need for CIT use to accommodate diverse student needs; and issues arising from the use of CIT in administrative systems and services.
Support issues, including more effective communication of CIT resources and services to students; better management of students’ expectations around access and support; significant issues relating to information literacy and training needs for both students and staff; and strategies to improve technical support services.

Full Report PDF (563KB)

Return to the Top of the Page

Any comments or queries should be sent to: wwweditor@dest.gov.au

This page was last updated on Tuesday, 26 August 2008
Department of Education, Science and Training
Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia
DETST Web Site Privacy Statement
Disclaimer