Equitable access to digital higher education for students with disabilities in South Africa

Abstract

Background: The growing reliance on digital learning in South Africa, partly because of the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 4IR technologies, risks excluding students with disabilities (SwDs) if measures to adequately support them are not in place. Objectives: The study aims to identify gaps in knowledge, policies, practices and resources, which could impede the full engagement of SwDs. This article utilises the conceptual framework for inclusive digital learning, which comprises three categories of concepts related to inclusive digital learning: (1) defining attributes, (2) antecedents (necessary conditions) and (3) consequences (results). The framework is applied to synthesise the literature, determine the framework's efficacy, feasibility, and suitability, and demonstrate its value and utility in the actual implementation of inclusive and high-quality higher education for SwDs in South Africa during this era of digital learning. Method: This study reviewed 22 articles (2020-2023) on disabilities, higher education, and digital learning identified through Google Scholar using Boolean operators. Results: The study reveals significant gaps in South African higher education research on institutional policies related to digital access, capacity development, and disability inclusion in teaching and curriculum design. Conclusion: The challenges facing SwDs and the existing research gaps imply that most higher education institutions lack the theoretical knowledge, policies, resources, infrastructure and staff capacity to support SwDs. Contribution: This study exposes gaps in the literature and recommends further research on higher education policies and to establish the potential for policy reform to better support SwDs in the current era of digital learning.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.