Equity? Are Resources and Course Materials Equitable for All readers?

At the start of preparing to do this blog, I was mentally organizing how I wanted to write it. How I wanted to answer the considered questions, if I want to make my own questions, how many citations I wanted to use from the source, then I started reading the article this week, Selwyn, N., Hillman, T., Eynon, R., Ferreira, G., Knox, J., Macgilchrist, F., & Sancho-Gil, J. M. “What’s next for Ed-Tech?”. Over the five (5) years I have been at UVIC, I have come across a wide variety of resources. I have had many that are so academic, no one in the class understood the points the articles make. This got me thinking now about different reading levels, and how we all, or most of us probably had to go through those reading exercises in the library where they would assess your reading skills. I myself was one of the few who had difficulties reading fast enough, or being able to understand the material fast enough in the paragraphs. I had the same thought while attempting to read this article. I think if we talk about equity and UDL, all learners and educators should understand the articles provided. I know I am not the only one who struggles with articles that are notably more academic.

I understand that this is a minor point to make in this topic, but it still makes a point in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) where reading should be universal, so why is there an extra 5 words in a sentence that over defines a single and simple point?

For example:

“they encourage a focus that problematizes individuals and makes them responsible for their position in society, thus ignoring inequalities in wider social structures. Secondly, these responses treat technology as an inherently ‘good thing’ that merely offers educational opportunities, thus ignoring the complex socio-cultural aspects of technology and the strong neo-liberal ideology that drives much of what is developed for education” (Selwyn et al. 2019. p. 2).

Just these two sentences, I personally do not understand. To better explain, phrasing is what confuses me, so the way that academics structure their articles does not flow easily for readers like me who need a more straight-to-the-point sentence. I tend to fully understand if they do not have a run-on sentence feel. I have noticed that academics and lawyers like to provide an academic loophole in the topic of a run-on sentence, in articles that disturb the flow of phrases. If UDL is all about universal design, and this course is about open education, then I would expect my dad to read these and understand what I am learning, no? Then again, I could be just straight out lying and just like to challenge how educational institutions provide material.

“Those individuals who are well-resourced and have strong educational backgrounds are likely to benefit the most from digital education” (Selwyn et al. 2019. p. 2). People who have a strong background in the material they are working with, will of course highly benefit from said material. I am an Indigenous studies major, so of course, I will fully understand an article about “pedagogy of discomfort” or the difference between terms, Resurgence and Reconciliation. Still, my department and the resources I have collected over time, are still understandable if read by my dad. Not saying that every single article in Indigenous studies is not heavily academic, but they are easier to understand than the courses I have taken in other departments. I suck a technology, improving, but still not great, so online learning, and trying to survive EDCI 335 and 339 have been a challenge for me.

I could google all the terms I have issues with, but that is about 2/3 of all papers I read and would take days to read and understand fully. So how is this equitable? how is this universal design? I have noticed that each year at UVIC is different in all aspects, and I have noticed a change in myself. Apparently this year I like to debate and challenge, with respect, the courses I am taking. My MUS 317 course, is about Indigenous peoples and music, but in this course, there is a whole lot about western music theory that tries to define Indigenous music using western terms and theory which appropriates and devalues, rather than much discussion and reflection about why these kinds of music are re-emerging and how they are modern acts of resurgence in this colonial world.

If we are wanting to provide OER’s and OEP’s to the public, they should be easily understandable to literally everyone, including diverse learners with disabilities. Take into account, sources with options for people with hearing or vision impairments. And yes, whoever is reading this is probably thinking, “but you are in university, so you should be able to understand these papers”. You’re right, but also consider that some departments are more informal and do not necessarily expect their learners to use this specific amount of heavy academic jargon. I myself have gotten amazing marks for my essays and I use “I” in all of them, even in English, I use non-formal writing and vocabulary and still get great marks.

Also consider this, are universities really pretentious? fancy? I personally think that university is just a tad overrated when it comes to formality. I really do not feel all that formal when I am in sweats and have bedhead stumbling into class, and they expect us to write an essay using “academic jargon”. Look at first years, they are fresh out of high school, and when I was a first-year, my professors automatically thought I would be writing like a third year with a couple of years of mid-terms, 8 paged essays, and two hours long exams under my belt. I came from a high school of 238 students with a graduating class of 38, my high school education was far from formal. Then you have students coming straight from St. Michaels University school who are already running circles around little small town me who is hoping to get a 50% on her English essay. Spoiler, I failed that English course.

I look at the blatantly obvious in courses, things others would not consider to write about. I look deep inside the box when people are looking outside of it. Long story short, I think courses need to provide readings that are beneficial to all levels of readers, looking through an open or UDL context. This includes the learners and educators who are going to make these changes to the education world in the future. We are learning how to make education more understanding and accessible to everyone, why would we make our own learning difficult when we are trying to create this new and improved education globally?

Reference:

Selwyn, N., Hillman, T., Eynon, R., Ferreira, G., Knox, J., Macgilchrist, F., & Sancho-Gil, J. M. (2020). “What’s next for Ed-Tech? Critical hopes and concerns for the 2020s”. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(1), 1-6, DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2020.1694945