Digital Pedagogy Toolbox: Who Are We Leaving Behind?

Photo by Taruna Goel

As a member of the post-secondary education community in B.C., I, like many others, have celebrated the expansion of digital pedagogies and the B.C. Post-Secondary Digital Literacy Framework as a way to promote flexibility, accessibility, and innovation. But beneath the surface, I have realized that perhaps some students, and some instructors, are quietly struggling to keep up.

As we adopt digital transformation, we must ask ourselves: who are we leaving behind? Are we unintentionally creating learning environments that benefit some while disadvantaging others?

In this article, I reflect on the hidden costs of an increasingly digital learning landscape. I also highlight how some of the strategies included in the Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning can help post-secondary educators design more inclusive learning experiences that ensure all learners have equitable opportunities to succeed.

The Hidden Costs of Digital Pedagogy

I teach a post-secondary course, Instructional Design in Adult Education, at the University of Victoria (UVic) as a part of the Certificate in Adult and Continuing Education (CACE) program. The course is an asynchronous, online course. While I am always excited about the opportunity to introduce adult learners to instructional design, I also realize that teaching the course in this format, though incredibly flexible, poses its own set of challenges; not only for me as an Instructor, but for my students as well.

I have facilitated this course for many years and what strikes me most in this teaching experience is how digital tools that are meant to enhance learning can sometimes unintentionally create barriers. The tools and technologies that promise flexibility or accessibility can leave some learners feeling excluded.

Online and/or hybrid learning was often framed as offering students more flexibility and choice. Given that students come from diverse backgrounds and have diverse needs, flexibility is desirable. However, while flexibility has the potential to increase access for some learners, the form it takes needs to be addressed. (Ikebuchi, 2023, p. 15)

Digital learning environments, especially asynchronous ones like the course I teach, are often framed as offering freedom, but that freedom comes with hidden costs. As instructors, we must acknowledge the challenges and hidden costs of digital pedagogies including cognitive, emotional, and financial costs. The systems that seem to work for the most tech-savvy students sometimes overlook those who are still adjusting to the pace of digital education or grappling with the overwhelming demands of digital pedagogy.

Who Struggles in the Digital Environment

While online/hybrid learning offers the promise of greater support for learners from marginalized groups such as those with learning differences and/or disabilities, or those who live in underserved, remote/rural communities (often Indigenous communities), these are often the groups that are most identified as facing challenges of access to technology, the Internet, or accessible content. Addressing issues of access is vital if institutions want education to be equitable and inclusive. Learners cannot be expected to have digital literacy skills if they do not have access to technology. Students with learning differences and/or disabilities can only benefit from online learning if they can access the content in equitable ways. (Ikebuchi, 2023, p. 14)

After teaching and working in the online learning world for over two decades, I have come to realize that digital learning isn’t inherently more inclusive; in fact, it often amplifies existing disparities.

• Students without digital fluency

Many students struggle with digital literacy, and this isn’t just a generational issue. While some of us may take it for granted, it is not easy to navigate different types of learning management systems, stay organized using digital and cloud-based resources and tools, and engage in asynchronous discussions and group work. It requires a level of digital literacy that not all students possess. Without focused guidance, these learners are not able to keep pace. Also, technology evolves so quickly that if you take a break from it for a year or two, or don’t use it for education and learning, getting back to it can be intimidating and overwhelming.

As an instructor I cannot assume digital fluency; it is something that must be taught and supported. Also, I view digital literacy not as an isolated skill, but an integrated part of the educational journey.

As post-secondary educators, we need to remember that integrating digital literacy into every aspect of the learning journey is not just a pedagogical choice; it’s an ethical imperative. It ensures that learners are equipped with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed academically, professionally, and personally in an increasingly digital world. (Goel, 2023)

• Students with disabilities and neurodiverse learners

In the online environment, neurodivergent students and students with disabilities are faced with barriers like cognitive overload, poor UX/UI design, and overreliance on text-based digital content and resources. Tools like auto-generated captions and screen readers help, but they are often secondary considerations rather than a core design philosophy. Students in my class who report their ADHD difficulties usually express how they have difficulty with web-based course platforms being distracting and overwhelming, especially when the layout, navigation, and functionality across courses and programs are inconsistent.

Without one-on-one dialogue and individual mentoring, these students are behind the game before they even begin. I am more than willing to help those who reach out, but I cannot help but think about how many others are quietly struggling without anyone even knowing it.

• Non-traditional students

My course attracts many adult learners returning to post-secondary education after years in the workforce. They also come from a variety of backgrounds including sectors that may or may not be considered tech-savvy. Many are mid-career professionals transitioning into training and education roles (e.g., tradesmen, clinicians, therapists, nurses, law enforcement officers, and emergency responders). They are returning to university digital learning environments and struggling to meet the expectations of online participation and engagement.

These learners are proficient in their field of practice and have specialized areas of expertise but may or may not have experience with online, formal learning. They struggle with the self-directed nature of many online courses and often find themselves isolated from other students who are more comfortable with digital tools. When they see other students navigating the online platforms with ease, and engaging in extensive virtual discussions and collaborative activities, they often experience frustration. This can sometimes affect their confidence in their ability to succeed in the course, and lead to disengagement and dropping the course. As an instructor, I have trained myself to be particularly sensitive to the needs of these non-traditional learners. Regular personal check-ins, clear expectations, and opportunities for in-person interaction such as frequent office hours can help support their learning and engagement.

• Financially disadvantaged students

During COVID, we all realized that the digital divide wasn’t just about access to the internet. It was about high-speed connectivity, updated devices, specialized software, and, more importantly, quiet study and working spaces. As more assessments and courses move online, students with limited resources face more hurdles. The hidden costs of digital pedagogy are often financial and these barriers are rarely acknowledged in the broader conversation about digital education.

As stated in the B.C. Post-Secondary Digital Literacy Framework:

A person’s access to adequate hardware and software is required for developing digital literacy. However, not all people in B.C. have access to hardware and software, nor are included in digital or online environments. Therefore, alongside this framework, post-secondary institutions are encouraged to consider and address barriers learners might encounter when accessing digital learning spaces including connectivity, software, devices, and learning spaces. (Government of B.C., n.d., p.3)

• Students who are digitally fatigued

There’s an important emotional hidden cost of digital pedagogies around digital fatigue. Yes, digital pedagogies are making online education flexible, but for many students, it feels like an ‘always-on’ environment with no clear boundaries between personal and academic life. In my teaching, I have observed how students can experience online burnout from managing work, study, and life because everything is increasingly becoming more digital!

The challenge is not about just keeping up with content, it is about managing what seems like an unending stream of digital interactions. This constant connectivity can lead to burnout and a sense of detachment. In the context of digital fatigue, conversations around the mental health and well-being of both university students and instructors are important topics in post-secondary education.

What Can Post-Secondary Educators Do?

Digital transformation, though revolutionary, is not always inclusive. But digital pedagogies don’t have to be exclusionary. By designing more intentionally, educators can mitigate some of the hidden costs of digital pedagogies.

Professional development topics related to digital learning are broad and varied. Like the challenges related to digital learning, some topics are directly related to technology use and others are more technology-adjacent (professional development related to assessment, instructional practices, and student support. (Canadian Digital Learning Research Association, 2024, p. 26)

The Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning were developed by the Quality Enhancement Working Group in alignment with recommended action 1 (a) from the Digital Learning Strategy. These guidelines provide a roadmap for post-secondary institutions in British Columbia to ensure digital learning models are inclusive, equitable, and sustainable.

Among other things, the guidelines emphasize:

Designing for equity and inclusion

• Digital learning environments should accommodate diverse learners by considering systemic inequities and integrating Universal Design for Learning (UDL). In addition, institutions should use intersectional approaches to assess how different groups experience digital learning.
• Accessibility should extend beyond compliance with technical standards to address barriers related to technology access, affordability, and student support services.

Addressing the digital divide

• Not all students have access to reliable technology. The guidelines recommend low and no-tech alternatives such as providing downloadable or print-based course material, offering technology borrowing programs, and creating physical learning spaces where students can access digital tools.
• Institutions should clarify how required technologies align with learning outcomes and provide alternative ways to complete coursework if students face barriers.

Supporting educators and learners

• Technology-enhanced learning should take a human-centred approach. Institutions should provide mental health and well-being support for both students and staff in digital environments.
• It is important to create opportunities for educators to upskill so they can effectively teach in digital environments. Educators need ongoing professional development in digital pedagogy so that they can develop new teaching strategies and design models that support the needs of digital environments and inclusive learning practices.

Moving Forward: Making Digital Learning Work for Everyone

The 2024 Pan-Canadian report on digital learning states:

Given the continuing interest in increasing hybrid, online, and technology-supported learning, it is important to acknowledge the challenges associated with technology adoption. Some challenges, like faculty and student digital literacy or technology infrastructure, are directly related to technology use, whereas others are more systemic in nature and become more pronounced when technology is introduced into the institutional context (e.g., faculty fatigue and burnout, quality assurance, and addressing inequities). (Canadian Digital Learning Research Association, 2024, p.21)

While digital learning offers new opportunities, it also creates barriers that disproportionately affect some learners. As we continue to innovate, we must also recognize and address the hidden costs of digital pedagogies that prevent both students and instructors from fully participating.

By leveraging the Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning we can navigate the expanding use of digital technologies in teaching and learning. This includes fostering the development of localized digital literacy policies and increasing digital literacy knowledge, skills, and abilities for all, including people of all levels of digital experience, backgrounds, contexts, and worldviews. We want to create a post-secondary system that truly works for everyone, not just those with access to the right tools and resources.

References

Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. (2024). 2024 Pan-Canadian report on digital learning: https://cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2024-Pan-Canadian-Report_EN.pdf

Goel, T. (2023, November 15). Digital pedagogy toolbox: Integrating digital literacy practices. BCcampus. https://bccampus.ca/2023/11/15/digital-pedagogy-toolbox-integrating-digital-literacy-practices/

Government of British Columbia (n.d.). The B.C. Post-Secondary Digital Literacy Framework https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/institution-resources-administration/digital-learning-strategy/bc_post-secondary_digital_literacy_framework.pdf

Government of British Columbia (n.d.). Appendix 1: Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/institution-resources-administration/digital-learning-strategy/guidelines_for_technology-enhanced_learning.pdf

Ikebuchi, S. (2023). Accessing education: Equity, diversity, and inclusion in online learning. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 49(1). https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28349  https://cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/28349

------------

Originally published by BCcampus: https://bccampus.ca/2025/03/05/digital-pedagogy-toolbox-who-are-we-leaving-behind/

Personalization of Learning: A Nuanced View

Image by Katie White from Pixabay

Personalization of learning has become one of the most frequently discussed trends in L&D. Beyond the usual methods of tailoring content to specific roles and tasks, commercial, adaptive technologies claim to offer personalized learning paths meant to customize learning experiences to individual needs.

As someone who has spent over two decades designing and delivering workplace training programs, I find myself asking a critical question: How much personalization is really needed in workplace training?

I am aware of the value that personalization can bring to address diverse learning needs and requirements. But I am equally experienced in trying to solve the challenges it poses especially when scaling learning interventions.

Contrary to popular belief and savvy marketing lines, personalization doesn’t automatically transform mediocre training into something impactful.

Also, I'd add that organizations truly cannot afford to chase the "goal of personalization" for every training intervention they design.

Value of thoughtful personalization There are clearly some opportunities where personalization of learning can add real value. For example, when we are trying to train people on highly complex, role-specific tasks in jobs that require deep technical expertise or jobs that are centered around people development. In these situations, it helps to address the diverse learner needs including individuals coming in with different prior knowledge and experiences, varying familiarity with the industry and its jargon, their range of learning preferences and accessibility needs, etc. An onboarding program, a leadership development program, or a language learning program can all benefit from some methods to tailor content to make sure that people get what they need without wasting time on redundant information. In these situations, personalization can also help learners feel more in control of their journey. This sense of autonomy and empowerment can certainly increase engagement and retention.

But, there are limits to this approach, especially in the context of workplace realities and varying learning needs and performance outcomes.

The cost and challenges of scaling personalization

Personalization is resource-intensive. Designing core and ancillary content, identifying multiple learning paths, creating adaptive content, and leveraging technologies that cater to individual preferences all require time, budget, and expertise. For organization-wide, large-scale training initiatives like compliance, regulatory, or safety training for hundreds of employees, scaling personalized approaches becomes impractical. I have seen enough cases when there are superficial attempts at personalization. For example, building multiple learning pathways without meaningful real differentiation. If there is very little or no variance in the actual content, learning assignments and assessments, and learning interactions and engagement that actually address the different deeper learning needs, then why do it?

Without thoughtful and intentional design, personalization can seem more like a check-box activity rather than a meaningful enhancement to the learning experience.

Risks of over-personalization

I've also seen how sometimes over-personalization can unintentionally isolate learners and prevent the development of a natural, organic organization-wide learning community. When the training path is too fragmented, employees tend to miss out on shared experiences that actually help in collaboration and alignment.

For one of the training interventions I designed many years ago, the client insisted on creating role-specific training for an enterprise software rollout for the organization. While it was valuable to tailor the content for individual role holders, there were over 20 unique roles to cater to, which seemed too many. The developmental timelines and budgets were quickly out of line. But more importantly, within this fragmented approach, there was no opportunity for cross-functional teams to engage with common content that reinforced some of the most critical features and functionality of the software for the organization. In this case, a challenge that repeatedly came up was that the sales team didn't quite understand how their choices within the software workflow were impacting the finance team who had to "redo" some of the choices each time. This not only caused friction among the departments but also led to slow adoption of the software. In the end, the client agreed that this over-personalization of learning was actually causing desensitization in teams and individuals.

Ethical considerations of personalization

There are also ethical considerations about personalization. I am still exploring this angle but I have a feeling that when there are algorithms that adapt content in a "black box" mode, it might inadvertently reinforce biases or limit exposure to diverse perspectives.

For example, what if an AI-driven platform customizes leadership development content based on a learner's existing profile or past choices but it ends up prioritizing content based on stereotypical gender-based assumptions (e.g., assigning women more content related to soft skills and men more technical or strategic content).

If algorithms segment learners too narrowly, the customized path might omit content deemed 'irrelevant,' potentially leaving some learners without exposure to certain content. This can create silos of knowledge and it certainly doesn't aid in consistent application of knowledge especially in areas like workplace ethics or other organization-wide, DEI-based initiatives or health and safety protocols.

The ethical concerns about personalization are not understood or are overlooked.

Personalization as a strategy; not a goal

In many ways, I see personalization as more of an instructional strategy or technique rather than a training goal. 

Personalization isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution, nor should it be the only or primary measure of effective workplace learning. Besides, it is not a zero or one approach. It's not about making everything personalized or doing no personalization at all. There can be hybrid models that allow for building a core training curriculum for all and optional learning interventions (not always training modules!) for groups of roles allowing us to tailor content to different audiences. Personalization can be achieved using performance support tools, coaching, mentoring, or a platform for developing a shared community that 'creates' their own customized content through discussions.

The ultimate goal of any learning initiative is impact. So, personalization should serve the learner, not the other way around. In the end, the idea is to be more intentional and thoughtful about balancing tailored approaches and practical scalability and using personalization only where it genuinely enhances outcomes and justifies the investment.

Before deciding on using a personalized approach, I'd urge instructional designers to consider: - Will personalization improve learning outcomes or engagement? - Is personalization worth the cost in terms of time, resources, and scalability? - Are there simpler or other alternatives that can achieve similar results?

-----------------

"behind-the-scenes" of this blog post: 

The #LearnChat is back on Bluesky.

In Jan, we kicked off the year with the theme: "Learning Goals and Expectations for 2025." One of the key questions posed was: How can technology better support personalized learning goals for individuals or teams, and what tools do you use? In response to the question, I shared how technology can enable learning goals but cannot drive the learning itself. Informal learning for me happens through Slack communities, #LearnChat, LinkedIn Groups, and similar platforms. Without clear goals, though, these tools often become nothing more than collections of bookmarks and saves.

I also shared my thoughts on the need for personalization in workplace training, noting that while it can be valuable, it doesn’t fix bad training and often comes at the cost of scalability.
The short exchange made me want to explore the topic of personalization in more detail and share my perspective on the personalization of learning within the context of workplace training.

Recognizing the 2025 International Day of Education

Today is International Day of Education. This year’s International Day of Education focuses on "AI and education: Preserving human agency in a world of automation."

As per UNESCO, under the theme “AI and education: Preserving human agency in a world of automation”, the 2025 International Day of Education encourages reflections on the power of education to equip individuals and communities to navigate, understand and influence technological advancement.

As computer and AI-driven systems become more sophisticated, the boundaries between human intention and machine-driven action often blur, raising critical questions about how to preserve, redefine, and, ideally, elevate human agency in an age of technological acceleration.

We have had several knowledge revolutions over the years. From viewing literacy as the ability to read and write, we are now embracing digital literacy for using digital tools and technologies including AI. Of course, there is great value in the act of information gathering and acquiring knowledge.

But education is different from information. The way I see it, education is not just about acquiring knowledge, it is about fostering curiosity, building critical thinking, and developing compassion. Education includes developing skills in emotional intelligence, social awareness, and ethical decision-making. We now live in a world of increasing automation and AI where staying current is important, but staying flexible, adaptable, and always ready to learn is critical. It is through this active engagement in education that we can we can shift the focus from artificial intelligence to augmented intelligence, preserve our human agency and ensure that technology enhances, rather than diminishes, our humanity.

Growing up, the values and traditions in my background taught me that education is about developing a deeper understanding of the world and our role within it. After over two decades in adult education, I’ve come to see education as a journey toward self-realization and inner awakening. Education is not something we passively receive, but something we actively engage in by constantly questioning, evolving, and striving to become the best versions of ourselves, both for our own growth and for the good of the interconnected world we live in.

Photo by Taruna Goel