On-Line Learning and Inequalities in a Globalization 4.0 Era

• In Event: TLC at APSA Luncheon: Online Learning and a Global Student Body

Abstract

There is a rich and growing literature related to on-line learning in political science and international relations (Gupta, et. al, 2017; Hamman, 2018). See also, for example, recent issues of the Journal of Political Science Education or the 2015 Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Political Science and International Relations edited by Ishiyama, Miller, and Simon. Hand in hand with this growth is an increase in the practice of on-line learning whether in online course offerings, hybrid classes, on-line degree programs, virtual teams, and MOOCS of many varieties and languages.

However, there is scant research dealing directly with inequalities, especially implicit inequalities, in various on-line learning settings and especially in cross-cultural perspective. The study reported on here seeks to fill this void. There are, of course, some exceptions that highlight positive aspects of on-line learning with regard to the presence or absence of implicit bias. One is, of course, writings discussing the possible benefits of early MOOCs in terms of access to high quality educational offerings, especially for rural populations and for those in developing countries. Another is a research stream dealing with cross-cultural on-line learning about which this and other authors have already written and continue to research. And a third are writings arguing that on-line learning provides a learning forum whereby the professor does not necessarily see the visual appearance of a student or her or his identity. Yet the studies of implicit bias in a range of arenas (Greenwald and Banaji, 2017), presage possibilities of implicit bias in online settings as well as in face-to-face settings. Additionally, very recent research suggests an absence of diversity of scholars in the political science field (Reid and Curry, 2019).

Today we are in what the World Economic Forum calls the era of Globalization 4.0, characterized by ever-increasing economic interconnections and emergent technologies such as artificial intelligence, Internet of Things, big data, robotics, or virtual reality. No matter whether one agrees with the World Economic Forum or not regarding Globalization 4.0, complex interconnections among private and public entities and emerging technologies are present. They lead to uncertainty and turbulence in higher education as well as in other settings. Such technologies, especially as they intersect with growing cybersecurity demands on the one hand and privacy demands on the other, pose important research and practice questions for the on-line arena. Additionally, there are newer actors in the on-line learning space including private sector partners and an on-line learning profession of technical experts. Thus, there is a need especially now to examine possible implicit and explicit inequalities in a range of on-line settings, especially those with global audiences.

This paper particularly addresses the intersectionalities (gender, race, class, culture) that can occur in on-line learning settings, especially those involving students from more than one culture. It focuses on the absence or presence of inclusive on-line and hybrid learning environments, whether individual courses or MOOCs or degree programs. Using theories from political science, sociology, and communication studies (especially cross-cultural communication and intersectionality theories) as well as theories from the education field, this paper presents and analyzes findings that unmask and categorize implicit inequalities and implicit biases in the on-line setting. With this recognition, it sets forth practice recommendations to bring about more inclusive on-line learning environments in this era of Globalization 4.0. Indeed, it concludes with recommendations for additional needed research and for requisite practice in designing on-line learning, especially as it intersects with newer technologies, rooted in awareness of potential inequalities, both explicit and implicit.

Works Cited

Reid, R., & Curry, T. 2019. Are We There Yet? Addressing Diversity in Political Science Subfields. PS: Political Science & Politics, 1-5.

Greenwald, A.G. and Banaji. M. R. 2017. The Implicit Revolution: Reconceiving the Relation between Conscious and Unconscious.
American Psychologist.
Gupta, BM, Kumar, Gupta, R. 2017. Global Publications Output on Mobile Learning during 2007-16: A Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment. International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology.
Hamman, K. 2018. Review of Minds Online: Teaching Effectively with Technology, Journal of Political Science Education.
Ishiyama, J., Miller, W.J. and Simon, E.,eds. 2015. Handbook of Teaching and Learning In Political Science and International Relations. Edward Elgar.
Reid, R., & Curry, T. 2019. Are We There Yet? Addressing Diversity in Political Science Subfields. PS: Political Science & Politics.

Author

• Nanette S. Levinson, American University-SIS