Strengthening digital inclusion through documented follow-up

In examining strengthening digital inclusion through documented follow-up, for corrective action, improvement should begin with a defined problem, a credible account of its causes and a measure capable of showing whether the response has worked.

Application to digital inclusion through documented follow-up

For digital inclusion, the public interest is not confined to institutional compliance. For the corrective action, a change in delivery mode should not weaken the defined learning outcomes, learner protection, accessibility or reliability of assessment.

• Test access before requiring use.
• Support staff and learners before using it to determine a learner or provider outcome.
• Provide alternative routes for material barriers.
• Define the educational purpose of the technology.
• Assure assessment validity.

Controls for digital inclusion through documented follow-up

It does not, without setting-specific evidence, demonstrate the operation of digital inclusion.

In the context of digital inclusion, effectiveness is the demonstrated change in the condition the action was intended to address.

Review of digital inclusion through documented follow-up

In examining strengthening digital inclusion through documented follow-up, across the defined scope, escalation should follow whenever the available record cannot support a safe conclusion for the affected learners.

The principal risks in relation to the matter are inaccessible content or interaction, reduced opportunities for timely support, assessment methods that do not support valid judgements, and supplier dependency without continuity controls. For digital inclusion, the risks are interdependent; failure of one control may conceal or disable another.

• What was the baseline?
• Did the effect reach the intended group?
• When should an effect be visible?
• What condition should change?
• Has the improvement been sustained?

Implications for digital inclusion through documented follow-up

Relevant evidence for digital inclusion will normally include assessment validity and integrity reviews, supplier performance and exit arrangements, accessibility and usability testing, delivery-mode design and approval records, and teacher capability and workload information. The record for digital inclusion should retain disagreement between sources until its cause and effect are understood.

When examining digital inclusion, implementation of the intended improvement can be tested without imposing unnecessary reporting. Responsible bodies should set a baseline and success measure before intervention, define the review period, compare the result with the intended outcome and examine adverse or unequal effects.

Evidence relevant to digital inclusion through documented follow-up

A decision to close improvement work on digital inclusion should be made by a person with authority and sufficient independence from implementation.

Across the defined scope, log-ins, connection time and activity counts require interpretation alongside assessment and learner experience.

For digital inclusion, decisions concerning the matter should remain traceable to the information available for the stated reference period.

Accountability for digital inclusion should follow decision-making authority.

Assessment of the matter should reconcile more than one source of evidence and control. The final judgement on digital inclusion should connect the applicable expectation to implementation and outcomes while identifying unresolved risk.