Evidence boundaries in the evaluation of digital inclusion

For digital inclusion, implementation should be organised around a decision that can be tested.

Application of the evidence to evidence boundaries in the evaluation of digital inclusion

Consequential findings on digital inclusion require current, attributable evidence for the scope concerned. A reliable record should not merge factual findings with policy intention or institutional judgement.

When examining digital inclusion, the subject should be examined as a connected system of policy, people, resources, decisions and evidence.

The principal risks in relation to the matter are assessment methods that do not support valid judgements, inaccessible content or interaction, technology access determining educational access, and reduced opportunities for timely support. For digital inclusion, the risks are interdependent; failure of one control may conceal or disable another.

Evidence concerning digital inclusion should be selected against a clearly defined question. For the control, the most relevant material is likely to include service availability and incident records, assessment validity and integrity reviews, learner access and participation information, and delivery-mode design and approval records.

Controls relevant to evidence boundaries in the evaluation of digital inclusion

Authorities and providers reviewing digital inclusion should proceed in a defined sequence. The method for the applicable requirement is to map the complete process, identify the intended result and responsible authority at each stage, and test normal cases together with exceptions.

The assurance record for the applicable expectation should retain the date of the evidence, the source responsible for it, the scope examined and the version of any instrument or definition applied. Across the defined scope, a later reviewer should be able to identify whether the condition changed or the evidential record was corrected. For digital inclusion, a superseded conclusion should be retained where it formed the basis of a material decision.

• What outcome is intended?
• Which evidence establishes operation?
• Who controls each stage?
• Where do exceptions occur?
• What action is required by the finding?

Review criteria for evidence boundaries in the evaluation of digital inclusion

Learner safeguards associated with digital inclusion should remain continuous where provision is delivered by several bodies.

The final record on the control should identify the applicable expectation, the relevant scope, the evidence examined, the sampling basis, material exceptions and the reason for the conclusion. The approving record should explain how an alternative approach satisfies the governing requirement. In reviewing digital inclusion, a limitation preventing a complete conclusion should remain visible and unresolved until suitable evidence is obtained.

• Maintain continuity and supplier exit controls.
• Assure assessment validity.
• Define the educational purpose of the technology before it is relied on for a decision with material effect.
• Test access before requiring use.
• Support staff and learners.

Implications for evidence boundaries in the evaluation of digital inclusion

For digital inclusion, a change in delivery mode should not weaken the defined learning outcomes, learner protection, accessibility or reliability of assessment.

Proportionality in relation to the applicable requirement does not mean reduced protection for learners exposed to greater risk. For digital inclusion, digital participation data should not be treated as a direct measure of learning.

For decisions concerning digital inclusion, the current development provides a basis for examining whether the applicable expectation is supported by responsible action and demonstrable result. Institutional improvement and public confidence both depend on transparent responsibility and credible evidence.