Keywords

Introduction

This chapter addresses the issue of gender in open, distance, and digital education (ODDE), which came to the fore in the 1980s and has been an ongoing concern since then. The increasing digitalization of the field led to a focus on online learning and virtual learning environments (von Prümmer, 2004b).

The concept of open and distance education (DE) has always been associated with the ideal of providing educational opportunities for minority groups and those who cannot access the educational system in the regular way. The establishment of single-mode distance teaching universities (DTUs) such as the Open University in Britain (OUUK) and the FernUniversität (FeU) in West Germany was an outcome of the political will in the 1970s to provide working-class people and other educationally disadvantaged groups with a “second chance” to access tertiary education and to obtain an academic degree (Boothroyd, 1994; McIntosh, 1977). In fact, research at the German FeU has shown that DE does serve as a second chance for women from a working-class background to achieve an academic degree previously denied them (von Prümmer, 1997, 2000).

Why is gender an issue in ODDE? Without a gender perspective differences between men and women were traditionally explained in terms of a deficit model, which saw women as lacking the qualities needed to be successful distance students. A case in point is gendered learning styles. The German FeU with its predominantly male student population propagated the ideal typical distance student as the “autonomous, independent” learner who neither needed nor wanted extensive support. If women wanted “support and connectedness” (Kirkup & von Prümmer, 1990), they clearly lacked the necessary autonomy and independence. Similarly, if women chose to study a limited range of subjects, it was basically their problem. And if women didn’t manage to organize their lives and give priority to their studies, maybe they were not suited for this type of education and didn’t deserve the opportunities offered.

Introducing the concept of gender into the picture brings a different perspective. It means looking at all aspects of the provision of DE and the situation of the students. It identifies gender factors and ways to turn gender differences into assets rather than disadvantages. For instance, in terms of this paradigm the need of women for personal contact with tutorial staff or support networks is not seen as psychological dependence but as bringing to DE valuable communication and affiliation skills (Kirkup, 1995: 11). In the same way, the observed gender differences in course choice lead to a reevaluation of the androcentric way in which the subject matter is presented.

As DE has moved from its traditional forms toward ODDE and virtual learning environments, there is even more need for concern regarding the effects of gender and the equitable participation of women in online education. Gender is an issue simply because – no matter how “virtual” they are – these environments are part of the “real” world and therefore gendered. Learner support, in particular, has to acknowledge gender as a category, which shapes the provision of online education and which affects students and their ability to participate fully in it. With regard to ODDE students who must work with information and communication technologies (ICTs), evaluation studies show persistent gender differences in three areas: (1) access to, and control over ICTs, available resources, and the gendered division of labor; (2) know-how and computer literacy, confidence, language and writing skills; and (3) learning styles, communication preferences, and usage of ICTs.

Gender Issues in Distance Education: Historical Context

The Situation of Women in Open and Distance Learning (ODL)

The 1970s saw the rise of tertiary distance education (DE) and its transformation into open and distance learning (ODL). Single-mode Open Universities (OUs) and Distance Teaching Universities (DTUs) were established around the globe to provide opportunities for “second chance” academic qualification for mature students already settled into jobs and family life.

If women were expressly mentioned as target groups for this type of education, they were often typecast as “housewives” for whom DE was ideally suited (McIntosh, 1977: 78). While house-bound and unable to attend face-to-face classes, housewives, especially mothers of small children, were supposed to be flexible in their time-management and therefore able to pursue their educational aspirations through home study. The fact that in many ODL courses female students were the majority was seen as proof of the success of opening these educational opportunities to women. Yet this unreflected view of the life circumstances of women contributed to a disregard of the needs of women distance students. Increasingly, teachers and institutional researchers were concerned with gender differences in DE, not only in access and participation but also in course choice, drop-out rates, and study success.

By 1982 the situation of women in DE had become a focus of feminist educators and researchers who started to connect globally in the Women’s International Network WIN within the International Council for Open and Distance Education ICDE. The insights gained by cross-cultural discourse and research were not simply additive but created added value for the understanding of the role of gender in DE. This was first manifested in Karlene Faith’s (1988) pioneering collection Toward New Horizons for Women in Distance Education: International Perspectives. This book is commonly referred to as the WIN-Book since it originated in the WIN movement and not only the editor and her team but all contributors were active WIN members, distance educators, and researchers. Its continued relevance is evidenced by the fact that the book was republished in 2017, both as hard copy and eBook (Faith, 2017).

Women Working in ODL

The concern with gender in DE first emerged as a global issue four decades ago at the 12th ICDE World Conference in Vancouver because the organization glaringly ignored the presence of women working and studying in the field. Even though 25% of the conference delegates were women they felt marginalized because of the gender-exclusive language and the male-dominated production and transmission of knowledge (Burge, 1988: x). This reflected the androcentrism in universities and schools, including DE institutions. Women were underrepresented in the higher ranks of academic and administrative positions and overrepresented in lower-level office and technical jobs and insecure positions.

Yet undeniably the learning experience of women distance students is shaped by the visibility – or invisibility – of women working in their DE institution (von Prümmer, 2000: 15). A preponderance of men in the higher levels of the academic hierarchy not only affects teaching but also research opportunities and activities and the publication of findings. A literature review of five prominent DE journals between 2000 and 2008 shows gender differences in research areas and research methods. Exploring the associations between gender, collaboration, and research the study found that women, whether as single authors or co-authors, were more likely to report on qualitative methods and on topics related to learners, their characteristics, support or interaction, and to communication in learning communities. Men, on the other hand, are stereotypically more concerned with technology and management (Zawacki-Richter & von Prümmer, 2010: 95).

The gender-differentiated academic hierarchies are widely reflected in research that typically requires funding, which also is more accessible to men than to women researchers. Looking into the productivity and impact of papers authored by men and women, a 2015 study showed a distinct underrepresentation of women in the most productive group of researchers. This is associated with gender differences in age, authorship position, and academic rank (van den Besselaar & Sandström, 2017 p. 1).

Women Distance Students

Gill Kirkup, an institutional researcher at the OUUK, points out that one of the important points to arise from the WIN-Book is the refutal of the view that ODL is a type of education particularly suited to women. This assumption was based on the well-known facts that compared to men adult women have many more restrictions on their time and mobility, and at the same time have less access to disposable income. Yet implicitly it presumed that there is no difference between men and women with regard to their study motivations, their intellectual styles, and their domestic circumstances (Kirkup, 1996:154).

In this context Gill Kirkup refers to the first internationally comparative research project in 1986–1988, conducted from a feminist perspective and explicitly directed toward the gendered circumstances of DE students. It was a large-scale parallel survey of women and men studying at the German FeU and the British OUUK. Addressing a wide range of themes, the research provided information on the composition of the student body and student characteristics, class background and social mobility, family and work commitments, study motivation and learning styles, communication and student support, subject preferences and prior educational attainment, the economic situation and access to resources, domestic division of labor; and control over one’s study time and space (von Prümmer, 2000). The data yielded gender differences in all of these areas and acted as starting point for further analysis and investigation.

The data analysis of the FeU study concentrated in the first instance on students’ choice of major subject and degree program, testing the assumption that the underrepresentation of women was due to a predominance of “male” subject areas (von Prümmer & Rossié, 1988). The starting point of the comparative analysis of FeU and OUUK data was focused on students’ private situation and their use of support services (Kirkup & von Prümmer, 1990). It showed that women leaned toward a connected style of learning, which tended to conflict with the distance teaching mode as practiced by FeU at the time (von Prümmer, 2004b:180).

The research confirmed the existence of gendered life circumstances. At the same time it refuted another presumption often used to explain gender inequality in DE, namely, a deficit model of women students who were seen to be less suited for independent study in ODL than their male colleagues (Kirkup, 1996: 155). Feminist theories and debates confirm that women are different, not deficient, and that DTUs must take these differences into account if they want to serve their women students (Kirkup, 1995: 11, von Prümmer, 2004b: 180–181).

Feminist Perspectives and ODL

The emergence of women, bringing with it feminist perspectives and the concern not only with the representation of women in the field but more broadly with gender issues, challenged the androcentrism of the DE world. Although, as Karlene Faith notes in the WIN-Book, not every contributor to this book would identify as a feminist, they all describe radical alternatives to the educational status quo (Faith, 1988:13).

To accept that gender is an overriding concept in ODL is to open a Pandora’s box, which will affect all facets of teaching and learning at a distance such as content and language, curriculum design, course delivery and technologies, student support and communication, cost and resources, as well as institutional and other research, policy decisions, staff development, and administration.

Women’s/Gender Studies (WGS) and Distance Education

An obvious deviation from androcentric content and curriculum are courses and degree programs in Women’s/Gender Studies (WGS), which often are explicitly founded in feminism and the women’s movement (AU Athabasca University, 2021). Due to their very nature as both a learning exercise and a consciousness-raising experience, WGS represent special challenges to teaching and learning at a distance as described by Edith Smith and Valerie S. Norlen in their account of “Tele-Distance Education in Women’s Studies” (1994). This confirms the findings Elizabeth Burge and Helen Lenksyj collected during their first graduate course in women’s studies at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE). They conclude that promoting distance mode women’s studies courses is a challenge in itself. It also presents implications for women-centered teaching in all other DE programs regardless of their possible explicitly feminist orientation. Gender analysis of all content and acknowledgment of the specific life circumstances and experiences of women students need to be integrated into teaching and learning processes across the board (Burge & Lensksyj, 1990).

Today Women’s/Gender Studies (WGS) programs look back on a long tradition and are nearly universally offered at a distance, as undergraduate and graduate degree programs as well as for personal development. Nearly four decades ago the OUUK offered its first Women’s Studies (WS) course (Kirkup, 1983), and 30 years later looked back on it as a success story. Gill Kirkup and Liz Whitelegg (2013) described the program as influential nationally and internationally for many feminists and WGS teachers and scholars who either enrolled at the OUUK or at other institutions, which had bought the materials. It is not as clear whether the WS course was successful in spreading gender analysis to the Open University’s other subjects and degree programs.

On the opposite side of the world the Indian Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) started its M.A in Women’s and Gender Studies program in 2013 aiming to enable students to apply gender perspectives to the complex power hierarchies and relationships of society (IGNOU, 2021). The WGS program thus stands in the feminist tradition of encouraging and equipping women to challenge the given power relationships even if they study at a distance and may not be supported by a local women’s group. Looking at DE from a perspective of women’s studies Natasha Patterson (2012) identifies three main issues for feminist pedagogy: it must (1) include the virtual classroom with its gender, race, and class inequalities; (2) provide strategies and frameworks for addressing the special needs of women in diverse circumstances; and (3) focus on the female adult learners who use the technologies in their online studies and contribute valid insights concerning their implementation and use. She concludes that teaching women’s studies at a distance offers broader insights and challenges about the teaching and learning of feminism.

Worldwide there are many WGS courses and degree programs on all levels of DE, as the most cursory internet search will testify. Googling “Women’s Studies Programs Worldwide,” for instance, leads to a University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) website on “Women’s/Gender Studies Programs & Research Centers” claiming to provide links to more than 900 women’s/gender/feminist studies programs, departments, and research centers around the world that have web sites (UMBC, 2021). These programs are by no means uniform in their focus and pedagogy. But WGS on the whole have provided an important platform for the exploration and development of feminist, or at least women-friendly, content and distance learning environments. Gender is an all-pervasive issue, which must be addressed across the board to overcome long-established patterns of androcentrism, even sexism, and male dominance.

Feminist Pedagogy and New Horizons for Women

Feminist pedagogy plays an important role in DE beyond the confines of Women’s/Gender Studies (WGS). The perspectives it brings to ODL have become even more relevant since the emergence of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), which have first supplemented the traditional forms of delivery and later replaced them to a large extent. In the 1980s and 1990s ODL evolved from mainly written and printed materials delivered through postal services and augmented by video and audio and by face-to-face meetings. The beginning of the twenty-first century saw a rapid expansion of the use of ICTs in all areas of teaching, studying, communication, delivery, and administration. As DE continued to evolve in further stages and different directions it was variously called e-learning, online education, studying at the virtual university, and eventually Open, Distance and Digital Education (ODDE).

Addressing ODDE and gender, this chapter deals with general issues affecting women in DE and their opportunities for equitable participation in this path to gaining vocational and professional qualifications or personal development. More specifically, it also deals with the various interrelations of gender and technology, which can act as a hindrance to equal participation or as an instrument of empowerment.

Issues of Equity and Empowerment

From the beginning, the world of DE has been closely associated with issues of equal access to education. Originally meant to provide education for people in remote areas, DE also became a means of extending educational opportunities to anybody who could not attend classes in person. Apart from geographical distance, reasons that prevent children or adults from attending traditional educational institutions may lie in social, cultural, or personal factors. Social class, for instance, may be a distancing factor, as people from a lower, minority, or working-class background cannot afford better schooling for their children or traditionally do not value advanced education. Cultural factors may prevent people of certain religious or ethnic backgrounds from providing their children, especially their daughters, with higher education. Or the mainstream culture may deny minority groups access to educational opportunities. Personal factors may be at work when a potential student is disabled, has to take care of children or other family members, works full time at a job, or is imprisoned or institutionalized.

This shift in focus was accompanied by a corresponding shift away from the original concept of “teaching at a distance” to “open learning,” which corresponded to a twofold commitment: an emphasis on open access and on the learning process and the needs of learners. These developments are often thought to open educational opportunities automatically to women, especially to those with multiple factors working against them. Research and experience has shown that it takes deliberate action and policies to mitigate the adverse effects of androcentric pedagogy and content and to ensure equity of access and study success for women.

A recent literature survey by Suzan Koseoglu and colleagues, covering 30 years of literature, focused on gender inequality in post-secondary and higher DE contexts and confirmed that gender inequality remains a pressing issue on a global scale (Koseoglu, Öztürk, Ucar, Karahan, & Bozkurt, 2020). Yet according to their analysis the majority of publications does not address gender issues but ignores both the causes of gender inequality (patriarchy and androcentrism) and their effects (women having less access to educational resources and formal learning opportunities). The authors conclude that better access to educational opportunities alone does not ensure gender equity. Rather, curriculum design should be informed by gender perspectives and centered on empowerment and agency in order to challenge existing cultural and traditional assumptions and political systems. In joining critical pedagogy in general and feminist pedagogy in particular to achieve these ends, Koseoglu and colleagues close the circle to the earlier demand of Elizabeth Burge and Helen Lenksyj (1990) to integrate gender analysis into all content, whether it be explicitly feminist or not.

The following sections deal with four areas of inequality and point out ways for the empowerment of women: (1) Gender roles and the social division of labor, (2) Learning environments, (3) Access equity, and (4) course content and choice of subject.

Gender Roles and the Social Division of Labor

A Woman’s Work Is Never Done

The gendered division of labor, which exists in most societies means that women are responsible for taking care of children and the household. Since many women DE students also work full-time or part-time outside the home, they have multiple commitments even before enrolling as distance students. Their courses are then an additional workload – a “third shift” (Kramarae, 2001) – which has to be fitted around their other roles. Recently, Covid-19 and pandemic-induced “work-from-home” (WFH)” has brought forth an impressive amount of research testifying to its gender-differentiated impact, both in the private sphere and in work-related areas, which reinforces the traditional division of labor and gender roles.

There exists a myth of flexibility and self-determination with regard to the domestic and family responsibilities of women. It is often assumed that DE is especially suited for “housebound mothers of small children” believed to enjoy flexible schedules and the freedom to organize their own days. In fact, the demands of home-making and childcare provide a fragmented workday over which the women have little control, making it difficult to free up time for studying, especially for the uninterrupted or lengthy periods necessary for in-depth reading or exam preparation.

Making Time for Her Studies

Despite these adverse circumstances women DE students do manage their course loads and exams by reorganizing their lives and negotiating the domestic division of labor with their partners and children. One of the most difficult tasks is the changing of priorities so housework and mothering no longer take precedence and outside help is accepted with childcare, cleaning, etc. (grandparents, daycare, cleaning service, take-away food).

To succeed in this, women must realize, at the beginning of their studies, how great the workload will be, how much time and concentrated effort has to be invested, that it is their right to study, even if they don’t aim for a degree, and that they need not feel guilty for “neglecting” their families. DE universities can and must assist this process by providing new students with information about likely difficulties so they can make allowances and prevent counterproductive behavior patterns to set in. Institutional support can help women to develop coping strategies, encourage students to share their experiences, and assist with setting up support networks and communication channels for the exchange between students.

Learning Environments

Home Study

Easily the most obvious difference between distance and campus-based education is the physical learning environment in which students and staff are situated. DE and e-learning in effect means the privatization of the learning environment (Evans & Grace, 1995), which has become the concern of the individual student. This means (1) The learning environment is no longer provided on a campus and in buildings supplied by the university; (2) Factors outside the university determine the learning setup to at least the same extent as do the university‘s study rules and regulations; (3) The student rather than the university takes responsibility for the conditions in which studying takes place; and (4) The student‘s personal life, resources, and access to technologies become increasingly important for her/his study success (based on data from FeU research; see von Prümmer, 2004a).

Privatized Learning Environments

The privatization of the learning environment brings with it both advantages and disadvantages, which affect women and men in different ways. The advantages in the case of “home study” are mostly savings in cost and time. Students do not have to fit in with schedules and locations set by the university and their learning activities are more compatible with other commitments. Many students, especially women, cannot pursue their education face-to-face at a traditional university. Through DE they can communicate with other students, tutors, and lecturers either live or through asynchronous channels. Thus working in groups and co-operating with others can be done via electronic channels, the telephone or even “snail mail” and does not cost as much time and money as traveling to meetings and classes would.

The disadvantages of such a privatized learning environment result from the fact that the students themselves are responsible for setting up their own learning environment and supplying the necessary equipment. “Electronic communication and online studying require expensive hardware, software and online-access but not all (potential) students have the necessary resources and financial means” (von Prümmer, 2004a:24). Women, who often have less or no income of their own, are more likely to find it hard to afford studying via the internet.

In this context it is worth noting that the domestic study situation of women and men depends to a large extent on their family status. While women and men are equally able to set up an undisturbed learning environment as long as they have no children, data shows that it is fundamentally different for parents: Fathers show similar patterns to men who live with a partner but without children. Mothers, by contrast, are much less likely to have their own undisturbed study space or private computer work place (von Prümmer, 2004a).

Taking Control of the Learning Environment

Research conducted with DE students who were (mostly single) mothers of small children taking vocational courses has shown that women can and do overcome these difficulties and take control of their learning environment if they (a) are aware of the problems caused by an inadequate learning environment, (b) set or change their priorities to make time and space for their studying, and (c) are sufficiently self-confident to claim their own space. This is very difficult to achieve in isolation but is possible if this isolation can be overcome. The women taking part in this project overcame the disadvantages of low income, inadequate housing, and lack of support by pooling their resources, co-operating in domestic chores, such as cooking, trading childcare and homework supervision, and by mutual support through discussion and self-help groups. In this way they were able to claim their own space, even in the face of opposition, and to make the most of limited resources to improve their domestic learning environment (von Prümmer, 2000: 75–78).

Access Equity

Factors Affecting Access to Education

Gendered access to education may be attributed to material factors and to cultural or religious factors regarding the role of women and men in society, and often these reasons overlap. On the material level it may be argued that a family lacks the money to send all children to school or that the family income needs to be supplemented through putting children to work. Where limited financial resources make it necessary to prioritize which child should get an education or attend secondary school and university, boys tend to be systematically preferred over girls regardless of intellectual ability and individual wishes. On the level of cultural and religious factors, it may be argued that a woman’s place is in the home and that she does not need higher education or vocational training to fulfill her “natural duties” as housewife and mother. Conversely, as future “head of household” and “breadwinner,” a boy is expected to get an education, possibly complete a degree, to obtain employment and start a career and take his “proper place” in the public sphere.

Looking at DE as a second chance for people previously excluded from (higher) education, it is easy to see that girls and women on the whole are more in need of such additional educational opportunities. This is especially true where gender discrimination meets discrimination based on class, race, or other factors affecting equal access. Women are also more likely to live in situations that make it difficult to impossible to attend face-to-face classes and/or to afford the direct (tuition fees, books) and indirect (child care, transport) costs associated with attending classroom-based educational programs.

Opening Educational Opportunities

The example of women from a working-class background (von Prümmer, 2000: 138–165) shows how they utilize DE for overcoming educational and career disadvantages such as the lack of opportunities for secondary and tertiary schooling combined with the fact that job – instead of career – choices are often based on practical considerations rather than aptitude and inclination. As a result they entered the workforce and started earning “their own money” at a young age, even if earnings were low and it was a dead-end, traditionally female job. The role of DE for these women was to provide a second chance through access to higher degrees and formal qualifications while continuing their paid work and earning a living. It also allowed them to enter nontraditional fields and test new or advanced subject areas without existential risk.

In addition to work-related and career interests, women from a working-class background also used DE to overcome other disadvantages such as a cultural environment not geared to intellectual pursuits, a pronounced gendering of social and family roles, and fewer opportunities to explore their own interests coupled with more pressures to be “practical.” In this context the role of DE was to widen their horizons and gain a “liberal arts” education, study nontraditional subject areas and pursue intellectual interests without pressure, build up self-assurance and a more positive self-image – in short, women from a working-class background use DE for personal as well as professional development.

Gendered Course Content and Choice of Subject

One source of educational discrimination is the traditionally gendered nature of subject areas where girls and women are encouraged to make different choices from boys and men. A 1983 comparison of students at the Canadian Athabasca University (AU) and the German FeU showed a marked divergence: while nearly two thirds of AU students were women, nearly four fifth of FeU students were men. At the time this could be attributed to a large extent to the different subject areas and degree requirements of the two universities (von Prümmer, 1983). Subsequent research showed persistent gender differences in students’ choice of degree programs (von Prümmer & Rossié, 1988). At FeU for example, even in 2021, while the overall proportion of women students has risen to 46%, the distribution across the five academic departments shows familiar gender patterns: Seventy-one percent of students in the Psychology Department and 59% in the Cultural and Social Sciences Department are women while, at the other end of the spectrum, 78% of FeU students in the Mathematics and Computer Science Department are men (FeU, 2021).

Students’ choice of subject is directly related to the courses and degree programs offered by their preferred school or university. Traditionally, women are more likely to enroll in subject areas such as social sciences and cultural studies, education, psychology, or nursing while men tend to choose STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) subjects and business. The increasing use of ICTs favors the enrollment of men who show more affinity to computers and technology. Unfortunately, in spite of numerous initiatives in countries around the world to attract more women into STEM fields, such gender differences in subject choice are the rule rather than the exception. Simply googling “women into stem subjects” yields dozens of items. It provides a Wikipedia (2021) entry and a number of websites with information, data, and publications from different countries. The links are too numerous to list or review here but should be easy to find.

Gendered course content manifests itself not only in the subject area itself but also in the androcentric presentation and language within the subject matter. In all kinds of subject areas, course material that is not gender-inclusive not only fails to engage women students, it may be off-putting or even offensive. Course authors and teachers without a gender perspective do not even realize the extent to which the language and images they employ marginalizes and alienates women and makes them all but invisible. In order to achieve equal study conditions and equal chances for successful studying, affirmative action and gender mainstreaming measures are needed to provide all teaching with gender awareness and training. The similarities and differences in the experiences, interests, expectations, attitudes, and behavior of women and men must be taken into account, and the causes and consequences of gender inequality identified in order to achieve equity (AQU Catalunya, 2018, p 13).

Feminist Perspectives on Women and Technology

Coinciding with the rise of Second-Wave feminism in the 1970s there was increasing concern with women and technology, both with the potential impact IT has on women’s jobs and with the advent of home computers and PCs, which initially functioned as the proverbial “toys for the boys” and men (Kirkup, 1992: 270–273). An early collection by Joan Rothschild (1983), entitled Machina ex Dea: Feminist Perspectives on Technology, sparked off research and theorizing in this new field, bringing together a variety of scholarly articles without imposing specific approaches either to feminism or to technology. The only shared premise was that a male bias exists in most technology research and analysis, and that that bias must be confronted and changed (Rothschild, 1983: 213).

In 1992 the OUUK started its revised women’s studies course, which featured four volumes of readings on the topics covered in the course. The volume entitled Inventing Women: Science, Technology and Gender was an introduction to acquaint students of women’s studies with some of the most important areas of debate of women’s studies scholars in the fields of science and technology (Kirkup & Keller, 1992: 1–2).

Fifteen years later Judy Wajcman’s (2007) article From Women and Technology to Gendered Technoscience situated current discussions of women’s positions in ICTs in the wider context of feminist debates on gender and technology and provided an overview of the various approaches to conceptualizing the link between gender and technology, both past and present (Wajcman, 2007: 287–288). Paralleling the increasing use of media and technology in DE, issues of equitable access to, and usage of, ICTs became more important, especially to potential students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Availability of ICTs in ODE

DE and e-learning settings rely almost exclusively on media, including printed materials as well as audio- and video materials, and ICTs with few elements of face-to-face and classroom interactions. Distance students are usually responsible for providing their own learning environment and equipment. The divergent life circumstances of men and women impact differently on their ability to study. The gendered division of labor affects the financial resources available to students and on their (in)ability to participate fully in the electronic campus.

With regard to technology, “access” denotes more than the physical availability of technical devices and connection to the internet. In order to make full use of ICTs for studying, students must have a degree of control over their equipment so they can set it up to fit the requirements of their studies (Kirkup, 1999). In this respect women are still faced with persistent gender differences, which are detrimental to the successful pursuit of a course of studies at a distance or via e-learning.

Superficially it may seem that the gender gap has narrowed, yet underneath the surface there remain crucial differences between male and female distance students. For one thing, more men own their equipment while women often rely on sharing someone else’s. This affects the extent to which men and women can freely access the equipment and the control they have over their technology-related learning environments. Even when women are the main users, the equipment is often set up to suit the needs and interests of other family members (von Prümmer, 2004b: 185). Also, women are less likely to have computer and internet access at work, partly because of a lower participation rate in paid work, partly because the jobs women hold often don’t allow them to utilize company equipment for private purposes, or the equipment isn’t suitable for study needs. Women therefore must rely slightly more on the provision of the technology in study centers and other external sources (von Prümmer, 2011: 122).

Acceptance of Technology

Students may be prevented from utilizing ICTs not only because they literally have no access to the necessary technologies and electronic devices but also because of feelings of alienation and lack of confidence.

Factors Affecting Women’s Participation in E-Learning

Research into gender issues in ODL environments has yielded divergent results concerning the participation of women in e-learning. On the one hand, gender differences in the use of ICTs seem to have all but disappeared with women and men having equal access to the new media and internet (Remmele & Holthaus, 2013). On the other hand, women are seen to have less access and less inclination to utilize ICTs, or they use them for different purposes than their more technology-oriented male peers. The latter findings are often summed up in the catch-phrase “toys for the boys, tools for the girls” (Dolch, 2020), which signals a different attitude with consequences for the equitable design and delivery of e-learning elements (Kelan, 2007; Kirkup, 1992: 270). In addition, women are still underrepresented in STEM subject areas (Hill, Corbett, & St Rose, 2010), which in turn are associated with computers and technology.

Traditionally, technology and science are male domains all but inaccessible to women, especially as developers (Kramarae, 2001: 5). Technology is often associated with masculinity and the underrepresentation or invisibility of women explained in terms of a biological determinism (Mawson, 2015: 40) or a masculine culture (Laigo, 2020). Girls and young women engaging in STEM subjects and ICTs used to be the exception rather than the rule. Though they may no longer be disbarred from entering scientific and technological fields, women are still discouraged from pursuing masculine subject areas and predominantly male fields. If they do, they are not only the minority of students and workers but are also faced with an inhospitable environment and women-unfriendly working conditions as, for instance, a study by Ruth Carter and Gill Kirkup (1990) showed for the field of engineering.

This results in the underrepresentation of women in these subject areas and occupational fields which were, and to a large extent still are, considered male domains. At the same time, it is these fields which are most likely to develop and utilize technologies, thus reinforcing their androcentric image. One example of transforming the character of a “male dominated field” is the work of Cecile Crutzen of the Dutch Open Universiteit (OUNL) (1994). As a feminist and female scientist she designed the OUNL’s introductory informatics courses. In her paper The Influence of Feminist Theory on Informatics Course Design Cecile Crutzen describes the process and how both the relation between feminist theories on objectivity in the sciences and Informatics and the dynamic concept of emancipation in education were her guidelines for choosing the contents, the examples, the subjects, and their sequence (1994: Abstract). Referring to Nelly Oudshoorn’s contribution to the Win-Book she addresses (1) The relation between objectivity and masculinity, (2) The focus of scientific thinking on mastery and control, (3) The impact of female experiences on scientific thinking, and (4) The existing dichotomies (1994: Sect. 4).

Women Using Technology for Communication

Continual research in the field of ODDE has confirmed the importance of communication for the successful studying of women distance students as reported by Kirkup and von Prümmer in 1990. Communication technologies can help women to assess their own situation through comparison with others in similar circumstances. It shows where difficulties and “failure” might be due to structural factors rather than to individual inadequacies. It shows potential ways to improve their situation through learning about solutions used by other students and is a means of breaking out of the isolation associated with distance and virtual learning (von Prümmer, 2000: 131–137).

In this context and thinking about conferencing technologies for learning Elizabeth Burge (1995) suggests that the metaphor of the internet as a weaving loom may be more appropriate for women than the often used metaphor of the electronic highway. Allowing asynchronous as well as synchronous contacts, exchanges and collaboration ODDE offers opportunities for co-operation and connectedness without forcing women to travel and be present at a specified time in a specified place outside the home. During the Covid-19 lock-downs and enforced working-from-home, with round-the-clock childcare and home-schooling, for many women the internet was the only means of communication with co-workers and friends, and a veritable life-line.

Internet Communication and Empowerment

Although it is sometimes assumed that the internet provides an ungendered environment, there is evidence that discussions and intercourse in “anonymous” mixed virtual meetings often silence and alienate women participants. Conversely, provision for women-only communication, off limits to men, offers networking opportunities in nonthreatening environments. Excluding men from conversations and social media groups may seem threatening to a gender used to dominating interactions in academic discourse and to defining the content. A “Women‘s Room” and women-only chat-groups can provide an opportunity for open and unguarded exchange not possible in mixed groups. By exchanging personal experiences women can recognize similarities in their circumstances and patterns of discrimination and oppression. They can then identify the need for action and develop strategies.

Just how can internet communication contribute to the empowerment of women? From a feminist perspective, the internet embodies the two elements “power” and “communication,” which are extremely relevant for the success and empowerment of women – incidentally, staff as well as students. The following section draws on the keynote presentation “Perspectives from Global Research for Women in E-learning” to the first IFWE conference in Phoeniy, Arizona (von Prümmer, 2004a).

Looking at the role of internet communication for women, Dale Spender’s, 1995 book Nattering on the Net comes to mind. The title of the book does not conjure up the usual images of the information superhighway. Rather, Nattering on the Net refers to chats with friends, “Kaffee-klatsch”-type gossiping sessions or an exchange of everyday information. Dictionaries define “nattering” as a “friendly conversation without any particular purpose” which is aimless, if not pointless, and dismiss it as “talking much about little.” What, if anything, does this have to do with power and the empowerment of women?

Dale Spender, the author of Nattering on the Net, is a pioneer of feminist linguistics and research into the power relationships of male-female discourse. It is not surprising that she dispels the notion of the internet as a place for informal gatherings and chats: The subtitle of her book makes the connection between “Women, Power and Cyberspace.” Together, the title and subtitle of Dale Spender‘s book spell out the connection between communication – even informal communication – and power. In order to achieve empowerment, women must discover common ground with other women and forge bonds, which are strong enough for joint action. Communication is a precondition of creating a strong and powerful community and organizing political action. One of the fundamental slogans of the women‘s movement in the 1970s, “Sisterhood is powerful,” applies also to DE and e-learning.

Over 30 years of institutional ODDE research have shown that women are under more pressure from family and work-related commitments, that they have to fit their studies around these commitments, and that they tend not to be relieved of their burdens when they take up studying. According to a widespread cliché DE is especially suited for family women who are stuck at home but assumed to be flexible in their schedules. Consequently, each individual student who fits this cliché tends to feel guilty if she has problems combining her course of studies with her family duties and employment. In reality, any such “failure” is not due to individual shortcomings but to patterns related to the gendered organization of society and the socialization of girls and boys. Through communication with other students, the women can recognize this and develop solutions and strategies for dealing with their situation. The isolation experienced by many students in ODDE tends to be more of a problem for women than men. Offering channels for asynchronous as well as synchronous contacts and exchanges the internet and social media provide a real chance for communication and networking, the basis for empowerment.

The second fundamental slogan of the women‘s movement, “The personal is political,” also applies to virtual and e-learning environments. The internet offers possibilities for networking on all levels from local to global, from small groups to large organizations. In order to make the internet work for women, though, its development must not be left to others – be it men, international corporations, or interest groups. Where women take possession of the virtual space they can discover or create structures, which offer them the best possibilities for their own development and the widest scope for action on their own behalf. In the spirit of the two feminist slogans, “The personal is political” and “Sisterhood is powerful,” internet communication is political and has the potential for empowering women. It challenges both the obvious male dominance and the latent androcentrism of ODDE and e-Learning environments.

Closing Remarks

Contributing a short chapter on “ODDE and Gender” for a comprehensive Handbook of Open, Distance, and Digital Education is an exercise equally exciting and frustrating. There is no way this chapter can address the full spectrum of “ODDE and Gender” but it points out some of the relevant gender issues that must concern everyone in the field. Most importantly it must be noted that “Gender” is not an isolated topic but is all-pervasive and a lens for looking at all aspects of Open, Distance, and Digital Education.

Looking at ODDE from a gender perspective brings with it challenges, chances, and changes not only for women in distance education but for everyone engaged in online and distance teaching and e-learning. This is as true today as it was 20 years ago when the first monograph on “Women and distance education” was published, focusing on the present and future “challenges and opportunities” of this nontraditional form of education (von Prümmer, 2000).

In ODDE there is a tendency to assume that more and better equipment, more sophisticated computer programs, more powerful data transmission, and increased communication technologies equate higher quality education. Yet “better servers” in the university do not automatically mean “better service” for the students, especially with regard to gender-specific patterns in access and study conditions. ODDE must no longer ignore the social and political implications of its educational provision as this adversely affects gender equity. For instance, a focus on the technologies at the expense of the human element leads to undesirable results: Seemingly endless amounts of money are spent on hardware, and little or no money on hiring and training the staff who will have to work with this technology, or on making sure all students and staff are computer-literate. (This section draws on von Prümmer, 2004b).

There is also a tendency of funding bodies and decision-makers to focus on subject areas, which have an obvious affinity to technology such as the male-dominated fields of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, and to be less open to developments in “non-technical” subject areas such as philosophy and literature, which are more popular with women students. To the extent that ICTs replace the traditional media and access to advanced technologies becomes an essential prerequisite for studying in the virtual university, there is an increasing danger that women will be disproportionately disbarred from entering and enjoying the virtual learning environment – unless gender issues are taken into account and the definition and construction of the virtual university is no longer left to the existing male-dominated, androcentric academic and political decision-making processes or to “market forces.”

In addition to these issues, which have emerged with the advent of ODDE, we still have to contend with the unresolved gender issues of traditional open and distance education. If anything, the gendered effects of students’ home also being their place of study are more pronounced in the “virtual “or” electronic” university. Not only must women students find the space and time for undisturbed studying, they now need unrestricted access to sophisticated computer equipment and fast Internet connections. They also need the know-how to operate the equipment and the inclination to work online. A gender perspective will mitigate the gender differences, which still exist and threaten the equitable participation of women in ODDE. It is necessary to recognize the danger of women being inadvertently excluded from equal access to the new online learning environments and to employ measures for ensuring equality for all.