Keywords

Background

Under the term of Open, Distance, and Digital Education (ODDE), several concepts are subsumed that on first sight easily align with ideas of internationalization and global perspectives in education as the term seems to hint at overcoming temporal, spatial, and even institutional boundaries. However, the entanglement of ODDE with internationalization and global perspectives is more complex and even partially contradictory (e.g., Gunawardena, 2014).

In his study on research areas in distance education, Zawacki-Richter (2009) identified “Globalization of education and cross-cultural aspects” (p. 7) to be a neglected research area at the macrolevel of distance education systems and theories. Globalization is delineated to encompass “[a]spects that refer to the global external environment and drivers, the development of the global distance education market, teaching and learning in mediated global environments and its implications for professional development” (p. 7). As indicated in the labeling of this research area and its description, focal points are aspects related to culture at different levels as well as globalization in education as opposed to internationalization (Altbach & Knight, 2007). However, during the years that have followed this systematization, linkages between globalization and culture and others – such as access, equity, ethics, and educational technology (Zawacki-Richter, 2009) – have become more apparent and pressing (e.g., Tait & O’Rourke, 2014).

To connect with the overarching topic of this section of the handbook, the main distinction to be drawn is between the global perspective on ODDE and the globalization and internationalization within ODDE. While the majority of the chapters in this section can be read in pursuit of offering or contributing to a global perspective on ODDE (e.g., Chaps. 16, “Assessing the Digital Transformation of Education Systems,” 17, “The Impact of International Organizations on the Field of Open, Distance, and Digital Education,” 18, “Online Infrastructures for Open Educational Resources,” and 20, “Challenges and Opportunities for Open, Distance, and Digital Education in the Global South,” by Qayyum, Orr, Mays, Marín and Villar-Onrubia), several chapters also emphasize processes within ODDE (e.g., Chaps. 25, “International Partnerships and Curriculum Design,” by Reiffenrath and Thielsch, and 24, “International Students in Open, Distance, and Digital Higher Education,” by Mittelmeier). In the following, these two differing views are considered and substantiated with examples to illustrate how they have played out in research and practice so far.

Global Perspectives on ODDE

In this section, global perspectives on ODDE is understood to be more encompassing than a national, regional, or merely institutional view and serves to sketch out the broader picture of ODDE as it unfolds across the globe. The perspective on ODDE aims to provide an overarching view by following the idea of cultural clusters across the globe (Ronen & Shenkar, 2013), comparisons of ODDE systems in an international perspective (Qayyum & Zawacki-Richter, 2018; Zawacki-Richter & Qayyum, 2019), and the focus on groups of countries (Latchem, 2018).

(Economic) globalization “involves a stretching of social relations across time and space such that day-to-day activities are increasingly influenced by events happening on the other side of the globe and the practices and decisions of highly localized groups and institutions can have significant global reverberations” (Goldblatt, Held, McGrew & Perraton, 1997, p. 271). In recognition of this entanglement on various levels, the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) argue that a global effort is needed to “achieve a better and more sustainable future for all” (United Nations, n.d.). This conclusion also applies to the broader field of education. The Covid-19 pandemic and its effects on education around the globe (Bond, 2020; Bond, Bedenlier, Marín, & Händel, 2021; Marinoni, van’t Land & Jensen, 2020) serve as one example of how education systems across the world have suddenly faced similar challenges and now need to adapt to changing realities. For ODDE, this global entails viewing developments in a comparative manner (e.g., Qayyum & Zawacki-Richter, 2018) to frame perspectives and conceptualize the broader landscape in research and practice.

Globalization and Internationalization Within ODDE

Globalization and internationalization within ODDE relates to developments that contribute to an internationalized or globalized stance within ODDE. Drawing on an established definition in the realm of higher education, internationalization “is defined as the process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of postsecondary education” (Knight, 2003, p. 2). In contrast, globalization is understood “as the economic, political, and societal forces pushing 21st century higher education toward greater international involvement” (Altbach & Knight, 2007, p. 290). Jointly, they relate to questions of culture (Gunawardena, 2014), the nature of globalization as a primarily economically driven meta-process (Carnoy & Castells, 2001), and the intersections of internationalization and globalization within education (see e.g., Altbach & Knight, 2007, for higher education).

A central topic permeating developments within ODDE has been that of culture (e.g., Al-Harthi, 2006) and specifically the role of hegemony of pedagogical values and theories in educational technology (e.g., McLoughlin, 2001; Lauzon, 1999). Tait and O’Rourke (2014) sum up the problem: “Transplanting any technology along with its ideological roots brings the risk of imposing an inappropriate set of assumptions and values on the users, thus detracting from, rather than supporting, intended goals” (p. 45). However, approaches to navigating this situation have been scarce so far. These questions and challenges for research and practice constitute one aspect located within the broader realm of internationalization and globalization within ODDE, and another is rooted in the institutional structures that characterize open (higher) education.

From an institutional focus, open education, as exemplified via the plethora of open universities that were founded in the twentieth century in numerous countries (Zawacki-Richter, von Prümmer & Stöter, 2015), has operated so far with a focus on the national education context (Tait, 2018). This is reflected in the institutions’ names, such as Open University of China, Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), or University of South Africa (UNISA). While open universities, such as the Turkish Anadolu University, also make efforts to internationalize through branch offices in other countries (Kondakci, Bedenlier, & Aydin, 2019), they continue to cater mainly to a nationally spread student body. This focus is also partly due to the language of the respective study programs. With open universities operating mainly at a distance, the uptake of increasingly digital formats in teaching, learning, and administration has led, in principle, to an even easier and faster dissemination of learning materials, accessibility of instructors and institutional information, and potentially easing the way to a global orientation. However, established notions of internationalization within higher education (Knight, 1994), or globalization (Altbach & Knight, 2007), largely work from the perspective of brick and mortar education institutions. Only recently have concepts such as virtual internationalization (Bruhn-Zass, 2020) or internationalization at a distance (Mittelmeier, Rienties, Rogaten, Gunter, & Raghuram, 2019) emerged that focus on the interplay of different institutional structures and the role of ODDE therein. Despite earlier arguments in favor of internationalized ODDE (Msweli, 2012), only recently has research engaged in this area and the specific topics therein, for example, the use of Open Educational Resources to foster internationalization (Nascimbeni, Burgos, Spina, & Simonette, 2021) or skills of learners in open virtual mobility contexts (Rajagopal et al., 2020).

Structure of the Section

This section collates a comparatively broad array of chapters that each addresses specific aspects of the global perspective on and international dimension within ODDE. While the section largely revolves around the macrolevel of distance education systems and theories (Zawacki-Richter, 2009), it also includes several chapters that align with the mesolevel of the institutions and the microlevel of teaching and learning within ODDE. As readers delve into the different chapters, it is suggested they do so with the idea that each chapter can be compared to a mosaic stone – showing the different facets of global and international perspectives and forming a whole when pieced together.

The section begins with Adnan Qayyum’s comparative assessment of the digital transformation of education systems, as it unfolds around the variables of digital assets, digital use, digital labor, and digital outcomes that are specific to each country and its education system. The author also stresses that the pandemic lays open shortcomings associated with these variables; for example, the lack of preparation of educators for completely remote education. Following this assessment, Dominic Orr delineates the role that international organizations such as UNESCO and OECD play as proponents of ODDE via the concepts of ideation, digital infrastructure projects, and multistakeholder networks. Another common thread of the chapter is the interrelatedness of international organizations and ODDE institutions in mediating expertise in the endeavor to develop accessible learning opportunities for all. Access to (informal) learning opportunities cannot be realized without infrastructure. Thus, Victoria Marín and Daniel Villar-Onrubia focus on infrastructures that enable the sharing of digital pedagogical resources – on a global and cross-border scale as well as national and regional. They illustrate the existing plethora and diversity of platforms, repositories, and initiatives while also highlighting associated challenges pertaining to quality assurance, sustainability, and the dominance of the Global North. In the following chapter, Sanjaya Mishra and Pradeep K. Misra view ODDE through the lens of nonformal education in developing countries and stress that ODDE can and does serve as an important means to foster educational opportunities in addition to formal education. However, they also call for locally anchored research into this nexus and highlight the need for attention in educational policy making. On the other side of the spectrum, Jill Borgos, Kevin Kinser, and Lindsey Kline focus on the borderless market that has revolved around ODDE, stressing the value that this educational segment has for public and private stakeholders and shedding light on intertwined issues such as privatization of education and questions of privacy and security.

The following chapters revolve around the specific education segment of higher education, shedding light on the fact that traditional internationalization within higher education and ODDE find increasingly common ground in their concepts and practices. Readers are nevertheless also encouraged to consider crucial aspects of these chapters in relation to other formal education settings. Elisa Bruhn-Zass elaborates on the concept of virtual internationalization as a new layer that can potentially permeate all dimensions of the comprehensive internationalization that brick and mortar higher education institutions (HEIs) strive to achieve. In this context, forms of ODDE are perceived as a means to realize different and new forms of HE internationalization. Correspondingly, the chapter by Tanja Reiffenrath and Angelika Thielsch focuses on the ways in which higher education institutions can foster their partnerships in international digital teaching and learning settings. They emphasize the importance of curriculum design as the “backbone” (Reiffenrath & Thielsch, 2022, p. 6) for international online courses, while also highlighting the role of virtual mobility and virtual exchange for current policy developments within the European Higher Education Area. Revisiting established notions of internationalization – and more specifically of international students – is also the focus of the contribution by Jenna Mittelmeier. She stresses that previously held assumptions about this group require reconsideration in the context of ODDE, including questions as to how define international students in ODDE, understand their specific experiences, and establish a broader knowledge base to inform further research and practice. Amir Hedayati-Mehdiabadi and Charlotte N. Gunawardena’s chapter on ethics and culture concludes this subsection by aligning course design for heterogenous learners in higher and adult education. They delineate the topics of community and language as crucial for the design of inclusive learning environments in ODDE and emphasize the role of the educator shaping the learning environment.

ODDE and its affordances to flexibly overcome time and space may lead to a global perspective that takes an equalizing stance. However, several of the chapters in this section critique such a perspective by voicing the need for specific consideration and focus. The remaining chapters in this section make this explicit and target topics that argue for a “global” and “international” perspective that is mindful of both the obvious differences between regions and countries and the subtle differences regarding voice and distribution of power in a seemingly all-accessible context. Tony Mays lays out the context of ODDE in the Global South and points to the fact that despite the perceived education potential of ODDE and existing projects and initiatives, challenges such as technical infrastructures continue to impede expanded implementation of ODDE. These and other aspects are mirrored in the contribution by Laura Czerniewicz and Lucila Carvalho, who discuss issues of equity within a global perspective of ODDE. Their chapter directs the reader to consider the intertwining dimensions relating to equity and ODDE, such as datafication, the precondition of an unequal postdigital society, and the effects on individuals and societies at large. The final chapter in this section resonates with the idea of stepping back to discern the different discourses revolving around ODDE in a global perspective. Jean-Paul Restoule and Kathy Snow focus on the situation of Indigenous ODDE students in Canadian higher education. Taking a personal stance, they argue that attention to the individual and social environment of a learner or group of learners remains crucial in order to see and address their needs appropriately and allowing for a broader range of voices in the discourse on ODDE.

Conclusions and Implications for Theory, Practice, and Research

The chapters in this section illustrate the array of topics that can be considered mosaic pieces under the heading of global perspectives and internationalization in ODDE. In sum, they provide a picture of a field that is still in the process of becoming – leaving ample space for further engagement in theory, practice, and research. As it stands, these three fields are not to be seen as separate grounds but rather interwoven and mutually dependent.

Theory

Revisiting Theory

Given the dispersed nature of the chapters, the wish for simply “more” theory would be short-sighted as the state of theoretical advancements is potentially rooted in different disciplines and should be considered individually for each topic. What can be concluded from some chapters – for example, Bruhn-Zass, Mittelmeier, Restoule and Snow, Czerniewicz and Carvalho, and Hedayati-Mehdiabadi and Gunawardena – is that existing assumptions and theoretical concepts are not sufficient to account for the entanglement of global perspectives and ODDE. Rather, as the authors of these chapters show, existing concepts leave room to be developed further and conceptualized into more encompassing concepts. This task also includes challenging existing understandings, for example, of what constitutes an international student, or disentangle facets of equity to understand how it relates to current changes in society and education. Furthermore, the revisiting of existing concepts and theories also necessitates asking: whose voice is being heard in the creation and dissemination of theory, which aligns closely with questions relating to the conduct and dissemination of research.

Practice

Reconciliation of Stakeholder Perspectives

The practice of ODDE in relation to global perspectives and internationalization is complex: A plethora of stakeholders with diverging and partly opposing intentions (e.g., international organizations, (education) enterprises, public and private education institutions, platform providers as well as individual instructors and learners) need to be cognizant of, and even reconcile, their interests and do so in a cross-border manner. Thus, despite the focus being primarily located on the macrolevel, the content of these chapters ultimately affects the level of individual courses and learners’ experience in ODDE, as well as their personal life situation beyond ODDE. It seems therefore advisable for any practitioner involved in ODDE to consider these intersections and (diverging) interests, especially on the continuum of the ideas of “open” on the one hand and the global market perspective on the other (see Chap. 22, “The Borderless Market for Open, Distance, and Digital Education,” by Borgos, Kinser, and Kline).

Questioning Educational and Technological Hegemony

Several chapters in this section also highlight the fact that specific cultural values are inscribed into educational technology and current practices and views on pedagogies. Therefore, ODDE cannot afford to take a “one size fits all” approach if it is to be applied and put to use in favor of cultural plurality, specific geographic and institutional preconditions, and be true to its often proclaimed character as an enabler for the provision of education for all. Again, while the chapters in this section emphasize on several levels, enacting this in and through practice remains an issue to tackle proactively in ODDE.

Research

Interdisciplinarity

The collection of chapters in this section is not confined to mere pedagogical considerations and research, but rather assumes an interdisciplinary stance, by also drawing on sociology, economics and business, cultural studies, and political science. Such an interdisciplinary stance is important when globalization is considered as an economically driven phenomenon (Carnoy & Castells, 2001). To disentangle the different disciplinary lenses that can be used to scrutinize the global perspective on and within ODDE, it seems advisable to be mindful of the interdependencies that exist between them – and put them to use for holistic research into specific topics.

Comprehensive Data

While researchers on this topic operate with concepts such as culture, values, or hegemony that are comparatively difficult to grasp and reflect upon (Olaniran & Agnello, 2008), there exists a perceived need to substantiate any research into these dimensions with data to go beyond theoretical and conceptual discussion. The likewise perceived lack of comprehensive and accessible data (e.g., on international distance education students or virtual exchange activities) makes it currently difficult to advance specific subfields empirically. Generating data of this scale seems almost impossible on an individual level, suggesting that international organizations, associations, and entities would need to play an important role in enabling research that goes beyond case studies and small-scale qualitative inquiry.

Locally Bound Research

Mishra and Misra’s suggestion to conduct research through actively involving local communities and Restoule and Snow’s anecdotal evidence show the importance of how, and by whom, research is conducted, specifically when questions of culture, local and regional feasibility, and impact are concerned. Going beyond simply conducting research, this perspective also implies an opportunity to revisit publication outlets for research on ODDE – a large majority of which operate in the English language and are hosted in Anglo-Saxon countries. Linguistic plurality and recognition of Non-English language discourse also play into this discussion (e.g., Beigel, 2021).