Jane Seale

Reports a qualitative study (interviews with 15 distance students and 5 tutors) to identify barriers and enablers to mental wellbeing and study success in distance learning. Presents a taxonomy spanning study practices, skills development, and distance‑learning environments, and offers implications for educators and policy developers.

Based on interviews with 52 practitioners, the article examines how special needs technology was developed and used for adults with learning disabilities (1970–1999). It identifies digital inequalities and a ‘vacuum’ of support, and discusses practitioners’ resistance. Concludes that without significant shifts in understanding and support practices, newer technologies are unlikely to reduce inequalities.

Investigates disabled students’ use of technologies in a UK teaching‑intensive university through survey and interviews, using a digital capital framework. Although students have social and cultural resources, these are sometimes inappropriate or under‑utilized, leaving students without the ‘right’ kind of digital capital to succeed. Implications are drawn for how HE institutions conceptualize and organize technology‑related support.

Uses the lens of digital capital to analyze technology experiences of 31 disabled university students. Finds students possess notable cultural and social digital capital, yet this capital is sometimes compromised or insufficient to ensure full benefit from technologies. Concludes that digital capital alone does not guarantee complete inclusion in university life.

Reviews accessibility‑specific tools and argues these have had limited impact on teachers’ practice in further and higher education. Assesses whether generic pedagogical tools—learning theories and learning‑design tools—can better link accessibility and pedagogy by raising awareness of barriers/facilitators and offering practical methods. Concludes that blending accessibility‑specific tools with generic pedagogical tools, while recognizing teacher and learner agency, may strengthen accessible e‑learning.

Proposes a broadened conceptual framework for digital inclusion in higher education that considers technology, personal and contextual factors, alongside resources and choices. Using evidence from a study of disabled students’ e‑learning experiences, the paper introduces ‘digital agility’ and ‘digital decision‑making’ to illuminate how complex factor interplays influence inclusion and empowerment.

Reviews student‑voice work in higher education and critiques weaknesses in participation, transformation, and empowerment. Uses two institutional cases to show how participatory methods can transform the familiar and empower by attending to what is unsaid as well as what is voiced. Concludes that participatory approaches have potential but require evaluation of long‑term impact.

Argues that much e‑learning practice still reflects didactic/behaviourist approaches and proposes a model that maps pedagogical processes, tools, and resources to support theoretically‑grounded learning design. Distills components from learning theories, builds a model, and illustrates how better articulation between pedagogy and tools can guide reflective, effective design.