Design Justice in Online Courses: Principles and Applications for Higher Education

Design Justice in Online Courses: Principles and Applications for Higher Education: Comparison

Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Abigail Zou and Version 1 by Florence W Williams.

Design justice is an emerging framework that centers marginalized communities in the design of systems and technologies. Originating from the intersection of design, technology, and social justice movements, design justice challenges traditional design practices that often reinforce societal inequities. When applied to online education, it prompts critical examination of who benefits from digital learning environments and whose needs are overlooked. The framework operates on the principle that those most affected by a system should have a central role in designing it, going beyond accessible or universal design to fundamentally alter power structures within the design process itself. This entry introduces the principles of design justice and explores their relevance to online education and instructional design, arguing that seemingly neutral elements of course design—such as assessment modes, interface layout, or content formats can perpetuate inequities if created without attention to learners’ diverse contexts.

design justice
online education
equity in education
participatory design
culturally responsive pedagogy

Design justice in education calls for learning environments that confront inequities and prioritize the voices of those historically marginalized in academic spaces. Purposeful curricular choices can foster belonging and shift online learning climates toward more inclusive participation ^[1]. This perspective aligns with the view that education should be a liberatory practice that challenges dominant norms and affirms learner agency ^[2]. Together, these ideas position equitable course design as a justice-focused commitment that shapes who participates, who is heard, and who ultimately succeeds in our learning systems.

Online education has undergone a rapid and transformative expansion, moving from a niche alternative to a central pillar of the global educational landscape ^[3]. Research, including insights from [4^[4][5],5], highlight the growing trend of online learning and its significant impact on higher education. These findings emphasize the need for institutions to adapt to increasing student demand for online learning, particularly in the wake of the pandemic. This includes developing robust online programs, building necessary infrastructure, and ensuring faculty are equipped to teach effectively in online and hybrid learning environments ^[6]. While this proliferation has increased access for many, it has also brought into sharp focus the systemic inequities and biases that can be embedded within digital learning environments. As online courses became the primary mode of instruction for millions, it became evident that the uncritical design of these systems could unintentionally disadvantage students from marginalized communities, highlighting a pressing need to adopt a more intentional, critical, and justice-oriented approach to instructional design ^[7]. Four empirically validated design justice principles that enhance online learning inclusivity for all students are transparent teaching, inclusive design, safe spaces, and accessibility measures ^[8]. This entry posits that seemingly neutral elements of course design can perpetuate inequities and advocates for applying these principles to advance equity and student agency in digital education.

Recent empirical research underscores the urgency of justice-centered approaches in online education. Post-pandemic studies reveal persistent digital divides that disadvantage marginalized students: Ref. ^[9] systematic review documented how online learning inequities disproportionately affect students from low-income backgrounds, rural areas, and underrepresented racial groups. Similarly, ref. ^[10] found that institutional responses to rapid online transition often amplified existing inequities rather than addressing them, with students lacking reliable internet access, appropriate devices, or private study spaces experiencing significantly lower engagement and completion rates. Ref. ^[11] documented declining engagement among STEM undergraduates during remote learning, with the steepest drops among first-generation college students and students of color. These findings demonstrate that technical access alone is insufficient; online learning environments must be deliberately designed with equity as a central goal. This entry, therefore, has three primary objectives: (1) to trace the emergence and evolution of design justice as applied to online higher education contexts; (2) to identify and synthesize empirically validated principles that promote equity in digital learning environments; and (3) to examine real-world applications, challenges, and future directions for justice-centered online course design. By examining design justice through these lenses, this entry contributes to the growing body of scholarship advocating for transformative rather than merely adaptive approaches to online education.

References

Letaw, L.; Garcia, R.; Garcia, H.; Perdriau, C.; Burnett, M. Changing the Online Climate via the Online Students: Effects of Three Curricular Interventions on Online CS Students’ Inclusivity. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, Virtual, 16–19 August 2021; pp. 42–59.
Hooks, B. Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom; Routledge: London, UK, 1994.
Anderson, T.; Dron, J. Three generations of distance education pedagogy. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 2011, 12, 80–97.
Kelly, B.; McCormack, M.; Reeves, J.; Brooks, D.C.; O’Brien, J. 2021 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Information Security Edition; EDUCAUSE: Louisville, CO, USA, 2021; pp. 154–196.
Starz, R.; Jagun, A. Between the Teacher, the Student and the Screen: (Post) Modern Trends in Educational Communication. In In-Between: Transversal Values in Contemporary Social Discourses and Culture; Brill: Leinden, The Netherlands, 2024.
Brown, M.; McCormack, M.; Reeves, J.; Brooks, C.D.; Grajek, S. 2021 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and Learning Edition; EDUCAUSE: Louisville, CO, USA, 2020.
Khalil, D.; Kier, M. Equity-centered design thinking in STEM instructional leadership. J. Cases Educ. Leadersh. 2021, 24, 69–85.
Hockings, C.; Brett, P.; Terentjevs, M. Making a difference—Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education through open educational resources. Distance Educ. 2012, 33, 237–252.
Iniesto, F.; Bossu, C. Equity, diversity, and inclusion in open education: A systematic literature review. Distance Educ. 2023, 44, 694–711.
Han, X.; Li, Y. Equity in digital education: Addressing the digital divide in a post-pandemic world. Front. Educ. Res. 2025, 8, 41–47.
Wester, E.R.; Walsh, L.L.; Arango-Caro, S.; Callis-Duehl, K.L. Student engagement declines in STEM undergraduates during COVID-19–driven remote learning. J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. 2021, 22, 10-1128.