Digital poverty in a country that is digitally powerful: some insights into leadership of girls’ schooling in India under Covid-19 restrictions

1

ABSTRACT

This paper examines leadership challenges in managing digital power and digital poverty, in the delivery of schooling during the Covid-19 emergency lockdown in India. The article suggests that although India is considered a global leader in digital technology, its primary and secondary school system suffers from digital poverty with associated tensions for school leadership.

The paper explores the nature of teaching and learning in a selection of girls’ schools in India during Covid-19. In the context of the pandemic, school leaders have had to respond quickly to remote learning, supporting teachers to facilitate the use of educational technology. Our research examined the experience of leadership in a cross section of schools from different geographical and socio-economic backgrounds. The respondents reflected on their engagement with digital literacy and remote teaching methodologies, and how the pandemic changed the classroom experience with little or no lead in time to adapt. The article examines how Indian women in positions of educational leadership perceive digital power or poverty and how it affects change and challenge in their leadership responsibility. Conclusions are drawn regarding educational practices operational at present and anticipate considerations which must be acknowledged to support virtual learning into the future.

KEYWORDS:

• Digital learning
• India
• covid-19
• educational technology
• educational leadership

Introduction

When the Indian Minister for Communication, Electronics and Information Technology, Ravi Shankar Prasad, announced an investment of approximately US $10 billion into digitization projects, he expressed the hope that it would assist in a new awakening of digital educational empowerment (16 July 2020, The Indian Express). Digital power in India is firmly rooted in business and commerce, leaving schools, particularly in rural locations, deprived of the resources they need to manage remote learning. Digital poverty can be defined as the absence of equipment, infrastructure, education and training, incorporating socio-economic challenges within the rural urban divide (Beaunoyer, Dupéré, & Guitton, 2020). The National Education Policy (NEP, March 2020) is designed to address these shortcomings. In addition to measures outlined to support all levels of educational provision, it recognizes that women are under-represented in education (NEP, 3.4). Following the national closure of schools during the Covid-19 pandemic, Muralidharan and Singh (2021), contend that ‘the widespread adoption of education technology may help accelerate the NEP’s stated goal of reducing the digital divide’ (p.38).

The context for this paper lies in a research programme, which studies professional development and leadership opportunities for women in girls’ schools in India. The participants in this study were chosen on the basis that all are school leaders, either principals, school managers, or teachers who occupy posts of responsibility. Leadership roles at middle management level can involve some classroom teaching, under the title role of school ‘Coordinator’. They work in private girls’ secondary schools run by a Catholic Order of nuns, who maintain strong ties to their ‘sister’ schools in the Republic of Ireland. The participating schools in this research project are therefore part of a wider education network, with schools in many countries including India, Pakistan, Zambia, and the Philippines. Finding from this research may therefore be relevant in a transnational context.

This article aims to examine the challenges educational leaders experienced in delivering remote learning at primary and secondary school level during Covid-19. It will compliment recent research conducted by UNICEF India on the reach and impact of distance learning in India during the Covid 19 lockdown (Van Cappelle, Chopra, Ackers, & Gochyyev, 2021).The unprecedented change which school closures and lockdowns brought to teaching and learning, are considered. Questions that provoked our research include: to what degree does digital power at a macro-economic level, translate into educational acumen in India’s schools, what is the experience of educational leaders in Indian schools working with educational technology, where can supports be put in place for leaders of teaching and learning practices which rely on educational technology?

Context

India has the largest youth population in the world. The number of children under 14 years of age make up 28% of the total population (Trines, 2018). A well-educated and skilled workforce is essential in supporting a growing population in a rapidly developing economy. India’s first independent constitution adopted in in 1950, called for compulsory education for all children up to the age of 14 years. Over the sixty years that followed, federal governance failed in pursuit of this policy. The Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act (2009), recognized this failure and aimed to provide equality of access integration for Indian school going children (Thapliyal, 2018). British colonial class-based education has left a system of inadequate government schools with poorly qualified teachers sometimes with no formal training. Private Christian colleges provide an English-medium education for all faiths, mainly from economic necessity (Stanley, 2001). Participation rates vary, particularly in rural areas and among lower caste or other minority groups. While school enrolment figures at primary level are acceptable, numbers enrolling for secondary education are worryingly low, particularly for female students (Kingdon, 2007). Reasons for this are lack of supply of nearby secondary schools and gender bias towards the education of males. Levels of early school drop-out are very high, with 47 million pupils leaving school before grade 10 (Trines, 2018). The question whether remote learning will create more access or further challenge for school learners to remain engaged with education, needs to be addressed (Reddy & Sinha, 2010).

The national closure of schools in India was initially uncoordinated. On 6 March 2020, the government closed all primary schools in Delhi state, but allowed any schools taking state examinations to remain open. All schools in Kerala closed on 10 March, with the number of infections rising; however, a national lockdown did not take place until 16 March, when the government invoked the Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897. In India, 136,861,298 females have been subject to school closure, attending primary and secondary level (UNESCO, 2020).

In a timely response to the Covid-19 crisis, the national government in India committed to a new educational policy (NEP, July 30th, 2020) which proposed to revolutionize the educational sector to prepare India for the future. Managing teaching and learning during the Covid-19 crisis, has illustrated how technology will continue to be a part of the way we educate children into the future (Samantray, 2020). Such change recognizes the potential of online learning, but it could exacerbate the problems of school withdrawal and absenteeism (D’Souza, 2020). Educational provision using virtual platforms and electronic technology has replaced the physical presence of a teacher in the classroom (Devitt, Bray, Banks, & Ní Chorcora, 2020). It cannot replace the immediacy of personal contact, nor can it provide for meaningful learning if pupils and teachers are not prepared properly in managing remote learning. It is clear that online tools and internet connectivity will also need to be widely available – and robust – if all children in India are to benefit from the education revolution which Covid-19 has precipitated.

This research paper is part of a wider study investigating provision of education for girls in schools in India and Pakistan. This research was prompted by the crisis which engulfed schools following the arrival of Covid-19 in India in March 2020 and was conducted during the initial phases of school lockdown throughout June and July 2020.

Conceptual framework and literature review

The conceptual framework for this paper draws on educational leadership, exercised and experienced by women, during a time of crisis and unexpected change brought about by Covid-19. Associated themes of digital power and the implications of digital poverty in a school environment are further evaluated. The hierarchical nature of leadership common in Indian schools, needed to adapt to a more distributed and transformative model under Covid-19 restrictions, as virtual reality replaced the personal presence of teachers. School leaders found themselves dependent on teachers who were technologically proficient, and digital power became transactional. The unprecedented upheaval that ensued following the lockdown of schools in India, brought a new social reality promoting digital relationships in order to manage leadership of teaching and learning. While India is recognized as a digitally powerful country, education suffers from digital poverty particularly among the female demographic. The education of girls in a patriarchal society such as India, needs to be supported by digital power if sustainable development educational goals are to be met in the future. How previous leadership models operated in a virtual environment during the Covid-19 crisis, and the experience of educational leaders using digital platforms, is a central focus of this study.

Collaborative practice between school principals and staff in middle management roles, can provide instructional and transformational leadership pathways, which ultimately benefit all educational parties within schools (Leithwood, 2016). “Distributed leadership is first and foremost about leadership practice rather than leaders or their roles, functions, routines, and structures” (Spillane, 2005, p. 144). Indian schools have been traditionally hierarchical in their approach to leadership, with a linear ‘top down’ structure for all educational decisions. Such a model fails to accommodate empathetic leadership, which is an essential quality for effective school leadership according to studies by Roy (2020). Leadership traits may be inherent and leadership behaviours can be learned, but ‘Contingency’ models of leadership are dependent on the conditions under which a leader operates (Roy, 2020, p. 9). Empathetic leadership is further considered by Trinidad and Normore (2005), who believe that women working in education prefer transformational leadership as the style best suited for developing consensus and cooperation, working in harmony with female values of socialization and communication. Distributed leadership, has been increasingly promoted as the most democratic leadership style in school as participants step in and out of leadership roles, informally leading together in a leader member exchange (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009; Hartley, 2016; Lui, 2020). Lui’s research (Lui, 2020) has examined distributed leadership in relation to school organisation and school context, concluding that school leaders adopt different leadership styles depending on the needs of the institution, its staff and its students. It is notable that leadership practices in the cultural cluster of Asian countries were seen to be divergent. In a study which examined operational leadership among women in India, Mythili (2019) argues that research on leadership among female educators in India has concentrated on gender and discrimination, ignoring their strengths and successes in traversing these obstacles. By remaining goal orientated, they mediate existing boundaries, exploit opportunities “with a moral purpose powered by agency”(p. 128). In a recent report focusing on women in leadership in Asia Pacific, education is seen as one of four pathways to empower and develop transformative leadership skills (United Nations, 2019). The connection between leadership and education is two-fold; it not only empowers the individual learner through the formal curriculum, but it also provides girls with professional leadership training through teacher training programmes. “Associational life often serves as a leadership incubator that allows women to find their footing and purpose in community movements”(UN, Pathways to Influence, p.43).

Definitions of distributed leadership in an educational context, depend on social environment (Timperley, 2005). Writing some time before the arrival of Covid-19, Hartley (2016), linked distributed leadership with digital technology in suggested that “Distributed leadership may be an early example of a ‘social technology’, or infrastructure, which is compatible with the material technology of ICT” (p.179). Hartley argues that digital outreach can be homogenized and standardized to invite shared, convergent open experience, “symbiotic with Distributed leadership” (ibid., p.180). Recent findings by Harris and Jones (2020), demonstrate how the systemic effect of Covid-19 on educational leadership and learning has impacted on the agency and autonomy of school principals worldwide. They suggest that hierarchical school leadership practices have been tested and challenged and may have changed irrevocably, as previous preparation and training did not accommodate a global pandemic. Gronn (2009) argues that distributed leadership practices within schools may often still recognize one individual as a prominent leader, to facilitate temporary changes in leadership on a short-term basis. With the initial Covid-19 lockdown, school leaders everywhere had to accept government directives which demand nationwide compliance, removing administrative agency and autonomy (MacNeill & Topping, 2007). This reinforced a hierarchical, ‘top-down’ style of leadership from government, but it also made demands for distributed leadership from school principals (Harris & Jones, 2020).

The professional exchange between formal school leaders and staff members needs to be strengthened and further developed, as Srivastava and Dhar (2016), point to authentic leadership as a necessary model for teachers and school leaders in India. UNESCO, UNICEF and the World Bank are committed to continued research, on the changing global picture of school closures which continues to emerge, and the effect that such measures have on leading teaching and learning (United Nations, 2020). Effective educational leadership and successful virtual engagement is seriously compromised by digital poverty in exposing the vulnerability of developing nations (Keniston, 2003; Ragnedda, 2017). Educational technology may offer a low cost, decentralized educational experience, however, it cannot accommodate for individual learning difficulties or contextual challenge (D’Souza, 2020). Previously, crisis management in schools was mainly concerned with local isolated incidents, which were managed on-site by school management, with the support of emergency response services. It is now clear that government departments of education, globally, need to plan for future closures by establishing modes of best practice based on existing evidence (Devitt et al., 2020). Teachers across the world have reported increased levels of collegiality and professional capital as they communicated with their class groups in every method available (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2020). On the other hand, remote teaching, and the ability of educators to adapt and refine their modes of ‘virtual’ engagement, are all open to public scrutiny (Gottleib & Schneider, 2020). It has become clear that flexibility in facing what is unpredictable will be needed in the future; school leaders have to accept that there are some uncertainties in life that cannot be brought under absolute control (Heller, 2020).

Digital power and digital poverty in delivering school education

Limited access to digital infrastructure, equipment, education, and training has a direct impact on life experience and opportunity (UNICEF, 2017). Increased access to digital capital is dependent on several factors: finance to buy it, training and knowledge to use it, and infrastructure to support it (Donaghy, 2021). While the debate on digital power in India began long before the arrival of Covid-19, the pandemic has brought the issue into sharp focus, as educational leaders struggle to implement new teaching practices, with very little time for planning or preparation. Internet based initiatives are often seen as potentially unifying urban and rural communities in developing countries (Venkatesh & Sykes, 2013). However, the lack of reliable internet connectivity is problematic when teachers are working from home, with some territories such as Jammu and Kashmir experiencing the complete withdrawal of service due to security concerns (Arora & Suri, 2020). The urban-rural digital divide between Indian states is complex: ‘within a state, there is an urban-rural digital divide; within urban, there is educated-uneducated digital divide; amongst educated there is rich-poor digital divide’ (Rao, 2005, p. 364). Basic obstacles such as lack of infrastructure, electricity, or internet blackspots, undermine consumer confidence in reliable connectivity. Beaunoyer et al. (2020), identify digital poverty using four associating factors: technological means, autonomy of use, support networks and experience or skill. The Covid-19 lockdown has resulted in low-income households falling short in all four dimensions, as the closure of schools removed opportunities for pupils to avail of facilities beyond their domestic reach. Mental health has been compromised, with governments shutting down numerous local gathering centres, where people might traditionally avail of free internet or Wi-Fi hotspots (Roy et al., 2020). Research conducted in 2002, identified only 1% of the population in India, having access to a computer, with only 0.5%, able to access the internet at home (Keniston, 2002). Personal computer statistics are more commonly recorded in terms of economic growth, with some of the world’s leading PC companies, such as Lenovo, Dell and HP, all manufactured in India. Despite measures introduced by successive governments, access to information technology remains comparatively low. The 75^th National Sample Survey Report, 2017–2018, recorded 23.8% of Indian households having internet access, with rural availability at only 14.9% (NSSO, 2017-18).

While the TALIS (Teaching and Learning International Survey), School Leadership for Learning report did not include India or Pakistan as a participating country, it prophetically called for new leadership solutions to be deployed in a rapidly changing world (OEDC, 2013). As different models of leadership have been studied in many different cultures and contexts, the challenges posed by Covid-19 are ‘common’ or shared, by most educational institutions around the globe. Traditional structures of management have been swept aside in favour of digital group meetings, where information is directly disseminated to all concerned parties (Figueiredo, 2021). Leadership in a digital environment requires new skills such as the promotion of digital community building and group participation in training, teaching and learning about educational technology (Ahlquist, 2017). This kind of ‘digital community building’ is only possible in schools that have robust internet connectivity, and the hardware and software that teachers and pupils need in order to thrive in a ‘remote learning’ world. Leading learning in a digital environment is not compatible with digital poverty.

The Digital India Campaign (July 2015) launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, aimed to move India to universal digital literacy, with high-speed national internet connectivity by 2020 (Mohanta, Debasisih, & Nanda, 2017). A central platform of this scheme was an initiative known as Pradhan Mantri Gramin Digital Saksharta Abhiyan (PMGDISHA) using private partnerships to deliver digital literacy to rural households. Training centres and schools were used to train local people in computer skills to certificate level. An evaluation of the scheme concluded that computer literacy itself, is not sufficient to engender technological advancement (Nedungadi, Menon, & Gutjahr, 2018). With the closure of schools due to Covid-19, this outreach initiative has been rendered ineffective in terms of education and training for digital literacies and skills.

Governments across the globe have recognized the need to invest in digital infrastructure to support education following the experience of Covid-19 lockdown. The NEP aims to improve access to educational technology at all levels by emphasizing the role that technology will play. While low-income countries struggle to implement a standardized digital educational model, the potential benefits of such an initiative, for pupils who cannot attend school are compelling (UNESCO, 2020). Demand for digital learning in India is high, but teachers lack specialized training and parent often cannot provide the resources needed to access digital educational platforms (Bansal, Roy, & Batra, 2021).

The gender divide in digital education

Gender equality and the empowerment of women in leadership is Asia, is an ongoing concern, as women are under represented on the majority of public offices and managerial boards (United Nations, 2019). Female Indian teachers only recently out number their male counterparts (The Times of India, 5 July 2021) having previously occupied a lower percentage of positions as Head or Principal teacher (Mythili, 2019). The dichotomy between the country’s digital economic power and its digital educational poverty, highlights the significant gender divide in access and use as only 29% of all internet users in India are female (UNICEF, 2017). This difficulty reflects wider social inequalities in India where education for women is not prioritized, in a highly patriarchal society.

Many female teachers experience increased stress when professional obligations are in conflict with the demands of family life. This conflict often prevents them from aspiring to positions of leadership (Islam, 2021). The domestic responsibilities undertaken by Indian women, are generally both unpaid and under-appreciated; this is a common experience of women in most developing countries, where female education is mainly focussed on preparing girls to be good housewives and mothers (Sadiqi, 2008). New pressures became evident for women working in educational leadership during the global pandemic.

A recent survey conducted for the Centre for Global Development reported that 69% of respondents believe that girl’s education will be more severely affected than boy’s education because of Covid-19. Reasons cited by the authors for this included school withdrawal due to the reluctance of families to pursue long-term educational for girls (Akmal, Hares, & O’Donnell, 2020). India’s technological power and the wealth that accompanies it, has not been invested in schools and education, a dilemma which challenged school leadership during the Covid-19 lockdown. Forbes India suggest that while only 38% of women in India own a mobile phone, their use of the device is subject to permission of a male guardian, describing Covid-19 and the gender-based digital divide as a roadblock to increased school accessibility (Forbes, 2020). For women educators in India, remote teaching has had a negative impact on their work-life balance (Rawal, 2021).

Methodology

While this research is part of a wider study on women working in educational leadership, the global pandemic provided an opportunity for data collection on how women leaders in the sample schools were adapting to the circumstances of the global pandemic. Prior to the onset of Covid-19, 75 interviews were undertaken with women working in education leadership, in Pakistan (n = 41) and India (n = 34). A total of 9 leaders from India were then identified as persons of interest to this satellite study, to be conducted in the light of the outbreak of the pandemic, globally. They all manage large girls’ schools and have responsibility for other staff members, their students, liaising with parents and other auxiliary school staff. It was deemed impractical to expect that a larger cohort of women leaders could make themselves available for a cycle of interviews and conversations, given the unfolding of the Covid-19 crisis and demanding context in which they were working. Of the nine women who we invited to participate in interviews, six women agreed to share their experience of managing education for Indian girls, through the Covid-19 lockdown. One of these was a school manager who had oversight of a number of schools, three others were school principals and the remaining two participants were school coordinators working in middle management.

All of the participants are female school leaders and have been employed in their school for over 5 years. The schools they work in are girls’ private secondary schools, Jammu and Kashmir in the north, Tamil Nadu in the south, with two leaders working in the central state of Delhi. Reya is an educational leader and chairperson of the institution’s educational committee in Tamil Nadu. She has previous experience working as a principal and maintains oversight of a number of schools in India South in her role as manager. Martha is principal of a rural mountain school, the smallest in the sample (no. of pupils 407) in Tamil Nadu, providing a contrasting experience. Two other participants are from the central Union state of Delhi; Tilda is principal of a large secondary school (no. of pupils @ 3,000) for nine years, while Alana has been a school Coordinator for two years in the same school with special responsibility for timetabling and examinations. The remaining two interviewees are from northern India, working in large schools in the Jammu and Kashmir union territory; Lotti is a school Principal of a large school (no. of pupils @ 2,800) while Poppy is the school Coordinator with special responsibility for higher secondary students. These two women were aware of their particular disadvantage working in a volatile political arena. It was important to take a geographical and demographical spread of schools to ensure equitable representation in view of the small sample size. None of the participants had any previous formal training in Educational technology, although Alana is a computer science teacher.

Semi-structured interviews formed the basis of this qualitative study. This process allowed the researcher to ask the respondent a series of questions which had been previously constructed, while allowing for spontaneous deviation in each response. Research questions were designed to interrogate the initial reality shock of lockdown along with the ensuing efforts made by school managers to respond to the unfolding crisis. The individual contribution of each respondent delivered a richly diverse set of experience, which illustrated the relationships and patterns which evolved within school communities during school closures. The interviews took place during the first school lockdown in India (June/July 2020), recording an immediate and timely response to an unfolding crisis within Indian education. Interviews were conducted through Zoom and Google Meets, and with consent they were recorded and transcribed. Continuity was ensured by conducting all interviews consecutively within a short space of time. Information was gathered on relevant issues, including the following: an analysis of the unprecedented turmoil in the initial phases of the Covid-19 lockdown, and the support provided to and by female school leaders working in girls’ schools, an analysis of the training provided to leaders and teaching staff in the move to remote teaching, how female teaching staff and education leadership adapted to the change to digital schooling, and finally, considerations associated with girls’ education as an on-going virtual experience of teaching and learning, with future planning around the Covid-19 crisis and the reopening of schools.

Qualitative analysis and coding of data was conducted on a thematic basis. Analysis followed the six steps as described by Braun and Clarke (2013), which involved preliminary familiarization with the data through reading and re-reading transcripts. Notes were made on initial ideas and patterns within each transcript. Then, initial codes were applied to each transcript in relation to personal actions and reactions to an unprecedented world pandemic, which informed the pattern of emergent thematic analysis. Initial codes were reviewed and refined to reflect the nature and relationship of the data within thematic areas, which were then reviewed across the entire dataset. Issues of school leadership policy and administration were collated on a school-by-school basis and compared for analysis. Information and skills relevant to the use and delivery of educational technology were itemized and cross referenced within the sample group. While each of these school leaders occupied a managerial role, they had all had been involved in remote teaching supporting colleagues under the new Covid restrictions. This provided some overlap between themes which emerged from interviews relating to their symbiotic experience of school leadership, their experience as school teachers and their evaluation of students’ experience, reflecting the interdependent nature of educational engagement in times of crisis (MacNeill & Topping, 2007).

Drennan asserts that the strength of semi-structured interviews lies in the ability of the researcher to view the questions asked from the perspective of the respondent (Drennan, 2003). This can provide insight into important areas not previously anticipated as relevant. Improvisation is essential as the researcher cannot know what the informant’s response might be (Wengraf, 2001). When semi-structured interviews are well prepared, well conducted and well analysed they can yield much more information than fully structured interviews (Baxter & Jack, 2008).

Findings: initial response to school closures

Despite being aware of the rapidly evolving health crisis in India, north, when the announcement came that schools were to close in response to the Covid-19 global pandemic, (16 March 2020) school leaders did not initially appreciate the significance of the event:

I got the notification by 11:30 but I never took it that seriously. Before also whenever we get such notification, we might have a relaxation of one day to work off, things like that. So, I never took it as that serious … (Tilda)

It was a shock first of all. We never expected this would happen. We were not prepared. (Lotti)

Interviewees were conscious of media reports pre-empting the closure as early as 6/7 March, but the possible implications of this were outweighed by the importance of the state board exams taking place at that time. Teachers later appreciated the enormity of the health crisis, in correlation to the decision to cancel outstanding state exams. In southern India, Reya explained that because exams for the 10th and 11^th standard had not been completed, with five papers yet to be taken, predictive grades were requested based on previous results (80%) and attendance (20%). Yearly assessment reports were sent out online for the first time, with teacher only given two or three days to prepare.

Principals and school leaders quickly realized they needed to work together to devise a road map for the term ahead, in consideration of all the educational partners. Distributed leadership practices began to emerge as principals looked to their most technologically able teachers to provide leadership among their staff. With no previous experience of mandatory delivery of schooling in a digital format, the traditional hierarchical model of school leadership was no longer viable. Principals who previously gave instructions to Coordinators, who then liaised with staff members on an individual basis, now conducted general staff communications through existing WhatsApp group text on a daily basis.

How we are going about it, what is going to happen, who has to be updating things and who has to be available, all that. Practically every day the message goes. (Tilda)

Early on, school leaders became aware of the value of various technologies for different purposes. To minimize disruption, the selection of a uniform digital platform for use within the school was considered important. The availability of online training influenced this selection. One school coordinator (Alana) evaluated all educational technology platforms which were available to the staff. She examined the features offered, reviewed the experience of other users, consulted with colleagues and considered the advantages and disadvantages for teachers’ pupils’ and parents’ use. Structured, in-house training was then organized, along with peer mentoring for older teachers who struggled with new technology:

They find it little difficult initially because they were also getting in tune to the new normal. So initially, it was little difficult. But all the time, they understood how to go ahead with that, so their response was positive. Now, if I compare their response from the initial time to now, it has changed. Now, they don’t need any help. (Alana)

Formal staff meetings generally took place using Zoom or Google Meets, while Microsoft Teams was the technology of choice for use in classroom learning. Google Meets was deemed suitable for small group tutorials. WebEx was also mentioned as an optional choice, with WhatsApp messaging used by all parties for general communication purposes.

Guidelines were prepared for staff and for parents who were informed about the new methods for teaching pupils. Lotti who is Principal of a school in the mountainous region of Jammu was conscious that approximately only 10% of the parent body are literate and would struggle to support their children being schooled at home.

The move to remote learning

School closures had previously taken place in Delhi over air quality concerns following Diwali (Nov 2019) but school leadership had not engaged in digital learning at that time. The most significant challenge to school leadership in moving to remote teaching and learning was identified as variable internet reliability and access. While urban schools in Delhi and Chennai did not indicate that they had been impeded by this, rural schools were severely disadvantaged. Digital poverty was widespread as many pupils did not have access to electronic equipment in order to access educational materials, while simultaneously, principals and their staff were frustrated in working with a 2 G network. Planning meetings and communications with staff were frequently interrupted:

Mostly the internet is the problem … some are able to come into the class, some are not able to come because of the internet. (Martha)

There were days, we had to postpone, postpone, postpone the meeting three days. Then we had to completely cancel the meeting for almost a week. (Lotti)

School leaders recognized that they needed to modify their timetables to accommodate the unpredictable nature of digital connectivity. Teachers who were IT proficient were called on to take the first set of classes as they could ‘troubleshoot ‘ problems while others familiarized themselves with the new technology. All schools surveyed had reduced the number of periods, per subject, per week. There was a recognition that timetabling for online teaching needed to be different from the models which were previously in use. Break times were built in after every class with no academic classes taking place in the afternoon. ‘Doubt’ classes had been timetabled by one school for a single period at the end of the morning.

Within this time limit teachers schedule this doubt class, and it is also for 45 minutes. Students, at the end of the “doubt class”, they ask their problems that they do to the subject, or if they want to discuss anything else with the teacher. (Martha)

The role of the Coordinator in middle-management was notable here in disseminating information and supporting colleagues when ‘doubts’ or problems occurred:

So, if any teacher has any a doubt or something, so they message me that, okay, this is something to be asked that how to go ahead with that. If I know the solution, I give it to them, but if I need to confirm, so I just make a note of all the things which I need to confirm. (Alana)

While academic subjects were scheduled for morning time, more active and creative subjects continued to take place in the afternoon. Innovative approaches taken by teachers to Yoga, physical education, art, dance and music were all mentioned as classes were delivered online, particularly to younger children. Interschool competitions were held, and specific national celebrations acknowledged. Celebrations planned for India’s Independence Day (15^th August) included a class symposium to be held remotely. In most schools the hierarchy of leadership was replaced by a distributed model, however, some principals still felt the need to observe and give feedback on virtual classes delivered by teaching staff (Reya).

Distributed leadership within school communities

School leaders managed the revolutionary change in work practices by joining together as a teaching community, to familiarize themselves with the technology they needed to use during the school closures.

… there is some network issue at my place, electricity failure or some network problem is there. So, we just do mutually exchange with other teachers so that students should not suffer, the classes should go on. That is our arrangement. (Poppy)

Leaders facilitated staff members who showed initiative in working together outside the direction of their principal. Subject specific ‘teams’ allowed for distributed collaboration on methodology and content, facilitating peer learning and the acquisition of new skills. There was general agreement among school leaders that teachers felt empowered by new training and satisfaction levels were deemed to be high.

Parental ‘buy-in’ was considered important for pupils to derive maximum benefit from online learning, with varying degrees of success from a school management perspective.

Before we could start this online classes, we spoke to the parents. They have to take responsibility because children are at home. They need to know what the children are learning whether they are really learning or doing something else. So, we have asked them to monitor. (Lotti)

Parents who valued education were conscious of comparing what was taking place in government schools with private schools. Principals noted that they were challenged by parents to deliver more than whatever was being done in government schools:

They compare the private schools and the government schools. Government school is not doing anything the private schools are doing, so what they do, they give the pressure. Instead of challenging the government school, they keep challenging the private schools. (Tilda)

Socio-economic factors were relevant when considering the support parents could offer to teachers in delivering teaching content. In poorer communities, as previously noted, internet access was problematic with obvious negative consequences for distance learning. Children did not have access to technology and the majority of pupils across all schools were using smart phones to access teaching materials. One significant finding was that many pupils were solely reliant on WhatsApp for all communication from school or from their peers:

Not laptop, not computer. I told you they are very poor children. They only have access to this, smartphones. Some of them are not even having smartphones. So only access to WhatsApp. Very few are having access to computer and other things..(Martha)

Parent Teacher meetings were held virtually with positive feedback on pupil wellbeing. Parents appreciated that they saved time previously spent travelling to and from school, additionally protecting the environment from harmful fuel emissions. Principals reported that parents were happy with the teaching and learning taking place, while pupils were benefiting from increased family time with their parents. An informal estimate figure of 80% satisfaction among parents was offered by one participant (Martha).

Initial pupil ‘buy-in’ to online schooling was considered highly successful by participants in the study. Despite the absence of home computers and PCs, students cooperated with their teachers, and generally embraced the new approaches to learning which were rolled out by each school. Students who were absent from classes, notably in the early stages of April, blamed their absences on internet connectivity problems, and they were seen to be anxious to make up for lost time. Several interviewees pointed out that pupils were far more ‘tech savvy’ than their teachers, and teachers often relied on students to help them with particular features.

Impact on teaching and learning

Respondents were anxious to point out that while students initially adapted well, they were looking forward to a return to the classroom for face-to-face teaching. Older students missed the social interaction of school life, but more serious concerns prevailed regarding the developmental progress of younger children who missed out on play and physical activities. Exam classes were considered a priority, but also worthy of mention were the pupils in the 11th standard who needed advice in making subject choices for final state exams the following year, which could influence future career choice.

The structure of a typical lesson involved teachers sending pupils a video which they were required to watch. They then asked the class to take down a number of questions relating to the video which they needed to complete. The answers were then sent back to the teacher as a screen shot by WhatsApp. Teachers spoke about worksheets, weekly assignments and notes contributing to online learning. Some teachers were concerned about the efficacy of online teaching methods:

We are trying our best to reach out to them, but sometimes students hesitate to ask the help also. In normal schools, we come to know from their face, their body language, how the things that are going on, but in online classes a lot of them don’t turn on their cameras sometimes. So, I think because of that also, the help which they need, they don’t ask for it. That is a big concern (Alana)

… everything is going on online and even though the teachers are teaching, but how much it is being interiorized or grasped or what, we have no idea. So, when they come back, it will be difficult to evaluate and analyse and assess the students. (Lotti)

Increased screen time was an obvious concern for teachers and was addressed by a government directive, limiting classes involving screen time to the mornings (15 July 2020). Schools also moved to prohibit students from messaging teachers or each other on Microsoft Teams after 4 pm, so that official screen time was monitored. The size of a phone screen, being used by the majority of students, was identified as a major concern possibly impacting negatively on pupil eyesight, and their ability to concentrate (Poppy). The personal attention and direct communication that face-to-face teaching offered was missed by all interviewees, as an irreplaceable connection between teacher and pupil. Large class numbers did not facilitate individual engagement between teachers and their pupils, further impeded by the absence of nonverbal forms of communication “when we are looking at the face of the child, we are able to understand what that child is going through” (Alana).

Principals agreed that the personal touch was necessary for full engagement with pupils as ongoing assessment of learning was considered problematic.

I’m not happy with the students sitting in online classes. I don’t know how we are able to help them at all levels because when they are at home, they don’t have that comfortable atmosphere interaction. There is no interaction. There is no physical activity. They are all the time, within that four walls. (Lotti)

On a positive note, staff were praised for adapting well to the new situation in their engagement with online teaching. It was suggested that too much time was previously spent by the teacher checking copybooks and homework in a classroom situation, where now teachers were more inclined to use a video or an audio file as a creative tool promoting engagement:

I found the art teachers are picked up quite well. I’ve been observing their classes and I give my feedback every day. Whatever classes that I observe, I give them the feedback, but I found they’re much more creative than in the real situation here in the classroom.(Reya)

Future teaching arrangements

Concerns were evident around the question of when pupils would be able to return to schools. The uncertainty regarding the ongoing rise in numbers of people contracting the virus in India was also a constant theme throughout each interview. One principal was worried that parents might blame the school if their child contracted the virus and hold them responsible (Tilda). Another respondent believed that schools would not open before there was a universal vaccine for the virus (Poppy). Confidence in the government management of the crisis was not high with 5 of the 6 interviewees voicing concern. Inconsistent communication from government was seen as an admission of helplessness, unable to predict the numbers of people who might fall victim to the virus. A ‘fear factor’ was evident among all educational leaders. Even if schools did reopen in September (2020) the government had directed that schools should blend some online teaching with face-to-face classes. The practicalities of such an arrangement posed problems for principals who felt they could not ask female teachers to be at home and in school on the same day. “we can’t have the teachers working in the school as well as online classes. It may be too difficult for us to manage” (Reya).

Morning and afternoon shifts were also proposed as viable options to accommodate family life for female teachers as homemakers and parents, which implied longer shifts in the working day for school leaders. Whatever accommodations could be offered, proper preparation and planning was seen as crucial to protect the safety of the pupils: “Main challenges would be first and foremost to ensure that they are safe physically, mentally, emotionally, they are safe. That is our main challenge” (Tilda).

The increasing financial demands made on schools in managing the Covid-19 crisis, raised questions about how much needed improvements to schools would be financed into the future. Private schools do not get any government assistance and the schools which took part in this research had not been able to charge fees since the beginning of the Covid-19 crisis. Lotti explained that were now finding it difficult to pay salaries of teachers and other staff expenses: “We have to pay the salaries, but we are finding it very difficult … We are giving something to the workers, the cooking staff, the clerical staff, the teaching staff … ”. Practical investment was needed for hand sanitizers, facial masks, social distancing equipment, along with upgrading educational digital technology. More importantly, the physical, mental and emotional welfare of pupils was of critical significance when considering arguments for a return to the classroom. The availability of counselling and mental health support was seen as a corner stone of student support, although details were not offered as to how these services might be provided. Evidence of the desire of pupils to return to school, was readily communicated:

They want to go to school. They are missing their physical education periods. They want to play games. They want to meet their friends, their classroom, because they’ve been long time now sitting at home and they are really anxious. They keep asking, “Ma’am, when will the schools be open?” And I don’t have any answer to them. (Poppy)

Concerns about lost time and the need to make up for teaching time, preferably in a blended format and particularly among senior classes was articulated by all school managers.

Discussion

As evidenced in the interview data outlined above, a complex range of issues emerged as the participants articulated their experience of managing the Covid-19 pandemic crisis. At the time of writing, India had just recorded three successive days of the highest increase in world Covid-19 numbers resulting from the Delta variant (Amit, 2021). In highlighting the characteristics of their role as school leaders, participants were conscious of the challenges experienced by several educational partners in the operation of schools. Theoretical constructivism suggests that leadership in schools is influenced by cooperation, interaction and engagement by all parties (Uhl-Bien, Riggio, Lowe, & Carsten, 2014). Such collaboration was necessary in addressing the new digital educational challenges which school personnel faced in delivering distance learning. Of necessity distributed leadership practices replaced previous hierarchical structures as staff training and managing teaching moved beyond previously accepted boundaries (Uhl-Bien et al., 2014). All parties experienced digital poverty, through a lack of resources, training and infrastructure. It was clear that while some differences were individually identifiable, mainly through the urban rural divide, the challenges which they faced were common to the sample group as women working in a gendered society (Venkatesh & Sykes, 2013). As a homogenous group of female leaders, gender issues were articulated as a cultural norm, with student welfare taking priority. Empathetic leadership was particularly evident when considering the challenges which might arise in managing a return to school for students and teachers alike.

Regional differences highlighted local problems particularly around infrastructure and the availability of suitable electronic learning devices (Arora & Suri, 2020). All school leaders reported that many digital learning platforms are available for engagement with online learning by staff, but students relied heavily and sometimes exclusively on smart phone technology (D’Souza, 2020). The popularity of WhatsApp communication was universal, as an immediate and versatile centralized messaging platform. On-going needs analysis is essential in monitoring the continued provision of education for children in Indian schools, given the lack of educational technology, an absence of suitable digital devices, all of which requires an organized federal response (Rekha & Shanthi, 2018).

The school leaders in this research study all considered that school closures had taken them by surprise even though they had been unofficially given notice of this through the national media. It is clear that they felt unprepared for the task of moving to online distance teaching and learning and did not consider themselves well-equipped for the transition (Srivastava & Dhar, 2019). None of the participants considered asking educational authorities for help with the provision of digital equipment or training. They did look to in house solutions, employing distributed leadership engaging with staff. Personal learning from a leadership perspective was evident as training programmes were accessed online to support staff. Strategically, younger teachers were considered more digitally literate in managing new educational learning platforms for delivering academic content. A strong sense of the positive influence which school leaders can offer in times of crisis was communicated, as teachers learned to incorporate new methodologies into their teaching (Srivastava & Dhar, 2016). While school leaders felt supported by each other and by their staff, this was not the case where government authorities were concerned (Bansal et al., 2021). Most participants agreed that the educational authorities were not dealing with the situation in a meaningful way but appreciated the difficulty of managing a global pandemic which could not have been anticipated (Harris & Jones, 2020).

Despite evidence of digital poverty, levels of confidence among school leaders were high when considering the ‘new normal’ of teaching and learning online. Variable Internet access throughout the country was frustrating and disrupted planning throughout the crisis. Complete breakdowns occurred in more remote areas, sometimes lasting for several days (Venkatesh & Sykes, 2013). While teachers continued to adapt to more innovative methods for teaching and learning, they were fearful of a practical return to the classroom, mindful of the safety and health of their pupils. School leaders were confident that they had responded to school closures in an organized way, delivering cross curricular education to the best of their ability. Despite this, school leaders felt cautious about parent approval and indicated that they felt under scrutiny. They were conscious that parents and therefore pupil support for digital teaching and learning strategies was limited by poor literacy levels, particularly in rural mountainous communities (Arora & Suri, 2020). While these poorer families struggled to avail of distance learning, they were considered to be living in a safer environment than urban students as local people did not travel very often, avoiding the possibility of community Covid-19 transmission. Two school leaders felt that schools should not reopen before a vaccination for the novel coronavirus has been rolled out. Findings indicated a significant level of anxiety among educational leaders, in allowing children back to school on grounds of health and safety. School management were also empathetic to female teachers managing work-life balance (Rawal, 2021).

Conclusion

The future for schooling in India is very unclear but future education will certainly incorporate more digital technology than heretofore. Educational technology will transform existing models of school leadership, as organizational hierarchies struggle to manage the distributed nature of internet connectivity (Figueiredo, 2021). Logistical challenges that surround the opening of schools, some with up to 3,000 pupils, might be offset by blended learning models which could factor in concerns for the safety and welfare of pupils and their teachers. Health and safety considerations are clearly of primary importance when considering a return to school, with the added preoccupation of making up for lost time (Samantray, 2020). Findings from this study show that here was a general acceptance among school leaders that time had been ‘lost’ as teaching and learning was compromised due to digital poverty.

This research contributes to evidence already in the field, which demonstrates that digital poverty is a formidable obstacle in the education of school children in India. The McKinsey Global Institute opened its report on Digital India: Technology to transform a connected nation, suggesting that ‘By any number of key metrics, from internet connections to app downloads, both the volume and the growth of its digital economy now exceed those of most other countries’ (Kaka et al., 2019, Preface). Despite this, the depressed socio-economic state of many parts of India negatively influences the implementation of virtual learning programmes. Out of necessity, this study was conducted remotely, using Zoom as a communication platform for interviews. The problems with poor internet access were witnessed first-hand by the researchers, as several interviews had to be abandoned and rescheduled due to poor connectivity. Digital poverty and socio-economic disadvantage are identified as contributory factors when school leaders reflected on the challenges associated with remote teaching and learning. The successful execution of the Digital India strategy has been interrupted by the pandemic and much remains to be done in the realm of educational technology. School leaders will continue to struggle in providing efficient distance learning for their pupils who have no access to electronic devices, an obvious requirement in order to fully engage with education online. Research participants highlighted fiscal concerns given their anxiety about the future of remote learning and blended schooling. Morale within the leadership of the teaching profession in India is undoubtedly low, with increased responsibilities with fewer resources. Female leaders involved in this study continued to put their students’ and staff needs before their own, declining to be drawn on themes relating to traditional gender roles.

The ethical debate on public verses private education is relevant in consideration of equitable access and opportunity. Private schools in India are generally chosen on the basis of quality of educational provision, recognized as providing better educational outcomes than private schools (Mousumi & Kusakabe, 2020) They receive no government support while often providing education for a minimal sum to many of the country’s indigenous poor. These schools can break the cycle of illiteracy in families by fostering education among children whose parents cannot read or write. School leaders are aware that infrastructure necessary to facilitate digital education, including reliable and consistent internet access, will be required to break the poverty cycle, particularly in rural and remote areas. It will also be required in managing future outbreaks of the Covid-19 pandemic, where education needs to move to an online forum.

Research suggests that distributed leadership is emergent, operating without preconceived boundaries and requires shared expertise (Woods, Bennett, Harvey, & Wise, 2004). The findings of this study are relevant to the evolving situation regarding the leadership of schools engaged in digital teaching and learning in India beyond the Covid-19 global pandemic. Previous reliance on hierarchical leadership has been replaced by patterns of distributed leadership, where teachers who are skilled in IT have become leaders for their peers. Principals and Coordinators have facilitated younger more digitally literate members of staff to direct others, in how to access and use educational technology to best effect. New models of leadership will doubtless continue to evolve in the post Covid-19 era, as technology, pedagogy and personality become increasingly important in the global classroom, and the study of forms of ‘followership’ will be recognized as crucial (Clarke, Killeavy, & Ferris, 2015).

The publication of the National Education Programme (March 2020) recognized the need to address the digital divide through increased investment in personal devices (24.2) and increased teacher training in educational technology (24.3). Existing mass media, such as radio, television and social media outlets are accepted by the report as viable means of delivering education to rural and remote communities (24.4 e). India’s digital poverty lies in the absence of government support for school leadership, trying to connect with students by distance learning. Media outlets are one-way educational providers, bypassing school managers and practitioner teachers. Educational technology in India, presently relates to in-house school tools such as Smart Boards, LCD screens and audio-visual equipment. Such technology does not facilitate remote learning. The phased nationwide reopening of schools from 30 September 2020, allowed for continued provision of virtual teaching with parental consent, but did not provide any fiscal supports for school leaders to implement blended learning (28 September 2020, India.com, news).

At the time of writing, India is in the midst of a surge in the spread of Covid-19; school closures are – perhaps understandably – of minor concern as numbers of deaths continue to soar. But it is in precisely this context that the participants in our study must continue to work; as seen in this article, school leaders consider pupil safety of paramount importance, but struggle to envisage how to manage the safe reopening of their schools. Questions regarding how to socially distance up to 40 students in one class were dismissed with very little consideration as simply not practical, as interviewees acknowledged that they had very few options other than closing schools completely until a vaccination programme is successful. Closed schools will continue to depend on digital technology to deliver teaching and learning.

To summarize, India’s digital power in the world of commerce and economics is not reflected in the realm of education. While the National Education Policy (Government of India, National Education Policy, 2020) aims to provide India with ‘equitable access to the highest-quality education for all learners regardless of social or economic background’(NEP, p.3), providing education for 250 million students, under the restrictions imposed by a global pandemic depends on digital educational technology (D’Souza, 2020). Beyond Covid-19, the possibilities which digital learning offers, in bridging the rural urban divide, require substantial investment into the future. Such investment is particularly relevant when considering delivery of education to women and girls, traditionally challenged in educational and leadership roles. Future policy and practice will demand a blended educational IT approach, as changes in our global environment and social crises bring unpredictable outcomes for school attendance. Challenges are evident for social integration, financial stability for institutions and most significantly, for personal wellbeing and growth (D’Souza, 2020). Politics, economics and education are intrinsically linked in the debate around education access and inequality. Digital policies and practices, which accommodate effective school leadership, can reboot India’s education system, beyond the Covid-19 crisis and into a virtual future.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the University College Dublin Foundation [57975].

Notes on contributors

Ruth Ferris

Ruth Ferris is the M. Michael Corcoran Doctoral Scholar at the School of Education, University College Dublin. Research interests include mentoring policies and practice in initial teacher training, the history of education and the Sustainable Development Goals. She was a member of the UCD research team who designed and implemented the National Induction Pilot Programme for Initial Teacher Training in Ireland.

Marie Clarke

Marie Clarke is Professor at the School of Education, University College Dublin. She is the Dean of Undergraduate Studies and and Director of the Center for the Study of Higher Education at UCD. She is UCD representative and Chair of the Worldwide Universities Network Global and Higher Education Research Steering group (GHEAR).

Deirdre Raftery

Deirdre Raftery is Professor at the School of Education, University College Dublin. She is an elected Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and has been a Visiting Fellow of the University of Oxford. She is widely published and held the position of joint editor of History of Education (Taylor & Francis) for five years.

Mags Liddy

Dr. Mags Liddy was Nano Nagle Newman Fellow at the School of Education, University College Dublin (2019-2012). Her research interests include global citizenship, education, activism and social change in line with the Sustainable Development Goals.

Seaneen Sloan

Dr. Seaneen Sloan is Assistant Professor at the School of Education, University College Dublin. She has an interdisciplinary academic background spanning health, social science, educational and psychological research. She has completed numerous evaluations of child development school based educational and wellbeing research programmes.