Students’ readiness for the posthuman workforce in a rurally located university in South Africa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38140/ijrcs-2024.vol7.2.03Keywords:
Posthumanism, rural university students, workforce readiness, digital literacy, technological acceptanceAbstract
The rapid advancement of digital tools, artificial intelligence, and global connectivity is reshaping workforce expectations, rendering it crucial to understand how students in rural and historically disadvantaged universities are preparing for such changes. These students often encounter compounded barriers, including inadequate digital infrastructure, outdated learning tools, limited exposure to emerging technologies, and scarce opportunities for practical collaboration, all of which impede their acquisition of the skills and competencies necessary to thrive in a posthuman environment. Guided by the Technological Acceptance Model and further interpreted through Van Dijk’s Digital Divide Model and Sen’s Capability Approach within a transformative paradigm employing participatory action research as a design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 fourth-year rural university students selected through convenience sampling, and the data were analysed thematically. The findings reveal that poor connectivity, limited access to modern learning tools, reduced exposure to advanced technologies, and inadequate opportunities for practical application collectively hinder students’ preparedness for technology-driven work environments. Despite these challenges, students exhibit resilience, adaptability, and problem-solving potential—qualities that are valuable for the evolving workforce. The study concludes that targeted interventions to improve infrastructure, enhance access to digital tools, provide structured exposure to emerging technologies, and strengthen digital literacy programmes are essential to bridging the preparedness gap and enabling rural students to thrive in the posthuman workforce. Consequently, this article contributes to the literature by elucidating the digital readiness gaps experienced by rural students and proposes interventions to bridge infrastructural, technological, and literacy barriers to facilitate equitable participation in the workforce.
References
Bhorat, H., Signé, L., Asmal, Z., Monnakgotla, J., & Rooney, C. (2023, May). Digitalisation and digital skills gaps in Africa. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/digitalization-and-digital-skills-gaps-in-africa-an-empirical-profile/
Braidotti, R. (2019). Posthuman knowledge. Polity Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chetty, K. (2017). Bridging the digital divide: Skills for the new age. Global Solutions Initiative.
Chisango, G., Marongwe, N., Mtsi, N., & Matyedi, T. E. (2020). Teachers’ perceptions of adopting information and communication technologies in teaching and learning at rural secondary schools in Eastern Cape, South Africa. Africa Education Review, 17(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2018.1491317
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Heeks, R. (2021). From digital divide to digital justice in the Global South: Conceptualising adverse digital incorporation. arXiv Preprint arXiv:2108.09783.
Kamutuezu, E. U., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., & Peters, A. (2021). An exploration of factors influencing the adoption of ICT enabled entrepreneurship applications in Namibian rural communities. arXiv Preprint arXiv:2108.09789.
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Springer.
Kolb, D. A. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
Boateng, G. (2024). Leveraging AI to advance science and computing education across Africa: Challenges, progress, and opportunities. In Artificial intelligence in education: The intersection of technology and pedagogy (pp. 205–222). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Le Grange, L., & Du Preez, P. (2023). Curriculum studies in the posthuman condition/posthuman curriculum (studies). South African Journal of Higher Education, 37(5), 60–77. https://doi.org/10.20853/37-5-5985
Lukose, J., & Agbeyangi, A. (2024). Enhancing ICT literacy and sustainable practices in the hospitality industry: Insights from Mnquma Municipality. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02781.
Mertens, D. M. (2019). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage Publications.
Aruleba, K., & Jere, N. (2022). Exploring digital transformation challenges in rural areas of South Africa through a systematic review of empirical studies. Scientific African, 16, e01190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01190
Omodan, B. I. (2023). Analysis of connectivism as a tool for posthuman university classrooms. Journal of Curriculum Studies Research, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcsr.2023.2
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). The Sage handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/146498805200034266
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modelling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
Snaza, N., Appelbaum, P., Bayne, S., Carlson, D., Morris, M., Rotas, N., ... & Weaver, J. A. (2014). Toward a posthuman education. Journal of Curriculum Theorising, 30(2), 39.
Du Preez, P., Maistry, S., & Simmonds, S. (2023). Posthumanist curriculum studies and post-schooling: Contemplations from the South. South African Journal of Higher Education, 37(5), 1-3. https://dx.doi.org/10.20853/37-5-6129
Sumak, B., Hericko, M., & Pusnik, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behaviour, 27(6), 2067-2077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005
Teo, T. (2011). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2432–2440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.008
Van Dijk, J. A. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements, and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4-5), 221-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Zheng, Y., & Walsham, G. (2008). Inequality of what? Social exclusion in the e-society as capability deprivation. Information Technology & People, 21(3), 222–243. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840810896000
Zwane, S. A., & Mudau, P. K. (2023). Student teachers’ experiences of open distance e-learning support in a posthuman era: A learner engagement perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies Research, 5(1), 13-33. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcsr.2023.3
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bunmi Isaiah Omodan, Sindile Amina Ngubane
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
