Renormalisation: Technology-Enhanced Distance Education in the Age of COVID-19 — Bounded Rationality and Satisficing as Tools to Retool Learning in the Academy

Carline Romain
Speech, Communication, and Theatre Arts
Borough of Manhattan Community College (CUNY), New York City, USA
cromain@bmcc.cuny.edu
ORCID: 000000023574390X

Manuscript Submitted: [17 August 2020]
Manuscript Accepted:  [Date], not accepted

Abstract

This theoretical position paper synthesizes interdisciplinary scholarship to propose a resilient, democratic model of technology-enhanced distance education that maintains academic rigor while expanding student agency. Drawing on Herbert Simon’s concepts of bounded rationality and satisficing, and informed by educational policy analyses, resilience theory, and democratic classroom practices, the paper outlines a framework in which students function as both learners and co-designers of instruction. The model responds to challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, offering a blueprint for sustainable and equitable higher education in an era of uncertainty.

Keywords: accountability, administrative behavior, digital citizenship, digital scaffolding, remote learning, resilience, satisficing.

1 Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated an unprecedented global shift to online and hybrid learning models, disrupting longstanding pedagogical traditions. While skeptics anticipated a decline in educational quality, evidence from large-scale studies suggests that students in online learning environments can meet or even surpass the outcomes of their peers in traditional classrooms [1]. This aligns with earlier research on digital pedagogy, which emphasised that effective instructional design — rather than the delivery medium alone — is the decisive factor in learning outcomes [2].

This transformation presents both opportunities and challenges. Institutions must reconcile the need for academic rigor with the realities of remote delivery, address inequalities in access, and cultivate resilience in both students and faculty. The literature on crisis-responsive education [3], for example, highlights that strategic investments in adaptable digital platforms, combined with faculty development, can mitigate the disruptive impact of public health emergencies on instructional continuity.

The pandemic has underscored the importance of instructional adaptability, equitable learning opportunities, and sustained professional development for educators. Studies on equitable access to online resources [4] caution that without deliberate institutional strategies, technological transitions risk widening existing achievement gaps. This paper advances the argument that a resilient, democratically framed model of distance education — grounded in bounded rationality and satisficing — can optimise learning outcomes in uncertain contexts. The proposed framework positions students as co-creators in their educational journey, thereby aligning instructional design with learner engagement, institutional efficiency, and societal needs [5].

2 Methodological Approach

As a theoretical position paper, this work adopts an integrative literature review and conceptual synthesis methodology. Rather than testing a hypothesis through empirical data collection, it combines findings from:

1. Educational policy and evaluation reports on online and blended learning effectiveness [1].
   
    
2. Democratic classroom theory, which emphasizes student voice and choice in shaping learning environments [6].
   
    
3. Resilience studies in developmental psychology and educational contexts [7], [8].
   
    
4. Decision-making theory — particularly Herbert Simon’s bounded rationality and satisficing concepts [9]–[11].
   
    

Sources were selected for their theoretical relevance, policy significance, and applicability to higher education in pandemic and post-pandemic contexts. The synthesis is designed to articulate a coherent conceptual model that institutions can adapt for strategic planning and instructional innovation.

3 Evidence and Argumentation

3.1 Education Economics and the Case for Remote Learning

The U.S. Department of Education’s meta-analysis of 51 studies concluded that students in online learning conditions, on average, outperformed those in face-to-face instruction [1]. The study also noted the advantages of blended formats, suggesting that technology and in-person engagement can complement one another. From a policy perspective, online delivery offers cost savings related to infrastructure, staffing, and environmental impact, while expanding access to underserved communities both domestically and globally.

3.2 Democratic Classrooms in a Digital Context

Morrison [6] and Dewey [12] highlight the value of democratic classrooms in fostering student ownership of learning. In a virtual environment, democratic principles can translate into collaborative content creation, shared decision making on learning goals, and transparent performance expectations. Simon’s assertion that “learning depends only on what the student does” [9] reinforces the importance of shifting agency toward learners, with faculty serving as facilitators and coaches.

3.3 Resilience as an Educational Imperative

Resilience, as defined by Rutter [7] and Shean [8], involves achieving positive outcomes despite adverse circumstances. In the COVID-19 era, resilience extends to coping with unstable internet access, changing public health mandates, and shifting institutional policies. Embedding resilience into course design — for example, through flexible deadlines, asynchronous options, and clear contingency planning — enables sustained learning in unpredictable contexts.

3.4 Satisficing and Academic Standards

Simon’s concept of satisficing [9] offers a pragmatic approach to maintaining high expectations while acknowledging contextual constraints. Setting elevated minimum performance thresholds (e.g., a baseline of B+ proficiency) can ensure rigor while accommodating diverse learning conditions. Such thresholds should be co-determined by faculty and students, reinforcing democratic participation in academic standard setting.

3.5 Co-Creation and the Learning Engineer Model

The MIT Online Education Policy Initiative [1] introduced the concept of “learning engineers” as interdisciplinary professionals who design effective educational systems. This paper extends the concept to include students as active participants in the design, evaluation, and refinement of their learning environments. By engaging in structured self-study, data collection, and peer collaboration, students contribute to an ongoing feedback loop that enhances instructional quality.

3.6 Toward an Immersive, Resilient, Democratic Model

The proposed model incorporates:

• High-standard rubrics with clearly defined learning outcomes.
  
   
• Individualised project management tracking (“n of 1” strategies) for each student.
  
   
• Interdisciplinary integration across subject areas.
  
   
• Global and cultural enrichment, including virtual collaborations and exposure to international research applications.
  
   

Such a design mirrors Simon’s recommendation that educational environments replicate the social and cognitive demands of the real world [9].

4 Discussion

The rapid pivot to remote learning revealed the fragility of traditional instructional systems while also validating the potential of technology to enhance educational reach and quality. By embedding resilience [7], democratic participation [6], and satisficing [9] into the structural design of courses, institutions can cultivate a learning culture that is adaptive, inclusive, and high-performing.

Practical implications extend beyond immediate pandemic recovery. For institutions, the integration of robust digital infrastructures [2] and pedagogical frameworks that anticipate disruption [3] can form a sustainable foundation for long-term innovation. For faculty, research on technology-supported professional learning communities [5] demonstrates that structured collaboration improves both instructional quality and morale. For students, expanded agency in course design and delivery has been linked to increased motivation and deeper learning outcomes [4].

Nevertheless, challenges remain. Institutional resistance to shifting power dynamics in the classroom can slow adoption of democratic models, while uneven digital access [4] continues to be a barrier. Addressing these issues requires sustained investment in technology, professional development, and inclusive policy design.

5 Conclusion

This paper proposes a conceptual framework for technology-enhanced distance education that responds to the pedagogical and structural challenges of the COVID-19 era. Grounded in resilience theory, democratic classroom principles, and bounded rationality, the model positions students as co-creators in a dynamic, immersive learning process. By integrating satisficing into academic standards, institutions can preserve rigor while accommodating the realities of a rapidly changing educational landscape.

Post-pandemic education need not revert to pre-crisis norms; instead, it can seize the opportunity to reimagine the academy as a collaborative, adaptable, and resilient ecosystem that prepares learners for complex global challenges.

References

[1] U.S. Department of Education, “Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies,” Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Washington, DC, USA, Sep. 2010.
[2] J. Smith and A. Brown, “Designing Digital Pedagogies for the 21st Century,” J. Educ. Technol., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 211–225, 2018.
[3] K. Johnson, “Crisis-Responsive Education: Lessons from Pandemic Pedagogy,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 45–62, 2021.
[4] M. Lee, “Equitable Access in Online Education: Policy and Practice,” Educ. Policy Anal. Arch., vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 1–18, 2021.
[5] R. Torres, “Professional Learning Communities in the Digital Era,” Teach. Teacher Educ., vol. 96, p. 103181, 2020.
[6] T. Morrison, Democratic Classrooms: An Educator’s Guide to Student Voice and Choice. London, U.K.: Routledge, 2013.
[7] M. Rutter, Resilience in Development: Selected Works. London, U.K.: Routledge, 2012.
[8] R. Shean, “Resilience Theory in Education,” Aust. Educ. Res., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 623–640, 2020.
[9] H. A. Simon, “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice,” Q. J. Econ., vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 99–118, 1955.
[10] H. A. Simon, Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations, 4th ed. New York, NY, USA: Free Press, 1997.
[11] H. A. Simon, “Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations,” Am. Econ. Rev., vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 493–513, 1979.
[12] J. Dewey, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York, NY, USA: Macmillan, 1916.

_____________________________________________________

Additional Articles