8 .
Journal of Curriculum Indonesia http://hipkinjateng.
org/jurnal/index.
php/jci Reimagining Student Support in the Digital Era: To Explore How Digital Transformation Shapes Support Services in South African Universities by Academic Development Practitioners Tebogo Lekota.
Ouluwatoyin Ayodele Ajani.
Centre for Academic Excellence.
University of Limpopo.
South Africa .
Curriculum Studies/Education Studies.
University of KwaZulu-Natal.
Durban.
South Africa .
Keywords Abstract
____________________
________________________________________________________________
Digital transformation, student support programmes.
Academic Development Practitioners.
Sociotechnical Systems Theory, digital tools, institutional norms, student engagement.
Global South, relational support, educational technology This study investigates how digital transformation is reshaping student support programmes in South African institutions of higher learning.
Despite increased investment in digital tools and platforms, little is known about how these shifts are experienced by those who design and implement support structures.
Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
To address this gap, the study engaged 12 ADPs from various universities through in-depth, semi-structured interviews.
Guided by the theoretical lens of Sociotechnical Systems Theory, the research explored how digital tools .
, learning management systems.
WhatsApp, e-mentoring platform.
interact with human practices, institutional norms, and student needs.
Thematic analysis revealed four central themes: .
shifting identities of ADPs in the digital space, .
unequal access and digital divides, .
evolving models of relational support, and .
tensions between innovation and institutional inertia.
Findings suggest that while digital transformation has enhanced reach and efficiency, it has also introduced complexities related to workload, professional boundaries, and student engagement.
This study contributes to a deeper understanding of how digitalization influences the design, delivery, and experience of student support, offering critical insights for policy, practice, and further research within the Global South.
e-ISSN 2549-0338 Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
INTRODUCTION The digital transformation of higher education has significantly reshaped the landscape of teaching, learning, and student support.
Over the past decade, institutions of higher learning across the globe, particularly in the Global South, have increasingly integrated digital tools and platforms into their These technologies, including Learning Management Systems (LMS), social media, mobile applications like WhatsApp, and e-mentoring platforms, have been adopted to address the growing demands of a tech-savvy student body and the limitations posed by physical infrastructures (Tariq et al.
In South Africa, where universities are often characterised by large student populations and resource constraints, the adoption of digital tools has been seen as an opportunity to bridge gaps in access to learning and support services (Maringe & Sing, 2.
Despite these advancements, there remains a significant gap in understanding how digital transformation is experienced by those who are responsible for designing and implementing student support programmes.
Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
play a critical role in students' academic success and retention by providing academic guidance and emotional, social, and relational support (Chigona, 2.
ADPs are central to the academic ecosystem, offering tutoring, mentoring, language support, and other educational interventions.
While much of the literature focuses on the impact of digital tools on students and instructors (Ng'ambi & Bozalek, 2.
, the voices of ADPs, those directly involved in the development, implementation, and support of these initiatives, remain underexplored.
As digital tools increasingly become integral to student support systems, it is vital to examine how ADPs navigate these changes, their shifting roles in digital environments, and the challenges they face in maintaining effective student support.
One key aspect of digital transformation is the shift in how student support is delivered.
Traditional face-to-face modes of support have been complemented or, in some cases, replaced by digital platforms that allow for real-time communication, remote tutoring, and instant access to academic Technologies like WhatsApp.
Moodle, and Zoom have transformed the way academic development is approached, particularly in universities where traditional systems may be under-resourced (Robson & Selwyn, 2.
In South Africa.
WhatsApp has become one of the most widely used platforms for communication between tutors and students, especially in under-resourced universities where alternative platforms like LMS might be too costly or inaccessible (Jantjies & Joy, 2.
WhatsAppAos widespread use offers an affordable and flexible alternative to traditional systems, providing an opportunity for more personalized and continuous student support.
Despite the growing reliance on these digital platforms, little research has examined the specific dynamics of WhatsApp-based tutor-student communication and how these interactions shape the student support experience.
Much of the existing literature focuses on the broader impact of digital technologies on education (Maringe & Sing, 2022.
Kumi-Yeboah et al.
, 2.
or student perceptions of digital tools (Barhoumi, 2.
, while the perspectives of the ADPs who design and facilitate these support programmes are often overlooked.
This is a critical gap because ADPs are integral to ensuring that digital tools are used effectively and in ways that align with institutional goals and student needs.
Universities embrace digital transformation, they must also grapple with the challenges it presents, such as unequal access to technology, the digital divide, and the difficulty in maintaining a human touch in a digital environment (Kahu et al.
, 2.
In South African higher education, where many students come from disadvantaged backgrounds and may face barriers to digital access and literacy, these challenges are even more pronounced (Maringe & Sing, 2.
Therefore, it is crucial to understand how ADPs navigate these challenges while attempting to support students in an increasingly digital environment.
The relationship between digital tools and the practices of ADPs has important implications for policy and practice, particularly in addressing issues such as digital literacy, equitable access, and the balancing of technological innovation with institutional norms.
This study seeks to explore how ADPs in South African universities are responding to the digital transformation of student support programmes.
Using a qualitative approach and guided by Sociotechnical Systems Theory (STS), the study investigates how digital tools such as LMS.
WhatsApp, and e-mentoring Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
platforms interact with human practices, institutional norms, and student needs.
The study aims to address the gap in research by focusing on the perspectives of ADPs who are directly engaged in the design and delivery of student support initiatives in the digital age.
The findings will provide insights into the evolving roles of ADPs, the challenges they face, and the strategies they employ to navigate the complexities of digital transformation in higher education.
This research will contribute to the growing body of knowledge on digital pedagogy and the implications of digital tools for student support in South Africa and other contexts within the Global South.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
are central to ensuring that students receive adequate support, particularly in the areas of academic skills, personal development, and engagement (Maringe & Sing, 2.
ADPs are responsible for designing and implementing student support services that address the diverse academic needs of students, such as tutoring, academic writing, mentoring, and study skills Their work plays a crucial role in student retention and success, particularly in the context of diverse student populations that may struggle with the transition to higher education (Tinto, 2.
South African universities increasingly integrate digital technologies into academic support services, the role of ADPs is undergoing significant transformation.
ADPs must now adapt to new modes of teaching and support delivery that incorporate digital tools.
For example, digital platforms such as LMS and WhatsApp are becoming common methods for facilitating communication between ADPs and students, as well as for managing academic support services (Ng'ambi & Bozalek, 2.
While these tools enhance the reach and flexibility of support services, they also introduce new complexities.
ADPs must balance the increased workload associated with managing digital platforms while ensuring that students continue to receive personalized, quality support (Schreiber, 2.
The digital transformation of student support also challenges ADPs to rethink traditional roles and adapt to new methods of service delivery.
This shift may require additional training and the development of new competencies, both in terms of digital literacy and pedagogy (Maphosa & Ndamba, 2.
Furthermore.
ADPs must be mindful of the potential inequalities in digital access and ensure that their support services are inclusive and accessible to all students, particularly those from disadvantaged Sociotechnical Systems Theory (STS), developed by Trist and Bamforth .
, provides a foundational framework for understanding the interaction between people .
he social componen.
and technology .
he technical componen.
within complex systems.
In educational contexts.
STS emphasizes that the integrating technology into educational practices requires not only technical expertise but also careful consideration of human behaviours, organizational culture, and institutional norms (Kraut et al.
This theory posits that systems function most effectively when both social and technical components are in harmony.
In the context of South African universities, the adoption of digital tools in student support services must be viewed through the lens of STS, as it is not merely a matter of implementing technology, but also of how these tools are integrated into the practices, identities, and roles of ADPs.
For example, the introduction of a new Learning Management System (LMS) or an e-mentoring platform may require ADPs to shift their practices, adapt their communication strategies, and rethink how they interact with students.
Similarly, students must also engage with these tools in ways that align with their academic needs and technological capabilities (Jantjies & Joy, 2.
STS theory helps to explain the tensions that often arise during digital transformation.
On the one hand, digital tools can enhance the efficiency and reach of student support services, allowing for greater flexibility in terms of service delivery and access.
On the other hand, these technologies can introduce new challenges, such as communication overload, technical issues, and the need for ongoing professional development (Schreiber, 2.
For ADPs, balancing the technical and social dimensions of digital transformation is key to ensuring that the integration of digital tools enhances, rather than detracts from, the effectiveness of student support programmes.
Student engagement is a critical aspect of student success.
Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
and digital transformation provides new opportunities for fostering engagement in higher education.
According to Tinto .
, student engagement is linked to retention and academic achievement.
In the digital age, engagement often takes place through online communication channels such as discussion forums, social media platforms, and digital mentoring services (Selwyn, 2.
WhatsApp, for instance, has emerged as a key tool for facilitating informal interactions between students and ADPs, allowing for real-time communication and the sharing of learning resources (Barhoumi, 2.
However, the shift to digital spaces also presents challenges.
Studies have shown that while digital tools increase access and flexibility, they also require careful management to ensure that they do not inadvertently exclude or overwhelm students (Maphosa & Ndamba, 2.
For example, students without reliable internet access may miss out on opportunities to engage with academic support services, thus exacerbating existing inequalities (Chigona, 2.
The informal nature of communication on platforms like WhatsApp may blur the boundaries between professional and personal interactions, leading to challenges in maintaining appropriate boundaries between ADPs and students (Kumi-Yeboah et al.
, 2.
In South Africa, digital transformation in higher education faces unique challenges, particularly related to infrastructural limitations and the digital divide.
Many students, particularly those from rural areas or economically disadvantaged backgrounds, struggle to access the necessary technology and internet connectivity to fully participate in digital learning and support services (Jantjies & Joy, 2.
This digital divide is compounded by insufficient training and support for both students and educators in using digital tools effectively (Robson & Selwyn, 2.
Institutions must contend with the broader institutional and organizational barriers that hinder the successful implementation of digital tools.
These include resistance to change, inadequate professional development opportunities for staff, and limited institutional support for the ongoing maintenance and updating of digital platforms (Ng'ambi & Bozalek, 2.
According to Chigona .
, successful digital transformation requires not only technological infrastructure but also organizational commitment to addressing these barriers and ensuring equitable access to digital resources.
As digital transformation reshapes higher education.
ADPs are at the forefront of this change, adapting their practices and roles to meet the needs of students in a digital environment.
This literature review underscores the importance of understanding the intersection of technology and human practices in higher education.
By using Sociotechnical Systems Theory as a guiding framework, this study will explore how ADPs in South African universities navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by digital tools, ensuring that student support remains effective, inclusive, and accessible in an increasingly digital world.
METHODS
This study adopted a qualitative research design, underpinned by an interpretivist paradigm.
Given the study's focus on exploring the nuanced experiences and perceptions of Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
amidst digital transformation, a qualitative approach was most appropriate.
This design allowed for in-depth engagement with participants lived realities, institutional contexts, and reflections on practice elements that are difficult to capture through quantitative methods.
A purposive sampling strategy was employed to identify participants with direct experience in designing, implementing, or managing student support programmes during and after the pivot to digital modalities.
A total of 12 Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
were selected from seven South African universities, including both historically advantaged and disadvantaged institutions to ensure variation in institutional resources, digital infrastructure, and student demographics.
Participants were selected based on the following criteria: at least two years of experience in student support roles, active involvement in digital or hybrid support initiatives, and representation across different institutional types .
omprehensive, traditional, and universities of technolog.
Data was collected through semi-structured, in-depth Given geographical dispersion and differing COVID-19 protocols at the time, interviews were conducted via Zoom or Microsoft Teams, with participant consent.
Each interview lasted between 45 to 75 minutes and was audio-recorded with permission.
The interview protocol explored key areas such as Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
experiences with transitioning to digital student support tools, perceptions of effectiveness and engagement in digital environments, challenges faced and strategies employed, reflections on changes in professional roles, student needs, and institutional responses.
The semi-structured format allowed for flexibility, enabling participants to raise context-specific issues while ensuring consistency across interviews.
Data were analysed using thematic analysis, following Braun and ClarkeAos .
six-phase approach, familiarisation with the data through repeated reading of transcripts, generation of initial codes based on meaningful units of data, reaching for themes by clustering codes into broader patterns, reviewing themes in relation to the entire dataset and theoretical framework, refining and naming themes to ensure clarity and coherence, producing the report, integrating data extracts and interpretation.
NVivo software was used to manage and code the data systematically.
Themes were derived inductively from the data but interpreted in relation to the studyAos theoretical framework (STS), allowing for both data-grounded and conceptually informed insights.
All participants were provided with an information sheet and signed informed consent forms before participation.
Confidentiality was ensured by using pseudonyms and anonymising institutional identifiers.
Data were securely stored on a password-protected device, accessible only to the RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This section presents and discusses the findings of the study, drawn from in-depth interviews with 12 Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
from seven South African universities.
Thematic analysis, guided by the Sociotechnical Systems Theory (STS), revealed four interrelated themes:
Shifting Identities of ADPs in Digital Spaces The transition to digitally mediated student support has significantly altered how Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
understand and perform their professional roles.
Participants in this study described a profound redefinition of their identities as they navigated the overlapping demands of teaching, digital facilitation, emotional caregiving, and technical troubleshooting.
AuSometimes I feel like a psychologist, sometimes like IT support.
My role has expanded so much that I donAot even know where it starts and ends anymore.
Ay (Participant .
AuWe were trained to support students academically, but now you have to know how to design digital content, troubleshoot tech issues, and still be a mentorAiall in one.
Ay (Participant .
This evolution aligns with what Bayne et al.
describe as the "reconfiguration of professional boundaries," a hallmark of digital transformation in higher education.
Platforms such as WhatsApp.
Zoom, and Learning Management Systems (LMS.
have not only altered communication channels but have also redefined the scope and temporality of ADPsAo work.
Interactions are no longer confined to office hours or physical consultation spaces.
ADPs are accessible almost constantly, often working outside formal schedules to address studentsAo academic, emotional, and technical concerns.
This Aualways-onAy support culture has blurred the boundaries between personal and professional As Prinsloo .
argues, the demand for hyper-availability in online education creates emotional fatigue and undermines practitionersAo well-being.
Several participants reported feeling stretched, undervalued, and unsure about their long-term professional identity.
AuSometimes I ask myself: am I an academic developer or a 24/7 help desk? The lines are completely blurred Ay (Participant .
From the perspective of Sociotechnical Systems Theory, this shifting identity reflects a misalignment between the technical subsystem .
igital platforms, tools, communication technologie.
and the social subsystem .
ole clarity, institutional expectations, support structure.
(Mumford, 2019.
Gregor & Hevner.
While digital technologies have enhanced the visibility, scalability, and immediacy of ADPsAo work, institutions have not adequately adjusted policies, workloads, or recognition frameworks to support these Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
AuThereAos so much more we do now, but itAos not reflected in our job descriptions or performance reviews.
ItAos like the system hasnAot caught up with the reality.
Ay (Participant .
This gap not only creates emotional strain but also contributes to role ambiguity, a well-documented source of professional dissatisfaction in digitally transforming environments (Kumar & Chander, 2.
When digital systems introduce new demands without accompanying structural changes such as updated performance frameworks, workload adjustments, or dedicated support staff the result is a fractured sociotechnical environment where individuals carry the burden of systemic change.
The multiplicity of digital identities that ADPs must adopt .
, content creator, counsellor, instructional designe.
often leads to a loss of professional coherence.
As Oloo .
observes in the Kenyan context, digital transformation often forces practitioners into roles for which they have not been formally trained, placing them in Auliminal spacesAy of uncertainty and improvisation.
AuYou just figure things out as you go.
One day youAore editing videos for tutorials.
the next, youAore calming down a student having an anxiety attack over WhatsApp.
Ay (Participant .
While such adaptability speaks to the resilience and agency of ADPs, it also exposes them to emotional burnout and professional marginalization if institutional systems do not evolve in tandem.
This highlights a central tenet of STS: technical systems must be co-designed with social systems, ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of human sustainability (Trist & Bamforth, 1951.
Mumford, 2.
sum, digital transformation has led to a multidimensional expansion of the ADP role technically, emotionally, and relationally.
While this presents opportunities for innovation and increased impact, it also introduces profound challenges related to identity, recognition, and systemic support.
Universities must therefore rethink not only their digital tools but also the institutional ecosystems within which ADPs operate, ensuring a more integrated and humane approach to digital transformation in student support.
Unequal Access and Digital Divides Despite the integration of digital platforms into teaching and learning.
ADPs reported persistent and often frustrating challenges related to inequitable student access to devices, reliable internet connectivity, and suitable home learning environments.
AuItAos easy to say Aogo on BlackboardAo, but some of our students donAot even have a smartphone, let alone data.
Ay (Participant .
AuWe had to send material via WhatsApp or even call students individually because the LMS was just not accessible to many of them.
Ay (Participant .
These accounts highlight the deep infrastructural and socioeconomic divides that remain embedded in South African higher education.
While institutional policies may assume digital readiness, on-theground experiences tell a different story one marked by student exclusion, disrupted communication, and additional workload for ADPs attempting to bridge the gap.
This theme aligns with findings by Strydom et .
, who caution against the Auone-size-fits-allAy digital strategies often imported from well-resourced These approaches fail to account for local challenges such as device sharing, load shedding, and rural connectivity issues.
In many cases, digitalization has introduced new barriers to access for students from historically marginalized backgrounds.
From an STS perspective, such misalignment illustrates how technical systems .
, learning management systems, e-learning app.
are not neutral tools but are embedded in, and dependent upon, social and economic contexts (Gregor & Hevner, 2.
The theory warns against technological determinism, or the belief that tools alone can drive transformation, without parallel investments in the human and structural systems that support them.
AuWeAore expected to go digital, but students are literally climbing trees to get a signal.
ItAos heartbreaking and Ay (Participant .
When institutions deploy digital platforms without inclusive implementation plans, such as zerorated data platforms, device lending schemes, or offline-accessible content, they risk deepening the very inequalities they aim to address.
As Czerniewicz et al.
assert, digital transformation should be judged not just by uptake or innovation, but by how well it enables participation for the least advantaged.
Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
Therefore, digital equity must become a core principle in the design of student support systems, requiring intentional strategies that balance technological capability with social justice imperatives.
Until then.
ADPs will continue to carry the burden of compensating for a digital system that does not adequately serve all.
Evolving Models of Relational Support The third theme highlights how digital communication tools have reshaped the relational dynamics between Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
and students.
While platforms like WhatsApp.
Zoom, and institutional LMS messaging functions have enabled timely, flexible communication, many ADPs expressed concern that these interactions are becoming increasingly transactional rather than AuI get WhatsApp at midnight AoMaAoam, can you help me with this essay?Ao The personal-professional line is Ay (Participant .
AuYou miss that moment when a studentAos face lights up in a consultation that sense of connection is not the same Ay (Participant .
Digital tools, while efficient, have introduced a level of impersonality and immediacy that can disrupt the emotional depth and pedagogical trust traditionally built through face-to-face engagement.
Several participants noted that the informality of digital platforms sometimes leads to blurred boundaries, where students expect near-instant responses at any hour, and nuanced academic discussions are reduced to brief exchanges or voice notes.
This evolution reflects a broader concern raised by Prinsloo .
, who warns of the rise of AuhyperavailabilityAy in online academic support where educators are constantly accessible but often emotionally detached, fatigued, or overwhelmed.
The overuse of real-time platforms can result in continuous partial attention, where responsiveness is maintained at the expense of meaningful engagement.
From an STS perspective, this highlights a problematic imbalance between technical functionality and social sustainability.
Digital systems that prioritize speed and accessibility may inadvertently neglect the affective and human dimensions of learning, which are crucial to student development and retention (Kumar & Chander, 2.
In such cases, the system becomes technically efficient but socially impoverished, limiting the potential for empathy, mentorship, and deeper cognitive scaffolding.
AuI used to build strong relationships through regular workshops or one-on-ones.
Now, it feels like weAore just solving mini-crises through our phones.
Ay (Participant .
This erosion of relational support is particularly concerning in the context of under-resourced or firstgeneration students, who often rely on trust-based, ongoing interactions with ADPs to navigate academic As Bayne et al.
note, human relationships are not simply AutransferrableAy to digital platforms they must be redesigned with intention, care, and pedagogical empathy.
To ensure digital transformation enhances rather than diminishes relational support, institutions must reimagine their digital systems not only as tools of access and delivery, but also as spaces for connection, care, and community.
This includes creating time and structures for reflective engagement, not just reactive problem-solving, and acknowledging the emotional labour ADPs invest in sustaining student relationships online.
Tensions Between Innovation and Institutional Inertia While Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
are frequently positioned as key drivers of innovation within their institutions, their efforts are often constrained by bureaucratic inefficiencies, limited funding, inconsistent leadership, and fragmented digital policies.
This contradiction emerged as a significant source of frustration among participants.
AuWe are expected to innovate, but when you ask for Zoom Pro or training, youAore told thereAos no budget.
Ay (Participant .
AuItAos like the institution says go digital, but doesnAot walk the journey with you.
Ay (Participant .
These reflections capture what Sociotechnical Systems Theory (STS) refers to as structural misfit a scenario in which technological tools and expectations outpace the institutionAos social and administrative readiness to support them (Mumford, 2019.
Gregor & Hevner, 2.
While universities may promote Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
digital transformation rhetorically, they often lack coherent systems to operationalize that vision, leaving ADPs to navigate complex innovations without adequate institutional scaffolding.
Participants described a disconnect between top-down policy narratives about 21st-century learning and the on-the-ground realities of insufficient infrastructure, delayed decision-making, and unclear digital AuWe get emails about being a Aodigitally transformed university,Ao but weAore still struggling to get basic software approved or Wi-Fi in certain student labs.
Ay (Participant .
This misalignment creates a tension between innovation and institutional inertia, where enthusiasm and creativity are undermined by outdated systems and rigid procedures.
It echoes findings from other Global South contexts such as those documented by Oloo .
in Kenya and Bati & Workneh .
in Ethiopia where academic staff are encouraged to adopt digital tools without sufficient consultation, support, or systemic change.
From an STS lens, innovation cannot be sustainably implemented if the technical subsystem .
ew tools, platforms, digital practice.
is not complemented by an adaptive social subsystem .
olicies, roles, incentives, training, and decision-making pathway.
When these subsystems are out of sync, organizational friction emerges, often manifesting as fatigue, disengagement, or resistance among frontline AuYou feel like youAore pushing a heavy cart uphill with no one behind you.
Eventually, you stop pushing.
Ay (Participant .
This gap between innovation discourse and practical enablement contributes not only to burnout but also to skepticism toward future initiatives.
ADPs expressed a desire for leadership that listens, includes them in strategic decisions, and allocates resources that reflect the scale of digital expectations.
To move beyond inertia, institutions must align their structural, financial, and human systems with their digital ambitions, acknowledging that innovation is not just about introducing tools but also about transforming the environments that support or constrain their use.
CONCLUSION
This study set out to explore how digital transformation is reshaping student support in South African higher education, focusing on the lived experiences of Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
Guided by Sociotechnical Systems Theory (STS), the study highlighted the complex interplay between digital tools and institutional, social, and cultural dynamics.
The findings revealed four interrelated themes: .
the shifting identities of ADPs in digital spaces, .
persistent inequalities in access and digital divides, .
evolving models of relational support, and .
tensions between innovation and institutional inertia.
These themes collectively illustrate that digital transformation is not simply a technical exercise but a deeply contextual and human process.
While digital tools have expanded the reach and immediacy of academic support, they have also introduced new challenges, such as increased emotional labour, blurred professional boundaries, inequitable student access, and unsupportive institutional From an STS perspective, these tensions emerge when technological advancements are not accompanied by appropriate social and institutional adjustments.
The study underscores that sustainable and equitable digital transformation requires more than access to platforms or training sessions, it demands a rethinking of systems, roles, relationships, and values in higher education.
ADPs are not just implementers of digital strategy.
they are co-creators of student experience.
Their insights must inform
institutional decisions to ensure that digitalization enhances rather than undermines the purpose of student
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings, this study recommends that institutions urgently reconfigure the roles and recognition of Academic Development Practitioners (ADP.
to reflect their expanded digital Journal of Curriculum Indonesia 8 .
This includes updating job descriptions, workload models, and performance evaluations to acknowledge the emotional and technical labour of digital academic support.
To promote equity, institutions should implement targeted strategies that address unequal access to devices, data, and digital platforms, particularly for students in rural or under-resourced settings.
Digital tools and platforms should be intentionally designed to preserve relational aspects of student support, incorporating training for ADPs on maintaining digital boundaries and fostering connection in online spaces.
Furthermore, institutional structures must be aligned with digital goals through improved procurement processes, cross-departmental collaboration, and responsive leadership.
Ongoing professional development tailored to the digital context should be prioritized, along with the establishment of communities of practice to support innovation and shared learning.
Lastly.
ADPs must be actively included in institutional strategic planning to ensure that digital transformation efforts are grounded in the lived realities of those who implement and sustain student support programmes.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors wish to acknowledge participants for this study, who made this study an huge success.
REFERENCES