Blended Learning in a Time of Crisis: A Necessary Shift or a Risky Shortcut?

Published on: April 20, 2026

In times of crisis, policy decisions are often made in haste. Bangladesh’s move to consider blended learning in response to the ongoing global energy crisis is one such decision. On paper, it appears rational. Reduce physical presence, cut fuel consumption, and keep education running. But as with many “efficient” solutions, the question we must ask is, "Does it work for everyone?" Because in Bangladesh, everyone does not belong from the same place, or same privileged background. 

Bangladesh has been here before. During the Covid-19 pandemic, online education was rolled out as a necessary alternative. And a significant proportion of the students; especially from rural areas, simply could not participate. Weak internet connectivity, lack of devices, and unreliable electricity were not exceptions; they were the norm. For many children, distance learning or online class was not just a shift in modality, it was the end of learning altogether.

Today, while connectivity has improved, the structural inequalities still remain deeply embedded. In rural Bangladesh, stable internet access is still inconsistent, and electricity disruptions are a lived reality. A policy that assumes continuous connectivity risks excluding precisely those learners who are already most vulnerable. And this is exactly where the idea of blended learning begins to fracture.

In urban, well-resourced settings, blended models can enhance flexibility. Students can access materials online, revisit lectures, and engage in interactive classroom sessions. There is evidence globally that such models, when thoughtfully designed, can improve learning outcomes. But transplanting this model into rural Bangladesh without addressing infrastructural gaps is not innovation, rather oversight.

Even in urban areas, questions remain regarding students' age. At the primary level, learning is not just about content delivery; it is about structure, routine, and human interaction. Young children do not “log in” to learning independently. They need guidance, supervision, and constant engagement. During the pandemic, participation rates among primary students were alarmingly low, not because they lacked interest, but because they lacked support.

This brings us to a reality often overlooked in policy discussions- the household. In families with two working parents, who will ensure that a six-year-old attends an online class, stays focused, and completes assigned tasks? How is the child expected to operate a device independently? And whose device will they use?

From a personal standpoint, I know this challenge is real. As a teacher, if blended learning is implemented, I will be required to take my classes online while my spouse manages their own professional responsibilities. In such a scenario, how do we ensure that our first-grade child is attending their online class from the same home? Having only one personal device? In contexts like this, online learning becomes fragmented, inconsistent, and ultimately ineffective.

There is also a pedagogical dimension to consider. Teaching online is not the same as teaching in a classroom. It requires different strategies, different pacing, and a different understanding of student engagement. Many teachers in Bangladesh have had limited training in digital pedagogy. Without adequate support, online classes risk becoming one-directional, which will ultimately be harmful for the younger learners. And yet, to dismiss blended learning entirely would be equally simplistic.

The current energy crisis is real. It demands adaptive solutions. Blended learning, if approached carefully, can offer flexibility and continuity. It can reduce pressure on transport systems and allow institutions to function during disruptions. It can even open doors to new forms of learning, but only if equity remains at the centre of implementation; only if every child is guaranteed equal access and support. The issue, therefore, is not the model itself. It is the assumption that one model can fit all contexts. 

A more thoughtful approach would recognise variation. Urban secondary and tertiary institutions may be better positioned to adopt partial online schedules. Rural schools, on the other hand, may require alternative arrangements that do not rely heavily on internet access. Primary education, irrespective of location, demands a fundamentally different strategy. One that prioritises in-person engagement. Policy, thus must move beyond uniformity and embrace nuance.

Because education systems are not just logistical structures; they are social ecosystems. When a child in Dhaka logs into a virtual classroom while another in Kurigram cannot even connect, we are not simply witnessing a technological gap, we are reinforcing inequality.

The energy crisis may have triggered this conversation, but the decisions we make now will extend far beyond it. Blended learning can either become a step toward a more resilient, inclusive system, or a reminder of how quickly gaps widen when context is ignored.