By Dr Jako Olivier, Adviser: Higher Education, COL  

In an age of artificial intelligence, more information does not guarantee understanding. UNESCO reports that globally at least 739 million adults still cannot read and write, two-thirds of them women. International Literacy Day is observed on September 8, with the 2026 theme being “Literacy for people, the planet and prosperity”. This invites attention to persistent inequalities and emerging challenges around literacy.  

For higher education delivered through open and distance learning (ODL), literacy is indispensable, but it cannot be treated as a requirement met at admission. Students often need continuing support with academic reading, writing and interpreting evidence, particularly when studying through an additional language. Across the Commonwealth, such support must reflect local languages and circumstances, from rural communities and small island states to large urban centres. Formal access to education is not automatically access to its knowledge.  

The growing use of AI brings opportunities for learning support, but also new demands on judgement. The Digital Education Outlook 2026, published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, cautions that improved AI-assisted performance does not necessarily ensure learning. Misinformation and uncertain authorship also require attention to where content comes from, whose perspectives it represents and what evidence supports it. Learners need critical judgement, not simply faster answers.  

Metaliteracy offers a useful response. Thomas P. Mackey and Trudi E. Jacobson coined the term in 2011 to describe an overarching framework extending information literacy. It helps learners evaluate information critically, create and share content responsibly, and reflect on their own learning across media and digital environments.  

Its four domains connect knowledge and practical action with emotions, attitudes and reflection on learners’ own thinking. The 2025 Metaliteracy Goals and Learning Objectives explicitly address ethical AI use and responsibility for generated content. This framework supports ongoing development, not just specific skills mastered once.  

COL supports capacities through partnerships and open resources. In South Africa, COL’s work with the Department of Higher Education and Training has supported national dialogue on ethical AI use in teacher education, linking it to assessment and continuing professional development. In Mauritius, COL is supporting the development of a governance framework for AI in higher education.  

Similarly, embracing the language diversity of the Commonwealth is also relevant when considering literacy. COL’s publication Global Resources, Local Contexts: A Scoping Review of the Literature on the Localisation of Open Educational Resources in Higher Education (2016-2025) examines the localisation of open educational resources in higher education. For multilingual learners, localisation should include opportunities to compare sources across languages, question automated translations and contribute local knowledge. Institutions should recognise student linguistic resources rather than mistake confidence in English for subject understanding. Learners should have opportunities to demonstrate understanding through written, audio and visual contributions across their languages. Localisation needs to address meaning, context and participation, not translation alone. 

In an ODL course, students could examine an AI-generated explanation of a local environmental issue, check it against reliable evidence, and develop an accessible, multilingual resource for their community. A short reflection could explain their source choices, corrections and use of AI. Assessment would then make both understanding and responsibility visible. 

Embedding such approaches requires institutional commitment and a serious consideration of metaliteracy. Policymakers, institutions and development partners should align curricula, staff development, learner support and AI governance, while funding accessible materials and low-bandwidth options. Librarians and educators should co-design this provision with learners, adapting it to local languages, infrastructure and priorities across the Commonwealth. Progress should be judged by learning and participation, not just tool uptake. 

Metaliteracy does not replace literacy; it builds on it. The next step is to give both sustained attention in ODL, so that learners can contribute knowledge, pursue their livelihoods and make informed decisions for their communities and the planet.