Online selection fails rural people

HE newly-introduced online selection system is a satisfactory function and a way forward for Department of Higher Education Research Science and Technology (DHERST).
It avoids inconvenience and dishonesty. It permits selection systematically – which is a very good approach that serves the interest of people. An article titled Online selection was not user friendly-parent was about rural schools.
This is a newly-introduced system that should require assessment and inspection in locality of schools, and cross-check to identify obstacles to the process.
Even in this day, students in rural areas do not know how to use smart phones or surf the internet.
It would be a failure on the part of the system if a smart student drops out for not filling the form accordingly or in time, due to certain obstacles. Will they be considered if they did well in their assessments but were unsuccessful in filling their online forms?
What would happen if their GPAs met the required or cut-off percentage but did not fully comply to the online form?
Before implementing this policy, did the DHERST conduct any feasibility survey to identify challenges in rural schools?
Obviously, this is the foremost approach that ought to have been taken before implementation of the online selection policy.
Otherwise, this would be a failed system or trial-and-error process.
What concerns me most are rural schools having poor network coverage in their locality.
Accessible facilities are downgraded and are not conducive to be use.
It is just a burden to parents in rural areas to buy smart phones and credits every week for their student children. To access the internet is so expensive.
If there was no feasibility survey or inspection prior to implementation of the policy, then the required three-month interval was inadequate and already a failure.
There should be measures taken to improve the progress of the system next year.

Raymond