I currently (fall 2016) teach at a Title 1 elementary school chock full of fascinating, talented, passionate, intriguing students. The families and the school are under-resourced. Below is a paper composed in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Masters in Education (Educational Technology) at Oklahoma State University. Of particular value, I believe, are the suggestions for improving community and family involvement in the spirit of overcoming an economically imposed digital divide. References are included following the paper, and are well worthy of further investigation. Formatting of the references didn't transfer well, please contact me and I will share them with you in a more easily portable format. Kathy Essmiller EDTC 5103 Dr. Tutaleni Asino Fall 2016 Considering the Digital Divide While information and communication technologies (ICT) have been suggested as a means through which education inequities might be eliminated or reduced, the impact of the integration of such technologies on student groups traditionally considered marginalized has not been fully investigated (Gherardi, 2016). Disparate access to ICT resources may result in an increasing gap among individuals, as well as between groups and even nations (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015). Broadbent (Broadbent & Papadopoulos, 2013) describes this digital divide as potentially limiting prospects which may be anticipated within education and employment spheres, with possible negative consequences on economic potential. Further challenges are imposed through disconnect as the ICT world is experienced by some but not others (Broadbent & Papadopoulos, 2013). Ritzhaupt (Ritzhaupt, Liu, Dawson, & Barron, 2013) analyzed the question of the digital divide in a study focused on Florida schools. Students were separated into several categories, including socio-economic status, race (white and non-white), and gender. Findings indicated the digital divide in Florida schools to be a reality, with white females with higher socio-economic status documented as experiencing it the least. Further expounding upon socio-economic concerns fueling the digital divide, Dolan (Dolan, 2016) presented for consideration the level of at-home access to ICT available to students, in addition to the resources available while at school. An exploration into student interaction with emerging mobile technology revealed aspects of the digital divide on an individual level (Asino, 2011). Students were introduced to a newly released mobile device; those unaccustomed to the devices were fearful and hesitant to tinker with the devices when given the opportunity (Asino, 2011), expressing particular misgiving concerning their families’ financial ability to replace damaged devices. Dr. Asino found, when presented with the possibility of using the mobile devices, that students communicated challenges to their use in regards to the availability of electricity, internet access, and how the devices might be powered (Asino, 2011). The dynamics behind unequal access feeding the digital divide are complex (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015). The elucidation of challenges into specific categories may aid in development of potential solutions (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015). Populations differ in levels of motivation (desire to use ICT), access to needed resources, skills acquired, use, and context (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015). As these challenges perpetuate unaddressed, the issues become multi-generational (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015). Consideration may be given as to how best to design and integrate educational technology to minimize the digital divide (Asino, 2011). Peters (Peters, Winschiers-Theophilus, & Mennecke, 2013) advocates for local solutions, inviting designs by users for their particular situation. The involvement of students in design can increase effectiveness of the proposed solutions (Druin, 2002). Some teachers frequently feed off student excitement regarding ICT, supervisors may see ICT administrative benefits, and some educators may see ICT and associated devices as a distraction (Asino, 2011). Student involvement may reduce some of the disparity in perception, as well as express a different estimation of needs, presenting aspects which might be otherwise unconsidered (Asino, 2011). Mobile devices may be considered for incorporation as a cost-effective bridge of the digital divide (Dolan, 2016), although some express concern regarding a broadening gap in mobile technology (Zhang, Trussell, Tillman, & An, 2015). When considering solutions, maximization of useful internet access should be addressed (Asino, 2011). Apps requiring little to no use of internet following install may be of particular appeal (Asino, 2011). Ghobaldi (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015), having categorized specific challenges feeding the digital divide, has enumerated associated suggestions for its alleviation. Training parents in the use of ICT resources and increasing the visibility of ICT incorporation into administrative and educational activities may enhance motivation and drive improved household skill (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015). Differences relating to socio-economic status may be reduced through improved school computer access and the removal of the burden for computer purchase and acquisition of home internet access for low income families (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015). The digital divide appears to be a reality, not only as relates to socio-economic status, but as relates to gender and race as well (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015; Ritzhaupt et al., 2013). Aspects of the digital divide can be discerned throughout the world (Bidwell & Winschiers-Theophilus, 2010). As members of a global community (Cullen, 2001), it benefits us to identify and collaborate to articulate solutions. References Asino, T. (2011). No electricity? No problem! How about some petrol iPad? TechTrends, 55(1), 18-19. doi:10.1007/s11528-011-0462-3 Bidwell, N. J., & Winschiers-Theophilus, H. (2010). UNDER DEVELOPMENT: Beyond the Benjamins: toward an African interaction design. interactions, 17(1), 32-35. doi:10.1145/1649475.1649483 Broadbent, R., & Papadopoulos, T. (2013). Bridging the digital divide – an Australian story. Behaviour & Information Technology, 32(1), 4-13. doi:10.1080/0144929X.2011.572186 Cullen, R. (2001). Addressing the digital divide. Online Information Review, 25(5), 311-320. doi:doi:10.1108/14684520110410517 Dolan, J. E. (2016). Splicing the Divide: A Review of Research on the Evolving Digital Divide Among K–12 Students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(1), 16-37. doi:10.1080/15391523.2015.1103147 Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour and information technology, 21(1), 1-25. Gherardi, S. A. (2016). Unfinished Bridges over the Digital Divide: A Case Study in Technology and Inclusive Education. Ghobadi, S., & Ghobadi, Z. (2015). How access gaps interact and shape digital divide: a cognitive investigation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(4), 330-340. doi:10.1080/0144929X.2013.833650 Peters, A., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., & Mennecke, B. (2013). Bridging the digital divide through facebook friendships: a cross-cultural study. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work companion, San Antonio, Texas, USA. Ritzhaupt, A. D., Liu, F., Dawson, K., & Barron, A. E. (2013). Differences in Student Information and Communication Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(4), 291-307. doi:10.1080/15391523.2013.10782607 Zhang, M., Trussell, R. P., Tillman, D. A., & An, S. A. (2015). Tracking the Rise of Web Information Needs for Mobile Education and an Emerging Trend of Digital Divide. Computers in the Schools, 32(2), 83-104. doi:10.1080/07380569.2015.1030531
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
January 2018
Categories |