There is no argument the use of technology is expanding. As its use grows, so does the gap or “divide” between active users and non- actives users or the “haves” and “have nots (McConnaughey, Nila, & Sloan, 1995).” This “digital divide” is a significant issue making technology an exogenous variable dividing people in the United States and around the world. Issues related to digital divide have been at the forefront of K-12 and higher education since the late 1960s (Kuttan & Peters, 2003; Wiburg & Butler, 2003). This topic is so heavily discussed it is difficult to research all of the relevant information. In fact, a Google search on the term “digital divide” yields about 212,000,000 results for me. With this in mind, this discussion will briefly address the problems and attempt to narrow the focus down to some of the possible local solutions for our children. After all, the problem is not as important as the solution.
The term “digital inequality” is a more comprehensive term than “digital divide” to describe the current technology disparity in society. The concept of digital divide is outdated because it defines access singularly in terms of availability of technology rather than including other important aspects of inequality. According to Barzilai-Nahon (2006), digital inequality is comprised of six factors:
- Infrastructure Access
- Affordability
- Use
- Socio-Demographic Factors
- Social and Governmental support and constraints
- Accessibility
With these six factors in mind, low-income children are highly vulnerable in terms of digital inequality (Cooper, 2004). Middle to upper- class children have an advantage since most of them have home computers with internet access. In fact, half of children coming from homes with an annual income of or $75,000 or above own computers. Only 15% of households between $20,000 and $25,000 have computers (Celano &Neuman, 2010).
Local progress toward resolving digital inequality can be made. Our schools and community must first be better equipped. This means there needs to be more computers and other technology available for our children.
Our schools and after school programs must have adequate facilities to accommodate the population of children in the area. The computer hardware needs to be progressively updated and the software needs to be current. High-speed internet access should be made available at all locations by improving our digital infrastructure.
Teachers must also develop their technological competency. Many teachers may have limited computer knowledge and skills. In addition to the amount of time they spend using computers by using email, creating instructional material, and keeping student records, teachers should be investing more time collaborating with colleagues and developing social networks. Building communities of practice is crucial to instituting innovative teaching strategies using technology. Teachers cannot sit stagnant and let technology pass them by. In turn they can pass that motivation on to their students by focusing less on basic computer skills and activities and more on strategic way to use computers. They can create more complex in-school assignments and encourage students to use computers more effectively. In addition, teachers need to be aware of the diversity in the classroom and apply more attention toward the most challenged students(Celano &Neuman, 2010).
Parents must encourage their children to actively use technology to learn and communicate. More importantly, children need to see their parents take an interested role in their learning. Parents should spend time discussing how technology affects news and world events with their children. They should maintain contact with their children’s teachers and mutually agree on digital literacy goals. Families should invest in learning about technology together by using the computer resources available to them.
Their also needs to be more collaboration between schools, public libraries, and after school programs. Community organizations, recreation centers, public agencies, and parent groups must band together to avoid letting children fall through the cracks. The more exposure and access children have to technology, the more prevalent it will be in their minds.
These ideas are pretty lofty considering the current economy. All of these solutions cost time and money driving up the cost of access. Several attempts at funding and facilitating have been made. Former president Bill Clinton proposed a $2.1 billion tax incentive for business to donate computers and related services to low in-income schools and communities. In 2000 the U.S. Senate considered a Digital Empowerment act proposed to double funding for school technology (Attewell, 2001). Recently, President Obama promised to make high-speed wireless internet access available to 98% of Americans (Obama, 2011). Unfortunately, government decisions are frequently well received, but often poorly planned and executed. While government support is hopeful, the past has proven this implementation unlikely. It is clear the realization of a solution must from a collaboration of both government and social support.
Resources
Attewell, P, (2001). The First and Second Digital Divides. Sociology of Education, Vol. 74 252-259 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/pss/2673277
Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2006). Gaps and bits: Conceptualizing measurements for digital divide/s. The Information Society, 22(5), 269-278. (PDF file)
Celano, D. & Neuman S. (2010). Roadblocks on the Information Highway The digital divide still looms large for low-income children. Educational Leadership. Retrieved from
http://www.educationalleadership-digital.com/educationalleadership/201011/?pg=52#pg52
Computer and Internet Use by Students in 2003. (2006). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006065
Cooper, M. (2004). Expanding the digital divide and falling behind in broadband. Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union. Retrieved from http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/digitaldivide.pdf
Kuttan, A., & Peters, L. (2003). From digital divide to digital opportunity. Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press, Inc. (PDF file)
McConnaughey, J., Nila, C. A., & Sloan, T. (1995). Falling through the net: A survey of the “have nots” in rural and urban America. National Telecommunications And Information Administration. Retrieved from http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fallingthru.html
Obama Promised Broadband Expansion, But What’s The Plan? (2011) Retrieved February 2, 2011, from http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/obama-promised-broadband-expansion-but-whats-the-plan.php
Dr. Matt Goff: e-Portfolio 