distributed learning environments and the multifaceted digital divide
Post on 10-Apr-2018
220 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
1/9
1
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
Amber Bryant
Northern Arizona University
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
2/9
2
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
Introduction
When the term digital divide first emerged, it mainly focused on computers and
related technologies. The concern revolved around those who had access to all the
advantages of a computer, and those who could not. With many education facilities
offering learning opportunities outside the classroom through distributed learning
environments, the digital divide has thoroughly manifested itself in the educational
setting. This paper seeks to explore the diversity within the diversity within the digital
divide, the implications for distributed learning, and the possible solutions for bridging
the gap.
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
3/9
3
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
Part II - The Issue
One of Americas leading issues in economic and civil rights is the digital divide.
This issue in equality is also a major international concern. In the early 1990s, the
digital divide was defined as a gap between those who have access to new
technologies and those who do not (Lynch, 2002). Although additional explorations into
the subject of the digital divide, show that it is multi-faceted and not just a clear single
gap with two groups divided equally. The digital divide is fueled by ethnic, geographic,
societal,and economic factors (Compaine, 2001).
Over the past decade overall access to technologies has increased greatly. This
is in large part due to the lowering cost of software and hardware, combined with
initiatives by many agencies to create community access points, and several federally
funded programs such as the E-Rate, or telecommunications discounts to schools and
libraries, the Technology Opportunities Program (TOP) and the Community Technology
Centers Program (CTC) (Dickard & Schneider, 2002). However, the divide between
certain groups still exists and in some cases is widening. Researchers with the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (1999) delved further into the issue
of the digital divide seeking to further define the divide. They have categorized the
digital divide by the following groups: Income, Race/ Origin, Education, Household
Type, Age and Employment. In the book The Digital Divide: Facing a Crisis or a Myth?,
Compaigne illustrates the divide in these groups by highlighting some of the research
findings of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
conducted in the reports, Falling Through the Net. Compaigne (2001, p.18) notes:
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
4/9
4
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
y Those with a college degree are eight times as likely tohave a computer at home and nearly sixteen times aslikely to have home Internet access as those with anelementary-school education.
y A high-income household in an urban area is twentytimes as likely as a rural, low-income household to haveInternet access.
y A child in a low-income White family is three times aslikely to have Internet access as a child in a comparableBlack family, and four times as likely to have access aschildren in a comparable Hispanic family.
y A wealthy child of Asian/Pacific Islander descent is nearlythirteen times as likely to own a computer as a poorBlack household, and nearly thirty-four times as likely tohave Internet access.
y Finally, a child in a dual-parent White household is nearlytwice as likely to have Internet access as a child in asingle-parent White household, while a child in a dual-parent Black household is almost four times as likely tohave access as a child in a single-parent Blackhousehold.
While these highlights primarily focus on having or not having Internet access
based on economic, ethnicity, education and type of household, the digital divide
includes more than just access to the Internet. Disadvantages can also be defined in
terms of lower performance software/ hardware, lower quality or high price connections,
difficulty in obtaining technical assistance, and lower access to subscription based tools
(Dimitrov, 2010).
Part III Discussion
Bridging the digital divide is the topic of many educational institutions. Access to
digital technology is a valuable dimension of the education system and the learners
educational benefits. The equal distribution of access to learning in a technology-
mediated environment can impact the individuals learning outcomes (Natriello, 2001).
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
5/9
5
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
Distributed learning environments are particularly susceptible to the effects of learning
outcomes with regards to the digital divide.
Many distributed learning environments require a variety of hardware and
software components to fully utilize the learning environments. Hardware required by
distributed learning might include computers, servers, modems, networking devices,
printer, scanners, and storage devices. Software components of distributed learning
might include word processor, e-mail packages, presentation program, spreadsheet,
database, authoring tools, plug-ins, and browsers (Huda Khan, 2001). Access to these
components alone can impact the student. Broadband connection, high-resolution
screens, and other course producers expectations may be difficult to achieve in many
homes. Creating distributed learning environments that utilize open-source tools online
and creating community centers with free computer and Internet access can lessened
the gap. The Web by its very nature is an excellent tool for many instructors to offer
distributed learning. It allows for non-centralized access to information without regard to
time or place.
The growing mobile technology is also helping to solve the digital divide. With the
newest and latest netbooks, wifi, and mobile phones, distributed learning is affordable
and accessible in many communities. Mobile media is considered to less expensive and
more accessible than traditional technology tools. The PEW Internet & American Life
Project (Horrigan, 2009) found that from 2006 to 2007 mobile technology had
significantly increased internet access and usage. They also reported that African
American users were the fastest growing group to adopt mobile Internet use. Previous
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
6/9
6
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
reports conducted by the NTIA (1999) had shown that African American households
had lower accessibility to the Internet than did White households of the same economic
status.
Although there has been an increase in access to mobile tools due to
affordability, in many areas access to the internet is still not possible. Satellite
companies offering Internet access are now gaining in popularity for rural areas that
have not previously had any access to the Internet (Poku & Vlotsky, 2002). With more
areas being able to access the Internet, distributed learning can truly be offered
regardless of location.
Another solution in bridging the digital divide in a distributed learning environment
is gaining access to academic journals. Movements to promote open access allow
greater opportunities for those who do not have access to subscription only sites to
research academic journals and literature are gaining momentum (Musakali, 2010).
Simply providing the technology tools does not ensure bridging the digital divide.
Swain and Pearson (2001) note that access and equity do not mean the same. In
bridging the digital divide we are concerned about equitable access. To reflect the
difference, the authors relate the following analogy. I take all of my students to a
swimming pool and have them jump into the pool. At that time, there is equal access to
the pool, but is the situation equitable? No. Unless all children can swimand swim
equally competentlythis is not an equitable situation. In the same way, putting
computers in the classroom does not automatically decrease the gap between haves
and have nots (Swain & Pearson, 2001, p.12). Teachers need to create learning
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
7/9
7
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
environments that establish the creative use of technology as a skill that assists all
students in developing their full potential. Teachers should create distributed learning
environments that are based on pedagogical methods and reflect upon the meaningful
use of technology in the learning environment. Students should learn to use technology
tools for productivity as well as for learning, research, networking, collaboration, and
problem solving.
Many issues have arisen in within the digital divide and providing distributed
learning environment across economic, geographical, ethnic and societal backgrounds.
Suggested solutions range from providing access to hardware and software to creating
environments that encourage using information and communication tools to enhance
higher order thinking skills and promote lifelong learners. However, researchers make
observations that the digital divide may not be decreasing, but rather the dimensions
may be changing. The continuous expansion of Internet access, along with continuing
societal change, requires that we move beyond the view of the digital divide solely being
defined in a two dimensional way of the haves and have nots. Explanation of
documentation of the continuing divide is needed if we are to document and explain
future digital inequality as access to technology is more readily available and Internet
penetration continues to increase (DiMaggio & Hargittai, 2001).
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
8/9
8
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
References
Compaine, B. (2001). The digital divide: facing a crisis or creating a myth? Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Dickard, N. & Schneider, D. (2002, July 1). The digital divide: Where we are. Edutopia,
Retrieved February 20, 2010, from http://www.edutopia.org/digital-divide-where-
we-are-todayDiMaggio, P. & Hargittai, E. (2001). From the Digital Divide to Digital Inequality:
Studying Internet Use as Penetration Increases. Working Paper #15. Princeton:Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, Princeton University. Retrieved
February 20, 2010, from http://www.princeton.edu/~artspol/workpap/WP15%20-
%20DiMaggio%2BHargittai.pdf
Dimitrov, I. (2010). Digital divide. Taking IT Global. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from
http://issues.tigweb.org/digitaldivide
Horrigan, J. 2009. Wireless Internet Use. Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Retrieved February 20, 2010, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/12-
Wireless-Internet-Use.aspx
Khan, B. (2001). Web-based training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Eudcational Technology
Publications, Inc.
Lynch, B. (October 2002). The digital divide or the digital connection: A U.S.
perspective. First Monday, 7(10). Retrieved February 20, 2010, from
http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_10/lynch/index.html
Musakali, J. (2010, January 6). Bridging the digital divide through open access. Science
-
8/8/2019 Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide
9/9
9
Running Header: Distributed Learning and the Digital Divide
and Development Network, Retrieved February 20, 2010, from
http://www.scidev.net/en/opinions/bridging-the-digital-divide-through-open-
access.html
National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (1999). Falling through
the net: Defining the digital divide. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn99/contents.html
Natriello, G. (2001, July). Bridging the second digital divide: What can sociologists of
education contribute? Sociology of Education, 74(3), 260-265. Retrieved
February 27, 2010, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2673278
Poku, K. & Vlotsky, R. (2002, January 4). Bridging the rural/urban digital divide.
Louisiana State University Agricultural Center.Retrieved February 20, 2010, fromhttp://www.lfpdc.lsu.edu/publications/working_papers/wp53.pdf
Swain, C. & Pearson, T. (2001, May). Bridging the digital divide: A building block for
teachers. Learning & Leading with Technology, Retrieved February 21, 2010,from http://people.virginia.edu/~har4y/edlf345/elementary/files/digital_divide.pdf
Delicious Bookmark
http://delicious.com/AmberBryant/ETC677+Diversity+Assignment+Spring+2010
top related