Download - Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide

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


2/9

2


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.


3/9

3


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:


4/9

4


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).


5/9

5


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


6/9

6


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


7/9

7


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).


8/9

8


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


9/9

9


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

Download - Distributed Learning Environments and the Multifaceted Digital Divide

Top Related