Fall, 2001
The Digital Divide and Educational Reform: Transforming the Model
Kathleen Hogan Jones
The flood of changes that have been ushered in by developments and advances in digital telecommunication technology is occurring with speed that makes those who are technologically “plugged-in” giddy. We are in the future. Yet we are cautioned to go forward with our minds open and our senses alert. How can caution be observed when changes seem to occur with astronomical speed and abundance? Can we affect the direction these changes take us and do we want to? I believe we can and should.
The freight train of technology is unstoppable. Our task as a society which enjoys the luxury of having the highest percentage of people with access to on-line technology in the world (BBC, 1999), is to intentionally direct the freight train in what we thoughtfully regard as useful, productive, and desirable directions. There are many agendas - social, political, and economic - which suggest the “right” direction technological development, usage, and advances should go. Regardless of which agenda(s) our society may favor, one inescapable reality that must be addressed is the phenomenon known as the digital divide.
The digital divide refers to the gap between those who have access to technology and those who do not. This gap may result from socio-economic status, geographical location, ethnicity, or cultural identity. Another way to look at this phenomenon is the fact that greater income and higher education lead to increased access to technology. This disparity translates into social and economic splits between the “haves” and the “have nots”, nationally and internationally (Yoder, 2001). Some of the things which those without access to technology will be denied are technology-related job skills, sources of information, and educational opportunities. More and more jobs at all levels require knowledge and use of technology. The list of these skills is staggering and growing. Within the last five years a spectrum of jobs related to developing and maintaining web sites for businesses have been created which previously did not even exist (SCANS, 2000). The universe of information available through the world wide web community puts incredible power of choice in the hands of the technologically literate and leaves the technologically disadvantaged powerless by contrast. Economic choices and markets, data that enables individuals to find answers to and solve problems, and worldwide communication networks for gathering and spreading information are some tools that greatly empower people who have access to technology. Educational opportunities made possible through the use of technology include greater information resources, distance learning, increased speed of sharing and retrieving information, and developing basic skills in the use of technology. A closer look at the impact technology is having on education reveals a much more fundamental influence. This influence on education would put those without benefit of access to technology at a greater disadvantage than any other element denied them because of the digital divide.
Throughout the history of public education many reforms aimed at saving, improving, correcting, or embellishing the business of teaching and learning have come and gone with only a few exceptions (Ellis and Fouts, 1997, 173-191). The lack of lasting reform in education is due in part to the fact that effectiveness is dependent on so many variables - who is implementing the new methods, what population is being served, how carefully is the prescription being followed, the variety of characteristics possessed by individual learners, to mention a few. Educators are now in a position to see a wave of educational reform whose impact is unavoidable and far-reaching. The cause of this reform will effectively alter the face of education because it is simultaneously altering the face of people’s daily lives with real impact. Digital technology does not represent a potential for true educational reform but, rather, the vehicle that will make this reform a certainty.
Education is affected by the veil of technology as it is draped over the existing methods and infrastructure characteristic of our educational system. Maintaining data bases, e-mail messaging, record-keeping, transmitting documents, and many other details necessary to run a school system are done increasingly more efficiently. But more substantial changes in education are inevitable. Even if the use of digital technology was just another tool or gimmick for educators to use if they wish, for learners to access if they can, and for people to try or not, its educational usefulness has already been demonstrated. There exists a large body of research which points to the inescapable fact that a wide variety of technology applications for instruction produce measurable results (Riley, Holleman, and Roberts, 2001, 21-23).
The revolution in telecommunications technology translates into a powerful instructional tool that will force teachers to drastically alter their pedagogy. For example, digital content will change the role penmanship plays in developing basic skills for early learners. The world-wide web offers immense resources for information which will require educating students on how to discern reliable sources of information from less reliable ones. Students have more ready access to their progress in classes due to spreadsheet technology. The method of delivery for instruction may change from one-to-dozens to one-to-hundreds or -thousands. These are some of the more rudimentary changes resulting from the use of technology in the classroom. Unleashed creativity and imagination, new perspectives from which to view traditional concepts or to develop new ones, new definitions for the role of “teacher” in the formal educational experiences of learners are just a few broad changes that characterize technologically inspired education. Time and space limitations are removed for educators who wish to exchange information, ideas, questions, and answers (STaR, 2000a, 8-10). This exchange can occur instantaneously between learners, between learners and their teachers, or among networks of both. International connectivity means virtually limitless exposure to information and ideas, not to mention cultures. The power of the Internet increases exponentially with each new person who is “hooked up” (BBC, 1999). The interactive possibilities with on-line technology force teachers to assume new roles - facilitators of learning, managers of information, designers of experiences. Assessments of students can be more dynamic by evaluating the processes used in learning, not just the outcomes. Teachers can truly tailor the educational experience to the needs of the individuals. All these pursuits have been touted as worthwhile for educators to attempt before, but now they will be much more manageable, possible, and probably unavoidable as technology invades the space of the classroom.
Research will no doubt reveal new insights into the brain’s capability to generate new ideas, understand relationships, solve problems, communicate effectively and a whole array of mental gymnastics due to the speed and volume enabled by the use of on-line technology. New technologies reveal frontiers of understanding how the brain functions in learning and the variety of neural dynamics that distinguish one individual from another. Visual design considerations involved with digital content and imagery provide a new way of transmitting information: communications through iconography; artistic creativity in visual, musical, and performance art; and system designs that address interactivity with all our senses. Text-based media will no longer dominate the realm of education thus allowing the business of teaching and learning to shift from content acquisition to mastery of learning (Rose and Meyer, 2000).
Effective reform in instructional techniques using digital content may spring from unlikely places. Social agendas which are commonly addressed through the institution of public school can be served in new and innovative ways. The issue of resegregation, a concern of many educators regarding equitable educational opportunities for minorities, is being addressed by a project known as the Cyberspace Regionalization Project (Becker, 1999). This project, initiated in 1999 for students in two New Jersey high schools, is designed to create interracial contact between and among students who attend “resegregated” schools. Teachers supervise students as they conduct video tele-conferences to work on projects in language arts, science, and reading. The Cyberspace Regionalization Project lets students regain racial and cultural contact with the inherent benefits unavailable before the desegregation initiatives of the 50’s and 60’s. Using technology to serve disabled learners may be the catalyst for a variety of completely new approaches to gaining knowledge for all learners. Examples of how technology will allow for unique means of educating students include utilizing the capacity for transforming one digital medium to another (text-to-speech, image-to-touch, text-to- touch (Braille), speech-to-text), using varied representations of meaning redundantly for clarity, and providing multiple representations for greater meaning (text on video, video on text, multiple sound and visual tracts, graphics on video, etc.) (Rose and Meyer, 2000).
The capabilities made possible by digital technology will surely mean major changes in education and great improvements will result as well. The concern which remains is whether or not all these benefits will be appreciated by all students equitably. The digital divide poses the threat to the likelihood that all learners will benefit equally from these educational reforms. In 1994 the White House challenged the nation’s schools to connect to the Internet by the year 2000 (NCES, 2000, 1). A variety of initiatives by both the federal government, private sector businesses, and local school districts provide opportunities for schools to reach this goal. The School and Libraries Universal Service Program, known as the E-Rate , is one of the biggest federal programs providing funding to schools in the form of discounts from the telecommunications industry. The majority of funds provided through the E-Rate program has gone to high-poverty school districts. In the arena of preparing teachers to implement technology in the classroom the Berkeley United School District has developed the Teacher Led Technology Challenge (TLTC) using funds from a Technology Innovation Challenge grant. TLTC supports a process that allows teachers within a building to act as peer coaches in areas of curriculum integration and technical expertise for the use of digital content in the classroom. In addition, states and school districts can tap into the federally funded Technology Literacy Challenge Fund to increase technology opportunities for students (Riley, Holleman, and Roberts, 2001, 14-15).
Since the federal government’s challenge in 1994 the number of schools connected to the Internet has increased from 35 percent to 95 percent. The National Center for Educational Statistics found that the ratio of students to computers with Internet connectivity was reduced from 12 to roughly 9 where 4-5 students per computer is considered an acceptable level for effective computer use (NCES, 2000, 1-2). The increase in the number of schools and classrooms connected to the Internet in the last decade is very encouraging. The sharp reduction in the number of students per computer with Internet connectivity within schools is truly cause for optimism. The aggressive approach of both the government and corporate sponsors to facilitate access to technology in education has been obviously well received. Unfortunately, all these glowing reports may have the effect of obscuring the reality that work to eliminate the digital divide in education is not finished.
In 1994 schools serving high percentages of students of lower income families, elementary schools, and urban schools were less likely to have Internet access than s chools serving middle to high income families, secondary schools, and suburban schools. Since then this disparity has all but disappeared. However, an examination of the statistics reveals that disparities still exist for classrooms regarding Internet connectivity. Since 1994 schools with high percentages of low income students gained in classroom Internet connectivity by 37 percent while the increase in classroom Internet connectivity for schools that have low percentages of low income students gained by 70 percent. Looking at this ratio in the nation’s schools reveals that certain kinds of schools still lag behind their counterparts. Medium- to large-size schools, urban schools, and schools with the highest concentrations of poverty all had a higher ratio of students per computer with Internet access. An additional complication to this disparity is the fact that family income is inversely related to the likelihood that a child will have access to a computer at home and access to the Internet at home (Riley, Holleman, and Roberts, 2001, 19). Ninety-four percent of families whose income is $75,00 or more have computers at home while only 31 percent of families whose incomes are less that $20,000 have computers. A comparison of the same income groups show that 85 percent of high income families have Internet access compared to only 18 percent for low income families .
The fact that both low-income families and the schools that serve those families are more likely to lack basic access to digital technology, particularly the Internet, raises a fundamental question: Does lack of access to technology at home make any difference in the education of students who do have access to computers with Internet connectivity at school? Some research suggests that students who have no access to digital technology at home perform poorly compared to those who do even when their schools provide digital technology (Riley, Holleman, and Roberts, 2001, 23). From a common sense standpoint, students who do not have access to technology in the home will be at a distinct disadvantage over those who do. On-line technology is the cornerstone of the significance of digital technology in education reform. One of the visions of future use of technology involves digital communications between learning centers and homes, precluding the need for students to attend a school on a traditional school-day schedule. At present the scope of education in this country does not include providing learning resources for families to use at home that are as costly as computers and a subscription to an Internet Service Provider.
As educators we embrace the notion, as most citizens do, that a high quality education is key to each child reaching personal potential and to providing an effective electorate that values life-long learning for the cumulative benefit of all. To hold this ideal up we must focus on the impact the digital divide has on education. The question which must be addressed and to which answers must be found is “How can we provide equitable benefits to all learners as part of the inevitable education reform resulting from the communications revolution made possible by digital technology?”. Remedies for the digital divide’s impact on education should involve addressing the issue both in schools and outside of schools. A good starting place is with educators themselves. States and local school districts can promote technological literacy by providing training resources to personnel in schools. Policies should require personnel to be both technologically literate and informed of issues related to technology in education. Educating educators should involve examining the problem of the digital divide in general and issues of particular relevance to the school or school district.
If a poor school is scrambling to solve problems of resource allocation such as buying enough textbooks, maintaining the building facilities, and providing adequate staffing for the student population, training teachers to use technology and purchasing the necessary hardware will not be a priority or even on the “to do” list. The irony of this kind of situation is that, while the pressing problems of today demand attention, failure to become technologically up-to-date will effectively put these schools farther behind other schools than they currently are. Sometimes the remedy is an “all or nothing” proposition. If all the resources in the form of personnel, software, hardware, and Internet connection cannot be funded, any fraction of this amount may not be of much use at all.
Schools that are faced with what seem to be insurmountable fiscal problems should receive the greatest support from the school district and the state for digital technology. This support should come in the form of resources specified to upgrade the technological literacy of the staff and the technology available to students. Initially these schools may find it painful to see so much money being spent on anything other than the problems associated with the status quo. Fortunately, the more fully a school in integrated with current technology many of these problems can be solved. Office personnel will enjoy greater efficiency. Teachers will need less time to keep records. Most importantly, students who receive more instruction through applications of digital technology will begin to experience the inherent educational benefits.
Federal and state governments as well as corporate interests(STaR, 2000b) aggressively, purposefully provide an array of technology upgrade opportunities to schools. However, most of these initiatives are designed to respond to invitations by school districts and schools in the form of grant applications. School personnel preoccupied with a deluge of daily problems are not likely to find time to apply for these kinds of resources. A deliberate effort by states and/or school districts can provide disproportionate funding to upgrade the educational digital technology status of schools identified as being the most needy.
Funds for digital technology provided to poor schools should be tied to standards (ISTE, 2001) and policy expectations to insure maximized benefits for students. Providing training and support is critical to implementing effective improvements in the use of digital on-line technology. To increase the likelihood that the governing standards and policies will be appreciated and adhered to by teachers, a peer-coaching situation is most desirable. The need for leadership to come from within a community is greatest where there is skepticism on the part of both the community and teachers about the need for digital on-line content in the classroom (Twist, 2001). The program started in the Berkeley School District (TLTC) is a successful initiative that promotes technological literacy for teachers and ultimately their students through use of existing expertise in staff that serve as peer coaches (Riley, Holleman, and Roberts, 2001, 14).
Allowing students to readily access on-line digital technology outside school is an important element in solving the problems created by the digital divide. The E-Rate program is one source of funding for libraries and community centers to reduce the expense of Internet connections. One limitation of this valuable resource is that it only provides funds for equipment and the cost of connecting to the Internet. School districts and state departments of education must assume a leadership role in making technology available to students outside the ordinary school day. Analyzing where the need is greatest within a school district gives a clearer picture of what resources are most needed and where they might be of greatest benefit. Providing citizen-forums to inform and motivate members of the community about the usefulness and need of digital technology outside schools. If more people who are made aware of the importance of digital content in effective education for now and in the future, the chances are greater that ideas, actions, and solutions for closing the gap of the digital divide within communities will result.
Partnerships in applying for grants, and in providing space, hardware, software, and support personnel should be established among school districts and local community centers and libraries (Chow, 1998). There is a plethora of corporate and government initiatives to tap into in order to fund these efforts. Philanthropic support should be solicited to provide additional revenue to provide educational technology services. Schools and school districts can make available the technology resources within the schools to the community at large at times when school is not in session. When individual schools and school districts start to think beyond the walls of the schools to imagine how the community can serve and be served by education, the problems associated with the digital divide will begin to be solved.
References
BBC (1999, January). Information Rich, Information Poor: Bridging the Digital Divide. BBC Online Network[Online]. Available:
Becker, J. (1999). The Cyberspace Regionalization Project: Simultaneousley Bridging the Digital and Racial Divide. The Secretary's Conference on Educational Technology, 2 White paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. [Online]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/Technology/TechConf/1999/whitepapers/paper7.html [2001, February 27].
Chow, C., Ellis, J., Mark,J. and Wise, B. (1998). Constructivism: Impact of CTCNet Affiliates: Findings from a National Survey of Users of Community Technology Centers. Newton, MS: Education Development Centers. [Online]. Available: http://www.ctcnet.org/impact98.htm [2001 April, 1].
Ellis, A., and Fouts, J. (1997). Coopertative Learning. Research on Educational Innovations. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, Inc., 165/174
ISTE (2001) (1994). National Educational TEchnology Standards. International Society for Technology Education [Online]. Available: http://cnets.iste.org/index.html [2001, April 1].
NCES (2000, February). (No Date). Internet Accesss in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms 1994-1999.
Riley, R., Holleman III, F., and Roberts, L. (2001, January). E-Learning: Putting a world-class Education at the Fingertips of all Children. U.S. Department of Education, The National Educational Technology Plan, 13-23. Educational Technology[Online]. Available:
Rose, D. and Meyer, A. (2000). Objectivism versus constructivism: The Future is in the Margins: The role of Technology and Disability in Educational Reform. Forum on Technology in Education: Envisioning the Future. White paper prepared for the U.S. Depsrtment of Education, Office of Educational Technology. Journal of Education Research, 39(3), [Online]. Available: http://www.air.org/forum/ABRose_Meyer.htm [2001, March 18].
SCANS (2000). Learning a Living: A Blueprint for High Performance A Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necressary Skills (SCANS) Report for America.
STaR (2000a, June). Power of Digital Learning: Integrating Digital Content. The CEO School Technology Readiness Report-Yrear 3. The CEO Forum on Education and Technology, 6-11 [Online]. Available: http://ceoforum.org/reports.dvm?RID+4 [2001, March 14].
STaR (2000b, June). Power of Digital Learning: Integrating Digital Content. The CEO School Technology Readiness Report-Yrear 3. The CEO Forum on Education and Technology, 30 [Online]. Available: http://ceoforum.org/reports.dvm?RID+4 [2001, March 14].
Twist, K (2001). The digital Divide in Indian Country, One World US Specisl Report, Washington, D.D., Benton Foundation, One World US. [Online]. Available: http://www.benton.org/OneWorldUS/OWUS020601.html [2001, March 13].
Yoder, Maureen Brown (2001, February). TThe digital divide. Learning and Leading with Technology, 28 (6) [Online]. Available: http://www.iste.org/L/archive/vol28/no5/featuredarticle/yoder/index.html [2001, March 2].
