This assignment was a group project that required us to work collaboratively to solve a problem as explained below. We used Google Drive to create, chat and collaborate, it was a great opportunity to work online with a group all located in different locations. All in all I found it to be an interesting and enjoyable experience. The assignment is described below.
As a member of this Task Force to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, you are assigned the task of evaluating these alternatives, possibly suggesting other alternatives, and giving recommendations. She has asked your group to prepare a multimedia presentation that will be delivered to all the relevant stakeholders.
For this assignment, you will collaborate with your small group, using Google Presentation to address the following:
1. Discuss and compare digital divide and digital inequality;
2. List the seven options suggested by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction;
3. Describe any alternative(s) in addition to the seven you believe should be considered; and
4. Identify the strongest alternatives and the weakest alternatives and why you rate them as you do.
While the Internet may be seen as one of the most popular vehicles for the dissemination of information, it may also be viewed as one that is easily accessible to certain classes of people, as is out of reach for many, giving only limited access to some. Hence emerging from this predicament are two distinct variables: Digital Divide and Digital Inequality. However, before one can adequately discuss the topic Digital Divide versus Digital Inequality, he/she should be able to distinguish between the two variables.
As a group we came up with what we believed to be pros and cons of the options listed above. We felt there was no one simple solution to these problems. We felt there had to be an array of options that needed coordination and a focused approach. In the presentation shown below our group felt there was a distinct need to solve this problem because according to statistics provided by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the United States is ranked nineteenth in the world for providing internet services for its people. This position should be a message for the USA for them to re-group and re-tool in order to re-claim their rightful position in the technological global marketplace.
In 2004 the President made the forward thinking statement that that “Within the next five years, they’ll make it possible for businesses to deploy the next generation of high-speed wireless coverage to 98 percent of all Americans” After those years have passed and the goals have not been met I wonder, given the budgetary challenges faced by the United States, that this goal will not be met even after the President finishes his last term four years from now.
Some areas of the US have a distinct digital inequality as some students go home to their broadband high speed internet and other students go home to their slow dial- up connection. Though both have access to the internet, those with a faster connection will eventually get their work done more efficiently, for example a student accessing a school based web site to get updates and connect with other students and learners, while dial up users are unable to do much more than view web pages and have limited internet experience. Given the growing economic divergence in the US, where the middle class is disappearing we will continue to see that thisl trend will continue as only the surviving middle and upper classes will be able to afford broadband and if the marginalized of the society gets access, it is still going to be the ‘slow’ dial- up connection; as a result, digital inequality will still linger.
However there are glimmers of hope as one emerging trend that needs careful attention and consideration is the fast growing use of smart devises, phones and tablets to the classroom. Several school districts and States are now mandating that all students in school will be provided with a computer and have promised broadband network support.
I teach in Alberta Canada and our Province has made integration of technology in the classroom a major goal and has supported this goal with significant resources, time and effort. Our students continually rank in the top 5 in the world for math and science test score results and this will only increase as the technological integration continues. It seems like it’s a full on race as we try to stay competitive with the rest of the world that we are all connected and interconnected with.
References
Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2006). Gaps and bits: Conceptualizing measurements for digital divide/s. The Information Society, 22(5), 269-278. (PDF file)
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
DiMaggio, P., & Hargittai, E. (2001). From the ‘digital divide’ to ‘digital inequality: Studying Internet use as penetration increases. Princeton University Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, Working Paper Series number, 15. Retrieved from http://www.princeton.edu/~arts…gittai.pdf
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., & Shafer, S. (2004). From unequal access to differentiated use: A literature review and agenda for research on digital inequality. Social Inequality, 355-400. Retrieved from http://www.eszter.com/research…uality.pdf
Hargittai, E. (2003). The digital divide and what to do about it. New Economy Handbook, 821-839. Retrieved from http://www.eszter.com/research…divide.pdf
ITU Country rankings. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.itu.int/net/itunews/issues/2010/03/26.aspx
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
Cooper, M. (2004). Expanding the digital divide and falling behind in broadband. Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union, October. Retrieved from http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/digitaldivide.pdf.
DiMaggio, P., & Hargittai, E. (2001). From the ‘digital divide’ to ‘digital inequality’: Studying Internet use as penetration increases. Princeton University Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, Working Paper Series number, 15. Retrieved from http://www.princeton.edu/~artspol/workpap/WP15%20-%20DiMaggio+Hargittai.pdf.
DeBell, M. and Chapman, C. (2006). Computer and Internet Use by Students in 2003 (NCES 2006-065). US Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
AECT Standards
This assignment conforms to the following AECT Standards, through the use of collaborative and integrated media technologies (Google docs, Google presentation), discussion of real world policy and regulations in an attempt to utilize technology for the benefit of others, and effective management of available resources.
This project addressed the following AECT Standards:
2.4 Integrated Technologies
Working with a group with members spread out across North America, we were required to work with multiple technology tools and integrate them to complete a project.
3.2 Diffusion of Innovations
This standard was achieved through our work with new tools.
3.4 Policies and Regulations
We addressed a critical issue in the realm of technology education. We made recommendations on policy implementation based on our discussions. We didn’t always agree, but we created some meaningful conversation.
4.2 Resource Management
It took careful planning and resource management to collaborate across timezones, work, and personal obligations.
0.000000
0.000000