How wide does the digital divide need to be?
Thursday, December 9, 2010 at 05:25AM 
An expected response to my last post about putting student connectivity devices on the school supply list was "But what about the kids whose families can't afford them?"
It's an important question that I should have addressed in the earlier post. Some thoughts...
1. My specs for the devices were set deliberately modest. A netbook, a web-enabled cell phone or an old laptop - all available for under a couple hundred dollars would meet the requirements. (My inner conservative often asks if families who can afford cable television, cigarettes, and McDonalds may have a priority problem, not a cash flow problem.*)
2. Since MN's constitution requires that all its citizens get a free education, we do have to be careful about what is actually reqquired. I don't really know how school supply lists get past this constitutional mandate. I do know that the district helps families that qualify for free and reduced price meals with things like supplies, activity fees, etc. I'd think we could do this as well when it comes to these devices.
3. One excuse that has long troubled me for not integrating technology into the classroom has been "...but not all children have a computer at home and these children would be at a disadvantage if we required the use of technology on an assignment." So, shades of Harrison Bergeron, we don't have kids who DO have access use it either. I can understand this when 80%, 50%, or even 30% of kids don't have access to a resource, but the numbers around our community show that over 90% of our households have Internet access. Does every last kid have to have a computer before the gap is sufficiently narrow that we don't feel we are treating anyone unfairly? What about those families who are ideologically opposed to having home Internet access?
Ironically, a student owned communication may well serve students living in poverty even more than those who are more affluent. Let's not use the "some kids can't afford a device" as a reason for not pursuing getting them in all kids' hands. The digital divide should recognized as a problem to be solved; not as barrier to progress.
Oh, I took the photo above in Jerash, Jordan in 2008. This young man, who did not look in the least affluent, was showing me his cellphone that was capable of showing Chuck Norris martial arts movies he'd pulled from YouTube. Jordan's GDP is $5,100 per person; the U.S. is $46,000. Humans find ways to acquire the things they find important.
*Bill Storm addresses this issue far more intelligently and compassionately than I do:
For some families you might as well list "Escalade" for all the good it will do to simply add a digital device to the supply list. It's not just a matter of money, but of culture. While the cost of a good netbook can be less than that of a decent pair of basketball shoes, to shift family priorities such that it makes sense to supply their students with digital devices there needs to be a compelling argument for making that shift in the face of desperate financial constraints for many if not most American families right now. Broad community and media exposure for that vision, coupled with partnerships with local ISPs, and some sort of subsidy program would be very helpful. Even with that preparation, school districts will need to be prepared to supply some students with devices and school-based wireless connections. Promotions that promise student backpacks will no longer weigh 23 pounds thanks to digital books might be an effective start.
Reader Comments (8)
It seems to me, as a single parent who has frequently been poor, that saying you can shift priorities to technology reveals a misunderstanding of what poverty is like. True poverty isn't a choice between fancy shoes and netbooks; it's wondering how in heck you can afford the $40 cap and gown required for your kid to march at graduation, supplied by a company with a monopoly. During one of my poor phases, my daughter was given an assignment to provide 80 portions of a meal that represented her country, Brazil. We bought oranges and divided them into slices. Only an affluent teacher would give an assignment like that. When I complained, she said, "But we have funds available for families who can't afford it." It was useless to learn that after the event. Besides, even when you're poor, you know that there are others who are worse off than you are. If I had requested help, would I have been depriving someone else of help? At the moment, my family is on free lunches while I'm hunting for a better job. We already have the computers, and my part-time job requires me to keep high-speed internet access, but all of us need new shoes. So we chose technology, but not without sacrifices in other areas. Not that I'm into allowing excuses either. But if you choose how to spend your salary, should the poor not also have that choice?
Let's not forget the vast array of FREE technology resources available through our public libraries as well!
Hi Jude,
Ah, it has been awhile indeed since I could be classified as "poor" but I did work my way through college on minimum wage jobs (received about $76 per week take home) while supporting a stay-at-home wife and infant daughter while paying all my college expenses. No scholarships, no food stamps, no family assistance.
And I do know this. We bought milk (usually powdered) before we bought beer. We bought groceries before we bought movie tickets. And I would like to think today, good parents of any social stripe would make their children's access to good online learning opportunities a priority.
I recognize that that schools will need to step in and supply devices for children living in poverty - that's a given. But given the relatively affluence of the great majority of this country's families, this should not keep up from getting these devices into all children's hands.
Doug
Hi Cheri,
My sense is that libraries will play an important role in providing access to equipment that will do tasks that these personal device cannot. (And expertise.) But having to go to a public library (and I love them) instead of reading, gaming, researching etc. 24/7 from one's bedroom, easy chair or porch, is a sorry substitute. Promoting this as a solution to poverty seems a kind of discrimination in itself.
Doug
Yes, going to the library is definitely not as convenient, but I don’t think it’s discrimination to use that as a solution! Our taxes (and those of the people facing poverty) have paid for the library services, so I would think of it as taking advantage of what we’ve already paid for and using our money wisely. When we can borrow, trade, etc., why not? We don’t need to own everything!
There is a clear difference between children living in poverty and parents who make choices with discretionary money. The choice between food and shelter and a digital device is not a choice. That is why any discussion about these devices in schools must be accompanied by proactive steps to assure equity of access in hardware, support and connectivity.
However, 100 million American homes have flat screen televisions worth $500 or more. Two thirds of American homes have video game consoles. How many of the kids in those homes have a $200 personal digital device dedicated to their learning? I would guess that would be a smallish single digit percentage. That's the culture shift that leaders in digital learning need to lead by making it a desirable commodity. Flat screens and video game popularity have been created by the profit motive of those who created them, and that's the American Way. Personal digital devices for learning need a similar approach, with careful marketing and generation of buzz, except ours is a "learning motive" and "international competitive edge motive" driving this particular vision. For that reason, I unabashedly and happily support unholy alliances with the Google devil and suppliers of these devices to make digital connectivity and networking available for kids in schools. It's the only future that really works.
I believe public libraries can definitely factor into the equation of poverty versus the digital divide.
If one has limited income, it is completely rational that the choices made about spending that income are based on value judgments. Certainly there are some poor families might choose to sacrifice something such as new shoes in favor of acquiring Internet access, however, many might not. The shoes might very well be viewed as more valuable because the family might very well view outer appearance as being extremely important to the success of their children. Now, I am quite sure that many people reading this are likely scratching their heads at this statement. But, think about it. In our country, whether we like it or not, people DO make instant judgment calls based on outer appearances. If a person is dressed shabbily this can lead to a poor public image, even though this is completely unacceptable and completely wrong. Many people that are poor DO prioritize items, which to those that are not poor, may seem completely irrational, The poor are simply trying to conceal their economic circumstances in an attempt to create a more positive image when out in public. When one really stops to examine the choice of an economically disadvantaged person's decision to purchase fancy sneakers rather than a simple laptop, one must agree that it is not actually so irrational.
Another reason appearance often takes presence over technology has to do with how a family caught in generational poverty views success. It may very well be that those that have been poor for a very long time view their situation as a sort of "lot in life." Trying to hide one's poverty in public can therefore conceal one's supposed lot in life and lead to a better opportunity to improve one's lot in life. It is logical that those coming from generational poverty might believe this since the people in our society that are in the middle to upper classes tend model trendy clothes as well as other superficial items. So, not only do fancy sneakers help one to fit in, they might help one to assimilate themselves into a different economic situation.
So, then, if we cannot force economically challenged people to spend their money on technology and if these people also do not value the use of technology more highly than the exhibition of superficial possessions upon their person, then how do we help to fill in the cavern known as "the digital divide?" Public libraries are the answer. These institutions can offer the technological tools and access. They can offer staff to facilitate its use. They can design programming that will expose children from all economic lots to the unlimited potential technology has to offer. They can work with local schools to tailor their programming to the needs of the community's youth and to help promote this programming to the community's youth. This will begin to fill the gap.
Over time the value of technology and importance of valuing technological tools over other superficial, status type items will develop. Eventually economically challenged adults will see the value of these tools because they will witness positive changes in the lives of their children. Children may become more interested in learning and school. They may opt to stay in school and attend college. These children will become adults that will break out of the poverty cycle. Their value of education and technology will be changed, and their own children will have a strong chance of becoming members of an economically advantaged family. And finally, over time, the hope will be that the next generation will come to value education and technology enough to provide appropriate tools to their children.
It can happen. In life, we get what we expect. If we expect the digital divide to be insurmountable, it will be. If we intend to fill the divide, we must lead by example. We must first give all people access to these tools and assistance with these tools. We must be steadfast, patient and dedicated. The gap will not disappear over night, but over time, with knowledgeable and equipped library staff, the terrain can be leveled for all.
I've been trying to find the words to post all day. After I submit, I'll think of everything I should have said. But we frequently have the library (24 computers) and the computer lab (24) booked and that's it for computer use. We have the mobile cart, which has a working 6 if the keys aren't scrambled, they connect to the wireless, and the planets are aligned so they actually have no other problems. This means any other teachers are out of luck. They can't schedule homework because 1) 90% of them won't do it and 2) in a class of 23, over half don't have computer access at home. For those who do have access, every day I deal with their documents saved in Microsoft Works (remember that?). The school itself still has Office '03, so even students who are better off with '07 or (gulp) '10, their documents aren't readable at school. The school won't consider Open Office. Then there's the fact I deal with students who come with no breakfast and do not receive free lunch because the parents either don't or can't fill out the form. I bring in muffins every week; would do it everyday if I could. I'm of the impression if you don't eat, technology isn't going to help you. With over 40% of the students having an IEP because they fall under the "socio-economic needs" because they come from despicable, white trash homes, there are many who fall through the cracks because there is too much need for a paltry budget the town always rejects. We work without contracts, teachers have been frozen in steps for years at a time, and we are one of the poorest districts in the state. Now to expect students to have X, whose parents don't have cars or food in the house, are uneducated themselves and see the school as a waste of tax money, would be another unrealistic expectation, similar to "zero dropouts by 20__."
Thanks for this, Bill. I agree that there will always be parents who will need help with this, as with other school supplies. It is a complex, value-laden topic!
Doug
Hi Stacey,
I genuinely appreciate your thoughtful insights. I do agree the library has a role to play. I just hope it enough to meet the needs of poor students by giving them adequate access.
All the best,
Doug
Hi Bob,
I appreciate the reminder that for many families, food on the table is not certain. I would agree that providing a computing device would take a backseat.
I still think Negroponte's OLPC project had the right idea - by providing the disadvantaged with technology, they may find a way to educate themselves out of poverty.
You are a saint for working where you do. Those of us from middle class districts need to be shaken now and then.
Doug