RP #8

In the article, “The New Literacy: Scenes From The Digital Divide”, Richard Rapaport reports that 72.5% of Americans use the internet today.  Due to these statistics, the digital divide that began in the 1990s appears to be decreasing as a result of the lower cost of hardware and software.  Today’s generation is considered digitally literate.  People use web 2.0 applications to interact, communicate, and work together on projects.  Social media has become an important factor in educational programs.  The new digital divide could end up segregating those who use social media and web 2.0 tools from those who do not use them.  Connie Yowell, director of education for the John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, calls  game and web developers the “pedagogical theorists of the 21st century.”    In other words, if educators do not utilize these new skills in the classroom, they will be less effective in communicating new concepts to their students.  Since 80% of all America teenagers use a computer, they are conditioned to complete tasks in digitally advanced ways.  Digital theorist Howard Rheingold thinks educators need to harness student interest in web 2.0 tools and teach them how to use it for educational purposes so they can learn skills for collaboration, activism, writing, and more.   Teaching students to utilize social media and other online applications for educational purposes will help prepare them for jobs that require computer fluency in the future. 

Eszter Hargittai and Gina Walejko use their article, “The Participation Divide: Content Creation And Sharing In The Digital Age” to explain ways socioeconomic status has impacted technology use.  The authors explain that the “participation divide” refers to creative activity online.  Members of higher socioeconomic groups are more likely to publish creative works such as videos, articles, and artwork because they have more access to digital tools and the internet.  Additionally, online sharing is also divided by gender.  Men are more likely to publish creative work online than women, but women are slowly bridging this gap (239, 240).  Hargittai and Walejko believe that wealthier individuals gain more educational knowledge from the internet and computers than people of lower financial status (240).  They found that 44% of American adults share content of some sort online, but those with more resources and internet connectivity are more likely to publish personal works online (241).  The authors performed a survey of college students at the University of Illinois, Chicago in an effort to learn more about how people from diverse ethnic backgrounds use the internet.  After collecting data about time spent online, the authors found that the average responders have six years of experience online (246).   While they exhibit a variety of skill levels, they spend on average aout 15 hours per week on the internet (246).  60.8% were involved in creative activities.  The information compiled from the survey revealed that students were more likely to participate in creative activities online if their parents were college educated (248).  Older students were less likely to post creative products online, and women were still slightly underrepresented (252).  The cause of the gender divide in creative online publishing is still unknown, but user skill level may play a key role (252, 253).   Hargittai and Walejko note that the participation gap studied in their survey will increasingly influence jobs, politics, and cultural identity in the future (253). 

Michelle Wright discusses the role of African Americans, specifically women and their participation in the technology field.  She believes that “by default the internet in the western world is always white, almost always male, and sexuality rarely emerges as an imaginative category” (49).  This statement alone illustrates Ms. Wright’s opinion that African Americans are underrepresented online and in digitally based employment.  However, she also explains that African Americans and Latinos are the two fastest growing groups of internet users (49).  This may be a result of the decreasing price for hardware and software (50).  Consequently, the digital divide may be based more on socioeconomic status rather than racial background.  The author spoke with three African American women in the technology field to gain some insight on their perceptions of racial diversity in their field.  The interviewed women felt that African Americans were in low positions, with African American women at the lowest ranking jobs (51).  These women did not feel members of their communities were computer literate, more as a result of few resources than lack of enthusiasm.  The author states that African American representation online is growing but not accurately represented (53, 55).  Wright feels that the term “African American” tends to represent black American males, discounting females and people from other countries who are black (56).  Wright explains that sentiments expressed online about race affect people’s attitudes about race in the real world (53).  Therefore, it is important to    do everything possible to represent all black populations online to reduce obstacles on the internet and in the physical world (57). 

Kathleen P. King uses her article, “Slamming The Closet Door And Taking Control” to document the positive effects of podcasts on the LGBT community.  King believes that web 2.0 tools have given many minorities a voice they never had.  The author documented the first three years of podcasting and noticed a variety of social phenomenons occurring.  When this method of digital recordings and subscription was first implemented, many found it to be the perfect platform for DJ-ing.  Eventually, podcasting became a censor-free pedestal for anyone to voice their opinions.  This freedom led to a variety of unique leaders in audio recording, creating small niche communities including a LGBT presence.  With the option of anonymity that accompanies the internet,  the usual “observer” who might listen to the voices of various media were now able to use podcasting to become a leader and participant.  King believes LGBT people were empowered and given a sense of identity through the development of podcasts.  They are given the chance to “test the waters of new or closeted personas”.  Podcasts continue to help users educate themselves in other ways as well.  For example, the widest reported use of podcasts is foreign language learning.  It allows for small group conversation and creation of new media.   King implies that web 2.0 applications would be a great platform for diversity training. 

One Laptop Per Child is a non profit organization that allows low income children from around the world to have 1:1 technology.  Children ages 6-12 regardless of socioeconomic status are given laptops designed to survive in rugged environments.  The laptops are charged through solar energy, designed to have screens viewable in direct sunlight, and built tough enough to withstand the rough handling of a child.  The laptops are made at a low cost, connect children to the internet, and provide them with free open source software.  While some may criticize the program for giving a child a laptop when they need food, shelter, or running water, the organization argues that technology is a resource to solve these problems.  It provides students with educational resources to solve problems that they may encounter in everyday life. 

The One Laptop Per Child China case study acquired information about students in Beijing migrant schools to determine the effectiveness of OLPC’s laptop initiative.  While they have provided 2 million laptops to students in over 40 countries, there has been little statistical evidence on the program’s impact.  The study revealed student improvement in computer literacy and math test scores after six months of laptop use.  The students were also reported more likely to use technology for learning activities rather than spending time watching TV.  The authors believe that OLPC is capable of reducing the digital divide through the increased knowledge of computer skills, but it is still unclear of how the program will directly affect test scores in the future.  

REFLECTION

It was interesting to read these articles on the digital divide and the participation gap because they focused mainly on gender and race rather than age as possible contributors to the problem.  I thought King’s article on podcasting made great points about the possibilities for support and dialogue among minority groups such as the LGBT community.  She explains that the internet provides users with the option to maintain anonymity if they choose to or provide personal information in an effort to network with people who have had similar experiences.  Wright seems to think the internet still needs more minority representation, expressing that the internet has primarily a white male voice.  She believes that those African Americans who do express themselves online are often interpreted as black American males rather than both genders from a variety of countries.  I think Wright assumes that all minority members wish to reveal their ethnic background online.  Through her assumptions, I think she does not consider that there may be more minorities represented online than she realizes.  Not everyone thinks it is necessary to express their personal information online.