Still Separate, Still Unequal? (The Case of Digital Equity in Education)
Published July 31, 2009 @ 07:31PM PT
[This is Part 4 in a series on race, schooling and educational opportunities. Part 1 can be found here, and Part 2 can be found here, and Part 3 can be found here.]
Fifty-five years ago, the United States Supreme Court declared that providing “separate but equal” educational opportunities to students based on race denied students of color the equal protection of the law. Largely, the holding in the Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education has been examined with respect to equity of access to the institution of schooling generally. And, while much of the progress that was achieved by eliminating legally enforced (de jure) school segregation has been erased by de facto housing segregation patterns that beget de facto school segregation, it is also clear that students of color continue to be denied equal educational opportunities within the institution of schooling. That is, while the post-Brown focus was and continues to be between-school and between-district segregation by race, more subtle forms of racial discrimination have persisted and proliferated within schools and districts, even in the most “integrated” schools and districts.
Less an issue of “within-school” racial segregation than one of segregation across schools and districts, consider the issue of digital equity in education. I've written a bit about digital equity in education (see e.g. http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v15n3/), but mostly in academic journals. So, I thought I'd use this space today to mashup some text from blog posts I've written before.
In homes, there are significant disparities in computer access and use by race. Fairlie (2005) found that African-Americans and Latina/os are much less likely to have access to home computers than are white, non-Latina/os (50.6 and 48.7 percent compared to 74.6 percent), and those differences are more pronounced for children than for adults. Using advanced statistical analyses, he concludes that, “[e]ven among individuals with family incomes of at least $60,000, blacks [sic.] and Latinos [sic.] are substantially less likely to own a computer or have Internet access at home than are whites.” In the following table, we see some of those differences.
One problem these data present for educators is that the significant inequities that exist within homes present a huge barrier to using technology to extend the learning day and to bridge a home-school connection. That said, there are opportunities for schools to level the playing field with respect to access to technology. However, within schools, while disparities are less pronounced, digital inequities persist. Here are some selected statistics from an NCES report:
-
In 2005, the ratio of students to instructional computers with Internet access in public schools was 3.8 to 1, a decrease from the 12.1 to 1 ratio in 1998, when it was first measured. However, schools with the lowest level of minority enrollment had fewer students per computer than did schools with higher minority enrollments. Specifically, according to my own analyses, schools in rural areas and schools with higher percentages of African-American students are more likely to have lower levels of computer access.
-
In 2005, 94 percent of public school instructional rooms had Internet access, compared with 3 percent in 1994. There are no differences across school characteristics.
Thus, while Internet access in schools and classrooms is consistently good and equitable, access to computers generally is slightly inversely related to the percentage of students of color in schools.
What about use of technology in schools? Let's look at some recent statistics on computer uses in schools disaggregated by race. [NOTE: these data are generated with the NAEP Data Explorer. Thus, these are nationally representative data].
Looking first at computer use for math, by race, in 2007, at 4th grade:
[NOTE: click on the following images to see larger graphics]
and then at 8th grade:
What do we see? Well, two things: First, computer use for math is more frequent in 4th grade than 8th grade (BTW, that's a consistent finding across lots of ed. tech. research; what's up with the secondary school teachers?). Second, at both grade levels, white students are more likely than African-American students to "never or hardly ever" use computers for math (and, yes, statheads, those differences are "statistically significant"). So, I can't say that African-American students use computers for math more than white students, but I can say they are less likely to "never or hardly ever" use computers for math in school.
In fact, that's pretty much the gist of what I report in the article in the Educational Policy Analysis Archive to which I linked above. African-American students have slightly lower levels of access to computers in schools, but the frequency with which they use computers in schools is at least as high, if not higher, than other students.
The logical next question, then, is "What are the students doing on the computers?" Answering that question is difficult, mostly for a lack of appropriate data. For math. though, there are some interesting data. By further sniffing through the NAEP Data Explorer, I "explored" differences in digitally-infused pedagogy by race. One of the items on the background questionnaire of the 8th grade NAEP in 2007 was as follows: "When you are doing math for school or homework, how often do you use these different types of computer programs?" One of the listed programs was "A program to practice or drill on math facts (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division)." Looking at the results for that item disaggregated by race, we get the following (again, click on image to enlarge):
Overall, African-American students are much more likely to use computers to practice or drill on math facts than White students. The learning affordances of the modern Internet seem to grow exponentially these days, but even in 2007 terms, using computers for drill on math facts is hardly taking advantage of the power of computer-mediated learning.
The educational research I have done over the last decade has taken me to schools all across the United States. I've been to schools in urban centers (e.g. NYC, Dallas, Houston, Miami-Dade, etc.), tiny rural towns (e.g. Beckley (WV), Gnadenhutten (OH), etc.) and everything in between. I can report with great confidence that the schools wherein I have seen advanced, progressive applications of technology have been schools that serve overwhelmingly Caucasian populations. Relatedly, if you consider all of the reasonably large-scale 1:1 computing initiatives in the United States, you would be hard-pressed to find such a program in a majority-minority community.
As the learning affordances of ubiquitous computing continue to expand, I worry deeply about creating a new sort of digital divide; one where students of color are not afforded the opportunities and advantages of learning in technologically innovative and important ways. The educational technology community is by no means bounded, but there is unquestionably a large, but tightly connected group of individuals who are arguably the "leading" practitioners with respect to technology in education. They are the folks who are connected through Twitter and through their blogs. They are overwhelmingly Caucasian, and I strongly suspect that if we polled them about the populations of students they serve, that population would be overwhelmingly Caucasian. A little over one year ago, Paul Bogush, a technologically-innovative teacher in Connecticut wrote:
Seventeen years ago a few months into my first teaching job, I was standing in an assembly when I realized something. I was the only white dude in the room.
I was looking around Twitter today at who other people follow and I had the same feeling come back. There are only white dudes in the “Twitter room.” I could not find anyone who was not. Out of every class that I have collaborated with this year only one person was an African American. Then I thought about the blogs I read, the wikis I check out, and the podcasts I listen to. Same deal as the Twitter room. What’s up with that?
Good question. What is up with that?
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
-
Still Separate, Still Unequal? (Final Thoughts)
-
Still Separate, Still Unequal? (The Case of Gifted and Talented Education)
-
Still Separate, Still Unequal? (The Case of Special Education)
Comments (12)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Leadership, Virginia Commonwealth University. WEB: http://jonbecker.net BLOG: http://edinsanity.com
Featured Education Actions
-
-
-
Eliminate Violence Against Women
1739 People
-
Eliminate Violence Against Women
I teach in an elementary school that hovers around 50% caucasian and 50% Hispanic. The community it serves has a high poverty rate. Fewer than half of my students have computer access at home and only half of them have internet access. I don't notice a difference in access based on race, but rather based on economics. The more money the parents make, the more likely the students are to have a computer with internet access.
Fortunately, my school has become over the last few years very progressive with both computer and internet access for our students. This does not mean the students use computers or the internet more, it just means they have greater access.
This year my administration has arranged for me to spend 2 hours daily helping teachers integrate the technology we have into their classrooms. I will be keeping anecdotal records on my blog detailing the progress we make. I didn't realize how few minority students had the opportunities my students have until I read your post. I feel fortunate to be in this position.
Wm Chamberlain
Posted by Wm Chamberlain on 08/01/2009 @ 06:04AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
This is a huge topic. It's really several topics all mashed together. The sub topics that I see are:
Access to current technologies in schools for poor and minorities.
Access to current technologies out of school for poor and minorities.
Types of technologies in use in school.
Teacher training on use of technology for teaching and learning.
Administrator training on use of technology for teaching and learning.
There are more but I'd start with the above after first doing some more investigation into how we measure all of the above. Generating data on the use of technology is a problem. Jon has done some great work on this, but a big bunch of his data is from 2005 and even earlier. The world has changed significantly since 2005. How many different devices and access plans have you changed since 2005?
The other big issue is how the data is generated. Access reporting is very unstable and unreliable. As an elementary classroom teacher I can tell you that the number of my families that have access to the Internet varies depending on who you ask. The central school administration has one number, the building has another number, a classroom teacher can get another number, and the students themselves can produce an altogether different set of numbers. I don't give all of my email accounts to just anybody who asks. I know lots of parents who don't want "the Man" to know their email address or their cell phone number. Students and parents don't give me their email and cell numbers until they trust me, and some not even then; they want to be the ones to decide how and what information comes to them. So, the data varies a lot depending on when you ask and who's asking.
Now onto another aspect of this issue -Access in general.
Fact: we have the resources already in place to provide access to everybody. It's not about money; its about control. For example, here in Minneapolis all residents of Minneapolis have free internet access to all civic and educational web sites via the local wifi provider. My students can access my class Moodle site for free, which means I can communicate with all of my students and their parents as long as they can get a hold of a used $100 laptop with a wifi card like the one with which I'm writing this post. The problem is that not many people know this fact and there aren't many who are attempting to educate people about this fact. Our school district is certainly not making this information widely known. The reason it's not making the info widely known is because the district doesn't have the equipment in place to make use of the technology and most teachers don't know how to make use of the technology. It's not because the poor kids don't want to or won't be able to use the technology if it is used.
I realize that the availability of a internet signal varies a lot depending on where you live, but I'll state again - it's not about the money. It's about control. The whole country of Macedonia has internet access and Brazil is quickly gaining ground on the US in the percentage of people with access. It's not about money, it's about control.
Posted by Dan McGuire on 08/01/2009 @ 08:00AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Dan, I agree with you about the data. NAEP used to ask lots of good questions about computer use in schools as part of the background questionnaires, but they've backed off on those items. We need large research programs like that to get the data because it's hugely resource intensive to collect enough data to allow us to generalize to various subgroups.
And, the Minneapolis WiFi deal sounds like a huge policy implementation fail.
Posted by Jon Becker on 08/01/2009 @ 05:49PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jon,
I love when we have both facts and observations to work with, I think you've done a great job of laying out the situation.
Of course I could comment in many ways, but I'll say what I see from a "life prep" perspective in my work with Michigan's Voc/Rehab agency.
Students from minority groups and impoverished communities lack the tech skills they need to survive when they leave high school, and this is because, while few - if any - schools are doing enough, the poorer the school, the less they are doing. And thus, we widen the digital divide daily.
Here's what I see, Students do not know how to use their mobile phones, their email, their voice mail or to text message. Oh, they have all these things - the poor are far more likely to have phones than computers - but since schools neither allow those phones in nor teach their use, they can not use them appropriately.
So Voc/rehab must teach the basics: How to choose a "resume appropriate" email address. How to create an employer friendly voice mail greeting. How to text your boss or email a co-worker. How to properly check email spelling. How to use Jott or Dial2Do to text from a car. How to properly search, look up an address, judge search results. Not to mention how to support their own reading and writing with online supports. All the things any decent school should be teaching in fifth grade. And V/R agencies really don't have the time or resources to do this well, or do this for enough kids. It is hard to make up for ten years of educational malpractice in a couple of week training course.
So by not teaching these skills, the rich kids - those from the iPhone/BlackBerry households - get these skills from family, and those traditionally "out of power" fall further and further behind.
Posted by Ira Socol on 08/01/2009 @ 08:20AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
What a timely piece! I'm in the middle of collecting data to put together a presentation that echoes your conclusions for a group of minority school leaders who are themseleves ill-informed about the inequities around technology's role to support learning. I have worked with districts across the US for nearly 20 years and it is frustrating to see the powerful ways technology resources can help change the learning environment with digital productions, virtual field trips, etc versus other schools where it's no more than a walk down the hall for 30 minutes of "drill & kill" practice. There has to be a way to help the school leaders in the less progressive districts recognize the short-comings and reach out to their communities, students, and teaching staff to address the situation. We have hosted a national technology and leadership conference for K-12 educators and school board members for 23 years, www.nsba.org/T+L, but unfortunately we have little success in reaching the most challenged districts.
Posted by Ann Flynn on 08/01/2009 @ 01:11PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Jon, I'd like to echo your observations about computer use/availability for minority children. I've seen it to. But I see an additional factor in large districts vs. small districts. I too visit a lot of different kinds of schools and have observed a general trend that large districts tend to spend money and leverage central control in different ways than small districts.
Large districts purchase in bulk and control in bulk. It tends to create locked down systems that may help with tech support headaches, but really limits student (and teacher) use for anything creative. These large districts also purchase "systems" as the money shows up, which creates randomness and lack of ownership for the long run. I've seen computer labs with 3 or 4 "learning systems" that do essentially the same thing, each costing on the order of $100,000 per site. Even if you believe that these systems work, having more of them isn't additive, especially when teachers are confused about how to use them or the various installations have "broken" the last installation.
Big districts believe they need big, one-size-fits-all solutions, both in purchasing and training, that end up not fitting anyone. This reinforces poor use of technology and results in the central admin believing that even more control is necessary. Teachers don't see good models, don't like being told what to do when they aren't consulted, and don't get support if they want to be creative. It's a sad, endless cycle.
In smaller districts, there is less control and computers can actually be used by students for more creative pursuits. Teacher PD can be more individualized which reinforces creative classroom use of technology. These factors reinforce each other.
I'm not saying that ALL big districts are "bad" and ALL small districts are "good". I'm not even sure where to draw the line between big and small.
But it's obvious that large districts tend to be urban districts, and urban districts tend to be poorer, have more minority students, and more non-english speaking students.
Posted by sylvia martinez on 08/01/2009 @ 05:47PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
If you look at the statistics, you'll see that rural students have an even lower % of broadband access than minorities. There are many demographics that need to be considered when it come to digital equity.
Posted by Diane Cordell on 08/01/2009 @ 05:59PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Sylvia and Diane,
I'm pondering both of your comments and thinking about the state of West Virginia. I've done much of my research there and I'm continually amazed at how much they are able to accomplish statewide. There are 55 county-level school districts there, but they only serve less than 1/2 million school-aged kids. Still, if we were to think of the state as one large school district, they serve as a counterpoint to both of your comments. Yes, Diane, they struggle getting access to many of their most rural counties (i.e. the places down in "the hollers"), but still.
While WV may be a counterexample, I do generally agree. There are huge numbers of kids who are about to be on the wrong end of a growing digital divide in education.
Posted by Jon Becker on 08/01/2009 @ 06:07PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Diane, I'd say similar things about Internet access as I did about computer access. I think there are many districts that have good Internet access rates, but filters and systems that make that access almost unusable. Not that low access is ideal, but if you are in a district where you can go to the IT guy and argue your case for getting stuff unblocked, you may actually end up with a access that is better than fast-but-blocked access.
I think we would agree, though, that there is much more here than meets the eye. Data is just one piece of the puzzle.
Posted by sylvia martinez on 08/01/2009 @ 06:14PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think the finding that "African-American students are more likely to use computer for drill on math facts than white students" is directly related to teacher distribution inequities in the US. Effective, qualified teachers are vital for students using technologies in meaningful ways. Highly-qualified teachers are more likely to serve districts with low-poverty populations. Why? Easier working conditions, better salary, more say in school decisions, etc. Consequently in the US, low poverty populations correlate with a higher percentage of white people. New teachers who enter the field with little training end up working in high-poverty, minority districts. (ex. Teach for America, local fellowship programs, etc.) Some schools serving high-poverty populations just have to fill vacant positions in September and hire teachers before they have even started teacher prep programs.
Using technology in progressive ways in education requires understanding of various ed facets such as pedagogy. Without strong preparation, teachers will just use tech in superficial ways. Despite all the access to the fanciest, progressive technologies, African-American students at large will not benefit until the teacher distribution inequities are addressed.
Policy-makers should not bother wiring up all schools with expensive technologies and broadband until the deeper, underlying issues of US education are addressed. What good is a lab of new computers if you are not going to use them appropriately?
Posted by Tom Patten on 08/02/2009 @ 12:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I agree that having teachers who understand how to use the tech productively is important, but even if a teacher knows how to do it, understands the pedagogical issues involved, and is motivated to use it, s/he may or may not be permitted or supported in doing so. High-poverty districts serving Hispanic or African-American populations are more likely to have strong centralized district controls on curriculum in general--scripted curricula, lock-step pacing guides enforced by frequent testing. etc. NCLB is only increasing this tendency, as way too many adults in the system are threatened with job loss if the test scores don't go up and resort to ever-more test-prep (memorization and drill) in an effort to save their jobs.
Posted by Jean Mitchell on 08/03/2009 @ 12:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Test
Posted by JJ Kim on 08/03/2009 @ 02:57PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.