Standard 4.1 Digital EquityCandidates model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources and technology-related best practices for all students and teachers. (PSC 4.1/ISTE 5a)
|
The artifact provided for this standard is a blog I wrote on digital equity. The post was written in February of 2016. The post focused on my experiences in attempting to address the digital divide over my many years in technology. While most everyone in the industry agree that such a divide exists, we have had very little success in its mitigation. In my blog I argue that the first step towards a lasting solution may well be a restatement of the problem.
Standard 4.1 outlines expectations for promoting equitable access to digital tools and resources. In this artifact I look at the evolution of the digital divide and ask why it still remains such a problem after more than two decades of attempts to address the problem. In my blog I share a story of how, more than a decade ago, I saw first hand that access was, at best, a small, first step towards leveling the field of technology. Specifically, I focused on the importance of working on the development of higher-level skills for both students and teachers in poor communities so that increased access might bring about an increase in the quality of the technology experience as well as opportunities.
As I read and researched to vet the framework of my beliefs, I was happy to see that I am not alone in feeling this way. I also learned that much of the current thought on the digital divide focuses more on the preparation of the teacher and not the physical resources. What I learned during the experience really helped shape my paradigm further as well as strengthen my resolve to model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access. As with so many technology initiatives, spending the money turns out to be the easy part. In the future I hope to deepen my research to include best practices for all students and teachers with regards to increasing and insuring equity in my own school. Two years ago we added a year-long business ed program within our computer science department and I have discussed adding coding to our curriculum next year. One of the first tasks I will face in realizing that vision will be to increase my teacher’s comfort in teaching programming.
While there can be no doubt that the digital divide exists, it is important that we stop letting ourselves off the hook so easily. I know that prior to this experience, I often approached equity as a budget issue. I would secure some funds and purchase more supplemental devices without really asking where those devices ended up or if they were helping students. Now I ask teachers for specific ways they intend to use the devices first. We are also continuing to increase our expectations for the teachers in terms of supporting their student’s technology. I have added two online, staff development courses targeting programming and have worked directly with our computer science teacher to be sure that students are exposed to code for at least a week in her classes. I now understand that spending all that money on devices only to have them sit unused because a teacher doesn’t feel comfortable is worse than not spending the money in the first place. Those funds could have spent elsewhere and in a way that might currently be benefiting students. Establishing the expectation that devices will be used daily has allowed us to monitor usage and work with teachers who hold students back. We will undoubtedly continue to watch usage statistics over the next several years as we attempt to determine the return on our investment. I am pulling reports on device use within our domain and I am also enlisting my administrators in monitoring usage of devices during their observations. The number this year have been encouraging but I now know that I must make this a part of my data collection process rather than assume that teachers are using their devices. I suppose will just have to implement our own version of trust but verify.
Standard 4.1 outlines expectations for promoting equitable access to digital tools and resources. In this artifact I look at the evolution of the digital divide and ask why it still remains such a problem after more than two decades of attempts to address the problem. In my blog I share a story of how, more than a decade ago, I saw first hand that access was, at best, a small, first step towards leveling the field of technology. Specifically, I focused on the importance of working on the development of higher-level skills for both students and teachers in poor communities so that increased access might bring about an increase in the quality of the technology experience as well as opportunities.
As I read and researched to vet the framework of my beliefs, I was happy to see that I am not alone in feeling this way. I also learned that much of the current thought on the digital divide focuses more on the preparation of the teacher and not the physical resources. What I learned during the experience really helped shape my paradigm further as well as strengthen my resolve to model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access. As with so many technology initiatives, spending the money turns out to be the easy part. In the future I hope to deepen my research to include best practices for all students and teachers with regards to increasing and insuring equity in my own school. Two years ago we added a year-long business ed program within our computer science department and I have discussed adding coding to our curriculum next year. One of the first tasks I will face in realizing that vision will be to increase my teacher’s comfort in teaching programming.
While there can be no doubt that the digital divide exists, it is important that we stop letting ourselves off the hook so easily. I know that prior to this experience, I often approached equity as a budget issue. I would secure some funds and purchase more supplemental devices without really asking where those devices ended up or if they were helping students. Now I ask teachers for specific ways they intend to use the devices first. We are also continuing to increase our expectations for the teachers in terms of supporting their student’s technology. I have added two online, staff development courses targeting programming and have worked directly with our computer science teacher to be sure that students are exposed to code for at least a week in her classes. I now understand that spending all that money on devices only to have them sit unused because a teacher doesn’t feel comfortable is worse than not spending the money in the first place. Those funds could have spent elsewhere and in a way that might currently be benefiting students. Establishing the expectation that devices will be used daily has allowed us to monitor usage and work with teachers who hold students back. We will undoubtedly continue to watch usage statistics over the next several years as we attempt to determine the return on our investment. I am pulling reports on device use within our domain and I am also enlisting my administrators in monitoring usage of devices during their observations. The number this year have been encouraging but I now know that I must make this a part of my data collection process rather than assume that teachers are using their devices. I suppose will just have to implement our own version of trust but verify.