Presentation for a PhD course in Critical Theorizing in Education. Examines digital divide in schools (and society).

2. Michael Nantais (nantaism@brandonu.ca)
EDUC 7050: CRITICAL THEORIZING ABOUT EDUCATION

4. internet?
“computer” skills

5. Indeed, the term ICT more accurately refers to an updating of the
conventional ‘information technology’ to encompass the rapid
convergence of technologies such as computers, telecommunications and
broadcasting technologies, as well as stressing the communicative and
networking capacity of modern-day information technologies. Thus, the
term ICT is best seen as an umbrella term for a range of technological
applications such as computer hardware and software, digital broadcast
technologies, telecommunications technologies such as mobile phones,
as well as electronic information resources such as the world wide web
and CDRoms.
Thus, it is clear that beneath the umbrella term of ICT we are concerned
with a heterogeneous range of technologies, types of information
and resources.
(Selwyn, 2004, pp. 346-347)

6. Travers & Decker (1999)
Ignore it!
Jump on the bandwagon!
Be fatalistic (accept inevitability)!
Engage it critically!

7. Weaver & Grindall (1998)
Techno-maniacs
Techno-phobes
 Critical techno-mania

8. “This is not simply a technological
revolution; this is a cultural revolution.”
-- Michael Wesch

9. Inequity

10. ?

11. ICT … is rightly seen as having the potential to help
individuals, groups, and even nations … Yet, at the same
time, infusions of ICT can also amplify existing
inequalities.
The notion of a digital divide has focused the attention of
the public and policy makers on the important intersection
between technology and inequality. … By focusing on the
diverse range of resources that enable meaningful use of
technology, and seeking long-term solutions that
strengthen marginalized groups’ agency, we can best
make sure that ICT is used to further a process of social
reform, equity, and inclusion.
(Warschauer, 2008, p. 149-150)

12. 5 areas of the “divide” in education:
School access
Home access
School use
Gender gap
Generation gap
(Warschauer, 2007)

13. 3 themes related to technology use in schools:
Workability
Complexity
Performativity
(Warschauer, 2007)

15. It is neither …
and it is both…

16. What is needed?
A “critical techno-mania”*.
•Weaver & Grindall (1998)

18. Image Credits
Slide # Source
3: iPod, camera, computer, Wii M. Nantais,
3: DVD player http://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhook/12404848
81/ (Creative Commons license)
3: Interactive Whiteboard http://www.flickr.com/photos/chanbliss/3423732675/
(Creative Commons license)
5: iPod screen M. Nantais
6: computer lab (Boissevain School) M. Nantais
7: computer, cable Microsoft ClipArt
8: students in lecture hall http://www.flickr.com/photos/yilka/1829139871/
(Creative Commons license)
9 & 10: computer M. Nantais
11: computer M. Nantais
12: kids & computers http://www.flickr.com/photos/gibsonsgolfer/40568674
45/ (Creative Commons license)
13: iPod screen M. Nantais
14: Access quote poster http://www.flickr.com/photos/wrichard/3743686850/
(Creative Commons license)
1 & 17: McLuhan quote poster http://www.flickr.com/photos/shareski/2917156969/in
/pool-858082@N25 (Creative Commons license)

19. References
Burgeja, M. (2007). The cost of accommodating classroom technology. Teachers College
Record. ID Number: 14858. Retrieved on October 4, 2009 from www.tcrecord.org.
Ching, C. C., Basham, J. D., and Jang, E. (2005). The legacy of the digital divide: Gender,
socioeconomic status, and early exposure as predictors of full-spectrum technology
use among young adults. Urban Education, 40(4):394–411.
Cookson, P. (2009). What would Socrates say?. Educational Leadership. 67(1): 8-14.
Jung, J.-Y., Linchuan Qiu, J., and Kim, Y.-C. (2001). Internet connectedness and inequality:
Beyond the ”divide”. Communication Research. 28(4):507–535.
Larson, N., Servage, L. and Parsons, J. ( 2007 ). The Google-ization of knowledge. Retrieved
from the ERIC database. (ED495676)
Rodino-Colocino, M. (2006). Laboring under the digital divide. New Media Society. 8(3):487–511.
Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New
Media Society. 6(3):341–362.
Shelley, M., Thrane, L., Shulman, S., Lang, E., Beisser, S., Larson, T., and Mutiti, J. (2004). Digital
citizenship: Parameters of the digital divide. Social Science Computer
Review.22(2):256–269.

20. References (continued)
Sutton, L. (2005). Blocked: Experiences of high school students conducting term paper
research using filtered internet access. Teachers College Record. ID Number:12248.
Retrieved on October 4, 2009 from www.tcrecord.org
Travers, A. and Decker, E. (1999). New technology and critical pedagogy. Radical Pedagogy.
1(2). Retrieved on November 11, 2009 from:
http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue1_2/01travers1_2.html
Warschauer, M. (2008). Whither the digital divide? In D. L. Kleinman, K. A. Cloud-Hansen, C.
Matta, and J. Handesman (Eds.) Controversies in Science & Technology: From climate
to chromosomes. (pp 140-151). New Rochelle, NY: Liebert.
Warschauer, M. (2007). A teacher’s place in the digital divide. Yearbook of the National Society
for the Study of Education Annual Yearbook 106(2), 147-166.
Warschauer, M., Knobel, M., and Stone, L. (2004). Technology and equity in schooling:
Deconstructing the digital divide. Educational Policy. 18(4):562–588.
Weaver, J. and Grindall, K. (1998). Surfing and getting wired in a fifth grade classroom: critical
pedagogical methods and techno-culture. In Kincheloe, J. and Steinberg S. (Eds.)
Unauthorized Methods: Strategies for Critical Teaching. (pp 231-251) New York:
Routledge.