Author(s): Kate Williams, 2009

License: Unless otherwise noted, this material is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial 3.0 License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

We have reviewed this material in accordance with U.S. Copyright Law and have tried to maximize your ability to use, share, and adapt it. The citation key on the following slide provides information about how you may share and adapt this material.

Copyright holders of content included in this material should contact open.michigan@umich.edu with any questions, corrections, or clarification regarding the use of content.

For more information about how to cite these materials visit http://open.umich.edu/education/about/terms-of-use.

Any medical information in this material is intended to inform and educate and is not a tool for self-diagnosis or a replacement for medical evaluation, advice, diagnosis or treatment by a healthcare professional. Please speak to your physician if you have questions about your medical condition.

Viewer discretion is advised: Some medical content is graphic and may not be suitable for all viewers.

Citation Keyfor more information see: http://open.umich.edu/wiki/CitationPolicy

Use + Share + Adapt

Make Your Own Assessment

Creative Commons – Attribution License

Creative Commons – Attribution Share Alike License

Creative Commons – Attribution Noncommercial License

Creative Commons – Attribution Noncommercial Share Alike License

GNU – Free Documentation License

Creative Commons – Zero Waiver

Public Domain – Ineligible: Works that are ineligible for copyright protection in the U.S. (17 USC § 102(b)) *laws in your jurisdiction may differ

Public Domain – Expired: Works that are no longer protected due to an expired copyright term.

Public Domain – Government: Works that are produced by the U.S. Government. (17 USC § 105)

Public Domain – Self Dedicated: Works that a copyright holder has dedicated to the public domain.

Fair Use: Use of works that is determined to be Fair consistent with the U.S. Copyright Act. (17 USC § 107) *laws in your jurisdiction may differ

Our determination DOES NOT mean that all uses of this 3rd-party content are Fair Uses and we DO NOT guarantee that your use of the content is Fair.

To use this content you should do your own independent analysis to determine whether or not your use will be Fair.

{ Content the copyright holder, author, or law permits you to use, share and adapt. }

{ Content Open.Michigan believes can be used, shared, and adapted because it is ineligible for copyright. }

{ Content Open.Michigan has used under a Fair Use determination. }

The Question of the Digital Divide...

…and Some Answers fromCommunity Informatics

Kate Williams

SI 575 Fall 2009 SeminarDecember 4, 2009

Community informatics

Local, historical communities

Information and communications

technologies digital toolsCONTINUITY

TRANSFORMATION

meets

+

A field rooted in the digital revolution, the information revolution

Starting from the social … [social informatics]

To start … what is the digital?

5000 b.c. to 1500s

1840s

1967

1974 1954Source Undetermined

Source Undetermined

Source Undetermined

Ted Nelson

Source Undetermined

hypertext + internet = WWW

• 1895: Paul Otletstarts RBU,eventually15m cards

• 1965: Engelbart coins the term

• 1970s: many versionsof hypertext

• 1989: Tim Berners-Lee proposes a World Wide Web

• 1970s: TCP/IP, sending data in redundant and reassembling packets

• 4 nodes in 1969,1B now 1038?

Robert H. Zakon

Source Undetermined

In popular imagination and useUS adults:73% talk while driving, 20% text

The MatrixITU

Esthr (flickr)

The digital divide, ten years ago

• a widening gap in access to and usage of computers and the Internet across the U.S. population and the concomitant exclusion from educational, economic, cultural, political, and social opportunity

• Information have-nots: "Americans who are low-income, Black or Hispanic or Native American, senior in age, not employed, single-parent (especially single female headed) households, those with little education, and those residing in central cities or rural areas.“ Commerce/NTIA 1999

Gap still widening: Global data

ITU

US gap persists: CPS 2007Percent of households using broadband at home

By ethnicity

Latino 35.2

African American 36.8

White 52.2

Asian 60.2

By education of head of household

No high school 17.1

High school 36.8

Some college 56.0

Bachelors or higher 73.9

Many dimensions to digital inequality

(and many approaches to this)• technical

means of access

• autonomy over the conditions of access

• individual skill• social support,

both technical and emotional

• purpose of use

• digital experience / interest / computer fear / is technology attractive? ‘psychological access’

• possession of computers/network ‘material access’

• digital skills / insufficient user-friendliness and inadequate education or social support ‘skills access’

• significant usage opportunities ‘usage access’

1. Discovering digital bridgesoutside the home

Kate Williams

From 32 DD surveys, three categories of questions emerged

– do you use a computer at home?

– do you use a computer at work?

– do you use a computer elsewhere?

Elsewhere = adult education center … assistive center … cable access center … church … college or university … community network center … community technology center … copy shop … cybercafé … day care center … government office … hospital … housing development center … job training agency… laundromat … library … literacy center … mental health agency … multiservice agency … museum … national urban league … neighborhood based organization … rehabilitation/drug abuse center … school … senior center … settlement house … standalone computer center … youth organization … and more

Source: Kate Williams

Percent of US households which…

(84%)

(56%)

(62% in 2003)

Source: Kate Williams

Three realms of computing that offer different conditions of

access

Source: Kate Williams

2. How do communities bridge the digital divide?

Source Undetermined

Schools - K-12 public 92Public libraries 14Apartments, hotels, and other group residences - public 2Government offices 1

Total Government 109

Schools - K-12 private 29Schools - preschools and child care - nonprofit 8Schools - other 1Churches and temples 29Civic organizations - other 12Civic organizations - youth 4Civic organizations - seniors 6Apartments, hotels, and other group residences - nonprofit 4Civic organizations - unions 3Museums and parks 2Hospitals and health care centers 1

Total Community 99

Schools - preschools and child care - for profit 13Schools - trade - for profit 10Apartments, hotels, and other group residences - for profit 15Copy shops, cybercafes, stores 4

Total Commercial 42

Schools - universities and colleges 3

Total University 3

Grand Total 253

Not all communities are equally served by public

computing

• Geolocating the 253 sites suggested this pattern

Source: Kate Williams

Group residence – Apartment complex

16Group residence – Hotel

16Preschool

9Copy shop

3Bar/restaurant/café

2Bookshop

2Computer-related

2Campground

1Group residence – Seniors

1School

1Tax service

1Business sites

54

Religious institutions

18Group residence – Greek association

17K-12 School – Private

12Association

9Social agency

4Preschool

2Adult education

1Group residence – Seniors

1Group residence – Students

1Group residence – Campus/religious

1Hospital

1Community sites

67

K-12 School – Public

33Library

4Park

3Group residence – Apartment complex

1K-12 School – Adult education

1Government sites

42

University

80Community college

1Seminary

1Higher education sites

82

All sites

245

C-U:Similarresults

Source Undetermined

3. How big is public computing?

Extrapolating…

Source Undetermined

…with four different assumptions

If rural areas have no public

computing

If rural areas have public

computing at same rate

calculating from 118 sites found in Toledo

84,662 93,580

calculating from 181 sites extrapolated in Toledo

129,863 143,542

4. Measuring top down solutions: What’s the

distribution of computers in libraries?

A nationwidecount…

…a local analysis

Source Undetermined

Source: Kate Williams

Difficult to overcome inequalities

Source: Kate Williams

5. The role of agency: Have-less communities tackling the digital

divide

Kate Williams

Social capital provided the basic fuel…

Kate Williams

Kate Williams

…for 15 years…

Source: Kate Williams

…by recruiting other social networks…

Source: Kate Williams

…to help produce cyberpower…

Kate Williams

6. How does community life itself

bridge the digital divide?

Examples of 31 grassroots community

groupsTenants Association agitates with city

agencies for housing maintenance and solutions to sidewalk threats, trash pileups, car thefts

Local Historians meets weekly at branch library, produces books, audios, videos, of their local historical research and memories

Community Center advises and supports immigrant families, wins local reforms, runs programs for youth, women, others

Downloaders: email, creating documents

Uploaders: maintaining group websites

Cyberorganizers: helping others become downloaders and uploaders

Source: Kate Williams

Again, social capital dominates…

• More social capital (help with IT), more IT use

• 73% of helpers are friends, family• 60% are volunteering• 54% are seen frequently ( >1x

fortnight)• 52% have visited in the home• 42% live within a mile

7. A closer look at uploading: Do communities own their own

cyber-representations?

Arab

Indian

Filipino

ChineseKorean

MexicanPuertoRican

Ethnic communities across metropolitan Chicago

JapaneseSource Undetermined

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Mexican (83)536,000

Filipino (45)29,000

Puerto Rican (62)114,000

Arab (73)15,000

Japanese (119)5,600

Chinese (132)31,000

Korean (79)12,000

Indian (N=62)26,000 people

Community Chicago Metro US World Unknown

Registrant addresses of ethnic Chicago URLs

Source: Kate Williams

8. Can we combine top-down and bottom-up solutions?

TOP 1994-2005: $230 million

• Using technology to attacking local problems

• Partnerships were mandated

• Mobilizing local leadership or peer educators was a winning strategy

Source Undetermined

BTOP 2010-2012: $7.2 billion

• Technology useas the goal

• Sustainabilitythe objective

• Emphasis on community institutions & public computing

• National discussion underway• Locally, univ-two cities partnership• New approaches to data: Government 2.0

Source Undetermined

9. Libraries are helping in new ways

Source Undetermined

The reference interview 1960s,

the informatics moment 2000sPublic Library• Reference

librarian• Cybernavigato

r• Computers

Community• Economic

s• Ages• Cultures

PatronPatron

Table 1. The informatics moment: What are patrons seeking and getting Cybernavigator help with?

LiteracyComputer

literacyAdvanced computer

literacyLibrary literacy Functional activity

Daily

using the mouse or browser,getting or using email

printing, computer reservations

searching for work, applying for jobs

Weeklywritingreading

producing or updating a document besides resume, doing research, using other government websites besides benefits, using social networking sites

using the library catalog,using library databases

producing or updating resume, doing homework, getting or checking benefits

Monthlytaking a computer class

playing a game

looking into current events or cultural information, getting health information, banking/buying/selling/ other e-commerce, seeking resources relating to being homeless

The informatics moment: a leap across the DD

Cybernavigator social capital Library social capital

CN helps someone who knows his or her name

CN helps someone he or she knows by name

CN helps someone he or she recognizes but don't know by name

Security guard connects patron to the CN for help

Non-CN library staff help someone with computer/internet, apart from printing/reservations

CH helps a group of 2 or more working together on a task

CN helps someone he or she knows from some community involvement

CN brings their own laptop to work

CN shares his or her own laptop with patron as part of help

Less than monthlyCN sees, runs into, or gets together with patrons outside of work

CN sees, runs into, or gets together with library co-workers outside of work

N = 27 cybernavigators

Monthly

Weekly

Daily

Librarians connects patron to the CN for help

Paraprofessionals connect patron to the CN for help

CN helps someone that a community member referred to him or her

[none]

More social capital > more kinds of IMs

• Challenges: Printing, reservations, no flash drives, word processing in the browser

• Mouse exercises versus solitaire • Successful job hunts• The Bing Crosby story• Huddled around a laptop in Chinatown• “I’m just a step ahead”• Help, and conflicts over help: the dislocations of

the information revolution in the library• So … recruit helpers over geeks … network the

CNs

The question of the digital divide: answers from community

informatics1. Many digital bridges outside the home

2. Communities bridge the DD in three ways

3. Public computing has proliferated

4. Top down solutions can’t always even the score

5. Have-less communities attack the DD

6. Community life itself (inadvertently) bridges the DD

7. Communities can own their own cyber-representation

8. Top down (outside) can work with bottom up (inside)

9. Libraries are helping in new ways

1. Many digital bridges outside the home

2. Communities bridge the DD in three ways

3. Public computing has proliferated

4. Top down solutions can’t always even the score

5. Have-less communities attack the DD

6. Community life itself (inadvertently) bridges the DD

7. Communities can own their own cyber-representation

8. Top down (outside) can work with bottom up (inside)

9. Libraries are helping in new ways

Sustainability

The question of the digital divide: answers from community

informatics