Page 29 - Šolsko polje, XXVII, 2016, no. 3-4: IEA ICILS in druge sodobne teme, ur. Eva Klemenčič
P. 29
p. mirazchiyski ■ the digital divide ...
the digital divide on the number of demographic and personal charac
teristics, such as computer possession and access, family and school so
cio-economic status, gender, ethnicity, experience with ICT, self-efficacy,
attractiveness of and interest in technology, rural location and education
al level (Henderson, 2011; Hohlfeld et al., 2008; M.-C. Kim & Kim, 2001;
Ritzhaupt et al., 2013; van Dijk, 2006). The focus of this paper is name
ly the third level, as it is the important pre-requisite for the students’ suc
cess in future. Broadly defined, digital skills are not limited to the abilities
to operate technology, but the abilities to search, process and apply infor
mation are the more important ones. Said another way, digital skills have
different aspects: instrumental, operational, structural, strategic and in
formational. The last one, viewed as increasingly important has two dis
tinctive components: formal (the ability to work with the formal charac
teristics of the technology, e.g. files and hyperlinks) and substantial (the
ability to find, select, process and evaluate information in sources regard
ing specific questions). Research so far has been focused on the operation
al skills, related to the command of hardware and software, while the in
formational component has been largely neglected (van Dijk, 2006; van
Dijk & Hacker, 2003).
The digital divide is multifaceted, resulting from the differences be
tween home and school, along the range of family SES, rural location and
gender. The ones who possess low CIL are likely to be from minorities,
with low income, with lower educational attainment and children from
single-parent families. The especially endangered are those who reside in
rural or central city areas, who are less-likely to have access to the internet,
thus being “information-poor” (Henderson, 2011). The suburban schools
are richer in ICT resources (hardware, software and network access), but
also in teacher preparation for using ICT in instruction. On the other
hand, poorer urban and rural schools have outdated ICT resources and
unreliable network access. These inequalities are actually a small and spe
cific part of the greater inequality picture (Kucukaydin & Tisdell, 2008).
Kim & Kim (2001) and van Dijk & Hacker (2003) add education and age
to the different digital divides. The digital divide needs to be framed as
any divide based on race, gender, class and nation around the world be
cause they reflect these divides in the same way (Kucukaydin & Tisdell,
2008).
Greater gaps still appear to exist between homes, based on SES. Pub
lic schools are perceived as bridging the gaps in possession of technological
means, and it is expected that schools’ ICT resources could decrease the
gaps based on student characteristics. But leaving possession and access
aside, there is still one substantial difference between students in schools
27
the digital divide on the number of demographic and personal charac
teristics, such as computer possession and access, family and school so
cio-economic status, gender, ethnicity, experience with ICT, self-efficacy,
attractiveness of and interest in technology, rural location and education
al level (Henderson, 2011; Hohlfeld et al., 2008; M.-C. Kim & Kim, 2001;
Ritzhaupt et al., 2013; van Dijk, 2006). The focus of this paper is name
ly the third level, as it is the important pre-requisite for the students’ suc
cess in future. Broadly defined, digital skills are not limited to the abilities
to operate technology, but the abilities to search, process and apply infor
mation are the more important ones. Said another way, digital skills have
different aspects: instrumental, operational, structural, strategic and in
formational. The last one, viewed as increasingly important has two dis
tinctive components: formal (the ability to work with the formal charac
teristics of the technology, e.g. files and hyperlinks) and substantial (the
ability to find, select, process and evaluate information in sources regard
ing specific questions). Research so far has been focused on the operation
al skills, related to the command of hardware and software, while the in
formational component has been largely neglected (van Dijk, 2006; van
Dijk & Hacker, 2003).
The digital divide is multifaceted, resulting from the differences be
tween home and school, along the range of family SES, rural location and
gender. The ones who possess low CIL are likely to be from minorities,
with low income, with lower educational attainment and children from
single-parent families. The especially endangered are those who reside in
rural or central city areas, who are less-likely to have access to the internet,
thus being “information-poor” (Henderson, 2011). The suburban schools
are richer in ICT resources (hardware, software and network access), but
also in teacher preparation for using ICT in instruction. On the other
hand, poorer urban and rural schools have outdated ICT resources and
unreliable network access. These inequalities are actually a small and spe
cific part of the greater inequality picture (Kucukaydin & Tisdell, 2008).
Kim & Kim (2001) and van Dijk & Hacker (2003) add education and age
to the different digital divides. The digital divide needs to be framed as
any divide based on race, gender, class and nation around the world be
cause they reflect these divides in the same way (Kucukaydin & Tisdell,
2008).
Greater gaps still appear to exist between homes, based on SES. Pub
lic schools are perceived as bridging the gaps in possession of technological
means, and it is expected that schools’ ICT resources could decrease the
gaps based on student characteristics. But leaving possession and access
aside, there is still one substantial difference between students in schools
27
