RE: [DDN] Ghana - Follow up on study of Adolescents and the Internet
Dina, I'd like very much to see the article you mention below. We've been working in Ghana for some years on two projects. One involves starting a new university of science and technology. See: www.gtuc.edu.gh The other is a village development project: www.patriensa.org Steve Eskow -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Borzekowski, Dina Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 8:52 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: [DDN] Ghana - Follow up on study of Adolescents and the Internet Just a follow up... Over a year ago, I asked members of this list serve to contribute some background information for a study examining Ghanaian adolescents' use of the Internet. Well - the results are now published in the latest issue of Developmental Psychology. The Hopkins press release is below. Let me know if you would like me to send you the entire article. Regards, Dina Dina Borzekowski, Ed.D. Assistant Professor Department of Health, Behavior and Society Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health May 1, 2006 Internet May Be the Way to Send Youth Health Messages In a study of Ghanaian teens and their Internet usage, Dina L.G. Borzekowski, EdD, assistant professor in the Bloomberg School's Department of Health, Behavior and Society, and her Ghanaian coauthors, Julius Fobil and Kofi Asante, learned that approximately 53 percent of teens from Ghana's capital city of Accra used the Internet to find health information, regardless of their school status, gender, age or ethnicity. The study is one of six articles about teens published today in a special issue of Developmental Psychology. In a world where we can sometimes be quick to point out the negative, this is a great example of the media being used in a positive way. The Internet can be a good educational and public health tool for hard-to-reach populations, said Borzekowski. The authors surveyed a representative sample of 778 15- to 18-year-olds living in Accra, Ghana, who were either in school or out of school. Participating youth completed self-report surveys of their media use. Whether it was for school, work or personal reasons, 52 percent of out-of-school Internet users had tried to get health information, while 53 percent of in-school Internet users had done the same. Of important social significance, said the authors was their finding that teens who were not in school used the Internet as an alternative to talking to their parents, who may have less formal education than the parents of teens in school. A lack of parental education or cultural taboos regarding sexual topics may make it more difficult for many of these [out-of-school] teens to get information on health and sex, said Borzekowski. The Internet is making great strides for youth in developing countries, said Borzekowski. The far-reaching and positive use of the Internet is invaluable for adolescents who want to find out more about personal, sensitive and embarrassing issues related to their bodies, relationships and health. Online Access by Accra's Adolescents: Ghanaian Teens' Use of the Internet for Health Information was authored by Dina L. G. Borzekowski, Julius N. Fobil and Kofi O. Asante. The study was supported by grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Institute for Population and Reproductive Health. Public Affairs media contacts for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health: Kenna Lowe or Tim Parsons at 410-955-6878 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
[DDN] An example of the digital literacy of digital natives
With the musician's pitch-perfect ear Phil Shapiro creates this example of digitally literate communication: a digital native's ode to the ending of Western Union's telegraph service: The Invention of the Telegraph So like the telegraph was invented in 1844 by Samuel Morse so that he could IM with his friends. So he would like telegraph things like, What hath God wrought. brb. His friends would telegraph back, u r the gr8test!! LOL Samuel Morse would then telegraph back, BCNU CUL8R GTR. Telegraph rocks, IMHO. (Be seeing you. See you later. Got to run.) Samuel Morse's parents used to limit the amount of time he could telegraph with friends. He was only allowed to telegraph with them after he had finished his homework. On January 27, 2006, Western Union discontinued the telegraph service that they had been offering for 145 years. The press release for this announcement said simply: Telegraph service just ended, OMG. TTFN. TAFN. (Oh my gosh. Ta ta for now. That's all for now.) Imagine such a digital native, fluent with his thumbs, asked to read the opening lines of Manuel Castells' THE RISE OF THE NETWORK SOCIETY: Toward the end of the second millennium of the Christian Era several events of historical significance have transformed the social landscape of human life. A technological revolution, centered around information technologies, is reshaping, at accelerated pace, the material basis of society. Economies of the world have become globally interdependent, introducing a new form of relationship between economy, state, and society, in a system of variable geometry. What does the digitally literate but otherwise text and meaning challenged student faced with such prose do? What does his teacher do? Does she abandon Castells and substitute hyperlinks to fun web sites? Does she have the student read Castells, but on a screen subdivided so that other messages can appear at the same time to make the multitasking twitch speed digital native comfortable? Perhaps there will be a new profession employing skilled translators such as Phil who can turn the flow of ideas in such complex texts into digithumbspeak. TAFN. GTR. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] NAAL points to serious, ongoing adult basic skills problem in U.S.
David, You ask me, and presumably others, to point you to evidence connecting the use of computers in education to higher levels of adult literacy: the implication of this request is that there is none. In an earlier post you cited a 1991 meta-study (why 1991, David?) that purportedly demonstrated the educational improvements attributable to CAI-a term still widely used in 1991. Here are some lines from the introduction to that study: The effects of computer use on a large number of outcome areas were examined, including academic achievement in general (30), in mathematics (13), in language arts (8), in reading (3), in science (2), in problem-solving skills (2), and in health and social studies (1 each). Most of us, you'll agree, assume that language arts and reading and problem-solving skills-indeed, all of these areas of concern are what we mean when we talk about literacy. Those students studied in 1991 are now 15 years older, with 15 more years of using computers in school, and college. And adult literacy has declined. But let us grant your point, David: no one promised us that students literate with computers would be more literate adults. The decline in adult literacy may be just another one of those unintended consequences. But it has happened. And the question becomes, is there a tradeoff between injecting computers into the schools and the consequences of that educational choice on the adults that are produced? Megabillions will be spent on narrowing the digital divide, and many of those billions will go to such programs as the Negroponte initiative. If we cannot learn to do more and better educating with them, the results will be as disappointing tomorrow as they have been up to this point, and that would be a human tragedy. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Rosen Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 8:14 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] NAAL points to serious,ongoing adult basic skills problem in U.S. Steve, Forgive me if all this has been discussed on DDN before, and if so please just point me to the archived messages. If not, however, could you give some background on the argument that narrowing the digital divide would increase adult literacy. Who made this argument? When? As someone who has followed adult literacy and technology for the last decade, somehow I have managed to miss it. I don't think narrowing the digital divide in itself will necessarily improve adult literacy in the U.S. or anywhere. Adult literacy -- literally adults who cannot read well working to improve their basic reading skills -- will increase if more adults are effectively taught to read. There may be some methods which use computers (and the Internet) which may be useful in this process, but I don't follow why one would think that access to computers and the Internet would by itself result in increased basic literacy. With access to a computer and the Internet those who were already literate could improve their reading comprehension and fluency by reading more and more challenging materials. But that might happen with access to a library or bookstore, too. David J. Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:56 PM, Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: Andrew and all, Perhaps the point I am hoping to get discussed is obscured somewhat when the issue becomes whether David Rosen or I reads the NAAL correctly.. We are concerned here with narrowing or eliminating the digital divide. Between 1993 and 2003 the digital divide in the US was narrowed dramatically. Many millions, billions, spent on hardware and software, in homes and schools and offices. A vast literature published on the transformations in education that computers will accomplish. The results to date of all this money, all this experimentation, all this hope? All who want to look at the results unblinkingly need to reckon with this conclusion: After ten such digital-divide-narrowing years, the ability of students to read prose and documents has dropped slightly for all levels of education. Or depending on how you read the numbers, or want to read the numbers searching for hope, literacy has remain unchanged. Either way, there is no basis here for arguing that the spread of the new communication technologies has accomplished that transformation. An honest appraisal of the results to date is badly needed, and new directions uncovered if the promise of the new technologies is genuine. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andrew Pleasant Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 12:53 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] NAAL points to serious,ongoing adult basic skills problem in U.S. HI all, I believe both David Rosen and Steve Eskow are correct, just looking
RE: [DDN] Regarding Literacy - Reading, Writing and Computers
Kevin Cronin makes important points regarding this matter of literacy. A few comments, questions. In order to read Kevin's message, I need to be able to use a computer with sufficient knowledge and skill so that I can get to his message, and get it on the screen where I can see it. I assume that knowledge and skill is part of what is meant by computer literacy. Since I have succeeded in doing that, I am at least minimally computer literate. I have not become computer literate, to the extent that I am, by taking courses on the computer in school or college or anywhere. Nor have my three sons, who are far more computer literate than I am. Now: my computer literacy brings Kevin's message into my home, on to my screen. And now I must use traditional textual literacy to decode the markings on my screen, turn them into language and meaning, see the flow of Kevin's reasoning, note the key points he is making and the structuring of them into a thesis, an argument, note where I think the argument falters, and so on. In the 21st century, my ability to engage in dialogue with Kevin and Andy and David and all here is determined by traditional textual literacy. A key question, then: If the schools teach students how to bring Kevin's words to their screens but they can't read them with understanding, has there been a tradeoff involved that is harmful to society? One possibility is that we have to rethink the ecology of education: what piece of education is assigned to the home, the neighborhood, the church, the school, and the other agencies of a society. It may be that other agencies, or even self-instruction, can teach the young to operate the radio, television set, the cell phone, and the computer, while we need schools to teach the far more difficult technologies of deep reading and writing. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevin Cronin Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 6:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [DDN] Regarding Literacy - Reading, Writing and Computers I am still troubled by some of the comments about the relationship between the decades of digital initiatives and some disappointing data about literacy. The digital initiatives have encouraged a great number of people to use computers in ways they did not previously contemplate, some to advance employment, others to advance their education or health, interact with government at all levels, others to advance their social needs and interact with friends, family in distant places. However, this computer literacy may be absolutely unrelated to traditional literacy concepts, still measured by reading and writing and capacity to use those tools to navigate the modern world. It's possible that great gains in computer or technical literacy, were caught up in a larger decline in traditional literacy, driven by factors like declining work opportunities for lower-income families and frustration with modern education systems, whether in big urban school districts or otherwise. For decades, America has valued literacy as a valuable end in itself. While literacy certainly enhances the quality of life and provides literate America with a tool to succeed, universal literacy is viewed as a goal in itself - everyone ought to be able to read and write. By contrast, computer literacy is generally linked to employment opportunities and economic success. Are people using these tools to help themselves get ahead? Digital initiatives don't succeed in the competitive funding world with the argument that people simply ought to be literate in the use of computers, like reading and writing. Can computer literacy be advancing? Yes, data says more people are using computers and going on line every year, even though I think progress can be faster. Is traditional literacy falling? Can both be true? Yes. Should government be doing more to address literacy in all its forms? Absolutely, but here's to be a better new year for us all. Kevin Cronin Cleveland, Ohio c: 216.374.7578 ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] NAAL points to serious, ongoing adult basic skills problem in U.S.
Andrew and all, Perhaps the point I am hoping to get discussed is obscured somewhat when the issue becomes whether David Rosen or I reads the NAAL correctly.. We are concerned here with narrowing or eliminating the digital divide. Between 1993 and 2003 the digital divide in the US was narrowed dramatically. Many millions, billions, spent on hardware and software, in homes and schools and offices. A vast literature published on the transformations in education that computers will accomplish. The results to date of all this money, all this experimentation, all this hope? All who want to look at the results unblinkingly need to reckon with this conclusion: After ten such digital-divide-narrowing years, the ability of students to read prose and documents has dropped slightly for all levels of education. Or depending on how you read the numbers, or want to read the numbers searching for hope, literacy has remain unchanged. Either way, there is no basis here for arguing that the spread of the new communication technologies has accomplished that transformation. An honest appraisal of the results to date is badly needed, and new directions uncovered if the promise of the new technologies is genuine. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andrew Pleasant Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 12:53 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] NAAL points to serious,ongoing adult basic skills problem in U.S. HI all, I believe both David Rosen and Steve Eskow are correct, just looking at the same data through different filters. When looking at literacy scores by level of education, literacy levels have either dropped or remain unchanged. (See my earlier posting under the other thread on the NAAL.) The overall rise is explained by there being more people with a higher level of education now as compared to the 1993 NALS. Education and literacy are highly (but definitely not entirely) correlated. The result, more people with more education pushed the overall average scores up. However, prose literacy declined for all education groups. Document literacy declined by education level for all those with education including or above 'some college'. Quantitative literacy remained unchanged (i.e. no statistically significant changes) by all education levels. (See page 14 of the NAAL report at http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006470). What is most intriguing is that Kuttner's response to the question (at least what David Rosen kindly forwarded) leaves out that part of this first data release from the NAAL. I don't take it as a very positive indicator that the education system has awarded bachelor and graduate degress to more, but less well prepared, people. The entire discussion, of course, assumes that the NAAL methodology is valid and reliable - I seem to recall the developers did not allow anyone 'outside' to look at the methodology during its development. There are many very valid criticisms of the 1993 NALS methodology - even though it remained the best available data for a decade - and the same may well come true of the NAAL. A quick, but not complete, perusal of the NAAL website seems to indicate they have released 'sample' questions but not the complete methodology nor the method of assessing the results to develop the scores nor the method of adjusting the NALS data to make it 'comparable'. So those parts of the story remain untold. Finally, after the repeated postponements, is it a coincidence that the first look at the NAAL data was released only after cuts in adult basic education and literacy funding were approved? According to the Dept. of Education, the 2006 budget cuts funding for Adult Basic Education and Literacy state grants from over $500 million in 2005 to $200 million in 2006. Best wishes, Andrew Pleasant ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Fwd: [AAACE-NLA] NAAAA..L This Can't Be Right
All, There are implications and warnings in the NAAL survey that can't be wrong-if the general trend of the numbers are at all accurate and revealing. One such finding is this: after 5 intense years of escalating use of computers and cell phones in schools, colleges, and the general culture; after five more years of television as the medium of choice for leisure time; after five more years of the spread of video game culture. . .after five such intense years of new media spread and immersion adult Americans, including American college graduates, are less able to read complex materials. Less able. Certainly not more able. Less able. One reason for trusting at least these gross findings of the study is that the findings are an embarrassment to the present US administration that sponsored the study , and its legislation intended to effect demonstrable improvement in general literacy, with increased use of educational technology a central piece of the platform. Less able. A honest appraisal of where we are now, what we know now, where we go from here with digital technology has to consider the possibility that that finding might be right, might stand up. If it does, what then? What do we say and do differently? Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Are digital natives analog immigrants?
John Hibbs asks for my recommendations for dealing with the New Illiteracy-if indeed there is a new illiteracy. Perhaps what we most need is some new conversational spaces that are not dominated either by the TechnoUtopians, who are sure that they have been given the answer to ignorance and poverty in the form of the computer, and TechnoLuddites, who see the new technologies as the source of the world's ills. The first group has its standardized answer: the new machines will do the job, and when they don't it's because the teachers (or the politicians, or the social workers) haven't been trained; the second group knows that ignorance and poverty can be traced to the machines that are turning learning and teachers into mass produced commodities. A third conversational space not dominated either by true believers or true disbelievers. We need, too, I think, to distinguish between our dealings with those on the two sides of the digital divide. Those without cell phones and computers who cannot use these devices to join the human conversation, or to connect to the information that will help them to learn and earn, should be helped to get them. Simple justice requires that continuing effort to narrow the divide. Those in the rich countries like the US I hope will begin to realize that we are entering a new phase of our love affair with the new technologies. History teaches us that each new communication technology begins a new romance, and part of that romance is the dream that the new device will usher in a period of transformation of learning, and of peace and prosperity. The telegraph, the radio, the cinema, television: the record is full of such dreams. Thomas Edison prophesying that the movies would make ignorance obsolete was typical of the belief in the revolutionary potential of a new medium, and the anthologies have hundreds of such visions. The new visionaries rarely talk now of books, or radio, or television: the new romances are built around the computer and the cell phone and the video game. So: perhaps the first thing we might do is consider learning something from history. We have had several decades of romancing about the computer-and regardless of how we push at the statistics of the recent studies of youth and adult literacy in the US it will be hard to argue that the revolution in learning promised by the romantics has occurred. If we are able to get beyond the dream and romance era, we might then begin to think about how to create new educational forms that incorporate the new tools and the best of the old tools and pedagogies, and test out the effectiveness of these designs in practice before we urge them on the world. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Hibbs Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 8:02 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussiongroup Subject: Re: [DDN] Are digital natives analog immigrants? At 6:27 PM -0800 12/18/05, Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: A growing body of literature argues that, in Steven Jo The digital natives may be analog immigrants If this is so, if there are several grains of truth here, what should our colleges and universities do about the New Illiteracy? Two possibilities quickly suggest themselves. The first: acknowledge that print literacy is dissolving and eroding and morphing into something else, and convert instruction and instructional media to that something else. The second: acknowledge that print literacy is the central literacy needed by those who function in the 21st century, and turn the attention of our best minds to the problem of how to save and enhance it. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] A good piece. What, Steve, are YOUR recommendations? e. -- John W. Hibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bfranklin.edu/johnhibbs ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Computers for education, health, etc
All, The second and compulsory $100 should not go to more hardware and software, which will only worsen the problem of speedy breakdown. That second $100 should go to a) establishing a service and repair capacity in the receiving community; and b) establishing a training capacity in the receiving community that will ensure that teachers, community leaders, and students know how to use the computers. Without training, without maintenance and service, the community's computers will be shelved or sold within six months. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Subbiah Arunachalam Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 12:03 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Computers for education, health, etc Kris Dev has a point. Simple but often missed. Arun Dear all, I believe if computers have to be really made useful in education, health, etc, there must be a long term plan of investment in creating suitable learning and health tools in an integrated way, rather than a disjointed way. The $100 laptop should go with a $ 100 investment in hardware, software, peripherals like projectors, scanners, printers, etc for education, health, etc.in atransparent way. Unless this is ensured and assured, the investment may go a waste in the long term , just as most deskcomputers given to schools and hositals are grossly under utilized, similar to computers in most government offices, used as elevated typewriters!! We are trying to change all these in a small way. Kris Dev http://ll2b.blogspot.com. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Making Computers Useful in Education
Here is the language of the analysis of the studies available in 1991, when the article cited by David Rosen was written. It is important to note that the article itself was not research on computerized instruction, but a summary of research done by others, most of it in the 1980's, when much of the work undertaken was CAI-computer-assisted instruction emphasizing drill-and-practice modes of instruction not now highly regarded. Some writers also reported on research which compared the effects of CAI alone with those produced by conventional instruction alone. Here, results are too mixed to permit any firm conclusion. Some inquires have found CAI superior, some have found conventional instruction superior, and still others have found no difference between them. This, of course, says exactly other investigators have found before and since this summary: No Significant Difference. One has to stretch considerably to see in such studies support for the notion that CAI can transform education.. What the new communication technologies can do is lower dramatically the cost of education. And they can move instruction to people and places not well served by the time-and-space bound apparatus of conventional instruction. And those gains may be enough to justify the new technologies. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Rosen Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 2:57 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Making Computers Useful in Education Steve and others who wonder if computers make a difference in instruction in U.S. K-12 schools, Take a look at this meta-study of 59 computer-assisted instruction (CAI) reports. http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/5/cu10.html It indicates that: * The use of CAI as a supplement to conventional instruction produces higher achievement than the use of conventional instruction alone. * Research is inconclusive regarding the comparative effectiveness of conventional instruction alone and CAI alone. * Computer-based education (CAI and other computer applications) produce higher achievement than conventional instruction alone. * Student use of word processors to develop writing skills leads to higher-quality written work than other writing methods (paper and pencil, conventional typewriters). * Students learn material faster with CAI than with conventional instruction alone. * Students retain what they have learned better with CAI than with conventional instruction alone. * The use of CAI leads to more positive attitudes toward computers, course content, quality of instruction, school in general, and self- as-learner than the use of conventional instruction alone. * The use of CAI is associated with other beneficial outcomes, including greater internal locus of control, school attendance, motivation/time-on-task, and student-student cooperation and collaboration than the use of conventional instruction alone. * CAI is more beneficial for younger students than older ones. * CAI is more beneficial with lower-achieving students than with higher-achieving ones. * Economically disadvantaged students benefit more from CAI than students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. * CAI is more effective for teaching lower-cognitive material than higher-cognitive material. * Most handicapped students, including learning disabled, mentally retarded, hearing impaired, emotionally disturbed, and language disordered, achieve at higher levels with CAI than with conventional instruction alone. * There are no significant differences in the effectiveness of CAI with male and female students. * Students' fondness for CAI activities centers around the immediate, objective, and positive feedback provided by these activities. * CAI activities appear to be at least as costeffective as--and sometimes more cost-effective than-- other instructional methods, such as teacher-directed instruction and tutoring. Most programs of computer-based instruction evaluated in the past, wrote Kulik and Kulik in 1987 have produced positive effects on student learning and attitudes. Further programs for developing and implementing computer-based instruction should therefore be encouraged. Based on review of the research evidence published both before and after Kulik and Kulik's paper, the present report strongly supports this conclusion. David J. Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Dec 19, 2005, at 3:27 PM, Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: Alex Kuskis says: I agree with Michael Gurstein's point that educational bureaucrats lack any understanding of educational technologies and how they should be implemented. Furthermore, even where hardware and software is in place, the majority of teachers will resist using them, without training and the incentive to reform an outmoded, industrial era educational system. Attempts to implement eudcational technologies without
[DDN] Are digital natives analog immigrants?
A growing body of literature argues that, in Steven Jones' words, EVERYTHING BAD IS GOOD FOR US. Television is good for us: makes us smarter. James Paul Gee studies WHAT VIDEO GAMES HAVE TO TEACH US ABOUT LEARNING AND LITERACY, and concludes that they have a lot to teach us. And yet... And yet there is the possibility that the ability of college graduates to read complex materials is declining sharply. Or so says the recent National Assessment of Adult Literacy. If the Assessment's findings hold up, the remaining question is, of course: Is the ability to read complex texts important in the 21st century? And if it is, are the digital natives well equipped for survival, much less leadership, in the 21st century? One popular and increasingly influential retailer of the thesis that the new generation of cell phone and iPod and computer communicators is a new breed of human with facilities adapted to work and citizenship in the 21st century is Mark Prensky Here is Prensky: Natives and Immigrants Why do I call these young computer enthusiasts and organizational activists digital natives? Think about the extraordinary cumulative digital experiences of each of these future business, military, and government leaders: an average of close to 10,000 hours playing video games; more than 200,000 e-mails and instant messages sent and received; nearly 10,000 hours of talking, playing games, and using data on cell phones; more than 20,000 hours spent watching TV (much of it jump-cut-laden MTV); almost 500,000 commercials seen - all before they finished college. At most, they've logged only 5,000 hours of book reading. This generation is better than any before at absorbing information and making decisions quickly, as well as at multitasking and parallel processing. In contrast, people age 30 or older are digital immigrants because they can never be as fluent in technology as a native who was born into it. You can see it in the digital immigrants' accent - whether it is printing out e-mails or typing with fingers rather than thumbs. Have you ever noticed that digital natives, unlike digital immigrants, don't talk about information overload? Rather, they crave more information. Multitasking means to Prensky the ability to IM with friends while attending to a college lecture or reading a book. Or getting all that a television documentary has to offer while attending to the captions scrolling below. College faculty throughout the US, and perhaps elsewhere where the new media are ubiquitous, will testify to the difficulty the digital natives have with the printed word. They resist reading even moderately difficult texts, and often refuse to buy textbooks, sometimes acknowledging that the words on the pages make little or no sense to them. The digital natives may be analog immigrants If this is so, if there are several grains of truth here, what should our colleges and universities do about the New Illiteracy? Two possibilities quickly suggest themselves. The first: acknowledge that print literacy is dissolving and eroding and morphing into something else, and convert instruction and instructional media to that something else. The second: acknowledge that print literacy is the central literacy needed by those who function in the 21st century, and turn the attention of our best minds to the problem of how to save and enhance it. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] NAAL points to serious, ongoing adult basic skills problem in U.S.
David, The finding that you underline-the large scale illiteracy in the United States-is a problem that has been with us for a long time. Perhaps the main point of the NAAL study differs for different interests. The main point for a group such as DDN, devoted as it is to expanding the use of the new communication technologies, is that in a decade in which the use of computer technology in our schools and colleges, and in the culture at large, has expanded significantly. . . the general level of literacy has declined. Further: there are suggestions by the officials connected with the study that new communication media-tv and the internet-are responsible for the decline. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Rosen Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 6:54 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: [DDN] NAAL points to serious,ongoing adult basic skills problem in U.S. Colleagues, The main point of the NAAL study (and the NALS study a decade earlier) , obscured in much of the discussion here so far, is that 13% of American adults (30 million people) are at a Below Basic literacy level, and another 29% (an additional 63 million people) are at a Basic level. In a changing economy, with global competitiveness, family self-sufficiency for millions of Americans is at risk. With current public resources, the U.S. Department of Education says we can reach under 10% (perhaps as low as 3%) of those in need. We have a serious adult literacy and basic skills divide. What can technology offer to help solve this problem? David J. Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Making Computers Useful in Education
Alex Kuskis says: I agree with Michael Gurstein's point that educational bureaucrats lack any understanding of educational technologies and how they should be implemented. Furthermore, even where hardware and software is in place, the majority of teachers will resist using them, without training and the incentive to reform an outmoded, industrial era educational system. Attempts to implement eudcational technologies without a corresponding curriculum reform and considerable teacher training are like pouring new wine into old bottles and are bound to fail... If an educational bureaucrat-presumably a school principal or a university leader or the head of an educational regulatory agency-wanted to bring to his school or college or educational network a practitioner and a set of practices that have proven their worth, where would he or she go for such expertise? Is there an example-perhaps a faculty member from a school of education-of a change process that has been set in motion that led to to successful change of the kind Mr. Kuskis says is possible? A change process that was not simply pouring new wine into old bottles, but actually poured the new wine into new bottles? Does that example also include convincing evidence that the new wine and the new bottles did in fact accomplish the transformations and the improvements claimed for them? By now there have been many-thousands?-of educational change projects built around the introduction of the new technologies. Surely one or two of them did the whole job-new wine, new bottles, hardware and software, teacher training, the entire package advocated by the champions of the new technologies. If even a few of them demonstrate the clearly what the new wine and the new bottles can do for learning, and we are told about them, we can use those stories of success to accelerate the tempo of change. The bureaucrats may be resistant to preaching and pronouncements, but even they have to be open to evidence. Without these demonstrations of possibility many of those indifferent or resistant feel justified in arguing that the advocates are the new faithful, asking the world to accept the new dispensation on faith rather than evidence. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Literacy level falls for US college graduates (fwd)
Here is an important conclusion from a Department of Education official: Grover J. Whitehurst, director of an institute within the Department of Education that helped to oversee the test, said he believed that the literacy of college graduates had dropped because a rising number of young Americans in recent years had spent their free time watching television and surfing the Internet If that is so it would appear that the new communication technologies can become the problem rather than the solution. An article in this Sunday's New York Times by David Carr, a new owner of a video iPod, seems to confirm thehy ypothesis that those who own the newest digital technologies tend to move away from the reading of complex materials that develops and sharpens the skills that are declining. Carr reports that since owning his new device he spends far less time reading and now uses that time to watch episodes of television dramas. If we think that the ability to read complex materials is a requirement for competence in our time, do we need to think about the part that the new technologies play in either deepening or eroding those skills? Can the computer improve complex reading skills? Or will it inevitably lead to their decline? Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andrew Pleasant Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 10:47 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Literacy level falls for US college graduates (fwd) Hi all, Listened to the original webcast of this data release. A couple observations ... We now have perhaps a clue why it took over 2 years and multiple delays of the planned release date since the end of field work to learn anything from this new data (and there is still more - e.g. about health literacy - that has yet to be released) as it doesn't look like the 'education president' and No Child Left Behind have moved any child or adult forward in terms of literacy skills. In fact, across all levels of education -- prose literacy skills declined in the past ten years. That is true for people with a graduate degree and for those with less than or some high school. For the other two 'types' of literacy the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL) measured, across education levels (from none or some high school to graduate degree) document literacy declined or remained unchanged and quantitative literacy remained unchanged. The administration spin tried to present the overall aggregate movement in average literacy rates as the most important point. However, any raise in 'average;' literacy level was created only because more people have a higher level education now than ten years ago (because of the way they analyzed the data so far, it is problematic to actually combine the prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores to determine an 'average'). But remember, people in this study with a graduate degree dropped 13 points in prose literacy and 17 points in document literacy as compared to those with a similar level of education ten years ago. What does all this mean? To my thinking, the shift in literacy rates the early look at the new data gives us is easily interpretable as a function of pushing more people through more years of schooling while actually teaching them less of the skills they need to survive and succeed in the world. In digital divide terms, it is entirely probably the new assessment will show that in terms of literacy the divide between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' has increased or, at the least, stayed the same (though we can't yet get to the original data to run that type of a complete analysis). Best wishes, Andrew Pleasant On 12/16/05, David Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy and others, Thanks for posting this. It is important to note that the interpretation that NCES -- which released the study -- gives to the decline in literacy for Hispanics is increased immigration by Hispanic adults who may not speak English or who may have had little schooling in their country of origin. There are some other findings worth noting: 1) Overall : No significant increases in U.S. adult literacy from 1992-2003. 2) Quantitative literacy skills are higher. 3) The results show a strong correlation between literacy and education level attainment 4) As literacy increases so does the % of the population which is fully employed (Of course this would also depend on the economy.) 5) Median weekly earnings also go up with higher literacy levels. David J. Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Dec 16, 2005, at 3:19 PM, Andy Carvin wrote: From the NY Times... -andy Literacy level falls for US college graduates The average American college graduate's literacy in English declined significantly over the past decade, according to results of a nationwide test released yesterday. The National Assessment of Adult Literacy, given in 2003
RE: [DDN] drinking water, food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, health, education, etc.
Linda. What a rich collection of resources on global issues you've put together. I thought I knew what was out there, but you've found good materials that are new to me. When students use the Internet to engage in dialog with student in other cultures, they are learning reading and writing and geography and history. And, importantly, they are having their consciousness raised about such issues as poverty, and what it does to families and communities and nations. Have you considered creating a blog on the various ways and tools school can use to create global awareness? Steve Eskow -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Linda Ullah Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 9:05 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] drinking water, food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, health,education, etc. This is a good point.. It reminds me of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. We have a HUGE need in the world to assure that people have adequate food, medical care, safety, clothing, sanitation, etc. This in itself is an enormous undertaking that we (I use we in a general sense--not pertaining to any particular we. ) tend to ignore--at least on any scale that would solve these problems. No one should have to go to bed hungry or afraid for his/her life. On the other hand, there is a potential danger that technology--if not available to the entire world could create a greater chasm between the haves and have nots, thus perpetuating the poverty in the world if those countries with the greatest poverty aren't brought into the digital age. Perhaps it could be argued that in order for a country to develop international economic strength in a global economy, Internet and other technology must be a priority. Another argument could be that the Internet could be used as a means to elevate awareness of the issues of poverty, and to connect people who might not otherwise help to a means to help eliminate hunger, lack of shelter, etc... I'd love to see school children using the Internet to help others. There are projects now that are trying to do this. I've been tying to put together a global project based learning web resource list for schools wanting to connect and do collaborative projects. If you scroll to the bottom of this web resource list, there are some project links of school related projects designed to help people in need: http://my-ecoach.com/online/webresourcelist.php?rlid=6499. If anyone know of more such project, please let me know and I'll add them to the list. It is my hope to get school children to help others in the world by using the Internet in a positive, pro-active way. Linda Ullah Teacher in Residence Foothill College Krause Center for Innovation [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.foothill.edu/kci On Nov 24, 2005, at 9:26 AM, Kris Dev wrote: Dear all, I agree that technology is required to develop society. But is is for a society that is already to developed to some extent. What about a society that has not developed at all? What would technology do there. So one size fits all policy is not good anywhere. Best is to have an equitable development policy and try to bring-up the most underdeveloped one step above and the under developed one step above and the develped one step above, each thro' their own requisite inputs. If there is no transparency and accountability in whatever is done, only the hype will be seen, and the benefits would get dissipated. What we need to see is all round development. How do we make the illiterate citizens (parents and the child) into literate citizens for the overall benefit of mankind is the question? We should be realistic in estimating the funds required to achive 100% literacy and the time frame, before we can say we have achieved anything. But for all technology to have any impact, drinking water, food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, health, education, etc. is of primary importance. No one would listen to a semon on empty stomach is the old saying. Kris Dev. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Terminology its discontents (Re: Third World)
Since I know that Third World was chosen by the partisans of those countries themselves, and many continue to favor it, I've been using Third World regularly. I think, however, that Don Osborn is right, and that the term has grown into negativity. Here is a point of view from Meadows, Meadows, and Randers in their BEYOND THE LIMITS: Like everyone, we have trouble with the choice of words to designate different regions of the world. We object to the words developed and developing for reasons that will become evident...The terms 'First,' 'Second,' and 'Third Worlds...[are] rapidly waning in relevance. 'North' and 'South' are geographically inaccurate but value-free designations often used in United Nations documents... But the distinction we think is most accurate for our purposes is between cultures that are 'industrialized' and 'less-industrialized.'... For general use, I think I will try to use North and South., following UN usage. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Donald Z. Osborn Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 10:32 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: [DDN] Terminology its discontents (Re: Third World) I wasn't going to get into this one, but will offer that I've stopped using Third World for some time. It's a legacy term, if you will, and it's not surprising that it is still in circulation (and it's better than some other legacy terms in the field, like underdeveloped). I understand its origins - at least in part - were half a century ago in the so-called non-aligned movement of countries professing allegience to neither the West or the Eastern bloc. Since third can also define a ranking, and the countries in the third world were generally among those with lower living standards, it was easy to make the association. Hence in the 70s the emergence of the term fourth world and so on. As for developing, I'm not so comfortable with that either. Although the intent is clear, there is also a real sense in which we all are developing, though obviously some are materially richer or poorer, and some countries have more elaborate and productive infrastructures than others, etc. All terms seem to have their strong and weak points, but the lesson I get from this is that maybe it is a good thing not to rely on such labels too much. Choose words and terms to fit the context, choose well and make the definitions clear. What that means in terms of inconvenience of not having a ready category to put whole countries under, perhaps more than compensates in obliging us to keep analysis appropriate, sharp, and adaptable. Don Osborn Bisharat.net Quoting Linda Ullah [EMAIL PROTECTED]: David, I don't see disagreement as much as the desire to find the best semantic fit. I like the word developing better than most of the other terms. It implies progress and positive energy. In terms of your advise to Beth.. I absolutely agree that it is critical to focus on development and sustainability of resources, She might look to local foundations. We have reasonably successful with this approach. Linda Ullah Teacher in Residence Foothill College Krause Center for Innovation [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.foothill.edu/kci On Nov 5, 2005, at 10:48 AM, Dave A. Chakrabarti wrote: Hi Vasu, Linda, Beth, I'm not sure I agree with you here. Why does Third World imply such negative connotations? It may just be a difference in how we understand the semantics, but I've also used Third World the way a geographer or economist uses it, i.e. to mean developing. Personally, I've often found greater beauty and more humanity in the third world than in more developed nations. I would certainly never use it in a negative sense...my emphasis in meaning has always been developing, perhaps in alternative ways rather than underdeveloped or backwards. Beth: In terms of best practices for running a community technology center, I'd say you should focus on development and sustainability of resources, which in your case will be mostly funding. Don't forget to line up sustainable sources of in-kind donations, such as laptop-repair and consulting, or donated space to work in, etc. I would suggest creating a system where the graduates of your program contribute back to the program, either monetarily or by donating their skills to teach the next generation of students. Similarly, being able to expand so you can retain a percentage of your graduates as instructors / administrative staff would also be a good goal to keep in mind. I'm also strongly in favor of teaching open sourced technologies and philosophies...i.e. Open Office instead of MS Office, etc. I'm of the opinion that the cost of running and maintaining a lab is often much lower using open source tools, even in areas where software is not always paid for anyway...simply because
RE: [DDN] A Littl' More On Bridging the Digital Divide in the US
Ronda Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The concept of computer labs as the answer for bridging the digital divide is obsolete— disadvantaged kids, starting at a the preschool level, need a computer in their home in order to have a chance at parity with their more affluent counterparts. Want to Improve High Schools? Put Computers in the Homes. is now published on the Digital Divide Network website. And of course Ronda is joined is this conviction by Negroponte and many others. My own hunch is that leaping the stage of the social computer and moving immediately to the personal computer is an invitation to failure. Unless the computers never need servicing, never get infected. Unless the computers are never given to the home without local and free servicing made available. Unless free and ongoing instruction in their use is made available to parents as well as students. Unless the computers are solar powered or hand cranked. If these conditions aren't met, a majority of the computers sent to the homes will not be functioning within six months. A social setting for shared use of computers-- a school, a library, a church, a community center--allows for instruction and servicing. Each user of such a computer as the Simputer can have his or her own card that allows for personal use of a shared device. The arrival of the low cost paper back book did not make the library obsolete. The arrival of television did not make the shared technology known as the school obsolete. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] A Littl' More On Bridging the Digital Divide in the US
Imagine a village, in Africa perhaps, where 200 literates are ready to use computers. Their average yearly income is $300 US. Forcing the personal computer solution--even when the $100 computer becomes a reality-- requires that each family pay one-third of its annual income for the device. Service and maintenance and the other costs associated with perosnal computer eats further into tthe meager family budget. $20,000 US for computer plus related expenses: an invitation unlikely to happen quickly, a slow and painful way to cross the digital divide. The social computer alternative: The village association or cooperative purchases 20 computers at $100, for $2000 US. Each villager who wants to use the computers pays an annual fee: say $25. Such a fee pays for the cost of the computers plus a sum for maintenance and service and other related expenses. Even $25 is difficult for a family living on $300. In the light of the history of squandered donor aid in the Third World, Negroponte's notion of having governments buy and distribute the computers to families seems like an invitation to more of the same. The analogy to the public library (or the public school, or the public road, or the public water supply) is this: if 200 people who cannot afford to buy the book have access to 10or 20 copies of the book, all can read it, even though they may have to wait a bit. This is not a socialist fantasy, but a proven social response to human needs. Perhaps the best metaphor for the social approach to the digital divide is the bridge, the public bridge across any divide. The bridge allows many to cross the divide, although they may have to wait a bit for their turn. The social computer allows many to enjoy the benefits of the new communication technologies, to cross the digital divide before they can afford to cross it on their own. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Taran Rampersad Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 8:58 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] A Littl' More On Bridging the Digital Divide in the US Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: My own hunch is that leaping the stage of the social computer and moving immediately to the personal computer is an invitation to failure. Well, if you think in terms of computers, I can understand that hunch. But a network of computers is a separate thing; a 'social computer' is also a computer that allows social networking by allowing access to others across a network. So if people have personal PCs to join the network, then I don't see how there can be a failure. Unless the computers never need servicing, never get infected. By these criteria, mankind would not have grown crops. They will always need servicing. There will always be security issues. But people adapt. Unless the computers are never given to the home without local and free servicing made available. I am vehemently against 'free' servicing. I do believe, however, that costs can be lower. Unless free and ongoing instruction in their use is made available to parents as well as students. It's available in many guises, and will continue to be. Unless the computers are solar powered or hand cranked. Solar might be better. The less moving parts, the better. A social setting for shared use of computers-- a school, a library, a church, a community center--allows for instruction and servicing. Each user of such a computer as the Simputer can have his or her own card that allows for personal use of a shared device. Let's not forget another social setting: The Internet. Sure, it's not a bunch of people in the same room, but then would you really want to share a room with me, Steve? The arrival of the low cost paper back book did not make the library obsolete. No. It didn't. The arrival of television did not make the shared technology known as the school obsolete. It depends on how you consider 'obsolete'. But I'm sure that television was only a factor in what I consider modern education. I also fault top heavy administrative spending on administration, in which I will enjoy Metzger's company. Bigger buildings and more administrative staff does not a better school make. And as such, neither will forcing people to group together to form an basic 'social computer'. A web server is a social computer, you said so yourself a while back. People will meet. People will get together. It's the nature of people. Perhaps we should let people choose how to interact with each other. At least, we could offer our species some dignity. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com Criticize by creating. — Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org
RE: [DDN] Educating the philanthropic community
Taran, 1. Every culture has the right to know about possible solutions to their problems. Not informing a community about such possibilities on the grounds that the natives are happy as they are, or that the solution will alter their culture, is morally questionable. The community should make this decision for itself after being informed. 2. Every solution is a new problem, including the problem of unanticipated consequences. 3. Every divide that is crossed opens up new divides. 4. Computers, for example, are not biodegradable. Computers allow for global capitalism to enter the local economy. That is: computers are a potent force for the weakening of local cultures. 5. The only way to keep these culture-degrading forces out of happy communities is take pains to see that they do not learn about computers. 6. We need to have developed a computer that is made wholly of Krispy Creme, granola, and raisins: communicates only in the local language; and is programmed to reject any message that contains the words dollars or euros. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Taran Rampersad Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 10:47 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Educating the philanthropic community Steve, Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: According to Taran, Hmm. According to Steve: the Amerindians of Guyana are quite happy to hunt for wood to burn for light and for cooking, and would have it no other way. That may be. However, I would favor asking them, rather than having Taran speak for them. On the matter of whether the Amerindians and the Ghanaians would welcome solar light in preference to kerosene or other harmful alternatives, Taran says this: Go ahead, Steve, because in the same way I certainly would prefer hearing something from the people from Ghana instead of you. So, your word is as good as mine. I'm certain that we need not pursue that line further. On the contrary, I think it important to continue to challenge your position that the Amerindians or the Ghanaians or the folks in Trinidad should not be offered the opportunity for solar lights or computers because if they said yes it would destroy their culture. It would be wonderful if that were what I did write. It was, however, not what I wrote. Further, to clear up something for you, I did not write about the Amerindians in Trinidad. And to further clear things up for you, I did not say that solar energy could not work for the Amerindians. I said, instead, that it would impact their lives in ways that you and I could not understand. Frankly, you're not challenging any position I have taken - you are simply shoving words into my keyboard, and my keyboard is about to vomit. I will provide you with direct evidence that there is strong positive interest in solar light in Ghana, and if you do not trust the authenticity of the email I will forward to you, or put out on this list, I will put you in direct touch with my Ghanaian colleagues. I don't want to talk to your Ghanaian colleagues, or your email evidence, or what have you. I've seen enough of what evidence looks like on email lists in my region of the world, and I've also been on the ground where the people who are in the studies walk. There's a vast difference between the two, and I expect no different from other parts of the world. What I would like is half the respect that you are showing your own projects and perspectives. Simply half will suffice. You're debating me on a topic that I am not debating. My point, as others have noted, is clear. Responsibility for appropriate use of technology is not up to the 'providers', it is up to the users. Further, it is important that new technologies be something which can be supported locally, which means it can just be 'plug and play' technology as a trade subsidy. If you want to debate, debate me on those points. The first village we would work with, which in turn will help other villages acquire lights, is www.patriensa.com I will shortly send to you an email from Osei Darkwa, the leader of the Patriensa project. (Patriensa is a small village some 35 miles from Kumasi.) You don't have to send me these things, Steve. In fact, unless everyone over there has access to email, the email describes people sympathetic to the project. In this case, I'm sure, everyone is happy with solar energy in these projects. But that isn't my point, and never has been. My point has been about addressing the negative aspects of technology, which below you accuse myself and others (wrongly) of neglecting. Further, the way this conversation is going, I really don't want to read too much more about it tonight. Or tomorrow. Will you now put me in touch with Amerindian leadership? Hehe. You don't understand much about Amerindians, do you Steve? Why would they want to contact you? Why would they want to talk to me
RE: [DDN] Educating the philanthropic community
According to Taran, the Amerindians of Guyana are quite happy to hunt for wood to burn for light and for cooking, and would have it no other way. That may be. However, I would favor asking them, rather than having Taran speak for them. Meanwhile, there is substantial evidence to back up some conclusions. First: there are literally billions of people in the world without electricity. Many of them spend an inordinate share of their incomes for the kerosene that slowly poisons them. And the villagers, most often women, spend much of their time hunting for wood to burn from a rapdily depleting supply. Further: we know for sure there are many villages and villagers doing these things who do not know that there is an alternative. We know this for sure from our personal experience in Africa and elsewhere, and from the experience of others who work in the Third World. And we know for sure that literally thousands of villages choose to solarize light and cooking when they learn that these are feasible options, and that there are those who will help them. To support that conclusion, here is evidence from two organization we have worked with: Solar Light for Africa www.solarlightforafrica.org This organization has installed solar lighting in some 1,500 villages, largely in Uganda, with some work in Botswana and Rwanda. Led by retired Episcopal bishop Alden Hathaway the project insures that the village really wants these units by providing half the funding for them from US donations; the other half of the necessary money comes from the village. Many of these units have been installed by teams of high school students trained as installers: half of the students are from the US, the other half from Uganda. The educational impact of this kind of human service is powerful. The other and newer organization is the Light Up the World Foundation, based at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada. See: www.lutw.org Perhaps we need to do less romanticizing about the happy natives who don't really mind lungs poisoned from kerosene or wood smoke because that's their culture, and they want to stay with the old ways. Some of us think when it comes to the AIDS epidemic and the possibilities of antiretrovirals and condoms and discussions of safe sex, and when it comes to corroded lungs, we might have a moral obligation to present possibilities to those suffering, and let them decide whether they want to stay with untreated dying from AIDS and children coughing from kerosene. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Taran Rampersad Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 8:05 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Educating the philanthropic community Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: But consider: Consider a community off the electric grid, using kerosene lamps for light, and blackening ceilings and lungs in the process. And spending hours searching for incresingly scarce wood for cooking fires. Assume further that the villagers do not know that are simple solar powered white LED units that can provde home light for less than they are paying for kerosene, and when the light is paid for for no regular expense. And there are simple solar cookers made of cardboard and aluminum foil that can minimmize or eliminate the hunt for wood as fuel. Hmm. Well, consider the Amerindians of Guyana. Most of them are quite happy, don't use kerosene, and find wood easily. They can go to 'civilization', as they call it, when they wish to. There's even a solar telecenter out there somewhere, which none use. They don't wander around the forest looking for things to take pictures of so that they can upload them to Flickr, and so on. Are we better than they are? I don't think so. If they are happy that way, then let them be happy. They like some of what comes their way - such as the road. One Amerindian commented that they don't mind the road because it's easier to walk to their hunting spot. I'd never considered that, and the politicians and good willed missionary-style 'we know what is best for them' folks never considered it either. They saw it as an intrusion upon the Amerindians. The point here is that going to 'save' people can be worse than killing them all off quickly. The need for technology - for 'education', as the Western world terms knowledge (not necessarily critical thinking) - has to come from within. Any revolution happens from within, not from without. There's a lot to be said for walking through the forest looking for something to eat, or some wood to burn. There's a noble way of life, not bending over backwards for funding so that people in forests who are happy can become 'civilized'. Solar lighting is a practicality which, on the surface, could help the Amerindian. But what about night vision? Hunting at night? And what about having to carry around a heavy battery during the change of campsites? Well, now we have
RE: [DDN] Educating the philanthropic community
It's easy to agree with the admonition that we not allow advertising to distort the development agenda, and important to agree, but there's another side to that coin. One of the pieces of conventional community development wisdom--almost sacred writ by now--is that development agents and agencies ought to listen to what the community wants, and respond, rather than bringing in answers and agendas. Yes indeed. But consider: Consider a community off the electric grid, using kerosene lamps for light, and blackening ceilings and lungs in the process. And spending hours searching for incresingly scarce wood for cooking fires. Assume further that the villagers do not know that are simple solar powered white LED units that can provde home light for less than they are paying for kerosene, and when the light is paid for for no regular expense. And there are simple solar cookers made of cardboard and aluminum foil that can minimmize or eliminate the hunt for wood as fuel. The situation, then, is this: Since the villagers do not know of these possibilities they will not list them when they are asked to name their needs. Is the development agency acting improperly when it looks to make the community leaders aware of these possibilities? Doing so, of course, can be called an attempt by the outsider to change the community's agenda. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of J Cravens Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 11:44 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Educating the philanthropic community Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the point is that a lot of the technology we're discussing should be encouraged by critical things - not by things that artificially creating a need and building unrealistic explanations - I wanted to say hurrah for this excellent point. I know that we could probably debate until the end of time what technology is the right technology for any given situation, but I do think that it's a much better-informed debate that can lead to more sustainable, more-audience-appropriate tech, than leaving the discussion to those with better advertising. About half a dozen times, I've been approached by a senior manager who got bedazzled by a sales pitch and he's now decided that the organization, or those it serves, really need WhamBam software, or BlingBling Inc. hardware. And I've had to put together powerpoint presentations and cost benefit tables and narratives and interpretive dances to counter the argument of the salesmen, whose undone months of methodical, critically-thought-out strategic planning. Sometimes I'm successful, but often, I'm stuck, or the people we were serving get stuck, with WhamBam software and BlingBling Inc. hardware. All because a non-tech person got bedazzled by advertising. One of the digital divides that needs to be bridged is helping people -- anywhere -- make informed choices about hardware and software, and being able to articulate and identify their own needs. but that's a rather huge goal in and of itself... -- Jayne Cravens Bonn, Germany Services for Mission-Based Orgs www.coyotecommunications.com Open University Development Studies www.coyotecommunications.com/development Contact me www.coyotecommunications.com/contact.html ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Alfred Bork
For some reason which others can guess at but only he can confirm Alfred Bork, who has a long ( 30 years? 40?) and distinguished record as an advocate and developer of computer tutoring programs chooses to confine his remarks in discussions such as this to bitter jabs at what he considers misquided emphases in the educational technology movement. Here, for example, is Dr. Bork describing a computer-teaching program in physics in a 1980 book of essays: Our most widely used student-computer dialogue is MOTION, an 'F=ma' world for the student to explore freely. Students control in a highly interactive manner, the force laws, equation constants and initial conditions. Thus, they can examine many more situations than they can in the 'real'world, with much more control. Further they need not view the systems only in configuration (x-y) space, but can plot any two or three physically meaninful variables, thus moving toward viewing the system as existing in a wide variety of spaces normally unavailable. The very wide use by students not enrolled in physics classes testifies to its success. Hubert Dreyfus, deeply critical of what he saw as an excessive faith in the future of the computer as a teaching tool, quoted this paragraph in his 1986 book MIND OVER MACHINE and commented: In the future such simulations will surely become more common, helping students of all ages in all disciplines develop thier intuition. Dr. Bork, was this prediction accurate? Or is the computer tutoring movement less alive than it was in 1980? You have never lost faith or sight of this vision, and now believe that new visual and audio technologies make it possible for well-designed teaching/tutoring software to be a principal weapon in such global education problems as illiteracy. Why has this bandwagon come to a halt? Steve Eskow -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alfred Bork Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 8:53 AM To: 'The Digital Divide Network discussion group' Subject: RE: [DDN] Creating the $100 Laptop Why not wait for the 99 cent laptop? Alfred -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Thompson Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 7:07 AM To: 'The Digital Divide Network discussion group' Subject: RE: [DDN] Creating the $100 Laptop Don't know about everyone else, but I think I'll wait for the $99 laptop. John T. Thompson, Ph.D. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] personal vis social and the academic
The concept of redundant students and superfluous students is hard for many to grasp. Clearly Joe Beckmann is one of them: Regarding redundancy, I still don't agree. One of the benefits of technology - sorry to infuse this into the discussion, but it gets increasingly critical to addressing the musical chairs zero sum game you raise regarding school size - is that the capital value of curriculum, institutional resources, staff development, and the whole infrastructure of schools and colleges can be shared by many more players, people, institutions, and courses. What is the capital value of being able to play the game yourself, rather than watch it from the stands? What is the capital value of a teacher-student conference with the teacher able to spend time with the student because he does not have 300 of them to teach--or 3000? What is the capital value of a course that encourages essay writing rather than multiple choice quizzes and exams, and allows the teacher to take the time to comment carefully on each essay? You are falling into the language of the school as factory, with its rhetoric of accountability, productivity, and, of course, capital value. What you ignore is the curriculum choices hiding in your language. The one-way lecture, can of course--to use your words--be shared by many more players, people, institutions, and courses. For that kind of sharing the giant school is as plausible as the small school. Indeed, the opposite is also true: for that kind of sharing you need no school at all: home schooling will do nicely as the scene of that sharing. The virtues of the small school are the virtued of the small community. They have to do with unmediated face-to-face communication and community. The vices of the small school are the vices of the small community. They have to do with provincialism, insularity, a lack of the diverse learning opportunities the large community offers. Technology, properly limited so as not to become dominant, can compensate for the vices of the small school. The problem can become how to keep the technoutopians and the technoromantics from expanding to fill the teaching and learning spaces of the small school. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] And the small community. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] personal vis social and the academic
If there's to be a debate, we need to join the issue. There is the matter of the small school: the issue of size and its impact on the educational process. And there's the issue of technology in schools, and the role it plays among other instructional modes and pedagogies. And there's the issue of the technocentric school: the school of any conceivable size that has all or most instruction connected to the new and the old technologies. Do you insist on conflating all of these: on talking about the small technocentric school? If so, my position on that proposal is simple: the virtues of the small schools are negated by technocentrism, and the virtues of technology can better be realized in one of Diane Ravitch's large schools--and at less cost. I refer you to two aged and still powerfully relevant accounts of this matter of institutional size, as an independent variable, and learning. In the 1950s Roger Barker, professor of psychology at the University of Kansas, and his colleagues studied thirteen high schools in eastern Kansas: school ranging in size from 40 students to 2000 and more, and published their findings in 1964 in a neglected educational classic, BIG SCHOOL, SMALL SCHOOL. A helpful summary and analysis of Barker's work is to be found in Kirkpatrick Sales' 1980 book HUMAN SCALE, a work whose concern with the size of institutions is summarized in its title. The second book is Arthur Chickering's 1969 brilliant work, EDUCATION AND IDENTITY Here is Chickering: ...institutional size has implications for student development in its own right...when students are superfluous they don't develop much, or to put it more elegantly, development varies inversely with redundancy..What does redundant or superfluous mean? Redundancy is five persons for a game of bridge, or ten persons for a baseball team...It's twenty persons on a trout stream or two thousand on a beach. It's a class play that calls for twenty in a class of eighty, or an athletic program with places for eighty in a school of eight hundred. To put it more generally, redundancy occurs when increases in the number of inhabitants of a setting lead to decreasing opportunities for participation and satisfaction for each individual. So: I want to disaggregate the matter of size, the smallness of the school, just for a while, from the matter of technology, to see if there is agreement to the proposition that smallness alone has great potential benefits to learning. And then if we agree on that we might be able to agree on the proposition that suitably enveloped in the small school and taking its rightful but not dominant place, technology can bring into that small and warm and supportive environment the skills and knowledge that are not already within it. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joseph Beckmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 5:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'The Digital Divide Network discussion group' Subject: RE: [DDN] personal vis social and the academic Ahh, a debate. Observing classrooms in Gates schools, where technology was ample, there were few times when students were urged to find out rather than turn to specific pages or websites. Even then, their searches were largely limited to Google, both because of the filters built into the schools' net connections and due to teachers' hesitation to challenge students to really open searches. In those same classrooms, teachers would turn to specific, pre-identified pages to support their discussions, as a lecturer might use PowerPoint, but never, in two years of observing these schools, encouraged students to search while a discussion was ongoing. In contrast, as an observer, I searched and found plenty to amplify, make more relevant, and make more interesting the often academic didacticism of even the best of traditional secondary school teaching. And this when there is substantial research (see, for one example, Ellen Langer's Power of Mindful Learning) that we learn more when we multi-task than when we limit and narrow classroom activities to exclude everything but the teachers' focus. Of course teachers are gadget freaks, but they are very rarely early adopters - OF ANYTHING. Very, very few teachers have telephones in their classrooms, incidentally, and that's after a century of adoption! The old Everett Rodgers stuff on the diffusion of innovations paced the adoption of any educational innovation at 25 years for 50% of the schools to adopt anything like that innovation. That's as true for a technologically infused classroom as it is - or was - for new math or ability level grouping. The computer is not the Great Instructor, but, rather, a really responsive library to which any student can contribute and from which any class can be improved. Surely the small school movement has stressed the interpersonal networking of a team of teachers with teams of students, but such teams are not exclusive to the size
RE: [DDN] personal vis social and the academic
Joseph Beckman has the beginnings of a powerful case for the small school that incorporates technology. Unfortunately, he clutters the case with some conventional assumptions about the resistance to technology by academics, and some questionable recommendations about the role technology should play in such schools. And this issue of small schools with teacher resources augmented by technology is critical for the issue of the digital divide: many schools on the wrong side of the divide are and have to be small by necessity of geography and demography. The Academy, he says, is notoriously technophobic. The usual indictment. Now, many of the teachers I know have radios and telephones, a few have television sets and air conditioners, and almost to a man and woman they have computers in their homes. The problem, then--or at least an important piece of it--lies not with technophobia but with technophilia, with those who so enchanted with their cell phones and computers that they would turn the small school into an endless connection between students and these devices. If the computer is to become the Great Instructor there is no point to the small school. The large school can have many more carrels with many more computers. Indeed, such defenders of the new technologies as Sir John Daniels also write books and advocate for mega-universities: universities like the British Open University that have 100,000 or more students. The great virtue of the small school is the relationships it can create between teachers and students, and students and students. In the small school the teacher knows the student by name and need, and can help each student. Students can study together, support each other, have more of an opportunity to engage in music and art and athletics, since the small school encourages participation rather than varsity excellence for a few and passive spectatorship for the many. In the small school it is easier to reach out to the community for support and opportunities for work and service experiences that are educational. The disadvantages of the small school, say the critics, is that it cannot afford the range of curricula of the large school; it cannot afford the range of qualified faculty... All the available research reveals that these advantages are true but largely of little impact on students, and more than compensated for by the advantages of intimacy and concern of the small school. Joseph Beckmann's emphasis on technology and what it can bring in to the small school is the central and clinching point, I think. We can say to those who believe that the technophiles would undo all of the advantages of the small school by their technocentrism by making it clear that those advantages of the small would continue to be featured: teachers and students would talk and think and collaborate together as warm and intimate human community for a good part of the school day, and supplement those learnings with those specialties and programs and possibilities that the computer can bring in from the nation and around the world. Joseph Beckmann says the only way to benefit from technology is to use a great deal of it--and that's the fear of the small school advocates. A legitimate fear, some of us who are not technophobes believe. The only way to benefit from the small school is to insure that there is a great deal of the talk and the connection and the participation that justify the small school in the first place. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Joseph Beckmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 6:07 PM To: 'The Digital Divide Network discussion group'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [DDN] personal vis social and the academic You've hit a topic that is still too largely ignored. Technology promises to realize the social liberal vision of transparent government, policy, program, business and development. Yet The Academy is notoriously technophobic. Diane Ravitch, in the US, has recently taken up the argument against small, high tech high schools, arguing, for example, that only large, comprehensive secondary schools have the curricular variety needed to prepare young people for the 21st Century. Compared to a place with a dozen teachers and 300 to 400 kids, her argument sounds rational, and her allies are massing a substantial counter-reform against the new secondary school tech movement. Yet there are over 15,000 online college courses and several more thousand secondary courses. There is an almost infinite range of course material available at subsidies so deep that they might as well be free in most US and European school settings, and Taran's $480 or so is not prohibitive anywhere, just a little steep many places. What is lacking is neither the courseware nor the innovative models. What truly is lacking is enough evidence of student productivity effected by this technology. Schools usually hide their students' portfolios, rather than promote
RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Updateonthe Simputer
Arun's case for the public computer thesis, below, is powerful and compelling. That we can do much to bridge the digital divide without public computing is a fiction that needs to be exposed and contested. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Subbiah Arunachalam Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 3:27 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Updateonthe Simputer Errol Hewitt wrote: As soon as the individual or family in the community sees the benefit of the technology to his/her own circumstance, is when the real economic decision will be taken to learn the skill and own it -- then is when the sacrifice will be made to 'own' it. Sorry, that is not what I see in reality. Most people learn the skills long before they can own a gadget. How many autorickshaw and taxi drivers in the city of Madras own the vehicle? A very small proportion. But they all know how to drive and they all have valid driving licenses. How many people working in BPO offices in Madras own computers at home? Hardly anyone. But all of them use computers with great felicity. Hundreds of villagers - men, women, adults, children - in Pondicherry have learnt to use computers through the 'public commons' facility made available through the MSSRF Knowledge Centres, but hardly anyone owns a computer. Look at the New York Public Library or the Library of Congress. If I am a member I can use all of their collections. Can I ever magine to own even a minute part of those magnificent collections? That is the power of the 'public commons' approach; that is the value of sharing. Arun [Subbiah Arunachalam] - Original Message - From: ehewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 9:07 PM Subject: Re: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Updateonthe Simputer Hi Arun, I think you have placed your 'finger' on the essential in this discussion when in the context of your entire note you said, Eventually, when an individual (or a family) earns enough to be able to afford something he/she may decide to 'own' it As soon as the individual or family in the community see's the benefit of the technology to his/her own circumstance, is when the real economic decision will be taken to learn the skill and own it -- then is when the sacrifice will be made to 'own' it. The more heavily discounted the price-- the better [but this is in the context where sacrifices are made even for non economic reasons e.g 'fashion' shoes etc] The truly important core factor is maximizing the use of the limited number of computers by meaningfully applying them to the individual in the community where he/she is... what they are doing and as they are... Taran's point is I think very valid in that the more the computer is configured around the needs of the individuals, the quicker and more applicable it is seen to be etc.-- the more applicable [beneficial] it is seen to be the greater the passion and the sacrifice for the community and the individuals to want to acquire. To be noted as well is the fact, alluded to earlier by Taran, that while purchase is essentially a one off matter, maintaining it in use is a bigger problem as in most developing countries annual Internet use is much higher in cost than per capital GDP. Errol [Errol Hewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED]] At 19:24 30/05/2005 +0530, you wrote: I agree with you Steve. At each one of the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation Knowledge Centres in Pondicherry in southern India we have a few computers - not more than five in any centre, and one of them is out of bounds for all but the centre volunteers. But these are common assets for the entire village. What is at work is the idea of public commons. We cannot afford to provide computers and telephones and Internet accounts to everyone in the village. That is the reality. How can we overcome the problem? What we lack is the financial resources to buy gadgets. What we have is a large heart, a willingness to share what little we have, a commitment to care for others. After all development is about sharing and caring. The computers and every other service provided at the centre (such as information on a whole range of local needs) is open to all. It works well. Eventually, when an individual (or a family) earns enough to be able to afford something he/she may decide to 'own' it. Arun [Subbiah Arunachalam] - Original Message - From: Dr. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 6:46 AM Subject: RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Update onthe Simputer Taran, I wish you'd reconsider your basic economics: for example, your belief that $480 that stays in India to buy a computer is better than buying one
RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Updateonthe Simputer
Taran Rampersad wants to believe, it would seem, that 20 people owning 20 motorcycles amounts to the same thing as a bus. (I'm guessing here that that's what the missing message argues.) And he wants to inject the important notion of the network into the issue: In a network, public computing is made possible by smaller computer in the network. Which means it's all the same thing. So the more people who have *individual* devices contributes to *public computing*. That's of course true, and irrelevant to the issue. If 20 people could afford to own 20 computers at $480 each, or $240, or even $100, that might be seen as preferable to 20 people sharing one $480 computer, or one $100 computer, but the issue that the public computing concept is trying to solve is how to make computing available to those who can't afford to own, learn, and maintain computers as individuals. Or, to risk belaboring the point which appears elusive, if 20 people chip in $24 each they can possess in common the same Simputer that you can afford to buy and use without sharing. And, interestingly, the flash card in its design makes clear that it is intended to be a public computer. Our Benjamin Franklin created the first subscription library in the US on the public principle: if 20 people joined together and bought one book each--a different book each--and put them in the common stock when they were finished, each subscriber could read 20 books for the price of one. This is the origin of the term still in use here, circulating library: the books circulate rather than remain on an individual owner's shelf. And as Arun and others here make clear, there are advantages well beyond the basic economics that are compelling. The 20 people who share a computer have the opportunity to form a community of practice. They teach other, support each other through the frustrations with a new technology: and sometimes 20 heads are better than one. You muddy the waters, Taran, when you try to blur the distinction between personal and public computing. Twenty people owning $480 computers for a total capital expenditure of $9600 is NOT the same as twenty people having access to a computer for $24. Twenty people on a bus is not the same as 20 people on 20 motorcycles. That's basic economics. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Taran Rampersad Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 3:54 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Updateonthe Simputer Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: Arun's case for the public computer thesis, below, is powerful and compelling. That we can do much to bridge the digital divide without public computing is a fiction that needs to be exposed and contested. Steve Eskow Sorry, Steve, I've read all of this quite carefully and posts I have made to this list about it have NOT shown up - notably the one about motorcycles instead of your buses. In a network, public computing is made possible by smaller computer in the network. Which means it's all the same thing. So the more people who have *individual* devices contributes to *public computing*. The more individual computing devices that are possible, the more your public computing concept holds true... so we're back where we are. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: Panama City, Panama [EMAIL PROTECTED] PLEASE DON'T HIT REPLY TO ALL! http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Update on the Simputer
Taran Rampersad comments on this: The approach Jon Hall describes below makes much sense: there are many governments around the world that might well consider it. This way: Assuming that they can afford it. It is important to do what Taran has done here: to make affordability a central issue in deciding on how best to attack the digital divide. Those of us who favor the public computing approach assume--and there is much evidence to back the assumption--that only a tiny fraction of those on the wrong side of the divide can afford a $480 computer, or a $240 dollar computer, and most would have to sacrifice to pay $100. Mass purchasing by government--and many governments can arrange for the necessary financing--will drive the price of the computers down. And a well-designed community telecenter campaign of the kind described by Arun will make it possible for villages and urban locales to buy computers from the government supply at the government's cost, or less if the government chooses to subsidize, so that the eventual cost to each user can be one-twentieth or less of $100. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] personal vis social and the academic
Janet Salmos writes: It seems to me that this list needs to focus on the issues of bridging the digital divide, not on politics. If we are to win the war against the digital divide we need to enlist all the major institutions of society. Perhaps the crucial bridge across the divide is government, and that bridge is built by politics. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Updateonthe Simputer
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Subbiah Arunachalam Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 6:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Updateonthe Simputer What Subbiah Arunachalam and his colleagues are doing in southern India is a model that can be adapted to many other countries and cultures: the model travels. Perhaps the Digital Divide Network needs to promote the idea of a public commons to accelerate the availability of the new technologies to those around the world who need them. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] I agree with you Steve. At each one of the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation Knowledge Centres in Pondicherry in southern India we have a few computers - not more than five in any centre, and one of them is out of bounds for all but the centre volunteers. But these are common assets for the entire village. What is at work is the idea of public commons. We cannot afford to provide computers and telephones and Internet accounts to everyone in the village. That is the reality. How can we overcome the problem? What we lack is the financial resources to buy gadgets. What we have is a large heart, a willingness to share what little we have, a commitment to care for others. After all development is about sharing and caring. The computers and every other service provided at the centre (such as information on a whole range of local needs) is open to all. It works well. Eventually, when an individual (or a family) earns enough to be able to afford something he/she may decide to 'own' it. Arun [Subbiah Arunachalam] - Original Message - From: Dr. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 6:46 AM Subject: RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Update onthe Simputer Taran, I wish you'd reconsider your basic economics: for example, your belief that $480 that stays in India to buy a computer is better than buying one elsewhere for $300. That may not sit well with those in India or Africa who have to buy a computer. Ghana, where I work, is richer than some of its sub-Saharan neighbors: $400 US is what the average Ghanaian earns a year, a year's earning not quite enough to buy your Simputer. And I wish you'd reconsider conclusions like this one: If you've ever had to share one computer with 20 people, and it was your only access point, I doubt you would be able to email as often. You wouldn't have leisure time to read articles that *you* might find interesting. I've had to share buses and trains with many people, and you're right: it's not nearly as convenient as owning my own automobile. And I've had to get my learning at public schools, not nearly as convenient as private tutoring. And I've had to borrow books from a public library, not nearly convenient as buying my own and owning them. And I've used computers at libraries and internet cafes, and you're right: sharing a computer is not nearly as convenient as owning one. And I ask you to consider that your convenience argument is misleading, and downright harmful. If we insist on private automobiles, millions will be continue to be without rapid transport, and we will continue to foul the environment. And if we insist on personal ownership of books, millions will not read, even if we cut down enough trees for all those books. And if we insist on the personal computer, billions will not cross the digital divide. If the advantages of the Simputer at $480 are so much greater than that of the desktop at less, let's urge small churches or cafes or schools in the poorer nations to buy one or two or three and share them, until such time as the folks in the community can afford to buy their own. In the focus on the reduction of cost, I sincerely believe by these communications that the increase in quality of life as the *value* has been lost. You may have it backwards, Taran. Those who insist on personal automobiles and personal libraries and personal computers may be the ones who are slowing down the erasure of the many divides between the haves and the have-nots. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Update on the Simputer
The approach Jon Hall describes below makes much sense: there are many governments around the world that might well consider it. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jon maddog Hall Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 7:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Digital Divide Network discussion group Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DDN] Update on the Simputer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Marvelous. The Simputer plus the idea of Public Computing plus promoting the idea of governments purchasing a million or more at one time and seeing to their distribution and we have a strategy for an attack on the digital divide that might make a difference. The concept of a government committing to purchasing a million or more units is not out of possibility. As I understand it, Brazil is developing a program to distribute computers to low-income families, bundling the cost of the computer with the cost of two years of internet services and financing the whole thing, with the end-users paying about $24. per month. At the end of the two years they will own the computer. Target volume: 1,000,000 units. md -- Jon maddog Hall Executive Director Linux International(R) email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 80 Amherst St. Voice: +1.603.672.4557 Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A. WWW: http://www.li.org Board Member: Uniforum Association, USENIX Association (R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries. (R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis (R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other countries. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] personal vis social and the academic
Tom Abeles maintains, cogently, that the rhetoric of the ICT as a/the vehicle for crossing the digital divide has become part of a quasi-religion: This plays critically in the issues surrounding the digital divide where it is an article of faith that the introduction of appropriate technology, in this case computers, as the way for social change to occur. Both the hope and the vehicles of possibilities (technoloty and process) are products of a liberal vision (not the Enlightenment liberal or libertarian, but social liberal). What makes this of concern is that this dogma is also being formalized and propagated in The Academy in a somewhat cloistered environment (mostly to protect an emerging faith amongst young turks who have to play the publish/perish game or who are trying to create sacred liturgy). And it is not subject to the critical analysis so needed if substantive change is to be promulgated. Indeed. That religious faith, however, seems not to respect traditional political and philosophical boundaries. In the US, one of the fervent propagandists for the technology-as-savior position is Newt Gingrich, also a fervent conservative. And one of the frequent voices on this list supporting the universal computerization thesis is also a follower of Ayn Rand, hardly a liberal. Perhaps the problem with the Academy is that it is losing its cloistered isolation from market pressures, and is becoming part of the marketing apparatus for the hardware and software establishment. See, for example, UNIVERSITY, INC for chilling examples of how the mega corporations increasingly shape the agenda for university research, and make it difficult for scholars to do the critical analysis which you so rightly maintain is the heart of the university role. Perhaps a litmus test for all of us in the US who are interested in your thesis is this matter of outsourcing. If Indians do indeed learn to use the new technology they do indeed improve their economic positions as American jobs and dollars flow to them: the economic impact of the new technology seems to be a reality in this phenomenon. Sub-Saharan Africa has not improved its economic position radically in the last few decades. If more African lean to use computers and do, for example, data entry, jobs and dollars will move from the developed countries to Africa. Is that a movement we of the Academy should support or resist? Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Update on the Simputer
Jayne Cravens writes: I just wanted to say that I find this back and forth about Simputer fantastic. Thank you to everyone who is contributing/debating. I'm learning so much. In your previous incarnation at the UN, and since, you've taught many of us a great deal, Jayne. Turn about is fair play. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Update on the Simputer
Taran Rampersad writes: ..Toss in the fact that only 50,000 [Simputers] were produced compared to the millions of components built by commercial entities. Don't believe me? Ask Negroponte why it takes a minimum order of 1 *million* PCs to meet the $100 laptop which the MIT Media Lab is looking at. Build 1 million Simputers, and the price would be drastically lower Negroponte's insistence on orders of a million computers or more is, I think, a brilliant piece of humanitarian strategy, perhaps as important as the computing device itself. It says to the world, and in particular to the governments of the poor countires, 1) We will lose more generations of our young to poverty and despair if you do not take bold steps; 2) A mass attack on the digital divide needs to be sponsored by the nation itself; 3)If you, the government, buy these machines in quantity the price can be dramatically reduced; and 4) You can can distribute them at your cost, or at prices that include a government subsidy. Selling a handful of high-priced Simputers to the already computer literate of a nation will do little to lessen ignorance and poverty. If the Simputer is a superior product, and mass producing it will dramatically lower its price, the Simputer firm might emulate Negroponte and insist on mass orders. Sombining mass orders with lower prices and the public computing idea would result in a major and substantial attack on the digital divide. A slow trickle of $480 computers to a handful of the already computer users will result in more generations of the needy being deprived of their use. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Update ontheSimputer
Todd Seal says important things about public and private computers: Why does this have to be an either - or problem? Those communities that have the population of those that can afford the personal, well, that's probably what they will buy. For those without that luxury, then certainly the public is the best option. A computer in a public space is better than no computer at all. Clearly there should not be either-or. I wonder, however, about basing the outcome on community wealth alone. There are reasons for advocating public transportation even for communities than can afford private autos. Perhaps there are similar reasons for advocating social and public computing. Interesting idea, though, about public and personal computing. I like the distinction and think it deserves a future investigation as to the applications of both uses of technology. Does this open a realm of different software for each application? Are there public and personal uses that are completely outside each other's domain? Can a computer have a public and a personal profile that will make available different facets of the computer? Since logging on to your computer is inherent in most operating systems, it wouldn't be too far a stretch to set up those distinct profiles and keep them secure. I, for one, have not encountered this idea of software designed for public computing, and it seems like an important road to follow. I think the right road is not universal and can only be determined based upon the inner workings of the community deciding. Perhaps there's a needs survey that should be developed to determine personal or public computing, so that donating organizations have a better idea what to donate. The ubiquitous Internet Cafe is one step toward public computing. Although the proposal raises the eyebrows of some civil libertarians, churches, with their commitments to community service as well as service to their own congregants, can be another vehicle for public computing. In some of the ealtheir nations public libraries are already involvedin public computing. The proposal that donor organizations might consider using their funds to encourage public computing is an important one. Wouldn't it be possible, though, to use the computer for both needs? While in a public location, can't I use my computer personally? Does the distinction really matter to a community without computer access? When I use the computer at my local public library--which I do from time to time--or at an Internet Cafe, I am using it personallly. The distinction, I think, matters a great deal. If a donor agency gives me a computer I can use it personally, but you cannot. If it's put in a public setting, we both can use it personally. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Update on the Simputer
Tom Abeles writes: Dr. Steve Eskow wrote (in part) Personal or social computing: which is the right road for those without computers and their benefits to get access to them? == I am not sure that this is the question. The first question to ask is the one to ourselves which seeks to unravel just how much of our cultural values we are imposing on this and related issues. And then, of course, Tom Abeles goes on to list a the correct questions and the correct answers and the correct agenda--all of which, of course, reflect the cultural values he would like to impose on the debate and its outcomes. So: perhaps it is time we recognize the log in our own eyes: we with computers and a membership to the Digital Divide Network are all part of the new Elite, and our differences reflect only intra-Elite factionalism. None of us, including the most fervent defender of local cultures, are immune from the infection of cultural values. So perhaps the first question is not that of Dr. Abeles, but this: When we advocate for the narrowing or closing of the digital divide gap, is that advocacy itself a foisting of our cultural values on the rest of the world? It can be so construed. There is a subtle form of insult in this concern for respecting the cultural values of the Other. If we say to poor communities around the world, here are these machines called computers, and here is what they can do, and here is what is involved, respect for them includes allowing them to decide for themselves whether the introduction of these devices imperils their cultural values. My own work around the world has taught me that if I present the new possibilities humbly but directly, the people involved are quite capable of deciding whether the ideas and the technologies clash with their cultural values, and quite willing to make those values explicit. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Update on the Simputer
Taran, I ask you this publicly rather than privately, since others on this DDN list may have the same question. How man US dollars does a high end Amida Simputer cost? And how does it compare in power and utility with an entry level Dell Computer that costs 298 US dollars, and is described in this way: Base Model Includes: IntelTM CeleronTM processor at 2.40GHz Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition 256MB Single-channel Shared6 DDR SDRAM at 400MHz 17 (16.0vis) Monitor 40GB5 Ultra/ATA 100 Hard Drive Integrated IntelTM Extreme 3D Graphics 90-Day Limited Warranty3 and At-Home Service4 Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Taran Rampersad Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 10:31 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: [DDN] Update on the Simputer I've made contact with Amida Simputer - I will be purchasing a high end Simputer at the beginning of June, and having it sent to me in Panama. This is an out of pocket expense for me, but I'm putting my money where my mouth is (now that I have the money coming in) and will be taking it with me to Guyana for two months. For those of you who contacted me offlist regarding getting one for review, it seems that the best way to do that is to spend a few hundred dollars and do it. Since the people who did contact me were working with institutions, I think this is a plausible scenario. I'll also be getting some more information from Amida Simputer which I shall share with the list once I get it. While I have the best wishes for MIT's $100 laptop - and serious misgivings - I'm more interested in what is tangible, here, and can use the support. When I am in Guyana, I shall be volunteering my technical skills at a local hospital, an orphanage and a vocational school. This is dealing with websites, PCs (and getting them running), and some other things. I'm certain I shall have some interesting things to share, and I'll start blogging about that in late June/early July. Since I'll be cat-sitting in Panama in between, I expect to get a lot of other things done related to cyber-stuff - including some follow up on mobcasting with Andy, and a few other things. Caffeine and a 1 megabit connection will be a wonderful thing in Panama. :-) -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Jose, Costa Rica [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN]The Personal vs the Social Computer Was: Update on the Simputer
(Disclaimer: I have interest,commercial or otherwise, in Dell Computers. I have great interest in machines and practices that will narrow the digital divide.) Nicholas Negroponte preaches the values of the personal computer: each child,each parent, each farmer,each soldier should have a private computer. Thus his quest for the $100 computer, thus the search for the Simputer. I believe that the universal personal computer should be the ultimate goal. There are, however, proximate as well as ultimate goals, there are appropriate and intermediate technologies as well as advanced technologies--there are, that is, advantages to using bicycles rather than automobiles for certain situations calling for transport. Or, to advocating public rather than private transportation. So: a village, on the wrong side of the digital divide, deserves access to computers and the benefits they bring. One possibility is that we--a donor agency-- generate some $10,000 US and purchase 20 Amida Simputers for 20 of the villagers. Another possibility is that we spend $300 US or $600 or $900 and put one, two, or three entry level desktop computers in a school or church or other public space. Negroponte explicitly resists the idea of shared and public computing, and wants immediately to move to personal computing. The down sides of personal computing are obvious, and extend well beyond the matter of initial cost. Personal computing tends to make maintenance and repair problems and costs also personal, for example, while social computing allows a community of users to share such costs. Personal or social computing: which is the right road for those without computers and their benefits to get access to them? Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Taran Rampersad Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 8:01 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Update on the Simputer Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: Taran, I ask you this publicly rather than privately, since others on this DDN list may have the same question. How man US dollars does a high end Amida Simputer cost? Right now? $480. With an initial run of 50,000 manufactured, it's hard to compete with a Dell - so take that into consideration before you start making judgements. Oh - and you're asking for a comparison of a laptop to a palmtop. That's a little strange, but I'll go with it. I imagine if I bought more than 10, I could negotiate a better price. And how does it compare in power and utility with an entry level Dell Computer that costs 298 US dollars, and is described in this way: Base Model Includes: IntelTM CeleronTM processor at 2.40GHz Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition 256MB Single-channel Shared6 DDR SDRAM at 400MHz 17 (16.0vis) Monitor 40GB5 Ultra/ATA 100 Hard Drive Integrated IntelTM Extreme 3D Graphics 90-Day Limited Warranty3 and At-Home Service4 Well, I don't know why you didn't check the Amida Simputer site, but here are the specs: http://www.amidasimputer.com/specs/ On a hardware level, it's pretty hard to compete with the laptop. But the Simputer has a few things that a discerning person will appreciate - such as a lack of need for downloading of Microsoft Service Packs (if that's a big loss for some, I don't know why), and special software which is written specifically for developing world applications. If it makes anyone feel better, perhaps we could get LPI to offer a Simputer Certification. :-) Since the 206MHz StrongArm Intel CPU doesn't need to run Windows XP, it's probably at least as responsive as the above machine - possibly faster. The video card is a non-issue; it's comparing a palmtop to a laptop (thus the same with the monitor). The Simputer also, I am sorry to say, lacks moving parts - so it's probably more robust in the long run. And with only 64 Megabytes of RAM, the Simputer won't run Windows XP. Fortunately, since it's running Linux, it doesn't *need* 64 megabytes of RAM. I'll have 2 months of support. When I have it, after 2 months in Guyana, I can speak more about that - if I have to use it. But that's a *service*, and isn't really a hardware specification or software specification. The real plus that I see? The hardware specs are open - Dell is notorious for creating specific parts that only are for Dell machines (so you have to buy parts directly from them). And the 'At-Home Service' and 90 day Limited Warranty are only useful when you can get support locally - and if you can get that support from an authorized Dell Dealer, you may have to wait a while for parts (a thing called 'Just In Time Inventory' makes that a concern). The Simputer, on the other hand, will get support from India - and I imagine in Guyana I'll have the same problems, until some group within the Latin American/Caribbean region produces them. But if I do need to ship it, it's 206 grams. I'll save a few stamps. Then there's the software, which
RE: [DDN] Rotary Cooperating Organizations working to reduce the DD
Doug, Your project is on the mark--sound, well conceived, and it will make a difference in Ghana. (My own work has taken me to Ghana, most recently in March, where we conducted workshops in distance learning for Ghanaian academics, sponsored by Ghana Telecom. You are looking for ways to leverage the impact of your project, to do more for more people. I'm copying Dr. Osei Darkwa, Principal of the Ghana Telecom Training Center in Accra, soon to become an accredited University College. You and Dr. Darkwa will want to be in touch with each other. He is coming to the US on June 5: I'm hoping that you and he are in Ghana at the same time. Dr. Darkwa is a Ghanaian who did his first degree in Ghana, his Phd in the US. He taught at the University of Illinois's School of Social Work before repatriating to Ghana to work for his country. And he is also Microsoft certifed! Ghana Telecom, which has physical presence in all ten geographic areas of Ghana, and whose telephone lines and other services span the nation and beyond, is committing itself to helping the continent, beginning with Ghana, to harness the teaching and learning power of the new ICT technologies. It is creating, among other new structures, a Center for Education and Technology in Africa, and is proposing to establish Africa Virtual Campus, quite different in intent and service from the existing Africa Virtual University: it is to be a centralized service that will provide the training, tools, and services the learning organizations of Africa need if they are to move to open and distance learning: if they are to move rapidly to narrow the digital divide. And Dr. Darkwa is also involved in in village economic development, and we work him on those project as well: see www.patriensa.com You two have much to talk about, and I hope you can meet. Dr. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of E-quip Africa Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 9:54 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: [DDN] Rotary Cooperating Organizations working to reduce the DD I am a Rotarian, retired computer instructor and founder/president of a nonprofit responding to discussions involving Rotary InternationalÂ’s assistance in reducing the Digital Divide. This is my first post after joining DDN Discussion Group a few months ago. I recently received an Individual Grant from The Rotary Foundation to travel to Ghana, West Africa (leaving in less than 2 weeks) to plan... yes PLAN, an international project between my local club and two clubs in Ghana. It is not a fishing trip to find a project, but travel to finalize a collaboration with previous agreement. TRF is one of the few sources I have seen with a grant available just for planning! The project involves bringing refurbished computers to Ghanaian primary secondary schools and supplying a Ghana Rotary Club's local project of building a city library in Sekondi/Takoradi. Our local club is working with my nonprofit 501 (c) (3) organization (E-quip Africa) as a non-Rotary, cooperating organization to solicit the donation of computers and find volunteers to refurbish, clean, pack and ship them via container. We have established standards for acceptance of donated machines which are in constant flux, but need to take into consideration the lag between the time of collection and the time of shipment. E-quip Africa will be registered in Ghana as a corporation with application for NGO status during this trip. We see this project as win-win in that computers with many years of use left in them are now available for elementary and secondary students who have had no previous access rather than sitting on shelves or being buried under 15 feet of clay and topsoil. Of course new would be preferred and anyone wishing to donate them will have our undivided attention! Fundraising for shipping and packing costs are made easier because matching grants are available from The Rotary Foundation at the District and International levels possibly quadrupling the amount kicked in by the originating club. Since most landfills and recycling businesses now require a disposal fee to get rid of computers, especially monitors, we ask for a cash donation at the same rate to accompany the equipment we receive which is tax-deductible when given to us. An interesting side to this is the use of used clothing to pack computers in cardboard boxes rather than bubble wrap or Styrofoam. The clothing is so in demand it almost evaporates out of the boxes when the computers are unpacked. The 40 foot container was packed by a professional mover so that perhaps one or two credit cards could have been inserted in the space left. This is essential for ocean container shipping. Our plan after a container is shipped is to follow up with a tour of interested volunteers and others. Chief among purposes are: 1.) To receive the gratitude of the Ghanaian school personnel (important
RE: [DDN] Let's Nominate Andy for the award
Tommy, add Steve Eskow to your list of names. Here, though, isn't a bulletin board, although a bulletin board is featured. This is the Digital Divide Network, and it's much more than a bulletin board, and the sum of its parts: it's a brilliant initiative that has assembled some 7000 people around the world into a virtual community of folks everywhere concerned with narrowing the digital divide. Dr. Steve Eskow -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tommy McDonell Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 5:59 PM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: [DDN] Let's Nominate Andy for the award Hi, Everybody. Most of you don't know me--I just lurk on Andy's discussion group. However, I do use the material here. I would like to nominate him for an award that he posted about. However, in order to do it, I need to give two or three other names. If you would be willing to join me, please send me your name, email etc. and tell me why! I think this bulletin board is reason enough, but his blog is also excellent as is his other work. Please help me nominate Andy!! Thanks, Tommy (And no, I'm not a guy!) Tommy B. McDonell Doctoral Candidate, Steinhardt School of Education [EMAIL PROTECTED] Adjunct, Marymount Manhattan College Adjunct, City College of New York-Graduate Education H: 212-929-6768, before 10PM F: 212-929-1129 - Original Message - From: Andy Carvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 1:13 PM Subject: [DDN] admin: off to Hungary, then Dubai Hi everyone, Tomorrow evening, I'll be off to Hungary for a five-day whirlwind tour of the country's telecottage movement. Telecottages are community technology centers that address a variety of local development needs, from Internet literacy training to e-government services. Hungary's telecottage movement is one of the oldest and best established projects of its kind anywhere in the world, so I'm really looking forward to visiting. Matyas Gaspar, founder of the telecottage movement, will be my host for the week. We'll visit urban telecottages in and around Budapest, as well as in rural areas in southern Transdanubia, just north of the city of Pecs. If all goes well I'll get to visit eight or 10 telecottages, spending the night in at least three different cities (Budapest, Gyorkony and Alsomocsolad). Because I'm visiting Hungary for a book I'm editing on community technology centers around the world, my schedule will be jam-packed with visits to telecottages, as well as interviews with project staff, local users and community leaders. I'll also get to field test my new 8.0 megapixel Konica-Minolta dimage A200 digital camera, which I also plan to use for shooting video blogs. Since I'll be spending most of my time in telecottages, Internet access shouldn't be a major dilemma. So I plan to blog as much as possible during my stay, posting photos, audio and video whenever feasible. So stay tuned from May 11-15; hopefully I'll have some interesting stories to share during that time. Meanwhile, a few days after I get home from Hungary, I'm back on the road again, this time to give a keynote at the GCC e-government conference in Dubai from May 20-25. I plan to talk about e-government for all, including discussing the recent example of the MyPyramid.gov website and some of the equity challenges facing it. Since Dubai is quite wired as well, I'll try to blog and podcast whenever possible. As always, you can find my posts at www.andycarvin.com. A mirror of the site is also located on DDN at http://www.digitaldivide.net/blog/acarvin. -andy -- --- Andy Carvin Program Director EDC Center for Media Community acarvin @ edc . org http://www.digitaldivide.net http://www.tsunami-info.org Blog: http://www.andycarvin.com --- ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: RE: [DDN] Digital Divide, Telecentres and Iraq
At 8:51 AM -0700 5/9/05, Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: In the case of the powerful drug called a telecenter, there are times and communities when that drug needs to be delayed or avoided until there is a readiness to benefit from it. Somewhat later Mr. John Hibbs asked: And, in the instant case - Iraq - perhaps could you tell us what matrix you would suggest as to when the telecenter would be useful? Or, when it would be harmful? -- I know of no such matrix, no formula or check list into which you plug the variables and press a button to come up with a decision. There are those who can make such diagnoses at a distance, and without full knowledge and sense of all the benefits and dangers inherent in a particular set of social, economic, ethnic, and political circumstances. I am not one of them. There are those who believe that the particular ecology of these cultural forces in a particular time and a particular place are irrelevant: that telecenters, like food and jobs, are universal goods that always contribute positively to the communitiesin which they are placed. I am not one of them. If I had to guess I would guess that telecenters in Iraq that confined their conversations to one or another of the warring ethnicities, that allowed for intragroup conversations, would do no harm and might do some good, while those that tried to generate dialog and reconciliation between those clashing groups, or between the American presence and those that are trying to destroy the Americans would do little good at this time, and potential harm. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: RE: [DDN] Digital Divide, Telecentres and Iraq
Dear Ashish Saboo, Thank you for the courteous disagreement: you show us the kind of communication that tries to avoid the anger that underlies violence. I think that after a bit more discussion we would find ourselves agreeing. You cite Andrew Grove's image of steel, which intrinsically is neither good nor bad, but can become a revolver or a syringe depending on how society uses it. The telecenter, then, like steel, has a potential for harm as well as good. I find images of medicine more useful to my thinking. There is no medicine, no wonder drug, that is useful for any ailment, any patient. We practitioners need to adopt for our work the model of diagnosis before prescription. If a community is the patient, we doctor-practitioners have to study the symptoms of that community to determine if a particular drug will be beneficial now.. In the case of the powerful drug called a telecenter, there are times and communities when that drug needs to be delayed or avoided until there is a readiness to benefit from it. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ashish Saboo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 5:14 AM To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Cc: John Hibbs; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; telecentres@wsis-cs.org Subject: Re: RE: [DDN] Digital Divide, Telecentres and Iraq [Dr. Steve Eskow] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Digital Divide
A small piece of the exchange between Kris Dev and Taran Rampersad: Kris Dev wrote: Dear all, My observations are simple and straight. The community knows what they need. And Taran began his answer this way: To an extent, I believe that this is true. If we are to make a difference, it is important that we be careful with this word community. It is a word that conjures up images of people who care about each other and understand what they need and can make a difference in their lives if they are allowed to speak and are heard and their voices and needs respected. To an extent, as Taran says, this is true. To a certain extent, the statement is also false.. The community is not a single entity whose mind can be known quickly and accurately, say by consulting and/or voting. The moneylender who profits by charging peasants exorbitant fees for loans is part of the community, and his interest and voice and vote are different than those to whom he lends money. The squire who has tenant farmers on his land is part of the community. The rich and the powerful are part of the community as well as the poor and the powerless. Kris Dev's observations are indeed simple and straight. The world and the communities that comprise it , however, is not simple and straight, but complex and jagged, and believing otherwise is to court failure. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] Digital Divide
Another word on this matter of romanticizing the community. To the list of divides that now includes the digital divide we might add the ethnic divide, the religious divide, and a larger list that embraces these that might be called the cultural divide. In Iraq, for example, to take an obvious case, who represents the community, and speaks for it: those who voted in the recent election or those who want to kill them for doing so? And it is not clear--to me, at least--that if we had a thousand telecenters in Iraq that the other divides would shrink. None of this should limit our efforts to shrink the digital divide. But it might limit our claims for what computers and communication can do about the other divides. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Taran Rampersad Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 6:20 PM Cc: The Digital Divide Network discussion group Subject: Re: [DDN] Digital Divide Dr. Steve Eskow wrote: A small piece of the exchange between Kris Dev and Taran Rampersad: Kris Dev wrote: Dear all, My observations are simple and straight. The community knows what they need. And Taran began his answer this way: To an extent, I believe that this is true. If we are to make a difference, it is important that we be careful with this word community. It is a word that conjures up images of people who care about each other and understand what they need and can make a difference in their lives if they are allowed to speak and are heard and their voices and needs respected. To an extent, as Taran says, this is true. To a certain extent, the statement is also false.. Absolutely correct, and I snipped the stuff I agreed with (all of it), but for clarification I just wanted to add when something is 'true to an extent', implicitly it is 'false to an extent'. The tough part in that is that there are are no clear differences. But the cool part is that there is so much to learn about... everything :-) -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: Panama City, Panama [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
RE: [DDN] apple feels learning happens only at k-12 schools and colleges
I use this medium rather than his blog or one I create to respond to Phil Shapiro's criticism of Apple's Tiger campaign because I am one of those who is more comfortable with the easy give and take of email dialog than I am with the formalities of the blog. (That may change.) The notion that Apple does not know that learning takes place outside of the school setting is wide of the mark: anyone who knows the history of the two Steves and their work and statements over the years knows of their belief in the power of nonformal learning. There is a simple explanation for Apple's current focus on the formal educational settings which does not involve ignorance of or indifference to other possibilities for teaching and learning. In the early days of school computing Apple had the lion's share of the school and college market: the Apple 2 and the early Macintosh's were everywhere, and all the others including Tandy and Morrow and Eagle--and IBM--far behind. That of course has changed, and currently Apple has only a minority share of the school and college market. The campaign that Phil criticizes is nothing more than a focused marketing campaign aimed at getting Apple back into contention in the school and college market. This focus on a target is of course how marketing works, and does not at all mean that Apple does not know or appreciate the nonschool contributions of nonacademics and nonschool settings to learning. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Phil Shapiro Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 8:59 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [DDN] apple feels learning happens only at k-12 schools and colleges hi everyone - apple computer feels that learning happens only at K-12 schools and colleges. that point of view is ingrained into their corporate culture. see apple's tiger educator evaluation program for one more instance of this. http://www.apple.com/education/tigerevaluation/ it's a pretty sad reflection on the company that its outlook is so limited. we who are outside-of-school educators feel that learning goes on everywhere at all times. and we feel you don't have to be a K-12 teacher or a college professor to be an impassioned and effective educator. apple hasn't yet heard of outside-of-school learning. we need to teach them. the question on the table is can a company involved in education learn. can they learn? let's hope they can. if you feel this is an issue that needs some public attention, you can link from your blog to the blog posting http://www.digitaldivide.net/blog/pshapiro/view?PostID=3078 adding your own comments and point of view. if you don't have a blog yet, you can set one up for free quite easily at http://www.blogger.com or, even better, the Digital Divide Network offers free blogging. http://www.digitaldivide.net do please send me any questions you might have about starting a blog. our collective voice is only as strong as the quantity and quality of our blogging. our cause is only as powerful as we are cohesive. - phil -- Phil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.his.com/pshapiro/ (personal) http://teachme.blogspot.com (weblog) http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/pshapiro (technology access work) http://mytvstation.blogspot.com/ (video and rich media) There's just so much more creativity and genius out there than our media currently reflect. FCC Commissioner Michael Copps ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] The digital divide and the idea of public computing
Underpinning the telecenter (or 40 foot van) is this idea...that the assets that are heavily used - as much as 24/7 - and supervised, maintained, updated, end up providing more value than cheaper machines, used by less trained persons, for short periods. The master idea informing the telecenter movement is that of public rather private computing, the computer as a shared and social tool rather than a private one. The box housing such a public computer may be a van, or a church, or a library, or a school. The computers in the box may be available 24/7 or a few hours a day. The sponsor of the center may be a for-profit firm or a government agency or a religious congregation. There will be no standardization of the telecenter movement because communities are not standardized in their needs and ability to provide and support. We often call the technology in question a pc. The term personal has been attached to the instrument, and it is this idea of the computer as a personal and private instrument that has generated the understandable interest in such development as the $100 computer. It seems plausible to maintain that the digital divide movement has to put pressure on this idea of the technology as private and personal, and find ways of underscoring the benefits of social and public computing. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: John Hibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Digital Divide Network discussiongroup [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:42 PM Subject: Re: [DDN] The digital divide and the idea of public computing At 4:58 PM -0800 2/28/05, Steve Eskow wrote: Perhaps we need a $500 dollar public computer more than we need a $100 private computer. I think a case can be made that can be made that a $500. - or $2,500 computer may be (cheaper?) (more profitable?) (of more use?) Underpinning the telecenter (or 40 foot van) is this idea...that the assets that are heavily used - as much as 24/7 - and supervised, maintained, updated, end up providing more value than cheaper machines, used by less trained persons, for short periods. In the rag trade, where I grew up, there was a saying...the expensive suit will be worn long, long after the cheap one has been thrown away. There was a related saying - something about value is remembered long after the price is forgotten. But we don't live in a black and white, either or world. We live in a world where in the best case situations, options are available from which wise decisions can flow. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Re: The digital divide and the idea of public computing
Taran, I disagree with almost every one of your statements below--but those disagreements needn't prevent us from finding a way to work together. (Even though I think ATLAS SHRUGGED is grandiose nonsense.) Rather than debating your history, philosophy, and sociology, let me ask you to consider a real-world example. Sub-Saharan Africa, where I go next week, has hundreds of thousands of people dying each week from AIDS. Swaziland and Botswana have almost 40 per cent of their people living with HIV/AIDS. Malawi has some 15 per cent of its people living and dying with AIDS. Dr. William Rankin, an Episcopal priest, felt called to do something about this suffering and dying, and created GAIA, The Global Aids Interfaith Alliance. Oversimplifying GAIA's work and approach, the organization organizes assemblies of clergy and lay leaders in Malawi, does workshops on safe sex and condom and antiretrovirals as medicine that combats AIDS, and enlists their help and support in the prevention and the treatment of AIDS. Churches become centers of information and treatment and for their congregations and communities. There is still dying in Malawi, but a sharply reduced rate because of the instruction and the antretrovirals provided by GAIA. Bill Rankin has made a difference. He did not ask the Christian sects to realize that they worshipped the same God, and to set aside their differences. He did not ask the Christians and the Muslims to realize that they were all Children of Abraham, and become as one people. If a church had a pastor and 18 congregants, that church became a classroom and a clinic for those congregants and their families. If that church could be helped to have a computer, training, and an Internet connection, it could become one bridge across the digital divide. Cheers, Taran. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 7:43 PM Subject: Re: [DDN] Re: The digital divide and the idea of public computing This was a nice lead in, by the way. Steve Eskow wrote: Taran, you've found and stated all the issues and objections to using churches as telecenters. Just a few comments. As you point out, religion separates people. And: Schooling separates people. Politics separates people. Tradition separates people. Income separates people. Geography separates people. Language separates people: perhaps we should insist that all who want to cross that divide learn a common language. English? Now, now. You're putting words in my keyboard. Religion can be traced to politics (take a look around), is embodied in tradition and has sometimes been used as an instrument for those in power to remain in power. Religion has also helped create the geographic borders we're describing. As far as language, I have already mentioned to a few people at the MISTICA reunion that language, as we know it, will eventually morph into a new language that is common. It won't be English, but it will be part English. That's my prediction, and it's already happening. But first, people must speak their own language. Perhaps that would be a better analog for religion. But it's been my observation that people generally embrace tradition instead of the philosophy. I don't claim to be a specialist on religion and philosophy, but I'm fairly well read. In brief, all of the aspect of that amorphous stuff we call culture separates people I think you missed my point. It's the denial of commonality that separates people. So: if we are realists, we begin with the world as it is--separated--and not how we would like to remake it in our own image of what a better world would be like.. That's the funny thing - the world is NOT separated. The separation is in the eye of the beholder. The world is round, the upper crust contiguous - but we need a way to describe distance for the purposes of travel and to avoid the 'Walk On Water' test. Thus we created measurement of the distance, and in time distance - our tool - ruled our thinking because it was a limitation for trade, for transport... and soon, a former tool became a master instead of a servant. Wars have been fought over measurements. Soon measures of distance *separated* people instead of connecting them. The English were pretty good at this - sending their convicts as far from England as possible, and accidentally creating the society which is a great part of Australia. Tradition stems from philosophy. Philosophy is the root of religion, regardless of what one thinks - whether it be the Philosophy of God or Humankind. Tradition is an enactment of philosophy, and also a lovely way to assure that philosophy passed from generation to generation - originally without having been written down. But then people argued over traditions, and they split. Some traditions wrote books, and within the later practice of the written traditions
Re: [DDN] Dark Horse for bridging the divide
A suggestion to Andy Carvin in the form of a question: Is there now available online a good course on computer service and repair that woould make it possible for those in the poorer countries to keep their computers running? Whether a computer in a poor community costs $100 or $1000, the odds are that it will soon need attention that requires knowledge and skill not readily available in the community. For example: I visited schools in Belize recently that had been given good computers by one of the organizations that collects and rehabilitates computers and ships them them to those needing them--and most of them were covered with clothes waiting for repair that might never happen. If our Digital Divide Network might focus on this matter of computer service and repair, we might attack this matter of the divide from the angle of maintenance, and this would be a great contribution to narrowing the divide. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Re: The digital divide and the idea of public computing
Taran, When a telecenter can cure AIDs... then maybe I'll see where you're coming from. Right now I see the only connection as people, and I don't see how computers - in churches or not - will help with the AIDs. So I don't understand why you keep bringing up AIDs. Probably more people in Africa die each month from AIDS than died in the tsunami: and apparently computers can help with a tsunami. If computer communication can't help with the great tragedy of our time, I, for one, lose interest in it quickly. But of course it can. Doing something about AIDS involves an educational dimension to lower the incidence of AIDS, and a medical dimension, to do something for those afflicted. The emerging field of telemedicine and the arrival of low-cost digital cameras makes it possible for nurses and doctors to diagnose and prescribe for patients without nurses and doctors. At the simplest level, an email message in plain text allows for the description of symptoms that permits the remote practitioner to recommend treatment. On the education front: computers can help to empower women economically, which makes it possible for them to resist unsafe sex. It can can introduce them to the ABC program which has been so effective in Uganda: Abstinence; Be faithful; Use Condoms. And it can connect poor women to low or no cost sources of condoms . And teach women and men about antiretrovirals and how to get them. And much more. Maybe churches can help with AIDs. But if that help requires people to change their cultural identity to suit the church with the ability to feed people so that they do not have to resort to other means of income, then I see the murder of a culture - something that the West does almost automatically, it seems. Profound agreement with this point. Now, it is common in Africa for people to have religious identities and ethnic and tribal identies, and institutional structures like churches that house and nurture these separate identies. It the priest and his 18 congregants identify themselves as Muslims, it would indeed be criminal to make them become Western agnostics or atheists or democrats in order to get help. Africa and the Asian continent are where, historically and through the perspective of religion, mankind started from. To subjugate them by not sending them food, then providing food through avenues of cultural change disgusts me. To subjugate them by not allowing them to use technology outside of the avenues of cultural change toward Western ways also disgusts me. Yes indeed. Africans are often Christians and Muslims because of Western--and Eastern--imperialism. But that is where they are now, and where they want to be: in those churches, and tribal and ethnic enclaves. Forcing them to give up their current identies in order to get food and medicine and become democratic seems like the latest form of Western imperialism. Feel free to criticize Rand's works. I don't buy into them wholesale. I just take what I think works and move on. And Rand is dead, and he institute with her name on it defied her wishes in more ways than one. I do feel free, Taran. Thanks for the continuing dialog. The issue of whether the computer can contribute to the great problems of our time--like AIDS--or deals only with issues currently fashionable in the rich countries is of great importance. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Steve Eskow wrote: Taran, I disagree with almost every one of your statements below--but those disagreements needn't prevent us from finding a way to work together. (Even though I think ATLAS SHRUGGED is grandiose nonsense.) Rather than debating your history, philosophy, and sociology, let me ask you to consider a real-world example. Sub-Saharan Africa, where I go next week, has hundreds of thousands of people dying each week from AIDS. Swaziland and Botswana have almost 40 per cent of their people living with HIV/AIDS. Malawi has some 15 per cent of its people living and dying with AIDS. Dr. William Rankin, an Episcopal priest, felt called to do something about this suffering and dying, and created GAIA, The Global Aids Interfaith Alliance. Oversimplifying GAIA's work and approach, the organization organizes assemblies of clergy and lay leaders in Malawi, does workshops on safe sex and condom and antiretrovirals as medicine that combats AIDS, and enlists their help and support in the prevention and the treatment of AIDS. Churches become centers of information and treatment and for their congregations and communities. There is still dying in Malawi, but a sharply reduced rate because of the instruction and the antretrovirals provided by GAIA. Bill Rankin has made a difference. He did not ask the Christian sects to realize that they worshipped the same God, and to set aside their differences. He did not ask the Christians and the Muslims to realize that they were all Children of Abraham, and become as one people. If a church had a pastor and 18 congregants
Re: [DDN] Re: The digital divide and the idea of public computing
Taran, You've clearly described one technical outworking of the idea of public computing. There was an influential book some years ago titled IDEAS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. We need technical outworkings of the idea of public computing such as you propose. Perhaps we need separate attention to how we get attention and support for the idea of public, rather than private and personal, computing. To pick a controversial example: I go to Ghana on March 9 . Everywhere in Ghana, and Africa in general, religion is exploding. Churches and mosques springing up everywhere, with clergy and congregations committed to public service as well as to faith. These churches often have connections to world networks of their denomination; many of the churches in the richer countries provide support of various kinds for the emerging churches in the Third World. If those churches could be influenced to see themselves as part of the answer to the digital divide, we might find computers and training and software and maintenance installed in little churches in the Third World. The larger question becomes: how do we get churches, and schools, and libraries, and NGO's to see that they have a role in shrinking the digital divide, and becoming the scene of public computing? Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 9:33 PM Subject: [DDN] Re: The digital divide and the idea of public computing Steve Eskow wrote: A hypotheis: The digital divide will not be solved by personal computers, and the emphasis on private ownership of the new communication technologies, but by the social comnputesr, computers shared by many people in a public setting. The intention of the terminology is to switch some attention away from the box, container of the new technology--the center, as in :telecenter--and to raise connsciousness of the need for sharing the technology and its maintenance. If there is merit to this proposition,--if we need to talk of publci computing much in the same way that we advocate for public transportation, then our Digital Divide Network might take leadership in creating the new discou\rse that emphasizes the sharing and collaborative use of the new technologies. The public computer can be in a school, an office, a library, a business, a church, or a van. Where it is housed will of course depend on the variables of community and culture: in some cases one computer in a church basement will be the center, in another there will many machines and staff. Perhaps we need a $500 dollar public computer more than we need a $100 private computer. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] You exactly described a content management system/community weblog as a social computer - which it is! Because you're not staring at it in your office or home doesn't make it less of a computer. $15 for a domain name in most parts of the world (less in some), figure up to $300 hosting fees for a year. It's as public as you want it to be. The trick is having it easily accessible for the community - and this can be done very cheaply with the Linux Terminal Server Project (LTSP), which allows a central server to 'drive' lower end machines for this purpose. Low cost hardware, low cost software. Run some wires and you're almost done. Then we're left with connecting the LTSP server to the social computer - the server. That's really the biggest problem around the world - and that's the common denominator. P.S. All over the commercial world, people are going crazy about the 'Desktop'. Folks, the desktop is nowhere near as important as the Server - no matter what anyone tells you. In a lot of ways, the computer you are reading this on is probably what would have been called a server a few years ago. I'm not saying that the desktop is dead - by no stretch. What I am saying is that the desktop is now the server. And the server aspect of your computer is the most important aspect right now - as are the internet servers we avail ourselves of. -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net Criticize by creating. Michelangelo -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.2 - Release Date: 2/28/2005 ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Re: The digital divide and the idea of public computing
Taran, you've found and stated all the issues and objections to using churches as telecenters. Just a few comments. As you point out, religion separates people. And: Schooling separates people. Politics separates people. Tradition separates people. Income separates people. Geography separates people. Language separates people: perhaps we should insist that all who want to cross that divide learn a common language. English? In brief, all of the aspect of that amorphous stuff we call culture separates people So: if we are realists, we begin with the world as it is--separated--and not how we would like to remake it in our own image of what a better world would be like.. That is: if those now on the wrong side of the digital divide are already separated, and we care about doing something substantial about that divide, we can denounce the separation, propose new institutional forms of togetherness (which in short order will also separate people), or we can begin by recognizing these islands of separation and asking how we can work with them so as to make a difference.. That is: we work with schools, although they separate people into those groups that can pay tuition and those that can't. We put public computers in libraries, although libraries--and computers--separate people into those that can read and those that can't, and tend to put resources like computers where they benefit the readers and leave the nonreaders untouched. We put computers into churches, and hope (some of us) that we can use those computers to begin to encourage interfaith dialog as well as economic development. I do want to challenge your reliance on an Ayn Randian version of the human condition: In the end, I really think that the Digital Divide can only be bridged by individuals acting in their own interest - taking ownership of their lives. When it comes to infrastructural issues, governments are responsible - but in any democracy, ultimately the individual is responsible. This is actually Randian in a way, but I think it's respectful To be equally direct: it is this crude philosophy of every man or woman for himself/herself that is the problem, not the solution. There is much dying in Africa from AIDS, to pick one social problem where computers and churches can make a difference, and the dying will not stop by urging a kind of crude capitalist ideal of selfishness. The genius of the computer is that it is the first dialogic medium in history, unlike the broadcast media such as television. The computer makes it possible for people in Trinidad to converse easily with people in California, so that they become a group, a potential collaborative. You and I are separated: by age, experience, education, nationality, perhaps race and religion, or nonreligion. We can't wait until those cultural differences are set aside to begin to search for ways to work together. I appreciate your willingness to take clear and strong positions: that willingness makes for good challenge and response.. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:06 PM Subject: Re: [DDN] Re: The digital divide and the idea of public computing Steve Eskow wrote: Taran, You've clearly described one technical outworking of the idea of public computing. There was an influential book some years ago titled IDEAS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. I shall have to find this book and read it. We need technical outworkings of the idea of public computing such as you propose. Perhaps we need separate attention to how we get attention and support for the idea of public, rather than private and personal, computing. To pick a controversial example: I go to Ghana on March 9 . Everywhere in Ghana, and Africa in general, religion is exploding. Churches and mosques springing up everywhere, with clergy and congregations committed to public service as well as to faith. No puns intended, I'm sure. These churches often have connections to world networks of their denomination; many of the churches in the richer countries provide support of various kinds for the emerging churches in the Third World. If those churches could be influenced to see themselves as part of the answer to the digital divide, we might find computers and training and software and maintenance installed in little churches in the Third World. The larger question becomes: how do we get churches, and schools, and libraries, and NGO's to see that they have a role in shrinking the digital divide, and becoming the scene of public computing? Sorry about the long response. This is a topic I have actually thought about quite a bit. I don't think I wrote anything offensive (it's hard to tell on religious topics), so if I did, please understand that it was not intentional. Now that I have
[DDN] The digital divide and the idea of public computing
A hypotheis: The digital divide will not be solved by personal computers, and the emphasis on private ownership of the new communication technologies, but by the social comnputesr, computers shared by many people in a public setting. The intention of the terminology is to switch some attention away from the box, container of the new technology--the center, as in :telecenter--and to raise connsciousness of the need for sharing the technology and its maintenance. If there is merit to this proposition,--if we need to talk of publci computing much in the same way that we advocate for public transportation, then our Digital Divide Network might take leadership in creating the new discou\rse that emphasizes the sharing and collaborative use of the new technologies. The public computer can be in a school, an office, a library, a business, a church, or a van. Where it is housed will of course depend on the variables of community and culture: in some cases one computer in a church basement will be the center, in another there will many machines and staff. Perhaps we need a $500 dollar public computer more than we need a $100 private computer. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Re: Mahatma Gandhi in an Italian Communications Company ad
Well said, Taran. On many matters of importance there is a crucial opinion divide that has to be narrowed if we are to walk together. Work together. One of the reasons for bridging the digital divide is that as more people everywhere are able to communicate more are able to take part in the opinion divide. In the search for the agreement that precedes acting together. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Frances Roehm [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [DDN] Re: Mahatma Gandhi in an Italian Communications Company ad Frances Roehm wrote: Dear Colleagues, We've heard quite a bit about our Gandhi. Agree or disagree, this is a powerful message. Can we talk about ways of bringing our people along, find areas we agree on, and do what we can to make things happen? Instead of talking about our areas of disagreement. We have a lot of work to do. Thank you, and best regards, Fran Frances E. Roehm SkokieNet Librarian Frances, While I agree with you, I must say that it is important that the issues be aired. These issues brought up... though I honestly don't understand them... are part of what we have to deal with. Understanding better what we have to deal with is a remarkable tool. Exploring different perspectives is important, as long as it can be done peacefully. Finding the things we agree on is less important, I think, than finding the things we disagree on. We do have a lot of work to do, and understanding where we disagree seems very important to me. -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.worldchanging.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Taran says: At the end of the day, people should probably try something new every day. It doesn't have to be technology, it can be walking a different route or maybe eating something new. That's the difference between stagnancy and progress. Like all advice, Taran, this piece is a mixed blessing. A half truth. At most. I live in a rich community in a rich state in a rich nation. A nation where every message seems to be, throw out something old and try something new every day. So: perhaps we need a counter-movement: At the end of every day, try something old. An old piece of clothing. An old book. An old idea that needs a little work to make it useful again. For example: turn off all the new media and read an old book. The bible, perhaps. Or Tolstoy's WAR AND PEACE. (Without enrichment, without links to sound and images and interviews with Tolstoy's great-great-grandson. After reading the unenhanced original, the DVD is ok.) Or: try talking to someone. If our online communities grow and prosper, and our local communities wither and die because we stop talking to neighbors, what a monster have we technoromantics uncaged. The great gift of this technology is that allows me to communicate with Taran, who otherwise would be lost to me. That's why the divide can't be narrowed without it. But I must learn to restrain my joy at these new powers and turn the machine off every day so that I might talk to neighbors. So: in order to get a truth, we might put two half-truths together: Try something new every day; Try something old every day. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3,2005 Steve Eskow wrote: Taran Rampersad writes But you see, people are slow to adopt things. Perhaps this is one of those enduring fictions, helped along as it is by Ev Rogers' taxonmy of early adopters and the like. The speed with which people all over the world are adopting the new technologies is astounding. The digital divide is caused more by poverty than by resistance to change. In a quantitative analysis, that's right. But qualitatively speaking, if the people who can adopt do not adopt, then that has more weight in the context of the technology than poor people being unable to adopt. There are few people who will adopt at the bleeding edge, but it's because of those few people that others do adopt. Consider Linux - a few early adopters assisted in the creation of an operating system which people in poverty could not access. But through the adoption process, it has become extremely accessible to even those in poverty when compared to proprietary software. People are indeed reluctant to disrupt styles of work and play that offer them important satisfactions because an outsider--often a marketer of some new product--tries to convince them that if they throw out the baby as well as the bathwater they will be happier in the long run. This is the main problem. Many of the new technologies are available at no cost, but the generation of mine and the generations preceding it are probably late to adopt because they feel that 'there has to be a catch'. Because of this discomfort, they may not adopt. And yet, there are no 'catches', it simply requires some personal effort. This is why we're using listservs for most of the communication here on the DDN, because many are simply not comfortable unless they can use Microsoft Outlook to inform us when they are out of town (perhaps so that someone can burglarize them and they can make insurance claims? I do not know). Perhaps on a busy day, such as when you sent this, I would not respond because I'm up to my neck in other listservs. I am one of those who prefers to use Outlook and remain comfortable. (I don't quite get the point of the burglarize reference.) I don't choose to get uncomfortable unless there are important benefits --benefits that appeal to me--offered to me in exchange for my discomfort. I don't yet see the benefits--to me--in what you are proposing. I hate to sound like I'm bashing Microsoft products, because I'm pretty balanced about Microsoft products. However, Outlook has shown time and again that it is unsafe and is a dependable vector for viruses. So while we talk about the comfort of the user, perhaps we should talk about the comfort of other people that user communicates with. I'm sorry, I view Outlook as a social disease. It's a personal opinion which is substantiated by all the emailed viruses I do get from people who use Outlook. What Outlook did do is get people using a technology. It did a good job of it as well. But when I get all these viruses emailed to me, I must wonder - should I blame Microsoft for selling something that can do
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Mr. Hibbs is apparently confused by my gender as well as by the dynamics of good instruction: perhaps the lady doth protest too much? He asked: and answered his own question: Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? This is indeed looking to technology to fix education, on the assumption that the problem is finding ways for education to help student learn more: the quantitative fix. The very notion of learning more is the beginning of a profound misreading of the problem of education. Many of the nonacademics who decide to advise the academy assume that the lecture is a mechanical performance that can, as suggested here, be recorded in advance with no loss of quality or impact: indeed, that the student would learn more if they could rewind the tape, review difficult ideas, etc. This is a very old, endlessly repeated mistake, and would that there was some way to end its reappearance. A good analysis of this mistake is Chapter 3 of Hubert Dreyfus' ON THE INTERNET, titled Disembodied Telepresence and the Remoteness of the Real. The good lecturer picks up cues from the students in front of him, and varies his rhythm, repeats ideas, invites questions, according to those cues. David Blair, a robe, who has taught extensively via interactiver television as well as lectured conventionally, makes interesting and important points in the Dreyfus chapter: In the first place I am often aware of a lot of things going on in the class in addition to a student actually asking a question or commenting. Sometiimes when a student asks a question I can see, peripherally, other students nodding their heads in agreement with the question. This would indicate that the student's question is important to the rest of the class so I will take more care in answering it fully. (This kind of adjustment, of course, cannot take place with a recorded lecture.) ...Second, as I lecture, I'm drawn to the point of view that is most comfortable or informative for me--a point of view that may be different from lecture to lecture or even may change during during a lecture. Perhaps this is simlar to Merleau-Ponty's notion of 'maximum rip.' To find this pooint of view requires that I be able to move around during the lecture sometimes approaching the students closely , sometimes moving away. And much more. Perhaps an important point to make is that we might usefully distinguish using technology to bring learning to those place in the world wherelive instruction is difficult or impossible and giving advice to the Harvards and the Sorbonnes as to how they might improve instruction by videotaping lectures. To repeat the original point of the post in question: the way to improve online education is to listen to the technology, learn its genius and its limitations, and develop instruction that emerges from that genius rather than by mimicking and improving the methods of face-to-face instruction. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
John Hibbs asks if a technologized alternative to the traditional lecture would enable students to learn more, and suggests an answer: Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? The search for technological fixes for education is of course as old as Socrates who used an early version of Power Point to help the slave boy learn the Pythagorean theorem. Some may remember an old New Yorker ( a U.S. humorous periodical) cartoon which showed a reel-to-reel tape recorder sitting on the instructor's desk, obviously delivering his lecture. In the classroom were 30 tablet arm chairs for the students. The seats were unoccupied: on each chair was a smaller tape recorder, recording the lecture. The question, Would the students...have learned more embodies a philosophy of education: the problem of education is quantitative, and education, like any business, can produce more learning if it becomes more efficient and one road to such productivity is, of course, technology. That is: if the tape recorder delivers the lecture, the instructor can be doing something else concurrently, a large increase in productivity. And if the tape recorder can take the lecture notes rather than the student, the student can be studying something else while the machine is recording, clearly a further gain in productivity. In his 1962 book EDUCATION AND THE CULT OF EFFICIENCY Raymond Callahan explores the period 1900 to 1930, the span of years during which the business mind and the practices of industrial capitalism permeated the practice of education. In the US it is still common for business executives to write, or have written for them, books outlining their views on fixing education. Recent books by David Kearns of Xerox and Louis Gerstner of IBM come to mind. And in the US legislation like the current No Child Left Behind act are attempting to fix education by imposing the logics and the rhetoric and the practices of industrialism on education: the results are not promising. As budgets are cut, the marketing consultants are flourishing, as they promise to restore enrollments and dollars using the same techniques that sell cereal and cosmetics on television. Callahan wonders early in his book how this penetration of education by the culture of industry and marketing had happened, was allowed to happen. Education is not a business, he says. The school is not a factory. But the schools were indeed allowed to become little businesses, little factories. A more recent study that rehearses much the same ground is Bill Reading's THE UNIVERSITY IN RUINS. Narrowing the digital divide will clearly require that we enlist the new communication technologies. The new technologies do not determine how we use them to do the work of learning. We can the new tools according to the logic of the factory, or we can use them in a way that respects the culture and the needs and the rhythms of those who teach and those who learn. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? - Original Message - From: John Hibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005 At 3:31 PM -0800 2/6/05, Steve Eskow wrote: My point is that although we call both forms conferences, they really have little in common with each other. Better: they ought not to resemble each other, since they are using different technologies with different strengths and weaknesses. The fac-to-face conference ought to improve by understanding and exploiting the virtues of assembling people together what you are calling proximity. The online form ought to exploit the lack of proximity--the overcoming of time and space restrictions at the expense of proximity. It seems to me the same could be said for conventional education (vs. distance education). In conventional education, as with most physical conferences, the students (attendees) come to class (keynote), sit quietly, - and go on their merry way. Do they learn? Were they motivated? Or did they just get their Attendance Sheet marked as proof of appropriate reverence? Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? Had they been able to insert
Re: [DDN] Conferencing Discussion
Suggestion to Stephen Snow: If one wants to think about improving email, one would get little help by thinking about how it resembles and is different from snail mail. Despite the mail designation, and the fact that both genres involve messages , at this point in time there is little that one form can learn from the other. And the desire to create a hybrid form--call it blended mail, combining the strengths email and post office mail--is that really worth trying to accomplish ?. Unless the analogy I am suggesting is misleading--and you may decide that is so--I'm suggesting that one can't improve face-to-face conferences by studying virtual conferences, and vice-versa. And like blended learning, which purports to combine the benefits of classroom learning with those of online learning, the hybrid may end up canceling the virtues of the two disparate and irreconcilable media. (The classroom component cancels the ability of distance learning to serve students unable to get to the classroomn; and the distance learning component negates the impact of face-to-face communication.) This is NOT to say that one can't print out an email and snail mail it to a relative without a computer. Or that one can't put a camera on face-to-face presentations and make those presentations available online. Hybridizing, however--trying to combine the virtues of two locales, two setting, two environments, two media--may not be the best way to improve each. We may end up combining the weaknesses of two powerful but distinct forms. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 10:34 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] Conferencing Discussion In a message dated 2/4/05 12:53:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am wondering perhaps if there are better ways to begin thinking about designing F2F conferences so they capitalize more on their greater strengths and the ways they are differentiated from the virtual ones. Both appeoaches have their place, even for the same information!, so I am wondering what people think about that, how F2F might be designed differently and how virtual might be designed differently, also. I spend a lot of time in both sets of conferences. There are ways to make FTF better, there are many constructs for those. I spend lately, time trying to access online conferences. I do like not having to wrap myself in a silver plane and spend all kinds of money for hotels, the conference fee, and other expenses... But people forget that the spontaneity, the interaction in a real conference do have some value. I have been trying to access the conference in Baltimore, but sometimes depending on how the on line is constructed it can be deadly boring , the level of interactivity is bad, and the project is more designed for the people at the real conference. There are ways of involving outside audience. PopTech and other conferences do this.. and one more thing. If you are at a real ftf people can't invade your space as they can when you are at home. The advantage to the online is the lack of expense and, the ease of being connected . Its just that it is an evolving art and lots of people have not spent many hours looking at a tiny window and understanding the possibilities that would make it more interesting and interactive. John Hibbs has some ways of combining both. The disadvantage of ftf is the integrity, and the reality of the conference.. that is hard to judge sometimes and when you get there, well, you are stuck. but the networking might still work well... usually. Just some thoughts.. my ideas.. Bonnie Bracey bbracey at aol com ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Taran Rampersad writes But you see, people are slow to adopt things. Perhaps this is one of those enduring fictions, helped along as it is by Ev Rogers' taxonmy of early adopters and the like. The speed with which people all over the world are adopting the new technologies is astounding. The digital divide is caused more by poverty than by resistance to change. People are indeed reluctant to disrupt styles of work and play that offer them important satisfactions because an outsider--often a marketer of some new product--tries to convince them that if they throw out the baby as well as the bathwater they will be happier in the long run. This is why we're using listservs for most of the communication here on the DDN, because many are simply not comfortable unless they can use Microsoft Outlook to inform us when they are out of town (perhaps so that someone can burglarize them and they can make insurance claims? I do not know). Perhaps on a busy day, such as when you sent this, I would not respond because I'm up to my neck in other listservs. I am one of those who prefers to use Outlook and remain comfortable. (I don't quite get the point of the burglarize reference.) I don't choose to get uncomfortable unless there are important benefits --benefits that appeal to me--offered to me in exchange for my discomfort. I don't yet see the benefits--to me--in what you are proposing. There are forms which are not as self limiting. As you say, all forms are self limiting - but the degree to which they are self limiting varies. For broad communication with large groups, websites are less self limiting - and are decreasing even further over time. Email hasn't really changed in the last 10 years that much... however, website technology has changed quite a bit, and has shown itself to be more adaptive to the demands we place on this medium. It even uses email as a tool at times. The hand-held hammer is not more limited than the jackhammer or the piledriver: indeed, for certain purposes the more powerful tools are almost useless. I, for one, don't want to have use shortcuts or insert URLs into a brower to conduct email eschanges: I much prefer the speed and simplicity of the listserv. I may be fooling myself, but I don't believe that preference is because I resist change. Steve E said: The online medium needs designs that don't begin by limiting themselves to mimicking a face-to-face form. A face to face form like the conference. And Taran said: I don't necessarily agree with this. We must not forget our roots either. Man is a social creature, and as such the senses play an important part. Face to face conferences are social gatherings - maybe some things are discussed, maybe not. But they are social gatherings, in the hopes of attaining some purpose that the attendees wish to achieve. How odd for me to defend face to face conferences - and yet, if web conferences incorporate audio and video, what is missing from the conference? I think here we are indeed talking past each other. My point is that although we call both forms conferences, they really have little in common with each other. Better: they ought not to resemble each other, since they are using different technologies with different strengths and weaknesses. The fac-to-face conference ought to improve by understanding and exploiting the virtues of assembling people together what you are calling proximity. The online form ought to exploit the lack of proximity--the overcoming of time and space restrictions at the expense of proximity. When forms like email and listservs and newsgroups continue to flourish and multiply despite the appearance of better forms like web sites, perhaps the explanation is not the rather tired one of resistance to change, but the continuing strength and vitality of a form that is maintaining its usefulness. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
A piece of theory might be useful in thinking about conferences online. The time-space geographers and sociologists are teaching us that space and spatial configurations aren't merely containers that hold the events that go on within them, but are constitutive: that is, they shape, or constitute, those activities. So: if a conference is going to take place in a building that has a lecture hall and classrooms and seminar rooms, those spaces, and the need to have all activities take place in real time, help to shape the structure of what we call a conference. We've learned, I think, from our experience with distance learning that when you move instruction from the bounded spaces of a campus to the new environment of cyberspace, the tendency is to replicate in the new environment what has always been done in the bounded spaces. So: we do online instruction in much the same way we do it on campus in classrooms, and we are given software that insures that we do the new work in the old ways. And so many institutions and their faculty new to distance learning look for ways to move all of the same real-time apparatus of instruction as it exists on campus intact and unchanged as it migrates online. It would seem that we want to do the same with conferences. For example: if the exigencies of time and space constraints of :real means that we have to crowd all of the speakers and all of the discussion into one day, or three days, why that's what we're going to do with online conferences: jam the experts into the old program formats. I'm aware that there are other besides me who find virtual conferences virtually unsatisfactory, and tend to avoid them--mostly because they use formats designed for face-to-face conferences which don't work as well online. The listserv is a mode of dialog that fits the genius of the online environment, and thus there are thousands of them, and they will continue to flourish and multiply. If we want to make good use of experts around the world meeting together and sharing their expertise widely we might do better to search for forms of such collaboration that are suited to this medium, and the search for such forms might be hastened if we didn't try to mimic the face-to-face conference. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Tom Abeles [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John Hibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3,2005 John has hit the nail on the head. First, for a global flow conference its decidedly being seen through US eyes. Secondly, the home base for the conference organizers is the Yale Law School which further narrows the scope of the conference and finally, as John has so perceptively picked up on, its a conference where most of the materials could just as easily be put up as a web cast or even as web pages with comment software to allow exchanges between all. And, in that respect it is anachronistic. Additionally, in most of these cases, panelist have expenses covered making the movement of bodies to the conference a decidedly costly event when most could be conferenced. This conference provides a brilliant opportunity to better understand where the golobal flow of information is, today. thoughts? tom abeles John Hibbs wrote: With all due respect, Eddan, why do I have to travel to Yale to participate in the conference? Arguably, Web based conferences are better than physical ones. And a whole lot cheaper. Nope, we can't duplicate the warm and fuzzy the comes from shoulder to shoulder linkages at physical conferences. But everything else can be done exceptionally well, especially for attendees of a kind that are likely to attend the Global Flow of Information Conference. NOTE: Several times we have tried to hold combination conferences - where there are virtual and physical attendees. I am not sure these work well enough to justify the work and handicaps. However, I deeply believe in the idea that one-to-many lectures and power point presentations (in all their glory) should be put up on the web in advance of the physical convention. Attendees can do themselves a real service by viewing these presentations in advance, leaving more time for QAthe best part of all lectures, in my opinion. At 7:08 AM -0500 2/3/05, Eddan Katz wrote: The Information Society Project at Yale Law School is proud to announce that registration is now open for The Global Flow of Information Conference 2005, which will take place on April 1-3, 2005, at the Yale Law School. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/GlobalFlow/registration.htm ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message
Re: [DDN] some thoughts about the use of exclamation marks
Phil Shapiro edits a pragraph this way: When people share ideas, communities grow! When communities share ideas, they learn from each other! I came to the Digital Divide Network to learn from others -- and hope I can make contributions that will enlarge the common knowledge assembled here! And concludes: can you see how exclamation marks and thoughtfulness don't fit so well together? I'll propose that for certain audiences, the communication might be improved this way: When people share ideas, communities grow! When communities share ideas, they learn from each other. I came to the Digital Divide Network to learn from other--and hope I can make contributions that will enlarge the common knowledge assembled here! Punctuation marks and such conventions as line spacing, underlining--and exclamation points!--are designed to help furnish the reader information about meaning and authorial intention that is supplied by vocal variations and gestures in the speech act. Any such convention CAN BE ABUSED! Such abuses, however, do not justify banning capitalization. Or exclamation points! Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Phil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 1:42 AM Subject: [DDN] some thoughts about the use of exclamation marks hi everyone - just wanted to share some thoughts about the use of exclamation marks in emails and online writings that represent our thoughts and work. i'm as guilty as anyone of using too many exclamation marks in my email and online writings. i'm trying to pare back, though. to help think about this topic here are two hypothetical DDN profiles. Profile 1 I just found out about the DDN community! I love everything about it! Send me some email! Profile 2 When people share ideas, communities grow. When communities share ideas, they learn from each other. I came to the Digital Divide Network to learn from others -- and hope I can make contributions that will enlarge the common knowledge assembled here. now, just as an excercise, add exclamation marks to all sentences in the second profile. Revised Profile 2 When people share ideas, communities grow! When communities share ideas, they learn from each other! I came to the Digital Divide Network to learn from others -- and hope I can make contributions that will enlarge the common knowledge assembled here! can you see how exclamation marks and thoughtfulness don't fit so well together? sometimes slight changes in how we communicate can change how our thoughts are perceived by others. it's fascinating that something as small as punctuation can make us appear more or less thoughtful. when i completed my undergraduate degree in philosophy, i was pretty sure at that time that the degree would have little practical use to me. i'm not so sure now. i hope the above thoughts provide some use to the DDN community as we continue our shared journey of exploration. - phil -- Phil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.his.com/pshapiro/ (personal) http://teachme.blogspot.com (weblog) http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/pshapiro (technology access work) http://mytvstation.blogspot.com/ (video and rich media) There's just so much more creativity and genius out there than our media currently reflect. FCC Commissioner Michael Copps ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] RSS: The Next ICT Literacy Challenge?
John Hibbs's message below seems to challenge the conventional wisdom which holds that the young are ready for the digital revolution while their elders resist it. The resistance to distance learning is not a new phenomenon: it is clear from much research that many young people prefer the conventional classroom, although why this is so is not clear. One possibility is the classroom allows for avoidance of participation, while online learning usually requires regular reading and writing. ( Classroom students apparently get away without buying or borrowing a textbook: how they can do this and pass courses is a mystery to me.) I might be one of those who would resist blogging, and would prefer conventional email. Blogging is less forgiving of half-formed or unformed thinking and errors of fact and syntax and spelling: it puts weaknesses on display for all to see. Further speculation on the cause or causes of this resistance to the new technologies would seem to depend on our further knowledge of what these students are currently doing with their lives that might help to account for their resistance. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: John Hibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 2:34 PM Subject: Re: [DDN] RSS: The Next ICT Literacy Challenge? At 11:40 AM -0800 1/21/05, Steve Eskow wrote: His first chapter is called The Daily Me, and deals with ever increasing ability of the new communication technologies to allow their users to personalize what they receive, tailor what comes to them so that they only hear and see what they want to hear and see. Steve, we may have already passed the Rubicon. I have come to know over 100 college undergraduates quite well. I see them daily, share many-a-meal, and even have some say in important aspects of their lives. I'm reasonably sure they like me a lot, and might even respect me just because of my limited amounts of gray hair. But could I interest even one in blogging? Or for that matter the beauties of education by distance means? Or the NY Times on line? Or that their employers will expect them to communicate well, which means lots of reading and writing,all within an intelligently framed context. Nope. Not one bit. They just look at me as some cave man from the Ice Age. At lunch they gather around the boob tube, glued to comics, sports or a really and truly dumb movie. Most dinners, about the same. What news they get is carefully filtered to their political and athletic leanings - Bush supporters swear by Fox, leftists are inclined to MSNBC. Pro sports or collegiate, don't bother me with the other if I have no interest outside of Eugene and the Ducks. Not one takes a daily newspaper, few read the articles I send them carefully pruned about matters I *thought* would be interesting to them. Yawn. Yawn. Perhaps the worst of this is they hold tight to whatever opinions they have formed, easily comfortable with the notion that my opinion counts just as much as yours. Perhaps this all has little to do with the digital divide? Or should we be expanding our own definition of The Divide? And, in closing, I love RSS. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] RSS: The Next ICT Literacy Challenge?
Steve, When television offered us only one or three channels, the medium tended to create the Daily Us rather than the Daily Me. Now that I can choose from an almost unlimited menu of channels there is a good possibillity that you and I are never looking at the same channel. We see elsewhere in the world pseudonations that are actually factions of clashing cultures without common values and goals to hold them together. As we develop and refine the new instruments of filtering and tailoring the messages that come into oour lives and heads, that danger of fragmentation becomes possible in all those nations that pride themselves on a common heritage and a common set of fundamental values. The point, perhaps, is that while we are refining the tools of the Daily Me we need to pay ssome attention to ways of creating the Daily Us. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Stephen Snow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 2:09 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] RSS: The Next ICT Literacy Challenge? Steve, You touch on a central downside to the Internet, in general. Because we are able to select information based on affinity we can get a lot more of what we are interested in -- at the expense of learning about things we might need need to know but are less interested in. To some extent, that is a value of media outlets, who create department stores of information rather than boutiques. This is becoming increasingly challenged, though, because of the intensifying melding of different media groups, which more and more cater to society's lack of time and to political interests in presenting information. From the beginning, email discussion lists and news groups made it possible to spend our time on the information we found most interesting or relevant without the messiness of stuff we didn't care about. RSS is just another iteration of that. It is a double-edged sword. Where, on the one edge, a free society is based on the ability to have unfettered access to information of our choosing, on the other edge, a free society's longevity is linked to common experiences, common goals and common understandings, which requires some connection to common information. As long as we continue to filter our experiences we run the risk of becoming not closer or more connected but more fragmented and disconnected as we share less and less in common. Steve Snow === Stephen Snow, MA, National Certified Counselor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Where love stops, power www.commcure.com begins, and violence 704.569.0243 and terror. -- CG Jung -- Artist-Blacksmith Assn. of N. America (www.abana.org) Assn. For Community Networking (www.afcn.org) Charlotte Folk Society (www.folksociety.org) Int'l Society for the Study of Dissociation (www.issd.org) Si Kahn (www.sikahn.com) One Special Christmas (www.onespecialchristmas.org) GROW BY GIVING: VOLUNTEER === - Original Message - From: Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 2:40 PM Subject: Re: [DDN] RSS: The Next ICT Literacy Challenge? Andy Carvin cites Dan Gillmor's concern for the difficulties of creating an informed public: Dan Gillmor at the Berkman blogger confab today just made the comment that the public will have to learn to do a little more work if they want to stay informed. It's not just going to show up on their doorstep the way it used to be, he said. It takes more effort to stay informed now, he noted. So what can we do to streamline the process? This matter suggests to Andy the need for RSS literacy, so that finding and moving current information of matters of importance are in a very real sense automated. Like most matters of importance this one has another side--and in this other view RSS becomes part of the problem rather than the solution. Cass Sunstein of the University of Chicago calls his important little book republic.com. His first chapter is called The Daily Me, and deals with ever increasing ability of the new communication technologies to allow their users to personalize what they receive, tailor what comes to them so that they only hear and see what they want to hear and see. The book was published in 2001, well before RSS technology made it even more possible for me to receive only those messages I want to receive. That is: if I want to watch only sports on television, or rock and roll, or crime shows, I can so arrange my Daily Me to make that possible. I do not have to spend a moment
[DDN] . Telemedicine, the Internet, and the poorer countries
I would appreciate help from Andy and the members of the DDN list that would point me to resources for learning about telemedicine possibilities in the poorer countries: web sites, organizations in the field, books, other resources. I am told that the new small low-cost digital video cameras and new software make it possible to send video images and conduct conversations between, say, Ghana, Uganda, Malawi in Africa, or Belize in Central America, and doctors and nurses in the US. Is this so? Are there models in place? (I am particularly interested in learning about possibilities involving Africa and Central and South America and the US..) Related question: For those poor communities that have limited or no medical facilities but might reach the Internet, might a church be the site of a telemedicine operation? Many US churches have companion relations with their denominational counterparts in the poor countries, and are deeply concerned about HIV?AIDS and other health-related issues. Telemedicine, whether housed in churches or not, seems a promising possibility. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
