According to the OECD (2002), the digital divide is the difference between people with opportunities to access technology and those who do not because of a wide variety of uses.
The growing popularity of devices and the connection to broadband internet, as well as the increasing presence of digital elements in everyday life, is making the digital divide over its use more important. From its inception in the 1990s to the present day, the digital divide scope has varied: it includes digital inclusion, digital citizen participation, digital core competencies, digital literacy, and digital accessibility.
There are several factors that influence the digital divide:
- Genre. Women have on average less confidence in their digital skills and less interest in technology for a variety of reasons.
- Educational and socio-economic level. People with more training make more use of problem-solving and more creative use of technology, in addition to those with more resources being able to access better equipment and devices. They may also have more free time to create content or learn.
- Geographic location. Internet access is more difficult in rural areas.
- Age. Called the gray crack. Older people have more difficulty adapting to the constant technological changes, or do not get out of it directly.
- Other factors. Ideological positions opposed to the use of technology in areas such as education, regardless of level of education or age.
- Both cognitive and physical disabilities. They need adaptations that do not allow the use of all devices or their possibilities.
According to the U.S. Wisconsin Department of Public Education, digital equity is the capacity for full citizen participation in society and the economy.
It consists of five elements:
- Affordable and robust internet broadband data service
- Digital devices suitable for the needs of the user
- Access to digital literacy training
- Quality technical support service
- Computer applications and online content designed to facilitate and encourage self-sufficiency, participation, and collaboration.
Digital inclusion is evolving at the pace of technology and requires strategies and investments to remove barriers to access and use of technology.
In the school context it consists of four pillars:
- Internet at home for school-specific use for no more than two children
- Internet access when students need it
- Enough digital literacy for students and family to help
- Digital resources / educational content / tools to complete learning activities.
According to the UK Government, the importance of internet use is evident even in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, but even among internet users there may be digital exclusion depending on what you do technology and its ability to navigate the digital world independently and securely.
Sociologist Paul Attewell (2001) made two distinctions about the digital divide: one about physical access to devices and a second about its use. Students with more resources and support at home make more creative use of technology, mobilizing higher-ranking cognitive skills, while students with fewer resources make more repetitive and passive use, prioritizing entertainment over respect. to play and personal interactions. The second crack is maintained even though the first one is removed.
The use in classrooms of passive modes of interaction with technology such as test-type exams, individual activities … aborts the motivation of students for the creative use of technology and can increase conflict by generating boredom. Fostering high-level learning opportunities is key to tackling the second digital divide.
Children and adolescents in vulnerable settings have less access to technology and a quiet place to study.
They also do not receive family support, especially from mothers and fathers who are unable to telework and cannot afford tutoring.
These students already showed low average school performance (Di Pietro et al, 2020). The closure of schools has increased these differences in a way that will become more demonstrable over time.
Students with special needs or lower cognitive abilities also suffer from the digital divide.
Younger children are even more vulnerable to being more dependent on their families and having less autonomy and adaptability. Parental education is not as critical to their performance as their involvement in education, according to the 2016 PIRLS study.
References
Attewell, Paul (2001) Comment: The First and Second Digital Divides, Sociology of Education Vol. 74, No. 3 (Jul., 2001), pp. 252-259 (8 pages)
Casacuberta Sevilla, David. «E-inclusió: els reptes cognitius». Enrahonar: an international journal of theoretical and practical reason, [en línia], 2007, Núm. 38, p. 221-30, https://www.raco.cat/index.php/Enrahonar/article/view/72488 [Consulta: 24-11-2020].
Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Dinis Mota Da Costa, P., Karpinski, Z. and Mazza, J., The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets, EUR 30275 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-19937-3 (online), 10.2760/126686 (online), JRC121071
Eivers, Eemer & Gilleece, Lorraine & Delaney, Emer. (2017). Reading achievement in PIRLS 2016: Initial report for Ireland.
Govern de Wisconsin, https://dpi.wi.gov/imt/educational-equity-digital-age
Govern de Gran Bretanya. Exploring the UK’s digital divide. https://www.ons.gov.uk/releases/exploringtheuksdigitaldivide
Mobile World Capital (2016). L’escletxa digital a la ciutat de Barcelona. https://www.mobileworldcapital.com/escletxa-digital/download/escletxa-digital_cat.pdf
Understanding the Digital Divide, OECD, 2002, page 5 http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/57/1888451.pdf
Zhang, D., and Livingstone, S. (2019) Inequalities in how parents support their children’s development with digital technologies, London School of Economics, http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/assets/documents/research/preparing-for-a-digital-future/P4DF-Report-4.pdf