-
4 F_%
4ffi
gp
5& N\&
el
I
Dismantling the Digital Divide:*
A Multicultural Education Framework
By Paul C. Gorski
Multicultural education calls for all
aspects of education to be continuously
examined, critiqued, reconsidered, and
transformed based on ideals of equity and
social justice. This includes instructional
technology and covers its content and delivery (or curriculum and pedagogy)
(Gorski, 2000). That is, it is not enough to
critically examine the individual resources-inthis case, CD-ROMs,Web sites,
or pieces of software-we use to ensure
inclusivity.
Instead, we must dig deeper and consider the medium itself and how it is being
used differently in different contexts. What
roles are various software titles, Web sites,
and the computers that facilitate our use
of them, playing in education? Are they
contributing to education equity or supporting current systems of control and
domination of those groups already historically privileged in the United States
education system (such as White people,
boys and men, first language English
speakers, and able-bodied people)? '
The term "digital divide" has traditionally described inequalities in access to
computers and the Internet between groups
of people based on one or more social or
cultural identifiers (Clark & Gorski, 2001).
Under this conceptualization, researchers
tend to compare rates of access to these
technologies across individuals or schools
based on race, sex, disability status, and
other identity dimensions. The "divide"
refers to the difference in access rates
among groups. The racial digital divide,
for example, describes the difference in
rates of access to computers and the
Internet, at home and school, between those
racial groups with high rates of access
(White people and Asian andAsian-American people) and those with lower rates of
access (Black people and Latina[ol people).
Similarly, the sex- or gender digital
divide refers to the gap in access rates
between men and women. So, by August
2000, when women surpassed men to become a majority ofthe United States online
population (NTIA, 2000), many people also
believed the sex digital divide had disap-
ample, of the 24,768 bachelors degrees in
computer and information sciences conferred during the 1996-97 academic year,
fewer than 7,000 were earned by women.
Fewer than one in six doctoral degrees in
this field were conferred to women (NCES,
1999). In fact, despite popular belief, the
number of women earning degrees in computer-related fields has been declining
since 1986. The gap in the percentages of
men and women earning degrees in the
field continues to increase (Carver, 2000).
Additionally, video games, largely
marketed for men and boys, often depict
Equal But Inequitable:
girls and women as damsels in distress or
An Example
sideshow prostitutes. Even those games,
from the Gender Divide
Most of the sex and gender inequities such as Tomb Raider, that challenge these
in society are replicated online. For ex- stereotypical roles by casting strong, indeample, research shows that the same sex- pendent, heroic female characters in lead
ist communication dynamics that can be roles dress these big-breasted women with
observed in board rooms and corporate impossibly-dimensioned bodies in tight)
offices every day are just as easily ob- revealing clothes. Most video game makserved within online discussion forums, ers are men and most video game consumdespite popular belief that such forums ers are boys and men (Gerrard, 1999). So
are discrimination free because users can- instead of critiquing this fact and considernot see each other. This includes both ing why it is so, the producers bow to
male dominance of discussion and a lack market pressures and recycle the industry
of respect and acknowledgement of sexism. Unfortunately, a majority of inforwomen's contributions (Gerrard, 1999; mation technology professionals cite video
games as their initial point of interest in
Grigar, 1999).
the
field (AAUW, 2000).
In addition, the ever-present and everAs a result of these and other sociogrowing Internet pornography' industry
political,
socio-historical, and socio-cultural
(Rich,2001), along with the threat of cyberdynamics,
as women became over 50 perstalking (Crary, 2001) and the relative
ease with which potential sexual preda- cent of the online population, only 27 per-'
tors can attain personal information about cent of all Bachelor's-level computer sciwomen online, make the Internet a hos- ence degrees were conferred to women (a
tile-and potentially dangerous-environ- 10 percentage point decrease since 1984)
(NCES, 1999) and only 20 percent of all
ment for many girls and women.
Equally hostile to women are aca- information technology professionals were
demic and professional pursuits of math- women (AAUW, 2000). So, while equality
ematics, sciences, engineering, computer in access rates reflects an important step
sciences (Turkle, 1991)-all traditionally forward, it does not, by any useful meamale fields that are closely linked with surement, signify the end of the sex digital
computers and the Internet. Research divide or significantly temper its larger
shows how women and girls are systemaati- implications. In fact, the glaring inequically steered away from these fields begin- ties that remain despite equality in
ning as early as elementary school through Internet access illustrate the urgency for a
school culture, classroom climate, tradi- deeper, broader understanding of the digitional gender roles, and other societal pres- tal divide and a deeper, broader approach
sures (Clark & Gorski, in press). For ex- for eliminating it.
peared. If there were more women than
men using the Internet, the logic wbnt,
equality had been achieved. Girls and
women were equally likely to use computers and the Internet as boys and men. Still,
though the fact that more girls and women
were using the Internet is a meaningful
step forward, a broader and deeper look at
their position in relation to the increasingly techno-centric society and global
economy reveals that equal access is considerably different from equitable access.
I
IMULTICULTURAL
28
EDUCATION
-
Drawing Connections
with Other Dimensions
of the Divide
II
These remaining inequities, which
mirror deeply entrenched and historically
cycled inequities in professional, economic,
and education opportunities for women in
the United States, together serve as a
clear, powerful critique of the uni-dimensional approach most often employed for
addressing the race and class digital divides: simply providing schools and communities with more comiputers and more,
or faster, Internet access. Again, though
this is a positive step forward, it fails to
address social, cultural, and political factors that will be in place with or without
more 'machinery.
For example, research indicates that,
while teachers in schools with a high
percentage of White students and a low
percentage of students on free or reduced
lunch programs are more likely to use
these technologies to engage students' in
creative and critical thinking activities,
teachers in schools with a high percentage of students of color and a high percentage of students on free or reduced
lunch tend to use computers and the
Internet for a skills and drills approach to
learning (NCES, 2000).
Additionally, the growing online presence of African Americans and Latina(o)s
is tempered by the growing number' of
white supremacy'Web sites and a more
intense sense of fear and vulnerability
among these groups (along with Native
Americans) related to the availability of
personal information online (EDA, 1999;
Spooner & Rainie, 2000).
Ultimately, the traditional understanding of the digital divide as a series of
gaps in rates of physical access to computers and the Internet fails to capture the
full picture of the divide, its stronghold,
and its educational, social, cultural, and
economic raiiaifications. Meanwhile, such
-a narrow conceptualization of the divide
serves the interests of privileged groups
who can continue to critique access rates
instead of thinking critically and reflectively abouit their personal and collective
roles in cycling and recycling old inequities
in a new cyber-form.
A new understanding of the digital
divide is needed-one that provides adequate context and begins with a dedication to equity and social justice throughout
education.Multiculturaleducation-afield
that enters every discussion about education with this dedication-offers an impor-'
tant, desperately needed framework for
such an understanding. It is from that
fraimework that I have crafted the follow-
ing statement about understanding and
eliminating the digital divide.
Toward a New Approach
for Dismantling the Divide
A multicultural education approach
to understanding and eliminating the digital divide:
(1) critiquestechnology-relatedinequities in the context of larger
educational and societal inequities, keeping at the fore of the
discussion the fact that those
groups most disenfranchised by
the digital divide are the same
groups historically disenfranchised by curricular and pedagogical practices, evaluation and
assessment, school counseling,
and all other aspects of education
(and society at large);
(2) broadens the significance of
"access" beyond that of physical
access to computers and the
Internet to include access to support and encouragement to pursue and value technology-related
fields, educationally and professionally (At home, in school, in the
media, by peer groups, etc.);
(3j broadens the significance of'
"access" beyond that of physical
access to computers and the
Internet to include access to nonhostile, inclusive software and
Internet content;
(4) critically examines not only
who has access to computers and
the Internet, but how these technologies are being used by various people or identity groups or
by those teaching various people
or groups;,
(5) considers, in the context of
studying access rates with this
broader definition of 'access," the
larger socio-politicalramifications
of, and socio-economic motivations
for, the expanding significance of
information technology,' not only
in schools, but in society at large,
and how the growing merger of
cyber-culture with wider U.S. culture privileges those who already
have access in the broadest sense;
(6) confronts capitalistic, propaganda, like commercials portrayingchildrenfromaroundtheworld
announcing their recent arrival
online, that lead.people to believe
that these technologies are availFALL 2002
29
able to everyone, everywhere,
under any conditions, who want
to use them;
(7) rejects as simplistic and
patriachal. any program that purports to "close" the divide only by
providing more computers and
more, or faster, Internet access,
to a school, library, or other public
place;
(8) rejects as inadequate any solution that aims to "close" and not
"eliminate" the divide; and
(9) conceptualizes the elimination
of the digital divide as those actions that:
(a)leadto, andmaintain, apresent
and future in which all people,
regardless of race, ethnicity, sex,
gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, disability status,
age, education level,'or any other
social or cultural identity, enjoy
equitable access-safe,', comfortable, encouraged and encouraging,non-lhostile, aiid valued physical, cultural, social access-to information technology including
software, computers, the and
Internet;
(b)leadto, andmaintain, apresent
and future in which all people,
regardless of race, ethnicity,'sex,
gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, disability status,
age, education level, or any other
social or cultural identity, enjoy
equitable access-safe, comfortable, encouraged and encouraging, non-hostile, and valued physical, cultural, social access-to educational pursuits in technologyrelated fields including mathematics, science, computer science, and engineering-,
(c)leadto, andmaintaii, apresent
and future in which all people,
regardless of race, ethnicity, sex,
gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, disability status;
age, education level, or any other
social or cultural identity, enjoy
equitable access-safe, comfortable, encouraged and encouraging,non-hostile, andvaluedphysical, cultural, social access-to career pursuits in technology-related fields including mathematics, science, computer science, engineering, and information technology;
(d)leadto, andmaintain, apresent
and future in which all people,
regardless of race, ethnicity, sex,
gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, disability status,
age, education level, or any other
social or cultural identity, play an
equitable role in determining the
socio-cultural significance of computers and the Internet and the
overall social and cultural value
of these technologies; and
unto itself, must be understood as one
part-albeit an immensely important
one-of a larger effort toward eliminating
the continuing and intensifying inequity
in every aspect of education and society.
(e)leadto, andmaintain, apresent
and future in which all of these
conditions are constantly monitored, examined, and ensured
through a variety of perspectives
and frameworks.
As information technology becomes
more and more interwoven with all aspects of life and well-being in the United
States, it becomes equally urgent to employ the complexities and critiques of
multicultural education theory and practice to the problem of the digital divide. It
is the next-the present-equity issue in
schools and larger society with enormous
social justice implications. This reframing
of the digital divide can serve as a starting
point for more active participation in digital divide research and action within the
field of multicultural education.
Additionally, this conceptual piece
should challenge those currently studying
or working to eliminate the divide in all
contexts to broaden and deepen their understandings of equity. It is crucial to recognize that the effort to eliminate the divide, while a clearly identifiable problem
intergrations. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Grigar, D. (1999). Over the line, online, gender lines: E-mail and women in the classroom. Pp. 257-281 in Blair, K. &
Takayoshi, P. (Eds.) Feminist Cyberscapes: Mapping Gendered Academic
Spaces. Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing
Company.
National Center for Educational Statistics
References
American Association of University Women
Educational Foundation (AAUW).
(2000): Tech-savvy: Educating girls in
the new computer age. Washington, DC:
AAUW Educational Foundation Research.
Carver, D. (2000). Research foundations for
improving the representationof women
in the information technology workforce
(unpublished report).
Clark, C. & Gorski, P. (2001). Multicultural
education and the digital divide: Focus
on race, language, socioeconomic class,
sex, and disability. Multicultural Perspectives 3 (3), 39-44.
Clark, C. &Gorski, P. (in press). Multicultural
education and the digital divide: Focus
on gender. Multicultural Perspectives.
Crary, D. (2001, June 30). States battle to
keep pace with online stalkers. The Baltimore Sun, p. A4.
Economic Development Administration
(EDA). (1999). Assessment of technology
infrastructure in Native communities.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Commerce.
Gerrard, L. (1999). Feminist research in computers and composition. Pp. 377-400 in
Blair, K. & Takayoshi, P. (Eds:) Feminist Cyberscapes: Mapping Gendered
Academic Spaces. Stamford, CT: Ablex
Publishing Company.
Gorski, P. (2000). Multicultural education
and the internet: Intersections and
(NCES) (2000). Internet access in U.S.
public schools and classrooms, 1994-
1999. Washington, DC: United States
Department of Education.
National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) (1999). Higher education degrees. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Telecommunications and InformationAdministration (NTIA). (2000). Falling through the net: Toward digital in-
clusion. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
Rich, F. (2001, July 8). Under wraps, porn
business thrives in U.S. The Baltimore
Sun, p. D5.
Spooner, T., and Rainie, L. (2000). AfricanAmericans and the internet. Washing-
ton, DC: The Pew Internet & American
Life PIroject.
Turkle, S. (1991). Computational reticence:
Why women fear the intimate machine.
In C. Kramarae (Ed.), Technology and
women's voices (pp.41-61). New York:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
-Paul C. Gorski is assistant director
of the Office of Human Relations Programs
at the University of Maryland,
College Park, Maryland
and an adjunct professor of education
at the University of Virginia's
Northern Virginia Center,
Falls Church, Virginia.
Letter to the Editor
Dear Editor:
I am writing in response to the article
that appeared in the MulticulturalEducation journal titled, "From Racial Stereotyping and Deficit Discourse Toward the
Critical Race Theory in Teacher Education." I agree wholeheartily that teachers
need to address the issues of oppression in
the classroom and teach students how to
identify forms of racism, stereotyping, sexism, and other forms of oppression. It is
important to teach about white privilege.
A good resource would be the Peggy McIntosh 1988 article titled "White Privilege:
Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." In the
article the author explains how her life is
easier because she is a white woman. As an
educator, I need to be aware of my white
privilege and avoid falling into teaching
using stereotypes. Students do not perform successfully when they are dealing
with teachers that already think that they
are going to fail no matter how.hard the
student tries.
Although I agree with the atticle, I
was left looking for more information on
ways of bringing Critical Race Theory into
my classroom. The authors' approach in
this article is to teach only about oppression and how to identify oppression in the
mass media. The authors do not explain
how to make a successful classroom that is
open to cultural differences. If students
are only taught to identify oppression and
not taught that we are alike as well, students may become less diverse because it
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
30
becomes a "them and us" conflict. Another
article that appeared in your journal titled
"multicultural Activities throughout the
Year" (Saul & Saul; Volume 8, Issue'4,
page 38) discusses the importance ofteaching multicultural education throughout the
year and to also teach that people are alike
as well as different. This would be a good
reference.
I appreciate the knowledge that I have
gained in these articles to be able to bring
multicultural education into the classroom
and continue my education and understanding of diversity in the classroom.
Sincerely,
Christian A. Showers
St. Cloud, Minnesota
COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
TITLE: Dismantling the Digital Divide: A Multicultural Education
Framework
SOURCE: Multicultural Education 10 no1 Fall 2002
WN: 0228805893003
The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it
is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in
violation of the copyright is prohibited..
Copyright 1982-2002 The H.W. Wilson Company.
All rights reserved.