By K. Zaldivar

Interesting data about Internet use around the world. 

http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

 

 

 

Research about Digital Divide based on the article: Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings by Jan van Dijk (2006).  By K. Zaldivar

As I read more about Digital Divide issues now days, I find this article interesting because it touches upon factors and issues regarding Digital Divide or the gap between individuals who have access or do not have access to computers and the Internet.   One main factor is the material access to technology.  We must ask the following question: Do students have access to appropriate computers and internet access? Where do they have access and how often can they access them? If I focus on my students, I have to say that 95% of my students don’t have access to the Internet at home.  Some of them have received computers from educational grants, but not having Internet access is a barrier they usually face.  Another factor they mentioned in this article was motivation, and I have to relate this to parent involvement and interest.  I feel most of my students are interested in using technology, but many of them come from home environments where parents never finished school and never had the opportunity to be exposed to technology.  For many of the parents computers and Internet are a taboo, as I have heard many of my students’ parents say.  According to the study mentioned in this article, some reasons that users had a lack of motivation were: no need to use it, no time, lack of money, lack of skills, and rejection of the medium (thinking that what they see in the computer can be dangerous information). Another factor mentioned in the article is skills access.  Individuals might have material access and motivation to use computers and Internet, but lack the skills to be proficient on its use. 

I thought reading this article opened my eyes to other issues involving the Digital Divide.  I highly suggest the reading of this article.

Reference:

Dijk van J. (2006).  Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34, 221-235.

http://www.sciencedirect.com.lp.hscl.ufl.edu/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6VC3-4KGPPP1-1-1&_cdi=5943&_user=2139813&_pii=S0304422X06000167&_orig=search&_coverDate=10%2F31%2F2006&_sk=999659995&view=c&wchp=dGLzVzb-zSkzk&md5=f34f97a02a95fb9f43c14cd24a39c967&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

 

CPolk - I too thought that this was an interesting article and that you summarized it nicely.  It is interesting and sad to think that not only are there Natives and Immigrants in reference to the Digital Divide, but there are Natives by age but because of their circumstances these Natives will ultimately be Immigrants.  It is important that we as educators give them, all students, not only access to technology but also the skills to be able to use it. 

 

Being a Digital Multipliers just like Prensky by K. Zaldivar

Being enrolled in this class of the use of Internet in Instruction has allowed me to be exposed to many issues happening in education related to technology.  A few weeks ago I would have agreed that all my students needed to be equally exposed to the digital world, but after reading many articles from Marc Prensky I have to admit that I have changed my point of view.  The article "Let's be Digital Multipliers: Eliminating the Digital Divide is Something Educators can Do" clearly explains what is to be fair with ALL students.  Prensky gives the example of the teacher having 30 students, 29 have computers at home, and one doesn’t.  She doesn’t give computer homework to the students because it would be unfair with that single student.  It makes me think: is that fair with the other 29?  This directly relates to my classroom setting where 8 students might have computers, but only 3 might be able to afford internet connection; the rest of the students don't have computers at home.  How do I make sure ALL mu students are exposed to the Digital world?  

 

Prensky argues that the students might not be able to access technology at home, but they need to be exposed to digital and technology experiences available because out in the real world it will be there for them to use.  We as teachers need to understand that everything in the future will be based and run through technology; well, aren’t we already?

 

Prensky also points out the fact that not all students will have the same access to the same technology, but teachers can always do something about it.  Teachers need to understand that not every student needs to have the same technology, but as Prensky mentioned teachers can always make accommodations for those students who don't have technology of their own.    In the real world do we all have the same laptops, or cell phones, or TVs? We don’t; the same is for our students.  Prensky wrote, “we should not care exactly which technology our students use, but we should make sure they are all using something.” (p. 2)  So no matter the resources available we need to make sure we are providing with the best we can to ALL of them.  Prensky suggested that “every student has ‘enough’ access, rather than ‘equal’ access to digital technology.” (p.2)  Some other suggestions the author made were to use the technology we have accessibility to and make sure the ones using it are the students.  Also, if we don’t have enough this is the way to teach some “sharing” skills to the students. He also suggests increasing the time of access to technology and finally to do the best we can to allow students who don’t have access to have it. 

 

After reading this article the digital Divide concept faded away from my teaching philosophy with the Let's be Digital Multipliers substituting it.  I also believe that educating our students' parents and families of the need to be technology and digital knowledgeable is a basic skills ALL of our students must have in order to be successful in this digital world.  The title of Prensky article explains it all: we need to make sure all of our students have some type of access to the digital world.  He compared teachers to “digital multipliers” : “people who find creative solutions that bring every students, no matter what his or her background or income level, into the digital world.” (p. 4)

 

References:

Prensky, M. (2008). Let's be digital multipliers: eliminating the digital divide is something educators can do.  Educational Technology. 

 

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-Lets_Be_Digital_Multipliers-ET-01-09.pdf

 

 

 

RJP   Digital Divide

I have been reading articles on the digital divide and have come to the conclusion that this divide is definitely a reality in the American school systems.  There are definitely the 'have'"s and the "have not’s" and this unequal distribution of technology affects the education and job potentials of these students.  Dumping computers into the ‘have not’ schools however is not the only answer.  It’s a symbolic temporary band aid to a greater social problem in America and will not resolve the problems. 

 

The American people need to demonstrate that education itself is important and be willing to place the recognition, respect, community support, parental support and direct the financial resources to support teachers and student learning.  Until the American people place significance on education for our youth we will continue to decline academically and as a world leader.  Society must be willing to provide the resources to the teachers and students to support the technology that is available, the training to incorporate and teach, and time and energy involved to maintain the focus and fast paced changes.  We must have classrooms that are conducive to learning, with smaller class sizes, additional staff to redirect students with attention and behavioral problems and greater financial rewards for teachers that do stay in the trenches.

 

This focus on education must originate in the family itself.  Children’s values develop in the home and within their communities.  If the culture in which a child lives does not place value on education, it becomes extremely difficult to provide the level of teaching and learning that is necessary for a child regardless of how much technology is involved.  Teachers can only be expected to accomplish reasonable results with a child in the average amount of ‘teaching-learning’ time of three hours per day.  Reinforcement of this learning must be followed up in the home and supported. 

 

Dumping computers into a school for a student to have an hour of access time in the library is wasted energy.  Without the appropriate technology support and teacher support, skills and time, only provides lip service to problem solving.  Additionally, students may have access through school and public libraries, but time constraints, filters, and the ability to store and download information often limit access”. (Franklin & Stephens, 2009, pg. 43).  Compare this limited access to the student who has home access 24/7 completing homework assignments and surfing the Web. 

 

In a study of the Mississippi Delta children, Thomas revealed that there was a significant discrepancy between children within lower socioeconomic groups and children in other groups related to access to computers in the home.  Despite the fact that computers were provided to the lower socioeconomic schools as a result of “No Child Left Behind”, and students had access during school hours, this study also revealed that these students had significantly less skills, abilities and knowledge regarding computer technology.  Franklin and Stephens comment that “Simply put, students without computer and Internet access in the home have fewer chances to gain the digital literacy needed to function in our current world” (2009, pg. 43).  Students “ now need to compete globally for technology based jobs, the lack of technological skills means even more disparity between workers both within and outside of the country” (Thomas, 2008, pg. 13).

 

As a society, are we willing to purchase and send a state-of-the-art computer home with a student whose family may not value the technology, education or the importance of both?  As a society do we really believe that the have’s should be financially supporting the have not’s by ensuring that every child has a home computer?   I dare say that we are not there as yet.  Realistically, I cannot fathom that this digital divide will ever collapse.  Even if as a society we fund home computers for all, technology is advancing so rapidly that these ‘take home’ computers will never keep up with the technology of the ‘have’ children.

 

Franklin, P. & Stephens, G.  (2009). Equitable Access, the Digital Divide,

and the Participation Gap.  School Library Media Activities Monthly.  XXV(5). January 2009. 

http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.lp.hscl.ufl.edu/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.42

 

Thomas, D.  (2008). The Digital Divide:  What Schools in Low Socioeconomic Areas Must Teach.  Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin. 74(4). Summer 2008. 

http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.lp.hscl.ufl.edu/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.42

 

Holly W. 6/12/10

     Educators can play a vital role in decreasing the digital divide according to Swain and Pearson in their report titled “Educators and Technology Standards: Influencing the Digital Divide.” They argue that the implementation of technology standards will facilitate this process (p. 326). The article focuses on three areas that have been shown to influence the Digital Divide in schools including: frequency of use, the differences in students’ experiences with respect to computer use, and technology professional development for teachers. Finally, the article discusses how the implementation of technology standards can change the Digital Divide (p. 327).  Swain and Pearson report that frequency of technology use and the differences in technology experiences vary among ethnic and economic status of the students as well as by the types of professional development experiences for the teachers. They suggest that the implementation of technology standards, “can guide teachers at all levels with suggestions for effectively integrating technology into the daily learning environment” (p. 331).

     Since we cannot put computers in the homes of all of our students the time students spend on the computer at school needs to be meaningful. Technology standards, according to Swain and Pearson, will help equalize the experiences that students receive with technology in the classroom. The argument is that the time spent on the computer at school will assist in decreasing the digital divide as long as the time spent is meaningful and not only drill and kill exercises.    

 

Swain, C,. & Pearson, T. (2002). Educators and Technology Standards: Influencing the Digital Divide. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.lp.hscl.ufl.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=7396082&site=ehost-live

 

 

Stephanie K.

We have discussed Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants and we all understand that there is a divide between students and teachers, but how does that really affect our students?  I really loved how Jennifer put up the youtube video of the iSchool Initiative and how the program is working to infuse technology within our schools.  I happened upon this video and although there are no words spoken it sends a very clear message about how the digital divide is harmful to our students unless we begin to change.  A great way to start that change is by signing up your school as part of the iSchool Initiative.

 

 

Carli B.

I really enjoy the PBS Frontline videos because it provides information on the current issues with technology and education. There are several interviews with important educators such as the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan. The following is a video of him in an interview on the Digital Divide.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/learning/schools/the-new-digital-divide.html?play

 

Donna Valdespino

Since I will be working with children, I found some resources that are showing that the digital divide is closing for students but we still have a lot more work to do.  There is students in developing countries that do not have access to computers or internet.  We still have many students in the United States that cannot access the internet at home.  They only have the opportunity to play on a computer when they are at school (if they have enough computers) or at a public library.  As a country, we still have a lot of work to do to close the digital divide. 

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/03/20/digital.divide.reut/index.html

http://www1.voanews.com/learningenglish/home/Computers-Children-Digital-Divide-Internet-Safety-90607409.html

(If the video for the site above does not work then you can try to watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgFlaZhs-Gc)

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/398/

 

 

Anna S.

 

 

The site that presented this video has great information about the digital divide!

 

Godswill Ulieme 6/8/10

 

Digital Divide

This term describes the gap between people that have access to digital and information technology, and those that do have limited or no access at all. This problem is common in a lot of our urban schools. Sometimes this is the difference between quality and mediocre education in our schools. I have included links to several articles that present different views on this subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/digital_divide

http://www.edutopia.org/digital-divide-where-we-are-today

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn99/

http://www.bridgethedigitaldivide.com/

http://news.cnet.com/2010-1071-85837.html

http://www.2.ed.gov/Technology/digdiv.html

 

 Chary Sagnip

Tampa, FL

 

[Originally, I posted this on Saturday, January 30th; but I saw that all of our postings had been deleted.  Just to make sure, I've re-posted it.]

 

“The digital divide still exists and is a serious issue in our country… It translates not only into equity of access to additional education after K-12, but also to access to jobs.” – Don Knezek, the chief executive officer of the International Society for Technology in Education, From Trotter’s Minorities Still Face Digital Divide.

 

If aforementioned is the case, then we (as educators and decision makers) need to RE-evaluate our county's current access, making sure if is available for ALL students.

Andrew Trotter, assistant editor for Education Week, comments and festering data (based on Kaiser reports and data provided through the U.S. Census Bureau) are a wakeup call to the reality of today’s educational and technological needs:

 

· “Based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey of October 2003, 93 percent of white students use computers, compared with 86 percent of black students and 86 percent of Hispanic students, the study reports. Among Asian-Americans, the figure was 91 percent.”

 

· “And while 67 percent of white students were likely to use the Internet, just 47 percent of African-American students, 44 percent of Hispanic students, and 58 percent of Asian-American students were likely to do so.”

 

· “Eighty-two percent of students with disabilities used computers, as opposed to 91 percent of the those without disabilities. Of the students with disabilities, 49 percent went online, compared with 61 percent of those who not have disabilities, according to the 62-page study.”

 

· On a positive side, Trotter finds “[A] divide in computer and Internet use between female and male students has virtually disappeared. Ninety-one percent of both female and male students use computers, the study found; moreover, 61 percent of girls use the Internet, compared with 58 percent of boys.”

Trotter examines beyond race and into economic demographics that are dependent on parents’ post secondary educational experience in his 2004 piece entitled High Tech Divide:

 

· “[C]hildren of those ages who have less-educated parents, or who attend schools in lower-income communities, were less likely than other children to use the Internet on a typical day or to have Internet access at home.”

 

· “[H]alf of all children ages 3 to 17 from families with incomes of $75,000 or more had Internet access at home, while just 15 percent of those from families with incomes of $20,000 to $25,000 did, according to the Kaiser issue brief [released surveys conducted in 2004 and 2003 by the Menlo Park, Calif.-based Kaiser Family Foundation.]”

· “39 percent of the children from families with annual incomes of $75,000 or more have never gone online, while 69 percent of children from families with incomes of less than $20,000 have never gone online.”

 

Marriot reconfirms Trotter’s results: “There is also a strong correlation, experts say, between household income and Internet access,” even though the use of technology has increased in the African American community. The New York Times’ Michel Marriott affirms in 2006 ( Digital Divide Closing as Blacks Turn to Internet ) , that according to Internet Experts: “[T]he falling price of laptops, more computers in public schools and libraries and the newest generation of cellphones and hand-held devices that connect to the Internet have all contributed to closing the divide.” According to Marriott, the steady growth in internet use is indeed with the African-American youth. Yes, minorities are using the internet more today for job and educational research, however, communities seek their youth to do more exigent research with their current technology – beyond the music and video downloading.

 

According to Trotter, “Schools play a big role in helping to bridge the digital divide, the report says, echoing past studies. Many disadvantaged students use the Internet only at school. Among the students who access the Internet at only one location, a majority of those who are in poverty get that access at school.” Trotter and Marriott found that there are multiple opportunities for those who are in the gap to seek their technological needs; individuals can do so by taking advantage of the technology provided in schools, public libraries, and community clubhouses. According to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (the same resource where Trotter obtained his statistics), Marriot writes that most individuals who do rely upon community computers use dated hardware within locations that are only opened for a limited time during the day. Thus showing that the economically and socially disadvantaged are still technologically destitute in that they do not have the ability to vastly access information and resources as the populations they are compared to.

 

Upon reading and researching the observations and statistics on today’s Digital Divide, the argument that Marc Prensky revealed in his 2004 text What Can You Learn From A Cell Phone? – Almost Anything! obtains more clarity and credibility. Cell phones are more accessible to those who are in impoverished circumstances; therefore cell phones are one way to sew up the Digital Divide. The use of the cell phone may be necessary.

 

Works Cited:

Marriott, M. (2006, March 31). Digital divide closing as blacks turn to internet. The New York Times, Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/us/31divide.html

Prensky, M. (2004). What can You learn from a cell phone? – almost anything!. Innovate!, Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-What_Can_You_Learn_From_a_Cell_Phone-FINAL.pdf

Trotter, A. (2006, September 8). Minorities still face digital divide. Education Week, 26(3), Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/09/13/03digital.h26.html

Trotter, A. (2004, October 1). High-tech divide. Education Week, 24(5), Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2004/09/29/05tech-2.h24.html

 

For Further Reading:

Clewly, R. (2001, April 27). I have (a digital) dream. Wired, Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2001/04/43349

Feller, Ben. (2006, September 5). Digitial divide still separates white and minority students. USA Today, Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-09-05-digital-divide_x.htm

Tu, T, & Nelson, A. (Ed.). (2001). Technicolor: race, technology, and everyday life. New York, NY: NYU Press. 

 

 

Shannon Hamlett

 

Computers for All Students: A Possible Solution to the Digital Divide

 

 

After reading the disheartening research provided by Chary on the ever-present digital divide, I was inspired to find a solution to this problem. Assuming that increased exposure to computers will improve student achievement and help eliminate the digital divide between students of varying ethnicities and income levels, I searched for examples of increased exposure to technology in low income schools. I was happily surprised to find several examples of low-income urban schools that, with help from technology grants and supplemental funding, were able to improve student achievement by providing laptops for all students.  Below is a summary of two successes:

 

 

1)      Curtis, D. (2003, January 24). A Remarkable Transformation: Union City Public Schools. Edutopia, Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/node//1017 .

 

 

·         In this article, the author highlights how a struggling school district transformed over the course of a decade through a combination of tactics. The tagline for the article reveals the key ingredient in this mix, technology: “The teachers and community -- and a large dose of technology -- come together to save this New Jersey school district.”

·         To summarize the strategies used, the author explains that: “A combination of focused leadership, a comprehensive, research-based overhaul of the system, technology, teacher and community input, site-based decision-making, and more (and carefully targeted) money explain the turnaround.”

·         In addition to increasing expectations of students and changing to a block schedule, students were “put to work” on interdisciplinary projects that usually relied on computers to completed. Students were “more likely will be working individually or in groups -- often at computers -- while the teacher circumnavigates the room, stopping to advise or confer when needed.”

·         The teachers and administrators agree that incorporating technology into the curriculum is what made the largest difference for this school district. The author explains: “The results were so positive that district officials decided to use much of the new money coming to the district (the result of a school equal-financing court ruling) on computers, connections, and software. Union City now has one computer for every three students and all of its classrooms wired for the Internet.”

·         The author concludes that allocating money to more computers was the key to turning this school district around. Using available funds to provide more access to computers was the decision that made a huge difference for these students.  

 

 

2)      Furger, R. (2001, November 1). Laptops for All: Using Technology to Go Beyond Traditional Curriculum. Edutopia, Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/node//895 .

 

 

·         In this article, the author highlights a magnet middle school in New York City, Mott Hall School. I was particularly drawn to this article because I have friends who teach at this school and knew that it was a model school; however, I had no idea that every teacher and every student is provided with their own school-issued laptop.

·         The school principal of this school notes that providing laptops was a solution to the digital divide that plagued most of the minority students at this school.  To roll out the program, parents and staff “developed policies to ensure the safety of students traveling to and from school, created a payment plan that relied on the contribution of families and the school district, and began troubleshooting everything from curriculum delivery to basic repair and maintenance.”

·         One key to the success of laptops in the classrooms was the focus on project-based learning vs. traditional assessments. Instead of taking paper and pencil tests, students use their laptops to complete online projects and assessments.  

·         The other key to success was the focus on staff development. Teacher in-service days are used to showcase “exemplary teaching units.” In addition, more experienced teachers mentor their colleagues, “opening up their classrooms for observation and taking the time after a long school day to meet and plan lessons.” In addition, partnerships with local universities, businesses, and other organizations provided additional support to the school.

·         In summary, the school’s commitment to technology has been the key to engaging students and improving student achievement.

 

 

 

Suzon P  6/12/10

  

The Digital Divide in Rural Florida

  

There exists another area of digital division that has not been addressed here. That is the digital divide that exists in rural locations. This area is of particular interest because it seems to not have an immediate solution. Access is still a barrier for many distance learners. There is a lack of high speed Internet access in rural locations. This is most onerous to rural children whose parents choose to home school, rural students taking classes in virtual schools and college students taking courses via distance eduation. They simply cannot access the applications they need for success. Tsao recommends the use of satellites for this purpose (Tsao, 2003). The charge for services in rural communities for satellite service is prohibitive. Companies tend to focus their investments in urban areas where there are high income consumers and high residential densities that maximize profits. Providers must expect a high rate of adoption before they invest in an area. Also, where broadband service is available, rural residents have significantly fewer competititve choices. Furthermore, two viable forms of broadband access in urban areas, cable modems and digital subscriber lines are unlikely to reach beyond the boundaries of central office dialing service areas in small rural towns.

 

Libraries provide access to all patron and may be a viable option in many communities. Public libraries have helped close the digital divide experienced by rural people to a certain extent. However, a rural person in Levy County may travel 30 minutes to get to a Library branch and get only 15 minutes with the computer before his time is up so another patron can have his equal access. I conclude that without more Library sponsored "computer places", the Library will continue to have a limited effect on the rural digital divide.

 

Even though high speed Internet decreases the effects of the digital divide, there is research that indicates that another there are other critical ingredients to the erradication of the riral digital divide: community context and relation to the lead institution (almost always a university) (Flora, 2003). In this paricular area, we are repleat with colleges and Universities that could fulfill this role. Computer access throughout the community that is sponsored by the area Colleges would help bridge the rural digital divide. Wireless access is a less expensive way to address this problem. Only when the bandwidth is there can the skills divide can be addressed and a college with all of its resources would already be in place to fulfill that purpose.

 

This is an ongoing and critical problem. However, in today's economic climate, I see very little chance that it will be solved in the immediate future.

Block, Judy (2010). Distance Education and the Digital Divide: An Academic Perspective. Retrieved June 12, 2010, from University of West Georgia:

http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring131/block131.html
Flora, C. B. (2006). Information Technology Critical as Rural and Remote Areas Transition to the New Economy. Retrieved June 12, 2010, from Rural Development News: http://www.soc.iastate.edu/extension/ncrcrd/rdn/rdnews28-2.pdf
LaRose, R., Gregg, J., Strover, S., Straubhaar, J., & Inagaki, N. (2008, November 30). Closing the Rural Broadband Gap. Retrieved June 12, 2010, from Michigan State University: https://www.msu.edu/~larose/ruralbb/
Tsao, H.-H. (2003). Learning without Boundary: Application of Satellite Communication System on Distance Education. Retrieved January 25, 2009, from Online Journal of Space Communication: http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/Issue5/current.html

 

Debbie H.

I think at this point, no one would argue that the Digital Divide is more than putting computers in schools; the gap between technologically literate and illiterate stems from social, cultural, economical, political and educational issues. For many reasons stated in a study on the Mississippi Delta region (Lentz et al, 2001) technology infrastructure has not been as valued in the south, especially in poorer, rural, isolated areas. And though studies (which by the way seem to be seriously outdated) are now being published on the Digital Divide in disadvantaged countries versus economically advantaged countries, 

I think we still need a lot of work here at home to determine if the gap has been lessened with low-income families.

 

It hasn’t from what I’m personally seeing. I teach at a school whose student population is more than 90% free/reduced lunch, and we have a 95% minority population. I surveyed my students at the beginning of the year and less than half had a computer in the home with Internet access. In fact, many students’ parents didn’t even have a working telephone or an email address. I had three students’ parents deny access to the Internet for their child at school, even though it was explained that the use would be supervised, was strictly for educational purposes, and there were numerous firewalls put in place by the county!

 

Do we as teachers ignore basic “book” literacy and go straight for technology literacy? That’s my big question. What will the next generation of students really need to be successful in our changing world? When students are behind their peers in reading levels, do we put them on a computer program instead? If they can’t understand word problems or calculate an equation in their head, should they on a computer? The more I read about the brain research behind technology natives, the more I am inclined to say (cringe) yes.

 

Work Cited:

Lentz, Becky and Oden, Michael, Digital Divide or Digital Opportunity in the Mississippi Delta Region of the US (2001). Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 25, No. 5, pp. 291-313, 2001. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1585340

 

Interesting resources from a previous class I found very interesting:

Bridging the Digital Divide in Bolivia

Hole in the Wall Experiment