The implications for this Technology Revolution in education are colossal. Though technophobes such as Kevin Robins and Frank Webster are skeptical over the appropriateness of technology in education, most scholars and practitioners in this field realize that students must learn to work with computers or they will be left behind. Nicholas Burbeles and Thomas Callister, Jr. point out that new technologies are becoming increasingly important for participation in social, economic, political and cultural life in our society (p.19). If we do not educate our students on the appropriate use of these technologies, we are not preparing them for full participation in our democracy.

...the discussion of access to technology must include broadband access to the Internet, access to software and web sites with meaningful and culturally appropriate content, and increased access to computer science classes.

However, it is important to address the issues and implications of the place of technology, especially of computers, in education. The issues of access and content must be examined first, as students must have the physical tools in order to utilize this new technology in their education. Additionally, appropriate teaching strategies need to be discussed critically in order to determine the best role of technology in education.

Access and Content:

The perception of meaningful access to computers and technology differs widely amongst scholars, educators, students, and other citizens. As a result, the concept of the "Digital Divide" becomes contested. In the early 1990s, the United States Department of Commerce, along with the Benton Foundation, the "Digital Divide" network, and other groups studied the "Digital Divide" as an issue of the disparities of access to computers and the Internet along lines of ethnicity, gender, class, and age (Bowman, p.1). Fortunately, the gap between the "haves" and "have-nots" has decreased. Thus, according to this narrow definition of access, the divide is being eliminated.

However, many scholars have expanded upon the original simplistic definition of access. Sticking with the technical aspects, another divide can be seen by investigating the disparities between which communities have access to broadband technology. This increased bandwidth is pivotal in determining which types of multimedia different citizens are able to access on the Internet. According to Bill Gates, the cost of connecting a home computer to a broadband network is estimated to be $1200 (p. 109). It is not difficult to imagine that suburbs are a much better financial investment than inner cities for corporations wishing to provide this technology. The limitations of modems prevent many homes from engaging in full participation on the Internet. Thus, while the rate of lack access to the Internet seems to be decreasing, the issue of complete access leading to full participation has not been fully investigated.

However, perhaps the "Digital Divide" should really be looked at as not mere access, but meaningful access. In order to use computers as tools for education, they must have relevant applications to the user’s life. Much of the software and content on the Internet is not neutral, as human programmers have purposefully determined what content is meaningful and thus should be included. This concept is no different from the biases of history textbooks that James Loewen exposes in Lies My Teacher Told Me. However, while the opportunity to build personal web sites is readily available for all, even web site developing software has certain cultural and gender biases.

An example of such gender biases can be seen in Jane Margolis’ research of computer scientists. In her work, she discusses the implications of the fact that over 80% of computer science majors in American Universities are men. She sees this gap reinforcing the idea she found in a 1970’s textbook, "boys make things and girls use things that boys make."

This gender differentiation holds disadvantages for women educationally and economically, but more importantly, technology misses out on the input and expertise that a diverse group of programmers can contribute. Margolis points out an example of a preventable technology mishap that occurred when engineers originally designed airbags for adult males, resulting in the deaths of women and children. Though this is an extreme example, it makes clear the implications when designers of technology do not represent the population of the users of such technology.

Thus, the discussion of access to technology must include broadband access to the Internet, access to software and web sites with meaningful and culturally appropriate content, and increased access to computer science classes. Without each of these components, the true digital divide of access will not be bridged.

Instructional Technology:

Perhaps the best place to see examples of technophiles and technophobes would be in a public urban high school. Many teachers, especially recent college graduates with technology methods courses, make great efforts to incorporate technology into their daily lesson plans. Other teachers, as Burbeles and Callister predict (p. 8), see this "Information Revolution" as just another trendy reform movement, destined to fail and be forgotten in the near future.

However, as I mentioned earlier, computers have invaded virtually every aspect of society. If a school's role is to prepare students to participate as citizens in their community, to live within this technological society, it is not enough to simply teach them "computer skills" as many schools currently do.

To borrow from Bruce Bertram’s article, Dewey and Technology," there are three kinds of reasons for employing technology in education. The first reason is the most commonly heard in today’s educational circles, and basically argues that we need to learn technology in order to acquire new skills in this information age. I would argue that most computer education occurring in schools falls under acquiring these new skills. This vocational approach to "teaching" computers is quite worrisome. Students are not taught to think critically, rather, they are taught that computer skills are isolated from other types of knowledge and their education is preparation for a future job or career. While these are good skills to have, in isolation they do not maximize the potential of computers and the Internet in schools.

Bertram’s second reason for using technology in education argues that computers transform education by using technology as a resource, or in other words students can learn through new technologies. Though I tend to agree with this reason, I must add the concept of "creating," rather than only "using" technology as a resource is important. This inclusion of creation encompasses the need for more programming courses, web design courses, as well as developing a new literacy in hyperreading (B&C p.36).

Rather, learning theories and new research must be kept in mind as teachers learn how to teach students to make sense of this Information Revolution.

The final reason Bertram cites for using technology in education is the need to learn about new technologies and the ways they permeate our social lives. Many students in actuality view computers as purely positive and have not been taught to critically examine other purposes for which people are on the Internet. Students need to be aware of the non-neutrality of computers, and explore their effects on our economic, political, and educational lives. With this critical perspective, students will continue to participate in a Deweyesque "Great Community" on the Internet, though with a critical eye on credibility and broader social issues. By allowing students to investigate the reasons why the US Department of Commerce is so involved in providing access to everyone, students will be in a much better position to determine people’s ulterior motives for being on the Internet.

Of course teachers need to develop strategies for teaching how to use the Internet effectively. As Burbeles and Callister point out, hyperreading and learning how to navigate rhizomatic text is not a skill that comes naturally to all students (p. 46).

Rather, learning theories and new research must be kept in mind as teachers learn how to teach students to make sense of this Information Revolution. As most scholars point out, although teachers won’t be replaced, their role as a teacher might be. Teachers no longer will be seen as the sole holders of the "truth," rather, they might operate more as a guide that assists children in sorting through massive amounts of contradicting information.

Bertram Bruce, "Dewey and Technology" Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, vol. 42 (November 1998) John Elkins and Allan Luke, eds. (Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1998)

Joseph Bowman, "Digital Divide Reality, Fact or Fiction: How do we meet the challenge" in Teaching to Change LA www.tcla.gseis.ucla.edu/divide/politics/bowman.html , June 2001.

Nicholas Burbeles & Thomas Callister, Jr. Watch IT: The Risks and Promises of Information Technologies for Education (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2000).

Arthur C. Clarke, 2001: A Space Odyssey (New York: New American Library, 2000).

Bill Gates, The Road Ahead (New York: Penguin Books, 1996).

Jane Margolis, "An adaptation of Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing (MIT Press, in press)" in Teaching to Change LA www.tcla.gseis.ucla.edu/divide/politics/margolis.html, June 2001.