Only 14 percent of U.S. classrooms have access to the

[Bonnie Bracey <BBracey@AOL.COM>]

In a message dated 8/6/98 4:39:25 PM Mid-Atlantic Daylight Time,=0Apmilbu=
ry@ericir.syr.edu writes:

>
> These trendy little articles and reports never seem to mention such
> things. I doubt that answers to many of these questions, and other
> important aspects that are not mentioned here, are available to or bein=
g
> considered by those who set policy for Internet use in schools. They ha=
ve
> arrive late on the scene, and seem determined to exert their
> territoriality, despite the fact that they are on unfamiliar terrain!
>
> It is far too early for a thoughtful, considered, informed or legitimat=
e
> "rising backlash against computer spending by schools" to occur. Those =
who
> complain are either wanting to get into the research funding stream,
> Neanderthal technophobics, laggards who balk at anything new, or jealou=
s
> that they didn't think of it first.

I AGREE. WRITE BACK TO THEM AND TELL THEM......

> Those of us who are out here in the schools, trying to give our student=
s
> experience with the same tools used in business and industry, have enou=
gh
> to do already without having to deal with technophobic reactionaries.
>
> I wonder how the rest of our members feel when they read such reports a=
nd
> articles?

  <A HREF=3D"http://www.ets.org/research/pic/cc-sum.html">Computers and=
=0AClassrooms</A>
From the ETS Policy Information Center report, Computers and Classrooms: =
The=0AStatus of Technology in US Schools. This material is copyrighted.
so you have to go to the website to read the whole report.

Under educational use I can only post this much.
=95There are major differences among schools in their access to different=
 kinds=0Aof educational technology.

=95Students attending poor and high-minority schools have less access to =
most=0Atypes of technology than students attending other schools.

=95Ninety-eight percent of all schools own computers. The current student=
-to-=0Acomputer ratio of 10 to 1 represents an all-time low ratio. The ra=
tio ranges=0Afrom about 6 to 1 in Florida, Wyoming, Alaska, and North Dak=
ota to 16 to 1 in=0ALouisiana

 =95While 85 percent of US schools have multimedia computers, the average=
 ratio=0Aof students to computers is 24 to 1, nearly five times the ratio=
 recommended=0Aby the US Department of Education. The ratio ranges from a=
bout 9 to 1 in=0AFlorida to about 63 to 1 in Louisiana. Students attendin=
g poor and high-=0Aminority schools have less access than students attend=
ing other schools.

=95About three-quarters of the nation's schools have access to cable TV. =
This=0Apercentage ranges from 91 percent of Connecticut's schools to 36 p=
ercent of=0AVermont's schools. Students attending poor and high-minority =
schools have less=0Aaccess to cable TV than students attending other scho=
ols.

Sixty-four percent of US schools have access to the Internet, up from 35=
=0Apercent in 1994 and 50 percent in 1995. In Delaware, Hawaii, New Mexic=
o, and=0ASouth Carolina, all schools are connected. Students attending po=
or and high-=0Aminority schools are less likely to have Internet access t=
han other students.=0AOnly 14 percent of US classrooms have access to the=
 Internet.

 =95Little more than half of our schools have CD-ROM drives, ranging from=
 91=0Apercent of the schools in North Carolina to only 29 percent of the =
schools in=0AVermont. Students attending poor and high-minority schools h=
ave less access to=0ACD-ROM than students attending other schools.

 Thirty-eight percent of our schools are using local area networks (LANs)=
 for=0Astudent instruction. This ranges from 57 percent of the schools in=
 Colorado,=0AUtah, and North Carolina, to 16 percent of the schools in Ve=
rmont. Students=0Aattending poor and high-minority schools have less acce=
ss to LANs than=0Astudents attending other schools.

=95About one-third of US schools have videodisc technology, ranging from =
95=0Apercent of Florida's schools to 10 percent of Mississippi's schools.
From another research project...In an October 8, 1996, article describing=
 one=0Aof California's technology corridors, the Wall Street Journal capt=
ured some of=0Athe enthusiasm many people feel for the revolution arising=
 from the marriage=0Aof computers and communications networks. "Silicon V=
alley," it said, "is in=0Athe midst of an epic boom, opulent even for thi=
s glittering edge of America."

But such riches haven't reached many low-income communities even ones lik=
e=0AEast Palo Alto, which is right in the middle of Silicon Valley's tech=
nological=0Aabundance. "Anywhere else in Silicon Valley, your parents use=
 computers, there=0Ais a shop down the street to sell you a computer, ano=
ther to fix your=0Acomputer, another to give you computer classes, [and) =
there are Kinko's=0Aeverywhere," notes Bart Decrem, director of a Califor=
nia youth technology=0Ainitiative called Plugged In. "In East Palo Alto, =
there's none of that."

The contrast between affluent and low-income communities may be particula=
rly=0Asharp in places like Silicon Valley, but it exists almost everywher=
e. The=0Asimple fact is that poor communities are entering the Informatio=
n Age far=0Abehind their wealthier neighbors.

"While [middle-class communities] are rapidly approaching the 'next cycle=
,'=0Athe technology of the previous cycle has already bypassed the inner =
city,"=0Asays Richard Krieg, executive director of the Institute for Metr=
opolitan=0AAffairs, a public interest organization in Chicago committed t=
o seeking=0Apractical answers to problems involving education, health car=
e, and crime.=0AKrieg notes that while families in affluent areas are rap=
idly acquiring home=0Acomputers, people in many low-income neighborhoods =
have little exposure even=0Ato earlier generation tools such as laser sca=
nners at supermarkets and bank=0Aautomatic tellers. "Despite limited empi=
rical study of technology=0Adiffusion..., it is clear that computerizatio=
n, telecommunications, and mass=0Amedia applications are dramatically und=
errepresented in distressed urban=0Aareas."

As Krieg suggests, the technology gap is not simply a reflection of the=
=0Achoices made by individual households. The deeper problem is that many=
 poor=0Aneighborhoods lack the infrastructure available in affluent areas=
. Groups such=0Aas the United Church of Christ that have studied patterns=
 of=0Atelecommunications investment have found that, all too often, telep=
hone and=0Acable companies have moved quickly to wire wealthier suburbs w=
ith advanced=0Asystems, while poor, inner-city neighborhoods aren't upgra=
ded. While public=0Aattention is often focused on whether individuals can=
 get a service, the=0Aequally important problem is that lack of adequate =
telecommunications=0Afacilities makes an area less attractive for busines=
ses. This can feed a=0Aspiral where the lack of investment at the communi=
ty level leads to fewer=0Aeconomic opportunities for people who live ther=
e. As a result, the poverty in=0Athe neighborhood makes it a less invitin=
g target for investment, further=0Aaggravating the problem.

The same neighborhoods that lack infrastructure are composed of household=
s=0Athat are far less likely to have the tools of the Information Age. In=
 an=0AAugust 1996 survey of southern Californians, the Los Angeles Times =
found that=0Ajust 22 percent of households earning less than $25,000 had =
access to=0Acomputers, compared to 69 percent of those with incomes over =
$50,000. "Poor=0Aneighborhoods of the region are just totally cut off fro=
m the potential=0Abenefits of an economy that integrates such vast scient=
ific skill," says Mike=0ADavis, a Los Angeles historian and teacher of ur=
ban studies at the Southern=0ACalifornia Institute of Architecture.

More recently, according to a Computer Intelligence 1998 Consumer Technol=
ogy=0ASurvey, 80 percent of families making more than $100,000 have compu=
ters. By=0Acontrast, of those families making less than $30,000 a year, o=
nly 25 percent=0Ahave computers. A 1998 study led by David Birdsell of Ba=
ruch College found=0Asignificant disparities in the area of education: of=
 people with an=0Aundergraduate degree or higher, 53 percent use the Web =
while only 19 percent=0Aof people with a high school education or less ar=
e Web users.

While demographic trends are changing quickly, there is some evidence tha=
t=0Arace and income may interact in troubling ways. A 1998 Vanderbilt Uni=
versity=0Astudy based on Nielsen data from late 1996 and early 1997 indic=
ates that=0Aracial inequities in computer ownership and Internet access j=
ump significantly=0Awhen household incomes drop below $40,000. In such ca=
ses, African Americans=0Awere less than half as likely as whites to own a=
 home computer and about 60=0Apercent as likely to have Internet access.

Similar trends appear in telephone service, a much older technology that =
many=0Apoor Americans still don't have. While all but 6 percent of U.S. h=
ouseholds=0Ahave telephones, 43.5 percent of families who depend entirely=
 on public=0Aassistance and 50 percent of female-headed households living=
 at or below the=0Apoverty line lack even this basic technology. And Afri=
can Americans and=0ALatinos lag about 10 percentage points behind their w=
hite counterparts in=0Aaccess to telephones even when income is held cons=
tant.
<A HREF=3D"http://www.benton.org/Library/Low-Income/">Losing Ground Bit b=
y Bit2=0A</A>

 <A HREF=3D"http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/net2/falling.html">The Digit=
al=0ADivide: A Survey of Information "...</A>
 <A HREF=3D"http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/net2/">Falling Through the N=
et II=0A</A>


Bonnie Bracey
Christa McAuliffe Educator CMI
Randolph Elementary School
1306 S. Quincy Street,
Arlington, Va 22204
703-228-5830=0A

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=
To quit LM_NET (or set-reset NOMAIL or DIGEST), Send email to
 listserv@listserv.syr.edu         In the message write EITHER:
 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST
 3) SET LM_NET MAIL  * Please allow for confirmation from Listserv
 For LM_NET Help & Archives see:  http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=