Top Banner

Click here to load reader

48

WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

Feb 19, 2018

Download

Documents

Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 1/48

 American Educational Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Review of

Research in Education.

http://www.jstor.org

New Technology and Digital Worlds: Analyzing Evidence of Equity in Access, Use, and Outcomes

Author(s): Mark Warschauer, Tina Matuchniak, Nichole Pinkard and Vivian GadsdenSource: Review of Research in Education, Vol. 34, What Counts as Evidence in EducationalSettings? Rethinking Equity, Diversity, and Reform in the 21st Century (2010), pp. 179-225Published by: American Educational Research AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40588177Accessed: 18-08-2015 14:39 UTC

 F R N S

Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40588177?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/  info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 2: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 2/48

Chapter

New

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds:

Analyzing

vidence f

Equity

n

Access,Use,and Outcomes

Mark

Warschauer

Tina

Matuchniak

Universityf California,

rvine

is broad onsensus

mong

ducators,

ommunication

cholars,

ociologists,

and economistshat he

development

nd diffusionf

nformationnd com-

municationechnologiesICT) arehaving profoundffectn modernife. his s

due

to the

ffordancesfnew

digital

media,

which

ridge

he

nteractiveeaturesf

speech

nd the rchivalharacteristicsf

writing;

llow

many-to-many

ommunica-

tion

mong eople

without

egard

o time

nd

space,

ncluding

ass

ollaborative

editing

f

exts;

acilitatehe reationf

global yper-indexed

ultimodalnforma-

tion

tructure;

nd enable ontent

roduction

nd distributionn

both

writing

nd

multimedian a scale

previously

nimaginable

Jewitt,

008; Warschauer,

999).

For ll these

easons,

omputer-mediated

ommunication

an be

considered new

mode

f nformation

Poster,

990),

or

a fourth

evolution

n

themeans f

produc-

tion f

knowledge

Harnad,

991,

p.

39),

following

he hree

rior

evolutionsf

language, riting,ndprint.

The

previous

evolution,

rought

bout

hrough

he

development

nd diffusion

of

printing,

ook enturies

o

unfold,

s itsfull

mpact epended

n

the ndustrial

revolutionhat

Gutenberg's

rinting

ress receded y

everal

enturies

Eisenstein,

1979).

oday,

hough,

he

evelopment

nddiffusion

f

omputers

nd

he

nternetccur

simultaneously

ith new conomic

evolution,

ased

n

transitionrom n

ndus-

trial o an nformational

conomy

Castells,

996).

This

helps xplain

oth

why

ew

media ave

pread

o fast

ndalso

why hey

re o

crucial o

enabling

ull

ocial nd

economic

articipation.

s Castells

1998)

concludes,

ased n his

xhaustiveocio-

economic

nalysis

f

his

ostindustrialtage

f

apitalism,

information

echnology,

Review

f

Researchn

Education

March

010,

Vol.

34,

pp.

179-225

DOI:

10.3102/0091732X09349791

©

2010 AERA,

http://rre.aera.net

179

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 3: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 3/48

180 Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

andthe bilityo use t nd dapt t, s the riticalactorngeneratingndaccessing

wealth,

ower,

nd

knowledge

n

our

ime

p.

92).

To

emphasize

his

oint,

he

U.S.

Department

fLabor'smost

ecent

ccupational

Outlook

andbookists Network

ystems

nd data

communication,

computer

software

ngineers,

pplications,

computer

ystems

nalysts,

database

dmin-

istrators,

nd

computer

oftware

ngineers,

ystems

oftware

mong

hefastest

growing

ccupations

n

the

United tates

U.S.

Bureau

f

Labor

Statistics,

007).

Looking

more

roadly,

n

the

nformationalist

conomy,

igh-paid

lue-collar

obs

based

n manual

abor

re,

or he

most

art, thing

f

the

past,

with he

previous

split

etween

lue- nd

white-collar

orkers

ow

replaced

y

three-way

ivision

among outine-productionorkerse.g.,dataprocessors,ayrolllerks,actoryork-

ers),

n-person

ervice orkers

e.g., anitors,

ospital

ttendants,

axi

drivers),

nd

symbolicnalysts

e.g.,

cientists,

ngineers,

xecutives,

awyers,

anagement

onsul-

tants,

rofessors;

eich,

991).

The

income, tatus,

nd

opportunities

orworkers

in

the

firstwo

categories

re

continuallyiminishing,

hereas

ymbolic

nalysts

command

disproportionate

nd

rising

hare f

hewealth

n

the

United tates

nd

other ountries.

nd

lthough

ome

ypes

f

ymbolic

nalysts

ight

e considered

as

technology

pecialists,

irtually

llof

hemmake

xtensivese

ofnew

igital

media

on a

daily

asis o

dentify,

olve,

ndbroker

roblems

nd

to communicate

omplex

concepts.

hus,

ccess o new

echnologies,

hether

t home

r at

school,

s critical

tothe

evelopment

f

ymbolic

nalysts,uthow uch echnologiesreput o use s

evenmore

mportant,

ith

high

remium

laced

n

abstraction,

ystemhinking,

experimentation,

ndcollaboration

Reich,

991;

Warschauer,

999).

Levy

nd Murnane

(2004,

2005)

detailed

tudy

f

occupational

atterns

n the

United

tates

rovides

mpiricalupport

or he

bove

nalysis.

heir

xamination

of ensus ata

hows

hat rom

969

to

1999

the emand

or

obsrequiring

omplex

communication

ose

early

4%,

and

the emand

or

obs

requiring

xperthinking

rose bout

%.

In the ame

eriod,

he emand

or

obs

requiring

anual

rroutine

cognitive

asks

ell

y

2%

to

8%

(see

Figure

).

Thesenumbers

ctually ownplay

thereal hanges,ecause hey nly eflecthiftsmong ifferentccupations,ot

changes

n

skills

equired

ithin

he ame

ccupation.

verall,

hedemand

or

obs

in

which

computer

an

ubstitute

or uman

hought

as

teadily

eclined,

hereas

the emand

or

obs

n

which

omputers

an

complement

nd

amplify

he

reativity

and

experthinking

fhumans

as

teadily

xpanded.

The

large

nd

growing

ole

f new

media

n the

conomy

nd

society

erves

o

highlight

heir

mportant

ole

n

education,

nd

especially

n

promoting

ducational

equity.

n the

ne

hand,

ifferential

ccess

o new

media,

roadly

efined,

an

help

further

mplify

he

lready

oo-large

ducational

nequities

nAmerican

ociety.

n

the ther

and,

t s

widely

elieved

hat ffective

eployment

nduse

of

echnology

inschoolsanhelp ompensateor nequal ccess otechnologiesn thehome nvi-

ronmentndthus

elpbridge

ducational

nd

ocial

aps.

For these

easons,

ccurately

ssessing

iverse

emographic

roups'

xperiences

with

echnology,

oth

n

and

out

of

school,

has been

an

important

riority

or

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 4: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 4/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak:

ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

181

Source.

evy

nd

Murnane

2005;

based n data

from

utor,

evy,

Murnane,

003).

advocates

f ocial

nd economic

quality

n theUnited tates

nd elsewhere.

arly

effortsodo so focusedn a narrowlyefinedigital ivide fdifferentialccess o

computers

see,

.g.,

National elecommunications

nd

nformationdministration

[NTIA],

1998).

However,

danger

o this

pproach

s that t

overly

etishizes

echni-

cal

matters.s

Kling

xplains,

[The]

big

problem

ith the

igital

ivide

raming

s that

t tends o connote

digital

olutions,

.e.,

computers

nd

telecommunications,

ithout

ngaging

he

mportant

et f

omplementary

esourcesnd

complex

nterventionso

support

ocial

nclusion,

fwhich nformational

echnology

pplications

ay

be

enabling

lements,

ut

re

ertainly

nsufficient

hen

imply

dded o

the tatus

uo

mix

fresources

and

relationships.

Warschauer,

003,

pp.

7-8)

In this eview,e take much roader

erspective

n how o

analyze

ssues ftech-

nology

nd

equity

or

outh

n

theUnited

tates.1 e

begin

with ccesss a

starting

point,

ut

onsider ot

nly

whetheriverse

roups

f

youth

ave

igital

media

vail-

able o

them ut lsohow hat

ccess s

upported

rconstrained

y

echnological

nd

social

actors.rom here

e

go

on tothe

uestion

f

use,

nalyzing

he

ways

nwhich

diverse

outh eploy

ewmedia or

ducation,

ocial

nteraction,

ndentertainment.

We

thenmove o

the

uestion

f

outcomes,

onsidering

he

gains

chieved

y

diverse

groups

hrough

se

ofnewmedia s measured

y

cademic

chievement,

cquisition

of

21st

entury

earning

kills,

nd

participation

n

technology-related

areers.

inally,

we ncludeneexample the isparitiesf nvolvementncomputerciencetudy

to

llustrate

ow ssues

f

ccess, se,

ndoutcome

re ntertwined.

Conducting

uch a broad

review s

theoretically

nd

methodologically

hal-

lenging.

he

very oncept

f CT or

digital

media s difficult

o

define,

nd could

Complex

ommunication

Expert

hinking

Routine

ognitive

RoutineManual

Non-Routine

anual

FIGURE 1

U.S.

Job

Skill

Demand,

1969-1999

(1969

=

0)

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 5: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 5/48

182 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

potentiallyncludenythingrom cellphone o a globalpositioningystem.n

this

eview,

e not

nly

ocus

n

computers

ndthe

nternetut

lso

considerther

related

media,

uch s video

game

onsoles,

f

evidence

uggests

heir se

may

be

related o differential

ducational

r social

utcomes.

n

addition,

hediverse

ays

that

eople

use

new

media nd

the

outcomes

hey

might

chieve re neither ell

understood

or

asily

auged.

or

example,

hevalue f21st

enturyearning

kills

is

broadly

ecognized

see,

.g.,

North entral

egional

ducational

aboratory

the

Metiri

roup,

003;

Partnership

or 1st

Century

kills,

009),

butfew tud-

ieshave

ried o

operationalize

hose kills r

measure

heir chievement.n

spite

f

these

imitations,

eofferhis eview

n

the

pirit

fAmericantatistician

ohn

ukey(1962),whodeclared hat far etternapproximatenswer o the

right uestion,

which s often

ague,

han n exact nswero the

wrong

uestion,

hich an

always

be mademore

recise p.

62).

ACCESS

Notions f

technology

ccess ave

teadily

hiftedver he

past

1

5

years

rom

narrow ocus n the

physical

vailability

f

digital

media

o a

broader ocus n the

sociotechnicalactorshat nfluence hetherndhow

people

ccess

echnology

see,

e.g.,

Warschauer,

003).

We

adopt

hat roader

erspective

n

this

nalysis,

xam-

ining irsthephysicalvailabilityf nternet-connectedomputersndthen he

factorshat

upport

rconstrain

ccess,

oth

n

thehome nd chool nvironments.

Home

v

Although

eople

ccess

he nternetrom

variety

f

ocations,

omeaccess

allows

degree

f

flexibility

nd

utonomy

ifficult

o

replicate

lsewhere

see

discus-

sion

n

Dimaggio, argittai,

eleste, Shafer,004;

Fairlie

London,

009).

The

degree

f home

ccess

o

computers

y

diverse

emographicroups

as beenwell

documented

n

theUnited tates

hrough

even

eports

ssued

ver he

ast

1

years

by heNTIA (1995,1998,1999, 000,2002,2004,2008a).All even TIAreports

were ased n theCurrent

opulation

urveys

CPS)

ofabout

50,000

U.S. house-

holds

onducted

y

heU.S. Bureau fLabor tatisticsnd

the

U.S. Census ureau.

The CPS

surveys

ollect

eneral emographic

ataon a

monthly

asis

nd

supple-

ment hosewith

pecialized

ata

t differentimes.

upplemental

ata

on

computer

and

nternet

ccesswere ollected

n seven ccasions etween

994

and

2007

and

formed

he

asis f he

NTIA

analyses.

The NTIA

reports rovide

n excellent asisfor

valuating

he

overall

igital

divide

n

theUnited tates ndhow thas volved ver

ime. he

CPS data

hey

re

based

n

are

uperior

o

other

ources

f

data,

uch s those rom

he

widely

ited

telephoneurveysf he ew nternetAmericanife rojectseediscussionelow),

because f the

arge

CPS

sample

ize;

the

methodologicaligor

n

sampling;

he

in-personurvey roceduresy

theU.S. Census

Bureau,

hich chieves

response

rate fmore

han

0%;

and the

onsistency

f

questions

sked

ver

multiple ears,

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 6: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 6/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak:

ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

183

thus llowingongitudinalnalysisU.S.Census ureau,006).Taken s awhole,he

reports

uggest

hat

teady

rogress

asbeen

made

n

extending

ome nternet

ccess

to

ow-income

nd

minority

ouseholds,

ut hat

aps

ased n ncome

nd

race till

remain

ubstantialndthat heres

a

long

way

o

go

to achieve niversalccess.

The most ecent TIA

study

eports

hat total f

61.7%

of U.S.

households

have ome

ype

f nternetccess t home.

he

argest aps

n

home nternetccess

areobserved etween

roups

withdifferentialncome

nd educational

ttainment

(see

Table

1).

Home Internetccess

by

ncome aries rom

5.5%

forhouseholds

earning

more han

$150,000

per

year

o

24.6%

forhouseholds

arning

etween

$5,000

and

$10,000

peryear.

Households

arning

ess

han

5,000

peryear

ave

a

slightlyigher

ate t31.9%,

perhaps

ecause f thenumber fstudentst this

income

evel.)

Home nternet

ccess

y

ducationalttainmentf

head

f

household

varies rom

8.5%

for hosewith n

elementary

ducation o

84.1%

for

hosewith

at east

bachelors

egree.

hese

gaps

by

ncome

nd education

re

furtherxacer-

bated

y

he act hat t s

precisely

hose ouseholds ith ittle conomic

r human

capital

hat re east

ble

o

provide

ther

dvantages

or

outh

n

the

evelopment

f

technological

r

academic

kills.

Differences

yrace/ethnicity

renot s

large

s

by

education r ncome

ut re

still

roubling.

ates f

home

nternetccess

by

race

vary

rom

5.5%

forAsians

to41.5% forNativeAmericans.igure , which howshome nternetccess or

Whites,

frican

mericans,

nd

Latinos

ver

10-year

eriod,

ndicateshe

persis-

tence

f

racial

ap

over ime.

The low rate f nternetccess

by

Latinos s

caused

o a

large

xtent

y

a lan-

guage

ivide. ased n his

nalysis

f

theCPS

2003

data,

which

ncluded

anguage

as a

variable,

airlie

2007)

reports

hat t that

ime

nly

13.1%

of

Spanish

nly

Mexican r MexicanAmerican amiliesn the

United tates

i.e.,

those amiliesn

which ll adults

poke

nly

panish)

ad

home

nternet

ccess,

s

compared

ith

home nternetccess ate f

40.1%

among

nglish-speaking

exican r Mexican

American amiliesn

theUnited

tates,

nd

that

much f this

ap

heldtrue ven

when ontrollingor ducation,amilyncome,mmigranttatus,nd other ac-

tors. airlie

oncluded hat he

digital

ivide

etween

White,

nglish-speaking

on-

Hispanics,

nd

Spanish-speakingispanics

n

the

United tates as on

par

with he

Digital

ividebetween

heUnited tates

nd

many

eveloping

ountries

p.

287).

More

recent ata

suggest

hat

non-English-speaking

atinos emain

group

with

alarmingly

owrates f

nternetccess nd use

Fox

&

Livingston,

007).

In

considering

ll of the

bove,

t s

important

o

keep

n

mind hat

ouseholds

with

hildren

end

ohave

reater

ccess o

computers

ndthe

nternethan he

en-

eral

population.

ccording

o

theCPS

data,

0.3%

of

family

ouseholds ith hil-

dren

ounger

han 8

years

ave nternet

ccess t

home,

s

compared

ith

7.4%

ofhouseholds ithouthildren.

study

ith hildrenatherhan ouseholdss the

unit f

nalysis,

onducted

y

theKaiser

amily

oundation,

nterviewednation-

ally

epresentativeample

f

2,032

8- to

18-year-old

hildrent

school nd

found

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 7: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 7/48

184

Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

TABLE 1

Percentage

f

U.S. HouseholdsWith

nternet ccess

Percentage

fHouseholdsWith

Internet ccess

Broadbands

Percentage

f

TotalWith

ThoseWith

Access

Broadband

Dial-up

Access

Totalhouseholds

61.7

50.8 10.7 82.3

Family

ncome

$)

<5,000

31.9 26.7 5.3 83.6

5,000-9,999

24.6 18.4 6.1

74.5

10,000-14,999

26.1

18.9 7.1 72.2

15,000-19,999

35.5

26.9

8.5 75.9

20,000-24,999

40.7

28.8

11.8

70.9

25,000-34,999

50.9

39.7

11.2

77.9

35,000-49,999

65.7 51.0

14.4

77.7

50,000-74,999

80.1

66.0

13.8

82.3

75,000-99,999

88.6

76.8 11.3

86.8

100,000-149,999 92.1 83.7 8.0 90.9

>$150,000

95.5 90.3

5.0

94.6

Educational

ttainment

f

head

ofhousehold

Elementary

18.5

13.1

5.4 70.8

Some

econdary

28.2

20.5

7.4

72.7

High

chool

raduate

49.1 36.8

12.1

74.9

Some

ollege

68.9

56.5

12.1

82.0

BA+

84.1

74.2 9.7

88.2

Raceof

head

of

household

White 67.0 54.9 11.8 82.0

Black

44.9

36.4

8.4

80.9

Native

merican

41.5

29.8

11.2

71.9

Asian

75.5

69.1

6.1

91.5

Hispanic

43.4 35.2

8.0 81.1

Household

ype

With

hild

18

years

70.3 59.5

10.6

84.7

No children

57.4

46.4

10.7

80.9

Source.

ational elecommunicationnd

nformationdministration

2008b).

that

4%

of them

eportediving

n

houseswith

nternet

ccess,

with henumber

rising

o

78%

of

11-

to

14-year-olds

nd

80%

of

15-

o

18-year-olds

Roberts,

oehr,

&

Rideout,

005).

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 8: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 8/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

185

Source.Fairlie

2008).

Conditions f

Access

Access o

technology

s not a

binary

ivision etween

nformationaves nd

have-nots;

ather,

here re

differingegrees

nd

types

f access

see

discussionn

Warschauer,

003).

People

withoutccess t

home

may

sethe nternett

ibraries,

community

enters,

riends'

ouses,

r

schools,

s willbe

discussed

hroughout

his

chapter.

nd

people

who

have ccess o the

nternet

t

homedo so

under

widely

varying

echnical

nd ocial onditions.

One of themost

mportant

echnicalonditionss

type

f nternetonnection.

Overall,

2.3%

ofthe

households ith ome

nternetccess ave

broadbandon-

nection

i.e.,

via

cableor DSL

[digital

ubscriber

ine]),

with

he

remaining

7.7%

connecting

ia

a

dial-up

onnection

see

Table

1).

Not

surprisingly,hough,ype

f

connection aries

y

household

ncome,

ducational

evel,

nd other

actors. or

example,

mong

Native

mericans,

1.9%

of nternet

ouseholds ave

broadband

connection,

hereas

mong

sian

Americans,

2%

of

nternet

ouseholdssebroad-

band.

Combining

he

differential

ercentage

f diverse

ouseholds ith

nternet

connections iththe

differential

ercentage

f

broadband se

among

nternet-

connected ouseholdsieldsven tarkerisparitiesftotal roadbandccess. nly

29.8%

ofNative

Americansave

broadbandccess

ompared

ith

9.1%

ofAsian

Americans;

nly

18.4%

of

households ith

ncomes etween

5,000

and

$10,000

have

broadbandccess

ompared

ith

0.3%

of

families ith

ncomesmore han

FIGURE 2

Home Internet

ccess

by Race/Ethnicity,

997-2007

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 9: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 9/48

186

Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

TABLE 2

Percentage

f U.S. Broadband Versus

Dial-up

Users

Engaging

in

Online

Activities n a

Typical

Day

(and

Who Have

Ever Done the

Activity)

Typical

Day

(Ever)

All

Internet Broadband t

Dial-up

at

Usage Categories

Users Home Users Home Users

Use

a

search

ngine

49

(89)

57

(94)

26

(80)

Check weather

eports

nd

30

(80)

36

(84)

14

(75)

forecasts

Get news online

39

(73)

47

(80)

18

(61)

Visit a state r local

government

13

(66)

16

(72)

4

(55)

website

Look online for nformation

23

(55)

27

(62)

10

(37)

about the 2008

election

Watch a video on a

video-sharing

16

(52)

20

(60)

5

(29)

site

Look

online for

ob

information 6

(47)

6

(50)

4

(36)

Send instant

messages

13

(40)

16

(44)

6

(38)

Read someone else'sblog 1 1 (33) 15 (40) 3(15)

Use a social

networking

ite

13

(29)

16

(33)

7

(21)

Make a donationto

charity

1

(20)

2

(23)

0

(9)

online

Downloaded a

podcast

3(19)

4

(22)

1

(8)

Download or sharefiles

sing

3(15) 3(17) 2(15)

peer-to-peer

etworks

Create or workon

your

own

blog

5

(12)

6

(15)

3

(8)

Source.

orrigan

2008).

$150,000;

and

only

13.1%

of

householdsheaded

up

by

someonewith n

elementary

school

educationhave broadband ccess

compared

with

74.2%

of those

headed

up

by

someonewith bachelor's

egree.

Furthermore,

esearch

uggests

hat

people

who have home broadband connec-

tionsuse the nternet

n

markedly

ifferent

ays

han

people

who havehome

dial-up

accounts

Horrigan,

008;

see

Table

2).

For

example,

2%

of

adults

withbroadband

access ooked online for nformationbout

the

2008

election,

whereas

nly

37%

of

those with home

dial-up

access

did

so.

Although

no similar

omparative

ata

are

availableforyouth, newould imagine hat hetypes f bandwidth-intensiveppli-

cations hat re

considered

specially

aluable

for

young

people,

uch as

development

and distribution f

sophisticated

multimedia ontent

Ito

et

al.,

in

press),

would

be

rarely

arried ut

on a

dial-up

account,

both because of the slowerdownload

and

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 10: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 10/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

187

TABLE3

Number f

HouseholdMembers erHome

Computer

or

Students

n

a California chool

District

African

Americans

Hispanics

Asians

Whites

Mean number f

computers

1.56

1.22 2.48

2.27

per

household

Mean

household

ize

2.63

4.61

3.46

2.18

Meanhome

user/computer

1.68/1

3.78/1

1.40/1

0.96/1

ratio

upload

imes s well s theneed o tie

up

a

household

elephone

ine or

nternetse.

Although

ot s

thoroughly

nvestigated,

ther echnical

onditions

urely

hape

home ccess o the nternet.or

xample,

tudents

er

omputer

atiowas dentified

a

decade

go

as a

key

actor

nfluencing

owwell

omputers

re

deployed

or each-

ing

nd

earning

t

schools

Becker,

000a),

yet

householdmembers

er omputer

ratiohas not

yet

been

eriouslynalyzed

s a factor

ffecting

ome

omputer

se.

Unpublishedata from rimes nd Warschauers2008) recenttudy f a laptop

program

n

an

urban alifornia

istrict,

ombined ith

U.S. census

eports

f ver-

age

family

ousehold

ize

byrace/ethnicity

n

the chool

district's

ounty,

ndicate

dramatic ifferences

n

householdmembers

er computer y

racial/ethnic

roup,

withWhite

families

aving oughly

ne

householdmember

er computer

nd

Hispanic

amilies

aving

early

our

eoplepercomputer

see

Table

3).

Such dis-

parities

ill

ikely

ffect

outh's

pportunities

o

enjoy npressured

ime o

explore

learning

pportunities

ith

omputers.

According

o

analysis

f CPS

data

by

Fairlie

2007),

African mericans

nd

Latinos

end o own

omputers

hat reno

older han hose f

Whites,

et hey

re

more ikelyoreporthat heiromputersrenotcapable f nternetccess. his

could

perhaps

e

explained

y

omputers

alling

nto

disrepair

r their

wnersim-

ply

acking

hemeans o

purchase

nternetccess. s for

ther echnical

actorshat

likely

ffect

omputer

se,

uch s differential

ccess o softwarer

peripherals,

here

are ittle

ata vailable.

Social

actorsre

quallymportant

s technical

actors

n

haping

ccess.nfluence

from

amily

embers

nd friendsan be criticaln

deciding

hethernd how

to

make

se

of

omputers

ndthe nternet.

study

f1

000

people

n

San

Diego

found

that

ocial ontact ith

ther

omputer

serswas a

key

actor

orrelatedith

om-

puter

ccess

Regional echnologylliance,001).

As the

tudyeports,

Although

most

espondents

tated hat

hey

now

people

who used

computers,

he

digitally

etached

(those

whodo nothavehome

ersonalomputers,

nternet

ccess,

r ccess o

the nternetutside f

he

home)

did not.

And when

ompared

ith

he

mpact

f

ethnicity,

ncome,

nd education

evel,

his

sentiment

that

hey

id notknow

thers ho

used

omputers

is far

more

ignificant,

p.

12)

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 11: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 11/48

188 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

Youth oday re not ikelyo be digitallyetached ;ndeed, s willbe discussed

below,

lmost ll

youth

se

computers.

owever,

ith

omputer

astery

epending

heavily

n social

upport,

oth from

eers

see,

e.g., Margolis,

strella,

oode,

Holme,

&

Nao,

2008)

and

family

embers

see,

.g.,

Barron, artin, akeuchi,

Fithian,

009),

many

ow-incomer

mmigrant

outh

illhave

ew

riends

r rela-

tives

ho re

ophisticated

sers

f

digital

media.

onditions

n

thehousehold

and

neighborhood)

uch s

relatively

ew

omputers,

esser

egrees

fbroadbandnternet

access,

ewer

eople

with

college

ducation,

nd

fewer

nglish

peakers

re

ikely

o

shape

hekinds

f

experience

outh

avewith

igital

media.We

will

return

o this

issue aternthe

hapter

henweexaminehe iverse

ays

hat

outh

se

echnology.

SchoolAccess

Given he

ngoing

iscrepancies

n

home ccess o

digital

media,

chieving

quity

of ccess t school akes

n

greater

riority.

here ave een

teady

ains

n

this

rea,

as more

ublic

chools f ll

types

et

more nternet-connected

omputers,

ut,

nce

again, aps

persist.

The National enter

or

Educational

tatistics

athered

ata on school ccess

through

urveys

f about

85,000

schools dministered

inetimes rom

994

to

2005,

nd

presented

hese ata

n two

ssue

riefsndfive

eports

ublished

etween

1999 nd2006, ach itledInternetccessnU.S. Public chools ndClassrooms.

The number f

public

chool tudents

er

nternet-connected

nstructionalom-

puter

n

diverse

ypes

f schoolswas calculated or ach

year

rom

998

to

2005,

except

or

005

(Wells,

ewis, Greene, 006;

seeTable

).

In

1998,

chools

with

50%

ormore

minority

nrollmentad

70.3%

more tudents

er

nternet-connected

computer

han

did schools

with ess han

%

minority

nrollment

with

atios

f

17.2:1

n

high

minority

chools nd

10.1:1 n

ow-minority

chools).

y

2005,

that

gap

had fallen o

36.7%

(with

atios

f4.1:1

in

high-minority

chools nd

3.0:1

in

low-minority

chools).

When

xamining

ccess

y

rate f

poverty,

s

defined

y

per-

cent

f

tudents

ligible

or ree r

reduced-price

unch,

he

ap

has lmost losed.

n

1998, choolswith 5% or more ftheir tudents

ligible

or reerreduced-price

lunch ad

58.5%

more tudents

er

nternet-connected

omputer

han id

schools

with ess han

5%

of

heirtudents

o

eligible

with

atios f 16.8:1

n

high-poverty

schools

nd

10.1:1

n

low-poverty

chools),

ut

n

2005

the

gap

was reduced

o

5.3%

(with

atios f .0:1

n

high-poverty

chools nd

3.8:1

n

ow-poverty

chools).

The

narrowing

f these

aps

s due

n

large

art

o

governmentunding,

ith he

federal-Rate

rogram

roviding

bout

2

billion

er

year

or elecommunications

and nternetccess

n

schools,

nd

many

chools

n ow-incomeommunities

sing

Title

funding

o

purchase

ducational

omputers.

As in home nvironments,hough,ociotechnicalactorsupportr constrain

use

of

computers

nd the nternet

n

schools,

ften

n

ways

hat

heighten

du-

cational

nequity. comparative

tudy

f

chool

echnology

se

n

high-

nd

ow-

socioeconomictatus

SES)

communitiesound

hat

he

ow-SES

neighborhood

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 12: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 12/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak:

ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

189

TABLE4

Ratio

of PublicSchool

Students

o Instructional

Computers

With

nternet

ccess,

998-2005

Years

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003 2005

All

public

chools

12.1

9.1

6.6

5.4

4.8

4.4

3.8

Instructional

evel

Elementary

13.6

10.6

7.8

6.1

5.2

4.9

4.1

Secondary 9.9 7.0 5.2 4.3 4.1 3.8 3.3

Locale

City

14.1 11.4

8.2

5.9

5.5

5.0

4.2

Urban

ringe

12.4

9.1

6.6

5.7

4.9

4.6 4.1

Town

12.2

8.2 6.2

5.0

4.4

4.1

3.4

Rural

8.6

6.6

5.0

4.6

4.0

3.8

3.0

Percentage

inority

enrollment

<6

10.1

7.0

5.7

4.7

4.0

4.1

3.0

6-20

10.4

7.8

5.9

4.9

4.6 4.1

3.9

21-49 12.1 9.5 7.2 5.5 5.2 4.1 4.0

>50

17.2 13.3

8.1

6.4

5.1

5.1

4.1

Percentage

f tudents

eligible

or ree r

reduced-price

unch

<35

10.6

7.6

6.0

4.9

4.6

4.2

3.8

35-49

10.9

9.0 6.3 5.2

4.5

4.4

3.4

50-74

15.8

10.0

7.2 5.6

4.7

4.4

3.6

>75

16.8

16.8

9.1

6.8

5.5

5.1

4.0

Source.Wells, Lewis,and Greene 2006).

schools

ended o have

ess table

eaching

taff,

dministrative

taff,

nd

T

support

staff,

hichmade

planning

or

echnology

se

more

ifficult

Warschauer,

nobel,

&

Stone,

004).

As the

tudy

eported,

he

high-SES

chools

tended

o nvest

more

in

professional

evelopment,

iring

ull-time

echnical

upport

taffnd

developing

lines f ommunication

mong

eachers,

ffice

taff,

edia

pecialists,

echnical

taff,

and

administration

hat

romoted

obust

igital

etworks.

his,

n

turn,

encour-

aged

more

widespread

eacher

se of

new

technologies.

n

comparison,

the ow-

SES schools adachievedess uccessncreatinghekinds f upport etworkshat

made

echnology

orkable

p.

581).

Because eachers

n

ow-SES

choolswere

ess

confident

hat he

quipment

hey

igned

p

forwould

ctually

ork,

nd that

f t

did

not

work,

hey

wouldhave

vailable

imely

echnical

upport,

hey

weremore

reluctant

o

rely

n

technology

n

theiresson

lans.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 13: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 13/48

190

Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

Inaddition,venwhen eachersn ow-SES chools adconfidencen thehard-

ware

nd

oftware

hey

ere

sing,

he heer

omplexity

f heirnstructionalnviron-

mentsmade

t

more ifficult

o use

technology

ell.

Challenges

hey

aced ncluded

larger

umbers

f

Englishanguage

earnersnd

at-risk

tudents,

arger

umbersf

students ith imited

omputerxperience,

nd

greater

ressure

o ncreaseest cores

and dhere o

policy

mandates. s a

teacher

n

a low-SES alifornia

igh

chool

aid,

Time is

probably

he

biggest

problem]

Now it's

ven worse. Now thatwe're

hanging

ur curriculum

ig

time to make it a

standards-based

urriculum ..

we

really

ave to be efficiento coverthe stuff hat's

n

the

standards

n

one academic

quarter.

here's

not much time for other stuff .

.

Before,

f

somebody

pushedthecomputerab,great. coulddropsomething hatwe weredoing. t's not that ritical, ouknow,

it's

n

assignment

e

like,but,

okay,

et's

drop

t and let's

go

into

the

computer

ab. And now we're

dropping

something

hat's n the

[ state]

xam at

the

end

of the

year

nd our

API

scorethat

goes

n

the

news]

paper

then could

go

down because

of

having

more

emphasis

on

computers.

o,

that

s,

to

me,

time s an even

bigger

bstaclenow than t was the first

ouple

of

years.

Warschauer,

nobel,

et

al., 2004,

p.

582)

Access

romOther ocations

More han alf fU.S.

teenagers

ay hey

ave ccessed

he nternetromibraries

and

at

friends'

ouses

Lenhart,

rafeh,mith,

Macgill,

008; Lenhart, adden,

& Hitlin,005),thoughheres scant esearchocumentinghat eens o inthese

locations.n

contrast,

heres a wide

body

fresearch

eporting

outh's

ich

xperi-

enceswith he nternet

ndother

igital

media

t

community

enters

see,

.g.,

Hull

&

Katz, 006; Kafai,

eppier,

c

Chapman,

009),

yet

tudies

uggest

hat ewerhan

1 in 1

youth

eport sing

he nternett such

enters,

nd almost o

youth eport

such

enterss

the

main

lace

hey

o

online

Lenhart

t

l.,

2005).

Morediscussion

ofhow

youth

make seof

echnology

t

community

entersnd

the ole f uch en-

ters

n

addressing

quity

ssueswith

echnology

illbe discussedater

n this

aper.

USE

The most ecent ata n numberf

youth

house he nternets

provided

y

he

Pew nternet American

ife

roject,

hich

nterviewed

00

parent-

hild

airs

y

telephone

nd found hat

9%

of

youth

ged

12-17

years

se

the nternet

t home

and

94%

use t

from

ny

ocation

Lenhart,

rafeh,

t

al., 2008;

seeTable

5).

The

89%

figure

s

considerably

igher

han he

0.3%

Internetccess ate or ouseholds

with

hildren

eported

y

CPS

(NTIA, 2008b)

as

well s the

8-80%

rate fhome

Internet

se

for

eenagers

eported

y

heKaiser

amily

oundation

Roberts

t

al.,

2005).

The differences

ay

be because

f the

ater

ate

of the

Pew

survey

om-

pared

with heKaiser

amily

oundation

urvey,

s well s due to differences

n the

methodologyfthePew urveyompared ith heCPS. Pewreports25% rate f

response

o ts

elephone

urvey,

nd

lthough

he

esponses

re

weighted

or

ace nd

education,

hey

renot

weighted

or

ncome,

nd

arethus

ikely

o

underrepresent

low-income

amilies hoeither

ack

working

elephone

ine

or

do

notwish o

be

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 14: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 14/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

191

TABLE5

Percentage

f U.S.

Teenagers

Who Use the nternett

Differentocations

Anywhere

At Home At School At a

Library

All teens

94 89

77

60

Gender

Girls

95 91 76

59

Boys

93

86

78

60

Age

years)

12-14

92 89

71 58

15-17 96 89 82 61

Race/ethnicity

White

96 91

78 59

Black

92

80

83 69

Hispanic

87 85 69

53

Annual ousehold

ncome

$)

<30,000

86

70

75

72

30,000-49,000

93

86 88

63

50,000-74,000

96 87

72 55

>75,000

97 99 74

57

Source.

enhart, rafeh,mith,

nd

Macgill

2008).

interviewedor research

roject.

Most

mportant,

he

parent-childair

nterviews

were

nly

onducted

n

English,

hus

eaving

ut

Spanish-speaking

atino amilies

who are known o have

markedly

ower ates f nternetccess hando

English-

speaking

atinos

Fairlie,007).

Finally,

he ew

urvey

eports

n

teenagers,

hereas

the

NTIA

discusses ouseholds ith

ny

ge

children

ounger

han

years.

That

being

aid,

heres ittle

isagreement

hat he

trong ajority

f

youth

ind

a

way

o

get

nline

omewhere.ecause frican mericannd ow-income

outh

se

the nternetn

public

ibrariest

significantlyigher

ates han heirWhite r

higher

income

ounterparts

see

Table

5),

it

appears

hat

he

ibrary

erves,

t east o some

extent,

s an alternativeutlet or hosewithout ome nternet

ccess.

It is also the case that

youth

pend

considerablemount

f

time nline r

otherwise

sing omputers.

he Kaiser

Family

oundation

eported

he

average

amount f

time

pent

n

computers

y

ge group

s

37

minutes

er

day

for - to

10-year-olds,

hour nd

2

minutes

er day

for11- to

14-year-olds,

nd

1

hour

and

22

minutes

erday

for

5-

to

1

-year-olds.

heir

ata,however,

ere ollected

in

2004,

thusbefore he

rapid

growth

f

socialnetworkites hathave

proven

o

popularmong outh.

What, then,

do

youth

do

online?We will

consider oth out-of-school

nd

in-school

ractices.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 15: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 15/48

192

Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

Out-of-School se ofDigitalMedia

A

recent

eport,

ased n

interviewsnd

observations

ithhundreds

f

middle

school- nd

high chool-aged

outh, rovides

n

n-depth

iew fhow

young

eople

in

theUnited

tates se

digital

media

oday

Ito

t

l.,

n

press).

to ndher

olleagues

identified

wo

primaryategories

f

online

practices,

hich

hey

abel

riendship-

drivennd

nterest-driven.

riendship-drivenractices

ssentially

nvolve

anging

ut

with heir

eers

nline nd

either

ake he

place

of

or

complement

ther

orms f

youth

ocializing,

uch

s

hanging

ut tthemall. outh

sually

ang

ut

nline

with

peers

rom

chool,

ut

lso

occasionally

ith riends

hey

meet

hrough

articipation

in sports,eligiousroups,rother fflinectivities.anging utrarelynvolves

people

hat

outh

o

not

already

now rom

heir real

ife,

xcept

n

the aseof

groups

ho

re

specially arginalized,

uch s

gays

nd

esbians,

ho

may

enture

out

more

roadly

nline

o seek ocial

ontacts.he

principal

ools or

anging

ut

are

ocial etworksites

specifically

ySpace

nd

Facebook),

nstant

essaging,

nd

computer

nd video

games.

ypical

riendship-driven

ctivities

nclude

hatting

r

flirting;

ploading, ownloading,

r

discussing

usic,

mages,

nd

video;

updating

profiles

nd

writing

n

friends'

alls;

nd

playing

r

discussingames.

The

majority

f

youth

o not

move

eyond riendship-driven

ctivities,

ut he

more

reativend adventurous

enture

nto nterest-driven

enres.

s with riend-

ship-drivenctivities,nterest-drivenctivitiesypicallynvolve ommunicating,

game

laying,

nd

haring

fmedia. ut

n nterest-driven

enres,

t s the

pecialized

activity,

nterest,

r niche

dentity

hat s the

driving

otivation,

atherhan

merely

socializing

ith ocal

peers.

his results

n

a much

deeper

nd more

ophisticated

engagement

ith

ew

media,

nd also

brings articipants

nto ommunication

nd

collaboration

ith

eople

fdiverse

ges

nd

backgrounds

round he

world,

ather

than

rincipally

ith heir

wn ocal

peers.

s to

etal.

in

press)

xplain,

Interest-driven

ractices

re

what

outh

escribe

s the omain f he

eeks,

reaks, usicians,

rtists,

nd

dorks,

hekidswho are

dentifieds

smart, ifferent,

r

creative,

ho

generally

xist

t the

margins

f

teen ocialworlds. ids find differentetworkfpeers nddevelop eepfriendshipshroughhese

interest-driven

ngagements,

ut

n

these ases

he nterestsome

first,

nd

they

tructure

he

peer

net-

work nd

friendships,

atherhan ice

versa. hese re

ontexts here ids

ind

elationships

hat enter

on their

nterests,

obbies,

nd career

spirations.

The

Digital

Youth

Project

dentified

wo

stages

f interest-driven

articipation,

which

hey

abel

messing

round nd

geeking

ut.

Messing

round

nvolves

arly

exploration

f

personal

nterests,

herein

oung

eople begin

o

take n nterest

n

and focus

n the

workings

nd

content

f the

technology

nd media

hemselves,

tinkering,xploring,

nd

extending

heir

nderstanding

Ito

et

al.,

2008,

p.

20).

Activitiesnthis egardncludeearchingornformationnlinendexperimenting

with

igital

media

roduction

r

more

omplex

ormsf

gaming.

eeking

ut

s the

next

tage,

nd nvolves

an ntense ommitment

o

or

engagement

ithmedia

r

technology,

ften ne

particular

edia

roperty,

enre,

r

type

f

technology

nd

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 16: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 16/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

193

learningonavigatesoteric omains fknowledgendpracticendparticipating

in

communitieshat raffic

n

these orms

f

expertise

Ito

et

al., 2008,

p.

28).

Examples

f

geeking

ut

nclude

reation

nd

sharing

f

animated ilms hatuse

computer

ame

ngines

nd

footage

machinima);

osting

nd

critiquing

f

creative

writing

elated

o

popular

ulture

fan

iction);

evelopment

nd

publishing

ideos

based

on

clips

from nime eries et

to

songs

anime

music

videos);

writing

nd

distributionf subtitlesf

foreign

ilms r television

rograms,specially

nime,

within

ours

fter

he ilms r

programs

re

released

fansubbing);

nd creation

nd

posting

f hort ramaticr

humorousilms n YouTube

video

roduction).

Learning

ndmedia

heoristsuch s Gee

2003,

2004)

and

Jenkins

2009)

make

a

compelling

ase that

youth's

ngagement

ithnewmedia

provides

ital

earning

experiences.

owever,

heir

writingsrincipally

ocus n

youth

who are

engaged

in

interest-driven

ctivities,

nd

especially

hose

who

geek

ut. Yetthe

to et al.

(2008)

study

eports

hat

nly

small

minority

f

youth

move

n

to this

eeking

out

stage,

nd also makes

vident hat ccess o additional

echnological

nd social

resources,

eyond

simple

omputer

nd nternet

ccount,

re

riticalo determin-

ing

whomoves n to these

more

ophisticated

orms

fmedia

articipation.

iven

the nature f

geeking

ut

activities,

echnological

esources

resumably

nclude

broadband

ccess,

elatively

ew

omputers

ith

raphics

nd

multimedia

apacity,

digital roductionoftware,ndequipmentuch sdigitalamerasnd camcorders.

Socialresources

nclude

community

hat

alues nd enables he

haring

fmedia

knowledge

nd

nterests,

hich an be found

mong

amily,

riends,

nterest

roups,

or

educational

rograms

uch s

computer

lubs

nd

youth

media

enters.

Ito et al.

(2008)

study

oesnot

ttempt

o

dentify

ho,

with he

help

fthese

resources,

ypically

oves

n

to the

geeking

ut

tage,

ndwho

does

not,

butother

studies ave

ddressedhis ssue.One ofthemost

ompelling

ccounts

s

provided

by

Attewell

ndWinston

2003),

who

pent

everal

onths

bserving

nd nterview-

ing

two

groups

f

computer

sers t home

nd school. he

first

roup

onsisted

ofAfrican merican

nd Latino hildren

ged

11

to

14

years

ho

attended

ublic

middlechool;most ame romoor ndworking-classamilies,nd ll cored elow

grade

evel

n

reading.

he

second

group

onsisted f

school hildren rom

more

affluentamilies ho

ttended

rivate

chools.

The

wealthier

ouths

tudied

y

Attewell

nd Winston

2003)

were

requently

engaged

n

interest-drivenctivities. or

example,

White

fourth-graderivate

school

tudent amed eke

was

political

unky

t

ten

years

ld

p.

124).

He

spent

his

nline ime

eading p

on the

residential

nauguration,

ownloading

ideo

lips

of

politicians,

nd

reading

andidates'

peeches.

o assist is

andidacy

or lass

resi-

dent an officehat

wasnot

anctioned

fficiallyy

he

eachersthis chool

Zeke

found free

website hat

llowed isitorso

construct

uizzes

nd modifiedt to

develop

n online

oting

ystem.

ith he

ooperation

fhisrival or ffice,e told

each

child

n

his

class o visit heWeb

page

for he

voting

ystem

oth

o read he

campaign

peeches

hat e

andhis

opponent

osted

nd

eventually

o vote.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 17: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 17/48

194

Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

The ow-SES rouplsopursuedheirnterests,ut nvery ifferentays. ypical

was

Kadesha,

13-year-old

frican merican

irl.

Kadesha nd herfriends

pent

much f heir

nline ime

hecking

ut

rappers

nd

wrestlers

whom

hey

eferredo

as their

husbands ),

ownloading

heir

ictures

s Screensaversnd

pastingmages

into

reports

Attewell

Winston, 003,

p.

117).

They

lso went

yber-

indow

shoppingogether,

hecking

ut

verything

rom otnew neakerso

skateboardso

Barbie

olls.

he

authors

xplained

owKadesha's

bility

o

exploit

he nternet as

greatly

estricted

y

her

imited

eading

nd

writing

kills:

As

image

after

mage

flashes

by,

.. it becomes noticeable how

rarely,

ow

lightly,

adesha settles n

printed ext.Likemanyof herfriends,he readsfarbelowgrade evel.So sheenergeticallyursues mages

and sounds on the

Web,

but

foregoes

ven news of her ove interest

f

that

requires

her to read.

p.

117)

Of course

orking,

ith

mages

nd

ounds anbe an

mportantart

f

geeking

ut,

but

AttewellndWinston's

escription

akes lear

hat,

n the aseof

Kadesha nd

many

f

her

riends,

ngagement

ithmultimedia as imited o

consumption,

ot

creation.

A

study

nalyzing

he

003

CPS data

provides

tatistical

vidence

f homeuse

divide

DeBell

&

Chapman,

006).

Among

hildren

n

grades

re-K

o

12

whoused

a

computer

t

home,

Whites

were

more

ikely

hanBlacks r

Hispanics

o useword

processing,-mail,multimedia,ndspreadsheetsrdatabases. heseapplications

were lso

more

widely

sed

by

hildren ho ived

n

high-income

amilies,

hosewith

well-educated

arents,

nd thosewith

nglish-speaking

arents,

s

compared

ith

children romow-incomeamiliesr whose

arents

id

not

graduate igh

chool

or

did

not

peak

nglish.

urthertatistical

vidence

omes rom recent

tudy

f

creative

omputing

articipation

n

twoCalifornia iddle

chools,

ne

in

a

high-

SES

community

nd

one n a

nearby

ow-SES

ommunity.

tudentst the

high-SES

school ad

greater

ccess o

diverse

igital

ools

including

omputers,

he

nternet,

printers,

canners,

andheld

evices,

igital

ameras,

nd video

ameras)

nd were

muchmore ikelyo havebothdepth nd breadth fexperiencendigitalmedia

production

Barron,

alter, artin,

C

chatz,

n

press).

Games

In

therealm

f

games,

esearch

uggests

hat here re lso

mportant

ifferences

associated ith ES and with

ender

s well.

Andrews

2007,

2008a,

2008b)

com-

pared

he

game-playingractices

f

133

students

iving

n

high-incomeeighbor-

hoods nd

attending

private

ollege

reparatory

choolwith hose f

95

students

living

n

low-income

eighborhoods

nd

attending

public

Title school

i.e.,

a

schoolwithmore han

40%

of its

students

ualifying

or ubsidized

unches).

Methods ncludedurveys,nterviews,ndpilesorts;he atternvolved anding

students

ame

boxes nd

asking

hem o sort

hem nto

various

ategories,

uch s

whetherhe tudents

ad

seenor heard f them

efore,

hetherhe

games

made

sense

o

them,

hat

ategories

f

games

hey

hought

hey

were,

nd whatkind f

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 18: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 18/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak:

ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

195

TABLEÓ

Types

f

Video

Games

Played

by

Students

n Two

U.S.

High

Schools

Socioeconomic

tatus Gender

%)

High(%)

Low(%)

Male(%)

Female

%)

Casual

games

22.6

10

4.5

29.7

Computer

ames

noncasual)

19.4 4.5

14.3

1.1

Fantasy

ames

16.1

7.3

16.1

5.5

Sports

ames

19.4 44.5

47.3

15.4

Source.

ndrews

2008b).

people

hey

hought

layed

hem.

asedon the

pile

orts nd

nterviews,

ndrews

developed

our

ategories

f

games,

hich hecalled asual

e.g.,

puzzle,

word,

ard

games), omputer

oncasual

e.g.,

imulationnd

strategyames

uch

s

The

Sims

r

Grand

heft

uto)

fantasy

involving ythological

r

mystical

haracters,

ncluding

both

ndividual

ole-playingames

or

ideogame

onsoles uch

s the

Playstation

and

massively

ultiplayerole-playingames

MMORPG]

for

omputers

uch

s

World

f

Warcraft),

nd

portse.g.,

NBA

Live).

When skingtudentsoidentifyhe opthree ames hat tudents adplayed

over

he

past

year,

ndrews ound

major

ifferences

oth

by

SES and

gender

see

Table

).

High-SES

tudents

eremore

ikely

han

heir

ow-SES

ounterparts

o

play

every

enre

f

game

xcept

or

ports.

he difference

as

particularly

ronounced

in the noncasual

omputer ames,

which nclude

trategy

nd

simulation

ames

believed o be

important

or

earning

urposes

see

discussion

n

Gee,

2003).

In the

pile

sorts nd

interviews,

ow-incometudents

xplained

hat hese

more nvolved

computer ames

were too

complicated

r too

confusing

Andrews,

008b,

p.

207).

Boys

weremore

ikely

han

girls

o

play

very

ind f

genre

xcept

asual

games.

ndcombined

urvey

nd nterviewata

reportedy

Andrews

uggests

hat

by

he ndofher

tudy,

large

umber f

high-SES

tudentsere

laying

World f

Warcraft,

ut hat

ery

ew emalesr ow-SES

maleswere

laying

his

r

any

ther

MMORPGs

an

mportantindingiven

hat he

omplex

nd

highly

ollaborative

nature f

MMORPGs makes hem deal

or dvanced

earning

nd

iteracy

ractices

(see,

.g.,

teinkuehler,

007).

This ast

finding

s associated

ith broader

rend

dentified

y

Andrews:

igh-

SES students

ere armore

ikely

han ow-SES tudents

o

play

games

with ther

people,

nd

maleswere

imilarly

ore

ikely

hanfemales o do

so

(see

Table

7).

For

example,

igh-SES

tudents

ere

nearly

ive imes s

likely

o

play

games

with

strangersnline s ow-SES tudents,ndboysweremore han ightimes s ikelys

girls

o

do

so.

Boys

were lsomore

han ix imes s

ikely

s

girls

o

play

with riends

online.

inally,

isparities

ere

lsonoted

n

regards

o tudents'

elated

iteracy

rac-

tices utside he

games.

or

xample,

ales nd

high-SES

tudents

eremore

ikely

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 19: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 19/48

196

Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

TABLE7

Differences

n

Social Patterns

f

Gaming

Between

Students

n

Two U.S.

High

Schools

Socioeconomic

Status

Gender

High(%)

Low(%) Male(%)

Female

%)

With ne

friend

nline

37.0

16.2 24.6 4.1

With

many

riendsnline

39.1 17.6 26.3

4.1

With trangersnline 50.0 10.3 26.3 3.1

With

trangers

n

person

net

15.2 4.3

6.1 1.0

café,

tc.)

With

ne friend

n

person

57.9 6.7

With

many

riends

n

person

57.9

28.6

At a

friend'souse

58.6 37.8

At a relative's

ouse

40.5 23.5

At a

game

tore

17.2

2.0

Source.

Andrews

2008b).

than

irls

r

ow-SES tudents

o

read

magazines

bout

ames

raccess nlinewalk-

throughs

i.e.,

ites hat

rovide

rittenr llustratednstructionsn

optimal

ays

o

beat

game

r

evel).

Andrews's

2008b)

findings

re

upported

y

ther

esearch

n

youths

xperiences

with

game

playing.

he

2003

CPS data ndicate

hat,

mong

tudents ho have

home

omputers,

oys,

Whites,

hildren

rom

igh-SES

amilies,

hildren

ithwell-

educated

arents,

ndchildren hose

arents

peak

nglish

re ll more

ikely

o use

computers

or

ame laying

han

re

girls,

lacks nd

Hispanics,

hildrenromow-

SES

families,

rchildren hose

arents

idnot

graduate igh

chool rdo not

peak

English

DeBell

&

Chapman,

006).

The Pew nternet Americanife

roject

ur-

veyed

1

2

1 -

to

1

-year-olds

n

theUnited tates rom ovember

007

through

February

008,

and found

hat,

ompared

ith

irls,

oys

weremore

ikely

o

play

videogames,lay

more

ame enres,

lay

nline

ames,

nd,

by nearly

hree

o

one

margin,lay

massively

ultiplayer

nline

ames

Lenhart,

ahne,

t

al.,

2008).

The

Pew

study

lso found hat f thosewho

played

ames,

Whiteswere

lightly

ore

likely

han

Blacks,

nd more han wice s

likely

s

Hispanics,

o

play

s

part

f a

guild

r

group,

nd thatWhites remuchmore

ikely

hanBlacks o

play

massively

multiplayer

nline

games.

Other tudies

uggest

hatwhenmales

nd

females r

high-SESnd ow-SESyouth rBlacks ndWhites lay he amegame, heymay

experience

he

game

differently

ecause f their

ackgroundnowledge,

elief

ys-

tems,

r

sensitivity

o

racially

r

sexually

harged

material

see,

.g.,

Kafai,Heeter,

Denner, Sun,

008;

DeVane&

Squire,

008).

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 20: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 20/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

197

Communityenters nd Libraries

A

number

f tudies

uggest

hat

ommunity

echnology

entersnd

othernfor-

mal

digital

media

rograms

irected

t

youth

an

help

vercome

any

f

these is-

advantagesegarding

ccess nduse

of

echnology.

enter

rograms

ypically

eature

up-to-datequipment, igh-speed

nternet

ccess,

nd

access o

digital

eripherals

such s

printers

r camcorders.

qually

mportant,

hey

rovide

social ontext

or

learning

ith nd

throughechnology,

hether

n

courses,

orkshops,rop-in

lub-

house ours

with

mentors,

r nformal

nteractionith

eers.

range

f tudies ave

reported

he

ositivexperiences

or

outh

n such

enters,

hether

orking

n

digi-

tal torytellingHull& Katz, 006;Hull & Nelson, 005),media reationhrough

use

of

programminganguages

Peppier

Kafai,

007),

or

digital

ocumentaries

on

the ocial

eality

n ocal ommunities

Warschauer,003).

Yet

nly

%

of

youth

indicate

hat

hey

ave ver

one

online t a

community

enter,

outh

enter,

r

house

f

worship

Lenhart

t

al.,

2005).

There s thusmuch

oom o

grow

n

giving

youth pportunities

or hesemedia-rich

xperiences

n nformal

ettings.

Public

ibrariesremuch

more

widespread

han

ommunity

echnology

enters

and are much

more ommon

oint

f nternetccess

or

outh

Lenhart,

ahne,

et

al.,

2008).

However,

hey sually

ack the extensive

echnology

nstruction

r

expert

mentorship

vailable

n

community

enters,

nd thus se of

computers

nd

the nternetn ibrariessmore ifferentiatedy ES,as usersmust elyn their wn

unequal

ocial esources

or

upport.

or

xample,

study

n

Philadelphia

ound hat

introduction

fnew

echnology

n

the

ity's

ibraries

ctually

idened divide

n

the

quality

f

ibrary

se

Neuman

Celano,

006).

Children

n ow-incomeommuni-

ties eceived

ittle

arentmentoring

n

ibraries

nd,

fter

echnology

as

ntroduced,

spent

onsiderable

ime ither

aiting

or

omputers

o be free r

playing

omputer-

based

games

with ittle extual

ontent;

echnology

hus

isplaced eading

or hese

children.

n

contrast,

arents

n middle-incomeommunities

carefully

rchestrated

children's

ctivitiesn the

computer,

uch

s

they

id

withbooks

Neuman

&

Celano,2006,p. 193).

Children

n those ommunitieshus

pent

more ime

n

print-basedomputerpplications,

veraging

1 lines f

print er pplication

om-

pared

o

3.9

lines f

print

or he hildren

n

ow-income

ommunities.s

a

result,

children

n

middle-income

ommunities

oubled he mount

f ime

pent

n

read-

ing

following

he ntroduction

f

technology,

nd

the

iteracy

ap

between

ow-

nd

high-income

outh

ncreased.

In-SchoolUse

Discrepancies

n

whether

outh

se

computers

nd the

nternett school renar-

rowerhan t home. his s seen

n

both

hePew

tudy

iscussed

bove

Table )

as

well s inDeBell andChapman's2006) analysisf CPS data,which howed hat

85%

ofWhites

n

grades

re-K

o

12 in

2003

reportedsing

computer

t

school,

compared

ith

0%

of

Hispanics

nd

82%

of Blacks.

However,

hemost

mpor-

tant

echnology

iscrepancies

n

U.S.

schools renot

n whether

omputers

nd

the

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 21: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 21/48

198

Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

Internetreused, utforwhat urpose.he twowidest .S. studiesBecker,000c;

Wenglinsky,

998)

on

this

opic

were onducted

n the

1990s.

Both howed

harp

disparities

y

race nd SES

in

hownew

echnologies

ere

eployed

or

ducation.

Wenglinsky

1998)

analyzed

ata from he

1996

NationalAssessmentf

Educational

rogress

NAEP)

to describe

echnology

se

patterns

f

6,627

fourth

graders

nd

7,146

ighth raders

cross heUnited tates. f all

racial

roups,

frican

Americans eremore

ikely

o

use

computers

t east nce week or

mathematics

at

both

he ourth

rade

nd

eighth rade

evel,

ikely

ecause fthe

requent

seof

remedial

omputer-based

rills

n

math.

et,

aradoxically,

smaller

ercentage

f

African merican

tudents

han

ny

ther acial

roup

was

taught

math

y

eachers

whohadhadprofessionalevelopmentntechnologyse n thepreviousyears.

Wenglinsky

1998)

divided

p computer

se nto wobroad

ategories.

he first

involved

pplyingoncepts

r

developing

imulationso use

them,

ctivitieshat

are both

hought

f as

teaching igher

rder kills. he second nvolved rill

nd

practice

ctivities,

hich

y

nature ocus n ower

rder

kills. he

study

ound hat

substantialifferences

y ace/ethnicity,

chool unch

ligibility

nd/or

ype

f

chool

existwith

egard

o whethertudents

eported

heir eachers

rimarily

sing

hese

activities

see

Table

8).

Most

notably,

ore han hree imes s

many

sian tudents

as Black tudents

eported

heir eacherss

primarily

sing

imulationsnd

appli-

cations neighth rademathematicsnstruction,hereasnly bouthalf smany

Asians s Blacks

eported

heir

eachers

rimarily

sing

rill nd

practice.

englinsky

does

not

report

ow

much

f

his ifferentialasrelatedoAsians ndBlacks

aking

different

ypes

fmath lasses

n

eighth rade,

ndhow

much,

f

ny,

may

ave een

independent

f

hat.

In the

econdnational

tudy,

ecker

urveyed

representativeample

f

4,000

teacherscross he United tates.His

study

onfirmedhe differencesound

y

Wenglinsky,

nd

found hat

hey

pplied

more

enerally

atherhan

ust

n

math-

ematics

Becker,

000b,

000c).

He summarizedhe

indings

hus

Computerse n ow-SES chools ftennvolvedraditionalracticesndbeliefsbout tudentearning,

whereas

omputer

se

n

high-SES

chools ften eflected

ore

onstructivistnd

nnovative

eaching

strategies.

or

xample,

eachers

n

ow-SES choolsweremore

ikely

han hose

n

high-SES

chools o

use

computers

or remediationf skills nd

mastering

kills

ust

taught

nd to view

omputers

s

valuable or

eaching

tudentsowork

ndependently.

n

contrast,

eachers

n

high-SES

chools eremore

likely

o

use

computers

o teach tudents

kills

uch

s

written

xpression,

aking

resentations

o an

audience,

nd

analyzing

nformation.

Becker,

000c,

p.

55)

Beckerlso ound hat mountf

usage

y

chool ES differed

y

ubject

rea.

n math-

ematics

nd

English

subjects

n

which,

t east t that

ime,

rill nd

practice

oftware

predominatedcomputers

ere sedmore

requently

n

ow-SES

chools

han

n

high-

SES schools. owever,n ciencenstruction,hich endedo nvolve ore imulations

and

pplications,

omputers

ere

sed

more

requently

n

high-SES

chools.

Much

has

changed

n

computer

apacity

nd

usage

n

the time ince these

two

national tudieswere onducted.

nfortunately,

here

ave been no similar

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 22: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 22/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

199

TABLE8

Percentage

f

U.S.

Eighth

GradersWhose

Teachers

eport

imulations/

Applications

nd

Drill/Practicess

Primary

omputer

ses

Simulations/Applications

Drill/Practice

Total

27

34

Race/ethnicity

Asian

43

27

Hispanic

31

30

White

25

34

Black 14 52

Family

ncome

School

unch

neligible

33

31

School unch

ligible

22

34

Type

f chool

Privatechools

30

10

Public chools

27

36

Source.

Wenglinsky

1998).

large-scaleuantitative

tudies one since o confirmr

challenge

hese

indings.

However,

numberf maller

ase tudies

onducted

y

he irst

uthor

f

his

hap-

ter

ave xaminedhe

ame ssuewith narrower

ens. hese

nclude

comparison

f

a

high-SES rivate

nd ow-SES

ublic

chool n

Hawaii,

oth

known or

ood

uses

of

educational

echnology

Warschauer,

000);

a

study

f20

mathematics,cience,

English,

nd social

tudies eacherst three

igh-SES

nd five

ow-SES

econdary

schools n

Southern

alifornia

Warschauer

t

al.,

2004);

and

a

multisitease

tudy

of 10

diverse chools n Maine

and California

ith ne-to-one

aptop

programs,

in

which ll

students

n

one or more

lassrooms ere

rovided

n

individualom-

puterWarschauer,006).Taken s a whole, hese tudies ave onfirmedmpor-

tant

iscrepanciesy

tudent

nd school

ES,

while

lso

uggesting

hat he

pecific

nature

fthese

iscrepanciesay

e

evolving

ver

ime. or

xample,

Warschauer

studies avefound

ifferencesot

only

n

constructivist

ersus ote

pplications

f

technology,

s

suggested

y

Becker,

ut rather

n

different

ypes

f

constructivist

activity,

ith hose

ccurring

n

low-SES choolsmore

ypically

ocused n

what

Scardamalia

nd Bereiter

2003)

called hallows

opposed

o

deep

onstructivism.n

these

nstances,

ndividualr

collaborative

tudent-centered

ork,

uch s

writing

newslettersr

finding

nformationn

Web

pages,

was often

arried ut with

ery

limited

oals,

uch

s the

development

f most

basic

computer

kills,

atherhan

the chievementfdeeper nowledge,nderstanding,ranalysishroughritical

inquiry,

s more

requently

ccurred

n

high-SES

chools.

The

California

tudy

arried ut

by

Warschauert al.

(2004)

illustratedn

part

why

eachers

n

low-SES chools eel

need

to

emphasize

omputer

kills.

urveys

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 23: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 23/48

200

Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

in the choolsndicated hat 9% ofhigh-SEStudents adcomputerst home

and

97%

had nternet

ccess,

whereas

n

the

ow-SES

chools,

he

rates

were

4%

for

omputer

ccess nd

72%

for

nternetccess.

n

interviews,

eachers

ade lear

that

hey

were

keenly

ware f

these

ifferences,

nd

ndeed,

hey

ended o

exag-

gerate

hem;

while

eachers

n

high-SES

chools new hat

lmost ll their

tudents

had

computers

nd

nternet

ccess,

eachersn

low-SES chools

elieved hat

nly

a

minority

f their

tudents ad such

ccess.

However,

hetherheir

iewswere

exaggerated

r

not,

he

eachers

n

ow-SES choolswere orrecto

assume hat

ub-

stantial umbersf heir

tudentsidnot

ome o schoolwith he

equisite

ccess o

have

developed

asic

omputeriteracy.hey

hus sed

disproportionate

mount

of ime o teach ardwarend oftware

perations,

nd

they

ere eluctanto

assign

homework,

uch

s research

apers

r

projects,

hat

equired

ut-of-schoolccess o

the

nternet.

n

high-SES

chools,

eachers

orrectly

ssumed hat

hey

ould

forego

instruction

n

basichardware

nd software

perations,

ecause tudents ad

ikely

learnedhese t home

andthat

ssigning

ore

n-depth

esearch

hat

equired

ut-

of-school

omputer

nd nternetccess

wouldnot

unduly

urden

heir

tudents.

Finally,

he

more ecent

aptop

tudy

Warschauer,006)

carried

ith

tboth

ad

and

good

news

s to the

potential

f hese

rograms

or

lleviating

nequity.

n the

one

hand,

aptop

rograms

ere

more

hallenging

o

mplement

n

ow-SES chools

formany fthereasons ited hroughouthis hapter.tudentsn ow-SES chools

had lesshome

omputer

xperience,

nd thus ookmore

ime o

adapt

to

using

laptops.

eachersn

low-SES chools

ended o be less

experienced,

nd technical

support

nfrastructuresere ot

lways

s

good.

Parents ere ess

bleto

guide

heir

childrenn

effectivese of

technology.

any

ow-SES chools

were

n

high-crime

neighborhoods,

nd

there as thusmore oncern

bout

aptops eing

tolenwhen

taken ome.

And teachers

ad

difficulty

iguring

ut thebest

way

o

ntegrate

ap-

tops

n

situations

here here ere

arger

umbersf

English

anguage

earners

nd

students

t below-basic

eading

evels.

However,

n the

positive

ide,

here ere

number f chools

nd

programs

dentified

n the

tudy

hat

arried ut

exemplary

technology-enhancednstructionith ulturallynd inguisticallyiverseow-SES

students.

n

these

rograms,

ell-rained

nd

highly

ommittedeachers ere

ble

o

use

aptops

o

help

aise ow-SES tudents'

est cores hile

imultaneously

ngaging

students

n

more

pportunities

or ritical

nquiry

nd

in-depth

earning.

inally,

because ow-SES

tudents ere lso ess

ikely

o have

computer

t

home,

aving

take-home

aptops

llowed

hem

o

gain

opportunities

o earn

echnological

kills

that

hey

might

othave

therwisead.

One

example

iven

s Castle

Middle chool

pseudonym)

n

Maine,

where bout

half he

tudentsre

highlympoverished

hites rom

earby

ousing

rojects,quar-

ter fthe

tudentsre

refugees

nd

mmigrants,

nd

many

f

the

emaining

tudents

are rommiddle-classndupper-middle-classuburbs.reviously,he chool adbeen

highly

tratified,

ith even

istinctducational

racks,

ncluding

ne for he

highly

gifted,

nefor he

ccelerated

but

not

gifted),

nefor

pecial

ducation,

nefor on-

Englishpeakers,

nd everalthers

alibrated

y

bility.

n

the

1990s,

he

chool ad

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 24: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 24/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

201

rejectedhe rackingpproachnddevelopedn ntegratedrogram,ithtudentsf

all bilities

including

s

many

pecial

ducationndESL studentss

possible) rouped

together

nto houses f bout 0 earnersith

main

eachers.

he

entireurriculum

for achhousewas

organized

nto hree - to 12-weekheme-based

earning

xpedi-

tions,

here

tudents orked

ollaboratively

n authentic

rojects.hough

he eform

had

predated

he chool's ne-to-one

aptop rogram,

he

development

fthe

aptop

program

mplified

he uccess f the

reform,

y

providing

hebest

ossible

oolfor

studentso

collaboratively

arry

ut

research;

resent

indings;

ndreflect

n,

critique,

anddocumentheir

ork,

hile

llowing

or

ndividualifferences

n

knowledge

nd

skills. s a

result,

astles ombined

est cores

n

writing,

athematics,

nd science

have xceededhe tateverage,nspite f he choolsarge umbersfEnglishearn-

ers nd ow-income

tudents,

nd

ll studentst the chool re

given

more

quitable

opportunity

o excel hanwould e

typical

n such

stratified

opulation.

OUTCOMES

Measuring

utcomessthemost

omplex

spect

f

nalyzing

echnology-enhanced

learning,

n

part

ecause he

goals

f

eaching

ith

echnology

re o

diverse,

nd

n

part

ecause

many

fthose

oals

do nothave

learly

perationalized

utcomemea-

sures.We

begin

by

discussing

cademic

utcomes,

hich re somewhatasier o

measure,ndthenmove n toexamining1st enturyearningkills.

Academic utcomes

In

testimony

efore

Congressionalearing

n

educational

echnology,

hris

Dede

(1995)

wisely

ointed

ut

the

problems

ithwhathe termedhe firemeta-

phor

f nformation

echnology.

ust

s

a fire

adiates

eat,

many

eople xpect

computer

o

radiate

earning.

nfortunately,

hat's

ot

the case.

Rather,

s Dede

noted,

information

echnologies

re more ike

lothes;

o

get

benefit,

ou

must

make hem

part

f

your ersonalpace,

ailoredo

your

eeds

p.

10).

The most ersuasivevidence hat ccess ocomputersaises tandardcademic

outcomes,

uch s

grades,

est

cores,

nd

graduation

ates,

omes

rom ome ather

than

chool

ettings.

t

may

e the asethat

t

home

people

re

more ble to make

computersart

f

heir

ersonalpace

nd

tailor hem o their

eeds.

One of he

argest

ndmost

igorous

tudies

f

he

elationship

fhome

omputer

use

to test core utcomesn the

United

tateswas

conducted

y

Beltran,

as,

and

Fairlie

in

press).

hey

used nformation

rom wonational ata ets o

explore

he

causal

elationship

etween

omputerwnership

nd

high

chool

raduation

ates.

The

data sets

were he

Computer

nd

Internet

se

Supplements

f the

CPS

for

2000-2003

discussedbove),

nd

theNational

ongitudinal

urvey

fYouth

997

(NLSY97).The latternvolved our-longnterviewsf a representativeample f

9,000

U.S.

youth

nd their

arentsnnually

rom

997

to

2002,

and also ncluded

the

gathering

f

educationalata uch s

youths'

chooling

istory,

erformance

n

standardized

ests,

ourse

f

tudy,

nd

the

iming

nd

types

f

degrees

arned.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 25: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 25/48

202

Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

Theyfound dramaticelationshipetweenome wnershipfcomputersnd

high

chool

graduation

ate,

with differential

n

graduation

etween

omputer

ownersnd

nonownersf

24.3

percentage

oints

ccording

o

the

NLSY97

data nd

16.6

percentage

oints

ccording

o theCPS

data.

They

note hat he 16.6

point

difference

ttributed

o

owning

computer

ound

n theCPS data s

arger

han he

White/blackifference

13.4

points)

nd

comparable

ith hedifferences

etween

teenagers

ho

have

ollege-educated

nd

high

chool

ropout

athers

19.7

percent-

age

points),

hohave

ollege-educated

nd

high

chool

ropout

mothers

20.7

per-

centage

oints),

nd

who

ive n families ith

ncomes f

$75,000-$

00,000

ersus

$20,000-30,000

19.2

percentage

oints)

ound

n the ame ata.

Part f he eason his ifferentials sohighs that omputerwnershiporrelates

with numberf ther

actorsssociated

ith

outh's

ducational

chievement,

uch

as

family

ncome, ace,

r

parents'

ducation.

owever,

hen

ontrolling

or

hese

and

other

ndividual,

arental,

nd

family

haracteristics,

t

was found hat

eenag-

erswhohave ccess o

home

omputers

re6 to 8

percentage

oints

more

ikely

o

graduate

rom

igh

chool

han

eenagers

ho do not

havehome

omputers.

hey

noted hat his

mplies larger

ifference

n

graduation

robability

han hediffer-

encefrom

aving college raduate

arent

elativeo

a

high

chool

ropout arent.

Using

imilar

ontrolss

above,

he

tudy

ound

hat

aving

computer

as

ssoci-

atedwith 0.22point ositiveifferencengrade oint veragebased n a 4-point

grade

cale,

hus

oughly

/3

hevalue

fa

+

or

-

grade),

nd a decline

f2.8

per-

centage

oints

n the ikelihoodf

being

uspended

romchool. he

study

oes

not

reveal he easons or ll these

enefits,

ut

he uthors

peculate

hat se

of home

computer

or choolwork

s a

principal

ne,

iting

ata

from heCPS

that

3.4%

of

youth

ith

ome

omputers

se

them or chool

ssignments.

One

question

hatBeltran

t al.

(in

press)

id

not

nvestigate

as the

possible

differential

ffectfhome

echnology

ccess

y

SES or

gender.

imply ut

do

the

benefitsfhome

omputer

se accrue

qually

cross

emographic

roups?

sing

previous

terationf he

National

ongitudinal

outh

urvey

NLYS88),

nd

based,

this ime,n standardizedests, ttewellndBattle1999)foundhat, ithoutther

controls,

aving

home

omputer

ascorrelated

ith bout

12%

increase

n

both

reading

ndmath est

cores.When ES

andother

actors ere ontrolled

or,

aving

a home

omputer

aised

est cores

y

3%

to

5%

of he

verage

core.Most nterest-

ingly,

hey

lso tudied

he

differential

ffect

y

ES,

andfound

hat,

ontrolling

or

other

ossible

actors,

ow-SES

tudents

ho had

home

omputers

eceivedmuch

lessbenefitrom hem

n

raising

heir

est cores

handid

high-SES

tudents

ho

had

home

omputers.

able

9

shows he ffect

izeon math

nd

reading

cores

or

high-SES

tudents

1

standard

eviation

SD]

above he ES

average),verage-SES

students,

nd

ow-SES tudents

1

SD below

he ES

average.)

he numbers

n the

table ndicatehe hangesnreadingrmath coremeasurednstandardeviation

units ssociated ith SD

increase

n home

omputer

wnership

y

families

t that

SES

level.

hey

ndicate

hat

mong

amilies

ith

ome

omputers

nd

controlling

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 26: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 26/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

203

TABLE9

Size of Home

Computer

ffect

y

Socioeconomic tatus

SES)

Effectn Math

Scores Effect

n

Reading

cores

High

SES

2.77

1.55

Average

ES

1.69

1.08

Low SES 0.60 0.61

Source. ttewellnd Battle

1999).

for ll other ossibleariables,hildrenrom

igh-SES

amiliesompared ith ow-

SES

familieseceivemore han our nd a half imes hebenefit

n

increased ath

scores

nd more han wo nd a half imes hebenefit

n

increased

eading

cores.

Substantial

iscrepancies

urtherxist hen

omparing

ales ersus

emales,

hites

versus

ispanics,

ndWhites ersus

lacks;

n

eachcasetheformer

roup

chieved

greater

enefitn school est cores rom

aving

home

omputer

han idthe atter

group

when

ontrolling

or ther ariables.

In

sum,

ccording

o this

tudy,

ot

nly

were frican

mericans,

ispanics,

nd

low-SES tudents

ess

ikely

o have home

omputer,

ut venwhen

hey

idhave

a computernthis tudy,hey,s well sfemales,eceivedess cademic enefitrom

having

ne

compared

o

White,

igh-SES,

nd

male

tudents.

ttewell

nd

Battle's

(1999)

study

rovides

o data s to

why

his

may

e the ase.

They

peculate

hat t

may

e

due

to the

ocial

nvelope

Giacquinta,

auer, Levin,

993)

that urrounds

children's

omeuse of

computers

nd includes hekinds f

technology

esources

(e.g.,

ducational

oftware)

nd social esources

scaffolding,

odeling,

nd

support

from

arents)

hatwe have

iscussed

arlier.

hey

onclude hat

Home

computing

ay

generate

nother Sesame treet ffect

hereby

n innovationhatheld

great

promise

or

oorer

hildreno catch

p

educationally

ithmore ffluenthildrens

n

practice

ncreasing

the

ducational

ap

betweenffluentnd

poor,

etween

oys

nd

girls,

ndbetweenthnicminorities

nd

Whites,

ven

mong

hosewith ccess o the

echnology.

Attewell

Battle, 999,

p.

1)

Attewellnd Battle's

tudy

s basedon data that re some 20

years

ld,

and the

amount fhome

omputers

nd

the

ways hey

re

used

have

xpanded ramatically

during

his ime.

However,

recent

olloquium

aperby

three uke economists

reports

imilar esults rom

study

n

North

arolina,

ith ace

nd SES

strongly

mediating

he ffectn academic chievementfhome

omputer

nd

nternet

ccess

(Clotfelter,

add,

&

Vigdor,

008).

If

theDuke

findings

old

up

under

crutiny

f

peer

eview,

hey

re venmore

isheartening,

s the

tudy

ndicatesn overall

ega-

tive ffectnmath ndreadingest cores or ow-SES nd African mericantu-

dents

with

omputer

nd nternet

ccess,

resumably

ecause f

unproductive

ses

of

echnology

hat

may

ot

nly

rowd ut

productiveomputer

ime,

ut

may

lso

crowd

ut

offline

tudying

p.

37).

As with he

Philadelphia

ibrarytudy

iscussed

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 27: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 27/48

204 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

above,uch indingsupporthenotion hat he socialnvelope urroundingom-

puter

se s more

mportant

han

omputer

ccess

tself.

Academic utcomes

rom chool Use

Studies f cademic

utcomes romchool

seof

echnology

remixed

see,

.g.,

discussion

n

Kulik,

003).

Many

tudies rebased

n

very

mall

ample

izes nd

take

lace

n

schools r classrooms

here ndividualducators

re

highly

xpert

n

particular

ses f

echnology,

nd

thus hese tudies

may

otbe

generalizable

oother

contexts.

Largertudies,hough,uggesthat he drill ndpracticectivitiesavoredn

low-SES

chools end o be

ineffective,

hereas heusesof

technology

ispropor-

tionately

sed

n

high-SES

chools chieve

ositive

esults.

he best

vidence

f his

discrepancy

omes rom

Wenglinsky

2005),

who

analyzed

ata

from he

NAEP in

1996, 1998,

nd

2000.

Overall,

Wenglinsky

ound

consistently

egative

nterac-

tion etween

requency

f

echnology

se nd

test core utcomes

n

mathematics

at

both he ourthnd

ighth rade),

cience

at

both

he

ourthnd

eighth rade),

nd

reading

at

the

ighth

rade;

eeTable

10).

This

ppears

o

be because f he

negative

effectsfdrill nd

practice

ctivities

hat reused

predominately

ith ow-SES tu-

dents.

n

contrast,

hemore onstructivistducational

echnology

ctivities

ypically

usedwith igh-SEStudentsere orrelatedith igherest core utcomes.

For

example,

n

mathematics,

englinsky

ound hat he use

of simulations/

applications

n

eighth rade

nd

games

n the

fourth

rade

ositively

ffectedest

scores,

hereas rill nd

practice

t the

ighth rade

egatively

ffected

he cores.

In

science,

ames

fourth

rade),

ord

rocessing

fourth

rade),

imulations

fourth

and

eighth rade)

nd data

nalysis

fourth

rade)

ll

positively

ffectedest cores.

And

n

eighth rade

eading,

seof

omputers

or

writing

ctivities

ositively

ffected

test

cores,

utuse of

computers

or

rammar/punctuation

r for

eading

ctivities

(which

sually

nvolve rill

r

tutorials)

egatively

ffected

est cores.

n each f he

three

ubject

reas,

tudentES

wasthe

trongest

actor

redicting

hether

echnol-

ogy

sewould e

positively

r

negatively

ssociated ith est core utcomes.

Morerecent

arge-scale

tudies ffer

upport

or

Wenglinsky'sindings

s

to the

ineffectiveness

f

drill-and-practice

oftware.he U.S.

Department

f Education

recently

ontracted national

xperimental

tudy

o

analyze

he

effectsf educa-

tional oftware

se on

reading

nd

mathematics

est cores.

total f 16 software

products,

llofwhich nvolved

utorialnd

practice

ctivities,

ere

arefully

elected

from ecommendations

ade

by

xpert anels;

2

ofthe

16 have ither

eceivedr

beennominatedo

receivewards romrade

ssociations, edia,

arents,

nd

teach-

ers.The

comparative

tudy

nvolved

,424

students

aught

y

428 teachers

n

132

schools crosshe ountryDynarskital.,2007).Teachers ere andomlyssigned

to use

1 of 16 software

roductsesigned

or

eaching

eading

nd

math

treatment

group)

r not

control

roup)

nd students

ere

iven

re-

nd

posttestsuring

he

first

ear

fuse.

Overall,

here

as

poor

lassroom

mplementation

y

eachersf he

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 28: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 28/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

205

TABLE 10

Links Between

Technology

Use

and Test Scores

Subject:

Grade

Test Scores

Math:

Fourth

grade

Frequency

f school

computer

se

-.06

Use:

games

.03

Student ES

.59

Math:

Eighthgrade

Frequency

f school

computer

se

-.06

Use:

simulations/applications

.04

Use: drill

nd

practice

-.06

Student ES

.39

Science: Fourth

grade

Frequency

f school

computer

se

-.21

Use:

games

.07

Use: simulations

.08

Use: word

processing

.09

Student ES

.25

Science:

Eighth

grade

Frequency

f school

computer

se -.12

Use:

data

analysis

.04

Use: simulations

.07

Student ES

.54

Reading: Eighthgrade

Frequency

f school

computer

se

-.02

Use:

writing

.06

Use:

grammar/punctuation

-.05

Use:

reading

-.05

Source. englinsky2005).

software

as

is

apparently

ften he case with

tutorial

oftware;

or nother

xample,

see Llosa &

Slayton,

009)

and no

significant

ffect f the software

se

on

reading

or math est

cores

f

treatment

tudents

s

compared

with he

control tudents ven

when

fully

mplemented.

In

contrast,

more

constructivistses of

technology

re

often

ound

n

one-to-one

laptop

schools,

where

tudents'

aily

ccess

provides

he

opportunity

or

reater

mas-

tery

f

computers

nd

their

eployment

or

writing,

esearch,

ollaboration,

nalysis,

andpublication seeWarschauer,006). Studentsn laptopprogramsreamongthe

most

frequent

sers f

technology,

nd several ecent

tudies how a

positive

orrela-

tion between

aptop

program

articipation

nd

test

core outcomes

see,

e.g.,

Suhr,

Hernandez,Grimes,

&

Warschauer,

n

press;

exas

Centerfor

Educational

Research,

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 29: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 29/48

206 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

2008;additionaltudieseportingositiveest core ffects,houghither ithout

control

roups

rwith elf-selectionnto

aptop

roups,

nclude

ulek&

Demirtas,

2005; Silvernail,007;

Jeroski,

008).

Only

neof hese tudies

pecificallynvestigated

he ifferential

mpact

f

aptop

program

articipation

n test cores

y

ES

orrace.

hat

tudy

f

ixth,eventh,

nd

eighth raders

ound hat

eing

African

merican,

ispanic,

r ow-SES

negatively

affected

ow

much

est core enefitn

reading

nd

mathematicstudentseceived

from

articipating

n

the

aptop

rogram,

hus

upportingindings

rom ther

tud-

ies on thedifferentialcademic enefitsf

computer

ccess nd use.

t

should

e

noted, owever,

hat

nly

n

some ombinationsf

grade

evel,

ubject,

nd demo-

graphic roup id thedifferentialffectsise o the evel fstatisticalignificance

(Texas

enter

or

ducational

esearch,

008).

In

another

tudy

hat ooked t

test

score utcomes

n

both

high-

nd ow-SES

chool,

cores

or

aptop

tudents

ctu-

ally

ell n

both chools

uring

he

first

ear

fthe

aptop

rogram

mplementation

(compared

ith cores or

non-laptop

tudentslsewhere

n

the

district),

nd

then

bounced ack o

equivalency

ith

on-laptop

tudents

y

he ndof he econd

ear

(Grimes

Warschauer,

008).

The

first-year

ip

was

greater

n the ow-SES chool

compared

ith he

high-SES

chool consistent ith he

finding

iscussed

arlier

that

aptop

rograms

re

more

hallenging

n

ow-SES chools

but,

t east

n

this

study,he econd-yearest core eboundnthe ow-SES choolwas lsogreater.

The ack f

positive

esults

ay

e

possibly

xplained

y

poor mplementation

f

the

programs,

ikely

eightened

y

hefact hat eachers ere

ssigned

o use

a

pro-

gram

atherhan

mpowered

o choose ne

themselves,

s well s too

early

esting;

technology-enhanced

eform

s somewhat

isruptiveinvolving

ew

quipment,

ew

ways

f

teaching,

tc.)

nd thus

ositive

est core esults

ay

not

ppear

ntil he

second

r

ubsequent

ear

see,

.g.,

Grimes

Warschauer,

008).

Twenty-Firstentury

earning

kills

The

types

f

tandardizedducational

ests ited

n

the bove

ection over

nly

a smallfractionf theknowledge,kills,nd attitudesouth eed to learn o be

successful

n

todays

nformation

ociety

see,

.g.,

Gee,2003, 2004;

Jenkins,

009;

Levy

&

Murnane,

004,

2005).

This

uggests

he imitationsf

overly

mphasizing

basic

tandardsnd standardized

ests.

n

an

erawhere

verything

tandardized

an

be

outsourced

o another

ountry,

nd the

eal

remium

hus omes rom

reativity

and

nnovation

see,

.g.,

Levy

&

Murnane,

004),

t s

counterproductive

o focus

all our

ducational

ffortsn

teaching

o

basic tandards.

The broaderet of

knowledge,

kills,

nd

attitudeshat re needed

or uccess

in

todays

world re

typically

abeled

1st

century

kills.

number

f efforts

ave

beenmade odefine ndcategorizehesekillsfor nexample,eeNorth entral

Regional

ducational

aboratory

the

Metiri

Group,

003;

for n overviewf

international

fforts,

ee

Leu, Kinzer,

oiro,

&

Cammack,

004),

with he

most

widely

ecognized

hat

f

he

artnership

or

1st

Century

kills.

he

Partnership

a

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 30: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 30/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

207

FIGURE 3

Twenty-Firstentury

kills

Information, edia,

and

Technology

Skills

Information

iteracy

Media

Literacy

ICT

Literacy

Learning

nd Innovation

kills

Creativity

nd Innovation

Critical

hinking

nd Problem

Solving

Communication

nd

Collaboration

Flexibility

nd

Adaptability

Initiative nd Self-Direction

Life nd Career Skills

Social and Cross-Cultural kills

Productivity

nd

Accountability

Leadership

and

Responsibility

Source.

artnership

or

1st

Century

kills

2009).

broad oalition feducationalroups e.g.,National ducational ssociation,he

Association

or

upervision

ndCurriculum

evelopment,

heAmerican ssociation

of School

Librarians,

ducational

esting

ervice),

echnology

irms

e.g.,

Apple,

Adobe,Cisco,Dell, ntel,

Microsoft),

nd content/media

roviders

e.g.,

McGraw-

Hill,

Pearson,

cholastic,

ego,

Blackboard,

esame

Workshop)

describes

hreeets

of kills hat reviewed s built n a

foundation

fcore

ubjects

e.g.,English,

rts,

mathematics,

cience,

istory)

nd

nterdisciplinary

hemes

e.g.,global

wareness,

civic

iteracy)

These hreekills ets

in

nformation,edia,

nd

technology;

earn-

ing

nd

nnovation;

nd ife nd career reas

see

Figure

)

are

ntimately

ied

up

withophisticatedses fnewdigitalmedia.

Though

here

s

widespread

greement

n thevalueof these

ypes

f skills

n

today's

orld,

he

ack f

commonly

ccepted

metricsor

measuring

chievementf

these killsmakes t

difficult

o assess he xtento which

hey

re

being

mastered

n

diverse

ettings.

ase

study

ata

provide

ome

vidence,

hough

hey

o not llow

for

uantifiableomparison.

In

school

ettings,

iscussionf such kills

requently

rises

n

researchn one-

to-one

aptop

chools.

Many

chool

aptop

programs

ere stablished

pecifically

with uch kills

n

mind,

nd substantive

ody

f

research

uggests

hat

well-imple-

mented

aptop

rograms

acilitate

cquisition

f

uch

kills.n

Maine,

or

xample,

where heresa statewide iddle chool ne-to-onerogram, ore han ne-third

of

students

eport

sing aptops

rom nce a week o

several imes

aily

o

gather

datafrom

multiple

ources o solve

roblems,

ather

ata boutreal-life

roblems,

evaluate

nformationbtained n the

nternet,

riticallynalyze

ata r

graphs,

olve

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 31: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 31/48

208 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

complex roblemsy nalyzingndevaluatingnformation,xplain roblem-solving

processes

nd

thinking,

nd

visually

epresent

r

investigateoncepts

Silvernail,

2007).

Interviewsith

eachers,tudents,

nd

parents;

bservationsf

classrooms;

and

analysis

f student ork

uggest

hat hese

ind f activitiesre

yielding

osi-

tive esults or

cquisition

f

2 1

t

century

earning

kills n

Maine and

elsewhere

(Warschauer,

006).

There s nsufficient

ata

o

assess

ny

differential

earning

f21st

entury

kills

n

schools

y

ace, ES,

or

gender,

ut he nformationiscussedbove

bout

tratifiedses

of

educational

echnology

s worrisomen this

egard.

he

types

f

drill nd

practice

programs

hat re

disproportionately

sed

with

ow-SES tudentsre

generallyeared

narrowly

n

acquisition

f cademicontentrbasic

iteracy

nd

numeracy

kills,o t

is unrealistico

assume hat

hey

ould ontributeuch o

broader1st

entury

kill

development.

n

contrast,

he

imulationsnd

applications

sed

disproportionatelyy

high-SES

tudents

re ften

eployed

ith

recisely

hose kill ets n

mind.

In

addition,

he

general

cademic limate

n

schools

ubstantially

hapes

how

media re

used,

with

echnologyerving

o

amplify

chools' bilities

o achieve heir

preexistingoals

atherhan o transformhe

oals

hemselves

see,

.g.,

Warschauer,

1999,

000).

Therefore,

chools hat re

lready

ocused

n

thekinds f

nformation

literacy,

ritical

hinking,

nd self-directionssociated ith 1st

century

earning

skillswillfindnewmedia powerful ayto achieve hese,whereaschools hat

do nothave uch

focus

willnot

ikely

uddenly

iscovert

through

diffusionf

computers.

arschauers

2006, 2007b)

comparativetudy

f

nformation

iteracy

practices

n

diverse

chools

n

Maine

provides

stark

xample

f this.

n

a

high-

SES suburbanchool

grades

-8),

sophisticated

nformation

iteracy

ractices

re

begun

n the

ifth

rade,

year

efore

tudents

eceive

heir

aptops.

tudentsttend

library

orkshops

here

hey

earn o access

iverseources f

nformation,

riti-

cally

valuate

hem,

nd

integrate

he

nformation

ppropriately

nto

variety

f

products.hey

re ater

aught

o

use

computers

o

access nformationrom

nline

referenceorks

nd

primary

ource ocuments.hese kills re

ventually

ut

o use

inchallengingnterdisciplinaryesearchrojects.n contrast,na low-SES chool

in

an

impoverished

ural

ommunity,

o

special

raining

n

information

iteracy

s

provided.

hough

he chool

ubscribes

o the ame

onlinedatabase f reference

works

nd

primary

ources,

either

tudents

or

teachersxhibit

ny

warenessf

it. Most

typically,

tudents

rab

hefirstource hat omes

p

in

a

Google

earch,

without uch

ritical

hought,

nd everalf he chools'

eachers

xpect

ittlemore.

Studentsre

bserved

pending

ubstantialime

utting

nd

pastingmages

ndtexts

into

ow-levelowerPoint

resentations.

he

study

s carefulo

point

utthat hese

kinds f

practices

renot

found t

all

ow-SES

chools,

resenting

counterexample

withmore

ositive ractices

nd

results.

owever,

asedon

analysis

f

data

from

1

elementary

nd

secondary

choolsnCaliforniandMaine, he

tudy

oncluded

that teachers

n

high-income

ommunities

ere

more

ikely

o

expect

nd

promote

critical

nquiry

nd

information

iteracy

hanwere

eachers

n

low-incomereas

(Warschauer,

007b,

p.

2537).

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 32: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 32/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

209

Out-of-Schoolevelopmentf21stCenturykills

There s ittle oubt hat ntensivese

of

digital

media

n

out-of-schoolnviron-

ments ancontribute

o the

evelopment

f21st

entury

earning

kills. s at

chool,

access oanduseofnewmedia re

necessary

ut nsufficientonditionsor he evel-

opment

f such kills. ut at east ome

youth,

uch s those hat to

and

her ol-

leagues

ound re

geeking

ut

n

nterest-driven

ctivities,

re

undoubtedly

aster-

ing

ophisticated

killsn each f he hreereas

elineated

n

Figure

.

Consider he

example

f

Max,

14-year-old

oy

who

hopes

obe a

director

r

filmmaker,

ndthus

decides o set

up

a

video-productionompany.

ax

and hisfriend

roduce

umor-

ous nddramaticideoshatheyost nYouTube,t east neofwhich asreceived

2

million iews nd more han

,000

text ommentsnd has been ired n ABC's

Good

Morning

merica. axalso

regularly

eceivesanmail

nd

has

received

fferso

purchase

ome fhisvideos or nline dvertisements.ho

would oubt

hatMax's

use of

digital

mediahas enhanced he

development

fhis media

iteracy,

reativity

and

nnovation,

ommunicationnd

collaboration,

nd nitiativend elf-direction?

One controversial

rea fhome

media se

s

game laying,

ith

ome oncerned

that tdivertsime rommore

roductiveursuits,

ndothers

rguing

hat

uch

lay

is

productive

or

earning

ew skills.

ne

study

ttempted

o assess heattitudes

developed

hroughame

play

ia a

survey

f

2,500 Americans,

rincipally

usiness

professionals,ho included ongamers, oderate amers,nd frequentamers

(Beck

&

Wade,

004).

The

survey

ethodologyimply

hows

orrelationsithout

the

power

o demonstrate

ausation;

evertheless,

he

findings

eveal ome nterest-

ing

differences.

mong

he

young

eople

urveyed,

requent

amers

remore

ikely

than

nongamers

o

value

isk

aking,

ay

for

erformance,

nd

connecting

ith he

right

eople

o

get hings

one;

hey

re lsomore

ikely

o

value he ate f he

rga-

nization

hey

ork or

see

Table

11).

Therehas

ong

been concern hat

irls

re not

gaining

he ame

knowledge,

skills,

nd attitudesbout

echnology

hat

oys

re,

because f differentialsesof

new media t home

see, .g.,

AAUW

Educational

oundation,000).

The most

recent esearch

uggests

hat

oys

nd

girls

pend

bout he ame ime n

computers

at

home,

ut that

oys

pend

ubstantially

ore ime han

girls laying

omputer

games

Roberts

t

al.,

2005).

Boysmay

lso be

engaged

more

requently

n

certain

types

f

geeking

ut ctivities

escribed

y

to et

al.

2008)

such s media

roduc-

tion,

hough irls

ppear

o be more

ngaged

n

other

ypes

f

geeking

ut,

uch s

those

nvolving

reative

riting

M.

Ito,

personal

ommunication).

here re still

substantialifferences

t

the

far nd of the

pipeline,

oth

by

gender

nd

race,

s

measured

y

numbersf

people

whoenter dvanced

tudy

nd careers

n

computer

science,

ngineering,

nd related

ields,

o

be

discussed

elow.

Finally, e note hat lassesnd nformalnstructiontcomputer edia enters

havebeen hown o

be

a

particularly

ffective

ay

of

developing

outh's

1stcen-

tury

earning

kills.

ull and Katz

2006),

for

xample,

escribehe

aseof

Darà,

13-year-old

irl

f

Guatemalan

eritage

ho

ttendedn after-school

edia

rogram

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 33: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 33/48

210

Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

TABLE 11

Percentage

f

YoungNongamers,

oderate

Gamers,

and

Frequent

amers

Who

Agree

With

Statements

Moderate

Frequent

Nongamers

Gamers

Gamers

The

best

ewardsome

o those

hat

45.7

50.1

60.7

take

isks

Taking

measurediskss thebest

52.9

54.6

59.7

way

o

get

head

I preferay ndbonuses ased n 34.6 36.5 47.1

actual

erformance

ather

han

set

alary

The best

way

o

get

hings

one

s to

72.1

70.6

77.5

connect ith

he

ight

eople

I

really

are

bout he ate f

the

39.4

41.0

44.0

organization

work or

Source. eck

ndWade

2004).

called

USTY

(Digital

Underground

torytelling

or

outh).

heir

rticle,

ased n

field

otes fDaras

participation

t

the enter

ndat school ver

Vi

years

nd

tory

scripts

nd

digital

tories

reated

y

Darà

during

his

ame ime

eriod,

ocuments

the

hanges

hat arà

experienced

hrough

articipation

t the

enter,

oth n

terms

of

media kills

masterednd

n

her

ense f elf nd

relationship

o the

world. s the

authors

xplain,

Not

only

idboth

Darà and

Randy

a

young

dult t the

chool]

masterhe

echnological

kills

ecessary

to create

igital

tories,

ut

they

lso

paid

ncreasingly

lose

ttention

o

thetechnical

spects

f an-

guage to ts ound, ogenre,o tspoetic imensions,ndtotextualmagessmessagesf notherort.

And

they

masterfully

ombined

mage,

ound,

nd text nto

powerful

nd

personally

eaningful

ulti-

media

arrativeshat lso

learly

nd

movingly

poke

o

others. hese thers

ncluded

heir

USTY

peers

and

friendss well s

a

larger

ocial

world hat

might

ot therwiseave

istenedowhat

hey

adto

say;

thefresh ature f

the

multimodality

nd multimediatself

ppeared

o

end heirdeasboth

urrency

and

urgency,p.

70)

As a

resultf hese

ew

kills,

arà

found

ays

o

reposition

erself

hroughigital

storytelling

oth

n

relationo the

people

he

oved nd

admired,

nd n

relation

o

institutions,

ike chool.

he

ccomplished

his not

nly

hrough

er

igital

tories

but lso

through

er social

elationships

ith

USTY

peers,

mentors,

nd

facilita-

torswhohelped uildDarasperceptionfherselfs anexpertigitaltorytellernd

a

skilled riter

ossessing

echnological

avvy

ho ould ssist er

riends

n

creating

digital

tories. n the

nd,

young irl

who

had

a

meek nd discontentedchool

identity

hus ecame

confidentuthornd ctive

ommunity

articipantp.

61).

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 34: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 34/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

211

This sonly neperson,noneprogram,ut t s illustrativefthe hangeshat

youth

an

experience

hen

hey

master

owerful

ymbolicystems

o

express

hem-

selves n issues f

high

ersonal

nd social elevance

see,

.g.,

to et

al.,

2008;

Kafai

et

l.,

2009).

t also

helps

lluminate

hat

gency

is-à-visew

media

ntails,

nd

why

community

entersanbe such

mportant

ites

n

the

evelopment

f uch

gency.

s

discussed

y

Baummannd

Briggs

1990,

nd

cited

n

Hull

&

Katz,

006),

the con-

structionnd

assumption

f

uthority

p.

77)

with

se

oftexts ests n four actors:

access,

egitimacy,

ompetence,

ndvalue.

ommunity

edia

entersan

provide

a)

access

o the

equisiteechnology

nd culturalrtifactsor

roduction

fmultimodal

texts;

b)

legitimization

f earners'

ntry

nto heworld f newmedia

hrough

he

support

f a

community;

c) themeans o

acquire

nowledge

nd

competence

ith

newmedia

hrough

nstruction,

pprenticeship,

nd

practice;

nd

d)

the

valuing

f

youths

multimodal

roducts

y

mentors,

eers,

nd

community

embersn

everyday

interactionnd

n

special isplays

r

performances.

lthough

ome

youth

re bleto

find

his

ccess,

egitimacy,

ompetence,

nd value

hrough

nline

ctivity

n

home

environments,

ot llwill e able

o,

nd

ommunity

entershus

rovidepotentially

rich lternativeenue or he

evelopment

f

uthority

hrough

edia se nd

mastery.

FROM ACCESS TO OUTCOMES:

THE COMPUTER SCIENCE PIPELINE

Although,

or he

purposes

fthis road

eview,

e

have

divided

ccess, se,

nd

outcomesnto hree

ections,

hey

re,

f

course,

losely

ntertwined.

o

illustrate

this nterconnection

e

take,

s

an

example,

he

omputer

cience

ipeline,

hat

s,

he

long-term

rocess

hrough

hich hildrenearn

bout

omputer

cience nd

pursue

advanced

tudy

nd

careers

n

the ield.

A

fascinating

xaminationf this

ipeline

omes rom heLos

Angeles

nified

School

District,

here researcheam t UCLA carriedut n

ethnographic

tudy

f

computer

ciencenstructiont three os

Angeles

rea

high

chools rombout 00

1

to

2004

Goode,

strella,

Margolis,

006;

Margolis

t

l.,

2008).

The sitesncluded

a 98%Latino chool nEastLos

Angeles, magnet

cience choolna

mostly

hite

neighborhood

utwith

4%

African merican

tudents,

nd

school n the

wealthy

hillsnear hePacific cean with mix fWhite

43%),

African merican

24%),

Latino

24%),

and AsianAmerican

tudents

8%).

Many

f theAfrican merican

andLatino

tudents

t the

wo

atter

chools raveled

ong

istances

y

bus o

attend.

Atthe irstwo

chools,

hichwere

redominately

atino ndAfrican

merican,

noAdvanced lacement

AP)

classes

n

computer

cience ere

ffered.

he

few om-

puting

ourses hatwere ffered

ocused

rincipally

n

computer

iteracy

nd basic

applications.

single

xception

as

programming

lass

t

the

mostly

atino chool

taughty n nstructorithout ormalrainingnthe ubject.he researchersoted

that

ssignments

ocused

n narrow

nput-outputroblems

ndtrivia

ames,

nd

that

none . .

features

he

roblem

olving

nd

cientific

easoning

hat s the oundational

knowledge

f

omputer

cience

Margolis

t

al.,2008,

p.

32).

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 35: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 35/48

212

Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

Incontrast,he choolnthewealthyeighborhoodad an extensiveomputer

curriculum,

eading p

to

AP

Computer

cience.

Nevertheless,

he

dvanced

om-

puter

lasses,

nd

especially

heAP

class,

were

hemselves

ighlyegregated,

ith

the

majority

f tudents

n

themWhitemales. he

researchers

oted

hat twas

pre-

dominately

hitemaleswho

had

the

xtensive

xperience

ith

omputers

t home

that

ave

hem

he onfidenceo take hese lective

ourses,

nowing

hat

hey

ould

succeed nd

getgood

grades

n

them.

hese

White

male

youth

ften

wnedmore

than ne

computer,

ad thefinancialesourceso

buy

he atest

ardwarend soft-

ware,

nd had extensiveome

xperience

n

programming

nd

gaming,

upported

by

networkffriends

nd

by

heir

arents, any

f

whomworked

n

technologyindustries.hese tudents ere ble to

play

with heirwn

computers,

ake hem

apart, ut

hem ack

ogether,

ry

utdifferent

oftware,

nd

earn

rom riends ho

were

oing

he

ame.

Many

f themwere

fully

apable

notof

not

only

rouble-

shooting

heir

omputers

ut

also

building omputers

from cratch'

(Margolis

t

al.,2008,

p.

80).

Few

minoritiesr femalest the chool

had

had

such xtensive

xperience

ith

computers

t home nd

many

were eluctanto take

hallengingomputer

cience

electiveourseshat ould

bring

own

heir

rade-pointverage

nd thus arm heir

chancest

college

dmission.

he

handful

f

femalesnd

minority

tudents ho ook

advancedomputercienceoursesften eltntimidatednclasswhenWhitemale

techies

Margolis

t

al.,

p.

83)

dominatediscussionsndmade un f hework f

other tudents.s a

result,

ery

ew emalesr minoritiest

any

f hree

chools

ot

the

ypes

f

xperiences

hatwould ead

them

o careers

n

computer

cience.

These

atterns

re ommon

eyond

hese hreechools.

n

California,

or

xample,

though

frican mericans

nd

Latinos

made

up

49%

of

the chool

opulation

n

2004,

hey epresentednly

%

of hose

aking

he

AP

computer

cience xamination

that

ear.

emales,

ho

imilarly

ade

up

49%

oftheCaliforniachool

opulation,

representednly

8%

of hose

aking

he xam

Margolis

t

l.,

2008).

High chieving

high

chool emalesremuch ess

ikely

o have

omputer

rogramming

xperience

than rehigh chievingigh choolmalesBarron,004).

Not

surprisingly,

omen

nd

minoritiesre

underrepresented

n

college

tudy

f

computer

cience nd

n

careers

n

the ield. ndfor

women,

he ituations

steadily

worsening

ver ime.

n

1985,

womenmade

up

49%

of U.S. students

eceiving

associate

egrees

n

computer

cience nd

37%

of hose

eceiving

achelor's

egrees.

By

2005,

the

ercentages

ad

dropped

o

30%

of ssociate

egrees

nd

only

2%

of

bachelors

egrees

National

cience

oundation,008;

see

Figure

).

As for

ace/ethnicity,

he

precipitous

all ff s not o much ver

ime,

utrather

according

o

degree

evel.African

mericans

eceived

4.4%

of their ssociates

degrees

n

computer

cience,

hus

eflectingstrong

nterest

mong

hat

opulationin

pursuing

his ield. uttheywere nly bleto receive1 6% of thebachelor

degrees,

.7%

of themasters

egrees,

nd

2.6%

of thedoctoral

egrees

National

Science

oundation,009;

seeTable

12).

For

Latinos,

henumbersre venworse.

Thus Blacks nd

Latinos,

ho made

up

a total f more han

quarter

f

the

U.S.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 36: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 36/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak:

ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

213

FIGURE 4

Bachelor's nd

Associate's

egrees

Awarded

n

Computer

ciences,

y

Gender:

985-2005

Source. ational cience oundation

2008).

population

n

2006,

receivedombined

ust

3.8%

of the

doctoral

egrees

warded

in

computer

cience.

DISCUSSION: OVERCOMING

THE

NEW

DIVIDE

Nearly

ll

youth

ccess

omputers

nd

the nternetomewhere.

hus,

whatwas

consideredhe

riginal igital

ivide

s

argely

esolved,

t east

n

the

United

tates.

Today

he

digital

ivide esides

n

differential

bility

o use newmedia o

critically

evaluate

nformation,

nalyze,

nd

interpret

ata,

attack

omplex roblems,

est

innovativeolutions, anagemultifacetedrojects,ollaborate ith thersnknowl-

edge

production,

nd communicate

ffectively

o diverse

udiences

in

essence,

o

carry

ut thekinds f

expert

hinking

nd

complex

ommunicationhat re t the

heart f henew

conomy

Levy

Murnane,

004).

Whereas hefirst

igital

ivide ouldbe solved

imply y

providing

computer

and n nternet

onnection,

his

igital

ivide

resents

greater

hallenge.

he

above

review

uggests

ive

teps

hatwe can take o

help

meet his

hallenge,

elated

o

individual

ccess,

urriculumnd

nstruction,

tandardized

ssessment,

ut-of-school

media

rograms,

nd research.

Ensuring egular

nd

Flexible

Access

First,

e need o

provide

chool-aged

outh

with

ndividualccess o

computers

with

roadband

nternetonnections.

hereas

weekly

rip

o a school

omputer

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 37: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 37/48

214

Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

Table 12

Degrees

Received

y

U.S. Citizens

nd Permanent

esidents

in

Computer

cience

by

Race/Ethnicity

n

2006

Percentage

Whites

Blacks

Latinos Asian

U.S.

population

ge

18-24

years

61.4 14.2

17.5 4.3

Associate

degrees

63.1

14.4

9.8

5.0

Bachelor

degrees

60.7

11.6

7.2

11.0

Masterdegrees 55.0 7.7 4.8 18.4

Doctoral

egrees

70.3

2.6

1.2

21.8

Source.

ational cience oundation

2009).

lab will

ufficeor

earning

asic

computeriteracy

r for

doing

reading

r math

drills,

egular

ndflexible

ccess

s

required

o facilitatehe

evelopment

f

dvanced

knowledge

roduction

kills

sing

echnology

and,

s this

eview as

hown,

uch

regular,

lexibleccess s far rom

eing

chieved

ymany

f

odays

outh,

specially

thosewho

re

lready

ost t risk or

ailuret school.

here re

variety

f

ways

o

increasendividualccess o

computers,

uch s

by

providing

ax reditsofamilies

who

buy

omputers

or chool

hildrent home.

However,

he

implest

nd most

direct

ay

s

through

ne-to-one

aptop

rograms

t school.

When uch

programs

also llow

tudentso

bring

aptops

ack

ndforth rom

ome,

he

programs

imul-

taneously

ddress

roblems

elated

o

school

ccess,

ome

ccess,

nd school-

ome

connections.

Until

now,

he

arge

osts nvolved for

hardware,nsurance,oftware,

echni-

cal

support,

nternet

onnections,

nd

professionalevelopment

made uch

pro-

grams

ery

ifficulto

mplement

or

inancially

trapped

chool

istricts.

owever,

the ontinuingall f aptop rices with ome mall netbook omputerslready

dropping

ear

200

will

bring

ownhardwarend nsurance

rices onsiderably,

and

the

ightweight

f netbooks ill

ncreaseheir

ortability

othfrom ome o

school

ndwithinhe chool

nvironment.t he ame

ime,

he

rowth

ffree

pen

source oftware

nd educationalesourcesan

facilitateheuseof ess

powerful

nd

inexpensive

etbooks,

hile lso

substantially

educing

hecosts f

both oftware

and technical

upport.

inally,

he

generational

hift f

teachers,

ith

more

eople

now

entering

eaching

areers

ith ubstantial

omputing

xperience,

an result

n

improved

edagogical

se of

computers

nd

thus urther

mprove

he ost-benefit

ratio.

A crucialdvantagefone-to-oneaptop rogramssthat hey otentiallyllow

all

studentsowork n

technology-based

esearch

ssignments

nd

projects

t

home,

thus

elping

xtend

earning

ime or ll

beyond

he

30-hour

chool

week,

major

goal

for

ducational

mprovement

Time,

Learning,

nd Afterschool

ask

Force,

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 38: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 38/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

215

2007).However,hiswillbe difficulto achievef tudentsackbroadbandnternet

access thome.

A

second

olicymplication

hen s the

need

or

niversalroadband.

Schooldistricts

nd educational

olicymakers

an consider number fmodels or

expanding

ome roadband

ccess,

rom

municipal

ireless

lans

for

ublic

ccess)

to school istrict-

rivate roviderartnerships

for

ubsidizedndividual ousehold

access).

Teaching

the

Word and

the

Vfä>rld

Second,

s shown

hroughout

his

eview,

ccess lonewill

not vercome

nequity

inuse and outcomes. criticaltep owardhat ndwillbetransformingeaching

and

earning

n

schools.

mong

chool

aptop

rograms,

or

xample,

hemost uc-

cessful

n

achieving

ositive

utcomes or ll

students

ave lear

nd

well-designed

learning

nd

iteracy

bjectives;

hey

re ducationaleform

rogramsnvolving

ap-

tops,

atherhan

echnologyrogramser

e

see

discussion

n

Warschauer,

006).

Whether

n

laptop

rograms

r other nstructional

nvironments,

chools

eed

to move

way

rom narrowocus n

teaching

hebasics o a broader

pproach

hat

emphasizes

oth asic nd 21st

entury

kills,

ith he atter

ncluding

he

kinds

f

expert hinking

nd

complex

ommunicationoted

yLevy

nd Murnane

2004).

Fortunately,

xcellent odels xist n how o

promote

hese

roader

kill ets n

tech-

nology-intensivelassrooms,hetherngenerale.g.,Kozma, 003; Means, enuel,

&

Padilla, 001; Sandholtz,

ingstaff,

Dwyer,

997;

Wenglinsky,

005)

or

in

particular

ays

hat

ddress

he

needs

f

Englishanguage

earnersnd at-risktu-

dents

e.g.,

Brown, ummins,

Sayers,

007; Cummins,008; Warschauer,006,

2007a;Warschauer,rant,

el

Real,

&

Rousseau,

004).

Studies

f

highly

uccessfulnstruction

f

t-riskearners

n

technology-intensive

environmentsave

ed

the first

uthor

f this

hapter

o summarizeuch a dual

approach

n basic

nd dvanced

kills s

teaching

hewordndtheworld

Warschauer,

2006,

2007a).

These

tudies evealed

ow

nternet-connected

omputers

an

become

powerful

ools or

elping

earners

nderstandnd

manipulate

ext,

hat

s,

to

grasptheword.With

ppropriate

nstructional

pproaches,

mages

nd video an scaffold

texts

nd

provide

lues or

eveloping

eaders.

ypertext

nnotations

an

offerur-

ther

caffolding

nd

encourage

ppropriate

eading trategies.raphic

rganizing

softwarean

help

tudents

nalyze

exts r

plan

heir wn

writing. ord-processing

software

llows tudents o achieve more terative

riting

rocess.

omputer-

mediated lassroom

iscussion

rovides

tudents

way

o

communicate

n

written

form,

hus

roviding

urther

pportunities

or earnerso notice

thers' rittenan-

guage

nd

hone heir wn

writing.

The same

tudies ave hown

nternet-connected

omputers

o be a

potent

ool

for ringinghewiderworldnto he lassroomnd thus or othmotivatingnd

contextualizing

iteracy

ractices.

tudentsanusethe nterneto

discoveruthentic

reading

materialn almost

ny

opic

nd be

introduced

o

up-to-date

nformation

and

perspectives

rom

eoples

nd culturescross he

globe.

They

can

gather

he

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 39: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 39/48

216 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

resourceseededocriticallyonsider iverseocial ssuesonfrontingheir ommu-

nity,

ation,

r

world.

tudentsan then

evelop

nd

publish igh-qualityroducts

about hesessues hat anbe shared ith nterlocutors

r he

ublic,

hether

n

their

community

r

nternationally.

nd,

hrough

hese

roducts,

tudents

an not

only

learn bout he

world,

ut analso

eave heirmark n t.

One

potent xample

f

eaching

oth

he

word

ndtheworld s

Project

resa

the

Strawberry

roject),

arriedut

mong

panish

ilingual

lementary

chool tudents

in

California

Warschauer,

007a,

Warschauer

Ware,

008).

Through

onduct-

ing

echnology-enhanced

esearchn the onditions

ffarm orkersn

neighboring

strawberry

ields,

nd

ssessing

nd

cting

n their

indings

n

ight

f tate

nd

global

contexts,atino hildrennvolvedntheproject orked owardmeetingasic tan-

dards

while

lexing

heir ritical

hinking

nd

communicationkills.

nfortunately,

though,

hen ne ofthemain eachersnvolved

ecame n

administrator,

he

was

unsuccessful

n

getting

ther eacherso continue

roject

resa ue to their ears

that uch

heme-based

rojects

oulddistract

rom heir ffortso raise est cores

(Warschauer

Ware,

008).

Measuring

What

We Value

As

seen

from he bove

xample,

hemain

mpediment

o

improvingeaching

with echnologyaynotbe ack f deas n how o reformurriculumnd nstruc-

tion,

utratherack f ncentiveo do

so,

because f

estingegimes

hat ewardhe

achievementf

only

basic nd

not

advanced

kills. s

Levy

nd Murnane

2005)

explain,

Perhaps

he

biggest

otential

bstacle

o

ncreasing

tudents'

astery

f

Expert hinking

nd

Complex

Communicationre

mandatory

tate ests

assessments)

hat

mphasize

ecall f facts atherhan hese

criticalkills.Most tates

ow

require

ll tudentso

complete

andatory

ssessmentss

part

f

programs

to increase ducational

ccountability.

n

many

tates,

hese ssessmentsave been

designed

oward

minimizing

osts

while

roducing

umericalcores hat

anbe

compared

cross istricts

r over ime.

n

a

subject

ike

history,multiple-choice

est s

more

ikely

o meet hese riteria

han n

essay

eeded

o

demonstrateomplex ommunication.n an area ikemath,multiple-choiceest s much ess xpensive

to

grade

han n

examwith

pen-endedesponses

hat

sks tudentso describe

heir

hought

rocesses

and to demonstratehe nature

f their

xpert

hinking.

n the drive or ducational

ccountability,

teachersave

trong

ncentiveso

teach o the est nd

o it s

particularly

mportant

hatwe

get

he ests

right,

p.

23)

If

this s the

ase,

how then an we

begin

measuring

hatwe value ather

han

simply

valuing

hat

we measure

Hersh,

006)?

The answer

s

through

n

ncrease

in

performance

ssessment,

ncluding

oth he

highly

nterpretive

inds

erformed

by

eacherst

the lass r chool evel

e.g.,

ortfolio

ssessment)

ndthe

more tan-

dardized inds hatwill ntail evelopmentf new arge-scaleests. n increasen

theuse of classroom

erformance

ssessmentill

necessitate

roviding

eachers ith

the

training,

esources,

dministrative

upport,

nd

incentives

o reorientheir

instructionnd

valuationf tudentso

focus n

the

evelopment

f

xpert

hinking.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 40: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 40/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak:

ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

217

An ncreasentheuseof tandardizederformancessessmentill equirehe unding

and

commitmento

develop

nd

deploy

ew ests

hatmore

ccurately

easurehe

kind f kills

eeded

or

he21st

century.

nd

assessmentsf

both

ypes

ill

need

to

nvolve se of

digital

media

ecause

aper-based

xaminations

annot

ccurately

capture

he

earning

hat

ccurs

hrough

seof

digital

media

see

study y

Russell

&

Piati, 002,

nalysis

f he

ssue

y

ilvernail,

005,

nd

discussionf

modal

alid-

ity

y

Luke,

009).

A

number f

recent

evelopments

elated

o

assessing

1st

century

kills re

worth

oting.

irst,

ducational

esting

ervice

2009)

has

developed

n

informa-

tion

nd

communication

echnologyiteracy

est

alled

Skills,

hich

laims o

assess

critical

hinking

nthe

digital

nvironment

para

). Second, heCouncil orAid

to

Education

2009),

a

nonprofit

ffshootf

Rand

Corporation,

as

developed

College

ndWork

Readiness

ssessment

hat

equires

pen-ended

esponses

o

con-

structedasks o

purportedly

easure

an

ntegrated

et f

critical

hinking,

nalytic

reasoning,

roblem

olving,

nd written

ommunication

kills

Council

or

Aid to

Education, 009,

fourth

aragraph).

hird,

he

National

Assessment

overning

Board

2008),

which

ets

olicy

or

he

NAEP,

as

ontractedith

WestEd o

recom-

mend heframework

nd test

pecifications

or

Technologicaliteracy

ssessment

thatwill

ombine

with he

urrent

ests f

reading,

riting,

athematics,

nd

sci-

encetobecome art ftheNation's eport ardbeginningn2012. Fourth,he

Programme

or

nternational

tudent

Assessment

as

developed

n

Electronic

Reading

ssessments

part

f ts

new

battery

f

tests

Haldane,

009).

And,

fifth,

Cisco,

ntel,

nd

Microsoftave

recently

unded team

f

researchersn

Australia,

the

United

tates,

nd

Hungary

o

develop

nd

pilot

CT-based ssessments

f21st

century

kills

Kozma,

009).

Though

one

f hese

nitiatives

ave

esulted

n

replacement

or

he

tate-specific

tests

hat

arry

o

much

weight

nder heNo

Child

Left

ehind

Act,

hey

re

wel-

come

fforts

oward

eveloping

oth

he

ntellectual

nd

policy

rameworkor

new

orientation

oward

tandardized

ssessment.

ithout

eform

f

ssessment,

eachers

andadministratorsnpublic chools andespeciallyn ow-SES chools hat re o

frequently

ubject

o

test

core

ressure

are

unlikely

o

focus n

the

broad

ommu-

nication

nd

thinking

kills

equired

or

uccess

n

todays

world.

Expanding

ut-of-School

edia

Learning

Improved

ndmore

qual

resources,

nstruction,

nd

ssessmentn

school

annot

in

andof

hemselves

ompletely

vercome

nequal

mounts f

physical,

uman,

nd

social

apital

n

youths'

ut-of-school

nvironments.

his s

especially

o

in

relation-

ship

o

earning

f

nd with

echnology,

o

much f

which

ccurs

utside f

chool

time.Providing ore qualhome ccess o individualomputersndbroadband

Internet,

s

discussed

bove,

will

be one

mportant

tep

owardhis

nd.Yet

without

enhancing

ocial

upport

or

earning

o

use these

esources,

hemere

rovision

f

equipment

ould

mplify

he

Sesame

treet

ffect

iscussedarlier.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 41: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 41/48

218

Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

Initial videncendicateshatommunityechnologyentersndyouthmedia ro-

grams

an

provide

dvanced

echnology

earning

xperiences

or

outh.

n

particular,

such

enters

nd

programs

an

help

ow-income

outh

ransition

rom

eing

assive

consumersf

media omore

ctivend ritical

roducers

f

digital

ontent.

ey

othis

transitions the

ocial

upport

ound

n

such

enters,

here

ow-SES

outh

an

gain

access o

the inds f

mentors,

xemplars,eers

ith

ommon

nterests,

nd

pro-media

production

orms

hat

many

igh-SES

outh

xperience

n

their

ome

nvironments.

Yet

nly

small

ractionf

youth

ttendshese

rograms.

he

expansion

f

unding

or

youth

media

rograms

nd the

nhanced

ntegration

f

technology

nto xtantfter-

school

rograms

hould hus e

on the

genda

f

ducational

olicymakers.

Unfortunately,

he urrentconomic limate

may

ead tate r

private

linderso

turn

way

rom

inancing

outh

media enters. ith

home ccess o

computers

nd

the nternet

lowly

ut

teadily

ncreasing,olicymakersay

lsobelieve

hat

outh

will

earnwhatever

hey

eed to know

bout

technology

n

home

environments,

under he

myth

hat ll

youth

re

digital

atives

see

Prensky,

001)

whocan

effort-

lessly

bsorb

dvancedmedia kills n their wn

or from

riends,

hus

making

om-

munity

enters edundant. e

hope

that his

eview as

demonstratedhe

naïveté

of

uchbeliefs

nd

the

necessity

f

providing

nhancedocial

upport,

uch s that

offered

n

youth

media

rograms,

fwe are

o

seriously

ackle

nequity

n

use

of

ech-

nologyndthe utcomesssociated ith uchuse.

Researchingechnology

nd

Equity

Finally,

hat

ind

f

researchs

required

o ncreaseur

understanding

f echnol-

ogy

nd

equity?

t

a national

evel,

he

most

horough

ources

f

tatisticalata

on

computer

nd

nternetccess ndusehave

ome rom he

ederal

overnment,

ither

viathe

Current

opulation

urveys

f heU.S.

CensusBureau r from he

National

Center

or ducation tatistics

fthe nstitutef

Education ciences

IES).

Yet he

gathering

f dataon

this

opic

by

both he

CensusBureau nd IES

slowed own

during

he

Bush

dministration,

hich

ownplayed

he

mportance

f he

ssue, nd,

as ofthis

writing,

as

yet

o be resumed

y

theObamaadministration,hich as

hadother

ressing

conomicmatters

o address.

resumption

f

regular

ederalata

gathering

n this

ssue s vital.

Second,

cholars

ddressing

he

relationship

f

technology

nd

earning

eed o

continueo

nclude ssues

f

equity,

oth

n

quantitative

nd

qualitative

tudies.

n

quantitative

esearch,

hemost

widely

ited tudies n differential

echnology

se

n

schools

renow decade

ld

e.g.,

Becker,

000c;

Wenglinsky,

998).

Quantitative

research

sing

more ecent

ata sets an reveal ow earlier

rends

may

have

per-

sisted r

changed

ourse.

n

qualitative

esearch,

here asbeen

tendencyymany

scholarsf echnologyndnew iteracieso examinemodel atherhan ypical rac-

tices,

with

heresultant

ublications

resenting

n idealized otion f how

diverse

groups

might

xperience

ew

echnologies

see

discussion

n

Warschauer,

n

press).

Ethnographers

oulddo

well

o

replicate

n

the

digital

ealmHeaths

1983)

study

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 42: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 42/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

219

oftypicalommunicationatternsnd iteracyracticesn twodiverseeighboring

communities,

s such

omparativethnography

an

richly

ortray

he ocial ontexts

that

hape

nequity.

CONCLUSION

There

s a

widespread

eliefhat he

alling

ost f

omputers

nd

nternetccess s

rapidly arrowing

digital

ivide

n

U.S.

society.

owever,

s this

eview

hows,

aps

inhome ccess

o

digital

edia

re till

ubstantial,

nd

nequalities

n

technologysage

and outcomes

re ven

reater.

nfortunately,

any

fthemeasures ost

requently

usedfor nalyzingechnology-relatedccess, se, ndoutcomesre nsufficient.or

example, hone-based

urveys

nvestigating

ome ccess

isproportionately

xclude

marginalized

roups,

uch s those

who do

not

peak nglish

r

thosewho cannot

afford

hone

ervice.

nd,

most

mportant,

tandardized

ests,

hich

ave ecome he

sine

ua

nonfor

measuring

chool-based

utcomes,

o not ven

ttempt

o assess he

broad

hinking

nd

earning

kills

ssociated

ith

dvanced

ses f

digital

media.

Though echnology-related

ccess, se,

and outcomes

re difficult

o

measure,

all

available vidence

uggests

hey

re

criticallymportant

actors

n

shaping

ocial

futures.

s we rethink

owto measure vidence

f

equitable

esources,onditions,

andoutcomes

f tudent

earning,

ontinued

lose ttentiono

the ole f

echnology

inboth chool ndout-of-schoolnvironmentssurgentlyeeded.

NOTES

Although

echnology

nd

equity

s an

important

ssue

acing

outh

hroughout

he

world,

space

imitations

revent

s

from

nalyzing

esearch

n this ssue

rom

ountries

ther han

theUnited tates. hose

nterested

n

nternational

erspectives

n

technology

ccess nd use

may

wish o consult

Warschauer

2003),

Matuchniak

ndWarschauer

2010),

Hull,Zacher,

and

Hibbert

2009),

Plomp,

Anderson,

nd

Law

(2009),

or the Centre orEducational

Researchnd

nnovation

2009).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We re

rateful

o

Robert airlief he

University

f

California,

anta ruz or har-

ing

with s

his ecent

nalyses

fhome ccess o

omputers

nd

ssisting

swith

nterpre-

tation

f

CPS data.

We re lso

grateful

o

he

ditors

fReview

f

esearchn

Education,

Allan

uke,

udith

reen,

nd

Gregory

.

Kelly,

nd

developmental

ditors,

ichole

Pinkard

ndVivian

adsden,

or heir

xtremelyelpful

uidance

nd

feedbacknour

outline nd

multiple

rafts

f his

hapter.

REFERENCES

AAUWEducational oundation.2000). Tech-savvy:ducatingirlsn thenew omputerge.

Washington,

C: AAUW

Andrews,

. G.

(2007).

A

tale

f

wo

ame

worlds:

omparing

he

iteracyracticesf

ow- nd

high-socioeconomic

tatus

SES)

students

urrounding

ideo

ames.

npublished

aster'she-

sis,

eachers

ollege,

olumbia

University,

ewYork.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 43: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 43/48

220 Review

f

Research

n

Education,

4

Andrews,. G. (2008a,June). aby ames, oy ames,amesornerds:lassndgenderaming

disparitiesmong

U.S.

youth.

aper resented

t the

Under he

Mask:

Perspectives

n the

Gamer

Conference,uton,

UK. Retrieved

anuary

9, 2009,

from

ttp://underthemask.

wikidot.com/ffusandrews

Andrews,

. G.

(2008b).

Gameplay,

ender,

nd socioeconomictatus

n

twoAmerican

igh

schools.

-Learning,

,

199-213.

Attewell,.,

&

Battle,

.

1999).

Home

computers

nd school

erformance.

he

nformation

Society,

5,

1-10.

Attewell,

.,

&

Winston,

.

(2003).

Children f

the

digital

ivide.

n

P.

Attewell,

N. M.

Seel

(Eds.),

Disadvantaged

eens nd

computerechnologies

pp.

117-136).

Münster,

Germany:

axmann.

Autor,

.

H.,

Levy,

.,

&

Murnane,

.

J.

2003).

The

skill

ontent

f

recent

echnologicalchange: nempiricalxploration.uarterlyournalf conomics,18,1279-1333.

Baumman, .,

&

Briggs,

. L.

(1990).

Poetics nd

performance

s

critical

erspectives

n

language

nd

social ife. nnual eview

fAnthropology,

9,

59-88.

Barron,

.

(2004).

Learningcologies

or

echnological

luency:

ender nd

experiential

if-

ferences.

ournal

f

ducational

omputing

esearch,

1,

1-36.

Barron, ., Martin,

.

K., Takeuchi,

.,

&

Fithian,

.

(2009).

Parentss

earning

artners

n

the

development

f

technological

luency.

nternational

ournal

fLearning

nd

Media,

1(2),

55-77.

Barron, .,Walter,.,

Martin,

.

K.,

&

Schatz,

.

(in

press).

redictors

f reative

omputing

participation

nd

profiles

f

xperience

n

two ilicon

alley

middle

chools.

omputers

Education.

Beck, .C, & Wade,M. W. 2004).Got ame:How the amer enerationsreshapingusiness

forever.

oston:Harvard

usiness chool

Press.

Becker,

.

J.

2000a).

Findings

rom he

eaching,earning,

nd

computing

urvey:

s

Larry

Cuban

right?

ducational

olicy

nalysis

rchives,

(51).

Retrieved

ugust

9, 2009,

from

http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n5

/

Becker,

.

J.

2000b).

Snapshot

7:

ubject

nd teacher

bjectivesor omputer-using

lasses

y

schoolocio-economictatus.

etrieved

anuary

0, 2009,

from

ttp://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/

findings/snapshot?/

Becker,

.

J.

2000c).

Who's

wired nd who's ot:Children's

ccess o and use of

computer

technology.

uture

f

Children,

0(2),

44-75.

Beltran,

.

O., Das,

K.

K.,

&

Fairlie,

. W

(in

press).

re

omputersood

for hildren?

he

effects

fhome

omputers

n educational

utcomes. conomic

nquiry.

Brown, . R., Cummins,.,& Sayers,. (2007).Literacy,echnology,nddiversity:eaching

for

uccess

n

changing

imes. oston:

llyn

Bacon.

Castells,

.

(1996).

The ise

f

he etwork

ociety. aiden,

MA: Blackwell.

Castells,

.

(1998).

End

of

millennium.

aiden,

MA: Blackwell.

Centre or ducational

esearchnd nnovation.

2009).

Digital earning

esourcess

systemic

innovation. etrieved

uly

3,

2009

from

http://www.oecd.org/document/47/0,3343

,en

2649 35845581 38777391

1 1 1 L00.html

Clotfelter,

.

T, Ladd,

H.

F.,

&

Vigdor,

.

L.

(2008,

December).

caling

he

igital

ivide:

Home

omputerechnology

nd tudentchievement.

aper

resented

t the ducation

olicy

Colloquia

eries,

arvard

niversity,

ambridge,

A. Retrieved

ugust

9, 2009,

from

http^/www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/colloquia.htm

Council or Aid to Education.2009). Collegend work eadinessssessment.

etrieved

February

5,2009,

from

ttp://www.cae.org/content/pro_collegework.htm

Cummins,

.

2008).

Technology,

iteracy,

nd

young

econd

anguage

earners:

esigning

educational utures.

n L. L. Parker

Ed.),

Technology-mediated

earning

nvironments

or

young nglish

earners:onnections

n and out

of

chool

pp.

61-98).

New York: awrence

Erlbaum.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 44: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 44/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds 221

DeBeil, M., & Chapman,C. (2006). Computernd Internet sebystudentsn 2003.

Washington,

C: National enter or

ducation tatistics.

Dede,

C.

(1995).

Testimony

othe

US

Congress,

ouse

f

Representatives,

oint

earing

n edu-

cational

echnology

n the 1st

entury.

etrieved

ebruary

, 2006,

from

ttp://www.virtual.

gmu.edu/SS esearch/cdpapers/congrpdf.htm

DeVane,B.,

&

Squire,

K.

(2008).

The

meaning

f race

nd violence

n

Grand heft uto.

Games

nd

Culture,,

264-285.

Dimaggio,

.

J.,

Hargittai,

.,

Celeste,

,

&

Shafer,

.

(2004).

Digital

nequality:

rom

unequal

ccess o

differentiatedse.

n

K. Neckerman

Ed.),

Social

nequality

pp.

355-400).

NewYork: ussell

age

Foundation.

Dynarski,

.,

Agodini,

., Heaviside, ., Novak,

.,

Carey,

.,

&

Campuzano,

.

(2007).

Effectivenessf reading

nd mathematics

oftwareroducts:indingsrom

he

irst

tudent

cohort. ashington,C: U.S. DepartmentfEducation.

Educational

esting

ervice

2009).

Skills verview.

etrieved

ebruary

5,2009,

from

ww.

ets.org/iskills/

Eisenstein,

. L.

(1979).

The

rintingress

s an

agent f hange:

ommunicationsnd

cultural

transformations

n

early-modernurope. ambridge,

K:

Cambridge niversity

ress.

Fairlie,

. W.

2007).

Explaining

ifferences

n

access o

home

omputers

nd

the

nternet:

comparison

f Latino

groups

o other thnic

nd racial

groups.

ournal

f

Electronic

Commerceesearch.

,

265-291.

Fairlie,

. W

(2008, November).

he ducational

onsequencesf

he

igital

ivide.

nnual

Lecture n

Science,

echnology

Society

t the

Center or

HumanPotential

nd Public

Policy, hicago,

L.

Fairlie, .W, & London,R. A. (2009,January).he ffectsfhomeomputersneducational

outcomes:vidence

rom

field xperiment

ith

ommunityollege

tudents.

aper resented

at the

Applied

Microeconomics

eminar,

niversity

f

California,

rvine.

Fox,S.,

&

Livingston,

.

(2007).

Latinos nline.

etrieved

anuary

0, 2009,

from

ttp://

www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/204/report_display.asp

Gee,

J.

P.

2003).

What

ideo

ames

ave o teach

s about

earning

nd

literacy.

ew York:

Palgrave

acmillan.

Gee,

J.

P.

2004).

Situated

anguage

nd

earning:

critiquef

raditional

chooling.

ewYork:

Routledge.

diacquinta,

.

B., Bauer,

.

A.,

be

Levin,

.

h.

(1993).

Beyond

echnologypromise:

n

examina-

tion

f

children'sducational

omputing

t

home.

ambridge,

K:

Cambridge

niversity

Press.

Goode,J.,Estrella, .,& Margolis, . 2006). Lost ntranslation:ender ndhigh chool

computer

cience.

n

J.

M.

Cohoon,

& W.

Apray

Eds.),

Womennd

nformation

echnology:

Researchn

underrepresentationpp. 89-114).Cambridge:

IT

Press.

Grimes, .,

&

Warschauer,

.

(2008).

Learning

ith

aptops:

multi-methodase

study.

Journal

f

ducational

omputing

esearch,8,

305-332.

Gulek,

.

C,

&

Demirtas,

.

(2005).

Learning

ith

echnology:

he

mpact

f

aptop

seon

student

chievement.

ournal

f

Technology,

earning,

nd

Assessment,

(2)

Retrieved

ugust

19,2009,

from

ttp://escholarship.bc.edu/jtla/vol3/2/

Haidane,

.

(2009).

Delivery

latforms

or

national

nd nternational

omputer-based

ur-

veys:

History,

ssues nd

currenttatus.

n

F.

Scheuermann,

J.

Bjjörnsson

Eds.),

The

transition

o

omputer-based

ssessment:ew

pproaches

o

killsssessment

nd

mplications

or

larve-scaleestingpp.63-67).Luxembourg:uropean ommissionointResearch entre.Harnad, .

(1991).

Post-Gutenbergalaxy:

hefourthevolutionnthemeans f

production

and

knowledge.

ublic-Access

omputerystems

eview,

,

39-53.

Heath,

.

B.

(1983).

Ways

ithwords:

anguage,ife,

nd workn

communitiesnd

classrooms.

Cambridge,

K:

Cambridge

niversity

ress.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 45: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 45/48

222 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

Hersh, . H. (2006).Lifes not standardizedest. etrievedebruary4,2009,fromttp://

www.educationevolving.org/pdf/Life_not_a_standardized_test.pdf

Horrigan,

.

2008).

Homebroadband

008.

Retrieved

anuary

0, 2009,

from

ttp://www.

pewinternet.org/PPF/r/257/report_display.asp

Hull,

G.

A.,

&

Katz,

M.-L.

2006).

Crafting

n

agentive

elf:

ase

studies

n

digital

torytell-

ing.

Researchn the

Teachingf nglish,

1,

43-81.

Hull,

G.

A.,

&

Nelson,

M. E.

(2005).

Locating

he

emiotic

ower

f

multimodality.

ritten

Communication,

2,

224-261.

Hull,

G.

A., Zacher,

.,

&

Hibbert,

.

(2009).

Youth, isk,

nd

quity

na

global

world.

eview

of

Research

n

Education,3,

1

17-159.

Ito,

M.,

Baumer,

., Bittanti, .,

Boyd,

D.,

Cody,

R.,

&

Herr,

.

(in

press).Hanging

ut,

messing

round,

eeking

ut:

iving

nd

earning

ith ewmedia.

ambridge:

IT Press.

ko, M., Horst,H., Bittanti, ., Boyd,D., Herr-Stephenson,., & Lange,P. G. (2008).

Living

nd

learning

ith

newmedia:

ummaryf indings

rom

he

digital outh

roject.

Retrievedecember

2,

2008,

from

ttp^/digitalyouth.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/report/

digitalyouth-WhitePaper.pdf

Jenkins,

.

(2009).

Confronting

he

hallenges

f articipatory

ulture: edia

education

or

he

21st

entury.ambridge:

IT Press.

etrieved

uly

,

2009,

from

ttp://mitpress.mit.edu/

books/chapters/Confrontinehe_Challenges.pdf

Jeroski,

.

(2008).

Wireless

ritingrogram

WWP):

Peace

River

orth,

ummary

eport

n

grade

achievement,

008. Retrieved

ebruary

, 2008,

from

ttp://www.prn.bc.ca/wp-

content7wwp2008grade6.pdf

Jewitt,

.

(2008).

Multimodality

nd

literacy

n school lassrooms.

eview

f

Research

n

Education,2,241-267.

Kafai,

.

B., Heeter, ,

Denner,

.,

&

Sun,

J.

Y.

(Eds.).

(2008).

Beyond

arbie&

Mortal

Kombat:

ew

erspectives

n

gender

nd

gaming.

ambridge:

IT Press.

Kafai,

.

B.,

Peppier,

.,

&

Chapman,

.

(2009).

The

omputer

lubhouse:

onstructionism

nd

creativity

n

youth

ommunities.

ewYork:

eachers

ollege

ress.

Kozma,

.

2003).

Technology,

nnovation,

nd ducational

hange: global

erspective.

ugene,

OR:

International

ociety

or

echnology

n

Education.

Kozma,

R.

(2009).

Transforming

ducation:

ssessing

nd

teaching

1st

entury

kills.

n E

Scheuermann,

J.

Bjjörnsson

Eds.),

The

transitiono

computer-based

ssessment:

ew

approaches

o kills

ssessment

nd

mplications

or arge-scale

esting

pp.

1

-23)

Luxembourg:

European

ommission

oint

esearch

entre.

Kulik,

.

A.

(2003).

Effects

fusing

nstructional

echnology

n

elementary

nd

econdary

chools:

What ontrolledvaluationtudiesay.Arlington,A: SRI International.

Lenhart,

.,

Arafeh,.,

Smith,

.,

&

Macgill,

. R.

(2008).

Writing,

echnology

nd teens.

Retrieved

ugust

5,

2008,

from

ttp://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/247/report_display.asp

Lenhart, .,

Kahne,

.,

Middaugh,

.,

Macgill,

.

R.,

Evans, ,

&

Vitak,

.

2008).

leens,

video

ames,

nd

civics. etrieved

ecember,

008,

from

ttp://www.pewinternet.org/

PPF/r/263/report_display.asp

Lenhart, .,

Madden,M.,

&

Hitlin,

.

2005).

Teensnd

technology.

etrieved

ugust

5,

2008,

from

ttp://www.pewinternet.Org/PPF/r/

2/report_display.asp

Leu,

D.

J.,Jr.,

Kinzer,

.

K., Coiro,

J.

L.,

&

Cammack,

. M.

(2004).

Toward

theory

r

new iteracies

merging

rom he

nternetnd

other

nformation

nd

communication

ech-

nologies.

n R. B.

Ruddell,

N. Unrau

Eds.),

Theoretical

odels

nd

processes

f

reading

(pp.1570-1613).Newark,

E: International

eading

ssociation.

Levy,

, & Murnane, .

J.

2004). Thenew ivision

f

abor: ow

computers

re

reating

he

next

ob

market.

rinceton,I:

Princeton

niversity

ress.

Levy,

,

&

Murnane,

.

J.

2005,

October).

ow

computerized

ork nd

globalization

hape

human kill

emands.

aper

presented

t

the

Planning

Meeting

n

21st

Century

kills,

National

cademy

f

Sciences,

Washington,

C.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 46: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 46/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

223

Llosa, , & Slayton,. 2009).Using rogramvaluationo mprovehe ducation fyoung

Englishanguage

earners

n

US schools.

anquaqe eaching;esearch,3,

35-54.

Luke,

A.

(2009).

Critical

ealism,

olicy,

nd

educational

esearch.

n K.

Ercikan,

W.-M.

Roth

Eds.),

Generalizingrom

ducational

esearch:

eyond

ualitative

nd

quantitative

polarizationpp.

173-200).

NewYork:

outledge.

Margolis,

.,

strella,

., Goode,

J.,

Holme,

J.J.,

&

Nao,

K.

(2008).

Stuck

n the hallownd:

Education,ace,

nd

computine.ambridge:

IT

Press.

Matuchniak,.,

&

Warschauer,

.

(in

press). quity

n

technology

ccess

nd

opportunities.

In B.

McGaw,

E. B.

Baker,

P. Peterson

Eds.),

nternational

ncyclopediaf

ducation.

NewYork: lsevier.

Means,

.,

Penuel,

W.

R.,

&

Padilla,

.

(2001).

The onnectedchool:

echnology

nd

earning

in

high

chool.an

Francisco:

ossey-Bass.National ssessment

overning

oard.2008).

Governing

oard wardsWestEd1.86million

contracto

developirst-ever

echnologicaliteracyramework.

etrieved

ebruary

5, 2009,

from

ttp://www.nagb.org/newsroom/release/tech-literacy-0608.pdf

National cienceFoundation.

2008).

Bachelorsnd associates

egrees

warded n

computer

sciences,

y

ex,

985-2005.

ttp://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/2008-05/figc-2.htm

National cience

oundation.

2009).

Women, inorities,

nd

ersons

ith

isabilitiesn cience

and

engineering

F.

15,

Trans.).

Arlington,

A: National cience oundation ivision

f

Science

esource tatistics.

National elecommunications

nd Informationdministration.

1995).

Falling hrough

he

net:

surveyf

he HaveNots n rural nd urban merica.

ashington,

C: Author.

National

elecommunicationsnd Informationdministration.

1998).

Falling hrough

he

net I: Newdataon the wital ivide.Washington,C: Author.

National elecommunicationsnd

Information

dministration.

1999).

Falling hrough

he

net:

efining

he

igital

ivide.

Washington,

C:

Author.

National elecommunicationsnd Information

dministration.

2000).

Falling hrough

he

net: oward

igital

nclusion.

ashington,

C: Author.

National elecommunicationsnd nformationdministration.

2002).

A nation nline: ow

Americansre

xpanding

heir se

f

he nternet.

ashington,

C: Author.

NationalTelecommunicationsnd

Informationdministration.

2004).

A nation nline:

Entering

he roadband

ge.Washington,

C: Author.

National elecommunicationsnd nformationdministration.

2008a).

Networkedation:

BroadbandnAmerica007. Washington.C: Author.

National elecommunicationsnd nformationdministration.

2008b).

Households

sing

he

Internetnandoutsidehe ome,y electedharacteristics:otal, rban, ural,rincipality,

2007.

Retrieved

anuary

0, 2009,

from

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/2008/Table_

Householdlnternet2007.

df

Neuman,

.

B.,

&

Celano,

D.

(2006).

The

knowledge ap:

Implications

f

leveling

he

playing

ield or ow-income

nd

middle-incomehildren.

eading

esearch

uarterly,

1,

176-201.

North

entral

egional

ducational

aboratory

theMetiri

Group.

2003).

enGauge

1st

century

kills:

iteracy

n the

igitalge.Naperville,

L:

Authors.

Partnership

or

1st

Century

kills.

2009).

Framework

or

1st

centuryearning.

etrieved

February

0, 2009,

from

ttp://www.21

tcenturyskills.org/documents/framewor^flye^

updated_jan_09_final-pdf

Peppier,.,& Kafai, . (2007).From uperGoo o Scratch:xploringigitalmedia roduc-tion n nformal

earning.earning,

edia,

nd

Technology,

2,

149-166.

Plomp,

., Anderson,

.

E.,

&

Law,

N.

(Eds.).

2009).

Cross-national

nformation

nd com-

munication:

echnologyolicies

nd

practices

n education

rev.

nd

ed.).

Charlotte,

C:

Information

ge.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 47: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 47/48

224 Review

f

Researchn

Education,

4

Poster,M. (1990). The mode f nformation:oststructuralismnd social ontext.hicago:

University

f

Chicago

ress.

Prensky,

.

(2001).

Digital

atives,

igitalmmigrants.

n the

Horizon,

(5),

1-6.

Regional

echnology

lliance.

2001).

Mapping futureor igital

onnections:

studyf

he

digital

ividen

San

DiegoCounty.

etrieved

ebruary

, 2006,

from

ttp://www.sandiego.

eov/science-tech/pdf/mapfuturedieitalconnect.pdf

Reich,

.

(1991).

Thework

f

nations:

reparing

urselves

or

1st

enturyapitalism.

ewYork:

Knopf.

Roberts,

.

R, Foehr,

.

G.,

&

Rideout,

.

.

(2005).

Generation

: Media

n

the ives

f

-18

vear-olds.

enlo

Park,

A:

Kaiser

amilv

oundation.

Russell,M.,

&

Piati,

.

(2002).

Does it matter

ithwhat write?:

omparing

erformance

on

paper, omputer

nd

portablewriting

evices.Current

ssues n

Education,

(4).Retrievedugust 9, 2009,fromttp://cie.asu.edu/volume5/number4/index.html

Sandholtz,

.

H.,

Ringstaff,

,

&

Dwyer,

. C.

(1997).

Teaching

ith

echnology:

reating

student-centeredlassrooms.

ewYork: eachers

ollege

ress.

Scardamalia, .,

&

Bereiter,

.

(2003).

Knowledgeuilding.

n

Encyclopedia

f

ducation

pp.

1370-1373).

New

York:Macmillan eference.

Silvernail,

. L.

(2005).

Does

Maine'smiddlechool

aptop rogram

mproveearning?

review

of

videnceo date.Retrieved

ugust

9, 2009,

from

ttp://www.usm.maine.edu/cepare/

pdf/MLTI705.pdf

Silvernail,

.

L.

(2007).

The

mpact f

heMaine

Learning

echnology

nitiative

n

teachers,

students,

nd

earning.

etrieved

ugust

, 2008,

from

ttp://www.usm.maine.edu/cepare/

miti. tm

Steinkuehler,. (2007).Massively ultiplayernline amings a constellationf iteracy

practices.-Learninq,, 297-318.

Suhr, .,

Hernandez, .,

Grimes,

.,

&

Warschauer,

.

(in

press). aptops

ndfourth

rade

literacy:

ssisting

he

ump

over

hefourth

rade

lump.

ournal

fTechnology,

earning,

andAssessment.

Texas

Center or ducational

esearch.

2008).

Evaluation

f

he

Texas

echnology

mmersion

Pilot:Outcomes

or

he hird

ear

2006-2007).

Retrieved

ugust

, 2008,

from

ttp://www.

tcer.org/research/etxtip/documents/y3_etxtip_quan.pdf

Time,

Learning,

nd

Afterschoolask Force.

2007).

A new

dayfor earning.

etrieved

February

5,

2009,

from

ttp://www.newdayforlearning.org/docs/NDLJan07.pdf

Tukey,

.

W

(1962).

The future

fdata

nalysis.

nnals

f

Mathematical

tatistics,3,

1-67.

U.S.

Bureau

fLabor tatistics.

2007).

The

0

fastestrowing

ccupations

overed

n the 008-

2009 Occupationalutlook andbook. etrievedanuary3,2009,from ttp://www.bls.

gov/news.release/ooh.tO

htm

U.S. Census

Bureau.

2006).

Current

opulation

urvey:

esign

nd

methodology

Technical

Paper

6).

Washington,

C: Author.

Warschauer,

.

(1999).

Electroniciteracies:

anguage,

ulture,

nd

power

n online ducation.

Mahwah,

T:Lawrence rlbaum.

Warschauer,

.

(2000).

Technology

nd school

eform: view

rom oth

ides fthe rack.

Education

olicy nalysis

rchives,

(4).

Retrieved

ugust

9, 2009,

from

ttp://epaa.asu.

edu/eoaa/v84 html

Warschauer,

.

(2003).

Technology

nd

social nclusion:

ethinking

he

digital

divide.

Cambridge:

IT

Press.

Warschauer,. (2006). Laptopsndliteracy:earningn thewirelesslassroom.ew York:Teachers

ollege

ress.

Warschauer,

.

(2007a).

A

teacher's

lace

n

the

igital

ivide.

earbook

f

heNational

ociety

for

he

tudy f

ducation,

06(2),

147-166.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:39:35 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 48: WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

7/23/2019 WARSCHAUER & MATUCHNIAK_2010_ New Technology and Digital Worlds

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/warschauer-matuchniak2010-new-technology-and-digital-worlds 48/48

Warschauer,

atuchniak: ew

Technology

nd

Digital

Worlds

225

Warschauer,. (2007b). nformationiteracyn the aptop lassroom. eachersollegeecord,

109,2511-2540.

Warschauer,

.

(in

press).

igital

iteracy

tudies:

rogress

nd

prospects.

n

M.

Baynham,

M.

Prinsloo

Eds.),

The

iituref iteracy

tudies.

asingstoke,

K:

Palgrave

acmillan.

Warschauer,., Grant, .,

Del

Real,G.,

&

Rousseau,

M.

(2004).

Promoting

cademicit-

eracy

ith

echnology:

uccessful

aptop

rograms

n K-12

schools.

ystem,

2,

525-537.

Warschauer,

., Knobel,

M.,

&

Stone,

L.

(2004).

Technology

nd

equity

n

schooling:

Deconstructing

he

digital

ivide. ducational

olicy,

8,

562-588.

Warschauer, .,

&

Ware,

.

(2008).

Learning,hange,

nd

power:

Competing

rames f

technology

nd

literacy.

n

J.

Coiro,

M.

Knobel,

C.

Lankshear,

D.

J.

Leu

(Eds.),

Handbook

f

esearch

n

new iteracies

pp.

215-240).

NewYork:

awrence rlbaum.

Wells,

.,

Lewis, .,

&

Greene,

.

(2006).

nternet

ccess

n

U.S.

public

choolsnd classrooms:

1994-2005.

Washington,

C: National enter or ducationaltatistics.

Wenglinsky,

.

(1998).

Does

t

compute?

he

relationship

etweenducational

echnology

nd

studentchievement

n

mathematics.etrieved

ebruary

, 2006,

from

tp://ftp.ets.org/pub/

res/technolog.pdf

Wenglinsky,

.

(2005).

Usingechnology

isely:

he

keys

o

uccess

n

chools.

ew

York: eachers

College

ress.