It’s been a busy month or so. Not only was there no break between submitting our IDEL assignments and starting the new course Digital Education in Global Context, this semester is a busy one for me with a face to face MSc in Project Management class starting in January along with a similar online one starting later in February.
This week is not really a mid-term break, rather a planning week to figure out the order of topics we will cover in the second half of the semester and who will lead the group blog over the various weeks. Not an easy task to coordinate I might add but we’re there or thereabouts at this stage and I’m looking forward to reading and blogging about the content as the weeks progress. I have missed keeping my individual blog up to date though so this post will focus on the highlights from the five weeks we’ve just completed on DEGC.
Selecting DEGC from a few options was a no brainer and we’re lucky in that the University of Edinburgh website is transparent enough to help up make our choices without too much difficulty. It was also interesting to engage with peers from other cohorts who also have an interest in the ‘sociological and political aspects of online learning‘. Twelve of us in total hit the ground running with blog leadership duties kicking in in week 2. I was lucky enough to co-lead in week 3 along with two colleagues, Antonia and Dora when the topic was on the economics of education. We discussed the Iron Triangle of access, cost and quality (yep – it’s not just a project management term) along with fake degrees and the future of digital education. Lots of commentary ensued and it was a very enjoyable week.
My highlight of the course to date followed in the next two weeks when the topics focused on digital divides, domestic in week 4 and global in week 5. The discussions were eye opening with the sharing of experiences amongst us contributing to the meaning of digital inequality and digital exclusion. I particularly found the existence of internet ‘ex-users’ an interesting addition to the more commonly assumed ‘non-users’. Who would choose to no longer access the internet? Plenty, as it happens.
DiMaggio and Hargittai’s list of five dimensions of digital inequality attracted my attention – 1) equipment 2) autonomy of use 3) skill 4) social support and 5) the purposes for which the technology is employed. Isn’t it interesting that 17 years following the publication of their paper many of these dimensions are still prevalent? Digital literacy in terms of the skills and support structures to use technology are as important as the hardware and connectivity required in the first place. This theme followed into the area of algorithms which I admit to knowing little about and I loved Michael‘s comment in particular: “Perhaps what is required is not only greater ‘algorithm literacy’ for learners and teachers, but also educating the software engineers involved in creating the algorithms about the social and political impacts they have?” Algorithm literacy, hmmm, perhaps there’s an assignment topic in here???
Global divides as the terms suggests, focused on the differences between rich nations and developing nations – economic, political, sociocultural and then some. We’re lucky enough to have a couple of peers who are engaged in education in African countries and the depth they brought to the discussions was thought-provoking.
At close to 600 words it’s time to save any more thoughts for a later post…
References:
DiMaggio, P. and Hargittai, E., 2001. From the ‘digital divide’ to ‘digital inequality’: Studying Internet use as penetration increases. Princeton: Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University, 4(1), pp.4-2.
Grant, L., and Eynon, R. (2017). ‘Digital divides and social justice in technology-enhanced learning’, in E. Duval et al. (eds.), Technology Enhanced Learning (Basel: Springer International Publishing), pp. 157-168.
Sandra Flynn 