The Public Library as the Great
Equalizer: Bridging the Divide
Abstract
This research
project focuses on the continuing problem of the digital divide. Although America is a wealthy nation
disparities still exist. The public
library is a government institution which can act in the capacity of a bridge,
traversing the gap between those who are knowledgeable and have access to the
internet and those who do not. This
study attempts to ameliorate the issue of the digital divide by focusing on
providing access to the individual. The
method utilized is a randomized pretest and posttest control group design (Raulin, 2007) .
Content
Introduction
Goals of Research
Objectives of Research
Research
Question
Literature
Review
Methodology
Procedures
Quantitative Measurements
Budget
Staff
Information
Projected
Timeline
Evaluation:
Outcomes Predicted (Expected
Results)
Program Evaluation
Sustainability
and Long-term Results
Introduction
The purpose of this research is to
investigate the issue of the digital divide and to discover how such a grandiose
impasse can be surmounted one individual at a time. There are numerous factors which contribute
to the existence of decreased access to the internet these reasons could be:
financial or cultural, or be related to age or disability, or to geographical
boundaries. The public library provides
an avenue of access which is free and available to anyone with a library card.
I chose this topic because the
concept of free and equal access to the internet concerns me a great deal. I think that the United States is evolving
and growing and through our maturation more services and resources should
become available to the general public regardless of an individual’s
socioeconomic status or other inopportune characteristics. Access to the internet abounds with many
fortuitous accommodations which behoove the individual who has access in a
myriad of ways. Therefore, everyone in
America should be able to benefit from this cornucopia of beneficence.
America is one of the richest
countries in the world. There is no
reason why our citizens should not benefit from our financial boon. The public library is touted as being the
great equalizer insofar as internet access is concerned. The research project is a necessary pry into
the fundamental capabilities of the public library to provide internet access
to the masses. This will be done through a randomized pretest
and posttest control group design to measure the degree of competency gained by
participants in the experimental group as compared to the control group (Raulin, 2007) .
The goals of the research project
are to increase the number of individuals who access “high quality” information
from the internet at the public library.
The first objective of the research project is to familiarize
individuals, who were previously unacquainted with the internet, with the
internet. The second objective is to
instruct individuals who are being introduced to the structure and usage of the
internet how to surf the web effectively and locate “high quality” information. Having “high quality” information at the
disposal of individuals who were previously unfamiliar with the internet should
improve those individuals quality of life.
In that way the public library will be providing a life changing service
to their patrons.
Research
Question
The research question here is: Is the
public library providing internet access to previously disconnected individuals? If so, how is the public library reaching out
to those afore mentioned individuals?
Are the public library’s outreach programs effectively enticing new
users into traversing the depths of their personal psychological barriers and
other substantial barriers to becoming savvy internet capable individuals who
can locate the “high quality” information that they may seek? And finally, how is the public library’s
outreach program going to be sustained?
Will the library continue to attract individuals, who previously had no
or very little knowledge of the world wide web and internet surfing, and
effectively tutor these individuals so that they are capable information
seekers?
Literature
Review
1) “Beyond Access: Psychosocial Barriers
to Computer Literacy”
Laura D. Stanley
The research of Ms. Stanley reflects the
fact that socioeconomic and racial barriers are not the only issues preventing minority
access to the internet. Ms. Stanley
uncovered three psychological reasons that she states contributes to lack of
internet activity among minorities they are: “relevance,” “comfort zone,” and
“self-concept” (Stanley, 2002) .
The concept of there being reasons that were not racial or socioeconomic
which prevent an individual from becoming internet competent gave me ideas for
attracting participants to the research study.
In order to attract individuals who
are not users of the internet into the library to be educated to use computers
effectively, the psychological barriers which have prevented them from learning
how to utilize computers in the past must be addressed. I hypothesize that offering computer literacy
classes in the evenings will make the classes more accessible to working
adults. In addition, alternate
activities should be available in another room for children of all ages in case
any of the potential students are also parents.
Finally, classes should be taught by individuals who are bilingual to
encourage the participation of Spanish or French (Haitian) speaking students.
2) “Remapping the Digital Divide”
Sharon Strover
This article brings to the forefront
the issue of the internet being “the great equalizer.” The article talks about the internet being
the new focus for the government as a replacement since the introduction of welfare
reform and the decrease in emphasis on Affirmative Action (Strover, 2003) .
‘”The current political interest in the Digital Divide is an attempt to
reverse the damage to race relations caused by welfare reform and by a retreat
from Affirmative Action”’ (Strover, 2003) . This is an interesting hypothesis. Could closing the digital divide repair race
relations in America?
This article caused me to reflect on
why it is so important to close the gap.
The poverty that presently exists in minority communities, is that due
primarily to the racism of the past and can closing the digital divide heal
America? Is that why providing internet
access to all Americans is so important? I do not know if universal access could
possibly repair the damage caused by America’s unequal heritage? I do believe that many people perceive the
internet as being a mechanism which has the possible function of bringing
wealth to the poor or at least more opportunities. I think that is why I am so concerned with
the issue of internet connectivity. I
think that in this day and age there is no need for such vast degrees of human
suffering and that having access to the internet can reduce abject poverty
significantly. Therefore, everyone
should be able to have access.
3) “Leveraging Sunken Investments in
Communications Infrastructure: A Policy Perspective From the United States”
Anthony G. Wilhelm
This was a long and involved article
which discussed the investments made by the US government and by private
investors into the connectivity infrastructure.
The most applicable portion of the article, for me, was the discussion
on “content” (Wilhelm, Leveraging Sunken
Investments in Communications Infrastructure: A Policy Perspective From the
United States, 2002) .
The article mentions the fact that low-income and underserved communities
need to have a desire to connect to the internet-- a perceived benefit. And for that reason “content” on the internet
is an issue.
Is the internet providing the type of
content that low-income and rural communities would find informative and
beneficial? Is the internet providing
content that would be beneficial to individuals with limited literacy
skills? Is the internet providing
content that could benefit individuals with disabilities? And finally, are minorities and underserved
communities being given an opportunity to contribute to the collection of
information available on the internet?
4) “They Threw Me a Computer. . .But
What I Really Needed Was a Life Preserver”
Anthony G. Wilhelm
Mr. Wilhelm stresses the dichotomy
between the haves and the have not insofar as internet access is
concerned. Mr. Wilhelm states that there
are two schools of thought, those who believe that the digital divide will
increase as time goes by and those who believe that the internet is the “great
leveler” that will make everybody equal (Wilhelm, They Threw Me a Computer. . .But What I Really Needed Was a
Life Preserver, 2001) .
I
tend to believe that both schools of thought are true.
I
believe that if there is no outside intervention then the digital divide will
increase. I also believe that the
internet could lead to a better informed more politically active, and therefore
more equal, democratic state. Access to
the internet is really a social and economic issue. If an individual does not have access to the
internet then that individual is being excluded from participation in American society
to a major extent. As time goes by those
who are left behind are more at risk of not being able to fully function in
American society. Therefore, access
needs to be available to anyone seeking a connection.
5) “Second-Level Digital Divide:
Differences in People’s Online Skills”
Eszter Hargittai
This research study asked the
question whether there were degrees of competency among internet users. This brought the issue of not just being
well-connected to light, but also the issue of competence. It was found that the younger an individual
was, the closer to 18years of age, the more capable the internet user was. In addition, the study found that the more
education an individual had received the easier it was for that individual to
locate sought after information on the World Wide Web. There was no correlation between sex and
information seeking skills.
This study led me to include the search for
“high quality” information on the pretest and posttest which tests
participant’s ability to effectively and efficiently search the web. This was done to demonstrate that not only
had the individual learned how to navigate the internet, but that that individual
could potentially locate desired information both efficiently and effectively.
6) “The Digital Divide or the Digital
Connection: A US Perspective”
Beverly P. Lynch
This article discusses the fact that
the digital divide is lessening. The new
focus may be on the second-level digital divide whereby access is not the issue
but effective and efficient search skills are the issue. This article seemed to minimize the continued
existence of the digital divide. There
was a policy change when Bush came into office and the national report on
internet connectivity was no longer, “U.S. Reports: Falling Through the Net” (Lynch, 2002) . There was a more positive spin on the report.
The change in the way in which the
digital divide was viewed at a national level alarms and concerns me. Clearly the digital divide has not been
ameliorated. This article gave my
research question higher priority. It
made the need to recognize and address the issue of the digital divide much
more immediate.
7) “Exploring the Future of the Digital
Divide Through Ethnographic Futures
Research”
Mathew M. Mitchell
This study was both interesting and
important. It dealt with the issue of
the digital divide in a pragmatic manner.
The issue of the digital divide is discussed with thirteen participants.
The study participants are asked to make
a prediction about the future of Washington State as it relates to the
persistence of the digital divide. The
thirteen participants are asked to reflect on the future of Washington State in
an optimistic way, a pessimistic way, and a very realistic way (Mitchell, 2002) . This type of study is called Ethnographic
Futures Research (EFR) (Mitchell, 2002) .
The EFR was a new format to me. I had never heard of it before. The thirteen participants were interviewed and
their interviews were transcribed then handed back to them so that they could
verify what had been said and make corrections.
This seemed to me to be a reasonable manner in which to gather
information and then accurately report that information to the general public
through a research project.
Methodology
The experiment will be a randomized pretest
posttest control group design (Raulin, 2007) .
The random assignment controls for both internal and external validity
by ensuring the fact that the two groups are “statistically equal” (Raulin, 2007) . The dependent variables are the pretest and
the posttest (Raulin, 2007) . The pretest allows the experimenter to
compare the pretest results of both the control and the experimental groups to
set a baseline to measure the post test against. The independent variable is the
classroom instruction that the experimental group receives.
Individuals
will be contacted randomly by mail. The
first one hundred individuals, who have no or very little previous experience
with accessing the internet, to positively respond to the invitation will be
included in the study. Every other
individual will be included in the experimental group. The remaining fifty individuals will be
included in the control group. The
experimental group will meet eight consecutive Saturdays in a two month period
to learn how to access “high quality” information via the internet. The control group will receive no classroom
instruction on internet search techniques.
The control group and the experimental group will both meet on the first
Saturday and the last Saturday of the program for a pretest and posttest.
The results of the pretest and
post-test of both the experimental and the control group will be compared to
see which group has located “high quality” information on the internet most
effectively and efficiently. It is my
hypothesis that the experimental group will locate “higher quality” information
in a shorter period of time on the posttest.
The control group will then be offered an opportunity to enroll in a
similar eight week two month consecutive evening program at the public library to
help them to improve their search and location of “high quality” information
skills on the internet.
The data collected will be compared as
quantitative data. Ratio scales will be
utilized to compare the data points therefore the ANOVA test is applicable. The ANOVA test will compare the variance
within both the experimental and the control groups as well as the variance
between the experimental and the control groups (Raulin, 2007) .
I hypothesize that there will be a statistical difference between the
experimental and the control group pretest and posttest as well as between the
experimental and control group posttests.
Budget
Research
Team Leader
10,000.00
Assistant
Team Leader
Volunteer
Alachua
County Library Staff 8,000.00
Supplies
(Stamps, Envelopes, Paper, etc.)
2,000.00
Total
20,000.00
Staff
Information
Research
Team Leader
Samantha Johnson sjohnson@fsu.edu
is a leading scholar in the area of the digital divide. She has been working for the past twenty
years with the US government to eliminate the digital divide by empowering
individuals through a connection to their local libraries. Ms. Johnson has a BS
in computer science from MIT and a PhD. in Library Science from Florida State University. Her years of experience in tandem with her
concern for social and economic justice make her a prime candidate to lead the
study team.
Assistant
Team Leader
Lloyd Smith lsmith@fsu.edu
is a graduate student working on his PhD. in mathematics at Florida State
University. Mr. Smith will be compiling
the statistical information through the ANOVA test. He has had a considerable amount of
experience working SPSS in graduate level statistical analysis courses. Mr. Smith volunteered for the position. Instead of being paid for the position he
will gain three credits towards his graduate degree in the area of statistical
analysis.
Additional
Staff
The two team leaders will be assisted by
members of the Alachua County Library Staff.
Eight members of the Alachua County Library Staff will work with the
research team on eight consecutive Saturdays for a small stipend of one thousand
dollars each.
Projected
Timeline
August
2009
The study team will meet to send out
random invitations to the experiment. It
is difficult to predict how many individuals are not yet familiar with the
internet and where they are located throughout the city of Gainesville,
FL. Therefore, three thousand
invitations (total) will be sent out randomly to all zip codes of the
Gainesville, Florida area.
September
2009
Participant participation will be
confirmed. Every other one of the first
one hundred willing participants will be randomly assigned to the experimental
group and the other fifty-participants will be randomly assigned to the control
group. This is a true experiment.
October
2009
All participants both experimental and
control group will meet on Saturday October 3rd
at 9:00am to take the pretest, then the control group will go home and
the experimental group will stay for class until 12:00 pm. The experimental group will meet in October
again from 9:00am-12:00 pm on the 10th, 17th, 24th,
and the 31st in a classroom setting.
November
2009
The experimental group will continue to
meet from 9:00am until 12:00pm in November on the 7th, 14th,
and 21st. After class on the
21st, at 12:30pm, both the experimental and control groups will take
a posttest to compare the efficiency and effectiveness of the two groups search
techniques of “high quality” information.
December
2009
The ANOVA will be run on the results of
the experiments by the assistant team leader.
The results will be written into a final research report by the team
leader.
Evaluation
Outcomes
(predicted)
The following outcome prediction matrix is for
a pretest and posttest. The pretest and
posttest will test for the computer skills that the individual participant in
the experimental group has gained from the instruction provided to the study
participant in how to utilize the computer and search for “high quality”
information. Instruction will be
provided on Saturday mornings for two months of eight consecutive meetings for
the experimental group only. The control
group will take both the pretest and the posttest, however, members of the
control group will receive no formal instruction on how to navigate the world
wide web.
The results of the pretest and posttest
of both the experimental and control group participants who completed the
program will be compared. It is the goal
of this research project that eighty percent of the experimental group will be
able to effectively and efficiently search for “high quality” information,
within a thirty minute timed period, on the internet after having attended the
instructional classes.
|
Outcomes
(the
experimental group) 50 of the Participants (Ps) who were unfamiliar with the
computers at the public library, utilize the public library computers to
effectively search and retrieve “high
quality” information within the allotted time period of thirty minutes to demonstrate proficiency in search
and retrieval skills.
|
Indicators
(experimental
group) Ps locate more “high quality” websites and information on a post test
than on a pretest when searching for particular websites and information
within an allotted time period of thirty minutes.
|
Data Sources
Thirty
minute timed pretest and thirty minute timed posttest to be taken by both the
experimental and control group.
|
Applied to
All
(experimental group) Ps who were admitted to the study completing the entire
study.
|
Data Intervals
End
of program duration, which will be 8 Saturday sessions held consecutively in
two months.
|
Goals
80%
|
The success of the
research project will be determined by the outcome of the ANOVA test. There should be a statistical difference
between the posttest of the experimental and the control group, as well as a
statistically significant difference between the pretest and posttest of the
experimental group. This research
project should prove that the independent variable, the internet access
instructional classes, makes a significant improvement in the ability of the
experimental group to locate and access “high quality” information.
Sustainability
and Long-term Results
The research project will be
sustained into the future by the Alachua County Public Library. The internet access instructional classes
will continue to be taught by the library staff. However, the classes will be offered during
the week in the evenings instead of on Saturday mornings. Respondents to the research invitation who
were not included in the experiment and who have little or no experience with
accessing the internet, along with members of the control group from the
experiment, will be invited to attend the library sponsored internet access
instructional classes.
Works Cited
Hargittai, E. (2002, April 1). Second-Level
Digital Divide: Differences in People's Online Skills. Retrieved July 15,
2009, from First Monday:
http://www.uic.edu.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/942/864
Haycock, K. (2004). Bridging
the Digital Divide Research Finding. Retrieved July 14, 2009, from Wilson
Web:
http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.42
Lynch, B. P. (2002,
October 7). The Digital Divide or the Digital Connection: A US Perspective.
Retrieved July 15, 2009, from First Monday:
http://www.uic.edu.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/996/917
Mitchell, M. M. (2002,
November 4). Exploring the Future of the Digital Divide through Ethnographic
Furtures Research. Retrieved July 15, 2009, from First Monday :
http://www.uic.edu.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1004/925
Raulin, A. M. (2007). Research
Methods: A process of Inquiry sixth edition. Boston: Pearson A&B.
Stanley, L. D. (2002,
September 27). Beyond Access: Psychosocial Barriers to Computer Literacy.
Retrieved July 15, 2009, from EBSCO:
http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/ehost/pdf?vid=6&hid=101&sid=06a816ac-e6e2-4dfd-830e-8b2d27c03996%40sessionmgr102
Strover, S. (2003). Remapping
the Digital Divide. Retrieved July 15, 2009, from EBSCO:
http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/ehost/pdf?vid=6&hid=101&sid=06a816ac-e6e2-4dfd-830e-8b2d27c03996%40sessionmgr102
Wilhelm, A. G. (2002,
July 1). Leveraging Sunken Investments in Communications Infrastructure: A
Policy Perspective From the United States. Retrieved July 15, 2009, from
EBSCO:
http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/ehost/pdf?vid=6&hid=101&sid=06a816ac-e6e2-4dfd-830e-8b2d27c03996%40sessionmgr102
Wilhelm, A. G. (2001,
April 2). They Threw Me a Computer. . .But What I Really Needed Was a Life
Preserver. Retrieved July 15, 2009, from First Monday:
http://www.uic.edu.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/844/753
No comments:
Post a Comment