I like to have my space say something about me as an individual – and also it’s a place to ring-fence all the resources that I want for my students. And I was, being territorial, fiercely protective of my classroom and my “stuff”. Which was wrong. Because, being resourceful, I was able to get things that my students, no matter their socio-economic divide, needed (old computers repaired by my husband to work in a classroom, little resources to help students with learning difficulties when out shopping at Target or the Dollar store). My space was conducive to learning – but only for the few that were scheduled to take my class.
This was not equal access. In the school that I am currently in where all the 6th – 11th Graders walk around with shiny, silver MacBook Pro’s, the need for territory is somewhat negated. Space is a premium in our school so often we share classrooms with other teachers who come and go and don’t afford the same level of respect to your “stuff” so, this year, I let go. I left my classroom, tucked myself into a corner of a closet and went mobile - which led to a surprising lesson about equity in the classroom.
As Hohlfeld, Ritzhaupt and Barron (2009) articulate, “Schools use ICT to communicate and collaborate with families and community members, they have the opportunity to increase their social capital by simultaneously addressing the digital divide. However, access does not necessarily equate with service,” I reflected on the one student in my 12th Grade class that did not have a laptop computer. The school digital program did not extend to his graduating year. As I moved much of my International Baccalaureate (IB) Geography Diploma Programme (DP) into a blended learning environment to merely meet the hours required for teaching, I feared this bright student would get behind. But, I worried needlessly – this student “survived” on an old computer that I cobbled together for his exclusive classroom use, the textbooks that I still had in hard copy and an old-school yellow notebook. He had wireless access and a Personal Computer (PC) at home and has the ability, the problem solving capacity and hard work ethic to keep up. While the mesosystem was not quite in tact for this student – the exosystems were clearly in tact and exerted a positive influence on his work.
But this is not the norm across schools in general. While we do have a high technology access and expectation for technology in our school, we are not necessarily very good at communicating well. As Epstein (2002) implies – “when school can implement effective communications and supports for interactions with families and community members, high involvement can be obtained which is linked to positive student outcomes.” Involving parents beyond the email home is critical – hence the digital notebooks that I have for my students have parent access so they can see their work as they progress and ask questions as the student goes along – not just at summative assessment moments. This involvement of community members, as Nettles (1991) suggests, “can serve as a way to mobilize the community and members.
This can help to build wider relationships so that all students feel included and parents feel informed. As media becomes a large part of children’s lives, “having an accurate understanding of the role of media in children’s lives is essential for all those concerned about promoting healthy child development.” The racial divide across the US seems wide - African American children average 4.27 hours screen time a day with media (music, reading, screen media) compared to 2.51 among white and 3.28 Hispanic students. The irony here is the media most accessible – television – seems to be most accessible to the lower socio-economic with 20% upper class students having a television in their bedroom with 64% on lower incomes having a television. There is physical access to technology, but how much influence is this having in the success of the student in the academic sense? As Barron (2010) notes, “Despite increasing levels of physical access, opportunities to participate in creative fluency building activities are unequally distributed.” (pg 186) – the type of digital devices available might not be conducive to the student learning beyond the classroom setting at all.
So it revolves around our space as teachers – creating a school climate (not just individual classrooms) that allows all students to equitably access technology and resources to engage and learn with. Getting parents and the community on board is key – but it is also a question of the faculty and administration understanding how to make the whole school environment accessible to all learners.
References
Barron, B., Walter, S. E., Martin, C. K., & Schatz, C. (2010, 12). Predictors of creative computing participation and profiles of experience in two Silicon Valley middle schools. Computers & Education, 54(1), 178-189. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.017
Hohlfeld, T. N., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Barron, A. E. (2010, 12). Connecting schools, community, and family with ICT: Four-year trends related to school level and SES of public schools in Florida. Computers & Education, 55(1), 391-405. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.004
Zero to Eight: Children's Media Use in America. (2011). Retrieved April 06, 2014, from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/research/zero-to-eight-childrens-media-use-in-america