For the first part of my project I have been exploring
digital inclusion and what it really means. Like most ‘concepts’, there is a
lack of clarity around definition. This puts it in danger of becoming another
meaningless concept that is bandied about. So what have I found?
Economic and political motivations
The
UK Government defines digital inclusion as ‘having the right access,
skills, motivation and trust to confidently go online’ (Cabinet Office, 2014). They
want us to be digitally capable of going online and using it to improve our
lives. However the government’s motivations stem from creating opportunities
and ensuring that we have the competencies needed to develop the economy. This
is evident from that fact that many of the projects that have arisen from the Digital
Strategy have focused on access and skills ( see Go ON UK ). While large companies are
working alongside the government to ensure we have the infrastructure to
deliver platforms and services, Go-ON UK are working with partners to make sure
that adults have the basic digital skills needed. And there are some fantastic
projects being delivered, many of which are focusing on those who are deemed to
be excluded (socio-economic areas of older demographics).
In fact even Europe has a digital strategy
to ‘help digital technologies, including the internet, deliver sustainable
economic growth’. Once again this focuses on access and skills, although there
is also mention of cyber-security. However this focus on access and skills, has
a hint of technological determinism (technology will make the world a better
place) about it. It divides people into the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’,
focusing on access and skills. Skills and access are not the only things that
influence decision about whether people find using technology appropriate or
meaningful in their lives.
Motivation to go online
The government strategy highlights ‘motivation’ and ‘trust’
as elements of their digital strategy, and say that overcoming the barriers is
about all of them, but there seems to be little in depth discussion around the motivation
and trust barriers. The motivation seems to be that being able to go online
will make it easier to find a job, to improve household income, to get more
benefits from public services and entertainment. But I wonder whether these
motivations are too ‘capitalist’ in their approach. In other words, they are
appealing to people economically and financially, rather than socially and
culturally. Motivation is about the relevance to the individual, and the triggers
will be different for different people. There cannot be a one size fits all approach.
Digital Inclusion (Seale, 2009)
Seale’s (2009) report is an update about the research being
conducted around digital inclusion, and what wider discussions can bring to the
development of technology enhanced learning. She highlights in the opening that
definitions of digital inclusion
‘tend to embed within them an expectation or imperative that digital
inclusion happens when all members of society are able to access the affordances
offered by technology use ‘(page 3)
The report focuses on four aspects: Access, Use, Participation
and Empowerment. Access, as is seen by the Government’s digital strategy links
to technologies and services (direct access is seen as being able to access
technology and indirect access is about accessing online services). Use, is highlighted
as mainly being about the skills that individuals have to use technology.
However, Seale notes that it is not just a lack of skills that influences
technology use. Technology must have some meaningful use in people’s lives and
afford contextual uses; in other words, does it have a ‘life-fit’. Seale also
asks us whether non-use of technology is problematic. This is an important question,
which later papers will explore.
Traditionally, ‘inclusion’ is focused on helping people to
participate in society. Therefore digital inclusion is about helping to reduce the
disadvantaged, and encourage participation for the marginalised. (see the
Helsper paper on my next blog post for the link between social and digital
exclusion). Seale draws our attention to
Cook and Light (2006) who explore participation and see it as a fluid process
and make a distinction between active (we influence the way technology is used)
and passive (recipients of the service) participation.
This leads on to the final aspect, empowerment. You see power comes up a lot in
discussions about the online world, but also in discussions about inclusion. Seale
highlights that the government see technology as a vehicle for empowerment, and
link this to the idea of independence. Seale issues some sensible warnings
about linking empowerment to independence and self-sufficiency, as it leads us
to link digital inclusion with skills deficits, forgetting that people have a
whole host of other ‘strengths, motivations and resourcefulness’ to bring with
them. Personally I would rather use the term self-efficacy, that is, an
individual believes in their own ability, which is what I think empowerment is
all about rather than independence.
The key point that Seale is making is that digital inclusion
is multi-faceted. It is a social, cultural and cognitive concepts, and so we
must define and redefine for our own contexts while recognising the wider
discussions that are going on. If we think about inclusion in terms of access,
then we consider how equality of opportunity can benefit. If we think about inclusion
in terms of use and empowerment, then we are prompted to think about the
equality of the outcomes not just the opportunities.
For my next blog post I will be exploring the concept of
digital inclusion some more, and looking at how this links to social
disadvantage, participation, and whether we need to change how we look at this,
and consider whether digital choice is a good thing.
Cabinet Office (2014) Government Digital Inclusion Strategy,
13 April 2014 [online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-digital-inclusion-strategy
Cook, J & Light, A. (2006) New patterns of power and
participation? Designing ICT for Informal and Personalised Flexible Community
Learning. E-Learning, 3, 1, 51-61.
Seale, J. (2009). Digital Inclusion. A research briefing by
the technology enhanced learning phase of the teaching and learning research
programme. [online] Available at: http://www.tlrp.org/docs/DigitalInclusion.pdf
