Monday 29 December 2014

Digital inclusion - what does it mean?

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

3 comments:

  1. Hi Samantha, I wish you well in your effort, but part of me cringes inside every time I see another piece of research about digital inclusion. Those of us who have been doing this sort of stuff for some time know what works and we need resources putting into making it happen, not more research. I think the reason why people still want to research this is the amount of funding which is tied up in legacy systems that don't work, which means that the stuff that does work gets tried once, if ever, and then discarded. You'll find some of my views here http://thehugofamilyblog.wordpress.com/2013/11/01/introducing-the-hugo-team-1-john-popham/ and here http://wp.me/ppLRZ-2zO.

    Sorry if this seems a bit negative, but I want us all to get on and make this stuff happen

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your comment John, and I probably agree. In looking at the research there is, it does seem to be slanted towards 'what will help me get more funding' approach, which unfortunately is the way of the world. Personally (and as a Scout) I think we need a bit more of the lets get on with it attitude. Maybe a bit more sharing of the best practice? It was hard to find the smaller, more niche projects that are having a effect and influence. I believe shouting about the good stories is one of your specialties? Good links and they reflect very much what I think is my ideals (go where they are, make it normal, have fun, make it happen)
    My focus is that for our volunteers participation is a key to what we do. And that the skills and approaches they take doing other activities, can be utilised for going online (hence the self efficacy). That's not to say that our volunteers don't, as loads do, but I want to help others be motivated, by taking them back to our values and getting them to the place where they say, 'why wouldn't I?'. One of the scouting principles is learning by doing....and I think that echoes your point of just getting on with it. If we focus more on what is happening, others get inspired. I am doing things a bit backwards as ever, as I am taking what I know works and trying to see if research and theory backs it up. I have also been shouting about the benefits of being online for a few years now, and helping to put this into context from a safeguarding perspective. People are inundated with negative stories, especially around.child protection,so I find have to up the positive content and help people overcome their fears. I that involves a bit of practicing what I preach!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Glad to see we are singing from the same hymn sheet. I started this http://www.distories.co.uk to collect stories about the hooks that get people online. Not had many contributions yet

    ReplyDelete