Starting with a deficit
When I was in seventh grade, I had a teacher who loved origami, every school project we turned that year involved some form of origami element. However, apparently the experience did not sink in because I had almost close to no abilities coming into this project. The level of dependence of the easy “google fix” is so profound that it is almost paralyzing, at the same time once the initial shock of not being to “google it” passes; your brain does try itself to become the search engine.
To start the project I took a good look at the picture carefully and at a glance it seemed like a simple thing to imitate. I had paper and scissors at home but I quickly realized I did not have enough paper (given my many fialed attempts) or the right consistency of paper. The only place I could look for instructions on how to do this is my phone or computer, so without that, all I had was direct observation and trial and error. Could not and did not figure out how to cut it to give it 5 points or even make it look pleasing to the eye. But as I got more involved in the process, it wasn’t entirely unpleasant the fact that I could simply google the solution.
It would have helped if I had had someone show me how to do it first, like either a tutorial or a teacher. This made me think about people, friends back in high school, who did not have access to the quick digital solution to complete certain homeworks. They still need access to information one way or the other. The digital divide that the literature refers to as the gap between those that have access to digital devices and those that do not is always changing and evolving (Wookjoon, 2016). This divide creates gaps of access to information and opportunities that over time leave people at a disadvantage. In addition, as pointed out in the readings, this divide goes beyond the physical access to phones, computer, and internet. The concept of digital divide now refers not only to the equipment but also to the literacy required to interact meaningfully with the technology (Ghobadi & Ghobadi, 2015).
Another interesting point that this experience brought to me was that it made me think about the ways we use technology to interact with others, like our family, in order to get the resources that we need. As soon as frustration sunk in because I couldn’t google the information, I thought I could call someone and see if they could explain it to me by phone or better yet, facetime someone who could walk me through the steps. Again it would involve using resources I was not allowed to use during the project. I Rojas et al. (2017) talk about the transmission of a family’s cultural capital over time and how those practices affect and mold the way we are socialized into the technology we use. There are pronounced differences in terms of adoption of technology depending on economic resources, gender, and cultural brackground. These differences are part of what Rojas et al. describe as the cultural capital that passes from generation to generation. So we can be limited or not by our family which is our immediate socializing agent.
Overall, a short break from a solution to a problem without technology is momentary refreshing but not viable. Access to tools, information, and knowing how to use all that is vital to a successful interaction in the digital world we live in.
References
Rojas, V., de los Ángeles Flores, M., & Straubhaar, J. (2017). Digital Inequality on the us-Mexico Border:
A Multigenerational Case Study in Laredo, Texas. Estudios Fronterizos, 18(37), 18–40.
Ghobadi, S., & Ghobadi, Z. (2015). How access gaps interact and shape digital divide: a cognitive
investigation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(4), 330–340.
Wookjoon, S. (2016). A study of the digital divide in the current phase of the information age: The
moderating effect of smartphones. Information Polity: The International Journal Of Government &
Democracy In The Information Age, 21(3), 291.
Pictures
