In our developing global society, we often find a sharp division between the “Haves” and the “Have Nots” with respect to new and innovative products appearing within the market places of differing economie
s. The leveling influence in assuring that a more equitable distribution of technology occurs between cultures and societies is communication. Further, I am in complete agreement with Dr. Elliot Soloway in that the most feasible method of information dissemination currently available is the portable phone, whether it is a simple cell phone or a newer, “smart” phone. This is a means of communication that is easily produced at a minimal cost and can be made available in great numbers in a very short time. The technology is fairly simple by current standards and signal coverage would be a small matter of arranging relay stations in a pattern to provide optimal area coverage.
With the (increased) introduction of mass communication, more information could be shared with a greater number of people, leading to awareness of new and emerging technologies that should be available to everyone. The influx of new technology, though common by our current standards, would be managed by local governments that would address issues concer
ning cultural and social needs and demands. This would, hopefully, maintain gender, cultural, and socioeconomic sensitivity. Until these technologies are made available, the thought of using current or older technologies in new ways to improve the standard of life for entire communities is a very real consideration. Many of the answers that have been developed for use by third world communities are based on common sense and are so simplistic that it is a wonder that they were not developed during the last century. This is the same kind of innovative thinking and initiative that should be applied top the incorporation of newer technologies as they become available.
For more information concerning the influx of technology into low-technology areas, visit the sites listed below:
“Big Tech Companies Can’t Forget Simple Gadgets, Inventors Say” -
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4225945.html
“Appropriate Technology Comes of Age: A Review of Some Recent Literature and Aid Policy Statements” http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=91665427
“A MacGyver for the Third World”
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2004/10/65276
“Tech targets the Third World”
http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/20/technology/fastforward_thirdworld.fortune/index.htm
“Big Tech Companies Can’t Forget Simple Gadgets, Inventors Say”
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4225945.html
“Science and Technology as a Tool of National Development in Third World Countries”
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Tadeo1.html
“Can the Cellphone Help End Global Poverty?”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/13/magazine/13anthropology-t.html?_r=1
s. The leveling influence in assuring that a more equitable distribution of technology occurs between cultures and societies is communication. Further, I am in complete agreement with Dr. Elliot Soloway in that the most feasible method of information dissemination currently available is the portable phone, whether it is a simple cell phone or a newer, “smart” phone. This is a means of communication that is easily produced at a minimal cost and can be made available in great numbers in a very short time. The technology is fairly simple by current standards and signal coverage would be a small matter of arranging relay stations in a pattern to provide optimal area coverage.With the (increased) introduction of mass communication, more information could be shared with a greater number of people, leading to awareness of new and emerging technologies that should be available to everyone. The influx of new technology, though common by our current standards, would be managed by local governments that would address issues concer
ning cultural and social needs and demands. This would, hopefully, maintain gender, cultural, and socioeconomic sensitivity. Until these technologies are made available, the thought of using current or older technologies in new ways to improve the standard of life for entire communities is a very real consideration. Many of the answers that have been developed for use by third world communities are based on common sense and are so simplistic that it is a wonder that they were not developed during the last century. This is the same kind of innovative thinking and initiative that should be applied top the incorporation of newer technologies as they become available.For more information concerning the influx of technology into low-technology areas, visit the sites listed below:
“Big Tech Companies Can’t Forget Simple Gadgets, Inventors Say” -
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4225945.html
“Appropriate Technology Comes of Age: A Review of Some Recent Literature and Aid Policy Statements” http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=91665427
“A MacGyver for the Third World”
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2004/10/65276
“Tech targets the Third World”
http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/20/technology/fastforward_thirdworld.fortune/index.htm
“Big Tech Companies Can’t Forget Simple Gadgets, Inventors Say”
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4225945.html
“Science and Technology as a Tool of National Development in Third World Countries”
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Tadeo1.html
“Can the Cellphone Help End Global Poverty?”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/13/magazine/13anthropology-t.html?_r=1
John
ReplyDeleteIf you read my blog, then you will know that I am not against global equal access. But at times, I feel like we, as techno-saturated, techno-loving, techno-savvy gurus, could be like Christian evangalists preaching our beliefs to Budhists and other non-Christian believers.
The perfect example, I think, comes from Rogers (2003) opening story about the Peruvian Village that had such grossly contaminated water that simply teaching them to boil their water would greatly improve their quality of their health and their life. It seems so obvious to us because we know for a fact that boiled water will eliminate many of the bad things in contaminated water. But attempts to do so failed because of the Peruvian Villages beliefs, because of their customs, and because of their way of life. They associated hot foods with illness. So boiling water (hot water) equated to illness so they would not boil their water despite factual information otherwise.
So in our attempts to give everyone a cell phone or equal internet access, would we be forcing anyone to boil their water when they believe hot means illness?
Koh
Roger, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
John, while I agree with you and Soloway that smartphones are a way to help bridge the digital divide, this issue is more controversial than one might imagine. I am our school’s technology teacher , and I got into trouble a couple years ago because I taught my 4th and 5th graders about SMS Google, a way to text Google in order to get information texted back such as weather conditions, flight info, money conversion, word definitions, etc. I think it’s an excellent resource. But one parent was livid that I would teach elementary school children about texting anything. She said that elementary school children had no business with cell phones. I tried to show her what could be done with them, and she refused to even look. She went to our school superintendent and complained!! Worse yet, even when I tried to show our superintendent what could be done with a cell phone, he said he didn’t understand what cell phones had to do with education. I think one problem is that people tend to limit their conception of technology to computers, when really there are countless other technology tools that may benefit learning and communicating. I have felt frustrated ever since this incident whenever I read a journal article or attend a educational technology conference session on how cell phones can be used in classrooms. I know that the number one person in our district has closed is mind to this possibility, and I’m not in a position to argue with the superintendent. Maybe I’ll try again after I have three more letters after my name! :-) Lisa
ReplyDelete