Level+2+Digital+Divide

=K-12 Teachers and the Second Level Digital Divide=

__Description__
The purpose of this study is to investigate the Second Level Digital Divide as it relates to K-12 environments in a large, urban area. The TPACK model is used as the analytic framework for this analyses. The study tests for differences in the use of instructional technology, by K-12 teachers, across school economic factors. Survey data from 94 practicing K-12 teachers is obtained to complete the analysis.

__Purpose__
The purpose of this study is to investigate the Second Level Digital Divide as it relates to P-12 environments in a large, urban area. The TPACK model is used as the analytic framework for this analyses. The study tests for differences in the use of instructional technology, by P-12 teachers, across school economic factors. Survey data from approximately 150 practicing P-12 teachers is obtained to complete the analysis. TPACK refers to the intersection of a teachers' technology, pedagogical, and content knowledge, (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). True technology integration occurs when a teacher draws upon these three knowledge bases and transforms students learning. However, the researchers investigate whether teachers are able to integrate technology to maximize student learning. The researchers investigate potentially important differences based on school economic factors.

__Background__
The Second Level Digital Divide refers to the difference, or "divide," in how technology is used as compared to the more well-known top-level Digital Divide which refers to the difference between the technology "haves" and "have nots" (Hargittai, 2002). In a 2002 study, Hargittai found differences in how members of the general population used computers to find digital information.

While Hargittai's study looked at differences in the general population's use of technology, there is also a body of research that suggests that there is a difference in how Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is being used in different educational environments. In schools that have a high percentage of students who come from economically disadvantaged homes, the students use ICT for remediation and skill reinforcement (Becker, 2000; Warschauer, Knobel, and Stone, 2004.) While in schools where the majority of the students are not from economically disadvantaged homes, the students use ICT for research, high-level analysis and synthesis (Becker, 2000; Warschauer, Knobel, and Stone, 2004.) It is important to note that the schools that have a higher percentage of students who come for economically disadvantaged homes do use the internet for research. However, it is perfunctory, at best, because researchers have found that often times they are simply using the internet to find basic information such as definitions of words ( Warschauer, Knobel, and Stone, 2004.)

The researchers work at a private university in a large city. Many of the research participants are teachers that work in the city, the suburbs, and in rural areas. The diversity of the environments in which the researchers' students teach has prompted the need to further investigate the issue of the Second Level Digital Divide.

This research study addresses the following research questions.
 * What pedagogical practices do teachers use in their classrooms?
 * How do teachers use technology in their classroom?
 * Is there a relationship between pedagogical practices and how technology is used?
 * Is there a difference in how technology is being use based on socio-economic factors?

__Methodology__
Ten graduate-level teacher education courses were surveyed at the beginning of a "Technology for Educators" course. The survey was given at the beginning of the course to determine how ITC is used prior to formal instruction. This is the data that will be reported in this study as it is the data that is relevant to the study. It is expected that approximately 150 practicing teachers will be enrolled in the courses. The survey measures pedagogical knowledge and practices (both with and without technology), content knowledge, technology skills (both personal and education-related) and school variables (economic factors, technological resources, and other professional resources available).

__Significance__
The significance of this study is that as the prevalence of Web 2.0 technologies and Cyberlearning increases it is important to make sure that care is taken to decrease important differences that may exists in how these tools are used in educational environments.

__References__
Becker, H. (2000). Who's wired and who's not: Children's access to and use of computer technology. __The Future of Children, 10__ (2), pp 44-75.

Hargittai, E. (2002). Second Level Digital Divide: Differences in People's Online Skills. //First Monday//. 7(4). Accessed 3/5/2010 http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/942/864

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record,108 (6), 1017-1054.  Warschauer, M., Knobel, M., & Stone, L. (2004). Technology and equity in schooling: Deconstructing the digital divide. __Educational Policy, 18__(4), pp 562-588.