missing links: lessons on the digital divide from texas' telecommunications infrastructure fund...
DESCRIPTION
TIF’s Community Networking Program Began in 2000, produced 3 rounds of funding Spent about $70 million and supported 188 communities in Texas Grants ranged from $250K to $500K Authorized institutions were “fiscal agents” of community collaborations Grants required: Public access computers A community Web portal Computer and Internet classes/training In , University of Texas team evaluated first round of 36 grantee communitiesTRANSCRIPT
Missing Links: Lessons on the Digital Divide from
Texas' Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund"Internet Use in the Americas"
Mexico City, MexicoJune 16-17, 2005
Gary ChapmanLBJ School of Public AffairsUniversity of Texas at Austin
Texas’ Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund (TIF)
• Began in 1995, originally scheduled to last for ten years and to spend $1.5 billion
• Ended in August 2003, spent approximately $1.3 billion in 8 years
• Four authorized institutions received grants:• K-12 schools• Public libraries• Nonprofit medical facilities• Higher education
• Grants were for infrastructure and connectivity, not training nor personnel
TIF’s Community Networking Program
• Began in 2000, produced 3 rounds of funding
• Spent about $70 million and supported 188 communities in Texas
• Grants ranged from $250K to $500K
• Authorized institutions were “fiscal agents” of community collaborations
• Grants required:• Public access computers
• A community Web portal
• Computer and Internet classes/training
• In 2002-2004, University of Texas team evaluated first round of 36 grantee communities
Patterns in TIF’s Community Networking
• Investments tended to reinforce the inventories and control of the fiscal agent institutions
• Single computers deployed at unusual sites were underutilized or even unused
• Weak connection to the communities most adversely affected by the “digital divide”
• Poor or weak support by the TIF agency
• Funding was binary, either on or off, limiting sustainability planning
• Grantee agencies were inherently conservative
Missing Links: What Would Have Helped
• A coherent vision of community networking
• An appreciation of the concept of “effective use”
• A “learning community” of community leaders
A coherent vision of community networking
• There was no shared understanding of public access or community networking in the TIF program
• The TIF staff was unable to provide support for innovation and inspiration
• The grantee agencies were focused on the requirements of the grant contract
• Once the grant requirements were met, the projects tended to stop developing
• Case studies of innovative and successful projects might have helped
An appreciation of “effective use”
Michael Gurstein, New Jersey Institute of Technology:
“The capacity and opportunity to successfully integrate ICTs into the accomplishment of self or collaboratively identified goals."
An appreciation of “effective use”
Mark Warschauer, University of California at Irvine
New tools to support community networking
• Blogging• Content management systems
• Mambo• Drupal• Plone• CivicSpace
• Bulletin boards• Photo-sharing: Flickr, BuzzNet• Group calendaring• Web portal software• Collaborative software, project management, wikis
The importance of a “learning community”
• The importance of a virtual community to support learning and avoid duplication of mistakes
• There are easy-to-use tools for building virtual learning communities
• Support for case studies and distribution of knowledge
• “Digital divide” projects should be built around the development of a learning community
Gary ChapmanLBJ School of Public AffairsUniversity of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas, [email protected]
