Digital Inequalities & Educators

Updated: Dec 1, 2021

What the research says and what you need to know to face digital inequalities in your classroom, district, policy, and beyond

You’ve likely heard the buzzword “digital divide,” but what does it mean to you and your campus or your district? How does what you do affect this? And is it even the best term? How can this research inform policy at all levels?


Let’s Call it Digital Inequalities

The COVID-19 pandemic made clear the necessity of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to education, employment, and life in general, but it remains to be seen if policy will reflect what to many is obvious. ICTs are not a luxury; they are a necessity. This issue is not limited to education and technology. It is truly interdisciplinary in nature and calls on perspectives from sociology, communication, and beyond. The integration of insights from multiple disciplines is necessary to fully understand and inform this global challenge.



Replicating Inequalities

Ok, so we know there are digital inequalities. Isn’t the Internet supposed to be democratizing? Isn’t it supposed to make certain parts of life easier for everyone? The research shows otherwise. ICTs are actually replicating current inequalities - with the privileged remaining so and the less privileged remaining so. How does this happen?



Digital Literacy

What does this have to do with literacy? Misconceptions about skills can lead to lack of differentiation for digital literacy instruction. And what about if digital literacy isn't considered 'literacy' in the sense that it's valued the same as pen/paper reading and writing? If the concept of literacy doesn't include digital literacies, they often don't get the same time and effort in the curriculum. As Coiro et al. (2008) asserts “the pervasive power of an assessment that measures only traditional print literacies profoundly determines what is taught during reading instruction, especially within schools that are under the greatest pressure to raise scores. This has resulted in denying online reading experiences to students in the most economically challenged school districts” (p. 8). Thus how we define literacy influences what happens in our schools and community centers.


Instructional Implications

What does this mean for you as a teacher or an administrator or even you as a possible influencer of policy? How can you use this research to better serve the people of your community? The research suggests:

  • Don't make assumptions about technological skill, regardless of age

  • Differentiate for all levels of digital learners

  • Offer ongoing support, especially to adult learners

  • Remember that access is only the first step in someone achieving digital literacy


Access is Not Enough

As an individual teacher, you have to realize that having Chromebooks or iPads in your classroom is not enough. Students need to know how to use them and how to navigate a complex digital world. And they all come will different levels of proficiency. To be truly empowered digital drivers, they also need access, use, and support outside of the classroom.


The real question is: what do we do with this information? How can this research inform policy at all levels?





Want to know more? Learn more? Read more? This blog was informed by the following sources:


  • Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786.

  • boyd, d. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press.

  • Burke, A. & Hammett, R. (2009). Introduction: Rethinking assessment from the perspectives of new literacies. In Burke, A. & Hammett, R. (Eds.) Assessing New Literacies: Perspectives from the Classroom. Peter Lang.

  • Cazden, C., Cope, B., Fairclough, N., Gee, J., Kalantzis, M., Cook, J., Kress, G., Luke, A., Michaels, S., & Nakata, M. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 62-92.

  • Christ, T., Arya, P., & Liu, Y. (2019). Technology integration in literacy lessons: Challenges and successes. Literacy Research and Instruction, 58(1), 49-66.

  • Cochrane, E., Flavelle, C., & Rappeport, A. (2021, November 15). Here’s what’s in the infrastructure bill that Biden signed today. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/us/politics/whats-in-the-infrastructure-bill.html

  • Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. (2008). Central issues in new literacies and new literacies research. In Coiro, J., Knobel. M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on New Literacies. Routledge.

  • Collin, S., Karsenti, T., Ndimubandi, A., & Saffari, H. (2016). A connected generation? Digital inequalities in elementary and high school students according to age and socioeconomic level. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 42(5), 1-17.

  • Curwood, J. (2014). English teachers’ cultural models about technology: A microethnographic perspective on professional development. Journal of Literacy Research, 46(1), 9-38.

  • Dimmick. I. (2021, October 11). San Antonio has a road map to close its digital divide, but the price tag could be $600M. The San Antonio report. https://sanantonioreport.org/san-antonio-digital-divide-plan/

  • Eynon, R. (2021). Becoming digitally literate: Reinstating an educational lens to digital skills policies for adults. British Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 146-162.

  • Eynon, R. & Geniets, A. (2016). The digital skills paradox: How do digitally excluded youth develop skills to use the internet? Learning, Media, and Technology, 41(3), 463-479.

  • Fang. M., Canham, S., Battersby, L., Sixsmith, J., Wada, M., & Sixsmith, Ad. (2019). Exploring privilege in the digital divide: Implication for theory, policy, and practice. The Gerontologist, 59(1), 1-15.

  • Gee. J. (2015). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. Routledge.

  • Hargittai, E. (2003). The digital divide and what to do about it. In Jones, D. (Ed.) The New Economy Handbook. Elsevier Science.

  • Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na (t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among the members of the “net generation.” Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92-113.

  • Hargittai, E., Piper, A., & Morris, M. (2019). From internet access to internet skills: Digital inequality among older adults. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18, 881-890

  • Hosman, L. & Comisso, M. (2020). How do we understand ‘meaningful use’ of the internet? Of divides, skills and socio-technical awareness. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 18(3), 461-479.

  • Hytten, K. & Bettez, S. (2011). Understanding education for social justice. Education Foundations, 25(1-2), 7-24.

  • Jenkins, H., Clinton., K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. MacArthur Foundation.

  • Jung, J., Ding, A., Lu, Y., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & Glazewski. (2020). Is digital inequality a part of preservice teachers’ reasoning about technology integration? American Behavioral Scientist, 64(7), 994-1011.

  • Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2011.) New Literacies: Everyday practices and social learning (3rd ed.). Open University Press.

  • Lev-On, A., Steinfeld, N., Abu-Kishk, H., & Naim, S. (2020). The long-term effects of digital literacy programs for disadvantaged populations: Analyzing participants perceptions. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 19(1), 146-162.

  • Litchfield, I., Shukla, D., & Greenfield, S. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on the digital divide: A rapid review. BMJ Open, 11, 1-9.

  • Marabelli, M., Vaast, E., & Li, J. (2021). Preventing digital scars of COVID-19. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(2), 176-192.

  • Martin, N. & Lambert, C. (2015). Differentiating digital writing instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(2), 217-227. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.435

  • O’Keefe, P., Johnson, B., & Daley, K. (2021). Continuing the precedent: Financially disadvantaging young people in ‘unprecedented” COVID-19 times. Australian Social Policy Association, 00, 1-18.

  • Pangrazio, L. (2014). Reconceptualising critical digital literacy. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(2), 163-174.

  • Qureshi, S. (2021). Pandemics within the pandemic: Confronting socio-economic inequities in a datafied world. Information Technology for Development, 27(2), 151-170.

  • Rafalow, M. (2021). Digital equality requires more than access. Educational Technology, 102(6), 26-29.

  • Talaee, E. & Norooze, O. (2019). Re-conceptualization of ‘digital divide’ among primary school children in an era of saturated access to technology. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(1), 27-35.

  • Vasquez, M., Janks, H., & Comber, B. (2019). Critical literacy as a way of being and doing. Research & Policy, 96(5), 300-311.

  • Street, B. (1984). Cambridge studies in oral and literate culture: Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.

  • Szostak, R. (2013). The state of the field: Interdisciplinary research. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 31, 44-65.

  • Wadmany, R. & Kliachko, S. (2014). The significance of digital pedagogy: Teachers’ perceptions and the factors influencing their abilities as digital pedagogues. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 11(3), 22-33.

  • Wickens, C. & Miller, T. (2021). Gender, digital literacies, and higher education: Examinations of equity. In Niemi, N. & Weaver-Hightower, M. (Eds.) The Wiley Handbook of Gender Equity in Higher Education (1st ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

  • Wilkin, S., Davies, H., & Eynon, R. (2017). Addressing digital inequalities amongst young people: Conflicting discourses and complex outcomes. Oxford Review of Education, 43(3), 332-347.


35 views0 comments