My hat really goes off to the artists at Ubisoft.

I think, though, that this is exactly where Banks might say that *meaningful* access comes in. For example, in your original post, you discussed population stratification and then concluded that “What this means is a dominant portion of the African American population does not have access to public funding, especially in schools, that can provide access to digital technologies, specifically computers and internet connectivity.” Based on the experiences of the many teachers I know who work in state designated high-poverty districts, this simply isn’t the case. (At least not in Illinois; I can’t speak for other places.) My mother works in a high-poverty school in Logan County that has multiple SMARTboards–a quite expensive technology–that were purchased through a grant. My husband works in a high-poverty, high-minority (read: Black) school in Springfield, and every single teacher was given a brand new MacBook at the beginning of the year because, as I understand it, the school had to spend the money allotted to it by the state for technology. Access to the hardware is not a problem in most Illinois schools. (Notice the “most.” I don’t claim to have knowledge of all Illinois schools, but I suspect my experience has been relived throughout the state.)

But *meaningful* access is a huge problem. These students do not understand why these technologies are relevant to their lives, and the teachers who are “given” these technologies don’t get any training on how to use them, let alone how to use them as pedagogical tools. When teachers have to spend more and more time trying to learn technology in order to teach it, other areas of education–which can also provide access for students–suffer. Our high-poverty classroom teachers are in a Catch-22. If they try to teach technology, they risk dropping ISAT scores under NCLB. But if they teach reading and math, they are accused of widening the digital divide.

OK, let me get down off my the-school-system-is-a-mess soapbox now.

I was also really intrigued by your admission that you’re not sure the use of “advanced” technology will better the lives of underserved populations. This is a question I’ve come to ask as well. And I also used to think technology is always good and wanted, as you say. I agree that it could give people “a leg up but that is only if they find personal value in such technologies.” And you’ve hit the nail on the head with that last bit, I think. This reminds me of how the European settlers came in and devalued the technologies of the Indians. Who are we to tell people who don’t want computers that they have to own/understand/use them?

“Access to technology means so much more than the presence of a particular tool, and definition of access that do not acknowledge how complex a problem it is are, in fact fraudulent, and will not serve to do anything meaningful for people who have consistently been denied anything close to real participation in our society.”

In my research of the digital immigrant and native I ran into the numbers he criticizes in that section and scrutinized them. I came to the exact same conclusions he does. They create an illusion of a closing gap, an illusion that is accepted as fact. The reality is the gap is not closing. however, another reality I came to realize in that research is the number of people in general that have access is actually much lower than many realize. even in talking to students at ISU I have seen evidence that not everyone has the access we are led to believe.

It is true that some have more ready access than others which is largely determined by family income. Still, the number of young people who use a computer for much more than homework (typing papers and doing a bit of research) is not as high as we are led to believe. Hand written papers in high schools was still the norm in 2005 (when I last taught).

So, this further convolutes the question of equal access because the numbers that constitute “access” in the first place are not commensurate with reality. this is really the issue I was attempting to get at with my mention of demographic data and the need to “close the divide”. Really, I see the divide most present in the ability to go to college or lack-there-of. This issue has more to do with the economic divide of the impoverished which is why I mentioned that particular segment of the population. The divider is the culture of poverty and the value of a job-right-now over the value of a job after you have been in school for four more years racking up inevitable debt that, given the cultural grounding active here, you will never ever be able to pay off.

Those who live in a state of poverty are forced by the culture of the impoverished to take up the mantel of “adult” and “provider” at a much younger age, often before even graduating from high school. The importance of a college degree, which also has digital literacies wrapped up with it, is not as high as being able to feed your family therefore investment in learning “digital citizenship” is not a of a premium.

The notion of equal access is post hand-to-mouth survival. The effort should be made to circumvent the culture of poverty, to get in at the root of the problem, to foster the desire for equal access. With out the desire there is no need, from the perspective of the subject that we deem should have the desire, for equal access.

I think the real issue is not a lack of access as much as it is a question of solving the poverty problem, a problem that, as of yet, society had determined cannot be solved.

How can we measure when the digital divide has been closed (or narrowed)? Do we measure it in acceptance or access? I do not deem either as a wrong answer. But it is tough to tell. How do we measure progress in this instance?

Matrix Online

Autoassault

Tablu Rasa

RFonline

Ryzome (though it has been resurrected several times now and is actually in operation yet again)

Sims Online

Earth and Beyond (probably one of the most tragic closures in MMORPG history)

Jump Gate (the original version. hopefully JG2 will survive)

Shadowbane

Fury

Heall Gate London (In the strictest sense not a MMORPG but it did have “massively” appeal. This one is actually in operation again but limited to the Far Eastern market.)

Google Lively (though not a MMORPG its demise is a result of the above illustrated interchange)