Sunday, October 18, 2009

Policy Brief: Access, the Digital Divide, and Special Populations

In today’s business environment, having Access to digital information entails having BOTH the physical access to digital technologies– i.e. having the hardware (computer equipment and internet connection) and software (computer programs ) to navigate the internet, and the skills access to utilize the internet to find digital information (source: Wikipedia, October 2009). According to 2009 reports, nearly 74% of Americans go online, which means that the vast majority of Americans have physical access to digital technology (source: World Internet Usage Statistics News and Population Stats; June 30, 2009). In a 2001 study of internet use at work, it was found that among government workers, 67.2% used a computer on the job and 52.5% used the Internet (source: Computer and Internet Use at Work in 2001; October 23, 2002). Extrapolating that data by the rate at which internet use in America has grown since 2002, we can estimate that approximately 92.1% of government workers today use a computer on the job and approximately 78.3% use the Internet. Thus, it is apparent that government workers have physical access to digital information. But, do they have the skills access to find and make use of today's digital learning technologies?

With so many Web 2.0 training options out there today which help achieve learning goals more efficiently and effectively than traditional teaching methods (source: WikiBooks, October 2009), it makes sense that the government is turning increasingly towards utilizing these new digital technologies to train their workers and disseminate Best Practices. However, with over 65% of government employees over the age of 45, it is often difficult for workers to gain the skills necessary to access and utilize this digital information. Thus, what could be a potentially huge money and time saving training tool for government workers, cannot be utilized on a wide scale until workers overcome this skills access barrier.

There are several options for overcoming this issue of digital skills access, the first of which would be to have the government invest in training courses for their employees to learn about Web 2.0 technologies. Studies have shown that increasing internet skills increases internet self-efficacy, which involves such items as confidence learning new skills using the internet, willingness to turn to an online discussion group when help is needed, and using the internet to gather data (source: Internet Self-Efficacy and the Psychology of the Digital Divide, September 2000). With internet skills training across the board, government workers could become more effective, more efficient, and any future policy training could become very simple and cost-effective to design and implement. The downside to doing internet skills training across the board is that it will be an initial investment upfront in the cost of the internet skills training, and a blanket training for all employees might not be the most effective way to address the skills gap that exists disproportionately across ages, races, and socioeconomic status.

The second option for overcoming the issue of digital skills access amongst government employees might be to require all government employees to take an initial Computer Skills Assessment to determine their current level of digital skill, and then to prescribe additional training according to the results of this test. Unlike the first option, this is not a simple blanket training for all employees, but instead would only train those workers who are lacking in certain skills (thus saving both the time and the cost of sending ALL employees to skills training). However, this option might potentially be perceived as unfair, as it may disproportionately single out the older, disabled, disadvantaged, or ethnic minority workers for the training classes (source: The Next Digital Divides, 2001). While these training classes may be essential life-learning skills that these groups may not have the opportunity to receive elsewhere, it could be contentious to address this issue in the workplace.

No comments:

Post a Comment