Urban Youth and Emerging Technologies

University of Pennsylvania

Spring Semester 2003

Mondays, 2:00-4:00 p.m.

Course Description:

 

The emergence of new information and communications technologies is changing the very fabric of our society, reshaping how we learn, work and participate as citizens in a growing global community. This course will examine the implications of these changes for urban schools and communities, using the greater Philadelphia area as a case study. Our framing questions will include: 1) Are emerging technologies furthering patterns of inequity and stratification in the United States?, 2) What technology-related knowledge, skills or practices are important to successful participation in current contexts of education, work, community and government?, and 3) What kinds of learning experiences and structures are successful in facilitating these skills and knowledge for youth in urban schools and communities? Why? And how do we know?

 

The course readings introduce different theoretical frames for viewing practice with technology and explore dimensions of content, identity, learning, community, and activity systems. Youth voices, particularly voices of those living in low-income and ethnically diverse communities, are dramatically missing from current debates around the implications of emerging technologies. In an effort to bridge this gap, and to explore how practice and theory can mutually inform one another, this course is designed around participatory projects. In small groups, students will spend 2-4 hours a week outside of class time participating in one of several contexts in which young people around Philadelphia are learning about and utilizing emerging technologies (e.g. web page design, video, animation software, geographical information systems). Prior experience with these technologies is not a prerequisite although students should be open to learning and utilizing new tools as part of their course experience. These fieldsites will include both school-based/classroom projects and after-school/community-based projects. Student placement in a fieldsite will be negotiated in an attempt to balance individual interests/constraints with program interests/constraints. Readings in the first section of the course will include a critical examination of the epistemological and methodological assumptions behind this form of research and learning.

 

Within each of the participatory projects, students will collect information from a range of data sources including interviews, artifacts and field notes. A regular part of our class sessions will include collaborative analysis and discussion of these data. The analytical “product” of this work will take two forms. First, each small group will work with youth using emerging technologies for a range of purposes. The products developed through these projects (e.g. video, webpage, GIS map) will be co-presented and shared at the end of class. The second analytical product of this class will be individual portfolios in which you will be asked to articulate, frame and explore an inquiry question around emerging technologies. You are encouraged to use this portfolio to explore and extend your current research interests.

 

 Course Readings:

 

REQUIRED BULKPACK: [Replica Copy Center will bring copies for purchase during the first day of class. Cash and check accepted.]

 

Course Activities and Assignments:

 

A.     Participatory Projects (Grade weight – 25%)

In small groups, students will spend 2-4 hours a week outside of class participating in one of several contexts in which young people around Philadelphia are learning about and utilizing emerging technologies (e.g. web page design, video, animation software, geographical information systems). The details of fieldwork – including placement, frequency and duration of field visits – will depend on class size. The first several weeks of the semester will be spent negotiating and defining these details. In all cases, students will be collaborating with youth around a project using an emerging technology. For instance, one group will be collaborating with youth doing video documentaries on the history of public education, while another will be collaborating with youth using geographical information systems and handheld technologies to map data about their neighborhood. The products from these projects (e.g. GIS map, video, webpage) will be co-presented in class on April 28th.

 

B.      Individual Portfolios (Grade weight – 40%)

In addition to your participatory projects with youth, you will be expected to develop an individual portfolio. The purpose of this portfolio is to help you explore and make connections between your fieldwork around emerging technologies and the theory and research associated with related topics. It is intended to reflect a semester-long, theoretical exploration of a problem or question that emerges from practice. Early in the semester, you will identify a question from your fieldwork about youth and emerging technologies that you would like to explore in more depth. You will be expected to write fieldnotes around your experiences with youth and collect other data as related to your inquiry question (e.g. interviews, artifacts). A regular part of our class sessions will include collaborative analysis and discussion of these data. These portfolios will be due in our last day of class May 5th.

 

The components of the portfolio include:

a)      An inquiry question; (due 2/24);

b)      An autobiographical introduction to the inquiry question (draft due 3/31);

c)      An analytical essay that links the course readings to a vignette from your fieldwork and ties together the pieces of the portfolio (draft due 4/14);

d)      A range of writing and artifacts that you choose to include.

 

C. Attendance, Preparation and Participation (Grade weight – 15%)

You are expected to complete the readings, attend class, and particulate thoughtfully in both face-to-face course interactions and discussions that occur in the on-line class space (using Blackboard). Everyone in this class, the instructor included, is considered both a learner and a teacher. The richness and meaningfulness of this course will depend greatly on the contribution of each member. Your engagement and participation in these activities are important not only for your own learning but also the learning of others.

 

D.  Leading Class Discussion (Grade weight – 10%)

Along with another colleague, you will be responsible for leading the class discussion for a portion of one week’s class. Once you have complete the readings and talked amongst yourselves, you should arrange to meet me at least three days before your assigned class. By Friday night prior to your session, you should post discussion questions on the blackboard site to guide other students in their readings. (You may not lead the discussion if you do not meet with me ahead of time.)

 

E.     Jigsaw Summaries (Grade weight – 10%)

In three of the classes, we will use a jigsaw approach to consider diverse perspectives on the topic of discussion. In a jigsaw structure, individuals “specialize” in a different area and are assigned to different readings. Within small group discussions, each individual presents on their specialization to inform a large group discussion. To support this sharing, each individual will write a 1-2 page summary of their assigned reading. A copy of this summary should be posted on Blackboard prior to class discussion. The summary should include the complete reference of the reading you are reviewing, your name, and a summary of the big ideas. Bulleted lists, visuals, and tables are encouraged.

 


Course Outline: INTRODUCTION – OVERVIEW OF THE COURSE

 

 

DATE

TOPIC/THEME

QUESTIONS

READINGS

Jan. 27th

Education and Research for Social Change

How can education and research mutually inform one another?

Greenwood, D. and M. Levin (2000). “Reconstructing the relationships between universities and society through action research.” In Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 85-106

 

Fine, M. (1994). “Working the hyphens.” In Denzin, N.K. & Guba (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 70-82.

 

Steinberg, S.R. & Kincheloe, J.L. (Eds.) (1998). Students as researchers: Creating classrooms that matter. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press. (Chapter 1, pp. 1-19, and Chapter 16, pp. 228-246).

 

Feb. 3rd

The Role of Technology in the Information Age

How are emerging technologies reshaping the practices of education, community, government and the workplace?

 

What implications do emerging technologies have for how we understand pathways to future success for urban youth?

National Academy of Engineering (2002). Technically speaking: Why all Americans need to know more about technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. http://www.nap.edu/books/0309082625/html/ (pp. 1-46)

 

Group A Jigsaw: Education

* National Educational Technology Standards http://www.iste.org/standards/index.html

* diSessa, A.A. (1988). What will it mean to be “educated” in 2020?, In Nickerson, R.S. & Zodhiates, P.P. (Eds) Technology in education: Looking toward 2020. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 43-66.

 

Group B Jigsaw: Workforce/Economy

* Aronowitz, S. (2001) Technology and the future of work, In Trend, D. (Ed) Reading digital culture. Blackwell Publishers, pp. 133-143.

* Castells, M. (2001) The informational economy, In Trend, D. (Ed) Reading digital culture. Blackwell Publishers, pp. 154-158.

 

Group C Jigsaw: Community

* Schön, D.A., Sanyal, B. & Mitchell, W. (Eds.) (forthcoming) High technology and low-income communities: Prospects for the positive use of advanced information technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Introduction- http://web.mit.edu/sap/www/colloquium96/papers/introduction.html

 

Group D Jigsaw: Government

* Poster, M. (2001). Cyberdemocracy: The Internet and the public sphere, In Trend, D. (Ed) Reading digital culture. Blackwell Publishers, pp. 259-271.

 

Feb 10th

Perspectives on the Digital Divide: Access and Equity in the Information Age

Will emerging technologies widen existing patterns of inequity in the United States?

Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. NY: McGraw-Hill (Chapter 12: The Digital Divide, pp. 255-279)

 

Compaine, B.M.  (Ed.) (2001) The digital divide: Facing a crisis or creating a myth? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Chapter 2: Declare the war won, pp. 315-355).

 

Warschauer, M.. (July, 2002).  Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide.  http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_7/warschauer/index.html

 

REPORTS ONLINE (OPTIONAL):

National Telecommunications & Information Administration (2001). A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Presence Online http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/

 

Harris, Leslie & Associates (July 2002) Bringing a Nation Online: The Importance of Federal Leadership http://www.bc-net.org/Broadband/FixedWirelessBroadbandProject.nsf/c39905004594509b85256c020048da39/fd5c34c8ce893c7185256c06004b05b5?OpenDocument

 

Feb. 17th

Perspectives on Youth Studies

How does our frame of “youth” and childhood influence our approach to action research in education?

James, A., Jenks, C. & Prout, A. (1998) Theorizing childhood. NY: Teachers College. (Chapter 10, pp. 195-218).

 

Lee, N. (2001) The extensions of childhood: Technologies, children and independence. In Hutchby, I. & Moran-Ellis, J. (Eds.) Children, technology and culture. London and NY: Routledge/Falmer Press, pp. 153—169.

 

Caputo, V. (1995) Anthropology’s silent “others” In V. Amit-Talai & H. Wulff (Eds) Youth cultures: A cross-cultural perspective. London and NY: Routledge Press, pp. 19-42.

 

Mar. 3rd

Technology as Tools: In and Of Culture

What role do technological tools play in practice?

Provenzon, E.F. (1998). Educational computing as a value-laden technology, In H.S. Shapiro & D. Purpel (Eds.) Critical social issues in American education. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 299-307.

 

Hutchby, I. & Moran-Ellis, J. (2001) Children, technology and culture. NY: Routledge/Falmer Press. (Introduction, pp. 1-10).

 

Bromley, H. (1998). Data-driven democracy:  Social assessment of educational computing, In. H. Bromley & M.W. Apple (Eds.) Education/Technology/Power. NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 1-25.

 

Mar. 17th

Perspectives on Practice with Technology: Issues of Content

What role does content play in how youth engage and practice with emerging technologies?

Children’s Partnership (1999) Online content for low-income and underserved Americans: The digital divide’s new frontier. http://www.childrenspartnership.org/pub/low_income/index.html

 

Kafai, Y. (1996) Electronic play worlds: Gender differences in children’s construction of video games. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick (Eds.) Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 97-123.

 

Pinkard, N. (2000) Lyric reader: An architecture for creating intrinsically motivating and culturally responsive reading environments. http://www.ciera.org/library/reports/inquiry-1/1-013/1-013.html

 

Mar. 24th

Perspectives on Practice with Technology: Issues of Identity

What role does identity play in how youth engage and practice with emerging technologies?

Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D. & Cain, C. (1998) Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Chapter 2, pp. 19-46, & Chapter 3, pp. 49-65).

 

Turkle, S. (1995) Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. Simon & Schuster. (Introduction, pp. 9-26.

 

A Jigsaw Reading:

Bynoe, Y. Exploring the digital divide. In the Politically Black Collection of Urban Think Tank Inc. http://www.urbanthinktank.org/pb07.cfm

 

B Jigsaw Reading:

Nakamura, L. (2001) Race in/for cyberspace: Identity tourism and racial passing on the Internet. In D. Trend (Ed.) Reading digital culture. Blackwell Publishers, pp. 226-235.

 

C Jigsaw Reading:

Gomez-Pena, G. (2001) The virtual barrio @ the other frontier (or the Chicago Interneta). In D. Trend (Ed.) Reading digital culture. Blackwell Publishers, pp. 281-286.

 

D Jigsaw Reading:

Leonard, M. (1998) Paper planes: Travelling the new grrrl geographies. In T. Skelton & G. Valentine (Eds.) Cool places: Geographies of youth cultures. London & NY: Routledge, pp. 101-118.

 

Mar. 31st

Perspectives on Practice with Technology: Issues of Learning

What role do issues of learning play in how youth engage and practice with emerging technologies?

Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. NY: McGraw-Hill (Chapter 7: N-Gen Learning, pp. 125-157.)

 

Tyner, K. (1998) Literacy in a digital world: Teaching and learning in the age of information. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. (Chapter 4, pp. 60-68)

 

Crook, C. (1996) Schools of the future, In T. Gill (Ed.) Electronic children: How children are responding to the information revolution. National Children’s Bureau, pp. 75-88.

 

Means, B., Penuel, W.R., & Padilla, C. (2001) The connected school. Jossey-Bass, pp. 194-229.

 

Apr. 7th

Perspectives on Practice with Technology: Issues of Community and Activity Systems

What roles do community and activity context play in how youth engage and practice with emerging technologies?

Brown, K. & Cole, M. Cultural historical activity theory and the expansion of opportunities for learning after school. http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/MCole/browncole.html

 

Heath, S.B. & McLaughlin, M.W. (1994) Learning for anything everyday, Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 471-489.

 

Giacquinta, J.B., Bauer, J., & Levin, J.E. (1993) Beyond technology’s promise: An examination of children’s educational computing at home. Cambridge University Press (Chapter 9: Redefining a new technology as a social innovation, pp. 132-148; Chapter 10, pp. 149-166)

 

Apr. 14th

Contexts of Youth Practice with Technology

What are youth practices and experiences with emerging technologies across different contexts of use?

 

What are the influences of youth praxis with emerging technologies across contexts?

Jigsaw A: School

Levin, D. & Arafeh, S. (2002) The digital disconnect: The widening gap between internet-savvy students and their schools. Pew Internet & American Life Report. Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=67

 

Jigsaw B: Home

Ba, H., Tally, W. & Tsikalas, K. (2002) Investigating children’s emerging digital literacies. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, Vol. 1, No. 4, http://www.bc.edu/research/intasc/jtla/journal/v1n4.shtml

 

Jigsaw C: Online

Center for Media Education. (2001) Teensites.com: A field guide to the new digital landscape. Center for Media Education Report. Washington, D.C. http://www.cme.org/teenstudy/

 

Jigsaw D: Community

Penuel, B., Michalchik, V., Kim, D. & Shear, L. (2001) The organization of learning in community technology centers: Learning with technologies in six communities. SRI International.

 

 

 

 

Supplemental Readings:

 

Ba, H., Culp, K.M., Green, L. Henriquez, A. & Honey, M. Effective technology use in low-income communities: Research review for the America Connects Consortium, by the Center for Children and Technology at Education Development Center, Inc. http://www.americaconnects.net/research/default.asp?subid=25

 

Becker, H.J. (2000) Pedagogical motivations for student computer use that lead to student engagement. Educational Technology http://www.crito.uci.edu/TLC/FINDINGS/spec_rpt_pedegogical/

 

Davies, B. (1999) What is Feminist Poststructuralist Research: Examining Texts of Childhood, In. B. Kamler (Ed.) Constructing gender and difference: Critical research perspectives on early childhood. NJ: Hampton Press, pp. 13-31).

 

Facer, K. Furlong, J., Furlong, R. & Sutherland, R. (2001) Home is where the hardware is. In Hutchby, I. & Moran-Ellis, J. (Eds.) Children, technology and culture. NY: Routledge/Falmer Press, pp. 13-27.

 

Honey, M., Moeller, B., Brunner, C., Bennett, D., Clemens, P. & Hawkins, J.(1991) Girls and design: Exploring the question of technological imagination. Center for Children and Technology Report. http://www2.edc.org/cct/publications_report_summary.asp?numPubId=48

 

Jones, S. (2002) The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today’s technology. Pew Internet & American Life Report. Washington, DC. http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=71

 

Kafai, Y. & Resnick, M. (1996) Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking and learning in a digital world. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

 

Knobel, K. & Lankshear, C. (2001) Cut, paste and publish: The production and consumption of zines. Paper presented at the State of the Art Conference, Athens, Georgia. http://www.geocities.com/c.lankshear/zines.html

 

Kuhlmann, A. & Friedman, L. (2001) Children learning with technology beyond the school bell and building: What do we know now? NCREL Report, Naperville, IL. http://www.ncrel.org/tech/child/

 

Malcom, S. (1998) Technology in 2020: Education a diverse population. In R. Nickerson & P. Zodhiates, Technology in education: Looking toward 2020. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 213-230.

 

McNamee, S. (1998) Youth, gender and video games: power and control in the home. In T. Skelton & G. Valentine (Eds.) Cool places: Geographies of youth cultures. London & NY: Routledge, pp. 195-206.

 

Sabo, K., Hart, R. & Iltus, S. (1998) Participatory approaches to program and project evaluation with children. Children’s Environments Research Group Report. City University of New York Graduate Center.

 

Schultz, K. (2001). Stretching the boundaries of participatory research: Insights from conducting research with urban adolescents, Australian Educational Researcher, Vol 28, No 2, pp. 1 – 28.

 

Valentine, G. & Holloway, S. (2001) “Technophobia’: Parents’ and children’s fears about information and communication technologies and the transformation of culture and society. In I. Hutchby & J. Moran-Ellis (Eds.) Children, technology and culture. London & NY: Routledge/Falmer Press, pp. 58-77.

 

Valentine, G., Holloway, S. & Bingham, N. (2000) Transforming cyberspace: Children’s interventions in the new public sphere. In S. Holloway & G. Valentine (Eds.) Children’s geographies: Playing, living, learning. London and NY: Routledge, pp. 156-173.

 

Zuga, K. (1996) Addressing women's ways of knowing to improve the technology education environment for all students. Journal of Technology Education. V10 n2 pp. 57-71. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v10n2/zuga.html

 

Related Organization Websites

 

Center for Children and Technology http://www2.edc.org/cct/

 

The Digital Divide Network http://www.digitaldividenetwork.org/content/sections/index.cfm

 

America Connects http://www.americaconnects.net/

 

Exploring Gender and Technology in Learning Environments: A Web-Based Instructional Resources http://www.gse.harvard.edu/~wit/exploring/

 

Center for Urban Youth and Technology http://www.albany.edu/cuyt/

 

SRI International http://www.sri.com/

 

International Society for Technology in Education http://www.iste.org/

 

U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology http://www.ed.gov/Technology/index.html

 

NCREL’s Educational Technology Resources Online http://www.ncrel.org/tech/

 

Greater Philadelphia Chapter of Community Technology Centers’ Network http://www.ctcnet-philly.org/

 

Gratz High School Youth-Driver Service-Learning Center http://www.gratzclusterydslc.org/

 

ProjecH.O.M.E. http://www.projecthome.org/neighborhood/family.html

 

Hopeworks ‘N Camden http://www.hopeworks.org/

 

Pennsylvania Service Learning Alliance Digital Divide Initiative http://www.delawarevalley.org/psla/

 

School District of Philadelphia – Learning Technologies Support Group http://www.ltsg.phila.k12.pa.us/

 

Pew Internet & American Life http://www.pewinternet.org/index.asp

 

Center for Media Education http://www.cme.org/

 

Just Think: Youth Media http://www.justthink.org/ymedia.html

 

Institute for African American E-Culture http://www.iaaec.com/about/index.html

 

Education with New Technologies: Networked Learning Community http://learnweb.harvard.edu/ent/home/index.cfm

 

TappedIn – Online Workspace http://www.tappedin.org/

 

Edutopia Technology Integration Resources (George Lucas Educational Foundation) http://www.glef.org/