Online Class-

I enjoyed the reading about 10 lessons in ICTs and education in the developing world. But the paper focused mostly on issues of access and the challenges of getting broadband connections and resources to install and troubleshoot computers in school. There was very little mention on the actual usage of the machines in the curriculum. The World Bank and other institutions must go beyond merely placing machines in the classroom and providing occasional teacher training. The actual use of the technology in the classroom and its integration in the curriculm is critically important.

In developing countries, even those lucky students who finish high school and college are often unemployable because the education they received is substandard. For example in a non-profit program that I ran to teach poor women computing skills, many women had finished college but could not use excel meaningfully because they did not understand why 2+2=4.

There is also the issue of language. Accessing the internet is fine but most of the content is in English and most government schools use English (if they do, ineffectively). While I agree that technology excites teachers and students alike, the most important part of this equation are the teachers and their training. Would not resources be better put into teacher education than on providing hardware.

What I am going to right about

I am planning to do a literature review with one main overiding question namely does the advent of modern communication technologies change existing power structures for the better. I want to look at two things to help answer this question. The first is the use of ICTs in developing countries to help people come out of poverty and to leapfrog development. The other is the use of the net in collective movements for democracy etc around the world. I already have several sources for the first aspect of this paper some of which come from the MIT press journal on information technology and development.

I hope that the two points for this paper are not too broad although the intent is to answer the same overarching question from two perspectives and maybe do a comparison of effectiveness between them.

Social Networking Sites

I think the papers we read today mostly confirmed what we already know: people who have are social offline take those connections online and are social online as well. The internet acts as a communication device to help people keep in touch in today's increasingly mobile world and increases weaker links. It may help people who who have problems with social cues etc. I am not surprised either that there is some fudging in the online dating world. Basically there appears to be consensus about the research on social capital and online interaction. What that means perhaps is that power structures may simply remain the same regardless of the existence of the internet. Power structures depend heavily on linkages and networking with people in powerful positions.

Social Networks

Duncan Watts theory of six degrees of separation is fascinating. The idea that I am connected to everyone on this planet by only six degrees of separation is amazing given that there are billions living on this planet. It shows us how close and yet how far we are from each other. Then the question is, what role are these social networking sites playing in bringing us close to each other. The paper by Donath and Boyd talk about the nuances of making our connections public and how the intricacies of the rules of social websites make an impact.

I agree with Donath and Boyd in when they that while we may increase our list of acquaintenances, we will not increase our deeper more fulfilling relationships. In the end of the day, it is these deeper relationships that help and support us. In the interest of the larger question that I am asking 'will power structures in the world be changed because of ICTs' I am curious whether this expanding network of acquaintenances can help start social movements. I think the answer is yes.

Nagging Questions

There are several things that are nagging me about this entire topic on the impact of social and communication aspects of ICTs. In fact this blog post is turning out to be a compendium of ideas that need to be further narrowed down.

Is the rise of the internet a fundamentally good thing or bad thing for our lifestyles? I suspect the answer is a yes but I do have some misgivings about it in the following context. Is the net impact of the net going to increase our social connectivity or decrease it or will it have no impact? Some studies we have read conclude that those who are social offline bring those contacts online as well and that their social behavior is reflected online. Like the television, is the Internet playing the role of a technology that reduces facetime between neighbors, friends and colleagues and if that is true then what is the impact of this loss?


One thing I am considering is doing a meta-analysis of studies on the impact of the internet on social capital in the western world. Please note that I am specifying the western world because many of the papers we read were ethnocentric and applied mostly only to the west.When looking at this we have to consider penetration of the internet among the population. For instance, internet access and langugae barriers probably make penetration rates so low in rural developing countries that it would be pointless to investigate its impact on social capital .

Phenomena such as second life and the inordinate amount of time that many people spend in that alternative universe also makes me uncomfortable. It would be interesting to find out what proportion of US youth spend a lot of time on the net gaming and what is the impact of this gaming on their lives? When previously they would hang out with their neighborhood friends or in other social activities, have these lifestyle changes made a significant impact in their life?

One other topic that interests me is the impact of the internet on people in developing countries? Has the net contributed in a significant way to their lives in terms of commerce or social connectivity? What proportion of people in South Asia have been enriched by this technology and how? Is there hope for deep structural change in their lives due to this particular technology? That is what entry into a utopian information age would entail, a deep structural change in which the poor get empowered and rich stop getting richer at the expense of the poor.

One other idea is investigate the use of the internet as a communication device by muslim fanatics to reach the public. There are reports about Al Qaeda resurgence and the emergence of videos on terrorist websites. How has the internet facilitated contact between these groups and the people they want to influence ? While this sounds like a fascinating but morbid study, I think it may be too much to pull together by the end of class.

Identity Online

Frankly, the readings for this particular session have felt a little surreal to me and created a sense of discomfort. The whole idea of gaming online with MUDDS for hours at a time seems unhealthy for most people. I think something seriously is wrong with the world if people have to retreat to MUDDs either to gain a sense of themselves or to escape their reality. I understand that some people with poor social skills would benefit from a world in which social cues are different but this is not true for the vast majority of us. In fact just reading these articles made me feel lonely.

I agree with Turkle that we all have multiple identities. For example , I am a mother, wife, employee, student, South Asian. If we engage fully with the world, why does anyone need to go to MUDDS to experience and test multiple identities. We have the real world around us to test out our identities. It could be that the virtual world feels safer in which to do that. But I feel that the lessons we learn by testing in the real world are difficult to replicate in the virtual. For instance, its easy to misconstrue what is said or communicated online without visual social cues. In fact this happens often. Turkle herself says so when she explores a young man's meeting with his online paramour.

Information Society

Are we truly in the era of the information society? I think not. We are still following the rules and regulations of the second wave and they show no sign of change. The super structure of society has not changed much and I do not forsee it doing so. However there are some exceptions to that. For instance, in Pakistan a country with few libraries and few information resources, the advent of the internet created a boon of information. Access to research papers, journals and other forms of information have changed the way research is conducted in Pakistan. The other thing that has happened now is that even villagers have more awareness of the world around them due to a proliferation of television channels from around the world that they can view now. They now know for instance the lifestyles of the rich in Pakistan and they are increasingly aware of the imbalance in wealth distribution in the country and resentment is growing. One result is a slide towards religious parties. So while the structure of society may remain unchanged, tremors are increasing.

I do believe that while modern communication technologies may change the way we live on a daily basis, the overall power structure of society will not change much. So, while globalization in the workforce is taking place due to new telephony technology and outsourcing is now the new mantra, this is not having an impact at a societal level. So while there is a new middle class that works in call centers in India, their emergence is not changing Indian society power structures significantly. There is growing consumerism and a better luxury goods market there but other than profits for certain companies, civil society there is continuing to function as before.