Digital Divide 1
The Digital Divide in Education
Scott McDonald
School of Education, Liberty University
Author Note
Digital Divide 2
The Digital Divide in Education
The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent school closures that forced educational
systems across the country to enter into an online/remote phase of the existing learning
environment for the better part of two years, actually brought the notion of the digital and
technological divide that exists in the modern educational system to the forefront of topics
involving the massive disparity that remains from one school to another, one school system to
another, across the entire United States of America. The issue, which is one of the most, if not
the most, pervasive, and prohibitive problems facing the learning and instructional communities,
is a much broader and comprehensive puzzle in need of solving than most people might think or
expect that it is. In fact, the enigma of this particular administrative riddle, and metaphorically
systemic cog in the engine that drives the educational systems across the nation, is such a
massively combustible problem that there exists neither quantitatively nor qualitatively succinct
solution that will solve this panoramically voluminous and contentiously explosive equation of
equitable opportunity. It is a real world, big picture problem that is multi-layered in design and
multi-faceted in execution. As such, it will take a multi-pronged and exceptionally diverse effort
to even come close to scratching the surface of an extraordinarily complex and challenging issue,
let alone making a sizable enough dent in its full-bodied armor defense system preventing a
quick-strike, one-and-done assault to make lasting changes for the better.
It does not take a rocket scientist to unearth the rationalization behind the amalgamation
that has been created here and allowed to run amuck and unrestrained for so long that it has
almost become sacrosanct and above reproach. Nor must a genius be enlisted to meticulously
analyze and scrutinize the data then make a proposal that concludes with the notion, that this
particular problem will take a wealth of time and effort to solve. Unfortunately, this is one
Digital Divide 3
problem for which there may by not an easy, one size fits all solution. In fact, a cure to this
disease that has festered under the surface of the educational system for years; a cancer that has
been allowed to grow, unchecked, so long that it has metastasized and spread to other areas
within the system, that things can not be completely restored, just because we wish them to be.
Yet, still, you have to try; an effort has to be made to repair the damage as much as is humanly
possible, and then hold the line so that it does not get any worse. In order to do this, however,
you must understand just how deeply the rot has grown into the core. You must procure enough
information to be reasonably sure that you can, with at least a rough certainty that you can
ascertain the when and how the paradigm shift occurred, and what can be done, or is being done,
in the effort of making things better for everyone. To that extent, you must take a closer look at
the issue through the lens of your state and local community; the national perspective; and some
insight into the worldview, just to put things into perspective.
Georgia’s Digital Divide
It is no secret that, while the COVID-19 pandemic did force schools and businesses to
close for a time period which, in the midst of the online educational process that local schools
had to create in a very haphazard and spur of the moment kind of way, the pandemic that rose up
in Wuhan, China and spread across the world at the literal speed of flight, did not actually create
the digital divide and technological inequalities that exist today. It did, however, shed some light
on the matter as technology soon became the name of the game for many areas of our lives, we
had previously conducted amidst a cloud of darkness that did not allow us to see, with an
unobstructed view, the challenges plaguing many individuals and groups of people in our
society. The light that shone down upon our social discrepancies, however, was not like that of a
spotlight the lit up one specific spot, and one specific spot only. Instead, the light passed through
Digital Divide 4
a prism, fracturing, refracting, and reflecting the light into thousands of isolated beams. These
beams then illuminated the darkest chasms of societal inequity, lighting up various nooks and
crannies that might otherwise have remained in the dark forever, hidden in plain sight from the
average individual’s view. COVID-19, for all the negativity that came with it, served a positive
purpose as well. It illuminated various points and places along the proverbial map of society,
allowing the bigger, broader picture to emerge; making the invisible visible, and bringing social
injustice and inequality out of the darkness, the shadows, and society’s dimly lit alleyways,
especially in terms of education, so that everyone could finally see what was always there,
affecting a vast minority of people and groups, so that we could finally have a chance to truly see
the reality of the social issues around us. These issues were not just present in other parts of the
world, other areas across the nation, out of sight and out of mind to most people. They were
happening in our own state, our own neighborhoods, our own schools.
“As medical research reveals how the coronavirus disproportionally affected people of
lower socioeconomic status,” noted Tauheedah Baker-Jones (2021), in a guest editorial that
appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “the pandemic also laid bare other inequities,
specifically the uneven distribution of technology and access to information, a situation known
as the digital divide” (para.1). Baker-Jones, the chief equity and social justice officer of Atlanta
Public Schools, continued to explain how the State of Georgia was significantly and
disproportionately affected by this digital divide prior to and throughout the problems that
education faced because of the pandemic, and that it was continuously taking place in real-time.
The key was not how Georgians were affected by these issues of social injustice throughout the
educational system but, what can be done to obliterate this problem, so that a massive disparity
of people can be alleviated of the pain and trauma such educational inequity causes.
Digital Divide 5
“A current broadband map reveals that even today more than a million Georgians lack
access to reliable high-speed internet service” added Baker-Jones (2021, para. 2). Narrowing this
problem down to raw data that virtually everyone can understand, Baker-Jones utilizes data
provided by a Pew Research study which indicates that, “the immediate aftermath of COVID-19
shows more than half (59%) of low-income households (income less than $25,000/year) faced
obstacles with digital learning either from lack of devices or insufficient connectivity” (2021,
para. 2). Admittedly, Baker-Jones acknowledges that this informational access divide was in
place long before the pandemic ever forced the world to shelter in place. In fact, he admits the
divide has been an issue for a number of decades in Georgia’s school systems. The digital divide
is as easy to see as looking at the rift between students with access to such technological
advancements as personal computers, mobile tablets, and high-speed access, and those without
such access. The reality here is that people are trapped within this, very real, digital divide, based
on such societal triggers as economics, culture, education level, and environment. Diving even
further into the issue, Baker-Jones explained that these advances in technology, especially in
communities of color, are just not considered necessities. They are perceived as luxuries that do
not hold a candle to such things as eating, having a roof over their family’s heads and clothes on
their back, as well as access to health care. At least, that was the notion until COVID-19 and the
shuttering of the schoolhouse doors, made this technology a necessity as well. It was either that,
or get left behind in a number of areas, not the least of which was education for their children.
Baker-Jones believes this is simply a problem that should never affect families in Georgia. “As
the high-tech hub of the South and the birthplace of the civil rights movement,” he insisted,
“Atlanta can and should be the leader in this change” (2021, para. 6).
Digital Divide 6
To combat these problems and look to lead the way in reducing the digital divide chasm
to little more than a sidewalk crack, Baker-Jones, along with State School Superintendent
Richard Woods, announced several programs and partnerships that are helping to alleviate the
problem and provide everyone fair access to educational technology. Baker-Jones announced a
partnership with T-Mobile, Sprint, AT&T, and Comcast, in a campaign called Get Our Kids
Connected, that bolstered technology access in Atlanta and the surrounding communities by
providing “15,361 hotspots or in-home connectivity” as well as, distributing “48,689 devices
(primarily Chromebooks and iPads)” to those families and students who stood in the digital
divide and needed a hand-up to get out of the chasm and stand tall with those students already
benefiting from such things. Additionally, Baker-Jones (2021) explained that a $25 million
investment they received, was being put to use to provide new Chromebooks or iPads to every
student in Atlanta’s Public Schools system at the start of the current school year.
“Georgian’s – including students and families – need access to high-speed internet,”
explained Woods (2021), in a press release from Verizon, “and as a state we’re committed to
working together with communities and industry leaders to close the digital gap” (para. 3).
Woods was working in conjunction with Verizon Public Sector, to announce a program that
would make provisions for underserved communities to utilize wireless broadband date and
voice services. In addition, eligible recipients, as determined through state agencies, political
subdivisions, and non-profit groups, would be furnished with smart phones, laptops, and other
equipment, again to help traverse the divide.
“Students throughout Georgia,” concluded Woods (2021), ‘including in rural areas, need
access to digital devices and the internet connectivity to power their learning” (para.4). Woods
contends that the Georgia Department of Education has a strategic initiative that looks to provide
Digital Divide 7
child-focused, classroom-centered education policies in meaningful and supportive ways to each
of Georgia’s K-12 school districts,
Taking The Battle Nationally
“During the pandemic,” explained Jennifer Chronis, in a Verizon press release, “we
worked with state and local governments to provide connectivity for students shifting to online
education as quickly as possible” (Basye, 2021, para. 7). Chronis, Senior Vice President of
Verizon Public Sector, was talking about an initiative their company was providing eligible
recipients in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, New
Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.
“A significant digital divide persists,” added Chronis, “and our mission for our digital
access program is to help bridge the connectivity gap by using the same model as distance
learning to serve low-income households” (Basye, 2021, para. 7). Additionally, Chronis
explained that Verizon’s distance learning program was already providing internet connections
and solutions that was both dependable and affordable for more than thirty-eight million
students, during the pandemic, in forty states and the District of Columbia.
Another corporation that jumped into action following the pandemic’s shut down of
schools and public life virtually worldwide was Twitter. Jack Dorsey, the company’s CEO Jack
Dorsey, explained they were providing $10 million to California’s Oakland Unified School
District. Dorsey further explained that the donation was to provide 25,000 Chromebooks to the
school district, with the intention of providing, “Every single child in Oakland access to a laptop
and internet in their homes” (Ames, 2021, p.74). It acknowledged that 71.2% of the children in
the school district qualified for either free or reduced lunch during the year the pandemic hit. The
poverty surrounding this one school district, came in stark contrast to their close proximity to
Digital Divide 8
Silicon Valley, a symbol of power and wealth in the area. Reflecting trends of lower-income
households across the nation, more than half of those students did not have access to computers
or internet connectivity that would allow them to continue their education once the schools
switched to remote learning.
Baltimore, Maryland, was another major metropolitan city that was drastically affected
by the pandemic’s forced closure of schools, according to a paper written by John B. Horrigan,
entitled, Baltimore’s Digital Divide: Gaps in Internet Connectivity and the Impact on Low-
Income City Residents. Horrigan explained that a study conducted in 2018 noted that 96,000
households in Baltimore (40.7%) did not have any type of wireless internet service in their
homes, be it cable, fiber, or digital subscriber line service. In comparison, he stated that, during
that same timeframe, some 69.6% of households nationwide, had access to wireless service. The
digital divide in the city was most drastic in low-income households and communities of color.
In fact, one of the most glaring examples of this technology inequality was noted by the fact that
80.7% of all white households had either desktop or laptop computers in the home. This was in
comparison to only 60% of African American homes and just 47.5% of Hispanic homes. Sadly,
the numbers are not just indicative of Baltimore. They reflect the same kind of digital equity gap
in a vast majority of cities nationwide. This systemic digital divide is existent almost entirely
along socio-economic and socio-cultural lines (Horrigan, 2020, pp. 410-411).
“Those on the wrong side of the digital divide,” suggested Horrigan (2020), “are left out
during a national crisis that in many ways necessitates online connectivity for accessing
education and health care services” (p. 412).
In her article, Bridging the Digital Divide in Our Schools – Achieving Technology Equity
for All Students, Laura Chris Green conferred that there is no real ability to effectively navigate
Digital Divide 9
the crossing from one side of the divide to the other, thus eliminating that chasm as an
impediment to educational progress completely, without first providing equity for all students.
Just installing the appearance of equity in education will not cut it. It is an all or nothing
complexity that has to endure a national committal in order to attain success. There cannot be
even the remotest possibility of impropriety of the entire house of cards will topple. There is no
middle ground and no half-ditch effort that is going to work. It has to be a seamless and smooth
transition, from coast to coast, border to border, or it Is simply an effort in futility. It is only the
future of our nation that is at stake here. The next three or four generations will decide the
direction and fate for us all. We either chart a course that sees us, once again, shoot for the stars
and race along the corridors of the information superhighway in the pole position and the
leadership lap, or we walk, single file, off the edge of the cliff and into oblivion. It is really that
simple. Once again, it is an all or nothing engagement.
“Students who do not have access to computers and the internet (among other
technologies),” suggested Green (2018), “will get further and further behind their peers who do”
(para. 1). As they do, these are the 70% of the population who will miss out on the higher
paying, more prestigious jobs. Their opportunities for success will come few and far between,
while they shape the nation for the generations that will follow. We, as a nation, will grow more
dependent on government assistance and more entitled with each passing year. A government of
the people and for the people will quickly becomes one that owns the people and dictates their
every move. All the while, the gap in the divide widens, despite the goal and effort being
established to shorten the expanse and make a massive realignment of equity for all.
“If you are affluent, young (under 30), college educated, White or Asian, and live in a
city,” exclaimed Green (2018), in an almost exasperated tone, “then you are more likely to have
Digital Divide 10
technology access than if you are poor, older, less-educated, African American, Hispanic or
Native American, and live in a rural area” (A Look at the Digital Divide, para. 1). It does not
have to be this way. If we can somehow upend this top-heavy mentality, that rates winning alone
as more intrinsically fulfilling than competing and completing the race with a more unified, all-
inclusive, mentality. It will only get better when we all decide, as one nation, that appalling
statistics like the fact that even among the poorest of us all, white children are still three times as
likely to have access to technology in a significant, life-affirming manner than African American
children, and four times more likely to do so than Hispanic children. This can all be abated with
just a little give and take from either side of the political spectrum; with just a bit more caring
and sharing from the boardrooms and backrooms of American corporate society. Once we, as a
nation, become more convinced that a hand-up, out of poverty is more satisfyingly important
than a hand-out, while remaining poverty stricken. We must grow more unified in our efforts to
liberate the brotherhood of man as one species, than wallow in our differences and work to
assure our own divided, yet mutual destruction.
“The path to educational equity is a never-ending one,” concluded Green (2018), “but
one from which we as a nation cannot afford to stray” (Recommendations, para. 25).
Ryan Benedici, in his article simply entitled, Closing the Digital Divide, appears to see
things as potentially looking up on the national horizon, however, he seems to believe there is
another level to focus on as it contends with the digital divide, social justice, and technological
equity. Understanding that the overwhelming idea, nationally, is to quite simply put technology
in the hands of all K-12 students. He warns, however, that connectivity without teachability and
thus responsibility has the potential to be the equation, or perfect storm, so to speak, that flips
this entire notion on its head. Students are becoming more tech savvy every day. Even those in
Digital Divide 11
many of the underserved communities are, at least, somewhat knowledgeable about technology.
And, as they say, a little knowledge in the wrong hands, with the wrong assumptions, is the
recipe for disaster. So, without trying to sound cynical about, and evasive in regard to the digital
divide and its impact on the educational process, before providing all the ingredients of the
casserole of potential destruction, perhaps someone should take a step back, tilt your head a little
to the left and a little to the right, and attempt to both see and approach the problem from a
different angle. After all, 99 percent of inspiration is preparation; while perception frequently
changes everything, making for a safer and more intuitive student-teacher symbiosis altogether.
Besides, the rate at which technology is advancing these days is by far faster, and at a much more
accelerated rate than education. The idea of digital equity can often be mistaken for digital use
equity, and therein lies the root of the problem.
“To achieve that level of equity,” suggests Benedici (2020), “educators must use
technology to support the four C’s – collaboration, communication, creativity, and critical
thinking” (p. 41). He implores administrators to consider the notion that throwing additional
money at the problem is not always the wisest solution. A wise person understands the idea that
there is such a thing as throwing good money after bad. It is really not a smart move to give
technology devices to students who have either never utilized such devices before or have too
much tech savvy for their own good; at least not prior to building and creating a technology in
education plan that is strongly rooted in technical knowledge, teaching skill, and tertiary
responsibility. Otherwise, in the one hand the device is utterly useless for more than just a fancy
paperweight, while in the other hand, it is license to chart their own course for nowhere, bringing
nothing of value away from the journey.
Digital Divide 12
“Using technology to create engaging and more personalized learning is a big step toward
achieving equity,” contends Benedici (2020). “And that approach, of course, starts with
professional development” (p. 42). In order to move the needle in an effective manner and
empower students to utilize technology to aim higher and shoot for greater achievements,
educators must be solidly grounded in an honest and effective ability to utilize and manipulate
that same technology for themselves, be well versed in the application and practice of the devices
that have been provided for students use, and well equipped to follow an ingeniously defined, yet
fully adaptable gameplan for educational success.
Worldwide Educational Inequity Along the Technological Divide
“The emergency remote teaching put in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic has led to
the widening of the digital divide among higher education students,” explained Turgut Karakose,
in a 2021 article for the Educational Process International Journal (p. 53). The article set out to
establish a roadmap, or sorts, that would help researchers and practitioners more easily assimilate
information and ideas that were initiated during the chaotic teaching expedition embarked upon
during the pandemic and subsequent in-house educational work stoppage for students, educators,
administrators, and educational staff who were equally affected by the haphazardly positioned
remote learning process established, there in, because of the almost instantaneously agreed upon
and virtually universal freeze placed upon that average everyday citizen of the world. “The
sudden and largely unprepared transition,” continued Karakose (2021), “to emergency remote
teaching placed serious pressures on not only students, but also academics, the families of both,
and also other stakeholders as well” (p. 53).
“Therefore, integrating the digital and distance education approach into the higher
education system,” continued Karakose (2021), “correctly and effectively may both facilitate the
Digital Divide 13
achievement of instructional goals and also help to eliminate digital inequality in the higher
education student population” (p. 53). In an effort to create continuity within the learning
process, various policy makers and higher education administrators across the globe made
decisions at differing levels and staggered opportunities, as this unprecedented global issue
crisscrossed the planet in record fashion, tipping the scales of social justice and widening the
chasm of the digital divide unlike anything they had previously experienced. The fact is, that this
was one for the record books. It left both students and educators, alike, backpedaling in a
desperate attempt to remain upright, locked in, and neurotically focused on the present task at
hand. The actors in life’s great Shakespearean comedy, struggled immensely to maintain their
balance and keep their feet churning, ever so slowly, in a forward motion.
“None of the epidemics experienced throughout human history,” explained Karakose
(2021), “have had such a profound effect on global education, nor caused such a serious
educational crisis as the COVID-19 pandemic” (p. 54). The quarantine and lockdown, which was
designed, on the fly, to help minimize the impact of the novel coronavirus. It had, however, an
adverse effect on areas of our daily lives, including, most notably, health, the world’s economy,
and education. The impact on institutions of higher education were especially brutal. Content for
new courses had to be developed in a rapid and disjointed fashion that the continuity of the
education system was placed in peril. Pre-existing inequalities within the global education
community were only amplified by this measure. After all, access to technological devices, in
addition to high-speed, broadband internet services, were extremely limited for those students
living in impoverished conditions globally. Not to mention, the reality that not all educators, nor
parents in the homes, were as technologically advanced and savvy as others, forcing
administrators to take extreme, emergency measures to ensure adequate attempts at closing the
Digital Divide 14
global digital divide were made. While not all students met with the same success as others, the
overall feel was that it was considered to be a successful endeavor, in spite of the massive
amount of obstacles faced during the rollout. Still, it is expected that many socio-economic and
cultural problems will most likely arise in light of this global strain. The true depth and brevity of
the problematic cultural impact may be difficult to truly ascertain for some time now.
Additionally, it may take many years to compensate for the losses felt in underserved,
underprivileged communities; and some sectors of global society may, unfortunately, never fully
recover.
“The rollout of technological advances in tertiary teaching and learning continues
unabated,” noted Julie Willems (2019), in her article, entitled, Digital Equity: Considering the
Needs of Staff as a Social Justice Issue, which appeared in the Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology, in 2019 (p. 150).
“While considerations to address the digital divide and digital equity for tertiary students
has been a growing social justice issue since the 1980s,’ she asked, “what of the academic and
professional staff who facilitate their teaching and learning? They are the other side of the coin
and, as a cohort, are as diverse as the students they teach” (Willems, 2019, p. 150).
Willems continued to explain that it takes a keen eye and an expert ear, to see and hear,
respectively, those teachers and staff who would make for an impactful member of the
educational team, especially when that team is responsible for the implementation of technology
in teaching and learning, in today’s higher education settings. One apple can upset the cart, as
they say, and one teacher or staff member, who is not relatable with the rest of the members of
the team, could prove disastrous. Making those key judgments requires more than just a
situational perspective. Increasingly necessary, at the same time as the ability to judge a
Digital Divide 15
candidate on their merits and skills, is the ability to empathize with the perspective employee. In
addition, it is becoming vastly more important that schools and other educational institutions
have a strong, healthy professional development program available to all staff members,
especially involving digital technology that is utilized in the education and development of
young minds, as a measure for both bridging and, hopefully, eventually eliminating the digital
divide that currently exists. It is also important, to create an area of empathetic understanding, in
regard to the various issues and problems staff members may encounter on a daily basis. Afterall,
attempting to lord over staff in a dictatorial manner, may actually backfire, as it could lead to
blowback and resistance that does nothing to help either side of the issue. The speaking softly
with a big stick in your hand approach that once worked for President Teddy Roosevelt, may not
be as effective as the notion of catching flies with honey. It is a different day, and a different
time, thus, a different approach to building and maintaining staff in this technological teaching
and learning landscape. A firm, yet nurturing style of leadership may be your best approach to
staff development.
“On the flip side,” concluded Willems (2019), “and with consideration for diversity, it
also recognizes the possibility of utilizing pedagogical approaches that do not adopt the
mandated technology” (p. 153). Especially when you consider the fact that, just because the staff
is invested in the technology from both teaching and learning aspects, does not automatically
mean they will utilizes said technology in the classroom, based on their positions of leadership in
the classrooms.
“Learning in the 21st century,” explained authors Lina Dias and Angelin Victor (2017), in
their article for the European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, “is omnipresent with
computer and technology and is gaining momentous in the lives of the young and becoming part
Digital Divide 16
of education at schools” (p. 339). The pair acknowledged that the use of technology in an
effective manner in the classroom can provide an amazing boost to the learning process. Various
mobile devices that have becoming increasingly more readily available for students, as a new
generation of educational tools are appearing on the market at a rapid and almost insane rate.
This wide variety of gadgets, gizmos, devices, and machines are bolstering the way students
react to, think about, process, learn from, and utilize technology in the classroom setting. These
implements and apparatus are helping to facilitate new ways of learning. They are helping to
make for a more mobile learning environment where students can quite literally attain
knowledge anywhere, and at any time. Not to mention the benefits if this new technology in
providing students with almost instant access to a vary array of information and resources. In
addition, students are becoming more innovative and skillful along technology lines.
“Positive evidence from parents,” added Dias and Victor (2017), “such as: increased
engagement and interest in learning, gaining knowledge and technology skills, more time spent
on homework and more opportunity to make learning relevant and authentic” (p. 340).
Conclusion
The digital divide, which measures the distance between the haves and the have nots in
society, in terms of socioeconomic status, socio-cultural status, education background, and
environmental conditions, has been prevalent in society, to one degree or another, since the dawn
of civilization. Human beings have almost always taken stock of themselves and those around
them and then basically segregated themselves from one another based on what you have, who
you are, what you know, and where you live. In American society, it basically goes back to the
playground days, where the kid with the most and best toys, holds influence over the others,
chooses sides, and basically runs the show. Society, and the nature by which we established the
Digital Divide 17
standards of power has not seemed to have changed very much since those days on the
playground, where most of the values and beliefs, at the very least in terms with how we
associate with and align ourselves with and against one another. The only realistic detail that has
changed, is the size and price of the toys we use to measure one another by; the status symbols
that the majority of us signify ourselves with and stack ourselves up against those around us. The
digital part of the equation deals with technology and our access to the various means to reaching
certain goals and our ability to ascertain and understand the next big thing, the next great
technological advancement. From the days of Edison’s lightbulb and Bell’s telephone; to the
days of indoor plumbing, the automobile, the radio, and the television; to the days when IBM
created the computer, Microsoft sparked the great race to build it better, faster, and smaller, and
Apple became the world’s great purveyors of innovation. Now, it is simply a case of who can
outdo the other, from Gates to Jobs to Zuckerburg to Musk. We want it streamlined with all the
bells and whistles; shinier, smaller, and more powerful.
That last great race, the one involving the wonders of technology, has seeped into many
of the most important aspects of our lives like healthcare and education. The divide in education
is a giant chasm that seems to grow bigger and wider on an almost daily basis. At times, as the
gap slowly closes then even more quickly grows farther apart, it can get lost in the shuffle of
life’s ebbs and flows. A times, especially when it pertains to education, the chasm can be so wide
that it becomes virtually invisible to us. It is the great can not see the forest for the trees debate;
and it remains at arms-length, just beyond the scope of our vision and the reach of our grasp,
until something races to the forefront and brings it all into perspective. We are left with the
microscopic vision that shows us all the wrinkles and warts of decay – forcing us to take stock of
our societal woes and take note of our own personal glories and our contemptuous indignities.
Digital Divide 18
The great collision of force and might exposing the dark underbelly of our educational disparity
came wrapped in a bubble too tiny to see with the naked eye, yet too powerful and terrifying
miss practically every second of our daily lives – the dread coronavirus COVID-19. The
pandemic that took the world by storm, virtually overnight, made us shutter the schoolhouse
doors, ban access to hospitals and medical centers to all but the sickest amongst us, and close
down and lock up the titans of commerce and industry. We hid ourselves away in the homes that
once upon a time allowed us our greatest access to freedom but, were relegated to the tiny cages
that threatened to become our tombs.
COVID-19, for all the death, destruction, angst, and sorrow that it brought to our lives,
was a beacon of light that helped is take inventory of certain industries we far too often seemed
to take for granted. One of those was education, which, through the panicked race toward remote
learning, with the pandemic nip at our heels, forced us to see just how far away from the table
the least among us was seated, and just how high atop the ladder a great many of us had climb. It
appeared as if it never occurred to us to reach back to the rung below us and pull the next boy or
girl up to the rung upon which we were perched. We had forgotten the age-old adage of each one
teach one, and, instead, stood as tight-lipped, encased in our on personal bubble, like Ebeneezer
Scrooge and all his “Bah Humbug” glory. The pandemic did not start the fire but, it certainly
brought with it gasoline and an extra match. In an effort to take stock of just when and how
things went from bad to worse, and to learn what can and is being done to address the problem in
what is, hopefully, not a futile attempt at a personal reckoning; you have to take a closer look at
the problem through the lens of social justice, aimed squarely at your state and local community;
a national portrait of the issue run amuck; and then seek out some insight into the chasm that
exists on the international stage.
Digital Divide 19
Reference
Ames, M. (2021). Laptops alone can't bridge the digital divide. MIT Technology Review, 124(6),
74-77.
https://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true
&db=asn&AN=153056859&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Basye, G. (2021, August 2). Georgia Dept. of Education and Verizon Launch Program to
Narrow Digital Divide. GlobeNewswire News Room. Retrieved July 1, 2022, from
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/08/02/2272840/0/en/Georgia-Dept-
of-Education-and-Verizon-launch-program-to-narrow-digital-divide.html
Bendici, R. (2020). Closing the Digital Divide: Educators work to ensure digital equity for all
students by shifting mindsets and improving professional development. (Cover
story). District Administration, 56(1), 40-
44. https://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=
true&db=asn&AN=141057886&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Downey, M., & Baker-Jones, T. (2021, March 15). Technology is not a luxury; it's now an
education necessity. ajc. Retrieved June 30, 2022, from
https://www.ajc.com/education/get-schooled-blog/technology-is-not-a-luxury-its-now-an-
education-necessity/VEZQOXBBZJGLDOOQ3VZUAM27WU/
Green, L. C. (2018, May 17). Bridging the digital divide in our schools – achieving technology
equity for all students. IDRA. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from
https://www.idra.org/resource-center/bridging-the-digital-divide-in-our-schools/
Digital Divide 20
Horrigan, J. B., & Abell Foundation. (2020). Baltimore’s Digital Divide: Gaps in Internet
Connectivity and the Impact on Low-Income City Residents. The Abell Report. Volume
33, No. 4. In Abell Foundation. Abell Foundation.
Karakose, T. (2021). Emergency Remote Teaching Due to COVID-19 Pandemic and Potential
Risks for Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students in Higher Education. Educational
Process: International Journal, 10(3), 53-61.
https://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tru
e&db=eric&AN=EJ1312104&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Victor, & Dias, L. (2017). Teaching and Learning with Mobile Devices in the 21st Century
Digital World: Benefits and Challenges. European Journal of Multidisciplinary
Studies, 2(5), 339–344. https://doi.org/10.26417/ejms.v5i1.p339-344
Willems, J. (2019). Digital Equity: Considering the Needs of Staff as a Social Justice
Issue. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 150-160.
https://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tru
e&db=eric&AN=EJ1238741&site=ehost-
live&scope=site https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5503
