I think the issue with this “issue” is, “What are we really arguing for?” Both groups made excellent points arguing for their side, but the issue was kind of muddied during the debate.
Kennedy and Ummey made great points, giving us a background of how technology helps “Bridge the Gap” and help those individuals get access to technology that helps them with things such as academic support to be able to overcome barriers that have prevented them from participating in the past. There is no doubt that technology is an amazing tool that can help those in need to be able to balance the scales, and for them to live a more equitable life.
In a throwback to Don Cherry’s glory days, Graeme and Jeff brought out some hard-hitting facts to solidify their stance on how technology has led to an even greater discrepancy, highlighting access to technology as one of the main causes for that. While Graeme embodied the persona of Don Cherry a little too well, what differed from the real Don Cherry was that he actually made some great points in his segment. Graeme brought out some heavy hitters, such as economic disparity and outdated technology, which really hurts Tech Equity.
I feel that Laura really said it best, while in class. We aren’t talking about technology, we’re talking about money and who has it, and who doesn’t. Our class is a perfect example of how technology has created an equitable learning environment, where there is some of the class who is attending each week from outside of Saskatchewan, and even some outside of Canada. While some of us could have made it work if these classes were in person on campus, others would not be able to, due to outside factors. So in this case, technology is creating an equitable situation for us all. But again to Laura’s point, we are all able to take this class due to the economic privileges that we have. We all have access to a device and internet that allows us to log in each week to class, as well as allowing us a platform to complete our research and assignments.
