I plan to have a separate post about this. This is me on Good Morning Arizona on November 16th at 8:30am with Brad Perry. Good Morning Arizona is Arizona's statewide morning news show. That's me talking about the bookmobile with Brad Perry, one of the hosts of the show. The bookmobile is a Ford E-350 15 passenger van we converted into a bookmobile. We installed bookshelving from Acore shelving and installed satelite dish from a company called Ground Control. They installed the dish onsite. The dish can be activated with the van running, on just the van's engine, or it can be plugged into a power outlet to run. It provides a wireless internet access signal within 200 feet of the location. If you would like to see more pictures and video of the bookmobile in action, go here: http://s105.photobucket.com/albums/m209/jdscott50/Bookmobile/
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Good Morning Arizona
I plan to have a separate post about this. This is me on Good Morning Arizona on November 16th at 8:30am with Brad Perry. Good Morning Arizona is Arizona's statewide morning news show. That's me talking about the bookmobile with Brad Perry, one of the hosts of the show. The bookmobile is a Ford E-350 15 passenger van we converted into a bookmobile. We installed bookshelving from Acore shelving and installed satelite dish from a company called Ground Control. They installed the dish onsite. The dish can be activated with the van running, on just the van's engine, or it can be plugged into a power outlet to run. It provides a wireless internet access signal within 200 feet of the location. If you would like to see more pictures and video of the bookmobile in action, go here: http://s105.photobucket.com/albums/m209/jdscott50/Bookmobile/
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Reading is good for you: print versus e-books
Recent articles in the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and now the Wall Street Journal have discussed e-books and printed books. Some of the top e-book blogs have dismissed these articles as simply anti-technology, one at Print is Dead goes so far to say that print is a vegetable.
SNIP
"This is completely the wrong approach to take. I mean, to force print down people’s throats as if it’s a vegetable they don’t want to eat is just about the worst strategy I’ve ever heard of. (Believe me, when I was a kid I hated lima beans, and my mom insisted I eat them; I dutifully shoved them down my prepubescent gullet, but as an adult I never touch them). So to try and guilt people to read print implies that to do so is a sacrifice; worse, that’s it’s a kind of punishment. It turns reading newspapers into a kind of penance for a digital life, a modern-day flogging in the form of papercuts and inky fingerprints.
"The experience taught me that a book is not what I had thought it to be. It is not, in any important sense, typeface, paper stock or cover art. A book is, foremost, the arrangement of words in sequence, and they are, to borrow a buzz-phrase from the digital folk, platform agnostic.
Of course, you can still buy the books to display, and read them on an e-book device. I read the classics that way and I have the nice leather-bound gold-leaf editions on my bookshelf. Then again, I read most of my books from the public library, so I can't put them on my shelf for status, but I can make a list on goodreads.com
Lastly, on the use of e-books for the general public, comes an article from the New Yorker:Future Reading, Digitization and its discontents:
SNIP
For now and for the foreseeable future, any serious reader will have to know how to travel down two very different roads simultaneously. No one should avoid the broad, smooth, and open road that leads through the screen. But if you want to know what one of Coleridge’s annotated books or an early “Spider-Man” comic really looks and feels like, or if you just want to read one of those millions of books which are being digitized, you still have to do it the old way, and you will have to for decades to come. At the New York Public Library, the staff loves electronic media. The library has made hundreds of thousands of images from its collections accessible on the Web, but it has done so in the knowledge that its collection comprises fifty-three million items.
END SNIP
Again, the concept of the divine in discussing the printed word. If you want to actually feel the book, you need to go to the public library. The actual concept of holding the book rather than reading its contents is more important here. The article discusses in depth the evolution of the book and reading and in a very romantic way. It did provoke a response from the Teleread blog:The New Yorker is as wrong about e-libraries as Martin Luther apparently was about paper books
SNIP
Here’s a challenge for The New Yorker. Can its contributors write up e-libraries without droning on about how we’ll always need paper books? Is every e-book lover an arson-minded Visigoth eager to burn down the great paper collections or rob them of funding? And do we all hate the idea of paper backups—or, for that matter, Main Street bookstores?
END SNIP
Teleread often laments why so many people hate digital books. The New Yorker laments the loss of the feel of the book. The Chicago Tribune laments the loss of the bookshelf (as status?). The Poynter institute also laments the feel of the newspaper "Hold it in your hand. Take it to the john. Just read it.” I also remember reading something when LAMA digitized their journal. They also stated something to the affect that you can take your reading device "to the john" as well. So there is an obvious difference between e-books and print books, the problem is not the content, or how the book is read, but the actual book that is the difference. They want to hold the book and have it on their bookshelf. Replication of that is that last barrier to total adoption.
Briefly, I will discuss the increased use of mobile readers for students. The Georgia Tech library experimented with e-books with their students, from the LITA Blog:
SNIP
"“Young people are open to accessing electronic material on mobile devices.” E-book readers should be like print, but better. E-book readers should offer the same types of flexibility and options that are expected with other mobile devices. They should merge the benefits of digital with that of paper: create something new that allows for taking notes in the margins of a hypertext medium.
END SNIP
So the barrier to e-books for students is extremely low. They are already ready for this format because they are used to digital devices. At the end of the presentation, it even recommends that popular fiction can be retrieved faster using ebooks, that Sony e-readers should be provided for circulation in libraries, and that e-books should be easier to find.
Further, Teleread is starting an initiative to help promote e-books for students.
Their proposal:
This project is a continuation of the six-year Ball State University research on digital reading. Its aim is to discover if the use of Wireless Handheld Devices (WHDs) can increase learning and if they can be introduced effectively into the classroom. If it can be shown that there is value in using WHDs, this project will lay the groundwork for determining how such devices should be used as well as the defining the necessary training for students and teachers.
END SNIP
Lastly, a recent report by the Department of Education stated that technology and media have permeated all households. Therefore, the use of technology to promote literacy is a valid path to take. I discuss more of that report here.
What's it all mean? E-books are on the way in.
1. The producers have already found a way to make reading acceptable on the eyes.
2. The proliferation of mobile devices and mobile screens have made that requirement less stringent. With so many "crackberry" addicts and ipod users, the tiny screen to read is not a problem.
3. The media has found a way to replicate reading habits. You can read it in bed, on the train, and some say even in the tub. A thorough analysis of the sony e-reader can also be found from the Travellin' Librarian Blog.
4. The producers need to find a way to bring the nostalgia to e-books. People like the format of the book because of the nostalgia aspect.
5. The producers need to find a way to create the status of the e-book. How many books on your reader? How many do you own? It won't replicate collection.
6. Digital Rights Management will hinder selection.
The last point affects public libraries the most. As many libraries are providing products like overdrive (downloadable e-books, audiobooks, music, and movies) the selection is rather sparse. This is due to the fact many of the publishing, music, and movie industry does not want to release these items digitally. However, they already produce it to us in a physical format. What really is the difference? This is the biggest hurtle to which there may be no immediate solution, except a change in the laws.
SNIP
"This is completely the wrong approach to take. I mean, to force print down people’s throats as if it’s a vegetable they don’t want to eat is just about the worst strategy I’ve ever heard of. (Believe me, when I was a kid I hated lima beans, and my mom insisted I eat them; I dutifully shoved them down my prepubescent gullet, but as an adult I never touch them). So to try and guilt people to read print implies that to do so is a sacrifice; worse, that’s it’s a kind of punishment. It turns reading newspapers into a kind of penance for a digital life, a modern-day flogging in the form of papercuts and inky fingerprints.
Just because something’s on paper doesn’t make it divine; it doesn’t even make it good. But Clark’s just interested in cozying up with newspapers in his breakfast nook, feeling all warm and sanctimonious. Meanwhile, I’ll be reading The New York Times on my laptop, and doing just fine."
END SNIP
This article is in context to newspapers in print versus newspapers online. However, there is an interesting point in this quote, "Just because something's on paper doesn't make it divine..." Isn't this true? The first wave of the e-book was easily scuttled because of back-lit computer screens. Behind that, was an anti-technology sentiment. In the second wave, that sentiment is more at the forefront since the technology scuttles the problems of reading a book on a computer screen. Even without the readers with special e-ink, many people report that they can read on their portable devices just fine. Take this article from the Chicago Tribune:
SNIP"The experience taught me that a book is not what I had thought it to be. It is not, in any important sense, typeface, paper stock or cover art. A book is, foremost, the arrangement of words in sequence, and they are, to borrow a buzz-phrase from the digital folk, platform agnostic.
To be sure, I am enough of a traditionalist to still want to own hard-copy books, and enough of a literature snob to want to have books on display in shelves. But that will be only one wing of my library.
Count me as an e-book convert, persuaded that their eventual widespread adoption is more than a pipe dream.
And now, I have to pick up my cell phone again. Ms. Austen is calling."
END SNIP
The writer in the article discusses his new love of e-books. He was surprised that he would like it so much. He found that the screen wasn't so bad and that the selection that it opens up, referring to Project Gutenburg and the availability on the mobi-pocket reader site, creates millions of books one could download for free. In fact, the only drawbacks are ones of sentimental value. I can't have the book on my shelf or I can't feel the book and have that experience.
A response to this article can be found on slowreading.net
SNIP
"I post these things at Slow Reading because I am truly fascinated by people’s experience of eBooks. I think they have their place, but in my opinion, they are no substitute when reading books like Austen for pleasure. Johnson disagrees. I’m sure I could put up with an eBook if I had to, but why would I want to?...I’m playing around with audio-books, too. I think of these things like meal substitutes; they’ll do in a pinch, but they’re not the genuine article.
END SNIP
I liked the last line here, "...they'll do in a pinch, but they're not the genuine article". I responded to his post stating that this person was probably so used to reading his blackberry, that he did not notice the format change. Mobile devices, in my opinion, don't create the same eye strain because the back-lit portion isn't as strong as a computer screen.
I have actually had the same experience. I have been reading David Copperfield on my Dell Axim and I haven't noticed any eye strain. I haven't read on it for longer than 30 minutes at a time, but it sure is convenient to always have a book to read on you. I find I read more often and faster I have it, plus it fits in my pocket.
People don't change behaviors based on technology, the technology must be slipped into those already set behaviors in order to be adapted. This is a way e-books can be adopted in a more widespread way, which leads to the quote:
To be a book-collector is to combine the worst characteristics of a dope fiend with those of a miser.
Robertson Davies
Of course, you can still buy the books to display, and read them on an e-book device. I read the classics that way and I have the nice leather-bound gold-leaf editions on my bookshelf. Then again, I read most of my books from the public library, so I can't put them on my shelf for status, but I can make a list on goodreads.com
Lastly, on the use of e-books for the general public, comes an article from the New Yorker:Future Reading, Digitization and its discontents:
SNIP
For now and for the foreseeable future, any serious reader will have to know how to travel down two very different roads simultaneously. No one should avoid the broad, smooth, and open road that leads through the screen. But if you want to know what one of Coleridge’s annotated books or an early “Spider-Man” comic really looks and feels like, or if you just want to read one of those millions of books which are being digitized, you still have to do it the old way, and you will have to for decades to come. At the New York Public Library, the staff loves electronic media. The library has made hundreds of thousands of images from its collections accessible on the Web, but it has done so in the knowledge that its collection comprises fifty-three million items.
END SNIP
Again, the concept of the divine in discussing the printed word. If you want to actually feel the book, you need to go to the public library. The actual concept of holding the book rather than reading its contents is more important here. The article discusses in depth the evolution of the book and reading and in a very romantic way. It did provoke a response from the Teleread blog:The New Yorker is as wrong about e-libraries as Martin Luther apparently was about paper books
SNIP
Here’s a challenge for The New Yorker. Can its contributors write up e-libraries without droning on about how we’ll always need paper books? Is every e-book lover an arson-minded Visigoth eager to burn down the great paper collections or rob them of funding? And do we all hate the idea of paper backups—or, for that matter, Main Street bookstores?
END SNIP
Teleread often laments why so many people hate digital books. The New Yorker laments the loss of the feel of the book. The Chicago Tribune laments the loss of the bookshelf (as status?). The Poynter institute also laments the feel of the newspaper "Hold it in your hand. Take it to the john. Just read it.” I also remember reading something when LAMA digitized their journal. They also stated something to the affect that you can take your reading device "to the john" as well. So there is an obvious difference between e-books and print books, the problem is not the content, or how the book is read, but the actual book that is the difference. They want to hold the book and have it on their bookshelf. Replication of that is that last barrier to total adoption.
Briefly, I will discuss the increased use of mobile readers for students. The Georgia Tech library experimented with e-books with their students, from the LITA Blog:
SNIP
"“Young people are open to accessing electronic material on mobile devices.” E-book readers should be like print, but better. E-book readers should offer the same types of flexibility and options that are expected with other mobile devices. They should merge the benefits of digital with that of paper: create something new that allows for taking notes in the margins of a hypertext medium.
END SNIP
So the barrier to e-books for students is extremely low. They are already ready for this format because they are used to digital devices. At the end of the presentation, it even recommends that popular fiction can be retrieved faster using ebooks, that Sony e-readers should be provided for circulation in libraries, and that e-books should be easier to find.
Further, Teleread is starting an initiative to help promote e-books for students.
Their proposal:
This project is a continuation of the six-year Ball State University research on digital reading. Its aim is to discover if the use of Wireless Handheld Devices (WHDs) can increase learning and if they can be introduced effectively into the classroom. If it can be shown that there is value in using WHDs, this project will lay the groundwork for determining how such devices should be used as well as the defining the necessary training for students and teachers.
END SNIP
Lastly, a recent report by the Department of Education stated that technology and media have permeated all households. Therefore, the use of technology to promote literacy is a valid path to take. I discuss more of that report here.
What's it all mean? E-books are on the way in.
1. The producers have already found a way to make reading acceptable on the eyes.
2. The proliferation of mobile devices and mobile screens have made that requirement less stringent. With so many "crackberry" addicts and ipod users, the tiny screen to read is not a problem.
3. The media has found a way to replicate reading habits. You can read it in bed, on the train, and some say even in the tub. A thorough analysis of the sony e-reader can also be found from the Travellin' Librarian Blog.
4. The producers need to find a way to bring the nostalgia to e-books. People like the format of the book because of the nostalgia aspect.
5. The producers need to find a way to create the status of the e-book. How many books on your reader? How many do you own? It won't replicate collection.
6. Digital Rights Management will hinder selection.
The last point affects public libraries the most. As many libraries are providing products like overdrive (downloadable e-books, audiobooks, music, and movies) the selection is rather sparse. This is due to the fact many of the publishing, music, and movie industry does not want to release these items digitally. However, they already produce it to us in a physical format. What really is the difference? This is the biggest hurtle to which there may be no immediate solution, except a change in the laws.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Children, Families, and Media:A Benchmark
Children, Families, and Media:A Benchmark
This report by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Innovation and Improvement and conducted by the Michael Cohen Group LLC, under the auspices of a grant to the Ready to Learn Partnership (RTLP) will focus on the use of media to help children learn to read. The purpose of the study was to examine technology acquisition throughout all levels of income. If technology had permeated throughout all of society, regardless of income, then it could be used as a tool for literacy.
From the report:
This report by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Innovation and Improvement and conducted by the Michael Cohen Group LLC, under the auspices of a grant to the Ready to Learn Partnership (RTLP) will focus on the use of media to help children learn to read. The purpose of the study was to examine technology acquisition throughout all levels of income. If technology had permeated throughout all of society, regardless of income, then it could be used as a tool for literacy.
From the report:
Overall Key Findings
Several key findings emerge from this research:
Households at all income levels participate in media ownership. For example, among caregivers with annual household incomes below $25,000, nearly three-quarters subscribe to cable TV, two-thirds have DVD players, over half have mobile phones, more than one-third have computers, and one-quarter have home access to the Internet.Access equals ownership. For most, access to media technology translates
into ownership of that technology. For instance, while Internet access may be
found in places outside of the home (work, libraries, etc.), most individuals who access the Internet do so from home.Participation is in the full range of media content and technologies.
Variation by income differs depending on the technology, however all technologies are represented in at least some households at all income levels.There are substantial differences in the incidence of ownership by
income level for many media – in particular, more expensive and emerging
media technologies are less commonly found at lower income levels. For instance, ownership of wireless handheld devices ranges from 8% of those with incomes of less than $25,000 to 50% of those with incomes of greater than $75,000.Other technologies enjoy near universal penetration. The least variation is found for a mature technology: television (which 95% of households earning less than $25,000 a year own, and 100% of those earning more than $75,000 a year own). Cable, radio, and CD-players are also found in most homes at all income levels.
Ownership and involvement in media and technology is about both affordability and perceived value(s); not everyone necessarily wants all media. For instance, videogame ownership tops out at 58% of households earning $75,000 a year or more, and there is little income difference in ownership of this technology.
In addition to ownership of media technology hardware, most individuals subscribe to additional services that deliver a wide range of media content. Most households with TVs also have cable service; those with computers also have Internet access (dial up or broadband).
Once a technology is owned, the ways in which caregivers use the technology are nearly identical at all income levels. Usage rates in computer owning low-income households meet or exceed overall usage rates in such key areas as work and professional tasks (68% compared to 55%) and for study purposes (45% compared to 38%).
Additionally, most caregivers engage in basic pre- and early-literacy learning activities with their children on a regular basis. There are some differences in the frequency with which children are read to and encouraged to spend time with books, but caregivers at all income levels are involved in fostering early language and literacy learning.
Other Key Findings:
Findings indicate that ownership of some media technologies is nearly universal (e.g., television) with little or no differences by income level. Other technologies are nearly universal at high incomes, but present in different degrees at other income levels (e.g., computers, mobile phones, cable). In contrast, some technologies – such as videogame systems – may not ever approach universality. This suggests that factors beyond income – perhaps limited interest or values – are at play. However, for some newer media technologies – including DVR’s (33%) and wireless handheld devices (14%) – it may be too soon to tell which ownership track will be followed.
In relation to Computers and Internet:
Computers are present in a majority of households. Sixty-three percent of caregivers’ households have computers. While levels of computer ownership differ considerably by income, nearly 40% of those earning less than $25,000 own computers.The great majority of computer owners (93%) have Internet access at home, with little variation by income except in type of access (broadband or dial up).
Nearly two-thirds (65%) of children using home computers also go online. Not surprisingly, rates of usage are lower among children five or younger (36%) than among six- to eight-year-olds (75%).
The specific ways in which computers are used (email, storing photos, household management, work or school related tasks, etc.) varies little by income.
In relation to videogames
Videogames
Videogame systems are not a universally owned technology – at any income level. Indeed, just over half of households with incomes above $75,000 (58%) own videogame systems, compared with 40% of low-income households.This suggests that income and affordability are not the only variables to consider in describing and analyzing media penetration. Videogame systems may appeal to a smaller segment of the population than other media technologies.
Print Media
In this era of widespread electronic screen media, the findings show that print media – particularly books – continue to be a significant presence in all households. Independent of income differences, the great majority of caregivers report owning children’s books (96%) as well as adult fiction (87%) and non-fiction (92%). There is little variation in the presence of books in the home by income level.There is variation by income in subscriptions for newspapers and magazines. For example, virtually all households (93%) with incomes over $75,000 subscribe to print media, whereas only 44% of households with incomes of $25,000 or less report subscribing to publications.
Conclusion
...some of these findings suggest that financial barriers to media and technology ownership are being lowered, and that the motivations to use media technologies are increasing, while other findings indicate that there continue to be real income differences in ownership and use, particularly for more expensive and emerging technologies. In fact, both are true. Regardless of how one assesses the current state, it is clear that, given the proliferation and increased affordability of media technologies, the metaphor of the “digital divide” no longer adequately characterizes the complex relationship between income and ownership of media technology. The current state is perhaps best described as a “digital continuum.”
Read the whole report here Children, Families, and Media:A Benchmark and webcast is here:http://www.rtlp.org/
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Digital Divide to Digital Continuum: has the digital divide been bridged?
The general reason for public libraries to provide access to technology is the digital divide. Low income has always been tied to lack of access to technology. Libraries have increased the number of computers and internet bandwidth to keep up with demand. However, a recent report by the Department of Education (Digital Divide to Digital Continuum) refutes the idea that there is a digital divide in relation to income and technology. A quote from the GovTech Blog, Digital Divide Subtracted, :
SNIP
New research funded by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Innovation and Improvement and conducted by the Michael Cohen Group LLC, under the auspices of a grant to the Ready to Learn Partnership (RTLP) revealed that while television took nearly three decades to become universal, nearly 40 percent of low income families now have computers and almost a third have Internet access at home in just the last five to seven years. This new research suggests that given the proliferation of media across the socioeconomic spectrum, although significant differences do exist by income level, a stark digital divide no longer captures the relationship between income and technology ownership and that technology is integrated into children's lives, regardless of their families' income.
END SNIP
This means that for public libraries, basic connections is not enough anymore. Yes we have public access computers (new ones thanks to Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other local intiatives), with internet (although it needs to be increased), but are we providing anything beyond that to enhance technology opportunities. Or is this our role?
I like the developments that I see in many libraries. They provide a technology petting zoo to help their patrons understand and use new technology. It also helps to show patrons how it relates to library usage, such as downloadable items and database usage.
David Lee King talks about Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library's Techie Toy Box (photos). Princeton Public Library provides a Gadget Garage too.
More from the article:
SNIP
"According to the survey, families from every income level own and use technology, albeit with differences in the frequency of participation based on income. However, the rate at which lower income families have come to own media technology has been astonishingly quick," said Dr. Michael Cohen. "The metaphor of the digital divide no longer captures the relationship between income and technology ownership. The current state is perhaps best described as a digital continuum."
END SNIP
So technology acquisition is growing very fast. Is access an issue? Library's have traditionally provided content via books and over the internet. We slice away at the proprietary layer of the web by providing free access to content. Newspaper archives, research, and even free downloadable content. I think our role is to continue to provide access to content and to educate the public on a variety of topics, especially technology. Technology is often thrown at people as a solution and the public library continues to be a hub of learning for that technology. Technology is available at all levels of society and acquired faster, but do learning curves differ? Yes they do.
Lastly:
"For years, Congress has supported literacy-based television programming to help pre-schoolers get ready to read and to foster reading skills among school-aged children," said Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro, House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture and a leading advocate for early childhood education. "This new study shows that we are making progress in closing the digital divide and that television and computers can be effective tools to reach children, regardless of income levels, in an effort to help them become productive and successful adults."
END SNIP
A webcast of the report will be available on October 25th: Digital Divide to Digital Continuum.
http://www.rtlp.org/
SNIP
New research funded by the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Innovation and Improvement and conducted by the Michael Cohen Group LLC, under the auspices of a grant to the Ready to Learn Partnership (RTLP) revealed that while television took nearly three decades to become universal, nearly 40 percent of low income families now have computers and almost a third have Internet access at home in just the last five to seven years. This new research suggests that given the proliferation of media across the socioeconomic spectrum, although significant differences do exist by income level, a stark digital divide no longer captures the relationship between income and technology ownership and that technology is integrated into children's lives, regardless of their families' income.
END SNIP
This means that for public libraries, basic connections is not enough anymore. Yes we have public access computers (new ones thanks to Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other local intiatives), with internet (although it needs to be increased), but are we providing anything beyond that to enhance technology opportunities. Or is this our role?
I like the developments that I see in many libraries. They provide a technology petting zoo to help their patrons understand and use new technology. It also helps to show patrons how it relates to library usage, such as downloadable items and database usage.
David Lee King talks about Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library's Techie Toy Box (photos). Princeton Public Library provides a Gadget Garage too.
More from the article:
SNIP
"According to the survey, families from every income level own and use technology, albeit with differences in the frequency of participation based on income. However, the rate at which lower income families have come to own media technology has been astonishingly quick," said Dr. Michael Cohen. "The metaphor of the digital divide no longer captures the relationship between income and technology ownership. The current state is perhaps best described as a digital continuum."
END SNIP
So technology acquisition is growing very fast. Is access an issue? Library's have traditionally provided content via books and over the internet. We slice away at the proprietary layer of the web by providing free access to content. Newspaper archives, research, and even free downloadable content. I think our role is to continue to provide access to content and to educate the public on a variety of topics, especially technology. Technology is often thrown at people as a solution and the public library continues to be a hub of learning for that technology. Technology is available at all levels of society and acquired faster, but do learning curves differ? Yes they do.
Lastly:
"For years, Congress has supported literacy-based television programming to help pre-schoolers get ready to read and to foster reading skills among school-aged children," said Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro, House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture and a leading advocate for early childhood education. "This new study shows that we are making progress in closing the digital divide and that television and computers can be effective tools to reach children, regardless of income levels, in an effort to help them become productive and successful adults."
END SNIP
A webcast of the report will be available on October 25th: Digital Divide to Digital Continuum.
http://www.rtlp.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)