|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spotlight on Austin Learning Academy: Austin's Community Based Organization (CBO) MovementAustin, Texas has recently experienced a period of tremendous growth and financial success. This growth, however, has not been equally distributed throughout Austin's population. It has instead served to further distinguish wealthy Austinites in the western section of the city from their neighbors to the east. This period of urban renewal and expansion did not create the problem of inequality, but it has further exacerbated the divide between these two areas. Despite these long-term inequalities, a number of community-based organizations (CBOs) have arisen to address specific community ills. One, the Austin Learning Academy (ALA), is a leader in its efforts to bridge the Digital Divide for citizens. ALA began as the Family Learning Center (FLC), which received its funding from the Austin Housing Authority. The project was a joint effort between the Housing Authority, the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, and the Austin Independent School District (AISD). Its goal was to bring about neighborhood change by establishing learning centers within housing projects that could address educational disparities in inner city neighborhoods. The neighborhoods for each of the learning centers were chosen with care because the FLC founders' primary mission was to make a strategic investment in each of the communities in question. The strategic investment meant that each of the centers would be placed in at-risk areas, but within CBOs that had strong ties to the community. The philosophy in these centers was: "learners rise (or sink) to the academic and behavioral standards set for them. The program’s founders 'do not believe poverty is a useful indicator of intellectual endowment.' The FLC approach creates activities based on high expectations for learners and a friendly, supportive environment which accords high status to both learner and mentor." (1) The FLC eventually broke its ties with the Austin Housing Authority, and later became the Austin Learning Academy (ALA). Severing ties with the Housing Authority was a milestone for the organization, as it became a self-sustaining entity capable of creating its own priorities and goals, funding sources, and links to the community. The primary focus of the new organization was provision of technology training and skill development. ALA partnered with Austin Free-Net to pioneer the Austin Access Model. This model encourages "implementation and improvement of community-based public access sites, the identification of social resources within the Austin community, and the ultimate development of 'community competence'." (2) ALA continues to be a leader in technological innovation and education for a population that otherwise would not have a chance to develop these life skills. The Austin Access Model targeted five main CBOs, one in each primary community, as neighborhood centers. Each of these five locations would offer expertise in a specific area of technological concern. One CBO might specialize in web design, while another would focus primarily on database creation and management. The concept behind this structure is directly related to a changing definition of community. Since individuals do not define themselves strictly in terms of residence in neighborhoods, and people are much more mobile than before, social capacity is improved if people are able to visit a number of different CBOs to obtain diverse skills and network with a variety of individuals. Lamont's story is a perfect example. Lamont learned technology skills not just in his own neighborhood, but at two ALA sites in different neighborhoods. Lamont had two different destination points (CBOs) to work with in two different areas, both of which he considered "his" neighborhood. His easy mobility across neighborhoods meant he could share his new knowledge and skills with others in each community. He could leave a piece of himself in both places. This structure works to increase the community competence of all specified areas. "Community competence represents social, intellectual and financial capital, it should augment the ability of citizens to develop and sustain their own communities and neighborhood programs." (3) The innovative techniques of Austin CBOs, as well as the city's technologically rich citizenry, have led the city to be ranked number two in a survey of five urban areas by the Pew Internet and American Life Project. "The city has benefited from the new wealth but it is also increasingly burdened by rapid growth…Issues of economic inequality have a long history as a central part of the city’s political debate, without much resolution. However, growing technology-generated wealth, along with input from community activists, has resulted in innovative programs to improve technology access to low-income Austinites." (4) But despite its rapid growth, socially conscious electorate, wealthy business community, and large population of CBOs, Pew rated Austin second due to a lack of partnerships between existing CBOs. Without strong links between these organizations, there can be limited information sharing and exchange of innovative operational or teaching practices. Freestanding CBOs do not have the social network to organize for a common cause, and this ultimately impedes substantive community change. "Infrastructure for community development is not as well developed [in Austin] as in other places studied. There are relatively few community development corporations in Austin, and they do not appear to have a strong role in public debate." (5) Nancy Nye and Norman Glickman also highlight the importance of a CBO network for promoting substantive community revitalization in their report "Working Together: Building Capacity for Community Development." (6) They value the linkage of CBOs with foundations and the public sector for both the individual CBOs and for the network of partnered entities to achieve positive change within the community. The Austin community, with its deep roots in the technology sector and its politically active population, have prioritized access and the development of a small, but innovative number of CBOs that deal with technology - Community Technology Centers (CTCs). Our study of Austin area CTCs will highlight the criteria necessary for individual CTCs to succeed This information, combined with knowledge of how these CTCs function within their communities, can act as a guide for positive community development efforts by CBOs in cities across the United States. |
More infoNotes
this page last updated |
