|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An Ideal CTC: Strategies for Community Development from Austin Community Technology CentersIntroduction (Part 2 of 2)Where did we start?Our knowledge about local efforts was based on the earlier, decentralized efforts to promote equal access to information and communication tools (ICT), better known as the Austin Access Model. Using the lessons from this model, earlier research and established social theories, and fieldwork with local CTCs, we established five working hypotheses that explain what we believe are the most critical elements of a CTC program that contributes to individual and community development. Those elements are: Organizational Vision and Community Ownership These five components are what we identified early on as critical to the healthy development of both CTC participants and the CTC's organizational capacity, with the long-term goal of building capacity at the neighborhood level. With this theory in mind, we embarked on our field research, working with 12 Austin-area CTCs. The objective was to identify how organizations were developing their respective programs and to determine to what extent the five criteria above were relevant to these organizations. Our involvement with these organizations went beyond observation. Some researchers participated in programs as volunteers. Others served as resources for organizations, providing information on how to obtain funding, where to refer individuals for services not offered at their respective organization, and how to enhance volunteer recruitment efforts. These activities served multiple purposes. First, they helped researchers and organization staff to establish a level of trust that increases the possibility for collecting significant qualitative data. Second, by establishing a relationship with these centers, we were able to listen and respond to what they identified as priorities for making their centers work. The latter point is particularly important in the context of University-sponsored research. While our research is grounded in academia, we do not see it as a pursuit where we seek to customize the organizational behaviors of the CTCs to fit the theory we developed. Rather, by working with these CTCs, we were able to re-think and re-shape our early theories to better reflect the reality in which these organizations thrive. What did we find?Longevity and Vision Not surprisingly, we found that the oldest organizations, such as Austin Learning Academy, American YouthWorks, and River City Youth Foundation had some of the most developed resources of trained staff, resources, and property. These organizations also had diverse programming, ranging from workforce training to meal programs. It cannot be overstated that time is a significant factor in the development process of any organization. The leadership in these organizations understand the importance of developing a vision for best serving their neighbors, and have developed the flexibility to adapt to changing needs. From our perspective, the ideal CTC would not only have flexibility, its leadership would have instituted ways to test its assumptions about the community and its needs. Multiple Points of Access Researchers who worked with Austin Eastside Story discovered that children who participated in their programs not only knew of other places for gaining access to the Internet, but were strategic about where they went based on the types of access they had at different sites. Our research re-affirmed past studies conducted in the Austin community in concluding that the East Austin 11th and 12th Streets corridor is the most developed area of a decentralized effort to ensure digital access as laid out in the Austin Access Model. Varied Learning Opportunities All of the organizations to varying degrees understand the importance of learning, and not just for participants. Learning opportunities for staff, participants and their families are critical to building capacity in any community. The types of learning that take place are also just as critical. Some organizations offered low-cost or free access to computers and the Internet. Some offered comprehensive programming, from charter schools to workforce training to meal programs. We were impressed with the quality of structured, supervised programs that already exist in Austin and with the recognition by CTC staff that unstructured "tinkering" time is just as important in the learning process. While existing programs have demonstrated varying degrees of success, we have theorized the next step that these highly developed programs may take to further enhance capacity-building. What we have witnessed this year has ranged from open, unstructured time on computers to workforce-based education and training. What we would hope to see in the future is an expanded organizational effort to respond to how people learn as well as what people learn. Our ideal CTC would have experienced, well-trained educators who see programs as not only education and training, but also education and schooling. What is the difference? Education and training A structured program where participants learn how to use computer programs in a step-by-step approach, maybe using pre-existing templates. An example would be students learning to use Microsoft Office by using a pre-existing template to make a sign for an imaginary business. With no relevance to the student, there is no learning beyond the basic computer commands it took to create the sign. In short, education and training is learning to do what is already known and to solve problems we already know how to solve. Education and schooling A project-based learning environment where problem-solving skills and replace rote instruction. Education and schooling is learning that emphasizes critical thinking and innovation to solve problems that still bedevil us. This vision would have students working in groups to collectively design Christmas cards. They learn through trial and error, with experienced instructors watching from a distance to troubleshoot their efforts only when absolutely necessary. Students' creativity and inquisitiveness drive the degree of complexity of the process. We realize not all students will want to learn Adobe Photoshop after making Christmas cards. We also realize that some students will want to do this, and it was this experience that opened an opportunity where it did not exist before. Types of Centers Our research led us to conclude that CTCs traditionally emerge in three
forms: the low-cost access site; the human capital, or workforce, training
site; and the educational model site. We suggest a fourth model, our "ideal"
model. This ideal CTC incorporates some of the promising practices of
the first three types, and incorporates innovation, problem solving, and
critical thinking into the learning process. It is these additional elements,
we argue, that will ensure true community capacity building in neighborhoods
served by these programs. The following profiles, organized by our five criteria, serve as snapshots to some of those barriers and to the creative and innovative solutions that we have identified in existing CTCs. |
More infoDownload the complete report: An Ideal CTC (Microsoft Word) Read the report online:
this page last updated |
