skip navigation
Evaluating Community Technology Centers
Picture of children using computer

Home

Our Theory

CTC Toolkit

Access in Austin

Digital Divide In Context

Research Activities

Our Thanks

About Us

This Site Is Accessible

An Ideal CTC: Strategies for Community Development from Austin Community Technology Centers

Learning Opportunities


A community-based organization that provides a variety of learning opportunities is most effective at developing community competence. Communities have diverse needs and interests that stem beyond technology, and individuals have different learning styles. CTCs that provide different kinds of classes and activities in a holistic environment are best at meeting the needs of all participants and the community as a whole.


An ideal CTC provides engaging and relevant content, encouraging participants to use the Internet for benefits that make sense to them.

Community members do not always know what computers have to offer that will be meaningful in their lives. When they get online, inappropriate or useless content can be a frustrating experience. An ideal CTC makes connections for participants and assists them in finding out what the computer can do that can help them communicate, build, learn, and grow.

Assets we observed:

  • Our Lady's technology initiative began when participants expressed a desire to learn how to communicate with far away family members using email.
  • Austin Learning Academy students interact with published authors on-line and engage in Question and Answer sessions with them, then create their own work and share it with family members.
  • The Tech Tots program at Any Baby Can gives children access to educational software designed for their age group.
  • Foundation Communities started a special outreach program for Spanish-speaking participants when they discovered many residents thought the Internet was only in English.
  • American YouthWorks participants engage in service learning projects that directly benefit their communities, such as building websites for local community organizations.
  • River City Youth Foundation participants are creating family trees for a collaborative project with PBS.

Barriers CTCs face:

Some centers have inconsistent Internet connections and old computers making computer-use frustrating. Some CTCs do not have staff or volunteers capable of helping students with advanced on the computers. CTCs may be tied to a specific curriculum that participants do not find relevant. This diminishes the possibility of broadening the horizons of the community through the use of technology.


An ideal CTC would have an open atmosphere in which teachers and students form supportive relationships to enhance learning.

Students and teachers would actively engage in conversations about curriculum as well as other aspects of life. Teachers would be involved in the community. The space would be set up to promote student interaction. The center would encourage peer learning, as well as free time for tinkering and developing analytical skills.

Assets we observed:

  • At American YouthWorks, staff and participants have time to "reconnect" on a regular basis as they work together on tasks other than class activities. This type of flextime helps develop relationships outside of class.
  • Our Lady Family Center maintains long-term relationships with participants and their families. Students bring all sorts of queries to the center, from how to fill out tax forms or open bank accounts, to the personal problems between parents and adolescent children.
  • One Learning Center at Foundation Communities has a site that offers an outstanding example of how the set up of the lab can be conducive to increased student interactions. Computers are lined up against the two longest walls in a rectangular room, and a table/workspace stands in the middle of the room where participants can work together on ideas. The teacher can teach and talk with the students with equal efficiency from any place in the room.

Barriers CTCs face:

Closely knit communities in which teachers and students have strong relationships can lead to limiting participation. The knowledge, sharing and solidarity created within the CTC do not serve to expand the community. CTCs may have volunteers who are able to teach classes for several weeks at a time, but who do not form personal relationships with students.


An ideal CTC would provide a variety of programs at a variety of times.

All of the CTCs we looked at provide more than one type of technology program. These ranged from adult technology and children's programs to those focusing on acquiring skills including classes in animation, graphics, and web design, as well as credit counseling programs that incorporate internet research skills. Offering a variety of programs means that participants with a variety of interests and learning styles can become involved.

Assets we observed:

  • ALA and American YouthWorks provide flexible curricula involving project-based learning designed to interest students and help other community organizations.
  • All of the CTCs studied provided some "free time" on the computer. Four of the CTCs are open in the evenings and many others had flexible hours although they were not designated official operating hours.
  • Wired for Youth excels at providing a variety of programs and times. Not only do they offer a variety of classes and unstructured "free time", students can sign up for one-on-one tutorials so that their more specific questions can be answered.

Barriers CTCs face:

CTCs that are inconsistent in their class times decrease long-term participant commitments to programs. CTCs may have limited access to computers if they are using other organizations' property, and this means students won't have as much time to work out problems on their own. CTCs that offer only structured, formal classes miss the opportunity to involve people in the community who don't learn well in that setting.


Future Research

A next step in our analysis would be to qualitatively study the kinds of relationships that develop between students and staff and amongst students. Though we were able to asses what CTCs offer, we were not able to fully address discrepancies between program missions and practices or determine the kinds of learning and teaching that are most conducive to increasing community competence. In a future study, we would more time to be spent studying how teachers and students interact and what students do during their "tinkering" times.

continue

More info

Working Hypothesis about Learning Opportunities

Download the complete report: An Ideal CTC (Microsoft Word)

Read the report online:


this page last updated
May 15, 2002