1 / 18

The Digital Divide in Family Support

The Digital Divide in Family Support. ACWA08 suetreg@barnardos.org.au. Anna at fifteen. Family homeless over a year Re-housed hour+ from school Can’t afford mobile calls/phone broken Rented computer is unusable Can’t IM friends - feels excluded

abra
Download Presentation

The Digital Divide in Family Support

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Digital Divide in Family Support ACWA08 suetreg@barnardos.org.au

  2. Anna at fifteen • Family homeless over a year • Re-housed hour+ from school • Can’t afford mobile calls/phone broken • Rented computer is unusable • Can’t IM friends - feels excluded • Difficulties with homework • Feels unsafe to use public library

  3. Barnardos’ interest in ICT • Need to improve participation in family support services particularly with children and young people • Case management system (SCARF) could be basis of software which may be potential useful to service users • Social justice issues for disadvantaged children • Experience with mobile phones

  4. Vodafone Foundation project with homeless young people • Itinerant lifestyle made contact, early intervention and monitoring of welfare was difficult • Access to mobiles and free calls to workers enabled: • Emergency assistance- overdose, self harm, arrest, assault, • Reminders- appointments • Better engagement- birthdays, events • Importance of understanding social circumstances -theft and muggings, dealing, cashing, debt.

  5. Could we use this the Internet more ? • Websites for access to information and exchange (depression sites, medical sites) • IM/ Email with workers • Social networks- 13%of adults make relationships on-line • Virtual worlds and social learning

  6. How feasible are these ideas?

  7. Access of families to the Internet • Actual use of Internet and young people: In 2003 98% used computers (OECD, 2006) 90% of 15 year olds competently used Internet, (95% in year 12, 49% in Years 1-3). • 2001 study of disadvantaged families with children: 59% children had computer at home (compared to 74% in general population of families with children) 32% (cf. 48%) had access to Internet at home (McLaren &Zappala) • BUT what of agency service users ?

  8. Research on access and attitudes to ICT among family support service users 2006/7 Qualitative study – 30 in 25 families4 (under 12) 3 (12-17 years) 5 (18-21years) in after care support 18 parents. 6 programs in Canberra and Sydney including outer areas Assessed the mix of technologies that were currently used or which were interest to service users

  9. Families use of mobile phones

  10. Mobile use 25 used pre-paid phones Only one not interested 4- lost, stolen Wide usage but problems of running out of credit. ..my worker would call me and I wouldn’t be able to call her back

  11. Home Access to Internet • Home internet functional (6 of 30) • Previously had Internet- 11 Broken, fires, pawned, couldn’t afford payments • no IT Support • cost of service providers-no ISP • no modems in donated machines • Usually interested- 2 older participants exceptions • Interested but no access (11):educational (loosing skills) and social exclusion.

  12. How The Internet Is Used • Websites: school research, rarely for Jobs/bills/ Centrelink • Instant messaging: extensively used and missed where access was poor. • Email not checked and sense that phone is easier, lessening popularity with spam and problems of effort. Two previously in fostercare were the exceptions. • Chatrooms: unclear • Blogging: generally unknown, literacy an issue • On-line Games: more limited, download problems • Social Networking Sites: heavy use, age specific

  13. Innovative use by families • Keeping in touch- geographic separation in disrupted families • Overcoming violence- access to children by violent partners • Small business ventures

  14. Attitude towards ICT and workers • Interested- it’s the norm • There are existing communication barriers- not identified by all BUT some objection to pagers, workers frequently did not allow mobile access • Face to face communication needs to be maintained • Timing important- getting to know you, use within relationship • Interest in information • Maintaining skills

  15. How could Internet contribute to work with families • Initiation of communication -hours, space, social barriers (education and literacy), sequencing of communication, value of wit and group membership • Distribution-more private than paper, ownership of what is written, password protection, automatic functions • Use -attractive, company and entertainment • Increased self disclosure, relationship development, increased participation: self presentation, focus on feelings, anonymity, time to think, less focus on appearance

  16. Impact on communication is unclear

  17. Duty of Care • Safety- Internet vulnerability Education on safe use of the Net- can we afford not to do this? • Distorted communication- changed dynamics, honesty • Balancing on and off-line communication, privacy and individual preference.

  18. We need to ask the questions • Are we adding to disadvantage by not engaging with the Internet? • Are workers ICT practices affecting communication? • Are we missing an opportunity? Maintaining contact and communication is central to our work. • How can we provide technical and educational support? • Will it happen to us anyway?

More Related