CHARACTERIZING
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE AMONG
HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES (HBCUs)
Dr.
Eugene Jones
Copyright January 1998 and October 2000
Abstract
The
current “digital divide” between Historically Black Colleges and
Universities (HBCUs) and other higher education institutions (HEIs) in this
country is anchored in societal demographics and the relatively short technology
history of these institutions, primarily since 1985. This paper discusses the
impacts of both of these factors. Cogent suggestions are made to help bridge
this divide for the benefit of the ultimate stakeholders, the student-graduates
of these valued institutions. In short, HBCU management must come to grips with
the consequences of not being engaged in this technology revolution to
the level of other HEIs.
The
background data and references cited herein are presented in more detail in
other papers by the author. One
paper is entitled “Why and how fast is the digital divide widening for
minorities in this country”. Another paper is “The digital divide, African
American students, and HBCUs; the problem, the challenge and the solution
respectively” (click here). The author is exclusively
responsible for the contents of these papers.
Impact
of Student Demographics
Several
recent studies by the Department of Commerce (DoC) conclude that access to and
use of technology in this country are stratified along racial or ethnic lines by
income, education, household composition, gender, age, and geography; these are
statistical correlations that do not necessarily imply causation. In these DoC
studies, the prime metrics of the "digital divide" are home computer
ownership and access to the Internet in the home, at school or college, in the
community, or in the workplace. These findings have serious implications in the increasingly
technology-laden workplaces of the 21st Century. But the most negative
impacts are expected among African Americans (Blacks) and other minorities.
First,
there is more likely to be a direct transfer of these societal effects among
African Americans onto HBCU campuses as a result of student demographics. That
is, if the metrics of the DoC studies hold for the future, a greater density of technology-underserved
students will likely populate HBCUs as compared to other HEIs; a similar
statement likely applies to some Hispanic Serving Institutions and Tribal
Colleges. From the DoC study results, several “gap factors" characterize the
digital divide on HBCU campuses, but these same factors must be considered
statistical in nature and not causative, namely:
·
Ethnicity and Technology
Access:
African American and Hispanic households are half as likely to
own computers as the population in general according to the DoC studies. As of
1998, 70—78% of HBCU students were African-American compared to 5% at other
HEIs. At the undergraduate level in 1998, 90%
of the 105 HBCUs were more than 92% African American, seven percent were
between 75 – 89%, with the rest below 10%.
·
Household Income and
Technology Access:
Lower-income households (below $30,000) are only one-half as likely to own
computers or have Internet access as high-income households according to the
DoC studies. Most HBCU students come from lower-income households as evidenced
by 80% being eligible for financial aid as compared to 25% at other HEIs. The
median household income in 1998 was $44,000 with African Americans at $28,000
or a negative differential of $16,000.
Moreover, this negative income gap for African Americans is expanding
by $500 annually according to Bureau of Labor statistics
·
Household
Composition, Gender, and Income and Technology Access:
Home computer ownership is lowest among female-headed households according to
the DoC studies. About 50% of
African-American females head households, which is double the national
average, who earn less than 70% of the average annual wage.
·
Gender, Geography
and Technology Access: Most
first-time HBCU undergraduate students, over 60% female as of 1998, attended
urban or rural secondary schools
that, if typical, had limited technology assets. Thus it is likely that fewer
incoming students to HBCUs will have used computers for homework as compared
to students at other HEIs. In the past, females were less likely to use
computers than males, but this trend is changing.
·
Education,
Workplace, and Technology Access: The
“have-nots” of the digital divide also lag in every degree level (i.e.,
associate, bachelors, masters, PhD, professional) when scaled to population
percentages.
Access and use of computers are an increasing function of education level,
which is linked to income, which is linked to status in the workplace..
From
these “gap factors”, it can be conjectured that the cumulative impacts of
the "digital divide" on many African Americans begin in the home,
continue unabated into the secondary schools they attend, and into the
postsecondary arena at HBCUs for about 17% of this group. Beyond academia, the
most profound impacts occur in the workplace through under-representation in
technology-driven, high-income occupations that now comprise 80% of all newly
created jobs according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1999. In turn,
these workplace impacts exacerbate the already wide gap in household income, and
will affect the next generation of African American youth entering school.
Thus, the negative impacts of the "digital divide" are both
cyclic and self-sustaining and if left unattended, will
characterize future generations of African Americans as the present. HBCUs must
confront these issues now within the routine scope of education.
Impacts
of Technology Evolution among HBCUs and Other Academia
Technology
growth in US academia paralleled the growth of federally sponsored
research. The emergence of the current and follow-on Internets is one example of
this alliance, among others. But significant sponsored research at HBCUs did not
register until the mid-1980's after the passage Public Law 99-661 (“set-aside
law”, now codified as Title 10 CFR Section 2323). At HBCUs in the early
1980's, there was a singular focus on administrative typically mainframe based
computing. There were only limited investments in academic or research
computing in real (i.e., geographic) or virtually distributed formats. As
a result, few networks existed on HBCU campuses as late as 1995.
On
the other hand, the introduction of the personal computer (PC) in the mid 1980s
quickly changed the technology infrastructures at other HEIs. Local area
networks (LANs) flourished to first link individual PCs to main and
mini-mainframes in the early 1990s, and then later to link PCs to other PCs
locally. In turn, these LANs established the single point of entry for the
Internet to arrive in the mid-1990s with its explosive growth afterwards.
The
effects of networks in academia were powerful. First, they eliminated the need
for separate computer assets and human support structures for academic,
administrative, and research computing. Decreasing equipment costs
fueled the explosive growth in technology during this period in other academia.
These emerging events also altered the organizational landscapes of
these institutions as internal support structures for technology were
formalized with requisite personnel, processes, and procedures, to include
organized planning and budgeting for technology. In some cases, technology
planning attained parity with other institutional priorities., and
altered dramatically the traditional infrastructure of these HEIs
and their ways of “doing academic business”.
But similar changes in technology assets, infrastructures,
priorities, etc., within other HEIs did not translate readily or uniformly
within HBCUs for several reasons.
Later
campus network development led to later campus wide LAN development
suitable for the Internet, which in turn led to later introduction of the
Internet on HBCU campuses, where dial-up linkages were the norm. Aging
equipment, typically mini-mainframes that were incompatible with both LANs
and the emerging Internet, absorbed disproportionate costs for
maintenance even as the cost for new compatible equipment plummeted. Since
funding for new equipment was often minimal at HBCUs, it is very likely that the
gap in computing assets, support structures, and technology infrastructures
between HBCUs and other HEIs actually widened during this period.
Nevertheless
as of 2000, robust technology infrastructures are now emerging at some
HBCUs. In May 2000, two HBCUs made the list of the "100 most
wired" campuses. One HBCU is already linked, and another one or two will
soon be linked, to Internet 2. In the past year, one HBCU campus supplied
incoming freshmen with laptops. Another HBCU established personal computer
ownership as a requirement for incoming freshmen in 2001. Several HBCUs have
equipped dormitories with outlets for Internet use, and almost half assess a
technology fee for students. Personnel titles such as "technology
manager" are emerging. Alliances between HBCUs and the computer and
telecommunications industry seek to lessen the life-cycle costs of technology
access and use on these campuses.
Still,
there is a chronological lag, estimated at about five calendar years by
the author, in these seminal activities at HBCUs when compared to
similar actions at other HEIs where the pace of technology started earlier and
increased even faster with time. Hence the "alleged" digital
divide between HBCUs and other HEIs exists either because of student
demographics, lags in technology assets and associated applications,
"time", or most likely, all three. Yet,
t
is increasingly clear that the “digital divide” between HBCUs and other HEIs
may
be viewed alternatively as a manifestation of the “second wave"
of technology infusion within the US academic community as a whole.
Unfortunately, most of the “first-wave” funding sources for
technology infusion in academia have vanished, or are vanishing fast, under the
assumption that all institutions were governed by the same technology pace,
which obviously was not the case in the past. Given
this scenario, the following questions are relevant:
·
What
can HBCUs do to interrupt this cycle of potential deficits for the much higher
density of technologically underserved students on these campuses?
·
How
is the present digital divide being fueled (i.e., funded) between HBCUs and
other HEIs through federal, state and local policies, processes, and other
actions?
·
What
near term changes are needed in organizational infrastructures, technology
assets, and mindsets at HBCUs to implement "catch-up" strategies to
cope with a higher density of technology-underserved students?
·
What
are the implications for HBCU student-graduates, the ultimate stakeholders in
these outcomes, as they seek to enter the future digital economy?
These
same questions apply to some the (smaller) Hispanic Serving Institutions and
very likely, all of the Tribal Colleges that enroll a much higher density of technologically
underserved students that other HEIs.
“Cutting
the Chase” - What must be done at HBCUs to bridge this divide …Now?
The
societal gaps in home ownership of computers for the current haves and have-nots
will decrease sharply over time; simple projections of historical data make this
assertion plausible. Most likely,
the cost of technology assets will continue to decrease, but other costs will
escalate, such as telecommunications and especially human resources to support
these assets. Academia will continue to compete fiercely with industry and
government for human talent. Conversely, Industry and government will continue
their feedback to academia that mismatches exist in the skill outputs and
workplace needs, very likely with the solution being stated as larger doses of
imported skills.
Amidst
these pervasive and contradictory forces, HBCUs must place a much higher
priority for institutional planning for technology.
The internal mindset about technology must change, as technology
is no longer an elective in the educational processes.
HBCU management must assure that all curricula, not just the sciences and
engineering, are immersed in the technology-based movement.
HBCU
management must effect technology infusion for productivity gains. For
example, Email is not a routine tool for many HBCU CEOs as it is for over 90% of
CEOs at other HEIs. Email is also not a routine tool for faculty and students at
HBCUs. Thus, it may not be the
issue of “access”, but the “usage” of available technology that will
either narrow or expand the digital divide among HBCUs in the short term.
New
institutional metrics encompassing cost, time, and productivity
are needed in the near term to assess technology benefits from applied usage
for students, faculty,
staff, and management. For example,
a routine meeting called by Email with high-level staff in hours rather than
weeks is such a metric. An Email in
lieu of a letter that takes weeks to reach all faculty members is another.
Generating a purchase order or new research project account in days rather than
months is another; generating a researcher’s final report by Internet is
another. Updates of syllabi with resultant course scheduling made in hours
rather than weeks are others. Developing
research proposals in days rather than academic years is another; developing
collaborative proposals electronically without travel or even long distance
calls are good metrics. Institutional progress reporting on-demand by top
management rather than subsuming weeks or months to prepare, is another.
Concurrently examining the transitional benefits of newer technologies
like Internet 2 is another, even if participation is not imminent.
Student
registration by Internet from anyplace to include updates of student aid,
grades, or even overdue books is a good metric. Students’ access to their
individual course schedules, syllabi for those courses, Email-chat links with
other students in each class; course notes and old exams, etc., constitute the
ultimate perspective of being “wired”. Reducing registration waiting lines; updates of student aid,
grade reporting via the Internet are others.
Arguably,
the requirement for students’ ownership of computers can be an asset, but only
if concurrent demands are made to infuse technology into every course by every
faculty. Otherwise, required computers could just make creative nightlights
(screensavers), portable and personalized music and movie systems, or no-cost
heaters for students’ living quarters, without evidence of educational
benefits. Even with such a requirement, there
must be well-organized institutional support to make this arrangement an asset
rather than a costly liability for students.
Over
the long term, much more useful relationships between cost of services and
technology infrastructures must be made, since overall, HBCUs now expend as
much or even more per student than comparable-sized HEIs, and academic cost are
skyrocketing everywhere. More money can lead to more technology assets, but the
payoffs can be negative (or unknown) if “leftover budgets” are used to
support maintenance, obsolescence, and replacement.
While
there are both internal and external constraints that are inextricably linked,
it is the author’s view that the formulae for lasting solutions to the
digital divide for HBCUs lie on or within these campuses. In fact,
technology infrastructure may the major determinant in the survival of many of
these valued institutions as the latter will very likely determine the relative
competitiveness for future students, traditional as well as non-traditional, in
competition with community, two-year, and technical colleges that have already
“bought into” this technology revolution.
In
summary, HBCU management must “cut the chase introspectively” to
close the digital divide for the benefit of their ultimate stakeholders, the
student-graduates who must compete in the digital economies of the future
cybercivilization. This will happen only when HBCU management, faculty,
staff and students clearly comprehend the dire consequences of not doing
so, and react accordingly.
About
the Author …
Dr.
Eugene E. Jones, is the founder, president, and principal consultant for
TRACTELL, a small business specializing in research, engineering, and technology
consulting, in Dayton OH. He received his bachelors’ degree in mathematics
with a focus in physics from Tennessee State University. He received a
master’s degree in mathematics with a focus in computer science from
Pennsylvania State University, and a doctorate in systems engineering
(operations research) from Ohio State University in 1978.
Dr.
Jones, a retired Lieutenant Colonel from the Air Force, served as mathematician,
systems analyst and designer, concentrating in statistical modeling of logistics
processes. He was Research Director
in the Avionics Directorate at Wright Patterson, AFB, OH where he and several
others initiated the first documented "set-aside" for HBCUs in 1978
for $1,000,000, a singular event that is arguably the forerunner of the current
DoD-wide HBCU program at nearly $50M/year.
In
the Air Force, Dr. Jones completed a distinguished flying career in heavy
bombers and fighter reconnaissance aircraft. He completed 155 combat missions --
with 100 of these in 100 days -- in
which he earned the Silver Star, the Distinguished Flying Cross, and fifteen
(15) Airmen's Medals, among others. During his military career, Dr. Jones served
as associate professor in systems management at the Air Force Institute of
Technology at Wright Patterson Ohio. After retirement, he served a tenured
associate professor in the Management Science Department in the College of
Engineering at the University of Dayton. He has 14 years of teaching experience at the undergraduate
and graduate levels in mathematics, statistics, numerical analysis, and
differential equations. He specialized in computer-based applications in
operations research and management science, decision-making under cost
constraints, cost estimation, quality control, and reliability theory.
In
his professional career, Dr. Jones served as the principal investigator for
twenty (20) contracts, grants, and subcontracts with the Department of Defense
(DoD), NASA, NSF, the Federal Aviation Administration, and private industry. His
company, TRACTELL, was the winner of five (5) Small Business Innovation Research
(SBIR) awards dealing with applications of embedded memory modules to enhance
equipment maintenance and repair. Dr. Jones has provided expert testimony and
consulting in utility regulation with the State of Ohio and Virginia.
He was principal investigator for three state projects to increase the
participation of minority businesses in high technology in Ohio. He conducted
Total Quality Management (TQM) workshops for faculty and management at Central
State University, Wilberforce University, Southern University at New Orleans,
Southern University Baton Rouge, and Tennessee State University. Dr. Jones was
the principal for two DoD efforts dealing with technical assistance for HBCUs
during the period from 1985 to 1995. The purpose of each contract was to
increase the participation of HBCUs in DoD's R&D procurement.
In 1994-1995, DoD awards to HBCUs increased 45%, the largest in history.
More
recently, Dr. Jones served as manager for the TRACTELL subcontract at the DoD
Major Shared Resource Center (MSRC) located at Stennis Space Center, MS. This
engagement, which resulted from an unsolicited proposal to a major DoD prime
contractor in November of 1995, encompasses the technical and administrative
coordination of five (5) HBCUs in the DoD High Performance Computing
Modernization Program (HPCMP). In
the main, Dr. Jones primary focus at present deals with HBCUs.
At
present, he serves as Co-Project Managers for the Tennessee State University-AOL
Foundation HBCU Digital Divide Project, and as a technology-consultant
--catalyst providing both group and individualized support of specific faculty
for technology infusion in the classroom. Relevant HBCU-related documents by Dr.
Jones can be previewed on the TRACTELL corporate website at http://www.members.aol.com/jonseej/tractell2000/default.htm.
Go
top
Go
to Home Page