‫الجزء الرابع من عدد من االجزاء‬-

‫احمد العطاب‬.‫د‬

Najran University
College of Science and Arts - Sharoura
Dr. Ahmed Alattab
Social Informatic For
Ict Policy Analysis

2
This chapter examines how Social Informatics
(SI) research can be of valueto information and
communication technology (ICT) policy
analysts.

information policy is “the set of rules, formal

and informal, that directly restrict, encourage,
or otherwise shape flows of information … [it is]
a balance between competing social interests;
and information technology affects those
interests through what people and institutions
do with it.”

Policy Analysis definition: “the use of multiple

methods of inquiry, in the context of
argumentation and debate to create, critically
assess, and communicate policy relevant
3
knowledge.”
A wide array of public policy issues fall
within the ICT policy analyst’s domain:

 from the reduction of the digital divide,

 to the promotion of electronic business,

 to changes in corporate media control,

 to the protection of digital intellectual property on

computer networks.

As analysts investigate these issues, their primary

goal is to influence the beliefs of policy makers by

clarifying the issues and defining and evaluating

the alternative positions that can be taken with

respect to these issues.

4
 Social Informatics for ICT Policy Analysts
• What is a digital divide?
The technological inequalities among
peoples in one country and between
countries, commonly known as the
digital divide.

5
How Can Social Informatics
Contribute to ICT Policy Analysts’
Work? ICT policy analysts can benefit
from SI theory and research in several
ways:

SI focus on the relationships among

ICTs; the people who design, use, and
manage them; and the contexts in
which they are used.

.

6
SI can provide policy analysts with
a set of reliable and tested
conceptual frameworks that they
can use to isolate, organize, and
understand the social, cultural,
and organizational forces affecting
ICTs and their uses in ways that
enhance the development of
policy-relevant knowledge.

It can provide them with a set of

reliable analytic techniques to help
identify and evaluate the social
consequences of the
implementation and uses of ICT-
based systems
7
How Can Social Informatics
Contribute to ICT Policy Analysts’
Work? ICT policy analysts can
benefit from SI theory and research
in several ways:

It can help them develop a more

critical appreciation of the benefits
and limitations that ICTs can
provide in social and organizational
settings

SI can help them understand how

the design, configuration, and
implementation of ICTs is a socio-
technical process—one that is
charged with political, economic,
social, and organizational 8
 ICT security policy
The key factors that warrant frequent
changes in the ICT security policy of an
organization are:

1. rapid ICT innovations,

2. growing security threats and

3. varying social and legal focus.

Such a situation indicates that protecting the
information assets of an organization is not
merely a technical problem, but involves privacy,
social, economic and management issues that
are unique to each business setting.
9
Key Social Informatics Themes and their Impact on
ICT-Policy

Embeddedness: ICTs do not exist in

social or technological isolation – their
cultural
and institutional contexts influence their
development,
implementation, use and role in
organizational change.
Configuration: ICTs are socio-technical
networks that can be configured in ways
that
influence their uses and social
consequences.
Duality: ICTs have both enabling and
constraining effects on groups,
organizations and larger scale social
orders
10
 Case Study
What follows is a case study that illustrates
the extent to which Social Informatics issues are
central to many ICT policy issues:
Book:
Understanding And Communicating Social
Informatics_ A Framework For Studying And
Teaching The Human Contexts Of Information And
Communication Technologies
Page: 55

11
56 Understanding and Communicating Social Informatics

4.1.2.1 Notebook Computers Replacing Textbooks

During the latter half of the 1990s and in the first years of this decade, many K–12 school districts and
corporations in the United States explored the potential of using notebook or laptop computers in
educational practice. According to Keefe and Zucker (2003, p. 9), ―large school districts (e.g., Henrico
County, VA) and even whole states (e.g., Maine) are adopting initia- tives involving laptops using wireless
networks connected to the Internet.‖ Apple, Microsoft, Dell, Toshiba, IBM, and other vendors are
wholeheartedly supporting these initiatives with grants, equipment, and in-kind donations. Mobile
computing for students seems to offer a solution to a range of prob- lems that were apparent in many
locations such as the high cost of textbooks, the decreasing budgets for school libraries, and the
subsequent lack of print resources for students. Some commentators are very optimistic about the future
of notebook computing in K–12 education. McKenzie (2001) argues that ―wireless notebook computers
may prove an ally in the effort to recruit the enthusiastic daily use of those teachers who have been hitherto
reluctant, skeptical and late adopting when it comes to new technologies.‖ However, according to
Belanger (2000):

The future of mobile computing in K–12 education is still uncertain. Laptops may never
become as common in classrooms as hand-held calculators. Solutions for issues of cost,
technical support needs, security, and equitable access are challenging for many schools. Many
schools with laptops, however, remain pos- itive and enthusiastic about the changes observed
and benefits their students derive from access to portable computers.

Can Social Informatics help the policy analyst evaluate this uncertain future? It is instructive to look at
a policy debate that took place in the late 1990s in Texas over the introduction of notebook computers
into K–12 edu- cation because it illustrates the ways in which an SI-informed policy analysis could have
positively influenced the debate. In the fall of 1997, the Texas Board of Education proposed what seemed
to be a very cutting-edge idea: replacing public school textbooks with notebook computers, one for each
student. Facing a $1.8 billion bill for the purchase of new textbooks over a six- year period, the Board’s
motivation seemed to be to cut costs. The Board developed a plan to put durable, low-cost notebook
computers into the hands of every Texas public school student, estimating that this would save the state
nearly $300 million each year. These projected savings would come from shifting materials costs from the
state to parents. Instead of purchasing textbooks, the state would require parents to lease notebook
computers for their school-aged children. The monthly lease fee would be $10 per child per
 Social Informatics for ICT Policy Analysts 57
month and the total lease cost would be $500. At that time, the state of Texas was spending
$450 on textbooks for each student per year, or $37.50/month (Christie, 1998). Asking parents
to pay for books or other educational materi- als is not unusual. Indiana, for example, charges
parents an annual $100 text- book rental fee for every child they send to public school.
The plan was presented to the state legislature in May 1998. Surrounded by supporters
from several educational software vendors, proponents of the plan predicted higher test
scores; happier, more engaged students; future tech-savvy employees; and significant cost
savings. They argued that note- book computers would be better than textbooks because
available educa- tional software would be more current (as well as inexpensive and quick to
update), and the notebook computers would contain modems so that stu- dents could
connect to the Internet. With the state saving so much money, some supporters envisioned
additional benefits, such as a reallocation of funds to construct new schools in order to
decrease classroom size and teacher–student ratios.
Despite all the possible economic and educational benefits that could accrue from the
statewide adoption of laptop computers in Texas schools, the proposal did not receive
legislative approval. Why would such a pro-education, pro-student proposal stall in the
legislature? While the plan seemed to have key ingredients to ensure easy approval, questions
such as the following may have caused some legislators to scrutinize the proposal more closely:

• To what extent do notebook computers enhance student learning in K–12

schools?

• To what extent do they increase the value of education?

• What are the actual costs of supporting millions of notebook computers for
students and teachers?

With regard to the first question, some other states have used ICTs to attempt to
remediate some public education deficiencies. School districts in South Carolina, Ohio, and
New York have been experimenting with varia- tions of ―the notebook computers for
students program‖ for some time, albeit with mixed results. A teacher in one poor New York
City school district claimed that notebook computers made one of her students ―write
longer and more thoughtful assignments‖ (Stoll, 1998). Other teachers have been more
skeptical about the benefits of replacing books with notebook com- puters and argue there
is no systematic research that demonstrates that computer use improves student learning
or achievement. In fact, educa- tional researchers grounded in curriculum and instruction
theory should
58 Understanding and Communicating Social Informatics

conduct more empirically anchored research on the role that computers play in K–12 classrooms (e.g., Coley, Cradler, &
Engel, 1997; Schofield, 1995).
The answer to the second question, if based on assumptions of techno- logical determinism, is easy. The introduction
of this technology should pos- itively impact student learning in measurable ways, increasing the overall value of
education. A more nuanced analysis based on an SI approach would find that the technology (notebook computers) itself
is embedded in a com- plex and dynamic social and organizational context of students, parents, support personnel,
schools, regulatory agencies such as State Departments of Education, parent–teacher groups, and a range of social
practices (such as teacher’s work flow and a student’s study habits). Using this approach, a pol- icy analyst would look to
the SI research that examines the use of notebook computers in educational settings taking this larger web of social and
tech- nological relationships into account (see, for example, Pew Internet Life Project, 2002). The subsequent analysis of
policy alternatives can then incor- porate these findings and provide policy makers with a richer understanding of the
possible consequences of their decisions.
The third question, that of technical support infrastructure costs, is more complex. The Texas proposal focused on cost
savings. However, it did not pro- vide a short or long-term plan for ICT implementation, training, upgrading, and
maintenance. An organizational informatics analysis of this proposal would question the absence of such plans. A smooth
implementation of any networked system requires, at the very least, some technological standardiza- tion within school
districts or at least school sites. Computer training requires a level of standardization and a significant time commitment,
especially when working with children who have widely varying skills, literacy levels, abilities, and interests. There is also
the question of the ways in which the curriculum would have to be changed to accommodate the introduction and
widespread use of this technology. Can teachers be expected to know how to alter their lesson plans, classroom activities,
and homework assignments to take advan- tage of these computers? None of the potential benefits comes without an
additional price tag, and it is incumbent upon ICT policy analysts to under- stand the ripple effects of their
recommendations on the larger society.
Organizational informatics (OI) can help ICT policy analysts understand the significant costs associated with providing
a technical support infrastruc- ture for the notebook computers in Texas (or in any state). This kind of analy- sis would
consider small hidden costs that could scale up, such as the cost of spare notebooks to replace damaged units, spare
batteries, power adapters, or even the increase in school electricity bills because notebook battery life is limited and
students would have to have their notebook computers plugged into electrical outlets for the majority of the school day. It
could also identify major expenditures that would come from having to hire technical support
 Social Informatics for ICT Policy Analysts 59

personnel to maintain and upgrade millions of notebook computers now owned by the school
system and people to train those involved in the imple- mentation and use of this technology.
Using an OI analysis to understand the implications of the Texas notebook computer proposal yields
an interesting insight for the ICT policy analyst. In the proposal, the claim was made that the cost
savings to the state would be an estimated $2 million. The current industry technical support model
assumes that there is one systems administrator (who typically earns
$50,000/year) for every 100 computers. A simple calculation using these and the numbers in the
proposal shows that the monthly cost of providing a min- imal technical support infrastructure would
be approximately $42 per machine per month. One implication of this analysis is that the ability to
pay must be factored into the evaluation of policy alternatives. It is not likely that all Texas parents
could afford $52/month ($10 notebook lease fee plus $42 support fee) per student. How can these
costs be covered for those who can- not afford to pay? If the state of Texas agreed to pay the $42 fee,
the projected
$1.8 million cost savings would quickly evaporate. Instead, there would be an increase of $54 per
student. In short, an analysis informed by OI would help the ICT policy analyst understand that there
are cost-based problems with the proposal. Such an analysis would have indicated that, in all
likelihood, the proposal would not have been able to deliver the cost savings that had been
promised.
Outside of the stipulation that the notebook computers would be equipped with modems, the
initial vision of statewide notebook computing in primary education did not include a networking
element. However, if the Texas proposal had followed the lead of the Clinton-Gore policy to extend
Internet connectivity to all K–12 school in America, it would have included a plan for networking the
notebook computers to allow access to the Internet. Social informaticians would also have examined
issues of pedagogical value, Internet filtering, and intellectual property rights. It is worth commenting
briefly on the first of these issues—pedagogy. Most of the rationales for pro- viding Internet access to
K–12 schools are based on (often tacit) assumptions that such access will enable students to learn
through inquiries that are enriched by a wide array of resources that cannot be readily found in K–12
school libraries and locally in many communities. Most of the educational technology projects
funded by the National Science Foundation in which schools use Internet access also emphasize
inquiry-based pedagogies. This model has strong appeal to many academics who see processes of
60 Understanding and Communicating Social Informatics

and discussions available through the Internet, takes significant time for teachers to develop, evaluate,
implement, and refine. Unfortunately, K–12 teachers have relatively little slack time for developing new
teaching approaches.
The point of these observations is not to criticize the national project of connecting K–12 schools to the
Internet. The point actually makes use of a deeper Social Informatics finding—that the value of ICTs usually
comes when social practices are changed along with the technologies; changing (or adding) technologies alone
rarely produces many transformative benefits. In the case of providing K–12 schools with Internet access, the
Presidential Advisors note that school reform based on technological innovation and change will also require
giving teachers more time to learn how to integrate digital networked resources into enriched forms of teaching.
Social and organizational informaticians have already researched infra- structure issues similar to the Texas
notebook computer proposal (Gasser, 1986; Kling, 1992; Kling & Scaachi, 1982; Kling & Star, 1998; Schmidt
&
Bannon, 1992; Schofield, 1995; Star & Ruhleder, 1996; Suchman, 1996). Their research demonstrates that the
deployment of ICTs has far-reaching but sub- tle consequences and indicates that those responsible for ICT
deployment often overlook or fail to see those consequences. The Texas notebook com- puter proposal is a
good case in point and one that could have benefited from SI research.
An SI approach to the analysis of notebook computers in primary and sec- ondary education could also aid the
ICT policy analyst by providing a clearer understanding of the web of complex social and organizational
relationships in which the computers would be enmeshed. From our earlier discussion of the adoption of ICTs
in organizations, we discussed how local incentive sys- tems strongly shape behavior; in fact, they are often
―designed‖ to do so. A closer look at the case of Texas, however, illustrates the difficulties of policy analysis when
there are conflicting incentive systems. On one hand, there is a proposal to implement a fundamental
technology-based school reform; on the other, there is an equally strong commitment to standardized testing.
Texas is one state whose politicians and State Board of Education have embraced high-stakes standardized
testing in an effort to improve education and the accountability of schools to their publics. High-stakes
standardized testing—in which students’ scores on a standardized test are used to decide such matters as who
will receive high school diplomas, what the annual raises will be for teachers and school principals, and the kinds
of state funding that will be available for school sites—is a highly controversial educational reform (Khattri, Reeve,
& Adamson, 1997). Some educational researchers are enthu- siastic about standardized testing, arguing that it
helps to improve school accountability, but they are less enthusiastic about high-stakes testing. In
 Social Informatics for ICT Policy Analysts 61

contrast, others claim that high-stakes standardized testing reduces the qual- ity of education for
many students, because many teachers ―teach to the test‖ (Grant, 2000; Mabry, 1999; Rallis &
MacMullen, 2000) in ways that limit the effectiveness of the curriculum and de-emphasize
―authentic‖ inquiry- oriented instruction.
Using an SI approach, a policy analyst might argue that high-stakes test- ing is intended to
shape the behavior of school administrators and princi- pals. The high-level rationale is that the
testing regimes will lead teachers to teach in ways that improve students’ learning. However,
those teachers who spend their limited ―slack time‖ learning the tests and how to teach test con-
tent, will have even less time to develop the inquiry-oriented pedagogies that notebook computers
and Internet access could support. In short, the two reforms—expanding inquiry opportunities
with Internet access in the K–12 schools and tightened school accountability through high-
stakes standard- ized testing—clash because they impose conflicting demands on how teach- ers
use their limited time. The extent of these conflicts in practice is an empirical matter.
Indirect evidence indicates that the different educational reform efforts that are sweeping the
U.S. may be incompatible in terms of classroom practices. This does not mean that reforms
should not be advo- cated. Rather, it indicates that the concrete demands of reform programs in
the classroom and on students’ and teachers’ time and orientation have to be brought center stage
to set appropriate expectations for their practical value. This example illustrates that the use of an
SI approach could help ICT pol- icy analysts in their work. By taking advantage of what SI
researchers have learned about the embeddedness of ICTs in complex social, cultural, and
organizational settings, analysts could more easily disentangle the notebook computer proposal
and clarify the range of reasonable and appropriate policy alternatives. In doing so, they would
take into account such socio-technical issues as the costs of the technology implementation
for school systems, State government, and parents; the costs of providing adequate technical
support, the development of training programs for teachers, students, and possibly parents; the
changes in work practices that would occur for teach- ers; and potential for conflicting incentive
systems that are likely to under- mine the effort before it really could get underway. Despite
the political argument that it is imperative to expand K–12 students’ access to the Internet by
allocating resources, policy analysts can use the findings of SI to bolster counter-arguments that
there is a range of costly and possibly disruptive con- sequences that might accompany such a
policy decision. Analysts would be able to clarify important and mostly tacit assumptions
underlying the politi- cal argument about the abilities of school sites to keep their equipment ―up
and running‖; the abilities of teachers to effectively integrate resources that
18