At Jhpiego, we are always talking about the appropriate application of technology. In my case, the focus is on using technology to support learning. And for the most part, I more narrowly define this to mean integrating technology into learning activities (formal or informal, self-directed or social) as opposed to using technology for administrative & management purposes (e.g. student information systems). Not that I'm not interested in the latter, but I'm only one person & there's only so much time in the day! Anyway, let's get back to this notion of "appropriate."
Appropedia defines appropriate technology as "technology that is appropriate to the environmental, cultural and economic situation it is intended for." So far, so good. The definition then continues, "It usually describes technologies which are suitable for use in the majority world (or 'developing nations')." [emphasis added] This is where, for me at least, things get difficult. I emphasized the term "usually" in the definition because I think it's very important. Specifically, I want to contrast it with an approach that I often encounter: one that substitutes in the word "always."
Every time I return to the field, I find evidence of explosions in technology availability and access. Below are photos from a recent Learning Technology Readiness Assessment we conducted in Botswana, plus one from Zambia, that provide evidence to that fact. And therein lie my questions:
Given the availability and accessibility of these technologies in Botswana, aren't technology-supported learning interventions based on them "appropriate" there? If computers are available and common, how is computer-assisted learning not appropriate? If WAP-enabled phones and mobile data access are common, how is browser-based mobile learning not appropriate? Shouldn't we be maximally leveraging the opportunities engendered by the environment?
And I guess a natural corollary would be, at what level should we be defining "appropriate" - country, region, global?
An IT staff member at Serowe accessing Facebook on his mobile phone
A personal computer in a (female) student's hostel in Serowe
A USB dongle for Celtel mobile internet access in Zambia
And if we want to be thinking about the (near) future, we should be looking beyond PCs and mid-level phones to smart phones (including iPhones) and high-broadband mobile Internet access. Once again, see proof of the future in the photographs below from Botswana.
An ad for the iPhone at Riverwalk Mall in Gaborone
And ad for mobile video calling at Sir Seretse Khama Airport in Gaborone
Thoughtful post James. I agree that appropriate technology is a pretty loaded term.
ReplyDeleteI would be tempted to define appropriate technology as technology which matches the economic, learning, and social milieu in which you are operating. As you say, if people have the technology (and have access to technical service/support), how is it not appropriate?
Obviously the one major caveat to this is how expensive the network is to access with the technology. As usual, I would emphasise network charge affordability over device affordability. Mobile broadband in SA two years ago was 5USD per megabyte. It is now down to about USD .20 per megabyte which is obviously much better but still way out of the range of the bottom economic segment of society. These charges are far more significant over time than the devices themselves.
Thinking further, I might qualify might statement above and say that it might be "appropriate" to pitch technology a little bit above the learning level of the target users to take into account the aspirational nature of technology use. A big takeaway from the hole-in-the-wall projects is that, given free access, users (especially kids) will figure out technology through a social learning process.
Lastly, I think the most interesting solutions (Ushahidi, Tradenet, et al) are accessible through a variety of interfaces so people can use what they have to access the service.
-Steve
Thanks for the mention of Appropedia!
ReplyDeleteAppropriate technology is definitely not the same as "low technology" - sometimes most appropriate solution is high tech.