In reference to our discussion yesterday, I wish to pass along the most recent data from Statistics Canada in regards to Internet use. According to their 2009 survey, 80.3% of individuals age 16 and over in Canada use the Internet, accessing it from a variety of locations. 77.1% of those individuals have home Internet access. Access is 70% or higher for all income quartiles, with 76.2% in the lowest income quartile claiming they use the Internet.

Here are some tables:
Internet use by individuals, by selected characteristics (Canada): http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/comm35a-eng.htm
Internet use by individuals, by location of access (Canada): http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/comm36a-eng.htm
Internet use by individuals, by location of access (BC): http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/comm36k-eng.htm

Notably, British Columbia has the highest rate of Internet access across the country: 85.4% of individuals in this province use the Internet, accessing it from a variety of locations. 83% of those individuals have home Internet access. The only area in which BC does not lead Internet usage across Canada appears to be Internet use in schools. School Internet access is 15.3% for British Columbia compared to 16.6% for the nation.

The target population for the survey was 16 years and older, which is evidently a limitation in giving secondary school educators a clear picture of student Internet use. Significantly, though, we find usage by individuals under the age of 34 is highest–over 96%–and that 91.1% of single-family households with unmarried children under age 18 have Internet access.

As well, an article reporting figures from 2005 states that rural access is lower than urban access: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/070913/dq070913d-eng.htm. If this trend remained the same over the past four years, Internet access in the Lower Mainland may be higher than what is represented by province-wide numbers, while Internet access in remote regions may be lower.

The matter of the digital divide mentioned in class is a serious concern; however, we should recall that there has always been a divide in regards to information access. Just as we have long taught print literacy in classrooms knowing full well that some children do not have access to books in their homes, we likewise need to address the question of digital literacy in classrooms knowing that some children do not have access to computers in their homes. Ultimately, to omit or downplay particular topics of study because students don’t have equal access to resources is to head down a slippery slope. It’s true, some students don’t have access to computers at home. Some students don’t have access to collections of literature at home. Some don’t have access to books at all, or to any print materials. Others cannot practice the language of instruction in their homes. Our response to such discrepancies must be additive rather than reductive — that is, rather than omitting a worthwhile topic because students don’t have equal access to resources beyond the classroom, we must consider how we might modify instructional strategies and provide support to accommodate those who are less advantaged.

For many, digital technologies have replaced print technologies as the dominant method of access to text for reading. The question is, how will ministries of education and teachers of English language arts respond? Certainly there are no easy answers.