Abstract
This paper examines how Latino immigrant families in California use information technology (IT) tools for their pre-existing personal, educational, and work-related activities inside their homes. In doing so, the paper re-examines the concept of access beyond the acquisition of these technologies, highlighting instead the importance of the local social and economical contexts of users and the implications for the design, implementation, and use of these technologies among immigrant communities. Results indicate that as these new comers appropriate IT tools to develop their personal, educational, and work-related needs and aspirations, they begin to develop important digital and language literacies, as well as new ways of interacting with formal institutions in the USA. In spite of new developments in technologies and social media since the study took place (2002), there is still little or no research that relies on direct observations to examine IT utilization inside the homes of immigrants and in relation to their pre-existing educational or labor-related activities. Results suggest a need for a more detailed study of these practices inside homes and their possible implications for educational and labor-related immigrant reform initiatives.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Issues of neighborhood safety, family preferences for whom their children befriended, set the tone for dismissing the initial intention of the Homework Centers.
A seventh home was also served, but since the family already had all the equipment (a gift that had not been used), our program only provided a scanner.
That course centered on exposing individuals with very low literacy levels to computers and the Internet. This meant centering on very basic computer skills such as turning on/off the computer, keyboard skills, opening and closing documents, etc.
We secured written consents of participation from all families, and they all knew that images of their homes and themselves would be used for professional meeting, conferences, and reports or publications by the authors.
When this author visited the Robles home, the family was always very quick to offer a seat since the height of this author is greater than that allowed by their home: they live in a basement.
Since the children of these families attend the after-school project, where they are developing computer skills, we dedicated less time at the homes to training them. Nonetheless, we keep a detailed record of their activities since we were interested in examining how they incorporated these tools to their school work, specially in a setting with less time restrictions than “school time.”
For reasons of confidentiality, I do not show that record here.
Our project was not organized to follow students’ daily activities in classrooms, but we supported teachers in their attempt to incorporate technology in the curriculum and helped them with their technical infrastructure.
At the time of this study, the civic test was obtained in English and through mail. Today, the entire process is offered online through text-based, audio, and video resources. See http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.749cabd81f5ffc8fba713d10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=c242df6bdd42a210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=c242df6bdd42a210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD.
References
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres & other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Becker, H. (1970). Sociological work. Chicago: Aldane.
Becker, H. J. (2000). Who’s wired and who’s not: children’s access to and use of computer technology. The Future of Children, 10, 44–75.
Benítez, J. L. (2006). Transnational dimensions of the digital divide among Salvadoran immigrants in the Washington DC metropolitan area. Global Networks, 6(2), 181–199.
Bowker, G. (1994). In formation mythology and infrastructure. In L. Bud-Frierman (Ed.), Information acumen: The understanding and use of knowledge in modern business (pp. 231–247). London: Routledge.
Brenner, C. T. (2009). Structure and strategies of immigrant integration: evidence from local governments in the new Latino destinations of the United States. Journal of Public Management & Social Policy, 15(1). Newark, NJ.
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London: Heinemann.
Correll, S. (1995). The ethnography of an electronic bar. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 24, 270–298.
deCerteau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
DiMaggio, P., Eszter Hargittai, C. C., & Shafer, S. (2004). Digital inequality: From unequal access to differentiated use. In K. M. Neckerman (Ed.), Social inequality (pp. 355–400). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Etzioni, A. (2007). Citizenship tests: a comparative, communitarian perspective. The Political Quarterly, 78, 353–363. doi:10.1111/j.1467-923X.2007.00864.x.
Fox, S., & Livingston, G. (2007). Latinos online. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center.
Gamon, M., Gao, J., Brockett, C., Klementiev, A., Dolan, W. B., Belenko, D., et al. (2008, August). Using contextual speller techniques and language modeling for ESL error correction. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling 2008) (pp. 169–176). Manchester.
Ganga, D., & Scott, S. (2006). Cultural “insiders” and the issue of positionality in qualitative migration research: moving “across” and moving “along” researcher-participant divides [40 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7(3), Art. 7, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs060379.
Garfinkel, H. (2004 [1967]). Studies in ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press [u.a.].
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Hawthorne: Aldine Publishing Company.
Hakken, D., & Andrews, B. (1993). Computing myths, class realities: An ethnography of technology and working people in Sheffield, England. Boulder: Westview.
Harper, D. (1987). Working knowledge: Skill and community in a small shop. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heidorn, G. (2000). Intelligent writing assistance. In Dale, R., Moisl, H., Somers, H. (eds.), Handbook of natural language Processing (pp. 181–207). New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Hull, G. (1993). Hearing other voices: a critical assessment of popular views on literacy and work. Harvard Educational Review, 63(1), 20–49.
Hymes, D. (2001). On communicative competence. In A. Duranti (Ed.), Linguistic anthropology: A reader (pp. 53–73). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Irving, L. (1999). Falling through the Net: defining the digital divide. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. Available: www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn99/contents.html.
Jasis, P. M., & Ordonez-Jasis, R. (2012). Latino parent involvement: examining commitment and empowerment in schools. Urban Education, 47, 65–89.
Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 39–103.
Lally, E. (2002). At home with computers. Oxford: Berg.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Lazarus, W. (2000). Online content for low-income and underserved Americans: The digital divide’s new frontier: a strategic audit of activities and opportunities. Santa Monica: Children’s Partnership.
Lemke, J. L. (1998). Metamedia literacy: Transforming meanings and media. In D. Reinking, L. Labbo, M. McKenna, & R. Kiefer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world (pp. 283–301). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Livingston, G. (2011). Latinos and digital technology, 2010. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center.
McDermott, R. P., & Hood, L. (1982). Institutionalized psychology and the ethnography of schooling. In P. Gilmore & A. A. Glatthorn (Eds.), Children in and out of school. Ethnography and education (pp. 232–249). Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Miller, D., & Slater, D. (2000). The Internet: An ethnographic approach. Oxford: Berg.
Moll, L., & Gonzáles, N. (1994). Lessons from research with language-minority children. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26(4).
Mouza, C. (2008). Learning with laptops: implementation and outcomes in an urban, under-privilege school. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 447. Research Library.
Muir, M., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2004). The Maine Learning Technology Initiative: an exploratory study of the impact of ubiquitous technology on student achievement. Maine Learning with Laptop Study (Available at http://www.mcmel.org/MLLS).
Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty and the Internet in democratic societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
One Laptop per Child. Vision: children in the developing world are inadequately educated. Retrieved 2008-01-25.
Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2008). Immigrants, English ability, and the digital divide. Social Forces, 86(4).
Paccagnella L. (1997). Getting the seats of your pants dirty: strategies for ethnographic research on virtual communities. Journal of Computers in Biology and Medicine 3(1). http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue1/paccagnella.html
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2004). The road to 21st century learning: a policymaker’s guide to 21st century skills. Washington DC.
Quan-Haase, A., Wellman, B., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2002). Capitalizing on the Internet: Social contact, civic engagement, and sense of community. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), Internet and everyday life (pp. 291–324). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ronnkvist, A., Dexter, S. L., & Anderson, R. E. (2000). Technology support: its depth, breadth and impact in America’s schools. Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations University of California, Irvine and University of Minnesota (http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/html/findings.html).
Saxe, G. B., & Esmonde, I. (2005). Studying cognition in flux: a historical treatment of “fu” in the shifting structure of Oksapmin mathematics. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(3), 171–225.
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Spooner, T. & Rainie, L. (2001). Hispanics and the Internet. Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Stanley, L. D. (2003). Beyond access: psychosocial barriers to computer literacy. Information Society, 19(5), 407–416.
Star, L. S. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientists, 43(3), 377–391.
Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Street, B. (1993). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
U.S. Department of Commerce. (2002). A nation online: How Americans are expanding their use of the Internet. Washington, D.C.: U.S.G.P.O.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Computer and Internet use by children and adolescents in 2001, NCES 2004–014, by Matthew DeBell and Chris Chapman. Washington, DC.
US Census Bureau. (2009). Computer and Internet use. Retrieved online http://www.census.gov/hhes/computer/publications/2009.html.
van Dijk, J., & Hacker, K. (2003). The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. Information Society, 19(4), 315.
Wilson, E. J. I. (2000). Closing the digital divide: an initial review. Briefing the President. Internet Policy Institute: http://www.internetpolicy.org/publications/index.html.
Wilson, S. M., Leighton, C., & Peterson, L. C. (2002). The anthropology of online communities. Annual Review of Anthropology, 31, 449–467.
Woods, P. (1992). Symbolic interactionism: Theory and methods. In M. LeCompte, W. L. Millroy, & J. Presissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 337–404). London: Academic Press.
Wray, P. (2001). Learning computer literacy. New York: DDC Publishing.
Acknowledgments
The study, from which this paper emerged, could not have been realized without the generous “access” these families provided to the author. Funding was provided by the US Department of Education, Office of Minority Education. Thanks to Daniel Warner, Lim Tsang, and Pablo Jasis at Art, Research, and Curriculum (ARC), where I worked while doing the worked described in the paper. Thanks also to Kallen Tsakilis for the exchange of ideas about our work in communities in New York and California. Special thanks to Elaine Lally who offered important comments on the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Torralba, J.A.(. A Survey of Emergent Digital Literacy Inside the Homes of Latino Immigrants in California. Int. Migration & Integration 16, 491–515 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-014-0348-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-014-0348-2