| Summary: | Perceptions of new technologies originate from well-established community practices and provide arenas for political and social manipulation. In British Columbia (1995-1996) all school districts were required to submit technology plans in order to qualify for targeted funding. These plans publicly embody the social and political organization of gendered technologies and bring into view the social relations and practices in which the texts are embedded. My rationale for constructing this document is to assess the deployment of technology in the education planning of the school districts in British Columbia as evidenced in the narratives of their texts thus making visible the gendered power relations that define the prevailing knowledge and practices of technology. A quantitative analysis of courses related to the areas of science and technology was undertaken wherein class composition was analyzed by sex for both students and instructors. Female students and instructors were not represented in numbers consistent with their representation in the system as a whole. Omission of women in representative numbers in the technology planning process was also found. This brings into direct view the social relations/organization and "biased" practices of the education system. Official government texts preceding the initiative were summarized and District Technology Plans were also analyzed to interpret the social relations and social practices embedded in the texts. Specifically, these texts were examined to determine their understandings and representations in four areas: equity, curriculum, staff development and technology. Generally plans were presented in a manner that suggested factual status with scant engagement with ideas outside of Ministry requirements. Cost effective and efficient delivery of services, programs and resources were depicted as commensurate with the introduction of new technologies and as justification for their introduction. The requisiteness of technology was a common theme in all documents. The detailing of the material tangibles (hardware inventories, cabling, etc.) was virtually universal whereas the detailing of the human enterprise (teacher development, equity issues, and implementation) was relatively deficient in comparison. The connection between technology and the social issues associated with gender equity was not at all developed with the exception of three school districts.
|
|---|
