Untitled - socium.ge

332 Lisa J. Servon and Randal D. PinkettCTCs are incredibly diverse in terms of both their organizational structuresand their missions. The relationships between these differences and programoutcomes merit closer examination to determine how successful CTCs are inmeeting their goals. This recommendation is particularly tricky to operationalizegiven the diversity of community technology programs and the rangeof goals they pursue. Despite the great potential of CTCs, they also face arange of challenges which must be addressed if these organizations are to realizetheir potential.THE COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY MOVEMENT:CURRENT CHALLENGESThe community technology movement is now at a crossroads. On one hand,the significant momentum established during the 1990s has produced a wellestablishedinfrastructure, which includes the following: CTCs such as theDepartment of Education grantees; networks of CTCs such as CTCNet and theIntel Computer Clubhouse Network; technology training programs such as theCisco Networking Academy; web resources such as DigitalDivideNetwork.org, Contentbank.org and TechSoup.org; technology programs akin to the TOPfunded initiatives; and intermediary and capacity-building organizations suchas the America Connects Consortium. On the other hand, this momentum hasbeen noticeably affected by recent and proposed federal budget cuts, the realitiesof the current economic downturn, and the resulting diminished supportfrom the philanthropic and private sectors. In addition to these setbacks thereare other challenges and opportunities facing the community technologymovement.First, there have been difficulties in capturing the “late majority” (Rogers,1983), 4 or significant members of the movement’s target population (forexample, low to moderate income or rural communities) who are often thehardest to engage. Some argue that community technology efforts have onlybeen successful in reaching the “early adopters” (Rogers, 1983), those alreadyinclined to embrace computers and the Internet. Recent studies at MIT, TheCamfield Estates–MIT Creating Community Connections Project: Strategiesfor Active Participation in a Low- to Moderate-Income Community (Pinkett,2001; Pinkett and O’Bryant, 2001), and the University of California, SanDiego, Beyond Access: Qualifying the Digital Divide (Stanley, 2002), examinedthe factors that inhibit residents’ use of community technology programs.Both reports concluded that a lack of relevance, fear, and cultural considerationsin addition to the lack of relevant content cited earlier, all contribute tothis obstacle.Second, difficulties in distributing lessons learned and forming partnerships