New Learning Technologies: Promises and Prospects for Women

Saturday Afternoon

Participants again divided into four workshops, led by the same facilitators: Community Access, Institutional Access, Quality of Learning and Opportunities for Learning.

Community Access (facilitated by Jo Sutton)
Susan Bazilli used the report back time to inform the group that the Women's Program, of Status of Women Canada, has agreed to fund a planning meeting for women interested in organizing a national conference of women involved in new technologies. Women interested in attending this planning meeting, which will be held in May, should contact Susan Bazilli or Jo Sutton.

A defined need that could come out of such a conference is for a national, cohesive position on technological access for women, something similar to the Beijing Platform for Action. Such a position could be presented to government and other funders to influence policy and decisions regarding new technologies. In order for such a position to be comprehensive, alliances would have to be developed between women's groups and with women individually in order to include all perspectives. This CCLOW conference has, so far, been the best opportunity for women across the country interested in technologies to get together and discuss issues and possible solutions. Further face-to-face meetings are essential.

Institutional Access (facilitated by Linda Shohet)
In this workshop, ways of influencing decisions and access at institutional levels were discussed. These included: lobbying, sharing information and networking in communities to have a stronger voice, raising awareness among young women of the importance of feminism, having women in privileged positions (those within institutions) pay attention to the needs of those who are marginalized. Different ways to conceptualize the dynamics of power in order to shift it were also discussed. Some of this focused on the metaphors that are used to describe various social, cultural, institutional activities and how these reflect a particular (usually male) way of engaging with the world.

Time restraint, and the corporate, institutional or political rush to achieve certain ends, was identified as a significant barrier to providing appropriate and meaningful access.

Degrees of privilege, "haves" and "have nots," were discussed in that access is often denied or restricted for those with less privilege; an institution or the government may provide access for marginalized populations but with limitations on how or when or for what purpose. Suspicion between community groups and academia was raised, in that community groups do not want to be co-opted by the academic world, and institutions are seen as protecting their turf especially with respect to funding.