What can be learned from these examples:

These examples demonstrate some principles and also lead into consideration of some broader questions.

• Don't make assumptions about capabilities of learners, in terms of what people can or can't do. (For example, some people might assume that people with limited literacy cannot use new learning technologies.)
  
  
• There are several examples of programs in non-formal settings more appropriately tailored for women. Is this because in these settings women are more likely to be making decisions that shape the programs?
  
  
• In both the formal and non formal learning sectors, some people indicated that certain technologies can increase the participation of women. To paraphrase one respondent, courses that use e-mail or newsgroups discussion groups allow people to spend more time "prethinking" what they're going to say. And they don't need to interrupt anyone to say it.
  
  
• Introduction of new technologies raises questions about educational strategies and their effectiveness, often highlighting issues that have been on the back burner for some time. For example, using a lecture format is not usually effective in conferencing technologies. "So now we're starting to ask questions, like how effective was lecturing beforehand?"

Following up the good examples

Proponents of new technologies often put their "best cases" forward to demonstrate the value and viability of a particular application. It is instructive to follow up with these examples after the spotlight has faded, to determine how well they have met the initial promise after the start up phase. As well, there are some criteria that can be applied to cases to determine whether they are in fact good examples of the use of learning technologies. These are:

• Does the example continue to demonstrate an appropriate use of technology, in the sense that the technology meets the needs of learners, context, content?
  
  
• Does this example continue to represent a genuine improvement in providing access to learning and/or quality of learning?
  
  
• Is the example sustainable, in that it can continue to be affordable and manageable after the initial start-up phase?
  
  
• Is the technology sufficiently robust, both in terms of durability and of continuity (vs. continual updates, changes, obsolescence) to continue to be usable?
  
  
• Are there trade-offs in this example?- for example are there some "winners" in terms of increased access, but some losers, in terms of increased cost?
  
  
• To what extent does this example provide a model that can be applied to other contexts, especially contexts related to women's learning?

Good practice and funding realities

One would hope that examples that do demonstrate the effective use of new learning technologies, especially for those who have previously had limited access to learning, will eventually influence the criteria for funding projects. So far, this does not necessarily seem to be the case.

For example, Industry Canada sponsors programs such as the Technology and Applications Development (TAD) Program, which provides up to 50% of the cost to a maximum of $1 million to stimulate innovative research and development in networking projects and applications for the marketplace in health care, education and lifelong learning. But in the materials developed to promote the program, there is no mention of women and other disadvantaged groups. In fact, these references are conspicuous by their absence. This is not to say that women need not apply, but only to imply that it is not an inviting environment. If equal opportunity is an issue in these programs, they certainly make no mention of it in their descriptive material.

A personal and practical approach to learning technologies

A number of our respondents said their attitude was to approach technologies systematically, and step by step. One of our respondents, who is very conversant with the new technologies spoke about her approach: