This study explores the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and the computer-use profile of 1241 school students in Flanders, the northern region of Belgium. More specifically, the article examines whether varying patterns of computer access, attitudes, competencies and uses can be seen as constituting differences in cultural capital. Additionally, gender was included in the survey as an important background characteristic in digital divide research. Path analysis was used to model the complex relationships between the influencing factors upon the ICT-related variables. What emerged from the analyses was that SES affects the computer-use profile only moderately. No relationship between SES and computer ownership was found. Moreover, the acquisition of ICT competencies can no longer be attributed to computer ownership. Apart from a small effect on ICT use (a higher SES tends to be associated with more ICT use), SES does not seem to affect the computer-use profile of young people in Flanders. The results of this study indicate that the existing differences in SES on computer-use profile are not sufficiently marked to deduce that ICT can be seen as an indicator of differing cultural capital.
Arbuckle JL ( 2003) Amos 5.0 Update to the Amos User’s Guide. Chicago, IL: Smallwaters.
2.
Bagozzi R., Davis F., and Warschaw P. ( 1992) Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations45(7): 659-86.
3.
Bollen K., Long JS ( 1993) Testing Structural Equation Models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
4.
Bourdieu P. ( 1966) L’école conservatrice. les inégalités devant l’école et devant la culture. Revue Française de Sociologie7(3): 325-47.
5.
Bourdieu P. ( 1986) The forms of capital. In: Richardson JG (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York, Westport, CT and London: Greenwich Press, 241-58.
6.
Bourdieu P., Passeron JC ( 1970) La réproduction. Eléments pour une théorie du système d’enseignement. Paris: Éditions de minuit.
7.
Broos A. ( 2006) De digitale kloof in de computergeneratie: ICT-exclusie bij adolescenten, unpublished Phd dissertation, KULeuven , Leuven.
8.
Castells M. ( 1996) The Rise of the Network Society. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
9.
Cho J., de Zuniga G., Rojas H., and Shah DV ( 2003) Beyond access: The digital divide and internet uses and gratifications. IT & Society1(4): 46-72.
10.
Clark LS ( 2003) Challenges of social good in the world of Grand Theft Auto and Barbie: A case study of a community computer center for youth. New Media & Society5(1): 95-116.
11.
Coleman J., Campbell E., Hobson C., Mcpartland J., Mood A., Weinfeld F., and York R. ( 1966) Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, United States Government Printing Office.
12.
de Graaf N., de Graaf P., and Kraaykamp G. ( 2000) Parental cultural capital and educational attainment in the Netherlands: A refinement of the cultural capital perspective. Sociology of Education73(2): 92-111.
13.
de Graaf P. ( 1986) The impact of financial and cultural resources on educational attainment in the Netherlands. Sociology of Education59(4): 237-46.
14.
DiMaggio P. ( 1982) Cultural capital and school success: The impact of status culture participation on the grades of US high school students. American Sociological Review47(2): 189-201.
15.
Duquet N., Glorieux I., Laurijssen I., and van Dorsselaer Y. (2006) Wit krijt schrijft beter. Schoolloopbanen van allochtone jongeren in beeld. Antwerpen /Apeldoorn: Garant.
16.
Elchardus M., Siongers J. ( 2002) Cultuurpraktijk van de ouders en schoolloopbaan van de kinderen, paper presented at the 10th sociaal-wetenschappelijke studiedagen, Amsterdam, 29-30 May.
17.
Erikson R., Goldthorpe J., and Portocarero L. ( 1979) Intergenerational class mobility in three western European countries: England, France and Sweden. British Journal of Sociology30(4): 415-41.
18.
Facer K., Furlong R. ( 2001) Beyond the myth of the ‘cyberkid’: Young people at the margins of the information revolution. Journal of Youth Studies4(4): 451-69.
19.
Fishbein M., Ajzen I. ( 1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
20.
Flemish Government (2007) Digitale kloof: Evolutie van pc-bezit naar leeftijd, geslacht, opleiding, sociale contacten, gezinsinkomen, het al dan niet hebben van betaald werk en kinderen. Available at: http://www.4.vlaanderen.be/dar/svr/Cijfers/Pages/Excel.aspx
21.
Forehand R., Middleton K., and Long N. ( 1987) Adolescent functioning as a consequence of recent parental divorce and the parental-adolescent relationship. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology8(3): 305-15.
22.
Garnier M., Hout M. ( 1976) Inequality of educational opportunity in France and the United States. Social Science Research5(3): 225-46.
23.
Gifi A. ( 1981) Nonlinear Multivariate Analysis. Leiden : Department of Data Theory.
24.
Glorieux I., Koelet S., Mestdag I., Minnen J., Moens M., and Vandeweyer J. ( 2006) De 24 uur van Vlaanderen. Het dagelijkse leven van minuut tot minuut. Leuven: Lannoo Campus .
25.
Gorski P. ( 2005) Education equity and the digital divide. Association for the Advancement of Computers in Education Journal13(1): 3-45.
26.
Hacker KL, Mason SM ( 2003) Ethical gaps in studies of the digital divide. Ethics and Information Technology5(2): 99-115.
27.
Hakkarainen K., Ilomäki L., Lipponen L., Muukkonen H., Rahikainen M., Tuominen T., Lakkala M., and Lehtinen E. ( 2000) Students’ skills and practices of using ICT: Results of a national assessment in Finland. Computers and Education34(2): 103-17.
28.
Hermans R., Tondeur J., van Braak J., and Valcke M. ( 2008) The impact of primary school teachers’ educational beliefs on classroom use of computers. Computers & Education51(4): 1499-1509.
29.
Horrigan JB, Rainie L. ( 2002) Emails that matter: Changing patterns of internet use over a year’s time. IT & Society1(1): 135-50.
30.
Hu L., Bentler PM ( 1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling6: 1-55.
31.
Internet World Stats (2009) Usage and Population Statistics, URL (consulted 10 January 2010): http://www.internetworldstats.com
32.
Jansen Reinen I., Plomp T. ( 1997) Information technology and gender equality: A contradiction in terminis?Computers & Education28(2): 65-78.
33.
Janssen J., Ultee W. ( 1994) De cultuur of de centen … Een nieuwe toetsing van hypothesen over culturele en economische hulpbronnen in de intergenerationele overdracht van onderwijs. Mens en Maatschappij69(4): 400-19.
34.
Katsillis J., Rubinson R. ( 1990) Cultural capital, student achievement, and educational reproduction: The case of Greece. American Sociological Review55(1): 270-9.
35.
Katz YJ ( 2002) Attitudes affecting college students’ preferences for distance learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning18(1): 2-9.
36.
Kearns P., Grant J. ( 2002) The Enabling Pillars: Learning, Technology, Community, Partnership. Commonwealth of Australia. Available at: http://ictpolicy.edna.edu.au
37.
Kennedy T., Wellman B., and Klement K. ( 2003) Gendering the digital divide. IT & Society1(5): 72-96.
38.
Kerckhoff AC ( 1975) Patterns of educational attainment in Great Britain. American Journal of Sociology80(6): 1428-37.
39.
Koivusilta LK, Lintonen TP, and Rimpelä AH ( 2007) Orientations in adolescent use of information and communication technology: A digital divide by sociodemographic background, educational career, and health. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health35(1): 95-103.
40.
Kozma R, ed. (2003) Technology, Innovation and Educational Change: A Global Perspective. Eugene, OR: Information Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).
41.
Kulik JA ( 1999) Meta-analytic Studies of Findings on Computer-based Instruction , in Technology Assessment in Education and Training. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
Lareau A., Weininger EB ( 2003) Cultural capital in educational research: A critical assessment . Theory & Society32(5/6): 567-606.
43.
Lazarus W., Mora F. ( 2000) On-line Content for Low-income and Undeserved Americans: The Digital Divide’s New Frontier. Santa Monica, CA: Children’s Partnership.
44.
Livingstone S., Helsper E. ( 2007) Gradations in digital inclusion: Children, young people, and the digital divide. New Media & Society9(4): 671-96.
45.
Loehlin JC ( 1998) Latent Variable Models: An Introduction to Factor, Path, and Structural Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
Looker ED, Thiessen V. ( 2003) Beyond the digital divide in Canadian schools: From access to competency in the use of information technology. Social Science Computer Review21(4): 475-90.
47.
Loveless A, Dore B, eds (2002) ICT in the Primary School: Learning and Teaching with ICT. Buckingham: Open University Press.
48.
Lucas S. ( 2001) Effectively maintained inequality: Education transitions, track mobility, and social background effects. American Journal of Sociology106(6): 1642-91.
49.
Norris P. ( 2001) Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
50.
O’Dwyer LM, Russell M., and Bebell DJ ( 2004) Identifying teacher, school and district characteristics associated with elementary teachers’ use of technology: A multilevel perspective. Education Policy Analysis Archives12: 1-33.
51.
Oecd/Ceri ( 2001) Learning to Change: ICT in Schools. Available at: http://www.oecd.org
52.
Pelleriaux K. ( 2001) Demotie en burgerschap. De culturele constructie van ongelijkheid in de kennismaatschappij. Brussels: VUBPRESS.
53.
Plomp T, Anderson RE , Law N, and Quale A, eds (2003) Cross-national Policies and Practices on Information and Communication Technology in Education. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
54.
Resta P. ( 1992) Organizing education for minorities: Enhancing minority access and use of the new information technologies in higher education. Education and Computing8(1): 119-27.
55.
Resta P., Laferrière T. ( 2008) Issues and challenges related to digital equity. In: Voogt J, Knezek G (eds) International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education. Berlin, Heidelberg and New York: Springer, 765-78.
56.
Roscigno VJ, Ainsworth-Darnell JW ( 1999) Race, cultural capital, and educational resources: Persistent inequalities and achievement returns. Sociology of Education72(3): 158-78.
57.
Schacter J. ( 2001) The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievement: What the Most Current Research Has to Say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology.
58.
Selhofer H., Hüsing T. ( 2002) The digital divide index: A measure of social inequalities in the adoption of ICT’, paper presented at IST 2002 Conference, Copenhagen, 4-6 November.
59.
Selwyn N. ( 2004) Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society6(3): 341-62.
60.
Shapka JD, Ferrari M. ( 2003) Computer-related attitudes and actions of teacher candidates . Computers in Human Behavior19(3): 319-34.
61.
Sullivan A. ( 2001) Cultural capital and educational attainment. Sociology35(4): 893-912.
62.
Sutton RE ( 1991) Equity and computers in the schools: A decade of research . Review of Educational Research61(4): 475-503.
63.
Tan B. ( 1998) Blijvende sociale ongelijkheden in het Vlaamse onderwijs . Tijdschrift voor Sociologie19(2): 169-97.
64.
Tondeur J., van Braak J., and Valcke M. ( 2007) Towards a typology of computer use in primary education . Journal of Computer Assisted Learning23(3): 197-206.
65.
Tondeur J., van Keer H., van Braak J., and Valcke M. ( 2008) ICT integration in the classroom: Challenging the potential of a school policy. Computers & Education51: 212-23.
66.
Tondeur J., Devos G., van Houtte M., van Braak J., and Valcke M. ( 2009) Understanding organisational and cultural school characteristics in relation to educational change: The case of ICT integration. Educational Studies35(2): 223-35.
67.
van Braak J., Kavadias D. ( 2005) The influence of social-demographic determinants on secondary school children’s computer use, experience, beliefs and competence. Technology, Pedagogy and Education14(1): 43-59.
68.
van Dijk J. ( 2006) Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings . Poetics34(4/5): 221-35.
69.
van Dijk J., Hacker K. ( 2003) The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon . Information Society19(4): 315-26.
70.
Vandenbroucke F. ( 2007) Competences for the Knowledge Society ICT in Education Initiative (2007-2009). Brussels: Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap.
71.
Vanderlinde R., van Braak J., de Windt V., Tondeur J., Hermans R., and Sinnaeve I. ( 2008) Technology curriculum and planning for technology in schools: The Flemish case. TechTrends52(2): 23-6.
72.
Vryonides M. ( 2007) Social and cultural capital in educational research: Issues of operationalisation and measurement. British Educational Research Journal33(6): 867-85.
73.
Warshauer M. ( 2002) Reconceptualizing the digital divide. First Monday7(7). Available at: http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_7/warschauer/index.html
74.
Willis PE ( 1981) Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs. Aldershot: Gower.
75.
Wilson K., Wallin J., and Reiser C. ( 2003) Social stratification and the digital divide. Social Science Computer Review2(2): 133-43.
