In 2021, N.J. Gov. Phil Murphy announced that education officials in his state had “closed” the digital divide by ensuring that every public school student had a laptop or tablet and internet access.
“Closing the digital divide wasn’t just about meeting the challenges of remote learning,” Murphy, a Democrat, said at the time. “It’s been about ensuring every student has the tools they need to excel in a 21st-century educational environment.”
While the Murphy administration was successful in giving 358,212 students access to critical education tools they previously lacked, the digital divide remains a problem in New Jersey and throughout the nation.
A U.S. Census Bureau survey undertaken during the pandemic found that not all families with school-age kids had internet access or computers. The levels varied by race and family income.
For instance, whereas 84% of Asian families said they always had a computer on hand for educational uses, only 72% of Hispanic or Latino families did.
Families with higher incomes were more likely to have both internet access and digital devices always available for education. But even the highest-income households didn’t have 100% availability of either. And only about two-thirds of families with incomes below $35,000 did.
Different communities took different approaches to handling the digital divide.
One reason for this may be the focus on temporary solutions.
Some states partnered with internet service providers or nonprofit organizations with a specific focus on digital access or inclusion, or other organizations with broader missions, such as local libraries.
A 2021 report from New America and Rutgers University shows that, while internet access has greatly increased since 2015, 1 in 7 children still do not have high-speed internet access at home.
One reason for this may be the focus on temporary solutions to deeper social issues. A device and hot spot issued for one year does not permanently address problems as complex as the digital divide.
Another factor may be the ability to identify those in need. New Jersey’s survey didn’t ask families about their devices and connectivity. Instead, state officials asked local school districts and took their word without double-checking their reported results.
At the federal level, similar attempts to measure the digital divide have also come up short, overestimating the number of people who have a computer and internet service. The Federal Communications Commission has also overstated the degree to which high-speed service is available to internet customers.
The federal infrastructure package seeks to tackle the digital divide more directly than ever before in the U.S. The law’s text says high-speed internet access is as essential as running water and electricity to “full participation in modern life in the United States.” The package included $2.8 billion to fund an effort to improve online accessibility for social services.
Whether the equitable delivery of digital access is achieved will depend on implementation. Studies of national broadband efforts in Australia and India show it isn’t always easy. For instance, in Australia, poorer communities got worse internet service than wealthier places. In the U.S., past broadband initiatives have not provided equitable service.
The infrastructure law has the potential to ensure that digital access becomes a higher government priority. But experience shows fully closing the digital divide will require much more.
Stephanie Holcomb is a Ph.D. student in planning and public policy at Rutgers University. Andrea Hetling is a professor of planning and public policy at Rutgers. Gregory Porumbescu is an associate professor at the School of Public Affairs and Administration at Rutgers University Newark. Vishal Trehan is a Ph.D. student in public affairs and administration at Rutgers Newark. Jessica Cruz, a Rutgers master’s student in public informatics, contributed. Distributed by The Associated Press.
