THE BANGALORE CHALLENGE:
CASE STUDIES OF THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TECHNOLOGY
IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
By
Erik Jon Byker

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Curriculum, Teaching, and Educational Policy
2012

ABSTRACT

THE BANGALORE CHALLENGE:
CASE STUDIES OF THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TECHNOLOGY
IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

By
Erik Jon Byker
As India aspires to become the information and communication technology (ICT) leader
in the world, the education of its children is a primary concern. While India’s policymakers
expect ICT to usher in promising education changes, there is a limited understanding of how
computers are used and negotiated in India’s schools. This dissertation is an ethnographic study
of the meanings and uses for computer technology in elementary schools settings in Bangalore,
India. The dissertation’s purpose is to describe and report on how computer technology is
socially constructed in Bangalore’s fifth grade classrooms. Using case study research design, the
dissertation investigates and compares the social shaping of computer technology in a
socioeconomic cross-section of four elementary schools.
The dissertation’s research questions and methodological approach are framed by the
Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) theory. SCOT maintains that social groups, like
students and teachers, construct the meanings and purposes for technology based on their social
context and interactions. In schools, the social shaping of technology happens in a context of use
and negotiation among students and teachers. The dissertation’s data are comprised of field
notes from extensive field observations, student and teacher questionnaires, teacher interviews,
student focus group interviews, and artifacts, like digital pictures, of each elementary school
setting.

How computer technology is socially constructed in Bangalore’s elementary schools is a
complex phenomenon. The dissertation thickly describes and offers various interpretations to
clarify this complexity. This study illustrates how students and teachers assign meanings to
computer technology in relationship to the school’s curriculum and pedagogical practices. The
dissertation also examines how the diverse meanings for computer technology relate to
contextual factors like the school’s mission statement and the predominant socio-economic status
(SES) of the student body.
At the dissertation’s two lower SES schools, both of which were located in villages, the
students used the school’s computer technology primarily to practice and learn English. Both
school’s teachers and students interpreted that computer technology was empowering and
provided the opportunity for a better life. At the dissertation’s middle SES school, the students
used the school’s computer technology as part of a scripted computer science curriculum based
on coding skills. Additionally, the computer science teachers at this school stated that the
computer’s primary purpose was for the development of logic skills needed for programming
and engineering software. At the dissertation’s upper SES school, the students used the school’s
computer technology to develop their research and presentation skills. At this school, the
teachers and students agreed that the computer’s most important purpose was to foster original
thinking and the ownership of ideas.
The dissertation concludes that accessory social groups, like non-governmental
organizations and the school administrators, have significant influence in stabilizing the
meanings assigned to technology. The dissertation’s findings enhance the understandings of the
way that social groups, in Bangalore’s elementary schools, use and assign meaning to computer
technology.

Copyright by
ERIK JON BYKER
2012

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

For most of my life I have been charmed by India. India’s rhythm and spice are a
celebration of life. I am fascinated with India’s transparency; its guile, squalor, and milking
cows are found on most every corner. Yet, in most corners of India, opportunity is also there.
Or perhaps it is more accurate to say that opportunity is, at least, advertised. These
advertisements often are in the form of billboards and posters promoting education, namely:
English tutoring and computer classes. During my first visit to Bangalore, I marveled at the
plethora of education and technology advertisements that dotted street corners and telephone
poles. The advertisements piqued my curiosity and professional aspiration to research the
intersection of education and technology as represented in Bangalore. This dissertation is a goal
fulfilled and I have so many people to thank for making it possible.
I am a forever grateful for my adviser and dissertation director, Anne-Lise Halvorsen.
Early on and throughout my doctoral program, Anne-Lise inspired me with her commitment to
excellence in research and her generous counsel. She encouraged me to pursue this research in
Bangalore and challenged me throughout the dissertation process. I am incredibly thankful for
her. It was important to me to have a dissertation committee that represented the scope and
caliber of my dissertation’s topic. I thank Amita Chudgar, Punya Mishra, and Suzanne Wilson
for being part of my committee. I am grateful to you all for sharing your expertise and
experiences. I am a stronger scholar and better person because of each of you. Many thanks!
I am grateful for all the wonderful Bangalore based people that helped me with this
dissertation research. I owe a big thank you to all the schools and participants that were part of
this study. I appreciated your time, gracious hospitality, and generosity of spirit. I am also

v

thankful for all the help and assistance that I received from my extended family in Bangalore. I
am especially grateful to Amma for her delicious chai tea and warm chapattis.
Within the Michigan State University community, I am thankful for the gracious
financial support of the Teacher Education Department, the College of Education, the
International Studies in Education Center, the International Studies and Programs, and The
Graduate School. Without their funding, I would not have been able to collect the data nor had
the gift of time to write the dissertation. I am also grateful for the faculty and friends that I have
had the good fortune to cross paths with while at Michigan State University.
I am blessed to be part of a large, wonderful family. I cherish the laughter and
playfulness of my siblings, their spouses, and their children. I am forever thankful for my
parents’ love, encouragement, and commitment to education. My mother, Kathy Byker, inspires
me with her artistry, grace, and faithfulness. My father, Dr. John Byker, will always be my first
mentor and is the reason I wanted to pursue a doctoral education.
Finally, this dissertation would not have been possible without the enduring love,
commitment, and sacrifices of Shalini Byker, my wife. Shalini, you are and will always be my
unchained melody. I could not have navigated this dissertation without you nor would I have
wanted to. You believed in me when I doubted, you encouraged me when I despaired, and you
kept me focused (and well-nourished) when I was disoriented. I love you. You have given us
two precious sons, Rohan and Arjen, who fill each day with joy and thanksgiving. Our boys are
wonderful gifts; both continue to help me to not lose sight of the best parts of life. Onward I
now go into the dissertation with the words of the ancient psalmist as a guide, “May the words of
my heart and the meditations of my spirit be pleasing in Your sight, my rock and my redeemer.”

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... xii
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................... xiii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION “THE BANGALORE CHALLENGE”………………………………….…...1
Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………………….…....2
Rationale of the Study…………………………………………………………………….4
Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………………….……...7
Research Questions……………………………………………………………….……...10
Context of the Study………….……………….…………….…………………………...11
India’s Elementary School System…..…………………………………………..11
English Language………..……………………………………………………….13
Social Class………………………………….…………………………………...14
Summary: Situating the Dissertation.……………………………………………16
Dissertation’s Chapter Organization……….…………………………………………….17
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………………………………..18
ICT Use in India’s Elementary Schools………….………………………………………18
Barrier 1: Lack of Resources…………………………………………………….19
Addressing the Lack of Resources Barrier………………………………20
Barrier 2: Lack of Teacher Preparation………………………………………….21
Addressing the Lack of Teacher Preparation Barrier……………………22
Barrier 3: Lack of Local Understandings………………………………………..23
Addressing the Lack of Local Understanding Barrier…….……………..23
Summary of Literature on ICT in India………………………………………….24
Going Forward: The Dissertation’s Inquiry……………………………………………...26
CHAPTER 3
METHOD………………………………………………………………………………………..30
The Setting: Bangalore, Karnataka, India…………………………………...…………..31
The Sample…………………………………………………...………………………….32
Bara National School…………………………………………………………….34
Jinka Public School………………………………………………………………34
Aadu International School……………………………………………………….35
Komu Community School……………………………………………………….35
Research Design………………………………………………………………………36
Data Sources…………………………………………………………………….38
Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………42
Limitations of the Study………………………………………………………………...43

vii

Language and Translation……………………………………………………….45
Outline of Case Study Chapters…………………………………………………………46
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS: BARA NATIONAL SCHOOL
“COMPUTERS FOR LOGIC AND CODING”…………………………………………...….....48
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups…..…………………………………………48
School and Schedule Description………………………………………………..49
Classrooms and Computer Lab Description……………………………………..50
The Curriculum…………………………………………………………………..52
The Computer Science Teachers………………………………………………...54
The Fifth Grade Students………………………………………………………..55
Interpretative Flexibility…………………………………………………………………56
Creating a Textbox……………………………………………………………….57
Analysis of Creating a Textbox……………………………………….....58
A Practical Test………………………………………………………………….60
Analysis of a Practical Test……………………………………………...61
Computer Science Teachers’ Interpretations……………………………………62
Students’ Interpretations……………………………………………..………….66
Summary…………………………………………………………………………68
Stabilization…………………………………………………………………………….69
Accessory Social Groups………………………………………………..……….71
Technological Frame………………………………………………………………….....73
CHAPTER 5
FINDINGS: JINKA PUBLIC SCHOOL
“A ONE LAPTOP SCHOOL”………………...………………………………………….....…...76
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups…..………………………………………..76
School and Classroom Description…………………………………………..…..78
The Curriculum and the Laptop….……..……………………………..…………81
The Teachers……………………...………………………………………...……82
The Students………………………………………...…………………………....83
Interpretative Flexibility…………………………………………………………...……83
Typing English Antonyms……………………………………………...…..……84
Analysis of Typing English Antonyms …………………….…………...85
Copying a Solar Eclipse with Etoys…………………………………..…………86
Analysis of Copying a Solar Eclipse with Etoys....……………………...86
Teachers’ Interpretations…………………………………………………..…….87
Students’ Interpretations………………………………………………….……...90
Summary………………………………………………………………………....93
Stabilization……………………………………………………………………….…….94
The SSA Foundation’s Vision and Laptop Program……………..………..…….96
The SSA Foundation as an Accessory Social Group……………..………….…100
Technological Frame…………………………………………………………………...102

viii

CHAPTER 6
FINDINGS: AADU INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
“WHERE CREATIVITY AND CURIOSITY ARE COUSINS”…………….………………...105
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups…..………………………………………106
The Elementary School and Schedule Description..…………………………....107
The Classrooms ………………………….……………………………………..108
The Curriculum and the Technology………………………...............................109
The Teachers………………………………………………………...………….111
The Students……………………………………………………….……………112
Interpretative Flexibility………………………………………………………………113
Inquiry through Mind Mapping……………………………………………..….113
Analysis of Inquiry through Mind Mapping …………………………...116
Creating a Unit Project Presentation……………………………………………116
Analysis of Creating a Unit Project Presentation.……….……………..118
Teachers’ Interpretations………………………..……………………………...119
Students’ Interpretations………………………………………………….…….123
Summary………………………………………………………………………..125
Stabilization…………………………………………………………………………….126
International Baccalaureate as an Accessory Social Group…………………….127
Technological Frame…………………………………………………………………...128
CHAPTER 7
FINDINGS: KOMU COMMUNITY SCHOOL
“AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL”………………………………….………………...131
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups…..…………..……………………………132
The Classroom and Schedule Description………...…………………………....135
The Curriculum and the Technology………………………...............................136
The Teachers………………………………………………………...………….137
The Students……………………………………………………….……………138
Interpretative Flexibility……………………..…………………………………………139
Creating Advertisements……..……………………………………………..….140
Analysis of Creating Advertisements...………………………………...142
Presenting Globish..……………………………………………………………143
Analysis of Presenting Globish.………………………………………..144
Teachers’ Interpretations………………………..……………………………...145
Students’ Interpretations………………………………………………….…….147
Summary………………………………………………………………………..149
Stabilization…………………………………………………………………………….150
Two Practical Skills…. ……………………………………………………….152
Administrators as an Accessory Social Group………………………………...154
Technological Frame…………………………………………………………………...155
CHAPTER 8
CROSS-CASE ANALYSIS…………………......………………………………………...…...157
The Thesis………………………………….…..………………………………………159
Malleability………………………………………......………………………....161

ix

Discussion………………………………………………….……………165
Paradox of Malleability………………………………...…….…………………166
Skill Development…………………………………………...………….167
Artifacts…….......………………………………………….……………169
Notions of Confidence.…………………………………….……………171
Discussion………………………………………………….……………174
Stabilization and Accessory Social Groups..…………...…….…………………175
Organizational Vision………………………………………...………….177
Set Curriculum......………………………………………….……………180
Discussion………………………………………………….……….……183
The Wider Sociotechnical Context….…………………….……………………185
Educators’ Notions of Future Possibilities………………………………188
Students’ Notions of Future Possibilities..……………………….………190
Future Career Options Reported by Students..………….……….………193
Discussion: The Middle Class Narrative..………………….……….……195
CHAPTER 9
CONCLUSION “BACK TO THE BANGALORE CHALLENGE”……………………...…...201
Situating the Findings in the Literature…………………..………………………….…203
The Wider Story……………………………..………………………………………….207
Future Study.………..………………………………………………………………….210
Significance.………..……………………………………………………….………….212

APPENDICES…………….…………………......………………………………………...…...217
Appendix A………………………………………………………………………….....217
Appendix B………………………………………………………………………….….218
Appendix C……………………………………………………………………………..219
Appendix D…………………………………………………………………………..…220
Appendix E…………………………………………………………………………...…222
Appendix F………………………………………………………………………….…..224
REFERENCES…...…………………………….......……………………………………...…...226

x

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 India’s Educational Governing Boards ………………………..……………….……….12
Table 2 The Dissertation’s School Descriptions………………………………………………....33
Table 3 Addressing the Case Study Research Design Issues …………………………………...37
Table 4 The Elementary Computer Science Curriculum at Bara National………………………53
Table 5 Two Versions of a Fifth Grade Practical Test for Computer Science Class………….…60
Table 6 Summary of Each School’s Findings Organized by Research Sub-questions………....158
Table 7 Each School’s Weekly Mode of Subject Matter Time………….……………………..161
Table 8 Top Three Most Cited Job Preferences by School………..………………………….. 194

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. A graphic representation of the definition of accessory social groups……………… 72
Figure 2. Screenshot of Jinka Public fifth grader’s solar eclipse using Etoys………………… 87
Figure 3. The hourglass analysis of the social construction of technology…………….………160
Figure 4. Themes that emerged from each school’s technological frame.……….……….……197

xii

KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS

ASER........................................................................................ Annual Status of Education Report
CAL ................................................................................................... Computer Assisted Learning
CBSE................................................................................... Central Board of Secondary Education
EFA...................................................................................................................... Education for All
FOSS ............................................................................................. Free and Open Source Software
IB ......................................................................................................... International Baccalaureate
ICSE................................................................. Council for Indian School Certificate Examination
ICT .......................................................................... Information and Communication Technology
MDGs ........................................................................................... Millennium Development Goals
NCERT .................................................. National Council for Educational Research and Training
NGO ............................................................................................ Non-governmental Organization
PPP ....................................................................................................... Public Private Partnerships
RTE ..................................................... Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act
SC ..........................................................................................................................Scheduled Caste
SCOT ....................................................................................... Social Construction of Technology
SSA ............................................................................................................. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan
SSBE.......................................................................................... State Board of Education Syllabus
TPACK ....................................................... Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge
UEE .............................................................................. Universalization of Elementary Education
UNESCO ................................... United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

xiii

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
“THE BANGALORE CHALLENGE”
In his September 2010 “back to school” speech, President Obama urged students in the
United States to work harder in order to keep pace with students in Bangalore, India. He stated,
“At a time when countries are competing with us like never before, when students in Bangalore,
India, are working harder than ever . . . success in school is going to determine success in the
twenty-first century” (“Working Harder,” 2010). This speech, now nicknamed in India as the
“Bangalore Challenge,” highlighted a perceived competitive edge that Indian students, especially
in metropolises like Bangalore, have in areas like math, science, and technology. According to
President Obama, success in this century will be determined by how students respond to the
Bangalore Challenge.
This dissertation examines a facet of the Bangalore Challenge by investigating how and
why elementary students in Bangalore use computer technology. I examine these “how” and
“why” questions within the context of India’s elementary school system, which is the level of
schooling that is attended by more of India’s vast population than any other (Ramachandran &
Sharma, 2009). Using case study research design based in an ethnographic tradition, I
investigate and compare the uses for computer technology in a socioeconomic cross-section of
four of Bangalore’s elementary schools. Specifically, I focus on how each school’s fifth grade
students and their teachers construct and negotiate meaning for computer technology use. I seek
to better understand how the social-cultural context and participants’ backgrounds inform the
meanings that participants assign to computer technology. The dissertation’s research questions
and methodological approach are framed by the Social Construction of Technology theory,

1

which is a social constructivist theory for examining how social actors shape and give meaning
to technology based, in part, on their socio-cultural context.
Statement of the Problem
To investigate the dissertation’s problem, I start by examining Bangalore as both a place
and an idea. Bangalore shares the dual and somewhat binary nicknames of “India’s Silicon
Valley” and “India’s Garden City.” In early Indian history, Bangalore was known as a lush
retreat for South Indian royals. Today, Bangalore is a place that echoes with the hum of
computer technology and the din of globalization. Bangalore as the nexus of globalization was
popularized by the writings of Thomas Friedman, author of The World is Flat. Friedman (2005)
asserts that Bangalore “represents the possibility to collaborate and compete in real time with
other people on more different kinds of work from more different corners of the planet on a more
equal footing than at any previous time in history" (p. 8). Indeed, many developed nations’
industries rely on the Indian workforce and India’s reach as technological leader touches most
developed nations. Thus, Bangalore represents the possibilities of Indian society.
Yet, the realities of Indian society show that India’s technological leadership barely even
grazes its rural villages. Indeed, it is rare for India’s rural elementary schools to have even a
single working computer (Azim Premji, 2004). Amartya Sen, the Nobel Prize winning Indian
economist, describes the ironic tension between possibilities and realties of Indian society. Sen
(2005) explains that, “India’s speed of expansion of technology products has been
extraordinary . . . yet the underdevelopment of the Indian school system, especially in rural areas
of the country, has been equally extraordinary, not to mention inefficient and amazingly unjust”
(p. 344). Despite the inequalities, policymakers seek to develop India’s elementary school
system. Over the last twenty-five years, India’s policymakers have shown a commitment to

2

universal elementary education and continue to craft policy to carry it forward. For example, in
1986, the Indian government instituted the Universalization of Elementary Education (UEE)
campaign to address the challenge of providing education for all children in India (Govinda,
2007). The UEE campaign mandates 100% enrolment and retention of India’s schoolchildren
from ages 6 to 14. In 2002, the Indian government added the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA)
component to the UEE campaign. SSA was connected to India’s push to meeting the United
Nation’s Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of providing a free, quality elementary
education to all schoolchildren. While India has yet to achieve 100% enrolment, SSA has
insured that all schoolchildren receive a nutritious mid-day meal, which a source of motivation
for staying in school. In 2009, the Indian legislature has enforced The Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Act (RTE), which affirms the legal right that all Indian children have
to a free elementary education. RTE empowers Indian parents with right to prosecute if their
child’s rights are not being upheld in schools.
UNESCO (2010) reports a steady rise in elementary school enrolment since the passage
of SSA and RTE. Yet, even with the rise in enrolment, dropout rates are high (Chudgar, 2009).
High illiteracy rates persist, especially among girl children (Chudgar, 2009, UNESCO, 2010).
Additional challenges, like overcrowded classrooms, contribute to India’s inconsistent education
quality. The 2009 Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) reported that the teacher to
student ratio in government run schools can range anywhere from 1:40 to 1:70. While SSA
prescribes a 1 teacher to every 30 student ratio, this ratio is far from being actualized in most
government run schools (ASER, 2009; NCERT, 2005). Similarly, there is a lack of proper
facilities in India’s million plus government run elementary schools. Almost 16% are without
drinking water and 51% are without a toilet (Azim Premji Foundation, 2004). These are the

3

realities of India’s elementary school system. However, in the face of these realities,
policymakers are inquiring about the role of computer technology in addressing the inequalities
and inefficiencies of India’s elementary school system.
As India aspires to emerge as the information and communication technology (ICT)
leader among the knowledge-based societies, it does so with the education of children as a
primary concern. These aspirations reflect two strong commitments for the betterment of Indian
society in the twenty first century. Abroad, India is known for its commitment to ICT and
Bangalore is the place that defines the scope of that commitment. At home, India is known for a
continual commitment to provide a free elementary schooling to all Indian children. One
commitment reflects India’s development; the other commitment reveals India’s sustainability.
Yet, little is known about the convergence of these two commitments; specifically, how Indian
children are using ICT in elementary schools and for what purposes. While India’s policymakers
often expect ICT to usher in promising education changes, there is a limited understanding of
how that technology is used and negotiated at the beginning level of Indian schooling: the
elementary school classroom.
Rationale of the Study
The rationale for this dissertation, then, is to investigate the intersection of these two
current phenomena in India: the rise of the ICT industry and the emphasis on elementary
schooling. The study provides a deeper understanding of how and why Bangalore’s elementary
students use computer technology. The study is situated in a set of contradictions, or paradoxes,
that complicate both my research questions and my findings. However, these paradoxes are
critical to acknowledge and explain in order to present the realities of India.

4

India as a country is a paradox. India has a population of over 1 billion people and is the
largest democracy in the world. Over the last decade, India has consistently had one of the
world’s fastest growing economies. Yet, despite this growth, one third of the world’s poor live
in India (UNESCO, 2008). For all the attention given to India and computer technology, the ICT
industry only represents a small subset of the Indian workforce. Even though India’s ICT
industry is important to the Indian economy, economists estimate that only a million Indians are
actually employed in an ICT field (Luce, 2007; Sen, 2006). Indians working in ICT represent
only a small fraction of India’s labor force, which is dwarfed by the hundreds of millions of
Indians who do agricultural related work. Yet, despite this difference, the small percentage of
Indians working in ICT collectively earns more annually than the hundreds of millions of Indians
working in agriculture (Deb, 2011; Luce, 2007). Thus, the study’s first paradox relates to the
global attention paid to the Indian ICT industry, which represents a growing but still relatively
small portion of the Indian workforce. Related to this paradox, I inquire about whether such
attention infers something about the meanings for computer technology within India?
The study’s second paradox concerns the proportion of Indian elementary schools that
have computer technology. Technology in India’s elementary schools is rather scarce. A little
over 16% of elementary schools in India actually have a computer in the school (NUEPA, 2011).
Although, private elementary schools are more likely to have a computer compared with
government run public elementary schools; computers are uncommon even in India’s private
elementary schools (Chudgar, 2009; Chudgar & Quin, 2012). Thus, Indian elementary schools
that do have computers are privileged. The study’s four schools represent this second paradox of
a small (but growing) subset of India’s elementary school population that is equipped with at
least one working computer. Even though a small percentage of India’s elementary schools have

5

computer technology, the paradox here is even enhanced as the Indian government emphasizes
the importance of computer technology in schools; sometimes over and above basic
infrastructure like working toilets.
Despite the small fraction of India’s workforce in ICT as well as the scarcity of computer
technology in elementary schools, these two paradoxes reveal an allure of possibilities that
computer technology offers to Indian society and to its education system. What is so alluring
about computer technology? And how does the dissertation define and understand the term,
computer technology? The allure of India’s computer technology is more than just hardware and
software; it is about the hope and possibilities of India’s future. Such hopes and possibilities
connect with the dissertation’s investigation of the paradoxes of Indian society as it relates to
meanings that people pin to computer technology. I sketch these meanings with a brief history.
Since the Renaissance Age, people used the word “computer” to describe mathematical
computations (Pelgrum & Law, 2003). By the end of the 1980s, the term “computer technology”
was replaced by “IT” (information technology) in business language. This change in
terminology signified a subtle, but important shift in thinking about computer technology.
Computer technology went from being a super-sized calculator to a tool for processing data.
Information technology was expanded to the term ICT around 1992 as e-mail and the Internet
became available to the general public (Pelgrum & Law, 2003). Through this etymological
evolution, computer technology morphed from being computational devices into communication
tools for exchanging information. Computer technology’s terminology, although changing, often
describes a computer’s physical properties. But, the meanings for computer technology go
beyond its wares. The meanings for computer technology are attached by users, who construct
purposes for computer technology. In this dissertation, I assert that computer technology is more

6

than just a tool; rather, as people use computer technology they assign different meanings to the
technology. And the meanings that people construct for technology convey symbolic capital
(Bourdieu, 1986). By symbolic capital, I mean the possibilities of power, economic
opportunities, and socio-cultural status that users confer on computer technology.
Thus, the dissertation’s rationale is to investigate not only the uses for computer
technology in Bangalore’s elementary schools, but to also explore the symbolic meanings that
people assign to computer technology. Indeed, computer technology represents something more
than just hardware and processing speeds. The dissertation examines a variety of these symbolic
meanings, which I call “narratives,” that emerge from the analysis of the dissertation’s case
studies. One such narrative is about the opportunity for a better life by learning the English via
the computer. Another narrative is about the practicality of learning computer programming
skills in order to secure an Indian middle class future. The third narrative is about the propriety
of using computer technology for research and knowledge ownership. I argue that these
narratives reflect Bangalore’ socio-cultural context and are the ways that Bangalore’s elementary
students are being prepared to negotiate their future success in India’s democracy. I also explore
why these meanings or narratives are assigned to computer technology. Why in Indian
elementary schools? And what do the narratives reveal about the Indian paradoxes that emerge
in its elementary school system?
Theoretical Framework
To investigate how elementary school users assign meanings to computer technology, I
ground this dissertation in social constructivist theory. While policymakers often equate
computer technology with promising societal development, many support school-based computer
technology investments hoping that the mere presence of computer technology might improve

7

student learning (Buckingham, 2007; Cuban, 2001; Pal, 2003, 2008, 2009; Thirumurthy &
Sundaram, 2003; Walsham, 2010). Wilson (2002) describes that kind of thinking as
technological determinism. Technological determinism is the belief that technology governs
people’s decision making. Technological determinists view technology as the cause for societal
transformations. Bimber (1990) further identifies technological determinism as the belief that
technology, rather than human action, is responsible for social change.
This dissertation is based in social constructivism rather than technological determinism.
Social constructivists argue that people, rather than technology, change society. For example, a
social constructivist theory of technology posits that social actors construct and negotiate the
meanings for computer technology. Furthermore, a social constructivist would contend that
technology has “no meaningful existence outside the context of use” (Leonardi, 2009, p. 293).
Simply put, social constructivism is the belief that a technology’s purpose comes from people.
This dissertation’s research questions and methodological approach are framed by a social
constructivist theory called the Social Construction of Technology or SCOT theory. SCOT
theory originated from Pinch and Bijker’s (1984) case study investigation of the historical
development of certain technologies. At its most basic level, SCOT theory maintains that groups
of people, or social groups, construct the meanings for technology based on their interactions and
negotiations.
SCOT theory offers a methodological approach for examining how people negotiate their
interpretations for technology. Specifically, SCOT theory offers four heuristics, or research
steps, for investigating how technological artifacts acquire meanings through social groups’
negotiations. The first SCOT step requires identifying relevant social groups. According to
Bijker (1995), relevant social groups are the actors who share space in a technology’s meaning

8

construction. The researcher identifies these groups based on the study’s context and the
technology under investigation. Bijker asserts that demographic data helps to “thickly describe”
(Geertz, 1973; Ryle, 1949) the relevant social groups. The dissertation’s relevant social groups
are fifth grade students and educators at four elementary schools in Bangalore, India.
The second SCOT step is to distinguish the relevant social groups’ interpretations of
technology. Bijker (1995) calls this step interpretative flexibility (p. 20). Interpretative
flexibility is a term that is meant to describe all the different meanings that relevant social groups
assign to a certain technology. SCOT asserts that interpretative flexibility is detected via each
social group’s rhetoric about a certain technological artifact. Thus, a key part of interpretative
flexibility is to record the ways that a social group describes a technology’s specific meanings
and purposes. For example, a group of teenagers might share that a computer is a word
processor, gaming device, and a social media tool; these different meanings make up the
teenagers’ interpretative flexibility about the computer.
The third SCOT step explains how the social groups negotiate their interpretative
differences. SCOT theory describes this negotiation process as a technology’s stabilization.
There are different categories of stabilization that are closely tied to negotiation and the amount
of power that a group holds. The categories of stabilization are: (1) consensus, where no social
group dominates the other and there is a consensus about the meaning of a technology, (2)
domination, where one social group dominates the “meaning making” and asserts its
interpretation for the technology; and, (3) competition, where two or more social groups compete
in the “meaning making” process and meaning is negotiated through competition (Bijker, 1995).
The fourth SCOT step requires a further examination of the setting’s contextual factors,
including the social groups’ demographics, to identify the technological frame that the social

9

groups share. A technological frame takes into consideration the wider context of cultural and
socio-economic factors that influence a technology’s social construction in specific settings
(Bijker, 1995; Klein & Kleinman, 2002). A technological frame also reflects the interactions
among social groups in a particular context. According to SCOT theory, the technological frame
is a frame of reference among the social groups in a particular setting that represents how the
social groups make sense of a technology in relationship to the context they share. The
technological frame helps to explain the interpretative flexibility and why social groups negotiate
certain meanings for computer technology based on their social context. The technological
frame provides deeper, contextual levels of understanding about the social shaping of technology.
In sum, I use SCOT theory to guide the investigation of how social groups in Bangalore’s
elementary school assign and negotiate meaning for their school’s computer technology. Given
the importance of Bangalore within the global society, I employ SCOT theory to further probe
the uses and socio-cultural context for computer technology in Bangalore’s elementary schools.
Research Questions
The dissertation’s two primary research questions are: (a) How and why is computer
technology socially constructed in Bangalore’s elementary schools? (b) How does the social
construction of technology compare across schools? To systematically organize these primary
research questions, I parse the questions into research sub-questions based on SCOT theory’s
heuristics:
1. Who are the relevant social groups and what is the social context like in the study’s
elementary schools?
2. What meanings do the study’s relevant social groups (students and teachers) assign to
computer technology?

10

3. How do the relevant social groups in each setting negotiate the meaning for computer
technology use? To what degree is there stabilization?
4. How does the school’s social context, including the relevant social groups’ demographics,
help explain the meaning they assign and negotiate to computer technology?
Context of the Study
Alexander (2003) describes India as being a “young democracy shaped by a culturally
ancient” society (p. 88). I investigate the dissertation’s research questions within Alexander’s
notion of the sociological tapestry that defines India. In order to provide deeper contextual
understanding, I discuss background information about India’s elementary school system.
Additionally, I explore two themes, English language and social class, that are important to
understanding the larger Indian context of this study.
India’s elementary school system. India’s elementary school system is complex.
Elementary education in India means eight years of schooling from the time a child is six years
old. In India, elementary school is defined as the time period between first and eighth grades
(NCERT, 1999). There are almost 2 million elementary schools spread across 35 Indian states
and union territories (MHRD, 2010). Almost 80% of India’s elementary schools are public,
government run schools. In most government run public schools the language of instruction is
the state language. For example, teachers in government run public schools in the State of
Karnataka primarily instruct in Kannada, the language of Karnataka. While the language of
instruction differs from state to state, all government run public schools follow a national
prescribed curriculum. The National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT)
is charged by the Indian government to “prepare, promote, oversee, and establish a national
system of education in India” (NCERT, 1988, p. 3). While NCERT mandates that government

11

run public elementary schools must include the subject matter areas of languages, mathematics,
science, and social science, the council allows for the curriculum to be somewhat tailored to
“local needs based on socio-political pressures” (NCERT, 1998, p. 80). This is especially true
when it comes to the mandate for the teaching of three core languages. While the typical three
core language formula includes the regional language, English, and Hindi, it is up to local district
officials to make the final decision of what languages are taught. Typically, language instruction
makes up 32% of the daily classroom time and mathematics makes up 14% of the daily schedule.
Governing boards deliver India’s National Curriculum. The governing boards are a form
of legitimatizing the curriculum and conferring status. Indeed, there is a high degree of public
opinion about the rigor of each governing board. Posters on telephone poles advertising a
school’s affiliation to an Indian governing board are quite common throughout India. Table 1
lists the type of governing boards in India, provides the board’s acronym, and indicates the
public status and school type affiliated with the governing board (NCERT, 2005).
Table 1
India’s Educational Governing Boards
Governing Board Name

Acronym

Status and School Affiliation

Central Board of Secondary Education

CBSE

High- Private & Public

Council for Indian School Certificate Examination

ICSE

Medium – Private & Public

IB

Exclusive – Private Schools

NIOS

Medium – Private Schools

Islamic Madrasah School Syllabus

-

Muslim – Private Schools

State Board of Education Syllabus

SSBE

International Baccalaureate
National Institute of Open School Syllabus

12

Low – Public Schools

As Table 1 shows, the Indian public confers a low status on the State Board of Education’s
Syllabus (SSBE). The public views SSBE as an inferior education because of the lack of English
instruction and the lack of rigor in the state’s curriculum (Advani, 2009; Kumar, 1991; Thapan,
1991). Kumar (2009) explains that Indian parents see private schools as a status symbol.
Conversely, public school education is de-valued because of the mistrust that many Indians share
about government managed institutions. Private schools are a symbol of prestige and cultural
capital (Bourdieu, 1984; Sarangapani, 2003; Thapan, 1991). A private school’s governing board
affiliation adds to this cultural capital. Over 20% of the elementary schools in India are private
(ASER, 2009). The Indian government officially recognizes private schools and classifies
private schools into two categories: aided or unaided. Private aided schools accept government
funds. Conversely, private unaided schools do not accept government funds and are completely
funded by private parties (Govinda, 2007). In the context of the dissertation’s four participant
schools: one school is public, government-run affiliated; one school is private aided; and two
schools are private unaided.
English language. English is the primary language of instruction in most of India’s
private elementary schools. English language learning is an important, albeit controversial,
dimension of Indian elementary schooling. Indian English, as Ramachandra Guha (2007) calls it,
represents India’s mixed identity. English is a vestige of colonialism but a pathway to privilege
and economic security. English is India’s business language. And, yet, many Indians worry that
the English language threatens India’s unique regional cultures and identities. The hegemony of
the English language is situated in the language’s power to dominate political, economic, and
cultural arrangements in a globalized society. Advani (2009) argues that the narrative of English
in the Indian education system reflects “a variety of discourses including the language of

13

colonialism, pan-Indianism, and globalization” (p. 2). Globalization has driven the demand for a
universal mode of communication. English meets that demand. Advani posits that English is the
medium of the global economy. It is required for landing a decent job and esteemed as the entry
ticket into India’s growing middle class. One can see this narrative unfold in Indian popular
culture, especially as depicted in the Indian popular media.
Summarizing the role of English in relationship to Indian society, Advani (2009) simply
states, “English education has increasingly become an object of desire for all” (p. 48). There is
an economic advantage attached to learning English. In my study, the participants often
referenced and reiterated the advantage of knowing English. Indeed, the coupling of computer
technology skills with command of the English language is a pervasive theme throughout this
study. At two schools in particular, the students perceived that English language was the
symbolic capital that computer technology provided.
Social class. Another theme in this study is the relationship between social class and the
meanings that students assigned to computer technology. As a culturally ancient society, India
has retained both positive and negative vestiges of antiquity. Guha (2008) explains that two of
the more lasting cultural vestiges are the divisions among caste and class. In India, social class is
complex and difficult to define. For the dissertation, I rely on Beteille’s (2007) and Sen’s (2005)
understanding that, in India, social class is a federation of cultural, economical, political, and
social arrangements. A social group’s social class confers their socio-economic status (SES). In
this dissertation, social class and SES will be used in synonymous ways. Beteille (2007)
suggests that India’s social class arrangements reinforce societal power structures and can be
divided, though not easily, into three strata: lower class, middle class, and upper class. A lower
class distinction are Indians who are often very poor, they own few possessions, and labor, for

14

very small wages, in non-skilled jobs. The Indian middle class distinction are people who a
skilled workers, they usually work for a salary, and they own many personal possessions. India’s
upper class people are wealthy and own even more possessions, including major possessions
such as businesses.
India’s social class distinctions must also be examined in the historical context of its caste
system. While this dissertation focuses mostly on social class, caste identity continues to be a
sociological complexity of Indian life (Hickey & Stratton, 2007). After one’s mother tongue,
caste is the principal way in which Indians identify themselves (Guha, 2008). Thapar (2003)
explains that the origins of the caste system revolve around two Sanskrit words, varna and jaita.
Varna is the word for purity, but its meaning has more to do with a hierarchy or division of
purity. Jaita is the Sanskrit word for birth. Taken together, varna and jaita shape the meaning of
caste system which is the hierarchy of purity which people are born into. The caste birthright is
an important difference between caste and class. People are born into their caste and, therefore,
cannot move between castes.
While discrimination based upon caste is now illegal in India, social inequality is still
common and reflected in India’s school system (Hickey & Stratton, 2007). Rao, Cheno, and
Narain (2003) assert that many middle class Indians believe that “lower castes are not deserving
of education and this belief is deeply rooted in caste discrimination and hampers the efforts to
universalize elementary education” (p. 173). The rootedness of caste within Indian society
makes the need for free and universal elementary education all the more necessary, yet, at the
same time all the more challenging. The challenge is how to overcome such a strong cultural
construct that affects the way in which elementary schooling is both conceived and organized.
This is India’s challenge for the twenty-first century.

15

Summary: situating the dissertation. Against the backdrop of Bangalore, the
dissertation explores the confluence of India’s commitment to ICT and to elementary schooling.
Within this confluence, issues like the role of English and the rootedness of social class are part
of the dissertation’s investigation of the social shaping of technology in Bangalore’s elementary
schools. Throughout the dissertation these contextual issues repeatedly get entangled with the
uses and meanings for computer technology in the study’s four schools.
This dissertation does more than just tell of the ways elementary schools in Bangalore use
computer technology. Indeed, the dissertation does not pretend that computer technology is
separated from the school’s socio-contextual fabric. Rather, the dissertation examines how
Bangalore’s elementary school participants construct meaning for computer technology in
relationship to their school’s socio-cultural context or what SCOT theory calls, their
technological frame. Through this examination, the dissertation investigates how the
participants’ meanings for computer technology are connected to socio-cultural relationships
like: (a) the coordination of Indian democracy and education; (b) the divide between
Bangalore’s urban and rural areas; (c) identity and English language instruction; (d) the
provision of resources to address social inequalities; and (e) social class and economic
opportunities. Furthermore, the dissertation examines how the participants’ meanings also shed
light on two paradoxes of the larger Indian society. The first paradox is the ever growing global
attention paid to the Indian ICT industry even though this industry only makes up a small
percentage of India’s labor market. The second paradox is the Indian government’s increasing
emphasis on computer technology in elementary schools, even though only a small proportion of
India’s elementary schools are equipped with such technology.

16

Dissertation’s Chapter Organization
I close this chapter by laying out the dissertation’s organization. Chapter 2 is a literature
review about the ways in which elementary schools in India are using computer technology.
Chapter 3 describes the dissertation’s setting and method in more detail. It also describes the
study’s participants, data collection methods, data analysis, and the limitations.
Chapter 4 through Chapter 7 are the schools’ case study chapters. Specifically, Chapter 4
describes the social construction of technology at Bara National School, which is a private,
middle class school affiliated with the CBSE. Chapter 5 reports on the social construction of
technology at Jinka Public School, which is the study’s government-run public school affiliated
with the State of Karnataka’s SSBE. Chapter 6 examines the social construction of technology at
Aadu International School, which is a private, upper class school affiliated with the International
Baccalaureate (IB) curriculum. Chapter 7 explains the social construction of technology at
Komu Community, which is the “daughter school” of Aadu International and is a private
community school for lower class village students.
In Chapter 8, I compare the schools via a cross-case analysis related to the SCOT themes
and the dissertation’s primary research questions. Chapter 8 includes a deeper examination of
how the case studies reflect the wider sociotechnical context of Bangalore, India. Chapter 9 is
the dissertation’s conclusion that revisits the Bangalore Challenge, situates my findings in the
literature, suggests the study’s further research opportunities, and discusses the significance of
this study.

17

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
While there is considerable interest in utilizing computer technology to raise student
achievement; educators and policymakers, in India and around the world, are unclear about the
most effective way to support computer technology related programs in schools. Despite all the
goals and promises related to computer technology, there are many barriers that constrain the
ways that elementary school teachers and students use computer technology in school classrooms
(Hew & Brush, 2007). In this chapter, I review the scholarship on the uses for information and
communication technology (ICT) in India’s elementary schools.
ICT Use in India’s Elementary Schools
India provides a compelling case study in examining ICT and elementary schooling.
The Indian government is exploring ways in which educators can use ICT to address the realities
of elementary school education in India (NCTE, 2009). Yet, despite the promises of increased
ICT investment, little is know about the ways in which India’s elementary school teachers and
students use technology. Additionally, there is a paucity of empirical research related to ICT and
elementary education in India.
After extensive searches on various academic search engines, I could only identify 14
empirical based studies, published in the 2000’s, that were related to ICT and elementary
schooling in India (Azim Premji Foundation, 2008; Banerjee, Cole, Duflo, & Linden, 2007;
Bharadwaj, 2007; Iyer & Baru, 2008; Kam, Kumar, Jain, Mathur, & Canny, 2010; Karnati, 2008;
Light, 2009; Linden & Banerjee, 2003; Mehta, 2005; Pal, 2009; Patra, Pal, Nedevschi, Plauche,
& Pawar, 2007; Pawar, Pal, & Toyama, 2006; Thirumurthy & Sundaram, 2003; Umrani-Khan &
Iyer, 2008). Of the fourteen articles, one study is a dissertation (Karnati, 2008) and four studies

18

are from peer-reviewed journals (Banerjee et al., 2007; Light, 2009; Pal, 2009; Thirumurthy
& Sundaram, 2003). The other ten studies are either from conference proceedings or working
papers and reports for international organizations. I include these studies because their
descriptive data shed light on the barriers to ICT use in India’s elementary schools. Additionally,
I include other literature (e.g., Azim Premji Foundation, 2004; NCERT, 2005) to provide further
contextual understandings. I describe and explain the following three barriers to ICT use in
India’s elementary school: lack of resources, lack of teacher preparation, and a lack of local
understandings. I also examine strategies, from the literature, for addressing each barrier.
Barrier 1: lack of resources. India’s National Curriculum Framework 2005 states that,
“the significance of ICT has been widely recognized, but the detailed guidelines and strategies
for its educationally optimum use has not yet been worked out” (NCERT, 2005, p. 92). NCERT
(2005) further points out the irony of India’s ICT prowess, but the dismal lack of ICT resources
in India’s elementary schools. Mehta (2005) found that Indian urban elementary schools were
four times more likely to have ICT compared to rural schools. Bharadwaj’s (2007) study of
1,000 ICT equipped elementary schools revealed fewer than six computers per school or about
one computer for seventy two students. Less than 9% of the teachers in the schools surveyed had
access to the Internet, whether at school or outside (Bharadwaj, 2007). Where computers are
available in India’s elementary schools, the emphasis is largely on acquiring computer literacy
skills (Iyer & Baru, 2008). ICT is commonly taught as a separate class rather than being
integrated into the subject matter (Adeya, 2002; Ahuja, 2000; Iyer & Baru, 2008).
Thirumurthy and Sundaram (2003) compared how teachers used ICT in six different
elementary schools. There were no computers in the classrooms in any of the schools; instead
children were taken to a computer lab, arranged in groups of three or four, and took turns playing

19

drill and practice games on the computer (Thirumurthy & Sundaram, 2003). Umrani-Khan and
Iyer (2009) reported that sharing computer hardware is a common occurrence in India’s
elementary school computer labs. Thus, at ICT equipped elementary schools, there tends to be
an overcrowding of resources. Whether it be cell phones (Kam et al., 2010), computer mice
(Pawar et al., 2006), or software (Azim Premji Foundation, 2008; Banerjee et al., 2007; Linden
& Banerjee, 2003; Pal, 2009; Patra et al., 2007) it is common for large groups of students to
share technology resources.
Addressing the lack of resources barrier. While there can be social benefits from
sharing, a child’s actual learning time or time on task with the technology is limited (Kam et al.,
2010). While computer equipment and hardware are scarce, the Indian government makes a
considerable investment in educational software through a partnership program called CAL. In
this program non-governmental organizations (NGO), like the Azim Premji Foundation, provide
computer hardware and educational software CDs to government run public elementary schools.
In exchange, the elementary school provides or creates space in their school for a computer lab,
called a Computer Aided Learning Center (CALC). Outside of school hours, the CALC
becomes a computer center, where community residents can pay a small fee and have access to
the computers.
During the school hours, each teacher is required to regularly take her students to the
CALC where the students learn computer literacy skills through an integrated, educational
software series. The software CDs have lessons aligned with the Indian National Curriculum.
Most of the CDs are written in English, some are also produced in local languages (Karnati,
2008). Pal (2009) reports that, “CAL projects are active in over 20,000 public primary schools
in India. CAL aids the curricular program in schools and typically include a computer center

20

with three to five machines set up per primary school of about 200–400 children in a rough 1:50
machine/child ratio” (p. 1387). Pal’s (2009) qualitative study included an analysis of stakeholders’ perceptions to CAL projects. Findings from the study suggest that even though students
had to share the ICT equipment they were still eager to learn with the aid of the computer.
Similarly, in Pal’s study parents viewed ICT as a public good that should be in schools rather
than at homes and shared by schoolchildren (Pal, 2009; Pawar et al., 2007).
Additional studies (Azim Premji Foundation, 2008; Banerjee et al., 2007; Linden &
Banerjee, 2003) related to CAL confirms that India’s education stakeholders, mostly parents,
have a positive view about any kind of technology which their child gets to use, even if means
the child has to share. The CAL findings offer a glimpse into an important distinction related to
ICT investment in Indian elementary schools. ICT software, rather than equipment and
hardware, is prioritized by the Indian government for addressing the resource scarcity; since the
software can be designed in a way that multiple learners can access it from a single computer.
Barrier 2: lack of teacher preparation. While Indian parents view student ICT use as
positive, Indian elementary teachers’ computer technology perceptions are more nebulous (Azim
Premji Foundation, 2008; Iyer & Baru, 2008; Thirumurthy & Sundaram, 2003). While many
elementary teachers perceive ICT as motivating for students (Iyer & Baru, 2008), others perceive
computer technology apprehensively and focus on the challenges (Azim Premji Foundation,
2008; Thirumurthy & Sundaram, 2003). One such challenge is the perceived lack of computer
training. This echoes what Law et al. (2008) reported from the large scale, multi-country ICT
study. Law et al. identified factors which affect teachers’ computer technology perceptions.
One factor is support. Teachers who feel supported, both technically and administratively, are
more likely to have a positive perception of computer technology. The literature reveals the

21

computer equipment issues, “overcrowding” of resources, and lack of training are factors leave
many of India’s elementary teacher feeling indifferent about ICT (Azim Premji Foundation,
2008; Bharadwaj, 2007; Iyer & Baru, 2008; Thirumurthy & Sundaram, 2003).
For example, Thirumurthy and Sundaram (2003) found that “teachers often express a
stream of concerns about ICT and curriculum integration, namely: misuse, overuse, and
overstimulation” (p. 309). While some teachers believe that children will benefit the most only
when curriculum is integrated with ICT, most teachers felt stifled by ICT and believed it was
additional work. Other teachers communicated feeling incompetent to use ICT and were not
satisfied with minimal ICT training and preparation they received when in college. The Azim
Premji Foundation (2008) study shared similar findings. They found that the elementary
teachers believed that ICT required additional training and work to be able to use ICT effectively.
Addressing the teacher preparation barrier. While there is not a lot of empirical research
on how Indian elementary teachers are being prepared to use ICT, the literature indicates that
there are several corporate sponsored projects focused on preparing India’s elementary teachers
to teach with technology. Many of these projects are spearheaded by private ICT companies
such as Dell Computers, Intel, and Microsoft (Aggarwal, 2009; Light, 2009; Mathur, 2007;
Suckow, 2010). Dell’s program, called the ‘connected classroom’, invests in low cost notebook
computers for Indian elementary teacher and students to use in the classroom. Part of this
program includes an online training module for preparing teachers to use the laptops in a
‘connected classroom’ (Aggarwal, 2009). Intel’s initiative is called Teach to the Future Program.
This program supports Indian elementary teachers with both face-to-face and online instructional
for how to teach with technology (Light, 2009; Suckow, 2010). Another example is Microsoft’s
Project Shiksha, also called “Empowering the Future” project (Suckow, 2010). Through Project

22

Shiksha, Microsoft provides inexpensive software, in depth training, and packaged ICT
curriculum. While these programs seem to contribute to the preparation of Indian elementary
teachers to teach with technology, there is a lack of empirical studies about each program’s
effectiveness. Thus, it is difficult to measure or begin to posit what kind of impact the programs
can have in relationship to elementary school teacher education in India.
Barrier 3: Lack of local understandings. Most of the research about ICT use in
elementary schools comes from developed nations. Generally, there is a lack of education
research in developing nations (Light, 2009; Pal, 2003, 2008; Patra et al., 2007; Walsham, 2010).
While Indian policymakers expect ICT to usher in promising education changes, they have a
limited understanding of how that technology is negotiated in elementary school classrooms.
Patra et al. (2007) identify this as a product of squeezing macro-level policy expectations into
micro-level contexts. At the local school level, there is also a lack of research about the
meanings Indian teachers and students assign to computer technology (Light, 2009; Pal, 2008;
Patra et al., 2007; Walsham, 2010). Researchers have yet to analyze the differences in Indian
teachers’ and students’ interpretations regarding ICT’s educational purposes (Pal, 2008, 2009).
Consequently, it remains unclear how and why computer technology is negotiated in India’s
most basic schooling unit: the elementary school classroom. Identifying and analyzing this
discourse addresses the need to develop frames of reference towards a deeper and more
collaborative understanding for elementary school computer use (MHRD, 2009b).
Addressing the local understandings barrier. Patra et al. identify that socio-cultural
contextual knowledge is missing in much of the empirical research on ICT use in India’s
elementary schools. Along with Pal (2008), they recommend that researchers, in developing
nations, include detailed descriptions of their study’s context. Patra et al. provide examples of

23

such description in their study on the different types of computer usage models across India.
Additionally, several researchers recommend case study research design as a way to address the
lack of local understandings (Hew & Brush, 2007; Light, 2009; Pal, 2003, 2009; Patra et al.,
2007, Wilson, 2002).
Summary of the literature on ICT in India. I reviewed 14 studies and identified three
barriers to elementary school ICT programs in India: lack of resources, lack of teacher
preparation, and a lack of local understandings. Although I described the barriers separately, in
reality the barriers are interrelated. Thirumurthy and Sundaram (2003) explained how
overcrowded ICT resources affected teachers’ attitude about using such resources. Conversely,
the gap in literature regarding local understandings of teachers’ ICT knowledge and skills, for
example, correlates with the teacher preparation barriers. In sum, this literature review suggests
that there is a relationship between India’s elementary school-based ICT program failure and
overcrowded resources, teacher attitudes and preparation, and localized contextual understanding.
Like with any research findings, though, there are some caveats. While I focus this
review on barriers to elementary school-based ICT programs in India, it does not speak to all the
complexities that define ICT use in India’s elementary school system. Other factors, such as
class size, school infrastructure, and administrative support, are likely barriers, as well.
Additionally, the review does not capture all the complex realities of the Indian elementary
school system. For example, UNESCO (2008) reports that the Indian public elementary school
system is plagued by an inconsistent quality of education. Overcrowded classrooms and a lack
of proper facilities pose not only a learning risk but also a health risk. For government run
public schools in India, UNESCO estimates that 7% of the schools do not even have one
functional blackboard, 16% are without drinking water, and 51% are without a toilet. GESCI

24

(2008) also cited that a consistent source of electrical power was a luxury which only India’s
elite private schools enjoy. When faced with these kinds of barriers, perhaps a better question to
ask is: How do elementary school-based ICT programs in India even succeed?
Nevertheless, this review of technology use in India’s elementary schools offers three
implications. First, it sheds light on the issue of ICT resource scarcity in India’s elementary
schools. Having the world’s second largest population, resource scarcity is already a political
and economic problem in India. Scarcity affects all aspects of Indian society. More independent
research is needed about the types of Public Private Partnerships (PPP) that exist in India, as well
as, the kind of impact these programs have on elementary schooling. Additionally, expanding
understanding about creative solutions to share educational technology resources, like the
multiple-mice project, will become increasingly more important as India emerges a leader in the
knowledge society. Such understanding is developed with more empirical research.
Second, there are implications related to preparing India’s teachers to use ICT in their
practice. So what does teacher preparation and “buy in” look like in India, where there are
estimated to be a million teacher vacancies within the next five years? Indian policymakers are
currently exploring ways in teacher education programs can utilize ICT the realities of preparing
India’s elementary teachers (NCTE, 2009). Policymakers would be wise to not only look at the
types of ICT hardware and software that can assist in this preparation, but also consider the
technological mindset being developed by a future crop of elementary teachers. A model like
Mishra and Koehler’s (2006, 2009) technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge
(TPACK) framework could prove to be instructive and fruitful to the challenge of preparing so
many teachers to use technology. TPACK explains the relationship among the following three
types of knowledge for teaching with technology: content, pedagogy, and technology. TPACK

25

is useful for identifying the knowledge required by teachers for connecting instructional
technology to teaching and content. Preparing India’s future elementary teachers requires not
only ICT resources, but also a mindset for how to integrate ICT with subject matter content and
pedagogical practice for educationally profitable outcomes
Third, and perhaps most pressing, is the need for more empirical research on ICT use in
India’s elementary schools. For as important as the ICT industry is to India, there is a dismal
lack of empirical research on ICT use in India’s education system. This implication also speaks
to the kind of scholarship represented in much of the literature on school-based ICT programs in
developing nations (Light, 2010; Pal, 2008; Walsham, 2010). Not only is there a lack of research
on ICT in India’s elementary school context, but the existing scholarship is inconsistent in its
rigor. For example, many studies that I reviewed did not include a complete description of
methodology or even the research questions. Only two of the thirteen studies actually grounded
the research in a stated theoretical framework (Pal, 2009; Patra et al., 2007). Few of the studies
included a description of the research design. While there are a number of research designs, like
case study, that could help a researcher systematically investigate local understandings; what
would be most helpful to the larger field is if future research conforms to a disciplined inquiry.
Going Forward: The Dissertation’s Inquiry
This dissertation seeks to address the “lack of local understandings” barrier through a
disciplined study of four elementary schools in Bangalore. Yet, what is a disciplined inquiry?
Lee Shulman (1988) explains that a disciplined inquiry “follows a set of rules and principles for
pursuing an investigation . . . the inquiry emerges from underlying social or natural science
disciplines which have well-developed canons of discovery and verification for making and
rating truth claims” (p. 18). What Shulman argues for is a systematic pursuit of knowledge in

26

educational research. Such research is marked by an explanation of the theoretical constructs
that inform the research. Disciplined inquiry also includes a methodology description and a clear
analysis for reporting research findings. To close this paper, I provide an outline of how the
dissertation conforms to a disciplined inquiry.
I begin with a story. In early April 2010, I received an e-mail invitation from the World
Bank asking me to electronically “attend” an Oxford style debate webinar located in New Delhi,
India. The debate’s motion simply stated, “Most investment in technology in schools is wasted.
Discuss.” I was intrigued by the statement and decided to listen in for awhile. Each side was
well represented by educators and policymakers. Many of the discussants offered quite
persuasive arguments, yet most were anecdotal accounts of wasted ICT investments in schools.
For example, one discussant shared about a small Indian village school that received a dozen
computers from a corporate sponsor. The computers were all neatly packed in boxes and
shipped to the school. A year later, a corporate representative came to visit the school and found
the computers tucked away in a classroom still all neatly packed in their boxes. The boxes were
never opened because the school was still waiting for electricity.
While this makes for a compelling story, I think the debate also offers a metaphor for the
current state of school-based ICT research in developing nations like India. Like the arguments
from the New Delhi debate, too much of the field’s research remains anecdotal because of the
lack of a disciplined inquiry. While anecdotes over hard evidence might make for appealing
newspaper reading, anecdotes, alone, do not move the field forward. Theories do, however, and
so do strong research methodologies. Thus, the dissertation is grounded in a strong theoretical
framework, SCOT theory, as a first step towards a disciplined inquiry in this field. Kurt Lewin
(1952) said, “Nothing is so practical, as a good theory” (p. 169). This dictum provides the first

27

recommendation: frame the research in theory. A theoretical framework helps the researcher to
interpret the data. Melnyk and Handfield (1998) explain that a benefit of using theory is that,
“research become less a matter of ‘hit or miss’ and more a targeted and purposeful search” (p.
312). Regrettably, much of the research surrounding school-based ICT use in developing nations
seems to be rather aimless.
This is worrisome considering the prevalence of technological deterministic language
within the field’s literature. SCOT theory provides both a theoretical framework and a
methodological approach for investigating how elementary schools use computer technology.
Rather than focusing on ICT, SCOT shifts the focus to the uses for ICT. The strength of SCOT
theory, though, is that it also offers a methodological approach for examining how people
negotiate meaning for technology. SCOT’s four step approach includes: (1) identifying the
relevant social groups who share space in a technology’s meaning construction; (2) examine
each group’s interpretative flexibility, which is their rhetoric about the purposes for using the
technology; (3) investigate how the social groups negotiate their interpretative differences; and
(4) examine each social group’s demographics or “technological frame” in relationship to their
interpretative flexibility (Bijker, 1997). SCOT theory is fruitful in that it disciplines the
dissertation’s research inquiry with both a theoretical framework and a methodological approach
for studying the phenomenon of school-based ICT use in Bangalore.
Policymakers and government leaders continue to inquire about the many barriers to
school-based ICT programs in developing nations like India. They debate whether ICT
investment in school is wasted. While ICTs are twenty-first century tools, they are still only
tools. In schools, teachers and students give purpose and meaning to these tools. They have
difficulty knowing how or why to use the tools. A disciplined research agenda, based on a

28

strong theoretical framework around the SCOT theory can help to uncover the complexity of
using ICT in India’s elementary schools. Lest the computers remain in neatly packed boxes,
such research would also shed light on the meanings and purposes that teachers and students
have for using ICT. Such research helps to explain the barriers to using ICT, as well as, the
innovative ways that teachers and students construct meaning for the technological tools they use.

29

CHAPTER 3
METHOD
I will never forget the question, “Sir, where is your village, sir?” A 10 year old, rural
Bangalorean girl asked me this question as I sat down to share a mid-day meal of rice and daal at
Komu Community School, a village school in my study. I was struck by her question because
while I was living in Bangalore at the time, I certainly felt like my village was closer to East
Lansing, Michigan, than to Ulsoor Lake District where my flat was located. I honestly did not
know how to answer her simple question. So I stammered, “Well, my village is in Michigan in
the United States of America and it is also in Bangalore.” Suddenly, I was the one being
interviewed. The 10 year old continued her inquiry, “Sir, sir, you mean you live in two villages,
sir?” I had to pause and reflect: What did I actually mean? The girl repeated, “Sir, you live in
two villages, sir?” Smiling, I nodded and replied, “Yes, I suppose I do.”
Doing field research means living in two villages. As the researcher I lived in my
research setting, Bangalore, and I also resided in my training ground: the College of Education at
Michigan State University. Geertz (1988) called this the challenge of “sounding like a pilgrim
and a cartographer at the same time” (p. 10). Michael Agar (1996) likened this phenomenon to
being a “professional stranger.” What Agar meant is that the researcher is a professional in that
she or he is trained, and mentored, in the science of research. Such science includes a disciplined
methodology to ground the research. And I learned this science at the university.
Yet, the researcher is also a stranger and has to figure out the art of gaining access to the
study’s people and places. As I would come to find out through the course of my study, the art
of research is best learned by being in the field. For example, I found that the teacher
participants were often put at ease when I let them know about my own teaching background as a

30

fifth grade teacher. One teacher even replied, “Oh, good, so you understand what it can be like
to teach.” Also, when I mentioned to the teachers that Shalini, my wife, was from India, it was
another way of establishing a commonality. I believe all the teachers were more open (and
welcoming) of my presence in their classrooms because of these shared experiences. Gaining
access and the participants’ trust is part of the art of research. Once immersed into the study’s
classrooms, though, I relied on the science of research to systematically guide my investigation.
The Setting: Bangalore, Karnataka, India
In order to begin my investigation I also needed to be immersed in the setting of
Bangalore. Located in Southern India, Bangalore is the country’s third most populous city.
Bangalore is also the capital of the Indian State of Karnataka, which is the ninth most populous
state of India’s 28 states and 7 union territories. Despite Bangalore’s reputation as hub for
technology, the State of Karnataka’s economy is still rural and agrarian based. Like most Indian
states, Karnataka has its own state language called Kannada. In 1956, the Indian government
formed Karnataka as a state that was to be an example of linguistic unity. Today, Kannada is the
mother tongue for more than 70% of people living in Karnataka (Rao, 2007). Kannada is the
primary language spoken by vendors, bus drivers, and auto rickshaw drivers. Additionally,
Kannada is the medium of instruction in Karnataka’s government run public schools.
The State of Karnataka is somewhat fractured because of its multilingualism. Even
though Kannada unifies much of the Karnataka countryside, English is the spoken tongue in
Karnataka’s urban high-rise apartments, technology centers, shopping malls, and private schools.
Guha (2007) describes how English has become the language of the Indian elite. English is the
fuel for the engine of India’s economic growth. One of the unintended consequences of India’s
economic growth is the deepening rift between India’s urban and rural areas. As the fissure

31

widens, India’s disparities and inequalities are revealed. Sen (2005) illustrates the disparity by
describing India as if a portion of the Indian population lived as though they were on the San
Diego shores, while another segment of the population live as they were in the sands of Somalia.
Karnataka reflects the extensive gulf between India’s rich and poor; a breach that is most
prominent between the state’s urban and rural areas.
Although Karnataka’s total rural population (66%) is almost twice the percentage of
Karnataka’s urban population (34%), the urban population enjoys a better standard of living and
higher wages compared to rural Karnataka (Deb, 2010). There is resentment in Karnataka’s rural
areas about cultural and linguistic identity loss (Rao, 2007). To seize upon the political will such
resentment often represents, the Karnataka government has tried to enforce legislation that would
make Kannada the primary language of instruction in all of Karnataka’s elementary schools
regardless of their public or private affiliation (Advani, 2009). The federal relationship between
Bangalore and Karnataka is a window into understanding the tension in India between the
ancient and the modern, the rural and the urban, and retaining a local cultural identity versus
becoming cosmopolitan. These tensions played out in unique ways at the study’s four schools.
The Sample
The dissertation’s sample was drawn from four elementary schools in Bangalore. The
target population at each school was fifth grade students and their teachers. The majority student
population at each of the four schools represents a particular socio-economic class. I selected the
fifth grade age range because that is when children begin to acquire experimental design skills
that lead to more advanced computer skills (Zimmerman, 2007). To investigate the study’s
research questions, it was also important that the students could verbalize their interpretations for
the computer’s main purposes. Across the four schools, the total participant sample was 237

32

fifth grade students and 15 educators. By educators I mean the school professionals who were
also part of the curriculum and instruction of the study’s fifth grade students. Of the 15
educators, 12 were either fifth grade teachers or fifth grade computer science teachers.
I used convenience sampling to arrange my field research at each school. I selected the
schools based on three criteria. First, each school had to be located either in the city of
Bangalore or within the rural Bangalore environs. Second, the schools had to have some form of
computer technology, like a computer lab or laptops. Third, the school’s majority student
population was to be representative of a particular socio-economic class. Table 2 describes each
school by its demographic description and sample size.
Table 2
The Dissertation’s School Descriptions
School

Type/Demographic Description

Sample

Jinka Public School

Government-run, lower SES, rural

Students: 11
Educators: 3

Komu Community
School

Private, lower SES, rural/urban mix

Students: 50
Educators: 5

Bara National School

Private, middle SES, urban

Students: 110
Educators: 3

Aadu International
School

Private, upper SES, urban

Students: 66
Educators: 4

The demographic differences among the four schools allowed for comparisons across a range of
context. I provide a brief description of each school, in the order that each school appears in the
case study chapters. To protect identity, all the schools, as well as the participants, are reported
as pseudonyms.

33

Bara National School. Bara National School is a private school located in a large
middle class neighborhood in Bangalore. More than 1000 students are enrolled. Each grade
level has at least three sections and each class size is capped at 40 students. Fifth grade
enrollment equals 110 students divided among three teachers. Bara National follows the Central
Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) curriculum. In accordance with CBSE, Bara National
implements a highly scripted computer science curriculum, which, starting at the first grade level,
includes a scope and sequence for all 12 years of education at Bara National. The computer
science teachers focus the curriculum on computer skills training and learning how to code in
variety of computer languages. For 45 minutes each week, the fifth grade students at Bara
National go to the school’s computer laboratory for their computer science class. The fifth grade
students’ computer use is focused on learning application software like Microsoft Word and
Microsoft PowerPoint.
Jinka Public School. Jinka Public is a government-run public school that is located
about 25 kilometers from Bangalore’s city center. The student population at Jinka Public
represents a low socio-economic status school in Bangalore. While Jinka Public is part of rural
Bangalore, the school is situated in a village that, culturally, seems quite removed from the hustle
and bustle of Bangalore. A Kannada medium school, Jinka Public serves about 60 students
living in the Jinka village. Jinka Public is a “one laptop” school, which means they have single
laptop that the whole school community shares. The laptop was provided through a PublicPrivate Partnership program with a Bangalore based non-governmental organization (NGO).
The “one laptop per school” is a scheme that supports the effort to maintain consistent
attendance among the school’s upper elementary students. Jinka Public’s teachers explained that
the laptop kept the students motivated to attend school. Additionally, it was also an incentive for

34

the parents, most of whom were day laborers or seasonal field workers, to keep sending their
children to the school. Jinka Public School is affiliated to the Karnataka State Board of
Education Syllabus (SSBE) and the government of Karnataka provides the curriculum materials.
Aadu International School. Aadu International School, a school for Bangalore’s
wealthiest families, is a private school on the outer edge of Bangalore. It is a highly ranked and
highly selective school. The school’s enrollment is over 950 students (preschool to twelfth
grade). The school serves as a boarding hostel for many students whose parents are diplomats or
foreign officials. Each grade level has three sections and each class size is capped at no more
than 25 students. Together, the fifth grade enrollment equals 66 students divided among three
teachers. Aadu International’s mission is to provide an inquiry-based curriculum that guides
students in becoming the “leaders of tomorrow,” which is part of school’s mission statement.
Technology wise, Aadu International’s fifth grade students use the school’s computer laboratory
and have access to a set of classroom laptops. Aadu International is affiliated with the
International Baccalaureate Program (IB). The medium of the instruction is English. The
population at this school represents Bangalore’s upper socio-economic status.
Komu Community School. Komu Community School is a “daughter” school of Aadu
International. Komu Community is a private school and represents the lower social economic
status. The school’s student population is a mix of urban and rural students. Komu Community
was founded in response to the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE).
The act mandates that all private elementary schools (Classes I – VIII) reserve 25% of their class
strength to underprivileged children. Private schools have options regarding their adherence to
this law. One option is to provide “Equal Opportunity Schools” where underprivileged are
provided a quality education but in a separate school building. Komu Community is an example

35

of one of these Equal Opportunity Schools. The school is located about kilometer from Aadu
International’s main campus. The students who attend Komu Community come from villages
within a five kilometer radius of the school. Komu Community has a one-to-one laptop program.
Each fifth grade student has his or her own laptop to use at the school. Komu Community also
represents the increasingly popular “community” school model. In community schools, there is
a commitment to teaching about the community and “local” knowledge.
Research Design
As I explained in the first chapter, I frame this dissertation in SCOT theory, which asserts
that people, in their social contexts, construct and give meaning to things (Bijker, 1995; Piaget,
1974; Pinch & Bijker, 1984). The study is further premised on Max Weber’s (1947) assertion that
no thing is significant in itself until a person gives it meaning. In other words, it is people who give
meaning and significance to things like computers or computer technology. In designing this study,
I build upon these premises of social constructivism by grounding the dissertation’s methodological
approach in SCOT theory and case study research design.
According to Yin (1994, 2008) case study is a research design for empirical inquiry that
allows for the investigation of complex phenomena within in an authentic context. The strength
of case study research design is that it allows the researcher to examine how and why questions.
The how questions are useful for identifying the processes that a people under study use in order
to accomplish objectives; whereas, the why questions are important for understanding the
reasoning and purposes behind the processes (Yin, 2008). To investigate how and why questions,
case study design encourages the inclusion of multiple data sources. Yin outlines the four design
issues that a researcher must address when using case study design: (1) identify the unit of
analysis; (2) decide whether the research calls for a single case or multiple cases; (3) enumerate

36

the case selection criteria; and (4) select multiple data collection methods. In Table 3, I explain
how this dissertation’s research design addresses each of Yin’s four design issues.
Table 3
Addressing the Case Study Research Design Issues
Case Study Design Issue

Dissertation Research Design

1) Identifying the unit of analysis

1) The unit of analysis is computer use in
Bangalore’s fifth grade classrooms

2) Decide on single case or multiple cases

2) The dissertation investigates the unit
analysis using multiple cases

3) Enumerate case selection criteria

3) Selection criteria included: (a) location;
(b) access to computer technology; (c) SES
variance

4) Data collection methods

4) The dissertation includes methods like
questionnaires, interviews, and field notes

As Table 3 shows, I carefully crafted the dissertation’s research design by taking into
consideration case study design issues. Because of its insistence on multiple data sources, case
study research design provides a robust data set that is useful for testing and developing theory
(Yin, 2008). Although this dissertation starts with SCOT as the study’s theoretical and
methodological framework, each case study offers a descriptive and analytical lens for
understanding (and, perhaps, building on) SCOT theory. In this study, I pair the SCOT theory
with case study research design in order to examine the dissertation’s primary research
questions: (a) How and why is computer technology socially constructed in Bangalore’s
elementary schools? (b) How does the social construction of technology compare across
schools? As I introduced in the dissertation’s first chapter, I parsed the main research questions
into four researchable sub-questions grounded in the SCOT methodological approach. From

37

October 2010 to May 2011, I investigated these research sub-questions using a qualitative
research approach in the ethnographic tradition.
Data sources. I collected four sources of data: artifacts, field observations, interviews,
and questionnaires. I start this section by describing the questionnaires. Identifying participants’
demographics is part of the first step of SCOT. To fulfill this step, I collected demographic data,
which included descriptive statistics, from the student questionnaire (see Appendix D) and a
teacher questionnaire (see Appendix E). The first part of the questionnaire’s purpose was to
generate demographic data to answer the dissertation’s first sub-question. So I designed each
questionnaire to uncover contextual factors, like socio-economic status (SES) and experience
that could be explained using descriptive statistics. For example, student questionnaire included
questions about what type of energy source the child’s family uses for cooking (e.g., firewood,
cooking gas, etc.), home computer ownership, and how many books the child owns. In crafting
the demographic related questions for the student questionnaire, I relied heavily on the Indian
Government’s Student Learning Study (RTE, 2010).
The teacher questionnaire’s categories of demographic data included items such as: age,
gender, and years of teaching experience. I also included questions to help identify each
teacher’s weekly access to computers at school and whether the teacher had access to a home
computer. I report these demographic data in my description of each school. Additionally, these
data provided additional context for understanding each school’s relevant social groups (i.e., fifth
grade students and teachers). Similarly, the questionnaires’ data shed light on the predominant
technological frame that defined each school. Technological frame is an important concept
related to SCOT theory; it is a concept rooted in the notion that context, including political,
cultural, and socio-economic factors, shapes the interpretations that each relevant social group

38

has regarding technology. Thus, I examined the demographic data from the questionnaires to
help answer the fourth research sub-question related to each school’s technological frame.
Additionally, I designed the questionnaires as a data source for the identification of each
group’s interpretative flexibility. In other words, the questionnaires included questions related to
purposes for using computer technology. I crafted these questions to investigate the second
research sub-question about the meanings that the relevant social groups assign to technology.
The questionnaires also provided a way to triangulate data about each relevant group’s
perceptions and purposes for computer use at school. Specifically, the second part of both
questionnaires included multiple choice question items related to purposes for computer
technology use at school as well as attitudes about computer technology. I adapted Veriki’s
(2010) computer perception questionnaire in designing the questionnaires’ second part.
Additionally, the second part of the teacher questionnaire was adapted from Law, Pelgrum, and
Plomp’s (2008) research design for the Second Information Technology in Education Study.
I submitted the teacher questionnaire to all the teacher participants (n=12) and all the
teacher participants returned their completed questionnaire for a 100% response rate. Likewise, I
distributed the student questionnaire to all the study’s student participants (n= 237). At Aadu
International, 65 of the 66 students completed the questionnaire for a 98% response rate. At
Bara National, 104 of the 110 students completed the questionnaire for a 94% response rate. At
Komu Community, 48 of the 50 students completed the questionnaire for a 98% response rate.
And at Jinka Public, all 11 students completed the questionnaire for a 100% response rate.
Field notes from on-site observations were largest source of qualitative data for
answering the dissertation’s research questions. I logged over 208 hours in the field. I averaged
48 hours of field observation time at each school and conducted 16 hours of interviews. To help

39

focus my field observations, I used the study’s observation protocol (see Appendix A). I divided
the protocol into the following four sections: (1) computer equipment; (2) computer usage; (3)
time; and (4) student and teacher interaction. During each on-site visit, I would write or type the
field notes according to the observation protocol for that day. I used time notations to help keep
track of progression of each class I observed. Additionally, in my field notes, I tried to capture
the actual dialogue among the teachers and students. At the Jinka Public school, though, I relied
on two interpreters, both of whom I discuss more about later in this chapter, to aid in translating
the dialogue among the school’s teachers and students.
Interviews were a third data source. I conducted two kinds of interviews: individual
educator interviews and student focus group interviews. At each school I interviewed a group of
students. Although I designed the study to only include a group of five to seven students for the
student group interviews, I found that I had to stay flexible about the student group interviews.
For example, at Jinka Public, the teachers requested that I include all the fifth grade students in
the student focus group interview. Overall, each school’s student focus group interview had at
least six students represented. While my intent was to select randomly the student focus group
participants this was not always feasible. For example, at Bara National, there was likely a
selection bias as the computer science teacher assigned me a focus group of students who
finished a project early. At Aadu International and Komu Community, I was able randomly
select students for the focus group interviews. I used a “semi-structured” interview technique
(Miles & Huberman, 1994) based on interview questions (see Appendix B) that I prepared in
advance of the study. I report the students’ responses with the generic pseudonyms, like
“student” and “students,” in order to protect the identity the student participant. The average
time length for each student focus group interview was 20 minutes.

40

I also interviewed all the educators (n=15) in this study. I designed the educator
interview questions (see Appendix C) to ascertain similar information as the student interviews.
However, during the educator interviews I also asked questions from my field note observations.
Additionally, if I was interviewing the school’s administrator, I would ask questions about the
school’s mission in relationship to the computer use. With the consent and permission from each
educator, I audio recorded each interview. Additionally, I transcribed the interviews, but used
only pseudonyms to protect the educator’s identity. Each educator interview averaged over 45
minutes in length. In sum, I captured almost 15 hours of educator interviews. Combined, the
student focus group interviews and educator interviews added 16 hours to the field time.
Artifacts were the fourth source of qualitative data. I collected artifacts from each
school: curriculum documents, PowerPoint presentations, student created documents, and digital
images of each school. I requested curriculum documents from each participating school, but
Bara National was the only school that gave me their written computer science related
curriculum document. While not a curriculum document, the fifth grade information and
communication technology (ICT) teacher at Aadu International gave me a link to a wiki that she
uses as a supplemental resource for her students. Additionally, the Aadu International teachers
shared ICT training documents related to a professional development that they received on using
their classroom Smartboards. All the study’s teachers provided examples of student work, which
included documents created with word processing software and presentations. Additionally, I
captured over 300 digital images (see Appendix F for the protocol related to capturing digital
images). The images provided a visual reference for comparing the computer hardware and
material resources, including the classroom layout, at each school. The artifacts provided an
additional data source to triangulate findings related to the SCOT based research questions.

41

Data Analysis
Consistent with the case study research design, the data collection and data analysis were
often intermingled and occurred in concert with the other (Yin, 2008). The bi-weekly research
memos that I would write to my dissertation director were part of this simultaneous act of data
collection and data analysis. In these memos and during our monthly Skype meetings, I would map
the data on to the SCOT theory components. I analyzed the demographic data, as reported on the
student questionnaire and teacher questionnaire, using descriptive statistics. Descriptive statistics
provide “snapshot” summaries of the participant’s demographics as well as their interpretations of
main purposes for computer technology. Since case study method relies on multiple data sources, it
is known as a triangulated research design (Yin, 2008). Triangulation means the checking findings
with at lease three data sources. The descriptive level data analysis provided another check on the
data. Using descriptive statistics, I was able to triangulate findings about each relevant social
group’s interpretative flexibility and technological frame. However, these data provided only basic
descriptive statistics and were not used to make claims toward causality or effects.
The other questionnaire data (as well as the artifacts, field notes, interviews) contributed
to the “thick description” that defines each case study. I analyzed these data using the constantcomparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) along with Miles and Huberman’s (1994) three
part interpretive approach: (1) data reduction; (2) data display; and (3) conclusion drawing
through triangulation verification. The first part of this analysis, data reduction, meant reading
the totality of each school’s data. I read through all the field notes, interview transcriptions, and
collected artifacts. I then re-read each school’s data and continue data reduction through coding
the data. There were codes, like SE for “school ethos,” that I arrived at before this present study.
School ethos (SE) and future preparation (FP) were codes from an earlier pilot study that I

42

conducted at a primary school in Southwest England. In that pilot study, I found both relevant
social groups (i.e., teachers and students) in a sixth grade classroom perceived that computer
technology was preparation for future success in school and in life. Additionally, I found how
the teachers would refer to and emphasize the school’s motto, “Connected to the Future,” when
discussing the purpose’s for computer use. Thus, before this present study, I anticipated that
school ethos and future preparation were two potential themes, and thereby would become codes.
In my field notes, I included the school’s mission statement and made note of slogans, posters,
and signs that contributed to school ethos.
The second part of the qualitative analysis was creating data displays. For the data
displays, I designed tables organized by the four SCOT categories: relevant social groups,
interpretative flexibility, stabilization, and technological frame. The data display also allowed
me to compare, contrast, include quotes, and probe additional themes (Miles & Huberman, 1994).
The third step in my data analysis was to draw conclusions based on confirming evidence and
data triangulation. Drawing conclusions is an inductive process of identifying themes that
emerged from the data. Miles and Huberman (1994) explain that the data displays are what a
researcher uses to begin to draw conclusions. Conclusion drawing, though, is also about
describing how and why the purposes for computer use (i.e., the social construction of
technology) made sense to the study’s participants. Rereading transcripts and re-listening to the
interviews proved to be helpful in further identifying the “sense making” of the participants.
Limitations of the Study
In any research project, especially one that is driven by interpretation of largely
qualitative data, the researcher embodies the strengths and weaknesses of the research design
(Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2007). The interpretations of a researcher shroud all the research stages; so

43

much so that the researcher, whether acknowledged or muted, holds “interpretive omnipotence”
(Van Maanen, 1988, p. 53) over the entire research project. As Van Maanen reminds field
researchers, such omnipotence is rife with limitations. How does the researcher recognize and
make these biases transparent? Geertz (1992) recommends the researcher practice a certain
amount candor and share “open and direct acknowledgement of limits” (p. 132). Peshkin (1988)
reminds his audience that a researcher’s subjectivity or bias can be uncovered; he argues that
subjectivity is an “amalgam of the persuasions that stem from a person’s background, status,
class, and values” (p. 17). Rather than just being aware of subjectivity, Peshkin believes that
researchers should systemically and actively seek it out.
Throughout the rest of this section, I share about my biases and background. I do so with
the clear objective that the sharing reflects more of an exercise in self-acknowledgement rather
than an exercise in self-absorption or what Van Maanen would call a “confessional tale” (p. 73).
Related to my interpretations of this current study, I think is important to acknowledge that I am
a Caucasian male, who comes from a middle class background as represented in the United
States of America. I also acknowledge that I have a bias in favor of educational technology. As
a user of technology and as a teacher educator who integrates educational technology in his
classroom, I often advocate for the benefits of educational technology. I also privilege the use of
computer technology in elementary schools as having powerful pedagogical potential and reality
for the future. I am also privy to what Van Maanen (2002) calls the “unremarkable becomes
under-represented” (p. 113), which means there a certain things happening in elementary school
classrooms, like morning routines or lining up for recess, that I find rather ordinary so I do not
make note of it. Thus, I have a bias in what I observe and, thereby, report. These biases are part
of the study’s limitations.

44

Language and translation. In preparing for this study, I did not give much thought to
language. In three of the four schools, English was the medium of instruction so I naively
thought I could easily train my ear to an Indian way of speaking English. Part of this thinking
was based on the knowledge that I had visited India before and have had thousands of
conversations with Indian speakers of English. I did find, however, that it took me longer than I
would have expected to understand all the communication that was happening during my field
visits. While I picked up the vocabulary quite readily, gestures and repeated phrases, like “do
you have any doubts?” took me longer to comprehend. Wiggling one’s head to signify “yes” or
an affirmative response is a common facial gesture in India. It is easy to mistake a head wiggle
for a head shake, which in another context, means “no” or is a negative response to a question.
While I knew and had encountered the head wiggle gesture numerous times before conducting
this research, I found it was a gesture I had to pay close attention to during the interviews.
Jinka Public was the only study site that required translation. While the Jinka Public
teachers could converse in English, it was their third language, after Kannada and Hindi. The
Jinka Public students were still developing their English language learning. As part of the
study’s research design, I translated the questionnaires and interviewing protocol into the
Kannada language. I offered the teacher and student participants the choice between completing
the English version of the questionnaire or the Kannada questionnaire version. The teachers
chose the English version and the students chose the Kannada version. I also followed Emmel’s
(1998) suggestions for having two translators present in the field. The translators worked in
tandem to agree upon the most accurate translation of what was said. Likewise, when I
transcribed the interviews with the Jinka Public teachers and student focus group, I had Shalini,
my wife, who speaks Kannada, double check the accuracy of each translation.

45

From a broader perspective, language and how it is communicated are representations of
power (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990). This is especially true in India, a multilingual society,
where language is deeply connected with a person’s identity. As examples, a person who speaks
Kannada is known as a Kannadiga; a Tamil speaking person, a Tamilian; both are common terms
of identification. The English language, British English to be exact, with its imposing history
and colonial legacy in India, communicates all sorts of politics including: domination over
rituals, global marketplace opportunities, and a language shift that has the potential to
disintegrate culture and community (Advani, 2010; Dalrymple, 2009; Tharoor, 2007).
As an English speaker, albeit with an “American” accent, I embody the aforementioned
politics the minute I open my mouth to speak or interview. Thus, the process of interviewing
had limitations. Reflexivity is the notion that interview participants parrot back what they
believe the interviewer hopes to hear. Even though I prefaced each interview with an
acknowledgment that “there were no right or wrong answers, I just want to hear your thoughts on
a couple of questions,” it is possible that the interviewees may have only expressed what they
thought I wanted to hear. Potential language bias in my syntax or wording of questions could
have led participants to certain responses. I have no evidence for this and tried to design the
interview questions to guard against reflexivity, but it is still a possibility.
Outline of Case Study Chapters
In this final section, I explain the ways that I have organized the dissertation’s next four
case study chapters. Each case study presents a story or what Van Maanen (1988) might call an
“impressionist tale” of the ways that fifth grade teachers and students use computer technology. I
begin each chapter with a short introduction about the school. After that introduction, I move
into a description of the first main chapter section: social context and relevant social groups. I

46

spend a good deal of time in this section unpacking the social context in order to render a
thorough description of the school (Maxwell, 2002). I narrate this contextual description in the
present tense to draw the reader into the school’s context, which as Van Maanen (1988) asserts is
how “to crack up open a context. . . and present the doing of fieldwork rather than the done” (p.
102). In cracking open each school’s context, I describe the classroom spaces, computer related
curriculum, and the demographic characteristics of the students and teachers.
In each chapter’s second section, I discuss the interpretations for computer technology.
While these interpretations largely are derived from an analysis of the interview and
questionnaire data, I start the section by sharing two small, but specific “impressionist tales”
(Van Maanen, 1988, p. 101) that are a retelling of actual events that happened in the field with
my interpretation of what transpired. Since these “impressionist tales” are short, I call them
“snapshots.” Like the social context description, I write these snapshots in the present tense to
invite the reader into each snapshot and observe what I observed (Van Maanen, 1988).
In the third chapter section, I discuss how the technology in the case study school became
stabilized by the students and teachers. I also introduce and explain the role that “accessory
social groups” played in stabilizes the technology. The fourth section of each chapter is about
the school’s technological frame. The section will summarize how the school’s social context,
social groups, interpretative flexibility, and stabilization are all part of the school’s larger
technological frame. The technological frame is the ensemble of social-contextual
characteristics that define that setting. SCOT theory posits that the technological frame becomes
an interpretive lens that informs the meanings and negotiations among the social groups in that
setting (Bijker, 1995). So I conclude each case study with an examination of the technological
frame in order to summarize the case study’s findings.

47

CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS: BARA NATIONAL SCHOOL
“COMPUTERS FOR LOGIC AND CODING”
In this chapter, I discuss Bara National School, which is a large private school that,
perhaps, most closely captures the Bangalore Challenge. The school is nestled in a middle class
neighborhood where many homes have at least a one car garage or a covered car port for parking
their vehicles. Stores like Baskin-Robbins, Levi’s, and Coffee Day (India’s version of
Starbucks) are located a couple of blocks from the school. These stores are reminders of how
globalization continues to define Bangalore. The constant traffic around these stores is
indicative of Bangalore’s congestion. Since it is located close to downtown Bangalore, parking
around Bara National School is at a premium. Small, sensible cars like Tata Indigos and Maruti
Swifts crowd the available parking spaces along the perimeter of the school. Many of the cars
have bumper stickers that divulge the middle class environs that surround the school. For
example, one car’s back bumper sticker states: It is not what you drive, it is where you park.
Although it might seem trivial, Bara National School was the only school in the study where the
vehicles parked around the school had bumper stickers. These bumper stickers seemed to
represent middle class sound bites.
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups
Slogans, like the ones found on car bumpers, often communicate an interpretation about
life or society. At Bara National there were several slogans and motivational type posters that
revealed the identity of the school. For example, on my first observation day at Bara National, I
took note of a framed poster near the school’s main computer lab that stated, “The way to get
noticed is to do QUALITY work.” The word quality was typed in all capitals on this particular

48

poster. The poster seemed to serve not only as a marker of pithy advice, but also as an important
reminder to Bara National’s students: quality work is a key to success. I also noticed what the
poster did not say. For example, it did not say, “The way to get noticed is to be creative” nor did
it state something even more obvious, “The way to get noticed is to ask questions.” On the
contrary, this poster, as well as the many other slogans fastened to the walls and bulletin boards
of Bara National, emphasized the importance of work in relationship to distinction. These
slogans helped to shape the school’s context.
School and schedule description. Bara National School is housed in an immense five
story school building that covers the area of an entire Bangalore city block. The school is
painted white and is surrounded by a high concrete wall that has three gated entrances. Bara
National goes from prekindergarten to twelfth grade and serves over a 1,000 students. The
school’s curriculum and schedule are academically rigorous. The school day begins at 8:15 in
the morning with the student body gathering in the large dirt courtyard behind the school. The
morning routine includes a recitation of a pledge to the Indian flag and the singing of the Bara
National anthem. On some mornings, students also complete stretching and yoga type exercises.
An 8:25am bell signals to the Bara National students that it is time to quickly disperse from the
courtyard in order to arrive to their first period class by 8:30am. Not counting lunch and a short
break of 15 minutes, the students have eight class periods of 45 minutes each. The students are
dismissed around 3:30pm each day. Certain times throughout the year, usually coinciding with a
comprehensive examination period, the Bara National students also attend school on Saturdays
for about three to four hours.
All fifth grade students start their day with mathematics. Three days a week, the fifth
graders have an additional mathematics period; so on those days the students have 90 minutes

49

total of math. Over the course of a fifth grade student’s weekly schedule, mathematics accounts
for 20% of the time. The students also have six 45 minute periods of science during a regular
school week. Together, mathematics and science comprise more than one-third (35%) of the
class time in fifth grader’s weekly schedule. English is another subject that is scheduled six
times during the week and like science, comprises 15% of weekly schedule. One day a week,
English is scheduled for two time periods, so that the students have 90 minutes of English that
day. In addition to English, mathematics, and science, the fifth grade students also have Hindi,
Sanskrit, and social studies as part of their daily schedule. The fifth graders’ weekly schedule is
rounded out with special subjects like: art, computer science, dance, library, physical education,
singing, and yoga. Computer technology is not integrated into the Bara National general
curriculum. Rather, the fifth grade students have a specific computer science class period where
they meet once a week.
Classrooms and computer lab description. The fifth grade students are divided into
three sections. Each section has its own homeroom where students spend the majority of their
academic day. The homerooms are compact, cubed shaped rooms that are plain but spotless.
Each homeroom has several large windows that are encased with iron security bars. Except
during the monsoon months of June through August, the windows remain open. In each
homeroom, a large ceiling fan helps to circulate Bangalore’s humid, tropical air. Each
homeroom’s focal point is the teacher’s lectern and the slate chalkboard. Students squeeze into
bench style, mahogany desks that are tightly arranged in three rows of six. The homeroom
teacher assigns students to their places on the bench, which remains the seating arrangement
throughout the year.

50

The homerooms are not equipped with computer equipment or digital devices like an
LCD projector. Each homeroom, though, has a small bookcase for a class library and for storing
textbooks. Student projects, like handwritten reports on India’s tigers, are showcased on the top
of the bookcase. A large bulletin board hangs on a wall in each homeroom. Announcements
about upcoming tests and comprehensive exams are prominently displayed in the middle of the
bulletin board. The weekly schedule is also posted as well as a collection of quotes and slogans.
Example slogans include: (a) “If there is no struggle, there is no progress.” (b) “The student who
is never required to do what he cannot do, never does what he can do.” (c) “It is greater work to
educate a child than to rule a state.” (d) “When pain ends, gain ends too.”
There are four rooms at Bara National School equipped with computer technology.
These rooms are: the school library, the audio-visual (AV) room, and the school’s two large
computer labs. I spent the bulk of my field observations at Bara National in the school’s main
computer lab and in the AV classroom. The students use the school’s computer labs exclusively
for their computer science classroom period. Students go to the AV classroom for what the
computer science teachers call “theory work,” which is when the teachers introduce and
demonstrate computer applications that the students will later practice. The students use the
school’s computer labs exclusively for their computer science classroom period. The “main”
computer lab gets the most use. The main lab is spacious, uncluttered, and well lit. Five ceiling
fans circulate the air in this breezy space. There are 45 Dell LCD, 19 inch, flat screen monitors
in the main computer lab. Each monitor sits on a learning station desk, which includes a roll-out
drawer for the keyboard and mouse. The monitors are cable connected to a mainframe computer
located in the adjacent classroom. Behind each learning station is a bright red plastic chair.

51

Four emerald colored bulletin boards hang on an interior wall of the main lab. The Bara
National secondary students are responsible for decorating the bulletin boards with different
technology related themes. For example, the boards have collages of computer related icons,
like the Microsoft Windows logo and the Apple logo. Mathematics and science related images
(i.e., pie charts, graphs, pi signs, and outer space) are included on the bulletin board collages.
Adorning the border of each bulletin board are technology related quotes like: (a) “Computer
comes from the title of a mathematician’s apprentice; the apprentice was responsible for
computing numerical calculations.” (b) “To err is human, to really foul things up requires a
computer.” from The Farmer’s Almanac 1978 (c) “Each copy of Microsoft Window’s 2000
contains 60 million line of computer code.” (d) “More than 80% of all the information on the
World Wide Web is in the English language.” The quotes are playful and poignant. They are
slogans that communicate various interpretations about the school’s computer technology.
The curriculum. Bara National is an English medium school. All subjects, except for
Hindi and Sanskrit, are taught in the English language. The school is affiliated to the Central
Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). At the elementary level, the CBSE designated Bara
National with “autonomous status,” which means the school is allowed to craft its own
elementary school curricula. The computer science curriculum was designed by a team of 10
computer science teachers who are from Bara National and two of Bara’s sister schools in
Bangalore. I refer to this team as the Bara Computer Science Team. The team uses what I
would call a “backward planning design” (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) in crafting the curriculum.
The scope and sequence of the elementary school computer science curriculum, as displayed in
Table 4, prepares students to become familiar with the keyboard and to master the functions of
different software.

52

Table 4
The Elementary Computer Science Curriculum at Bara National

Grade Level

Topic and Skills

Software

First Grade

Introduction to the computer
Use the mouse, keyboard, arrow keys,
and how to type

Picture maker
(Students use the arrow
keys to make simple
pictures)

Second Grade

Third Grade

Fourth Grade

Fifth Grade

Sixth Grade

Introduction to the computer’s logic
Create pictures and draw with TuxPaint

TuxPaint (Free and Open
Source Software –FOSS)

Recognize the Input-Process-Output cycle
Create images with Microsoft Paint
Practice the LOGO computer language

Microsoft Paint
LOGO

Identify an operating system (OS) and
network
Use command keys in MS LOGO
Draw geometric figures with MS LOGO

E-mail
DOS
Microsoft LOGO

Comprehend and utilize word processing
feature
Create a PowerPoint and use images to
enhance PowerPoint presentations

Microsoft Word
Microsoft PowerPoint

Create a simple HTML webpage
Introduce the Internet
Create and enter data on a spreadsheet
Perform basic math operations on a
spreadsheet

Internet Explorer
HTML programming
Microsoft Excel

As Table 4 shows, the Bara National computer science curriculum is quite comprehensive. The
computer science teachers stress the importance of teaching the children to become familiar with
the “entire keyboard.” The Bara Computer Science Team designed the curriculum not only to
introduce students to various software programs (i.e., Microsoft Word), but to also introduce and
provide the students lots of opportunities to use all the keyboard commands. The head computer

53

science teacher, Ms. Janisha, explained how knowing “the entire keyboard” was an essential part
of learning to program. By the time the Bara National students matriculate to the seventh grade
they have a solid foundation for programming in Visual Basic.
On my first observation day at Bara National, Ms. Janisha presented me with a 20 page
document of the school’s scope and sequence. Additionally, the fifth grade computer science
teachers gave me the fifth grade’s “notebook manual,” which contained all the fifth graders’
computer science lessons and activities. The notebook was more than 80 pages long and the
students used this notebook like a text book. The notebook provided detailed information about
Microsoft Word and Microsoft PowerPoint, the two programs that the fifth graders learned
throughout the year. While the students were encouraged to use a home computer for projects in
science and social studies, the computer science teachers reported that it was rare for the fifth
grade students to use the Bara National computer labs for any other subject matter besides
computer science. Hence, there was very little integration of computer technology throughout
the fifth grade core curriculum.
The computer science teachers. All of Bara National School’s computer science
teachers are female. The computer science teachers always come to school professionally
dressed in either a traditional sari or a salwar kameez with a dupatta, which is a long shawl.
Two of the computer science teachers, Ms. Sanchana and Ms. Vitna, are responsible for the
instruction of the school’s fifth graders. Ms. Sanchana is the longer tenured teacher of the two.
She has been teaching at Bara National for over 10 years and has a Master’s in computer science.
Ms. Vitna has a Bachelor’s in computer science and was in her sixth year of teaching. For this
study, I also interviewed Ms. Janisha, the head computer science teacher. Although Ms. Janisha
is not directly involved with the fifth grader’s computer science instruction, she oversees the

54

school’s entire curriculum design and implementation. Ms. Janisha has been teaching at Bara
National School for over 20 years. She has a dual Master’s degree in computer science and
education. On the teacher questionnaire, all three teachers indicated that they all owned a home
computer and revealed that lesson planning was their primary use of their home computer.
The fifth grade students. There are 110 fifth graders at Bara National. Of those 110
students, 104 of them completed the student questionnaire for a 94% return rate. Four students
were absent the day the questionnaire was distributed and two students elected not to complete
the questionnaire. As mentioned earlier, the fifth grade class is divided into three sections. One
section has 36 students while the other two sections have 37 students each. The gender pairing is
almost equal as boys make up 52% of the fifth grade class. Students wear uniforms that are neat,
clean, and business like. The boys wear dark dress shoes that shine with polish, brown pants
with a black belt, and a pin-striped, short sleeve dress shirt with a red tie. The girls also wear the
same shirt with a tie as well as a brown skirt and polished dress shoes. While school uniforms
are common throughout Indian private schools, the Bara National uniform made the students
look like they were professionally trained learners.
All the fifth graders who completed the student questionnaire indicated that their family
owned a cell phone and a television. Ninety-eight percent of the families own a home computer.
All the fifth graders indicated that their families cook meals on a kerosene stove or with a hot
plate connected to a cooking gas cylinder. For transportation, all the students indicated that their
family owns a car and 88% of Bara National families also own a bicycle. More than threequarters of the students reported having over 100 books in their home. Most of the fifth graders
live in a home or flat (i.e., apartment) with five or six rooms, including a kitchen and one
bathroom. The students at Bara National are squarely in India’s middle class.

55

Interpretative Flexibility
As discussed in Chapter 1, SCOT theory employs the term interpretative flexibility to
recognize that relevant social groups’ have different interpretations for computer technology.
However, as the social groups interact and negotiate meaning (which SCOT refers to as
stabilization) interpretative flexibility diminishes as the social groups agree on a unitary meaning
for the technology. I posit this meaning to be unitary, as opposed to a singular meaning, because
of the multiple interpretations, albeit related, that share space in the meaning. The section’s
header is something of a misnomer, while I do touch on the interpretative flexibility of the Bara
National computer science teachers and fifth graders; the section is more about the unitary
meaning for the school’s computer technology. I start by sharing two “snapshot” examples how
the fifth grade students use the school’s computer lab.
Creating a textbox. Upon earlier directions from Ms. Vitna, a fifth grade section
gathers in their homeroom for the start of the computer science class period. The fifth grade
students, all 37 of them, are sitting shoulder to shoulder behind their bench style desks. Ms.
Vitna enters the classroom. The students all rise and say, in unison, ‘Good morning, ma’am.”
Ms. Vitna points to where I am standing and says, “Sir is here again.” Then the fifth grade
students turn to me and say, “Good morning, sir.” I reply with, “Thank you, good morning.”
Then Ms. Vitna motions for the students to be seated. Ms. Vitna writes the word “textbox” on
the classroom chalkboard. She turns to the students, who are all silent, and states, “The lesson
for today is how to create a text box (in Microsoft Word).” She then asks the students, “Children,
tell me, what is the lesson for today?” The students eagerly respond, “Ma’am, the lesson for
today is how to create a textbox.”

56

Ms. Vitna continues, “Who here knows what a textbox is?” Several students raise their
hands and begin shouting, “Ma’am, ma’am, pick me, ma’am!” Ms. Vitna chooses a boy in the
front of the classroom. The boy stands up and promptly replies, “Ma’am, a textbox is a box in
Word that you can make to insert text, ma’am.” Ms. Vitna smiles at the boy. The boy sits down.
Ms. Vitna goes back to the chalkboard and creates a flowchart below the word “textbox.” She
uses arrows and words to create the flow. She writes, with chalk, the following words: insert,
textbox, right button, add text, and edit text. Ms. Vitna draws an arrow between each word. The
arrow is pointing down. Then Ms. Vitna explains that she is going to teach everyone the five
steps to create a textbox.
Ms. Vitna starts, “To make a textbox, you click on the insert tab, then you click on
textbox, then you use your mouse’s right button to place the text box on the document. From
there you can add and edit text.” Ms. Vitna pauses, scans the classroom, and states, “If you have
any doubts, then please raise your hand.” The students remain quiet and no one raises a hand.
Ms. Vitna replies, “Good, now we go to the AV room to see how to create a textbox. Children,
now line up and go to the AV room.” The girls line up and go first, the boys then line up and
follow Ms. Vitna to AV room. It takes the whole class less than 45 seconds to climb a flight of
stairs and find their seats in the AV room.
The AV room’s desktop computer and PowerPoint projector are already on. Ms. Vitna
opens a new document in Microsoft Word and asks, “Children, who here remembers the steps
for creating a textbox.” Hands start waving and Ms. Vitna chooses a boy to answer. The boy
stands up and explains, “Ma’am, first you click the insert button, then you go down and click
where it says textbox, ma’am.”

57

Ms. Vitna follows the boy’s directions and the boy resumes his instructions, “Ma’am,
now you place your text box on the document and add your text, ma’am.” The rest of the
students watch as Ms. Vitna inserts the text book. Ms. Vitna tells the boy to sit down and then
asks the entire class, “Do you have any doubts?” This time the students all reply (in unison),
“No, ma’am.” Ms. Vitna informs them that they are now going to walk to the main computer lab
where they are to do the following six things: (1) Insert at textbox; (2) Type something in the
textbox; (3) Resize the textbox; (4) Highlight the textbook in a different color; (5) Create a
border around the textbox; (6) Save the work to the fifth grade class folder. In all, the
demonstration in the AV room lasts only six minutes.
The students walk to the main computer lab, sit in their assigned spots, and open a new
Word document. They have about 20 minutes to complete the textbox tasks. Ms. Vitna enters
the lab and inquires, “Children, okay, children what six things are you to do?” Hands go up and
students are eager to answer. Ms. Vitna selects a girl. The girl stands up and says, “Ma’am, you
want us to insert a textbox, type something inside it, resize the textbox, color it, make a line
around it, and then you want us to save it to our folder, ma’am.” Ms. Vitna tells the girl that she
remembered correctly and could sit down. During the next 20 minutes, the fifth graders
complete the six textbox tasks. Ms. Vitna circulates around the main computer lab room and
checks the students’ progress. A bell rings; the students push in the keyboard drawer, stand
behind their red plastic chairs, and wait to be dismissed by Ms. Vitna. After all the students are
standing up with their chairs pushed in, Ms. Vitna says, “Children, you may go.” With that the
students are off to their next class period.
Analysis of creating a textbox. This snapshot captures a typical computer science lesson
at Bara National, in terms of pedagogy and organization. So what does the snapshot tell? There

58

are two details that I highlight. The first detail is Ms. Vitna’s authority as the computer science
teacher. Throughout the lesson, Ms. Vitna is the focus. The students listen and do not question
her authority or her knowledge of what their learning to do with Microsoft Word. The
compliance of the students is an important part of the computer technology’s stabilization, which
I will discuss later in this chapter. However, just a couple of observations related to student
compliance. I observed over 50 hours of computer science class periods at Bara National and
never heard a student ask Ms. Vitna (or Ms. Sanchana or any other teacher for that matter)
questions like: Why do I have to do this? Why are we learning this? How will this help us in
the future? In fact, in all my observation hours at Bara National, there were only two times
when students raised questions after the computer science teachers asked, “Do you have any
doubts?” In both instances, the students responded with a clarifying question rather than a
question of resistance. There is a high degree of deference and authority conferred on the
computer science teachers.
The second detail relates to Ms. Vitna’s orderly pedagogy. Ms. Vitna organized this
textbox lesson into a series of linear steps. This was not by accident. Rather, Ms. Vitna was
modeling the logic that a computer uses to process commands. Indeed, Ms. Vitna’s lesson
demonstrated a key technological (and pedagogical) interpretation that the entire computer
science team assigns to the school’s computer technology: computers are logic devices and
students should learn to operate the computer in logical steps. For example, by the end of her
lesson, Ms. Vitna expects her students to complete the same sequence or steps for creating a
textbox. The steps are more than just a list of directions; the steps are a way for the students to
develop their understanding of the computer’s logic.

59

A practical test. Another time I observe a fifth grade section complete what the
computer science teachers call “a practical test.” Every three weeks the computer science
teachers assign a practical test where the students demonstrate the skills they have mastered from
the previous class periods. As Table 5 shows, the purpose of the practical test was for students to
demonstrate that they knew how to underline, create a bullet point list, and change the font size
and text color in Microsoft Word.
Table 5
Two Versions of a Fifth Grade Practical Test for Computer Science Class

Computer Science Practical Test – Code A

Computer Science Practical Test – Code B

Duration: 30 minutes
Max Marks: 25

Duration: 30 minutes
Max Marks: 25

Instructions:
I. Design a MS Word document as given
below:
a. For the Heading, set any Font name
(type), Font Size=22
b. Underline the heading
c. Bullet the given list (Any bullet of your
choice)
d. Use any font color for the bulleted list

Instructions:
I. Design a MS Word document as given
below:
a. For the Heading, set any Font name
(type), Font Size=22
b. Underline the heading
c. Bullet the given list (Any bullet of your
choice)
d. Use any font color for the bulleted list

II. Save the document as name.sem1.doc in
5 folder

II. Save the document as name.sem1.doc in
5 folder

Here is your heading: Peaks
Here is the list: Mount Abu, Badrinath,
Kapilash

Here is your heading: Temples
Here is the list: Badrinath, Kedarnath,
Lotus

Ms. Sanchana allots 30 minutes to complete the practical test. Most students, though,
need less than 15 minutes to finish. During the practical test, the computer lab is silent save for
students tapping on their keyboards. Ms. Sanchana walks around the classroom to check on the

60

students’ progress. At one point during the practical test, she states, “If any of you have any
doubts about the instructions, please raise your hand.” Not a single hand goes into the air. After
about 15 minutes, most students complete the practical. Ms. Sanchana tells the students who are
finished to either Microsoft Paint or TuxPaint and create drawings for the rest of the class period.
I observe that most of the fifth grade students open TuxPaint and create pictures using that
program. I ask Ms. Sanchana about this and she explains that the children like TuxPaint because
it was recently installed on the computers and allows students to create paintings. Then Ms.
Sanchana added, “I don’t mind that they play with it after they are finished. The children work
hard in the regular classroom that they see the computer lab as a place where can have a break
from the pressures of school."
Analysis of a practical test. This snapshot captures two more themes related to the
unitary interpretation for Bara National’s computer technology. First, the snapshot shows an
example of the skill-based foci of the computer science curriculum. The fifth graders are
assessed on their demonstration of computer skills rather than on the production of specific
content. Indeed, the peaks and temples content on the direction sheet that Ms. Sanchana passed
out were trivial. Ms. Sanchana’s objective for the assessment was to identify if the students
could create and format a bulleted list of information. The emphasis on practicing skills is
another part of the computer science team’s unitary meaning for the school’s computers; which
is to develop programming and coding skills.
The practical test snapshot also shows the testing culture that defines Bara National. The
fifth graders take a practical test about every third class period, which means that 33% of their
computer science curriculum involves summative assessments. Frequent assessment is a
common practice throughout Bara National. Krishna Kumar (1991) explains that India’s

61

“textbook culture” (p. 65), a culture instilled by England during India’s colonial history,
contributes to the practice of habitual testing. In a textbook culture, there is fixed knowledge and
content based in a textbook that the student is required to reproduce (Kumar, 1991; Sarangapani,
2003). Tests and examinations are the most efficient way to evaluate whether a classroom
crammed with students has learned the textbook’s content. Therefore, the school’s habit of
testing reflects the Indian education system’s socio-historical context.
Another part of the habitual testing seems more pragmatic: classroom management.
Bara National’s class sections average 36 students per section. In a classroom space the size of a
large bedroom, the pedagogical options are more constrained so habitual testing helps ensure a
class of students who are quiet, focused, and orderly. Testing is another interpretive feature for
Bara National’s computer use. The practical tests, as summative assessments, provide a way for
the computer science teachers to monitor the students’ development of logical skills as they learn
to program software. In light of Bara National’s habitual testing, focus on skill development,
and didactic instruction, I found Ms. Sanchana’s final comment about student enjoyment to be
quite interesting. Ms. Sanchana shared how fifth graders interpreted the computer science period
to be a “relaxing break” from their otherwise busy schedule. The interpretation of the computer
science curriculum being relaxing was something that the participants echoed in their interviews.
Computer science teachers’ interpretations. Even though I interviewed each
computer science teacher separately, the three shared a similar interpretation regarding the
computer science curriculum. In my analysis of the first snapshot, I explained how the computer
science teachers identified the computer as tool for developing logic. Furthermore, the computer
science teachers believed that logic was the foundation for computer coding and programming.
This emphasis on logic and coding was repeated throughout their interviews.

62

I started each teacher interview with this question, “What two words or phrases do you
think of when you hear the word computer?” While I asked this to the computer science teachers
separately, I report their responses together. The computer science teachers replied with, “A
wonderful, human invention,” “computers are logic devices,” “a machine used for trade and
education,” “research,” “an appliance,” and “enjoyment.” The computer science teachers’
responses suggest that they understand the computer to be a tool (i.e., device, machine, or
appliance) that people use for many different purposes.
In answering my next question the computer science teachers began to narrow in on a
unitary interpretation for the computer’s primary purpose at Bara National School. I asked each
computer science teacher, “What do you understand as the purpose of using school’s computer
technology?” The lead computer science teacher, Ms. Janisha, explained that the purpose of
using computers in school was to “enhance a child’s ability to think logically.” Ms. Janisha also
stressed that the Bara National computer science class provided a “reinforcement of the logic the
children learn in mathematics and science.” Ms. Janisha continued this thought by explaining,
“At this school, we are not so much teaching the children about computer technology, because
computers keep changing, what we teach them is logic, because a strong foundation in logic
helps the children confidently use technology.” The two fifth grade computer science teachers
concurred. For example, Ms. Sanchana shared that the main purpose for the school computer
was to “acquaint the children with the computer so that they can know how it works and, in the
future, how to develop computer programs.”
Developing logic was the computer science teachers’ main interpretation for computer
technology use. From their interviews and teacher questionnaire responses, the computer science
teachers identified three criteria for the development of logic development. Confidence in using

63

all the keyboard commands was the first criterion for logic. The second criterion was continual
practice using software applications and tools, like the formatting tools in Microsoft Word. The
third criterion was framed as the outcome of logic development: students knowing how code
and program software. Indeed, the overarching goal of the Bara National curriculum is for the
students to learn several computer programming languages including Visual Basic and C++.
The computer science teachers use the phrase “not have any doubts” in relationship to the
first criterion of developing confidence. To not have any doubts means two things. First, the
phrase was an invitation to ask questions in order to eliminate any doubts about a certain skill.
Second, the phrase is also used in a synonymous way with building skills. For example, I asked
Ms. Vitna about why she had the students use keyboard commands in Word (i.e., Ctrl C for copy,
Ctrl V for paste) rather than use the computer’s mouse. Ms. Vitna replied with, “It is because I
want the children to learn how to use the keyboard commands as well as the mouse. They need
to know how to use all the keyboard, so that they will not have any doubts.” In this sense, “not
having any doubts” meant recognizing and deftly using all the keys on the computer’s keyboard.
Another phrase “all the keyboard” was also connected to developing confidence and the skill set
needed for programming computer software. At Bara National, the computer science teachers
start early, at the first grade level, teaching the students to confidently use the computer’s
keyboard and thereby eliminating “any doubts.”
In her interview, Ms. Sanchana discussed confidence in relationship to the second
criterion about practicing. Ms. Sanchana stated that while confidence is a great quality for fifth
graders, students develop this confidence through the practice of skills. Ms. Janisha, the head
computer science teacher, shared a similar interpretation when I asked her, “How do the students
develop and grow in confidence?” Ms. Janisha explained, “The children develop confidence as

64

they practice using applications. This practice is the stepping stone for the programming
language, like HTML and Visual Basic, which these fifth grade children learn when they
progress to sixth and seventh grade.” Ms. Janisha finished her response by surmising that
confidence and practice are both parts in the “long journey to learning programming, learning to
use the computer to solve simple problems, and learning to think logically.” The journey is
sustained, according to the Bara National computer science teachers, when the students have
opportunity to practice skills. The commitment to practice was evident in the computer science
teachers’ time management. As part of my field observations, I kept track of the students’
practice time. I found that for a 45 minute computer science class period about two-thirds of the
time was for practice. As the first snapshot depicted, the computer science teachers directly
instruct the students for about 15 minutes. The pace of their instruction is swift, exact, and with
some degree of call and response, but no discussion. The remaining time, around 30 minutes,
was for the students to practice.
Programming was the third criterion for learning to think logically. Programming is also
the outcome of thinking logically. However, the computer science teachers were committed to a
pedagogy that modeled programming type skills. Ms. Sanchana explained this pedagogy,
“Programming requires attention to orderly steps and details. I divide all my lessons into five or
six sequential steps that are easy for the children to remember.” The idea here is that
programming involves logical steps or commands for the computer to operate. Hence, the most
efficient way to learn programming is through direct, sequence focused pedagogy (i.e.,
explaining things in logical steps). On the teacher questionnaire, I had the computer science
teachers’ rank five statements (from order of greatest importance to least importance) about
computer related skills. Two computer science teachers ranked “program or coding computer

65

programs” as greatest. The third computer science teacher ranked “creating documents or
multimedia presentations” as greatest, and second most important was “program or coding
computer programs.” I followed up with the computer science teachers about these rankings. I
was interested to hear about why they thought programming was so important. In their responses,
Ms. Sanchana and Ms. Vitna emphasized that programming is what the students will need to
know how to do as they progress through Bara National. Ms. Janisha was more specific in her
answer, “It is because over 80% of our graduates go into a computer related field in Bangalore,
so we prepare them for their future work.”
Students’ interpretations. The Bara National students shared somewhat different
interpretations for the school’s computer technology. However, before I unpack the examples of
the students’ interpretative flexibility, I share details about their attitudes regarding computer
technology. On the student questionnaire, all the students agreed or strongly agreed that they
enjoyed using the school’s computer technology. Additionally, all seven students in the student
focus group agreed with what Ms. Sanchana shared at the end of the second snapshot. The
student focus group reported that they enjoyed the computer science period because computer
science was the class that connected to what they wanted to do for a career. All the students in
the focus group agreed that computer science was nice break from their normal schedule.
My first interview question to the student focus group was the same as the teachers’
interview, “What two words or phrases do you think of when you hear the word computer?” The
students responded with the following associations: “games [repeated six times],” “entertainment
[repeated five times],” “textbox,” “searching,” and “Internet.” I then asked the students about
what the computer helped them to do at school? While all the students answered this question,
their responses were short and to the point. Three students shared that the computers helped

66

them to know how to create a textbox in Microsoft Word. I was not too surprised by this
response since the students just finished a practical test about creating textboxes. Two students
explained how the computers helped them to save files. Two other students shared how the
computers helped them to create nice transitions and animations in Microsoft PowerPoint. All
the students responded with skills they were learning in the computer science class.
In my data analysis, I noticed how the student focus group created a dichotomy regarding
their interpretations for computer technology. When I personalized the questions by asking the
students what they would prefer to do with computer technology or what words they associated
with technology, then the students’ responses were more about playing online games or using
computer technology to access entertainment related websites like the Indian Premier Cricket
League. However, any question that I contextualized by framing computer technology within
the context of schooling, the focus group answered with references to specific skills they were
learning in their computer science class. For example, I asked the focus group if what they were
learning right now on the computers would be helpful in the future. All the students referenced
specific skills that they were learning in Microsoft Word. One student shared that, “Yes, because
in the future, if you don’t know MS Word then you will be stuck. If a boss gives you a project or
a presentation to prepare, knowing MS Word, will help you be able to complete it.” Related to
the future, another student also explained, “In the future I need to know how to make a textbox
or use bullet points for work projects. We learn many things to help in the future.”
The dichotomy was a representation of students’ interpretative flexibility. The Bara
National students had one set of interpretations regarding computer technology when it was
related to the context of school, but quite a different set of interpretations outside of the Bara
National context. The students’ questionnaire responses also revealed the dichotomy of their

67

interpretative flexibility. For example, their responses to the question about what they believe to
be the most important thing to do on a computer were quite mixed. Of the students who
completed the questionnaire, 54% selected “search for information” as the computer’s most
important purpose, 38% selected playing games, and only 6% of the students selected “learn
basic skills,” which was the response that their computer science teachers selected the in
response to the questionnaire item about the computer’s most important purpose.
Finally, in general, I found that of all the dissertation’s student focus groups, the Bara
National focus group gave the shortest answers to my interview question with the least amount
of explanation. This was not because the students were rude. Rather, it could have been a
reflection of the respect they were showing me as an outsider and older, authority figure. It may
have also been a reflection about the lack of experience they had with small group discussion.
Or it could just be that the Bara National students were use to responding with short, direct
answers to questions.
Summary. In sum, the Bara National teachers and their students had different
interpretations for their schools’ computer technology. For the Bara National teachers, the
computer technology was about the development of logic and skills for coding and programming
computer software. For the students, who dichotomized their interpretations, their interpretative
flexibility was broader. The interpretations were related to the specific MS Word skills but also
included searching for information and playing games, which were activities they did on their
home computers. While the interpretative flexibility was different, the Bara National computer
science teachers’ interpretations for the school’s computer technology dominated the meaning
making for the school’s technology. Indeed, as shown in the snapshot examples, the students
complied with the computer science teachers’ unitary interpretation for computer technology.

68

While the students’ had different interpretations regarding the computer technology, they were
strongly in agreement with their teachers that computer technology would be helpful in their
future jobs and careers.
Stabilization
Stabilization is the negotiation process, among social groups, that leads to an agreement
about the unitary meaning for the school’s computer technology. When such an agreement
happens, SCOT identifies that the technology’s meaning becomes obdurate and fixed so that the
meaning goes from flexibility to obduracy (i.e., becoming hardened) and adopted into the
school’s rhetoric and “network of practices” (Bijker, 1995, p. 273). At Bara National, the
computer science teachers dominate the stabilization process with their interpretation for the
school’s computer technology as developing logic for computer programming. I use the word
dominate in a descriptive way rather than in an evaluative or judgmental way.
The domination of the Bara National computer science teachers is a reflection of the
hierarchical relationship of schooling. Kumar (2003) asserts that it is the nature of elementary
schooling, especially elementary schooling in India, for a hierarchal relationship to exist among
teachers and students; such a relationship maintains order. The teacher’s position of authority
over the students gives the teacher power over the students’ decision making (Apple, 1995). The
domination of the teacher is also a reflection of cultural norms in India, where children are taught
from an early age the Hindi phrase, “Mada, Pita, Guru, Daivam (mother, father, teacher, god)”
as the hierarchy of respect and importance.
Related to these cultural norms is the respect conferred because of a person’s age. The
Bara National students use the word “ma’am” as a sign of that respect. Ma’am is short for
madam and it is quite common to hear students start and finish their sentences with “ma’am”

69

when they are addressing a female teacher. Sarangapani (2003) explains that the use of the word
“ma’am” in Indian schools is also rooted in the cultural identity of the teacher being a guru.
Sarangapani defines guru as a knowledgeable leader who has strong moral authority. Thus,
ma’am is not only a term of reverence; ma’am is an acknowledgement of the teacher’s wisdom
and authority. Conversely, the hierarchal structure and cultural norms did not mean the
computer science teachers were domineering. Quite the opposite actually, for example, the
computer science teachers referred to their students using the endearing term, children. In the
interviews, the computer science teachers spoke highly of the students’ hard work and dedication.
The domination by the computer science teachers had to do with the curriculum they
taught rather than how they taught it. Indeed, the scope and sequence of Bara National’s
computer science curriculum was oriented towards developing logic and skills necessary for
programming. The school’s computer science curriculum, which was developed by the Bara
Computer Science Team, was part and parcel of the domination. The curriculum’s focus is on
understanding the logic of the computer’s software. The computer science teachers’ pedagogical
practice is an extension of the curriculum as the teachers break down computer skills into small
orderly steps in order to show students the computer’s logic.
Stabilization is about power (Bijker, 1995; Giddens, 1979). Stabilization reveals the
social group who had the power to dominate the meaning making of a technology. At one level,
it is evident that the two fifth grade computer science teachers at Bara National had power
because of their cultural position of authority. Yet, I contend that the computer science
curriculum had a great deal of power in stabilizing the meaning for the school’s computer
technology. For example, the two Bara National fifth grade computer science teachers reported
that they would not veer from the computer science curriculum at all

70

The Bara Computer Science Team was another social group that had power in
stabilization process. Yet, the Bara Computer Science Team was not a relevant social group
since the team had different degrees of proximity to the actual classroom uses for the technology.
SCOT posits that there are secondary social groups that also influence a technology’s social
construction. SCOT labels these groups as “other social groups” (Bijker, 1995, p. 271).
According to SCOT, other social groups have an indirect influence on a technology’s social
construction and have little inclusion into the uses for the technology. In expanding on SCOT
theory, I contend that “other social groups” is a limited and problematic term when it comes to
describing the social construction of technology in schools.
The limitation is that “other social groups” does not precisely represent the agency and
power that some “other social groups” possess. I might be tempted to identify Bara Computer
Science Team as an “other social group,” but such a label does accurately represent how directly
involved the Bara Computer Science Team is in shaping the school’s curriculum. Indeed, the
team has a high degree of influence in the stabilization process. Thus, a more refined term is
needed to describe “other social groups” like the Bara Computer Science Team that have a great
deal of influence in stabilizing the meanings assigned to a technology even if these groups have
little inclusion in the actual daily classroom uses of the technology. I introduce “accessory social
group” as terminology that more accurately depicts this relationship. I include the word
“accessory” to illustrate how these social groups add their influence and take on a supplementary
role (as opposed to a subordinate or “other” role) in a technology’s social construction.
Accessory social groups. I define accessory social groups as social groups that have a
high level of influence in shaping the meanings of a technology, but have a low level of inclusion
into the technology’s actual use. Figure 1 illustrates a graphic representation of my definition of

71

accessory social groups. The top arrow represents the high level of influence that accessory
social groups have in shaping the meanings for computer technology, while the bottom arrow
captures the low level of inclusion in the actual uses for the technology.

HIGH LEVEL
A technology’s
meaning

Accessory
Social Groups
Uses for a
technology
LOW LEVEL

Figure 1. A graphic representation of the definition of accessory social groups.
Throughout the rest of the dissertation, I will reference Figure 1 as I develop the
terminology’s meaning in fuller detail. In identifying the study’s accessory social groups, I
adhere to Bijker’s (1995) technique of “follow the actors” (p. 46). This technique or method
involves listening carefully and noting any groups of actors that a relevant social group
repeatedly refers to in their communications. For example, in my interviews and conversations
with Bara National’s computer science teachers, I observed the computer science teachers
repeatedly talk about the Bara Computer Science Team. They talked about their “summer

72

break” planning meeting with this team, they talked about what it was like to collaborate with
teachers from Bara National’s sister schools, and they also talked about the review and approval
process related to their work in the Bara Computer Science Team.
Yet, the computer science teachers also mentioned, a number of times, the Bara National
administration and the school’s parents. The computer science teachers explained how the
administration, especially the Bara National chief executive office (CEO) who they called “Sir,”
would audit their curriculum to check that it was sufficiently rigorous. Additionally, they
explained that “Sir” expected the curriculum to be covered in an academic year so that the
students could seamlessly matriculate through the curriculum. Hence, the Bara National
administration, especially “Sir,” represented another accessory social group who had a high level
of influence but a low level of integration in the daily uses of the technology.
Technological Frame
I conclude this case study of Bara National with a discussion of the school’s
technological frame. The technological frame is the cohesive narrative or the “big picture” of the
technology’s social construction at Bara National. I start, though, with an examination of
technological frame in relationship to the Bangalore Challenge. Earlier in the chapter, I asserted
that Bara National, out of all the dissertation’s schools, most closely captures the perception of
the Bangalore Challenge. I recount why. The school’s academics are rigorous. The instruction
is fast-paced and didactic. The class sizes are large and, at the secondary level, the students will
be competing against each other for honor and distinction. Mathematics, science, and English
account for the large majority of the weekly schedule. Knowledge in these subjects is
memorized and continually assessed through tests and exams. Finally, the school building itself
looks like an unembellished office complex that is the academic workplace for students. The

73

school’s slogans and posters remind students that there is no progress without struggle and that
hard work is the way to get noticed. Taken together, the characteristics of Bara National are a
striking and, perhaps, imposing picture of the Bangalore Challenge; a picture that does indeed
capture the hard work of Bangalore’s students. And, yet, this is not the only picture of the
Bangalore Challenge, nor is Bara National the only school that represents the contours of this
challenge, which I will continue to explore in the next chapter’s case study.
Keeping with the picture motif, though, I examine Bara National’s technological frame.
The technological frame is the sum of the school’s social context, interpretations about
technology, and stabilization. The technological frame is shared by all of Bara National’s social
groups and structures their interactions related to the school’s computer technology (Bijker,
2010; Prell, 2010). The social context characteristics that I described above are part of that
frame. In addition, there are economic characteristics that also shape the frame. For example,
the school is located in a middle class neighborhood situated in urban Bangalore. Most of the
fifth grade students who attend Bara National are also middle SES in India. They speak English
fluently. They can afford polish for their business shoes. They live in homes or large flats with
at least six rooms. These dwellings have indoor plumbing so that the students just turn a handle
to get water rather than pumping water at a well. All their families own a car and 98% of the
families own a home computer. The computer science teachers also are a part of India’s middle
class. They also speak English fluently and own a home computer. They are teaching specialists
who all have a degree in computer science. They have job security and have taught at the school
for at least six years.
What SCOT argues is that the students and teachers interactions within this shared social
context are part of the school’s technological frame; and, in turn, frame gives sense to the fixed

74

meaning the social groups assigns to its computer technology. One way to examine this
technological frame is through the construct of SES, where the technological frame structures the
computer lab as a place where knowledge is reproduced for middle class kinds of jobs. And the
Bara National students, as middle class representatives, are being prepared with the computer
programming knowledge and skills to solidify their future role in the middle class.
Examining the technological frame from the perspective of SES, the computer science
curriculum carries on India’s middle SES. The computer science preparation secures the Indian
middle class through computer programming skills. The logic for the Bara National for such a
technological frame is founded on this corollary: (1) Bara National fifth grade students, who are
middle class, use the computer lab to practice computer application commands and to learn to
think logically; (2) The keyboard command skills and logic are necessary components of
learning computer programming; (3) Learning computer programming insures the continuation
of the middle SES among the Bara National since a computer programmer is a solid middle class
job in India (Nilekani, 2009; Tharoor, 2007); so (4) Therefore, the Bara National computer lab is
a place of preparation in computer programming so that the Bara National students can
reproduce their position in the Indian middle SES. While this makes for a compelling narrative
(and one that is captured in the Bangalore Challenge), is it the only narrative for understanding
Bara National? I will take up that question in Chapter 8.

75

CHAPTER 5
FINDINGS: JINKA PUBLIC SCHOOL
“A ONE LAPTOP SCHOOL”
This chapter reports on findings from a rural elementary school on the outskirts of
Bangalore. The school, called Jinka Public, is situated in the center of Jinka village. While only
20 or so kilometers from Bangalore’s city center, Jinka Public is remote. The school’s red dirt
courtyard doubles as grazing area for cows and has just enough room for the occasional car that
navigates its way to the school. Where Bara National, the case study from the Chapter 4, might
come closest to capturing the Bangalore Challenge; Jinka Public is a school on opposite end of
the spectrum. Indeed, Jinka Public is furthest from any notions that education policymakers
would have of the measuring stick for educational success in the twenty- first century.
Jinka Public represents a different kind of challenge among Bangalore’s elementary
schools. It is the challenge of access and preparation. Jinka Public captures the dual challenges
of providing access to computer technology and preparing teachers and students to continue to
use the technology after its introduction to a school. This chapter’s narrative explains how Jinka
Public is an example of the budding and dynamic relationship among India’s government run
public schools and private organizations. Through an investigation of each relevant social
group’s uses and purposes for computer technology, I also give an account of a larger story
within India about the persuasive coupling of technology and English language learning.
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups
Jinka Public School is a government run elementary school in rural Bangalore. As
representative of India’s innumerable public elementary schools, Jinka Public is an example of a
“typical” elementary school in rural India. However, as the chapter’s title states, Jinka Public is

76

also a “one laptop school,” meaning that it has one laptop for the whole elementary school to use.
From a cursory reading of the phrase, “one laptop school,” it might be tempting to conclude that
Jinka Public is just another story of the barriers to computer technology that exist in India’s rural
schools. As I explained in the dissertation’s literature review, resource scarcity is the chief
barrier to the integration of computer technology in India’s elementary schools (Azim Premji
Foundation, 2008; Banerjee et al., 2007; Iyer & Baru, 2008; Pal, 2009).
While there is much more to the Jinka Public story than just barriers, scarcity is certainly
a theme. Not only is there scarcity of computer equipment, which actually is intentional, there is
also a lack of consistent electrical power. Blackouts and brownouts occur at a daily rate. The
school is situated in a village where most the travel is non-motorized. Walking, usually without
shoes, is the main form of transportation. A bicycle is considered a luxury. Most villagers work
in the surrounding ragi and millet fields; laboring, often with only simple tool blades, by the
bending the back and breaking already calloused hands. Wood fires are the main source of fuel
for cooking. Save for the fact that most of Jinka’s villagers carry cell phones; the village has an
almost archaic quality of life. A quality that is defined by grit and a reliance on low tech tools
like the rope that tethers a cow to a fence.
Although it is within reach of one of Bangalore’s main roads, Jinka Public is quite
removed from Bangalore’s high-rises and technology centers. Those who toil in the fields that
surround the village are known as the krishikaru or field workers. The krishikaru, who are
mostly women, use hand-sickles to chop the ragi grain ears from the plant’s stalk. The grain is
pressed into bundles. The younger women, some who have infants tied to their hips, balance the
bundles on their heads and transport the bundle to the threshing area. Older women working in
the fields are burdened with large sheaves of dried ragi stalks. In contrast with the din of

77

Bangalore’s busy traffic, the area around the Jinka village is void of any kind of machinery. The
work here is done by hand.
While India is known for its immense cities like Mumbai and New Delhi, the rural,
village life still shapes and defines India. More than 70% of Indian geography is rural (ASER,
2011). Deb (2011) contrasts India’s urban and rural life. He explains that the world magnifies
India’s outsourcing industry and computer technology industry as representative of Indian life.
Yet, India is still centered in villages and shaped by an agrarian lifestyle. Close to 400 million
Indians are employed in farming (Deb, 2011). The agrarian portrait of India captures the life in
the Jinka village. About three hundred people call the village, “home.” Yet, home is a loosely
understood word, because many of the villagers are migrant laborers who have to travel from
field to field to help with planting and harvesting. Other villagers are day laborers who go to
Bangalore to work on construction projects. The children of the krishikaru and the day laborers
make up the population of Jinka Public.
School and classroom description. Jinka Public is the centerpiece of the Jinka village.
The school day is six hours long, starting at 10am and ending at 4pm. The school serves 63
students across first grade to seventh grade. Jinka Public is comprised of three main buildings:
the primary school (for first grade to fourth grade), the upper primary school (for fifth grade to
seventh grade), and the small lunch hut where elderly village women prepare the “mid-day” meal
for the children.
The primary school building is a concrete pagoda like building with Spanish tiles on the
roof. Four pillars support the building’s front balcony. These four pillars are decorated with
India’s tri-colors (green, white, and saffron). The upper primary school building is a barracks
style structure that is also supported by tri-colored pillars. A red dirt courtyard separates the

78

buildings. A flagpole, also painted with tri-colors, stands in the courtyard’s center. The Jinka
Public students start the school day around the flag pole. The morning routine includes raising
the Indian flag, singing songs, chanting a prayer, and doing some yoga style stretches. Adjacent
to the flagpole stands the village’s water well. Throughout the day, the Jinka villagers go to the
well to collect water for cooking. Additionally, women gather at the well to clean stainless steel
plates and wash clothes. The well also serves as the watering hole for the village livestock. It is
common to see calves tied up next the well. The villagers and the Jinka Public School students
routinely bless and feed the calves scraps of food.
I spent most of my time in the upper primary building. The building is partitioned into
two rooms: (1) the science and social studies room; and (2) the language and literacy room. The
science and social studies room is also the homeroom for the fifth grade students. There is only
one desk in this classroom and it is reserved for the teacher. The desk sits at the front of the
classroom next to the chalkboards. Students sit on the concrete floor and use their book bags as
makeshift desks. The book bag becomes a place to prop up a book for reading and a surface to
rest an elbow when writing.
The language and literacy room is divided into two sections. There is the classroom
section where the students sit on the charcoal-colored, concrete floor in rows of three behind
long wooden lectern style desks that stand just a half a meter high. The other section contains a
large staff room table. The teachers use this table as a central place to grade papers, eat lunch,
talk with the village elders, and meet with visitors. Almost every wall in the upper primary
building is decorated with posters and murals. The posters are translated in English and in
Kannada, the state language of Karnataka. Most murals, though, include just the Kannada script.

79

The variety of murals provides an interesting visual text. For example, the murals on the
wall by the chalkboard show the colors of the rainbow, the moon’s phases, and colored diagrams
of a solar and lunar eclipse. The two side walls are painted with multiplication tables, math
symbols, the Earth’s lines of latitude and longitude, the solar system, and the human digestive
system. The back wall is dedicated to India’s history and geography. A political map of India is
painted in one corner and a district map of the State of Karnataka is painted in the other corner.
The language and literacy room is packed with posters. Agricultural posters prevail. For
example, two posters next to the chalkboard showcase illustrations of tropical fruits and
vegetables. Both posters are brightly inscribed (and a tad self-aggrandizing) with titles that state:
The Latest Literacy Wall Chart Poster for Children. The English name for each fruit and
vegetable is at the top of each picture while the Kannada script is situated at the bottom. Affixed
above the posters of fruits and vegetables is a homemade poster, called “Uses of Domestic
Animals.” This poster shows pictures of animals like cows, goats, sheep, and dogs. A sentence
about each animal is written in English and Kannada script. For example, the poster’s first
animal is a cow and next to the picture it reads (in English), “This is a cow, it gives us milk.” I
counted over 100 posters and murals on the walls of Jinka’s upper primary building.
The teacher’s staff room has a wide collection of materials along its perimeter walls. The
area is decorated with Indian flags, Indian maps, and a wide collection of posters and framed
pictures celebrating Hinduism and India’s famous men. A black slate chalkboard hangs on the
wall opposite the table. Above the chalkboard are framed portraits of Hindu deities, Gandhi,
Nehru, Ambedkar, and Swami Vivekananda, who the Jinka teachers’ explained “was the guru
who brought Hinduism to the United States.” Green, gold, and red tinsel garlands adorn the
frames. The focal point is the middle frame, which was about twice the width as the other

80

pictures. Dressed in speckles of cardinal and gold, the frame showcases a trio of Hindu gods.
From left to right, the threesome included: Saraswati, goddess of education and knowledge;
Lakshmi, goddess of wealth; and Ganesha, god of success and happiness.
The curriculum and the laptop. Jinka’s curriculum is based on the Karnataka State
Syllabus (SSBC). Jinka is a “Kannada medium” school that follows India’s National Curriculum
Framework. Regular school attendance and dropping-out of school are challenges in India’s
rural schools. Jinka Public is not immune to these challenges. To boost attendance and lower
the drop-out rates, the Indian Government and state governments instituted a variety of
“schemes” and programs. Providing a mid-day meal (i.e., lunch) is an example of a scheme to
ensure that children stay in school throughout the day.
Another example is a program called Nali-Kali, which means joyful learning. Nali-Kali
is a kinesthetic type of learning strategy that Karnataka’s government-run public school teachers
use to motivate their lower elementary students to stay active. The strategy involves singing,
dancing, and lots of movement. The Jinka Public lower elementary teacher demonstrated a NaliKali based math lesson on factors that included a grouping game where students run to form
group sizes based on a number the teacher calls out. The State of Karnataka introduced NaliKali as a program to make school more appealing to younger elementary children.
The Jinka Public laptop program is a scheme to keep upper elementary students
motivated to attend school. The laptop was provided through a Public-Private Partnership (PPP)
program with a Bangalore based non-governmental organization (NGO), which I will call the
SSA Foundation. Being that Dell Computers is one of the SSA Foundation’s donors, the Jinka
Public laptop is a Dell with a 15 inch screen. The laptop operates on a free and open source
(FOSS) system called Ubuntu.

81

Jinka Public’s “one laptop school” program starts at the fifth grade. The school’s fifth
grade students share the laptop during their English language class period. Additionally, all of
Jinka Public’s upper elementary students are allowed to “sign out and take home” the school’s
laptop. The fifth graders, many of whom have older siblings, explained that the laptop is at the
place they live about once a week. In sixth grade, the SSA Foundation distributes the students a
USB two gigabyte (2 GB) thumb drives to store projects and documents. The USB thumb drive
is the property of the student and becomes another source of motivation to raise school
attendance. Students use their USB drive to save Writer (a FOSS word processor) documents
and pictures they create using Etoys or Tux Paint. They also save their report card on the USB
drive and short progress reports (written in English) that they take home and explain to their
parents. The seventh graders are responsible for monitoring the laptop’s battery and re-charging
the battery as needed. Additionally, Jinka Public teachers assign one seventh grade student as
the laptop leader or as they would say, in Kannada, the “laptop magu,” which means the laptop
kid or child. The laptop magu is usually a boy who the teachers identify as responsible,
confident with the computer, and has an aptitude for speaking in English. This boy brings the
laptop around the village to whoever checked it out. The laptop magu mentors the fifth grade
students in using the laptop and provides basic technical support.
The teachers. Of Jinka Public’s staff of four teachers, there are three male teachers and
one female teacher. The three male teachers dress in long slacks, open dress shirts, and sandals.
The female teacher dresses in a traditional Indian sari. Two male teachers are responsible for the
instruction of the school’s fifth graders. Mr. Kathir is responsible for teaching science, social
studies (or what the Jinka teachers refer to as “social”), and math for Jinka Public’s upper
elementary students. Mr. Pahal is in charge of teaching the three-language formula required in

82

Karnataka’s government-run public schools: Kannada, Hindi, and English. Both teachers are in
their late 30’s and have been teaching at Jinka Public for over 10 years. Both learned to use a
computer on their own. Neither teacher owns a home computer and reported that they use the
school’s laptop about three times a week for updating students’ grades and records.
The students. Eleven students are in the fifth grade class. Of these eleven, there are six
girls and five boys. Jinka Public was the only school in this study where the children did not
wear school uniforms. The boys dress in long slacks and polo-style, collared shirts. The boys
often roll up their slacks at the pant leg and wear belts that almost wrap twice around their waist.
Girls wear long dresses or a traditional salwar kameez. Most the girls arrive at school with a
bindi, or red dot, on their forehead. The girls and boys walk to school barefoot.
The majority of students live in small, brick and mud dwellings called kutchas. These
hut-like dwellings have either a thatched roof or a roof fashioned from pieces of metal. The
kutchas have one or two rooms and are void of plumbing and running water. Food is cooked on
a wood fire. While the students live in small kutchas, it is interesting to note that 72% of the
Jinka Public fifth grade students indicated that their families owned a television. All the Jinka
Public students indicated that their families owned a cell phone.
Interpretative Flexibility
Interpretative flexibility means how a relevant social group’s interprets the reasons for
why they are using a certain technology. Like I did in the Bara School chapter, I begin this
section by offering two snapshots of the ways that the fifth grade students used the school’s
laptop. The snapshots provide examples of the “curriculum in use” or how teachers and students
designed learning experiences around the laptop. Earlier I introduced the laptop magu, a seventh
grade boy who takes care of the laptop. During the school day the laptop magu supports students

83

in their operation of the FOSS programs installed on the laptop. In the first snapshot, the laptop
magu is guiding a fifth grade student in a language related activity.
Typing English antonyms. A boy and a girl sit barefoot on a dusty concrete floor of an
empty school classroom. The boy is a seventh grader and is known as the laptop magu. The girl
is in fifth grade and is still learning how to use the computer. Both children sit with their legs
crossed and with their book bags directly in front of them. A black, Dell laptop computer rests
on the boy’s book bag. Next to the boy is a piece of paper that has English words printed on it.
The boy explains that “sir” (i.e., Mr. Pahal, the language teacher) gave him the paper to show the
girl how to type into the laptop. Using the laptop’s touchpad, the boy shows the girl how to click
on the OpenOffice Writer program icon.
Writer is a FOSS word processing program that is similar to Microsoft Word. The boy
opens Writer and creates a table with two columns. Using the laptop’s touchpad, the boy
changes the font size to 18 point and clicks on the italics button. He presses the Caps Lock key
before he instructs the girl with one simple Kannada word “nodi,” which means watch or look.
The girl draws in closer. The boy begins typing the words from the paper onto the screen. In the
left side column the boy types “day,” he mumbles the word as he taps the keyboard. The girl
also echoes the word, “day.” The boy hits the tab button. Then he brings his index finger to the
laptop’s touchpad and navigates to Writer’s toolbar. He re-clicks the font button and changes the
size to 18. He also clicks the italics button.
In the right side column, the boy types “night.” Again, he whispers the word as he types.
The girl repeats and says, “night.” By the time the boy finishes, he has typed in the left column:
day, young, far, short, laugh. On the document’s right side column he has typed: night, old, near,
tall, cry. The boy highlights the left side words in red and the right side words in green. He

84

takes out a USB thumb drive, inserts it in the computer, saves his document and opens up a new
file. The boy turns to the girl and says in Kannada, “neevu trimaadi,” which means now you try.
This is the girl’s clue that it is her turn to type. The boy hands the girl the laptop and she
proceeds to set up the document the same way and types the same English antonyms listed on the
sheet of paper their teacher gave them. When she finishes typing, the girl’s document looks
almost exactly like the boy’s except she highlights all of her words in orange. The boy shows
her how to highlight the left side words in orange and the right side words in blue. She repeats
the words one more time and they save her document to the laptop magu’s USB thumb drive.
Analysis of typing English antonyms. This snapshot captures a common way that the
Jinka Public fifth graders use the school’s laptop. So what does the snapshot tell? First,
snapshot shows an interpretation, among the Jinka Public teachers and students, that the laptop
should be used for English vocabulary practice. This use is not only evident from the typing and
organizing of English antonyms, but it also captured in the language the Jinka Public teacher
used to write out the list of antonyms. Second, in this snapshot, the fifth grade student is copying
a text. Copying is a use and a meaning. The fifth grade students use the laptop primarily to copy
English words. This type of copying reflects the teachers’ pedagogical practice and belief that
copying is a way to build word recognition and develop vocabulary.
While copying was the common way the fifth grade students used the computer, the
snapshot also shows some opportunity for creative expression. For example, in the first snapshot
the students highlight the text they have created in different colors. Finally, the snapshot shows
how the laptop magu, rather the one of the teachers, guides the fifth grade student in her use of
the laptop. The Jinka Public laptop belongs to the students. Student responsibility of the laptop
is one of the SSA Foundation’s conditions when donating a laptop to a rural school.

85

Copying a solar eclipse with Etoys. Another time I observed the laptop magu showing
a fifth grade boy how to create a drawing with the Etoys program. Etoys is a FOSS created for
kids to create sketches, drawings, and diagrams. The students use Etoys primarily for sketching
and drawing diagrams. Here is an example of how. Two boys huddle together around the Jinka
Public laptop. The laptop rests on the older boy’s book bag. The laptop magu, who is the older
boy, shows the younger boy, who is a fifth grader, how to create a picture using Etoys. The
laptop magu points at the screen and instructs the younger boy to click on Etoys. The younger
boy obeys; he opens a new project and clicks on a paintbrush icon. A small white screen appears
along with a toolbar with features and colors on it. The laptop magu points to a mural of a solar
eclipse. The laptop magu tells the boy to sketch that diagram with Etoys. The boy uses the
Etoys toolbar to draw the solar eclipse in black and white. Although the classroom mural was
written in Kannada script, the laptop magu helps the younger boy label his sketch in English.
When the younger boy finished filling in his drawing with color, the laptop magu saved the
drawing on a USB thumb drive.
Analysis of copying a solar eclipse with Etoys. The second snapshot also shows an
example of copying. Yet, in this example the copying includes a translation of the solar eclipse
mural into English. Like the first snapshot, this second snapshot shows the prominence given to
the English language when using the laptop. Figure 2 shows a screenshot image of the younger
boy’s sketch before he colored it in with the aid of the Etoys toolbar. Except for the English and
some broken lines, the younger boy’s drawing was similar to the classroom mural.

86

Figure 2. Screenshot of Jinka Public fifth grader’s solar eclipse sketch using Etoys.
The snapshot also shows the students’ versatility in using different types of FOSS software, like
Etoys, to create artifacts on the laptop. From time to time, I refer back to these two snapshots to
highlight and probe ways that meanings for the laptop manifest through uses.
Teachers’ interpretations. From their interviews and questionnaire responses, Jinka
Public’s two fifth grade teachers shared about the school’s laptop and swiftly converged on a
central interpretation. Indeed, both teachers explained that the main purpose for the Jinka Public
laptop was for the students to learn English. The first interview question I asked was, “What two
words or phrases do you think of when you hear the word computer?” The Jinka Public
teachers’ responses included, “enjoyment,” “motivation,” “a help to learn about places,” and “a
help to learn fast between kids.” As I continued to ask questions, English language learning was
most important among the Jinka Public teachers’ interpretations. For example, when I asked,
“What do you understand as the purpose of using the laptop in school?” Mr. Kathir, the science
and social teacher, replied, “We live in a competitive world, where you have to know the
computer. Our kids become competitive when they know English and science. The laptop helps

87

them learn English.” Mr. Kathir’s interpretation echoes the Indian sentiment about English as
the language of global dexterity and opportunity (Advani, 2009).

Mr. Pahal, the language and

literacy teacher, explained how the “laptop helps the kids to learn English fast.” I followed-up
on his response by asking, “How so? How do you think the laptop helps the kids to learn
English?” Mr. Pahal replied by explaining, “The computer [he points to the laptop’s screen] is in
English. The keyboard is in English. So the kids learn English to make the computer and
keyboard work.” Mr. Pahal’s emphasized the importance of understanding English as the
foundation for operating the laptop or “making the keyboard work.”
Mr. Kathir discussed making the keyboard work through the skill of typing in English.
He explained it this way, “Typing is for learning English. If a child types in “planet” and gets an
error then the program marks it as an error. When he goes to correct the error, he then learns the
way to spell the English word.” Like the first snapshot illustrated, typing English words into a
Writer, the FOSS word processer, was a common laptop activity for the fifth grade students.
Both teachers brought up the importance of the students learning to type. Learning to type,
though, meant something quite different from what some might think of as correct finger
placement on the keyboard. Typing tutorial software was neither installed on the laptop nor was
it discussed by either teacher. However, when the teachers discussed typing it was in the context
of English vocabulary building. Mr. Pahal, for example, discussed the concept of “fluency” in
reference to learning to type. Mr. Pahal explained, “The kids should know how to type. The
kids will get fluency in English while they learn to type on the laptop. And from the typing their
fluency in English will improve.”
Even though the interviews were translated from Kannada into English, I followed what
both teachers said because of how often they repeated certain English words. Typing was one of

88

those words and fluency was another. When I heard Mr. Pahal say fluency, though, I was a bit
surprised and asked, “How do the students build English fluency on the laptop? What do you
want them to do to build this fluency?” Mr. Pahal shared a couple examples, “I give words to
look up in the dictionary and to type into a Writer document. They also type singular and plural
English words and opposite words.” Mr. Pahal’s idea of fluency had more to do with typing,
copying, and producing English words on the laptop, rather than smooth verbal communication.
Additionally, typing was associated with copying English words. Similar to what the fifth grade
girl was doing in first snapshot, typing was the pathway to English vocabulary and to spelling.
English language learning was the teachers’ main interpretation for student laptop use.
Within that interpretation they shared three important outcomes that English language learning
via the laptop offered their fifth grade students. These outcomes provide a deeper layer of
understanding regarding the prominence the Jinka Public teachers put on English language
learning. Motivation, confidence, and collaboration were all outcomes (or outgrowths) of the
main interpretation of English.
The Jinka Public teachers discussed motivation in by using phrases like “a way to learn”
and “makes the life better.” Additionally, in their questionnaire responses, the teachers strongly
agreed with the statement that the use of the computer motivates students. Both teachers
mentioned how they noticed students’ attendance improved once the laptop was introduced to
the school. Yet, throughout the interviews, both teachers discussed motivation in the context of
learning English. For example, I asked, “Why are your students motivated to use the laptop?”
Mr. Kathir explained that the students were motivated since they “see the computer as a way to
learn English and they want to learn English because it will make their life better.” Mr. Pahal

89

also added, “They see that English will help them the most in life. So they spend a lot of time
learning to type in English and become familiar with the English keyboard.”
Developing confidence was another repeated outcome for the laptop’s purpose for
learning English. I asked a question about whether or not the students’ use of the laptop was
helping to prepare the students for the future. Both teachers affirmatively stated that they
believed the laptop was helping their students for the future. I followed up by asking, “How so?”
Mr. Pahal explained that the laptop will help the students when they go to secondary school. He
believed that they would have more confidence in their English language and in operating a
computer because of Jinka Public’s laptop program. Mr. Kathir shared that use of the laptop,
“Makes life easier for these kids. They will continue to use the laptop to learn English. The
laptop helps them to grow in confidence in their English.” The teachers’ interpretation was that
students gain confidence from learning English with the laptop.
Collaboration was a third outcome of learning English with the laptop. For example, the
teachers both strongly agreed with the questionnaire statement that asked about whether the use
of the laptop increased students’ interaction and collaboration. The teachers also emphasized
how the students support one another in their use of the laptop. According to the teachers
collaboration had other benefits. For example, collaboration helped to increase sharing and
reduce the amount of arguments. Since there is only one laptop, sharing is a norm that helps to
support the laptop’s maintenance. Put more simply, the teachers perceived that student-led
collaboration as a key part of the limited conflicts over Jinka Public’s single laptop.
Students’ interpretations. In the student focus group interview and questionnaire, the
students shared similar interpretations about the school’s laptop. I conducted my interview with
all 11 fifth graders. My first interview question was the same as the teachers’ interview, “What

90

words or phrases do you think of when you hear the word computer?” The students responded,
mixing English with Kannada, by sharing the following associations, “typing [repeated three
times],” “English [repeated twice],” “games,” “typing my name,” “typing my parents’ names,”
“Etoys,” “ball game,” “Writer program.” The students mentioned the words “typing” and
“English” the most.
As a follow-up to the first question, I asked the students about the language they use to
type into the laptop. The students responded in unison, “English, sir.” I continued to inquire
about the students’ perceptions of the relationship between English and typing. I asked, “Do you
think that typing on the laptop helps you to learn English?” Again, students echoed, “Yes, sir.” I
replied, “How so? How do you think that typing on the laptop helps you learn English?” A fifth
grade boy student started in, “Everything we type on the laptop is in English, so when we use the
laptop we learn English.” Another boy student added, “The laptop’s keyboard is in English that
helps us learn English.” Much like the Jinka Public teachers, the Jinka Public students also
identified typing on the laptop as the way to learn English. Also, students’ interpretation of
typing was more akin to data entry or tapping English words on the keyboard rather than a finger
placement system.
The students’ questionnaire responses align with their teachers’ interpretations of English
and the laptop. All the Jinka Public students either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement:
I do better in reading, social, and second language (English) when using the computer. Students
also agreed or strongly agreed that they enjoyed using the laptop. The students also shared their
teachers’ belief that increased motivation was an outcome of using the laptop. On the
questionnaire survey, the Jinka Public students all agreed or strongly agreed with the statement:
I am motivated to learn in school when I use a computer. In the focus group interview I asked,

91

“Do you believe that that knowing how to use the laptop will help you in the future? If so, how
so? If not, why not?” Once the translation was finished, the students started in with almost in
one accord by exclaiming, in English, “Yes, sir.” Then the students began quickly chattering in
Kannada to explain why they believed that way. The translator asked them to speak one at a
time. The first student to speak up said this in Kannada, “Laptop neevu nam deshage haege
bandira, haage naavu nim daeshage barthare.” Translated into English this means “the laptop is
how you [they were speaking to me] were able to come to our country, so in the same way, we
learn the laptop to be able to go to your country [the United States].” In this example, the
students were motivated to use the laptop because of a future opportunity it could afford them.
Motivation was also encapsulated by a place, like the United States of America, that represented,
in the students’ perception, success and a good life.
Collaboration was another outcome of the Jinka Public single laptop program. On the
questionnaire students reported that they agreed or strongly agreed with the statement: I work
better with other classmates when using a computer. Student collaboration is a key way that
Jinka Public’s students learn how to use the laptop. The second snapshot depicted a fifth grade
student creating a solar eclipse diagram with Etoys. It is an example of how Jinka Public’s fifth
grade students characterized collaboration common to Jinka Public school. Collaboration
involves working with an older student. Students discussed how much they relied on the laptop
magu and other seventh grade students to mentor their uses of the laptop’s software. Students
also explained that if they encounter problems with the laptop they talk to the laptop magu and
students who are older. The students did not identify the Jinka Public teachers as people they
would go to when they encountered a problem with the laptop.

92

Finally, while the students agreed that the laptop helped them to learn English, they all
disagreed with the statement regarding whether they learn more from the computer or from a
textbook. This was in contrast to their teachers’ responses to the same question item on their
questionnaire. On the teacher questionnaire, Mr. Kathir and Mr. Pahal both agreed with the
statement: Students learn more from the computer than from a textbook. As a follow-up to the
students’ responses, I asked the students about why they disagreed with the statement by
inquiring, “So why do you think you learn more from a textbook?” One student offered this
explanation, “The laptop is for typing, but the book tells what is important.” Another student
stated, “I learn more from the book because I use the book more than the laptop.” These
responses suggest an important distinction in the students’ interpretation of the laptop. The
laptop is a tool for the imitation rather than for erudition.
At Jinka Public, the students use the laptop as a tool for copying English vocabulary. In a
different time, a slate and piece of chalk or a notepad and pencil would have been equivalent
technological examples of the laptop’s primary purpose. While the students interpreted the
laptop as a fine tool for word processing and duplicating diagrams, the laptop was not perceived
as a tool for searching and finding information. Of course, with no Internet connectivity, Jinka
Public’s students do not have access to the World Wide Web so that limits how they can use the
laptop as a tool to search and gather for information. However, there are FOSS software titles,
including encyclopedias and English language tutorials that use a communicative approach for
language learning that can be downloaded. But such software was not downloaded to Jinka
Public’s laptop.
Summary. Both the students and teachers at Jinka Public shared the same primary
interpretation about the school’s laptop: it is for typing in English. While both relevant social

93

groups believed that the laptop was useful for learning English, the approach to learning English
was based on vocabulary building through copying words. Thus, the laptop was seeped in
pedagogy of replicating written English words and duplicating classroom murals.
Both of Jinka Public’s relevant social groups perceived that the use of the laptop garnered
many positive outcomes. One outcome was that the laptop was a tool for practicing and
developing confidence with English language vocabulary. Another outcome was that the
laptop’s use also increased motivation to learn English. The teachers explicitly voiced this
interpretation through explanations like “the kids want to learn English to make their life better”
and “they see that English will help them the most, so they spend a lot of time learning to type in
English.” Echoing the teachers’ sentiments were notions that students were motivated to use the
laptop to learn English because doing so meant a better life, a better future, and, perhaps, even a
chance to go to the United States of America. One student explained it this way, “If I use the
laptop then I can use faster. Then if I learn English from using the laptop, I can come to your
country to spend time there.”
Stabilization
In the previous section I explained that English language learning was the shared
interpretation, among the students and teachers, for the purpose of the Jinka Public laptop. Yet,
how did such a shared interpretation emerge? As a review, stabilization is the process by which
an interpretation, albeit unitary, is agreed upon by relevant social groups and becomes a fixed
meaning. Jinka Public reflects two types or categories of stabilization: consensus and
domination. There is a consensus among the students and teachers about the English language
learning purpose, but there is also domination by the SSA Foundation, the accessory social group
that provided the laptop. SCOT asserts that for technology’s meaning to become stabilized there

94

has to be a match between what the relevant social groups describe as a technology’s purpose
and how they use the technology. For example, in the case of Jinka Public, both relevant social
groups described the laptop as a way to learn the English language and their use for the laptop
was consistent with such a description. Like the snapshots depicted, students used the laptop for
English vocabulary building.
Consensus happens when both relevant social in groups move toward a shared meaning
in their rhetoric and their rhetoric converges on a singular definition of the technological artifact.
Furthermore, consensus occurs when both relevant social groups have a shared role in the
technology’s uses. The Jinka Public students had “ownership” for the laptop. Ownership, here,
does not mean that the students purchased the laptop; rather I use the word ownership to mean
the responsibility the Jinka Public students had for the care and upkeep of the laptop. The
teachers agreed to share and, even, to give the students ownership of the laptop to complete
English language and vocabulary building exercises.
The degree of laptop ownership that the Jinka Public students had was somewhat
surprising given the fact that in elementary schooling, especially Indian elementary schools,
domination of the teachers over the students is more typical. Indeed, it also evident in the
literature that the Jinka Public’s level of consensus is uncommon in Indian elementary schools,
especially in government-run public schools, where students are told what to do and do it without
question (Kumar, 2004; Sarangapani, 2003). At Jinka Public, the laptop was reserved for the
students. Both teachers, Mr. Kathir and Mr. Pahal, acknowledged this fact in their explanation of
how the laptop is student maintained and supported by the laptop magu. The students concurred,
in both word and deed, with their teachers’ sentiments and would go to the laptop magu, rather
than to the teachers, if they had any problem with the laptop. In the context of the Indian

95

schooling system that has a strong tradition of teacher authority as well as a hierarchical structure,
how did such consensus happen at Jinka Public School? To understand the consensus at Jinka
Public, I turn to examining the domination of the SSA Foundation as accessory social group.
The SSA foundation’s vision and laptop program. The stabilization at Jinka Public
School would not be possible without the SSA Foundation. Why? The school would not even
have its one laptop without this Bangalore based NGO, whose mission is to improve and nurture
India’s government run public schools through a decentralized model based on developing basic
skills. The SSA Foundation influences, and stabilizes, the meaning making at Jinka Public
School in two ways. First, the SSA Foundation transmits the vision for how students should use
the Jinka Public laptop. Second, the SSA Foundation provides the laptop and incentives.
The SSA Foundation’s mission and vision focuses primarily on improving India’s rural
public schools by partnering with state governments across India to decentralize the
government’s role in operating the school. It seems ironic that the SSA Foundation gets
involved with state governments so that the governments will become less involved,
bureaucratically, with their schools. The SSA Foundation’s relationship with state governments
is an example of the rise in popularity of India’s PPPs to support: teacher development, English
language learning among rural elementary students, and technology integration. The SSA
Foundation represents the private side of the PPP through their involvement as a NGO with the
Indian government. Among a number of schemes the SSA Foundation implements, the “one
laptop per school” program has specific goals and objectives towards the enhanced delivery of
elementary education in its schools.
To examine the SSA Foundation’s vision for how Jinka Public should use the laptop, I
visited and interviewed the SSA Foundation’s chief executive officer (CEO), Mr. Amit. I started

96

by asking Mr. Amit questions related to why the SSA Foundation decided to support government
run public schools? He explained that over 80% of India’s elementary schools are government
run. Yet, government run public school resources and infrastructure are deplorable. Teacher
absences, student drop-outs, lack of electricity, few functioning toilets as well as the lack of
separate toilets for genders, and a lack of teaching materials are issues that are common to
government run public schools in rural areas.
According to Mr. Amit, supporting government run public schools was a “no-brainer”
because these schools serve the largest amount of students. Mr. Amit stated it like this,
“Government run public schools represent the scale of India’s problems and the scale of
possibility—we desire to have a sizable impact throughout India’s education system so the best
place to begin is with government run public schools.” After discussing with Mr. Amit the larger
mission of the SSA Foundation, I inquired, “What words or phrases do you think of when you
hear the word computer?” Mr. Amit answered, “I think of the computer as a valuable resource
for learning. Also, the computer is a valuable tool that children should use for building basic
skills in English.” Throughout the interview, Mr. Amit referenced Dr. Sugata Mitra’s (2001)
work with the “Hole in the Wall” project. The SSA Foundation’s vision for it laptop program in
schools was based on Mitra’s work in that the laptop should be a tool to spark the child’s natural
curiosity. Additionally, the laptop should allow the child to meet the goals that he or she is
interested in attaining. Mr. Amit stated that the best way for teachers to guide their students’
curiosity is to allow the children to plan out their own programs for using the laptop.
Without specifically mentioning John Dewey, Mr. Amit echoed Deweyian sentiments
about the relationship of the child to learning experiences. For example, when Mr. Amit
explained that students should be able craft their own plans for using the computer, it reminded

97

me of what Dewey (1902) emphasized about letting the “child’s nature fulfilling its own destiny”
(p. 31). Also, Mr. Amit’s insistence that the child’s use of a laptop stimulates further learning
resonates with Dewey’s explanation of the relationship between stimuli and experience so that
children begin to assert themselves in their learning. The child taking ownership and the lead for
the school’s laptop is the bedrock of the SSA Foundation’s vision. It is a vision influenced by
Mitra’s work and congruent with the philosophy of John Dewey.
But why only one laptop per school? Throughout the rest of this section, I address that
question. While the SSA Foundation is involved in teacher trainings and other school
development programs (e.g., providing library books and materials like paper and pencils), their
main donor organizations are most enthusiastic about supporting technology based programs.
Donors are apt to invest in something tangible. Mr. Amit explained that the donors want to
know that their money is going for something that can help students today and in the future.
Thus, a laptop seems like a sound investment because it has the potential to be used right away
and also to prepare a child for the future.
Mr. Amit explained that top donor organizations, like Dell Computers, would prefer to
donate more laptops so that more children have access. Yet, the SSA Foundation prefers a one
laptop per school program rather than a larger donation of computers. Mr. Amit explained that
the SSA Foundation starts by asking donors the following question, “How many laptops does a
rural school need?” Mr. Amit answered by explaining, “One, a school should start with one
laptop. To start, a school only needs a single laptop.” Mr. Amit starts the SSA Foundation’s
donor presentations this way to guard against unrealistic expectations from donor organizations.
Technological deterministic language (i.e., technology governs human actions rather than human
beings giving purpose to technology) creeps into the purposes and potential of donor investments

98

in technology. For example, according to Mr. Amit, donors and Indian government officials
often invest or support investments in technology with the belief that learning outcomes will
increase by just having laptops in schools. Mr. Amit explained how donors and government
officials view laptops as an “automatic deliverable” that donors believe should produce. This
kind of view leads to a rush to provide as many laptops as there are students so that there will be
more automatic results and success stories. Yet, Mr. Amit cautioned that such a view is naïve to
the realities of schooling in rural India, where resources are scarce and electrical power is
unreliable.
For example, Mr. Amit explained that India’s rural schools have a tight budget for
electricity; often, the school principal is given a certain amount of rupees per month to run the
electricity and when those rupees run out so does the electricity. Mr. Amit stated that for a rural
school, like Jinka Public School, to run a ten monitor computer lab they could go through their
monthly electricity budget in five days. Mr. Amit concluded, “So, opportunity cost is an issue
related to computers in rural areas. Schools often have to choose either to operate the computers
for a couple of days or to run lights and ceiling fans for most of the month.” I followed up with
Mr. Amit by asking, “If electricity was not an issue or you were able to identify donors who
would cover the cost of electricity would you still be favor of a one laptop per school program?”
Mr. Amit quickly replied with, “Yes, absolutely.”
Mr. Amit went on to explain how all his years in software development (he worked for
Dell Computers in Texas for many years before moving back to Bangalore) helped shaped his
view of computers. In Mr. Amit’s understanding a laptop is a “computing resource.” He
explained that a laptop is a great tool for computing, composing, and even creating. Yet, in order
to maximize the benefits of a laptop, a person needs to plan out how it is that she or he will use

99

the computer. Mr. Amit’s philosophy about the importance of planning was a key element to
SSA Foundation’s belief regarding how students should use their school’s one laptop. The SSA
Foundation’s approach is to teach students to plan out the work they intend to do on the laptop. .
Mr. Amit made a distinction between the laptop as a learning resource (i.e., a person can
use the Internet to learn more about a topic of interest) and a laptop as a material resource (i.e., it
is manufactured and requires a care and upkeep in order to function properly). Mr. Amit stated
that donors and state governments often forget about the laptop being a material resource.
Scarcity has an unintended outcome that people typically are better stewards of resources that are
scarce. Thus, the provision of only one laptop at Jinka Public is another way to develop the
school community’s perception of the high value in the laptop’s material resource.
The SSA foundation as an accessory social group. Since the SSA Foundation provides
the vision for how Jinka Public’s teachers and students should use the laptop, they stabilize the
purpose for the laptop at the point of entry. The SSA Foundation is an example of an accessory
social group as they have a high degree of influence in the meanings for the laptop, but are not
involved into the day to day uses of the laptop. The SSA Foundation’s organizational vision for
their one laptop per school program dominates the process of stabilization at Jinka Public School.
The outcome of domination is a material donation, the laptop. The laptop serves as a reminder of
the organization vision for how the teachers and students should use the donation.
This is what is happening at Jinka Public School; the SSA Foundation, as an accessory
social group, provides the laptop on the condition that the laptop is reserved primarily for student
use. Likewise, the SSA Foundation installs the FOSS software, like EToys and OpenOffice,
which the Jinka Public students can access and explore. It is important to note that all the FOSS
software is in English. So even though Mr. Amit did not discuss at length about English

100

language learning as part of the SSA Foundation vision, the Jinka Public students identified that
they needed to know some English to access the laptop. By using the laptop’s software the Jinka
Public students have opportunity to practice and build their English vocabulary. Finally, the
SSA Foundation trains the teachers in regards to how they can guide their students in using the
laptop, but with the expectation that the students will be the ones in charge of the laptop. In
these ways the foundation dominated the meaning making of the Jinka Public laptop once the
laptop entered the school.
The process of stabilization at Jinka Public School provides an interesting case study of
the social construction of technology. Accessory social groups, like the SSA Foundation, can
play the role as the arbitrator of power. Bijker (1995) employs Anthony Giddens scholarship on
power in his analysis of how stabilization is laden with power dynamics. According to Giddens
(1979), power is “the transformative capacity to harness the agency of others to comply with
one’s ends” (p. 93). Applying this definition to the case of Jinka Public, the SSA Foundation
wields power through their vision for the “one laptop program.” The vision includes a
transformative capacity.
The SSA Foundation uses the laptop as a tool (and incentive) for transforming the
teacher-student power relationship. Rather than domination of the teachers’ meaning for the
laptop there is more of a consensus about the meaning; and, certainly, a consensus about the use.
Indeed, the Jinka Public students are empowered to use the laptop and, if they have a problem, to
go to the laptop magu for help. Thus, the SSA Foundation’s vision for the laptop also influences
the consensus among the Jinka Public relevant social groups related to how the students maintain
the laptop. There is something curious about the stabilization at Jinka Public—students actually
have more ownership (and to some degree, power) regarding the laptop’s use. Students refer to

101

the laptop as “our laptop,” as if there was a collective ownership. This reflects the SSA
Foundation’s notion (and domination) that the technology is best served in the hands of the
students. While the Jinka Public teachers still give students assignments (like the typing out
antonyms described in the first snapshot) to complete on the laptop, the laptop is understood as a
tool that is primarily for the students. Throughout this dissertation, I have touched on the highly
structured, hierarchical relationship between Indian students and teachers. Kumar (1991)
characterizes the relationship as adding to “the legitimacy of teacher dominance – a supremacy
that has been sung about in India since yore” (p. 89). However, when it comes to the school’s
laptop, this supremacy is being put to the test at Jinka Public School as the teachers and students
have a consensus about the laptop.
Technological Frame
Jinka Public offers another narrative, and technological frame, in understanding the
Bangalore Challenge. While this narrative does not make for sound bites in speeches, it does
represent the challenges of elementary schooling in India’s rural areas. The Jinka Public
narrative includes a PPP that seeks to equip students with the opportunity that a laptop
symbolizes. Such an opportunity includes the chance to develop technological awareness while
practicing English vocabulary. This opportunity, though, is framed by the scarcity of the
technological resource. Jinka Public has only one laptop for all the students to share. Even
though the SSA Foundation has intentionally designed their program with scarcity in mind, the
one laptop per school program is a reminder of the persistence of scarcity. Many of the Jinka
Public fifth grade students would be identified by the Indian Government as Scheduled Caste
(SC) or Dalits, which means that the students belong to a class that is underprivileged and
historically disadvantaged within India. The students walk to school barefoot. Most students

102

live in one or two room kutchas where there is no indoor plumbing and food is cooked over
firewood. A bicycle, if a student’s family is lucky to own one, is the main source of wheeled
transportation. In sum, the Jinka Public’s technological frame is defined by the lower class in
India’s rural areas.
Examining the Jinka Public narrative and technological frame from the perspective of
SES, the laptop program becomes a tool for the opportunity to learn English. Indeed, both the
teachers and students interpreted the laptop as a tool for learning the English language. This
interpretation is echoed in a Jinka Public fifth grader’s response to a question about the laptop’s
importance, “Everything we type on the laptop is in English, so when we use the laptop we learn
English.” By learning English via the laptop, the Jinka Public students believed that there would
be greater opportunities towards the promise, of what their teachers called, “a better life.” A
better life meant a life that was not confined to manual labor or working in the fields like their
parents; it meant a life that was different from a lower SES. Simply put, a better life meant the
opportunity to gain possible entry into India’s middle class.
The SSA Foundation’s vision for their laptop program frames the relevant social groups’
perception that the laptop could lead to a better life. The foundation’s organizational vision goes
beyond just providing laptops, the foundation advocates for the village children. The laptop
program is the foundation’s way of equipping the Jinka Public students not only with technology
skills, but also with confidence, responsibility, and the power of ownership. Thus, the Jinka
Public technological frame is informed by the perception that the uses for the laptop can equip
students to break free of their lower SES. How? The students use the laptop to increase their
English vocabulary and to practice operating a computer while, at the same time, gain experience
being the laptop’s owners and stewards. The skills, speaking in English and operating a laptop,

103

are necessary for entry into India’s middle class (Advani, 2009; Guha, 2008). The Jinka Public
teachers shared this sentiment as they explained how their students recognized that English and
computer technology will “help them out the most” in their lives. Thus, examining technological
frames from the SES construct, the logic, at Jinka Public, goes like this: (1) The Jinka Public
fifth grade students, who are a part of a lower SES, operate the school’s laptop to practice typing
English vocabulary words; (2) Typing in English helps the students learn the English language;
(3) In India, speaking the English language, along with operating a computer, are the keys to
social mobility (i.e., a better life); and (4) Therefore, the Jinka Public students use and perceive
the laptop as a tool for the opportunity to learn English. While this makes for an interesting
narrative about the school’s technological frame is it the only narrative for understanding Jinka
Public?

104

CHAPTER 6
FINDINGS: AADU INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
“WHERE CREATIVITY AND CURIOSITY ARE COUSINS”
This chapter reports on findings from Aadu International School, an exclusive private
school located just outside of Bangalore’s urban sprawl. “Creativity and curiosity are cousins”
reads the purple and white sign hanging on the walls of the Aadu International School’s fifth
grade classrooms. Like the “QUALITY work” poster at Bara National School, the “creativity
and curiosity” sign is more than just an alliterative slogan. The sign is an interpretation for the
purposes of being apart of Aadu International School. As I observed from my field research at
Aadu International, creativity and curiosity informed the ways the fifth graders used the school’s
computer technology. This school’s case study puts a new spin on the Bangalore Challenge.
While the academics are rigorous at Aadu International, the school values an inquiry based
learning approach over a rote memorization approach and unit projects rather than unit exams.
Indeed, the Aadu International story illustrates a different response to the Bangalore Challenge as
the school ventures out in developing its students’ entrepreneurial and leadership skills by
fostering their creativity and curiosity.
Aadu International is where Bangalore’s wealthy and globalized send their children to
school. About 40% of the students are internationals and expatriates. The students are the sons
and daughters of diplomats, entrepreneurs, and executives from many of Bangalore’s large
technology companies like Infosys and Wipro. The school is situated in the space just before
where “rural” Bangalore begins and “suburban” Bangalore ends. Coconut and palm trees bound
much of the surrounding environs. It is an area of Bangalore where a person can see water
buffalo trudging through rice fields that butt up against the walls of gated communities that

105

guard large homes with two car garages. It is the encroachment of affluence on the idyllic; an
area where modern India meets ancient India. Such areas are becoming more and more common
as Bangalore increases in population and prestige.
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups
Aadu International School is situated about two kilometers from a major roadway that is
the home address for a number of Bangalore’s elite private schools. Grain fields and a lush
forest of tropical trees surround three sides of the school’s perimeter. On the fourth side, a gated
community of new homes, advertised as being “a slice of Bangalore’s luxury lifestyle,”
completes the perimeter. Across the road from the gated community is an immense brick
making factory and kiln. While the Aadu International students arrive on campus in luxury
buses or in their parent’s Scorpio SUVs, groups of day laborers walk barefoot along the same
road, preparing for a day of stacking and loading bricks onto lorry trucks. The laborers live in
kutchas (clay constructed dwellings) that are located in the forest in front of the school campus.
This is life in India, where the poorest often live just across the road from the wealthiest.
The rustic setting changes once the Aadu International security guards push open the
stately, wrought iron entry gates. Immediately, the setting turns palatial. Jasmine bushes frame
the school’s limestone walkways and fill the entire campus with a fragrant smell. Magnolia trees,
with their cream colored flowers, dot the landscape. Crescent shaped flower beds, in a colorful
array of marigolds, border the entry way to each of the campus’s four main buildings. Each
building’s architecture resembles an elegant mixing of the Monticello with the Taj Mahal and is
dressed in white marble with towering Corinthian columns. Playgrounds, athletic fields, tennis
and basketball courts, and an open-air amphitheater with enough seating for 800 people are all
contained within the 40 acre campus.

106

Unlike many of Bangalore’s elementary school campuses that just have dirt patches
where students play, Aadu International School has spacious lawns of green doorva grass. The
lawns are well-manicured and quite inviting. During my field visits to Aadu International, I
observed students lounging, reading books, strolling together, and playing games of soccer and
cricket on the school’s lawns. The campus is unique and unlike any school campus that I have
ever visited. It seems befitting of royalty.
The elementary school and schedule description. The fifth grade classrooms are
located in the elementary school building. An impressive marble staircase, with 32 steps,
ascends up to the middle floor entry doors of this three floored building. The Aadu International
spacious cafeteria, called the “canteen,” takes up the entire ground floor. The second and third
floors contain classrooms for the third grade, fourth grade, and fifth grade students. Additionally,
there are separate classrooms for art, drama, Hindi, music, and a special education resource room.
The elementary school building’s hallways are spacious with high ceilings. Students’ art work
and inspirational posters hang on the walls of these hallways. For example, one poster shows a
picture of Leonardo da Vinci with the following quote, “Knowing is not enough, we must apply.
Be willing is not enough, we must do.”
Like the rest of Aadu International, the elementary school day begins at 9:15am and
finishes at 3:45pm. In between those times, the students receive a 15 minute morning break and
a 55 minute lunch and recess break. Class periods are 55 minutes long, with a total of six class
periods per day. On Mondays, the fifth graders start their first period morning class in their
homeroom section. During this first period class, called Unit of Inquiry, the teachers lead a
discussion on whatever integrated unit topic the students are currently exploring. The Unit of
Inquiry typically integrates science and social studies related themes. Throughout the week, the

107

fifth grade students have daily periods of English, math, and Unit of Inquiry. Additionally, their
last period class (i.e., sixth period) is known as Class Teacher’s Time, which the teacher gets to
choose what the students will do. More often than not, the Class Teacher’s Time is a
continuation of the Unit of Inquiry. The fifth grade students use the time to work on unit
projects that showcase their learning throughout the unit. Altogether, the Unit of Inquiry class
period comprises about 40% of the fifth grade weekly schedule.
Additionally, the fifth graders have two periods of a second language throughout the
week. For the second language class, the students can elect to take French, Hindi, or Spanish.
The remainder of the weekly schedule includes special periods like: art, assembly, dance,
information and communication technology (ICT), library, physical education, and sport hour.
While the fifth grade students have a special ICT class period, the ICT teachers, along with the
other specials’ teachers, integrate their content and instruction with the students’ Unit of Inquiry.
Classrooms. At Aadu International School, I spent my field time observing in the
school’s three fifth grade classrooms. Additionally, I observed the fifth graders ICT classroom
sessions in the school’s computer lab. The computer lab is a terrace style room with four raised
platforms where desks are grouped side by side. The lab has an assortment of 28 older model
Compaq and Samsung desktop computers. The computers are arranged in paired learning
stations. Each learning station comes equipped with a 15 inch monitor, keyboard, headphones, a
computer mouse, and the computer’s central processing unit (CPU). Two of the desktops
computers seemed to be in disrepair and did not turn on. The lab is roomy and has four large
widows. An air conditioning unit, which the ICT teachers turn on during afternoon class
sessions, is situated in the back corner of the lab. A digital LCD projector hangs from the ceiling
and projects on to the classroom’s main wall. All the paired desks face this main wall, as the

108

wall is the focal point of the computer lab. The computer lab is efficiently organized in this
spacious but rather plain looking room.
The fifth grade classrooms are spacious but certainly not plain. Rather, the stately
classrooms showcase the students’ work and inquiries. From almost the floor to the ceiling, the
classroom is decorated with student artifacts, project posters, newspaper clippings of current
events, as well as signs that explain the school’s philosophy and mission. Many posters are
created by students and include a multimedia mix of computer images and handwriting. Near the
entry door, a sign announces the school’s vision statement, "To create leaders of tomorrow
through whole-education and life-long learning.” Below the vision statement is the school’s
Latin motto, In Omnia Paratus, which means ‘prepared for all challenges.’ Beside the posters,
the front wall of each classroom is equipped with a Smartboard, which the teachers and students
operate using desktop computer station. The students sit in comfortable chairs behind wood and
steel desks. Each individual desk has a flip-top space where the students store notebooks,
textbooks, and school supplies like crayons and pencils. The desks are arranged in small groups
of three or four. Students collaborate in these small groups, but also can move their chairs to
easily form new groups.
The curriculum and technology. Aadu International is an English medium school that
is affiliated with the International Baccalaureate (IB) program. Headquartered in Geneva,
Switzerland, IB is an international educational foundation that promotes an inquiry-based
curriculum. Among educators and policymakers, IB affiliation carries prestige and cultural
capital related to citizenship preparation in a global society. Schools that are affiliated with the
IB curriculum are required to post in their classrooms IB related materials like: (a) the IB
Learner Profile and (b) the IB Research Cycle. The IB Learner Profile is a list of educational

109

qualities and characteristics, based on the mission of IB, of being an IB student. The
characteristics include being: communicators, balanced thinkers, risk-takers, inquirers,
knowledgeable, caring, reflective, and principled. The profile, according to IB, is also meant to
be a source of motivation to the students and they begin to recognize that the profile stands for a
person worth becoming.
The IB Research Cycle is designed as a flow chart that is organized around a circle of
words: question, sort, plan, gather, synthesize, and evaluate. It is common to hear the Aadu
International teachers ask their students about where they are in the research cycle. Students will
reply with: “Sir, I am a still gathering my resources” or “Ma’am, I am synthesizing my research
right now and putting it in my own words.” The IB Research Cycle is not just informational text
to adorn classroom walls; it is text that is integrated into the daily classroom discussions.
The three fifth grade classrooms share a set of six laptops. Generally, each fifth grade
classroom has access to the laptops at least once a day. Since they are sharing the laptops with
multiple people, students bring their own USB thumb drives to save their documents. The six
laptops are Acer brands with 14 inch monitors. The students share a laptop in small groups; with
three to four students using a single laptop. In my student focus group interview, I asked the
students about sharing the laptop and they all said they did not like it. They explained that
sharing a laptop with four people works okay when they were all researching the same topic, but
was difficult when everyone is trying to research separate unit projects. The students manage
this difficulty by taking turns on the laptop. Sometimes the fifth grade teachers will borrow a
laptop set from the fourth grade teachers. Yet, even with six extra laptops, it still means that
most of the fifth grade students have to double up on a laptop.

110

The Aadu International teachers recognized advantages and disadvantages to the laptop
scarcity. Learning to cooperate was a perceived advantage as the students had to negotiate and
collaborate while using a single laptop. The teachers noticed how this helped students to
compromise and share ideas more readily in their research. The disadvantage was the inefficient
use of time when students had to do their own research. Starting in sixth grade, Aadu
International has a “one laptop per child program” where all the students get their own laptop.
The teachers explained that sometime in the next couple of years the school administration was
hoping to purchase laptops for the fifth graders as well.
The teachers. There are three homeroom teachers in the fifth grade. The teachers are
well supported. For example, each homeroom teacher has a teaching assistant. The assistant’s
role is to support the homeroom teacher, escort the fifth grade students to their specials and to
lunch, and occasionally teach a class period of English or mathematics. The school also employs
several specialists. At the elementary school level the specialists include: an art teacher, a
French teacher, a Hindi teacher, an ICT teacher, two librarians, a music teacher, a physical
education teacher, two Spanish teachers, a Special Education teacher, and several instructors for
sporting activities like equestrian. Throughout the week, the fifth graders interact with a dozen
teachers and specialists besides their homeroom teacher.
Of the homeroom teachers, one is male, Mr. Bibin, and two are female, Ms. Darsha and
Ms. Gopa. The ICT teacher, Ms. Lalan, is also a female teacher. Aadu International was the
only school in this study where the female teachers dressed in a style different than the
traditional sari or a salwar kameez. Instead, the female teachers frequently wore Indian styled
kurtas with slacks or dark jeans. The male teacher wore a tie, short sleeve shirts, and dressy
pants. The teachers are in their thirties and all have been teaching at Aadu International School

111

for over five years. The three fifth grade teachers, Ms. Darsha, Ms. Gopa, and Mr. Bibin, had a
bachelor’s degree in education; whereas, the Ms. Lalan, the ICT teacher, had a master’s degree
in computer science. On the teacher questionnaire survey, all the teachers indicated they own a
home computer and that they use a computer on a daily basis. Ms. Lalan indicated that it was at
the university where she learned how “to use computer technology in teaching.” Conversely, the
three fifth grade teachers indicated they learned to teach with computer technology on their own.
The students. The fifth graders are divided into three sections, each of which has 21 – 23
students. Altogether there are 66 students in fifth grade. Of the 66 students, 65 students
completed the student questionnaire for a 98% response rate. The student who did not complete
the survey was absent the day I distributed the questionnaire. Almost 40% of the fifth graders
were born in a country other than India. The gender breakdown of the fifth grade class, as a
whole, is 56% boys and 44% girls, which is skewed a little higher for boys compared with the
school’s overall gender distribution of 53% boys and 47% girls. Such a percentage, though, is
consistent with literature in India that shows a higher percentage of boys are enrolled in private
schools as compared with girls. The higher percentage is related to a choice many Indian
families make in sending their sons to private school rather than sending their daughters (Advani,
2009; Ramachandran & Sharma, 2009)
Three days a week, the students wear green and gold track suits with an athletic shirt
emblazoned with the school’s crest. On Tuesdays and Thursdays, the students dress in their
formal uniform. The boys’ formal uniform includes a green, gold, and red striped tie with a
white, short sleeve dress shirt and khaki pants. The girls’ formal uniform is the same except
khaki skirts replace the khaki pants. Regardless of what day it is most the students wear brandname athletic shoes like Adidas, Nikes, and Skechers.

112

On the student questionnaires, 100% of Aadu International fifth graders who completed
the questionnaire indicated that their family owned a cell phone, computer, radio, and television.
Likewise all the fifth graders indicated that their families cook meals using a stove top oven that
is connected to a cooking gas cylinder. Almost 70% of the students indicated that they live in
homes or apartments with eight or more rooms, including the kitchen and bathrooms. More than
80% of the students have 200 books in the place they live. For transportation, all the students
indicated that their family owns a car and about two-thirds of the students also indicated that
their family owns a motorcycle or scooter. Almost 91% of the students indicated that they own a
personal bicycle. A majority of the fifth graders (63 %) also own an iPod and personal cell
phone. The Aadu International students’ demographics represent India’s upper class.
Interpretative Flexibility
The teachers and students shared a unitary interpretation for the school’s computer
technology that was centered around the IB’s curricular emphases on research and inquiry. I
start this section on interpretations for the school’s computer technology by offering two
snapshots. In the first snapshot, I share a Unit of Inquiry class session in Mr. Bibin’s class. The
students are discussing their research projects and, as a class, decide to use a mind mapping
Internet based program, called Bubbl.us, to sort and synthesize their ideas for their upcoming
unit projects. In the second snapshot, I illustrate an example of fifth grade student using a
classroom laptop to research and create a PowerPoint presentation.
Inquiry through mind mapping. The fifth graders at Aadu International School start
their morning by discussing their current unit projects. Mr. Bibin, their teacher, tells them to
update the other students in their “desk group” about the status of their project idea. After ten
minutes or so, Mr. Bibin asks the groups to wrap up their discussions and face the Smartboard.

113

Mr. Bibin then says, “Now I would like to hear what you have discussed and find out about you
unit project ideas. First, let’s review the topic for this current unit, what is our inquiry?”
Students raise hands and others begin to call out answers. Mr. Bibin calls on a girl
student. The girl says, “Sir, our inquiry is about how the world works. We are learning about the
world’s different ecosystems.” Mr. Bibin smiles and replies, “Yes, that is right. Now in your
groups you discussed topics related to this inquiry. How many of you have a topic idea for your
unit project?” Ten hands shoot into the air. Mr. Bibin continues, “Okay, so how many of you
are still deciding on your topic idea?” A couple of students blurt out, “me,” while a dozen hands
go in the air. Mr. Bibin explains they will discuss their unit project ideas and that he would like
to use the Smartboard for this activity. Mr. Bibin asks the students about their suggestions in
regards to a computer program they could use to help organize and keep track of the discussion.
One student suggests typing the ideas in a Microsoft Word document and then another student
says that they should create a mind map with bubbl.us. Bubbl.us is a free, Internet based mind
mapping program. The mind map idea is the most popular and quickly agreed upon.
Mr. Bibin types in “bubbl.us” in the Internet address bar and signs in to his class account.
Mr. Bibin asks if any students would like to be in charge of creating the mind map. Two girls
volunteer. Mr. Bibin directs them to sit by the desktop computer connected to the Smartboard,
listen closely, and map out the discussion. Mr. Bibin then asks the class, “Okay, what should be
our central idea for the center bubble?” Students call out different suggestions like, “human
choices,” “ecosystems,” and “the environment.” Mr. Bibin replies, “Are there any other ideas
you have for the central bubble?” A boy student calls out, “Sir, how about ‘threats to our
ecosystems’?” A girl student raises her hand and responds to the boy, “But not everything that
humans do is a threat to the ecosystems.” Mr. Bibin then asked the girl student, “Well what do

114

you suggest?” The same girl continued, “Sir, I think we should have two bubbles in the middle
with a line connecting the two. One bubble can be called ‘human advancements’ and the other
bubble should be ‘ecosystems.’ Then we can look at how the human advancements affect
ecosystems.” This suggestion sounded like a good idea to the rest of the class. The girls
operating the desktop computer created two central bubbles with an arrow connecting the
“human advancements” bubble to the “ecosystems” bubble.
Mr. Bibin then asks the students to call out the ecosystems that they have been
researching as part of their small groups. Students exclaim, “deserts,” “choral reefs,” “forests,”
“mangrove swamps,” “savanna,” and “tundra.” All these examples are added to the mind map as
smaller bubbles around the “ecosystems” bubble. Mr. Bibin asks, “Okay, now what are
examples of human advancements. Let’s name some and the students creating our mind map
will try to type in as many as they hear.” One by one students share advancements like:
“entertainment,” “clothes,” “instruments,” “shoes and boots,” “food,” “diesel and petrol,”
“furniture,” “buildings,” “jewelry,” “stationery,” and “medicine.”
Mr. Bibin praises the students for their responses. Mr. Bibin asks, “Of all the
advancements on our mind map, what is one that you use at school on a daily basis?” A boy
student replies, “Sir, we use a lot of stationery.” Mr. Bibin nodded his head and stated, “Yes,
good.”

Mr. Bibin asks the class, “What materials make up the stationery we use?” The

students call out: “paper,” “erasers,” “pencils,” and “markers.” These responses are added to the
“stationery” bubble. Mr. Bibin picks the paper example. He asks the class to think about how
paper is made and the ecosystems that paper production affects. Without prompting, the
students in charge of the mind map create a line from the “paper” bubble to the “forests” bubble
on the ecosystem side. The class discusses how paper production affects the forests. Mr. Bibin

115

concludes the discussion by pointing to the mind map and explaining that the students should
create their own mind map, either in their notebooks or on a classroom laptop, to synthesize the
information for their unit projects.
Analysis of inquiry through mind mapping. This snapshot captures a common use for
Aadu International’s computer technology. Mr. Bibin integrates the use of the Smartboard into a
class discussion about the fifth graders’ unit projects. Furthermore, the class uses the mind
mapping tool (i.e., bubbl.us) as a way to organize and record the flow of the classroom
discussion. The mind map connects to the inquiry driven discussion. Thus, the purpose for the
using the technology matches the pedagogical purposes of the discussion. The computer
technology helps to facilitate the discussion, but the classroom discussion is most important. The
snapshot also captures the role of inquiry at Aadu International. The commitment to inquiry is
reflected in the way Mr. Bibin phrases his questions and develops a line of questioning. The
questions help guide the students in a synthesis of the Unit of Inquiry themes and ideas; while
the mind map helps all the students to stay connected in a visual way to the discussion.
Creating a unit project presentation. As part of their Unit of Inquiry, the fifth graders
complete a unit project. There are several unit projects options for the students to choose from,
including: conducting interviews, creating a PowerPoint presentation, creating an informational
poster, and writing essays. More the 50% of the fifth graders choose to create a PowerPoint
presentation for their project. This snapshot illustrates an example of how one student created a
PowerPoint for her unit project.
It is the last period of the day, called Classroom Teacher’s Time, and the fifth graders get
the whole 55 minute period to work on their unit projects. The classroom is abuzz with noise
and activity as students discuss their projects with one another, take inventory of their resources,

116

and rummage through their desks for books and computer printouts that will aid in their research.
A couple students immediately start working on one of the six classroom laptops. I watch as one
fifth grade girl arranges her desk with a laptop on the left hand side of the desk and a notebook
on the right. The girl opens up two programs on the laptop. One program is Google, which the
girl uses as her primary search engine for her research. The second program is Microsoft
PowerPoint. She opens a new PowerPoint document and on the title slide she types, “Human
Advancements in the Tundra.” On this same slide, she also types her name. Then she clicks on
the Google window and begins searching for images of tundra. She finds an image of polar
bears walking through a landscape of ice, snow, and short grasslands. The girl copies the image
and pastes it to her title page.
The girl pauses to look into her notebook. She then creates six more slides on her
PowerPoint. On each new slide, she types in titles, one title per slide: (1) Tundra Description,
(2) Tundra Ecosystem, (3) Human Advancements, (4) Human Threats, (5) Question - Drilling
Oil, and (6) Sources. The girl clicks on the tundra description slide and begins typing in a bullet
point description of the tundra. She copies most of the description from notes that she had
earlier recorded in her notebook. The girl continues this same process for adding content to
slides. On the Human Advancements slide, for example, she types in bullet pointed phrases like
“dog sleds,” “snow machines,” and “oil pipelines.” She also includes “oil pipelines” with the
bullet points on the Human Threats slide. Once the girl clicks on the Question - Drilling Oil
slide, though, she goes back to Google and begins to search using this exact phrase: oil drilling in
the tundra. She begins clicking on some of the suggested page links, but soon goes back to the
Google main page. She tries her search query again, but this time she includes quotation marks;
her search looks like this: “oil drilling in the tundra.”

117

After narrowing her search this way, the girl begins navigating the suggested page links.
She stops on a page that discusses the “pros and cons” of drilling for oil in Alaska National
Wildlife Refuge. She begins to take notes in her notebook. For about three minutes, she
continues to read the web page and take notes. She also clicks on the website address, copies it,
and then pastes the website address on her PowerPoint slide entitled Sources. The girl then goes
back to the slide called Question – Drilling Oil. For this slide, she selects the two textbox option.
In left side textbox, she types, “For.” On the right side textbox, she types, “Against.” She lists
some bullet point arguments for each side. Later, the girl told me that during her presentation
she was going to have her classmates debate this question about “drilling oil in the tundra.”
Before the girl gives the laptop to another student to use, she types in two more web addresses
that she previously wrote in her notebook. She also saves her PowerPoint project to her USB
thumb drive.
Analysis of creating a unit project presentation. The second snapshot illustrates the
research and design process that a fifth grader employs to create a PowerPoint. The PowerPoint
is the convergence of the girl’s creativity and curiosity. The student is constructing her unit
project with Google and PowerPoint, which are two computer applications that she, like other
Aadu International students, finds useful. Google extends her inquiry and allows her to search
for the information regarding whatever unit questions she is exploring. PowerPoint gives her a
tool for presenting that inquiry; a tool to craft and communicate the inquiry. Like most Aadu
International students, she keeps applications open on the laptop and she is deft at clicking back
and forth on the applications as she synthesizes her research.
Yet, while these software programs aid her in the research, they are secondary to the
main point of her activity: research synthesis. The snapshot captures the school’s emphasis on

118

synthesizing information. Like the first snapshot, this second snapshot shows the integration of
the IB curriculum model with the uses for the school’s computer technology. From time to time,
I refer back to these two snapshots to further illustrate the interpretations and uses for computer
technology among the Aadu International social groups.
Teachers’ interpretations. According to the Aadu International teachers, their fifth
graders primary purpose for using the school’s computer technology should be for research and
inquiry. The centrality of this purpose was made clear with each interview that I conducted. To
organize this section on teacher interpretations, I first report what the three fifth grade teachers
shared and then I report on what Ms. Lalan, the fifth grade ICT teacher, stated in the interviews.
I found that Ms. Lalan’s responses throughout the interview process were more focused on ICT
and the school’s computer technology. By parsing out Ms. Lalan’s response, I aim to show some
of the nuance at Aadu International in terms of teachers’ interpretations.
I started each teacher interview with the question, “What two words or phrases do you
think of when you hear the word computer?” In response to the first question, the fifth grade
teachers replied with the phrases like, “A device to help and assist me,” “a tool for
communication,” “an underutilized teacher tool,” “displaying audio-visuals,” “a tool for
creativity,” “a device for endless opportunities and for searching endless information.” Ms.
Lalan, the ICT teacher, answered the same question by explaining, “I have more than two
phrases. I think of the computer as a tool for learning. The computer helps with three types of
learning: project-based learning, game-based learning, and collaborative learning.”
The fifth grade teachers responses reflect their interpretation that the computer is a tool
that people use for creativity, communication, research, and for multimedia display. The
teachers also identified that the computer was a tool with endless possibilities, yet something that

119

was underutilized by teachers. The ICT teacher, Ms. Lalan, identified the multiple ways that a
computer could be a “tool for learning.” She included projects, collaboration, and games as the
ways a person learns with the computer. Taken together, the teachers (including Ms. Lalan)
responses reveal a nuanced interpretation of the computer as a tool that has several applications
including: research, inquiry, creativity, and collaboration.
However, as I continued on with the interview questions, each teacher began to narrow in
on a unitary purpose for the school’s technology: research and presentation of inquiry. For
example, my next interview question was, “What do you understand as the purpose of using the
laptops and computer technology in this school?” In their responses, the teachers, including Ms.
Lalan, focused on research. The lead fifth grade teacher, Ms. Darsha, explained that, “What we
want to get them to do is to think with the computer. So we give them research to conduct on
their own. The computer is a device for the children’s own learning and thinking.” In his
interview, Mr. Bibin concurred with Ms. Darsha’s sentiments and explained, “The primary
purpose for the laptop is to learn how to research. Research is the way the children form their
own ideas about our Units of Inquiry. Then the children use their research to create their own
presentations.” The teachers emphasized how research was part of owning ideas (i.e., learning to
think on their own). In addressing this question, Ms. Gopa also discussed the importance of
research as idea ownership and connected this with the IB Research Cycle, which was posted in
each classroom. Here is how Ms. Gopa explained the relationship, “I want the children to
understand that they are not just pulling information from Google, which is not okay. They need
to organize the information, synthesize it, and evaluate it to show they have processed the
information.”

120

In her response to the same question, Ms. Lalan, the ICT teacher, also discussed how
students began to process information and, thereby, gain ownership for their ideas via research
on the school’s computers. Ms. Lalan explained, “Research is the basic skill they learn here, it is
the basic purpose. They can find out for themselves about different topics and ideas. Research
is the way that life-long learning happens.” I followed up with Ms. Lalan, by asking, “How so?
How does research encourage life-long learning?” Ms. Lalan continued, “Research is the
platform for their studies here at this school. When the students know where to find information,
how to find information, and, most importantly, how to process information then the students are
prepared to think for a lifetime.”
In their responses, the teachers described the outcomes of research in proprietary
language; students would know how to process information and own their ideas. During my data
analysis, I was surprised by how often the teachers used the word “own” and made references to
the students “owning” their ideas (i.e., the synthesis of their research). Indeed, idea ownership or
proprietorship was the outcome the teachers stressed throughout their interviews. Additionally,
the teachers often expressed that the ownership of information and ideas was developed through
presentation. Presentation was a second part of the Aadu International teachers’ unitary meaning
and purpose for the school’s computer technology.
The teachers spoke about presentation in connection with characteristics from the IB
Learner Profile and with the synthesis component of the IB Research Cycle. For example, Ms.
Gopa identified that presentation was how the students developed as risk-takers and
communicators (both qualities of an IB Learner) in their presentations. Here is how Ms. Gopa
put it, “The children learn to communicate their ideas and even take risks when they create a
PowerPoint and present it.” Ms. Darsha shared similar thoughts as she framed the importance of

121

presentation to the IB Research Cycle, “They love making PowerPoint presentations. The
presentation helps them to synthesize their research into main points and ideas. They use the
PowerPoint to organize and communicate the synthesis of their inquiry.” The second snapshot
captures a strong example of how a student organizes a PowerPoint presentation to communicate
her synthesis of inquiry.
Ms. Lalan, the ICT teacher, also identified PowerPoint presentations as important.
However, she connected the importance of PowerPoint with the development of specific
computer skills rather than practicing the IB Research Cycle. Ms. Lalan explained it like this, “I
want them to know how to integrate sound effects, transitions, clip art, and video clip to their
PowerPoint presentations. The children should know this to enhance the presentation of their
PowerPoint.” Although Ms. Lalan’s interpretation for computer technology related more to the
developing specific computer skills, the fifth grade teachers centered their interpretation on the
development of idea ownership through research and presentation. The teachers referenced
many parts of the IB curriculum model, including the IB Learner Profile and IB Research Cycle,
in framing this interpretation. Indeed, the students’ Google based searches was a way the
students would begin the research cycle by collection information about the topic. The Aadu
International students would continue to use the Internet to synthesize their research and make it
their own. Presentation was also a key interpretation among the teachers. Presentation allowed
the students to become knowledgeable inquirers of a certain topic and communicate that topic to
the whole class. Such practice was helping the students develop the qualities of an IB Learner.
Throughout the interviews, each Aadu International teacher shared concerns they had in
regards to the school’s computer technology. One concern was digital citizenship. The teachers
wanted to be sure that their students were academically honest. Ms. Darsha used this exact

122

phrase to explain how the students go about their research, “The first thing we insist on is
academic honesty. We insist on citations and not just “copying and pasting” but giving proper
credit to your sources. This is also part of their synthesis of research.” Likewise, in her
interview, Ms. Gopa reiterated similar sentiments, “I want the students to know how to quote a
website and know to properly cite resources. This is the way students learn to sort out their ideas
from the ideas of others and give proper credit to websites that influenced their inquiries.”
While academic honesty was an issue the teachers raised, cyber safety was the concern
that the fifth grade teachers discussed the most. The three fifth grade teachers indicated that
cyber safety was of utmost importance since their students were using the Internet, primarily
Google, to research their unit projects. By cyber safety, the teachers meant that students should
responsibly navigate the Internet by not looking at inappropriate pictures or websites and
immediately closing any pages that made them uncomfortable. While the school had software
filters installed on all their computer equipment that would block students from clicking on
dangerous websites, the teachers connected cyber safety to the IB Learner Profile of a student
being both principled and responsible. In short, the teachers understood cyber safety as part of
what it means to develop students who are “the leaders of tomorrow.”
Students’ interpretations. The students confirmed their use of Google on both the
student questionnaire and in their interview responses as part of the student focus group. I start
with the student questionnaire. First, all the Aadu International students agreed or strongly
agreed that they enjoyed using the school’s computer technology. Next, in response to the
question about what they believe to be the most important purpose of the computer, almost 75%
of the students indicated that “searching for information” was most important. A couple of

123

students even wrote in Google next to the “search for information” choice. The popularity of
Google as a search engine was confirmed in the student focus group.
My first interview question to the student focus group was the same as the teachers’
interview, “What two words or phrases do you think of when you hear the word computer?” The
students responded with the following words and phrases: “research (repeated seven times),”
“presenting (repeated four times),” “PowerPoint,” “Google,” “Facebook,” “Skyping,”
“communication,” “games,” “information.” Since so many of the students mentioned research, I
followed up with a question about why research and the programs they use to research. A
student in the focus group explained, “Research is what we do in our units. It is part of the
inquiry. I basically use Google to research. I can find whatever I am looking for with Google.”
Another student added, “Google helps me to find my information faster. It is the best source for
up to date information.” Other students also shared about Google, explained how they start their
research using the Google search engine or go to Google when they needed images for a
PowerPoint they were creating.
I also asked the student focus group what the computer helped them to do at school. The
students narrowed in on two main themes in relationship to this question. The first theme was
exploration. One student explained, “I like it when our teacher give us a website and tell us to
explore it. I explore and it helps me think about the questions we are asking in our unit. I like
this way of exploring the Internet.” Another student shared, “Exploring using Google helps me
to think of all the information available to me through the computer.” Here the students focused
on how Google, as a computer technology, helped them to explore their unit questions. The
computer was a tool for exploring and searching these questions in a faster way. In connection
to the speed of exploration that computer technology allowed, another student in the focus shared

124

how, “I use the computer for searching educational websites and finding information. The
computer helps me to find my information faster.” One more focus group student quickly
concurred and chirped, “To explore and find research, we also put quotations around the search
item in Google. This helps us to find exactly what we are looking for. It helps to cut down the
amount of time that we spend searching for information.” Like their teachers who emphasized
the importance of research, the students identified exploration and searching as a way to find
information for their unit projects.
The second theme was presentations. Related to the question of what the computer
helped them to do, the student focus group shared how the computer made it possible for them to
not only search quickly, but also to find pictures on Google and include the images in the
PowerPoint presentations they crafted about their research. A focus group student explained,
“The computer helps me to present my research in more exciting ways. Whatever we are
learning in class, we can also learn on our computers. Then I can use the computer to present
what I have learned.” Another student added, “I like to use the computer for all my research
presentations and unit projects. I think the computer helps with the creativity in my
presentations, because I want to find pictures on the Internet and include them in my PowerPoint
presentation to better explain my research.”
Summary. The students’ interpretations about computer technology were aligned with
the teachers’ emphases on research and presentation. Students were largely in agreement about
those purposes. The students communicated that agreement in their responses to a question that I
asked about what they thought their teachers wanted them to be able to do with computer
technology. For example, here is what one student said, “Mr. Bibin wants us to know how to
find good information and to be able to be safe on the computer.” Another student added that,

125

“If you look right now, technology is changing. The teachers know that and want us to be able
to know how to use the computer or any kind of technology for ourselves.” As a summation
response to the question, a student from the focus group shared, “The teachers want us to know
that computer technology is important for research and for how we communicate our ideas.
With the computer and technology, we now can communicate ideas to the whole world.”
In sum, the Aadu International teachers and their students had a similar interpretation for
their schools’ computer technology. For the teachers, including the ICT teacher, computer
technology was most useful for the students’ research and presentation of their inquiries.
Additionally, research and presentation were part of the inquiry process for how students began
to own their ideas.
Stabilization
As discussed earlier, stabilization is the negotiation and interaction process, among social
groups, that leads to a meaning agreement about a school’s computer technology. When such an
agreement happens, SCOT identifies that a technology’s meaning becomes obdurate and fixed so
that the meaning goes from malleability to obduracy (i.e., becoming hardened). The meaning
then gets adopted into the school’s rhetoric and “network of practices” (Bijker, 1995, p. 273). So
at Aadu International there was a consensus among the relevant social groups (i.e., teachers and
students) about the research and presentation purposes for computer technology. The teachers
gave students a certain amount of autonomy within the bounds of cyber safety.
Why the emphasis on research, though? While research was part of the IB curriculum’s
inquiry based approach, there might be additional reasons for Aadu International’s emphasis on
developing research skills. Peter Morville (2005), author of Ambient Findability, argues a
connection between power and research. Morville defines research as information findability,

126

which is the ability to search, find, and process information. According to Morville, a key to
power and access in the twenty-first century is having the ability to find information and process
(or synthesize) the information.
The purpose for computer technology use at Aadu International seems to echo Morville’s
notions of information findability. While research and presentation, which is a form of
information processing, are embedded into the IB curriculum, there also seems to be this
connection to power. The power comes from proprietorship, or the ownership of ideas.
Knowledge and idea ownership were echoed throughout the teachers’ interviews. The teachers
framed this ownership as the way in which students synthesize information. It seems though
there is a relationship to maintaining power.
International baccalaureate as an accessory social group. The teachers’ commitment
to the IB curriculum was influential in regards to this consensus. I argue that the Aadu
International teachers referenced the IB Organization as an accessory social group. However,
throughout this section and the rest of the paper I refer to the IB Organization as it is represented
by the IB curriculum. By IB curriculum, I mean the set of documents that the IB Organization
created to guide schools and teachers about the organization’s goals and outcomes. Thus, the IB
curriculum is an extension of the IB Organization. In keeping with the definition of accessory
social group, I define the IB curriculum as an accessory social group example because of the
high level of influence in shaping the curriculums but a low level of inclusion into the
curriculum’s daily uses. To make that argument, I follow Bijker’s (1995) method of “follow the
actors.” As I discussed in the Bara National School chapter, “follow the actors” method involves
listening carefully and making note any groups of actors that a relevant social group repeatedly
refers to in their interviews or conversations.

127

The Aadu International teachers not only referenced the importance of the IB curriculum
in their interviews, the IB curriculum mission and materials were posted on all four walls of each
teacher’s classroom. Not only were the IB Learner and IB Research Cycle documents posted,
but the IB Mission Statement was also prominently displayed. The IB mission is the following,
“Develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and
more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect. Our international
education programs encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and
lifelong learners” (“Mission and Strategy,” 2008). Rather than computer-based skill foci for
computer technology, the IB curriculum encouraged the integration of computer technology into
the research cycle. The IB curriculum fostered this integration through a focus on developing
students into IB learners who were strong communicators, balanced thinkers, and risk takers
Technological Frame
I started this chapter with a discussion of Aadu International’s relationship to the
dissertation’s larger narrative about the Bangalore Challenge. The chapter examined how Aadu
International expands the notions of the Bangalore Challenge even further as it delivers a
rigorous curriculum that is based on inquiry methods and emphasizes questioning, synthesizing,
creating, and presenting. Thus, Aadu International is an elementary school that is quite a
departure from the more traditional pedagogical practices of drill and memorization.
Aadu International’s technological frame is different from the study’s other schools.
Most of the Aadu International students are the children of CEOs, entrepreneurs, and expatriates.
The Aadu International students wear trendy, Western-style brands of shoes like Nikes and
Skechers. Most students live in homes or upscale apartments with more than eight rooms
including the kitchen and bathrooms. The school’s upper SES influences its technological frame

128

and the way the students use the school’s computer technology. Each fifth grade classroom is
equipped with a Smartboard system that the students also use quite frequently. The students use
the school’s technology for research and enhancing their unit projects. The teachers emphasize
that such research promotes ownership of ideas and original thinking. Thus, the computer
technology provides a tool research, presentation, and the ownership of ideas in order to spur
original thinking.
The technological frame of Aadu International is the shared socio-contextual space and
includes SES. In examining Aadu International’s technological frame I turn to Anyon’s (1981)
scholarship on school knowledge and social class. Anyon’s study of the construction of
knowledge in New Jersey’s elementary schools was part of the original inspiration for this
current study. Although, the questions and theoretical frame that I used for this dissertation
ended up being quite a departure from Anyon’s work, there were a couple interesting findings
related Aadu International the schools in Anyon’s study.
One of those shared findings relates to Aadu International’s technological frame being a
combination of Anyon’s definitions of an “affluent professional school” and “executive elite
school.” Anyon describes the affluent professional school as representative of the upper middle
class (in the context of the United States, though). Creativity and conceptual knowledge was the
emphasis of the curriculum in this school. The affluent professional school’s focus on creativity
echoed Aadu International’s emphasis on creativity and curiosity being cousins. Aadu
International also shared characteristics of an executive elite school, which is representative of
the upper SES (again in the context of the Unites States). The curriculum and pedagogy of an
executive elite school is based on original thinking and leadership. This is similar to Aadu
International’s focus on developing tomorrow’s leaders who know how to form their own ideas.

129

In examining Aadu International’s technological frame, I inquire about the relationship
between the school’s upper SES and the meanings assigned to computer technology. Through
the construct of SES, one might posit that the Aadu International students, as upper class
representatives, are the future leaders and entrepreneurs in not only India, but around the globe.
Hence, their value lies not so much in the computer programming skills, but in their innovative
thinking, their proprietary ideas, and their desire to lead. Thus, the school’s computer
technologies are tools that help to facilitate the development of originality. Aadu International
School’s inquiry-based curriculum and its focus on integrating computer technology throughout
the curriculum further encourage the students in their ownership of their ideas. Using these
associations with SES, the logic for the Aadu International computer technology could be based
on a corollary written like this corollary: (1) Aadu International fifth grade students, who are
upper SES, use the school’s computer technology to research and enhance their unit projects that
are part of the school’s inquiry-based curriculum; (2) Research and unit projects help to develop
original thinking as students begin synthesize research into their own ideas; (3) Idea ownership
and originality are the hallmarks of being strong leaders of tomorrow that are prepared for all
challenges; so (4) Therefore, the Aadu International computer technology promotes leadership
development through the ownership of one’s ideas and original thinking. Such ownership of
ideas also fosters an entrepreneurial spirit. Like I stated in the previous chapters, while viewing
the findings this narrative through SES makes for a compelling story, is it the only narrative for
understanding Aadu International?

130

CHAPTER 7
FINDINGS: KOMU COMMUNITY SCHOOL
“AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL”
At the periphery of the Aadu International campus is a kilometer long gravel road that
leads to a separate school campus called Komu Community. At the entrance of this school, there
is a white sign similar in size to a parking signpost. The bright red letters on the sign greet each
visitor with this statement: “You are now entering an equal opportunity school.” In response to
the Bangalore Challenge, the sign is both a purpose statement and a political statement. In this
chapter, I investigate how Komu Community is an example of a school that confounds the
Bangalore Challenge narrative by bridging the local village with global community. Indeed,
Komu Community is a school that prepares India’s most common elementary aged children—the
underprivileged children living in villages—with language and technology skills for a successful
future and a deep appreciation of their villages.
As the “daughter school” of Aadu International, Komu Community’s purpose is to
provide a high quality education to local village children. The Komu Community administrators
and teachers define this “high quality education” as immersed in an English medium curriculum
that prepares students with technology skills. Such an education also delivers a political
message. Unlike Aadu International, which serves Bangalore’s wealthiest families, Komu
Community is a school for the poor and impoverished. Komu Community serves the very
population living directly outside the Aadu International stately gates. As I discussed earlier in
the dissertation, Komu Community originated as the way Aadu International chose to comply
with the 25% rule in the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE). The
25% rule states that all private schools throughout India have to reserve one-quarter of their

131

classroom seats for underprivileged children. Alternatively, the private schools can construct a
separate school building, called an “Equal Opportunity School,” that is specifically for
underprivileged students living in the area around the private school. Komu Community is an
example of such an Equal Opportunity School. The children who attend Komu Community live
in villages that are within a five kilometer radius of the school. To carry out its purpose of
providing equal opportunities through a high quality education, the Aadu International trustees
adopted a community school model for Komu Community. The community school model,
which has become increasingly popular among policymakers in developing countries, is a model
of education that seeks to empower local communities (Sujatha, 1999; UNESCO, 2008, 2010).
One way that community schools empower the community is through their commitment to teach
about local customs. Another way that community schools give power to local communities is
by directly employing teachers who are from that community. While Komu Community’s two
administrators are former teachers of Aadu International School, all the Komu Community
teachers live in the same local villages where their students live.
Social Context and Relevant Social Groups
The reflection of the local villages is evident even as one walks down the dusty road that
leads to the Komu Community campus. Large murals adorn the five campus buildings; the
murals show Hindu gods, people working in fields, and dancing celebrations. Signs explain the
meaning of each mural. The signs are written both in the Kannada script, the official state
language of the State of Karnataka, and in English. These signs are more for visitors than for the
students who attend Komu Community. For the students, the murals communicate symbolic
meanings of local customs far beyond what 140 words on a sign could capture. The murals are
the tangible examples of Komu Community’s commitment to being a community school. While

132

the school seeks to reflect the cultural context of the surrounding villages and people, Komu
Community is also a school committed to preparing its students to live in a globalized world.
This is evident from the Komu Community mission statement that is showcased near the entry
door of each classroom. The statement reads: “Our mission is to prepare twenty-first century
citizens possessing a strong sense of the community with a global perspective.” The Komu
Community administrators believe this mission is best delivered with a curriculum focused on
English proficiency and supported with computer technology.
Komu Community is contained within the expansive Aadu International campus grounds,
the school is somewhat separated from Aadu International’s marble edifices. The distance and
remoteness, though, provides Komu Community with a certain distinction. The school campus
is designed to look like a village school, albeit one that is quite upscale. Small fields of ragi,
millet, and red sorghum surround three sides of the school campus. Coconut trees tower over the
grain fields; these trees form a natural border between the school and the forest where many of
the area’s small villages are located. Before Komu Community created a policy of busing all
their students to the school, many of the school’s children would walk to school via the forests
and fields. Tardiness, among the students, became an issue because so many children would take
their time “to smell each coconut,” as one Komu Community administrator put it, as they walked
to school. So Komu Community now buses all its students to and from the school campus each
day. Besides the school buses, the only other motorized vehicles that traverse gravel road to
Komu Community are the administrators’ compact cars and the occasional Bajaj scooter.
It is common to see families packed on a scooter or walking along the dusty road. The
families’ purpose is to apply for the chance to get their children selected to Komu Community.
Although Komu Community was still in its inaugural year during the time of this study, the

133

school quickly gained an excellent reputation among the local villages. The school’s student
capacity is 300 students from first grade to sixth grade. In its first year, Komu Community had
over 1200 applicants for their 300 spots. Everyday I visited Komu Community, there were local
villagers lined up by the principal’s office door to fill out applications for the next academic year.
I noticed the earnestness in the villagers’ faces as they hoped to secure a seat at Komu
Community for even just one of their children.
While the villagers waited in line, I observed many of them curiously scanning the
campus grounds, which most likely seemed a bit peculiar. Indeed, in keeping with the idea of a
community school, the Komu Community campus was landscaped and manicured to resemble a
village. For example, a large mango tree was planted in the center of campus to provide a shady
place for the children to congregate. For the villagers, the mango tree must have looked
somewhat familiar because in many Indian villages a large tree, typically a Banyan tree, provides
a central gathering spot. Komu Community’s mural of the chital, or spotted deer, striding
through stalks of grain depicted an everyday scene. Similarly, the villagers would have
recognized the bust of Ravana, the red-faced demon, perched on an overhang warding off any
evil spirits. Yet, there were also parts of the Komu Community campus that would likely seem
rather strange to the villagers. Children typing away on laptop computers might have sounded
unfamiliar. Another curiosity might have been the school’s brick privy building that had a steel
roof, a separate bathroom areas for boys and girls, and sit-down flush toilets that were plumbed
to a septic system. The school’s durable materials unveiled the monetary investment to building
a first-class community school campus. Yet, there is some irony in the building materials as just
the Komu Community construction materials alone would likely have cost more rupees than
many villagers would ever hope to earn over their lifetime.

134

Besides the five school buildings, the campus also included: (a) two large, canopy-like
structures; (b) an open-air amphitheater; (c) a playground; and (d) a pond surrounded by a wire
fence. The Komu Community teachers and students use the canopies for many different
purposes. For example, the canopies serve as stretching area for the students’ morning yoga and
as a cafeteria sitting area during their mid-day meal. Large, Spanish-tiled roofs on each canopy
provide shade from sun and protection during the monsoon rains. The open-air amphitheater
was built on a grass berm. Students sit on this spacious berm for the school assemblies and
special performances. A walking path surrounds the perimeter of the pond. However the pond is
fenced off to keep out the local cattle and to dissuade the children from playing in the water.
The classroom and schedule description. The fifth graders share the large upper
primary classroom building with the sixth grade students. A brick wall separates the building’s
two classrooms. The building is painted in a garnet color that contrasts nicely with the jadecolored roof. Geometric patterned rangoli form a decorative border around the building’s two
mustard colored classroom doors. The fifth grade classroom is rather spacious. Each wall is
decorated with bulletin boards. One bulletin board contains hand-drawn pictures of the brain,
spinal cord, and nervous system. Another bulletin board contain proverbs like: (a) “Good work
attracts good people” (b) “Silence and smile are two powerful tools” (c) “Talk less and work
more” (d) “The student’s life is a golden life” (e) “Where there is a will there is a way”
(f) “Practice makes man perfect” and (g) “Knowledge is power.”
The students’ desks, 25 in all, take up the classroom’s floor space. The desks are
arranged in five small groups, with five desks per group. In one of classroom’s front corners, a
large metal storage locker contains all classroom laptops. In front of the locker, a small table and
metal folding chair provide a makeshift teacher’s desk. A keyboard rests on top of the table; the

135

keyboard is attached to a computer that sits on the floor. The teachers use this computer to
operate the classroom’s Smartboard. Two small sound speakers are affixed above the
Smartboard while a large political map of India hangs next to the Smartboard. An LCD
projector, which points to the Smartboard, is bolted to an overhead ceiling beam.
Although there are 25 student desks in the fifth grade classroom, there are actually 50
fifth graders who attend Komu Community. To accommodate all these students, the Komu
Community school day is divided into two shifts: the morning shift and the afternoon shift.
There are 25 students in each shift. The morning shift starts at 8am and finishes by 11:30am so
that these students can eat their mid-day meal, which is provided by the school. The afternoon
students arrive in their buses just a little after 12pm to eat their mid-day meal. The afternoon
shift starts at 12:30pm and goes until 4pm. Regardless of the shifts, though, the order and
sequence of the fifth grade daily schedule stays the same. Each school day, the fifth grade
students have 5 class periods that are 40 minutes in length.
English and mathematics are scheduled everyday, and on some days, the students have
two class periods of mathematics and English. Each week the fifth graders receive 320 minutes
of English language instruction and have 240 minutes of mathematics. English represents 32%
of the weekly schedule and mathematics takes up 24% of the weekly schedule. Together,
English and mathematics are the subjects that the students spend the majority (56%) of their
week learning. Throughout the week, the fifth graders also have four class periods (16%) of
science, three periods (12%) of social studies, two periods (8%) of second language (Kannada),
and two class periods (8%) of information and communication technology (ICT).
The curriculum and technology. Komu Community teachers are trained in inquirybased teaching methods by staff members from Aadu International. While much of the Komu

136

Community teachers’ pedagogical practices are informed by International Baccalaureate (IB)
teaching strategies, the Komu Community curriculum is affiliated with the Central Board of
Secondary Education (CBSE). The CBSE has the highest status of all the Indian based
curriculum boards and maintains a rigorous, English-medium curriculum. The Komu
Community administrators explained that the CBSE curriculum was, as they put it, “too
advanced for our children, many of whom are learning English for the first time.” To
compensate, Komu Community supplements the CBSE curriculum with material from the
Karnataka State Syllabus (SSBC).
Even with the SSBC curriculum, the Komu Community teachers still supplement
additional resources to help enhance the curriculum. This is due to the fact that the Karnatakabased SSBC curriculum materials are written in Kannada, but the language of instruction at
Komu Community is in English. The teachers rely on the school’s technology, mainly the
student laptops, to help enrich the SSBC curriculum with English based activities. The fifth
grade has 25 laptops, one for each student who attends whether in the morning shift or afternoon
shift. The laptops are Jetway Ecomos with a 10 inch screen and are connected to the school’s
wireless network (Wi-Fi) to allow students to access the Internet.
The teachers. At Komu Community, there is one fifth grade teacher, Ms. Mamita, and
two ICT teachers, Ms. Eshani and Mr. Tarun. Both ICT teachers have responsibility for ICT
teaching. Ms. Eshani is the lead ICT teacher for the fifth graders while Mr. Tarun provides more
technical support. Ms. Mamita, the fifth grade classroom teacher, is responsible for teaching the
core fifth grade subject matter, including English, mathematics, science, and social studies.
Apart from ICT, the only other subject matter that Ms. Mamita does not teach is second language.

137

The school’s Kannada teacher was the second language instructor for all the grade levels. I did
not include this teacher in my study because of the limited time and interaction I had with him.
Both Ms. Mamita and Ms. Eshani dress in traditional Indian salwar kameez that they
match with a long shawl called a dupatta. Mr. Tarun dresses in business attire and wears long
slacks, collared dress shirts, and black dress shoes. The three teachers are in their early twenties
and in their first year of teaching at Komu Community School. All three own laptops, which
they use on a daily basis. Ms. Eshani and Mr. Tarun, the two ICT teachers, are both working
towards their Bachelor of Computer Science degrees and learned to use computer technology in
their teaching from their university programs. Conversely, Ms. Mamita, who is finishing up her
Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com) degree, indicated that she learned to use computer technology
in her teaching from a professional development course. The teachers indicated that their
primary purposes for using the laptop were for e-mail and grading.
The students. In the fifth grade, 25 students attend the morning shift and different group
of 25 students attend the afternoon shift. Gender parity is one of the core values at Komu
Community and the school is intent on keeping class sizes equal in proportion to gender.
Therefore, of the 50 fifth grade students, 25 are girls and 25 are boys. In each shift, the boys and
girls are mixed so that there are 12 or 13 of each gender. Of the 50 fifth grade students, all of
them completed the student questionnaire for a 100% return rate.
The fifth grade students wear a basic uniform. The uniforms are athletic looking and
closely resemble cricket wear (as in the sport of cricket). The uniform includes green and gold
track-style pants and a matching athletic looking jersey shirt. The Komu Community crest and
school name, written in English and Kannada script, are all embroidered on the shirt. The
students are required to wear shoes. Most children wear shoes with holes or shoes that are a

138

couple sizes too big for them. Hindu religious markings on the forehead, such as bindis, or red
dots, are common among both the girls and boys. The children are linguistically diverse as
Kannada, Malayalam, Tamil, Telegu, and Urdu are all mother tongue languages. Most of the
fifth grade students live in kutchas. There is no indoor plumbing in a kutchas, whatever water
that is needed for cooking and cleaning is pumped into buckets, often by the hands of children.
As indicated on the student questionnaire, most of the families cook their food over fire wood.
Although their dwellings are small, 80% of the fifth graders indicated that their families
owned a television. Also, 98% of the students indicated that their families owned a cell phone,
albeit a basic mobile phone solely for talking. However, 90% of the fifth graders have less than
25 books in their dwellings. Only 8% of the fifth graders indicated that their family owns a
home computer. A bicycle was the most common form of wheeled transportation among the
fifth graders’ families as indicated by 72% of the students. The majority of the Komu
Community student population is low socio-economic status. The population represents a mix of
rural and urban locales, as some villages in the school’s five kilometer radius are populated by a
dozen or so people, whereas other villages are like small cities of 25,000 people. Most the
students are the sons and daughters of farm workers, day laborers, and manual workers.
Interpretative Flexibility
As explained in earlier chapters, the SCOT notion of interpretative flexibility captures
how a relevant social group’s interprets the meaning for why they are using a certain technology.
To identify the interpretative flexibility among Komu Community’s teachers and students, I start
this section with snapshots of the ways that the Komu Community fifth grade students used the
school’s laptops. The snapshots provide examples of the “curriculum in use” or how teachers
and students designed learning experiences around the laptop.

139

Creating advertisements. Ms. Eshani begins the fifth grade ICT lesson by announcing
it is a “practical lesson in PowerPoint.” What she means by practical is that the fifth graders will
be creating a document with Microsoft PowerPoint rather than just learning about a PowerPoint
feature, which would be called a “theory lesson.” When Ms. Eshani says “practical lesson” the
fifth graders let out a buzz of excitement, they open their laptops, which are already on their
desks, on click on the Microsoft PowerPoint icon. After the brief commotion, Ms. Eshani
continues with her lesson, “Children, today you are going to make advertisements in PowerPoint.
Tell me, children, what is advertisement?”
The fifth graders, whose desks are arranged in groups, begin talking to one another, but
the students do not offer an answer. Ms. Eshani interrupts their caucusing and states, “Can no
one tell me? Children, maybe you need clue? Would you like clue for advertisement?” The
fifth graders call out, “Ma’am, yes, ma’am. Ma’am, please, ma’am.” Ms. Eshani smiles and
replies, “Okay, children, I give you clue. You find advertisements in paper.” She then holds up
a copy of the Deccan Herald, a popular English language newspaper in Bangalore. Several
hands go into the air accompanied by shrieks of, “Ma’am, I know, ma’am! Ma’am, ma’am, pick
me, ma’am!” Ms. Eshani points to a girl who is waving her hand. The girl exclaims, “Ma’am,
advertisement is selling picture, ma’am.” Ms. Eshani replies, “Yes, advertisement is picture in
paper to sell you things—like this.” Ms. Eshani points to an advertisement on the Deccan
Herald front page. Then Ms. Eshani continues, “Today, I give you different advertisements.
Then, you make advertisement with PowerPoint.”
Ms. Eshani starts to distribute cut-outs of the newspaper advertisements. Each fifth
grader gets an advertisement. As she is passing out the cut-outs, Ms. Eshani tells the students to
re-create their advertisement on a PowerPoint slide. She lets the students know that they can

140

change the color of the text, but the advertisement design should be similar to the cut-out
example. Ms. Eshani also tells the students that if they do not know what a word means on their
advertisement cut-out to go to Google and search for the word or ask one of their group members.
The fifth graders begin re-creating their advertisements.
I watch as a fifth grade boy re-creates an advertisement about Hewlett-Packard (HP)
laptops that corresponds with a promotion during the Holi festival (Holi is an Indian holiday,
celebrated during springtime, which often includes children throwing colored powder on each
other). At the top of the PowerPoint slide, the boy inserts a Word Art text book that has a multicolored font. The boy looks at the advertisement cutout that is next to his laptop and then begins
to type, “Happy Holi from HP Computers.”
The boy opens a new window and goes to Google Images. He types and searches for
“laptops.” The boy scrolls down a page of laptop images. He finds one he likes and copies the
image using the laptop’s mouse pad. Then, the boy clicks on his PowerPoint window and pastes
the laptop picture on the PowerPoint slide. Using the laptop mouse pad, he moves the image
over to left side. The boy clicks back on the Google Image window, selects another laptop
image, copies it, and pastes this second laptop image on his PowerPoint slide. The boy slides the
second laptop image directly underneath the first laptop image. The boy then looks down at the
advertisement cut-out. He studies it. Then he goes back to the PowerPoint slide. He clicks on
the “Text Box” icon. Using the mouse pad, the boy moves the textbox to right of the first laptop
image. The boy clicks on the textbox and changes the background color of the textbox to red.
He looks down at the advertisement cut-out and then begins to type in the red textbox a bullet
point list of features of the laptop. On the final line of the textbox, he changes the font size, taps
the caps lock key, and types, “BEST BUY: Rs 26,000 + TAX.”

141

The boy picks up the advertisement cut-out, takes a few moments to compare the cut-out
with what he has copied so far on the PowerPoint slide, and then puts the cut-out back on his
desk next to the laptop. The boy creates another textbox on the PowerPoint slide; he colors this
textbox yellow, and places the yellow textbox next to the second laptop image. The boy types in
a bullet point list along with a “best buy” price in the textbox. He then saves his PowerPoint
slide to a USB thumb drive. A couple days later, during the next ICT class time, the boy would
present, what he called his, “Holi laptop advertisement.”
Analysis of creating advertisements. This snapshot reveals a common use of the Komu
Community laptops by the fifth graders. The students use their laptops to create and present
PowerPoint documents. The snapshot depicts the meanings that the relevant social groups,
especially the teachers, assign to the laptops. First, the laptops are practical. Not only is the
laptop practical for copying and re-creating advertisements, but it is also practical for looking up
the meaning of English words. Likewise, a second meaning, assigned to the laptops, is that the
laptops provide a way to build and practice English vocabulary. The snapshot also shows a
dominant pedagogy for learning English vocabulary: copying, or imitating, an artifact. However,
although the fifth graders were copying (or re-creating) their cut-out advertisements, this
practical exercise provided them with an opportunity to use a variety of PowerPoint features.
For example, the activity might be practice for a future career in graphic arts. In snapshot’s final
sentence, I reveal a third interpretation of the laptops, particularly when creating documents in
PowerPoint. Ms. Eshani, as well as the other Komu Community educators, believes the laptops
are for presenting. Verbal presentation allows the students to gain confidence as they practice
their English in front of an audience. The students verbally present just about everything they
create on their laptops.

142

Presenting globish. Hanging on the wall space directly below the Smartboard in the
Komu Community fifth grade classroom is a paper display of animals that one might see on an
Indian safari. Words are written on each animal. For example, the words celebrate and equal
are tattooed on a paper elephant. This display is titled, “Globish Words.” Globish is a
portmanteau, or blending, of the words globe and English. The school’s vice-principal explained
that globish words, like create and examine, are commonly used words in the English language
that help prepare students to communicate in a globalized society. Each Komu Community
classroom has a display of globish words and the students learn globish vocabulary along with
English grammar. This snapshot captures a globish lesson for fifth graders.
Ms. Mamita writes four words on the white board: perish, performs, produces, protects.
Then she tells her students to open their laptops and click on Microsoft Word to create a new
document. The students follow her directions. Ms. Mamita then instructs the fifth graders to
type the words that she listed on the board. Ms. Mamita points to each word and tells the
students in the Kannada language what each word means. She then says in English, “Children,
now on your laptops type a sentence in English after each word. Try to use pronouns in your
sentences. Go to the Internet dictionary if you want to find out more about the word.”
I observe a girl begin typing in her Word document. After the word, perish, the girl
types: We should not perish our nature. The girl spaces down to the next word, performs, and
types in: She performs dances. Then the girl opens a new window, goes to the Internet, and
types dictionary.com in the address bar. Once dictionary.com opens, she types in the word,
produces. For a brief moment, she scans the dictionary.com page and then turns to one of the
members in her group. In the Kannada language, she asks what the word, produces, means. The
group member replies to her inquiry in Kannada. Then the girl returns to her Word document

143

and begins to type: Cow produces milk. The girl then spaces to the last word in the list, protects,
and types: Amma (mom) protects me.
Throughout this time, Ms. Mamita walks around the room and assists students with their
sentences. When the students are finished typing, Ms. Mamita announces, “Children, now copy
your sentences in your notebooks so that you can present your sentences to the class.” The fifth
graders take out a notebook and pencil from their desks. They begin copying their sentences into
their notebooks. After about five minutes, Ms. Mamita inquires, “Who would like to present
their sentences?” Almost all of the fifth graders hands go in the air along with cries of “ma’am,
ma’am” to show their eagerness to volunteer.
Ms. Mamita chooses six students, including the girl I observed, to present. The fifth
graders walk to the front of the classroom, stood in front of the Smartboard with their notebooks
opened, and one by one began sharing their sentences. During their presentations, Ms. Mamita
reminds the presenters to speak loudly and look at their classmates rather than looking too much
into their notebooks. After each recitation, the rest of the class applauds. When all six finish, the
class applauds again. Then Ms. Mamita states, “I will be listening throughout the day to see if
you can use one of these words in a sentence.” About an hour later, during the mathematics
session, I hear a student call out, “Ma’am, ma’am, he perish my book!”
Analysis of presenting globish. This snapshot also reveals meanings for the Komu
Community laptops. Like in the earlier snapshot about creating advertisements, the activity in
this snapshot is about building an understanding of English vocabulary. Indeed, the students use
their laptops to build their conceptual knowledge of “globish” vocabulary. Ms. Mamita’s
pedagogy helps to scaffold their understanding of these globish words as she first translates and
explains what the word means in Kannada. Yet, the main activity is to practice using English in

144

multiple ways. The students type the vocabulary words, they use the globish words in sentences
(albeit simple sentences), copy the words into their notebooks, and some students even present
their sentences to the class. The laptops provide a way to facilitate this activity as the students
are allowed to look up the words on the Internet for further clarification about meaning. Thus,
the laptop is a tool for building their English vocabulary.
Teachers’ interpretations. I interviewed the teachers separately. From their responses,
all three teachers identified English language learning and presentations as the main purposes for
the Komu Community laptops. The first interview question I asked was, “What two words or
phrases do you think of when you hear the word computer?” The Komu Community teachers’
responses were: “good for English presentation,” “saves energy,” “easy to create,” “builds life
skills,” “needed for survival and success”, and “secure future.” Ms. Mamita responded with
“good for English presentation” and during her interview, I followed up about what she meant.
Her response captures how she understands the dual purposes for the Komu Community laptop,
“Laptops help children learn English and presentation help children practice their English, so
they can learn their English better.” Ms. Mamita emphasized how the laptop is a tool for English
language exposure and a tool for practice.
Before I delve deeper into the connection between the laptops being a tool for language
exposure and a tool for practice, I note the other responses to the first question. I found their
responses interesting because of the emphasis the teachers put on efficiency (i.e., saves energy),
survival, success, and a secure future. Their phrases were reminders that the teachers are from
the same villages as their students, where almost all work is done by hand with simple tools like
a water bucket or a sickle to cut ragi. Furthermore, the teachers’ responses seemed to reflect an
appreciation for what is possible with a high-tech tool like a laptop computer.

145

When I started to inquire about the purpose of laptops for their students, the teachers
focused their responses on the importance of the students using their laptops for English
language exposure and for proficiency. For example, when I asked, “What do you understand as
the purpose of using the laptops in school?” Ms. Eshani, the lead ICT teacher, responded with,
“It helps their English. They enter English words in their laptops and present these words for the
benefit of all children. English words help them operate their laptops. They create presentations
to practice their English.” Ms. Mamita also referenced English in her reply to the question, “The
laptops motivate them to learn their English. They learn more English words when they use their
laptops.” In both Ms. Eshani’s and Ms. Mamita’s responses, they understood English as a
significant part of operating and using computer technology. Indeed, both teachers equated
“operating” and “using” the laptops to English language exposure and increasing vocabulary.
The idea here is that once the students turn on the laptops they are immersed in a virtual world of
English language.
The two teachers also expressed that learning English was about more than just using a
laptop. Indeed, English represented the security of a future job. For example, this sentiment was
shared by Mr. Tarun, the other ICT teacher, in his reply to the students’ purposes for using the
Komu Community laptops. Mr. Tarun remarked, “The laptops are a help for their English
language. The laptops and English provide a secure job for them. Whatever field they may
choose to study they need to know how to talk in English and use a computer.”
The teachers interpreted that using the laptops for presentation purposes was another
way the students practiced and developed their English vocabulary. Thus, the students’
PowerPoint presentations were a tangible outcome for building their confidence with English.
The students’ constant creation of PowerPoint presentations was something that I was struck by

146

in my field observations. I probed this practice further in my interviews and asked, “I have
noticed that the students create a lot of PowerPoint presentations, what is the purpose for making
PowerPoint presentations?” Ms. Mamita explained that there are two purposes for the students
work on PowerPoint. First, PowerPoint helped the students build their technical knowledge
about the software. For example, students learned how to design a PowerPoint slide by using
bullet points, inserting clipart, and including WordArt. Second, PowerPoint gave the students
practice with communicating their ideas through a text based and verbal way.
Ms. Mamita identified that PowerPoint allows students to organize their communication,
which is a key for students who are learning English. She said, “I want the children to organize
and communicate what they are learning. The more the children communicate in English, the
more confidence they will have with English. I tell them, the more you present the more
confidence you will have in your English.” This quote highlights how the teachers interpreted
the students’ use of PowerPoint presentations as congruent with main purpose for the laptops,
which was to build English vocabulary.
Students’ interpretations. In the student focus group interview and on their
questionnaires, the students shared similar interpretations about the school’s laptops. I
conducted the focus group interview with eight fifth grade students. My first interview question
was the same question from the teachers’ interview, “What words or phrases do you think of
when you hear the word computer?” The students responded in English with these associations:
“English (repeated five times),” “PowerPoint (repeated four times),” “Google (repeated three
times)” “games,” “fast,” “learning,” and “whole world.” I was curious about the words that the
students repeated. Specifically, I wanted to find out why English, PowerPoint, and Google were
repeated a couple of times.

147

I rephrased my next three questions to inquire about why students associated their laptops
with English, PowerPoint, and Google. First, I asked about English, “Why English, why does
the laptop make you think of English?” A girl replied, “Sir, laptops help us learn English.
Laptops will help me speak English nicely.” A different fifth grade girl interrupted and shared,
“Sir, if I do not know English then I do not know how to use laptop. English and the laptop help
me find a good job.” Like their teachers’ interpretation, the students had a strong association
with the laptops helping to improve their English or as the first girl put it, “to speak English
nicely.” The students also communicated that English was part of operating a laptop and if they
do not know English, then they will not know how to use a laptop. Conversely, the students
emphasized how using their laptops was part of their English language development.
Second, I also followed up about why PowerPoint was repeated four times. A boy in the
focus group explained, “Sir, we learn English with PowerPoint. We like PowerPoint. We enjoy
it because we can include pictures with the English words.” A girl in the focus group added,
“We show the PowerPoint to the class. We speak in English when we show PowerPoint.” What
theses students were communicating is how the PowerPoint gave them a chance to practice
English. The PowerPoint represents activity based learning. Like the first snapshot illustrated,
when creating their PowerPoint slides, the Komu Community student are actively using English
vocabulary. They are matching pictures to text. Thus, the PowerPoint provides a tool for
understanding English vocabulary, a tool for providing a contextual meaning to English words.
In their creation of PowerPoint presentations, the students developed a deeper understanding of
English vocabulary by including images with the vocabulary. Likewise, the students’ verbal
presentations provided great practice for communicating in English.

148

Third, Google was another word that the students repeated. I followed up on why. The
students shared how Google helped them to search for information and the meaning of English
words. The students explained that they used Google to find images that corresponded to the
English vocabulary words they were learning. A girl in the focus group explained the
importance of Google in this way, “Google shows pictures of words. This is a help to speaking
English.” The Komu Community students identified how they searched Google as a way to
build their conceptual understanding of English vocabulary. Like the old adage that a picture is
worth a thousand words, the Komu Community students would often start to build this
vocabulary by searching on Google Images in order to get a picture of the word. In the focus
group, one of the boy students shared why he liked Google Images, “I find information about
English words by looking at the pictures on Google. The pictures are a help to know what the
English words mean.”
Summary. In sum, like the teachers’ interpretations of the laptops, the Komu
Community students identified that the laptop’s primary purpose was for learning English. For
both groups, PowerPoint presentations provide a way to practice English language through
design and presentation. Google was understood as a dynamic tool that allows the students to
build conceptual knowledge of English vocabulary. For example, the students explained how
they understood the questionnaire’s category of “searching for information” as equivalent to
searching Google for information about English vocabulary words. Ms. Mamita also confirmed
that Google was most likely what most of the students associated with “searching for
information.” Both the teachers and students communicated that English was the most important
technical skill for operating the laptops. While PowerPoint and Google help the students to
practice and build upon their English language development, English proficiency is the end goal.

149

Stabilization
At Komu Community, then, the teachers and fifth grade students interpret the school’s
laptops as a way to build English language proficiency. The teachers dominated the meaning
making for the school’s laptops, but the teachers were also dominated by the Komu Community
administrators’ vision for the school’s one-laptop-per-child program. The stabilization of the
Komu Community laptops starts with school’s administration. Specifically, Mr. Chitesh, the
school’s principal, and Ms. Risha, the school’s vice-principal, dominate the interpretations of the
purposes for the laptops at Komu Community School in two ways. First, Mr. Chitesh and Ms.
Risha communicate the Komu Community vision for the school’s one-to-one laptop program to
the teachers and larger community. Second, the administrators train and support the teachers in
how the students should use the laptops during the school day.
In many ways, Mr. Chitesh is the originator of Komu Community School. Mr. Chitesh
was a long-time secondary school teacher and administrator at Aadu International. The idea for
Komu Community School emerged in 2008 during a professional development workshop that
Mr. Chitesh presented for Aadu International School staff. The theme of Mr. Chitesh’s
workshop was “social entrepreneurship,” which he defined as, “taking risks and investing in and
education that benefits and helps to transform the larger community.”
Mr. Chitesh explained that during his social entrepreneurship workshop, he wanted to
rouse the Aadu International School community into doing some kind of community action
project that would benefit the villages surrounding the Aadu International campus. It happened
that the Aadu International School chief executive officer (CEO) attended Mr. Chitesh’s
workshop. The CEO was inspired and talked with Mr. Chitesh about the idea of creating a
community school for children in the villages that surrounded Aadu International. Under the

150

leadership of Mr. Chitesh, and with the support of Aadu International School, Komu Community
School was founded and built by June 2010. In less than two years from Mr. Chitesh’s
workshop on social entrepreneurship, Komu Community opened its door to hundreds of village
children living within a five kilometer radius of the school.
In their interviews, Mr. Chitesh and Ms. Risha referred to the school’s unique vision. For
example, when I asked about the school’s laptop program, each one explained how the laptops
are one facet of the school’s overall vision statement, which states: “To adopt an integrated
approach to learning, with emphasis on empowering students through leadership competencies,
proficiency in English, the power of technology, and a strong sense of their communities." The
administrators recognized the laptops were part of a deeper commitment to providing an
education that connected children to their villages while also preparing the children for future
success in a globalized India. Mr. Chitesh put it this way, “We are a unique school. Of course,
there are rich school models for rich people. And there are schooling models for educating poor
people. But, it is very rare to see a rich school model for poor people.” Mr. Chitesh explained
that what he meant by that statement was that Komu Community adopted some of the best
practices of Aadu International School, like inquiry-based strategies for learning, and applied
those practices to the context of a community school. So the investment in the one-laptop-perchild program was an example of “rich school model for poor people.” But such an investment
was one component, among many, in providing a quality education.
Mr. Chitesh defined quality education as an “education for life.” Ms. Risha explained
how a quality education empowers children with confidence and self-esteem. According to Ms.
Risha, the Komu Community children receive a comprehensive education, one that prepares
them with English and technology skills, but, even more importantly; it is an education that

151

imparts dignity, equality, and self-worth. Ms. Risha summed up her beliefs about quality
education by explaining that, “Our children might have been born to poor families, but that is not
their mistake. That is not their karma. They are children, like any other children in the world.
The goal here at Komu Community School is to get the children to believe it.” The school’s
commitment to English language learning and to their laptop program are both means to
realizing the end goal of a quality education that includes emancipation.
Two practical skills. Out of the larger goal of “delivering a quality education,” the
administrators identified two important skills that Komu Community was preparing its students
with: (1) proficiency in the English language and (2) the ability to operate computer applications.
The administrators believed that these two skills worked in tandem. Mr. Chitesh explained that
there was an incentive for the students to learn English since the laptops’ Windows based
operating system was also in English. Because the students desire to use their laptops, they also
are compelled to learn a basic level of English to operate the laptops. Mr. Chitesh further stated
that, “Komu Community School has proven that English language learning and technology skills
can develop together.” He identified that it is the child’s curiosity that makes this happen.
As Mr. Chitesh discussed the importance of curiosity, he referenced Mitra’s (2002) “Hole
in the Wall” project and explained how many of the Komu Community students arrived on
school’s first day like the children from the “Hole in the Wall.” The students had almost no
exposure to computers and could only understand a handful of English words. Yet, after only a
couple hours of using the laptop, many of the students figured out how to use the laptop’s mouse
pad as well as click on links to the Internet and several computer applications. Mr. Chitesh
commented how he noticed that once students overcame their fear of touching the laptops, they

152

quickly became interested in learning how to operate the laptops. Together, curiosity and
interest in the laptops motivates the students to learn English.
The administrators also identified the importance of Komu Community students
mastering the skill of being technologically literate with a computer. By technological literacy, I
mean the ability of the students to confidently operate computer applications like Microsoft
Word, Microsoft PowerPoint, and, even, the Google search engine. Both administrators posited
that the skill of operating computer applications was something that has immediate and lasting
benefits for their students. An immediate benefit is increased confidence. When the Komu
Community children were given a school laptop, Ms. Risha explained that this act removed the
“fear of technology off their minds.” She reported that the children at Komu Community are no
longer afraid to turn on a laptop or worry about breaking the laptops just because they touched it.
The skill of operating computer technology starts with being confident and comfortable with
computer technology.
The lasting benefit of technological literacy is future success. Mr. Chitesh talked about
this benefit as part a package of “life skills” that the students needed success in school and their
future careers. Mr. Chitesh identified that “life skills” included the skills of operating a
computer, searching for information with a computer, and presenting information with a
computer. Mr. Chitesh explained that he often imagined 10 to 15 years in the future when Komu
Community students were on the job market. The students’ likelihood of landing a good job (i.e.,
a middle-class job) would increases significantly when they show that they can operate a
computer and present in English. Thus, the PowerPoint presentations that the fifth grade
students created and presented to their peers were an important part of their development for
future success.

153

Administrators as an accessory social group. I have been building a case for the role
that “accessory social groups” have in shaping the meaning-making for computer technology in
schools. As I stated earlier, an accessory social group has a high degree of influence in the social
construction of a technology even though the group has a low level of inclusion into the actual
uses for the technology. Thus, the accessory social groups bring a certain degree of “rhetorical
stability” (Bijker, 2010) to a technology’s social construction. By rhetorical stability, I mean the
stabilization of a technology based on a social group’s verbal descriptions about the technology
rather than their uses for the technology.
The Komu Community administrators are an example of an accessory social group.
While Mr. Chitesh and Ms. Risha are not involved in the day-to-day uses of the school’s laptops,
they do have a considerable amount of influence on meanings for the laptop. The administrators’
vision of “delivering a quality education” through practical skills like English language learning
and presenting PowerPoints dominates how the Komu Community teachers and students use the
laptops. Specifically, the administrators believe that the student use of the laptops is both
emancipatory and pragmatic. In discussing emancipation, I follow Friere’s (1970, 2005) notions
of an emancipatory education, which is an education that liberates; an education which helps
learners to be conscience of who they are and ways to change social structures. The Komu
Community administrators understood that the students’ use of the laptops was, in part, an act of
emancipation. The laptops symbolized the “ticket to a better life,” as Mr. Chitesh called it, and a
way to have access into India’s middle class. Such interpretations for the laptops were part of
Komu Community’s vision to liberate students with the “power of technology.” Yet, the
administrators’ interpretations were quite pragmatic in that they have identified two skills,
English language learning and operating computer applications, as the most practical for the

154

students’ future education and career. Like the snapshots help illustrate, the ICT teachers
designed the laptop activities to be as pragmatic as possible for the students.
Technological Frame
Komu Community School adds another layer to the Bangalore Challenge. It is a
Bangalore-based school that seeks to prepare village students with knowledge of their
community and knowledge of the world. It is a school for equal opportunity. Even though
Komu Community might not be recognized as a school that would be the measure for success in
the twenty-first century, it is school that does get noticed, especially by the local villagers who
live within the school’s five kilometer radius. One reason it gets noticed is because of Komu
Community’s technological frame that aims to empower students, who are mostly in the lower
class, with technology skills.
One way to investigate the Komu Community technological frame is through the SES.
Certainly, Komu Community provides a compelling narrative regarding SES. The Komu
Community participants had a refined interpretation for the laptops. This interpretation was
captured by the school’s vision statement, which was posted in every building and classroom at
Komu Community: “To adopt an integrated approach to learning, with emphasis on empowering
students through leadership competencies, proficiency in English, the power of technology, and a
strong sense of their communities." In keeping with this vision statement, the laptops are a tool
of empowerment.
Indeed, the laptops are part of the school’s integrated approach to learning, which
empowers students to become technically-savvy, English proficient leaders that still care about
their villages. Such empowerment paves the way to the Indian middle class via tech skills and
English proficiency. The logic for the Komu Community laptops is organized thusly: (1) Komu

155

Community fifth grade students, who are lower SES, use their laptops for creating and presenting
artifacts in English; (2) By creating and presenting artifacts, the Komu Community students
become proficient in the English language; (3) English language proficiency is empowering and,
coupled with technology skills, provides an entry way into India’s middle class; so (4) Therefore,
the Komu Community laptops are part of empowering the Komu Community students to gain
access to India’s middle class. In Chapter 8, cross-case analysis chapter, I examine whether this
is the only narrative regarding Komu Community’s technological frame.

156

CHAPTER 8
CROSS-CASE ANALYSIS
This chapter’s purpose is to report on the dissertation’s two main research questions:
How and why is computer technology socially constructed in Bangalore’s elementary schools?
How does the social construction of technology compare across schools? The four case studies
presented in the earlier chapters provide narrative examples of the social construction of
technology in Bangalore’s elementary schools. While these narratives share similar themes, the
narratives cannot be reduced to a single theme. Indeed, the malleability of computer technology
is a finding across the case study schools. By malleability, I mean the many ways that people
shape and reshape the meanings for computer technology based on several factors like social
context and negotiations with other people (Bijker, 1995; Feenberg, 1991).
The cross-case analysis examines themes related to technology’s social construction
through a comparison of the case study schools. I start by anchoring the chapter in a table (see
Table 6) that summarizes the findings from the four case studies. The table’s headers correspond
with SCOT’s themes of: (a) relevant social groups’ social context and demographics; (b)
interpretative flexibility; (c) stabilization; and (d) technological frame. The order of the SCOT
themes aligns with dissertation’s four research sub-questions: (1) What are the demographics
characteristics of the relevant social groups in fifth grade classrooms in Bangalore? (2) What
interpretations do the relevant social groups assign to computer technology? (3) How are the
interpretations for computer technology stabilized? (4) How do the social groups’ demographic
characteristics help explain the meaning they assign to computer technology use? Table 6
presents a summary of findings, organized across schools that are arranged by the SCOT themes,
which correspond to the dissertation’s four research sub-questions.

157

Table 6
Summary of Each School’s Findings Organized by Research Sub-question Themes
SCOT Themes

1) Context /
Demographics

2) Interpretative
Flexibility

3) Stabilization

Schools

4) Technological
Frame

Jinka
Public
“One laptop
school”

Rural Bangalore
Village school
Students are
barefoot, no shoes

Laptop is used for
“basic skills” like
typing and learning
English vocabulary
words

Dominated by
the donor org.,
the SSA
Foundation

Lower SES
Laptop is entry
into India’s
middle class

Komu
Community
“Equal
opportunity
school”

Sub-rural
Bangalore
Community school
Students wear
oversized shoes
with holes

Laptops are for
developing English
proficiency and
“life skills” by
creating and
presenting artifacts

Dominated by
the school’s
administration
and school’s
vision

Lower SES
Laptops are entry
into India’s
middle class

Bara
National
“Computers
for logic &
coding”

Urban Bangalore
Private school
Students wear
polished black or
brown business
shoes

The computer lab is
for developing the
logic needed for
“programming
skills” and coding
software

Dominated by
the school’s
computer
science teachers

Middle SES
Computers help
secure a middle
class, technology
related job

Aadu
International
“Creativity
& curiosity
are
cousins”

Suburban
Bangalore
Private school
Students wear
Nikes and
Skechers shoes

Laptops and the
computer lab are
for developing
“research skills”
and enhancing
presentations

Consensus
among the
school’s
teachers and
students

Upper SES
Computers help
foster leadership
and
entrepreneurship

158

The Thesis
Table 6 is the chapter’s summative graphic organizer. I analyze and compare the themes
that emerged from the four case study schools based on the Table 6 findings. These findings are
part of the chapter’s thesis. In addressing the aforementioned research questions, I argue a multifaceted thesis: (a) Taken together, the case studies show computer technology’s malleability
across Bangalore’s elementary schools; (b) However, given the paradox of malleability, within
each school the meanings for computer technology became obdurate (or fixed) in relationship to
the curriculum, pedagogical practices, the school’s ethos, the school’s social context, and the
socio-economic status (SES) of the student body; (c) Additionally, the influence of accessory
social groups stabilized and often dominated the meaning making for each school’s computer
technology; (d) Stabilization, though, occurs within a school’s technological frame; each
school’s technological frame is a reflection of Bangalore’s wider sociotechnical context. Put
simply, there are many different meanings for computer technology, but in specific settings, like
schools, social groups negotiate one or two meanings that become fixed according to the
school’s context. These fixed meanings often reflect the wider social factors of a society.
I proceed with a caveat about answering the dissertation’s primary research questions. I
recognize the tension in research (and in the thesis I statement I just wrote) towards causation.
Throughout this chapter’s analysis, though, I seek to avoid making causal claims about
technology’s social construction being related to one or two social factors at each school. The
“generative promise” of this analysis is in comparing and clarifying the complexity that is part of
technology’s social construction in elementary schools (Peshkin, 1993). While I parse out and
order the thesis for purposes of lucidity, in reality, this thesis is full of complexity and nonlinearity. Indeed, the social construction of technology in schools involves a combination of

159

meanings, uses, and stabilization of computer technology in concert with several social groups
who are relationship in educative and political ways. So not only is technology’s social
construction complex, non-linear, it is also messy (Law, 2004).
I organize the messiness through what I call an “hourglass analysis.” I start the hourglass
analysis with an examination of technology’s malleability as a broad theme across all schools;
then I narrow in on technology’s obduracy with the cases; I broaden again by analyzing
technology’s stabilization across the school; and, I finish with a wider analysis of each school’s
technological frame in relationship to Bangalore’s wider sociotechnical context. Thus, an
“hourglass analysis” of technology’s social construction starts with the wider context, narrows in
on the shaping of technology’s meanings within specific case settings, and then expands to the
purposes of these meanings in the wider context. Figure 3 provides a graphic representation of
the “hourglass analysis” that I use to structure the chapter’s cross-case comparisons.

Wider context

Malleability

Within
cases

Obduracy

Stabilization
Within
cases
Technological frame
Wider context

Figure 3. The hourglass analysis of the social construction of technology.

160

Malleability. Malleability provides the foundation for SCOT as it suggests that there are
a plethora of meanings for computer technology and these meanings are constructed by social
groups who are interacting in and making sense of society writ large. Malleability is also the
sum of the social groups’ interpretative flexibility as malleability refers to all the possible
meanings for computer technology. I discuss the malleability of computer technology across
case study schools by investigating each school’s weekly schedule. The weekly schedules shed
light on the curricular emphases that influenced the ways that students used computer technology.
In particular, I examine each school’s curricular focus in terms of subject matter given the most
amount of weekly time. I contend that the differences in mode of subject matter time show
examples of the malleability of meanings for computer technology across the four schools. I use
Table 7 to present these findings. Table 7 shows the subject matter that was scheduled with
highest percentage of time and the most minutes of instructional time per week.
Table 7
Each School’s Weekly Mode of Subject Matter Time

School

Subject Matter
Mode

Subject Minutes/Total Minutes
Per Week

Percentage of
Weekly Time

Jinka Public

Math

270 minutes/1500 minutes

18%

Komu Community

English

320 minutes/1000 minutes

32%

Bara National

Math

360 minutes/1800 minutes

20%

Aadu International

Unit of Inquiry

495 minutes/1600 minutes

31%

161

Table 7 provides comparisons about each school’s weekly schedule. Although Table 7
does not capture data regarding the quality of instruction in these subject matter areas, it does
describe what subject matter each school spent the most amount of its week covering. Again, I
reference this table to compare how a social factor like a school’s weekly schedule relates to the
meanings that the social groups, especially the teachers, assign to computer technology. I begin
with the clarification that the total amount of minutes per week does not include break times or
lunch periods. Of all the study’s students, the Bara National fifth graders spent the most amount
of time in school at 1800 minutes (30 hours) per week. By comparison, the Bara National fifth
graders’ weekly schedule was more than 12% longer than the Aadu International fifth graders,
20% longer than Jinka Public, and 80% longer than Komu Community fifth grade schedule.
These 1800 minutes did not include the extra time that the Bara National students occasionally
spent during a Saturday morning school session, I omitted these data because the Saturday
school timings were irregular and happened only during the formal testing periods.
In keeping with Bara National’s emphasis on developing logical ways of thinking, 20%
of the fifth grader’s weekly schedule was dedicated to mathematics. Like I explained in the case
study chapter on Bara National (Chapter 4), logical thinking was one foci of Bara National’s
mathematics curriculum. In many ways, the computer science period was an extension of that
logic. Ms. Janisha, Bara National’s lead computer science teacher, said as much when she
explained how the computer science class was a “reinforcement of the logic the children learn in
mathematics.” Bara National’s priority on mathematics shapes, in part, the computer science
teachers’ interpretations for the school’s computer technology.
In contrast, Komu Community students spent the least amount of time in school.
However, of all the schools, Komu Community spent the most minutes—320 minutes per

162

week—learning English as a specific, language arts type subject matter. Komu Community’s
total minutes of weekly time on English was only around 12% less than the total number of
minutes the Bara National fifth graders spent in their weekly mathematics classes (360 minutes),
even though Komu Community fifth graders attend school 800 less minutes each week compared
with the Bara National students. The large disparity in weekly time is a reflection of Komu
Community’s two shift schedule, which I discussed in Chapter 7. However, whether the Komu
Community fifth graders attended the morning or afternoon shift the emphasis on English
language proficiency was the same. The Komu Community educators explained that the amount
of weekly instructional time given to English as a specific subject matter was meant to immerse
their students in the English language. Mr. Chitesh, the Komu Community principal, illuminated
that relationship when he stated that, “The children should see a connection between knowing
English and working with their laptops. Both are going to land them a job and both are a means
to survival.”
At Aadu International, the subject matter emphases and weekly schedule were quite
different. Aadu International’s fifth graders spent more than a third of their weekly schedule
engaged in their Unit of Inquiry. The Unit of Inquiry is the terminology that the International
Baccalaureate curriculum uses to designate the students’ investigation of a transdisciplinary
theme that is usually science and social studies focused. At Aadu International, the Unit of
Inquiry time is where the fifth graders sharpen their research skills by collecting information on
the unit questions and ideas they are interested in exploring. Additionally, near the end of each
Unit of Inquiry, students worked on unit projects that showcase what they learned throughout the
unit. Throughout the Unit of Inquiry time, students used the school’s laptops and computer lab
to support their investigations. Thus, the 31% of Unit of Inquiry time mirrors the interpretations

163

and meanings that the teachers assigned to computer technology. Ms. Darsha, the lead fifth
grade teacher at Aadu International, explanation of computer technology’s main purpose
captures a telling example, “The students use the computers to conduct their own research
related to their inquiries. The computers are devices for their research and thinking. We want
them to process that research and use the computers to prepare it for presentation.”
Jinka Public was different from the three aforementioned schools. While mathematics
was the subject matter that was given the most weekly instructional time, the Jinka Public
students’ main purpose for the school’s laptop was to type English vocabulary words (see
interpretative flexibility column in Table 6). However, since there was only one laptop, the Jinka
Public students completed their English language activities on their own time. Jinka Public’s
emphasis on math (which is taught in Kannada language) seemed to be related to the school’s
alignment to India’s National Curriculum Framework (discussed in Chapter 1), which mandates
a higher percentage of instructional time be reserved for mathematics. While Jinka Public
students do not practice mathematics on the school’s laptop, Jinka Public does schedule almost
the same percentage weekly time for mathematics (18%) as Bara National (20%).
My purpose for comparing each school’s weekly schedule is to show quantifiable
examples for computer technology’s malleability in the wider context of Bangalore’s elementary
schools. For example, in three of the four cases, the uses for the school’s computer technology
were related to the subject matter area that was scheduled for the highest percentage of weekly
time. Both Komu Community and Aadu International integrated computer technology
throughout their respective curricula. Given their commitment to integration, it follows that the
teachers and students would associate the meanings for computer technology with the subject
matter area in which they used that technology the most. Thus, one might expect there to be a

164

relationship between subject matter and computer technology uses. However, at Bara National
the computer technology was not integrated throughout the curriculum. Rather, the school’s
computer technology was its own subject matter area (i.e., Computer Science). Yet, the
computer science teachers interpreted that the computer science periods were an extension of the
logic students learned in their mathematics class periods. Hence, mathematical logic was part of
the Bara National computer science teachers’ (and by proxy their students) interpretations for the
meanings and uses of computer technology. Whereas, at Komu Community, English language
proficiency shaped the meanings and uses for the computer technology; while at Aadu
International it was inquiry and research of transdisciplinary unit topics.
Discussion. Malleability provides the starting point for addressing the dissertation’s first
research question: How and why is computer technology socially constructed in Bangalore’s
elementary schools? Bijker (1995) identifies that malleability allows for the possibility of
choices to be made about technology and these choices represent the “bundle of meanings about
what computer technology can be used for” (p. 281). Indeed, within the context of Bangalore
there are many “bundles of meaning” that actors can assign to computer technology. Put another
way, each “meaning bundle” represents a narrative about the possibilities of computer
technology. As Table 6 details, Jinka Public’s meaning bundle surrounds English vocabulary
building; while Komu Community’s meaning bundle for computer technology connects to
English proficiency; Bara National’s meaning bundle centers on developing logic for
programming; whereas Aadu International’s meaning bundle for computer technology relates to
research and inquiry.
The first point of my thesis, then, is that the meanings for computer technology in
Bangalore’s elementary schools are malleable. Across the case studies, there was not one exact

165

meaning for computer technology that all four schools shared in common. Even in the schools
that had a relationship with each other, like Aadu International and Komu Community, and were
separated by less than kilometer’s distance, the meanings for computer technology were different.
Rather, each school’s social groups assigned meaning to computers in ways that connected with
the school’s unique curricular emphases. While malleability is a helpful starting point for
analyzing how and why computer technology is socially constructed, it is important to note that
malleability is not boundless. Indeed, there are constraints to malleability’s “bundles of
meaning.” In Table 7’s description of weekly schedules, the case of Jinka Public provides an
example of constraints. Since the school has only one laptop, there is a resource constraint.
There are only a certain number of students who can use the laptop at one time. There are also
constraints related to laptop’s hardware, which is not as accessible in the students’ native
language (or script). These constraints shape the meanings and uses for computer technology.
Paradox of malleability. Although computer technology’s malleability offers many
“bundles of meaning,” the paradox of malleability is that when social groups, in a specific setting,
interact they narrow in one or two meaning bundles so that a computer technology’s meaning
becomes quite fixed. SCOT theorists identify the paradox of malleability as how computer
technology’s meaning goes from malleability to obduracy (Bijker, 1995). Obduracy, SCOT
theorists explain, is the way in which a meaning for computer technology becomes so fixed (or
hardened) that the meaning shapes the network of practices, rhetoric, and beliefs among social
groups in specific setting (Bijker, Hughes, & Pinch, 1989). To answer the dissertation’s primary
research question, in this section I focus on describing and comparing how computer technology
was social constructed across the four schools. I examine three themes that capture the obduracy

166

of meaning for computer technology within each case study school. The three themes are: (1)
skill development, (2) technological artifacts, and (3) the educators’ notions of confidence.
Skill development. In all four case study schools there was an agreement that computer
technology was useful for developing skills, but each school’s educators identified a different set
of skills. In each case study chapter, I presented two “snapshots” of the predominant ways that
the students used their school’s computer technology. The snapshots captured the curriculum-inuse and the skills that each school’s educators believed were important. The educators
specifically referenced these skills in their interviews. On Table 6, I put quotes around the
phrases that the educators repeatedly used to define computer technology skills. At Jinka Public,
the educators talked about their students using the school’s laptop to develop “basic skills.” At
Komu Community, “life skills” were the focus. At Bara National, the computer science teachers
emphasized “programming skills;” whereas at Aadu International, “research skills” were stressed.
A closer examination of these phrases reveals the obduracy of interpretations for
computer technology at each school. Indeed, factors like the school’s social context, the school’s
SES, and the educators’ pedagogical beliefs about computer technology all reinforced the
obduracy that the different skill sets represented. For example, at Jinka Public School, the
village school located in the rural part of Bangalore, the educators discussed the importance of
students developing “basic skills” on the school’s laptop. For the Jinka Public educators, basic
skills meant their students would learn how to type in English. The fifth grade teachers at Jinka
Public explained how typing on the laptop helped students practice English vocabulary. Mr.
Amit, the CEO of the SSA Foundation that donated the school’s laptop, stated it this way, “The
laptop is useful for building basic skills in English.” Why basic skills in English? Both the
students and teachers at Jinka Public explained that learning English was the key to “a better

167

life” and more opportunity. The laptop’s meaning became fixed or obdurate on helping student
gain basic skill (i.e., typing English vocabulary) to gain access to a better life.
A somewhat similar narrative unfolded at Komu Community; however, the Komu
Community educators talked about the students developing “life skills.” Like the Jinka Public
students, the Komu Community students represent India’s lower SES. However, Komu
Community had laptops for all its students so it was not constrained by a lack of resources like
Jinka Public. The Komu Community’s administrators believed that the laptops help develop
“life skills.” They identified life skills as: (a) operating a computer, (b) searching for
information with a computer, and (c) presenting information in English with the aid of a
computer. The Komu Community teachers indentified that life skills included knowing how to
use software programs like Microsoft Word, Microsoft PowerPoint, and how to use Google to
find information. Ms. Mamita, the school’s fifth grade teacher, explained how such skills made
the children “ready for the future.” At Komu Community, the educators connected life skills to
the school’s vision of empowering student with English proficiency and technical capabilities.
Such skills would, as Mr. Chitesh, the school’s principal, stated, “Insure the students a ticket to a
good job and a quality life.” Thus, preparing the students to become English proficient and
skilled at operating computer technology defined the obduracy of the Komu Community laptops.
At Bara National, there was also a focus on skill development for the future. Yet, unlike
the Komu Community, the Bara National computer science teachers pinpointed that the future,
for most of the Bara National students, would be in software engineering or computer
programming: the kind of middle class job that many of the students’ parents also made a career
of in Bangalore’s computer technology industry. The obduracy of meaning for the Bara National
computer technology was fixed on reproducing “programming skills.” Ms. Janisha, the lead

168

computer science teacher, explained these skills the following way, “Our curriculum is a journey
of learning programming skills on the computer. At the younger level, this means learning to use
the computer to solve simple problems and learning to think logically.” Why programming
skills? Again, Ms. Janisha summed it up best by explaining how 80% of the Bara National
graduates go into a computer programming field, so the curriculum is designed around
programming skills in order to prepare the students for their future work as programmers.
While Komu Community and Bara National focused on developing skills for future jobs
and careers, skill development at Aadu International focused on skills that students would use in
their schoolwork. The Aadu International teachers stressed the importance of using the school’s
computer technology for “research skills.” They explained how “research skills” helped the
Aadu International students successfully navigate the school’s IB curriculum. Mr. Bibin, one of
the Aadu International fifth grade homeroom teachers, explained that, “Research skills are part
of idea ownership. We want our students to formulate their own ideas in their inquiries. And we
also expect them to cite where their ideas came from by giving proper given proper credit to
sources.” The teachers’ focus on developing research skills was not only connected to the IB
curriculum, it was also part of the notion of owning ideas. For Aadu International students, most
of whom were upper SES, ownership was likely to be a familiar concept. Whether it was
intellectual property or businesses, many of their parents were owners of brands and ideas. The
Aadu International teachers framed research skills around idea ownership as one demarcation of
the obduracy of the school’s computer technology.
Artifacts. Technological artifacts reflected each school’s different emphases on skill
development. The artifacts provide further evidence for the paradox of malleability. I will
explain by examining word processing software artifacts. The Jinka Public students used a

169

program called Writer, an Open Office version of Microsoft Word. In keeping with the school’s
focus on developing “basic skills,” the Jinka Public students used Writer primarily for listing
English vocabulary words. Specifically, the students created two columns and typed in English
antonyms on either side of the column. The Komu Community students used Microsoft Word
for their word processor. The students’ word processing activity involved typing in the
definitions to globish words, which are commonly used words in the English language. Like
Jinka Public, this exercise provided the Komu Community students practice with typing in
English. However, in keeping with the school’s emphasis on “life skills,” the Komu Community
students went beyond listing words, they also defined each globish word and created a sentence
with each word.
The Bara National students also used Microsoft Word in their computer science time.
Their purpose for using Microsoft Word was not for the purpose of learning English, but, instead,
they developed their “programming skills” by systematically practicing Word’s formatting
applications. Specifically, the Bara National students changed the font size and color of text,
organized text using bullet points and numbered lists, and used word art within a textbox. These
were some of the Word formatting skills that were formally assessed by the Bara National
computer science teachers. Aadu International students used Microsoft Word primarily for essay
writing. As part of their Unit of Inquiry, students would type essays about questions that they
explored in their research. The Aadu International fifth grade teachers explained to the students
how the essays reflected the synthesis component of the research cycle. Microsoft Word was a
tool to assist the Aadu International students in composing and presenting their synthesis of
research. The essay was the outcome of their “research skills.”

170

These brief descriptions of word processing artifacts illustrate that while all fifth grade
students across the four schools used word processing software their purposes for doing so were
quite different. For example, at Jinka Public and Komu Community, the students used the word
processing software to practice English. While the Komu Community English language
activities provided a deeper context for understanding English vocabulary, both schools engaged
their students in activities that would increase their exposure to English language. Might one
observe Bara National students doing similar English language activities on their school’s
computer technology? No, not at all, the Bara National children knew conversational English;
the medium of their instruction was English, so the Bara National students would consider any
computer-based, English language activities dull and pointless. The Bara National students’
purpose for word processing was to build their computer programming skill set. The computer
science teachers sequenced the formatting activities in order to, as Ms. Vitna put it, “show the
computer’s logic and have the children format in steps because that is what computer
programmers do.” While at Aadu International, the purpose for word processing was to
synthesize and present research. The essay was the product of “research skills” and provided a
professional way for the students to present and own their ideas.
Notions of confidence. Confidence was a word that all the schools’ educators referenced
and repeated in their individual interviews. Across schools, I found that words and phrases
associated with confidence kept being repeated. For example, the educators talked about the
importance of students “feeling confident,” “not feeling afraid to touch the computer,” and “not
having any doubts about operating the laptops.” Yet, while the educators might have shared a
similar language for expressing the purposes of computer technology, their notions for a word,
like confidence, were quite different school by school. The Jinka Public educators talked about

171

confidence in two ways. First, confidence meant overcoming the fear of touching the school’s
laptop. While this might seem trivial, it was quite important to the Jinka Public teachers and to
Mr. Amit, the SSA Foundation’s CEO. The Jinka Public educators explained how their students
were very afraid to touch the school’s laptop because they thought they might break it. To help
the students overcome this fear, Mr. Amit suggested that the teachers assign one student as the
laptop magu or laptop captain to take care of the laptop. Mr. Amit’s rationale was that once the
other Jinka Public students saw the laptop in the hands of a fellow student that would help to
ease any feelings of anxiety about damaging the laptop. In keeping with theme of obduracy of
computer technology at Jinka Public, the Jinka Public educators also shared how the laptop
helped the students develop confidence in their English language comprehension. Rather than
gaining confidence through overcoming a fear, this second notion of confidence was more about
the students expanding their English language vocabulary.
The Komu Community educators shared similar interpretations about confidence. For
example, the Komu Community administrators explained how confidence meant “taking the fear
of technology off the child’s mind.” This was similar to the Jinka Public notion of overcoming
fears as a source of confidence. However, the Komu Community administrators would use the
word “risk-takers” to describe how the Komu Community students were no longer afraid of the
technology and, in fact, were willing to take risks. One of the risks the students took was giving
presentations in English. The Komu Community teachers explained how such risks were the
way the students “gained confidence as they practice their English in front of an audience.”
While both the Jinka Public and Komu Community educators shared similar notions of
confidence, they interpreted confidence according to a particular understanding about their
students’ English language development. The Jinka Public educators’ interpretation of

172

confidence was at an introductory level of English where students practiced and replicated
English vocabulary words. However, the interpretation at Komu Community was a more
advanced level of English where students practice using English language through presentation
and typing English words in original sentences.
The Bara National computer science teachers shared the notion of confidence as
overcoming fears. This was captured by Ms. Sanchana, a fifth grade computer science teacher,
who stated, “I believe that children should not be scared to use the computer. We teach them
confidence. The child should see that using a computer is the same as using his fingers to learn.”
Yet, in keeping with their meaning obduracy for computer technology, the Bara National
computer science teachers interpreted confidence with developing “programming skills”
necessary for operating all the computer’s functions. This is what Ms. Vitna meant when she
asserted that, “We teach the students to use the whole keyboard and all the keyboard commands,
so that they will not have any doubts about the computer.” For the Bara National computer
science teachers, “not having any doubts” meant that their students understood the computer’s
logic and were deft at using all parts of a keyboard since these were essential skills for coding
and programming software.
In contrast to the other schools, the Aadu International educators spoke the least about the
purpose of technology for developing students’ confidence. They communicated their notion
about confidence as a concern about their students “over-confidence” with computer technology.
For example, Mr. Bibin explained, “My students think that they know how to do everything with
a computer. Sometimes I worry that they have too much confidence.” However, almost
immediately after raising the concern about over-confidence, Mr. Bibin shared an example of
observing an Aadu International student who was attempting to add a transition to text on a

173

PowerPoint presentation. While practicing the presentation, the student realized that the
transition was not working. Rather than giving up or go to Mr. Bibin for help; this student
corrected the mistake by using the PowerPoint help feature. Mr. Bibin shared how this was
example of confidence as “self-correction” by “knowing when a mistake has been made.” Such
confidence was not about being skilled as much as it was about habits of self-reliance and
independent thinking.
Discussion. In this section, I examined and compared three themes that shed light on the
obduracy of meaning about computer technology in each case study school. The purpose was to
show evidence for the second statement in my thesis that within each school the meanings for
computer technology became fixed or obdurate in relationship to factors like the curriculum,
pedagogical practices, the school’s ethos, and the socio-economic status (SES) of the student
body. At the section’s beginning, I described obduracy as part of the paradox of malleability,
which is what happens when a computer technology become contextualized—the technology’s
purposes and meanings go from being malleable to being fixed or obdurate. Thus, a
technology’s purposes and meanings become shaped, in part, by the setting where the technology
is situated.
As I illustrated in the dissertation’s four case study chapters, each school’s setting was
unique. For example, each school served a different population of students and they had
different curricula and different slogans that represented their school’s ethos. But the schools
also shared similarities. The fifth grade students at all four schools created artifacts using word
processing software and their educators all shared interpretations that computer technology was
important for building confidence and developing skills. However, as I analyzed these
similarities, there were striking differences that emerged from case to case. So, for example,

174

while the students at Komu Community and Aadu International both used Microsoft Word to
create word processor artifacts, the artifacts served different purposes and helped the students
develop different skills. At Komu Community, artifacts were part of developing life skills, like
English proficiency, whereas at Aadu International, the artifacts were for “research skills.” At
Jinka Public, as an example, the student body’s lower SES status and village location seemed to
be social factors that influenced the fixed interpretation, among the school’s educators and
students, that the laptop should be used by the students to gain basic skills in English.
Conversely, the social factors at Bara National were representative of a middle class status in
urban Bangalore. As such, the Bara National’s social factors seemed to influence the
interpretation that the school’s computer technology should be used for developing logic and
programming skills. The obduracy of meaning for computer technology in Bangalore’s
elementary schools was shaped, in part, by the social factors that encompass a school’s social
context. However, there is more to each school’s story than just social factors, there is also the
interaction among social groups.
Stabilization and accessory social groups. The obduracy of a computer technology’s
meaning relates to a variety of social factors at each school, but it also is a reflection of the
interactions among social groups. In this section, I address the complexity across cases by
discussing the interactions among social groups that are part of what SCOT refers to as
stabilization. Where malleability and obduracy have to do with a technology’s interpretative
flexibility in relationship to social factors, stabilization captures the negotiation process between
social groups. Stabilization provides insight into the social groups’ power dynamics. In
particular, stabilization uncovers how power is negotiated among the social groups in a particular

175

context. Stabilization also helps shed light on why certain meanings for computer technology
are agreed upon by social groups.
For example, Jinka Public School’s social groups agreed that their laptop’s primary
purpose was for the students to build their English vocabulary. This purpose was shaped by and
negotiated, in part, as a response to Jinka Public’s social context, which is defined by the
students’ lower SES. Social mobility was the Jinka Public educators’ most common rationale for
why their students should use the school’s laptop to learn English vocabulary. The educators
often repeated that the laptop provided their students more opportunity for, as the educators put it,
“a better life.” The opportunity for a better life is part of the answer to the question of why
computer technology is socially constructed the way it is at Jinka Public School.
Throughout the dissertation’s case study chapters, I cultivated a theoretical basis for the
role of accessory social groups in stabilizing the meanings for computer technology in schools.
As a reminder, I define an accessory social group as a group of actors who have a high level of
influence in shaping the meanings of a technology, but have a low level of inclusion in actually
using the technology within the specific setting under study. I return to the Jinka Public example
to help explain. The SSA Foundation was the non-governmental organization (NGO) that
donated the laptop to Jinka Public School. As an accessory social group, the SSA Foundation
was not involved in the day-to-day uses for the Jinka Public laptop, but it still maintained a high
degree of influence related to the laptop’s meaning as a tool for developing basic skills in
English. The concept of accessory social group is an original and new contribution to SCOT
theory; based upon my analyses of the data, using a grounded theory approach (Glaser & Strauss,
1967), I developed the notion of an accessory group to represent social groups that have a great
deal of power and influence in a computer technology’s social construction.

176

To structure this section’s analysis, I discuss two themes that emerged across the cases in
relationship to accessory social groups. First, accessory social groups, as represented by an
organizational vision, had a great deal of influence in the lower SES schools, like Jinka Public
and Komu Community. Second, accessory social groups, as represented by a set curriculum, had
a higher degree of influence in the higher SES schools, like Bara National and Aadu
International. I organize the rest of the section with paraphrased sub-headers for each theme. I
start with the schools represented by an “organizational vision” and then move to a discussion of
the stabilization in the “set curriculum” schools.
Organizational vision. The accessory social groups at Jinka Public and Komu
Community dominated the stabilization of each school’s computer technology through their
organizational vision. Dominated is the terminology that SCOT theorist use to explain the power
relationship among social groups as they interact and negotiate a computer technology’s meaning.
The SSA Foundation is the NGO donor organization that supplied Jinka Public with their laptop.
As an accessory social group, the SSA Foundation also provided the vision for how the Jinka
Public students should use the laptop. Their vision was that the students would maintain the
laptop in order to spark their curiosity in technology and English. The SSA Foundation
envisioned that the children would use the laptop to learn basic computer skills and English
vocabulary. Finally, the SSA Foundation believed that the students’ desire to learn subject
matter, like English, increased when they were given stewardship for the laptop and allowed to
plan out their learning experiences with the laptop.
At Komu Community, stabilization was dominated by the school’s administrators, who
were also an example of an accessory social group. The administrators’ vision was that the
Komu Community students would use the school’s laptops to develop their English language

177

proficiency and their ability to operate computer applications. Both of these components or
skills were included in Komu Community’s official vision statement. Additionally, the
administrators stated that both skills were essential parts of delivering “a high quality education”
to all the Komu Community students. Since the administrators helped to train the school’s
novice teachers, their vision for the Komu Community laptops was dominant.
Although the SSA Foundation and the Komu Community administrators were not
directly included in the daily classroom uses of computer technology, their organizational vision
dominated because of their power. The locus of SSA Foundation’s power was centered in their
provision of the laptop and their communication of the way they believed the laptop should
primarily be used as device for the students. The Komu Community administrators’ power laid
in their teacher training and continual communication for the pedagogical uses of the school’s
laptops. SCOT theory follows Anthony Giddens (1979) notions that power is a relational
concept that has a “transformative capacity to harness the agency of others” (p. 93). The notion
of power having a transformative capacity is an interesting one when applied to schools.
Transformative capacity seems to be in contradiction with Bourdieu and Passeron’s (1990)
assertions about the reproductive capacity of power in school organizations, where schools often
reproduce existing norms and societal structures. In the cases of Jinka Public and Komu
Community, though, the accessory social groups maintained an organizational vision that the
students’ uses for computer technology would be more transformational than reproductive. Why
was that?
Both Jinka Public and Komu Community serve low SES village students. The accessory
social group at each school has an organizational vision that seeks to provide more opportunities
for the students. For example, the SSA Foundation’s CEO, Mr. Amit, talked about how the

178

laptop will “help prepare the Jinka Public students for a better future.” The Komu Community
administrators discussed how the laptops “empowered students with an education for life.”
Both accessory social groups also identified the importance of using computer technology to
assist with learning English. So within the organizational vision of the SSA Foundation and
Komu Community administrators, both believe that the uses for computer technology are part of
transforming the lives of village students.
As I discussed in the Jinka Public and Komu Community case study chapters, I found it
interesting that both accessory social groups referenced Dr. Sugata Mitra’s (2001) “Hole in the
Wall” project when discussing their beliefs about how students should use computer technology.
Mr. Amit explained how Mitra’s work informed the SSA Foundation’s vision about letting the
students’ natural curiosity about computer technology shape how they use computer technology.
Thus, a teacher’s involvement should be at a minimum when it comes to computer technology.
The Komu Community administrators also discussed how Mitra’s scholarship inspired the
school’s vision about how the students’ curiosity and interest in their laptops motivates them to
want to learn more English to continue to operate their laptops. Both accessory social groups’
organizational vision connected with Mitra’s notions about minimally invasive education that
allowed students the freedom to explore computer technology.
SCOT theory asserts that power in relationship to a technology’s stabilization can be
constraining and freeing. The organizational visions of the SSA Foundation and the Komu
Community administrators does both. Their vision constrains the traditional Indian teacher as
the sole transmitter of knowledge in favor of giving the students the autonomy to explore and use
computer technology in ways they find interesting. Granted, both accessory social groups still
guide the English language foci for the computer technology. Yet, their emphasis on English is

179

also in service to transforming the lives of the village students. Thus, in the cases of Jinka Public
and Komu Community, the accessory social groups exercised their power to stabilize the
meaning for each school’s computer technology through an organizational vision meant to
empower students with technology and English language skills.
Set curriculum. Accessory social groups were also part of the stabilization of meaning at
the study’s higher SES schools: Bara National and Aadu International. However, these
accessory social groups’ power was represented in each school’s curricula rather than in an
organizational vision. In their case study chapters, I discussed how Bara National’s and Aadu
International’s curriculum shaped and stabilized the student uses of computer technology. At
Bara National, I identified two accessory social groups connected with the school’s computer
science curriculum. The first accessory social group was the Bara Computer Science Team that
wrote the computer science curriculum for all of the schools affiliated with Bara National. The
second accessory socials group was the Bara National administration who officially approved
and legitimized the school’s computer science curriculum. At Aadu International, the accessory
social group was the International Baccalaureate curriculum board, which provided the
guidelines for what the Aadu International teachers should teach and how they should teach.
As I examine the role of each school’s accessory social groups, I start with an important
distinction related to each school’s rhetoric about computer technology. Bara National, the
middle SES school, the educators employed the term “computer science” to refer to its computer
related classes. However, at Aadu International, the upper SES school, the teachers specifically
referred to the school’s computer technology as “ICT” and identified any computer related
classes as “ICT time” or the “ICT class.” This rhetoric was also represented by the differences in
each school’s computer related curricula. The Bara National computer science curriculum was

180

didactic and highly structured. Aadu International’s ICT class curriculum was inquiry driven
and highly integrated. Both curricula, though, focused on a set of learning goals that the students
should develop with the aid of computer technology. However, these learning goals were
completely different.
The Bara National computer science teaching team, which included ten teachers
altogether (five computer science teachers from Bara National and five other computer science
teachers from two nearby “sister” schools), focused the school’s computer science curriculum on
programming skills. In the Bara National case study chapter, I referred to this accessory social
group as the Bara Computer Science Team. The Bara Computer Science Team designed the
scope and sequence of computer science curriculum and wrote all the curriculum notebooks from
first grade through twelfth grade for the three schools affiliated with Bara. The students used
these notebooks like a textbook. The notebooks detailed the specific computer science skills (i.e.,
the learning goals) that the Bara Computer Science Team expected each grade level to master.
The notebooks also explained the purposes for all the computer applications that the Bara
National students would learn. For example, the purpose statement on the first page of the fifth
grader’s Microsoft Word notebook explained that, “Word processing is one of the most
important activities carried out in a workplace. You use word processing for the preparation and
presentation of documents.”
The two Bara National fifth grade computer science teachers did not veer from this
computer science curriculum at all. These computer science teachers also discussed how “Sir”
(the Bara National CEO) reviewed and approved the computer science curriculum. There was an
expectation by “Sir” and the rest of the school’s administration that the teachers would cover the
entire curriculum over the academic year. Thus, both the Bara Computer Science Team and the

181

school’s administration were accessory social groups as they wielded a high degree of influence
regarding the meanings for Bara National’s computer technology, but were not necessarily
included in the daily classroom uses for the computer technology.
The International Baccalaureate (IB) Organization stabilized the meaning for the Aadu
International computer technology through the IB curriculum. Like I explained in Chapter 6, the
IB curriculum is an extension of the IB Organization. However, unlike Bara National, which had
a very hierarchical structure of stabilization, the IB curriculum offered an egalitarian approach
that ceded power to the Aadu International students to used ICT as an inquiry tool. The ICT
learning experiences were also contextually bound and integrated within Units of Inquiry. The
IB curriculum model emphasized how students should use ICT for their research and
presentation of ideas they developed throughout a unit. Rather than a focus on computer related
skills, the IB curriculum focused on how ICT helped students develop the competencies of an
“IB Learner,” which included the competencies like knowing how to be a: balanced thinker,
ethical inquirer, leader, and a risk taker.
Thus, the IB curriculum model was an accessory social group that stabilized the
meanings for ICT by fostering a consensus among the Aadu International School teachers and
students about ICT’s purposes. The students used the school’s ICT to support their research and
inquiries of the IB curriculum. The Aadu International teachers gave the fifth grade students
autonomy in their research and inquiry. However, the teachers set the parameters for this
autonomy by giving students a range of choices for their unit projects. These choices steered the
ways that Aadu International students chose to use the school’s ICT (i.e., choices include
creating PowerPoint presentations for unit projects and writing essays). This kind of learning
model was established through IB curriculum.

182

While there were differences among the accessory social groups at Bara National and
Aadu International, each accessory social group’s power was grounded in the curriculum. At
Bara National, the computer science curriculum was written by the Bara Computer Science
Team, all of whom had at least a Bachelor’s degree in computer science. The team designed the
curriculum around skills that would prepare their graduates for jobs as software engineers and
computer programmers. Thus, the Bara Computer Science Team exercised their power by
designing a set curriculum that reproduced the knowledge and computer skills necessary for
computer programming (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990). Furthermore, the Bara computer science
curriculum was appraised by the school’s administration, including the CEO of all Bara schools.
With “Sir’s” (which is how the computer science teachers referred to the CEO) approval, the
computer science curriculum gained legitimacy among the Bara National students, teachers, and
parents. The Aadu International students and teachers ICT use was also guided by a set
curriculum given by the IB Organization. However, the IB curriculum focused more on
developing learning competencies (e.g., being ethical inquirers) rather than on programming
skills. Thus, the IB curriculum at Aadu International exercised their power to stabilize an
integrated meaning for the school’s ICT with an emphasis on learning competencies. In contrast,
the accessory social groups at Bara National were connected with the school’s computer science
curriculum and exercised their power to stabilize the meanings for the school’s computer
technology through a skills based curriculum.
Discussion. Throughout the section I examined how accessory social groups exercised
their power either through an organizational vision or through a curriculum to stabilize each
school’s meanings for computer technology. I also analyzed why certain meanings for computer
technology were stabilized. As part of this analysis, I identified the relationship between the

183

school’s predominant SES and the stabilization process. However, there is more to stabilization
than just a story of social-economic reductionism; the stabilization of computer technology
shows interrelationship of obduracy, power, and SES. Stabilization has more to do with vision
statements and curriculum than solely with socio-economic structures.
Jinka Public and Komu Community, as examples, were both lower SES schools while
their accessory social groups were representative of India’s middle SES. In both schools, these
accessory social groups’ organizational vision dominated the meanings for the computer
technology. The SSA Foundation and Komu Community administrators shared a similar vision
to transform and empower the lower SES students with technology and English language.
However, if this organizational vision was just reduced to SES, was it the students’ lower SES
status that shaped the vision or was the accessory social groups’ own middle class background
more influential in shaping their organizational vision? Such a conundrum should refute notions
or tendencies to reduce technology’s social construction to just a response to SES.
While SES was an intentional part of the study’s design and selection criteria, the
students’ nor the accessory social groups’ SES level does not tell the whole story. If SES did,
then one would not expect the highest SES class students (i.e., Aadu International) and the
lowest SES class students (i.e., Jinka Public) to share some findings in common. Two findings
existed. The first finding was that the fifth graders, at both schools, were given the most amount
of autonomy related to how they could use their school’s computer technology. While their
purposes for use were different, the Aadu International students and the Jinka Public students
were allowed the most choice. Interestingly, the rationale for this choice was similar as well. At
Aadu International, the IB curriculum model, which is based in inquiry, provided the rationale
for student autonomy with computer technology. At Jinka Public, the SSA Foundation’s

184

organization vision, which was partly based on Deweyian notions that children should plan their
own programs for using computer technology, provided the rationale the Jinka Public students’
autonomy with the school’s sole laptop. The second finding had to do with resources and the
computer hardware. At both schools, Aadu International and Jinka Public, there were not
enough laptops or computer technology for every student. So students had to negotiate a
schedule to share the school’s computer technology.
In sum, SES is a social factor that is a part of the stabilization of computer technology in
schools, but SES does not govern the entirety of a computer technology’s social construction.
Rather, computer technology’s social construction in schools is a reflection of many social
factors that includes the interactions among accessory social groups and relevant social groups.
Indeed, the influence of accessory social groups, through their through organizational visions and
set curriculums, stabilized and often dominated the meaning making for each school’s computer
technology.
The wider sociotechnical context. Up to this point in the chapter’s “hourglass analysis”
of cross-case themes, I have described computer technology’s malleability related to the wider
context of Bangalore’s elementary schools. I discussed how malleability is one way of
explaining the multitude of meanings (i.e., the sum of all social groups’ interpretative flexibility)
for computer technology. Within the case studies, I examined obduracy, which is when a certain
unitary meaning for computer technology becomes fixed in relationship to social factors. In the
previous section, I identified each school’s accessory social groups and discussed their role in
stabilizing the meanings for computer technology either through their organizational vision or
their set curriculum. Now, in this final section, I compare each school’s technological frame in
relationship to the wider sociotechnical context. Specifically, I discuss the final statement in the

185

chapter’s thesis, which is: Stabilization occurs within a school’s technological frame; and each
school’s technological frame is a reflection of Bangalore’s wider sociotechnical context.
Bijker (2010) asserts that the technological frame allows one to explain the stabilization
process in deeper contextual ways through an inquiry about why a computer technology’s social
construction follows a certain way. SCOT explains that the technological frame is the
combination of the social factors and the interactions among social groups in specific settings.
The technological frame shapes the social groups’ meanings for computer technology and is
“built up when interaction ‘around’ the computer technology begins” (p. 69). On a sociological
level, the concept of technological frame is rooted, in part, to symbolic interactionism (Bijker,
1995; 2001; 2010). Indeed, SCOT reflects Blumer’s (1969) assertion that: (1) People act toward
things, like laptops or computers, based on the meanings they assign to those things; (2) People
derive the meanings for things, like a laptops, based on their interactions with others; and, (3)
People use an interpretative process to negotiate the meanings for things.
If I were to interpret the findings from a symbolic interactionism perspective, each
school’s technological frame would be about the social groups’ interactions and how those
interactions narrowed in on a symbolic meaning for school’s computer technology. For example,
from a symbolic interactionist perspective, the Jinka Public School’s sole laptop would be the
symbol for a better life. At Komu Community, the school’s one to one laptop program could be
a symbol of empowerment or equal opportunity. At Bara National, the school’s computer lab
might stand as a symbol for logic. At Aadu International, the school’s computer technology
might be a symbol of ownership. This, again, is from a symbolic interactionist perspective as a
sociological theory.

186

Yet, SCOT is more than just a sociological theory. Rather, SCOT attempts to wed
sociological theory with technological theory (e.g., Hughes, 1983). Bijker (1995) identifies this
union as the “sociotechnical” part of SCOT theory. The sociotechnical represents a wider
societal context and includes the political and economic dimensions of the social shaping of
technology. Bijker (1995) uses the example of a light bulb to explain the sociotechnical, “The
‘stuff’ of a technological invention like a florescent light bulb was economics and politics as
much as electricity and fluorescence. This ‘stuff’ is the sociotechnical of technology” (p. 273).
In many SCOT studies, the sociotechnical gets overlooked or dismissed for technological
minutiae; however, examining the wider sociotechnical context provides insights about the
relationship of technology’s social construction to the political and economic dimensions of a
society (Bijker, 2010). In the rest of this section, I investigate the wider sociotechnical context
of Bangalore, India, through an examination of each school’s technological frame.
Now where to begin with such an examination? SCOT theorists suggest starting with
two promising units of analysis for the investigation and comparison of the sociotechnical within
technological frames: artifacts and future uses. Artifacts are meaning bundles; artifacts illustrate
the “hardened networks of practice around a technology” (Bijker, 2010, p. 282). An analysis of
artifacts reveals the sociotechnical. Put more simply, “artifacts have politics” (Winner, 1980, p.
122). Here politics means power and the negotiation of power that takes place among social
groups of people. So another way to interpret the meaning of artifacts is through an explanation
of artifacts as part of the way to secure power in a society. Using my earlier analysis of artifacts
from this chapter as examples, I extrapolate that the skill set represented within each school’s
word processing artifact shows an understanding of a way to secure power, even if it is just a
small degree. A pathway to power: at Jinka Public is through “basic skills” like English

187

vocabulary and typing; at Komu Community it is through “life skills” like English proficiency
and presentation; at Bara National the power pathway is via “programming skills” for
engineering software; and at Aadu International it is through “research skills” for idea ownership.
Artifacts become declarations of power represented in the exercise of these skills. The artifacts
shed light on the importance of English language, software engineering, and idea ownership to
Bangalore’s wider sociotechnical context.
Future uses for computer technology is another unit of sociotechnical analysis. Indeed,
SCOT argues that an analysis of the sociotechnical includes an investigation into how
technology guides future uses (Bijker, 2010). Looking to the future means examining what
social groups believed that computer technology equips them to do. In the rest of this section, I
compare and discuss the theme that all the social groups in this study interpreted computer
technology as a primary means for future possibilities.
Educators’ notions of future possibilities. Across the schools, the educators shared a
similar interpretation that computer technology was a key part of their students’ future
opportunities. The Jinka Public teachers explained how the school’s sole laptop would make
their students lives “better” in the immediate future and distant future. To their immediate future,
the teachers thought that Jinka Public students would be better prepared for going into the
secondary schools where there were computer labs. For the distant future, the teachers identified
the affordances that the laptop represented in learning English and employment. Mr. Pahal, the
school’s language teacher, put it this way, “The laptop gives the children more confidence in
their English to get a job in Bangalore.” The Komu Community teachers expressed a similar
sentiment. Ms. Eshani, the lead ICT teacher, stated it this way, “Computer technology helps
their future. They are still learning, but the computer is a help because they will need to know

188

how to use the computer when they go to Bangalore for a good job.” The sociotechnical
emerged in the two teachers responses. Both teachers focused on the future employment
opportunities, especially in Bangalore, that computer technology represents. Mr. Pahar also
associated a job in Bangalore with confidence in speaking the English language. Like the skills
that the Jinka Public and Komu Community
The Bara National teachers connected future opportunities with understanding the logic
of tools rather than focusing solely on a career. For example, Ms. Sanchana explained that, “The
future is about enhanced appliances. We now have computers, but in the future it could be
different appliances. When the students understand the logic of enhanced appliances, they can
use any appliance whether now or in the future.” The Aadu International teachers also shared a
similar interpretation. Ms. Darsha, the lead fifth grade teacher at Aadu International, explained
the connection to the future in this way, “The children are prepared to create and present with the
computer. This is also preparation for their future career. I think that the computer will be
indispensible to them in the future.” Notions about the sociotechnical also emerged from the
Bara National and Aadu International educators’ responses. However, these notions had more to
do with the importance of understanding computer technology as a tool. For example, Ms.
Sanchana’s response highlighted the importance of understanding the logic of technology
whereas Ms. Darsha emphasized the importance of using computer technology to create and
present. Understanding the logic of computer technology and knowing how to create with
computer technology are two knowledge areas that often get rewarded in Bangalore.
Although teachers at all four schools indicated that computer technology skills was
critical for future career opportunities, those career opportunities differed by school. In these
examples, the sociotechnical is reflected in the teachers’ perceptions of the relationship between

189

computer technology and future opportunity. On the question’s surface, the educators agreed
that computer technology is part of preparing students for a future career. As soon as the
teachers start to explain, the different interpretations and technological frames emerge. The
Jinka Public teachers identify the relationship between computer technology and future
possibilities with: building confidence, English language, Bangalore, and a job. The Komu
Community teacher also associates the relationship between computer technology and a future
career with Bangalore and getting a good job. The Bara National teacher interprets the
relationship as something akin to logic readiness. The Aadu International teacher understands
that creating and presenting are part of the relationship between computer technology and a
future career.
Students’ notions of future possibilities. The students across schools shared their
interpretations about the future possibilities because of computer technology. The students’
notions of future possibilities were different across schools. These differences shed light on the
intricacies that part of the wider sociotechnical context. All the students shared a positive reply
to my student focus groups question about whether or not computer technology will help them in
the future. Students started their response with an enthusiastic “yes” or “of course!” However,
the differences in their perceptions of the future emerged as the students explained why they
believed that computer technology prepares them for the future.
The Jinka Public students responded with references to increased opportunities and social
mobility. For example one Jinka Public fifth grade student explained, “The laptop is how you
[they were speaking to me] were able to come to our country, so in the same way, we learn the
laptop to be able to go to your country [the United States].” In this explanation the Jinka Public
student communicated the future possibilities that computer technology offered. The students

190

also expressed a motivation to learn how to use the laptop because of a future opportunity it
could afford them. While the these opportunities included the aspiration of social mobility,
including travel to the United States, the Jinka Public students were vague about the details of
what that kind of social mobility required.
In their explanations for how computer technology prepares them for the future, the
Komu Community students also resonated with the theme of social mobility, but the Komu
Community students were more specific about the details. For example, a fifth grade girl,
responded to the question of the relationship between the school’s computer technology and her
future by sharing, “Sir, someday I will speak better English. Then I will be a ‘big boss’ and use
the computer in a ‘big boss’ office.” I found out from the Komu Community teachers that ‘big
boss’ meant something like a mid-level manager in a corporate office. The Komu Community
students adopted the term ‘big boss’ from a popular Indian television series. The girl response
included an association with better English and working as a big boss. She also communicated
that she would continue to use a computer in the big boss office. This Komu Community fifth
grader’s explanation was shared by many of her class mates; a job like a ‘big boss’ required
better English and knowing how to use a computer.
In general, the Bara National student focus group responses to my interview questions
were straightforward and pithy. Their responses were more about future security than social
mobility. For example, a Bara National fifth grade boy explained that computer technology will
benefit him in the future because, “When a boss gives me a job to do on the computer, I will
know how to do it.” A Bara National fifth grade girl agreed with the boy and added that, “When
I join a company later in life, I will know how to do my work projects fast and I will be able to
enjoy work projects because I will know all about how the computer works.” Another fifth

191

grade boy had this to share, “In the future, if you don’t know Word or PowerPoint then you will
be stuck. If a boss gives you a project or a presentation to prepare, knowing Word and
PowerPoint will help you be able to complete it.”
During the student focus interview, I was struck by how often the Bara National students
made reference to “work projects” and “bosses assigning work.” In their responses, the Bara
National students recognized their role in the larger sociotechnical context would be as highly
skilled workers with knowledge of computer systems. Conversely, the students did not identify
themselves as a leader, a future boss, or a CEO. Rather, many of the students were already
consigned to a future of being professional, middle class workers, like computer programmers
and software designers. They would join a company, work fast and efficiently, and be expected
to complete work projects that would require knowing “all the parts of a computer.”
The Aadu International student focus group responses were almost in direct contrast with
what the Bara National students shared. When I asked the Aadu International students to explain
why they believed they were being prepared for the future because of the school’s computer
technology, a fifth grade boy immediately responded with, “When I grow up I will have my own
company, computer technology will help people learn about my company. Also, I will need to
know how to continue to use the computer to communicate to my workers.” A girl in the
student focus group had this to share, “I think it is both the computer technology and our teachers
that are helping our future. The teachers want us to know how to use computer technology for
ourselves so that we can find good information.”
The Aadu International student focus group responses were indicative the themes
regarding idea ownership, leadership, and entrepreneurial skills. This was most evident in the
response of the fifth grade boy who desired to own his company. He identified that advertising

192

and communication were affordances that computer technology would offer his future business.
The girl spoke about “using technology for ourselves” with the goal of “finding good
information.” In contrast to the Bara National focus group, the Aadu International students
communicated their ownership over what computer technology allows them to do. Rather than
being workers, the Aadu International students perceived themselves as being the owners of
information. The differences, by school, in students’ notions of their future opportunities reflect
each school’s unique technological frame. Each unique technological frame incorporates
political meanings that allows one group of students to socially construct computer technology to
become socially mobile (i.e., Jinka Public) while another group of students cast computer
technology as part of their future as CEOs (i.e., Aadu International).
Future career options reported by students. The differences in the students’ notions of
future opportunities also became evident from their responses to the following short answer
question on the student questionnaire: “What kind of job would you like to have in the future?”
In analyzing the data from this question, I first noticed the differences in response variety. For
example, the Jinka Public students wrote in one of three different responses: teacher, software
engineer, or police. Granted there were only 11 fifth grade students at Jinka Public, but I thought
the students would share more variety of responses. Of the 50 fifth graders at Komu Community,
they wrote in 12 different job possibilities. In terms of preference variety, girl students were the
only ones who wrote in “teacher” at Jinka Public and Komu Community.

Bara National had

104 students complete the questionnaire and the students wrote in 25 different job preferences.
Seven Bara National students wrote in “Undecided” as their response to the question with one
student including an exclamatory note stating: “I am too young to even decide!” Aadu
International had the most variety of responses as the 65 students who completed the survey

193

listed 28 jobs they were interested in the future. I tabulated and organized the top three most
cited job preferences by school. Table 8 shows the top three responses for each school as well as
the selection percentage of each job.
Table 8
Top Three Most Cited Job Preferences by School
Most Cited Job Preferences
First job (% cited)

School

Second job (% cited)

Third job (% cited)

Jinka Public

* Teacher (55%)

Software engineer (27%)

Police (18%)

Komu Community

Software engineer (36%)

* Teacher (30%)

Military (12%)

Bara National

Software engineer (31%)

Doctor (18%)

Scientist (11%)

Aadu International

CEO (17%)

Veterinarian (11%)

Author (8%)

Note. The asterisk sign (*) before the job title signifies that the response was cited exclusively by
one gender. At Jinka Public and Komu Community, only female students wrote in “teacher.”
Like Table 8 shows, software engineer, teacher, and police or military were the three
most cited job preferences among the Jinka Public and Komu Community students. It was not
surprising to see the high percentage response for “teacher” (or that it was only female students
who wrote in this response) since it is well established in the literature that Indian parents of
underprivileged female children often desire that their daughters go into teaching, because
teaching is considered a secure government job that has some degree of flexibility for family

194

planning (Advani, 2009; Pal, 2008; UNESCO, 2010). To some degree, a similar perception
exists with a military or police office job for sons in underprivileged families. The male children
are encouraged to join the military for the security that job offers.
However, about one third of students at both Jinka Public and Komu Community
identified software engineer as their job preference. Close to the same percentage of Bara
National students (31%) also reported software engineer as the top job preference. The other two
most cited job preferences of the Bara National students (doctor and scientist) are jobs that align
within the spectrum of India’s middle SES. Finally, the Aadu International students’ responses
not only had the most variety, they shared no real commonalities with the other schools. For
example, only one student at Bara National wrote in “CEO” as a job preference on the
questionnaire compared with the eleven students at Aadu International who wrote CEO as their
preference. Five of the Aadu International wrote in Author as their job preference, which is a job
that also requires a great deal of original thinking and ownership of ideas. Perhaps the most
interesting difference among the schools with regard to job preferences was simply the
difference in amount and type of jobs that the Aadu International students wrote in. Not only did
the Aadu International students list 27 different job preferences, they were the only group to
include job titles such as banker, astronomer, racehorse breeder, and land developer.
Discussion: The middle class narrative. I closed each case study chapter with a question
about whether the technological frame could be reduced to a story about each school’s meanings
for computer technology in relationship to its predominant SES. The short answer here is no.
The whole point of social construction theory is that a technology is constructed in different
ways and for many different reasons. Indeed, the social construction of technology is more than
just economic determinism or socio-political reductionism. SCOT employs technological frames

195

as a way to broaden each story to discuss a wider sociotechnical context that includes (but not
limited to) an economic dimension, a political dimension, a social dimension. Hence, the
technological frame reflects the complex and diverse social-cultural factors in a particular setting.
Kirkpatrick (2008) describes a technological frame in this way, “The technological frame is a
discursive system of reference that insures that while social groups may have different
interpretations for a technology they are nonetheless working together in the construction of a
common object” (p. 27).
I analyze this section’s themes about technological frames by starting with the
acknowledgement that perceptions about future opportunities are more than just reflections of
social class. Yet, social class, especially in relationship to India’s middle class narrative, does
seem to be influential. By social class, I follow Sen’s (2005) notion that, in India, social class is
a federation of cultural, economical, political, and social arrangements. These social class
arrangements are institutional in how they reinforce existing power structures. But these
arrangements are also influential as they are integrated into the life of India and can be
“transformational” (Sen, 2005, p. 207). Such is the influence of India’s middle class narrative,
which “despite the fuzziness of its boundaries . . . spearheaded the modernization of Indian
society and gave shape to its modern institutions” (Beteille, 2007, p. 290). The middle class
narrative is India’s great magnet; the lower class is drawn to the middle class narrative’s promise
of security and prosperity while the upper class is drawn to the middle class narrative’s broad
base of skills and English speakers (Deb, 2011; Guha, 2008; Kumar, 1991). While some
question whether the India’s middle class narrative is just myth (Birdsall, 2010), the middle class
narrative, as represented by a skilled technology workforce who speak English, is one way of
interpreting each school’s technological frame.

196

I argue three plausible themes related to the study’s technological frames and the Indian
middle class. One theme is about using computer technology in order to gain the necessary skills
for entry into India’s middle class. A second theme is about reproducing the knowledge and
programming skills necessary for a secure middle class job. The third theme is about knowledge
ownership and the reliance on the middle class. To assist with unpacking this discussion, I refer
to Figure 4, which is a graphic representation of the themes related to the technological frames of
the schools.

Jinka

Komu

Organizational visions
Lower SES
Laptop(s) & English
Village schools

Bara

Computer science curriculum
Middle SES
Logic and programming

Aadu

IB Curriculum
Upper SES
Research and presentation

School

Technological
frame

Entry into
India’s
middle class

Reproduce &
secure
middle class

Ownership &
reliance on the
middle class

Theme

Figure 4. Themes that emerged from each school’s technological frame.

As Figure 4 shows Jinka Public and Komu Community were the study’s lower SES
schools. Both schools were village schools and both shared a similar meaning for their school’s

197

laptop(s). The social groups at both schools interpreted computer technology as a tool for
English language learning. Additionally, the social groups framed their discussion of the
computer technology’s meaning around rhetoric about empowering students with English
language and technology skills to provide more opportunities for a better life. Such rhetoric
captured the possibilities of gaining entry into India’s middle class. Additionally, the
organizational vision of each school’s accessory social group further stabilized that theme. Both
accessory social groups were arbitrators of power in their commitment to the vision of providing
a “better life” through the use of computer technology to gain exposure and proficiency in
English.
Although Jinka Public and Komu Community share the same theme regarding entry into
India’s middle class, I want to make a conceptual distinction between opportunity and
empowerment. At Jinka Public, the social groups, including the SSA Foundation, spoke about
the laptop as providing an opportunity for a better life. At Komu Community, though, the
message regarding the laptops was much stronger among the social groups, especially the
school’s administrators. At Komu Community, the laptops were interpreted as empowering. I
recognize a subtle, yet important, difference in the two notions. In the case of Jinka Public,
opportunity is synonymous with chance. That means the Jinka Public had a chance at a better
life because of the school’s laptop, but chance does not guarantee that it is going to happen nor
does it mean that the students will be guided along the way. At Komu Community, though, the
conception is that the laptops, along with the guidance of the teachers, empower the students
with the skills necessary to gain entry into India’s middle class. The future opportunities and job
preferences that I analyzed earlier reflect the possibilities that the Indian middle class offers.

198

Figure 4 also shows how Bara National School’s technological frame includes the
stability of computer science curriculum and the predominance of a middle SES. Since the Bara
National students already belong to India’s middle class, the computer science teachers enacted a
computer science curriculum that would reproduce the knowledge and skills necessary for
securing a stable, middle class job in computer programming. The Bara Computer Science Team,
as an accessory social group, were power reproducers as they crafted a curriculum to reproduce
the logic and coding skills required for a secure career in the computer technology industry. The
future opportunities and job preferences that I analyzed earlier reflect the security that the Indian
middle class offers.
Figure 4 demonstrates how the third theme regarding ownership and reliance on the
middle class fits into the Aadu International’s technological frame. The Aadu International
social groups centered their meanings and purpose for the computer technology on the ownership
of ideas. Idea ownership and original thinking are valuable characteristics of entrepreneurs and
leaders. The IB curriculum model, as a social accessory group, is also a power reproducer as the
curriculum focuses on developing IB Learners who understand the proprietary value of their
ideas. In such proprietorship of ideas, though, there is a nod to the reliance on the middle class
as the workers to help sustain those ideas. Such an acknowledgement of the middle class is
captured in the quote by the Aadu International fifth grade boy, “Computer technology will help
people learn about my company. Also, I will need to know how to continue to use the computer
to communicate to my workers.” The reliance on the middle class is a tentative and nebulous
finding related to this current study that needs further investigation.
In sum, according to SCOT, the technological frame provides a frame of reference among
all the social groups in a particular setting that structures the social groups’ interactions. One

199

way to interpret each school’s technological frame is to overlay a wider sociotechnical context
about India’s middle class narrative. This is especially poignant in the context of Bangalore,
where the middle class’ social capital includes English language skills and computer technology
skills. In relationship to the larger middle class narrative, the dissertation’s case studies provide
four stories that shed light on the uses, meanings, interactions, politics, and possibilities related
to computer technology in Bangalore’s elementary schools. And, yet, these are only four stories.

200

CHAPTER 9
CONCLUSION
BACK TO THE BANGALORE CHALLENGE
This dissertation investigated stories of the meanings and purposes for computer
technology in four of Bangalore’s elementary schools. These stories are situated in the two
paradoxes I identified in India: the first paradox relates to the country’s relationship with
technology; the second paradox relates to the use of computer technology in elementary schools.
I briefly revisit these paradoxes here and explain how my study reinforces and complicates the
existence of these paradoxes.
Indians place great importance on computer technology skills, yet only a small proportion
of the Indian workforce work in the computer technology industry. On the one hand, the
Bangalore Challenge exists because India has developed an international reputation in computer
technology. On the other hand, this reputation has been developed by a relatively small
proportion of the country’s population: most Indians never have the opportunity to acquire
computer technology skills. The second paradox, related to the first, is the tension between the
country’s fascination with computer technology and the absence of computer technology from
most elementary schools. The schools in my study were not representative of the majority of
India’s elementary schools since each of them used some form of computer technology. I am
mindful that these are stories of privilege. The elementary schools in this study were privileged
to have computer technology in their schools. Thus, a school like Jinka Public, even with only
one laptop for the whole school, is privileged because its students are being equipped with some
kind of computer technology skills.

201

Even though the schools were privileged it did not mean that all the schools shared the
same meaning for computer technology. Indeed, the meanings were quite varied and, depending
on a school’s social factors, were quite context specific. Computer technology continues to play
an important role in the Indian economy and social life. While only a small proportion of India’s
population is employed in its ICT industry, computer technology has a great amount of symbolic
capital. In Bangalore’s elementary schools, for example, some students understood that
computer technology would provide opportunities for a better life by learning English whereas
other students understood computer technology as tool for developing proprietary knowledge.
Thus, the privilege of having computer technology represented different narratives about
securing the possibilities of higher status and a better life in India. My study further complicated
the paradoxes by showing that even if students do have access to technology, social class plays a
critical role in the types of technology skills they are taught.
Computer technology will continue to be important to India’s future and there will also
continue to be multiple narratives about why computer technology is important for India’s
children. Indeed, stories of these four schools are not the only stories of my experience
collecting data in India. During my ten months in Bangalore, I had the opportunity to visit other
schools and educational settings that were also constructing meanings for computer technology.
For example, I think of the Ramji Center, an afterschool computer center in one of Bangalore’s
largest slums, where slum children go to create colorful posters with a Free and Open Source
(FOSS) design application called TuxPaint. The children develop technological literacy and
confidence as they craft and produce social justice oriented posters that raise awareness about
Bangalore’s slum conditions. The Ramji Center participants constructed different kinds of
meaning for computer technology. For the center’s participants, computer technology became a

202

way to develop consciousness and advance self-determination. One of the Ramji Center teachers,
a 15 year old girl who also lived in the same slum, explained it like this, “The world will tell us
that the slums are where we belong, but knowing the laptop is our way out, and it is the
children’s way out, too.”
At another elementary school I visited, the Kripa School, the students were learning how
to use Microsoft PowerPoint and Microsoft Excel programs to create, promote, and manage
fictitious businesses. The Kripa School participants interpreted that the purpose of computer
technology was for developing applicable, business skills; skills that would serve them well in
managing a future small business. The Ramji Center and Kripa School offer additional
narratives of computer technology’s social construction in Bangalore. These are stories for a
different time. But, like the case studies in this dissertation, these stories show that in order to
understand what computer technology means it is best to start with how and where the
technology is being used. Throughout this dissertation, I have explored how computer
technology is used in elementary schools in Bangalore, India. I conclude the dissertation by
considering how the stories map on to the wider Indian context. To do this, I examine how the
dissertation’s findings and cross-case analyses relates to the literature that framed my study. I
then move to a discussion of technology and the future as represented by the Bangalore
Challenge. Finally, I finish the chapter with my recommendations for further study as well as
share my arguments related to the dissertation’s educational significance.
Situating the Findings in the Literature
The central goal of this study was to investigate the contextual uses for computer
technology in Bangalore’s elementary schools. I used the Social Construction of Technology
theory to guide that examination. The study’s main purpose was to thickly describe and compare

203

computer technology use in Bangalore’s fifth grade classrooms. The dissertation confirmed
many findings in the literature on technology use. These findings include the scarcity of
technological resources in Indian village schools (i.e., Jinka Public School) as well as the way
the computer technology is used in Indian schools to primarily reinforce a computer science
curriculum (i.e., Bara National School). Yet, the dissertation’s case study chapters provided a
deeper context for understanding each of these findings.
Furthermore, the dissertation offered more complex findings about the meanings that
India’s elementary schools teachers and students assign to computer technology. In the wider
literature, there are two sources, in particular, that provide additional insights about the findings
in regards to elementary schooling and India: (1) Jean Anyon’s (1981) work on social class and
school knowledge and (2) Krishna Kumar’s (1989) scholarship on the social character of
learning in India.
Anyon’s (1981) study on the construction of school knowledge in elementary schools in
New Jersey provides a valuable interpretive lens for the dissertation’s findings related to social
class. Although my study is separated by time (more than 30 years), distance (nearly 8,000
miles), and context (i.e., social, economic, political, cultural, linguistic, and so forth), I assert that
Anyon’s work still offers a useful framework for investigating the relationship between SES and
elementary schooling. Two schools in this study, Aadu International and Bara National, most
closely related to Anyon’s findings. Aadu International, the dissertation’s upper SES school,
was a mix of Anyon’s “affluent professional school” and “executive elite school.” Anyon
describes the “affluent professional” school as a representative of the United States’ upper
middle class. In her study, the “affluent professional” school emphasized the importance of
creativity along with a deep understanding of concepts. This is similar to Aadu International’s

204

sign about curiosity and creativity being cousins. Anyon describes the “executive elite” school
as representative of the United States’ wealthiest families. According to Anyon, in an “executive
elite” school the curriculum stresses the development of analytical and intellectual capacities.
This echoes much of the pedagogy at Aadu International, where students were taught to
“think for themselves” and develop the thinking and research skills (i.e., intellectual skills) that
would aid them in becoming tomorrow’s leaders. Anyon (1981) contends that knowledge
ownership also includes being willing to question knowledge. At Aadu International, students
were encouraged to ask questions. Additionally, questioning was part of the school’s standard
operating procedure for researching with the computer. Yet, not only did the Aadu International
students question the practicality of certain activities on the computer (this was especially
common in their ICT class), but they were also asked to question the reliability and credibility of
the sources they cited as part of their research.
Findings from Bara National, the dissertation’s middle SES school, were similar to the
middle class school in Anyon’s study. According to Anyon, middle class schools and their
teachers view knowledge as having a market value, where knowledge is acquired and produced
for the purpose of being consumed. Anyon (1981) calls this the “commodification of
knowledge” (p. 33). As a commodity, knowledge has an exchange value and can be traded in for
a secure job or career. Knowledge commodification reverberates through Bara National lead
computer science teacher’s statement that 80% of the school’s graduates go into a computer
technology field in Bangalore. The knowledge of computers or, more specifically, of computer
programming has a great market value in India as well as in much of the developed world. Thus,
the Bara National computer science teachers prepare their students with that kind of knowledge
through a highly structured and sequenced curriculum based on logic, coding, and programming.

205

Anyon suggests that students in middle class schools are usually willing to work hard
because of the high reward (i.e., future job security) that the reproduction of knowledge
represents. The posters on Bara National’s walls capture Anyon’s point here; Bara National’s
students are reminded that “quality work gets you noticed” (as the poster in the computer lab
states). The students work hard at mundane computer related tasks and do not question the
knowledge. Such behavior “legitimates production for consumption” (Anyon, 1981, p. 34). It
reinforces the understanding that Bara National’s computer science curriculum helps students get
into the right Indian colleges and eventually land strong middle-class in a computer related field.
The dissertation offered findings that extend beyond Anyon’s study. The findings from
Jinka Public and Komu Community were a departure from Anyon’s findings related to lower
SES schools (or “working class” schools). According to Anyon, knowledge and curriculum in
lower SES schools are often quite disconnected from the lower SES students’ history and
possible futures. Yet, at Jinka Public and Komu Community, I found the exact opposite.
In examining the findings at Jinka Public and Komu Community, I found Krishna Kumar’s
(1991) scholarship on the social character of learning more relevant. Kumar asserts that
education in village schools is a mix between the local culture and national politics. The
findings at Jinka Public and Komu Community support the notion that at the Indian national
level, English language and technology skills are quite valuable. Kumar emphasizes that parents
and policymakers hope that the school, especially in villages, is a place of possibility for a better
future for Indian children. In both cases, Jinka Public and Komu Community, the computer
technology was interpreted as a tool for transforming their students’ future.
At both schools, the emphases on computer technology were deeply connected to the
students’ aspirations and to their future. For example, at Jinka Public, the students were the

206

owners and caretakers of the school’s laptop. The Jinka Public students were largely responsible
for shaping the laptop’s curriculum and activities that were centered on their aspiration to learn
English for “a better life.” Thus, the Jinka Public laptop became a tool for future opportunity. In
the same way, the laptops at Komu Community were part of the school’s “equal opportunity”
mission. The Komu Community educators viewed the laptops as a way to empower the students.
Rather than being a tool of reproduction or even oppression, which is how Anyon characterizes
lower SES schools’ curriculum, the Komu Community laptops were tools for transformation.
The students were engaged with computer related activities, like creating English language
advertisements, which represented practical types of computer-based skills.
The Wider Story
The wider implication of this dissertation is that the study helps explain (and complicate)
the wider story of the confluence of computer technology and elementary schooling in Bangalore,
India. In the dissertation’s first chapter, I discussed how this confluence was a reflection of
India’s two commitments. Computer technology is a representation of India’s commitment to
development through its ICT industry. Elementary schooling is a representation of India’s
commitment to sustainability by providing universal elementary education to all its children.
Investigating this interrelationship of commitments has provided new and deeper narratives for
how students and teachers construct meaning for computer technology.
One narrative is from an economic point of view. Krishna Kumar (1989) posits that,
“Schools equip individuals with knowledge and skills that are appropriate to the tasks generated
by the economy and supported by politics and the local culture” (p. 69). One picture of the wider
story is related to how the four case study schools equipped their students with computer
technology skills in response to the “tasks generated” by Bangalore’s middle class narrative;

207

tasks which become forms of symbolic capital. For example, the village students at Jinka Public
and Komu Community were being prepared with English and technology skills for entry into
middle class kinds of tasks. The Bara National students were being trained with the logic and
coding skills necessary for secure, middle class jobs as computer programmers. The Aadu
International students were being prepared with research and leadership skills that foster the
ownership of ideas and entrepreneurship; and, such entrepreneurship often relies on the middle
class for sustenance. These combined findings from the four case study schools present a
socioeconomic narrative about technology’s social construction in Bangalore’s elementary
schools.
I could also explain the social construction of technology in Bangalore’s elementary
schools from more of a pragmatic point of view. From this perspective, the dissertation’s wider
story would be about how the teachers and students use their school’s technology based on what
is most practical or what makes the most sense considering the constraints. For example, a
computer science class may be the most practical use of the computer labs at Bara National.
Since the school has such large class sizes, trying to coordinate additional computer lab time to
integrate other subject matter might not be feasible. So a scheduled rotation of classes learning
about computer science is the most practical option at Bara National. At Jinka Public, as another
example, what makes the most sense is that the students would use the school’s laptop for
learning English vocabulary, because the keyboard’s letter symbols correspond with the letters in
the English alphabet. Thus, in order to access the laptop in a meaningful way, the Jinka Public
students need to have some sense of English letters and words. Indeed, the dissertation’s case
studies could be told as stories of the practical ways that the students were using (and sharing)
the school’s computer technology.

208

So the dissertation has many different narratives. However, is there a common thread?
At the outset of the dissertation, I introduced and discussed the phrase, Bangalore Challenge. As
a brief refresher, the Bangalore Challenge is the nickname for a speech by President Obama that
indicated how success in the twenty-first century will be determined by how well kids in the
United States compete academically with kids in Bangalore and Beijing. In India, the message
rang clear: Indian students, especially those living in India’s large metropolises like Bangalore,
have a perceived advantage in areas like science and math over students in a developed nation
like the United States. Likewise, for many Indians, President Obama’s speech signaled an
important shift in thinking about the geography of global talent represented in the large scale of
Asia’s human capital.
The Asian continent’s human capital potential is especially robust in India, as India is the
world’s largest democracy with one of the world’s largest English speaking populations. The
combination of democratic freedoms with multilingualism increases the likelihood that India’s
children shape tomorrow’s global society (Guha, 2008). Thus, the challenge that Bangalore
offers is not only a challenge to the United States, it is a challenge to the world. As Guha (2008)
asserts this challenge, as represented in the city of Bangalore, is the Western world’s recognition
that India is more and more equipped to become a global superpower. The Bangalore Challenge,
as proclaimed by Indian policymakers and the Indian press, largely portrays an urban India that
educates the best and brightest students; students who are prepared to dictate the terms of success
for the future. As many Indian scholars note, this is quite an amazing achievement for such a
democratically young county that is a conglomeration of diverse languages and identities (Guha,
2008; Sen, 2005).

209

India’s emergence as an economic and technological power in the global economy has
led other countries, like the United States, to pay attention to its education system. Attention that
Guha (2008) calls “equal parts wonder, admiration, and paranoia” (p. 718) about India’s role in
shaping future global relations. Therein lays another meaning of the Bangalore Challenge; the
reaction to India’s steady rise is a mixture of both wonder and paranoia that India’s future
generation will snatch up all the jobs worth having. In this regard, the Bangalore Challenge
conveys a certain prestige and cultural capital associated with India’s education system.
Although the Bangalore Challenge is a narrative unfolding in India, albeit in mostly
urban areas like Bangalore, it certainly is not the complete story of the confluence of technology
and education. This dissertation sheds light on the reach of the Bangalore Challenge within India.
Bara National School’s emphasis on logic, computer programming, and continual testing might
capture the academic rigor associated with the phrase the Bangalore Challenge. Yet, Bara
National does not fully capture the Bangalore Challenge as represented in the narratives of
students who are working hard to learn English with a laptop, like at Jinka Public School and
Komu Community School. Such narratives complicate the Bangalore Challenge. The
Bangalore Challenge should be broadened further to include the students at Aadu International
School who are working hard at developing their research skills as they prepare to become
tomorrow’s leaders and entrepreneurs. The Bangalore Challenge is a challenge to India, as well.
That challenge is to understand the many different narratives that are part of technology’s social
construction in India’s elementary schools.
Future Study
I now discuss future studies that would complement (and, possibly, challenge) these
findings. I recommend studies that would further the field’s understanding of the social shaping

210

of computer technology in elementary schools. I start with two future studies that are specific to
India. One study connects with Indian policymakers’ contention that issues within Indian
education and schooling are fundamentally linked to India’s democracy (ASER, 2010).
Although this dissertation touched on the wider socio-cultural context in relationship to the
Bangalore Challenge, another fruitful study would explore the extent to which the stabilization of
computer technology in India’s schools mirrors democracy. Bijker (2001) asserts the possibility
of examining the democratization of technology vis-à-vis the way technology is negotiated in
certain contexts. The idea is that in democratic societies, like India, the uses and stabilization of
computer technology should have a democratic quality to them. The Komu Community
administrators’ vision of providing “equal opportunities” for their students by using the school’s
laptops is one example of technology’s democratization from this current study.
Another study, though, could probe the relationship between India’s computer technology
and its democracy by starting with questions like: What computer technologies are commonly
used in Indian elementary schools? To what extent do these uses for computer technology
reflect democratic ideals and activities? To what extent does the negotiation (or stabilization) of
the computer technology reflect democratic ideals and activities? The literature suggests that
future empirical studies of technology’s democratization, in local contexts and wider contexts,
would be a promising line of research in uncovering how people use technological tools to
achieve democratic ends (Bijker, 2001; Feenberg 1991, 1992). Indeed, such research could yield
interesting findings in India, the world’s largest democracy.
In my study, I theorized about the role of accessory social groups in stabilizing the
meanings for each school’s computer technology. While I grounded the theoretical
underpinnings for accessory social groups in the specific context of Bangalore’s elementary

211

school classrooms, there were accessory social groups, like parents, that could have been given
greater consideration. Parents, especially parents in India, are usually highly invested into their
children’s education. Parents have a good deal of influence in also shaping the meanings for
computer technology (Pal, 2009). Further research could probe the extent to which parents
influence the social construction of technology in India’s elementary schools.
Further research is also needed about accessory social groups. As I mentioned before,
accessory social groups is an original concept that emerged from this dissertation’s analysis. The
concept is the dissertation’s contribution to extending and refining SCOT theory. “Accessory
social groups” is a theoretical concept that emerged from a process of grounded theory (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967). This concept, though, needs further research to refine its definition and test its
veracity in other contexts and settings outside the realm of Indian schooling.
Significance
This dissertation is significant in several ways. First, the dissertation is significant
because of its methodology. This study is the first of its kind to apply SCOT theory to an
examination of computer technology use in Bangalore’s elementary schools. Before this study,
SCOT theory was primarily used as a socio-historical theory for studying a technology’s
historical development across a wide range of context. Yet, in this study, I applied SCOT theory
to a specific context, Bangalore’s elementary school classroom. Using SCOT theory’s
methodological heuristics, I grounded this research in a systematic and disciplined inquiry. As
the literature review in Chapter 2 explained, the field of research on technology uses in
elementary schools, particularly in the Indian context, was lacking such a disciplined inquiry.
This dissertation offers a model of such a methodological inquiry. The findings from the study
are also ways to test SCOT theory. The inquiry also adhered to Glaser and Strauss’s (1968)

212

notions about grounded theory as the dissertation added definitional dimension to SCOT theory
in regards to “accessory social group.” This is significant because it increases local knowledge
and understanding about how Indian students are being prepared with computer technology with
the support of school administrators or Public Private Partnerships.
Second, the dissertation has educational policy significance, especially within the
context of Indian elementary schools. The dissertation findings speak to India’s dual
commitment to elementary education and technology; a commitment that finds its locus in
Bangalore. Through legislation like Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and the Right to Education Act, the
Indian government continues to act on this commitment in order to convert “India’s demographic
advantage into a knowledge powerhouse” (MHRD, 2009, p.5). Yet, such legislation needs
context and the instructive illustrations and insights that research offers (Light, 2009; Pal, 2009).
Sarangapani (2003) contends that, “Observing and understanding the voices and practices of
Indian elementary classrooms provides crucial insight into the universe of meanings that make
up the school experience” (p. 247). This dissertation provides the context and illustrations for
providing a deeper understanding for policymakers about the multiple ways that India’s
elementary school children are using computer technology. The dissertation’s thick description
also will help policymakers understand the meanings that schools assign to computer technology
in meeting their educational goals.
Third, the dissertation is significant in technological ways. SCOT theory asserts that
studies on the social construction of technology should go beyond simplistic conclusions about
technology being shaped by humans and their societal structures. Rather, SCOT theory seeks to
examine a technology’s core and the way that core works in relationship to the specific context
in which the technology is socially constructed. This dissertation is about the context of the

213

Indian elementary school classroom, specifically in Bangalore. The study shows how social
groups in these classrooms constructed different meanings for their “core of technology” (Bijker,
1995, p. 281). So at Jinka Public the core of the school’s laptop became a tool for a better life by
learning English. The core of the Komu Community laptops was about empowerment and
providing equal opportunities for students to become proficient in English. The core of Bara
National’s computer lab seems to relate more to logic and programming; whereas, the core of the
Aadu International computer technology is knowledge ownership through research and
presentation. These are narratives that illustrate the wide range of meanings that are constructed
about “a technology’s core” by teachers and students in Bangalore. The technological
significance of this study parallels the educational significance as the uses for a school’s
computer technology are constructed into something considerable more meaningful than just the
computer hardware, software, or knowing how to tap on a computer’s keyboard.
In conclusion, I finish this dissertation by reflecting on a statement by Clifford Geertz
about ethnographic work. Geertz (1992) said, “The aim of ethnography is to clarify what on
earth is going on among various people at various times and draw some conclusions about the
constraints, causes, hopes, and possibilities-- the practicalities of life" (p. 133). The
dissertation’s comparative case studies examine computer technology’s social construction in
fifth grade classrooms in Bangalore, India. My goal was to deeply describe and compare the
four cases rather than try to generalize the role of computer technology in India. In meeting this
goal, I have addressed the research gap about how computer technology use in India’s
elementary schools relates to socio-cultural contexts. In doing so, I have followed the
recommendations of the field, including Indian scholars, through my inclusion of contextual
descriptions. The case studies also provided support for the concept of accessory social groups.

214

This concept along with dissertation’s thick description provides ways to clarify the complexity
that is part of computer technology use in Bangalore’s elementary schools. Furthermore, the
dissertation provides new understanding of the contours of the Bangalore Challenge from the
perspective of elementary school teachers and students using technological tools.

215

APPENDICES

216

Appendix A: Observation Protocol
The study’s observation protocol is a list of questions to focus my field observations. I include
questions for descriptive purposes (i.e. school setting context). I also include questions to
investigate the second and third component of SCOT (interpretive flexibility and stabilization).
I coded the observation questions as follows:
• D stands for questions which aid in describing each setting
• IF stands for questions which examine the interpretive flexibility
• S stands for stabilization
I have different foci for each observation cycle. Each cycle will last between two to three days. I
intend to observe 8 to 10 days at each school setting.
Foci 1: Computer equipment
• D - How many working computers are there at each setting (specifically for 5th grade
students to use)?
• D – Where are the computers located: in the classroom or in a computer lab?
• D - What kinds of software/hardware are installed/included with the computers?
• D - Is there Internet connectivity? If so, what kind (broadband, wireless)?
Foci 2: Computer usage
• D – How often do the student participants use the computers? (Hours and days per week)
• D - For what purposes are the computers being primarily used (“Drill and practice”
software, creating multimedia, project based learning, etc.)?
• D – Are there assignments given which require computer use? If so, what are the
assignments? What is the subject matter area?
Foci 3: Time
• D – Describe the instructional time with computers: How much is direct instruction?
How much time for student practice?
• D – How is the teacher using the computer during the instructional time?
Foci 4: Interaction
• S – Describe any discussion/interaction which teacher and student participants have about
computers.
• IF - What statements (about computers) does the teacher make? What questions does the
teacher ask?
• IF - What statements (about computers) do the students make? What questions do the
students ask?
• IF – What adjectives do the teachers use to describe computer use?
• IF – What adjectives do the students use to describe computer use?

217

Appendix B: Student focus group interview
Purpose: The purpose of the student focus group interview questions is to identify the students’
interpretation(s) of using computer technology. The questions are designed to inquire about
distinctions between the students’ and teachers’ interpretive flexibility when it comes to using
computers. In the analysis of the interview, I will compare the student focus group transcript
with the teacher interview transcript in order to distinguish the interpretations of each group and
examine the degree of stabilization (how much similarity there is between the two groups
interpretations of computer use in schools).
I coded the questions to show how each one aligns to the SCOT theory:
• IF stands for interpretive flexibility
• S stands for stabilization
• TF stands for technological frame
1. Why do you use a computer in school? (IF – perceived purposes of computer technology)
2. What does a computer help you do at school? (IF – perceived outcomes)
3. Do you ever have problems with using computers at school? If so, what kind of
problems? If not, why not? (IF – perceived problems)
4. Follow up to anyone who answered yes to question #3: Who solves these problems? How
do they do it? (IF – solving problems)
5. Why do you think your teacher wants you to use a computer? (IF – identifying the
difference in interpretive flexibility)
6. What two activities would you choose to do on the computer (in school) if you had your
own choice? (S – examining the stabilization of using computers in the school)
7. What two activities do you suppose your teacher would choose for you to do using the
computer? (S – examining the stabilization of using computers in the school)
8. Do you think that your use of the computer in school prepares you for the future? If so,
how? If not, why not? (TF – technological frame – identifying the future of computer
technology)

218

Appendix C: Teacher interview
Purpose: The purpose of the teacher interview questions is to identify the teachers’
interpretation(s) of using computers in schools. In addition, the questions are designed to inquire
about distinctions between the students’ and teachers’ interpretive flexibility when it comes to
using computers. In the analysis of the interview, I will the teacher interview with the student
focus group transcript in order to distinguish the interpretations of each group and examine the
degree of stabilization (how much similarity there is between the two groups interpretations of
computer use in schools).
I coded the questions to show how each one aligns to the SCOT theory:
• IF stands for interpretive flexibility
• S stands for stabilization
• TF stands for technological frame
1. What do you understand as the purpose of using computers in school? (IF – perceived
purposes of computer technology)
2. What does a computer help you do at school? (IF – perceived outcomes)
3. Do you ever have problems with using computers at school? If so, what kind of problems?
If not, why not? (IF – perceived problems)
4. Follow up to anyone who answered yes to question #3: Who solves these problems? How
do they do it? (IF – solving problems)
5. How do you think your students might answer the question about a computer’s purpose in
school? In other words, why do you think your students want to use a computer? (IF –
identifying the difference in interpretive flexibility)
6. What two activities would you choose to do on the computer (in school) if you had your
own choice? (S – examining the stabilization of using computers in the school)
7. What two activities do you suppose your students would choose to do (at school) when
using the computer? (S – examining the stabilization of using computers in the school)
8. Do you think that your students’ use of the computer in school is preparing them for a
future job or career? If so, how? If not, why not? (TF – technological frame – identifying the
future of computer technology)

219

Appendix D: Student Questionnaire
Purpose: The student questionnaire’s purpose is to generate demographic data and identify
students’ perceptions about using computer technology. The questionnaire is adapted from the
SLS study.
I coded the questions to show how each one aligns to the SCOT theory:
• IF stands for interpretive flexibility
• S stands for stabilization
• TF stands for technological frame
Directions: Please circle your responses.
1. What is your age? ____________ (TF – demographic data)
2. What is your gender? Boy or Girl (TF - demographic data)
3. Which of these items do you have in your home (circle all that apply):
A. Radio
B. Television C. Computer D. Cell phone E. None of the above
(TF – demographic data)
4. Which of these is used in your home to cook food?
A. Firewood B. Kerosene stove
C. Gas D. Hot plate E. Other: ____________
(TF – demographic data)
5. What kind of vehicle(s) does your family own?
A. Motorcycle B. Scooter C. Bicycle D. Car E. Other: ______ F. None of the above
(TF – demographic data)
6. How many books (not counting magazines or newspapers) are in your home?
A. 1-15 B. 15 – 40 C. 40 – 100 D. 100 - 200 E. Over 200 F. Zero
(TF – demographic data)
7. How many rooms are in your home?
A. 1-2 B. 3-4 C. 5-6 D. 6-8 E. Over 8
(TF – demographic data)
8. What items do you own or have?
A. Bicycle B. Book bag C. An iPod D. A cell phone E. None of the above
(TF – demographic data)
9. What do you believe is the most important thing which you can do on the computer?
A. Search for information B. Create movies/multimedia C. Listen to music D. Play games
E. Process information faster F. Communicate with friends (email) G. Learn basic skills
H. Other: ________________ (please specify)
(IF – Perceived purpose)
10. What do you believe your teachers would say is the most important thing which you can do
on the computer?
A. Search for information B. Create movies/multimedia C. Listen to music D. Play games
E. Process information faster F. Communicate with friends (email) G. Learn basic skills
H. Other: ________________ (please specify)
(IF and S – perceived purposes and stabilization of those purposes)

220

11. What subject matter do you learn best when using a computer?
A. Reading/Literacy B. Maths C. Science D. Social studies E. Second language
F. Other: _____________________ G. None
(IF – Perceived purpose)
12. What subject matter do you learn best without using a computer?
A. Reading/Literacy B. Maths C. Science D. Social studies E. Second language
F. Other: _____________________ G. None
(IF – perceived problems)
13. I enjoy using a computer in school.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – Perceived outcome)
14. I am motivated to learn in school when I use a computer
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – Perceived purpose)
15. I work better with other classmates when using a computer.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – Perceived outcome)
16. I know how to use a computer for school related purposes.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – Perceived purpose)
17. My school work and home work are improved because of my computer skills.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcome)
18. I do better in math and science when using a computer.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcome)
19. I do better in reading, social studies, and second language when using a computer.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – Perceived purpose)
20. I learn more from the computer than from a teacher.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcome)
21. I am a better student because of computer technology.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcome)
22. What kind of job would you like to have in the future? (Please write a short answer)
__________________________________________________________________________
(TF – demographic data)

221

Appendix E: Teacher Questionnaire
Purpose: The teacher questionnaire’s purpose is to generate demographic data and identify
teachers’ perceptions about using computer technology.
I coded the questions to show how each one aligns to the SCOT theory:
• IF stands for interpretive flexibility
• S stands for stabilization
• TF stands for technological frame
1. What is your gender? Male or Female (TF – demographic data)
2. To which age group do you belong?
A. Below 25 B. 25-29 C. 30-39 D. 40-49 E. 50-59 F. 60 or above
(TF – demographic data)
3. How many years of teaching experience do you have?
A. Less than 1 B. 1 -3 C. 4-6 D. 7-10 E. 11-15 F. 16-20 G. More than 20
(TF – demographic data)
4. What is your highest level of education?
A. Some college B. Bachelor’s degree C. Master’s degree D. Ph.D. degree
E. Other: ______________ (please indicate)
(TF – demographic data)
5. How often do you use a computer at school? (If you answered A, B, or C, please move
question 6 and 7)
A. Daily B. Three times a week C. Once or twice a week D. I do not use a computer
(TF – demographic data)
6. Where did you learn how to use computer technology in your teaching?
A. Self-taught B. Professional development at school C. College or university
D. A colleague or colleagues E. Other: ______________ (please indicate)
(TF – demographic data)
7. What is your primary purpose for using a computer at school?
A. Communication (email) B. Book-keeping C. Creating media presentations (PowerPoint)
D. Entertainment (games) D. Research E. Other: ____________________ (please indicate)
(IF – perceived purposes)
8. Do you have a computer at home? Yes or No (If yes, please answer question 9)
(TF – demographic data)
9. What is your primary purpose for using a computer at home?
A. Communication (email) B. Book-keeping C. Creating media presentations (PowerPoint)
D. Entertainment (games) D. Research E. Other: ____________________ (please indicate)
(TF – demographic data)

222

10. What do you believe should be your students’ primary purpose for using a computer at
school?
A. Communication B. Use software to practice skills C. Create multimedia
D. Entertainment (games) D. Research (searching for information) E. Other: _________
F. I do not believe my students should use computers
(IF and S – perceived purposes and stabilization of computer technology)
11. What subject matter do your students learn best when using a computer?
A. Reading/Literacy B. Maths C. Science D. Social studies E. Second language
F. Other: _____________________ G. None
(IF – perceived outcomes)
12. What subject matter do your students learn best without using a computer?
A. Reading/Literacy B. Maths C. Science D. Social studies E. Second language
F. Other: _____________________ G. None
(IF – perceived problems)
13. The use of computers has helped to motivate my students
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
14. The use of computers has increased the level of student interaction and collaboration.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
15. The use of computers has positively impacted my students’ learning and achievement.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
16. Most of my students can capably use computers at an age-appropriate level.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
17. The use of computer technology has improved the quality of my students’ work.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
18. The use of computer technology can enhance school subject matter like math and science.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
19. The use of computer technology can enhance school subject matter like reading, social
studies, and second language?
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
20. Students learn more from a computer than from a teacher.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
21. I am a better teacher because of computer technology.
Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree
(IF – perceived outcomes)
22. What is the most important thing that you would like your students to know about using a
computer? (Please write a short answer)
__________________________________________________________________________
(IF – perceived purposes)

223

Appendix F: Digital Image Foci
Purpose: I will capture digital images of each school setting in order to provide a visual source of
data for the technological frame of the study. I will not capture images of student or teacher
participants. The digital image foci include:
Focus 1 – School building and grounds (i.e. playground equipment)
Focus 2 – Classroom and/or computer lab
Focus 3 – Examples of computer hardware/software at each school setting
Focus 4 – Other ICT (if any) at the school

224

REFERENCES

225

REFERENCES
Adeya, N. C. (2002). ICTs and poverty: A literature review. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from:
http://www.idrc.ca/en/eDO_TOPIC.html
Aduwa-Ogiegbaen, S., & Iyamu, E. (2005). Using information and communication
technology in secondary schools in Nigeria: Problems and prospects. Educational
Technology & Society, 8(1), 104-112
Advani, S. (2009). Schooling and the national imagination: Education, English, and the Indian
modern. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Agar, M. H. (1996). The professional stranger: An informal introduction to ethnography.
New York: Academic Press.
Ahuja, S. (2000). Information technology in India: A shift in the paradigm. Paper presented at
the Where in the World Conference, Budapest, Hungary. Retrieved from:
http://www.emergence.nu/events/budapest/ahuja.pdf.
Alexander, R. (2003). Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary
education. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Altheide, D., & Johnson, J. (1994), Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative
research. In N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (485499). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Anderson-Levitt, K. (2003). Local meanings, global schooling: Anthropology and the world
culture theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Annual Status of Education Report (ASER). (2009). New Delhi: Pratham Resource Center.
Annual Status of Education Report (ASER). (2010). New Delhi: Pratham Resource Center.
Apple, M. (1994). Ideology and the curriculum. New York: Routledge.
Apple, M. (2003). The state and politics of education. New York: Routledge.
Azim Premji Foundation. (2004). The social context of elementary education in rural India
report. Bangalore, India: Azim Premji Foundation. Retrieved from
http://www.azimpremjifoundation.org/
Azim Premji Foundation. (2008). A study of computer assisted learning program. Bangalore,
India: Azim Premji Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.azimpremjifoundation.org/
Balakrishnan, P. (2004). Measuring productivity in manufacturing sector. Economic and
Political Weekly 39(1), 1465-1471.

226

Banerjee, A., Cole, S., Duflo, E., & Linden, L. (2007). Remedying education: evidence from two
randomized experiments in India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 1235-1264.
Basu, A. (1978). Policy and conflict in India: the reality and perception of education. In P.G.
Altbach and G.P Kelly (Eds.) Education and colonialism. New York: Longman.
Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, codes, and control: Toward a theory of educational transmission.
New York: Routledge.
Beteille, A. (2007). Marxism and class analysis. New Delhi: Oxford Press.
Bharadwaj, V. (2007). ICT usage in a 1000 schools in India. Digital Learning, 3(8).
Bhasin, P. (2010, February). The world wants to follow the ICT-driven Indian economy.
Business Standard. Retrieved from http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/theworld-wants-to-follow-ict-driven-indian-economy/385246/
Bijker, W. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical
change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bijker, W. (2001). Understanding technological culture through a constructivist view of science,
technology, and society. In S.H. Cutcliffe and C. Mitcham (Eds.). Visions of STS:
Counterpoints in science, technology, and society studies (19-34). Albany, NY: SUNY
Press.
Bijker, W. (2010). How is technology made? That is the question! Cambridge Journal of
Economics, 34(1), 63-76.
Bijker, W., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (1989). The social construction of technological systems:
New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT
Press.
Bijker, W. & Law, J. (1992). Shaping technology/building societies: Studies in sociotechnical
change. Boston: MIT Press.
Bimber, B. (1990). Karl Marx and the three faces of technological determinism. Social
Studies of Science, 20(1), 333-351.
Birdsall, N. (2010). The (indispensable) middle class in developing countries. In R. Kanbur and
M. Spence (Eds.). Equity and growth in a globalizing world. Washington, DC: World
Bank Publications.
Bissell, C. (2010). The social construction of educational technology through the use of
proprietary software. In the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning,
Aalborg, Denmark.

227

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. NY: Prentice-Hall.
Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the
dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6),
3-15.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J.G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society, and culture. London:
Sage Publications.
Bowles, S. & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America. New York: Basic.
Brey, P. (2008). The technological construction of social power. Social Epistemology, 22(1),
71-95.
Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: Childrens learning in the age of digital culture.
Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Chudgar, A. (2009). Does adult literacy have a role to play in addressing the universal
elementary education challenge in India? Comparative Education Review, 53(3),
403-433.
Chudgar, A., & Quin, E. (2012). Relationship between private schooling and achievement:
Results from rural and urban India. Economics of Education Review.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis for field
settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Dalrymple, W. (2009). Nine lives: In search of the sacred in modern India. London:
Bloomsbury Publishing.
Das, M., & Kolack, S. (2008). Technology, values, and society: Social forces and technological
change. New York: Peter Lang.
Deb, S. (2011). The beautiful and the damned: A portrait of new India. New York: Faber and
Faber, Inc.
Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Chicago: DC Heath & Company.

228

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1991). Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and comparative
logic. Academy Of Management Review, 16(3), 620-627.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (2002). Building theories from case study research. In A.M. Huberman & M.B.
Miles (Eds.), The qualitative researcher’s companion (5-36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Elgali, Z., & Kalman, Y. M. (2010). The construction of failure and success concepts in K-12
ICT integration. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 6, 281293.
Elman, C. (2005). Explanatory typologies in qualitative studies of international politics.
International Organization, 59(1), 293-326.
Emmel, N. D. (1998). Neighborhood, perceptions of health and the value placed on the health
care delivery in the slum of Mumbai. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds.
Erickson, F. (1973). What makes school ethnography ‘ethnographic’? Council on Anthropology
and Education Newsletter, 4(2), 10-19.
Ertmer, P. A., Addison, P., Lane, M., Ross, E., & Woods, D. (1999). Examining teachers’ beliefs
about the role of technology in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 32(1), 54-71.
Feenberg, A. (1991). Critical theory of technology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Feenberg, A. (1992). Subversive rationalization: technology, power, and democracy. Inquiry,
35(1), 301-322.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, (Eds.), The Sage Handbook
of Qualitative Research, 4th Edition (301-316). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York:
Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Freire, P. (2005). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books.
Geertz, C. (1988). Works and lives: The anthropologist as author. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Geertz, C. (1992). Local knowledge and its limits: Some obiter dicta. Yale Journal of Criticism,
5(2), 129-135.

229

Geertz, C. (2000). Available light: Anthropological reflections on philosophical topics.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in
social analysis. New York: Macmillan.
Global e-Schools and Communities Initiative (GESCI). (2008). Towards a national policy on
ICT in school education in India: A multi-stake holder perspective. Retrieved from:
http://www.gesci.org/assets/files/GESCI%20COMPENDIUM%202008.pdf
Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1981). Ethnographic research and the problem of data
reduction. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 12(1), 51-70.
Good news for Bangalore: Obama is worried. (2010, September 16). Daily News and Analysis
India. Retrieved from: http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_good-news-forbangalore-kids-obama-is-worried_1438722
Goodison, T. (2002). ICT and attainment at the primary level. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 33(2), 201-211.
Government of India, Right to Education [RTE]. (2010). The student learning study. Retrieved
from: http://righttoeducation.in/student-learning-study-india-report
Govinda, R. (2007). Education for all in India: Assessing progress towards Dakar goals.
Background paper for the Education for All Global Monitoring Report, 2008. Paris:
UNESCO.
Guha, R. (2007). India after Gandhi: The history of the world’s largest democracy. London:
Picador India.
Hakansson, A., & Deer, K. (2006). Indigenous people and ICTs. Global Alliance for ICT and
Development. Retrieved from
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/gaid/unpan033376.pdf.
Hannum, E. & Buchmann, C. (2005). Global educational expansion and socio-economic
development: An assessment of findings from the social sciences. World Development,
33(3), 333-354.
Hickey, G.M. & Stratton, M. (2007). Schooling in India: Effects of gender and caste. Scholarly
Partnership, 2(1). Retrieved from: http://opus.ipfw.edu/spe/vol2/iss1/6
Hughes, T. P. (1983). Networks of power: Electrification in western society, 1880–1930.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

230

International Baccalaureate’s Learner Profile. (2005). Retrieved from: http://www.ibo.org/profile
International Baccalaureate’s Mission and Strategy. (2008). Retrieved from:
http://www.ibo.org/mission/
Iyer, S. & Baru, M. (2008). Computer curriculum in elementary schools in India. Digital
Learning India, Retrieved from: http://www.digitallearning.in/articles/articlee?
articleid=2013&typ=COVER%20FEATURE
Jayapalan, N. (2005). History of education in India. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers.
Jhurreev, V. (2005). Technology integration in education in developing countries:
Guidelines to policy makers. International Education Journal, 6(4), 467-483.
Kam, M., Kumar, A., Jain, S., Mathur, A., & Canny, J. (2010). Improving literacy in rural India:
cell phone games in an after-school program. International Conference on Information
Technologies and Development, May 2010, IEEE Conference Proceedings.
Karnataka Ministry of Education. (2010). Current status of elementary education in Karnataka
report 2010. Bangalore: Karnataka Ministry of Education.
Karnataka Ministry of Education. (2011). Current status of elementary education in Karnataka
report 2011. Bangalore: Karnataka Ministry of Education.
Karnati, R. (2008). Computer aided instruction for out-of-school children in India: An impact
study in Andhra Pradesh. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, United States -Pennsylvania. Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses: A&I. (Publication No. AAT
3309451).
Khare, A., Singh, V., Arora, S., Jain, N., & Verma, A. (2010). Designing competitive strategy
using CRM for India primary education. International Journal of Indian Culture and
Business, 3(4), 466-487.
Kingdon, G. G. (2007). The progress of school education in India. Oxford Review of Economic
Policy, 23(2), 168-195.
Kirkpatrick, G. (2008). Technology and social power. New York: Palgrave.
Klein, H. & Kleinman, D. (2002). The social construction of technology: Structural
considerations. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 27(1), 28-52.
Kluge, S. (2000). Empirically grounded construction of types and typologies in qualitative social
research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(1).
Retrieved from: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0001145

231

Kozma, R. B. (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change: a global perspective.
Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Kozma, R., & Wagner, D. (2006). Reaching the most disadvantaged with ICT: What works? In
R. Sweet & D. Wagner (Eds.), ICT in non-formal and adult education: Supporting outof-school youth and adults. Paris: OECD.
Kremer, M., Muralidharan, K., Chaudhury, N., Rogers, F. H., & Hammer, J. (2005). Teacher
absence in India: A snapshot. Journal of the European Economic Association, 3, 658-671.
Kulkarni, P. (2010). Implementing RTE: Unrecognized schools pose fresh challenges. Education
Master. Retrieved from http://www.educationmaster.org/news/implementing-rteunrecognized-schools-pose-fresh-challenges.html.
Kumar, K. (1989). Social character of learning. New Delhi: Sage.
Kumar, K. (1991). The political agenda of education. New Delhi: Sage.
Kumar, K. (2004). Perspectives on learning in elementary schools. Plenary address. National
Conference on Leadership in India’s Elementary Schools. Retrieved from
http://www.azimpremjifoundation.org/downloads/Plenary%20Address.pdf
Kumar, K. (2009). What is worth teaching? New Delhi: Longman.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Law, J. (2004). After method: The mess in social science research. New York: Routledge.
Law, N., Pelgrum, W.J. & Plomp, T. (2008). Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the
world: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 study. Hong Kong: Springer and
Comparative Education Research Center.
Lewin, K. (1952). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers by Kurt Lewin.
London: Tavistock.
Leye, V. (2009). Information and communication technologies for development: A critical
perspective. Global Governance, 15(1), 29-35.
Light, D. (2009). The role of ICT in enhancing education in developing countries:
Findings from an evaluation of the Intel teach essentials course in
India, Turkey, and Chile. Journal of Education for International Development, 4(2), 1-15.
Linden, L., & Banerjee, A. V (2003). Computer assisted learning: evidence from a randomized
experiment. MIT Poverty Action. Lab Working Paper Series, 5.

232

Lipartito, K. (2003). Picturephone and the information age: The social meaning of failure.
Technology and Culture, 44(1), 50-81.
Little, A. W. (2010). Access to elementary education in India: Policies, politics and progress.
Research Monograph Report 44. London: Create Pathways to Access Consortium.
Luce, E. (2007). In spite of the gods: The strange rise of modern India. New York: Doubleday.
Mattingly, C. (1991). Narrative reflections on practical actions: Two learning experiments in
reflective storytelling. In D. A. Schön (Ed.), The reflective turn: Case studies in and on
educational practice, (235–257). New York: Teachers College Press.
Maxwell, J. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational
Review, 62, 279-300.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in
education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11.
Mehra, B., Merkel, C., & Bishop, A. P. (2004). The internet for empowerment of minority and
marginalized users. New Media and Society, 6(6), 781-802.
Mehrotra, S. K. (2006). The economics of elementary education in India: The challenge of public
finance, private provision, and household costs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mehta, A. (2005). Elementary education in urban/rural areas: Analytic tables. Where do we
stand? New Delhi: NIEPA.
Mehta, A. (2007). Elementary education in unrecognized schools in India: A study of
Punjab based on DISE 2005 data. New Delhi: NIEPA.
Melnyk, S. A., & Handfield, R. B. (1998). May you live in interesting times ... the emergence of
theory-driven empirical research. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 311-319.
Ministry of Law and Justice, Indian Government. (2009). The right of children to free and
compulsory education act, 2009. New Delhi: The Gazette of India. Retrieved from:
http://www.education.nic.in/Elementary/free%20and%20compulsory.pdf
Misa, T. J. Retrieving sociotechnical change from technological determinism. In M.R. Smith
and L. Marx, eds, Does Technology Drive History? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework
for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

233

Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2007). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK):
Confronting the wicked problems of teaching with technology. In C. Crawford, et
al (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education
International Conference 2007. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Mitra, S. (2002). Minimally invasive education: A progress report on the "hole-in-the-wall"
experiments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 367-371.
Morville, P. (2005). Ambient findability. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Books.
Naipul, V.S. (2011). India: A million mutinies now. New York: Vintage Books.
National Council of Educational Research and Training [NCERT]. (1988). National curriculum
for elementary and secondary education: A framework. New Delhi: NCERT.
National Council of Educational Research and Training [NCERT]. (1998). India: Education
policies and curriculum at the upper primary and secondary education levels. New
Delhi: NCERT. Retrieved from:
http://scripts.mit.edu/~varun_ag/readinggroup/images/9/9c/Secondary_Education
National Council of Educational Research and Training [NCERT]. (2005). National curriculum
for elementary and secondary education: The 2005 framework. New Delhi: NCERT.
National Council of Educational Research and Training [NCERT]. (2006). National curriculum
framework 2005: Syllabus for classes at the elementary level. New Delhi: NCERT.
National Council on Teacher Education [NCTE]. (2009). National curriculum framework for
teacher education: Towards preparing professional and humane teacher. New Delhi:
NCTE. Retrieved from http://www.ncte-india.org/publicnotice/NCFTE_2010.pdf
National University of Educational Planning and Administration [NUEPA]. 2011. Elementary
education in India: Progress towards UEE flash statistics. New Delhi: NUEPA.
Ngwa, O., Shu, S.J., Kudi, D., Mbarika, I., & Mbarika, V. (2008). The unintended
consequences of ICT in sub-saharan Africa. Global Devevelopment Papers 2008.
Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/globdev2008/16
No offense taken! Says Bangalore to Obama. (2010, September 15). New Delhi Television
Website. Retrieved from: http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/no-offense-taken-saysbangalore-to-obama-52316
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2001). The well-being of nations:
The role of human and social capital. Paris: OECD.
Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development . (2006). Are students ready for a
technology-rich world? What PISA tells us. Paris: OECD.

234

Pal, J. (2003). The developmental promise of information and communications technology in
India. Contemporary South Asia, 12, 103-119.
Pal, J. (2008). Computers and the promise of development: Aspiration, neoliberalism, and
‘technolity’ in India’s ICTD enterprise. UNESCO Chair/ ICT4D Collective, Working
Papers Series. Retrieved from:
http://tier.cs.berkeley.edu.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/tierwiki/media/2/2b/Joyojeet_Pal.pdf
Pal, J. (2009). My child will be respected: Parental perspectives on computers and education in
Rural India. Information Systems Frontiers, 11(2), 1387-3326.
Parente, S.L. & Prescott, E.C. (1994). Barriers to technology adoption and development. The
Journal of Political Economy, 102(2), 298-321.
Patil, S. (2007). The socio-economic bases of Karnataka politics. In H. Ramaswamy, S.S.
Patagundi, & S.H. Patil (Eds.), Karnataka government and politics
(228-245). New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.
Patra, R., Pal, J., Nedevschi, S., Plauche, M., & Pawar, U. (2007). Usage models of classroom
computing in developing regions. Proceedings from IEEE 2007: International
Conference on Information Technologies and Development.
Pawar, U., Pal, J. & Toyama, K. (2006). Multiple mice for computers in education in developing
countries. International Conference on Information Technologies and Development, May
2006, IEEE Conference Proceedings.
Peattie, L. (2001). Theorizing planning: Some comments on Flyvbjerg’s rationality and power.
International Planning Studies, 6(3), 257-262.
Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a
worldwide educational assessment. Computers and Education, 37, 163-178.
Pelgrum, W. J., & Law, N. (2003). ICT in education around the world: Trends, problems and
prospects. Paris: UNESCO.
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity. One’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17-21.
Peshkin, A. (1993). The goodness of qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 22(2), 23-29.
Pfaffenberger, B. (1992). Technological dramas. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 17(3),
282-312.
Piaget, J. (1954). Construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York: Grossman.

235

Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artifacts: or how the
sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social
Studies of Science, 14(3), 399-441.
Pinch, T.J., & Hughes, P. (1987). The social construction of technological culture. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Prell, C. (2009). Rethinking the social construction of technology through following the actors:
A reappraisal of technological frames. Sociological Research Online, 14(2)
President Obama Bangalored again. (2010, September 15). Deccan Herald. Retrieved from:
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/96896/president-obama-bangalored-again.html
Ramachandran, V., & Sharma, R. (2009). The elementary education system in India. New Delhi:
Routledge.
Rao, K.R. (2007). The emergence of modern Karnataka: History, myth, and ideology. In H.
Ramaswamy, S.S. Patagundi, & S.H. Patil (Eds.), Karnataka government and politics
(30-43). New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.
Rao, N., Cheno, K., & Narain, K. (2003). Primary schooling in China and India: Understanding
how socio-contextual factors moderate the role of the state. International Review of
Education, 49(1), 153-176.
Ravenswood, K. (2011). Eisenhardt's impact on theory in case study research. Journal of
Business Research, 64(7), 680-686.
Ravindran, N. (2011). Tongue twister: Karnataka government makes it mandatory for
immigrants to learn Kannada. India Today. Retrieved from:
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/karnataka-government-makes-it-mandatory-forimmigrants-to-learn-kannada/1/141081.html
Robertson, J.W. (2003). Stepping out of the box: Rethinking the failure for ICTS to transform
schools. Journal of Educational Change, 4, 323-344.
Rogers, P. L. (2000). Barriers to adopting emerging technologies in education. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 22(4), 455–472.
Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sarangapani, P. M. (2003). Constructing school knowledge: An ethnography of learning in an
Indian village. New Delhi: Sage Publications India.
Sen, A. (2005). The argumentative India: Writings on Indian culture, history, and identity.
London: Penguin Books.

236

Schutz, A. (1962). Collected papers (Volume I): The problem of social reality. The Hague:
Martinus Nijhoff.
Schutz, A. (1964). Collected papers (Volume II): Studies in social theory. The Hague: Martinus
Nijhoff.
Shah, P. (2010). Where public and private co-exist: The opportunity in the right to education act.
Pragati: The Indian National Interest Review, 4, 23-28. Retrieved from:
http://pragati.nationalinterest.in/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2010-03-communityed.pdf
Shulman, L.S. (1988). Disciplines of inquiry in education: An overview. In R.M. Jaeger (Ed.),
Complementary methods for research in education (pp. 3-19). Washington, DC:
American Educational Research Association.
Smith, M.R. & Marx, L. (1994). Does technology drive history? The dilemma of technological
determinism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Staples, A, Pugach, M., & Himes, D. (2005). Rethinking the technology integration challenge:
Cases from three urban elementary schools. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 37(3), 281-307.
Suckow, M. (2010). No more boundaries: Sharing best practices in teacher training, retention,
and induction in Gujarat, India. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, 2010 Annual Conference, Denver, CO.
Sujatha, K. (1999). Education of India scheduled tribes. Paris: International Institute for
Educational Planning/UNESCO. Retrieved from:
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001202/120281e.pdf
Thapan, M. (1991). Life at school: An ethnographic study. New Delhi: Oxford Press.
Thapan, M., & Lardinois, R. (2006). Reading Pierre Bourdieu in a dual context: Essays from
India and France. New Delhi: Routledge.
Thapar, R. (2003). Early India: From the origins to AD 1300. New Delhi: Penguin.
Tharoor, S. (2007). The elephant, the tiger, and the cell phone. New York: Arcade Publishing.
Thirumurthy, V., & Seng-Hoon, A. (1999). Mathematics curriculum in India and Singapore.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Childhood Education
International Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX.
Thirumurthy, V., & Sundaram, N. (2003). Computers for young children in India. Childhood
Education: Annual Theme 2003, 79(5), 307-313.

237

Tongia, R., Subrahmanian, E., & Arunachalm, V.S. (2005). Information and communications
technology for sustainable development: Defining a global research agenda. Bangalore:
Allied Press.
Umrani-Khan, F. & Iyer, S. (2009). Computer Attitude and Fluency: A Study of Elementary
School Students. In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2009 (pp. 3521-3530).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
United Nations [UN]. (2002). Implementation of the millennium development goals. New York:
United Nations.
UN. (2005). World summit on the information society: Tunis commitment. New York: United
Nations
UN. (2008). The global information society: A statistical view. New York: United Nations.
Retrieved from http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/LCW190_en.pdf
United Nations Development Program [UNDP]. (2003). Promoting ICT for human development
in Asia, realizing the millennium development goals. New Delhi, India: Asia-Pacific
Development Program and Human Development Resource Centre. Retrieved from
http://www.apdip.net/projects/2003/asian-forum/resources/mdg-ict-matrix.pdf
UNDP. (2010). Meeting the millennium development goals. New York: United Nations.
Retrieved from http://content.undp.org/go/cmservice/stream/asset/?asset_id=262007
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2001). Literacy
as freedom & literacy for all. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001349/134934eb.pdf
UNESCO. (2005). The quality imperative, Global monitoring report. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved
from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001373/137333e.pdf
UNESCO. (2006). Mapping the global literacy challenge. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from
http://www.unesco.org/en/efareport/reports/2006-literacy/
UNESCO. (2008). The global literacy challenge. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001631/163170e.pdf
UNESCO. (2009). Guide to measuring information and communication technologies in
education. Montreal: UNESCO Institute for Statistics. Retrieved from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001562/156207e.pdf
UNESCO. (2010). Education for all, Global monitoring report. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001866/186606E.pdf

238

U.S. Department of Education. (2010). National educational technology plan. Washington, D.C.:
Ed Pub. Retrieved from http://issuu.com/world.bank.publications/docs/9780821385876/3
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Van Maanen, J. (2002). The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. In A.M. Huberman &
M.B. Miles (Eds.), The qualitative researcher’s companion (101-117). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Wade, R.H. (2002) Bridging the digital divide: New route to development or new form of
dependency? Global Governance, 8(4), 53-85.
Walsham, G. (2010). ICTs for the broader development of India: An analysis of the literature.
Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 41(4), 1-20.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interviewing.
New York: The Free Press.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wild, K. (2003). Measuring and enhancing the impact of ICTs on the millennium development
goals. A discussion paper for the 4th session of the UN ICT Task Force.
Wilson, M. (2002). Understanding the international ICT and development discourse:
Assumptions and implications. The Southern African Journal of Information and
Communication, 3(1).
Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121-136.
Winner, L. (1993). Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and
the philosophy of technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 18(1), 362-378.
Wong, K. (2007). Using ICT in primary schools: Different perceptions by school heads and
teachers in Hong Kong. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 3(3), 342-366.
Work harder to meet the Bangalore challenge. (2010, September 15). The Hindu. Retrieved
from: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article666585.ece
World Bank. (2003). ICT and MDGs: A world bank perspective. Washington: World Bank
World Bank. (2010). The millennium development goals and the road to 2015: Building on
progress and responding to crisis. Washington, D.C: World Bank Publications. Retrieved
from http://issuu.com/world.bank.publications/docs/9780821385876/3
Yeung, B. (2008). Digital equality: Empowering underprivileged youth in India with information
and technology. Edutopia. Retrieved from: http://www.edutopia.org/global-educationindia

239

Yin, R. (1993). Applications of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publishing.
Yin, R. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publishing.
Yin, R. (2010). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: Guilford Press.
Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and
middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172-223.

240