What Does Broadband Mean?

A lot of the stories I grazed through early this morning on my iPhone were about the U.S. stimulus package and, specifically, how a significant portion of that money was going to the tech industry.  One of the expressed concerns  was that much of the money would be going to large corporations, such as IBM, Cisco, and AT&T — and perhaps at the expense of innovation.  I have to agree with this concern, though innovation is only part of the intent of stimulus, and many of the projects (problems) in my country are huge.

Flickr user, Keith Lam, posted this picture of the Cotton Bowl playing on his laptop — in the airport.  He posted the photo to Flickr via e-mail.

One such huge project (problem) is broadband expansion — making broadband information (The knowledge economy) available to all U.S. citizens.  One of the questions being struggled with is, “What is broadband?”

Congress has earmarked $7.2 billion in stimulus aid to deploy broadband in underserved parts of the USA. But what does that mean, really?

The Federal Communications Commission is trying to come up with answers. At the request of lawmakers, the agency is in the process of defining “broadband,” “underserved” and other terms. The FCC is advising the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which will make the final call on how stimulus money gets doled out. (What’s ‘broadband’?)

Definitions vary wildly.  AT&T, according to the story, suggests a tiered approach, saying that 200 kilobits per second is a good starting minimum for a definition of “broadband.”  Intel, on the other hand, says that 100 megabits is more reasonable.  Considering how much of the content flowing around the Internet today is multimedia (i.e. YouTube), I’d side with the 100 megabits.

The challenge is getting it out to rural areas — and so much of the U.S. is rural and underserved by access to information.  According to the story, the median download speed in the U.S., as of 2008, was 2.3 megabits.  That rate was provided by a Communications Workers of America survey (see State-by-State Bandwidth Ranking).  Of course some states are much lower, Montana mentioned with only 1.3 MB.

The story then attempted to compare the U.S. broadband with that of other industrial countries, by listing the mean bandwidths for Japan (63mbs), South Korea (49mbs), France (17mbs), and Canada (7.6).  I have put together a data table that includes a number of factors that make achieving higher mean bandwidth easier in some countries than it is in others.

This is no excuse, however, for not bringing people into the knowledge age with all haste, and my country has floundered too long.

So, my question to you is, “What is broadband to you?”  I’m not interested so much in numbers, as I am in what kind of access to information should citizens from any country expect to have in the 21st century?  What do we need to know and what does that information need to look like?

Thanks in advance.

Powered by ScribeFire.

8 thoughts on “What Does Broadband Mean?”

  1. Interesting story this morning here in Australia about our national broadband network…. Our government is going out on their own to form a company to develop a nation wide network. Story at http://whirlpool.net.au/

    For me as a teacher though I am excited about this as it gives me the ability to create media content for my students that can truly bring 1 to 1 learning to a whole new level. We are working with schools in second life at the moment and most of my students don’t have the speed at home to make this happen. I also want to have a lifestyle where content will be delivered to me what I want.

  2. If I were at my parents house and counting login time and directly going to your website it would take me 10 minutes (5 just to login). They live “in the country” and in a canyon. They are on dial up. I am online 8 -10 hrs or so hours a day except at their house. It is intolerable. After six months of trying to improve access via satellite or new providers we have given up. My mom is getting a netbook she can use at the public library. If I were still a student the access at my childhood home would be prohibitive compared to the access my town living peers would have. Some of my students still struggle with this because I live in a semi-rural area. When we talked about the need for infrastructure I didn’t think roads and bridges, I thought digital network infrastructure. Just this morning I was suggesting that the real access problem in the US is not computers but ability and know how in using available tools online. But this is a real problem too. It is sometimes easy to forget about the rural areas and the limited access they have.

  3. I feel very fortunate to finally have access to a cable Internet service,which was preceded by a wireless service that worked when nothing interfered with the line of sight (leaves on trees in the summer seemed to be the worst offender). I have a colleague who lives in a rural area where the only service available is dial-up and it is not reliable. She and her family of three users has chosen a Verizon modem at $60.00 per month, but they are still limited to one user at a time. So this costly option, which many cannot afford, can still be described as limited service.

    I certainly hope the emphasis on broadband makes it possible for all to be connected!

  4. How fast is fast enough? I think a steady 5MB is a good number. The difference between the US and the rest of the countries on that list…and most of the rest of the world for that matter. Internet has been considered a utility. Once the US decides that being connected is a utility just like water, sewer, power, etc then we’ll make some in roads, until then the US won’t be able to keep up with places like Japan were $20/month will get you 25MB or more. It’s one thing to have access to the Internet it’s another thing to make it affordable. Until the US decides that it falls under a utility rather than allow big companies to control it…the US will always be behind I’m afraid.

  5. How is an invidualized graduation plan different than an IEP?

    A fundamental flaw in the secondary system is that it is mired in competition. For example, how do we define the purpose of IEPs? Some of us (us = educators) see them as a way to equalize the playing field, so those who need extra help can remain in the game. Some of us see them as a way to maintain motivation and a steady rate of skill acquisition and learning. Which purpose are IEPs most likely to accomplish?

    To put it another way, our system is designed to separate the cans from the can nots, (the supervisors from the factory floor workers). We grade; we rank; we reward those who distinguish themselves within this seemingly objective ranking system. When the system tries to define achievement through some different means, other than ranking and grading, like skill acquisition or performance assessment for example, the system is said to be dumbing itself down or rewarding mediocrity, etc. In essence, the type of competition inherent in the secondary system forces us to push some kids to the bottom and eventually out, yet we point to these same students as evidence that the system is failing. We have to rearrange our thinking and the system so that we accept that all students need to continue their education. We need to create a system that nurtures learners, (those who respect learning and want to continue to learn), rather than kids who simply want to be ranked higher than their peers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *