This study investigates the differences in adolescent engagement with Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), such as computers, the Internet, and mobile phones. Involving 698 second-year high school students from urban, rural, and ethnic Tibetan regions of China, it finds that patterns of access and use indicate status and power, and the meanings teenagers pour into the technologies articulate social and educational differences. On average, Tibetans are disadvantaged in access, and the return on parental education is greater for the mainstream Han than it is for Tibetans. However, state ‘preferential policies’ have mitigated Tibetans’ plight in use, which makes the least privileged to be Han students with parents having no more than six years of education.
BenklerY (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.
2.
BonfadelliH (2002) The Internet and knowledge gaps: a theoretical and empirical investigation. European Journal of Communication17(1): 65–84. DOI: 10.1177/0267323102017001607.
3.
Bu¨chiMJustNLatzerM (2016) Modeling the second-level digital divide: A five-country study of social differences in Internet use. New Media & Society18(11): 2703–2722. DOI: 10.1177/1461444815604154.
4.
BuckinghamD (2005) Schooling the Digital Generation: Popular Culture, the New Media and the Future of Education. London: Institute of Education, University of London.
5.
CarrNG (2010) The Shallows: How the Internet Is Changing the Way We Think, Read and Remember. London: Atlantic Books.
6.
ChanAS (2008) Slashdot.org. In: TurkleS (ed.) Inner History of Devices. Cambridge, Mass.; London: MIT Press, pp. 125–137.
ChengH (2010) Educational barriers for migrant children in China: A mixed-methods analysis focused on ethnic minorities. Columbia University, New York.
9.
CollinsK (2010) Advanced sampling designs in mixed research. In: TashakkoriATeddlieC (eds) Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. London: Sage.
DiMaggioPHargittaiECelesteC, et al. (2004) Digital inequality: From unequal access to differentiated use. Social Inequality. Russell Sage Foundation.
12.
EynonRGenietsA (2016) The digital skills paradox: how do digitally excluded youth develop skills to use the internet?Learning, Media and Technology41(3). Taylor & Francis: 463–479. DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2014.1002845.
13.
GorskiP (2005) Education equity and the digital divide. Association for the Advancement of Computing In Education Journal13(1): 3–45.
14.
GunkelD (2003) Second thoughts: Toward a critique of the digital divide. New Media & Society5(4): 499–522. DOI: 10.1177/146144480354003.
15.
HargittaiE (2010) Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills anduses among members of the ‘Net Generation’. Sociological Inquiry80(1): 92–113. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x.
16.
HargittaiEHinnantA (2008) Digital inequality: differences in young adults’ use of the Internet. Communication Research35(5): 602–621. DOI: 10.1177/0093650208321782.
17.
HargittaiELittE (2011) The tweet smell of celebrity success: Explaining variation in Twitter adoption among a diverse group of young adults. New Media & Society13(5): 824–842. DOI: 10.1177/1461444811405805.
HuXSalazarMA (2010) Ethnicity, rurality, and status: Hukou and the institutional and cultural determinants of social status in Tibet. In: WhyteMK (ed.) One Country, Two Societies: Rural-Urban Inequality in Contemporary China. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
20.
IgnatowGRobinsonL (2017) Pierre Bourdieu: theorizing the digital. Information Communication and Society20(7). Taylor & Francis: 950–966. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2017.1301519.
JacksonLAZhaoYKolenicA, et al. (2008) Race, gender, and information technology use: the new digital divide. CyberPsychology & Behavior11(4): 437–442. DOI: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0157.
23.
LingRS (2012) Taken for Grantedness: The Embedding of Mobile Communication Into Society. Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: The MIT Press.
24.
LivingstoneSHelsperE (2007) Gradations in digital inclusion: Children, young people and the digital divide. New Media & Society9(4): 671–696. DOI: 10.1177/1461444807080335.
25.
MaxwellJA (1997) Designing a qualitative study. In: BickmanLRogD (eds) Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. London: Sage.
26.
MicheliM (2015) What is new in the digital divide? Understanding Internet use by teenagers from different social backgrounds. Communication and Information Technologies Annual10: 55–87. DOI: 10.1108/S2050-206020150000010003.
27.
MillJS (1991) On Liberty and Other Essays. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
MillerD (2013) Social Networking Sites. In: HorstHAMillerD (eds) Digital Anthropology. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 146–164.
29.
MingHH (2009) Growing up in the urban shadow: Realities and dreams of migrant workers’ children in Beijing and Shanghai. Cambridge, Mass.
30.
MossbergerKTolbertCJStansburyM (2003) Virtual Inequality: Beyond the Digital Divide. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
31.
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (1999) Falling through the net: defining the digital divide. U.S. Department of Commerce.
32.
NorrisP (2001) Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
NottenNPeterJKraaykampG, et al. (2009) Research Note: Digital Divide Across Borders—A Cross-National Study of Adolescents’ Use of Digital Technologies. European Sociological Review25(5): 551–560. DOI: 10.1093/esr/jcn071.
34.
OblingerDOblingerJL (2005) Educating the Net Generation. Washington, DC: Educause.
35.
PeterJValkenburgPM (2006) Adolescents’ internet use: Testing the ‘disappearing digital divide’ versus the ‘emerging digital differentiation’ approach. Poetics34: 293–305. DOI: 10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.005.
36.
Plano ClarkVLCreswellJW (2015) Understanding Research: A Consumer’s Guide. 2nd ed. London: Pearson Education.
37.
PostiglioneGA (2008) Making Tibetans in China: the educational challenges of harmonious multiculturalism. Educational Review60(1): 1–20. DOI: 10.1080/00131910701794481.
38.
PrenskyM (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon9(5): 1–6. DOI: 10.1108/10748120110424816.
39.
QiuL (2009) Working-Class Network Society: Communication Technology and the Information Have-Less in Urban China. Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: The MIT Press.
40.
RobinsonLCottenSROnoH, et al. (2015) Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information Communication and Society18(5): 569–582. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1012532.
41.
SandelowskiM (2000) Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. Research in Nursing & Health23: 246–255. DOI: 10.1002/1098-240X(200006)23:3<246:: AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-H.
42.
SautmanB (1999) Expanding Access to Higher Education for China’s National Minorities: Policies of Preferential Admissions. In: PostiglioneGA (ed.) China’s National Minority Education: Culture, Schooling, and Development. New York; London: Falmer Press.
43.
SelwynN (2006) Digital division or digital decision? A study of non-users and low-users of computers. Poetics34(4--5): 273–292. DOI: 10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.003.
44.
SelwynN (2011) Schools and Schooling in the Digital Age: A Critical Analysis. London: Routledge.
45.
ServonLJ (2002) Bridging the Digital Divide: Technology, Community, and Public Policy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
46.
StrangV (2006) The Meaning of Water. Oxford: Berg.
47.
TapscottD (1998) Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
48.
TapscottD (2009) Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation Is Changing Your World. New York: McGraw-Hill.
49.
TeddlieCYuF (2007) Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research1(1): 77–100. DOI: 10.1177/2345678906292430.
50.
TurkleS (2011) Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. New York: Basic Books.
51.
ValkenburgPMPeterJ (2009) Social consequences of the Internet for adolescents: a decade of research. Current Directions in Psychological Science18(1): 1–5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01595.x.
52.
van DeursenAvan DijkJ (2011) Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media & Society13(6): 893–911. DOI: 10.1177/1461444810386774.
53.
van DeursenAvan DijkJ (2014) The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society16(3): 507–526. DOI: 10.1177/1461444813487959.
54.
van DeursenAvan DijkJ (2015) New Media and the Digital Divide. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Second Edi. Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.95086-4.
55.
van DijkJ (2005) The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Information Society. London: Sage.
56.
van DijkJ (2006) Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics34: 221–235. DOI: 10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004.
57.
WallisC (2011) New Media Practices in China: Youth Patterns, Processes, and Politics. International Journal of Communication5: 406–436. DOI: 1932–8036/20110406.
58.
WarschauerM (2003) Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide. London: MIT Press.
59.
WarschauerM (2011) Learning in the Cloud: How (and Why) to Transform Schools with Digital Media. New York: Teachers College Press.
60.
WhyteMK (2010) One Country, Two Societies: Rural-Urban Inequality in Contemporary China. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
61.
WilkinSDaviesHEynonR (2017) Addressing digital inequalities amongst young people: conflicting discourses and complex outcomes. Oxford Review of Education43(3). Routledge: 332–347. DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2017.1305058.
62.
XiangB (2007) How far are the left-behind left behind? A preliminary study in rural China. Population, Space and Place13(3): 179–191. DOI: 10.1002/psp.437.
63.
XiaoZ (2013) ‘You are too out!’: a mixed methods approach to the study of ‘digital divides’ in three Chinese senior secondary schools. Durham University. Available at:http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/8456/.
64.
XiaoZKasimAHigginsS (2016) Same difference? Understanding variation in the estimation of effect sizes from educational trials. International Journal of Educational Research77: 1–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2016.02.001.
