| Итог: | Technology penetration in LDCs has been observed to be driven by the promises inherent in technologies however, evaluating its impact have been evasive (Adedokun-Shittu & Shittu, 2011; Unwin & Day, 2005).This illusive perception of technology has beclouded the specific and local impacts technology has on education in LDCs. This has consequently led educators in LDCs to entirely refer to technology impacts derived by evaluation tools designed in developed countries (DC) rather than create local tools that derive specific and local impacts.Ashraf, Swatman and Hanisch (2008) argue that applying indicators for measuring ICT impact which are designed in one context and then applied in another has led to many failures of ICT4D projects.Researches by InfoDev (2006) emphasized that the aims of any impact evaluations are to see how far the intervention has reached its desired audience, to identify effects and to measure impacts considering different quantifiable local indicators. Heeks (2005) maintains that improved ICT4D interventions must be associated with local data content and ICT skills for sustainable impacts to be feasible.
|
|---|