ABSTRACT
Much of our current knowledge about technology in research and learning settings relates to devices and software programs: What types should be purchased?;How many should we buy?;What training is required?;and What return on investment will they produce? The implicit message communicated by this research is that technology transforms learning by simply being introduced into a setting -- and that any technology tool will produce powerful opportunities for learning. Just give youth iPads and results will follow. Over the past several years, groups of learning scientists, critical scholars, and participatory researchers have pushed back against this perspective, arguing that: (a) most traditional technologies utilized by scholars today reproduce problematic "banking" methods of learning (Freire, 1970);(b) scholars, leaders, and educators who rush to integrate technology in formal and informal learning settings often overlook the ways that race, identity, power and privilege shape the technologies that they give youth;(c) context matters -- unlocking the benefits of these new participatory forms of technologies for learning requires a shift in pedagogical approaches, embracing more critical, de-colonizing, and participatory forms like youth participatory action research (YPAR);and (d) new, mobile, interactive, accessible forms of technology have the potential to transform learning by creating a new participatory culture that fosters collaboration, communication, critical consciousness, and creativity. Throughout this dissertation, I use the term participatory technologies to describe these emerging tools. I define participatory technologies as the broad set of technology tools that can allow youth to engage with, critique, and co-create the systems, structures, and environments that shape their everyday lives. Participatory technology tools allow individuals to be both consumers and producers of information;and as the term "participatory" suggests, I argue that it is important for youth to use technology to "read the world" using their own socio-cultural lenses;critique and dismantle systems of power, privilege and oppression;and become active participants in co-creating a more just and equitable world around them. Using participatory technologies, youth can examine, influence, and alter the way that power is conferred and exercised across many arenas ranging from public health (#StayHome), politics (InstagramLive town halls, Arab Spring), civil rights (#BlackLivesMatter), urban planning (Google's Sidewalk Labs), disaster response (Ushahidi), to social justice (#MeToo). In the era of COVID-19, the case for participatory technologies could not be more urgent. As Alain Labrique, director of the Johns Hopkins University Global -mHealth Initiative shares, "The connectivity and participation through technology we have today gives us ammunition to fight this pandemic in ways we never previously thought possible" (A. Park, 2020, para. 3). In the face of this unprecedented global pandemic, colleges and classrooms have rushed onto online settings, physicians are conducting tele-visits through FaceTime and WhatsApp;"non-essential" workforce members, as well as family and friends, are connecting over Zoom;"social distancing" adherence is being tracked by epidemiologists through geo-location data;and global dance parties are being held on Instagram Live. To date, however, the global technology response to COVID-19 has only scratched the surface of what new participatory tools offer. For example, much needed real-time data on where outbreaks are occurring, how many tests are available, and what resources exist in communities in terms of critical health services, tests, or groceries (Where can I buy eggs? Which places take WIC for baby formula? Where are the lines the shortest? Where/when can elders and vulnerable populations shop safely?) (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the widespread adoption of digital pathology (DP) for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. This paradigm shift is likely to influence how we function routinely in the postpandemic era. We present learnings from early adoption of DP for a live digital sign-out from home in a risk-mitigated environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We aimed to validate DP for remote reporting from home in a real-time environment and evaluate the parameters influencing the efficiency of a digital workflow. Eighteen pathologists prospectively validated DP for remote use on 567 biopsy cases including 616 individual parts from 7 subspecialties over a duration from March 21, 2020, to June 30, 2020. The slides were digitized using Roche Ventana DP200 whole-slide scanner and reported from respective homes in a risk-mitigated environment. RESULTS: Following re-review of glass slides, there was no major discordance and 1.2% (n = 7/567) minor discordance. The deferral rate was 4.5%. All pathologists reported from their respective homes from laptops with an average network speed of 20 megabits per second. CONCLUSION: We successfully validated and adopted a digital workflow for remote reporting with available resources and were able to provide our patients, an undisrupted access to subspecialty expertise during these unprecedented times.