Overall, the BANG evaluation was successful in meeting its objectives of helping students mold their research to better address community needs, and in some cases, highlight an ICT policy area. What is perhaps more important is the way in which BANG has evolved from a group of talented students with a focus on pure computer science, to a cohesive team of software engineers with a deep understanding of the socio-cultural issues that impact on -- and are impacted by -- the use of the systems they build.

Executive summary

This report documents a two-year collaboration between bridges.org and the Broadband Applications Networking Group (BANG) during 2003-2005.

Computer science research in developing countries
Increasingly, research that shows a direct benefit to mankind receives preference in funding. The advent of technology and its close ties with industry has accelerated this shift  and it is particularly apparent in developing nations where budgets for non-applied research are low. But the reality of the so-called "digital divide" means that most technology advances never reach the majority of people in developing countries. And there is growing recognition that ICT-related research needs to go further to meet developing country needs. Some technology-related disciplines have emerged with a broader perspective that encompasses socio-economic development. "Computer Science" does not normally incorporate community needs, but some academics believe that computer science in developing countries should also be adapted to include a social element. They argue that developing country universities do not have the luxury of studying technologies that are out of reach of ordinary people.

The Broadband Applications Network Group (BANG)
The Broadband Applications Networking Group is comprised of students pursuing Masters and PhD studies in computer science at the University of the Western Cape and the University of Cape Town. BANG believes that computer science in Africa should be more needs-driven, and the group aims to address this issue by conducting research that connects better to the community or affects ICT policy-making processes. In particular, BANG explores new ideas and methodologies for improving ICT access for disadvantaged groups in South Africa.

The BANG students first came together in 2003 with eleven distinct research projects, and it evolved from there. BANG research currently centres around two umbrella projects: the  Multi-modal Telemedicine Inter-communicator (MUTI) project applying computer science to rural telemedicine, and the SoftBridge Instant Messaging Bridging Architecture (SIMBA) project working on Deaf telephony. MUTI and SIMBA are both communications systems that allow synchronous and near-synchronous transmissions in environments with poor or intermittant connectivity. At the heart of each system is the "SoftBridge", a framework that allows users with different technologies and capabilities to exchange information in a seamless way.

The bridges.org evaluation
Bridges.org was engaged to work with the team of students to help them critically evaluate their efforts and apply good practice principles in the field of ICT and development. The bridges.org Real Access/Real Impact (RA/RI) framework was the main tool used in this evaluation, with two methodologies: (1) the Real Access criteria were applied to analyse all issues surrounding ICT access and use, and (2) the 12 Habits of Highly Effective ICT-Enabled Development Initiatives were used to gauge whether and how the students applied basic good practices in ICT project management to their research work in the communities. The evauluation was conducted in four phases.

The first phase identified initial strengths and weaknesses of each project (and of the group as a whole), and set out a framework for evaluation of future phases of the BANG effort and its constituent projects. The evaluators identified an overall lack of cohesion among the BANG group, with students bringing widely differing approaches, projects, and understandings of the goals of BANG.

The second phase focused on putting the previous recommendations into action; bridges.org worked with BANG leaders and encouraged students to frame their thinking around Real Access principles, and formulated a two-part questionnaire that students used to critically analyse their projects. The salient issue that emerged in Phase Two was the dichotomy between those projects designed at inception to address a particular need in a community and those that were more technical in nature. The evaluators also urged students to consider the ICT policy aspects of their work, and consider how they could leverage their work to focus attention on certain issues and help drive needed change in legal and regulatory regimes affecting ICT use.

The third phase looked at the SoftBridge system as a whole through the lens of the Real Access/Real Impact framework. The group conceptualised the SoftBridge, breaking it down into functional layers that BANG has termed an "Open User Inter-connection (OUI)" model: User/social (the social dynamics that affect how the user communicates), Modalities (different ways, or modes, of communication), Human Computer Interface, Device, and Network. The group used the RA/RI framework to refine the OUI model and SoftBridge concepts by exploring the idea of using Real Access as a design rationale for the system. Hence, Real Access principles could be used as a framework for each layer of the OUI model in order to define the social issues that a SoftBridge would address.

During the fourth phase of the evaluation, the BANG group shifted its work from numerous research projects loosely connected by the SoftBridge system and the BANG ethos, toward a collection of sub-projects directly associated under the MUTI and SIMBA umbrella projects. These two projects not only provided cohesion for the group's overall socially-focused approach, they also offered real testing sites for computer science to be applied. The fourth phase of the evaluation focused on understanding and applying the 12 Habits to the the MUTI and SIMBA projects, which helped the students gain a deep understanding of the socio-cultural issues surrounding the introduction and uptake of the systems by each target community.

Remarks
The evaluation process encouraged BANG students to “think out of the box” and broaden their approach toward computer science research. The methodologies were found to be particularly useful during the design stage of a research project, as a checklist for writing proposals. However, in some cases the framework is more effective as a means of sparking thought around the issues than as a rigid means of evaluation.  

The concept that computer science research can be leveraged to influence change in ICT policy processes was a part of the BANG ethos, and through the evaluation workshops with bridges.org the students gained a deeper understanding of how this could be accomplished.

Addressing the need for continuity and sustainability will continue to be a challenge for the BANG initiative as it goes forward. Building trust within the community is essential for the effective implementation of projects and uptake of technology, and underlying this is the trust developed between the "donor" and "recipient". But students graduate and move on. It is therefore crucial that knowledge about the communities and projects is institutionalised, and that BANG leaders play a role to ensure continuity within an area of research over the long term.  

Overall, the BANG evaluation was successful in meeting its objectives of helping students mold their research to better address community needs, and in some cases, highlight an ICT policy area. What is perhaps more important is the way in which BANG has evolved from a group of talented students with a focus on pure computer science, to a cohesive team of software engineers with a deep understanding of the socio-cultural issues that impact on -- and are impacted by -- the use of the systems they build.