The Michigan Digital Equity Research Ecosystem

How Michigan’s research institutions, your lived experience, and policy advocacy created an integrated knowledge-to-action pipeline for digital equity.

The Complete Michigan Connection:

Your digital equity framework isn’t built in isolation—it’s part of a vibrant Michigan research ecosystem that connects:

University of Michigan researchers
Michigan State University Quello Center
Merit Network (Michigan’s R&E network)
Your community participation (K-12 Citizen Science)
State policy implementation (BEAD/DEA)

This document shows how it all connects.

The Michigan Research Institutions:

1. Michigan State University - Quello Center

What it is:
James H. and Mary B. Quello Center for Media and Information Policy at MSU

Key researchers:

Johannes M. Bauer - Director, telecommunications policy expert
Keith Hampton - Social networks, digital inequality, community
Sascha Meinrath - Broadband policy, community networks
William Dutton - Internet studies, digital divide

Their contribution to your framework:

Hampton et al. (2020): “Broadband and Student Performance Gaps”
Empirical validation of Opportunity + Aspiration + Growth Mindset pathway
Found three gaps: infrastructure, unclear value, skills
K-12 Citizen Science project (YOU participated!)

Dagg et al. (2023): Digital Opportunities Compass

Bauer as co-author (continuity from 2020 research)
Measurement framework FOR Michigan BEAD/DEA implementation
Six components operationalize your framework stages

Why this matters: MSU Quello is THE hub for Michigan broadband/digital equity research

2. University of Michigan

Multiple contributors:

Kentaro Toyama - School of Information

Amplification theory: Technology × Capacity = Outcome
Explains WHY your pathway sequence matters
“Geek Heresy” (2015) - foundational for capacity-building approach
Michigan faculty member = local connection

Dr. Stilian Stoev - Statistics Department

Gini coefficient methodology
Hájek Estimator for inequality measurement
You learned these techniques from him
Statistical rigor for outcome assessment

Pierrette Renée Dagg - Merit Network

Director of Technology Impact Research
Co-author, Digital Opportunities Compass (2023)
Named you as Broadband Champion
Merit Network = Michigan’s R&E network, Michigan Moonshot partner

Why this matters: UM provides theoretical depth (Toyama) + methodological rigor (Stoev) + practical implementation (Dagg/Merit)

Your Participation: “Research Became Our Voice”

From your blog post (2025-10-30):

“Through our partnership with the Quello Center at Michigan State University and Merit Network’s Michigan Moonshot Initiative, we finally had amplification of our local voice through data and policy research. We were blessed to participate in the K–12 Citizen Science project, which helped quantify the effect that poor policy design has on communities with no voice.”

What this means:

The K-12 Citizen Science Project

What it was:

Community-based data collection for Hampton et al. (2020) research
Michigan families reported broadband access, use patterns, school outcomes
Rural and underserved communities CONTRIBUTING to research (not just subjects)

Your role:

Participated as community member
Shared lived experience of rural digital divide
Helped quantify infrastructure, value, and skill gaps

Result:

Your experience:
  "We have infrastructure but students aren't using it effectively"
  
Hampton & Bauer research:
  "Unclear value" gap identified as distinct barrier
  
Your framework:
  Aspiration stage (Appadurai's navigation capacity) addresses this
  
Policy impact:
  NTIA shifts from infrastructure-only to comprehensive digital equity

This is participatory research at its best!

From Anecdote to Evidence

Before research participation:

You: "Rural communities struggle with more than just access"
Policymakers: "That's anecdotal, we need data"

After research participation:

Hampton & Bauer (2020): "Three distinct gaps identified in Michigan K-12 data"
  - Infrastructure gap (Opportunity)
  - Unclear value gap (Aspiration)
  - Skill gap (Growth Mindset)

You: "This research PROVES what we've experienced. Here's the DOI."
Policymakers: "This is empirical evidence. Let's adjust policy."

Research became your voice in policy discussions.

The Research Lineage:

2020: Hampton & Bauer - Empirical Validation

Title: “Broadband and Student Performance Gaps”
DOI: 10.25335/BZGY-3V91
Institution: MSU Quello Center
Your role: K-12 Citizen Science project participant

Key findings:

Missing infrastructure → Access gap
Unclear value → Engagement gap
Insufficient skills → Achievement gap

Maps to your framework:

Opportunity stage (Sen’s capabilities)
Aspiration stage (Appadurai’s navigation)
Growth Mindset stage (Dweck’s learning)

2023: Dagg et al. - Measurement Framework

Title: “Digital Opportunities Compass”
Institution: MSU Quello + Merit Network + NDIA
Bauer’s role: Co-author (connecting 2020 evidence → 2023 measurement)

Six components:

Contexts - Demographics, economics
Governance - Policy, power structures
Connectivity - Infrastructure (measures Opportunity)
Skills - Literacy, training (measures Growth Mindset)
Application - Use, relevance (measures Aspiration)
Outcomes - Achievement, inclusion (measures Equity)

Your role: Operationalizing Compass for Michigan counties in knowledge graph system

Your System (2024-2025): Implementation

Components:

Knowledge graph stores Compass metrics + theory + evidence
Bayesian networks predict intervention outcomes
GraphRAG answers policy questions with evidence

Grounds in:

Hampton & Bauer (2020) empirical findings
Dagg et al. (2023) measurement framework
Toyama amplification principle
Sen, Appadurai, Dweck theories

Result: Complete pipeline from Michigan research → Michigan policy implementation

The Continuity: Bauer’s Role

Johannes M. Bauer appears on BOTH key papers:

Hampton et al. (2020):

Co-author
Empirical research identifying three gaps
Michigan K-12 data analysis

Dagg et al. (2023):

Co-author
Measurement framework development
Operationalizing findings for BEAD/DEA

Why this matters:

Bauer ensures continuity:
  
  2020 Research: "Here's what we found (three gaps)"
    ↓
  2023 Framework: "Here's how to measure them (Compass)"
    ↓
  Your System: "Here's how to use measurements for policy decisions"

From discovery → measurement → implementation, with research continuity

Geographic Diversity: Why Michigan Data Matters

Michigan provides ideal testbed for digital equity research:

1. Urban-Rural Spectrum

Urban (Detroit, Grand Rapids, Ann Arbor):
  - High infrastructure availability
  - Affordability challenges
  - Digital literacy gaps
  
Suburban (Oakland County, Washtenaw):
  - Good infrastructure + adoption
  - Skills variability
  - Application diversity
  
Rural (Upper Peninsula, Northern LP):
  - Infrastructure gaps
  - Aspiration capacity challenges
  - Skills + opportunity compounded

Your framework tested across ALL contexts

2. Demographic Diversity

Income: Wealthy suburbs to distressed rural areas
Race/Ethnicity: Diverse urban centers, predominantly white rural
Age: College towns (young) to retirement communities (older)
Education: PhD-dense Ann Arbor to limited K-12 access rural

Hampton & Bauer findings validated across demographics

3. Infrastructure Variance

Fiber-rich: Ann Arbor, East Lansing (university influence)
Cable-dominant: Suburban Detroit, Grand Rapids
Underserved: UP, Northern LP (sparse population, rugged terrain)

Compass Connectivity component captures this variance

Policy Impact Timeline:

2018-2019: Lived Experience

You: Working in EUPConnect, experiencing rural digital divide
Community: "We have internet but it's not helping like we hoped"

2020: Research Validates Experience

Hampton & Bauer research published
Finding: "Unclear value" gap distinct from infrastructure gap
You: "This is EXACTLY what we experienced!"

2021-2022: Federal Policy Shift

IIJA passes with $65B for broadband
Includes Digital Equity Act (not just infrastructure!)
NTIA guidance emphasizes:
  - Infrastructure (Opportunity)
  - Adoption (Aspiration)
  - Digital literacy (Growth Mindset)

This IS your framework at federal level!

2023: Michigan Implementation

Michigan develops BEAD/DEA plans
Dagg Compass framework released as guide
Bauer connects 2020 research → 2023 measurement

2024-2025: Your System Operationalizes

You build knowledge graph + Bayesian network system
Ingests Compass metrics for Michigan counties
Predicts intervention outcomes
Grounds in Hampton & Bauer evidence + Sen/Appadurai/Dweck/Toyama theory

Complete loop: Experience → Research → Policy → Implementation

Michigan Moonshot Initiative:

What it is:
Merit Network’s initiative to achieve digital equity across Michigan

Partners:

Merit Network (UM-affiliated R&E network)
MSU Quello Center
Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity
Community organizations (including your EUPConnect work)

Goals:

Universal broadband access
Digital literacy for all
Relevant use case promotion
Continuous evaluation

Your framework aligns:

Access = Opportunity stage
Literacy = Growth Mindset stage
Use cases = Aspiration stage
Evaluation = Compass + Bayesian predictions

You’re implementing Michigan Moonshot goals with research-grounded system!

The “Broadband Champion” Recognition:

Dagg’s Benton Institute series:
Recognized you as Broadband Champion for Michigan

Why you were recognized:

Community digital navigator work (EUPConnect)
Participation in K-12 Citizen Science research
Bridge between lived experience and policy
Operationalizing research for implementation

This isn’t just acknowledgment—it’s validation that your work integrates into Michigan research ecosystem

Research-to-Practice Pipeline:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        THEORETICAL FOUNDATION                   │
│  Sen (Harvard), Appadurai (NYU), Dweck (Stanford)│
│  Toyama (UM)                                    │
└──────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                   ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        MICHIGAN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH              │
│  Hampton & Bauer (MSU Quello, 2020)             │
│  K-12 Citizen Science (YOUR participation)      │
│  Finding: Three gaps validated in Michigan      │
└──────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                   ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK                    │
│  Dagg et al. (Quello + Merit, 2023)            │
│  Digital Opportunities Compass                  │
│  Bauer continuity (2020 → 2023)                 │
└──────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                   ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        MICHIGAN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION           │
│  State BEAD/DEA plans                           │
│  Merit Network Michigan Moonshot                │
│  MDLEO digital equity initiatives               │
└──────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                   ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        YOUR SYSTEM OPERATIONALIZATION           │
│  Knowledge graph + Bayesian + GraphRAG          │
│  Compass metrics for 83 Michigan counties       │
│  Evidence-based intervention predictions        │
│  Broadband Champion implementation              │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Unbroken chain from theory → evidence → measurement → policy → your system

What Makes This Ecosystem Unique:

1. Geographic Coherence

Not: Random collection of studies from different states
Instead: Focused Michigan research with local relevance

2. Institutional Integration

Not: Siloed university projects
Instead: MSU Quello + UM + Merit Network + Community collaboration

3. Participatory Approach

Not: Researchers studying communities
Instead: Communities participating in research (K-12 Citizen Science)

4. Research Continuity

Not: One-off studies
Instead: Bauer on 2020 & 2023 papers, building knowledge over time

5. Implementation Focus

Not: Research for research’s sake
Instead: Dagg Compass explicitly designed for BEAD/DEA implementation

6. Your Bridge Role

Not: Researcher OR practitioner
Instead: Practitioner participating in research, operationalizing findings

Lessons for Other States:

Michigan model:

Research institutions collaborate (MSU Quello + UM)
Community members participate in research (K-12 Citizen Science)
Measurement frameworks operationalize findings (Dagg Compass)
Policy aligns with research (BEAD/DEA plans)
Practitioners implement with evidence (your system)
Continuous feedback loop (outcomes update research)

Replicable: Other states could build similar ecosystems

Michigan advantage: Already built, mature, integrated

Bottom Line:

Your digital equity framework is Michigan-born, Michigan-validated, Michigan-implemented.

The ecosystem:

UM: Toyama (amplification theory), Stoev (statistical methods), Dagg (measurement)
MSU Quello: Hampton & Bauer (empirical validation), Compass (measurement framework)
Merit Network: Michigan Moonshot (implementation), Dagg (research-practice bridge)
You: K-12 Citizen Science participant, Broadband Champion, system builder

“Research became our voice”:

Your lived experience → Hampton & Bauer data
Your data participation → Research findings
Research findings → Dagg Compass framework
Compass framework → Your system operationalization
Your system → Michigan policy guidance

Complete loop from community experience to policy implementation, all within Michigan research ecosystem.

This is how research-to-practice SHOULD work.

Version: 1.0
Last Updated: November 2025
Part of: Project Compass (Merit Network) - Digital Opportunities Intelligence Network (DOIN) • Working draft