Digital Natives: Navigating Literate Worlds

So, my meme is pretty broad--but just imagine a world where students are instructed by the best and brightest on digital literacy skills! They would learn how to best utilize the digital realm and participate in this global culture. 

The same can be said about different digital media and software packages that are introduced in different subjects. How does it change the knowledge structures within the subject itself?

Core bodies of knowledge across disciplines are currently shifting because of the technological resources that are available at our disposal. Just as the calculator in mathematics is giving rise to more complex problems and patterns, other disciplines are experiencing a similar effect.

How is your discipline changing in the information age?

More and more frequently, I see students that prefer to read the condensed "Cliff Notes" version of a book for literature class. What do we do in this instance--do teachers work tirelessly to combat this, or do we accept this as an additional analysis to enhance our overall comprehension of a novel?

There are so many notions to consider in situations like these For my discipline, it is no longer sufficient to require students to access a singular textbook in order to learn about nutrition. I prefer to align my curriculum with current articles and studies throughout the web.

As we continue to pick up an even faster pace in our quest for knowledge, I think there will come a time when textbooks are obsolete--and I think that will happen very soon. A textbook format is finding it difficult to keep up with our ever-expanding sources of information--it becomes outdated in a matter of 2-3 years now.

There is evidence, particularly based on the work of Head and Eisenberg (2009, 2010), that students are simply using resources such as Wikipedia to "scope" the academic "problem" they are researching.

The research presented in this chapter was particularly eye-opening, and caused me to reflect on my own experiences with academic research. I confess, I have always used Google and Wikipedia to "scope" the problem, and gain some sort of understanding before delving deeper into academic studies.

Sometimes, that happens to be as far as I go unless I am required to cite reputable sources. (In those cases, Wikipedia does not qualify as a reputable source.)

In my opinion, the bulk of this problem stems from the fact that we are not instructed on how to properly conduct academic searches within a database. Oftentimes, as an undergraduate, a librarian will come to one or two of your undergrad classes and give a short session on how to use the databases that are provided with your tuition money. And, this is usually where it ends.

In regards to K12 education, many students are not formally educated on how to properly search, synthesize, and eloquently summarize information from reputable sources.

Their attitudes and values appear to be more closely aligned with expediency and familiarity that with precision and effort. 

From a behavioral standpoint, I understand why students choose familiarity over something more complex, even though it will yield much more valuable resources. It is simply easier to navigate the familiar when you do not understand its counterpart. Once again, these behaviors prove the need to teach digital literacy skills within K12 education.


Using the Internet does not automatically guarantee participation in the information society, hence assistance is required in order to engage them in relevant activities.

Yet again, this is another example of why it is crucial to not engage in overgeneralizing of the "digital native." Too often, we overestimate the extent to which people engage in civic, political, and social activities. However, the study of youth in Sweden proved that young people most commonly use the internet for social and communicative purposes.

In order to guarantee participation, education must focus on technology as a participatory medium. And in order to accomplish this, it's imperative to focus on digital 2.0 technologies that merit the feeling of participation (such as blogs and peer-to-peer communication mediums.

The Civic, Social, & Multimodal Lives of Digital Natives

How about that meme? I just couldn't resist.

Chapter 4

"There is a danger that the fetishization of cutting-edge technologies by civic organizations may reinforce inequalities."

"However, they need to be aware of an over-optimistic or utopian approach: the use of networked technologies is not inherently democratic, nor does it automatically have democratic consequences."


Oftentimes technology is regarded as the "holy grail" of the future, and Chapter 4 discusses how it is fueling political change and civic engagement.

This particular chapter made me think of the current presidential candidates vying for their spot in the primary. Most notably, the oldest candidate and self-described democratic socialist Bernie Sanders. (Independent senator from Vermont)

Technology and social media have become a prominent theme in campaigning, and Sen. Sanders is currently leading the way on all platforms.  He strategically hired President Obama's digital operations team to assist with his campaign.

(If you're interested, here's a pretty good video below.)



The point I'm trying to make here is that Senator Sanders knows how to reach people-he understands that the political climate is shifting under his feet. Technology is not here temporarily; it is here to stay.

However, it's important to recognize the biases of technology so we don't risk losing people in the process. Prior to the technological age, we had socioeconomic inequalities that existed and we still do. Not everybody has access to digital tools or has been educated on their applications, therefore we run the risk of losing the same disenfranchised group of people as before.

Chapter 5

On the term "digital native":
"The criticism centers around the idea that this term overemphasizes differences between generations and undermines diversity within the generation in question."

The Baby Boomers.
The Woodstock Generation.
The Digital Native.

What do all of these terms have in common?

They are terms used to classify and over-generalize an entire population born in a specific area. However, we see diversity and individualism within each group of people--they are not the same.

When we use the term digital native, we are over-generalizing and making the assumption that they all know how to operate, synthesize, and create within the digital realm. But this is simply not the case. As educators, we have groups of students that range in economic backgrounds, cultures, and ability. We have much more variance in generations than is suggested.

Chapter 6

"The essential nature of traditional skill development for students further indicates that today's students are not so different from previous generation: they still need to learn the same basic skills."

Never did a quote ever ring so true. 

I think many older veteran teachers feel displaced in a world consumed by the digital. Too often, I hear that teachers are not offered nearly enough professional development on how to properly use digital tools. This leaves the teachers feeling disconnected from their students, thus creating a rift from the beginning.

The fact remains that students today still need to learn the skills of yesterday. Students still must learn how to write, use literary devices, and properly synthesize information. The primary difference now is that we have much more efficient manners in which to do so. 

Whereas we used to teach things one thing at a time, we now have the opportunity to develop technology-integrated projects that utilize 10 concepts at once.

When differences are so apparent, showing people just how similar they actually are almost always results in positive effects. 

Digital Natives: Reflecting on the Myth

"A technoevangelist's fortune"

Preface

"Proponents of the digital natives argument typically overstate the extent and effects of technological changes and ignore elements of continuity. Yet the history of technology suggests that change, however rapid, is generally incremental rather than revolutionary."

I enjoyed how the author presents both sides to the digital native argument. He is correct in his quote that sometimes proponents of digital technology may exaggerate the positive effects, often to their advantage.

Change is natural, and we accept that it occurs over a period of time as opposed to overnight. We didn't introduce iPads to education the moment they were released, but rather we waited until research was conducted and their advantages were proven.

I think it's paramount to keep this quote in mind when the discussion or implementation of technology for educational purposes arises; the purpose of technology is not to replace but to supplement and enhance pedagogy.

Chapter 1

"Advocates of technology integration in education must therefore attempt to understand the discourses that drive it, and in some cases, harm its acceptance, and find a balance between the technological innovations that can be sustained by sound pedagogy, and those driven more by commercial interests."

To me, this quote is all about educating yourself. It is imperative to understand the discussion from proponents as well as opponents, in order to successfully integrate the best forms of technology. Additionally, America remains a capitalistic society where we see corporations influencing various industries, in particularly education. Just as we have seen corporations influence the content we teach by which textbooks are designated for use, in the future we will see them(corporations) attempt to dominate the technological market.

Therefore, it is critical to educate oneself on all facets.

Chapter 2

"Digital wisdom is a two-fold concept, referring both to wisdom arising from the use of digital technology to access cognitive power beyond our innate capacity and to wisdom in the prudent use of technology to enhance our capabilities."

As I re-read this quote it reminds me of the recent movie Lucy, starring Morgan Freeman and Scarlett Johanssen. If you have seen the movie then you're aware of the connection I'm making-the main character, Lucy, is able to access beyond the average 10% of her brain. (Which is a myth, might I add.)

But the digital wisdom that the author is referring to arises from the use of technology that enhances our already human capabilities. I like to compare this to an already "wise" person. What makes a person wise in this day and age? Typically it is somebody with a wealth of not only knowledge, but also experience under their belt. Often times, this happens to be an older person because they have had a longer time on earth to acquire this boundless information and perspectives.

So, it is only natural to assume that once we are able to hasten our knowledge acquisition and experiences, we too will become "wise." Or as the author calls it, digitally wise.

As philosophers Andy Clark and David Chalmers argue, "extended cognition is a core cognitive process, not an add-on extra", as "the brain develops in a way that complements the external structures and learns to play its role within a unifies, densely coupled system."

So, I admit it-chapter 2 was so great that I couldn't just settle on one quote. However, I promise to keep this as brief as possible.

When considering technology we don't consider it a part of our body, but rather an external apparatus that we rely on--and quite often, might I add. But philosophers suggest that one day we will accept this technology as a part of us, and we will learn how to it works in tandem with humans as not two separate entities, but one.

There are numerous conspiracy theories out there that suggest that one day technology will overtake us all. And these are obviously skepticisms, but I've always felt that a little skepticism is healthy. But what  they might not have considered is that technology cannot replace the human brain, but it can enhance it.

The author explains that advancements are not always widely accepted-most notably today is the "calculator" issue. However, if we look throughout the course of history there has always been a trade-off. When the art of writing developed, we were shortsighted because we were concerned about the impact it would have on our memory if we began to record things by writing them down.

There will always be a trade-off. There will inevitably be a function that we lose, but just imagine what we can gain! The calculator outsources mundane tasks and creates room for the mathematical ideas with much more complexity. When we delegate the mundane to technology, our minds advance to the "bigger" ideas.



Chapter 3

"In some ways, students today are ahead of their elders. Technology is second nature to them and they accept it without question. Schools lag behind."

This quote was too great of a note not to end on, and boy does it put everything into perspective! Our "digital immigrants" are ahead of us; they accept technology and mold it to their needs while schools do the polar opposite. We have some instructors that implement technology by requiring their students to create a Word document rather than a handwritten report.

This isn't a novel idea-it's basic at best. In order to successfully reform our education system to serve us we need to begin with assessment. We must redefine our assessments to include technology implementation of the highest caliber, followed by redefining our content and method of delivery to reflect these changes.

Learning is changing because of technology. Students no longer need to sit in a row of desks while they listen to the teacher impart knowledge to them. Because let's face it, kids can stay at home and and watch a lecture via the internet.

In this technological age, the very job of a teacher is transitioning to a facilitator-somebody that rather teaches students how to learn, and how to create knowledge for themselves.

Digital Media Effects on Conventional Reading & Writing Practices.

According to the New York Times article, "Literacy Debate: Online, R U really reading?" Web Evangelists and Traditionalists appear to be at a divide on whether the internet is conducive to promoting reading and comprehension skills. Let's not dismiss the fact that diminishing literacy skills have been on the rise lately, but should we attribute poor reading scores to the growth of the internet?

Everything will always have its set of pros and cons--even the internet. While I realize that without it I would probably not be scanning through the NY Times as part of my morning ritual, I can see how the internet has made me a more distracted reader. Formerly, we didn't have the ability to switch to another topic or source if we didn't care for what we were reading. (There is much more effort involved in flipping through the pages of a book, or even finding an entirely different book on your bookshelf.)

So, I am aware of the detriments that the internet has caused when it comes to reading--I have experienced it myself.


          "Learning is acquired mainly from books, and most readily from great books."

As an avid book reader, I have have experienced the depth of learning that can take place in a book. This is something that the article refers to as having a set beginning, middle, and end. And without books, many of us would have a wildly different perception of culture and feelings. 

The act of reading a book many times places you in another person's shoes, thus creating a sense of empathy for the character(s) you're reading about. A book can transport you to the other side of the world, without even leaving your couch. 

However, as we have witnessed in the field of education, there are many children that do not have the luxury of reading a book from start to finish. As referenced in the NY Times article, there are many children diagnosed with Dyslexia and ADD--both of which make reading a lengthy book infinitely more difficult.

So, in reality, the web has opened up a whole new door for everybody--especially those that would otherwise not go near a book. Digital media supporters say that web reading may eventually surpass those who only rely on books.

“It takes a long time to read a 400-page book,” said Mr. Spiro of Michigan State. “In a tenth of the time,” he said, the Internet allows a reader to “cover a lot more of the topic from different points of view.”

I also see a variety of people reading articles via their smartphone that wouldn't even consider picking up a book. And this isn't due to the fact that they cannot manage a book, but they simply are not interested.

From an educator's perspective, I can see the need for digital media literacy courses within our schools. While the internet can be accessed by students at home, this does not exempt us from teaching them proper digital media skills. Critics suggest that even though they are reading, many students (adults even) cannot distinguish a legitimate source from a fictitious one.

All in all, the web has provided us with a multitude of information at our fingertips that will continue to thrive whether Traditionalists approve or not. Books will stand the test of time, whether it be in paperback or an e-book equivalent. Whatever side you are on, you cannot argue that reading books does not promote literacy and reading skills. A blended approach to learning will prove to serve students the best, as it will promote differentiated instruction. What we can do at this point, is ensure that students are taught the skills necessary to decode images, distinguish valid sources, and ultimately be considered "literate" in digital media.

Texting & Multimodal Texts

The most important things I learned from the TedTalk are:

• Just as it is cognitively beneficial to be bilingual or bidialectal, it is also beneficial to be able to switch between texting and speaking formally. These are quite similar concepts.
• Texting is a form of speech--it is more of a short-hand form of communication. It developed in the 21st century as a direct result of technological advancements in communication. 
• Speech has been around for many years, but writing only developed in the latter part of those years. Communication via writing is still a work in progress as it continues to evolve.

But the MOST important thing I learned is that...

Texting is not killing language.

However, it's much easier to think that this is the case rather than to recognize the educational disparities and social inequity that can be directly attributed to our decreasing literacy rates. Upon delving deeper, we can see that texting is not a language but a form of short-hand speech. It's primary purpose is that of communication, and this is precisely why it is succinct and to-the-point. 

Prior to this 21st Century era where we have the ability to communication instantaneously at our fingertips, the methods of communication that existed were much like written letters. These were either typed on a typewriter or they were hand written with all the necessary information you needed to include. Because let's face it, the likelihood of receiving a response within a day or so was highly unlikely. Thus, the generations before us wrote in what we know as formal or standard language. (Writing is a conscious process.)

So, I like to think of texting as a "nonverbal speech." Texting is merely a "new" way of speaking to one another, and should be valued as such. One of my favorite points from the TedTalk is that "texting can be compared to speaking in a second language or dialect." Therefore, switching between texting and speaking can be considered cognitively beneficial.