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 A textbook format is finding it difficult to keep up with our ever-expanding sources of information--it becomes outdated in a matter of 2-3 years now.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.
Great job on the meme, I really like the optimism it illustrates. Technoevangelists might paint a picture that technology itself is the key, when in reality it is what the users do it with and that depends greatly on digital literacy.
ReplyDeleteI too use Wikipedia quite a bit, especially when I was an undergrad. I’d consider it a starting point in my research. It may be to clarify the topic, grab a few key points, and use the bibliography at the end to assist in further research. I don’t believe the use of Google or Wikipedia versus academic databases needs to be an either or situation when it comes to academic research. Both options have a place in research, if one knows how to use them to their best potential. I think the authors of Chapter 8 expressed it best when they stated that “students need to be fully aware that when they rely too much on Google for their studies something is gained—a remarkable ability to locate information that can be uses; but something is also lost—hard-won but essential skills in finding, evaluating, and using high quality online information” (p. 132).
At a college level, do professors assume that their students have an understanding of how to effectively research using digital resources? To an extent, I feel that college is meant to be a more concentrated study and shouldn’t be spent time teaching students digital literacy skills. Yet at the same time, assuming that they already have these skills when they don’t is a disservice to them. As you said in your post, certain behaviors can be made to be familiar if students are exposed to them enough and digital databases can be expedient if the students know how to use them.