Digital native

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Digital Natives)
Jump to: navigation, search


A digital native is a person who was born during or after the general introduction of digital technologies and through interacting with digital technology from an early age, has a greater understanding of its concepts. Alternatively, this term can describe people born during or after the 2000s, as the Digital Age began at that time; but in most cases, the term focuses on people who grew up with the technology that became prevalent in the latter part of the 20th century and continues to evolve today.[citation needed]

Other discourse identifies a digital native as a person who understands the value of digital technology and uses this to seek out opportunities for implementing it with a view to make an impact.

This term has been used in several different contexts, such as education (Bennett, Maton & Kervin 2008), higher education (Jones & Shao 2011) and in association with the term New Millennium Learners (OECD 2008). The opposite of digital native is digital immigrant, an individual who was born before the existence of digital technology and adopted it to some extent later in life.

Origins[edit]

Marc Prensky coined the term digital native in his work "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants" published in 2001. In his seminal article, he assigns it to a new group of students enrolling in educational establishments.[1] More recently, Description of people who were "born digital", first appeared in a series of presentations given by Josh Spear beginning in May 2007.[2][3] A Digital Native research project[4] is being run jointly by the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School and the Research Center for Information Law at the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland. A collaborative research project[5] is being run by Hivos, Netherlands and the Bangalore based Centre for Internet and Society.[6] The Net Generation Encountering e-learning at university project[7] funded by the UK research councils was completed in March 2010. More recently the Museum of Social Media,[8] launched in 2012, has included an exhibit on "Digital Natives & Friends."

Conflicts between generations[edit]

Due to the obvious divide set between digital natives and digital immigrants, sometimes both generations are forced to meet which commonly results in conflicting ideologies of digital technology. The everyday regime of worklife is becoming more technologically advanced with improved computers in offices, more complicated machinery in industry etc. With technology moving so fast it is hard for digital immigrants to keep up.

This creates conflicts among older supervisors and managers with the increasingly younger workforce. Similarly, parents clash with their children at home over gaming, texting, YouTube, Facebook and other Internet technology issues. Much of the world's Millennials and Generation Z members are digital natives.[9] According to law professor and educator John Palfrey, there may be substantial differences between digital natives and people born before 1980, in terms of how people see relationships and institutions and how they access information.[10]

Education, as Marc Prensky states, is the single largest problem facing the digital world as our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language. Immigrants suffer complications in teaching natives how to understand an environment which is "native" to them and foreign to Immigrants. Prensky's own preference to this problem is to invent computer games to teach digital natives the lessons they need to learn, no matter how serious. This ideology has already been introduced to a number of serious practicalities. For example, piloting an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in the army consists of someone sitting in front of a computer screen issuing commands to the UAV via a hand-held controller which resembles (in detail) the model of controllers that are used to play games on an Xbox 360 game console. (Jodie C Spreadbury, Army Recruiting and Training Division).[11]

Discourse[edit]

Different approaches to educate the digital native

Not everyone agrees with the language and underlying connotations of the digital native.[12][13] The term suggests a familiarity with technology that not all children and young adults who would be considered digital natives have, though some instead have an awkwardness with technology that not all digital immigrants have. This is depending on the location of the school and whether or not the students have access to these endless technologies. In its application, the concept of the digital native preferences those who grow up with technology as having a special status, ignoring the significant difference between familiarity and creative application. Like animals to their natural habitat, those who were raised in a digital world naturally develop a keen perception and understanding of their surroundings. Many children in this generation are empowered through technology because of this. Thus we should be able to use and teach using these technologies or examples of these technologies that the students have grown up with. These students are what Bennett described as “digital natives or the net generation, these young people are said to have been immersed in technology all their lives, imbuing them with sophisticated technical skills.” (Bennett, et, p. 775).[14] Future teachers will come to the table of education with much more experience with the use of social media than their predecessors. Their use of social media has the opportunity to influence the way that social media is and can be utilized as a tool for collaboration.

The term digital immigrant overlooks the fact that many people born before the digital age were the inventors, designers, developers and first users of digital technology and in this sense could be regarded as the original 'natives'. To confuse the prolific (and arguably superficial) use of digital technology by current adolescents as deep knowledge and understanding is potentially misleading and unhelpful to the discourse. The term also discounts the broader and more holistic knowledge, experience and understandings that older generations may have about digital technologies and their potential place in society. Digital immigrants are believed to be less quick to pick up new technologies than digital natives. This results in the equivalent of a speaking accent when it comes to the way in which they learn and adopt technology. A commonly used example is that a digital immigrant may prefer to print out a document to edit it by hand rather than doing onscreen editing.

The classification of people into digital natives and digital immigrants is controversial. Some digital immigrants surpass digital natives in tech savvy, but there is a belief that early exposure to technology fundamentally changes the way people learn. The actual classification of people into immigrants and natives is tricky as the adoption of digital technology hasn’t been a unified phenomenon worldwide. For North America, most people born prior to 1980 are considered digital immigrants. Those closer to the cutoff are sometimes called digital intermediates, which means they started using digital technology in their early teens and thus are closer to digital natives in terms of their understanding and abilities.

Digital Natives term is synonymous with the term Digital Inclusion. Being digitally included means that you are innately able in using a smartphone or computer tablets. Crucially, there is debate over whether there is any adequate evidence for claims made about digital natives and their implications for education. Bennett, Maton & Kervin (2008), for example, critically review the research evidence and describe some accounts of digital natives as having an academic form of a moral panic.Modern technology has enabled the non-speaking to speak, the non-hearing to hear and the non-seeing to see.Recently lot of digital devices are used for special needy people and effectively used the media in education. Nachimuthu & Vijayakumari (2012). Using such a terminology is rather a sign of unfamiliarity and exoticism in relation to digital culture. Of course, nobody is "born digital"; as with any cultural technology, such as reading and writing, it is matter of access to education and experience.

It considers that all youths are digital natives in the modern age. However, this is not the case. It is primarily based on cultural differences and not by age. According to Henry Jenkins (2007), "Part of the challenge of this research is to understand the dynamics of who exactly is, and who is not, a digital native and what that means." There are underlying conflicts on the definition of the term "digital natives" and it is wrong to say that all modern age youths are placed in that particular category or that all older adults can be described as digital immigrants. Some adults are more tech savvy than a lot of children, depending on socio-economic standings, personal interests, etc., but as teachers we must include the world outside with which the children are familiar and use it inside the classroom.

The formulation of digital native is also challenged by researchers looking at emerging technology landscapes. The current discourse concentrates largely on developed technology and has a particular bias towards white, middle-class youth who have the privilege of access to technology. Nishant Shah (2009) says, "It is necessary to promote research that grasps that not all Digital Natives are equal. Each context will have certain norms by which digital nativity is understood and experienced. Dismantling the universal Digital Native and considering contextualised Digital Native identities might also help us move away from speaking of the Digital Native as a necessarily elite power-user of technology and understand the identity as a point of departure from earlier technology-mediated identities within those contexts." He also suggests that one way of understanding digital natives is to look at how they use digital technologies to engage with their immediate environments and initiate processes of social and personal change.[15]

It is possible to argue that digitality is not a birth-right but instead a product of cultural capital. According to its originator, Pierre Bordieu, cultural capital is defined as “the possession of certain cultural competencies, bodies of cultural knowledge, that provide for distinguished modes of cultural consumption”.[16] Familiarity with technology and ease of use is a form of social capital that allows those who possess it to advance in society.In fact, scholars have commented on the variability of technological literacy in different social groups. In “Communities, Cultural Capital and the Digital Divide,” Viviana Rojas calls this phenomenon a person's "techno-disposition." This familiarity with technology is one of many privileges granted by cultural capital. She defines techno-disposition more explicitly as " practices, perceptions and attitudes, technical education, awareness of technology, desires for information, job requirements, social relations with community members and community organizations, and geographical location."[17] One's techno-disposition, not simply one's access to technology, she argues, is at the root of any digital divide. [18]

As we move into the second decade of the 21st century, others are calling into question Prensky’s Digital/Immigrant dichotomy on different grounds. Jones & Shao (2011)[19] recently conducted a literature review for the UK Higher Education Academy which found that there was no empirical evidence of a single new generation of young students. They argued that complex changes were taking place but there was no evidence of a generation gap. The nature of the metaphor itself is challenged, with White and Le Cornu (2011) drawing attention to the difficulties that a language-based analogy introduces, especially when then linked to age and place. They also highlight the rapid technological advances that have been made in the last ten years, most notably in the advent of social networking platforms. White and Le Cornu therefore propose an alternative metaphor of Visitors and Residents which they suggest more accurately represents the ways in which learners engage with technology in a social networking age.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

[22]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Prensky, Marc (2001). "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants". On the Horizon 9 (5): 1–6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816. 
  2. ^ "Josh Spear presentation at Zeitgeist Europe 2007". Youtube.com. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  3. ^ "Wanna go to digital rehab? No No No: Talking to the born digital generation". Iabuk.net. 2007-11-18. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  4. ^ digital-native.org
  5. ^ "Digital Natives with a Cause? / Themes / Hivos Knowledge Programme / Home - Ontwikkelingsorganisatie Hivos". Hivos.net. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  6. ^ cis-india.org
  7. ^ "The Net Generation encountering e-learning at university". Open.ac.uk. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  8. ^ "Communication & Media Studies - Museum of Social Media: HOME - Wiley Online Library". Onlinelibrary.wiley.com. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  9. ^ Shapiro, Evan. "TV: An Intervention." HuffPost TV. June 5, 2012
  10. ^ Mike Musgrove (October 17, 2008). "Talkin' About the Digital Generation". Washington Post. Retrieved 2013-02-03. "Palfrey: ... people who were born today... may well see relationships differently, they may see institutions differently, ..." 
  11. ^ Public email b November 4th, 2007 by Paul Maunder s
  12. ^ Doug Holton, [1], EdTechDev, retrieved May 2010; Jamie McKenzie, 'Digital Nativism, Digital Delusions, and Digital Deprivation' [2], From Now On: the educational technology journal, Vol 17,No 2, retrieved 29 August 2010; G Kennedy, T Judd and B Dalgarno, 2010. "Beyond Natives and Immigrants: Exploring types of net generation students", Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol 26, Issue 5, pp 332-343. Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S.J., and Healing, G. (2010). Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? Computers & Education. Vol 54 (3) pp722-732. Jones, Chris and Shao, Binhui (2011). The net generation and digital natives: implications for higher education [3]. Higher Education Academy, York.
  13. ^ "'Technology and society: Is it really helpful to talk about a new generation of "digital natives" who have grown up with the internet?'". The Economist. 4 March 2010. Retrieved 22 April 2012. 
  14. ^ Bennett, S.; K. Maton, L. Kervin (2008). "The Digital Native Debate: A Critical Review of the Evidence". British Journal of Educational Technology 39 (5): 775–786. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x. 
  15. ^ "Presentation at Re:publica 2010, Berlin". Youtube.com. 2010-04-23. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  16. ^ Cultural capital see page
  17. ^ Rojas, 9
  18. ^ Rojas, Viviana "Communities, Cultural Capital and the Digital Divide"
  19. ^ "Jones and Shao (2011) The net generation and digital natives: implications for higher education. Higher Education Academy, York". Oro.open.ac.uk. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  20. ^ http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
  21. ^ November 4, 2007 (2007-11-04). "Army fly UAV Spy Plane with Xbox 360 Controller | Paul Maunders | Web log". Pyrosoft.co.uk. Retrieved 2013-12-10. 
  22. ^ Jenkins, Henry. "Reconsidering Digital Immigrants". Retrieved 5 December 2007. 

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]