Talk:Digital literacy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Title[edit]

This page incorrectly redirects to "Computer Literacy." Digital Literacy and Computer Literacy are not identical terms. They are used in different contexts, represent separate industries, and are defined by different interests. Therefore, their literacy (measurements of and disciplines for acquiring competency and comprehension) each have different parameters. The faculties of Universities expanding their Library Sciences programs are concerned with Digital Archiving and Digital Literacy, not Computer Archiving (if there even is such a thing) and Computer Literacy. The usage of these terms is quite distinct, and it is incorrect to colonize the term Digital Literacy under the rubric of Computer Literacy, as has been done here. Computer literacy refers to a competency with respect to a tool. Digital literacy refers to a competency with respect to the production and organization of data and knowledge (i.e., learning) systems, which may include an examination of computers and other tools used in that enterprise. drmjb (talk) 23:26, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Definition[edit]

I don't like the opening paragraph of this page. There is no accepted definition of digital literacy and the one provided is a lot closer to a definition of information literacy than digital literacy. I plan to revise the first paragraph and make some changes to make it much more nuanced that it is at present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbyelliott (talkcontribs) 14:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The introduction to digital literacy comes off as too redundant. There are too many unnecessary links that lead to other pages. Why does there need to be a link for "digital" or "smartphones"? For this topic, so many links may stray off topic and take the focus off the actual article and lead one to believe it is a page for different kinds of technology. Keykeen (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

With the help of Melissaborrego, I was able to edit some of the introduction paragraph.

"Digital literacy is the knowledge, skills, and behaviors used in a broad range of digital devices such as smartphones, tablets, and desktops all of which are seen as network rather than computing devices. Digital literacy initially focused on digital skills and stand-alone computers, but the focus has moved from stand-alone to network devices. Digital literacy is distinct from computer literacy and is considered one of the nine components of digital citizenship.

The last two sentences of this paragraph needed some edits. I made a few, but please continue to improve them. I condensed two sentences and deleted the last one altogether. I think the idea it conveyed about critical and ethical thinking are explained more clearly in the paragraph below. However, the one element from the deleted sentence that is not represented in the paragraph below is the ethical element. If you want to insert that idea here or in the next paragraph, I think your best course is to find a source to summarizeCathygaborusf (talk) 00:10, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

A digitally literate individual will possess a range of digital skills, knowledge of the basic principles of computing devices, and skills in using computer networks. The individual has the ability to engage in online communities and social networks while adhering to behavioral protocols. The individual is able to find, capture, and evaluate information. Digital literacy requires the individual to understand the societal issues raised by digital technologies and possess critical thinking skills. These skills can be possessed through digital experiences that pushes individuals to think in a variety of ways through a multitude of media platforms. The evolution of digital media has quickly integrated into literacy. Digital literacy does not replace traditional forms of literacy. It builds upon the foundation of traditional forms of literacy. It allows individuals to communicate and learn in through a plethora of ways. Different kinds of skills ranging from social to critical thinking enable individuals to interpret the meanings of digital devices."

The introduction has been condensed and many links have been removed to keep the focus on the main topic. However, there should be another paragraph or a few more sentences discussing the importance of digital literacy. I am having some trouble on putting this together since there are too many ideas that can be written into this paragraph. Any suggestions on what should be written for the concluding paragraph to make the introduction stronger? Keykeen (talk) 09:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the wikilinks can be kept, but maybe having only one of each existing link would be best. There are a couple of links that appear more than once or twice, so I can go ahead and have only one for each. The phrase "learn to use computers" links to the computer literacy page, and while it does make sense, I think it should be un-linked, as the computer literacy page is already linked within the introduction. Any thoughts? Sarahibrahim (talk) 18:07, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sarah. I agree! Please move forward with your suggestions. Melissaborrego (talk) 18:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Some really good editing here, but, as you note, there is room for improvement.

First, you deleted the best passage from the original intro (in my opinion): Digital literacy is the marrying of the two terms digital and literacy; however, it is much more than a combination of the two terms. Digital information is a symbolic representation of data, and literacy refers to the ability to read for knowledge, write coherently, and think critically about the written word.

Then, you keep in the idea that digital literacy builds on traditional literacy, but you seem to have cut out the Henry Jenkins citation. You need to leave that in.

I agree that the intro seems redundant and that you can slim it down. However, I disagree that the links harm the flow of the intro. One principle of Wikipedia is providing links to readers so that they can go check out related terms that they may not know. Using links lets the reader decide if s/he wants to click away and get info needed to understand the “Digital literacy” entry or if s/he wants to ignore the links and just keep reading. So, cut out the redundancy but do not eliminate the links.Cathygaborusf (talk) 23:43, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

I made changes to the intro based on feedback, please let me know what you all think:

Digital literacy is the marrying of the two terms digital and literacy; however, it is much more than a combination of the two terms. Digital information is a symbolic representation of data, and literacy refers to the ability to read for knowledge, write coherently, and think critically about the written word.

A digitally literate individual will possess a range of digital skills, knowledge of the basic principles of computing devices, and skills in using computer networks. The individual has the ability to engage in online communities and social networks while adhering to behavioral protocols. The individual is able to find, capture, and evaluate information. Digital literacy requires the individual to understand the societal issues raised by digital technologies and possess critical thinking skills. These skills can be possessed through digital experiences that pushes individuals to think in a variety of ways through a multitude of media platforms. The evolution of digital media has quickly integrated into literacy.

However, digital literacy does not replace traditional forms of literacy. Digital literacy builds upon the foundation of traditional forms of literacy. [2] Digital literacy allows individuals to communicate and learn in through a plethora of ways. Different kinds of skills ranging from social to critical thinking enable individuals to interpret the meanings of digital devices.

In addition to critical thinking skills, digital literacy involves ethical norms and standards of behavior in online environments. Every online community has its individual sets of norms and rules in regard to creating and circulating information. [2] Behavioral protocols are required in the digital age where there is no longer a clear distinction between online consumers and producers. [2]

Digital literacy is one of the nine core elements of digital citizenship. A digital citizen has the ability to be active citizens in online environments and possesses the technical literacy skills necessary to effectively engage with the web. [3] The internet is accessible in their homes and individuals use the internet daily.[3]Melissaborrego (talk) 04:29, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Melissa and Cathy, thank you both for your feedback. Melissa, your revisions fit Wikipedia's criteria and sets an unbiased tone that will be easy to read. Great job!Keykeen (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Im new to this, but shouldn't the end of the first paragraph where the artical describes where "digital literacy" came from should be near or part of the third paragraph because the name and what the name is comprised of fit together more. Then the order would go from the end of the first paragraph bing about the internet, then into why its not computer literacy, then into what digital literacy is and why it is called that. Foxx Molinari (talk) 07:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Scope/advert[edit]

GDLC seems like a reactively small UK and/or US org. Needs some proper notability cites to keep its references. Rich Farmbrough, 14:12 16 October 2008 (UTC).

Shut up you fool — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.74.96.81 (talk) 17:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


p

Never mind digital, how about English literacy?[edit]

Digital literacy and digital access have become increasingly important competitive differentiators, and for individuals, communities and societies. Maybe things are different now, but if I'd turned a paper containing that sentence I'd have got red ink bleeding all over it. And is there a way of saying "competitive differentiators" that explains what we're talking about without proactively incentivizing our paradigms? --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

English[edit]

Are there any good sources out there, or are thay all written in educator-speak? --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Digital Literacy vs Information Literacy[edit]

The subject of this article is "Information Literacy" not "Digital Literacy". Being digitally literate is not just about being able to use Information Technology (IT) or a particular programme really well. It is about feeling comfortable communicating in many different ways using digital technologies, i.e. it is more about communication than out finding information.

Being digitally literate is not just about being able to use Information Technology (IT) or a particular programme really well. It is about feeling comfortable communicating in many different ways using digital technologies.

Digital Literacy definitions:

Davies and Merchant (2009), “see digital literacy as a set of social practices that are interwoven with contemporary “ways of being” (p83).


In research reports and other publications it is obvious there is a general acceptance of what Digital Literacy is, however, few actually state the definition they use. The term as it is currently used was first coined by Paul Gilster (1997) but thirteen years is a long time in modern technology. There is also still some debate about the term Digital Literacy but most have come to accept the use as explained by Hague and Williamson (2009). Definitions are troublesome things; they can be confusing in their brevity or in their loquacity. Definitions help people feel they have a grasp of the subject but it is easy to misdirect people with them. It would indeed be wrong not to try to offer some sort of definition for Digital Literacy, luckily there are a number of definitions from research and organisations such as the European Union. For example the following definition from the Digital Literacies Research Briefing by the Technology Enhanced Learning phase of the Teaching and Learning Research Programme states that Digital Literacy is:

“... the constantly changing practices through which people make traceable meanings using digital technologies.”

Gillen and Barton (2010 p9)

the E-Inclusion Initiative definition is;

“Digital literacy involves the confident and critical use of Information Society Technology (IST) for work, leisure and communication. It is underpinned by basic skills in ICT: the use of computers to retrieve, assess, store, produce, present and exchange information, and to communicate and participate in collaborative networks via the Internet.”

Danish Technology Institute, European Commission E-Inclusion Initiatives 2008

and this definition is from The eLearning Programme of the European Commission.

Digital Literacy is the awareness, attitude and ability of individuals to appropriately use digital tools and facilities to identify, access, manage, integrate, evaluate, analyse and synthesize digital resources, construct new knowledge, create media expressions, and communicate with others, in the context of specific life situations, in order to enable constructive social action; and to reflect upon this process.

DigEuLit Project 2006

Different definitions tend to address different populations with different understandings of the issues and terms involved. However, wising a combination of current understandings of Digital Literacy it could be considered as: the confident and comfortable use of technology whether for work, leisure or communication for the usual daily activities of living. It is using technology to solve problems to improve our own and other people’s lives and goes beyond the acquisition of operational skills to the critical and discriminating use of technology.

References[edit]

Danish Technology Institute (2008) What is Digital Literacy? European Commission E-Inclusion, http://www.digital-literacy.eu/20663 Accessed 2010.03.06

Davies J and Merchant G (2009) Chapter 5 Negotiating the Blogosphere, Educational Possibilities in Digital Literacies: Social Learning and Classroom Practices (Eds) Victoria Carrinton and Muriel Robinson, Sage Publications Ltd, London

DigEuLit Project (2006) Progress Report, http://www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=6973&doclng=6 Accessed 2010.03.14

Gillen J and Barton D (2010) Digital Literacies: A Research Briefing by the Technology Enhanced Learning phase of the Learning and Teaching Research Programme, London Knowledge Lab, London

Gilster P (1997) Digital Literacy, John Wiley and Sons, New York

Hague C and Williamson B (2009) Digital participation, Digital Literacy and school subjects: A review of the policies, literature and evidence, Futurelab: Innovation in education, London

D. Bawden, Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In: C. Lankshear and M. Knobel (eds), Digital Literacy: Concepts, Policies and Practices (in press, Peter Lang, New York, 2008).

PDF: www.soi.city.ac.uk/~dbawden/digital%20literacy%20chapter.pdf (Accessed 2012.07.30)


Timjohnsonfreemantle (talk) 12:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


While making sure that the sources are written correctly and making sure they are live, I found many references that needed fixing. Attached is part of the fixed list. Note that only 23 of the 38 total references (notes) are listed (only the ones that needed fixing are listed, up to 23), as I did not yet go through the rest. I will add as I fix.

2. ^ Ferrari, Anusca (December 2010). "Digital Competence: Identification and European-wide validation of its key components for all levels of learners". Joint Research Centre.

4. ^ jPodcaster (October 1, 2012). "Making sense of the 8 Elements of Digital Literacy". Professionalism in the Digital Environment.

8. ^ Belshaw, D. (2011). What is “digital literacy”? Retrieved from http://neverendingthesis.com/doug-belshaw-edd-thesis-final.pdf

11. ^ Hobbs, R. (2012). Digital and Media Literacy: A Plan of Action. Retrieved from https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/2010/11/Digital_and_Media_Literacy.pdf

12. ^ Head, A., & Eisenberg, M. (2009, December). How college students seek information in the digital age. Retrieved from http://ctl.yale.edu/sites/default/files/basic-page-supplementary-materials-files/how_students_seek_information_in_the_digital_age.pdf

13. ^ Prensky, Marc (2001). "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants". On the Horizon. 9 (5): 1–6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816.

15. ^ Allen, Mary (January 30, 2013). "Cultural consumption on the Internet by older Canadians". Statistics Canada. Perspectives on Canadian Society.

16. ^ Loos, Eugene (2012). "Senior citizens: Digital immigrants in their own country?". Observatorio. 6 (1): 1–23. doi:10.7458/obs612012513.

17. ^ Wyatt, Sally (2005). "Non-users also matter: the construction of users and non-users of the internet". How users matter the co-construction of users and technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. ISBN 9780262651097.

18. ^ White, David; Le Cornu, Alison (2011). "Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement". First Monday. 16 (9): 775–786. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x.

19. ^ White, D. (2013, May 31). Visitors and residents Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sFBadv04eY

20. ^ White, D. (2013, June 5). Visitors and residents mapping activity. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9IMObcyKbo.

21. ^ Hart-Davidson, Bill; Cushman, Ellen; Grabill, Jeff; DeVoss, Danielle Nicole; Porter, Jim (2005). "Why teach digital writing?". Kairos. 10 (1).

22. ^ Beers, Kylene; Probst, Robert; Rief, Linda (2007). Adolescent Literacy: Turning Promise into Practice. UK: Heinemann Publishing. ISBN 9780325011288.

23. ^ McAdams, Mindy; Berger, Stephanie. "Hypertext". Journal of Electronic Publishing. Sarahibrahim (talk) 06:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Sarah, are you noting these or fixing these? Did you see the instructions on how to edit reference links?Cathygaborusf (talk) 23:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

I saw the instructions, and edited accordingly. Sarahibrahim (talk) 00:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Electracy merged into this article[edit]

Last year, someone proposed that Electracy be merged into this article. As no one objected, an editor merged the articles in July 2012. Another editor recently objected to that merger and restored the other article. I have reverted that edit on the grounds that he or she had ample time to object last year and if he or she believes the article should be reinstated then a discussion should be held to see if consensus has changed.

With all of that said, I oppose restoring the Electracy article. It appears to be a neologism that never really caught on. ElKevbo (talk) 19:13, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I am the editor who proposed the change. I do have a "watch" on this page, but I didn't get the notification of a change or missed it. What are the criteria for determining that a neologism has not "caught on"? A search at Amazon.com shows that one recently published book includes the word in its title (Jan Rune Holmevik. Inter/vention: Free Play in the Age of Electracy [March 2012]), and one book that is to be published this summer does as well (Sarah J. Arroyo. Partcipatory Composition: Video Culture, Writing, and Electracy [Aug. 2013]). A different book, published soon after the Wikipedia entry for electracy won its first battle of this sort, also uses the term in its title (Jeff Rice & Marcel O'Gorman. New Media/New Methods: The Academic Turn from Literacy to Electracy [July 2008]). Note that these are all by different scholars. A Google search for electracy yields 18,000+ results. A look at the talk archive for the original entry addresses the issue of whether or not it is a neologism, among other issues. I support restoring the term. rsmyth (talk) 19:52, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Please restore the Electracy article as it was approved. I looked back in the record and could not even find the original article. Electracy is not Digital Literacy. I rely on the Wiki article to make this distinction in my teaching and verification in my writing. This same argument was made when the article was launched and overridden by the community of experts. Please don't make us have to continue to fight this fight. John Craig Freeman (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Electracy is exactly NOT digital literacy. That is the point of the term. As the book marked a shift from orality to literacy, the network marks a shift towards electracy. The term is in use academically and captures a concept not adequately expressed by other theories. This has been discussed previously, and clearly electracy is not a neologism nor pointer towards digital literacy. Please restore the original Electracy article as approved. Jack Stenner (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
What is it about this topic that brings out the SPAs? ElKevbo (talk) 23:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
So are you interested in RE-discussing the merits or pulling the wikipedia, stifle-discussion trump card (quite soon, I might add)? BTW, who is the mysterious "someone" that initiated this AGAIN? Jack Stenner (talk) 13:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I have no idea what you're talking about in your first sentence.
Here is the recent history of this as it appears in the article's history. User:Beland redirected the article in July of last year after User:Jarble suggested merging it in March; only one editor commented in Talk to support the merger and that happened in April. A few months after the articles were merged, User:Bbjudy deleted the electracy material that was merged into this article. That brings us to January of this year when User:Rsmyth reverted the merge, an action I then reverted. I then opened this discussion and posted a note about this discussion on the (then- and currently-redirected) electracy Talk page.
I don't have a very strong opinion on whether this topic belongs in this article or its own article. My primary objection is to how this was starting to unfold. If there is consensus to keep the other article then that's fine. But you have to admit that this is a damn odd situation when almost all of the participants are single-purpose accounts who don't even have the courtesy to maintain and update the article.
On a separate note, Bjudy's deletion of the electracy content that was merged into this article seems to have been out of place, too, and should be undone pending resolution of this discussion. But yet again we have a single-purpose account as Bjudy only edited twice and both edits were to remove this material.
So what is going on here? ElKevbo (talk) 00:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the additional information, and thank you, truly, for your attention to this topic. With regards to the SPA issue, whether interested parties have a long WP track record is of minor relevance if we're trying to establish the intellectual/academic/cultural positioning of the content. Contributors may not be actively involved with WP, but they may know something about the meaning of Electracy. The only purpose I can see that mentioning SPA serves, is to dissuade participation by those who might want to contribute but haven't previously been involved. The real issue is credibility. One would hope a user willing to use their real name or provide personal information related to their account deserves more than to have their opinion marginalized as no more valid than a truly mysterious and unaccountable Bjudy. I hope that clarifies my first sentence. No hard feelings... Jack Stenner (talk) 14:40, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome! Please understand that having a number of new or inexperienced editors, especially those who only focus on a particular topic, suddenly jump into a conversation is often a sign that something is awry. It usually means that the topic has been brought up on another website and people are being encouraged to join the discussion and that usually also means that those new participants have no idea how Wikipedia works - policies, culture, history, etc. It's like a huge crowd suddenly showing up a what is usually a quiet school board meeting only to discuss one specific issue. It may be a valid concern but it's certainly going to raise eyebrows and make the regulars wonder what the hell is going on and why this issue is so important to these people that never show up to any other meetings. But thank you for your patience and helpful explanations! ElKevbo (talk) 15:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Now, back to the point. A number of recently published books (see above) and journal articles/citations (2007-2013 alone), by a range of authors, utilize the term Electracy and explore the theory. This new scholarship adds weight to the validity of the argument in support of Electracy proffered when the issue first came up in 2007. Those who know the theory, know the concept is antithetical to digital literacy. I see nothing to suggest that User:Jarble has any credibility with regard to this discourse. What justification remains for merging the two? Jack Stenner (talk) 14:40, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Personally, I think you've made the case. My opinion is definitely swayed by the way in which the electracy article material was summarily deleted from this article without explanation or justification by an editor whose only edits were to delete this material. Unless anyone else objects, I think it'd be fine to restore the other article since this discussion has been much more substantive that the one that happened when the article was merged into this one.
It would probably be good to place a note in that article's Talk page documenting these events so others know what has happened. If that article doesn't have an explicit "How electracy differs from digital literacy" section then it might also be a good idea to create one to try to prevent similar confusion in the future. ElKevbo (talk) 15:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Excellent ElKevbo, and thank you for your help in tracking down the info. The addition of a "How electracy differs from digital literacy" sounds like a great suggestion as well. Jack Stenner (talk) 16:38, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello ElKevbo, Let me add my thanks for you time and attention to this debate. I will admit that I am a newbi at Wikipedia, and passionate about the complex concept of electracy. Now that I am here, I hope to engage more fully in Wikipedia because I really believe in it, and I am willing to learn about its policies, culture and history. John Craig Freeman (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I, too, am grateful for how quickly this was resolved. To avoid this kind of thing in the future, I would be interested in knowing what it takes to avoid being labelled an SPA... Are there some minimum number of articles that have to be created from scratch? and/or minor edits that need to be made? Thanks for any insight about this. rsmyth (talk) 03:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
There is no set criterion. Edit some different articles, join a WikiProject, maybe do some recent-change patrolling - the more you branch yourself out the less "SPA-ey" you look. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a single-purpose account, by the way - the only thing that really matters is that you edit in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. And no-one expects you to get everything right straight away, as there is definitely a steep learning curve to this site. Feel free to ask me on my talk page if you have any other questions about editing. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

This discussion piqued my interest, so I had a search for sources. On the first page of Google Books I found four good references[1][2][3][4] and I stopped searching after that. Electracy is indeed a neologism, but it seems to easily pass WP:NEO. I would just make one change to the article - we should more clearly attribute the term to Ulman, as that is how it's referred to in all of the sources that I found. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Cite rebuttal of Prensky[edit]

Marc Prensky's work was not peer-reviewed and has been widely refuted. I propose either removing this section (as it's tangential) or at least citing Bennett, Maton & Kervin's 2008 paper. Dajbelshaw (talk) 14:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Peer-reviewed or not, Prensky's work has been very influential and his ideas are very widespread so it would be a grave mistake to simply remove his work from this article. It may be useful and appropriate, however, to add a brief mention of subsequent works that have refuted his ideas. ElKevbo (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough given Prensky himself has distanced himself from the distinction. I propose citing the 2008 paper as an example as well as, perhaps, a more nuanced approach such as White & Le Cornu's Visitors & Residents (which has been influential in the UK, at least) Dajbelshaw (talk) 14:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Clarify 'Eight essential elements' section[edit]

I don't want to edit this section directly (as it cites my work). Nevertheless it could be improved in a number of ways:

  • Footnote 6 as it currently stands cites a Slideshare presentation to a conference. Possibly better to cite the thesis? http://neverendingthesis.com / http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3446/ (Chapter 9)
  • Futurelab's work (footnote 4) is a 'components' based approach, but doesn't use the same elements as cited on the page
  • The Edudemic link (footnote 5) is broken (404)
  • Not here to self-promote, but I've written a book to help clarify this stuff: http://www.digitalliteraci.es

Dajbelshaw (talk) 21:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

For the broken links, I can go ahead and tag them as dead links. As for the other attached footnotes, including the slideshow and articles, I don't think they are credible. The slideshow doesn't really have any references, and the articles simply promote the slideshow, and don't do much else. The footnotes that aren't broken do lead to active(?) pages, although they don't have anything to do with the section at all. The only sites I can find that talk about the core elements of digital literacy at all are the slideshow, articles promoting the slideshow, and the e-book based on the slideshow. I am not sure whether or not this is because this may be a new concept, but I just can't find any other source whatsoever that refers to the core elements. Perhaps it may be best to remove this section, or do more extensive research on my behalf to at least support the section. I also noticed that after researching the author of the book and slideshow, I was unable to find any credentials, other than being a "self-professed Open Educational Thinkerer" and giving a TEDx talk.
Dajbelshaw, I understand you've written a book on the concept, so I was wondering whether you have your work based on any outside references I can take a look at? Sarahibrahim (talk) 20:12, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Sarah and I think the core elements section should be deleted. Our group has conducted extensive research and there is not enough research or credible sources supporting these 8 elements. It is misleading to readers if we only cite one source for the entire section. Melissaborrego (talk) 18:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Melissa, what I can do instead of taking the whole thing down completely, I can just begin the section saying these ideas come from Doug Belshaw, and this is who he is, etc., and not every source would agree and whatnot. After some thinking, I think that this section should stay, as it may simply just be a new concept, or even one that may not have been looked into. This is what I can perhaps start it out with: The following concept of the core elements of digital literacy stem from Doug Belshaw, a self-proclaimed Open Educational Thinkerer. Belshaw wrote his doctoral thesis on the core elements of digital literacy, a concept which seems to have been his own idea. While there are currently no other sources, below are the eight essential elements of digital literacy, as proposed by Doug Belshaw. Sarahibrahim (talk) 17:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey Sarah! The Core Elements category seems really random. If there are a lot of deadlinks in this section and issues with the references, I believe that the entire section should be deleted. It seems there is not much information about the source to make it reputable. It would not make the digital literacy page reputable. If you feel that it should be replaced with another category, I recommend looking into this article Youth Digital Cultural Consumption and Education. Designs For Learning by Pini, M., Musanti, S. I., & Pargman, T. C. There is some information that discusses different core values in digital media, education, and literacy. I would check it out if you wanted to replace the Core Elements with something else. Keykeen (talk) 18:16, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

"Use in..."[edit]

Hi all, I am currently in the middle of reviewing and suggesting ways I believe this article can be fixed, and I had a few suggestions. This article, to me, seems a bit disorganized. Perhaps all the "Use in..." subsections can be grouped together, or at least the "Use in education" subsection can be placed under "Core elements and their educational effects" as it seems to fit in there. I plan on starting with that in the near future, unless anyone disagrees or even has a different suggestion. Thanks. Sarahibrahim (talk) 02:05, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sarah, I agree with your organization suggestions. It looks like there are many "uses" subsections that could be grouped together in one area. Perhaps the section could be called "Digital Literacy Uses" and the following subsections could be education, society, and workforce. Unless anyone else disagrees, I think that you should definitely move forward with your idea. Melissaborrego (talk) 04:29, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sarah and Melissa. I agree with both of you. There are multiple categories that describe the uses of digital literacy. I feel that the article will be stronger if we were to concise the uses into one category with smaller subcategories. The subcategories could focus on the aforementioned topics Melissa stated. — Preceding Keykeen comment added by Keykeen (talkcontribs) 16:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


In the Use in section, there is a subsection titled Social networking. The term "social network" is one that has become replaced by, or rather, has become a part of, social media, which refers to the plethora of online sites (Boyd, 2014, p.6). So, social networking is more of an outdated term, or at least one that has expanded greatly, seemingly used within the realm of social media. I suggest that the title be changed from Social networking to Social media.

Boyd, D. (2014). It's complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.

Sarahibrahim (talk) 17:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I just found an article that introduces different "frameworks" in digital literacy. I was thinking this could replace the core elements category or actually just add it to the Use in Education category? It has a more central idea on how digital literacy/media has an impact on the way individuals are informed. Over the past few years there has been a rise in the creation of media platforms. People turn to media to get informed on a plethora of topics or as a way to participate. I wrote a small paragraph explaining the three frameworks in digital literacy and education.

-According to Santo (2011), there are three core ideas between media and literacy that have grown within the past sixty years. The first core idea is associated with how media has impacted individuals of all ages among any issue. The second core idea goes into further explanation from the first core idea. With a plethora media platforms arising since the early 2000s, digital media has been a form to educate individuals and encourage participation. The final core idea wraps up the aforementioned values and states that media are used as tools to reform and participation among social, political, and cultural issues.-

I will post the quote if anyone wants to contribute to my paragraph. "For instance, Santo (2011) distinguishes three frameworks or waves that illustrate the discussion of the relation between literacy and media in the last 60 years. He distinguishes a first wave of critical media literacy characterized by its association with both the explosion of the broadcast media in the 20th century (e.g. TV, radio, film, press) and the emergence of practices that empowered young people in relation to the messages of the mass-media landscape. With the emergence of the Internet, a second wave media literacy framework takes form mainly informed by the work of Gee (2004), Lankshear and Knobel (2007) and Jenkins, Clincton, Purushotma, Robinson and Weigel (2009) in their new media literacy. This framework emphasizes participatory media literacies and explains how people can participate culturally through new media, and become not only consumers of culture but also producers of it (Santo 2011, 2012). If the first wave of media literacy focuses on the criticality of the information spread by mass-media, the second wave encourages participation through media. Elaborating on these two prominent frameworks, Santo (2011) suggests a third wave that he calls “hacker literacies.” Hacker literacies are defined as “empowered participatory practices that are grounded in critical mindsets and that aim to resist, reconfigure and/or reformulate the sociotechnical digital spaces and tools that mediate social, cultural and political participation” (Santo, 2011, p. 2). This third framework addresses technologies and media not only as a means for self-expression and participation but also as sociocultural tools″.- (Pini, M., Musanti, S. I., & Pargman, T. C., 2014, pp.63-64)

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). Pini, M., Musanti, S. I., & Pargman, T. C. (2014). Youth Digital Cultural Consumption and Education. Designs For Learning, 7(2), 58-79. doi:10.2478/dfl-2014-0063Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

Keykeen (talk) 17:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The "Use in Education" subsection needs to be expanded. Digital literacy has an substantial effect on education due to the fact that many educators are turning to technology to hone skills in different subjects for students. I found an article that focuses on digital literacy in the classroom. There is a paragraph that discusses the idea of digital composition. I've noticed that digital composition is not brought up once throughout the article. It would be a great addition to this subsection. For those who need a clarification on what digital composition is, it is "The integration of research and writing with the help of technology". Digital technology has had an impact on the way educators present ideas in the classroom. They turn to technology to stay up to date with current events and relevant ideas. With the use in technology rising over the past decade, teachers are not eliminating the traditional foundation in education, but merely are enhancing it with digital literacy through a variety of curriculums.

References: Mckee-Waddell, S. s. (2015). Digital Literacy: Bridging the Gap with Digital Writing Tools. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 82(1), 26-31.

Keykeen (talk) 18:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I think that the concept of digital composition would be an excellent and informative addition to the current "Use in Education" section! Perhaps you can include specific examples or different types of technology that teachers are using in the classroom. I think that by providing some examples of technology that teachers are using to enhance the ways they present ideas in the classroom would help the reader understand the concept more. Melissaborrego (talk) 20:59, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I have a suggestion in regard to the wording of "digital literacy uses." Instead of using the word "uses" we should use "digital literacy applications." I think that "applications" sounds more encyclopedic than "uses." The subsections would also be changed. For example, "use in education" would be changed to "applications in education." Let me know what you think before I edit the page. Melissaborrego (talk) 17:52, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Melissa for your feedback! I put together a paragraph that covers the main points of digital composition. "According to Suzanne Mckee-Waddell (2015), digital composition is the ability to integrate multiple forms of communication technologies and research to create a better understanding. In order to reach this result, one must use intellectual and practical skills. Digital technology impacted the way educators teach in the classroom. Educators turn to technology to stay up to date with current events. With the use in technology rising over the past decade, educators are not eliminating the traditional foundation in education, but merely enhancing it with digital literacy through a variety of curriculums. With technology on the rise, there are several platforms created for different purposes. For writing tools, Google Docs have allowed students to work together on projects. Prezi is a website that allows one to create presentations with more of a creative twist. Easybib allows individuals to cite any source through a generation in any given format. Educators have even turned to social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Edmodo, and even Instagram to communicate and share ideas with one another. New standards have been put into place as digital technology has consumed the classroom. As technology evolves, so does the learner. Digital composition keeps educators and students connected through modern teaching techniques." Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Keykeen (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey Melissa, digital literacy applications does sound more professional; however, I feel one might confuse it with actual applications one might use on the phone or computer. How about Values in Digital Literacy? Keykeen (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I see your point about "applications" being confusing. I will change it to "values of digital literacy." Thank you for your suggestion! Melissaborrego (talk) 22:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Keykeen, here is my feedback for your entry. I suggest including Suzanne Mckee-Waddell's professional title so that the reader knows her qualifications and credibility of the topic. I would possibly remove "According to..." and instead write "Suzanne Mckee-Waddell states/founded/coined/conceptualized the idea of..." so the paragraph flows better and fits Wikipedia's standards. Also, instead of writing "one must use..." try using "individuals must use..." Great job!Melissaborrego (talk) 22:10, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Melissa for the suggestions. I agreed with many of your suggestions especially the one about tone. I made a few edits after reading your comments. Here is the updated version to fit more of a encyclopedic tone. "University of Southern Mississippi professor, Dr. Suzanne Mckee-Waddell conceptualized the idea of digital composition. It is the ability to integrate multiple forms of communication technologies and research to create a better understanding of a topic. In order to reach this result, an individual must use intellectual and practical skills. Digital technology impacted the way educators teach in the classroom. Educators turn to technology to stay up to date with current events. With the use in technology rising over the past decade, educators are not eliminating the traditional foundation in education, but merely enhancing it with digital literacy through a variety of curriculums. There are several platforms created for different purposes. For writing tools, Google Docs has allowed students to work together on projects. Prezi is a website that allows individuals to create presentations with more of a creative twist. Easybib allows individuals to generate a citation in any given format. Educators have even turned to social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Edmodo, and Instagram to communicate and share ideas with one another. New standards have been put into place as digital technology has augmented classrooms. As technology evolves, so does the learner. Digital composition keeps educators and students connected through modern teaching techniques." Keykeen (talk) 20:03, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Keykeen, I like the improvements you made to this paragraph. It is fair to say, though, that McKee-Wadell "conceptualized" digital composition? that is a pretty huge claim that puts the emphasis on her rather than on the advent of and educational uses of digital composition. I might start the paragraph with the second sentence, replace the word "it" with "digital composition" and just cite McKee-Waddell at the end of that sentence with a link. I also made a few small grammatical edits. I did not edit your sentence about Prezi, but I want to ask: more creative than what? PowerPoint? Also, you need to make your key terms in this paragraph links to their Wikipedia pages.Cathygaborusf (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Broken links in digital and media literacy section[edit]

Hello everyone. I was reading through the digital and media literacy subsection and I found a few broken links. First, the Renee Hobbs hyperlink doesn't lead to its Wikipedia page. The link leads to a page stating that the page has been moved or deleted. Second, the hyperlink to "Digital and Media Literacy: A Plan of Action" leads to a 404 not found page. The footnote #11 in this section also leads to a 404 not found page. I suggest finding reliable sources to replace these broken links or rewriting the section entirely from scratch. I would like to hear your thoughts and suggestions before I move forward. Melissaborrego (talk) 05:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

In addition to Melissa's comment, multiple links in the references section are unreliable. There are a total of eleven links that do not work or are unreliable : 1) The Hive Mind 2) Digital Natives, Immigrants, Part 2 3) Digital Literacy Contest 4) Champions of Digital Literacy 5) Global Literacy (Hot Chalk) 6) Council Overview 7) Certiblog 8) Certiport 9) CEPIS 10) Microsoft Digital Literacy 11) ECDL Foundation. Some links are blogs and according to the Wikipedia guidelines, blogs are unacceptable resources due to the fact it may be biased or incorrect. The link from Microsoft may lead one to believe that they are advertising Microsoft over other websites or one may perceive it as one trying to sell Microsoft products. — Preceding Keykeen comment added by Keykeen (talkcontribs) 10:10, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for making that list Keykeen! To add, I found that a citation is needed under the "use in society" subsection. Also, under the "core elements and their educational effects" subsection, the term "networked society" leads to another broken link. I suggest we read over this section and double check sources and citations. Melissaborrego (talk) 05:18, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Since no one has disagreed, I will begin working on a draft for the digital and media literacy subsection. I will be re-writing the entire section, as the current sources lead to broken links. Researcher and professor at New York University, Danah Boyd, wrote the book It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens (2014) and I think it is a reliable source in writing this section. I think Boyd's book is a worthy source to include in this article because it contains information about media literacy and its impacts on evaluating messages.
I also purpose moving the digital citizen subsection under the digital and media literacy subsection because being media literate is at the heart of being a digital citizen. According to Boyd (2014), proponents of media literacy education programs in the 1930s began to emphasize critical thinking skills in order teach citizens how to effectively evaluate propaganda posters in the United Kingdom (p.181). Media literacy skills are a core component of being a digital citizen and knowing how to effectively evaluate messages is a large part of being an informed citizen as well. Please let me know your thoughts, otherwise, I will move the digital citizen subsection under the the digital and media literacy subsection. I am also open to suggestions and other sources you believe may be useful in writing this section.
Reference:
Boyd, D. (2014). It's complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. Melissaborrego (talk) 23:46, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Do you think the Digital citizenship section is necessary or even remotely relevant? I think the article can still work really well without it. Digital literacy seems to be merely a component of digital citizenship, instead of the opposite, and since this article is about digital literacy and not digital citizenship (especially seeing as it isn't really discussed and seems as though it's only there as a filler), it may be better if taken out altogether. What do you think? Sarahibrahim (talk) 03:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
I think that the digital citizenship section is relevant, however, it should be a subsection under digital and media literacy instead of having a section of its own, that way it's not a filler. I think it's worth mentioning digital citzenship because being media literate allows us to effectively make decisions in our society. I believe that if we do not understand how to break down the media messages we recieve on a daily basis and form our own opinions, we aren't maximzing our rights as digital cititzens. I do think, however, that we should find a better source to support the current information on digital citizenship and improve the current description. Melissaborrego (talk) 17:36, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Based on Ian's message, for the references that send you to a "dead" page, we should add [dead link] to it. Some of the references that [dead link] would be added to are "Global Literacy HotChalk articles about digital literacy around the world. [dead link]", "Digital Literacy Contest A competition of digital literacy skills which libraries host for their patrons. [dead link]" , "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II by Marc Prensky. [dead link]" , and "The Hive Mind: Folksonomies and User-Based Tagging by Ellyssa Kroski. [dead link] ". Keykeen (talk) 18:08, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Here is my draft for the digital and media literacy section. I was able to find a peer-reviewed journal, co-written by Renee Hobbs, who is currently cited in that section! I think that my draft should be included in this section because it informs the reader about the beginning of digital and media literacy and the catalysts that ignited media literacy education. Furthermore, the current Wikipedia article only contains a bulllet list of skills for digital and media literacy. I think my paragraph does a better job at elaborating on the competencies. Please let me know any feedback you may have.
Digital and media literacy (section):

Media literacy education began in the United Kingdom and the United States as a result of war propaganda in the 1930s and the rise of advertising in the 1960s, respectively. Manipulative messaging and the increase in various forms of media further concerned educators. Educators began to promote media literacy education in order to teach individuals how to judge and access the media messages they were receiving. The ability to critique digital and media content allows individuals to identify biases and evaluate messages independently (Boyd, 2014, p. 181).

Reference: Boyd, D. (2014). It's complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.

Digital and media literacy competence (subsection):

Renee Hobbs, professor of Communication and Media at the University of Rhode Island, developed a list of skills that demonstrate digital and media literacy competence. Digital and media literacy involves knowing how to retrieve, distribute, and understand information found in digital environments, such as the internet. Digital and media literacy includes the ability to examine and comprehend the meaning of messages, judging credibility, and assessing the quality of the digital work. The individual is capable of analyzing digital and media messages by recognizing the author's perspective and overall purpose. A digital and media literate individual has the aptitude to create diverse forms of digital content and possesses technology skills to create digital content. The individual becomes a socially responsible member of their community by spreading awareness and helping others find digital solutions at home, work, or on a national platform (Martens & Hobbs, 2015, p. 121).

Reference: Martens, H., & Hobbs, R. (2015). How media literacy supports civic engagement in a digital age. Atlantic Journal Of Communication. 23 (2): 120–137. doi:10.1080/15456870.2014.961636. Melissaborrego (talk) 05:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Melissa, Your paragraph for "Digital and media literacy" is organized better than the one that is published. The paragraph is read smoothly and is easier to understand. The paragraph that is currently under that section comes off as a bit overwhelming. I could see how the previous author believed it would be beneficial for readers to include a plethora of history of the topic, but the way it is written throws so much information without much of a explanation. Your paragraph is short and concise. My only critique is to include slightly more background information on Boyd to make it stronger.

For your subsection paragraph, I think it is well written with information that is up to date. Glad that we finally have some research on Renee Hobbs especially since there was no page for her on Wikipedia. I believe that adding this subsection will help the reader have a better understanding to the term. Keykeen (talk) 08:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback Keykeen. I will be working on my draft using your suggestions. I have also decided that I don't want to move the digital citizenship section into the digital and media literacy section. After doing more research, I think that the digital citizenship section is a better fit for digital divide. The research I found describes digital citizenship as the ability of individuals to be active citizens in online environments. They are defined as routine users of the internet and possess the technical literacy skills necessary to effectively engage with the web. The internet is accessible in their homes and individuals use the internet daily (Mossberger, McNeal, and Tolbert, 2007, pp. 1-2). I think that their definition of digital citizenship is more related to the digital divide than digital and media literacy because it cites internet access as a requirement of digital citizenship. Access to technology is a core component of the digital divide, so I think that digital citizenship logically fits best under the digital divide section.

Reference: Mossberger, K., McNeal, R., Tolbert, C. (2007). Digital citizenship: The internet, society, and participation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Melissaborrego (talk) 19:16, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi all. Below is my draft for the digital and media literacy section, let me know what you think.

Media literacy education began in the United Kingdom and the United States as a result of war propaganda in the 1930s and the rise of advertising in the 1960s, respectively. Manipulative messaging and the increase in various forms of media further concerned educators. Educators began to promote media literacy education in order to teach individuals how to judge and access the media messages they were receiving. The ability to critique digital and media content allows individuals to identify biases and evaluate messages independently (Boyd, 2014, p. 181).

Danah Boyd, a researcher and professor at New York University and author It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, stresses the importance of critical media literacy, especially for teens. Danah Boyd advocates that critical media literacy skills are the first step in identifying biases in media content, such as online or print advertising. Technical skills and knowledge of navigating computer systems further help individuals in evaluating information on their own. Barriers in acquiring technical skills and computer knowledge set forth a limit for individuals in fully participating in the digital world (Boyd, 2014, pp. 181-183).

Renee Hobbs, professor of Communication and Media at the University of Rhode Island, developed a list of skills that demonstrate digital and media literacy competence. Digital and media literacy involves knowing how to retrieve, distribute, and understand information found in digital environments, such as the internet. Digital and media literacy includes the ability to examine and comprehend the meaning of messages, judge credibility, and assess the quality of the digital work. The individual is capable of analyzing digital and media messages by recognizing the author's perspective and overall purpose. A digital and media literate individual has the aptitude to create diverse forms of digital content and possesses technology skills to create digital content. The individual becomes a socially responsible member of their community by spreading awareness and helping others find digital solutions at home, work, or on a national platform (Martens & Hobbs, 2015, p. 121).

References:

Boyd, D. (2014). It's complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.

Martens, H., & Hobbs, R. (2015). How media literacy supports civic engagement in a digital age. Atlantic Journal Of Communication. 23 (2): 120–137. doi:10.1080/15456870.2014.961636. Melissaborrego (talk) 23:39, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Great discussion of links, organization and content! I made one small grammar edit in the Digital and Media Literacy section. Cathygaborusf (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Thank you for the grammar edit, Cathy. I added a new topic sentence in the last paragraph to improve the transitions between paragraphs 2 and 3:

Media literacy education began in the United Kingdom and the United States as a result of war propaganda in the 1930s and the rise of advertising in the 1960s, respectively.[1] Manipulative messaging and the increase in various forms of media further concerned educators. [1] Educators began to promote media literacy education in order to teach individuals how to judge and access the media messages they were receiving. [1] The ability to critique digital and media content allows individuals to identify biases and evaluate messages independently.[1]

Danah Boyd stresses the importance of critical media literacy, especially for teens. [1] Danah Boyd advocates that critical media literacy skills are the first step in identifying biases in media content, such as online or print advertising.[1] Technical skills and knowledge of navigating computer systems further helps individuals in evaluating information on their own. [1] Barriers in acquiring technical skills and computer knowledge set forth a limit for individuals in fully participating in the digital world.[1]

In order for individuals to evaluate digital and media messages independently, they must demonstrate digital and media literacy competence. Renee Hobbs, professor of Communication and Media at the University of Rhode Island, developed a list of skills that demonstrate digital and media literacy competence. [2] Digital and media literacy involves knowing how to retrieve, distribute, and understand information found in digital environments, such as the internet. [2] Digital and media literacy includes the ability to examine and comprehend the meaning of messages, judging credibility, and assessing the quality of the digital work. [2] The individual is capable of analyzing digital and media messages by recognizing the author's perspective and overall purpose. [2] A digital and media literate individual has the aptitude to create diverse forms of digital content and possesses technology skills to create digital content. [2] The individual becomes a socially responsible member of their community by spreading awareness and helping others find digital solutions at home, work, or on a national platform.[2]Melissaborrego (talk) 02:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Global impact[edit]

After reading through the Global impact section, I noticed that there were only a couple of different countries that were discussed. I do believe that the article should either include other parts of the world, to give a better overview of the impact of digital literacy globally, or maybe not include it at all, and speak more generally.

I saw that China and the Philippines were included, and thought that other areas can be included (if this section should be expanded), perhaps some European countries and South American countries, just to give readers a better idea of just how much more other parts of the world are impacted than others.

If anyone would like to go ahead and expand on that, that's great. If not, I'm more than willing to do so, and will post anything I find just as soon as I can. Sarahibrahim (talk) 03:57, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I think we should definitely expand on the global impact section. Digital literacy has an impact on every part of the world, and to only provide information on China and the Phillippines is not allowing the reader to learn about other prospectives from the many other regions in our world. As you have suggested, I think we should include more information about the impact of digital literacy on more countries. Perhaps each of us could contribute and report on a different region? Melissaborrego (talk) 23:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
I found two different studies done in various parts of the world: Europe and South Africa. Here's what I can add to this section:
A study done in 2011 by the Southern African Linguistics & Applied Language Studies program observed some South African university students regarding their digital literacy. It was found that while their courses did require some sort of digital literacy, very few students actually had access to a computer. Many had to pay others to type any work, as their digital literacy was almost nonexistent. Findings show that class, ignorance, and inexperience still affect any access to learning South African university students may need (Kajee & Balfour, 2011).
(Kajee, L., & Balfour, R. (2011). Students’ access to digital literacy at a South African university: Privilege and marginalisation. Southern African Linguistics & Applied Language Studies, 29(2), 187. doi:10.2989/16073614.2011.633365)
In 2011, the EU Kids Online conducted a study that examined the amount of time children in Europe spent on the computer. It was found that roughly 85% of European children use a computer without the supervision of a teacher or parent, showing that these children have acquired some form of digital literacy (Matyjas, 2015, p.2901). The reasoning behind this is that most European children have access to various digital devices, allowing them to learn more and be more digitally literate later on in life.
(Matyjas, B. (2015). Mass Media and Children. Globality in Everyday Life. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 174(International Conference on New Horizons in Education, INTE 2014, 25-27 June 2014, Paris, France), 2898-2904. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.1026)
These two summaries can further expand on the global impact that digital literacy has on various populations across the world. Sarahibrahim (talk) 03:21, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I found an article that has a study on the effects of digital media and education based in Argentina. I think this would be a great addition in under Global Impact and Use in Education. Keykeen (talk) 1:45, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree with your call to any editors to expand this section. The few sentences you added do bring in other parts of the world, but this section still feels disjointed and incomplete.Cathygaborusf (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Digital divide, digital inequality, participation gap, and digital natives/immigrants grouping[edit]

The digital divide section is very brief and I think we should show a complete picture of the digital divide by including more concepts, such as digital inequality, participation gap, digital native and digital immigrant. I found more information on these concepts in the book I mentioned previously, It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens (2014) by Danah Boyd. Currently, this Wikipedia page has information on digital natives and immigrants, so we could move that section under the digital divide and include more information from Boyd's book. It would make sense to move the concepts of digital visitors and residents under the digital divide section as well, as these concepts are similar to digital natives and immigrants.

Also, footnotes #31 and #36 lead to broken links, so we should definitely cut these sources out unless anyone can find the correct links.

What do you guys think about dividing up this section? It would require some sections to be rearranged and more research, so I think a group effort would work best. Let me know what you think. Melissaborrego (talk) 00:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

I just found an article that touches on what digital natives and digital immigrants are but it also talks about how a social object like mobile devices is understood by groups or communities.Cathy ceee (talk) 02:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Cathyceee, Can you share that article with us? I would like to know if that article contains similar or different ideas from Boyd's book. If we can find sources with opposing views, it would be a good idea to cite those articles in order to provide the reader with unbias information. There's a good amount of information on digital natives and digital immigrants on the current Wikipedia article, but if we find new information we should definitely include it. Melissaborrego (talk) 03:29, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Ahn, J., & Jung, Y. (2016). The common sense of dependence on smartphone: A comparison between digital natives and digital immigrants. New Media & Society, 18(7), 1236-1256. doi:10.1177/1461444814554902Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cathy ceee (talkcontribs) 17:39, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The article says what digital natives and what digital immigrants are, but also talks about the dependency on mobile devicesCathy ceee (talk) 17:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that we need to include information about dependency on mobile devices for this Wikipedia page, dependency is not relevant to digital literacy. However, I do suggest writing a paragraph describing digital natives and digital immigrants with new information that isn't already cited. I have begun writing a paragraph for participation gap and I will paste it below this comment. Participation gap is a new term for this Wikipedia page and I am open to any suggestions for my draft. Specifically, I would like to know if you think I should include Boyd's fieldwork observations of the participation gap. If I go ahead and include her observations, then I would summarize what she observed when teens used technology. She describes how teens use technology and the different experiences that formed from their use.
Media theorist Henry Jenkins coined the term participation gap and distinguished the participation gap from the digital divide. The term, participation gap, surfaced after the digital divide was proclaimed to have reached an end by the media. The media claimed the end of the digital divide as a result of increased digital access in the United States. According to Henry Jenkins, the participation gap describes how varying degrees of access lead to various experiences with technology (Boyd, 2014, pp. 193-194).
Danah Boyd, researcher, professor at New York University, and author of It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, conducted fieldwork and saw the effects of the participation gap on teens in the United States (Boyd, 2014, p. 194).
Reference: Boyd, D. (2014). It's complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. Melissaborrego (talk) 21:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Would anyone like to take up the concepts of digital visitors and digital residents? I think these concepts can be expanded upon. Currently, there is only a brief description of the topics in the Wikipedia article. I think we can research more current information as well. I will be including more information on digital immigrants and digital natives, and I don't have much time to do research on digital visitors and digital residents. I would appreciate help in this section. Thank you! Melissaborrego (talk) 16:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback Melissa. I'll help on looking for info on digital visitors and reidents.Cathy ceee (talk) 06:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Here is my draft for the digital natives and digital immigrants subsection, let me know what you think.
Marc Prensky is credited as the originator of digital natives and digital immigrants because he popularized the concepts. However, Poet and cyberlibertarian John Perry Barlow and media theorist Douglas Rushkoff have also been cited to have coined the terms (Boyd, 2014, pp. 177-179).
John Perry Barlow used the concepts in his statement entitled A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, for the 1996 World Economic Forum in Davos. John Perry Barlow's poetry showcases the generational gap that grew with the rise of technology. John Perry Barlow metaphorically suggested that children are natives in the growing digital world and parents are fearful of the growing generational gap in regard to technology. Douglas Rushkoff employed the concepts of digital natives and digital immigrants in his book, Playing the Future. Douglas Rushkoff praises children's progress and growing competence with technology and labels youth as digital natives (Boyd, 2014, pp. 177-179).
Also, here is my edited paragraph citing the effects of the participation gap that Danah Boyd observed:
Danah Boyd conducted fieldwork and saw the effects of the participation gap on teens in the United States. Danah Boyd observed privileged and disadvantaged teens' different experiences with technology. In New York, she observed a teen girl use her Android phone for texting and using mobile applications. The teen girl was able to use technology to participate in social media, but the internet was too slow on her phone to complete homework assignments. Although the teen girl had full access to the internet, the slow internet on her mobile device limited her experience (Boyd, 2014, pp. 193-194).

Reference: Boyd, D. (2014). It's complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. Melissaborrego (talk) 19:02, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I also rewrote the digital divide section. I included new information and fixed the tone of the current entry.
The digital divide was discussed by journalists, academics, and governmental agencies in the 1990s. The digital divide was used to distinguish the digital accessibility gap between wealthy and lower-income groups (Boyd, 2014, p. 193).
Jessamyn C. West, the author of Without a Net: Librarians Bridging the Digital Divide, defines the digital divide as the gap between individuals who can and cannot easily access technology, or the haves and have-nots. The digital divide highlights the privileges individuals have in accessing technology (Cohron, 2016, pp. 77-78).
Professor at UCLA's School of Education and Information Studies Howard Besser argues that the digital divide means more than technology access between the haves and have-nots. The digital divide encompasses aspects such as information literacy, appropriateness of content, and access to content. Beyond access, a digital divide exists between those who have the ability to apply critical thinking to technology. Language and English fluency creates a barrier in the digital divide as well, as most content online is written in English. The digital divide includes a gap between individuals who have the ability to create digital content or are merely consumers (Besser, 2001).
In 1994 the United States Department of Commerce began investigating the causes of the digital divide. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) conducted the survey, Falling Through the Net. The NTIA discovered that many socioeconomic factors, such as income, geographical location, age, and education were the driving forces of the digital divide. Older, less educated, and lower-income individuals were less likely to own a telephone or computer in their homes (Cohron, 2016, p. 78).
The NTIA conducted a second survey in 1999 and found that statistics of the digital divide improved. Computer ownership and internet access increased across every demographic group and geographic area. However, the research found that certain groups were advancing faster in regards to internet access. Those who had easy access to technology were growing more information rich than the have-not group. The research revealed that the socioeconomic factors found in the first survey are still present in growing the digital divide, although access to computers and internet use increased (Cohron, 2016, pp. 78-79).
References:
Besser, H. (2001). The Next Digital Divides Retrieved from http://tcla.gseis.ucla.edu/divide/politics/besser.html
Boyd, D. (2014). It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
Cohron, M. (2016). The Continuing Digital Divide in the United States. The Serials Librarian. 69 (1): 77–78. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2015.1036195 Melissaborrego (talk) 19:24, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

So it does not look like you have made any of these changes yet, right? It's a bot hard to see what you would change and what you would keep. I would only say that the Participation Gap section should cite Jenkins directly and not rely on Boyd.Cathygaborusf (talk) 01:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

To clarify, here is the entire section I wrote about the digital divide that will be posted,I will make a separate post for the participation gap:

The digital divide was first widely discussed by journalists, academics, and governmental agencies in the 1990s.[1] The digital divide was used to distinguish between the digital accessibility of wealthy and lower-income groups. [1] Jessamyn C. West, the author of Without a Net: Librarians Bridging the Digital Divide, defines the digital divide as the gap between individuals who can and cannot easily access technology, or the haves and have-nots. [5] The digital divide highlights the privileges individuals have in accessing technology. [5]

In 1994 the United States Department of Commerce began investigating the causes of the digital divide. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) conducted the survey, Falling Through the Net. [5] The NTIA discovered that many socioeconomic factors, such as income, geographical location, age, and education were the driving forces of the digital divide. [5]Older, less educated, and lower-income individuals were less likely to own a telephone or computer in their homes. [5]

The NTIA conducted a second survey in 1999 and found that statistics of the digital divide improved. Computer ownership and internet access increased across every demographic group and geographic area. However, the research found that certain groups were advancing faster in regards to internet access. [5] Those who had easy access to technology were growing more information rich than the have-not group. [5] The research revealed that the socioeconomic factors found in the first survey are still present in growing the digital divide, although access to computers and internet use increased. [5]

Expanding on the definition of the digital divide, Professor at UCLA's School of Education and Information Studies Howard Besser argues that the digital divide means more than technology access between the haves and have-nots. The digital divide encompasses aspects such as information literacy, appropriateness of content, and access to content. [6] Beyond access, a digital divide exists between those who have the ability to apply critical thinking to technology. [6] Language and English fluency creates a barrier in the digital divide as well, as most content online is written in English. [6] The digital divide includes a gap between individuals who have the ability to create digital content or are merely consumers. [6]Melissaborrego (talk) 03:25, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Here is my draft for the participation gap section, with a new source citing Henry Jenkins:

Media theorist Henry Jenkins coined the term participation gap and distinguished the participation gap from the digital divide.[1] According to Henry Jenkins, the participation gap describes the gap in skills that emerge when individuals have different levels of access to technology. [7] Henry Jenkins states that students learn different sets of technology skills if they only have access to the internet in a library or school. [7] Students who have access to the internet at home have more opportunities to develop their skills and have fewer limitations, such as computer time limits and website filters commonly used in libraries. [7]

The effects of the participation gap were studied by Danah Boyd, who observed and conducted fieldwork on teens in the United States. [1] Danah Boyd observed privileged and disadvantaged teens' different experiences with technology. In New York, she observed a teen girl use her Android phone for texting and using mobile applications. The teen girl was able to use technology to participate in social media, but the internet was too slow on her phone to complete homework assignments. Although the teen girl had full access to the internet, the slow internet and mobile device itself limited her experience in further improving her competence with technology. [1] The teen girl's limited access to technology highlights the participatory gap in skills that individuals experience when they have limited access to the internet and various modes of technology.

References 1. Boyd, Danah (2014). It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. pp. 177–194. ISBN 978-0-300-16631-6. 7. "The Participation Gap: A Conversation with media expert and MIT Professor Henry Jenkins". National Education Association. March 18, 2008. Retrieved November 27, 2016.Melissaborrego (talk) 03:50, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

21st-century skills[edit]

While reading through this section, I noticed that one of the sentences had words repeating, and a name was spelled incorrectly. Below is the fixed version.

Digital literacy requires certain skill sets that are interdisciplinary in nature. Warschauer and Matuchniak list information, media, and technology; learning and innovation skills; and life and career skills as the three skill sets that individuals need to master in order to be digitally literate, or the 21st century skills. In order to achieve information, media, and technology skills, one needs to achieve competency in information literacy, media literacy and ICT (information communicative technologies). Encompassed within Learning and Innovation Skills, one must also be able to be exercise their creativity and innovation, critical thinking and problem solving, and communication and collaboration skills (the "Four Cs of 21st century learning"). In order to be competent in Life and Career Skills, it is also necessary to be able to exercise flexibility and adaptability, initiative and self-direction, social and cross-cultural skills, productivity and accountability, leadership and responsibility.[29] Aviram & Eshet-Alkalai contend that there are five types of literacies that are encompassed in the umbrella term that is digital literacy.

I also propose moving this section under the Digital and media literacy section as it would be optimal, as these skills, according to Warschauer and Matuchniak (2010), are needed in order to become digitally literate. Without these skills, one would not be digitally literate.

Since this section did not cite Warschauer and Matuchniak, I also went ahead and found their journal article.

Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New Technology and Digital Worlds: Analyzing Evidence of Equity in Access, Use, and Outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179–225. doi:10.3102/0091732X09349791 Sarahibrahim (talk) 18:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sarah! I think you should definitely move the 21st-century skills section to the digital and media literacy section. Your revised version sounds great. My only suggestion would be to change "one" to "individuals". I think the paragraph flows better using "individuals". I just added my revised draft to the digital and media literacy section, so feel free to move your draft whenever you are ready. I think your entry should be first, in terms of organization. My paragraphs would follow your entry, since the section is called "Digital and media literacy", it makes sense to solely talk about digital literacy first, then digital and media literacy skills.Melissaborrego (talk) 20:02, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Digital citizenship[edit]

Hi all. Here is my draft for the digital citizenship section. I found a new source for this section. The book, Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society, and Participation (2007) by Karen Mossberger, Ramona McNeal, and Caroline Tolbert provides new information on what it means to engage in digital citizenship.

Digital citizenship means individuals have the ability to be active citizens in online environments. Digital citizens possess the technical literacy skills necessary to effectively engage with the web and are routine users of the internet. The internet is accessible in their homes and individuals use the internet daily (Mossberger, McNeal, and Tolbert, 2007, pp. 1-2).

Political participation and civic engagement are core components of digital citizenship. Political information and news accessed online furthers political knowledge and promotes civic engagement. Karen Mossberger, Ramona McNeal, and Caroline Tolbert, authors of Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society, and Participation studied that online consumption of political information is associated with more political knowledge, discussions, and awareness (Mossberger, McNeal, and Tolbert, 2007, pp. 61-65).

Reference: Mossberger, K., McNeal, R., Tolbert, C. (2007). Digital citizenship: The internet, society, and participation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

I think that we should still keep the 9 themes of digital citizenship on the page. However, I think they should be summarized as opposed to listing the 9 themes. Would anyone like to collaborate and summarize the 9 themes? Melissaborrego (talk) 00:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

After a peer review session in class, we have decided to entirely delete the digital citizenship section from the Wikipedia article. There is a digital citizenship article on Wikipedia, so we plan on writing a sentence or two briefly introducing the concept in the introduction and linking to the Wikipedia "digital citizenship" page. If anyone is opposed to this idea please let me know or I will go ahead and delete this section and make changes in the introduction.Melissaborrego (talk) 20:26, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Seeing that digital literacy is one of the nine components of digital citizenship, I believe that the concept could be briefly mentioned in the introduction. We could probably have link that takes people to the digital citizenship page.Keykeen (talk) 08:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I'd be a little bit careful about the Riddle source. While he seems like a legit educator, that is a self-published pageCathygaborusf (talk) 01:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Cathygaborusf

Hi Cathy. We will be deleting the digital citizenship section that links to Ribble's web page on digital citizenship. Since digital citizenship already has a Wikipedia page of its own, we will add a brief sentence in the introduction and link to the proper Wikipedia page. I will be referencing this source: Mossberger, K., McNeal, R., Tolbert, C. (2007). Digital citizenship: The internet, society, and participation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Melissaborrego (talk) 01:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Tone, Spelling and Grammar Changes and proposed deletion of sections[edit]

Hi all. I am going through the entire article and fixing any tone, spelling, and grammar errors. I am fixing the tone to match Wikipedia's standards and any grammar or spelling mistakes. Here is everything I propose updating:

Introduction:

Digital literacy is the knowledge, skills, and behaviors used in a broad range of digital devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops and desktop PCs, all of which are seen as a network rather than computing devices. Digital literacy initially focused on digital skills and stand-alone computers, but the focus has moved from stand-alone to network devices. Digital literacy is distinct from computer literacy and digital skills. Computer literacy preceded digital literacy. Computer literacy refers to the knowledge and skills in using traditional computers, such as desktop PCs and laptops. Computer literacy focuses on practical skills in using software application packages. Digital skills is a more contemporary term and are limited to practical abilities in using digital devices, such as laptops and smartphones.

A digitally literate individual will possess a range of digital skills, knowledge of the basic principles of computing devices, and skills in using computer networks. The individual has the ability to engage in online communities and social networks while adhering to behavioral protocols. The individual is able to find, capture, and evaluate information. Digital literacy requires the individual to understand the societal issues raised by digital technologies and possess critical thinking skills.

Digital literacy does not replace traditional forms of literacy. It builds upon the foundation of traditional forms of literacy.[1] Digital literacy is the marrying of the two terms digital and literacy. However, it is much more than a combination of the two terms. Digital information is a symbolic representation of data, and literacy refers to the ability to read for knowledge, write coherently, and think critically about the written word. I propose deleting this paragraph below from the introduction, it has no relevance to the article, nor are these concepts mentioned in the following sections of the article. Digital literacy researchers explore a wide variety of topics, including how people find, use, summarize, evaluate, create, and communicate information while using digital technologies. Research also encompasses a variety of hardware platforms, such as computer hardware, cell phones and other mobile devices and software or applications, including web search or Internet applications more broadly. As a result, the area is concerned with much more than how people learn to use computers. In Scandinavian English as well as in OECD research, the term Digital Competence is preferred over literacy due to its holistic use. In 2013, European Commission published a Digital Competence Framework [2] which also includes the notion of digital literacy, but goes further than that, for example, defining problem solving in digital environments as part of the Digital competence.

Academic and pedagogical concepts From a competency perspective, literacy is the lowest level in a progression that spans literacy, fluency, and mastery. From an academic perspective, digital literacy is a part of the computing subject area, alongside computer science and information technology.[3]

Digital literacy is a new literacy and may itself be decomposed into several sub-literacies. One such decomposition considers digital literacy as embracing computer literacy, network literacy, information literacy and social media literacy. Previous conceptualizations of digital literacy focused on the practical skills associated with using computers, now considered computer literacy. These include hardware skills, such as connecting devices, and software skills, such as using application packages. Contemporary conceptualizations of digital literacy add to these traditional skills and embrace knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors, particularly with respect to networked devices, such as smartphones, tablets, and personal computers. Digital literacy differs from computer literacy in a number of significant ways. While it embraces the practical skills that computer literacy incorporates, there is a much greater focus on sociological, political, cultural, economic and behavioral aspects of digital technologies.

As a pedagogical approach in curriculum design, the implementation of digital literacy affords far-reaching advantages. The internet is both a source of information and communication that has increased exponentially internationally. Subsequently, integrating technology into the classroom in a meaningful way exposes students to a range of literacy practices called multi-literacies, which broadens their outlook and widens vistas of information and knowledge which is highly constructive. This methodology embraces the constructivist theory of learning (Bruner, 1978) wherein learners draw from their existing knowledge in order to construct new learning.

I propose deleting this section because there is only 1 source cited in the first 2 sentences. The following paragraphs are not cited, and therefore should be deleted. I didn't bother fixing tone or grammar for this section since there are not any sources supporting it

Values of digital literacy

Schools are continuously updating their curriculum in order to keep up with accelerating technological developments. This often includes computers in the classroom, the use of educational software to teach curriculum and course materials being made available to students online. Some classrooms are designed to use smartboards and audience response systems. These techniques are most effective when the teacher is digitally literate as well.

Teachers often teach digital literacy skills to students for online research. Such skills include verifying credible sources online and how to cite web sites. Google and Wikipedia are used by students to conduct general research.[13]

Educators are often required to be certified in digital literacy to teach certain software and, more prevalently, to prevent plagiarism amongst students.

Digital writing Digital writing is a new type of composition being taught increasingly within universities. Digital writing is a pedagogy focused on technology's impact on writing environments; it is not simply using a computer to write. Rather than the traditional print perspective, digital writing enables students to explore modern technologies and learn how different writing spaces affect the meaning, audience, and readability of text. Educators in favor of digital writing argue that it is necessary because technology affects the ways students can produce and deliver their writing. [14] The goal of teaching digital writing is that students will increase their ability to produce a relevant, high-quality product, instead of just a standard academic paper.[15]

One aspect of digital writing is the use of hypertext. As opposed to printed text, hypertext invites readers to explore information in a non-linear fashion. Hypertext consists of traditional text and hyperlinks that send readers to other texts. These links may refer to related terms or concepts or they may enable readers to choose the order in which they read. The process of digital writing requires the composer to make unique choices in creating hypertext. These decisions lead the reader to question the author's responsibilities and objectivity.[16]

Values in society Digital literacy helps people communicate and keep up with societal trends. Literacy in social network services and Web 2.0 sites helps people stay in contact with others, pass timely information and even sell goods and services. This is mostly popular among younger generations, though sites like LinkedIn have made it valuable to older professionals.

Digital literacy can also prevent people from believing hoaxes that are spread online or are the result of photo manipulation. E-mail frauds and phishing often take advantage of the digitally illiterate, costing victims money and making them vulnerable to identity theft.[citation needed] I propose deleting this sentence since there is no source attached.

Research has demonstrated that the differences in the level of digital literacy depend mainly on age and education level, while the influence of gender is decreasing (Hargittai, 2002; van Dijk, 2005; van Dijk and van Deursen, 2009). Among young people, in particular, digital literacy is high in its operational dimension (e.g. rapidly move through hypertext, familiarity with different kinds of online resources) while the skills to critically evaluate content found online show a deficit (Gui and Argentin, 2011).We should delete this paragraph since the journal article is not cited.

Building on digital literacy is the concept of digital creativity which is the expression of creative skills in the digital medium. This can include programming, websites and the generation and manipulation of digital images.This sentence should be deleted, no sources are attached and digital creativity is not relevant to this article.

Social media With the emergence of social media, individuals who are digitally literate now have a major voice online.[17] Websites such as Facebook and Twitter, as well as personal websites and blogs, have enabled a new type of journalism that is subjective, personal and connects readers on a global scale. [18] These online communities foster group interactivity among the digitally literate. Social media also helps users establish a digital identity [19] Without digital literacy or the assistance of someone who is digitally literate, individuals cannot possess a personal digital identity. This is closely allied to Web Literacy.

Values in the workforce

Those who are digitally literate are more likely to be economically secure.[20] Many jobs require a working knowledge of computers and the Internet to perform basic functions. As wireless technology improves, more jobs require proficiency with cell phones and PDAs.

White collar jobs are increasingly performed on computers and portable devices. Many of these jobs require proof of digital literacy to be hired or promoted. Sometimes companies will administer their own tests to employees, or official certification will be required.

As technology has become cheaper and more readily available, more blue-collar jobs have required digital literacy as well. Manufacturers and retailers, for example, are expected to collect and analyze data about productivity and market trends to stay competitive. Construction workers often use computers to increase employee safety.[20]

Job recruiters often use employment websites to find potential employees, thus magnifying the importance of digital literacy in securing a job.

The 2014 Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) defines digital literacy skills as a workforce preparation activity.[21]

Digital divide Digital literacy and digital access have become increasingly important competitive differentiators.[24] Bridging the economic and developmental divides is in large measure a matter of increasing digital literacy and access for peoples who have been left out of the information and communications technology (ICT) revolutions. I propose deleting this sentence, it has an invalid link.

Professor at UCLA's School of Education and Information Studies Howard Besser argues that the digital divide means more than technology access between the haves and have-nots. The digital divide encompasses aspects such as information literacy, appropriateness of content, and access to content. [25] Beyond access, a digital divide exists between those who have the ability to apply critical thinking to technology. Language and English fluency creates a barrier in the digital divide as well, as most content online is written in English. The digital divide includes a gap between individuals who have the ability to create digital content or are merely consumers.

Research published in 2012 found that the digital divide, as defined by access to information technology, does not exist amongst youth in the United States.[26] Young people of all races and ethnicities report being connected to the internet at rates of 94-98%.[26] There remains, however, a Civic Opportunity Gap, where youth from poorer families and those attending lower socioeconomic status schools are less likely to encounter opportunities to apply their digital literacies toward civic ends.[27]

Community Informatics overlaps to a considerable degree with digital literacy by being concerned with ensuring the opportunity not only for ICT access at the community level but also, according to Michael Gurstein, that the means for the "effective use" of ICTs for community betterment and empowerment are available.[28] Digital literacy is of course, one of the significant elements in this process.I propose deleting these 2 sentences, ICT and community informatics are irrelevant to the digital divide.

The United Nations Global Alliance for ICT and Development (GAID)[29] seeks to address this set of issues at an international and global level. Many organizations (e.g. Per Scholas for underserved communities in the United States and InterConnection for underserved communities around the world as well as the U.S.) focus on addressing this concern at national, local and community levels.this paragraph should also be deleted, it is linked to an invalid source link.

Digital natives and digital immigrants

Marc Prensky invented and popularized the terms digital natives and digital immigrants. A digital native, according to Marc Prensky, is an individual born into the digital age. A digital immigrant refers to an individual who adopts technology later in life.[30] These terms aid in understanding the issues of teaching digital literacy, however, simply being a digital native does not make one digitally literate.

Digital immigrants, although they adapt to the same technology as natives, possess a sort of accent which restricts them from communicating the way natives do. In fact, research shows that, due to the brain's malleable nature, technology has changed the way today's students read, perceive, and process information.[31] This means that today's educators may struggle to find effective teaching methods for digital natives. Digital immigrants might resist teaching digital literacy because they themselves were not taught that way. Marc Prensky believes this is a problem because today's students speak a new language that educators do not understand.[30]

Statistics and popular representations of the elderly portray them as digital immigrants. For example, Canada in 2010 found that 29% of its citizens 75 years of age and older, and 60% of its citizens between the ages of 65-74 had browsed the internet in the past month. Conversely, internet activity reached almost 100% among its 15 through 24-year-old citizens. [32] Eugene Loos identifies the most common assumptions about digital technologies and the elderly, all of which contribute to portray them as digital immigrants and to perpetuate digital ageism. Senior citizens may be regarded as a homogenous group, however, this group does not want or is not able to make use of digital information sources. Eugene Loos claims this is not a problem because as time passes, these generations will be succeeded by new generations that have no problem at all with digital technologies.[33]

 Digital immigrants: Accrding to Ahn, Juyeon, & Jung, Yoonhyuk]a Digital Native is someone who has grown up with technologies. For example, a pager, the first cell-phone, and an oversized cube computer. They also have different undertsandings of digitcal use. While digital immigrants, who have been exposed to digital technology later in life. (Prensky, 2001) states, "digital natives” indicates the young generation born after the 1980s, “digital immigrants” desig- nates the parent generation of DN. Because DN have been growing with diverse digital technologies, they are inclined to adopt and be favorable to emerging technologies." Ahn, J., & Jung, Y. (2016). The common sense of dependence on smartphone: A comparison between digital natives and digital immigrants. New Media & Society, 18(7), 1236-1256. doi:10.1177/1461444814554902 Cathy ceee (talk) 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Digital visitors and digital residents In contrast to Marc Prensky, Dave White from the Department for Continuing Education at the University of Oxford has been publicizing his concept of digital visitors and residents.[35][36] Digital visitors leave no online social trace where as digital residents live a portion of their lives online. These are not two separate categories of people, but rather a description of a continuum of behaviors. It is probable that many individuals demonstrate both visitor and residential behaviors in different contexts. Dave White has developed a mapping tool which explores this concept.[37]

Global impact Government officials around the world have emphasized the importance of digital literacy for their economy. According to HotChalk, an Online resource for educators: "Nations with centralized education systems, such as China, are leading the charge and implementing digital literacy training programs faster than anyone else. For those countries, the news is good."

Many developing nations are also focusing on digital literacy education to compete globally.

Economically, socially and regionally marginalised people have benefited from the ECDL Foundation’s ECDL / ICDL programme through funding and support from Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives, international development agency funding and non-governmental organisations(NGO’s).

The Philippines' Education Secretary Jesli Lapus has emphasized the importance of digital literacy in Filipino education. Jesli Lapus claims a resistance to change is the main obstacle in improving the nation's education in the globalized world. In 2008, Jesli Lapus was inducted into Certiport's Champions of Digital Literacy Hall of Fame for his work to emphasize digital literacy.[39]This last paragraph is the only citation for this section. We should delete the first 3 paragraphs, and keep the last one I revised.Melissaborrego (talk) 21:45, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Melissa, thank you for taking the time to change the tone for the whole article. After reviewing your proposed cuts for certain sections, I agree with all of your suggestions. The only thing I would recommend is for Global Impact that we expand more on the topic. I read your previous research on South Africa and Europe, but how about we include studies from at least one country from every continent (excluding Antarctica) to show diversity. It would be a great addition to the section. Keykeen (talk) 20:24, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

There are a few sections I didn't delete and would rather have other editors look into making further changes. Our group has made significant changes so far, and here is what we think others should work on: 1. The "academic and pedagogical concepts" section could use more sources. 2. The "global impact" section could use more research from other parts of the world not already mentioned. Melissaborrego (talk) 03:55, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Digital literacy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 13 December 2016 (UTC)