Talk:Digital native

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

Book: Born digital[edit]

There's a book, "Born digital - Understanding the first generation of digital natives" (link). Is it the source of the notion of "digital natives"? Should it be included in the literature section? -- (talk) 16:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

As we at FTHS continue our investigation into this fascinating concept, we are aware of the importance of all voices...especially those of educators. We need to learn what works, but at the same time, not compromise our standards. Township09 (talk) 14:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC) (talk) 14:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

It may also be useful to look at some of Don Tapscott's work too. The book Growing Up Digital and Grown Up Digital certainly make contributions to the debate around Digit; Natives, though there's plenty in there for those who might argue a more nuanced situation. Illuminatusds; talk 10:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)


Is this area necessary or does it contribute anything at all? The third paragraph at the very least seems to be sensationalist and very biased, in addition to making very little sense, and should probably be removed. (talk) 06:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd agree with taking out the third paragraph; it isn't supported at all. But I think there should be a section for the opposing viewpoints and criticisms with sources like in the second paragraph. Take a look at the criticism section in Constructivism (learning theory). This has lots of sources and extensive criticism (and responses to criticism) because the research isn't clear cut. This article doesn't need anything quite that big, but something for balance would be good. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 11:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
The Discourse section definitely needs a clean-up. Unfortunately, I don't have journal access. There are citations available at the Mark Prensky page in the Criticisms section. Unfortunately, I can't in good conscience cite something I haven't read and I don't have journal access. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:33D0:EF40:852F:18E:16A2:B7BB (talk) 15:24, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, a lot of the conflict in the Discourse section seems to stem from a false dichotomy between natives and immigrants. Natives and immigrants are discussed to death, but what of the settlers? For instance, paragraph two:

"The term digital immigrant overlooks the fact that many people born before the digital age were the inventors, designers, developers and first users of digital technology and in this sense could be regarded as the original 'natives'"

According to my reading of the article, these people are settlers - not immigrants. The article defines settlers as people who "grew up in an analog-only world, they have helped to create and shape the digital worlds contours." Thus, the "inventors, designers, and first users of digital technology" would be settlers, not natives
I know we all love a good debate but c'mon guys, there's no need for it here.
JamesOpenshaw (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

ADD and ADHD connection[edit]

I'd like to add a reference to what led Prensky to popularize the term, namely the explosion in ADD and ADHD diagnosed children in the early '90s. His use of the term was an attempt to explain young people who were having a harder and harder time learning via traditional teaching methods, and he reasoned that the "always on", media saturated world of the '90s was to blame. While I'm actually kind of on board with this idea (that media overload leads to ADD), I think it's really very bad that he chose the word "digital" as a label, because the media saturation that young people experienced starting in the mid-80s really had nothing to do with computers, and everything to do with technologies like the VCR, cable television, and the CD. A typical child born in 1980 would not have had a significantly different relationship with digital technology from a person born in 1970, but would have had greater access to media at an early age due to the massive surge in its availability in the '80s.

I'd also like to add that most, if not all, of the earlier uses of the "digital native" metaphor were done with some artistic license, and were derivative in tone (deliberately, I believe) of the Hacker Manifesto of 1986.

If there aren't any objections, I'd like to start adding this to the page. Da9iel (talk) 19:07, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Digital native. 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) 02:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC)