What do you make of the (divergent) positions of Boyd and Prensky (per our discussion in class and/or per the article above?) Where do you stand on the “digital native” terminology?
Today was the first time I had ever heard the terms "Digital Native" and "Digital Immigrant". The terms made sense to me. They seemed like a clever way to describe the children that are growing up in today's technological society in contrast to those of us that were not surrounded by so much technology during our childhood.
Our discussion today in class focused mostly on Marc Prensky. Prensky states that, "today‟s students think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors." He says that, "it is very likely that our students’ brains have physically changed –and are different from ours – as a result of how they grew up." This also made sense to me. I can see how my daughters seem to "think" differently. They have almost an intuition about how to use technology, that I simply don't have. I am reluctant, some might say hesitant in my use of technology. I still have my "accent", similar to if I were learning to speak a new language. I am willing to try, but definitely feeling like an immigrant in the process. During class today, I was beginning to think this Prensky guy was onto something.
But then I read what Dannah Boyd had to say about these popular coined terms and she raises some valid points as well. Boyd questions the ability of "digital natives" to be able to, "inherently have the knowledge or perspective to critically examine what they consume." They appear fluent in their computer skills while navigating Facebook and Instagram or even Googling information but "becoming literate in a networked age requires hard work." Boyd believes that the term "digital native" implies expertise in all things technological when in reality this is not the case. It gives society a sense of false security that these individuals are using and interpreting the information accurately; however we must learn to "become medial literate". Youth must, "have the skills to ask questions about the construction and dissemination of particular media artifacts." Just because it is on the internet does not make it true. And the fact of the matter is, "most people have little training in being critical of the content that they consume." I know that I am guilty of this myself. I often find myself believing everything I read, and it is really only recently that I have started to be more cautious of the information that I am taking in.
So what do I think about the term "digital native"? To tell you the truth, I have mixed feelings. I know several people that would not fit into the category of being born after 1980, that are extremely tech savvy on all levels. I also know people (myself included) that were born after 1980 that are nowhere near native in our digital skills. However, I think that the term is an accurate way to describe the youth of todays society at the service level. Most appear to have native like fluency in their ability to navigate through social media, search engines, email and word processing. They can pay bills and find directions and order pizza faster that you can say "bippity boppity boo". But to imply that they understand how to use the technology that is so readily available to them in a purposeful way is not always an accurate statement. I do not feel confident in giving them that much credit, especially if we are not taking the time to teach them how to truly become literate in those skills, because like Boyd says "becoming literate in a networked age requires hard work."
