Much
like Sasquatch, the “Digital Native,” as coined by Prensky (2001), is a highly
debatable subject. I would love to call
myself a digital native, but am I? At
twenty-seven years old, I come from a reasonably affluent family, meaning we
had decent technology growing up.
However, that still means I remember playing Pirates on a Commodore
64. My elementary days had monthly Mac
lab days where we got to play one-color Number Munchers. Even in high school, our Mac lab time was
spent creating offline projects in Hyperstudio.
Cell phones were not really user friendly until the Nokia and StarTAC
came out in high school. Did I grow up
in a digital world? Kind of. For those
that are older than I am, you would probably say yes. However, if I think about what digital
experiences kids nowadays are having from birth, I may fit more into the
category of “digital immigrant.”
AS we
look for a clear definition, Prensky (2001) throws out a list of characteristics
stating that:
Digital Natives are used to
receiving information really fast. They
like to parallel process and multi-task. They prefer their graphics before their text
rather than the opposite. They prefer
random access (like hypertext). They
function best when networked. They
thrive on instant gratification and frequent rewards. They prefer games to “serious” work. (pp 3-4)
I agree with Prensky that this generally describes the
students in my classroom today. However,
as a biologist I must disagree on his notion that the brains of digital natives
are physically different. Rather, I tend
towards Davidson’s (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011a) view that while the way
they process may be different, it is really just another way an organism is
adapting to its environment, as opposed to the evolutionary jump that Prensky
seems to be pushing for. However,
according to Dede’s (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011b) continuum, I must say
that I fall into the category that believe that technology, like language, is
learned much easier if you have access to it from birth as opposed to learning
it later in life. Even if you can learn
it the same later in life, technology moves fast enough that you will never
truly be able to catch up with someone who has been learning it since they were
one.
As
Thornburg (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011a) then questions, where do we draw
the line for calling someone a digital native as opposed to a so-called digital
immigrant? I believe it has more to do
with taking on the characteristics described in the quote above by Prensky
(2001). Take digital multi-tasking, the
ability, or shall I say necessity, of having ten different programs and windows
open while working on a project. For me,
it was not until college that I was able to master this skill, partly because
the computers prior to that made having ten windows open nearly impossible. Now, I have taken on this multi-tasking as
part of life, both in and out of the computer world. However, I do not do this half as well as younger
students who have been exposed since birth.
As Prensky describes, I have a “digital accent” that may be faint, but
is still noticeable to a younger, more digitally adept clientele. Accordingly, I am going to draw the line for
the earliest true “digital natives” as someone born in the mid to late
nineties. Though this could vary greatly
depending on socio-economic group and many other factors, it was at this time
that technology in the home truly became digital. Home computers became fast enough and cheap
enough to foster the skills previously described. This would also put children born at this
time at the perfect age for adapting social media once it bloomed earlier in
this last decade.
Even if
I am a highly integrated digital immigrant, I am still going to deal with an
ever-widening gap between my students and me.
I also agree with Dede (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011b) that we will
see a larger variety of students in our classroom than we may have a decade or
two ago. This will not only be due to
general technology knowledge but the fact that the technology is getting
diverse enough that we may soon see student adept at niches far removed from
another student ( ex: Web design vs. video editing). This diversity is even greater at a low and
mixed income school like mine. There is
no perfect answer, but I know it will have to do with a mix of general tech
skills mixed with cutting edge. I
believe the shotgun effect may be the best choice, as we will never truly have
enough time in the classroom to cover all technology options deep enough in
class. As more and more of our students
become what Dede (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011c) calls “neo-millennial
learners” we will best serve our populations by introducing them to a sampling
of what is available and encouraging them to expand what they like outside of
the classroom.
P.S. After living in the Northwest for a few years I have
determined that Sasquatch . . . is real!
Resources:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011a). Digital
natives vs. digital immigrants [DVD]. Available from Walden University.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011b). Today’s
learners [DVD]. Available from Walden University.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011c). Millennial learning
styles [DVD]. Available from Walden University.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).
No comments:
Post a Comment