Context of educational institutions and rationale for ICT integration

A few years ago, at a transition evening where I work, I listened intently as the deputy principal addressed our new generation of students as 'Digital Natives', and promised to deliver an innovative and engaging learning environment for said students. The parents seemed pleased to have such a label applied to their offspring, excited to be a part of this promising future. The students looked on expectantly, each one clasping a device, ready for learning and eager to embrace their 'digital native' title. Prensky’s (2001) assertion that people born in the early 1980s onwards have been immersed in technology their whole lives, and as a result “think and process information fundamentally differently to their predecessors” (p.1). Coining the label “Digital Natives” (p.1) to describe this generation, Prensky describes learners who are tech savvy, switched on, conversing in a new digital language whilst seeking fun in the traditional educational environment (2001). In contrast, “Digital Immigrants” (p.1), the label Prensky uses for all others, are depicted as “heavily accented, unintelligible foreigners” (p.2). I belive that this is a dangerous assumption to take on as it provides teachers with reasons for disengagement with Information Communication Technologies (ICT), placing them as poutsiders to the ICT revolution, and creating a divide, resulting in great disservice for all concerned, specifically our students.

Bennett, Maton, & Kervin (2008) critically evaluated Prensky’s claims, responding that the issue is “much more complex than the digital native characterisation suggests” (2008, p.783). It is not simply a matter of being born a digital native as there are various factors in play, and the “moral panic” (p.782) surrounding educational practice is not under as much threat as has been suggested(Bennett, Maton, & Kervin, 2008).

In schools today, there seems to be a divide in ideas of how to best cater for our students, how to prepare them for success in an ever changing world, and these unsubstantiated labels bring another layer of complexity, separating the educator from those receiving instruction, even further. While Prensky (2001) asserts that "our students have changed radically" (p.1) and that we are failing them by continuing to teach in traditional ways, Kirshner and Bruyckere (2017) challenge that the digital native even exists, labeling this as a myth that is detrimental to “our educational system, our children and teaching/learning in general" (p.140).

Fast forward to two years later, and the “Digital Natives” (Prensky, 2001, p.1) at our school are hardly interacting with their devices, with many teachers claiming that students prefer traditional methods of learning. Was Prensky right about the archaic ways of the “Digital Immigrants” (2001, p.1) – are they to be blamed for disengagement? And how then do we stimulate “digital competence – the confident and critical use of technology” (p.4) which our students need to participate in society? (Bower, 2017).

Clearly, labeling generations of learners and educators can have beneficial and detrimental effects. At times, it may be an efficient way to categorise learning and teaching for the benefit of the learner and the teacher, providing timely differentiation solutions in the classroom. Yet, more often than not, the labels that we apply lead to boxing-in our students, our educational practices, and ourselves. The use of labels such as digital natives and immigrants, as well as the 21st Century Learner, must be carefully considered for ICT implementation in our educational institutions, if they are to succeed and withstand time and change.

References

Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The "digital natives" debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786.

Bower, M. (2017). Design of technology-enhanced learning: integrating research and practice. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.

Kirshner, P., & Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teacher and Teacher Education, 67, 135 -142.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5). 1-8.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 2: Do They Really Think Differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-6.

#EMT503 #Module1