Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

132 Words: A Critical Examination of Digital Technology, Education, and Citizenship

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article explores the potential of digital technology to advance democratic citizenship. Drawing on critical theory and following a critical, comparative qualitative study which examined the relationships among digital technology, education, and democracy in the US and Israel, the authors explore epistemological assumptions of teaching and learning with digital tools. The article examines the tension between the promise of digital technology to transform education, and the instrumental hegemony of the neoliberal imperative. At the heart of this article, the authors contend that current teachers’ understanding of using digital technology, and the practices used in classrooms constrain the promotion of digital citizenship. The authors argue that transforming education through digital technology and advancing civic aims require epistemological transformation which will move beyond instrumental understanding of digital tools. They conclude with a recommendation of a theoretical framework for digital citizenship.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We refer digital technology to computers, tablets, smartphones, videos, presentations, digital whiteboards, and any accessible digital device that enables the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for teaching, learning, communicating, and acquiring information.

References

  • Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angelo, T. (2012). Designing subjects for learning: Practical, research-based principles and guidelines. In L. Hunt & D. Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-centered approach (pp. 93–111). ACER Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, S. J. (2012). Global education INC.: New policy networks and the neo-liberal imaginary. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, S. (2012). Citizenship as shared fate: Education for membership in a diverse democracy. Educational Theory, 62(4), 381–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2012.00452.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, R. J. (1978). The restructuring of social and political theory. University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement. Paradigm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W. (2005). Edgework: Critical essays on knowledge and politics. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the demos. Zone Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brookfield, S. (2010). Learning democratic reason: The adult education program of Jürgen Habermas. In M. Murphy & T. Fleming (Eds.), Habermas, critical theory and education (pp. 125–136). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: Children’s learning in the age of digital culture. Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckingham, D. (2015). Defining digital literacy: What do young people need to know about digital media? Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 10, 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canella, G. S., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2012). Deploying qualitative methods for critical social purposes. In S. Steinberg & G. S. Canella (Eds.), Critical qualitative reader (pp. 104–114). Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carspecken, P. F. (2012). Basic concepts in critical methodological theory: Action, structure and system within a communicative pragmatic framework. In S. Steinberg & G. S. Canella (Eds.), Critical qualitative reader (pp. 43–66). Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2011). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deakin Crick, R., & Joldersma, C. W. (2007). Habermas, lifelong learning and citizenship education. Study in Philosophy and Education, 26, 77–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, M. (2016). The critical global educator: Global citizenship education as sustainable development. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emejulu, A., & McGregor, C. C. (2019). Towards a radical digital citizenship in digital education. Critical Studies in Education, 60(1), 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feenberg, A. (1991). Critical theory of technology. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feenberg, A. (2010). Between reason and experience. MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, M. P., & Opitz, M. F. (2015). Helping young children discover the joy of learning. Review of Human Factor Studies, 21(1), 27–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner-McTaggart, A., & Palmer, N. (2018). Global citizenship education, technology, and being. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 16(2), 268–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. A. (2003). The abandoned generation: Democracy beyond the culture of fear. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. A. (2011). The promise of critical pedagogy in the age of globalization: Toward a pedagogy of democratization. In H. H. Giroux (Ed.), On critical pedagogy (pp. 69–85). The Continuum International Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Capizzi, A., Harris, K. R., Hebert, M., & Morphy, P. (2014). Teaching middle school students: A national survey. Reading and Writing, 27, 1015–1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9495-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, M. (2015). A Habermasian perspective on joint meaning making online: What does it offer and what are the difficulties? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9215-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests (J. Shapiro, Trans.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

  • Habermas, J. (1973). Theory and practice (J. Viertel, Trans.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

  • Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action, volume. 2 (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

  • Hinrichsen, J., & Coombs, A. (2013). The five resources of critical digital literacy: A framework for curriculum integration. Research in Learning Technology, 21, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21.21334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honneth, A. (1995). The fragmented world of the social: Essays in social and political philosophy. (C.W. Wright, ed.). State University of New York Press.

  • Horizon Report. (2014). Higher education edition. NMC. http://www.nmc.org/publications/2014-horizon-report-higher-ed

  • Horkheimer, M. (1972). Critical theory; selected essays. Herder and Herder Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ichilov, O. (2009). The retreat from public education [electronic resource] : global and Israeli perspectives. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9570-21

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Israeli Ministry of Education. (2010). 2010–2015 Guide for the Digitized School. http://sites.education.gov.il/cloud/home/tikshuv/Documents/mdrich_ashalem_tikshuv.pdf

  • Knight-Abowitz, K., & Harnish, J. (2006). Contemporary discourses of citizenship. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 653–690. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076004653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, A. (2009). When 21st-century schooling just isn’t good enough: A modest proposal. District Administration, 45(2), 38–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public goods, private goods: The American struggle over educational goals. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 39–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Garza, V., Keicher, A., & Popov, V. (2019). Predicting high school teacher use of technology: Pedagogical beliefs, technological beliefs and attitudes, and teacher training. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(3), 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9355-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamlok, D. (2017). Digital technology and education in the age of globalization [Doctoral dissertation, Miami University], Ohio. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=miami1492461952509602.

  • McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., Ortega, T., Smith, M., & Wineburg, S. (2018). Can students evaluate online sources? learning from assessments of civic online reasoning. Theory and Research in Social Education, 46(2), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2017.1416320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means, A. J. (2018). Learning to Save the future: Rethinking education and work in an era of digital capitalism. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mikander, P. (2016). Globalization as continuing colonialism: Critical global citizenship education in an unequal world. Journal of Social Science Education, 15(2), 70–79. https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/jsse-v15-i2-1475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, J. (2007). The logic of neo-liberalism and the political economy of consumer debt- led growth. In S. Lee & S. McBride (Eds.), Neo-liberalism, state power and global governance (pp. 157–172). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M. (2010). Forms of rationality and public sector reform: Habermas, education and social policy. In M. Murphy & T. Fleming (Eds.), Habermas, critical theory and education (pp. 78–93). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Noble, D. D. (1996). Mad rushes into the future: The overselling of educational technology. Educational Leadership, 54(3), 18–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD [The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development]. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved on March 29, 2020, from: http://www.oecd.org/publications/students-computers-and-learning-9789264239555-en.htm

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pangrazio, L. (2016). Reconceptualising critical digital literacy. Discourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(2), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.942836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2011). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan, K., Evmenova, A. S., Sacco, D., Schwartzer, J., Chirinos, D. S., & Hughes, M. D. (2019). Teacher perceptions of integrating technology in writing. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2018.1561507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts-Mahoney, H., Means, A. J., & Garrison, M. J. (2016). Netflixing human capital development: Personalized learning technology and the corporatization of k-12 education. Journal of Education Policy, 31, 405–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1132774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning strategies. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 105(2), 44–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowan, L. (2017). Teachers’ beliefs about the impact of games on the academic and social experiences of diverse and at-risk children in schools: A Deleuzian perspective. Learning, Media and Technology, 42(3), 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1160925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahin, A., Top, N., & Delen, E. (2016). Teachers’ first-year experience with Chromebook laptops and their attitudes towards technology integration. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 21(3), 361–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-016-9277-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltman, K. J. (2014). Neoliberalism and corporate school reform: ‘Failure’ and ‘creative destruction.’ Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 36(4), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2014.938564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltman, K. J. (2017). Scripted bodies: Corporate Power, Smart Technologies, and the undoing of public education. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selwyn, N., Nemorin, S., & Johnson, N. (2017). High-tech, hard work: An investigation of teachers’ work in the digital age. Learning, Media and Technology, 42(4), 390–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1252770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, N. (2016). Kahoot app brings urgency of a quiz show to the classroom. The New-York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/technology/kahoot-app-brings-urgency-of-a-quiz-show-to-the-classroom.html

  • Slakmon, B. (2017). Educational technology policy in Israel. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 25(1), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2016.1231709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stitzlein, S. M. (2020). Learning how to hope. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tewell, E. (2016). Toward the resistant reading of information: Google, resistant spectatorship, and critical information literacy. Portal Libraries and the Academy, 16(2), 289–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilak, S., & Glassman, M. (2020). Alternative lifeworlds on the internet: Habermas and democratic distance education. Distance Education, 41(3), 326–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1763782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Guoyuan, S., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59, 134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Education (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. National Education Technology Plan 2010. U.S. Department of Education.

  • U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update. Education Publications Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varenne, H. (2014). Comments on Tobin’s contribution to comparative research in anthropology and in education. Comparative Education, 16(2), 43–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, J. (2015). Pressed for Time. The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, M., Walker, J. D., Braseby, A. M., & Sweet, M. S. (2014). ’Now, what happens during class?’ using team-based learning to optimize the role of expertise within the flipped classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3–4), 253–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters, A. (Oct. 22, 2015). The algorithmic future of education. Hack Education. Retrieved on March 29, 2020 from: http://hackeducation.com/2015/10/22/robot-tutors

  • Williamson, B. (2013). The future of the curriculum. School knowledge in the digital age. MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. S., & Santoro, D. A. (2015). Philosophy pursued through empirical research: Introduction to the special issue. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 34(2), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-015-9460-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Tel Aviv University, P.O. Box 39040, 6997801, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Dan Mamlok & Kathleen Knight Abowitz

  2. Department of Educational Leadership, Miami University, Oxford, OH, USA

    Dan Mamlok & Kathleen Knight Abowitz

Authors
  1. Dan Mamlok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kathleen Knight Abowitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Mamlok.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

We report that this manuscript has no potential conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mamlok, D., Abowitz, K.K. 132 Words: A Critical Examination of Digital Technology, Education, and Citizenship. Tech Know Learn 27, 1237–1257 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09540-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09540-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation