The digital literacy debate: an investigation of digital propensity and information and communication technology
- 1.1k Downloads
Research suggests students’ use of information and communication technology (ICT) may be more a matter of digital literacy and access rather than a generational trait. We sought to identify ICT preferences of post-secondary students (N = 580) through a Digital Propensity Index (DPI), investigating communication methods, Internet practices and the creation of online content. Age, gender and socioeconomic status were examined as factors which might explain why students use ICT. Results suggest age is a factor in ICT use but that it is not the most important consideration; the gender gap and gaps between socioeconomic groups in terms of ICT use may be closing. The findings raise a variety of implications for institutions training pre-service teachers, curriculum developers designing instructional materials and educational leaders developing ICT policy for schools.
KeywordsDigital literacy Digital natives Digital propensity ICT Age Gender Socioeconomic status
- American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. APA Online. Retrieved March 29, 2009 from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code1992.html.
- Bullen, M., Morgan, T., Belfer, K., & Qayyum, A. (2008, October 20–22). The digital learner at BCIT and implications for an e-strategy. Paper presented at the 2008 research workshop of the European distance education network (EDEN), Paris, France.Google Scholar
- Conole, G., Laat, M. D., Dillon, T., & Darby, J. (2006). JISC LXP student experiences of technologies final report. Joint Information Systems Committee. Retrieved March 30, 2009 from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearningpedagogy/lxpprojectfinalreportdec06.pdf.
- Downes, T. (2002). Blending play, practice and performance: Children’s use of the computer at home. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 3(2), 21–34.Google Scholar
- Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
- Jones, M. G., Harmon, S. W., & O’Grady-Jones, M. (2005). Developing the digital mind: Challenges and solutions in teaching and learning. Teacher Education Journal of South Carolina, 2004–2005, 17–24.Google Scholar
- Keen, A. (2007). The cult of the amateur: How today’s Internet is killing our culture. London: Broadway Business.Google Scholar
- Kennedy, G., Krause, K.-L., Judd, T., Churchward, A., & Gray, K. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108–122.Google Scholar
- Kvavik, R. (2005). Convenience, communications, and control: How students use technology. In D. G. Oblinger & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation (Chap. 7). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.Google Scholar
- Kvavik, R. B., Caruso, J. B., & Morgan, G. (2004). ECAR study of students and information technology, 2004: Convenience, connection, and control , 5. Retrieved March 30, 2009 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers0405/rs/ers0405w.pdf.
- Lohnes, S., & Kinzer, C. (2007). Questioning assumptions about students’ expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate, 3. Retrieved September 29, 2009 from http://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=431&action=article.
- Lorenzo, G., & Dziuban, C. (2006). Ensuring the net generation is net savvy. The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. Retrieved March 30, 2009 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3006.pdf.
- Margaryan, A., & Littlejohn, A. (2008). Are digital natives a myth or reality? Students’ use of technologies for learning. Unpublished manuscript, Glasgow Caledonian University.Google Scholar
- Norman, D. K. (2008). Predicting the performance of interpreting instruction based on digital propensity index score in text and graphic formats. Unpublished dissertation, University of Central Florida.Google Scholar
- Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (Eds.). (2005). Educating the net generation. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.Google Scholar
- Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, 1–6. Retrieved March 29, 2009 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/default.asp.
- Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part II: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9, 1–6. Retrieved March 29, 2009 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/default.asp.
- Roberts, D. F., Foehr, U. G., & Rideout, V. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8–18 year-olds, pp. 1–145. Retrieved March 29, 2009 from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Generation-M-Media-in-the-Lives-of-8-18-Year-olds-Report.pdf.
- Salaway, G., Caruso, J. B., Nelson, M. R., & Ellison, N. (2008). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2008, 8. Retrieved June 24, 2009 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERS0808/RS/ERS0808w.pdf.
- Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native—myth and reality. Paper presented at the CILIP (Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals) London seminar series. http://www.scribd.com/doc/9775892/Digital-Native.
- Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.Google Scholar