Are Today's Youth Digital Natives? - Boyd
"Teens may make their own media or share content online, but this does not mean that they inherently have the knowledge or perspective to critically examine what they consume."
In "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants," Prensky attempted to attach terminology to those that have grown in an era of technological advancements. I believe while Boyd understands the ideas of "immigrants" and "natives," he believes the focus is on the wrong thing. I enjoyed reading Boyd's analysis of a "digital native" because Boyd wasn't much concerned with the terminology.
Instead, Boyd was concerned with painting of any tech-savvy youth with such a brought brush. Boyd argued that we are too caught up on the terminology rather than the connotations they carried. By trying to categorize technology users, we are overlooking the importance of becoming competent users. This is exactly what I did in my last blog post.
Boyd states that the main concern for young students using tech is the lofty task of making children media literate. According to Boyd, this means that "when [youth] engage with media— either as consumers or producers—they need to have the skills to ask questions about the construction and dissemination of particular media artifacts."
What Boyd means in this section, is that we must know how to find credible sources. Users must know how to interact with an online sources and identify any biases. Moreover, Boyd spends a long time discussing Wikipedia vs Google, and how complex algorithms only further complicate a fast pace and often misused learning tool.
This in particular resonated with me, especially when Boyd states that "although nearly every teenager I met told me stories about teachers who had forbidden them from using Wikipedia for schoolwork, nearly all of them used the site anyhow. Some used the site solely as a starting point for research, going then to Google to find sources they could cite that their teachers considered more respectable."
More times than I can recall, I had started my research on Wikipedia and branched out simply because the website was not allowed as a credible source. This section really resonated with me and really made me believe Boyd's point. The terminology isn't the most important component. What's important is that both digital natives and immigrants are able to properly utilize this powerful resource so that credible information becomes the status quo.
In "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants," Prensky attempted to attach terminology to those that have grown in an era of technological advancements. I believe while Boyd understands the ideas of "immigrants" and "natives," he believes the focus is on the wrong thing. I enjoyed reading Boyd's analysis of a "digital native" because Boyd wasn't much concerned with the terminology.
Instead, Boyd was concerned with painting of any tech-savvy youth with such a brought brush. Boyd argued that we are too caught up on the terminology rather than the connotations they carried. By trying to categorize technology users, we are overlooking the importance of becoming competent users. This is exactly what I did in my last blog post.
Boyd states that the main concern for young students using tech is the lofty task of making children media literate. According to Boyd, this means that "when [youth] engage with media— either as consumers or producers—they need to have the skills to ask questions about the construction and dissemination of particular media artifacts."
What Boyd means in this section, is that we must know how to find credible sources. Users must know how to interact with an online sources and identify any biases. Moreover, Boyd spends a long time discussing Wikipedia vs Google, and how complex algorithms only further complicate a fast pace and often misused learning tool.
This in particular resonated with me, especially when Boyd states that "although nearly every teenager I met told me stories about teachers who had forbidden them from using Wikipedia for schoolwork, nearly all of them used the site anyhow. Some used the site solely as a starting point for research, going then to Google to find sources they could cite that their teachers considered more respectable."
More times than I can recall, I had started my research on Wikipedia and branched out simply because the website was not allowed as a credible source. This section really resonated with me and really made me believe Boyd's point. The terminology isn't the most important component. What's important is that both digital natives and immigrants are able to properly utilize this powerful resource so that credible information becomes the status quo.
Hi Vinny, I enjoyed reading your blog post. I too agreed with some of the items stated by Boyd. For instance, teaching students about the biases found online resonated with me the most. It's important that we teach students to look at digital sources more critically.
ReplyDeleteThe Wikipedia section threw me. I am one of those teachers that state that students cannot use it because it can be riddled with inaccuracies. I have shown them how to use Wikipedia to find credible sources by using the source information at the bottom of the page. I guess I have been affected by the amount of times I have seen people change a Wikipedia page to troll professional athletes and politicians, but to not recognize the fact checkers they have is an oversight.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi,
ReplyDeleteI like how you mentioned that Boyd stresses that students need to know how to critique the media and use credible sources. I agree that people, not even just students, often mistake fake news or virtual garbage for real, credible sources. This is certainly a problem that teachers need to be aware of. This is a fun site to have students analyze before revealing to them it is fake: https://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/.