Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants: Part 2

In reference to the theory of digital natives and digital immigrants proposed by Marc Prensky (2001), I decided to investigate the issue further.  I wanted to find out if there was really a difference between children who were raised with in a technology-rich environment as opposed to individuals who had limited exposure during their childhood.

I interviewed a seven year old girl, talked with two sixteen year olds, and polled my adult Sunday School class to gather information for this podcast.  Even though all of the participants were raised within the same community, I found that their exposure to and experiences with technology were varied.  These examples seemed to contradict theories by Dr. Marc Prensky (2001) who said that children raised in technology-rich environments are more comfortable with technology as adults.  Some of the interviewees were very comfortable with technology and use it extensively at either school, work, or at home while others used it on a limited basis.  The podcast that follows contains some of the answers that were shared during my explorations.
            
                           http://podcastmachine.com/podcasts/13915/episodes/71949

References

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part II: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6).

Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants: Part 1

Dr. Harvey Silver stated in the video Understanding the Learner (Laureate Education, 2011) that teachers need to make students feel that their learning and knowledge is worthwhile and, it needs to catch their attention.  Lessons and activities cannot do that sufficiently if they are not designed for the particular students with which they will be used.  With that being said, teachers must get to know their students and the types of learners they are.  While many of them may be classified as digital natives, there are some exceptions.

What is a digital native?  According to Dr. Marc Prensky (2001), digital natives are those individuals who have grown up in a technology-rich world.  They are people who like to receive information at a very fast pace and prefer to receive graphics before text.  They can parallel process, multi-task, and they function best when they are networked with or connected to other people.  Digital natives thrive on instant gratification and prefer games over other styles of work.  And, because these learners prefer random access rather than linear steps, traditional teaching methods can often “retard learning for brains developed through games and web surfing” (Prensky, 2001).  In my opinion, the majority of students today fall into this category of digital natives.  They have grown up with multiple television sets in their houses, they have played countless hours of video games on a variety of gaming systems, and they have iPods, iPads, and/or cell phones.  They have been immersed in technology.  They are comfortable using it and are quite proficient with these modalities. They could not imagine life prior to these inventions.

Conversely, digital immigrants are those people who have not had the experiences with technology that their counterparts have had from an early age.  They are individuals who, at some point in time, crossed-over into the digital realm and started on their digital journey.  They are not as automatic in the use of technologies as the natives, and some will never achieve the same levels of proficiency.  They may become familiar with a variety of technologies, but it will usually be after multiple exposures.  Generally, this conversion happens later in one’s life, after childhood has passed. 

Tim McHale, in the article Portrait of a Digital Native, espoused the idea that “the brain’s ability to effectively self-organize competing information remains in the developmental process until 16 or 17 years of age.”  At that point, the learner will have to work harder to incorporate new skills.  That is where fear steps in.  I have seen this with my own life and in the lives of others.  When presented with a task that evokes fear, some people think it is easier to avoid the task then to work at learning the skill.  My grandmother was a prime example.  She worked as a cashier in a department store for years.   Then, when the store switched to computerized cash registers and an electronic inventory system, she experienced fear.  Her fears were so strong that, instead of trying to learn the new system, she quit her job.  I daresay she was not even on the fringe of becoming a digital immigrant.

Students in my classroom support the characteristics that describe digital natives.  They want to be entertained.  They want to compete against each other and they definitely want prizes for their efforts.  They are easily bored with tackling traditional reading, writing, and math practice.  These students want to know why they have to complete certain tasks and they want to know if they can use technology to achieve their goals.  I have found that even in the results from Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Inventory that are administered yearly, more of my students are falling into the interpersonal and the bodily-kinesthetic categories than in the past.  The students conceivably learn better by talking to others and moving about—components that do not often appear in the traditional classrooms of the past.  The students that are in my classroom today are definitely not the same type of students that occupied the desks ten to fifteen years ago.

What then are the implications for digital immigrants in teaching and leading the digital natives? In the article Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants: Some Thoughts from the Generation Gap by Timothy VanSlyke (2003), he challenges the findings of Marc Prensky and offers his twist on the theories Prensky shares.  While he supports many of the statements and implications made by Prensky, he does not believe that the makeup of the brain actually changes for digital natives.  He does agree that many of today’s students are much more advanced technologically, but that they can adapt and be successfully taught with non-technology instructional methods.  I tend to side with VanSlyke.  While I know that students are changing, I do not believe there is a physical change at the cause.  I believe that the environment plays a key factor in forming the students of today.  Students who are allowed or given access to technology will crave it just as those children who are given many sweets or material items.  Those children who have limited or no access to the same items will not develop a dependence on them.   Dr. David Thornburg, in the video segment Debate: Digital Natives vs. Digital Immigrants supported the same theory when he said, “The environment in which they were brought up in prior to school effects them.”   Yes, the students of today are different, but it is not due to physical alterations in the brain.

In order to work with the students who have become technology immersed, teachers need to change.  Seeking professional development about ways to integrate technology in the classroom is just one of the steps educators can take to help bridge the technology gap.  Teachers should research, acquire, and utilize the latest products to become familiar with their merits.  Educators must also be open-minded and patient.  As fearful as technology can be, the benefits it can espouse are more important.  Teachers must then reflect on their methodologies to determine if there are better ways to accomplish learning objectives than were used previously and if so, adjustments need to be made.  If standard methods are better for completing a task, they should be implemented.

Carol Ann Tomlinson, in the video segment Differentiation, Part 2 (Laureate Education, 2011) reiterated that we as teachers must “teach the students we have, not the students we used to have or the students we wish we had.”  With this directive, teachers who fall into the digital immigrant category, or worse—those who haven’t even attempted to migrate—must get on board and redesign our lessons and classrooms to reflect the needs of our current students, the ones who have lived with technology of some type almost every day of their lives.  Our entire curriculum does not have to be technology-driven, but it should certainly be technology-rich. 

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (2011). Program 31: Designing curriculum, instruction, and assessment [DVD]. Understanding the Learner. Baltimore, MD.  Silver.

Laureate Education, Inc. (2011). Program 33: Designing curriculum, instruction, and assessment [DVD]. Differentiation Part II. Baltimore, MD.  Tomlinson.

21st Century Skills

Partnership for 21st Century Skills, or P21, is a national group interested in helping to advocate or promote 21^st century skills for United States students.  The group has been tasked with helping to bridge or close the “profound gap <that> exists between the knowledge and skills most students learn in school and the knowledge and skills they need for success in their communities and workplaces.” 

The organization has created a framework that illustrates and explains each of the student outcomes it feels crucial for student success. Those outcomes  fall into the categories of core subjects and 21st century skills, learning and innovation skills, information, media, and technology skills, and life and career skills. The framework also includes the support systems that are needed to help students obtain those skills. The supports include standards and assessments, curriculum and instruction, professional development, and learning environments.  As with any structure, strong supports need to be in place to keep the framework intact.  This framework is no different and includes the resources needed to provide that support.

As I ventured through this website, I encountered many resource links containing information further explaining the rationale behind the group and its missions. There were video clips, blog links, and educator resources.   Not only did the site share the objectives or outcome that it feels needed to be met, it also gave examples of schools and other organizations that had been successful in implementing the strategies.  Corresponding contact information for each of the ‘pilot’ organizations was also provided.   A frequently asked questions, or FAQ, section proved to also be helpful.

As a model of the strategies and outcomes it is promoting, the P21 group prepared a video illustrating the “4C’s” from the learning and innovation skills category—creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration.  The video, entitled Above and Beyond, gives credence to the process.  In the video clip, the characters represent the need for thinking creatively, with the results taking them “above and beyond” the normal expectations.  The video was another example of how students could or should be engaged to produce and think beyond their normal parameters.

One of the features of the site was the inclusion of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) map examples prepared for the 4th, 8th, and 12th grade levels in the subjects of Social Studies, English, and Math.  Each map contains lessons/activities and lists of corresponding resources needed for implementing the lessons.  A similar format was used additionally for creating maps for the 21^st century skills in the areas of math, world languages, arts, geography, science, social studies, and English.  These maps help teachers take the guess work out of deciding how to implement the process within the classroom.  As an educator, I appreciate having examples by which to guide the process.

As I toured the site, I did not really find anything with which I disagreed.  The site seemed to be developed in accordance with data revealed in other research I have read on the topic of 21st century learners.  One item that did serve to be disappointing was that my state, Virginia, was not included as one of the fifteen states classified as a 21st century state. 

With the amount of information and examples provided on the pages of the  Partnership for 21st Century Skills site, educators now have a point of reference, examples, and contact information to guide their students into becoming 21st century learners.

To Blog or Not to Blog?

“Blogs are not going away—we need to teach our students how this powerful media works” (November, 2008).  In support of November’s proclamation, blogs are going to continue to appear in classrooms across the country.  The degree to which that occurs will be based on each teacher’s familiarity and comfort with this tool and also on the technology available to make its use possible.

As I am just starting to become familiar with the concept of blogging, I plan to proceed with caution.  Initially within my fifth grade classroom, I plan to establish a blog with which both students and their parents will have access.  Through my site I plan to include daily homework assignments for all of the subjects I teach, announcements of upcoming events, and possibly a few class pictures—which will be with written parental permission as is required by our school’s acceptable use policy.

Once students have been instructed with the rules and etiquette involved with blogging, I will begin to allow select students from my Language Arts class to write articles for possible publication on our class blog.  I am hoping that the initial limited selection of work will spur students into improving their personal writing skills so that they too, will be selected for this same honor.  The goal is for all students to eventually have at least one of their writing pieces published.  Additionally, after the students receive instruction in creating multimedia presentations, some of these products will then be selected for display as well. 

In lieu of the age of my students, generally 10-12 years of age, and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA, 1998) I plan to serve as the determiner of what will be placed on the site.  Because I want this experience to be positive for students, parents, the school system and myself, I plan to keep tight reigns on this initial blog.

References

November, A. (2008). Web literacy for educators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

iPad versus iPod

In hopes of having some money allotted for instructional supplies this school year, I have begun investigating the classroom purchases I would like to make.  With already having an iPad in my classroom, I can see the merits and the possibilities for adding more to my inventory.  My dilemma, of course, is cost of each one, and funding is limited.  I have considered the possibility of adding iPods in lieu of iPads, but I am very unfamiliar with the features and capabilities an iPod could provide.

 As I went in search of product comparisons, I found the standard technical listings of similarities and differences in storage size, screen size, battery life, and such.  What I had hoped to find was actual suggestions from classroom teachers who had used both platforms.  However, most of the comparisons I read were made by people who had their definite preferences for one over the other and did not provide the information for which I was searching.

What I am seeking are comments and recommendations from educators who have utilized both the iPad and iPod in their classrooms and can give me the advantages and disadvantages of each in an elementary school setting. 

Resources

Costello, Sam. (April 12, 2012.) Comparing Features: iPad 3 vs. iPhone 4S vs. iPod touch: How does the hardware and software stack up?   Retrieved from http://ipod.about.com/od/ipadcomparisons/a/ipad-iphone-3gs-ipod-touch.htm.

Diff en technology.  iPad vs. iPod: Difference and comparison.  Retrieved July 4, 2012 from                   http://www.diffen.com/difference/iPad_vs_iPod.

Decisions, Decisions

As I have been researching various blogs, I have found an abundance of ideas that I would like to incorporate into my classroom. My next challenge is to decide which ones I want to tackle first.

If you have any absolute favorites that would be great in a fifth grade English classroom, please share.