Boyd vs. Wesch and the Digital Native

Dana Boyd and Mike Wesch both take interesting directions, regarding the importance of technology in our classrooms, and the social revolution it is creating. Boyd comments about the generational gap in regards to technology and why youths are considered as “digital natives”. There is this idea that all teens understand technology because they “learn faster” or “grew up with it”, however they also need to be taught to evaluate information.

On the flip side, Wesch feels that participation, and collaboration is more important than technology when thinking in terms of engaging our students. He believes that we need to move from making our students knowledgeable to knowledge-able, and that by doing so takes knowledge-ability, which is a result of practice. I agree wholeheartedly that this idea of social-technology takes social movements and makes them worldwide movements in days. The ALS ice-bucket challenge last summer is one example of a small movement brought “alive” by digital technology.

I feel that both of these authors’ views are valid in their own rights. Depending on the climate and culture of your school depends on if these ideas could be successful. I agree with Welch’s statement about social revolution. This type of social technology is allowing us to collaborate through sites like Facebook, and twitter as well as academically through sites like Wikipedia.  I think that technology is only going to become more and more important for our students and embracing the change is going to help our students be successful.

Boyd continues to talk about the idea of "digital wisdom" and teaching our students how to sift through revelant and appropriate information they find on the web rather than censoring it. I understood this idea clearly because I am experiencing it in my own school with censoring things rather then creating “teachable moments”. Wikipedia was an idea that I had trouble with in the Boyd piece. I was always told that information from Wikipedia wasn’t a reliable source for information, so in turn I did the same to my students. Wesch also believed that Wikipedia is a place in which people can collaborate and learn from one another. I understand and appreciate the idea of collaboration and learning from each other, however I still do not think it should be the only means of research for students.

Where do you stand on the “digital native” terminology?

I think that I stand on the side of Marc Prensky. I think that in some ways I am a digital immigrant because I have grown up with various different types of technology. However I do feel that personal interaction is just as important. I learned people skills by talking to people, todays’ digital natives sometimes only communicate with a screen in front of them.

 I remember life with out a cellphone and a computer; I still remember how it changed my life when it first came out and how I can’t live with out them today.  When I tell my students what my first cell phone looked like and that it was a black and green screen, it is unimaginable to them. However they have experienced this “digital life” since the day they were born. They are able to figure their way about the school firewall and bring up anything that I need that is blocked. Sometimes I don’t feel that I am neither supported nor capable to meet the needs of their capabilities.  

In my school there are teachers that still will not allow students to type papers with the notion that they will “plagiarize”. Prensky makes the point that our Digital Immigrant teachers, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language. Those moments need to be teachable and not censored. Unfortunately not keeping up with the times teaches our students nothing about skills that are now needed in the 21^st century- therefore, they lag behind their peers.