Response to Jenkins, Prensky Regarding Digital Natives
Posted on December 5, 2007
Filed Under education, meme, web 2.0 |
Henry Jenkins’ awesome blog “Confessions of an Aca/Fan” has once again brought up the topic of the digital natives and immigrants initially conceptualized by Marc Prensky (See link here to read Henry’s very thorough post). As I travel around speaking to groups about Web 2.0, Second Life, and other technologies that are changing education, I often get asked about natives and immigrants but I realized, while reading Henry’s post, that I’ve never blogged up my answer to the issue regarding the terms and the shifts the terms are meant to capture. So, since I’ve got laryngitis and had to cancel a talk for today, I thought I’d blog instead.
When I give talks about the digital and education I usually make my case by presenting facts about the Millennial generation and their technology use to justify that educators really need to begin paying attention to the changes that are upon us. I present stats from Pew, Gartner, Forrester, and other research groups to set the stage for the conversation but I have to acknowledge that the numbers really don’t create a full picture of what’s happening. I, after all, am not in the group traditionally termed as “natives” and yet I exhibit all the traits. I am my own proof that the difference between native and immigrant isn’t age related. Acclimation and adoption of technology is not generational. I understand though, how looking back, Prensky might have thought that a new generation was bringing about the change. His terms give us something to scaffold conversation from and, for that, we should be appreciative. But I think we all know that there is more to these technology-adoption shifts than an age group growing up with access to computers.
I narrow the phenomenon, the difference between those who readily adopt and include technology in their lives and those who are hesitant or resistant to technology, down to two causes: 1) exigency and 2) lack of medial hauntings. Let me explain.
Exigency Creates Digital Lives
I do not know how to drive a race car, parachute from a plane, or play piano. These are all skills that I’ve never needed to know or had adequate motivation to learn. Now, if someone told me tomorrow that the plane I’ll be boarding on Friday will have engine trouble and that I’ll need to parachute to safety you can bet I’d be researching it today. I’d have an exigency to learn the new skill. For many people who are termed immigrants, or techno-hesitant, this exigency to adopt a digital lifestyle isn’t there. I learned to use email when I found out that I could communicate with friends who lived far away without incurring phone charges. I learned to create web pages when I realized that I really wanted to have an online presence to use for job applications (and I learned to code HTML in Notepad, thank you very much!). My mother learned to use a computer, and then to blog, when she became basically house bound due to illness and realized that using the internet would allow her to travel virtually and still keep in touch with the outside world. My soon-to-be-mother-in-law (who is in her late 60s) began adopting technology to keep in touch with her children, who are spread from coast to coast. In all cases, there was an exigency. A pressing reason to adopt the skill, to let the technology invade our lives.
Many people we term as “immigrants” are simply folks who didn’t have an exigency to adopt a technology until later than others. Perhaps their career didn’t require it or their social network was very local and face to face. “Natives” are simply people who have a somewhat innate exigency or who have adopted so much that their lives before adoption are a blur of lack of connectedness.
Lack of Medial Hauntings Creates Natives
In an essay in Hawisher and Selfe’s Passions and Pedagogies for the 21st Century, Sarah J. Sloane writes about a student who has “medial haunting,” conceptions of a new technology based on how an older similar technology worked. If we’re old enough, we all have medial haunting. If you ever used a manual typewriter than moved on to a word processor you can probably remember that you sometimes forgot that the word processor had functions that the typewriter didn’t. If you then bought your first personal computer, you, no doubt , made sure that there was a word processing program installed before exploring the computer’s other functions. When I moved to Office 2007 from Office 2000 I was endlessly frustrated by looking for familiar buttons that were suddenly gone or moved. I was using the new software with a strong medial haunting of the old software. Those of us who are old enough, or fortunate enough, to have had experience with earlier technologies are sometimes limited by their use when we move on to a newer one.
However, the group we call “natives”, today’s kids, are not haunted by earlier similar technologies. Their use of a cell phone is not hindered by their functional assumptions carried over from using a party line at home, for example. They aren’t intimidated by a 16 button console controller because they never played Atari with two buttons and a joystick. They adopt technologies easier because, for lack of a better phrase, they don’t know any better. They have no reason to be afraid of a new tool or to be fearful of a new gadget. I watch my 6 year old triplets pick up gadgets, poke at them, test them, and then use them much faster than I ever would simply because they aren’t afraid of them (probably because they didn’t pay for them, as I remind them when they play with my iPhone).
It’s important, though, to remember that you don’t have to be young to lack medial hauntings. You simply need to be someone who hasn’t had experience with a previous similar technology. And, on the converse, I think we can begin to understand the difficulties created by the digital divide. In addition to access, we must also consider perceptions and fears of technology that inhibit adoption.
Finally, I’d like to note that we should be careful of the assumption that being a native is somehow superior to being an immigrant. Immigrating to technology implies choice, reflection, and a critical approach. Natives, whether to a land or a technology, aren’t often able to fully step outside their culture to see it for what it is. In addition, I think we immigrants need to be careful how we treat the natives. Every time I speak to an educator who is determined to take away cell phones, shut down Wikipedia, or ban Facebook from campus I’m reminded of historical subjugation of natives. We ought to be very careful about imposing our immigrant, and I dare even say Conquistador, attitudes when dealing with native culture. There’s a whole lot we can learn from the natives.
Comments
5 Responses to “Response to Jenkins, Prensky Regarding Digital Natives”
Leave a Reply
Thank you, Sarah, for such a carefully considered, articulate summary of your thoughts on the native-immigrant concept. And thank you for taking the time to share it. Ann (Zann Canto in SL)
[...] my blog reading, but today I caught up with Intellagirl’s Ubernoggin and got sucked into her Response to Jenkins, Prenskey Regarding Digital Natives [...]
Very thoughtful post. Like you, I find that using various digital devices to be something that comes very easily, whether it’s a cellphone or another new gadget. I tend to poke and prod, trying to figure out what the thing will do and won’t do and I’m not afraid to have to reboot or restart something. I’ve always found the Presnky definition to be very hard to swallow. I don’t see this a being an either/or situation. If we were to push the analogy that he uses, then we have divides all over the place. I grew up with tv - colour tv. Didn’t know there was anything else but there are many still today who can remember time when there was no tv. Prensky’s divide presumes that those on the “immigrant” side will not ever fully understand life with only digital. Yet, there will come a time when these natives are, in fact, immigrants as time and progress move along. The one thing I’ve noticed is that many we term as immigrants sure like to label things and people, grouping them to make things easier to discuss/describe/quantify while natives just use, not worrying about where they fit. Why can’t we forget about the labels and begin to look at how we are going to move forward and encourage all people to use tools to help them expand their knowledge and express their understanding?
Finally, I don’t like the idea that someone who designs computer games creating a divide that promotes their use and then gives a reason for parents not worrying about playing the games. Something just doesn’t sit right with me about that.
Again, great post. I enjoy your posts, insights and the odd twitter that I catch. Best wishes for you and your family in 2008.
Thanks for sharing this post, Sarah. I’ve had difficulty with Prensky’s definitions for awhile, but I never took the time to think through and articulate why. You’ve made some connections (especially to medial hauntings) that I had never thought of…and that make complete sense.
Thanks, and happy new year!
[...] Response to Jenkins, Prensky Regarding Digital Natives : UberNoggin: Big Brains - Big Ideas Annotated [...]