Digital literacy

Introduction

In 2016, Wikipedia defined Digital literacy as the knowledge, skills, and behaviors used in a broad range of digital devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops and desktop PCs, all of which are seen as network rather than computing devices. In other words, this definition somehow extends computer literacy by networking aspects, but further down, digital literacy is rather defined in terms of applicable competencies, including social ones: “A digitally literate person will possess a range of digital skills, knowledge of the basic principles of computing devices, skills in using computer networks, an ability to engage in online communities and social networks while adhering to behavioral protocols, be able to find, capture and evaluate information, an understanding of the societal issues raised by digital technologies (such as big data), and possess critical thinking skills.”

In 2011, Wikipedia defined Digital literacy as “the ability to locate, organize, understand, evaluate, and analyze information using digital technology. It involves a working knowledge of current high-technology, and an understanding of how it can be used. Further, digital literacy involves a consciousness of the technological forces that affect culture and human behavior. Digitally literate people can communicate and work more efficiently, especially with those who possess the same knowledge and skills. Research around digital literacy is concerned with wider aspects associated with learning how to effectively find, use, summarize, evaluate, create, and communicate information while using digital technologies, not just being literate at using a computer. Digital literacy encompasses all digital devices, such as computer hardware, software (particularly those used most frequently by businesses), the Internet, and cell phones. A person using these skills to interact with society may be called a digital citizen.” (retrieved 19:22, 5 December 2011 (CET))

See also: computer literacy

Definitions

It is very difficult to give a precise definition of digital literacy and it is probably safer to speak about various digital literacies. “digital literacy” can be understood as “a shorthand for the myriad social practices and conceptions of engaging in meaning making mediated by texts that are produced, received, distributed, exchanged, etc., via digital codification.” (Lankshear and Knobel, nd)

Often, digital literacies are associated with "new literacies". For example, Lankshera and Knobel (2013). adopted the idea that “new literacies” was best understood in terms of practices that were increasingly mediated by new technologies, but not necessarily mediated by new technologies.

Wikipedia(April 2016), also states that digital literacy is a new literacy, and may itself be decomposed into several sub-literacies. One such decomposition considers digital literacy as embracing computer literacy, network literacy, information literacy and social media literacy. And in the [ new literacies article (Aprils 2016), we can read that “Accompanying the varying conceptualizations of new literacies, there are a range of terms used by different researchers when referring to new literacies, including 21st century literacies, internet literacies, digital literacies, new media literacies, multiliteracies, information literacy, ICT literacies, and computer literacy.”

Technical components of new literacies are according to Wikipedia (April 2016): practices as instant messaging, blogging, maintaining a website, participating in online social networking spaces, creating and sharing music videos, podcasting and videocasting, photoshopping images and photo sharing, emailing, shopping online, digital storytelling, participating in online discussion lists, emailing and using online chat, conducting and collating online searches, reading, writing and commenting on fan fiction, processing and evaluating online information, creating and sharing digital mashups, etc. (see: Black, 2008; Coiro, 2003; Gee, 2007; Jenkins, 2006; Kist, 2007; Lankshear & Knobel, 2006; Lessig, 2005; Leu, et al. 2004; Prensky, 2006).

The KnowIt Goals

The University of Colorado at Boulder defines ICT skills with a list of goals that describes what students should be able to achieve with IT.

GOAL 1: Students will be able to recognize, articulate, and characterize what they need to know as they approach a problem, project, writing assignment or other research task.

GOAL 2: Students will be able to access needed information effectively and efficiently independent of form or format.

GOAL 3: Students will be able to evaluate information and information sources critically.

GOAL 4: Students will be able to use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose as well as to retain selected information as part of their accumulated knowledge.

GOAL 5: Students will be able to manage and organize information effectively and efficiently using information technologies.

GOAL 6: Students will be able to produce and create structured electronic documents that successfully express their ideas for a specific audience and situation.

GOAL 7: Students will be able to manipulate and use qualitative and quantitative data and aural and visual information using information technologies.

GOAL 8: Students will be able to collaborate appropriately and effectively using information technologies.

GOAL 9: Students will be able to successfully communicate produced content using information technologies.

GOAL 10: Students will be able to participate as informed members of the academy who understand major legal, economic, social, ethical, privacy, and security issues related to information technologies.

Although these goals are then further expanded on the web site, there are not precise definitions of technical skills to be acquired. For example Goal 7 (data analysis skills) are defined as:

1. Recognize when qualitative and/or quantitative data is needed.
2. Select the appropriate application to manipulate data (ex. spreadsheets, statistical packages).
3. Navigate and use applications effectively.
4. Evaluate derived data using application effectively.
5. Generate reports as appropriate.
6. Recognize when visual and aural information is needed.
7. Obtain, manipulate and insert visual and aural information (download, upload, change format, resize, crop, etc.) into personal documents using selected applications.
8. Understand use of images and use appropriately in produced information.

In other words, this kind of list rather reflects the kind of technical knowledge that a student should seek out.

Digital literacy of the younger generation

Selwyn (2009:Abstract) “provides a comprehensive review of the recent published literatures on young people and digital technology in information sciences, education studies and media/communication studies. The findings show that young people's engagements with digital technologies are varied and often unspectacular – in stark contrast to popular portrayals of the digital native. As such, the paper highlights a misplaced technological and biological determinism that underpins current portrayals of children, young people and digital technology.”

Digital literacy may be highly influenced by acceptance of technology. Edward (2010) in a study about Student attitudes towards and use of ICT in course study, work and social activity concludes that “Usefulness and Ease of Use are key aspects of students' attitudes towards technology in all areas of their lives, but ICT is perceived most positively in the work context. The work context also appears as an important driver for technology use in the other two areas of use. There are implications for higher education practitioners in terms of decision making about whether and how to require students to use particular technologies for course study. The evidence suggests that of the various factors that influence use of and perceptions about ICT, its perceived functionality plays a dominant role. Practitioners should not assume that students share their view of what is functional or that a technology does deliver its promised functionality in a particular study context.”

Bibliography

• Arthur, C. (2006), What is the 1% rule? The Guardian July 20th. Retrieved November 10th from http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/jul/20/guardianweeklytechnologysection2

• BECTA, Web 2.0 technologies for learning at KS3 and KS4 - Project overview, Index page (5 reports)

• Bennett, S., Maton, K., Kervin, L. (2008), "The ‘digital natives’ debate", British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 39 No.5, pp.775-86.

• Beyers, RN, Koorbanally, NA (2009). Computer literacy: insufficient for digital age literacy learners, eSkills Summit 2010, Cape Town, 26-28 July 2010, pp 10, http://hdl.handle.net/10204/4753

• Burnett, C., Dickinson, P., Myers, J., and Merchant, G. (2006), 'Digital connections: transforming literacy in the primary school.' Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(1) 11-29.

• Carr, Nicholas (2008). "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic

• Cole, M. (2009). Using Wiki technology to support student engagement: Lessons from the trenches. Computers & Education, 52 (1), 141-146.

• Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.

• diSessa, A. (2001), Changing Minds: Computers, Learning, and Literacy. The MIT Press.

• Duderstadt, J. 2004. Higher learning in the digital age: An update on a National Academies study. Paper presented at the 6th annual meeting of EDUCAUSE, Denver, CO, October. PDF, retrieved 19:22, 5 December 2011 (CET).

• Edmunds, Rob; Thorpe, Mary and Conole, Grainne (2010). Student attitudes towards and use of ICT in course study, work and social activity: a technology acceptance model approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, Early View 27 Dec 2010. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01142.x

• Fisher, M., Baird, D. (2009), "Pedagogical mashup: Gen Y, social media, and digital learning styles", in Hin, L., Subramaniam, R. (Eds),Handbook of Research on New Media Literacy at the K-12 Level, IGI Global, Hershey, PA.

• Gui, M. & Argentin, G. (2011). Digital skills of internet natives: Different forms of digital literacy in a random sample of northern Italian high school students, New Media & Society. Volume 13 Issue 6 http://nms.sagepub.com/content/13/6/963

• Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday 7(4).

• Kress, G (2003), Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.

• Lanham, R. (1995), 'Digital literacy.' Scientific American, 273, 3 160-160

• Lohnes, S., Kinzer, C. (2007), “Questioning assumptions about students' expectations for technology in college classrooms”, Innovate, Journal of Online Education, Vol. 3 No. 5. PDF, retrieved 19:22, 5 December 2011 (CET).

• Oblinger, D., and J. Oblinger, eds. 2005. Educating the Net Generation. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE. PDF, retrieved 19:22, 5 December 2011 (CET).

• Olson, D. (1986), 'Intelligence and literacy: the relationships between intelligence and the techniques of representation and communication.' In Sternberg, (Ed.), Practical intelligence. Cambridge: CUP.

• Luehrmann, Arthur. "Computer Literacy--What Should It Be?" The Mathematics Teacher vol 74 no 9, Dec 1981.

• Martin, A. (2008). Digital literacy and the ‘digital society’. Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices, 30, 151-176.

• Prensky, Marc, 2001 "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants.", On the Horizon 9:1-6. PDF part I reprint,

• Rainie, L., M. Kalehoff, and D. Hess. 2002. College students and the Web: A Pew Internet data memo. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project. Abstract/HTML/PDF, retrieved 19:22, 5 December 2011 (CET).

• Selwyn, Neil (2009) The digital native – myth and reality, Aslib Proceedings, Volume: 61 Issue: 4. DOI 10.1108/00012530910973776

• Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002), 'Weaving the literacy web: changes in reading from page to screen.' The reading teacher, 55(7), 662-229.

• Snyder, Ilana and Beavis, Catherine 2004, Doing literacy online : teaching, learning and playing in an electronic world Hampton Press, Cresskill, N.J.. Abstract only

• Tyler, Keith D. (1998). The Problems in Computer Literacy Training: Are We Preparing Students for a Computer Intensive Future?. Writing for the Professions. HTML, retrieved 19:22, 5 December 2011 (CET).

• Wecker, C. (2007). Computer literacy and inquiry learning: when geeks learn less, Journal of computer assisted learning, 23, 133-144, 2007.

• Weller, Martin, The Digital Scholar - How Technology is Transforming Scholarly Practice, Bloomsbury.

• Wolfe, Barbara B. "Achieving Computer Literacy." SIGUCCS Newsletter. Summer 1998. ACM. pp. 29-32.