Journal one – The journal suggest that in the case of parent/child interaction, the parent may struggle to keep up, or interact with the child using the new technologies that has evolved in children’s toys. I think this is an over reaction, whilst I can see perhaps grandparent\ young child issues, I don’t think there is a big enough age gap between a young child and its parent to have such an impact or effect on their relationship. Most adults/ parents of today’s world, (digital immgrants) that have not grown up or with the new media world are now and have been for a number of years being pushed into using new technological advancements whether its in work or there everyday lives. Whilst parents often express their thoughts of ‘oh in my day we didn’t have that’ I don’t think it completely disables them from being interactive with new media.
Journal 2 – This journal states that “as schools increase the use of new technologies, and include sophisticated new texts to their student learning, old tested practices are inadequate and are rapidly becoming redundant. ” Ok so there is with out a doubt an element of truth here. However I do think it’s a rather strong point to make. I don’t think we’ll completely abandon all old practices of teaching, because at a majority of these ‘new’ style of teaching stems in some way from the old. As this statement could suggest that in the future, we all give up going to school and just work completely digitally from home, after all we will be able access all the relevant material!!! I personally don’t think this is either possible or going to happen. I think the old style methods of teaching, turning up to class being taught by a actual person incorporated alongside digital help will still be relevant. After all the education systems to the government are too important and people still need jobs.
Journal 3 - This journal talks about a case study therefore it simply says what they did and the results they gained from it. However they do make reference to perhaps why these results have occurred. One major point I have is, I don’t think they can make to many presumptions or state facts on a case study that only contained 16 girls from one place.
Journal 4 – This is a fairly goof journal, however am going to disagree with one the basic points made in the article “Students are always at the edge, looking in. The teacher is the source of all knowledge” Traditional everyone looked upon and understood the teacher to be the one person that holds all the knowledge. However in this day and age, there is heavy emphasises on interaction as opposed to the conventional sit and listen technique. Students have a lot to offer, in their own experiences, especially with the opportunities provided with new media.
Journal 5 – This journal is quite technical. It explains how programmes can be used to narrow the gap between the student and teacher. However, I think its important to understand that the introduction of new programs has to be learnt by both the student and the teacher. Whilst it suggests students are technologically advanced, there is still a learning process to be gone through.
Friday, 13 March 2009
Thursday, 12 March 2009
Website 5
My final website is a blog and again is fairly up-to-date. Written in December 2007, the author has written an opinionated blog on his discomfort with the use of these phases digital immigrant and digital native. The blog explores where these phases came from.
The author does make reference to important theorist (Prensky) on this subject, however the article is more a copy/paste of a number of theorists work rather than his own.
However he does make some good points on how these terms help us “to recognize and respect the new kinds of learning and cultural expression” which have emerged from a the new generations of today.
The author is fairly negative towards these distinctions and feels of we continue to use them we are hindering ourselves by not being able to talk “meaningfully about the kinds of sharing that occurs between adults and children and we won't be able to imagine other ways that adults can interact with youth outside of these cultural divides.”
Overall an ok source but not particularly useful if your looking to find fact about the this topic, however useful in terms of finding differing attitudes to the terms.
The author does make reference to important theorist (Prensky) on this subject, however the article is more a copy/paste of a number of theorists work rather than his own.
However he does make some good points on how these terms help us “to recognize and respect the new kinds of learning and cultural expression” which have emerged from a the new generations of today.
The author is fairly negative towards these distinctions and feels of we continue to use them we are hindering ourselves by not being able to talk “meaningfully about the kinds of sharing that occurs between adults and children and we won't be able to imagine other ways that adults can interact with youth outside of these cultural divides.”
Overall an ok source but not particularly useful if your looking to find fact about the this topic, however useful in terms of finding differing attitudes to the terms.
Website 4
This article is quite recent, 2007, and certainly on first relfelction looks to be a very useful website. After a very lenghtly read, I was pretty impressed. Not only is it up-to-date it turns out to be a very valuable source.
The author has taken care to construct her article and as result the information is clear and easily comprehendible. It begins by giving a clear definition of the two words, ‘Digital Native’ and Digital Immigrant’ . Stating how the young are immersed in volumes of digital technologies and grow as a result whilst the older generation adapt to methods of learning. The author even breaks down the differences in a very simple table to help the reader learn.
The author uses quotes from reliable theorists and uses their work to help give examples. She writes about the discourses, limitations and assumptions made in this area of discussion. And makes interesting references to the effects of relationships.
The author has taken care to construct her article and as result the information is clear and easily comprehendible. It begins by giving a clear definition of the two words, ‘Digital Native’ and Digital Immigrant’ . Stating how the young are immersed in volumes of digital technologies and grow as a result whilst the older generation adapt to methods of learning. The author even breaks down the differences in a very simple table to help the reader learn.
The author uses quotes from reliable theorists and uses their work to help give examples. She writes about the discourses, limitations and assumptions made in this area of discussion. And makes interesting references to the effects of relationships.
Website 3
This article on this website is specifically targeted at certain aspect of digital immigration, and is certainly a little harder to read. It is definitely a credible source, if you can understand the underpinning of psychological effects and the role of the brain in digital progression.
It is very a reliable source, a theorist, who seems to very much understand the works of digital immigration. However the article was written in 2001 and whilst there seems to be a lot of medical evidence in this article it is quite possible that in the last 7-8 years there may have a significant medical progression that may further prove or disprove his theory.
It is divided up into sections, in order to concentrate on the different areas of how our ‘brain waves’ affect our digital advancement. Comparing that of the digital native and the digital immigrant. Again using credible references, examples and quotes from reliable sources.
It is very a reliable source, a theorist, who seems to very much understand the works of digital immigration. However the article was written in 2001 and whilst there seems to be a lot of medical evidence in this article it is quite possible that in the last 7-8 years there may have a significant medical progression that may further prove or disprove his theory.
It is divided up into sections, in order to concentrate on the different areas of how our ‘brain waves’ affect our digital advancement. Comparing that of the digital native and the digital immigrant. Again using credible references, examples and quotes from reliable sources.
Website 2
Firstly this article is from 2001, so pretty much eights years ago, however I wouldn’t quite say out of date. The general meaning and definitions of Digital immigration remain very similar to today’s definition.
I think the site is a very useable source of information, as it is from a direct theorist, as opposed to someone’s opinion making reference to a theorist. And displays evidence of researching and studying the subject first. It even uses evidence from medical sources to back up his arguments.
It uses examples and makes clear differences between the older generations and the younger helping to make a distinction between the digital natives and digital immigrants
The article makes very good cultural references and is written in away that is not too hard to understand.
I think the site is a very useable source of information, as it is from a direct theorist, as opposed to someone’s opinion making reference to a theorist. And displays evidence of researching and studying the subject first. It even uses evidence from medical sources to back up his arguments.
It uses examples and makes clear differences between the older generations and the younger helping to make a distinction between the digital natives and digital immigrants
The article makes very good cultural references and is written in away that is not too hard to understand.
Week 8, Website one
Website 1 Criticism
The website contains an article on the discussion of Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants and suggests that these terms help us to understand the differences between those who are comfortable with technology and those who are not. It places an emphasies on how gaps in generations may play a huge role in this.
The article is written using quotes from a couple theorists to back up his argument. However, and this is where my first criticism comes in, the whole article seems to be written according to one particular theorist. Therefore there is a certainly a lack of his own input into the article. Secondly it also means is references list is very short, displaying a lack of research.
The article is also very personalized, therefore I don't see how it could be of much use to someone looking to further their understanding of the world of digital Immigrants, as whilst he uses quotes, the author at times disagrees on personal grounds. Its an opinionated article. This heavily affects its useabilty.
The article was published in 2003, so not particularly up-to-date, this may affect the useability, as the it is quite likely that new connotations of the subject digital immigrants will have been brought to the fore by 2009.
The content of the article is interesting as he uses personal examples (his place of inhabitance) however not completely relavent.
One part of the ariticle i liked was the point made, using other theorists works, about who shapes digital media. "Digital immigrants are attempting to teach the digital natives with methods that are no longer valid." This suggests that the digital natives are the driving force for new media developing. The alternative the site suggests, is for the digital immigrants to be taught by the digital natives this new "language" in certain advancements.
The website contains an article on the discussion of Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants and suggests that these terms help us to understand the differences between those who are comfortable with technology and those who are not. It places an emphasies on how gaps in generations may play a huge role in this.
The article is written using quotes from a couple theorists to back up his argument. However, and this is where my first criticism comes in, the whole article seems to be written according to one particular theorist. Therefore there is a certainly a lack of his own input into the article. Secondly it also means is references list is very short, displaying a lack of research.
The article is also very personalized, therefore I don't see how it could be of much use to someone looking to further their understanding of the world of digital Immigrants, as whilst he uses quotes, the author at times disagrees on personal grounds. Its an opinionated article. This heavily affects its useabilty.
The article was published in 2003, so not particularly up-to-date, this may affect the useability, as the it is quite likely that new connotations of the subject digital immigrants will have been brought to the fore by 2009.
The content of the article is interesting as he uses personal examples (his place of inhabitance) however not completely relavent.
One part of the ariticle i liked was the point made, using other theorists works, about who shapes digital media. "Digital immigrants are attempting to teach the digital natives with methods that are no longer valid." This suggests that the digital natives are the driving force for new media developing. The alternative the site suggests, is for the digital immigrants to be taught by the digital natives this new "language" in certain advancements.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
.jpg)