Debunking the “digital native”: beyond digital apartheid, towards digital democracy

1. Debunking the “digital native”: beyond digital apartheid, towards digital democracy Cheryl Brown Laura Czerniewicz

2. Why this issue? • Much discussion about age/ generational aspects of young people today • Lots of different labels being used • Net Generation, “digital Natives” Generation Y, Generation C • Whatever the terminology the argument is that this impacts on various aspects of their life specifically • That higher education needs to change in response to this

3. South African students South African universities are dominated by the millennials BUT there is a wide age range 54 % of students are under 22 years old

4. This paper • Examine discourse around the “digital native” • Is this a term we would like to use? • Is there evidence to support/ reject concept in our context • Is age a determining factor in being a “digital native”? • Are our entire generation of university students “digital natives”? • Is the situation getting better or worse? • Possible opportunities for democracy

5. The term

6. “Digital native” • Problematic concept/ offensive term • Could give young people false impressions of their ability • consequences in how they manage negative/ risky online situations (Helsper 2008) • The “native” as the future and in command & the “immigrant” as old, the past and obsolete (Bayne and Ross 2007) • In SA context synonymous with colonialism, apartheid, domination

7. and it gets worse … “Digital wisdom” • Prensky’s new term “homo sapien digitalensis” • Imbued with digital wisdom because digital technology not only makes humans smarted but wiser • Evolutionary metaphor • reinforces connotation of backwardness and progress • Natural selection and extinction • And a future for those who have evolved • The positioning of some students as better than other evokes a digital digerati – a cyber elite

8. Empirically supported?

9. Our project A research project on ICT access and use for teaching and learning in SA higher education Two surveys of 10 110 students in total 2004 - 6 universities in Western Cape 2007 - 6 universities in other parts of South Africa mixed-method approach quantitative analysis of 58 question survey qualitative analysis of the questionnaire’s open-ended questions Student interviews (f2f and phone)

10. … our project 2008 survey of 4226 users of LMS at UCT Abbreviated 2009 survey of 466 students at 4 diverse universities, followed by 80 phone interviews Drawing on a range of studies spread over time and space not longitudinal or directly comparable however they do all focus on the South African university student and as such are describing and interpreting the experiences of a specific group

11. Age a determining factor?

12. Our study: ICT experience of millennials Level of ICT experience of under 22 year olds

13. Continuum Range of experience within age groupings

14. Conclusion? • Not about age, experience is important • Students born into millennial generation cannot be assumed to have grown up digital • homogeneity cannot be assumed in terms of computer experience • There are students with low, medium and high levels of computer experience in all age groupings

15. A whole generation?

16. The“digital native” Based on the Prensky’s notion of digital native as being A person from the millennial generation A person who has grown up with digital technology One who comes to university familiar with computers; Is purported to learn to use computers informally - either teaching themselves or through social networks such as family and friends - rather than needing to be taught.

17. Defining the “digital native” in our data Grown up using computers > 10 yrs experience Learnt to use a computer by teaching themselves or through social networks ie family and friends Able to solve ICT problems themselves or by drawing on supportive social networks In 2007 this applied to only 11% - 375 students Not a generation but an ELITE

18. About this group Even gender mix From high to average socio economic groups Mostly speak English or Afrikaans speaking (74%) Have excellent off-campus access at home often multiple forms of off-campus access (inlc .portable) high practical access Are confident of their own abilities 81% rate their ICTs skills as good or excellent Have high social use of ICTs Are usually doing courses in science, engineering or health sciences

19. Conclusions? In South Africa digital natives are not a generation but an elite. So what about the rest of the students?

20. Deepening divides

21. the “digital stranger” not just a matter of “natives” or “immigrants” there is a significant group of the millennial generation students who lack experience and opportunity to use ICTs In 2007 (22% - 734 individuals) Not had access to a computer before they attended university Had less than 2 year experience using a computer Relied on formal channels to acquire this knowledge Such polarisation indicates that the “the digital natives and the “digital stranger” are on opposite sides of a worsening digital divide.

22. About this group More women than men Largely South African (95%) with 80% speaking an African language as a home language. 90% have no access to ICTs off campus Those with off-campus access have very low practical access Low self confidence

23. Cont … Mostly doing business degrees Very low social use of ICTs Mostly learn in formal structured ways Learnt to use ICTs through community training course ss The dominant way of acquiring ICT knowledge is through university training courses; rely strongly on University support staff for help with ICTs problems

24. Not unique although largely ignored • Other studies (eg Helsper in UK) have shown that people who suffer social disadvantage are more likely to be disengaged from ICTs

25. An example: Socio Economic Group

26. Conclusions? • If we use these dualistic distinctions we see a marked gap between “natives” and “strangers” • Some have called this a dilemma of justice (Broekman, Enslin et al 2002)

27. Digital democracy

28. Cell phones and our students Ownership is ubiquitous Ownership is not socially differentiated Main means of access to Internet off campus for students from low SEGs Type of internet access for low SEG students

29. Another case A survey of low-income black South African youth at an urban township (Kreutzer 2009) The majority (83%) of the poor young urban South Africans access the Internet via their phone on a typical day About half of all an individual’s expenses spent on cell phones Sample of youth, average age of 17 years

30. Should we be surprised? No, because….. South Africa has the third largest mobile internet using population in the world South Africa ranks 6th in the global Top 10 for mobile internet usage, ahead of both the US (7th) and the UK (9th) Mobile internet in South Africa is among the least expensive in the entire world; traditional desktop access is still among the most expensive

31. What about mobiles and learning? % of cell phone time spent for academic purposes

32. Cell phones and learning: some examples I use my phone…, especially for accounting, because he's [the lecturer] very fast. He explains so fast. So I just record sometimes when I feel that I'm tired.. my brain cannot concentrate anymore.. I just record. And then I'll come and listen later. You can communicate with fellow students and get instant help with projects and assignments. You can access it [the LMS] anywhere (even from your cell phone). You can use your phone via google. Maybe I don't have time for a computer. Or maybe it's late, and the assignment must be submitted. Then I use my phone

33. Cell phones and “digital natives” In 2008 UCT students who are active users of Vula reported 72% using their cell phones for academic only or academic and personal use 6.8 percent (290 students) access the Vula on their cell phones/PDAs/mobile devices They said They want better access to Vula via their cell phone, They would make more use of the Vula if they could access it (at all and/or easier) from their cell phones

34. Cell phones and “digital strangers” Cluster from 2009 survey (inclu UCT students) A group of 159 students who are failing computer literacy assessment have fewer than 4 years experience using ICTs low reported use of computer-based technologies 58% never or hardly every use email 71% never or hardly ever use the internet for social purposes Poor access to computers 52% no access to computers off campus 32% access through a public facility or through a third party

35. Yet All of this cluster have cell phones 72% report using texting (sms) often 34% report using chat often (Mxit) Over a third (38%) use their cell phones as their only form of computer off campus Half of theseare using their cell phone to access the internet (n=54)

36. Redefining the “digital” and the “native” Digital presently implies Computers (a specific object) Fixed Have or have-not On/ off Native implies Non-native (stranger) Better (digital digerati) Concepts out of date, excluding & inaccurate?

37. Thinking differently Digital - beyond computers Digital artefacts are being “reconfigured” Unexpected /unintended uses Access is increasingly being determined by connectivity not by location Learning is being reconstituted as students use cell phones for access and use in unanticipated ways

38. Thinking differently Reclaiming the digitizen All students live in a digitally mediated world All students have a digital “identity” and set of practices All students are digital citizens Acknowledge the full spectrum of digital capabilities All have a set of capabilities in varied configurations New technological habitus

39. Conclusion South Africa still grappling with social exclusion Link between social and digital exclusion Small minority of digital natives Until now educators faced with a “dilemma of justice” simultaneously supporting students’ participation in new global practices without further marginalising previously disadvantaged Mobiles offer an unprecedented opportunity

40. Conclusion Design for increased diversity and new practices Design for multiple devices and practices Mobile not secondary device Leverage the affordances of mobility Leverage contemporary literacies, and emergent cell phone-mediated practices in ways which strengthen teaching and learning