In reading more about it, I think there is increasing skepticism of Prensky’s original division of generations into 2 distinct camps: digital immigrant or natives. Clearly, there is a broad spectrum of comfort with technology, and that comfort level often corresponds with age. However, the groups do not break down quite so neatly. In the article “The Digital Natives Debate: A Critical Review of the Evidence” by Maton Bennet, Bennet points out that to break the issue down simply into “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” is an oversimplification and ignores the fact that most of our current technology was imagined and pioneered by people from the “digital immigrant” generation. Also, the terms don’t account for the many other factors besides age that influence a person’s comfort and familiarity with technology.
One interesting critique of the terminology is that, in fact, it is not age that determines a person’s exposure to technology, but their socio-economic status. Although there are age-related trends to be observed, some researchers argue that it is more relevant to study the correlation of wealth to access to technology. Related to that, is the difference in how technology is used from culture to culture. Not only must we acknowledge that access to technology is as equally impacted by wealth as it is by age, but also that culture has a profound influence on the role technology plays in the lives of individuals and societies. I think Prensky’s original theories were fascinating, but current debates reveal that the issue is much more complex than he initially speculated.
Love the interesting points brought up in your critique. The generation gap in technology immigrants and natives is oversimplified and forces people into set groups. I think your point on socioeconomic status as being the true culprit has merit because people are more interested in their own health rather than global innovations. Each scenario is unique and the only critique I would counter with is what do you define as technology?
ReplyDeleteI also agree socio-economic status can play a larger role than a generational one. I can cite real world examples of my students not having access to the same kind of technology I have enjoyed for the last ten years. In contrast, I have not had the desire deepen my electronic integration into such environments as Twitter. I am not sure if that is a little mature paranoia, or the concern I will be hooked into another social media whirligig!
ReplyDelete