Digital Literacy in Higher Education: The Rhetoric and the Reality

Abstract

This chapter examines empirical data to address the rhetoric of the digital native as a competent and digitally literate learner. The chapter also questions the reality of the notion that a digital delivery platform is easy to navigate and facilitates positive learning experiences. Data from surveys of students studying both on-campus and via distance education (or online) at the University of Southern Queensland (USQ), a regional Australian university, provides useful insights into the literacies of digital natives and will help to debunk the myth about digital learning being quick and easy. The findings indicate that most distance education students identified concerns about how technology supported their learning and were frustrated by information and communication technology (ICT) issues. For example, while those classified as digital natives did display high levels of digital literacy, this result was not confined to a particular age group. Interestingly, the students in this sample who could be classified as "digital natives" (under 30 years of age) did not prefer the distance or online mode of study; they preferred to study on-campus (60%). In contrast, the "digital immigrants" (those over 30 years of age) preferred the distance/online mode of study (57%). Both groups showed a high degree of experience with, and confidence in, their ability to engage with the various digital technologies. Evidence presented in this chapter will help universities to put in place appropriate and timely interventions to enable students to develop and apply digital literacies to support their learning. Specifically, guidelines for educators on how best to embed digital literacies into an online pedagogy, and recommendations for establishing effective learning management systems to support online education, are provided. IntroductionTwo interrelated myths arise from Australian higher education's responses to an increased emphasis on technological delivery. One myth stems from the view that tertiary education students are digital natives who have universal and uniform digital experiences. This myth presumes that the technological experiences of these students are homogeneous and linked to a sophisticated knowledge and understanding of information and communication technologies (ICTs). The second myth emanates from the idea that the internet is a panacea for the issues of increasing costs of higher education and increasing demand by students for authentic and interactive learning opportunities. The assumption here is that technology underpinning online learning is quick, easy to use, can be accessed by everyone, and is appropriate for all learning activities.

Business students’ experiences of technology tools and applications in higher education

“…Differences between generations are often said to impact on individuals’ engagement with technology (Helsper & Eynon, ), yet, generalising on age grounds is ‘problematic’ (Burton et al ., , p. 4). Nevertheless, much has already been rehearsed in the literature around those born after 1980 and the contention that they have grown up immersed in, surrounded by and comfortable with, technology (Bennett & Maton, ; Helsper & Eynon, ; Oblinger, ; Oblinger & Oblinger, ; Prensky, ; Prensky & Berry, ).…”

Engaging the disengaged: Exploring the use of course-specific learning analytics and nudging to enhance online student engagement

“…Academics may possess assumptions that technology is quick, easy to use, effortlessly accessible and appropriate for all learning activities. Further, that students' technological experiences are homogeneous, accompanied by sophisticated knowledge of information technologies (Burton et al, 2015). Assumptions like this can further disadvantage students, placing them at risk of lagging behind in their studies as they make their transitions to online study navigating often unfamiliar and inconsistent learning management systems.…”

“…Many institutions look to online learning as a panacea for increasing costs and growing student demands for convenient learning opportunities. Burton, Summers, Lawrence, Noble and Gibbings (2015) argue that, although perceived as digital natives, many students are inexperienced with online pedagogies and are unskilled and unprepared for navigating often inconsistent online learning management systems. There is also uncertainty about whether students who are technologically proficient and benefitting from state-of-the-art, ubiquitous technology know how to strategically employ technology-based tools to optimise their learning experiences (Burton et al, 2015).…”

Implications of Updating Digital Literacy – A Case Study in an Optometric Curriculum

“…This is not the case (Ng, 2012). There is growing recognition that technology use does not necessarily equate to technology understanding and may not contribute to transferable digital literacy skills (Burton, Summers, Lawrence, Noble & Gibbings, 2015;McLachlan, Craig & Coldwell-Neilson, 2016). Further, it has been demonstrated that, as a concept, the phrase digital natives is unhelpful when making assumptions around digital capabilities particularly of students (White & Le Cornu, 2017).…”