Workshop for Instruction in Library Use (WILU) (45th : 2016)

Between “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” : addressing IL needs of the mixed student population… Samokishyn, Marta May 31, 2016

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


58233-Samokishyn_Marta_Between_digital_natives_2016.pdf [ 2.56MB ]
JSON: 58233-1.0307232.json
JSON-LD: 58233-1.0307232-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 58233-1.0307232-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 58233-1.0307232-rdf.json
Turtle: 58233-1.0307232-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 58233-1.0307232-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 58233-1.0307232-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

Marta Samokishyn, Saint Paul University, Ottawa, ON  BETWEEN “DIGITAL NATIVES” AND “DIGITAL IMMIGRANTS” addressing IL needs of the mixed student population in a small academic library    Digital literacy creates a challenging divide within the classrooms with mixed students popula-tion for librarians because a) the object of instruction heavily relies on the basic digital literacy skills and b) without students’ basic foundation of digital literacy, information literacy instruction becomes extremely difficult and sometimes impossible to teach. We have decided to use Pres-nky’s framework regarding “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” and that of some of his critics to understand a correlation between information literacy and digital literacy as well as to outline how confidence levels in technology use relate to the performance of the students.   Even though some authors claim that digital native/digital immigrant divide is dying (see Hol-ton, 2010), or that this term might be misleading or overgeneralized (Bennett et al., 2008), a signifi-cant body of literature and practice indicates that there is still a strong digital divide within the classroom, which impacts learning to a great extent because of the fundamental difference in  In our study, we have used both quantitative and qualitative methods as well as observation to see how the confidence level in the use of technology impacts students’ learning and measurement of success in the infor-mation literacy sessions facilitated by the library. While digital technology changes the terrain of higher education, it also re-quires a new innovative approach to learning and the understanding of the complexity of digital literacy in relation to infor-mation literacy. Proficiency in digital literacy does not automatically mean higher proficiency in information literacy and, for li-brarians, involves new challenges and tasks to be able to facilitate students’ transition towards “digital wisdom” (Presnky, 2012).  Introduction Digital citizens VS Digital natives/Digital residents Digital immigrants /Digital visitors Born after 1993  Born before 90’s Connectivity: “anytime and anywhere” Fast-paced learners Preference for multi-tasking and parallel processing In-person connections are more im-portant Linear approach to learning  Prefer single tasking Prefer mobile and voice technologies and web 2.0 Pragmatic in their approach to tech-nology Vast amount of information in variety of different formats very quickly Looking for answers with no particular regard to the type of sources Linear approach to data searching Type and format of the resources are still very important Expect web supported “richer, Inspiring learning experience” Focus on relevant, fun and instantly  useful learning Prefer to follow the curriculum guide and linear, logical and sequential ap-proach to information Library is seen as a “virtual digital en-vironment” 24/7 instant access is very important Rely mostly on library print collection Prefer two-way communication, using social media, video channels (YouTube, Periscope) Traditional reading and writing com-munication methods “Strong sense of online communities of interest, linked in their own web space” “Function best when networked” Rely heavily on the advice of their peers Prefer traditional in-person communities Rely heavily on the advice of the authori-ty figure, rather than peers Might exhibit lack of critical thinking and overconfidence Can feel intimidated by assignments that require technology use; Rely on the tools that are not relevant or can’t provide the depth of information needed Strategies for bridging the digital gap Welcome a variety of ways to express knowledge  Provide flexible learning environment by adapting the assignments for the variety of students’ needs.  Provide support from the library on variety of issues relevant to the use of technology Engage digital natives with new and engaging technolo-gy and combine it with the traditional teaching methods. Pair students up to facilitate students’ understanding and learning  Facilitate equal access to information and elimination of the digital divide through individualized approach to each student  Explore partnership opportunities on- and off-campus and provide multiple instructors for support for students who are less technically savvy. Based on Jukes and Dosaj, 2006; Chelliah & Clarke, 2006; Prensky, 2010; Prensky, 2001a;  Prensky, 2001b; Ashling, 2008; Eshet-Alkalai, 2004; Rowlands et al., 2008. Case study  International vs Non-international Student population Student population by country Students demographics by age Perceived confidence levels by age Ashling, J. (2008). We’re all members of the Google generation. Information Today, 25(3), 22–23. Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2002). Promoting literacy in a digital age: approaches to training for information literacy. Learned Publishing, 15(4), 297–301. Becker, C. H. (2009). Student Values and Research: Are Millennials Really Changing the Future of Reference and Research? Journal of Library Administration, 49(2009), 341–364. Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The “digital natives” debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786. Chelliah, J., & Clarke, E. (2011). Collaborative teaching and learning: overcoming the digital divide? On the Horizon, 19(4), 276–285. Holton, D. (2010). The digital natives/digital immigrants distinction is dead or at least dying, EdTechDev.   Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93. Fieldhouse, M. (2009). Digital Natives: can information literacy save them from information anarchy? Refer, 25(3). Retrieved from  Guo, R. X., Dobson, T., & Petrina, S. (2008). Digital natives, digital immigrants: An analysis of age and ICT competency in teacher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(3), 235–254. Isin, E. (2015). Being Digital Citizens. Rowman & Littlefield International. Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: Where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503–520. Jukes, I., & Dosaj, A. (2006). Understanding Digital Kids (DKs). Teaching and Learning in the New Digital Landscape. InfoSavvy Group.  Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2008). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. Peter Lang.  Prensky, M. (2001a, September/October). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Prensky, M. (2001b, November/December). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-6. Prensky, M. (2010), ‘‘Why YouTube matters’’,On the Horizon, 18(2), 124-31. Prensky, M. (2012). From digital natives to digital wisdom: Hopeful essays for 21st century learning. Corwin Press.  Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, P., Fieldhouse, M., Gunter, B., … Tenopir, C. (2008). The Google generation: the information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proceed-ings: New Information Perspectives, 60(4), 290–310. Stoerger, S. (2009). The digital melting pot: Bridging the digital native-immigrant divide. First Monday, 14(7). Retrieved from Serving Diverse Students in Canadian Higher Education | McGill-Queen’s University Press. (n.d.). Retrieved May 3, 2016, from VanSlyke, T. (2003). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Some thoughts from the generation gap. The Technology Source, 7(3). White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). Retrieved from   Sources  


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items