The 'digital natives' debate: a critical review of the evidence

TLDR: It is proposed that a more measured and disinterested approach is now required to investigate ‘digital natives’ and their implications for education and it is argued that rather than being empirical and theoretically informed, the debate can be likened to an academic form of a ‘moral panic’.

Abstract: The idea that a new generation of students is entering the education system has excited recent attention among educators and education commentators. Termed ‘digital natives’ or the ‘Net generation’, these young people are said to have been immersed in technology all their lives, imbuing them with sophisticated technical skills and learning preferences for which traditional education is unprepared. Grand claims are being made about the nature of this generational change and about the urgent necessity for educational reform in response. A sense of impending crisis pervades this debate. However, the actual situation is far from clear. In this paper, the authors draw on the fields of education and sociology to analyse the digital natives debate. The paper presents and questions the main claims made about digital natives and analyses the nature of the debate itself. We argue that rather than being empirically and theoretically informed, the debate can be likened to an academic form of a ‘moral panic’. We propose that a more measured and disinterested approach is now required to investigate ‘digital natives’ and their implications for education.

Full text

University of Wollongong University of Wollongong
Research Online Research Online
Faculty of Education - Papers (Archive) Faculty of Arts, Social Sciences & Humanities
2008
The 'digital natives' debate: a critical review of the evidence The 'digital natives' debate: a critical review of the evidence
S. Bennett
Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong
, sbennett@uow.edu.au
Karl A. Maton
University of Sydney
, kmaton@uow.edu.au
Lisa Kervin
University of Wollongong
, lkervin@uow.edu.au
Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/edupapers
Part of the Education Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Bennett, S.; Maton, Karl A.; and Kervin, Lisa: The 'digital natives' debate: a critical review of the evidence
2008.
https://ro.uow.edu.au/edupapers/1149
Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information
contact the UOW Library: research-pubs@uow.edu.au

The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence
Sue Bennett, Karl Maton and Lisa Kervin
Sue Bennett is a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Education, University of
Wollongong. Karl Maton is a Lecturer in the Department of Sociology and Social
Policy at the University of Sydney. Lisa Kervin is a Lecturer in the Faculty of
Education, University of Wollongong. Address for correspondence: Faculty of
Education, University of Wollongong, Australia. Email: sue_bennett@uow.edu.au
Abstract
The idea that a new generation of students is entering the education system has
excited recent attention amongst educators and education commentators. Termed
‘digital natives’ or the ‘Net generation’, these young people are said to have been
immersed in technology all their lives, imbuing them with sophisticated technical
skills and learning preferences for which traditional education is unprepared. Grand
claims are being made about the nature of this generational change and about the
urgent necessity for educational reform in response. A sense of impending crisis
pervades this debate. However the actual situation is far from clear. In this paper, the
authors draw on the fields of education and sociology to analyse the digital natives
debate. The paper presents and questions the main claims made about digital natives
and analyses the nature of the debate itself. We argue that rather than being
empirically and theoretically informed, the debate can be likened to an academic form
of a ‘moral panic’. We propose that a more measured and disinterested approach is
now required to investigate ‘digital natives’ and their implications for education.

The one thing that does not change is that at any and every time it appears that there
have been ‘great changes’
Marcel Proust, Within a Budding Grove
Introduction
Commentators on education are arguing that a new generation of learners is entering
our educational institutions, one which has grown up with information and
communication technology (ICT) as an integral part of their everyday lives. It is
claimed these young people’s use of ICTs differentiates them from previous
generations of students and from their teachers, and that the differences are so
significant that the nature of education itself must fundamentally change to
accommodate the skills and interests of these ‘digital natives’ (Prensky, 2001a). We
shall argue that though such calls for major change in education are being widely
propounded, they have been subjected to little critical scrutiny, are under-theorised
and lack a sound empirical basis. There is thus a pressing need for theoretically
informed research.
In this paper we bring together educational research and the sociology of knowledge
to provide an analysis of the current state of play in the digital natives debate. We
begin by setting out the main claims made in the debate. Secondly, we explore the
assumptions underlying these claims and the consequent arguments for educational
change, highlighting the limited nature of the research evidence on which they are
based. Thirdly, we consider why such poorly evidenced claims have gained
widespread currency by analysing the nature of the debate itself. This highlights how
principal positions have created the academic equivalent of a ‘moral panic’ that
restricts critical and rational debate. Lastly, we argue that the debate as currently
formulated is at an impasse and the way forward requires a research agenda capable
of providing a sound basis on which future debate and policymaking can be founded.
Claims about ‘digital natives’
The generation born roughly between 1980 and 1994 has been characterised as the
‘digital natives’ (Prensky, 2001a) or the ‘Net generation’ (Tapscott, 1998) because of
their familiarity with and reliance on information and communication technology
(ICT). They are described as living lives immersed in technology, “surrounded by and

using computers, videogames, digital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all
the other toys and tools of the digital age” (Prensky, 2001a, p. 1). Social researchers,
Howe and Strauss (2000; 2003), labelled this generation the ‘millenials’, ascribing to
them distinct characteristics that set them apart from previous generations. They offer
a positive view of this new generation as optimistic, team-oriented achievers who are
talented with technology, and claim they will be America’s next ‘great generation’.
Immersion in this technology-rich culture is said to influence the skills and interests
of digital natives in ways significant for education. It is asserted, for example, that
digital natives learn differently to past generations of students. They are held to be
active experiential learners, proficient in multi-tasking, and dependent on
communications technologies for accessing information and for interacting with
others (Frand, 2000; Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005; Prensky, 2001a, 2001b; Tapscott,
1999). Commentators claim these characteristics raise fundamental questions about
whether education is currently equipped to meet the needs of this new cohort of
students. Tapscott (1998), for example, described education in developed countries as
already in crisis with more challenges to come: “There is growing appreciation that
the old approach [of didactic teaching] is ill-suited to the intellectual, social,
motivational, and emotional needs of the new generation” (p. 131). This was echoed
by Prensky’s (2001a) claim that: “Our students have changed radically. Today’s
students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach”
(emphasis in original) (p. 1).
For those born prior to 1980 Prensky has coined the term ‘digital immigrants’
(2001a). He claims that this section of the population, which includes most teachers,
lacks the technological fluency of the digital natives and finds the skills possessed by
them almost completely foreign. The disparity between the technological skills and
interests of new students and the limited and unsophisticated technology use by
educators is claimed to be creating alienation and disaffection among students (Levin
& Arafeh, 2002; Levin, Richardson & Arafeh, 2002; Prensky, 2005a). Prensky
characterises this as “the biggest single problem facing education today” (2001a, p.
3). To address this proclaimed challenge some high-profile commentators are arguing
for radical changes in curriculum, pedagogy, assessment and professional
development in education.

The debate over digital natives is thus based on two key claims: (1) that a distinct
generation of ‘digital natives’ exists; and (2) that education must fundamentally
change to meet the needs of these ‘digital natives’. These in turn are based on
fundamental assumptions with weak empirical and theoretical foundations, which we
will explore in the next sections.
On the distinctive characteristics of ‘digital natives’
The claim made for the existence of a generation of ‘digital natives’ is based on two
main assumptions in the literature, which can be summarised as follows:
1. Young people of the digital native generation possess sophisticated knowledge of
and skills with information technologies.
2. As a result of their upbringing and experiences with technology, digital natives
have particular learning preferences or styles that differ from earlier generations of
students.
In the seminal literature on digital natives these assertions are put forward with
limited empirical evidence (eg, Tapscott, 1998) or supported by anecdotes and
appeals to common-sense beliefs (eg, Prensky, 2001a). Furthermore, this literature
has been referenced, often uncritically, in a host of later publications (Gaston, 2006;
Gros, 2003; Long, 2005; McHale; 2005; Skiba, 2005). There is, however, an
emerging body of research that is beginning to reveal some of the complexity of
young people’s computer use and skills.
Information technology use and skills amongst young people
One of the founding assumptions of claims for a generation of digital natives is that
young people live their lives completely immersed in technology and are “fluent in
the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet” (Prensky, 2005b, p.
8). Frand (2000) claims that this immersion is so complete that young people do not
even consider computers ‘technology’ anymore. Personal testimonials (eg, McNeely,
2005; Windham, 2005) depicting young people’s online lives as constantly connected
appear to confirm such generalisations.

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What are the contributions mentioned in the paper "The 'digital natives' debate: a critical review of the evidence" ?

In this paper, the authors draw on the fields of education and sociology to analyse the digital natives debate. The paper presents and questions the main claims made about digital natives and analyses the nature of the debate itself. The authors propose that a more measured and disinterested approach is now required to investigate ‘ digital natives ’ and their implications for education. In this paper the authors bring together educational research and the sociology of knowledge to provide an analysis of the current state of play in the digital natives debate. The authors begin by setting out the main claims made in the debate. Secondly, the authors explore the assumptions underlying these claims and the consequent arguments for educational change, highlighting the limited nature of the research evidence on which they are based. Thirdly, the authors consider why such poorly evidenced claims have gained widespread currency by analysing the nature of the debate itself. The disparity between the technological skills and interests of new students and the limited and unsophisticated technology use by educators is claimed to be creating alienation and disaffection among students ( Levin & Arafeh, 2002 ; Levin, Richardson & Arafeh, 2002 ; Prensky, 2005a ). The debate over digital natives is thus based on two key claims: ( 1 ) that a distinct generation of ‘ digital natives ’ exists ; and ( 2 ) that education must fundamentally change to meet the needs of these ‘ digital natives ’. The claim made for the existence of a generation of ‘ digital natives ’ is based on two main assumptions in the literature, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Young people of the digital native generation possess sophisticated knowledge of and skills with information technologies. One of the founding assumptions of claims for a generation of digital natives is that young people live their lives completely immersed in technology and are “ fluent in the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet ” ( Prensky, 2005b, p. 8 ). Some of this research ( Kennedy et al., 2006 ; Kvavik et al. 2005 ) has identified potential differences related to socioeconomic status, cultural/ethnic background, gender and discipline specialisation, but these are yet to be comprehensively investigated. This is further supported by recent research showing family dynamics and the level of domestic affluence to be significant factors influencing the nature of children ’ s home computer use ( Downes, 2002 ). The second assumption underpinning the claim for a generation of digital natives is that because of their immersion in technology young people “ think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors ” ( Prensky, 2001a, p. 1, emphasis in the original ). The enthusiasm for educational games amongst some commentators rests on the possibility of harnessing the high levels of engagement and motivation reported by many game players to motivate students to learn. Cognitive psychologists have studied the level and range of skills exhibited at different ages ( Berk, 2006 ; Carlson & Sohn, 2000 ; Mityata & Norman, 1986 ). Thus, differences across the developmental stages need to be considered when making claims about the level of skills ‘ young people ’ have and their ability to successfully utilise these when interacting with ICTs. Furthermore, the claim that there might be a particular learning style or set of learning preferences characteristic of a generation of young people is highly problematic. In this section, the authors have examined the key assumptions underlying the claim that the generation of young people born between 1980 and 1994 are ‘ digital natives ’. It is apparent that there is scant evidence to support this idea, and that emerging research challenges notions of a homogenous generation with technical expertise and a distinctive learning style. The claim the authors will now examine is that current educational systems must change in response to a new generation of technically adept young people. However, there is little evidence of the serious disaffection and alienation among students claimed by commentators. The participants did report feeling limited in the time they were allocated to use computers at school and in the way their use was constrained by teacher-directed learning activities. This view is supported by research in post-compulsory education indicating that students are not clamouring for greater use of technology ( Kvavik et al., 2004 ; Lohnes & Kinzer, 2007 ). For example, it can not be assumed that knowing how to look up ‘ cheats ’ for computer games on the Internet bears any relation to the skills required to assess a website ’ s relevance for a school project. This is not to discount other arguments made for changes to education that are based on theory and supported by clear research evidence, but the authors suggest that the same standards must be met before radical change is made on the basis of the digital native idea. Their analysis of the digital native literature demonstrates a clear mismatch between the confidence with which claims are made and the evidence for such claims. These characteristics are exemplified in the followed quote from Prensky ( 2001a ), but are also evident throughout much of the digital natives literature: Today ’ s students have not just changed incrementally from those of the past. The authors argue that rather than being empirically and theoretically informed, the debate can be likened to an academic form of a ‘ moral panic ’. Lastly, the authors argue that the debate as currently formulated is at an impasse and the way forward requires a research agenda capable of providing a sound basis on which future debate and policymaking can be founded. Furthermore, this literature has been referenced, often uncritically, in a host of later publications ( Gaston, 2006 ; Gros, 2003 ; Long, 2005 ; McHale ; 2005 ; Skiba, 2005 ). The results also suggest that the frequency and nature of children ’ s Internet use differs between age groups and socio-economic background. These findings suggest that technology skills and experience are far from universal amongst young people. With this comes the danger that those less interested and less able will be neglected and that the potential impact of socioeconomic and cultural factors will be overlooked. It is suggested that because of these factors young people prefer discovery-based learning that allows them to explore and to actively test their ideas and create knowledge ( Brown, 2000 ). Furthermore, the substantially greater popularity of games amongst males compared to females ( Kennedy et al., 2006 ; Kvavik et al. 2005 ) may limit the appeal of games to all learners. Instead it suggests variations and differences within this population which may be more significant to educators than similarities. Selwyn ’ s ( 2006 ) student participants were also frustrated that their freedom of use was curtailed at school and “ were well aware of a digital disconnect but displayed a pragmatic acceptance rather than the outright alienation from the school that some commentators would suggest ” ( p. 5 ). This evidence points to differences in the ways young people use technology inside and out of school and suggests that school use of the Internet can be frustrating, but there is little basis to conclude that these differences are causing widespread and profound disengagement in learning. Furthermore, questions must be asked about the relevance to education of the everyday ICTs skills possessed by technically adept young people. Indeed, existing research suggests otherwise. This suggests that students ’ everyday technology practices may not be directly applicable to academic tasks, and so education has a vitally important role in fostering information literacies that will support learning. A further divide is then created between those who believe in the digital native phenomenon and those who question it. 

Q2. What is the main argument for the enthusiasm for educational games amongst some commentators?

The enthusiasm for educational games amongst some commentators rests on the possibility of harnessing the high levels of engagement and motivation reported by many game players to motivate students to learn. 

Q3. What did the study show about the use of computers in primary schools?

Downes’ (2002) study of primary school children (5-12 years old) found that home computer use was more varied than school use and enabled children greater freedom and opportunity to learn by doing. 

Q4. What is the main reason why the popularity of educational games is limited to all learners?

the substantially greater popularity of games amongst males compared to females (Kennedy et al., 2006; Kvavik et al. 2005) may limit the appeal of games to all learners. 

Q5. What is the main argument for a dramatic shift from text-based to multimedia educational resources?

In summary, calls for a dramatic shift from text-based to multimedia educational resources, the increased use of computer games and simulations, and a move to constructivist approaches that emphasise student knowledge creation, problem solving, and authentic learning (Brown, 2000; Oblinger, 2004; Tapscott, 1999) based solely on the supposed demands and needs of a new generation of digital natives must be treated with caution. 

Q6. What is the second assumption underpinning the claim for a generation of digital natives?

The second assumption underpinning the claim for a generation of digital natives is that because of their immersion in technology young people “think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors” (Prensky, 2001a, p. 1, emphasis in the original). 

Q7. What is the main argument that Brown (2000) makes?

Brown (2000), for example, contends “today’s kids are always “multiprocessing” – they do several things simultaneously – listen to music, talk on the cell phone, and use the computer, all at the same time” (p. 13). 

Q8. What is the claim the authors will examine?

The claim the authors will now examine is that current educational systems must change in response to a new generation of technically adept young people. 

Q9. What is the main argument that the students were frustrated with the way their freedom of use was restricted?

Selwyn’s (2006) student participants were also frustrated that their freedom of use was curtailed at school and “were well aware of a digital disconnect but displayed a pragmatic acceptance rather than the outright alienation from the school that some commentators would suggest” (p. 5). 

Q10. What is the main claim for the existence of a generation of digital natives?

The claim made for the existence of a generation of ‘digital natives’ is based on two main assumptions in the literature, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Young people of the digital native generation possess sophisticated knowledge of and skills with information technologies. 

Q11. What did the participants report feeling at school?

The participants did report feeling limited in the time they were allocated to use computers at school and in the way their use was constrained by teacher-directed learning activities.