This article goes against the notion of Prensky’s theory that there are ‘digital natives’ and says they don’t exist.
The article says that the student’s computer levels haven’t budged in a decade. I disagree with this as ‘most’ students have had to have access to a computer for along time for work now, so we surely must have got better somehow? Even if its just students who have got faster at typing, through using the computer more, or learnt how to do a bit more on Microsoft word as they use it for work etc. Furthermore in university we have to learn how to use journals and access websites like them, to complete our courses and essays, so we must have improved in this way to. Also the article claims that ‘’every class has a handful of people with amazing skills and a large number who can't deal with computers at all," and I disagree with this to. Although I do not have evidence myself to prove the theory wrong I think it is quite bold to claim that this is the same for ‘every’ class.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is true to say that practice makes perfect and your right, I cant think of any university course where you wouldnt need to use a computer!! Even a friend who is at golf college in America still has to write essays in order to keep up educational skills.
ReplyDeleteHowever, those who use computers everyday in life are obviously going to be better, but I agree that the statement made in this article is far too broad.
it seemed like a fair point to make that perhaps 'natives' dont exist however i think to state that computer levels for students haven't changed at all, is just opinion not based upon any facts. I suppose you could say the same for me. i dont have any facts to prove it wrong. its just like i have said we use them so much, for social and learning therefore can't have not changed at all.
ReplyDelete