𝙴𝙽𝙶 𝟻𝟷𝟻𝟸 | 𝙵𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚕 𝙿𝚛𝚘𝚓𝚎𝚌𝚝

Digital “Nativeness”, Digital Literacy, and Pedagogy in Millennial Learners during the 2010s

     A well-known term of individuals who are born in the early 1980s, mid-1990s, and early 2000s are categorized into the generational group called millennials. They are a new generation of experiential learners, multitaskers, and somewhat impatient group who are technologically engaged with various devices. Children who have grown up since the emergence of the World Wide Web and the assortment of related digital technologies (e.g., cell phones, text messaging, video games, and instant messaging) are now being referred to as the Millennials (Howe & Strauss 2000). This generation is different from previous generations in important ways, in which millennials have access to more information in a variety of formats. Millennials prefer comprehending and receiving information in realistic contexts and simulated environments along with the application of non-linear texts. In addition, millennials prefer self-direction, and various forms of assignments and peer feedback that use multiple resources when it comes to learning approaches that create an effective and impactful experience. There are eight dominant themes that define millennials as those who 1) possess new ways of knowing and being; 2) drive a digital revolution transforming society; 3) are innately or inherently tech-savvy; 4) are multitaskers, team-oriented, and collaborative; 5) are native speakers of the language of technologies; 6) embrace gaming, interaction, and simulation; 7) demand immediate gratification; and, 8) reflect and respond to the knowledge economy (Smith 12). These inquiry-based, learning approaches are implemented with inductive reasoning, fast-paced and hands-on interaction with applied content, and competent visual-literacy skills, which are all essential components when navigating digital technologies. This is especially common in the workforce. Millennials tend to adapt to new technology quicker, will be more proficient than most of their predecessors, and will naturally multi-task. However, certain traits are lost or missing, as employers feel that millennials display decent capabilities to solve problems and think critically, and that they often lack the interpersonal skills that most employers look for in new employees. From the millennial’s perspective, text messaging is the most common and convenient method of communication. The millennial generation is quick to adapt, but not the most knowledgeable from a business outlook. 

    With digital technologies comes the need for more varied forms of communication, and that being fluent in the use of social media platforms and other digital applications overshadow traditional learning methods. Overall, millennials construct their knowledge and engage themselves in the process with the notion of a “plug-and-play” experience, one where they can participate and experiment in learning activities with peer cooperation (Duderstadt 2001). In other words, they use the social context of technology for enjoyment, challenges, and learning together. In result, millennials are also defined as “digital natives,” in which they are perceived to be inherently knowledgeable and well-rounded with technology and are active consumers of it. However, there is a stark difference between being “digitally native” vs. being “digitally fluent/literate.” By understanding millennials and how they are learning from digital platforms, these terms highlight key components of technology-based learning activities. It should be further noted that this final project will primarily focus on millennials during the 2010s, being that it was a decade of social media and that the 2010s brought sweeping change to the world in many facets, but one thing is certain: this was the decade of the smartphone, and with the rise of the smartphone came the rise of social media (“Reflecting on 10 years of social media”).

    To further analyze the context of this topic, certain terms must first be defined in order to understand what they mean. It has generally been suggested that there is an obvious difference between “digital natives” and “digital immigrants.” Digital natives are “native speakers” of the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet (“Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” 1). In other words, digital natives are defined as those who are assumed to be inherently and innately knowledgeable about the use of understanding technology and applying it. On the other hand, “digital immigrants” are described as those who have attempted to learn how to use computers at some point during their adult life. Digital immigrants are assumed to resist new technology or at least have some difficulty accepting it (Vodanovich et al. 2010). Furthermore, digital immigrants are those who were born when the computer was not personal, mobile phones were not invented, and a reliable source of information was the actual, physical library. Concerning the manner in which millennials learn, Prensky states that, “Students think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors” (“Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” 1). Because of this generational divide, the question being asked and considered is: What are some aspects of being literate and comprehensible with information, which are needed to effectively locate, evaluate, and use information, especially in digital and technological formats?

    By exploring millennial traits, there is discussion of whether a certain generation of learners is the defining factor or whether exposure to technology is a critical element in determining at least some of the characteristics attributed to millennials (Rickard & Oblinger 2003). With the increased access to and usage of computers, mobile devices, and utilization of the Internet, especially social networking platforms and text messaging, these technologies and digital platforms have influenced educators’ approaches to teaching and curriculum development. This is due to accommodating millennial learners out of concern. With the influx of social media and networking use during the 2010s, there is increasing digital expectancy for educators to develop learners’ digital fluency, as they will expect that their educational experience will be substantial in technologies. For educators of millennials, it is important to fulfill these digital expectations and become digitally fluent themselves to remain relevant and prepare millennial learners to engage themselves in a world that is becoming ever more digitalized. Communication changes with the advancements in technology so in result, these literacies are often multimodal (Jewitt 241). For example, one cannot view a blog or website without finding it necessary to understand an image along with written contextual information. Becoming competent in comprehending texts, images, and other forms of media through a digital format has become a pinnacle feature in education, since the Internet is now a necessary component of classroom learning and research. Regarding social media and online networking, it is important for millennials to be able to distinguish and navigate information for truth and meaning. Millennial learners demonstrate “a deep-seated need to communicate and collaborate, to access information at any time of the day or night, and to have the tools they need to synthesize, evaluate, and create information” (Fisher and Frey 225). The outcomes in the fluency of millennial learners depend on what educators are capable of teaching; educators need to plan innovative and effective pedagogical approaches in order to help students develop a high level of aptitude to interact fluently with both information and technology. This is important to consider because methodologies include the consistency of effect that will influence how millennials interact and learn in and out of the classroom. In fact, access to various forms of multiliteracies and digital technology available is crucial to allow students to experiment with, use, develop problem-solving skills, and head in the direction of becoming lifelong learners and digital innovators (Howell 2012).           

    As millennials consume even more information on a daily basis, the concept of digital literacy is one of the primary competencies of learning in the digital age. Therefore, it is important that those literacy skills are embedded in the learning curriculum. For instance, distinguishing between what is real or fake news in an online format has been a challenge, since millennials struggle with deciphering what information is considered to be valid. In result, the move to integrate effective digital literacy into a learning curriculum is increasing and that “few organizations have developed comprehensive plans that specify technical learning objectives or ensure successful integration of technology to enhance students’ digital and visual literacy” (Kavalier and Flannigan 2006). Although it is generally assumed that millennials and the youth need to learn these digital literacy skills, educators and administrators, as mentioned earlier, who were not born during the digital age, should also learn to become digitally literate in order to adapt and navigate around it. When a new skill is being learned, there is an objective to aim for initial basic understanding, followed by competence, and later fluency. This same concept also applies to acquiring digital skills, as it takes repetition, time, and experience within multiple contexts in technology such as applications, tools, and how to express ideas by utilizing them. The challenge now is how educators can reach out to millennials so that they can provide a productive and engaging learning environment. For one, the application of social and collaborative learning allows millennial learners to become aware and responsible for their own learning process and take advantage of feedback from their peers. In result, this enables them to interact with their peers by sharing their ideas and supporting each other in the way they learn. However, traditional social and collaborative learning approaches cannot be applied in every digital learning experience because it requires active participation and engagement. Also, learning systems often lack challenging resources and tools to support socialization and collaboration, which makes the overall learning experience ineffective and unstimulating. Thus, learning resources that lack engagement, authentic interactivity, social identity, and user empowerment and challenge, tend to generate a negative effect in the motivation and engagement of the learning process within the millennial learner. Daily applications of technology are perceived to be very common and a significant part of a millennial’s lifestyle and environment. It is commonly known that millennials during the 2010s were actively using social media and networking systems. Despite this notion, this does not necessarily mean that they possess the knowledge or skills to make the most of their online experiences. The rhetoric of “digital natives,” far from being useful, is often a distraction to understanding the challenges that youths face in a networked world [and that curiosity] may lead many teens to develop meaningful knowledge about social media, but there is huge variation in knowledge and experience (Boyd 176). In result, this variation of experiential and multiple approaches to literacy reshapes pedagogy towards millennial learners. The aim and purpose of these multi-literacies are to enhance and intensify the application of multimodal texts with a wide range of literacy practices so that peer engagement and interaction are in effect. Therefore, multi-literacies challenge the one-track relationship between teacher and student, along with the traditional settings of a classroom. From this perspective, the social and political goal of multi-literacies is to situate teachers and students as active participants in social change, the active designers of social futures (Cope and Kalantzis 2000). Overall, pedagogical approaches that consist of multi-literacies are defined as developing models of effective critical engagement with learner values, skills, and design.

    Web 2.0 refers to platforms that are highly interactive and provide users with the ability to integrate different media within their content creation. In contrast to Web 1.0, which is described as a one-way type of passive communication, Web 2.0 allows users to take on the roles of being the initiators and recipients of information. The term often describes a heterogeneous mix of relatively familiar technologies and old practices [while it] encompasses the work of large corporations, along with exceedingly emergent ones (Alexander 152). It is suggested that there are numerous platforms that fit the characteristics of Web 2.0. Among these platforms include Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Wikipedia. These platforms enable this engaging, interactive process (e.g., social networking, text messaging, shared photos, podcasts, streaming videos, wikis, blogs, discussion groups) (Harris 2009). An entire genre of Web services has emerged solely for connecting people to each other based on their interests and fuels engagement within the online community. With the ongoing development of new technologies and tools, learning in online environments essentially reflects the field of new literacies that focus on how language and literacies involve skills and processes that are common to textual literacy. In addition, it is important to note that certain skills require knowledge when it comes to Web 2.0, such as reading and comprehending websites, deciphering information, using search engines, and selecting appropriate hyperlinks. Therefore, it is imperative not to view the concept of Web 2.0 as a general whole, but rather as a complex and constantly evolving form of social participation and interaction that provides an outlet for literacy requirements. For example, while Facebook and Twitter are social media platforms that feature status updates, both platforms can increase student engagement and student perspectives of their educators. Facebook incorporates activities and items that include, but are not solely limited to photos, videos, chat discussions, and even online gaming. The focus towards Facebook is primarily on a socially interactive level, and where the user is centered on one’s self by publicly sharing life details or events. On the other hand, Twitter is primarily structured as a platform that brings a community of common and/or shared interests together. These interests can range from a plethora of topics, whether they are academic, political, or social. In result, the foundational premise of the technology tool may be what allows a platform to initiate engagement outside of the classroom setting but may also function better as a tool for integration within academic coursework.

    In the context of education and pedagogy, educators should consider how millennial learners can gain a better perspective on viewing digital literacy as a form of social participation, and how digital media could be applied to facilitate inquiry, initiation, and the various methods of instructional practices that would be supportive. Educators also need to experience the same kinds of digital literacy practices that they hope to introduce and teach to millennial learners. The process for professional development needs continuity and needs to focus largely on the pedagogical practices and goals, rather than the mastery of such tools. In other words, educators need to learn how to become facilitators at some point, not someone who subtly monitors in the background. Rather, they must learn to fill in a variety of rules, including carrying out direct instruction when needed. Typically, educators who instruct millennials are from a range of generations. However, a commonality is that the majority of their educators are digital immigrants. O’Brien and Scharber (2010) state that:

            The generation of teachers, administrators, and school board members who resist implementing one-to-one laptop programs, making the Internet available throughout a school or district, or permitting students to connect to and work within social networking sites is often resistive not just because of their perceived fears about exposing young people to the more seedy aspects of the media-sphere but also because they are simply stuck in the stance of conserving resources, saving money, and being financially responsible (601).

While there are indeed younger educators, there are educators who have taught for an extended number of years and have also remained in the profession with probably minimal adjustments and changes, regarding pedagogical approaches and discourse. As technology advances and becomes intertwined with education, the educator is then positioned in a situation that may seem both foreign and challenging in a discourse that places him or her as being required to adjust and change the teaching curriculum. This displays a conflicting call to action because on the one hand, the educator is informed that by his or her age, he or she will demonstrate a basic skills level with technology that is reflected on the educator’s status as a “digital immigrant.” Additionally, it is expected that educators whose age range reflects of that of a digital immigrant must adapt to newer teaching methods within a digitalized format in order to continue to guide and teach a cyclic round of learners who are, in contrast, fit the category of being a “digital native.” There can be an underlying issue regarding a disconnected relationship between educator and learner, in which it is through the educator’s willingness to change the approach to the curriculum.

    This opposition in the immigrant-native relationship reflects that educators lack agency and are in a position where they must adapt to changes in order to maintain their validity as academics who are more or less “keeping up with the times.” Whether or not if educators identity as digital natives or digital immigrants, technology skills in the classroom are to be acquired and assessed at some point. When educators are perceived as continuously lacking and in need of advancement, the possibility of a disagreement can be delegitimized, which reflects their ignorance or resistance to change. Any critique of technology, its role in education, or its implementation, as long as it comes from an ‘immigrant’, is one that is subjective. Activities such as personal technology use, preparing lessons on a digitalized format, and experiences with technology use with students offer the opportunity to discuss technology use with both newly hired educators who identify as digital natives, and veteran educators who identify as digital immigrants. Petrina, Feng, and Kim (2007) emphasize the importance of examining generational issues within native and immigrant constructs that are not supported by stating that, “The digital native–immigrant framework overlooks processes of learning together (e.g., intergenerational learning) and mistakenly identifies cross-generational differences as a form of ‘digital divide’” (376–377). For digital native educators, implementation of classroom technology allows them to examine if their familiarity with technology provides a better foundation for incorporating web-based tools in the classroom. Since technology can be more familiar to digital native teachers, this proposes that authentic activities which utilize technology in the classroom allow a new educator to use his or her existing knowledge while presenting the importance of acquiring new and authentic knowledge that can be quickly compartmentalized (“Listen to the Natives” 10). Therefore, educators, regardless if they are digital natives or digital immigrants, can reflect on, adapt, and apply these developing and evolving pedagogic approaches that connect with contemporary multimodal literacy and fluency practice.

    In pedagogy, the idea that digital natives have different learning styles generates much discussion among academics and administrators in higher education. This in turn created an immediacy to implement more online courses and digital media use in academia (Yu et al. 2010). As stated earlier, Web 2.0 allows users to take on the roles of being the initiators and recipients of information. A prominent characterization of millennials is that they are the first generation to be immersed in ICT, or Information Communication Technology. Computers and online media are a significant part of a millennial’s academic setting and household. Prensky states that digital natives are fluent in the language and culture of ICT, adjusting easily to changes in technology and using ICT in creative and innovative ways (“Listen to the Natives” 9). One of the literacy and ICT skills that millennials are taking advantage of is social networking sites such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram. While this is perceived as a convenient and accessible way to communicate, it is common that academic institutions usually implement heavy restrictions on the use of the Internet. A prime example is that social networking sites are often blocked inside computer labs and academic libraries. This restriction results in being unable to build a connection between the technological approach that millennial learners are used to and the classrooms that educators expect them to learn in. In addition, these limitations are almost always justified by claiming that they are intended to protect students. Such protection, no matter how much it is administered with good intention, actually fails to prepare millennial learners by not providing the proper supervision and guidance that many of them would benefit from during their online learning experience.

    There is pedagogical understanding of millennials’ use of online web platforms, which initiates engagement with the literacy experiences of millennial learners and their interests. This focus on pedagogy regarding multimodality and multiliteracy is often perceived as a supportive tool that educators can apply and engage in with the resources that learners offer into the classroom. In addition, this includes the process of creating textual meaning as millennial learners are familiarizing themselves with the utilization of digitalized information and becoming fluent in it. Textual meaning can offer insights into the types of resources that learners can have access to, such as the texts they develop as designs of meaning, along with its processes that they are engaged in. In this way, considering the role of the learner in literacy brings discussion on how to construct the relationship between literacy spaces inside and outside of academia.

    From an early age, the world in which millennial learners have grown up and become exposed to and immersed in has an active presence with digital media and technology. They have adapted to continuous multitasking and switch from one activity to another quickly and with minimal readjustment time (Brown 13). Educators in this ongoing digital age must understand the learner style of a new generation of instructing the audience. If the path to literacy in higher education can be described as learning what it takes to write the traditionally academic essay, millennial learners must then develop the necessary scaffolding and preparation required to become digitally multiliterate and accustomed to multimodal texts and technologies. In Multiliteracies for a Digital Age (2004), Stuart Selber mentions three important aspects of multiliteracies regarding digital information and texts, which are categorized as critical, functional, and rhetorical. One of these aspects is his take on critical literacy, in which he further addresses that the goal is to discover how “students might be encouraged to recognize and question the politics of computers” (75) and that there is a skills-based representation of literacy. In result, composing various styles of texts (i.e. physical print texts to digital texts) require a set of courses that redefines traditional paths to literacy that are also applicable to other types of literacy. Therefore, educators should emphasize different types of computer literacies and help learners become skilled at moving among them in strategic ways. Millennial learners who are not adequately exposed to all three literacy categories will find it challenging to fully participate in technological activities. Additionally, there are three subject positions connected to the literacy landscape: students as users of technology, students as questioners of technology, and students as producers of technology (Selber 24–25). The impact on society of the Internet, wireless communication, and related technologies is always expanding. In other words, this level of integration into daily life appears to increase as rapidly as the development of new tools, mobile device apps, services, and platforms. There is continuing demonstration that the everyday use of technology, including the Internet, does not entirely guarantee technological fluency, competency, literacy, or the critical analysis skills required and applicable to comprehend new information. The spread of digital information makes it increasingly important for millennial learners to possess competencies for managing, integrating, and developing information, in addition to finding, using, and evaluating it. Even if learners are immersed in technology outside of academia, many do not expect the classroom environment to reflect their personal array of technology, with many preferring moderate usages of technology in their learning environments. Thus, educators must not assume that the increased use of technology is necessarily better. By integrating technology, it is important to consider the function of a tool instead of merely the tool itself. For example, focusing on teaching advanced contexts of searching and transferrable function through the web interface (e.g. databases or search engines), creates a stimulating experience. Applying observation to monitor comprehension and providing clarification are also excellent assessments for learning techniques.

    Digital fluency can support developmentally determined expectations beyond the normal curriculum learning and teaching imperatives. In such contexts, the importance of new and emerging literacies become a priority consideration. To demonstrate digital fluency and competence most likely continues to become established in educational curriculums. Digital media and pedagogy provide a unique environment for engaging with ideas and structures within the academic digital experience. Digital learning tools can also instigate diverse learning environments that reflect a multi-faceted classroom experience. However, it is important to consider the outcomes of technology use in the classroom so that learners can comprehend and process new knowledge. The opportunity of providing various learning styles is also being aware that each millennial learners’ accommodation and preference can impact how he or she may function within a learning environment. While it is not well-advised to state that only learning styles are the sole reason on why certain technologies are implemented, it is a component that needs to be considered.     

    In this digital day and age, millennials’ general use of social media reflects the degree to which they use a social media platform differently than other platforms. Furthermore, the identified groups utilize the same application of social media in different ways (i.e. passively or actively). In particular, educators should realize and be aware that millennial learners must be taught digital literacy and should be guided in course-related social media use. Nevertheless, the focus needs to be on molding millennial learners so that they can adjust and integrate new technology into their lives while being cognizant of the primary purpose of their learning outcome. One way to accomplish this is to utilize methodologies and techniques that provide learners a higher level of aptitude to interact fluently with both information and technology. This can serve as a framework to support educators who seek to integrate technologies into their courses and curricula in effective, meaningful, and contextual ways. By considering the functions of technology and specific learning assessments, pedagogies, and outcomes, educators can generate effective and stimulating learning environments in order to have learners become engaged and interactive, and support diverse learning styles and cognitive processes.

    Digital content and social media platforms allow millennial learners to create and share media, and platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have changed the traditional methods of comprehending information. In addition, these platforms have created innovative ways to enable knowledge transfer and networking. Educators must be able to acquire and apply additional knowledge due to the constantly changing trends and attitudes of the millennial user. Regarding the concept of digital literacy in an academic environment, the learning styles of millennials are entwined with digital and networked technologies and are combined with an active engagement in these new technologies, which leads towards a complex pedagogical approach. A multimodal perspective reflects the complex pedagogical approach of designing curriculum knowledge across modes in the classroom. Furthermore, multimodality offers new ways to think about learning, and how educators may apply multimodal tools to implement in the classroom. Millennials are consumed with information from online content and digital media, so helping them comprehend meaning from these pieces of information must become a target of academic success. In result, it is imperative that proper instruction must be applied to address this issue. Through technology, several values have become molded, in which there is no filter or censorship, but that the authenticity of the message or content being displayed may be questioned. It is through these life circumstances that can mainly come with multiple opportunities to improve and enhance skills in generating and comprehending online media in a digitalized format.

Works Cited

Alexander, Bryan. “Web 2.0 and Emergent Multiliteracies.” Theory into Practice, vol. 47, no. 2, 2008, pp. 150-160.

Boyd, Danah. It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. Yale University Press, 2014.

Brown, John Seely. “Growing Up Digital: How the Web Changes Work, Education, and the Ways People Learn.” Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, vol. 32, no. 2, 2000, pp. 11-20.

Cope, Bill, and Mary Kalantzis, editors. Multiliteracies. Routledge, 2000.

Duderstadt, James J. “The Future of the University in the Digital Age.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 145, no. 1, 2001, pp. 54-72.

Fisher, Douglas, and Nancy Frey. “Preparing Students for Mastery of 21^st Century Skills.” 21^st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn, 2010, pp. 221-242.

Harris, Roger. “Social media ecosystem mapped as a wiring diagram.” http://www.twitterthoughts.com/social-media-news-analyses/2009/9/3/social-mediaecosystem-mapped-as-a-wiring-diagram.html. Accessed 2 December 2020.

Howe, Neil, and William Strauss. Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation. Vintage, 2000.

Howell, Jennifer. Teaching with ICT: Digital Pedagogies for Collaboration and Creativity. Oxford University Press, 2012.

Jewitt, Carey. “Multimodality and Literacy in School Classrooms.” Review of Research in Education, vol. 32, no. 1, 2008, pp. 241-267.

Jones-Kavalier, Barbara R., and Suzanne L. Flannigan. “Connecting the Digital Dots: Literacy of the 21^st Century.” Educause Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 2, 2006.

O’Brien, David, and Cassandra Scharber. “Teaching Old Dogs New Tricks: The Luxury of Digital Abundance.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, vol. 53, no. 7, 2010, pp. 600-603.

Oblinger, Diana, and Wendy Rickard. “The Next Generation Student.” Chronicle of Higher Education, vol. 14, 2003.

Petrina, Stephen, Franc Feng, and Juyun Kim. “Researching Cognition and Technology: How We Learn Across the Lifespan.” International Journal of Technology and Design Education, vol. 18, no. 4, 2008, pp. 375–396.

Prensky, Marc, “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants.” On the Horizon, vol. 9, no. 5, 2001.

Prensky, Marc. “Listen to the Natives.” Educational Leadership, vol. 63, no. 4, 2005, pp. 8-13.

Selber, Stuart. Multiliteracies for a Digital Age. SIU Press, 2004.

Smith, Erika E. “Social Media in Undergraduate Learning: Categories and Characteristics.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 14, no. 1, 2017, pp. 12.

Ulch, Jancy. “Reflecting on 10 years of social media.” kps3, https://kps3.com/the-2010s-a-decade-of-social-media/. Accessed 27 November 2020.

Vodanovich, Shahper, David Sundaram, and Michael Myers. “Research Commentary – Digital Natives and Ubiquitous Information Systems.” Information Systems Research, vol. 21, no. 4, 2010, pp. 711-723.

Yu, Angela Yan, et al. “Can Learning Be Virtually Boosted? An Investigation of Online Social Networking Impacts.” Computers & Education, vol. 55 no. 4, 2010, pp. 1494-1503.