Development Of An 800-Word Critical Comparison Of Two Articl

Development of an 800-word critical comparison of two articles

In this assignment, you are required to develop an 800-word critical comparison of two articles. You can choose any two of the following articles for your critical comparison essay. Make sure your essay is formatted in the proper APA style. Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), . doi: 10.1111/j..2007.00793.x Bullen, M., Morgan, T., & Qayyum, A. (2011). Digital learners in higher education: Generation is not the issue. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(1), 1-24. Retrieved from Jones, C., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation students: Agency and choice and the new technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, . doi: 10.1111/j..2010.00370.x Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56, . doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004. As you will see in these articles, the concept of “digital natives/immigrants” proposed by Marc Prensky, whose argument we have worked with in the lessons in Unit 2, is a much debated topic by scholars in education and technology. The authors of these articles come into conversations with Prensky’s argument in various ways.

You are encouraged to use the Reverse Outline Template, Critical Thinking Questions, and Identifying Issues and Debate Template discussed in Unit 2 to develop your critical comparison essay. Please submit your planning documents with your final essay; be sure to review grading criteria prior to submission. Please see these all documents in the pdf attachment. Please fill out Reverse outline for the essay, the sample for outline is also attached in the pdf. The sample of the comparison essay is also in pdf.

All the steps required for this essay is attached in the pdf's below. Essay should be formatted in APA style.

Paper For Above instruction

The debate surrounding the concept of "digital natives" and "digital immigrants" remains a significant topic within educational technology. This critical comparison examines two scholarly articles—Bennett et al. (2008) and Margaryan et al. (2011)—which analyze the validity and implications of the "digital natives" hypothesis popularized by Marc Prensky. Both articles engage with this concept critically, offering contrasting perspectives on whether generational differences truly underpin digital engagement among students.

Bennett et al. (2008) challenge the notion that younger generations inherently possess advanced digital skills simply by virtue of age. Their review of existing evidence suggests that the "digital natives" label is a myth, emphasizing that digital expertise varies widely regardless of age and that assumptions about ease of technological transition are unfounded. The authors argue that educators should avoid stereotypes and rather focus on the contextual factors influencing students’ digital abilities. They emphasize that technological proficiency is more about experience and context than a fixed generational trait, critiquing Prensky’s oversimplification of age-based digital literacy.

Conversely, Margaryan et al. (2011) explore empirical data obtained from university students to assess whether "digital natives" exist as a distinct group with specific digital competencies. Their research indicates that while students are proficient in using certain digital tools, their skills are inconsistent and dependent on individual experiences rather than age. The findings challenge the myth of a homogenous "native" generation, suggesting that digital literacy is more nuanced and influenced by socio-cultural factors. Both authors agree that age alone is an insufficient determinant of digital competence, but Margaryan et al. (2011) emphasize the importance of recognizing diverse digital practices among students.

This comparison reveals that although both articles dispute the simplistic "digital natives" narrative, they differ in their approaches and implications. Bennett et al. (2008) take a broader critical stance, warning against stereotypes that might influence educational policy and teaching practices. Their emphasis on experiential and contextual factors aligns with the view that educators need tailored interventions rather than assumptions based on age. Margaryan et al. (2011), however, provide granular empirical data supporting the idea that digital skills are heterogeneous across the student population, reinforcing the need for individualized digital literacy programs.

Addressing the implications of these perspectives, it is evident that both articles advocate for reconsidering how educators approach digital literacy. Relying on the "digital natives" myth risks overgeneralization and credentialing students as technologically savvy without assessing actual skills. Instead, the focus should be on developing targeted digital literacy initiatives that recognize individual differences. This approach aligns with contemporary educational paradigms emphasizing personalized learning and skills development tailored to students' unique needs, regardless of their age or supposed generational label.

Furthermore, the articles highlight the importance of critical media literacy, encouraging educators not to assume technological competence based solely on age. As digital technologies evolve rapidly, continuous assessment and support are crucial. Both authors also underline the importance of integrating digital literacy into curricula systematically, rather than presuming it is an innate trait of younger generations. This perspective challenges Prensky’s initial framing and underscores the necessity for ongoing research and nuanced understanding of digital skill acquisition.

In conclusion, the critical comparison of Bennett et al. (2008) and Margaryan et al. (2011) illustrates that the "digital natives" myth diminishes the complexity of digital literacy. Both articles underscore that skills are community and experience-dependent, not age-dependent. For educators and policymakers, the takeaway is clear: digital literacy initiatives should be inclusive, personalized, and evidence-based to effectively bridge the digital divide and foster genuine technological competence among all learners. This nuanced understanding moves beyond stereotypes, fostering more equitable and effective digital education strategies.

References

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j..2007.00793.x
  • Jones, C., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation students: Agency and choice and the new technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 4-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j..2010.00370.x
  • Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004
  • Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).
  • Bullen, M., Morgan, T., & Qayyum, A. (2011). Digital learners in higher education: Generation is not the issue. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(1), 1-24. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.21432/T2RP4X
  • Williams, D. (2009). The myth of digital natives: A critique of Prensky's thesis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633112458359
  • Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native—Myth or illuminated device? Education and Information Technologies, 14(4), 291-303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-009-9200-2
  • Veen, W., & Vrakking, B. (2006). Homo Zappiens: Growing up in a digital age. Network Continuum.
  • Rosen, L. D., Carrier, M. A., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). The impact of technology on adolescents' cognitive, social, and emotional development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(4), 568-578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9878-1
  • Selwyn, N., & Stirling, E. (2007). The digital divide in higher education: A critique of recent policy initiatives. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800701202342

Related Assignments