Post #1

After watching the presentation on Prensky's position, he seemed to believe that younger generations have inherent knowledge and skills that help them interact with the digital world. The presentation associated physiological changes in young people with their aptitude for tech and media literacy. His stance did not differentiate between young people's familiarity with social media or the operation of programs and apps and understanding the complexities of digital systems, hardware, and programs. Boyd's position seemed to take a more dynamic and holistic perspective, as she consistently emphasizes that adults and youth both need to develop media literacy and tech skills to be active participants in society. Boyd concluded that the term digital native is problematic because it "assumes that young people are either passive recipients of technological knowledge or learners who pick up on this language easily."

I resonated with Boyd's belief that all should be active learners rather than defaulting to one's assumed social status. This ideology would require people to view those outside of their identity/age groups as dynamic humans requiring support and resources. Although I understand Prensky's immigrant vs. native analogy, I believe that it may minimize the very real experiences of more marginalized immigrant communities. However, I do believe that there is a need to assess the differences between younger generations born into the digital age and those who were not. The idea of these two different populations makes me curious about what could come of education if educators were able to fully incorporate tech and social media as resources for learning.