This article was downloaded by: [Chinese University of Hong Kong]On: 21 December 2014, At: 11:18Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Pedagogies: An International JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hped20

Deconstructing digital natives: youngpeople, technology and the newliteracies, by Michael ThomasElizabeth Thorne-Wallington aa Washington University , St. Louis , MO , USA E-mail:Published online: 18 Sep 2012.

To cite this article: Elizabeth Thorne-Wallington (2012) Deconstructing digital natives: youngpeople, technology and the new literacies, by Michael Thomas, Pedagogies: An InternationalJournal, 7:4, 382-384, DOI: 10.1080/1554480X.2012.724208

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2012.724208

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

382 Book reviews

and language sharing provide a nuanced understanding of language. After reading thisbook, I could not help but consider the range of languages available to non-dominant youthbeyond those covered in this book.

ReferencesAlim, H.S. (2005). Critical language awareness in the United States: Revisiting issues and revising

pedagogies in a resegregated society. Educational Researcher, 34, 24–31.Milroy, J., & Milroy, L. (1999). Authority in language: Investigating standard English. New York,

NY: Routledge.Pratt, M.L. (1991). Arts of the contact zone. Profession, 9, 33–40.Rampton, B. (1995). Crossing: Language and ethnicity among adolescents. London: Longman.

Danny C. MartínezUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

Email: dannycm9@uic.edu© 2012, Danny C. Martínez

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2012.724207

Deconstructing digital natives: young people, technology and the new literacies, byMichael Thomas, New York, Routledge, 2011, vii + 220 pp., US$39.95 (paperback), ISBN978-0-415-88996-4

The term digital natives is commonly and popularly used. But what do we really meanby it? Deconstructing digital natives: Young people, technology, and the new literacies,edited by Michael Thomas, analyses a number of possible meanings, uses and applicationsof the concept. As the title indicates, the book focuses on young people, particularly thosebetween the ages of 12 and 18 years. It is immensely useful for researchers, teachers andparents. It is clear when one finishes the book, how tentative is our understanding of digitalnatives and how much research remains to be done.

The book is divided into three sections: “Reflecting on the Myth”, “Perspectives”and “Beyond Digital Natives”. Contributors include researchers from the United States,United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Sweden and Norway. The book includes several stylesof research and analysis, blending conceptual approaches with qualitative and quantita-tive methods. Most of the essays are primarily descriptive and illustrate the central issueof youth’s relation to technology. Several other essays are also prescriptive, at least tothe extent of suggesting how the very notion of digital natives needs to be expanded andre-framed.

The first section explores how the term digital native was first articulated and used.Thomas claims the term typically describes those born after 1980 and is based on threeassumptions: first, that digital natives are a largely homogeneous generation; second, thatdigital natives have different learning styles from preceding generations; and finally, build-ing on the second assumption, that the digital natives demand a new way of teaching andlearning involving technology. Those of preceding generations, who were born before1980, are not digital natives, but may be “digital immigrants”. In Chapter 2, Prenskydefends the use of the term, writing, “What has surprised me the most is the violence andvitriol of some of the disagreements” (p. 16). Prensky finds it to be useful, while admittingthat it is subject to extreme overgeneralization. The real significance of the concept lies in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Chi

nese

Uni

vers

ity o

f H

ong

Kon

g] a

t 11:

18 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Pedagogies: An International Journal 383

its articulation of the comfort with which young people approach technology. Prensky’sfinal suggestion is that the focus of research should not lie on establishing a dichotomy ofdigital natives and digital immigrants, but rather on creating “digital wisdom” (p. 18) forboth groups.

Jones disagrees with any use of the term in Chapter 3. He writes that “technologies sim-ply determine the outlook of an entire generation is one that should be discarded” (p. 43).He concludes that much research is needed to examine how new technologies can affordcertain types of learning experiences.

This pattern of identifying the limitations of the term and yet continuing to accept itsuse is present throughout the book. Shakuntala Banaji begins Chapter 4 by stating,

Notwithstanding a number of sophisticated critiques emerging in relation to some of thehomogenizing rhetoric of the “Digital Natives” debate, the idea that civic action in onlineenvironments will appeal to young people more naturally than offline action has now becomea commonplace suggestion. (p. 49)

Banaji ultimately concludes that different individuals will have different online experi-ences. Levy and Michael challenge the term further in Chapter 6, “Analyzing Students’Multimodal Texts”. Levy and Michael address the limitations of “digital natives” and foundthat “regardless of the technical fluency” (p. 95), there was still a great deal of variance intraditional skill levels.

Erstad, in Chapter 7, dismisses the term as overgeneralizing and instead focuses on“digital literacy” (p. 100), the ability to understand the different literate worlds that youngpeople interact between online and offline, and its relation paves ways for young peopleto access and interpret information. Similarly, Kennedy and Judd write that it is time tomove beyond “stereotypical views of students as ‘Digital Natives’ ” (p. 133). Levy, inChapter 10, finds that even very young children, and even in a very small cohort, havedifferent responses to digital technologies.

What all of these authors make clear is that by referring to an entire generation as “dig-ital natives”, researchers are limiting nuances, such as difference in skill level, and candraw only the broadest conclusions. Palfrey and Gasser argue in the final chapter of thebook that the term “while awkward” can be used to promote public discourse among par-ents and educators. They suggest that there is no clear generational break between digitalnatives and digital immigrants, and that not all young people use technology in the sameway. Palfrey and Gasser recommend, like Erstad in Chapter 7, and perhaps like Prenskywith his notion of “digital wisdom”, that the most important quality of this population isdigital literacy or new media literacy. They write that this set of skills allows young peo-ple distinguish dangerous situations online, when one’s safety or security might be at risk;locate high-quality information, similar to Kennedy and Judd’s study (in Chapter 8) of theeffect of Google on search quality; and manage their own identity by choosing and control-ling what personal information they make available online. Palfrey and Gasser write thatwhile researchers can continue to study this specific population of digital natives, the goalof research should be to “understand youth (and adult) practice with respect to informationas it changes based on sound data” (p. 201).

Deconstructing digital natives in many ways challenges and even dismisses the veryconcept the book examines. Despite limitations of the term, however, potential affordancesfor understanding digital issues as they pertain to youths also become clear. The messageof the book is not to see the term “digital natives” as a dichotomous or all-encompassing

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Chi

nese

Uni

vers

ity o

f H

ong

Kon

g] a

t 11:

18 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

384 Book reviews

concept, but rather as a guiding principle to understand a group or population of young peo-ple. With that understanding, future research is needed to collect empirical evidence thatexamines the variance between population attributes and individual skills and behavioursas well as the potential effects on teaching and learning. This book demonstrates that under-standing how digital technologies impact young people today is an international challenge,which no simple, absolute term can completely describe or explain.

Elizabeth Thorne-WallingtonWashington University, St. Louis, MO, USA

Email: ethornew@wustl.edu© 2012, Elizabeth Thorne-Wallington

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2012.724208

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Chi

nese

Uni

vers

ity o

f H

ong

Kon

g] a

t 11:

18 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014