Immigrants in the Digital Age

Prensky's article dealing with "native" students and "immigrant" teachers in the digital age brought some interesting assumptions into the debate. Prensky's overall premise is that today's students, having grown up with technology as an everyday tool, are far more competent and familiar with it than their teachers. This in turn leads to a disconnect that teachers need to work to overcome in their instruction. Essentially, the argument is that teachers must incorporate technology into their classrooms and instruction as a means of bridging the gap between them and their digitally minded students.

I find the distinction that Prensky makes between teachers and students to be a broad generalization. While I do believe that in many cases this generalization can be found to be true, I'm not sure that this is necessarily the case across the board. I especially find the generalization to be untrue as it pertains to newer teachers.

For example, I (being 26 and a child of the 80s) did not grow up surrounded by all of the same technology as current students. However, the internet, computers, and other digital-age technology came into play while I was still a student. Therefore, I do not believe that I am so much an "immigrant" as an "ancestor." Personally, I feel that I am competent with computers and digital media. I've been using the internet for research, Powerpoint for presentations, blogs for recording thoughts and other digital media from early on in their existence. Yes, technology has obviously advanced since I was a student, but I have learned it as it has come into play.

Prensky seems to take the view that there is no learning curve for the student, that the use of technology is almost inherent in their being by way of growing up around it. I would challenge that basic assumption, pointing out that for many students (especially the underpriviledged) technology is not a day to day fact of life in the home. Students are only "digital natives" if they have developed the skills through using the technology.

To move on from this dichotomy of digital native and immigrant, I would like to also look at Prensky's assertion that technology (specifically the example of cell phones) must be incorporated to make instruction effective. While I believe that the use of technology in the classroom is beneficial if used properly, I would argue that it is not necessary to the learning process and that, if taken to the extreme will only serve to make students dependent upon the technology.

Prensky says, "Today's students have mastered a large variety of tools that we will never master with the same level of skill. From computers to calculators to MP3 players to camera phones, these tools are like extensions of their brains. Educating or evaluating students without these tools makes no more sense to them than educating or evaluating a plumber without his or her wrench."

Essentially, it sounds to me as though Prensky is arguing that we cannot evaluate a student's abilities apart from these technological tools. Are we then to believe that students are no longer capable of doing math in their heads, researching in books, or creating art apart from technology? If this is the case, I believe that we are failing our students by allowing them to become dependent upon technology. While I believe that modern technology allows for more production in the workplace and convenience, I think that we have a problem if we are not able to function apart from it.