You are here:

You Can Teach Old Dogs New Tricks: The Factors That Affect Changes over Time in Digital Literacy ARTICLE

, , The Open University of Israel, Israel

JITE-Research Volume 9, ISSN 1539-3585 Publisher: Informing Science Institute

Abstract

The expansion of digital technologies and the rapid changes they undergo through time face users with new cognitive, social, and ergonomic challenges that they need to master in order to perform effectively. In recent years, following empirical reports on performance differences between different age-groups, there is a debate in the research literature concerning the nature of these differences: whether they reflect age-related cognitive abilities of the users, or that they are related to the usability and experience of users with the technologies. This study attempts to establish whether changes in digital literacy, through a period of five years, are age-dependent or the result of experience with technology. The study is based on empirical findings from two independent studies of Eshet-Alkalai & Amichai-Hamburger (2004), which investigated digital literacy skills among different age groups, and of Eshet-Alkalai and Chajut (2009), which investigated changes over time in these digital literacy skills among the same participants five years later. In order to distinguish between the age-related and the experience related factors, the present study reports on findings from control groups of a similar age and demographic background, which were tested with tasks similar to Eshet-Alkalai & Chajut (2009). Results show two major patterns of change over time: (1) closing the gap between younger and older participants in tasks that emphasize experience and technical control (photo-visual and branching tasks); (2) widening the gap between younger and older participants in tasks that emphasize creativity and critical thinking reproduction and information tasks). Based on the results from the control groups, we suggest that experience with technology, and not age-dependent cognitive development, accounts for the observed life-long changes in digital literacy skills. Results, especially the sharp decrease in information skills, suggest that the ability to find information or use digital environments does not guarantee an educated or smart use of digital environments.

Citation

Eshet-Alkalai, Y. & Chajut, E. (2010). You Can Teach Old Dogs New Tricks: The Factors That Affect Changes over Time in Digital Literacy. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 9, 173-181. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved November 16, 2018 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Aviram, R., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2006). Towards a theory of digital literacy: Three scenarios for the next steps. European Journal of Open Distance E-Learning. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Aharon_Aviram.htm.
  2. Ba, H., Tally, W., & Tsikalas, K. (2002). Investigating children’s emerging digital literacies. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 1. Retrieved from http://www.jtla.org.
  3. Bawden, D. (2001). Information and digital literacies: A review of concepts. Journal of Documentation, 57, 218-259.
  4. Benjamin, W. (1994). The work of art in the age of technical reproduction. [Hebrew translation from German].Tel Aviv: Teamin Publishers.
  5. Bruce, B.C. (2003). Literacy in the information age: Inquiries into meaning making with new technologies. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.
  6. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). American time use survey summary. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.nr0.htm
  7. Carrington, V., & Marsh, J. (2005). Digital childhood and youth: New texts, new illiteracies. Discourse, 26, 279-285.
  8. You Can Teach Old Dogs New TricksEshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 93-106.
  9. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2004). Experiments with digital literacy. Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 7, 425-434.
  10. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Chajut, E. (2009). Changes over time in digital literacy. Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 12, 713-715. Doi: 10.1089=cpb.2008.0264.
  11. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2007). Does the medium affect the message? The influence of text representation format on critical thinking. Human Systems Management, 26, 269-279.
  12. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2009). Congruent versus incongruent display: The effect of page layout on critical reading in print and digital formats. In Y. Eshet, A. Caspi, S. Eden, N. Geri & Y. Yair (Eds.), Learning in the Technological Era IV: Proceedings of the 2009 Chais Conference, 18.2. 2009, Raanana, The Open University of Israel, pp. 73-80.
  13. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 85–105.
  14. Hargittai, E. (2002). Beyond logs and surveys: In-depth measures of people’s web use skills. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 1239-1244.
  15. Hargittai, E. (2005). Survey measures of web-oriented digital literacy. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 371-379.
  16. Labbo, L.D., Reinking, D., & McKenna M.C. (1998). Technology and literacy education in the next century: Exploring the connection between work and schooling. Peabody Journal of Education, 73, 273– 289.
  17. Marcum, J.J.W. (2002). Rethinking information literacy. Library Quarterly, 72, 1-26.
  18. Marsh, J.M. (2005). Popular culture, new media and digital literacy in early childhood. NY: Routledge.
  19. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. San Diego: Morgan Kaufman.
  20. Nielsen, J., & Tahir, M. (2002). Homepage usability. New York: New Riders Publishing. Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9. Retrieved from http://pre2005.flexiblelearning.net.au/projects/resources/Digital_Natives_Digital_Immigrants.pdf. Prensky, M. (2001b). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63, 8-13.
  21. Shneiderman, B. (1998). Designing the user interface. New York: Addison Wesley.
  22. Snyder, I. (2007). Literacy, learning and technology studies. In R.W. Haythornthwaite (Ed.). The Sage handbook of e-learning research (pp. 394-415). London: Sage Publications.
  23. Spiro, R.J., Feltovitch, P.L., Jacobson, M.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology, 31, 24-33.
  24. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  25. Tenner, E. (2006, March 26). Searching for dummies. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/opinion/26tenner.html
  26. Tuft, E.R. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire, CT: Graphic Press.
  27. Tyner, K. (2003). Beyond boxes and wires: Literacy in transition. Television& New Media, 4, 371-388.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.