|
Title:
|
DIGITAL IMMIGRANTS, DIGITAL NATIVES AND CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (CPD) FOR ACADEMICS: ARE THE STEREOTYPES UNHELPFUL? |
|
Author(s):
|
Andrew Rothwell |
|
ISBN:
|
978-972-8924-82-9 |
|
Editors:
|
Gunilla Bradley and Piet Kommers |
|
Year:
|
2009 |
|
Edition:
|
Single |
|
Keywords:
|
Continuing Professional Development, Digital Immigrants, Digital Natives |
|
Type:
|
Full Paper |
|
First Page:
|
51 |
|
Last Page:
|
57 |
|
Language:
|
English |
|
Cover:
|
|
|
Full Contents:
|
click to dowload 
|
|
Paper Abstract:
|
Digital natives and digital immigrants were identified by Marc Prensky (2001a, 2001b) and describe in the first case
young people of undergraduate age or less, who have grown up in rich, technologically enhanced environments and
whose brains (he suggested): are likely to be physically different as a result of the digital input they received when
growing up (2001b, page 3). Those of us who may consider ourselves digital immigrants may not have been born into
the digital world but we do embrace it, even if we may sometimes find it difficult. Much of the literature on these
immigrants and natives focuses on the student experience, the challenges of teaching and learning with the digital native
generation. Examples include Zevenbergen (2007) on pre-school learners, Green and Hannon (2007) on school age
learners, and Sharpe et al. (2006) and Salaway et al. (2006) on University-level learners. This paper takes a different
perspective and reports research conducted with academics in the UK that seeks to redress the image of (many nontechnical)
academic faculty as reluctant digital immigrants: rather it suggest that academic faculty, through exposure to
their own technologically rich environment, and driven by the acquired ability to multi-task to cope with the multifaceted
nature of their roles and the varied pressures of their jobs, have become wired more like digital natives, and undertake
their continuing professional development (CPD) in a more native than immigrant way, a factor which institutions
ignore at their peril. At a time of increasing knowledge obsolescence (Pazy, 1992) faculty themselves may not be able to
optimise their learning experiences because the media through which essential professional development is delivered has
not kept pace with the changing demands (and approach to learning) of the intended audience. This in turn has
consequences for the sustainability of the University in an increasingly competitive and challenging environment.
Although the survey used has only been implemented in one institution so far, qualitative and exploratory work
undertaken elsewhere (Rothwell et al. 2008), suggests that these issues may be common across a range of institutions,
thus presenting implications for strategic approaches to CPD in many Universities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
