The impact of new technology on children and new forms of media is a constant area of concern among policy makers and educators (as well as among parents!) During US-based ‘Digital Citizenship Week’ LSE visiting fellow Ioanna Noula addresses the idea that children need education in the concept of ‘digital citizenship’ and explains how current approaches might be lacking

Noula, I

White Rose Research Online

This is a repository copy of Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by a new commercial landscape?.White Rose Research Online URL for this paper:http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/138342/Version: Published VersionOther:Noula, I orcid.org/0000-0003-1534-0246 Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by a new commercial landscape? Media Policy Project Blog. eprints@whiterose.ac.ukhttps://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. 21/10/2018 Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by a new commercial landscape? | LSE Media Policy Projecthttp://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2018/10/18/education-for-digital-citizenship-is-in-vogue-but-is-it-dominated-by-a-new-commercial-landscape/ 1/3Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by anew commercial landscape?The impact of new technology on children and new forms of media is aconstant area of concern among policy makers and educators (as wellas among parents!) During US-based ‘Digital Citizenship Week’ LSEvisiting fellow Ioanna Noula addresses the idea that children neededucation in the concept of ‘digital citizenship’ and explains how currentapproaches might be lacking. “Citizenship is in the making and not a safe possession of empiricists or normativetheorists” (Van Gunsteren, 1988). Over the past decade, digitalisation and artificial intelligence have been seismically re-organisingthe socio-political landscape, generating new hopes and fears and producing new risks along withunique opportunities. In this context and specifically within the limits of education, the neologism“digital citizenship” has become a catchphrase to accommodate adult concerns regardingchildren’s relationship with new media and its impact on children’s development, learning abilitiesand successful socialisation.The notion of digital citizenship has become a particularly popular concept in the educationcommunity and has been widely endorsed by influential organisations in the fields of education,children’s advocacy and media literacy. Against the backdrop of general lack of digitalunderstanding in the pivotal sector of basic education, research “air-gaps” are filled by digitalcitizenship quasi-experts who leverage their digital skills and expertise and their professionalrelationship with education to attend to legitimate adult anxieties over children’s well-being.Although digital citizenship remains a largely contested concept in academic research and debate,the education sector appears to be widely adopting skills-based definitions and practicalapproaches to the concept. The emergence and prevalence of these technocratic definitions ofdigital citizenship is due to their ‘user-friendly’ character. Such definitions prevail in the realm ofeducation because they offer palpable and comprehensible instructions, promising to enableteachers and parents to deal with their concerns around digitalisation while evangelising a digitalutopia.The most representative and popular account of education for digital citizenship has beenproduced by Mike Ribble, “the godfather of digital citizenship”, in his book Digital Citizenship inSchools. I would argue that Ribble’s “nine elements” definition of digital citizenship education andthe extensive adoption of his ideologically driven conceptualisation has a detrimental effect ondiscussion. Ribble’s definition is problematic in that it assumes the “neutrality of technology” andspotlights issues of “appropriate use” and “user responsibility,” which contribute to a lack ofattention to the responsibilities of the tech sector, and keeps corporate practices off theaccountability grid.Ribble’s and other similar top-down definitions “garnished” with techno-utopian narratives andabounding with concern about children’s welfare have created a new market of consultancy and21/10/2018 Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by a new commercial landscape? | LSE Media Policy Projecthttp://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2018/10/18/education-for-digital-citizenship-is-in-vogue-but-is-it-dominated-by-a-new-commercial-landscape/ 2/3conferences. In turn, this market establishes the authority of these approaches, through systematicdissemination and engagement with education stakeholders. Self-proclaimed digital citizenshipexperts branded as “digital citizenship consultants” or “digital citizenship speakers” speak withfervent enthusiasm about the potential of the digital to create a global village of kindness andcreativity that resonates with the narratives of Facebook’s Manifesto. The case of the Digital Citizenship Institute. Business or welfare?Backed by influential organisations including Common Sense Education, the National Associationfor Media Literacy Education (NAMLE), and several educational technology (edtech) companies,the Digital Citizenship Institute (stylised as DigCit Institute) offers the best example ofentrepreneurial activity in the digital citizenship education landscape. The Institute is organisedaround Ribble’s definition of digital citizenship and convenes annual summits for educationaudiences.The commercial character of the Institute is communicated through the use of catchy slogans (i.e.“act Locally, think Globally”, “from the classroom to the boardroom”, “be safe, savvy and ethical”)and manifests in the kinds of services provided including consultancy, teacher certification,curriculum development, keynoting opportunities. Unholy alliances with edtech providers ofcontroversial services demonstrate an unprincipled view of education.Although children are placed at the forefront of the Institute’s marketing strategy, its mission isclearly underpinned by a condescending deficit model of childhood (children seen as vulnerablebeings and in need of protection) and an outdated understanding of children’s citizenship (childrenas “citizens in waiting”).Since its inaugural event in 2015, the DigCitSummit has been one of the most eminent events withan exclusive focus on digital citizenship education. The 2016 summit, hosted at Twitter’sHeadquarters, was a landmark event that contributed to the wide recognition and increasedauthority of the Digital Citizenship Institute. This year’s event was backed by unusual sponsorsincluding the controversial multinational group IKEA or the odd sponsor “Pappy’s Smokehouse” (!).With emphasis on examples of best practice and individual experiences rather than researchevidence, “Digcit” advocates often depart from an unchecked enthusiasm about tech. This techno-hype which is matched by the vocal championship of self-evident civic and educational values(goodness, empowerment, positive and proactive attitudes and ethical behaviours) is obscuring the  mission of education to promote democratic citizenship. Proponents of digital citizenshipmisrepresent traditional concepts for education including critical thinking and empowerment,fuelling the neoliberal character of contemporary education systems.The lack of digital understanding, along with increasing adult concerns around the impact ofdigitalisation and overwhelmed teachers’ need for solutions, enables the activity of agents thatoffer quick-fixes.Digital (?) Citizenship and the tradition of democratic educationIn contrast to their stated commitment to empowering young people in the digital age, “9 elements”type digital citizenship definitions encourage a compliant model of citizenship which transposesresponsibility to citizens, focusing on “ethical and responsible use”.I have identified three key implications of the proliferation of these deeply ideological approachesto digital citizenship:21/10/2018 Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by a new commercial landscape? | LSE Media Policy Projecthttp://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2018/10/18/education-for-digital-citizenship-is-in-vogue-but-is-it-dominated-by-a-new-commercial-landscape/ 3/3October 18th, 2018 | Children and the Media, Digital Inclusion, Featured, Media Literacy | 0 Comments1. Highlighting  individual  users’  kindness  and ethics  as  enablers  for  a  positive  digital  culture  conceals  theresponsibilities of the tech industry.2. By emphasising kindness and ethics, these approaches also undermine the value of conflict and dissentfor the advancement of democracy and the progress of human civilisation.3. Subscribing  to  the disconnect  between online and offline,  they decontextualise  the notion of  citizenshipwhich ensures  that  ‘the attentions of  concerned adults and youth alike are  turned away  from  the socialconditions that make young people vulnerable and likely to engage in risky behaviours’.Considering education as the cradle of democracy and the custodian of collective social values, itis important to examine the costs and benefits of the introduction of tech in pedagogical spaces. Tothis end, critical literacies that address more than technical skills and competence should beconsidered. Decisions and policy for education should be made in light of persuasive empiricalresearch and evidence, rather than relying on wishful thinking. Truly empowered citizenship is theoutcome of robust critical literacies that enable individuals to be self-reliant, resilient and able toengage holistically with their environments, rather than merely functional.In line with the democratic legacy of the western world, citizens of the digital world should have asay in the shaping of their lifeworld and be able to participate in ways that are meaningful to themin order to determine their sociocultural universe. Contemporary digitally-enabled citizenshipshould be founded upon the principles of equitable dialogue and inclusiveness, while alsoembracing the productive contribution of dissent.Digital citizenship is a useful concept that can steer public and academic debate drawing attentionto the transformations of citizenship in light of the digital disruption. However, the exclusive focuson behaviours and tech skills leaves citizen participation and empowerment out of its scope andsignificantly limits the potential of education to bring about change.This post gives  the views of the author and does not represent the position of the  LSE MediaPolicy Project blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by a new commercial landscape?

https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/138342/1/Education%20for%20digital%20citizenship%20is%20in...%20landscape%3F%20%7C%20LSE%20Media%20Policy%20Project.pdf

Education for digital citizenship is in vogue, but is it dominated by a new commercial landscape?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

White Rose Research Online