Abstract
This chapter explores what a consideration of the manner in which design influences social experiences online might mean for educational researchers, educators, and pupils. The chapter begins by critiquing the current approaches towards technology in education, particularly highlighting the one-size-fits-all model of technology in classrooms, the creeping ‘data gaze’ in education, and the attempts to present and view technology as apolitical. The chapter finishes by summarising how Comic Theory (presented in Chap. 6 of this book) can help understand the interactions of young people online in a nuanced and careful manner. To echo Larkin’s (2008, 3) words, ‘what media are needs to be interrogated, not presumed’. This holds true for education and for our understanding of media writ large. It is hoped that Comic Theory presents a method through which this interrogation can take place.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allsopp, D. H., Colucci, K., Doone, E., Perez, L., Bryant, E., Jr., & Holhfeld, T. N. (2012). Interactive whiteboard technology for students with disabilities: A year long exploratory study. Journal of Special Education Technology, 27(4), 1–15.
Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2011). ‘Digital native’ and ‘digital immigrant’ discourses. In R. Land & S. Bayne (Eds.), Digital difference: Perspectives on online learning (pp. 159–169). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Blank, G., & Dutton, W. H., With Lefkowitz, J. (2019). Perceived threats to privacy online: The internet in Britain. Oxford Internet Survey 2019. Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.
Boczkowski, P. J., Matassi, M., & Mitchelstein, E. (2018). How young users deal with multiple platforms: The role of meaning-making in social media repertoires. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23(5), 245–259.
Cottom, T. M. (2017). Black CyberFeminism: Ways forward for intersectionality and digital sociology. In J. Daniels, K. Gregory, & T. McMillan Cottom (Eds.), Digital sociologies. Policy Press: London.
Davis, J. L., & Jurgenson, N. (2014). Context collapse: Theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society, 17(4), 476–485.
Despujol, I. M., Turro, C., Busqueis, J., & Canero, A. (2014). Analysis of demographics and results of student’s opinion survey of a large scale MOOC deployment for the Spanish speaking community. In Proceedings of Frontiers in education conference (pp. 1–8). Madrid, Spain.
Emejulu, A., & McGregor, C. (2019). Towards a radical digital citizenship in digital education. Critical Studies in Education, 60(1), 131–147.
Foucault, M. (1979). The history of sexuality (Vol. 1). London: Allen Lane.
Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power, and liberation. London: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Gillen, J., Staarman, J. K., Littleton, K., Mercer, N., & Twiner, A. (2007). A ‘learning revolution’? Investigating pedagogic practice around interactive whiteboards in British primary classrooms. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 243–256.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. London: Allen Lane.
Gopal, P. (2017). Yes, we must decolonise: Our teaching has to go beyond elite white men. Accessed 09/2019. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/27/decolonise-elite-white-men-decolonising-cambridge-university-english-curriculum-literature
Gov.UK. (2019). Statutory guidance National curriculum in England: computing programmes of study. Published 11 September 2013. Access 09/2019. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study
Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213–225.
Iniesto, F., & Rodrigo, C. (2016). A preliminary study for developing accessible MOOC services. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 6(2), 126–150.
Jurgenson, N. (2012). When atoms meet bits: Social media, the mobile web and augmented revolution. Future Internet, 4, 83–91.
Kennewell, S., & Beauchamp, G. (2007). The features of interactive whiteboards and their influence on learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 227–241.
Larkin, B. (2008). Signal and noise: Media, infrastructure, and urban culture in Nigeria. Durham: Duke University Press.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press.
Laurillard, D. (2016). The educational problem that MOOCs could solve: Professional development for teachers of disadvantaged students. Research in Learning Technology, 24, 1–17.
Lewin, C., Somekh, B., & Steadman, S. (2008). Embedding interactive whiteboards in teaching and learning: The process of change in pedagogic practice. Education and Information Technologies, 13(4), 291–303.
Loren, T. (2019, March 14). The hottest chat app for teens is … Google docs. The Atlantic. Access 09/2019. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/hottest-chat-app-teens-google-docs/584857/
Macleod, H., Haywood, J., Woodgate, A., & Alkhatnai, M. (2014). Emerging patterns in MOOCs: Learners, course designs and directions. TechTrends, 59(1), 56–63.
Munafo, J., Diedrick, M., & Stoffregen, T. A. (2017). The virtual reality head-mounted display Oculus Rift induces motion sickness and is sexist in its effects. Experimental Brain Research, 235(3), 889–901.
Neff, G., & Nafus, D. (2016). Self-tracking. Boston: MIT Press.
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York: New York University Press.
Northcote, M., Mildenhall, P., Marshall, L., & Swan, P. (2010). Interactive whiteboards: Interactive or just whiteboards? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 494–510.
OFCOM. (2019, February). Children & parents: Media use and attitudes report 2018. OFCOM. Accessed 08/2019. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-aChildren and parents: media use and attitudes report 2018nd-data/media-literacy-research/childrens/children-and-parents-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2018.
OECD (2013). New sources of growth: Knowledge-based capital: Key analyses and policy conclusions: Synthesis report. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/knowledge-based-capital-synthesis.pdf
Privacy International. (2019). No body’s business but mine: How menstruation apps are sharing your data. Access 09/2019. https://www.privacyinternational.org/long-read/3196/no-bodys-business-mine-how-menstruation-apps-are-sharing-your-datas.
Rowe, E. (2019). Capitalism without capital: The intangible economy of education reform. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(2), 271–279.
Selwyn, N. (2007). The use of computer technology in university teaching and learning: A critical perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 83–94.
Slay, H., Siebörger, I., & Hodgkinson-Williams, C. (2008). Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just “lipstick”? Computers & Education, 51(3), 1321–1341.
Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 91–101.
Spring, J., & Picciano, A. G. (2013). The great American education-industrial complex: Ideology, technology, and profit. London: Routledge.
Strauss, V. (2018). Teachers are now being asked to punch time clocks. What does that mean for their profession?. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2018/03/04/teachers-are-now-being-asked-to-punch-time-clocks-what-does-that-mean-for-theirprofession/?utm_term=.57738f160db4
Weller, K. (2016). Trying to understand social media users and usage: The forgotten features of social media platforms. Online Information Review, 40(2), 256–264.
Zhao, X., Lampe, C., & Ellison, N. B. (2016). The social media ecology: User perceptions, strategies and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 89–100). ACM.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dyer, H.T. (2020). Critical Digital Citizenship: A Call to Action for Educators and Educational Researchers. In: Designing the Social. Cultural Studies and Transdisciplinarity in Education, vol 11. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5716-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5716-3_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-5715-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-5716-3
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)