Some Materials for Teaching Boyd’s “Literacy: are today’s youth digital natives?

Table of Contents

Researching the Rhetorical Situation; Pre-reading & Jigsaw work...........................2

Videos to introduce/Illustrate Claims and authors referenced in the text...........2

Headings, section titles and sub-section titles......................................................2

Charting....................................................................................................................3

Some Questions for Discussion (or Homework).......................................................3

Finding claims:.........................................................................................................5

MAIN CLAIM.............................................................................................................5

Connections to rhetorical analysis...........................................................................5

Questions to Connect to Outside Texts....................................................................7

Source texts & Areas of Focus for Student-led Group work and/or Presentations 7

1

Researching the Rhetorical Situation; Pre-reading & Jigsaw workChris

It’s Complicated: the Social Lives of Networked Teens. dana boyd. Yale University Press, 2014. Could begin by showing the image on the front cover, the table of contents, the publishing information, the footnotes, the creative commons license for the electronic version of the text,etc., in order to start a discussion of the authors’ project and intended audience.

Assign students to research the author, her blog, the publisher, context, the license information, and key references in the text.

Videos to introduce/Illustrate Claims and authors referenced in the text Marc Prensky explains digital natives to PBS interviewer on Frontline

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGQLTHyRG_g TED talk that assumes the division between digital immigrant and digital native.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_9gI0B4nS4 Dr. Devorah Heitner is the founder and director of Raising Digital Natives, a resource for

parents and schools seeking advice on how help children thrive in a world of digital connectedness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRQdAOrqvGg (use to show existence and popularity of the term ‘digital native’)

Leo Laporte and danah boyd, author of "It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens," talk about how the idea of 'Digital Natives' is a misnomer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0k-Rx4sht8 (4 minutes)

Author and social media scholar danah boyd sat down with UW Comm undergraduate Austin Williams to discuss her new book, "It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens," parental anxiety and the importance of empowering youth communities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTvR2EFXRYU (12 minutes)

Boyd cites the influential work of Tarleton Gillespie on the politics of algorithms.This 5 minute interview of Gillespie by an undergraduate spells out some main ideas of his work in a very accessible way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cT1i1_Nydw

Do "Digital Natives" Exist? Idea Channel, PBS Digital Studios. Fun entertaining video that echoes many of Boyd’s claims. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WVKBAqjHiE

Video: Eli Pariser TED talk, “Beware Online Filter Bubbles.” http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en

Excerpts from Tarleton Gillespie’s talk on The Politics of Platforms. Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interactive/events/luncheon/2010/01/gillespie

Also, related talk by Gillespie’s at University of Illinois https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hxcofU_o7Y

2

Headings, section titles and sub-section titles

It’s Complicated: the Social Lives of Networked TeensLiteracy: are today’s youth digital natives?

1. The Emergence of the Digital Native2. Youth Need New Literacies3. The Politics of Algorithms4. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production5. Digital Inequality6. Beyond Digital Natives

Charting

Micro-charting: have students do a close reading of the 4 introductory paragraphs (176-177). What do they notice about pronoun use, style, vocabulary, genre, references to past research, footnotes, etc.

Macro-charting: divide students into six groups and have them present on the main “moves” identifiable in the six main sections of the text.

1. The Emergence of the Digital Native2. Youth Need New Literacies3. The Politics of Algorithms4. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production5. Digital Inequality6. Beyond Digital Natives

Some Questions for Discussion (or Homework)

1. Who is Boyd? What is her background? Who does/has she worked for? What kind of writing has she done in the past? How does this book/chapter fit with previous work?

2. What kind of researcher is she? Is there anything in the text that provides a clue to the work she does?

3. Boyd talks a lot about the ways young people use digital media, and the different skill levels young people have. Did you recognize yourself or people you know in any of her examples?

3

4. Boyd spends a lot of time talking about the “rhetoric of digital natives.” What does she mean by this? Why does she think this is important?

5. Boyd draws a distinction between authors such as Rushkoff and Barlow who originated the expression “digital native,” and writer Marc Prensky, who also used the term, and is now most associated with it. What does she imply about the way these authors use the term? Does she appear to approve more of some authors’ use? (see pages 178-9)

6. Boyd claims that the “rhetoric of digital natives” brings with it assumptions and implications. She thinks many problems have resulted from these. List all the problems Boyd associates with the concept.

7. What does she think should be done to address problems caused by the “rhetoric of digital natives”?

8. Boyd poses many questions in the text. List all the sentences in which questions are posed (use control-f “?”) and chart them – describe what they are “doing.” Do you notice a few main ways questions are used to achieve rhetorical effects?

9. According to Boyd, what concepts should we replace “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” with? What would be a better way of thinking about differences in the way people use new media and acquire digital literacy skills?

Boyd claims that young people should be taught critical digital literacy? Why does she claim this? What examples does she give of critical digital literacy?

10. Boyd talks about the importance of “empowering youth” by helping them develop sophisticated digital literacies. What does she mean by this – what skills, and what kinds of participation does she emphasize?

11. Boyd thinks it is important that youth become “powerful citizens of the digital world.” (183) What does she mean by this?

12. Boyd discusses the “politics of algorithms.” What does she mean by this?

13. Do you generally trust google results, and distrust Wikipedia? (186)

14. Boyd talks about how many young people consider google the “center of the digital information universe.” Does this conform to your views? (186)

15. How much do you trust the search results from google? Boyd discusses common assumptions about google (p 184). Do you or those you know, make similar assumptions?

4

16. Have you hear of “search engine optimization”? Have you thought about how algorithms shape search results?

17. Do you use Wikipedia in your schoolwork? Why/why not? What did your teachers say to you about Wikipedia, and how does this connect with the examples discussed in Boyd?

18. See page 191. She talks of how people she interviewed had not heard of discussion page of Wikipedia, or history of edits, or how it can be used to examine sources and knowledge as process.

Reading Danah Boyd’s “Literacy: Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives?”

Jenny Shepherd

Response DirectionsBegin this assignment by reading CR pages 9 and 10 to find out more about identifying a writer’s claims and about strategies you can use to be a more critical reader.

Next, after using the previewing strategies to skim the structure, read Boyd’s chapter, making notes as you go. Once you are finished, respond to the following questions

Who is the audience for this chapter and how can you tell? What are Boyd's main claims? What are the main types of evidence you saw in the text? Identify a strategy Boyd uses to persuade her audience (see page 7 of the reader). Do you

think this is effective? Why/why not? What are some of the key terms that essential to understanding this chapter?

Notes and QuestionsArticle Structure:

1. Intro- Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives? (overview of argument) Digital natives vs. digital immigrants

2. Emergence of the Digital Native (background and definitions) History of terms/concepts

3. Youth Need New Literacies (critique of existing concepts and how to extend) What is media literacy and why is it important?

5

Moving from critical consumption to knowledgeable production (not just using, but using purposefully)

4. The Politics of Algorithms (example) Acknowledging bias in search algorithms and results and implications Summary and then rhetorical move to critique- 186 “Given the lack of formal

gatekeepers and the diversity of content and authors, it’s often hard to determine credibility online”- also a transition to next section, distinguishing between search capabilities of existing knowledge to how knowledge is socially constructed (and why that’s important to digital literacies)

5. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production (example) defining the social construction of knowledge in sites like Wikipedia and why the

wider concept is important to learning highlighting the idea that all content (print or online) is never entirely neutral

6. Digital Inequality (example) Tech access doesn’t necessarily equate to tech literacy Who is responsible for addressing digital inequality and what should be included in

this?

7. Beyond Digital Natives (conclusion and looking towards new ways of conceptualizing the issue) Outlining shortcomings and what is useful about previous definitions/distinctions of

“digital natives” How to extend previous understandings of this concept for greater equality and more

critical use of technologies

Detailed Discussion Questions Boyd makes a key distinction on page 177 between consumption and production of digital

content. What is the difference between the two and why does it matter?

How would Boyd define being “literate” and “media literate” (p. 181)?

On page 178, Boyd discusses a quote about natives and immigrants in cyberspace. What role does the source/his background play in interpreting her argument?

Boyd often distinguishes between formal/explicit instruction about how to use technology with more personal/social/experimental ways of learning technology. What are the key distinctions between these and why do they matter to Boyd’s argument?

o What experiences did you have with learning digital technologies (both formal and informal)?

6

o Did your learning experiences ever include explicit attention to ways of being critical/questioning of particular technologies or their affordances? If so, what and how?

182-183 “In order to attract wide audiences, many technologies are designed to be extraordinarily simple… Although it is not necessary to be technically literate to participate, those with limited technical literacies aren’t necessarily equipped to be powerful citizens of the digital world.”

o What are the arguments for and against this technological simplification and how do they fit with Boyd’s argument? (can use the example of creating a website through hand-coding or through a site like Wordpress)

o This is also a good spot to talk about affordances and drawbacks, the idea that few issues are pro/con and are instead much more complex and filled with tradeoffs

185- why is it important to be able to think critically about underlying biases? What are the consequences of NOT attending to these?

187- What is “knowledge production” and why does Boyd think it is important?

189- Boyd discusses the edit and discussion features of Wikipedia. Why or how are these important to her argument and to larger understandings of Wikipedia/web 2.0 capabilities?

o 191- does teaching critical digital literacies necessitate using a context like Wikipedia to help “youth to interrogate their sources and understand how information is produced”? Why or why not?

189- Why does Boyd use the examples of bias and cultural perspective in textbooks to help support her argument about how bias and differing perspectives exist in online sources like Wikipedia?

192- What is the “digital divide”? Does it still exist? Why does this distinction matter?

197- Boyd advocates for the concept of “active learning”. What is this and how does it connect to Boyd’s argument (or the larger “conversation” on digital literacy)?

197- Boyd makes a distinction between developing an “intuitive sense” for how to use technology and more explicit understanding of how to use technologies critically. What does she mean by this and why is it important?

7

Argument/Claims “digital natives” is a term that implies youth have an inherent understanding of all things

digital- 176

rhetoric of “digital natives” is a distraction to understanding what youth in digital environment need to know/do (this is a stereotype that is harmful to understanding the real literacy needs of students/youth)- 176

implicit claim, p. 177- Literacy practices change much faster than they used to in a print world, so teaching a static set of skills for being literate is no longer sufficient

179- lumping together all youth as digital natives obscures uneven distribution of technology skills and literacies

180- Inequality reproduces itself when we aren’t being critical of what we’re doing and why

180- familiarity with latest gadgets or services is often less important than possessing critical knowledge to engage productively

181- “Youth must become media literate”

181- “people must also learn to question the biases and assumptions underpinning the content they see”

185- although it isn’t necessary to understand the technical details, it is important to recognize that algorithms aren’t neutral, that they can reveal politics and biases when they prioritize certain content over others

186- personalization algorithms “produce social divisions that may undermine any ability to create an informed public”

191- Dismissing Wikipedia (and similar crowd-sourced content) because it may contain biases or inaccuracies misses a prime learning opportunity for “helping youth to interrogate their sources and understand how information is produced”

193- equating tech access to tech know-how is problematic and leads to a “participation gap”

195 Rhetorical Move- summarizes prior claims made by others and acknowledges relevance of some of it, but then disputes and extends:“There is little doubt that youth must have access, skills, and media literacy to capitalize on opportunities in a networked society, BUT focusing on these individual capacities obscures how underlying structural formations shape teens’ access to

8

opportunities and information”

197- “I believe that the digital natives rhetoric is worse than inaccurate: it is dangerous. Because of how society has politicized this language, it allows some to eschew responsibility for helping youth and adults navigate a networked world.”

197- developing an implicit or “intuitive sense” of how technology works is different/insufficient from an explicit critical approach to its use

9

Finding claims:Locate problem/solution pairs in the textLocate all the question answer/pairs in the text Locate passages in the text where Boyd emphasizes how much an issue matters, or where she explicitly uses the language of argument

MAIN CLAIMA useful place to start when identifying the main claim or overall argument, is this quotation from the introduction:

“The notion of the digital native, whether constructed positively or negatively, has serious unintended consequences. Not only is it fraught, but it obscures the uneven distribution of technological skills and media literacy across the youth population, presenting an inaccurate portrait of young people as uniformly prepared for the digital era and ignoring the assumed level of privilege required to be “native.” Worse, by not doing the work necessary to help youth develop broad digital competency, educators and the public end up reproducing digital inequality because more privileged youths often have more opportunities to develop these skills outside the classroom. Rather than focusing on coarse generational categories, it makes more sense to focus on the skills and knowledge that are necessary to make sense of a mediated world. Both youth and adults have a lot to learn.” (179)

Connections to rhetorical analysisThe chapter engages in an analysis of the “rhetoric of digital natives.” Boyd presents a genealogy of the expression, explaining where it begins, how different versions evolved, and how the terms were taken up by certain authors and groups. She claims this rhetoric has had many bad effects, and explains why she thinks it has led people to misunderstand young people’s relationship to digital technologies.

“The burden of responsibility shifts depending on how we construct the problem rhetorically and socially. The language we use matters.” (196)

“The ‘rhetoric of digital natives,’ far from being useful is often a distraction to understanding the challenges that youth face in a networked world.” (176)

“The notion of digital natives has political roots, mostly born out of American techno-idealism.” (177)

“Yet many who use the rhetoric of digital natives position young people either as passive recipients of technological knowledge or as learners who easily pick up the

10

language of technology the way they pick up a linguistic tongue. These notions draw on the frames that Barlow and Rushkoff put forward but twist them in ways that are far from their intention.” (178)

“In 2001 educational consultant Marc Prensky penned an article entitled ‘Digital Natives, Digital immigrants.’” (179)

“As the term took off and began to permeate popular discourse, scholars began critiquing the underlying implications.” (179)

“The notion of the digital native, whether constructed positively or negatively, has serious unintended consequences.” (179)

“The challenges brought forth by media literacy stem from and reinforce the broader issue of digital inequality, which is often elided by the frame of digital natives.” (192)

“[As Henry Jenkins explains] talk of digital natives may also mask the different degrees of access to and comfort with emerging technologies experienced by different youth.” (192)

“By focusing on the ‘digital divide’ between levels of access and types of competencies, Jenkins highlights how a well-intentioned public uses the rhetoric surrounding digital natives to obfuscate and reinforce existing inequalities.” (193)

“The burden of responsibility shifts depending on how we construct the problem rhetorically and socially. The language we use matters.” (196)

“I believe that the digital natives rhetoric is worse than inaccurate: it is dangerous. Because of how society has politicized this language, it allows some to eschew responsibility for helping youth and adults navigate a networked world. If we view skills and knowledge as inherently generational, then organized efforts to achieve needed forms of literacy are unnecessary. In other words, a focus on today’s youth as digital natives presumes that all we as a society need to do is be patient and wait for a generation of these digital wunderkinds to grow up. A laisses faire attitude is unlikely to eradicate the inequalities that continue to emerge. Likewise, these attitudes will not empower average youth to be more sophisticated internet participants.” (197)

Questions to Connect to Outside Texts How can young people acquire the broad digital competencies that are needed? What are some key critical digital literacy skills?

11

Boyd Teaching Notes - Susan

A brief breakdown of the article, pointing to some of her claims and evidence, and some ideas for writing and discussion in class. Susan.

Boyd – Ch. 7 literacy: are today’s youth digital natives?

1. Introductiona. Terms – digital natives, digital immigrants, networked publicsb. Gives background details that inform her discussion of digital nativesc. Makes several small claims about the idea, which are really previews of her

larger argumentd. Evidence: briefly mentions her work and previews some findings from that work

2. The Emergence of the Digital Nativea. Terms – techo-idealism, cyberlibertarianism, b. Evidence: definition of term digital native, including details about the originals of

the term based on other scholar’s workc. Evidence: presents the arguments by Barlow, Rushkoff, and Prinsky as the

generally accepted views on the term/subject, which she begins to counter at this point in the text

i. Unintended consequences (179)ii. Point leading to her main claim: “it makes more sense to focus on the

skills and knowledge that are necessary to make sense of a mediated world. Both youth and adults have a lot to learn” (180)

d. Claim: “Familiarity with the latest gadgets or services is often less important than possessing the critical knowledge to engage productively with networked situations” (180)

i. Consider who decides and what specifically constitutes productive engagement?

ii. What networked situations?e. Purpose (?): Starts to make a call to action of educators (she doesn’t quite follow

through on this, though)3. Youth Need New Literacies

a. Terms – critical media literacy, native participantsb. Claim: “Youth must become media literate” (181)c. Provides a clarification of what it means to be media literate and gives

background on the concept as it predates the interneti. Emphasizes the more pressing need to be media literate today (par. 3

181)

12

d. Prescriptive explanation of specific knowledge and skills she deems necessary to develop media literacy

e. Evidence: Example – MySpacef. Claim: Makes a sub-claim that speaks to her purpose: “those with limited

technical literacy aren’t necessarily equipped to be powerful citizens of the ditial world” (183). She’s claiming that students who don’t learn about coding and other technical skills have less power.

4. The Politics of Algorithmsa. Evidence: example of teenager’s understanding of Wikipedia as an unreliable

source, and Google as a reliable sourceb. Explains that Google has no involvement in the veracity of contentc. Explains algorithms and the biases that are inherent in them because of the

people involvedd. Evidence: Eli Pariser – filtering algorithmse. Evidence: “scholars at Harvard’s Berkman Center”

5. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Productiona. Points out that teachers aren’t explaining what about credible sources make

them sob. Wikipedia as an example of a “evolving document” (191)c. Claim: “Crowdsourced content…can, and often does, play a valuable role in

making information accessible and providing a site for reflection on the production of knowledge” (191-92)

6. Digital Inequalitya. Terms – digital inequality, digital divideb. Evidence: Henry Jenkins highlights the problems with thinking about an entire

group of people using one term that fails to consider variations in group dynamics and individuals who don’t meet the criteria for the term

c. Digital divide, specifically the divide between access along economic linesd. Evidence: “Scholars and governmental agencies began to argue that access alone

mattered little if people didn’t know how to use the tools in front of them” (193).e. Evidence: Her fieldwork with teens (doesn’t identify their races)f. Evidence: Kate Crawford and Penelope Robinsong. Explains that there are political implications of the ways we frame digital

inequality (doesn’t really go into this much – maybe this is a preview of a later discussed point?)

7. Beyond Digital Nativesa. Evolution of term digital natives

i. Movement to reclaim the term digital native1. Claims that she doesn’t believe yet that it can be reclaimed (196)

b. Claim (framed as a belief – ugh): “I believe that the digital natives rhetoric is worse than inaccurate: it is dangerous” (197)

c. Purpose (?): Starts to make a call to action of educators (she doesn’t quite follow through on this, though)

13

d. Closes with a sort of call to action (really more of a warning), urging us to reconsider how we view and discuss our youth

Pre-reading Activities:Quick write before they read the text– Describe how technologically advanced or skilled your generation is, providing examples to explain. How do you understand the term digital native? Digital immigrant? Do you find these terms – native/immigrant – to be flawed in any way? Why/why not? What do you think about the inherent connotations with the terms?Read only the section headings and predict what the section will be about

Discussion questions after they’ve read the text:Boyd is very focused on the necessity of students developing digital knowledge, not just by practical use of specific platforms like Facebook and Google (as mere participants), but by learning how these platforms work, perhaps even learning coding and computer programming skills. What is your reaction to this emphasis – this new literacy that she advocates students become skilled in?

Activities/writing after they’ve read the text:Write a précis of the chapter (paying attention to her motivations behind writing this – what does she want her audience to do? Who is her intended audience? It seems sometimes she is aiming this at educators, but she veers away from that angle and doesn’t offer any real solution to how we as educators can help students improve their digital literacy).

My observations about the text itself (notes to myself to consider for later classroom discussion about critical reading):I noticed that she gave several examples of white teenagers, with that specific distinction, but later in the section on digital inequality, she didn’t include the teens’ races. Was this deliberate or does she get into this later in the book? What motivations might she have had to highlight the privileged students races (who were only white) and downplay the underprivileged students races (by not identifying them at all)? How does this exclusion speak to other potential biases the author may hold? How does this exclusion potentially highlight the inequality in a positive way? How do you consider race to be a factor in the discussion on digital ability?

14

Source texts & Areas of Focus for Student-led Group work and/or Presentations

Chris

Complicating, defending, challenging and extending the idea of “digital native” Do "Digital Natives" Exist? Idea Channel, PBS Digital Studios. Fun video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WVKBAqjHiE John Palfrey and Urs Gasser, Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation Of Digital

Natives. Published by Basic Books, 2008. (We have the electronic copy. Students could look at the introduction, a chapter or a section on the concept).

Vaidhyanathan, Siva. “Generational Myth.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55.4 (Sep 19, 2008): B7-B9. Extends Boyd. Accessible and easy to read.

Doug Holton, “The Digital Natives / Digital Immigrants Distinction Is Dead, Or At Least Dying.” Blog post March 19, 2010. Collection of articles, stories, conference papers on the topic. http://tinyurl.com/ngpjshh

“On Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives: How the Digital Divide Affects Families, Educational Institutions, and the Workplace.” http://www.zurinstitute.com/digital_divide.html (This accepts the category but qualifies it by creating many distinctions and sub-categories.)

Michael Thomas, (ed.) Deconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology, and the New Literacies. Routledge, 2011. “…an unprecedented assemblage of critical scholarly perspectives on the digital native.”

Christopher Jones and Binhui Shao. “The Net Generation and Digital Natives: Implications for Higher Education.” A literature review commissioned by the Higher Education Academy, 2011.

Research on the digital literacies of young people/undergraduates – does it confirm, extend, complicate or challenge Boyd?

Results from RWS survey of digital literacies from spring 2015. “When Students Can't Compute.” Dian Schaffhauser. October 2013 digital edition of

Campus Technology. “Online education promises learning opportunities f or all, but too many community college students lack the tech skills--and the access--to take advantage of these resources.”

Hargittai, E. “Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet Skills and Uses among Members of the “Net Generation”. Sociological Inquiry. 80(1):92-113, 2010.

“Adaptability to Online Learning: Differences Across Types of Students and Academic Subject Areas.” Di Xu & Shanna Smith Jaggars, CCRC Working Paper No. 54.

Revisualizing Composition: Mapping the Writing Lives of First-Year College Students. This Writing in Digital Environments (WIDE) Research Center study reports initial findings

15

drawn from a survey of students enrolled in writing classes at a sample of US postsecondary institutions.1

Publications from the Ethnographic Research in Illinois Academic Libraries (ERIAL) Project, http://www.erialproject.org/.

Digital Literacy & Inequality Astra Taylor, “Open Systems and Glass Ceilings.” http://www.nationofchange.org/open-

systems-and-glass-ceilings-1397223100 Hargittai, E. “Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet Skills and Uses among Members of

the “Net Generation”. Sociological Inquiry. 80(1):92-113, 2010.

What search skills do young people have? What attitudes do they have to Google and Wikipedia? Are they aware of “search engine bias” and the politics of algorithms?Boyd claims that many young people have unsophisticated search skills, trust too easily in the results provided by Google, and are unaware of the “politics of algorithms.”

The texts below could be used to illustrate, extend, complicate, challenge and qualify Boyd’s arguments.

1. Video: Eli Pariser TED talk, “Beware Online Filter Bubbles.” http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en

2. Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Donna M. Lanclos, and Erin M. Hood, "'I always stick with the first thing that comes up on Google....' Where People Go for Information, What They Use, and Why," EDUCAUSE Review Online, December 6, 2013.

3. “At Sea in a Deluge of Data,” Alison J. Head and John Wihbey Chronicle of Higher Education, JULY 07, 2014. http://tinyurl.com/qx76ao8

4. “In Google We Trust: Users’ Decisions on Rank, Position, and Relevance.” Bing Pan et al. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. Volume 12, Issue 3, pages 801–823, April 2007.

5. Alison J. Head, "Learning the Ropes: How Freshmen Conduct Course Research Once They Enter College," Project Information Literacy Research Report, December 4, 2013.

6. Alison J. Head and Michael B. Eisenberg, "Lessons Learned: How College Students Seek Information in the Digital Age," Project Information Literacy First Year Report with Student Survey Findings, University of Washington's Information School, 2009

7. Soo Young Rieh and Brian Hilligoss, "College Students' Credibility Judgments in the Information Seeking Process," in Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility, eds. Miriam J. Metzger and Andrew J. Flanagin, MIT Press, 2008.

8. Sook Lim, "How and Why Do College Students Use Wikipedia?" Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 60, no. 11, 2009

1 Published at the Writing in Digital Environments (WIDE) Research Center, http://wide.msu.edu.

16

9. Alison J Head and Michael B. Eisenberg, "How Today's College Students Use Wikipedia for Course-Related Research," First Monday, vol. 15, no. 3, 2010.

10. Helen Georgas, "Google vs. the Library: Student Preferences and Perceptions When Doing Research Using Google and a Federated Search Tool," Libraries and the Academy, vol. 13, no. 2, 2013, pp. 165–185.

11. “The ERIAL Project: Ethnographic Research in Illinois Academic Libraries” by Andrew Asher, Lynda Duke, and Dave Green. Academic Commons, May 2010.

12. The ERIAL (Ethnographic Research in Illinois Academic Libraries) project is a series of studies of student digital literacy conducted at Illinois universities. “The majority of students -- of all levels -- exhibited significant difficulties that ranged across nearly every aspect of the search process”… They tended to overuse Google and misuse scholarly databases. They preferred simple database searches to other methods of discovery, but generally exhibited ‘a lack of understanding of search logic’ that often foiled their attempts to find good sources.”

13. Cass Sunstein, “The Daily We: Is the Internet Really a Blessing for Democracy?” Boston Review, Summer, 2001.

14. “Algorithms and Bias: Q. and A. With Cynthia Dwork.” The New York Times, AUG. 10, 2015. http://tinyurl.com/po3rq26

Critical Digital Literacy "Crap Detection 101.” City Brights, Howard Rheingold, SFGate.com. SFGate Blogs. Rheingold, Howard – video on crap detection. http://rheingold.com/2013/crap-

detection-mini-course/ Prezi on the subject: https://prezi.com/cutjhwskuqbk/chapter-2-rheingold-prezi/ Scott Rosenberg, “In the Context of Web Context: How to Check Out Any Web Page,”

Wordyard Blog, September 14, 2010, http://www.wordyard.com/2010/09/14/in-the-context-of-web-context-how-to-check-out-any-web-page.

Bing and the Microsoft Education Team, “From Search to Research: Developing Critical Thinking through Web Research Skills” PDF, pp 3-14, 31-37.

17