Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Learner and Digital Networks

  • Chapter
Networked Learning

Part of the book series: Research in Networked Learning ((RINL))

Abstract

Networked learning naturally focuses on learning, but learning is not thought of as an abstract phenomenon it involves real people and organisations. In this chapter, the focus is on the learner, but it is on real embodied students rather than broad generalisations. The learner is not something generic, the learner is always a substantial person, embodied and embedded in an assemblage of social and material relations. The early descriptions of the learner and students in networked learning assumed a person connected to others via a fixed computing device. Contrast that early setting with the situation in the contemporary period when students and learners have access to networked communication in most locations and at all times via a smartphone.

Networked learning has had to take account of a persistent argument which has suggested that the introduction of digital and networked technologies has changed the lives and attitudes of young people in a fundamental way. This chapter examines the idea of a net generation of digital natives and provides an alternative way of thinking about the relationships between the use of networked technologies, students and education. The chapter argues that there is no real evidence of a significant break between young people and the rest of society and that educationalists should approach net generation and digital native literature with extreme caution.

This chapter begins from this changed technological environment for the learner and the ways in which the relationship between the learner, young people and technologies has been theorised. It concludes by locating the learner in the discourse around the student experience. The learner in networked learning develops in an emergent way from interactions with other humans, mediated by language and technology, and connected indirectly with earlier activity through the learning resources that they and others have contributed. Learning can often be mundane, but it is deeply connected to civilisation and it is the root of human development, it is at the heart of the process of historical change and progress. Such a view found in networked learning contrasts sharply with the reduction of learning to performance in league tables and a bland and homogenised student experience.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/consultations/paulramsden_teaching_and_student_experience

  2. 2.

    http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/teachingandresearch/Interpretingstudentsurveys_Nov_2005.doc

  3. 3.

    For example in the USA see http://nsse.iub.edu/; in the UK see http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/lt/publicinfo/nss/; in Ireland http://studentsurvey.ie/wordpress/about-the-survey/

References

  • Bavelier, D., Green, C. S., & Dye, M. W. G. (2010). Children, wired: For better and for worse. Neuron, 67(5), 692–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2011). ‘Digital native’ and ‘digital immigrant’ discourses: A critique. In R. Land & S. Bayne (Eds.), Digital difference: Perspectives on online learning (pp. 159–169). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S., & Maton, K. (2011). Intellectual field or faith-based religion: Moving on from the idea of ‘digital natives’. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing digital natives: Young people, technology and the new literacies (pp. 169–185). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S., Matton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the literature. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(9), 775–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1979). Individual differences in study processes and the quality of learning outcomes. Higher Education, 8, 381–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1998). Learning from the Confucian heritage: So size doesn’t matter? International Journal of Educational Research, 29, 723–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BIS (Department for Business and Skills) (2011). Higher education: Students at the heart of the system. Department for Business and Skills White Paper. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32409/11-944-higher-education-students-at-heart-of-system.pdf

  • Brown, C., & Czerniewicz, L. (2008). Trends in student use of ICTs in higher education in South Africa. Paper presented at the 10th Annual Conference of WWW Applications, Cape Town, South Africa, 3–6 September 2008. Retrieved from http://www.cet.uct.ac.za/files/file/ResearchOutput/2008_wwwApps_UseTrends.pdf

  • Brown, C., & Czerniewicz, L. (2010). Debunking the ‘digital native’: Beyond digital apartheid, towards digital democracy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 357–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullen, M., Morgan, T., & Qayyum, A. (2011). Digital learners in higher education: Generation is not the issue. Canadian Journal of Learning Technology, 37(1).Retrieved from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/issue/view/71

  • Caruso, J. B., & Kvavik, R. B. (2005). ECAR study of students and information technology 2005: Convenience, connection, control and learning: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ECAR/ECARStudyofStudentsandInformat/158586

  • Carvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (Eds.). (2014). The architecture of productive learning networks. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corrin, L., Lockyer, L., & Bennett, S. (2010). Technological diversity: An investigation of students’ technology use in everyday life and academic study. Learning Media and Technology, 35(4), 387–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crook, C. (2002). The campus experience of networked learning. In C. Steeples & C. Jones (Eds.), Networked learning: Perspectives and issues (pp. 293–308). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Czerniewicz, L., Williams, K., & Brown, C. (2009). Students make a plan: Understanding student agency in constraining conditions. Research in Learning Technology, 17, 75–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlstrom, E., & Bichsel, J. (2014). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2014. Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar

  • Dahlstrom, E., Walker, J .D., & Dziuban, C. (2013). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2013. Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar

  • Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Retrieved from http://jime.open.ac.uk/2012/18

  • Dede, C. (2005). Planning for ‘neomillennial’ learning styles: Implications for investments in technology and faculty. In J. Oblinger & D. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation (pp. 226–247). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2008). Integrating technologies into educational ecosystems. Distance & Education, 29(2), 127–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R., & Goodyear, P. (2010). Students experiences of e-learning in higher education: The ecology of sustainable innovation. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, M. A., & Wiebe, S. (2009). Net generation expectations for technology-mediated learning at the university level. In A. Mendez-Vilas (Ed.), Research, reflections and innovations in integrating ICT in education (Vol. 1, pp. 996–1000). Badajoz, Spain: Formatex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galloway, A. R. (2012). The interface effect. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, P., & Qin, J. (2007). Identifying the generation gap in higher education: Where do the differences really lie? Innovate, 3(5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P. (2000). Final report, volume 1: Networked learning in higher education project (JCALT). Retrieved from http://csalt.lancs.ac.uk/jisc/

  • Goodyear, P. (2001). Effective networked learning in higher education: Notes and guidelines (Deliverable 9). Bristol, England: Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC). Retrieved from http://csalt.lancs.ac.uk/jisc/docs/Guidelines_final.doc

  • Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practices. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 21, 82–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P. (2014). Productive learning networks: The evolution of research and practice. In L. Carvalho & P. Goodyear (Eds.), The architecture of productive learning networks (pp. 23–47). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P., Asensio, M., Jones, C., Hodgson, V., & Steeples, C. (2003). Relationships between conceptions of learning, approaches to study and students’ judgements about the value of their experiences of networked learning. The Association for Learning Technology Journal, 11(1), 17–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P., Jones, C., Asensio, M., Hodgson, V., & Steeples, C. (2005). Networked learning in higher education: Students’ expectations and experiences. Higher Education, 50(3), 473–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourlay, L. (2014). Creating time: students, technologies and temporal practices in higher education. E-Learning and Digital Media, 11(2), 141–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gros, B., Garcia, I., & Escofet, A. (2012). Beyond the net generation debate: A comparison of digital learners in face-to-face and virtual universities. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, IRRODL, 13(4). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1305/2311

  • Harasim, L. (Ed.). (1990). Online education; perspectives on a new environment. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital Na(t)Ives? variation in internet skills and uses among members of the ‘net generation’. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargittai, E., Fullerton, L., Menchen-Trevino, E., & Thomas, K. Y. (2010). Trust online: Young adults’ evaluation of Web content. International Journal of Communication, 4, 468–494. Retrieved from: http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/download/636/423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healing, G., & Jones, C. (2011). Learner experience advancement project (LEAP) phase 2, stage 2 final report. Milton Keynes, England: The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Human communication via computer (1st ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley [Revised Edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993.].

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosein, A., Ramanau, R., & Jones, C. (2010a). Are all Net Generation students the same? The frequency of technology use at University. Paper presented at the IADIS E-learning Conference July 2010. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/24114/

  • Hosein, A., Ramanau, R., & Jones, C. (2010b). Learning and living technologies: A longitudinal study of first-year Students’ frequency and competence in the use of ICT. Learning Media and Technology, 35(4), 403–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (1991). Generations: The history of America’s future and the fourth turning: An American prophecy. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next greatest generation. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C. (2011). Students, the net generation and digital natives: Accounting for educational change. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing digital natives (pp. 30–45). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C. (2012). Networked learning, stepping beyond the net generation and digital natives. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning (pp. 27–41). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C. (2013). The new shape of the student. In R. Huang & J. M. Kinshuk Spector (Eds.), Reshaping learning—The frontiers of learning technologies in global context (pp. 91–112). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Asensio, M. (2001). Experiences of assessment: Using phenomenography for evaluation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(3), 314–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, N., Blackey, H., Fitzgibbon, K., & Chew, E. (2010a). Get out of MySpace! Computers & Education, 54(3), 776–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Bloxham, S. (2001). Networked legal learning: An evaluation of the student experience. International Review of Law, Computers and Technology, 3(15), 317–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (2009). Analysing networked learning practices: An introduction. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, C. Jones, & B. Lindström (Eds.), Analysing networked learning practices in higher education and continuing professional development (pp. 1–27). Rotterdam, England: Sense Publishers, BV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Healing, G. (2010a). Net generation students: Agency and choice and the new technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 344–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Healing, G. (2010b). Networks and locations for student learning. Learning Media and Technology, 35(4), 369–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Hosein, A. (2010). Profiling university students’ use of technology: Where is the Net generation divide? The International Journal of Technology Knowledge and Society, 6(3), 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Ramanau, R. (2009). Collaboration and the net generation: The changing characteristics of first year university students. In C. O’Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reiman & A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning: CSCL2009: CSCL Practices (pp. 237–241). Rhodes, Greece: University of the Aegean.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S. J., & Healing, G. (2010b). Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? Computers & Education, 54(3), 722–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Shao, B. (2011). The net generation and digital natives: Implications for higher education. New York: Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/evidencenet/net-generation-and-digital-natives

  • Jöns, H., & Hoyler, M. (2013). Global geographies of higher education: the perspective of world university rankings. Geoforum, 46, 45–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, B. (2003). Baby boomers, generation X and generation Y?: Policy implications for defence forces in the modern era. Foresight, 5(4), 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D. (1996). The intention to both memorise and understand: Another approach to learning. Higher Education, 31(3), 341–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Bennett, S., Judd, T., Gray, K., & Chang, R. (2008). Immigrants and natives: Investigating differences between staff and students’ use of technology. In Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology? Proceedings of ascilite Melbourne 2008. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/procs/kennedy.pdf

  • Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Gray, K., Judd, T., Waycott, J., & Bennett, S., et al. (2007). The net generation are not big users of Web 2.0 technologies: Preliminary findings. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/kennedy.pdf

  • Kennedy, G. E., & Judd, T. S. (2011). Beyond Google and the ‘Satisficing’ searching of digital natives. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing digital natives (pp. 119–136). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Dalgarno, B., & Waycott, J. (2010). Beyond natives and immigrants: exploring types of net generation students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 332–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knox, J. (2014). Digital culture clash: ‘massive’ education in the E-learning and digital cultures MOOC. Distance Education (Special Issue on Massively Open Online Courses), 35(2), 164–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause, K.-L. (2007). Who is the e-generation and how are they fairing in higher education. In J. Lockard & M. Pegrum (Eds.), Brave new classrooms: Democratic education and the Internet (pp. 125–139). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2013). Design principles for mobile learning. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (2nd ed., pp. 244–257). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvavik, R. (2005). Convenience, communications, and control: How students use technology. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation (pp. 82–101). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf.

  • Li, N., & Kirkup, G. (2007). Gender and cultural differences in internet use: A study of china and the UK. Computers & Education, 48(2), 301–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., & Ranieri, M. (2010). Are ‘digital natives’ really digitally competent?—A study on Chinese teenagers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 1029–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohnes, S. & Kinzer, C. (2007). Questioning assumptions about students’ expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate, 3(5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Manovich, L. (2001). The language of new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography—describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. (1994). Phenomenography. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., pp. 4424–4429). Oxford, England: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., Dall’Alba, G., & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19, 277–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning 1: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning 11: Outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, D., Hodgson, V., & Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (2012). Networked learning: A brief history and new trends. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning (pp. 3–24). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McNaught, C., Lam, P., & Ho, A. (2009). The digital divide between University students and teachers in Hong Kong. In Same places, different spaces. Proceedings of Ascilite, Auckland, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland09/procs/mcnaught.pdf

  • Nagler, W., & Ebner, M. (2009). Is your university ready for the Ne(x)t-Generation?. In Proceedings of 21st World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (EDMEDIA) (pp. 4344–4351), 22–26 June, Honolulu, HI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nardi, B. A., & O’Day, V. L. (1999). Information ecologies: Using technology with heart. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oblinger, D. (2003). Boomers, Gen-xers and millennials: Understanding the new students. Educause Review, 38(4), 37–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Educating the net generation. EDUCAUSE Online book. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf

  • Oliver, B., & Goerke, V. (2007). Australian undergraduates’ use and ownership of emerging technologies: Implications and opportunities for creating engaging learning experiences for the net generation. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 171–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • PA Consulting Group. (2014). Charting a winning course: How student experiences will shape the future of higher education. Retrieved from http://www.paconsulting.com/our-thinking/download-pas-2013-report-charting-the-course/

  • Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., Cook, J., & Kress, G. (Eds.). (2010). Mobile learning: Structures, agency, practices. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2011). Reclaiming an awkward term: What we might learn from ‘digital natives’. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing digital natives (pp. 186–204). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedró, F. (2009). New millennium learners in higher education: Evidence and policy implications. Paris: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI).

    Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. H. (2009).Sapiens digital: From digital immigrants and digital natives to digital wisdom. Journal of Online Education, 5(3). Retrieved from http://www.wisdompage.com/Prensky01.html

  • Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2011). Digital wisdom and homo sapiens digital. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing digital natives (pp. 15–29). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham, England: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radloff, A., Coates, H., James, R., & Krause, K-L. (2012). Report on the development of the university experience survey. Department for Industry, Australian Government. Retrieved from http://www.innovation.gov.au/highereducation/Policy/Pages/Library%20Card/UES_Development_Report.aspx

  • Roschelle, J. (2003). Unlocking the learning value of wireless mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), 260–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, L. D. (2010). Rewired: Understanding the i-generation and the way they learn. New York: PalgraveMacmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P., Huntington, P., Fieldhouse, M., Gunter, B., Withey, R., Jamali, H., Dobrowolski, T., & Tenopir, C. (2008). The Google generation: The information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proceedings, 60(4), 290–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salajan, F. D., Schönwetter, D. J., & Cleghorn, B. M. (2010). Student and faculty inter-generational digital divide: Fact or fiction? Computers & Education, 55(3), 1393–1403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salaway, G., & Caruso, J. B. (2007). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar

  • Schulmeister, R. (2009). Is there a net gener in the house? Dispelling a Mystification. E-learning and Education (Eleed), 5. Retrieved from http://eleed.campussource.de/archive/5/1587

  • Schulmeister, R. (2010). Students, internet, eLearning and Web 2.0. In M. Ebner & M. Schiefner (Eds.), Looking toward the future of technology-enhanced education: Ubiquitous learning and digital native. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selwyn, N. (2008). An investigation of differences in undergraduates’ academic use of the internet. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(1), 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native—myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 61(4), 364–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharples, M., Arnedillo-Sánchez, I., Milrad, M., & Vavoula, G. (2009). Mobile learning: Small devices, big issues. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, S. Barnes, & L. Montandon (Eds.), Technology enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 233–249). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage handbook of E-learning research (pp. 221–247). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. D., & Caruso, J. B. (2010). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2010 (Research Study, Vol. 6). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar

  • Smith, S., Salaway, G., & Borreson Caruso, J. (2009). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2009 (Research Study, Vol. 6). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar

  • Stoerger, S. (2009). The digital melting pot: Bridging the digital native-immigrant divide. First Monday, 14(7). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2474/2243

  • Tapscott, D. (1997). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D. (1999). Educating the net generation. Educational Leadership, 56(5), 6–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. (2010). Innovating the 21st century university: It’s time. Educause Review, 45(1), 17–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thinyane, H. (2010). Are digital natives a world-wide phenomenon? An investigation into South African first year students’ use and experience with technology. Computers & Education, 55, 406–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2011). Deconstructing digital natives. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Beemt, A., Akkerman, S., & Simons, P. R. J. (2010a). The use of interactive media among today’s youth: Results of a survey. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1158–1165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Beemt, A., Akkerman, S., & Simons, P. R.-J. (2010b). Patterns of interactive media use among contemporary youth. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 103–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., & Gray, K. (2009). Digital divides? Student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1202–1211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, A. (2005). Information seeking behavior in ‘Generation Y’ students: Motivation, critical thinking, and learning theory. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31(1), 46–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, D.S., & Le Cornu. A. (2011). Visitors and residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16, 9(5). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, Merseyside, UK

    Christopher Jones

Authors
  1. Christopher Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jones, C. (2015). The Learner and Digital Networks. In: Networked Learning. Research in Networked Learning. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01934-5_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation