There seems to be a common belief and general consensus of sorts that young people, these ‘digital natives’, have a higher level of digital ability than the people teaching them. This stereotype of older people not being able to keep up with the times has been around for generations and has very little to do with the current state of affairs, as compelling a notion as it is.
This viewpoint is problematic in education as it perpetuates a pernicious myth that the failures of the education system to suitably prepare students for their adult lives is the fault of the luddite teachers who can’t cope with changing times. Certainly, training and exchange of ideas about teaching techniques and schools must be ongoing, but the assumption that young people are somehow automatically digitally literate is problematic. It perpetuates the myth that it is a lack of gadgets, apps or games that are creating the barriers to access, rather than a pedagogical or institutional failing.
Young people are great at using and manipulating technology for things that motivate them, which in the teen years, is often related to social connectivity and rewards. This means that they are masters at growing their social media following and mastering complex video games. They are also wired to learn quickly, which is why it’s such a crucial time for them to be educated to perform complex and challenging tasks and to develop the thought processes and problem solving abilities that will keep them in good stead once the pruning, myelination and remodelling stage of their brain development is over. At this stage of their lives, there is so much potential for education to either hinder their prospects or enable them to flourish and develop.
The DfE’s recently announced tech strategy is certainly an improvement over not having one at all, but there is a critical feature lacking with it, and that is a focus on learning. There is a very prominent focus on reducing administrative tasks for teachers and developing partnerships with the tech industry, primarily for infrastructure and safeguarding needs. But learning is not addressed. Rather than revolutionising technology for learning by making advanced platforms available for personalised learning or creating interactive experiences that advance learning through knowledge sharing or community building, the strategy focuses on industry partnerships, anti-cheating software and increasing administrative capacity.
The current problems relating to digital literacy being identified by employers are not that young people don’t know how to use a computer, but rather that they don’t know how to solve the problems the businesses are trying to address. The current generation is not used to building things or searching for answers to an unknowable question. They don’t understand the power of advanced coding and mathematics to create systems and allow people to build things. They are used to having answers given via Google and social media. Many people think the answer to a technology problem is ‘Did you restart it?’, instead of ‘how can we solve climate change?’ The more advanced the technology we use, it seems, the less care and attention are given to problem-solving and critical thinking.
The UK is far behind the United States and China in its digital education strategy and from the looks of this current offering, they intend for it to stay that way. The strategy primarily focuses on infrastructure, but with only a £10 million backing (about £400 per school), we can expect it to have minimal impact. But it is not just the lack of financial investment. People have been asking why the UK doesn’t have its own version of Huawei, the Chinese telecoms giant, and they could equally ask why the UK doesn’t have its own version of Microsoft, Google or Apple for education. Maybe this is because tech leaders like Bill Gates see computers as tools of communication, creativity and collaboration, areas conspicuously missing from the DfE’s edtech strategy.