Final Reflections

It’s been a great journey, farewell UOSM2008!

According to Gibbs (1988), the act of having an experience is not adequate on its own. It is imperative that individuals process their thoughts and feelings because without reflecting there is the potential to forget (Gibbs, 1988).  Therefore, reflection plays a critical part in the learning experience (Gibbs, 1988). My journey throughout the UOSM2008 module has been thought-provoking, beneficial and educative.

Figure 1: My learning cycle

Description
Created by Tewsdae Topping using ‘Canva’ (Gibbs, 1989).

Description: What happened?

I joined the UOSM2008 module to gain some formal education on the web. ‘Living and working on the Web’ appealed to me as I noticed the impact of digital technologies in the working world. Being a sociologist, I have realised the ongoing academic debate around digital technologies and its impact on cultural, economic and political practices (Orton-Johnson & Prior, 2013).  Moreover, I had poor media literacy and lacked skills in blogging, creating online materials such as videos and infographics and managing my online identity. Each week, my peers and I on the UOSM2008 module wrote a blog post on a given topic. After everyone’s posts were uploaded we could read each other’s and comment on various posts to create a critical discussion on the topic.

Feelings: What were you thinking and feeling?

At first, I was intimidated as I this was unlike any module I had ever done before. However, once I began reading and working on the topics my confidence grew.  I learned an immense amount through exploring new topics and discussion from various peers weekly. I felt that I had been oblivious to certain things before. For example, when learning about media literacy I felt that my experiences online began to make a lot of sense. I had noticed that my Facebook timeline was not the same as it used to be and once I learned about filter bubbles and echo chambers, I began to understand the importance of algorithms and the implications they had.

In addition, this module changed the way in which I perceived learning. For instance, learning through connectivism was new to me. Through my personal learning network on the MOOC and the UOSM2008 module, I developed my digital profile. This module also changed my approach to other modules for example, whilst studying social movements I realized that most of the literature focused on traditional ways of collective action. However, UOSM2008 allowed me to recognise the affordances of digital technologies. For example, today activism can take place online through online petitions, hacktivism and virtual sit-ins (Van Laer & Van Ailst, 2010). Prior to this, I would have focused on traditional forms of collective action such as marches, strikes and lobbying.

Evaluation: What was good or bad about the experience?

An advantage of this module introduced is that it introduced me to another method of learning called connectivism (Future Learn, 2018). I learned mainly from interactions with my connections with people on the module, technology and non-human information resources. The lecturers took a different approach to learning and one that I haven’t experienced on any other module. UOSM2008 has equipped me with skills in content creation and knowledge that I will use and develop beyond this module. For instance, I will be more cautious with my online identity, search engines and the content that I interact with online. One thing that did not go so well, I think were my discussions, I think that I shied away from interacting with more people.

Figure 2: My Digital Profile

000
Created by Tewsdae Topping using ‘Piktochart’

Analysis: What sense can you make of the situation?

I felt that my arguments around the topic were developed and my use of sources was a mixture of the original sources and additional ones that I found on my own. My discussions with others on the module was very engaging, however, at times, I felt that I was not in the correct word count. At first, I did not support comments with sources but once I began to, the discussions became stronger. I believe that my peers contributed substantially to my understanding of living and working on the web.

I learned a range of new skills. As Smyth (1989) notes, values, beliefs and assumptions are an important element of learning. I found that my previous assumptions and beliefs about learning have changed due to learning through connectivism. My understanding of how the media works have advanced especially after learning the key concepts of media literacy. Furthermore, I have seen the impact of media on society such as the US elections and Brexit.

Conclusion: What else could you have done?

Ultimately my experience on the UOSM2008 module was very informative and beneficial. One thing I might have done differently is to be more aware of the visits to my blog. I felt that I had to rush in my responses at times as when I would check them there was a lot of questions from my peers. I also would have used voice-overs more in my videos as I think it adds more of a personal touch.

Action Plan: What would you do next time?

If given another time to do the module or one similar again I would be bolder in my content creation and opt for doing more voiceovers. I would also comment on more than the minimum number of blogs. I think that I might come across a similar experience in the working world and to prepare for that I plan to do other MOOCs to get comfortable with interactions and to form networks.

 

Word count: 906

 

References

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford: Further Education Unit, Oxford Polytechnic.

Orton-Johnson, K. & Prior, N., 2013. Digital Sociology: Critical Perspectives. University of Edinburgh, UK: Palgrave Macmillian

Smyth, J. (1989). Developing and sustaining critical reflection in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 2-9.

Van Laer, J. & Van Ailst, P., 2010. Internet and Social Movement Action Repertoires. Information, Communication & Society, 13(8), pp. 1146-1171.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Topic 3

Reflection on Single vs Multiple Identity

Which is better?

At first, I thought having multiply identities was the best option as individuals can create different profiles or accounts to suit different audiences. After reading Nikhita’s Blog and looking at her comparison between Mark Zuckerberg and Christopher Poole I was more open towards the benefits of anonymity. Poole noted that people can be authentic through anonymity as they are more comfortable in expressing their true opinions without consequences (Lindsey, 2011). On the other hand, Zuckerburg noted that single identity prevents bad internet practices and enforces legitimacy (Lindsey, 2011).

After speaking with peers on my blog post and theirs, I began to evaluate the claims made by both Poole and Zuckerberg. For instance, Zuckerberg notes that single identity prevents bad internet practices and enforces legitimacy (Lindsey, 2011). However, my experience with Facebook (see Figure 1) is just one example of how displaying your identity can result in identity theft and therefore is not as legitimate as Zuckerberg claims. Additionally, after the Facebook scandal it is debatable whether Facebook is encouraging single identities to protect people or to help advertisers and other third parties (BBC, 2018).

Screenshot 2018-04-30 15.00.36
Figure 1: My real profile (Tewsdae Topping) and a fake profile (Ciara William) using my pictures.

Although Poole argues that anonymity encourages authenticity and allows creativity, as mentioned in one of my previous blogs anonymity can lead to unethical practices. As Tufekci (2017) noted, sites like Reddit allowed anonymity through pseudonymous names and this led to huge rings of paedophiles online. This type of gathering would have been less possible without the help of the internet and the protection that users had through pseudo names that could not link them to their real identity (Tukeci, 2017).

Conclusion

It is hard to make claims over which is better in terms of single or multiple identities. Both types can be used for good or bad. Overall, activity online can be good or bad regardless of identity choices.

Word count: 306

My comments:

Chole’s Blog

Nikhita’s Blog

References:

1. Costa, C. & Torres, R., 2011. [Online]
Available at: http://eft.educom.pt/index.php/eft/article/view/216/126
[Accessed 29 April 2018].

2. Lindsey, 2011. [Online]

Available at: http://www.dailyinfographic.com/who-are-you-online-infographic

[Accessed 28 April 2018].

3. Tufekci, Z., 2017. Twitter and Tear Gas. [Online]
Available at: https://www.twitterandteargas.org/ 
[Accessed 29 April 2018].

4. BBC, 2018. [Online]

Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43649018

[Accessed 29 April 2018].

 

Topic 3

How many people are you online?

Digital Identities

The concept of digital identity is becoming increasingly important in society (Costa & Torres, 2011). In the past, one’s online identity could be detached from real life, however, in recent times the two have been more interconnected (Krotoski, 2012). Digital identity has become so important that a person’s digital footprint could affect job hunting if employers and recruiters find undesirable content amongst candidates (Jacobs, 2013). Furthermore, having a good online presence, for example through a blog could individuals secure a job (The Employable, 2014). Therefore, managing one’s digital identity and social presence is valuable and essential (Costa & Torres, 2011).

Costa and Torres (2011) assert that digital identity is important for two main reasons: presentation and reputation.  Presentation refers to how individual showcase themselves and interact online. Whereas reputation refers to how others perceive a user online based on cultural and social standards (Costa & Torres, 2011). Therefore, individuals may choose to have a single identity or multiple identities online.

A single identity is one where the user can be identified as the same across all platforms. For example, using a real name and picture on all sites or services, social media accounts, emails, blogs etc (Future Learn, 2018).

Multiple identities occur when people have different identities across platforms or identities suited for different contexts such as personal or professional. Some identities may be identifiable whilst some are anonymous (Future Learn, 2018).

new-piktochart_29815321
Created by Tewsdae Topping using ‘Piktochart’ Source: Future Learn (2018)

Conclusion

Although single identity is generally seen as more authentic than multiple identities, there has been a debate about whether this is the case. Some challenge the idea of authenticity, highlighting that people may present an identity that is the best version of themselves (Haimson & Hoffman, 2016). Furthermore, the way that people present themselves to different groups such as family versus friends may be different but authentic (Haimson & Hoffman, 2016).

Word count: 306

References

  1. Costa, C. & Torres, R., 2011. [Online]
    Available at: http://eft.educom.pt/index.php/eft/article/view/216/126
    [Accessed 22 March 2018].
  2. Future Learn, 2018. What is your network identity?. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/learning-network-age/4/steps/303357
    [Accessed 22 April 2018].
  3. Haimson, O. L. & Hoffmann, A. L., 2016. Constructing and enforcing “authentic” identity online: Facebook, real names, and non-normative identities. First Monday, 6 June.21(6).
  4. Jacobs , D. L., 2013. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2013/05/17/how-an-online-reputation-can-hurt-your-job-hunt/#6ec4c4066695
    [Accessed 22 March 2018].
  5. Krotoski, A., 2012. The Guardian. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/apr/19/online-identity-authenticity-anonymity
    [Accessed 22 March 2018].
  6. The Employable, 2014. The Employable. [Online]
    Available at: http://www.theemployable.com/index.php/2014/10/28/blogging-can-help-get-job/
    [Accessed 22 March 2018].

 

Topic 2

Why media literacy matters!

Initial thoughts

At first, I realised that I was a quite unaware of how the media works. I had heard of the term fake news, but I merely associated it with Donald Trump. However, after researching I realised that fake news is an actual concept. My discussion with Karishma made me realise that I had been misinformed by a fake news report before. Chloe also highlighted the health risks associated with fake news due to false health information.

Trash Segregation Classroom Poster
Created using ‘Canva’ by Tewsdae Topping

I knew that my social media feeds had changed and disproportionately had fitness and food pages. I also realised when using my friend’s social media, hers was quite different to mine. However, I now firmly attribute this to filter bubbles and echo chambers.

Blue Lines Open House Flyer (1)
Created using ‘Canva’ by Tewsdae Topping

In my opinion, the problem with algorithmic feed or search results is that there is no transparency. Tufekci, 2017 pg.160 notes “how is one to know whether Facebook is showing Ferguson news to everyone else but him or her, whether there is just no interest in the topic, or whether it is the algorithmic feedback cycle that is depressing the updates in favour of a more algorithm- friendly topic, like the ALS charity campaign?”.

Additionally, I was concerned about how media literacy could impact social change. Social movement activists especially have issues with algorithms, Upworthy for example, produced a lot of “feel good” content in hopes of pleasing the Facebook algorithms (Tufekci, 2017). Facebook then changed its algorithm, which hugely affected this type of virality and Upworthy’s traffic fell by half (Tufekci, 2017).

Conclusion

Media literacy is important because it can affect education, politics and health, especially through fake news. Social change, for instance, may be harder to achieve if people are in filter bubbles. Moreover, people may believe that they are influencing others when it is merely the result of an echo chamber.

Word count: 306

My comments

Nathaniel’s Blog

Iarina’s Blog

References

  1. BBC, 2017. Hurricane Irma: No such thing as a category six storm. [Online]
    Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-41187164
    [Accessed 18 March 2018].
  2. Jacobs, W., Amuta, A. O. & Jeon, K. C., 2017. Health information seeking in the digital age: An analysis of health information seeking behavior among US adults. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/23311886.2017.1302785?needAccess=true
    [Accessed 18 March 2018].
  3. Klöckner, J., 2018. Facebook’s Fear Machine: How The Social Network Enables Racist News. [Online]
    Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/facebook-fear-machine_us_5a9e4ddfe4b0479c02567fa3
    [Accessed 17 March 2018].
  4. McGee, M., 2013. EdgeRank Is Dead: Facebook’s News Feed Algorithm Now Has Close To 100K Weight Factors. [Online]
    Available at: https://marketingland.com/edgerank-is-dead-facebooks-news-feed-algorithm-now-has-close-to-100k-weight-factors-55908
    [Accessed 18 March 2018].
  5. Tufekci, Z., 2017. Twitter and Tear Gas. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.twitterandteargas.org/
    [Accessed 16 March 2018].
Topic 2

How is your media literacy?

Media Literacy

In a world where we are heavily surrounded by digital technologies, it is important to be cautious of online information. As noted in last week’s topic of digital differences, we touched on the notion that our learning and views can be limited if we do not widen our learning network.

One way to achieve this is through improving our media literacy.  Media literacy can be defined as a “framework to access, analyse, evaluate and create messages in a variety of forms–from print to video to the Internet” (Thoman and Jolls, 2005, p.190). Media literacy also aids in the understanding of the role of the media and the skills needed in a democratic society Thoman and Jolls, 2005, p.190).

new-piktochart_28746904 (1)
Figure 1 – created using ‘Piktochart’ by Tewsdae Topping

Factors to consider

Echo chambers –  Unlike passive media forms, the internet allows people to bypass sources that they do not agree with. This results in an echo chamber where people interact with those with similar views (Sunstein, 2001).

Filter bubbles –  Personalisation based on our past online behaviour is often generated through machine learning algorithms, this isolates users from opposing information (Future Learn, 2018).

Fake news – this refers to new articles that are intentionally false and misleads readers (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017).

Why is all this important?

According (Buckingham, 2003) mass media plays a key role in economic, social and political processes. The media displays both factual and fictional information which both can influence our views (Buckingham, 2003). For instance, in the 2016 United States elections, many fake news stories favoured Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. As a result, some commentators argue that many voters were influenced by fake news (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017). The media is becoming more embedded in everyday life and social institutions. Therefore, it is vital that individuals are media literate so that they can effectively participate in public arenas (Buckingham, 2003).

Word count: 306

References 

  1. Allcott, H. & Gentzkow, M., 2017. Social Media and Fake News in the 2016. [Online]
    Available at: https://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/fakenews.pdf
    [Accessed 10 March 2018].
  2. Benson, J., 2017. Rubicon Online. [Online]
    Available at: http://www.rubiconline.com/stop-sharing-see-fake-news-for-what-it-is/
    [Accessed 10 March 2018].
  3. Buckingham, D., 2003. Media education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture. [Online]
    Available at: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Media_literacy#Five_Core_Concepts_of_Media_Literacy
    [Accessed 10 March 2018].
  4. CBS News, 2018. Don’t get fooled by these fake news sites. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/dont-get-fooled-by-these-fake-news-sites/21/
    [Accessed 10 Mrach 2018].
  5. Future Learn, 2018. Media Literacy. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/learning-network-age/4/steps/303353
    [Accessed 10 March 2018].
  6. Sunstein, C., 2001. Echo Chambers: Bush v. Gore, Impeachment, and Beyond. [Online]
    Available at: http://assets.press.princeton.edu/sunstein/echo.pdf
    [Accessed 10 March 2018].
  7. Thoman, E. & Jolls, T., 2005. Media literacy education: Lessons from the center for media literacy. [Online]
    Available at: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Media_literacy#Five_Core_Concepts_of_Media_Literacy
    [Accessed 10 March 2018].

 

Topic 1

Reflecting on digital differences

Inequalities in the UK

I enjoyed the topic of digital differences this week as it felt like building upon what I had thought about last week in my discussion with Anna about cultural and socio-economic factors. Previously, I had thought about the differences between internet usage and access depending on country and age. However, after reading Carl’s Blog  I began to critically consider the digital differences within the UK. After discovering that 5.9 million UK adults have never used the internet and therefore possibly lacking digital skills, I was baffled at why this may be. However, after discussion with Carl, I realized that the UK has an ageing population and many who are homeless and in poverty. Therefore, there was a correlation between inequalities experienced offline and the digital differences online. Moreover, we agreed on the level of intersection between inequalities.

Access as a human right

Chole’s Blog furthered my thinking as she raised the issue of more things being exclusively available online. Furthermore, she questioned whether or it is a basic human right to have access to the internet. In addition, Chloe provided insight on the effects of digital technologies (iPads) on babies and toddlers. This made me question whether there should be a digital difference between certain age groups such as babies and toddlers as it could have adverse effects on their developing brains.

Conclusion

000
Figure 1: Digital differences in the UK from 2011-2017 (ONS, 2017). Created by Tewsdae Topping using ‘Piktochart’

Overall, I think that digital differences are lessening between some groups as shown in Figure 1. However, some groups are still behind for example, across all age groups those who were disabled had a lower number of users compared to those who were not (ONS, 2017). Furthermore, 27% of people in DE households (low income group) have a higher amount of non-users in comparison to ABC1 households (high income group) with 7% (Ofcom, 2017).

Word count: 301

My Comments:

Chole’s Blog: https://chloeheighwayblog.wordpress.com/2018/02/26/what-is-the-digital-divide/comment-page-1/#comment-5

Carl’s Blog: https://cl5g16.wordpress.com/2018/02/26/a-modern-form-of-inequality-digital-differences/comment-page-1/#comment-12

References

  1. Ofcom, 2017. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/105507/internet-use-attitudes-bulletin-2017.pdf
    [Accessed 4 March 2018].
  2. Office for National Statistics, 2017. Office for National Statistics. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/itandinternetindustry/bulletins/internetusers/2017
    [Accessed 4 March 2018].

 

 

Topic 1

Do our differences shape how we interact on the web?

Digital Differences

An individual’s online behaviours are often connected to their offline contexts (Future Learn, 2018). The concept ‘Digital Differences’ refers to the inequalities in access to technology and practices among various groups. These inequalities are based on factors such as age, gender, class, income and race (Halford & Savage, 2010).

https://www.powtoon.com/embed/dkno30kOTv1/

Within developing countries, often times access is concentrated in urban areas meanwhile rural areas fall behind (Furuholt & Kristiansen, 2007). To make matters worse, those lacking access often fall into a cycle of deprivation as they may miss out on information that could improve life chances (Halford & Savage, 2010). For example, a person without internet access due to low income misses out on the opportunity of finding a job through the internet.

However, access does not guarantee improvement of inequality. An improved approach to digital differences emphasises the importance of how technologies are used. This argument implies that some forms of usage increase chances of gaining cultural, financial, human or social capital, meanwhile others may put users at a disadvantage (Halford & Savage, 2010).

The introduction of Internet Cafes is a prime example of how the use of access is vital in determining outcomes. Some cafes have facilitated education and helped people to improve their skills, whereas others have been closed due to unethical use such as underage gambling (Furuholt & Kristiansen, 2007).

My experience

000
Figure 1: My digital differences (Created using ‘Piktochart’)

In terms of access, I think that being at a university has allowed me to access a lot of information on the web that I would not usually be able to such as exclusive academic journals. As a female under 23 years old in the UK, I also have the opportunity to participate in free coding courses. Other parts of my identity such as age and ethnicity play a role in my practices.

Word count:301

References

Furuholt, B. & Kristiansen, S., n.d. Internet Cafés in Asia and Africa – Venues for Education and Learning?. [Online]
Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7882/5f8e9571ca20b6ae10031da6cd51688733a8.pdf
[Accessed 25 February 2018].

Future Learn, 2018. Future Learn. [Online]
Available at: https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/learning-network-age/4/steps/303344
[Accessed 25 February 2018].

Halford, S. & Savage, M., 2010. Reconceptualizing Digital Social Inequality, Information, Communication & Society. [Online]
Available at: http://edshare.soton.ac.uk/6774/8/halford_savage_ICS_2010.pdf
[Accessed 25 February 2018].

Statista, 2018. Statista. [Online]
Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/323859/us-weekly-minutes-computer-internet-age/
[Accessed 25 February 2018].

 

Introductory Topic

My Reflection on the Introductory Topic

Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants

Initially, I was sceptical about Prensky’s theory of digital natives and digital immigrants. After interacting with my peers, I recognised that I was not the only one who did not identify as a digital native and therefore would not fit into Prensky’s theory. At first, I was quite focused on the age biases in Prensky’s theory. However, after reading Anna’s blog, I realized that I had not thought about the importance of socio-economic and cultural factors. After reading more about these factors, I learned that culture is a key determinant of the attitudes and behaviour towards technology (Eseonu & Egbue, 2014).  Furthermore, high levels of social inequality can contribute to low levels of technology adoption as some groups do not have the power to engage with digital technologies (Eseonu & Egbue, 2014).

Digital Vistors and Digital Residents  

After reading the posts of my colleagues, it was evident that the digital visitors and residents framework was a better way to describe our use of digital technologies. Although we all fall into the generation that Prensky calls digital natives, we all use digital technologies differently. For example, Anna spoke about not wanting to reveal too much online. Whereas, Adrian was more involved in online communities, particularly YouTube where he creates content and engages with his subscribers.

000
Created by Tewsdae Topping using ‘Piktochart’

Conclusion

Discussion with my colleagues has allowed me to see that a variety of factors that affect digital literacies. As I was focused on age biases, I overlooked the importance of cultural and socio-economic factors. Overall, my knowledge of digital visitors and residents has improved. Prior to taking this module, I had no idea about digital visitors and residents. I knew that I used digital technologies, however, I can now place myself on the digital spectrum.

Word count: 295

My comments:

Anna’s blog: https://uosmanna.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/the-digital-spectrum-where-do-i-fit-in/#comments

Adrian’s blog: https://ak13g15.wordpress.com/2018/02/11/which-are-you-digital-resident-or-digital-visitor/#comment-3

 References:

  1. Eseonu, C. & Egbue, O., 2014. Socio-Cultural Influences on Technology Adoption and Sustainable Development. [Online]

Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283233101_Socio-cultural_influences_on_technology_adoption_and_sustainable_development

[Accessed 18 February 2018].

 

 

 

 

 

Introductory Topic

Introductory blog

Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants

Prensky’s concept differentiates between those who were born in the digital world and speak the digital language (Natives) and those who have adjusted to the new technology at a later part of their life but will always have an “accent” (Immigrants) (Prensky, 2001). He also implied that ‘Immigrant educators’ would need to reform their methods of teaching to accommodate the Digital Natives (White & Cornu, 2011). However, although students may be born in a digital world, they do not necessarily have the skills to effectively use new technology and some even prefer traditional forms of teaching (Harris, Warren, Leah & Ashleigh, 2010). Prensky’s concept received criticism for its age-related bias and a new framework emerged.

Digital Visitors and Residents

A digital resident is a person who lives a part of their life online, they are usually a part of a Web community that accommodates relationships and where they can display their online persona  (White, 2008). Visitors use the Web as a tool to carry out a function or complete a task (White & Cornu, 2011). Visitors are less likely to have any online profiles or anything that would expose their identity. For instance, a visitor may use YouTube to view a demonstration of a task. Whereas a resident may have a YouTube channel where they regularly post content and interact with viewers.

new-piktochart_27975270

Personal digital literacies and online behaviours

After analysing both frameworks, I’ve concluded that Prensky’s Digital Native label would not suit me despite being a millennial born into the digital world. I consider myself to be a digital resident as I engage with others online and have a social presence. However, based on the self-test it is evident that there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of my digital literacy.

new-piktochart_27975625 (1)

 

Word count: 300

References

  1. Harris, L., Warren, L., Leah, J. & Ashleigh, M., 2010. Small steps across the chasm: ideas for embedding a culture of open education in the university sector. [Online]
    Available at: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/80397/
    [Accessed 10 February 2018].
  2. Prensky, M., 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. [Online]
    Available at: https://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
    [Accessed 10 February 2018].
  3. White, D., 2011. Not ‘Natives’ & ‘Immigrants’ but ‘Visitors’ & ‘Residents’. [Online]
    Available at: http://tallblog.conted.ox.ac.uk/index.php/2008/07/23/not-natives-immigrants-but-visitors-residents/
    [Accessed 9 February 2018].
  4. White, D. & Cornu, A. L., 2011. Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. [Online]
    Available at: http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3171/3049%20https:/comminfo.rutgers.edu/~tefko/Courses/Zadar/Readings/Selwyn%20dig%20natives,%20Aslib%20Proceedings%202009.pdf
    [Accessed 10 February 2018].