Summary Of Digital Natives Digital Immigrants Marc Prensky
In the article Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Marc Prensky asserts that if digital immigrant educators wish to reach digital naives they will have to adapt. Prensky’s claims are a response to the fact that teachers don’t believe that they should have to adapt in order to teach students. With the rapid change change of students and technology the interests and focuses of students have shifted. In addition to this change in students, the educators are remaining the same causing a communication disconnect. Prensky, states that there is a distinct disconnect between the digital immigrants and natives because of lack of effort, resistance to change, and conflict of communicative interests.
Prinsky uses numbers to defend his claim early …show more content…
on by stating that “the average college grad spends less than 5,000 hours reading but over 10,000 playing video games and over 20,000 watching television” (1). This is obviously very different to previous generations as technology advances over time. He puts this into the article in order to give the reader an idea of the vast difference between time spent reading and time spent on digital technology by college graduates.These numbers are effective because it gives the reader an insight on just how different digital immigrants and digital natives are, as well as how opposing their thought processes have become over time. The numbers Prinskey lists although exclusive to one group of students still emphasize the ever so evident disconnect between the generations of students and their instructors. The fact that these numbers apply to the average college grads making this a relevant and fairly common fact that affects a large amount of students. Not to mention that this contrast in numbers is only recorded in the average college grad so the numbers in middle school, high school, and college students would be even higher. Which visually does an amazing job at proving his point that students and their interests are changing at exponential rates. More importantly it supports his statement that digital immigrants have to adapt in order to connect with their students because this change is inevitable.
Along with Prinskey’s very successful use of logos in the statement above he follows them up with other strong points in order to support his claim. Prinskey himself writes that “digital natives are used to receiving their information fast, multitasking, and prefer graphics before text” (2) He is declaring that digital natives prefer to be intrigued when it comes to tasks at hand and are better at doing more things at once than their predecessors which creates a need for fast pace movement and learning. These are all factors that can be proven with statistics and data or even looking at classroom full of students, this is a factual statements that clearly backs up his original claim that in order for teachers to truly teach and connect with their students they will have to adapt to this new fast pace way of life and teaching. Although this use of logos was effective for the most part, due to the lack of backup support by statistics and data the supporting detail fails to appear as a hard hitting fact and more of a strong statement made by Prensky to defend his point. Nonetheless, his use of logos in this instance is successful as it does a great job at briefing explaining new thinking process of digital natives. This success also again produces heavy evidence of why digital natives and digital immigrants are so different and why the immigrants need to adapt to keep up. Prensky keeps up this cycle of strong elements of persuasion when he uses the words of Doctor Bruce D. Perry to prove his point. According to Dr. Perry “Different experience lead to different brain structures” (1). What Prensky does here is he uses Dr. Perry’s words in order to support his main claim. This works due to the fact that Dr. Perry is in fact a credible source as he is a doctor at Baylor College of Medicine. He uses the fact that Dr. Perry has found that different experiences causes different brain structures to reaffirm the fact that that the differences in the thinking between the digital immigrants and natives are not only at a physical level but also at a cerebral level. The differences between these two generations aren’t due to just the budding rise of technology but also because the experiences people have, changed them severely. The reality the newer generation faces, has changed the way in which they have grown up which has lead to a difference in the way that they think. This then relates to the way they retain information and learn. This is effective in the way it is laid out Prensky puts this quote in a place that makes the most sense, in a paragraph about how these differences go past the surface level that most educators assume them to be at. Which makes it very clear at that Prensky knows what he is talking about and how to use evidence to make his point clear and factually accurate.
This entire article is a form of Ethos as the man who writes it is an award winning author, speaker, “practical visionary” for education.
This entire article is writing for educators at a general level and who better to write an article about the need to adapt than an educator who is a digital immigrant. As a man with a vast background such as teaching at all levels and being a CEO for a software company that develops games. This article is as a whole is the perfect form of Ethos. As Marc Prensky has seen education and the disconnect between teacher and student from all levels including pre-K to college. Not only this but Prensky has seen and developed the exact technology and tools he believes will help bridge the disconnect between digital natives and digital immigrants. Prensky also points this out in the article when he reveals that he “ uses digital games in order to teach digital natives as it is the platform they are most familiar with” (4) Prensky uses the things he is most familiar with education and technology to do just that teach with technology but also to prove his claim that digital natives do in fact learn better through technology due to their familiarity with it. Along with that, the digital immigrants must catch up in order to teach their students the things that they must learn. This fits perfectly because Prensky is writing on a topic that he is well versed in and considered to be an expert in and his own credibility is enough to back up his statements as well as his
claim.
Prensky does a great job at persuading his audience via his use of ethos as well as logos and he continues that trend into pathos. In this article, he maintains that “despite often hearing that his methods won’t for for them because their subjects aren’t “facts based” and he believes that to be a lack of imagination and provides them with a way to simulate said methods to make the lesson more interesting” (6). This is important because it gives the reader a real example and visual of how one of these thought experiments/simulations might work. He does this while also showing the educators who are reading how simple it is to create one of these digital native alternatives. It also doesn’t over explain to the point where the reader would be confused about the point Prensky is trying to make. Prensky secures this usage of pathos by providing solutions on the side he wants to persuade, in order to create a motivation to agree with his claim. He shows the his audience the educators a simple way to quickly adapt to the fast past pace that their students are moving at around them.
Despite all of the great ways Prensky used pathos in the last paragraph this particular example falls flat. The way he defends his claim is by using an example where his former student says “He went to highly ranked college where the professors had graduated from MIT but still left due to the fact that they only read from text books.” (3) It had the potentially to be a great use of pathos if only it had been elaborated on but the statement made by the student seems to fall a bit flat in the sense that we know nothing other than he went to a great school then left. Unfortunately, it doesn’t add much to the article and again ends up falling flat and seeming a bit awkward. Especially, since Prinskey goes onto to write “that dropping out may have been a possibility when jobs that didn’t require degrees were in abundance but with that no longer being the case most dropouts are having to go back to school reaffirming said generational divide.” (3) With the awkwardness said quote and the following paragraphs after it kind of makes the aspect that would’ve made it pathos fall flat.
With all of that being said overall Prensky does an amazing job at persuading the audience to agree with his claim that there is a generational divide and that the digital immigrants are going to have adapt. He touches on the reasons there is a divide, he delves into factors from all perspectives, and even offers solutions to fix said problem all throughout the article. This as a whole created a beautifully written and successful attempt at persuading his audience.
Prinsky uses numbers to defend his claim early …show more content…
on by stating that “the average college grad spends less than 5,000 hours reading but over 10,000 playing video games and over 20,000 watching television” (1). This is obviously very different to previous generations as technology advances over time. He puts this into the article in order to give the reader an idea of the vast difference between time spent reading and time spent on digital technology by college graduates.These numbers are effective because it gives the reader an insight on just how different digital immigrants and digital natives are, as well as how opposing their thought processes have become over time. The numbers Prinskey lists although exclusive to one group of students still emphasize the ever so evident disconnect between the generations of students and their instructors. The fact that these numbers apply to the average college grads making this a relevant and fairly common fact that affects a large amount of students. Not to mention that this contrast in numbers is only recorded in the average college grad so the numbers in middle school, high school, and college students would be even higher. Which visually does an amazing job at proving his point that students and their interests are changing at exponential rates. More importantly it supports his statement that digital immigrants have to adapt in order to connect with their students because this change is inevitable.
Along with Prinskey’s very successful use of logos in the statement above he follows them up with other strong points in order to support his claim. Prinskey himself writes that “digital natives are used to receiving their information fast, multitasking, and prefer graphics before text” (2) He is declaring that digital natives prefer to be intrigued when it comes to tasks at hand and are better at doing more things at once than their predecessors which creates a need for fast pace movement and learning. These are all factors that can be proven with statistics and data or even looking at classroom full of students, this is a factual statements that clearly backs up his original claim that in order for teachers to truly teach and connect with their students they will have to adapt to this new fast pace way of life and teaching. Although this use of logos was effective for the most part, due to the lack of backup support by statistics and data the supporting detail fails to appear as a hard hitting fact and more of a strong statement made by Prensky to defend his point. Nonetheless, his use of logos in this instance is successful as it does a great job at briefing explaining new thinking process of digital natives. This success also again produces heavy evidence of why digital natives and digital immigrants are so different and why the immigrants need to adapt to keep up. Prensky keeps up this cycle of strong elements of persuasion when he uses the words of Doctor Bruce D. Perry to prove his point. According to Dr. Perry “Different experience lead to different brain structures” (1). What Prensky does here is he uses Dr. Perry’s words in order to support his main claim. This works due to the fact that Dr. Perry is in fact a credible source as he is a doctor at Baylor College of Medicine. He uses the fact that Dr. Perry has found that different experiences causes different brain structures to reaffirm the fact that that the differences in the thinking between the digital immigrants and natives are not only at a physical level but also at a cerebral level. The differences between these two generations aren’t due to just the budding rise of technology but also because the experiences people have, changed them severely. The reality the newer generation faces, has changed the way in which they have grown up which has lead to a difference in the way that they think. This then relates to the way they retain information and learn. This is effective in the way it is laid out Prensky puts this quote in a place that makes the most sense, in a paragraph about how these differences go past the surface level that most educators assume them to be at. Which makes it very clear at that Prensky knows what he is talking about and how to use evidence to make his point clear and factually accurate.
This entire article is a form of Ethos as the man who writes it is an award winning author, speaker, “practical visionary” for education.
This entire article is writing for educators at a general level and who better to write an article about the need to adapt than an educator who is a digital immigrant. As a man with a vast background such as teaching at all levels and being a CEO for a software company that develops games. This article is as a whole is the perfect form of Ethos. As Marc Prensky has seen education and the disconnect between teacher and student from all levels including pre-K to college. Not only this but Prensky has seen and developed the exact technology and tools he believes will help bridge the disconnect between digital natives and digital immigrants. Prensky also points this out in the article when he reveals that he “ uses digital games in order to teach digital natives as it is the platform they are most familiar with” (4) Prensky uses the things he is most familiar with education and technology to do just that teach with technology but also to prove his claim that digital natives do in fact learn better through technology due to their familiarity with it. Along with that, the digital immigrants must catch up in order to teach their students the things that they must learn. This fits perfectly because Prensky is writing on a topic that he is well versed in and considered to be an expert in and his own credibility is enough to back up his statements as well as his
claim.
Prensky does a great job at persuading his audience via his use of ethos as well as logos and he continues that trend into pathos. In this article, he maintains that “despite often hearing that his methods won’t for for them because their subjects aren’t “facts based” and he believes that to be a lack of imagination and provides them with a way to simulate said methods to make the lesson more interesting” (6). This is important because it gives the reader a real example and visual of how one of these thought experiments/simulations might work. He does this while also showing the educators who are reading how simple it is to create one of these digital native alternatives. It also doesn’t over explain to the point where the reader would be confused about the point Prensky is trying to make. Prensky secures this usage of pathos by providing solutions on the side he wants to persuade, in order to create a motivation to agree with his claim. He shows the his audience the educators a simple way to quickly adapt to the fast past pace that their students are moving at around them.
Despite all of the great ways Prensky used pathos in the last paragraph this particular example falls flat. The way he defends his claim is by using an example where his former student says “He went to highly ranked college where the professors had graduated from MIT but still left due to the fact that they only read from text books.” (3) It had the potentially to be a great use of pathos if only it had been elaborated on but the statement made by the student seems to fall a bit flat in the sense that we know nothing other than he went to a great school then left. Unfortunately, it doesn’t add much to the article and again ends up falling flat and seeming a bit awkward. Especially, since Prinskey goes onto to write “that dropping out may have been a possibility when jobs that didn’t require degrees were in abundance but with that no longer being the case most dropouts are having to go back to school reaffirming said generational divide.” (3) With the awkwardness said quote and the following paragraphs after it kind of makes the aspect that would’ve made it pathos fall flat.
With all of that being said overall Prensky does an amazing job at persuading the audience to agree with his claim that there is a generational divide and that the digital immigrants are going to have adapt. He touches on the reasons there is a divide, he delves into factors from all perspectives, and even offers solutions to fix said problem all throughout the article. This as a whole created a beautifully written and successful attempt at persuading his audience.