Which of the following involves the knowledge and understanding of computers mobile devices Internet and related technologies?

Cited by (0)

Digital literacy

Digital literacy is not a significantly less equivocal concept than that of information services. It is one of numerous new literacies that has been introduced and discussed in various disciplinary contexts during the last couple of decades. Several researchers, most prominently David Bawden (2001, 2008b) and Allan Martin (2006), have attempted to bring analytical order into the discourse by writing comprehensive reviews of the concept of digital literacy and its relation to partly overlapping concepts such as information literacy, library literacy, media literacy and computer literacy. As Bawden (2008b) remarks, there is a certain observable continuum from the early references to computer literacy and the subsequent emergence of new forms of literacies from information literacy to the Internet, web literacy and digital literacy.

The origins of the contemporary understanding of digital literacies are typically traced back to the work of Paul Gilster (1997). He claimed in one of the first comprehensive accounts of the notion that digital literacy is about ‘mastering ideas, not keystrokes’. Even if Gilster’s proposition has been accepted by many theorists and practitioners at a fundamental level, the technical-skills-based emphases are still prominent in the practical discussion on how digital literacy should be promoted and taught. A similar polarisation, as Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel (2008) point out, is the dichotomy of whether digital literacy is perceived as a skills or a broader competence-related issue. The two different perspectives stem from a similar polarisation in the debate about the nature of competences. Paul Hager and David Beckett (1995) underlined that competences cannot be reduced to a list of abilities or capabilities. Competence is a constellation of abilities and/or capacities embodied in successful activities (tasks) and outcomes. From the competence perspective, digital literacy is a middle point of purely behaviourist and activist views of human beings.

The proliferation of competing definitions and inconsistency of the references to different types of digital literacies is problematic, as Yoram Eshet-Alkalai (2004) has argued, but it is doubtful whether it is possible to reach a full consensus of views. The roots of the dichotomies can be traced back to indifferences about the fundamental focus of the notion of literacy. Gilster’s idea of literacy may be seen as a relatively straightforward extension of the traditional idea of literacy as a capability to read and write – to cope with information using the conventional array of contemporary technologies (Bawden, 2008b). This understanding is contrasted by a socio-cultural understanding of literacy as a constellation of social practices. The socio-cultural view of literacy is highlighted in such digital-literacy-related concepts as attention literacy (Rheingold, 2009) or participation literacy (Giger, 2006). Jennifer Sharkey and D. Scott Brandt’s proposition (2008) that digital literacy can be seen as an amalgamation of information and technology literacies has similar implicit underpinnings. The implication of these points of view is that literacy is contextual to particular types of texts and that the interpretation of those texts depends on their readers. A further implication of these premises is that of the plurality of literacies instead of the existence of one monolithic literacy. There is a trend to acknowledge the plurality of viewpoints and refer to digital literacies instead of a digital literacy (Lankshear and Knobel, 2008: 1).

The notion of digital literacy or indeed digital literacies shares many of the confusions related to the related notion of information literacy. Alistair Mutch’s critique that much of the information literacy discussion has focused on the concept rather than its implications (Mutch, 1997) also applies to digital literacy. Similarly, many of the practical initiatives and attempts to improve digital literacy have had abilities-oriented rather than socio-cultural underpinnings, despite the contrary emphases of theorists and researchers (Buckingham, 2006). One conceivable reason for the popularity of theoretically simpler conceptualisations is their measurability, as the study of Eszter Hargittai (2005) demonstrates. Another similarly apparent fascination of skill-oriented conceptualisations is that skills are easier to conceptualise as learning outcomes than more generic competences as, for instance, the formulation of the MacArthur Foundation report Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture (Jenkins et al., 2006) shows.

We have seen that many of the indifferences about the nature of digital literacy can be traced back to fundamental differences of perceiving the notion of ‘literacy’ as a constellation of abilities or social practices. In this book, digital literacy is understood in a somewhat non-traditional sense that gives some justification to the use of the singular form. Similarly to the ‘information service’, ‘digital literacy’ is seen as a boundary object, a manifestation of a general approach of how people are supposed to be able to help other people in their pursuits of knowing within their bounded reality. As with information services, our journey will focus more on the notion instead of its diverse manifestations, which, quite correctly, give formidable reasons to use a plural form of the term. For the same reason, the reading of the relation of digital literacy and boundaries is different from the theorising inspired by the theory of the zone of proximal development of Lev Vygotsky (1978). My interest in this book is not to look into the mechanics of digital literacies, in the same way as I considered the mechanics of information services outside the scope of this text.

However, it is relevant to ask why this particular book focuses on information services and digital literacy. A simple reason for this choice is that of connotations. The undisputable ideological emphasis of direct and indirect approaches to intervening in the way people know in contemporary society is on digitality and the effect of digital information. Unlike David Buckingham (2006, 2010), I am not equally convinced that information literacy is a problematic concept because of its emphasis on information instead of broader cultural and social matters. The proposed kind of problem arises from a positivistic and rather narrow idea of information and its impact on people’s lives. Web literacy and game literacy are appropriate concepts, but their superiority depends significantly on how information literacy is understood. The reason for discussing digital literacy instead of information literacy is its explicit focus on the notion of digitality and how, not only in information literacy but also in related literacies, the implicit or explicit concern is digital technology and its consequences on the use of information and media (Martin, 2008). As long as the literacies are discussed as ideological manifestations, I am inclined to argue that the major underlying ideology of most of the prominent new literacies (with the apparent exception of such concepts such as television literacy or film literacy) is that of digitality. As Martin has remarked, they are all ‘literacies of the digital’ (Martin, 2008: 156).

Digital literacies

Digital literacies have been defined in a variety of ways (Lankshear & Knobel 2008; Bawden 2001, 2008). Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel (2008, pp. 2-4) have identified three perspectives on digital literacies: the conceptual definitions; the standardized operational definitions; and the sociocultural view of digital literacy.

The conceptual definitions of digital literacy include a general idea or ideal of digital literacy. David Buckingham’s (2008, pp. 78-80) general idea, for example, which is based in the British media education tradition, identifies the key aspects to digital literacy. These are: representation; language; production; and audience. According to this view, digital literacies include an understanding that digital media offer particular interpretations of reality, rather than reflect it (representation), have particular codes and conventions to construct meanings (language), are produced by a variety of interest groups, such as commercial corporations (production), and are responded to in different ways by different users (audience). From this perspective, being digitally literate means mastering these basic concepts and acquiring a conceptual understanding of the Internet and digital media culture through these concepts.

The standardized operational definitions of digital literacies consist of lists of functions and operations a person should be able to accomplish with computers and the Internet (Lankshear & Knobel 2008, pp. 2-4). A recent example of a standardized operational definition is by Genevieve Marie Johnson (2008) who has defined the cognitive skills for required Internet use, which she identifies as functional Internet literacy. Her definition includes a categorization of typical internet activities and a list of cognitive skills related to each activity. Johnson’s categorization includes five activities: communication; information; recreation; commercial; and technical. The activity of communication, for example, includes skills, such as entering an email address, reading and understanding a message, complying with email instructions, identifying essential information, combining multiple messages and judging the intention of communication (Johnson 2008, p. 39). In this case, being digitally literate appears to require the acquisition of standardized skills in each predefined category.

The third perspective on digital literacies, formulated by Lankshear and Knobel (2008), approaches literacies as social practices. The term practice, in this case, refers to patterns in using literacies in particular situations and activities, including embodied meaning-making (Barton 2007, pp. 36-7). This view is based on the sociocultural theories of literacies and the New Literacy Studies tradition that has developed since the 1980s. This tradition approaches literacies (reading and writing) as social practices, not as individual skills or conceptual understanding. A key to this view is to situate reading and writing in their social context by emphasizing that ‘literacy can only be understood in the context of the social practices in which it is acquired and used’ (Barton 2007, pp. 24-5).

Originally, the New Literacy Studies were not primarily about new technologies at all. However, many new literacy researchers, such as Pahl and Rowsell (2005), have emphasized that, in a digitally mediated culture, it is necessary to go beyond reading and writing in the traditional sense (that is, with a focus on printed texts) to consider the whole multimodal communicational landscape in which people live. Following this idea, Lankshear and Knobel (2008, p. 258) defined digital literacies as social practices that ‘involve the use of digital technologies for encoding and accessing texts by which we generate, communicate and negotiate meanings in socially recognizable ways’. From this perspective, being digitally literate is to be able to participate in social practices that involve meaning-making with digital technologies and media.

Lankshear and Knobel (2008) have conducted studies on a variety of social practices in.the Internet (for example, blogging, using Ebay, and Facebook) to prove that they are indeed literacies—that is, valuable vernacular activities in their own right. Indeed, the social practice view of literacies arose from an interest in people’s actual everyday uses of literacy, not from school uses of literacies (Barton 2007, p. 175). Viewed from this perspective, school is only one special context for the manifestation of literacies in people’s lives. Schools have certain physical settings, routines, regularities in interaction, social hierarchies, and rules and patterns of socialization, all of which frame the activation of literacies. People who act in schools in certain roles (pupils and teachers) also always bring their cultural knowledge from other settings of their lives to school literacy practices (Barton 2007, pp. 174-85).

In this chapter I apply the sociocultural view of literacies to study digital literacies in the context of schooling. I study digital literacies as school practices involving the use of digital technologies and media for generating, communicating and negotiating meanings. I call these practices ‘schooled digital literacies’.

4.1.1 Digital literacy

Improving digital literacy skills is seen as a key goal by many libraries. Digital literacy builds on general literacy and reading skills to provide people with an understanding of how digital technology functions and how to use it effectively. This includes critical thinking and assessment of information, familiarity with various devices, the ability to navigate the internet, and an understanding of issues associated with digital technology like data privacy. These skills are now seen as essential in an increasingly digital world, necessary to successfully navigate and use the online environment. As more and more functions are transported to the internet, digital literacy skills become critical. Libraries often see the effect of a lack of familiarity with, and knowledge of, digital tools, with requests for assistance to do basic tasks like using email, attaching documents, finding a website and filling in online forms, revealing the need for improved digital literacy skills in the community. The libraries examined in this book have prioritised the fostering of digital literacy skills as one of their key strategic goals. Examples in which libraries are working to improve digital literacy skills in their communities are:

Coding clubs—clubs for children to learn basic programming skills

GiGames—a gaming club for 10- to 14-year olds (Stuttgart City Library, Germany)

Spaces to test new technologies (Stuttgart City Library, Germany)

Makerspaces providing access to programming languages like Python and Scratch, and to Arduino and Raspberry Pi computers (Edmonton Public Library, Canada; Denver Public Library, United States, et al.)

Seniorgamer—a gaming programme for people with early onset dementia (Drammen Library, Norway)

Media Elternabend—an annual digital literacy event aimed specifically at parents (Stadtbibliothek Mannheim, Germany)

Approaches to Measurement

Digital and media literacy have been called “a constellation of life skills” (Hobbs, 2010, p. vii) given the diverse definitions, uses, purposes, and contexts in which these literacies are applied. Accordingly, in the scholarship within the discipline of education, there is as yet no consensus as to how these competencies should be measured. Academic researchers have been especially challenged to create research that meets the needs of educators in the field. Competency-based or performance measures of media literacy are appealing to both educators and pragmatic researchers: the use of naturalistic measurement of tasks resembling school assignments may help link academic research on media literacy with assessment of student learning, increasing the perceived relevance of academic scholarship among K-12 educators. However, researcher-initiated interventions that rely on large-scale surveys and self-report measures are useful for developing theoretical models and testing some of the explicit and implicit benefits of media literacy education. Martens (2010) wrote: “It has become widely accepted that evaluating and explaining effectiveness is one of the most profound challenges for contemporary research on media literacy education” (p. 9).

Theoretically, the measurement of media literacy competencies has been influenced by the development of perspectives from both the humanities and the social sciences. Humanistic approaches to media literacy tend to emphasize ideas from semiotics, meaning, interpretation, and political economy; social scientific approaches to media literacy emphasize media effects. The core concepts of media literacy are a set of humanistic principles developed at the Aspen Institute Leadership Conference on Media Literacy in the early 1990s. The concepts emphasize that: (1) all media messages are constructed; (2) media messages are constructed using a creative language with its own rules; (3) different people interpret the same media message differently; (4) media have embedded values and points of view; and (5) most media are organized to gain profit and/or power. These ideas serve as foundational understandings that media literate individuals use as both consumers and producers of media messages (Center for Media Literacy, 2002). In synthesizing the core ideas of media literacy, information literacy, visual literacy, and new literacies, Hobbs (2006) structured key humanistic ideas around the theoretical frames of authors and audiences (AA), messages and meanings (MM), and representations and reality (RR). Reflecting the British media education tradition, Buckingham (2007) identifies the concepts of language, production, audience, and representation as reflecting the core theoretical ideas that serve to focus critical inquiry.

Social scientific perspectives to media literacy education generally emphasize the negative effects of media and efforts to use media literacy education to mitigate those effects. Some examples include a focus on media violence, sexual representation, and body image (Potter, 2010). In the social science conceptualization of media literacy, since the mass media have the potential to exert a wide range of potentially negative (and positive) effects, the purpose of media literacy is “to help people to protect themselves from the potentially negative effects” (Potter, 2010, p. 681). Scholars working in this tradition tend to target a specific “problem” whereby a particular vulnerability to media messages is identified and an intervention is designed. This work often relies on survey research to measure digital and media literacy competencies and test hypotheses about the relationships between variables that assess the impact of advertising, news media, media violence, racism, sexism and issues of representation, and perceptions of credibility of news and information.

Children's vulnerability to advertising and persuasion has long been a concern of media literacy educators (Rozendaal, Lapierre, van Reijmersdal, & Buijzen, 2011). As a result of deregulation of media industries in Great Britain, media literacy has become the official remit of the British media regulator, OFCOM (Wallis & Buckingham, 2013). There, government researchers have examined how British children interpret a variety of new forms of advertising. For example, research has shown that many children and young people are relatively unfamiliar with how to recognize online advertising. In one performance-based measure of media literacy, children were shown a picture of the results returned by Google for an online search for “trainers,” the British term for athletic shoes, and then asked to identify advertising displayed in online search results. Although the sponsored links were presented in an orange box with the word “Ad” written in them, less than one in five children and only one-third of teens were able to identify correctly these sponsored links as a form of advertising. Half of British teens were aware of personalized advertising, by recognizing that some people might see ads that differ from those they see when visiting the same website or app. However, less than half of the teens were aware of the potential for vloggers (creators of video blogs) to be paid for endorsing products or brands (OFCOM, 2016). This evidence suggests that media literacy competencies are still not developed fully among British children and teens, although media education has had a long and distinguished tradition in the context of English instruction.

In recent years, performance-based empirical research on media literacy measures have been outstripped by qualitative research studies that dominate the education literature. In many studies of digital media and learning, researchers develop a short-term (often), grant-funded intervention and report on informal learning practices that involve children and youth who participate in digital media literacy programs or online communities (Barron, Gomez, Pinkard, & Martin, 2014). Numerous case studies of practice also fill practitioner journals, such as the Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, demonstrating the varied contexts in which teachers, and those working in afterschool settings, have developed programs and activities that blend critical thinking and creative media production using digital media and technologies. Case studies of individual learners/classrooms help scholars and educators visualize the learning process inside the classroom and advance theory about digital and media literacy education pedagogy but may not elucidate how to evaluate, scale, or assess the quality of school-wide or district level initiatives.

Below, I identify the distinctive characteristics of performance or competency-based measures of media literacy and measures that rely on self-report of attitudes and knowledge. Performance-based measures represent the “gold standard” because they precisely capture dimensions of media literacy competencies using tasks that are highly similar to the everyday practices of analyzing and creating media in the real world. Self-report measures can help researchers test theories by asking users to self-assess their knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors, and by considering the relationship between media literacy competencies and other variables. Each of these approaches has value to practitioners and scholars. I now examine some characteristics of competency-based and self-report measures to assess media literacy education.

2.1 What Is Digital Literacy?

The term digital literacy is attributable to Paul Gilster (1997), who referred to digital literacy as a logical extension to literacy, defining the term as “the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources when it is presented via computers.” While digital literacy has been associated with positive social engagement, for example, as an attribute of engaged citizens and employees, defining this term has proven to be complex, because the digital environment is constantly changing (e.g., Pangrazio, 2014). In definitions, there is often an emphasis on mastery of skills and tools. The United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (2013) echoes Gilster’s definition:

[Digital literacy is] the ability to use digital technology, communication tools or networks to locate, evaluate, use and create information. It also refers to the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources when presented via computers, or to a person’s ability to perform tasks effectively in a digital environment.

UNESCO (2013)

Digital technologies, as well as the digital information involved, are equally important to digital literacy. Digital devices, such as computing and communication instruments, and tools, such as databases, enable access, management, and creation of digital information. These means of interacting with digital information are viewed as networking devices, rather than simply computing devices. The digital information itself offers the digital material to be acted upon. Our capabilities, demonstrated through our interaction with this digital environment, determine our level of digital literacy.

According to the American Libraries Association’s Digital Literacy Task Force (2011), a digitally literate person is someone who:

•

possesses the variety of skills – technical and cognitive – required to find, understand, evaluate, create, and communicate digital information in a wide variety of formats;

•

is able to use diverse technologies appropriately and effectively to retrieve information, interpret results, and judge the quality of that information;

•

understands the relationship between technology, life-long learning, personal privacy, and stewardship of information;

•

uses these skills and the appropriate technology to communicate and collaborate with peers, colleagues, family, and on occasion, the general public; and

•

uses these skills to actively participate in civic society and contribute to a vibrant, informed, and engaged community.

ALA Digital Literacy Task Force (2011)

The European Union refers to digital literacy as digital competence and includes this in its standard of eight key competencies for lifelong learning:

Digital Competence can be broadly defined as the confident, critical and creative use of ICT [Information and Communications Technologies] to achieve goals related to work, employability, learning, leisure, inclusion and/or participation in society. Digital competence is a transversal key competence which, as such, enables us to acquire other key competences (e.g., language, mathematics, learning to learn, cultural awareness). It is related to many of the 21st Century skills which should be acquired by all citizens, to ensure their active participation in society and the economy.

Ferrari (2013)

This EU report offers a self-assessment tool for evaluating digital literacy or competencies in five areas (information retrieval, evaluation, and management; communication; content creation; safety in the digital environment; and problem solving) with three proficiency levels: A, foundation level; B, intermediate level; C, advanced level (Ferrari, 2013).

This self-assessment rubric (Figure 2.1) can help you to identify your own digital competencies by inviting you to consider your strengths and weaknesses in the digital environment. This self-evaluation will help you consider areas for improvement, so that you can start planning how to fill any gaps in your digital skills.

Prepare and Prevent

•

Digital literacy: This refers to the evolving digital and social media applications, including, but not limited to, search engines, medical blogs, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia, and other social media channels.

Virtual dissection: Virtual dissection tables and screen-based applications are complementing and beginning to replace human cadavers, allowing students to perform dissections that achieve educational objectives virtually. Examples include Anatomage, ImageVis3D, and 4DAnatomy.

Full physiological simulations: There are a number of international efforts (Virtual Physiological Human and HumMod) that seek to integrate research findings to create a functional digital patient for use in patient care, teaching, and research.

Curated online information: The vast information available through the Internet is being assessed by experts and combined into reliable and valid repositories that will be available to practitioners, patients, and learners (Wikis and Webicina.com are two examples).

Microchip modeling: Organs-on-Chips technology is an example of using human data rather than humans to conduct clinical trials. This technology provides a range of chips that model different organs, e.g., the liver, kidney, and heart. Researchers plan to connect these chips and create the first connected organs-on-chips human model by 2016.

DIY (do it yourself) biotechnology: Methods and materials in biotechnology have become more broadly available (iGEM, DIY division), allowing interested parties to conduct experiments outside of the traditional laboratory setting.

Gamification of patient care: Applications that function like games are being developed and used to achieve better health outcomes (Shine, FitBit, and Lumosity). Physical activities, cognitive functions, and other skills can be acquired, monitored, and improved with online gaming solutions.

Perception of Video Images

One component of digital literacy develops early in infancy: the ability to make sense of two-dimensional (2D) still and moving images and see their similarity to what they depict. For instance, after 5-month-olds habituate to the sight of a doll, they transfer their habituation to a picture of the doll (DeLoache, Strauss, & Maynard, 1979), showing that they recognize it as the same doll. Between 2 and 5 months, infants use a video image of their otherwise out-of-sight legs to direct their kicks at a noisy toy (Rochat & Morgan, 1995) and respond to video of an adult as they would to the actual adult, with smiles and increased movement (Bigelow, 1996; Hayes & Watson, 1981; Muir, Hains, Cao, & D’Entremont, 1996; Murray & Trevarthen, 1985). At 9 months, infants express similar emotions to videos of various entities (a person, an interesting toy, a spooky mask) as they do to the real things (Diener, Pierroutsakos, Troseth, & Roberts, 2008). By 1 year, the emotional responses that adults on video make to toys influence infants' willingness to engage with the real toys (Mumme & Fernald, 2003).

Besides making sense of pictorial images, infants also discriminate images from reality. Newborns both see the similarities between and differentiate pictures of objects from real objects (Slater, Rose, & Morison, 1984). By 4–6 months, infants smile more at a real person than at live video of the same (equally responsive) person (Hains & Muir, 1996), and 9-month-olds look longer at actual people, objects, and events than at videos of these entities (Diener et al., 2008). Thus, perception of the contents of video appears to be relatively automatic, but infants do attend to perceptual cues that differentiate images from reality.

An initial challenge for children's digital literacy is posed by the conflicting cues that make pictorial images both similar to and different from the three-dimensional (3D) world. Realistic video images and pictures retain much of the information in their real-world referents, including color, shadows, relative size, and (in the case of video) movement. At the same time, infants can perceive the flatness of images. Sensitivity to depth cues based on binocular disparity and motion parallax develops by 4 months (Held, Birch, & Gwiazda, 1980; Nawrot, Mayo, & Nawrot, 2009): babies detect that the image of a 3D object to their two eyes is slightly different, and changes as they move their head.

Children's natural exploratory behavior gradually helps them determine the affordances of 2D images. For instance, young infants often attempt to grasp at objects depicted in realistic pictures (DeLoache, Pierroutsakos, Uttal, Rosengren, & Gottlieb, 1998) and video. When 9-month-olds were seated within reach of a video screen on which a series of toys appeared, each child manually investigated by rubbing and patting the pictured objects and attempting to pluck them off the screen (Pierroutsakos & Troseth, 2003). As shown in Fig. 1, infants were especially persistent with moving toys, following them across the screen, and repeatedly trying to access them. Although 9-month-olds perceive information about the lack of depth in the images, they may not know the implications of these cues for their behavior, failing to realize that depictions do not afford the same set of responses as do the actual depicted objects.

6.6 Digital Literacy

This section focuses on the digital literacy skills needed to succeed in modern society and the role of public libraries in developing these. To succeed in modern society, information and digital literacy skills are arguably as important as basic reading, writing and numeracy skills. Jaeger et al. (2012: 3) explain that digital literacy encompasses:

the skills and abilities to access the digital infrastructure

an understanding of the language and component hardware and software required to navigate the technology

an individual’s ability to locate, evaluate and use digital information – both technologies (computers) and services (e-mail)

In the seminal book Digital Literacy, Paul Gilster (1997) describes digital literacy as ‘the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources when it is presented via a computer’. Gilster suggests that in modern society ‘the skills of the digitally literate are becoming as necessary as a driver’s license’, and that surviving in the increasingly digital environment requires digital literacy skills. Importantly, Gilster (1997) comments that when ‘acquiring digital literacy for Internet use’ the most ‘essential’ competency ‘is the ability to make informed judgments about what you find on-line’. This point was reflected in the following comment by an interviewee about the lack of digital and information literacy skills among young people:

…even though we say all the young people nowadays can or do have digital literacy, they really don’t[; many] of them don’t or they can use text speak on their phone but they maybe aren’t very good at searching for information or knowing what information they have[,] whether it is actually accredited information.

LNI4

Evidently, information literacy skills are part of the skills required to be considered digitally literate. Digital literacy is now recognised as ‘a keystone for civic engagement, educational success, and economic growth and innovation’ (Clark and Visser, 2011: 39). The term ‘digital literacy’ gained popularity in the 1990s and evolved from the concept of the digital divide (Jaeger et al., 2012: 5). Improving the digital literacy skills of citizens can help develop the wider economy because they can contribute as a member of a skilled workforce. In modern society, those lacking in digital literacy skills are at a disadvantage when seeking employment in many areas that require the ability to use a computer. A 2015 survey by the digital skills charity Go ON UK highlighted a serious problem in modern society, whereby 23% of UK adults do not have the ‘basic digital skills’ needed to complete online tasks such as safely carrying out transactions or avoiding malicious websites. Go ON UK’s chief executive officer, Rachel Neaman, referred to a ‘digital skills crisis’, and that the ‘lack of basic digital skills’ among UK residents would ‘continue to hold back economic growth, productivity and social mobility’. In addition, the Internet entrepreneur Baroness Martha Lane-Fox (2015) argued that the lack of digital literacy skills was ‘hurting the country’. Helsper (2015) described the lack of basic digital literacy skills and access in already disadvantaged areas as likely to increase inequality of opportunity around the United Kingdom.9 The importance of developing the digital infrastructure of countries and the digital skills of citizens is fundamental for wider social and economic growth. Thompson et al. (2014: 75) observe that digital literacy skills are needed for inclusion, and they recognise the important role public libraries play in supporting digital literacy skills and digital inclusion (Thompson et al., 2014: xiv). Thompson et al. (2014: 1) note that the ‘term public policy is used to indicate decisions and activities by the government to address public problem’. Moreover, digital literacy and digital inclusion have become ‘central issues for public policy’ in contemporary society (Thompson et al., 2014: 1).

Public libraries play a key role in building a digitally inclusive and information literate society. By providing assistance in the use of technologies and the Internet, public libraries alleviate the potential constraints facing those lacking digital literacy skills and the undereducated, thus enabling digital citizenship. Ferguson (2010: 2) asserts that information literacy and digital inclusion are now central components of the public library’s lifelong learning strategy and can contribute to the development of social capital. Digital inclusion is critical for participation in modern society, and public libraries now have a role to play in developing digital literacy skills of citizens and encouraging them to avail of the benefits of being online. Digital literacy is being recognised as ‘a keystone for civic engagement, educational success, and economic growth and innovation’ (Clark and Visser, 2011: 39). Indeed, it is often those people who are not online or do not have the skills for access who are missing out on the benefits and opportunities that digital access can bring.

Influences and affordances of digital media platforms

Turner et al. (2017) defined digital literacy: “[It] takes into account the full range of skills needed to read, write, speak, view, and participate in online spaces. All of these practices require media literacy, which includes the ability to access, analyze, evaluate, create, and participate with media in all its forms.” Zarouali, Ponnet, Walrave, & Poels (2017) studied adolescents 16–18 years old viewing retargeted ads on social media (Facebook) and reported several observations as follows:

retargeted advertising is associated with a higher purchase intention;

the intrusion into an adolescent’s “private sphere” leads to teen skepticism about this practice and a lower purchase intention; and

adolescents with higher privacy concerns or who had a text debriefing that advised them of the retargeting had more skepticism and lower purchase intentions.

Vanwesenbeeck, Ponnet, and Walrave (2017) studied factors related to teens understanding of selling and persuasion and advertising literacy via social network games (SNGs). These factors included individual traits, the need for cognition (willingness and motivation to use cognitive reasoning), and perspective training (the ability to understand others’ perspectives as different from one’s own). The researchers reported that high need for cognition scale scorers have a higher conceptual knowledge of SNG advertising, and that a critical attitude toward advertising reduced purchase intentions.

Moreno, Kota, Schoohs, and Whitehill (2013) have developed a conceptual framework to describe aspects of social media that influence viewers and users. Building on research that demonstrated that use of the social media site Facebook offered gratifications such as entertainment and recognition (Zhang, Tang, & Leung, 2011), as well as social interaction (Lin & Lu, 2011), Moreno sought to identify the perceptions of users as to which aspects of Facebook they viewed as influential. Studying college undergraduates from the University of Wisconsin, the researchers created concept maps using five steps: preparation, generation, structuring, representation, and interpretation (Trochim, Cook, & Setze, 1994). In total, 13 input clusters within four domains were identified: connection, comparison, identification, and Facebook as an experience (Fig. 2.1). The central cluster, “Facebook establishing social norms” reflected the evolution of Facebook as a social arbiter of online behavior and language. Participants also identified negative experiences alongside positive experiences with Facebook use, and reported a perception that Facebook might have a more significant influence on identity among younger teens whose development is at an earlier stage.

Comparison with peers and others was identified as an important component that could be exploited to promote both high-risk behaviors (e.g., sexual activity, substance use) and wellness practices. Greater parental monitoring is associated with less exposure to a negative influence such as alcohol use (D’Amico study).

Social media and apps continue to evolve and change, and teens are quick to follow their peers to new sites that afford communication and gratification. Moreno and Uhls have suggested reframing the study of digital media through affordances rather than by specific site brands. Affordances were introduced by James Gibson in his book “The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception” and Donald Norman in his 1988 book “The Psychology of Everyday Things.” The term indicates how an object is designed should suggest how it should be used.

“... the term affordance refers to the perceived and actual properties of the thing, primarily those fundamental properties that determine just how the thing could possibly be used. [...] Affordances provide strong clues to the operations of things. Plates are for pushing. Knobs are for turning. Slots are for inserting things into. Balls are for throwing or bouncing. When affordances are taken advantage of, the user knows what to do just by looking: no picture, label, or instruction needed”

(Norman, 1988, p. 9).

Individuals pick up information to guide action, by directly perceiving and implementing the function of an object in its environment. However, McGrenere and Ho (2000) underscored that Gibson’s intent was for affordances to exist independently of users’ perceptions, that is, a door can still open even if the pedestrian does not see the handle.

For example, Gibson’s affordances are seen as binary, that is they either exist or not, and are not dependent on the individual’s knowledge or abilities. Norman’s affordances are more complex, and include the background, experience, and abilities of the perceiver that can influence how an affordance is used.

Affordances can be a mechanism for understanding social media across brands, and allow researchers to identify risks and benefits for adolescent users and make evidence-based recommendations as to which platform may be best for teens. Moreno and Uhls explored five types of affordances observed in social media:

Functional affordances: How social media messages can be saved and shared. Examples include the ability to retweet a message (replicable), or to share a post on Facebook to a broader audience (scalable). Additional factors include the ability to edit or delete a post, the ability for others to capture and store a post (permanence). A teen whose cognitive and emotional development is still in relatively early stages may not understand that a post that has been retweeted or a photo temporarily posted on Snapchat can “go viral” and remain permanently on the internet.

Social affordances: Providing entry, via a login and membership to a “group”, social inclusion. Teens can develop social connections with family, friends, and acquaintances, as well as online recommendations to connect with others via suggested “Friends” by social media platforms or through hashtag-supported, common-interest communities. Teens learn to navigate the customs of social connections online, including how to effectively communicate and their audience’s “rules.” Some social connections allow teens to access resources and support, but others may provide peer pressure to engage in unhealthy activities or behaviors, such as the “pro-mia’ and “pro-ana” sites that promote bulimia and anorexia, respectively (Lajunen et al., 2007).

Identity affordances: Identity development is a critical task in adolescence. Social media platforms that allow teens to present themselves through photos, videos, text, and creative arts promote the exploration and formation of a maturing identity and self-image. (Boz, Uhls, & Greenfield, 2016).

Cognitive affordances: Social media afford teens the opportunity to enhance learning and knowledge, and explore environments beyond the local home, school, and neighborhood (Zhao, Liu, Tang, & Zhu, 2013). Benefits include options to develop and share creative projects and to obtain resources for health and wellness. Digital literacy skills can be honed that can help teens assess quality and accuracy of information obtained online. Additional cognitive skills facilitated by such affordances are “triggered attending,” through which teens are called to interact to communications via mobile phone alerts.

Emotional affordances: Teens can use social media tools to express their emotions and opinions online via “likes”, hearts, and emojis, for example. Online communications can help generate empathy–as well as envy, anxiety, and depression—from social comparisons (Chou & Edge, 2012). Users can follow or unfollow others, and upvote and downvote content. Following celebrities and politicians, however, could promote parasocial relationships, that is, one-way connections between a user and someone they have never met. Negative emotions can also be stirred by misinterpreted communications, social rejection, and cyberbullying.

1.4.7 Learning programmes

Library programmes which focus on learning have a strong emphasis on digital literacy and technology skills, as well as promoting job readiness. Other learning opportunities promoted by libraries see them take advantage of their role as a meeting place to support clubs, and to complement online learning courses. In 2013 Manchester Libraries, United Kingdom, ran free digital literacy workshops for unemployed women (Digital skills for women, 2013). Run by industry leaders, the courses included basic I.T. skills, introduction to web development, social media and introduction to programming (Digital skills for women, 2013). In 2013 Bergen Public Library began a 3-year project called Digital Arena. Its aim was to transform the library into a place for learning and experiencing new media and digital technology (Jore et al., 2014). As part of the Digital Arena project, the library runs Code Club for children, where they learn basic coding skills using Scratch and LEGO Mindstorms (Jore et al., 2014). Bergen also runs the DEL Digital Inclusion programme which includes a Service Centre for Language and Digital Services, providing library visitors with daily access to guidance on technology-related topics, in a variety of languages (Jore et al., 2014). The DEL Digital Inclusion programme also runs Laptop Clubs. These clubs teach elementary computer skills to promote digital literacy in the community (Jore et al., 2014).

Kaunas Municipal ‘Vincas Kudirka’ Public Library, Lithuania, developed a programme to promote technology skills in an effort to encourage young people to pursue technology-related careers (EIFL, 2016j). This addresses a national skills shortage, as only 6% of college and university students enrol in I.T.-related courses (EIFL, 2016j). Partnerships with the technology industry were used to develop the programme, involving the Association of Lithuanian Engineers, I.T. teachers and the Robotics School (EIFL, 2016j). Kaunas’ programme involved the opening of a learning space in 2015 called ‘Future Laboratory 3D’ (EIFL, 2016j). This space facilitates the learning of technology skills, as well as providing the opportunity for students to visit technology companies and gain work experience and careers guidance (EIFL, 2016j). Programme participants worked on a project to build a model ‘smart city’ using design software, 3D printers and Arduino kits and had the opportunity to exhibit parts of their ‘smart city’ project at the Vilnius Mini Maker Faire (EIFL, 2016j).

Stadtbibliothek Mannheim, Germany, runs an annual digital literacy event specifically aimed at parents (Ertelt & Hekmann, 2014). Media Elternabend seeks to improve media competence and knowledge amongst parents, acknowledging their crucial role in teaching digital literacy skills to their children (Ertelt & Hekmann, 2014). The event begins with a talk by an expert in a relevant field, and information stations reflecting different topics are presented throughout the library for people to browse, with information in the form of pamphlets, brochures and relevant material from the library collection (Ertelt & Hekmann, 2014). The event has widespread promotion and after the 2014 event, Mannheim made a short film showcasing Media Elternabend for its YouTube channel (Ertelt & Hekmann, 2014).

Sengkang Public Library, Singapore, runs a Parenting Club, the first learning community solely aimed at parents in Singapore (Abdullah, 2013). The Club gives parents of young children the opportunity to meet each month and share their experiences in parenting (Abdullah, 2013). The club is run by a facilitator, and library staff assist in recommending suitable books and topics for discussion (Abdullah, 2013). Sengkang has a large demographic of children, with 22.3% of the population under 14, and the club has received an overwhelming response (Abdullah, 2013).

Hultsfred and Hagfors Libraries, Sweden, are using the concept of living libraries, where users can ‘borrow’ a person to talk to, to help assist foreign language speakers to learn Swedish (Jokitalo, 2015d). Both libraries are offering to ‘lend’ Swedish language speakers out to users to help improve their language skills (Jokitalo, 2015d). Stockholm City Libraries also support the learning of Swedish by running language cafés to enable people to practice their language skills in a relaxed, informal environment (Hjerpe, 2014b). Led by volunteers, cafés are also available in other languages such as Japanese, Italian and German, and offer informal, conversational learning (Hjerpe, 2014b). Cafés are often led by previous participants in the Swedish language cafés, who prepare topics to guide the conversation, and actively encourage participants to speak (Hjerpe, 2014b).

Malmö City Library's learning centre, Lӓrcentrum, was established in 2010 as a collaboration between the Library and the Malmö educational administration (Wahlstedt & Cederholm, 2013). Malmö employs three teachers to staff the centre, who work alongside librarians to provide a learning environment for digital literacy, new immigrants to learn skills and communicate, and to teach Swedish language skills (Wahlstedt & Cederholm, 2013). The centre also acts as a learning space for library employees to improve and practice their technology skills (Wahlstedt & Cederholm, 2013). The centre has engaged with the local business community in the ‘Open Office’ programme, where organisations occupy the Lӓrcentrum space for a week, holding lectures and presentations and being available as ‘living books’ for the public to consult (Wahlstedt & Cederholm, 2013).

Micoud Public Library, Saint Lucia, developed a learning programme to tackle unemployment and promote job skills in young people (EIFL, 2016h). Micoud observed that although young people were competent with using social media apps, they lacked word processing and basic computer skills (EIFL, 2016h). The library created a 4-week training programme that taught computer literacy, using email and word processing software, job application skills, interview skills, time management and goal-setting (EIFL, 2016h). Micoud had an overwhelming response to the programme, with a growing waiting list, and feedback that participants had received job interviews and job offers (EIFL, 2016h). Micoud was awarded an EIFL Innovation Award for the programme, and plans to run further training in 2017 (EIFL, 2016h).

Many libraries are beginning to partner with course providers in order to support people in their community that are seeking to continue their education, whether formal or informal. Libraries including Los Angeles Public Library, Sacramento Public Library and the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County are participating in a programme that offers the chance to complete a high school diploma (Lepore, 2015). Career Online High School is an online accredited course provided through Gale Cengage aimed at adult learners who wish to complete their high school diploma (Lepore, 2015). Part of libraries’ appeal as partners is that library buildings are neutral spaces, without the sometimes negative associations of formal learning institutions (Lepore, 2015). Participating libraries purchase a scholarship from Gale Cengage, to provide the course to applicants that have gone through a selection process, whilst Career Online High School provides teachers, coaches and the I.T. set up (Lepore, 2015). In another example of supporting formal learning, the Swedish city of Vejle launched Smart University Vejle in 2013, a university which provides online content to help support students who wish to study without having to attend university in the city (Jokitalo, 2014e). Vejle Public Library is supporting the university by providing various facilities to students, including study areas, meeting rooms and video conferencing (Jokitalo, 2014e). Public Library ‘Victoria Dorantes’ no. 382, Mexico, runs a distance education programme aimed at parents called ‘Back to School for Better Family Learning’ (EIFL, 2016o). The library has partnered with Tec de Monterrey, a technical university, which provides the course content, and the Education Department of the State of Tlaxcala, which provides the computers and internet connections (EIFL, 2016o). The library aims to create a learning environment in families and encourage parents to support their children's education (EIFL, 2016o).

Libraries are also venturing into the field of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Ridgefield Library, United States, included a MOOC as part of its summer reading programme (Pawlowski, 2013). Using a Coursera class called ‘The Fiction of Relationship’, it held meetings for course participants each week over 10 weeks (Pawlowski, 2013). The group watched the lecture projected on a screen and then discussed the lecture content and the week's readings (Pawlowski, 2013). Ridgefield said the programme contributed to its goal to be an intellectual and cultural centre and supported lifelong learning (Pawlowski, 2013). In 2014 New York Public Library also announced a partnership with Coursera. New York will take part in Coursera's Learning Hubs initiative and will support selected Coursera classes by hosting weekly in-person discussion groups at several branches (Enis, 2014b). Courses are selected by assessing topics of broad appeal and whether content ties in with library collections (Enis, 2014b).