I had the pleasure of meeting John Palfrey (albeit briefly) and listening to a couple of his presentations when I attended iLaw (which I miss terribly, btw) at Harvard’s Berkman Center a couple of years ago. So when I saw that he had a new book out and that it was about digital kids, I figured it might be worth picking up.
Now I just got it, and as is usually my wont, I was doing some quick skimming around when I landed on the passage below towards the end of the book. Suffice to say that if the it covers these topics in an interesting and challenging way, I’ll be writing more about it.
I think of this book as an invitation to conversation. It’s an invitation sent out especially to parents and teachers of Digital Natives and would-be Digital Natives. I think they–we–are essential to the happy resolution of the many conflicts we describe in this book. Parents and teachers have lots to worry about, I know much of it unrelated to the privacy or Web-surfing habits of their kids. But this is important, and more so with each passing day.
As of today, and surely subject to change, I’m absolutely convinced of three things about the population born digital.
First, the ways in which some–by no means all–young people are interacting with information, with one another, and with institutions is changing rapidly. the consequences of these changes are enormous for the future of our societies. It’s not a foregone conclusion that it will turn out well. There’s a lot we’ve got to get right if we want to give our children, and our societies, bright futures.
Second, I’m certain that there is a global culture in the making, which joins people from many corners of the globe together with one another based upon common ways of interacting over information networks. The emergence of this common culture is part and parcel of the trend toward globalization. The consequences of this second notion, of an emerging global culture, ought to be overwhelmingly positive. It is a dramatic amplification of the diplomatic and cross-cultural benefits gained by the invention of the telegraph, millions of international student exchanged, and the rise of the globally networked economy. As we celebrate the emergence of this global culture, we need to recognize that a sharp divide has formed between those with both the access and skills to participate in this digital culture and those without either.
Third, while there’s no one-size-fits-all solution to the issues that we worry about–privacy, safety, piracy, overload, and so forth–the best and most enduring solutions are community-based efforts. These are big, gnarly, complicated, subtle issues, every one of them. We have to be flexible in how we approach them, to think creatively, to work together. We have to draw on our wisdom of Digital Natives themselves in the process. They are our greatest hope, hands down.
I know that I’ve been accused of getting a little too excited by writing like this, but you can add this to the chorus of smart people who see what’s happening as “tectonic” as Shirky says it. And yes, we all like to hear others confirm what we ourselves believe; Palfrey may be in my echo chamber for sure. But like Shirky, at first blush this has a pretty balanced feel to it (digital natives reference aside.)
By the way, the book has a pretty impressive wiki to go along with it.
Dear Will,
This sounds an awful lot like Seymour Papert’s book, The Connected Family: Bridging the Digital Generation Gap
(published in 1996).
Papert’s insights aren’t just rooted in the Internet or pop-economics, but in five decades of working with and studying children.
Why don’t you share your thoughts about and excerpts from Papert’s seminal book with your vast PLN?
After all, shouldn’t learners be dealing with primary resources?
Save a few bucks and time. Now, thanks to the Internet, you can watch these authors speak about these issues.
Here’s just one example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xvf_cBImR5Q
Sounds like a great current book. In my mind, it is good to hear and deal with a current perspective rather than a 12 year old book written in ’96.
I would much rather deal with folks that are forward thinking and may have a great handle on the digital native rather than one that is entrenched in 50 years of the same old same old.
Your view also hold weight as it comes from a tried and true educator, rather than a self proclaimed educational expert.
Thanks for the review, I look forward to reading it.
And Gary, it’s Ok for a book to be rooted in the internet, it is the most advanced tool for education and information available.
wow!
Are you suggesting that shallow derivative work is better because it’s new?
There are but a few people of Papert’s intellect and powerful ideas per generation and their wisdom is timeless.
That is why I asked Will to share his thoughts on The Connected Family with you rather than the current airport bookstore treasure.
WOW! And I thought the snarkiness was limited to the presidential campaign! Oh well, civility and blog commenting don’t tend to go hand in hand either – it seems comments are usually a love fest or knock down drag out cage match…
Ok. Calm down people.
@Lohman In all fairness, Gary is a tried and true educator just like me. In fact, his diverse experiences make him arguably more of a valuable voice in this community than mine.
Having said that, I’m just wondering Gary how you know that this is a “shallow derivative work” without reading it. And Papert’s wisdom may be timeless, but surely you can’t be suggesting that no one else has anything to add to the conversation. Are you?
Look, we have different heroes here, but I’m willing to listen to your thinking and be open to it. The “All Roads Lead to Papert” line does limit the dialogue at times, however.
Will,
Now you are taking a cheap shot. As a former English teacher, surely you would agree that there are “foundational” texts in any field.
I’d like to think that authors and pundits making pronouncements about revolutions in childhood, learning or society are well-versed in the field’s major works in order to have legitimacy and context.
Incidentally, I’ve read lots of the net books you’ve recommended, written about some of them and gone out of my way to recommend you and your book. I don’t put a lot of stock in authors who embrace and repeat such nonsense as digital native/immigrant. Why should I give such authors my money or time?
Instead of demeaning Dr. Papert without a single rationale, perhaps you would like to say something about the comments dismissing books and any idea older than a year or two.
Gary,
Where am I demeaning Papert? Seriously? Where?
If anything, I’m taking you to task, not him. I don’t disagree that he has “foundational ideas”, but he’s not the only one. Not that you are saying that either, but just about every conversation with you goes back to Papert.
I appreciate your recommendation of my work. And by the way, I defended you above. I wouldn’t take cheap shots at you, nor anyone else for that matter.
Gary and Will,
Even in your disagreement you professional discourse is exemplary.
Thank you for the example professional sparing.
Sonja
After reading the post and comments I am very interested in reading both Papert and Palfrey’s work. It seems both may have something valuable to add to a very important current (and timeless) topic in education and society. Shouldn’t we all be open to various viewpoints and research methodologies as long as they add something to our collective knowledge base and understanding?