Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teenagers connected to digital environments – what happens when they get to school? Commonalities, similarities and differences from their perspective

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In light of the many major changes in teenagers’ lives of due to digital applications and the significant role they play in their lives, and since school is a place where they spend many hours, this study examined their perspective of how the digital environment is integrated into their school life. Participating in this mixed-method study were 233 Israeli teenagers who completed a questionnaire and of whom 45 were interviewed. Findings show that what they have in common is extensive use of their smartphones and computers for study-related matters, they use many apps and social networks and belong to a variety of study-related groups. Similarities are that they have learned to need information and to obtain relevant information to solve problems or satisfy their curiosity. Differences lie in their comparison of the digital environments of their smartphone and home computer and those used in school, and to some participants the school environment seems outdated, slow, and scholastically and technologically unchallenging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACMA. (2007). Media and communication in Australian families. Sydney: ACMA Available at http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310893. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (2008). Of rhetoric and representation: The four faces of ethnography. The Quarterly Sociological, 49(1), 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, A., & Hanson, J. (2003). Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial issues in mass media and society. Guilford: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technologicl pedagogicl content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ascough, R. (2007). Welcoming design: Hosting a hospitable online course. Teaching Theology and Religion, 10(3), 131–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashburn, E. A., & Floden, R. E. (2006). Meaningful learning using technology: What educators need to know and do. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, E., & Delamont, S. (2006). In the roiling smoke: Qualitative inquiry and contested fields. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(6), 747–755.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atwal, K., Millwood Hargrave, A., Sancho, J., Agyeman, L., & Karet, N. (2003). What children watch: Analysis of children’s programming provisions between 1997–2001. London: BSC/ITC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, C. (2010). The impact of instructor immediacy and presence for online student affective learning, cognition, and motivation. The Journal of Educators online, 7(1), 1–30 Retrieved from: http://www.thejeo.com/Archives/Volume7Number1/BakerPaper.pdf. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Bauerlein, M. (2008). The dumbest generation: How the digital age stupefies young Americans and jeopardizes our future (or, don 't trust anyone under 30). New York: Penguin Tarcher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billings, D., & Halstead, J. (2009). Teaching in nursing: A guide for faculty (3rd ed.). Saunders/Elsevier: St. Louis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, D. (2015). The rise of writing: Redefining mass literacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, J., & Zillman, D. (2002). Media effects, advances in theory and research. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byron, T. (2008). Safer children in a digital world: The report of the Byron Review. Retrieved from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-00334-2008.pdf. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Chenail, R. J. (2012). Conducting qualitative data analysis: Qualitative data analysis as a metaphoric process. The Qualitative Report, 17(1), 248–253 https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol17/iss1/13. Accessedn Jan 2019.

  • Christensen, C., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2008). Disruptive class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, T., Narayan, V., & Oldfield, J. (2013). iPadagogy: Appropriating the iPad within pedagogical contexts. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 7(1), 48–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J.E., & Kritzer J.B. (2009). Strategies for success: Teaching an online course. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 28(4), 36-40. https://search.proquest.com/openview/a5278523c40042a6555aa670df1cecd0/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=26876

  • Coleman, A. M. (2001). Dictionary of psychology. Oxford Reference Online: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comstock, G., & Scharrer, E. (2007). Media and the American child. San Diego: Elsevier/Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durish, P. (Ed.). (2013). Information technologe programs: Successes and challenges. Birmingham: The Haworth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisen, S., & Lillard, A. S. (2017). Young children’s thinking about touchscreens versus other media in the US. Journal of Children and Media, 11(2), 167–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engstrom, M., Santo, S., & Yost, R. (2008). Knowledge building in an online cohort. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(2), 151–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feenberg, A. (2010). Btween reason and experience: Essays in technology and modernity. Cambridge: Cambridge MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, K. A. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education. An evidence-based perspective (pp. 93–143). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowles, J. (2003). Is television harmful for children? No. In A. Alexander & J. Hanson (Eds.), Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial issues in mass media and society (pp. 47–53). McGraw-Hill/Dushkin: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatfield, L., & Millwood-Hargrave, A. (2003). Dramatic Licence – Fact or fiction? London: Broadcasting Standards Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley, M. (2008). Questioning qualitative research: Critical essays. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbert, R. L., & Stephenson, M. T. (2003). The importance of indirect effects in media effects research: Testing for mediation in structural equation modeling. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 47, 556–572.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jadric, M., Bubas, G., & Babic, S. (2010). Motivation, internet access and ICT experience as factors of success in a non-moderated e-learning course. Int. J. of Intelligent Defence Support Systems, 3(1/2), 116–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jelfs, A., Richardson, J. T. E., & Price, M. J. (2009). Student and tutor expectations of effective tutoring in distance education. Distance Education, 30(3), 419–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J., & Sankey, M. (2008). Communities of practice: A sphere of influence enhancing teaching and learning in higher education. Paper presented at Australian and New Zealand Communication Association Conference 2008. Retrieved from http://eprints.suq.edu.au/42681/Lawrence_Sankey_ANZCA2008.pdf.

  • Lee, C. (2008). A neophyte about online teaching. Qualitative Inquiry, 14(7), 1180–1186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., Magjuka, R. J., Bonk, C. J., & Lee, S. (2007). Does sense of community matter? An examination of participants’ perceptions of building learning communities in online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(1), 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S., & Bober, M. (2005). UK children go online: Final report of key project findings. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.

  • Livingstone, S. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society, 10, 393–411.

  • Livingstone, S. (2013). Online risk, harm and vulnerability: Reflections on the evidence base for child internet safety policy. ZER: Journal of Communication Studies, 18, 13–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S. (2015). From mass to social media? Advancing accounts of social change. Social Media and Society, (May 11). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115578875.

  • Livingstone, S., & Sefton-Green, J. (2016). The class: Living and learning in the digital age. New York: NYU Press ISBN 9781479824243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., & Görzig, A. (Eds.). (2012). Children, risk and safety on the Internet: Research and policy challenges in comparative perspective. Bristol: Marston Books, Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., Ólafsson, K., & Haddon, L. (2014). Children's online risks and opportunities: Comparative findings from EU children Online and Net Children Go Mobile. LSE, London: EU Children Online.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahler, D. (2012). Teaching literacy in primary schools using an interactive whole-class technology: Facilitating student-to student whole-class dialogic interaction. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 21, 137–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matareese, A. (2011). Online learning: Experts say digital literacy is about thinking — not gadgets. Medill News Service, April 30th.

  • McQuail, D. (2005). Mass communication theory. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuail, D. (2010). Mass communication theory: An introduction. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyers, S. (2008). Using transformative pedagogy when teaching online. College Teaching, 56(4), 219–224.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ofcom - Office of Communications (2010). UK adults' media literacy report. Retrieved 17 May from http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/adults-media-literacy.pdf. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Oliver, K., Osborne, J., & Brady, K. (2009). What are secondary student’s expectations for teachers in virtual school environments? Distance Education, 30(1), 23–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oriogun, P. K., Ravenscroft, A., & Cook, J. (2005). Validating an approach to examining cognitive engagement within online groups. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(4), 197–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelz, B. (2004). Three principles of effective online pedagogy. Journal of the Asynchronous Learning Network, 8(3), 33–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittman, L. D., & Richmond, A. (2008). University belonging, friendship quality, and psychological adjustment during the transition to college. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(4), 343–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, W. J. (2004). Theory of media literacy: A cognitive approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 2, 101–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. Internet & Higher Education, 10(1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A., & Downey, J. R. (2010). Why some distance education programs fail while others succeed in a global environment. Internet & Higher Education, 13(3), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A., Wighting, M. J., & Lucking, R. (2004). The classroom and school community inventory: Development, refinement and validation of a self-report measure for educational research. Internet and Higher Education, 7(4), 263–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salman, E. (2006). Taxonomy of collaborative e-learning. Cincinnati: Union Institute & University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salyers, V., Carter, L., Carter, A., Myers, S., & Barrett, P. (2014). The search for meaningful e-learning at Canadian universities: A multi-institutional research study. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning – IRRODL, 15(6).

  • Sharan, Y. (2014). Learning to cooperate for cooperative learning. Anales de Psicologia, 30(3), 802–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, P., Li, C. S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, M. M. (2009). Instructional-design theory to guide the creation of online learning communities for adults. TechTrends, 53(1), 48–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Splitter, L. J. (2009). Authenticity and constructivism in education. Studies in Philosophical Education, 28(2), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-008-9105-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P., & Kitter, S. (Eds.). (2010). Millennials: A portrait of generation next. Retrieved from http://pewsocialtrends.org/assets/pdf/millennials-confident-connected-open-to-change.pdf. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Tyner, K. (2014). Literacy in a digital world: Technology and learning in the age of information. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voogt, J., & Pelgrum, H. (2005). ICT and curriculum change. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 1, 157–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In R. Van der veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99–174). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, S. (2006). Student views of effective online teaching in higher education. American Journal of Distance Education, 20(2), 65–77. Accessed Jan 2019

  • Young, S., & Bruce, M. A. (2011). Classroom community and student engagement in online courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(2) http://jolt.merlot.org/vol7no2/young_0611.htm.

  • Zilka, C.G. (2014). Empowering educators & mentors in the social media age – the three element way. Butan-Galim. (Hebrew).

  • Zilka, C. G. (2016a). Reducing the digital divide among children who received desktop or hybrid computers for the home. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 233–251 http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3519. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Zilka, C. G. (2016b). Do online friendships contribute to the social development of children and teenagers? The bright side of the picture. International journal of Humanities and Social Science (IJHSS), 6(7).

  • Zilka, C. G. (2017a). Awareness of eSafety and potential online dangers amongst children and teenagers. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 319–338 https://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3864. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Zilka, C. G. (2017b). Awareness of ICT capabilities, digital literacy, and use of reflective processes in children who received their first home computer. Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 9(1), 80–98 http://www.inderscience.com/info/ingeneral/forthcoming.php?jcode=ijtel. Accessed Jan 2019.

  • Zilka, C.G. (2018). Аlways with them: Smartphone use by children, adolescents, and young adults – Characteristics, habits of use, sharing, and satisfaction of needs. Universal Access in the Information Society, 1-11. (UAIS). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0635-3.

  • Zilka, C. G. (2019). The use of Mobile technologies by immigrant adolescents in coping with the new language and with their formal studies. In A. Forkosh-Baruch & H. Meishar-Tal (Eds.), Mobile technologies in educational organizations (Chapter 10 pp. 192–210).https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/the-use-of-mobile-technologies-by-immigrant-adolescents-in-coping-with-the-new-language-and-with-their-formal-studies/227229 https://www.igi-global.com/viewtitlesample.aspx?id=227229&ptid=214497&t=The%20Use%20of%20Mobile%20Technologies%20by%20Immigrant%20Adolescents%20in%20Coping%20With%20the%20New%20Language%20and%20With%20Their%20Formal%20Studies&isxn=9781522581062

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bar-Ilan University; Achva Academic College, Ha-Zayit st. 106, 79265, Emunim, Israel

    Gila Cohen Zilka

Authors
  1. Gila Cohen Zilka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gila Cohen Zilka.

Ethics declarations

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

The study received approval from the institutional review board (IRB) of Achva Academic College.

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zilka, G.C. Teenagers connected to digital environments – what happens when they get to school? Commonalities, similarities and differences from their perspective. Educ Inf Technol 25, 1743–1758 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10052-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10052-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation