Students’ access to digital literacy at a South African university: Privilege and marginalisation

Abstract Lifelong learning has become associated with participation in the digital age, affecting everything from access to information technology, to its use in teaching and learning. It is therefore inevitable that educationists turn to digital literacy practices to examine their contribution to, and influence on, learning. This article explores the digital literacy practices of a group of higher education students with minimal previous access to digital resources, as well as how they compensate for uneven access, with a view to examining what they perceive to be challenges and possibilities offered by technology. Thus the article highlights how they are ‘caught-between’ two worlds: the technologicised and non-technologicised. The work is framed by New Literacy Studies, which suggests that literacy is a contextualised practice positioned in relation to social institutions and the power relations that sustain them (Gee, 1996). Emerging themes indicate that students perceive digital practices to have symbolic value, and provide access to cultural capital.

[1]  B. Street.  The Implications of the ‘New Literacy Studies' for Literacy Education , 1997 .

[2]  G. Bond,et al.  The languages of Africa and the diaspora : educating for language awareness , 2009 .

[3]  D. Murray.  Protean Communication: The Language of Computer-Mediated Communication , 2000 .

[4]  Mark Warschauer,et al.  Dissecting the "Digital Divide": A Case Study in Egypt , 2003, Inf. Soc..

[5]  Shirley Pendlebury,et al.  Promises of access and inclusion: Online education in Africa , 2000 .

[6]  Roger Boshier.  Running To Win: The Contest between Lifelong Learning and Education in Canada. , 2000 .

[7]  Ragnar Andreas Audunson,et al.  Technology and Social Inclusion. Rethinking the Digital Divide , 2006, J. Documentation.

[8]  Angela Murphy,et al.  The e-skills landscape in South Africa , 2009 .

[9]  James C. Gee.  The New Literacy Studies , 2015 .

[10]  William P. Ancker.  The Challenge and Opportunity of Technology: An Interview with Mark Warschauer. , 2002 .

[11]  N. Mercer,et al.  Language, literacy and education: A reader , 2003 .

[12]  R. Goodfellow.  Online Literacies and Learning: Operational, Cultural and Critical Dimensions , 2004 .

[13]  B. Street.  Literacy in Theory and Practice , 1984 .

[14]  P. Bourdieu,et al.  Language and Symbolic Power , 1991 .

[15]  Mark Warschauer,et al.  Technology and Curricular Reform in China: A Case Study , 2004 .

[16]  Pm Rea-Dickins.  Encyclopaedia of Language and Education: Language Testing and Assessment , 1997 .

[17]  H. Abadzi.  Efficient Learning for the Poor: Insights from the Frontier of Cognitive Neuroscience , 2006 .

[18]  E. Wenger,et al.  Practice, person, social world , 2012 .

[19]  Roz Ivanic,et al.  Situated literacies : reading and writing in context , 2000 .

[20]  J. Gee.  Social Linguistics And Literacies: Ideology in Discourse , 1996 .

[21]  Chrissie Boughey,et al.  Learning to write by writing to learn: a group-work approach , 1997 .

[22]  David Corson,et al.  Encyclopedia of Language and Education. , 1999 .

[23]  Beverly Derewianka,et al.  Exploring How Texts Work , 1991 .

[24]  Theresa Lillis,et al.  Student Writing: Access, Regulation, Desire , 2001 .

[25]  C. Boughey.  'Naming' Students' Problems: an analysis of language-related discourses at a South African university , 2002 .

[26]  A. Feenberg.  The critical theory of technology , 1990 .

[27]  Alan Rogers.  Review of “Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context” by David Barton, Mary Hamilton & Roz Ivanič (eds.) , 2001 .

[28]  Brian Street.  Academic literacies and the new orders: implications for research and practice in student writing in higher education , 2004 .

[29]  Constance C. Gerger.  Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. , 1993 .

[30]  Roger Boshier,et al.  Discursive Constructions of Web Learning and Education , 2000 .