Lenhardt et al, “Teens and Social Media” is a report on a large study conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life Project, which conducts a variety of different surveys about the Internet. Here’s where to talk about it.
Now, this is the whole report, including the methodology at the end, but it is imminently readable and skimmable. I’d suggest reading the executive summary at the beginning and then finding more details you might be interested in the report.
Also, here’s a 2009 update on this report:
I think this report is interesting for all kinds of reasons. I’m struck by the level of online participation by teens: 93% is about as close to 100% as we’re ever likely to get. I think it’s also interesting to see that youth are less interested in email and Twitter.
The other reason why I think this stuff is important is because it’s another reason as to why “access” isn’t really a viable excuse for not discussing issues of technology and teaching. I don’t mean to suggest that all is equal; like everything else in our society, there are disparities based on socio-economic factors that obviously influence things like the kind of access that users have. But that 93% of all teens does indeed factor in things like race and gender.
I also should point out (and this might be obvious already) that access is now a complete non-issue for college students– at least in my experience. When I started teaching in 1988 at Virginia Commonwealth University (which is in many ways a university similar to EMU), I used to have students who didn’t know how to type and who had never touched a computer. When I taught first year writing this past fall, I think had one student who didn’t have either a desktop or laptop computer, and she had no problem getting to on-campus computer labs and such.
Now, just because these teens and others have access and are using these technologies doesn’t necessarily mean that they are thinking about how they are using these technologies. But we’ll talk about that in the second half of the week….
My biggest concern is not the possibilities of money making and understanding technology, but the psychological impact of not having face to face social interaction. I know people that can barely be in a crowd but their interactions online are completely different. I wonder if the web is making us both recluse and socialites. What psychological impacts will this have? And I am definitely concerned about the English language. Acronyms for words– I’m still so lost even after studying it. We can’t lose email! It is so important! It is so easy to write a simple letter!!! It’s the daughter of actual letter writing! If car and cell phone companies come out with an acronym based language I’ll be completely lost!!!
Good point about the portion of the population who are really shy and don’t communicate face to face, but are incredibly active online. I think the Wolak article mentioned this with that population of teens being more at-risk for being sucked into inappropriate/predator-related relationships.
I think we need to watch our kids offline and online, both. There seems to be this assumption that because it is online it is worse, but those who would do harm are just coming from a different direction. i can see a shy child being even more intimidated by someone in person.
Great point… I do think the internet is making us both recluses and socialites. But, I wonder if there is really any direct correlation between “interent socializing” and apprehension to communicate f2f. I guess what I’m wondering is, even if there was no internet, would the “anti-social” be any less so? Or, would they simply find another way to maintain their anti-social behavior? Does the internet simply provide an outlet so that those who aren’t as comfortable f2f can still socialize in some way? I have no idea what the answer is, but it got me thinking…
Okay I can see the concern about “losing” language but it is not real. Langauge changes all the time, but maybe we just don’t see it shifting as quickly as we do today. I’m sorry but my students can write sentences, they dont use text language in their essays, they can communicate with me, and work together well when they have to. I just see the internet and all the ways we can communicate online as another way to add to the communication process. I agree that there is nothing more fun then sitting with my family and friends in a room and talking and laughing, but that is not something I can do everyday. I can see what they are up to and comment on that on FB when I get online. I think it is great. My cousin lives out of state, I have not talked to her in months but I got to talk to her the other day on Facebook. One thing the article points out is that young people are blogging, creating websites, and downloading content. This means a lot to me. They are becoming literate in ways my generation never was and that is a good thing. I realize there are drawbacks, but there are to anything we do. I think our concerns are not how to keep kids offline but how to engage them where they are. If we don’t we will lose them.
So true, Cristin; there are benefits to having kids computer literate. There has to be a balance and I think the biggest issue is how to keep it. Because if there is not a balance then some of the things I mentioned above may happen or is already. I have talked with people who want to create an acronym based language for cell phones and car phones. I’ve talked with English teachers who are afraid of losing the language we have now and cannot understand the acronym language that they cross every day.
I think the fear is legitimate and shared by many. Just as we get used to one technology and master its language, it changes form. I don’t want to draw lines here unless it is psychologically damaging. There is a psychological impact caused by the technological change just as it affects culture.
I don’t know Cristin, I’ve had students write B/C, JK, and IMO in their actual papers before. It’s not appropriate but a lot of the times they don’t even realize they’re doing it. Don’t get me wrong, I like taking shirt cuts in texts as well, but they have to know that in formal writing they can’t do that.
I think I talk a lot about it with them as well so I think that is why I don’t see it as much. They are not aware of it as much as we are, but when you make them aware of it they seem to understand it has a place and not in academic or job related writing.
I think I would have to agree with you Cristin. Working in student services at UofM, I have a lot of contact with students and experience examples of their writing in various ways– emails, independent study proposals, course work, etc. Nine out of ten of them write mildly decent and I have next to never seen the text-speak of LOL or OMG (even in emails). There is something about the concious effort of writing that, I think, makes them switch their brain from simple texting or chatting online into a more academic, professional voice. But, I do sometimes fear their level of spoken communication. On paper they can edit themselves, but in person they can’t take the time to do that often. That is where I run into issues, especially since a lot of them use the acronyms in their talk! I hope the refining of speaking skills comes with age, but I do wonder…
Heh, shirt cuts….
I have seen LOL or IMO and such in student writing before, but not often, and to me, it’s another example of a teaching moment. It’s all about context/purpose, right? If you are sending a text or tweet, writing “I am now laughing out-loud” would seem kind of strange and pretentious, wouldn’t it? In an essay– especially a more formal one for a class or something– something like “IMO” doesn’t make near as much sense as “In my opinion.” And my experience has been that students get that context thing pretty quickly once it’s pointed out to them.
Cristin, I love having your opinion as a mom! I think you’re right that parents should be aware of what their kids are doing and who they’re talking to regardless of what medium is being used. Understanding the technology and knowing the potential danger and benefits allows us to lovingly guide our children towards both safety and growth.
I think my first message was written almost incoherently! It’s totally fragmented. Geez.
From this article, the thing that stood out to me the most was the idea of the Multi-Channel Teen. Those who have access to and use all of the media technologies out there. To be honest with you, I thought that number would have been around 70% or higher, but the number, while still large, is only at 28%. I just see so many students texting, talking, and using laptops around campus, I thought the percentage would have been a bit higher. Just the other day, on my own facebook page an old student of mine said he was in a Sprint or whatever phone store and a 17 year-old girl was screaming and cussing out her mother for not buying her a $600 phone. I didn’t even know phones came with such a price tag. Not sure if he was exaggerating or not, but the instance of this happening is increasing ten-fold. I’ve been in a Sprint store twice in the last week alone and saw similar instances both times. Not sure where I’m going with this, but teens expect to be given this technology. If they’re just handed these forms of digital literacy with no explanation of how it effects or influences them (in both positive and negative ways) is that an acceptable practice? I just don’t know.
It’s not just teens. My husband and I took an 8 year-old little girl who is a friend of ours out for birthday dessert last night, and she was telling us that next year she’s going to get a cell phone for her birthday. When she asked me what kind of phone I thought she’d want, I started thinking “pink, Hello-Kitty…” but no, she wants one with a “keyboard” so that she can text.
My eleven year old sister just got her first cell-phone this past Christmas and it’s a full-fledged texting phone. I suppose I would’ve held off another year, however, I do think by the time kids are in high school a cell-phone is standard issue – it’s just too darn useful for a variety of reasons. Anyway, the main issue still seems to be that parents should just maintain a general awareness of what their children are up to. Now, how that is done I’m not sure, but I’m sure there’s some people eager to tell us somewhere.
It’s kind of a long story/tangent, but my wife and I got our son a cell phone mainly because it was getting to be a pain in the butt for us when we wanted to get a hold of him after school. He doesn’t use it much, and as far as I can tell, the ways in which boys and girls use cell phones at his age (he’s 12) is significantly different. Or maybe it’s because my son is in kind of that geeky kid/not cool kid crowd….
That’s a good question Angie. I’m thinking most teens see getting these things the same way I might have seen getting my B/W Gameboy when I was younger. It was something cool that I wanted and it was fun; I was not at all concerned with what it was teaching me etc. How I interact with things, what I’m doing with them, how is it affecting my view on the word…those seem like adult concerns, which are to most all kids just boring things to think about, more learning stuff.
On that idea. As I said about the Salon article, it’s great teens are writing more online etc., but if they aren’t really questioning what they’re writing or looking at how they’re writing it, what really has changed in terms of literacy? Is it just more is better?
Just reviewing the statics, it amazes me how much time is spent posting on the internet with these students and mostly they were not taught by a teacher to do this and they did not have to do it. It is creative, they are reading and writing and commenting on their peers stuff,
I am on board with the new media composition and see the good it can do. My concern is the accessibility when you get to more economically deprived areas that are not as savvy as city populations. For instance in the UP, the schools are not as wealth as Saline, Chelsea, Ann Arbor and many do not have the computer labs for teachers to start teaching new media composition or the new technologies. Will there be a definite divide between literate and non literate society in the computer, media field. When they do these polls are they taken in rural areas too?
The short answer Gloria is “yes:” statistically speaking, 93% of all teens are online, regardless of any of these mitigating factors like being in the UP, etc. Now, my guess is that there are places like the UP or inner-city Detroit where it’s less than 93%, and there are places like Ann Arbor and Chelsea where it is more than 93%.
Note also this isn’t about access in schools. This is access teens have, mostly probably in the home but also in libraries, schools, other public places, etc.
And I think that is just it. I totally agree that access is still an issue, but it should be a non-issue (at least for American school children). They may not have access in their homes to a computer/internet, but there are so many outlets in the community where they can get it. For instance, I worked in a low-income school district for a year and not only did the public library have a computer lab, but the local elementary, middle, and high school would have “lab hours” after school for students who needed to stay and type up a paper, access the internet, etc. (with a late bus to take them home when they were done). And, that is not to say that they can’t get access at a relative or friend’s house, too. Now, the level of their literacy may be lacking, but they have access to grow that literacy.
Not that I’m completely disagreeing with the point about accessability (I do think the lack of it is overexagerated), but I don’t think availability is the same as access. Sure, the vast majority of American teens have access to the internet via libraries, relatives etc. if they don’t have it at home. But some of these alternatives are not available to them because they have no way to get to them (more so in lower-income communities). In order to use the interent at the library, you have to be able to get to the library. And, if your parent(s) work evenings, you have siblings to take care of after school, you don’t have access to affordable & safe public transportation (such as Detroit) etc., it can be very difficult to physically get to a place w/ internet access. That’s great that some schools try to account for this, like how Ashley describes, but I fear that schools like these are few and far between, particularly in the places where they would benefit the most.
There are definitely different ways of thinking about access. What I think you all mean is physical access to networked computers. There’s also intellectual access that students have in schools where new media writing is valued and taught.
I agree with you, Gloria: it’s awesome that teens are writing blog posts and creating interesting content for the web on their own without being asked to by teachers. I also think that their blog posts, videos, etc. could be more rhetorically effective if they received instruction in using these tools at school.
Just because someone can reach a book on a shelf doesn’t mean they’ll take down and teach themselves to read. The same could be said about using new media. Self-teaching is easier online, of course, because there are more freely available resources out there. I just think we want our students to a) have good sources for their info, and b) feel as if they can come to us with questions about writing online. Maybe that will win us some cool points, too.
Again, let me emphasize that statistic, Dave: 93% of all teens are engaged in online activities, and that’s across socio-economic status. Again, I’m not saying that it’s all equal by any stretch of the imagination and there are variables based on all kinds of local conditions. But in the U.S., we’re probably about as close to universal internet access as we’re going to get.
Also, as I commented here, there are a lot of access issues we ultimately can’t do anything about.
I guess my biggest resistance to the access problem– besides the fact that, relatively speaking, it isn’t a problem– is that in my experience, it’s used mainly as an excuse. I don’t think this is what Dave or anyone else in this group is saying, but I have to say that I have worked with a number of teachers and students over the years who bring up the access issue as an excuse: that is, I really think “my students don’t have access” or “we can’t do that at my school” or similar claims are really another way of saying “I’d rather not do this computer stuff.” I dunno, but in my book, if access is a problem for 1 out of 10 students, that’s not a reason to not do something. If that makes sense.
Your point is certainly well-taken. I definately know for a fact that A LOT of teachers and students use it as an excuse (I’ve seen it first-hand). And, I’m glad you recogonize that that is not what I’m talking about. It should certainly not be used as an excuse because the overwhelming majority of students do have access. I just think it’s equally important to remember that there can be mitigating circumstances for individual students, and teachers who are going to emphasize new media need to take that into consideration and make appropriate accomodations for those who may have obstacles between themselves and the tools they need. Find out which students may need accomodations made and work w/ students and parents to get everyone access.
I think the most important factor for me, as a teacher of high school kids, is that they know how and where to get information. They ARE doing it. They are also creating information and using the information they find and putting their own twist on it. I think in some ways, it is really cool. If they were spending that kind of time at the library researching, and writing in a journal, we would applaud them. I think we need to learn how to harness those interests and use them for teaching purposes.
There has been a lot of discussion about teaching by texting, etc. Since my school still has a “no phones in class rule,” I haven’t yet had to deal with those kind of decisions, thank goodness.
But my other concern is that the more kids use the informational ‘tools’ that are available and work that into their own media, the more the lines become blurred re: plagiarism. I think that many of them don’t see a problem with it, because the information is “free” and easy to get hold of. The article was interesting and basically supported my suppositions.
Great point Judy! The plagiarism rule is hard defined at a community college. Even adults think if twisting words or tweeking ideas you don’t have to give credit to the source. This is one of the problems English teachers will have to discuss isplagiarism when this new way of composing is in full swing.
Yes I agree. I tell them the internet is not a free for all. The sites they might want to use need to be sited because they were written by someone, and there are some they should not use.
You know, plagiarism is one of those terms that has been defined so well so many times I’m not sure what it actually means to plagiarize anymore.
BTW, the plagiarism thing is one of the other “big issues” that we’ll be talking about soon– next week, actually.
These stats are uber interesting and sparked a lot of questions for me:
- Why do teens of different ages and genders do different things online more often, e.g. read/write blogs vs. watch/post YouTube videos? Is it their stage of development, or the different presentations they find most appealing, or the way these tools interface with other parts of their lives (sports, etc.), or…?
- What are teens blogging about? Are they mostly day-in-the-life sort of blogs (like old school Xanga)? Or are they themed and planned and thoughtful?
- Why aren’t teens as interested in Twitter? It seems to me that Twitter’s brevity and up-to-the-second trends would be attractive to them. I wonder why Twitter is more popular with 20-somethings like (most of) us?
- Why are teens more tuned-in to the privacy thing than adults? Is it all the messages that they get from adults about the scary people out there? Or could it be because they are coming to SNS’s 5+ years after they started to catch on? In that time, these sites were reimagined many times, and over the course of that evolution, users had to consider new things, like privacy–something we (or at least I) didn’t think much about when Facebook was just a small network of only local college friends.
Also, while the authors maintain that race and class aren’t huge factors in who gets online, such factors do influence which tools they use more often, according to this article from NPR: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113974893&sc=fb&cc=fp. Really interesting, I think, and very recent.
Privacy? for sure…the kids really want their privacy, I think, because teens naturally want to be private from US. But, they want all their friends to read what they write. I don’t think they are private because of internet predator fears–they are afraid that their parents will find out that they are talking about drinking, sex, porn, etc. online and they don’t want to get into trouble.