What kind of (digital) citizen?. A between-studies analysis of research and teaching for democracy

• Published date: 05 November 2018
• Date: 05 November 2018
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-06-2018-0067
• Pages: 342-356
• Author: Marie K. Heath
• Subject Matter: Education,Technology & learning,Campus systems,Distance learning,Online learning/e-learning

What kind of (digital) citizen?

A between-studies analysis of research and

teaching for democracy

Marie K. Heath

Loyola University Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Abstract

Purpose –Public schools in a democracy should educate young people to develop the knowledge and

dispositions of citizenship in order to foster a more inclusive society and ensure the continuation of the democratic

republic. Conceptualizations of citizenship must be clearly framed in order to support civic engagement, in

particular, civic engagement for social justice. Rarely do educational technology scholars or educators interrogate

the International Society for Technology in Education definition of digital citizenship. Educational technologists

should connect notions of civic engagement and conceptions of digital citizenship. Instead, the field continues to

engage in research, policy and practice which disconnects these ideas. This suggests that a gap exists between

educational technologists’conceptualizations of citizenship and the larger implications of citizenship within a

democracy. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Design/methodology/approach –This paper uses a between-study analysis of the literature to answer:

How does the field of educational technology discuss and research digital citizenship? The data were coded

using constant comparative analysis. The study adopted a theoretical framework grounded in Westheimer

and Kahne’s (2004) What Kind of Citizen, and Krutka and Carpenter’s (2016) digital approach to citizenship.

Findings –The findings suggest that educational technologists’uncritical usage of the term digital

citizenship limits the authors’field’s ability to contribute to a fundamental purpose of public schooling in a

democracy –to develop citizens. Further, it hampers imaginingopportunities to use educational technology to

develop pedagogies of engaged citizenship for social justice.

Originality/value –Reframing the conception of digital citizenship as active civic engagement for social

justice pushes scholarship, and its attendant implications for practice, in a proactive direction aimed at

dismantling oppression.

Keywords Social media, Educational technology, Digital citizenship

Paper type Literature review

Public schools in a democracy should educate young people to develop the knowledge and

dispositions of citizenship in order to foster a more inclusive society and ensure the

continuation of democratic republics (Apple and Beane, 1995; Dewey, 1916, 1976; Giroux, 1988).

To that end, conceptualizations of citizenship must beclearly framed in order tosupport civic

engagement, in particular, civic engagement for social justice (Foucault, 1991; Giroux, 1988;

Westheimer and Kahne, 2004). Scholars in political science and com munications have engaged

in rigorous deliberation surrounding the definitions of citizenship, democracy and the

implications for social justice (e.g. boyd, 2014; Kahne et al., 2016; McGillivray et al., 2016;

Westheimer and Kahne, 2000, 2004; Tufekci, 2017), and certainly, explorations and

investigations of civic engagement and participation exist within media studies, information

technology and literacy scholarship (e.g. Bennett, 2008; Hollett et al., 2017; Jenkins et al., 2009;

Mirra and Garcia, 2017; Rheingold, 2008).

International consortia and societies focused on technology integration (e.g. Common

Sense Media, the International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL), the

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) also recognize the importance of

citizenship within the digital realm, referred to as “digital citizenship.”These societies

influence international conceptions of digital citizenship, as well as international policy,

practice and research. For example, ISTE partners with partners with technology

organizations in Malaysia, the Arab Gulf States, India, Labtech International, Worlddidac

and VirtualEduca, and in every state in the USA to “Inform lesson and curriculum planning;

The International Journal of

Information and Learning

Technology

Vol. 35 No. 5, 2018

pp. 342-356

© Emerald PublishingLimited

2056-4880

DOI 10.1108/IJILT-06-2018-0067

Received 1 June 2018

Revised 16 August 2018

22 August 2018

26 August 2018

Accepted 27 August 2018

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/2056-4880.htm

342

IJILT

35,5