There is no denying the power of digital literacy. Going beyond just the number of people involved in literary forms found on the internet lies a larger question. Why is it viewed as having little capacity? This is so because with anything online there is still a stigma found in incorporating the digital literacy format. This format is mainly thought to be found in social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. Until digital literacy is clearly defined, until literary sites are recognized for their positives in literacy, and until it is realized there are more formats for digital literacy beyond social media sites, it will be a struggle to use them for their value.
Digital literacy has few traits that are different from non-digital literacy. It’s still ideas, thoughts, and discussion of issues. It’s also still the ability to comprehend postings and formulate objective writing on issues read. From there the writing is merely typed, instead of printed. Digital literacy could be any useful work of script, either comprehended or written about, that is projected into an online format and then shared with a select group or groups. It is a very similar literary learning experience shaped into a different format. Understanding literacy in a new format is very achievable. Definitions of digital literacy are dabbled in at the home page here.
So what are some positives in digital literacy that can be pitted against the negatives? Bridget McCrea goes into why they can be cost effective. Secondly, once one understands how to navigate digital literacy sites they can be a cinch in on-going, personal exploration. Continuing, one can have their voice heard through personal, substantial postings. Lastly, it’s innovative. It’s a break from normalcy that can unlock creative traits within the individual. However, with these positives there are clear drawbacks, directly inverse. Yes, they are cost effective but less secure. Allowing them on chance to be tampered with in a negative fashion. Navigation of sites can be too daunting, too much of a different kind of work, and hold little appeal to different groups of people. The largest drawback to a reliance on digital literacy is the social realm. Postings are pointless, maybe too personal, and intangible. A person can choose what they want to read, but there is an abundance of clutter to wade through. Like any social site feelings are at risk, making it a risk of incorporation, especially to younger individuals. Rather than a safe haven to explore personal, fresh beginnings, it could be another medium of personal attack. The positive is close to the negative, but implementation in a chosen moderation and digital literacy can unlock doors.
Digital literacy is beyond just Twitter and Facebook. Twitter can be a great feed for accessing these different sites, mind you. The current site, WordPress, is an example of a digital literacy site that can step away from the clutter found in social media. Digital literacy sites for education are in abundance . If someone finds Twitter and Facebook lacking then other sites using digital literacy are never far away.
In closing, digital literacy can be effective depending upon the individual and what makes them tick. These sites are in abundance and can be tailored to fit a person’s needs in a literary format. Most importantly is trying this method of learning, efficiently, before detecting it insubstantial.