Literacy means an ability to ‘read’ and consume the content before you. To be digitally literate suggests that you are able to work with a variety of digital media and, as such, differs from web literacy as it implies that it is more to do with the devices used than one application on those devices. It is the ability to seem “tech savvy” and engage with information, communication and media on a meaningful level.

Digital literacy promotes a participatory culture through the very nature of the devices being used and the applications available on them. Active participation is encouraged by the natural user interfaces of modern tablets, smart phones and gaming consoles (such as the Wii). These require users to interact with devices on a far more intimate level than the point and click of a mouse. Beyond that, web 2.0 tools and various apps engage users by encouraging them to create, collaborate on and share content with authentic, global audiences.

For the most part, the learners I work with are proficient gamers who can multi-task and navigate between applications at ease. They are ‘digital natives’, born into a world where technology evolves at warp speed. However, even though they are digitally literate many of them are not fluent and often come across as digitally incompetent. There was a myth in media/English studies that suggested students were masters of visual analysis simply because of the amount of television and cinema they are exposed to in contemporary society and many teachers (and adults in general) assume teenagers are proficient with all things digital. This is simply not the case; while students are immersed in both digital media and social viewing they are not taught to be critical of the content before them or the process through which it was created. As a very basic example of how many students are not digitally fluent, I often receive emails from students with essays (or other written texts – short stories, poems, etc.) in the body of the email itself. When quizzed, they respond that they don’t know how to add an attachment or didn’t know that they were meant to. This is a fairly low level skill but it is often skimmed over in classrooms because teachers expect that students will already have that knowledge (and are concerned with pre-existing time constraints and the need to teach to a curriculum). Imagine those students later in life adopting the same (lack of) strategy when applying for a job – would you take the applicant with their resume and cover letter in the body of their email or the one who has them as separate attachments? And, without the basics, how do you then take that student and push them towards interactive digital CVs and developing an online presence (their identity or brand)?

The discourse surrounding digital literacy is also, possibly, part of why teachers skim over certain skill sets. The language used struggles to keep up with each technological advancement. Terms are created then used by a select group of people who define it, refine it and share it with the rest of the world via social networking and other tools for communication. Meanwhile, groups elsewhere develop their own terms and eventually we are left with a number of words that mean the same or similar things but there is no continuity, no definitive terminology. And this leads to confusion. The devices themselves, however, are obvious in their evolution. Each new tablet or smart-phone (or web tool) builds on the successes of previous models (whether of the same brand or not) and adds a new feature. There is still some uncertainty in terms of how ‘future’ devices will impact on our culture (Google glasses and watch-based products) but not the same uncertainty that can be found in the language of digital literacy.