Coexistance in a Digital Neighborhood

Children are called digital natives. Teachers are outsiders in their world. How do educators make meaningful connections on students’ turf without it coming across as forced and incoherent? Many reports about connecting with students tell that educators need to use the mediums that children access in their daily lives. They are online in social environments. Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are only a few. Education is a social process. Through logical reasoning, the crossover should be simple to accomplish. Using these devices to engage in dialogue with students does not automatically elevate us to acceptance. The possible result of diving headfirst into social media integration is the equivalent of the awkwardness of watching an adult speaking to a child while using intonation and faddish slang.


So, how do you make a connection? First it is important to understand how and why children make connections in online communities.

Online identities exist in three levels.

1. True identity: This is the truest self and includes real profile names and personal information.

2. Pseudonymity: This provides a level of protection to the user. Fabricated profile names or user IDs take on aspects of the true personality without directly revealing the identity. A person who plays as a pitcher on a baseball team may use a name like, “fastball123.” Reputation building is possible and others in the community come to recognize the individual through this identity.

3. Anonymity: This has the most obscurity in online social environments. Reputations are impossible to build without the ability to take credit for contributions in the online community (Junco, 2014).

For more about online identity development:

Social Media and Student Identity Development

Download Infographic

In educational settings, the goal is to get investment then credit students for their contributions. The level that you most desire is the true identity of the child. The problem that creates is, this level does not provide the securities that a student may desire in expressing their opinions and beliefs. While this holds true, there are other considerations that online communities offer that extend some of those securities. Junco (2014) explains the Online Disinhibition Effect as, “Online, there is a barrier between the communicator and the recipients—that barrier being the computer” (p. 113). Someone who tends toward introverted behavior in public forums like a classroom may be more inclined to offer input in a social network chat. There are multiple reasons for disinhibition online. Students are capable of planning and editing exactly what they want to express before making it public. In the privacy of their homes, they do not have the sensation that their peers are watching them.

The second part of coexisting in this environment is remembering that while you are opening a door to them in their native environment, you are still the teacher. Treat the social network like an extension of the classroom. Build and plan the use of social media into lessons and curriculum. Do not use social media simply as a bridge to gain the student’s attention. This method is a lure and will create distrust. This infographic provides an excellent process for using social media.

Still reluctant? You are not alone. While research and surveys show that teachers recognize the importance of the use of technology in education, many are still not using it. Check out this link to read an article that could help if you are still on the fence.

U.S. K-12 Teachers Reluctant to Integrate Social Media in Classrooms