Jill Scevak

Digital footprint of children: latest research on the issues and implications

digital footprint of children and young people, , , , , ,

Australian children are among the youngest and most prolific users of the internet in the world. They are, on average, a little under eight years old when they begin using the internet and most go online daily. So it is not long before they develop an extensive digital footprint. But not much is known about young people’s digital footprint awareness and how to best educate them to manage their growing online presence.

My colleagues, Jill Scevak, Shamus Smith, Erica Southgate and I decided to investigate the issues involved in children understanding and managing their digital footprint.

We surveyed a variety of experts about what they thought were the main digital footprint issues for children and for young people. We spoke to primary school students (and next year we will be following this up by speaking to secondary students), did an online survey of Australian university students, and ran focus groups with university students at one Australian university. Here I will give an overview of what we found so far, and look at what this might mean for careers education.

What the experts say

We surveyed 53 digital and career experts (academics, researchers, policymakers, teachers, and university career advisers). They told us that:

  • Education for digital print management should be sequential to match the development of those being educated.
  • They were concerned that children don’t have the cognitive development to understand the longevity of what is put online
  • They said a holistic approach needs to be taken to manage the issue of digital footprints – education should come from family, schools, universities, government and career educators. It is considered to be both a societal and an individual issue.

The experts noted that children ( aged 5 to 12) can be technically clever online but lack an understanding of the possible consequences of their actions, especially regarding safety issues such as security, privacy settings, abuse, predators, and bullying. Some of those surveyed were concerned that due to children’s innocence, that they may be too trusting. Children also have little control of what gets posted about them. Privacy was considered to be overall the most serious issue for children.

When asked about the digital footprint issues for young people ( aged 18 to 24) the experts surveyed identified many of the same concerns as for children, but with additional concerns about the permanence of what is posted online and the implications of this for employability. They noted that is it nearly impossible for most people to be completely anonymous online and that they need to be aware of the immediacy and longevity of their digital engagement.

What the children said

We ran focus groups with thirty-three 10-12 year olds from three primary schools in regional NSW. The children we spoke to were very aware of cyber safety and could discuss the issues of privacy, security, cyber bullying and online predators. This knowledge has come from school and (to a lesser degree) from home. They could tell us the rules for safety (don’t click on anything strange, don’t ‘friend’ people you don’t know, don’t put information about yourself online).

These students have varying degrees of parental support and involvement with their internet use. They know what digital footprints are, and are able to describe the implications of these (‘the internet keeps everything’). They manage their digital footprints by minimising them. They see digital footprints as a ‘danger’ and so they use social media for private chats, not for making public posts. They did not know that you could create a positive digital footprint.

What the university students said

We ran an online survey for university students and had 635 responses from 28 Australian universities. From this survey we found that university students are very concerned about their digital footprints and want more guidance.

  • Over 75% (n=425) of students claim that their university has provided them with no guidance on how to manage their digital footprints.
  • Over 70% of students (n=445) responded to the question: What would you like to know about your digital footprint?
  • Typical responses include:-

“how to erase, keep private and monitor”;

“How can I create a professional digital footprint? What kind of information should I avoid posting for my digital footprint to look professional?”

We also ran focus groups with 30 students at one Australian university. We found that due to their concerns about their digital footprints they use a variety of strategies to manage their digital footprints. Their strategies include

  • Varied privacy settings
  • Use of pseudonyms and anonymity
  • Selectivity in the use of their real names
  • Locking profiles down (aiming for complete privacy)
  • Making profiles completely public but never posting anything
  • Separation of professional and personal profiles
  • Not using any social media

Implications for careers education

There have been massive changes in employment over the past 2 generations. A single-track career is no longer the norm and new career patterns have emerged: serial careers, (a number of career changes) lifestyle careers (making career decisions based on lifestyle choices, for example working part time to care for children), portfolio careers (a combination of carefully chosen jobs undertaken simultaneously which utilize different skills) and well as more haphazard career paths due to the increase in part-time work, and under and unemployment.

Along with these changing patterns, the internet has changed the way people seek and find jobs and the way companies recruit and select employees. More than half of all organisations have a policy of profiling potential employees and a quarter of workers have witnessed their employers using the internet to profile candidates.

In this context it is very important that students are taught to present themselves well online. Responsible online engagement can create a positive public persona which acts as ongoing résumé of achievement and identity.

From surveying and talking to university students we know that they are not confident that they are able to create a professional digital footprint.

Our conversations with primary students suggests that the end of primary school is a good time to start educating them to build a positive online presence. This would build upon their cyber safety awareness and help them to transition to high school where their internet usage increases.

This education could be further developed in high school and university. That way students are given more options regarding the informed management of their developing digital identity.

 

BuchananDr Rachel Buchanan is a Senior Lecturer in Education at the University of Newcastle. She teaches educational foundations and researches into the equity and social justice implications of education policy and the increased deployment of digital technologies within the education sector. She can be contacted via Rachel.Buchanan@newcastle.edu.au or found on twitter: @rayedish.     

 

Rachel is undertaking this research with Dr Jill Scevak, Dr Shamus Smith and Dr Erica Southgate. Part of this research was funded by the Australian Government Department of Education, through a HEPP National Priority Pool grant. The research with primary schools was funded by the .auDA Foundation. More information about our research can be found here. (This post provides a follow up of our investigation into Australian students’ understanding of their digital footprints.)

First in family to attend university: latest Australian research findings

equity in higher education, First in family to attend university, higher education policy, , , , , , , , , , ,

Over the past fifty years there has been a huge increase in enrolments in higher education in many countries, including Australia. Increases range between 15 to 50 per cent, and Australia is approaching the upper limits of that measure. This has resulted, in part, from a drive in countries such as the US, UK and Australia, to improve economic growth by encouraging students from backgrounds previously not attracted to university education, to gain a tertiary qualification.

The enrolment surge has raised many issues for universities as they deal with the influx of a new type of student. Having attracted these students into tertiary education, universities have a moral and ethical responsibility to identify and support them. It is unethical to invite students into university study for broad economic and corporate purposes without considering how participation affects the students involved.

In Australia, universities have particularly targeted students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. However there is now a stigma attached to this label, and it can lead to deficit approaches, where students are treated as being from problematic backgrounds, or needy communities, who are not likely to succeed without outside help.

In contrast, in the US there has been a focus on research around students who are first-in-family (FiF) to attend university. This category is more useful as far as education services and support goes, and students are more likely to be comfortable being identified as first in family to attend university. However this category of students does not appear in Australian policy.

Currently, FiF students are gaining increased attention from researchers and institutions around the world, including here in Australia. While some of these students may come from low socioeconomic status backgrounds, not all do. However, much of the research suggests that FiF students, if they do enrol, are more likely to struggle at university and to discontinue their studies.

Our research findings on first in family (FiF) to attend university in Australia

A group of colleagues and I conducted a study at a large regional university in NSW on first in family to attend university. Our findings would be useful for any university that is expanding its enrolment base, and should underpin future government policy-making in this area.

FiF are a diverse group with common aspirations

We discovered FiF students are a diverse group, in terms of age, life experience and expectations of university. However they share a common desire for a better life and hope that university will help them achieve this. Some are keen to gain financial freedom, and many older students are aiming to improve their careers. They all share an interest in the focus of their degree program.

Transitions are different but university is an alien place

The transition to and through university differs for every FiF student, but they share a need to overcome a sense of university as an alien place, and to develop a sense of belonging. This is especially true for those who were not high achievers in high school. Many struggle against the belief that ‘university is for really smart people’ and ‘not people like us’.

Most have to do paid work and study

Most FiF students have to undertake some level of paid work while they study. Students who have to relocate in order to study, and those with family commitments are affected most by finances.

There are costs for travel, books, printing, childcare and loss of income while undertaking professional experience placements.

Families can impact study

Family commitments can impact study in many ways. One student told us:

I am from a family of 11, so studying at home can be an issue most of the time. I don’t have many friends either, there isn’t much help around!

Dropping kids to school and driving to uni getting parking takes about an hour so if lecture begins before 10am then it has to be missed.

However family and friends are a major source of support for these students, even though those people may not understand what the student is going through.

Loss of social life, health and well being

FiF students also suffer from loss of social interactions and reduced health and wellbeing, especially during peak assessment times.

New friends

Making friends in their courses is also important. These students, in particular, need peers to discuss course content and assessment with.

Achievement gap

There remains an achievement gap for FiF students. Our study indicates that the achievement outcomes of FIF and non-FIF are similar in the first year of study, but that achievement decreases for FIF in subsequent years of study. Most support structures at universities are aimed at first year students.

Realistic expectations

FiF students generally have realistic expectations of university and work hard to achieve their goals. They do not take success for granted. They are aware of the changes made to their skills, lives and future opportunities because of their studies.

Overwhelmingly, FiF students find the struggle worth persevering. They cite benefits in terms of personal growth, social experiences and a better understanding of society, and feel this benefits other members of their families too. These students often pave the way for other family members. Many feel ‘lucky’ to have the opportunity to attend university, often underestimating the impact of their own hard work and determination.

Help from university staff is important

University staff and services (academic, medical and financial) can also be of help. One student said:

staff that smile and are always approachable. The resources available such as extended library hours and IT staff. The HUB. A psychologist. Meditation and relaxation classes. Utilising all the available resources in the first year from the learning support centre. A positive attitude. Helping others helps me. Persistence.

Despite the available support services, it can be difficult to navigate the landscape of university, especially for those struggling with family and/or health issues, or to understand language used by staff and requirements of enrolment and assessment. Time-poor students find it difficult to access services in addition to the demands of study and paid work.

More research and more support is needed

Although a number of universities, including the one where the current research was conducted, have a strong corporate commitment to attracting and retaining low SES and/or FiF students, the commitment is not always supported sufficiently to filter down in a practical way to the students involved. Many of these students do succeed, but all could be better supported.

 

A full report of the study can be found here

I would like to acknowledge the financial support for the study received from the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education.

 

Suzanne Macqueen1-1Suzanne Macqueen is a Lecturer in the School of Education at the University of Newcastle teaching courses related to primary social studies curriculum, classroom management, literacy and professional preparation. She has a Master of Education (Research) on the topic of between-class achievement grouping for literacy and numeracy classes in primary schools. She is currently undertaking PhD research related to the impact of widening participation initiatives in teacher education. She is also involved in research projects studying equity in higher education and Global Education.

Suzanne would like to acknowledge the financial support for the study received from the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education.

Research evidence of issues facing disadvantaged students in higher education

equity in higher education, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The issues facing disadvantaged students wanting a tertiary education are multi-faceted. Just getting into a course at university can be difficult, then there are many hurdles students will face before they actually complete their degree.

This is why funding of over $1 million was made available by The National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE) during 2014 and 2015 for research projects at Australian universities and other research organisations to investigate aspects of student equity in higher education.

The competitive research grants program was designed to further investigate the impact higher education policy has on marginalised and disadvantaged students and how we could improve participation and success. The NCSEHE publication ‘Informing Policy and Practice’ highlights the outcomes of the first 12 research reports.

Each report addresses different, but related, aspects of higher education student equity. They all bring evidence-based investigation to the consideration of policy and practice. This research highlights the complexity of the issues the researchers are attempting to unravel, and that simple statements arising from analysis need to be carefully considered.

The results confirm that more needs to be done to ensure that capable people are not prevented from accessing and completing higher education.

Higher education confers significant individual benefits in terms of personal development, career opportunities and lifetime learning. Higher education is also the key to the social well-being and economic prosperity of Australia. Providing access to higher levels of education to people from all backgrounds enhances social inclusion and reduces social and economic disadvantage.

In the interests of individuals and for the nation, higher education equity for all capable people must be seen as an objective of the system.

We know, from our research, that the policy framework needed to achieve the required change for disadvantaged people will not result from a single policy decision or funding program. It is complex and challenging and needs a wide-ranging response.

There are 12 research reports available. They include research across the various equity groups:-

Resilience/Thriving in Post-Secondary Students with Disabilities: An Exploratory Study
by Dr Rahul Ganguly, Dr Charlotte Bronwlow, Dr Jan Du Preez and Dr Coralie Graham (University of Southern Queensland)

Educational outcomes of young Indigenous Australians
by Stephane Mahuteau, Tom Karmel, Kostas Mavromaras and Rong Zhu (National Institute of Labour Studies at Flinders University)

Are low SES students disadvantaged in the university application process?
by Dr Buly Cardak (La Trobe University), Dr Mark Bowden and Mr John Bahtsevanoglou (Swinburne University of Technology)

Choosing university: The impact of schools and schooling
by Jenny Gore, Kathryn Holmes, Max Smith, Andrew Lyell, Hywel Ellis and Leanne Fray (University of Newcastle)

Do individual background characteristics influence tertiary completion rates?
by Patrick Lim, National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER)

Completing university in a growing sector: is equity an issue?
by Dr Daniel Edwards and Dr Julie McMillan (ACER)

Exploring the experience of being first in family at university
by Associate Professor Sharron King (University of South Australia), Dr Ann Luzeckyj (Flinders University), Associate Professor Ben McCann (University of Adelaide) and Ms Charmaine Graham (University of South Australia)

Secondary School Graduate Preferences for Bachelor Degrees and Institutions
by Trevor Gale (Deakin University), Stephen Parker, Tebeje Molla, Kim Findlay, with Tim Sealey

Best practice bridging: facilitating Indigenous participation through regional dual-sector universities
by Bronwyn Fredericks ( CQUniversity) et al

University access and achievement of people from out-of-home care backgrounds
by Andrew Harvey, Patricia McNamara, Lisa Andrewartha, Michael Luckman (La Trobe University)

Understanding Evaluation for Equity Programs: A guide to effective program evaluation
by Dr Ryan Naylor, Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education (University of Melbourne)

Equity groups and predictors of academic success in higher education
by Jill Scevak, Erica Southgate, Mark Rubin, Suzanne Macqueen, Heather Douglas, Paul Williams (University of Newcastle)

 

Sue_Trinidad_Retouched_2 copy

 

Professor Sue Trinidad – Prior to becoming the Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education’s Director, Sue was Deputy Pro-Vice Chancellor and Dean of Teaching and Learning in the Faculty of Humanities at Curtin during 2007-2012. In these roles she provided academic leadership for the five schools and led the Higher Education Equity Participation Program for a large faculty which had many LSES, Indigenous and regional students. Sue is an established scholar in the areas of higher education pedagogy and change management, the use of technology and student learning. Her research covers higher education and leadership, including the use of technology for regional, rural and remote areas to provide equity access to all students regardless of their geographical location. Sue has also been involved in consultancies, research projects and grants both in Australia and internationally, including Australian Research Council and Office for Learning and Teaching funded research. She currently sits as an advisor to the Western Australian Minister of Education on the Regional and Remote Advisory Council (RREAC).  Her teaching, learning and research have been acknowledged by a number of awards including the 2001 Life Membership Award for the Educational Computing Association of Western Australia for her work with teachers, two best research paper awards in 2004 and 2006,  the Vice-Chancellor’s Award for Excellence and Innovation in Higher Education in 2010; a Citation for Outstanding Contributions to Student Learning 2014; and the PTCWA Outstanding Professional Service Award 2014.

Digital Footprint: not everyone is equal and why unis need to teach managing DF as a 21st century skill

digital footprint of children and young people, , , , , ,

Australians are among the most digitally connected in the world and young people spend a lot of time online. Most young Australians have an extensive digital footprint, especially university students.

Digital footprints are created through interaction with the internet and social media. Increasingly, digital footprint management is an important career development skill and one that is vital to the professional opportunities of university students.

However, we know very little about what university students know and do, in regards to their digital footprints. This post provides an initial overview of our* investigation into Australian university students’ understanding of their digital footprints. This research and our data collection are still taking place.

ABS data indicates that over 90% of Australians aged 18-40 regularly use the internet. The increase in online activity and social media usage has implications for digital footprints given that 800 000 Australians post videos online, and of the 47% of 16-25 year olds that use platforms such as snapchat, 25% admit to posting material of a sexual nature online.

Digital Footprints

Such social media activities can create a negative, publically accessible digital footprint that can detrimentally impact an individual’s current prospects and future careers.

However, responsible online engagement can create a positive public persona which acts as ongoing résumé of achievement and identity.

Management of digital footprints is a 21st century life skill, a lack of which could have serious social and professional consequences for students. Popular media is full of warnings about the problems caused by poor digital footprint management:

From The Age: “What if today’s sexting teenager is tomorrow’s prime minister – adult lives can be marred by the digital footprint students are laying down now.”

From the SMH: “Young ones, your online reputation is, like, forever”

Professional social media platforms, such as LinkedIn, make the professional implications of a badly managed online presence clear: “Your digital footprint is ruining your job application”

Higher Education, Social Media and Digital Footprints

Yet, with our increased digital connectivity having no online presence can be as detrimental as having a badly managed one. Research tells us that

  • Human Resources practitioners are increasingly using social media in recruitment, selection and hiring practices.
  • Social Networking awareness is largely absent from the Higher Education curriculum.
  • Curation and management of digital footprints is emerging as an essential skill for career development, yet universities are not adequately addressing this.

In regards to university students:

  • Students with a high Socio-Economic Status (SES) background are coming to university with more technological knowledge and skills, have more experience with, and positive attitudes towards the use of ICT, than students with a low SES background.
  • These students are better placed, than students from other backgrounds, to develop and manage their digital footprints while at university.
  • Higher education institutions must help students who are coming to university without the digital education confidence and knowledge develop the required digital skills for success and achievement at university and beyond.

The Equity and Digital Footprint Project

Our project focuses on this emerging equity issue to better understand what undergraduate students from low SES and non-traditional backgrounds know and do in relation to their digital footprints. Information from this research will be used to develop resources to help students build a positive digital footprint.

To achieve this we are currently:

  • Reviewing the relevant literature
  • Conducting an online survey of university students across Australia to determine their knowledge and behaviour in relation to digital footprint management.
  • Running focus groups with University of Newcastle students to speak to students in more depth about their use of professional social media.
  • Doing an audit of university online resources on digital footprint to determine how well Australian universities are addressing this issue
  • Conducting an online survey of ICT educators, policy makers and higher education career service personnel to garner collective wisdom and evidence of which educational approaches would be most effective for students.

Preliminary findings

While it is very early days, our initial explorations reveal that:

  • “Anecdata” abounds – There is lots of anecdotal evidence about the uses and abuses of social media and digital footprints, and media reports of the sensational examples provide only a distorted picture.
  • There is conflicting information about the extent to which employees are using digital footprints to vet applicants.
  • Students are aware that their internet usage creates a digital footprint, and they employ a variety of strategies to minimize or manage their digital footprints. These strategies range from a refusal to use social media, judicious use of privacy settings, minimal or highly strategic use of their real names when online, through to working from an assumption that privacy does not exist. Most students see their digital footprint as a liability rather than an opportunity.
  • While Universities in the United Kingdom are producing some excellent comprehensive resources and services for digital footprint education the approach is very uneven in Australian universities.

Given the emphasis on excellence and equity in Australian universities and the pattern of increased access to universities from students from all backgrounds it is important that universities provide adequate support to all their students. Increased access to university is not an achievement if students are not provided with the resources and skills to participate and succeed in, and beyond, university. Not all students come to university with the necessary digital skills and knowledge.

Given the increased importance of social media management and having a traceable online presence, digital footprint education can provide students with opportunity to turn access and participation in university education into success; a positive online presence acts as an on-going record of identity and achievement.

 

BuchananDr Rachel Buchanan is a Lecturer in Education at the University of Newcastle. She teaches educational foundations and researches into the equity and social justice implications of education policy and the increased deployment of digital technologies within the education sector. She can be contacted via Rachel.Buchanan@newcastle.edu.au or found on twitter: @rayedish.       *Rachel is undertaking this research with Dr Jill Scevak, Dr Shamus Smith and Dr Erica Southgate. This project was funded by the Australian Government Department of Education, through a HEPP National Priority Pool grant. More information about our research can be found here