Study: Social networks may subvert 'digital divide'
Social networks like Facebook and MySpace have reputations as time-sucking procrastination tools, but a new study from the University of Minnesota says au contraire.
Social networks build beneficial technological, creative, and communication skills, the study says, leading the researchers to actually describe social networks with the adjective "educational." Who knew?
"What we found was that students using social networking sites are actually practicing the kinds of 21st century skills we want them to develop to be successful today," Christine Greenhow, a learning technologies researcher from the school's College of Education and Human Development, said in a release Friday.
Data from the study came from teenagers ages 16 to 18 in about a dozen urban high schools in the Midwest.
"Students are developing a positive attitude towards using technology systems, editing and customizing content and thinking about online design and layout," Greenhow continued. "They're also sharing creative original work like poetry and film and practicing safe and responsible use of information and technology."
As an added bonus, social networks may be part of the reason that low-income students are largely just as technologically proficient as their peers, contradicting parts of a 2005 Pew study that detailed an economic "digital divide." According to the new study, a full 94 percent of students use the Internet, 82 percent use it at home, and 77 percent have social-networking profiles.
The "digital divide," obviously, goes far beyond Facebook profiles, and social networks come with a whole host of new problems like cyberbullying, but at least there are signs that it could be leveling the playing field a bit.
Caroline McCarthy, a CNET News staff writer, is a downtown Manhattanite happily addicted to social-media tools and restaurant blogs. Her pre-CNET resume includes interning at an IT security firm and brewing cappuccinos. E-mail Caroline.





As well, I have over 25,000 unique visitors to my blog (I'm obviously not famous). The blog is now a good source of income for me and has also lead to speaking engagements, a new position, and additional contract work. A couple weeks ago, Business Week did an article about me - discovered from a blog post I wrote.
Wow - you are so wrong!
"And another thing, why does everyone and their dog have a blog? Unless your famous, NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU THINK! Therefore, you don't need a blog"
First to answer you question: Because we can. Got a problem with that bunky? NOBODY CARES IF YOU DO.
Apparently, you consider yourself 'famous'. Otherwise, you are violating your own theory by expressing your opinion here, on a Blog, at the water cooler, or on a street corner.
Your idea that only the famous should have a forum for expressing their opinions is un-democratic (and stupid). Ever heard of freedom of speech? No? You're a Republipuke, huh?
"Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self." --Cyril Connolly
So, up yours ... and your little dog too.
-
by harloHolmes
June 23, 2008 8:57 AM PDT
- The commentary on this piece is delightfully insipid! Keep up the good work!
-
Reply to this comment
-
(15 Comments)All kidding aside, I would love a link to the research cited. Could you post it?