'I'm not a computer person': Negotiating participation in academic Discourses

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 109-118

  Lohnes Watulak, Sarah ^a  

^a TOWSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC DISCOURSE; COLLEGE STUDENTS; DISCOURSE ANALYSIS; PERSONAL LIVES; QUALITATIVE STUDY; TECHNOLOGY USE; UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS;

SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; TECHNOLOGY;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84355162315     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01162.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Allison, D., &, DeBlois, P., (2008). Current issues survey report, 2008. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 31, 2, 14-30. Retrieved September 26, 2010 from
2. Bennett, S., Maton, K., &, Kervin, L., (2008). The 'digital natives' debate: a critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 5, 775-786.
3. Bloome, D., Carter, S. P., Christian, B. M., Otto, S., &, Shuart-Faris, N., (2005). Discourse analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events: a microethnographic perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Ching, C. C., &, Vigdor, L., (2005). Technobiographies: Perspectives from education and the arts. Paper presented at the First International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Champaign, IL.
5. Facer, K., &, Furlong, R., (2001). Beyond the myth of the 'cyberkid': young people at the margins of the information revolution. Journal of Youth Studies, 4, 4, 451-469.
6. Gee, J. P., (1992). The social mind: language, ideology, and social practice. New York: Bergin & Garvey.
7. Gee, J. P., (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: theory and method. London: Routledge.
8. Gee, J. P., &, Green, J., (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: a methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119-169. (Pubitemid 128353044)
9. Green, J., &, Bloome, D., (1997). Ethnography and ethnographers of and in education: a situated perspective. In, J. Flood, S. Heath, &, D. Lapp, (Eds), A handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (pp. 181-202). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
10. Harper, D., (2002). Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies, 17, 1, 13-26.
11. Herring, S. C., (2008). Questioning the generational divide: technological exoticism and adult construction of online youth identity. In, D. Buckingham, (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 71-94). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Jaschik, S., (1998). Liberal-arts colleges worry about computer support and staffing. Chronicle of Higher Education, A29.
13. Knowlton, D., (2002). Promoting liberal arts thinking through online discussion: a practical application and its theoretical basis. Educational Technology & Society, 5, 3, 189-194. (Pubitemid 38817204)
14. Kuh, G., &, Vesper, N., (2001). Do computers enhance or detract from student learning? Research in Higher Education, 42, 1, 87-102.
15. Kvavik, R., &, Caruso, J., (2005). ECAR study of students and information technology, 2005: convenience, connection, control, and learning. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
16. Lohnes, S., &, Kinzer, C. K., (2007). Questioning assumptions about students' expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate Journal of Online Education, 3, 5. Retrieved September 26, 2010 from
17. MacVay, G., Snyder, K., &, Graetz, K., (2005). Evolution of a laptop university: a case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36, 3, 513-524. (Pubitemid 43906800)
18. Merriam, S., (1997). Qualitative research and case study applications in education: revised and expanded from case study research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19. Oblinger, D., &, Oblinger, J., (2005). Is it age or IT: first steps toward understanding the net generation. In, D. Oblinger, &, J. Oblinger, (Eds), Educating the net gen (pp. 2.1-2.20). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved September 26, 2010 from
20. Perry, A., (2004). A discovery oriented technology enhanced abstract algebra course. Education, 124, 4, 694-698.
21. Prensky, M., (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, 5, 1-6.
22. Rainie, L., Kalehoff, M., &, Hess, D., (2002). College students and the web. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and Life Project. Retrieved September 26, 2010 from
23. Rezak, A., &, Alvermann, D., (2005). Why choose one? Multimodality, identity, literacy practices of LiveJournal bloggers. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, Miami, FL.
24. Salaway, G., Caruso, J., &, Nelson, M., (2007). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2007. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
25. Shapiro, W., Roskos, K., &, Cartwright, P. G., (1995). Technology-enhanced learning environments. Change, 27, 6, 67-69.
26. Smallen, D., (2004). A liberal arts IT odyssey. Educause Review, 39, 1, 28-41.
27. Tapscott, D., (1998). Growing up digital: the rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
28. Von der Emde, S., Schneider, J., &, Kötter, M., (2001). Technically speaking: transforming language learning through virtual learning environments (moos). The Modern Language Journal, 85, 2, 210-225. (Pubitemid 33778027)
29. Zimic, S., (2009). Not so 'techno-savvy': challenging the stereotypical images of the 'Net generation.'. Digital Culture & Education, 1, 2, 129-144. Retrieved on July 9, 2010 from