Visitors and Residents

In an entertaining webinar, Dave White of the Department for Continued Learning at Oxford University, enjoys a beer while he presents findings from Isthmus, a JISC-funded project. He describes how Marc Presky’s outmoded pre-Web 2.0 concept of digital natives and immigrants became largely interpreted in generational terms, and offers an updated concept for the social web; suggesting learners engaging in social media fall into two distinct groups – visitors and residents.

Residents see the web as a space, in which they develop a visible social presence, creating digital profiles as a form of individual branding.
Visitors may use the web in sophisticated ways but remain largely invisible. They see web as a toolbox to dip into and use without leaving a digital footprint.
  • Residents see the web as a space, in which they develop a visible social presence, creating digital profiles as a form of personal branding.
  • Visitors may use the web in sophisticated ways but remain largely invisible. They see web as a toolbox to dip into and use without leaving a digital footprint.

In reality, these two groups exist on a continuum, which White subsequently maps onto a professional-private axis.

Motivation to use social media is not related to competences, age, or experience, but is rather influenced by learning ecologies. Visitors, it would seem, are goal-orientated; viewing learning as content delivery, and valuing the role of the expert. Residents see learning as a social activity, in which identity propagation plays a key role.

White suggests we are entering a postdigital era – in which tools are becoming culturally normalised – and argues the tools and applications themselves can be seen as either residential or visitor orientated.

A video based on White’s ALT-C 2009 presentation is also available.

Tags: , ,

7 Responses to “Visitors and Residents”

  1. virginia Yonkers Says:

    This appears soooo much more useful than natives and immigrants. It also makes me wonder about the students (regardless of generation) who are visitors, but we want to become residents. Does this also tie into online communities (i.e. you might be a visitor in one type of community, as I am to facebook, but a resident at another, as I am with ning)? How do we get people to become “residents”? I think the question of trust is a big issue.

  2. Andy Coverdale Says:

    You seem to be suggesting a correlation between communities and platforms. is this necessarily the case? I agree that an individual can engage in visitor- and resident-type activities in different situations, but is this determined by socio-cultural or technological structures?

  3. virginia Yonkers Says:

    I guess one problem I had with the digital natives or immigrants was that fact that there was a uniform amount of knowledge in “technology”. I have a greater understanding of the technological underpinnings of new technology than my husband or children. But I would be considered an immigrant. But the fact is that technology continually changes and with it the socio-cultural structures. I was on Facebook within the first year that it was developed as a member of our University. It changed drastically when it was “opened” up. My kids use it differently than friends and relatives of my generation.

    Within the technological structures, there can be multiple socio-cultural structures and practices. Just like habitat structures can be similar between urban, suburban, rural, and different countries, structures between technology can be similar. However, the town next to mine differs because of a different community feeling. Experience, ties to the community, understanding of communication cues between members of the community affect the way someone feels coming into a new community. My husband and I lived in a neighborhood for 7 years and never felt a part of the community and felt as if we were considered “visitors”. However, our current community, we feel like residents as we know how things work, who the players are, and the subtle communication cues.

    I feel it is the same with technology in that some will always feel like technology visitors as they learn new technology. Some may always “fit in” immediately and be a resident where ever they go. Still others will be a visitor initially and then move to resident status depending on the technology and community support in using the technology. And finally, others will be visitors at some technologies (usually by choice) and residents at others. I think there is a lot more choice in the use of technology and a lot more community influence that creates trust in using a certain technology.

  4. uberVU - social comments Says:

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by andycoverdale: New blog post: Visitors and Residents http://bit.ly/JKbV

  5. About learning in virtual networks | Heli on Connectivism Says:

    […] also appreciate Andy’s blog. His post about visitors and residents remind my own but he can say things clearly. Then Dr Smetty tweeted about her blog including […]

  6. Top Five Posts | PhDBlog.net Says:

    […] Visitors and Residents (7 November 2009) […]

  7. About learning in virtual networks | Heli's reflections on open learning Says:

    […] also appreciate Andy’s blog. His post about visitors and residents reminds my own but he can say things more clearly. Then Dr Smetty tweeted about her blog including […]

Leave a Reply