I found the idea of digital identities very interesting. I used to think of myself as a digital native as I do spend a lot of time in the digital space. In both my professional and personal capacities, where I feature as a content creator and have social presences in both. The rethinking of the previously established notions of Digital Natives and Immigrants. in terms of digital residence and visitors I find fascinating. The Idea of moving between the two where you may be a resident in one area and a visitor in another, or only a resident for a short period of time as necessary. The theory highlights the importance of understanding how people interact with digital technologies and how these interactions shape our identities and relationships. As we become increasingly reliant on digital tools and platforms, it is crucial to be aware of our own digital behaviour and to consider how we want to engage with the digital world.
My own digital fingerprint was quite revealing to me and provided insights in how I use and navigate digital space. I do spend most of my time as a digital resident, again in both my professional and personal capacities, leaving strong traces of my presence there in both. Yet this is not all there is to my digital identity. There are quite tools that I only use on occasion, that I only visit when needed. In my own digital fingerprint, I also thought of digital technologies as constituting both online as well as offline digital tools, the latter forming my digital home to continue the analogy.
Weather we find ourselves as residence of visitors in any instance the fact that digital reliance is here to stay. We are in the digital age, and as with any age before it is knowing how to use its tools will determine how we successfully navigate its terrain. Digital literacy is fast becoming as important for our (social & professional) survival. Beetham and Sharpe ‘pyramid model’ of digital literacy development model (2010) provides a good framework for the development of digital literacies. It akin to a “Maslowian hierarchy of digital needs” where you have to start with the awareness of what tools are available followed by acquiring the skills you need to use the aforementioned tools and then the understanding of the best practises of using both the tools and skills to inform your digital identity.
This is a workable model. However, when we examine it in light of David White digital identity I feel as if it relates more to the digital visitor, who finds a tool to use and then learns to use it for a specific purpose before abandoning it until the next time the need arises. However, when we engage with this model from a digital resident’s point of view something interesting emerges (in my opinion at least). Once a digital resident reaches the pinnacle of the pyramid, it inverts. Once you have established your digital Identity you start leaving traces as a digital resident. These traces then start to define the practises that are required for your functioning in the digital spaces, which in turn informs the ever-evolving digital skills. However, skills are useless without tools, and therefore the skills dictate the tools that are being developed and the cycle continues.
In short, we shape our digital identities through the digital tools we use, but then we reflect these identities back into the digital mirror and in so doing our digital identities shape the digital tools we use.