When the term “digital fluency” came up in my study, my first reaction was “sure, that’s me.” I made this assumption on the grounds that I often know more about digital technologies and web 2.0 applications than the majority of my senior colleagues, and because I find learning new technologies very straight forward. To me, digital fluency and being a “digital native” (Howell, p. 6) sounded synonymous, both meaning growing up around digital technologies and therefore having strong technological intuition when familiarising with new programs.
It turns out I was quite wrong. Howell goes on to describe the level of digital fluency that is standard for children finishing primary school or beginning secondary school as something quite beyond what I ever learned, making me reclassify myself, not necessarily as a digital immigrant but more of a technology neophyte (Howell, p. 133). She describes this grouping as “beginners who have a solid grounding in the basics, and are ready for more complex learning experiences with technology.”
Having made this breakthrough about where I stand on the spectrum of digital fluency, I still do not fear getting future students to this point. Howells description of various technologies one can use with students to facilitate creative, experimental and purposeful technological learning (Howell, p. 135) sent my imagination running wild with ideas of my own. However it did instil on me how arrogant I had been to think I did not need further education in this area, and how important it is that I develop not just a digital pedagogy for my teaching, but for my own life-long learning as well.