ETL523 Module 04: Digital citizenship in the contemporary context notes

Siobhan WalkerETL523 Digital Citizenship in Schools

4.1 Summary: Digital Citizenship and AI/Algorithmic Literacy

Defining Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Generative AI (GAI)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a complex and evolving concept due to the varied definitions of intelligence itself. Intelligence may be intellectual, emotional, or social, making it difficult to capture in a single definition. Broadly, AI refers to technologies that simulate human-like thinking and problem-solving abilities (Siemens, 2022; Southgate et al., 2018).

Generative AI (GAI) is a subset of AI focused specifically on creating new content. Tools such as ChatGPT exemplify GAI, producing novel outputs based on user prompts. The emergence of GAI technologies has sparked significant discussion in educational spheres, particularly regarding their potential roles and risks in the classroom (Baidoo-Anu & Ansah, 2023; Chiu, 2023; Kovanovic, 2022; Wang & Cheng, 2022).

These technologies are constantly evolving, so educators must remain informed and responsive to developments. It is not feasible to teach students about every GAI tool they may encounter, but it is essential to equip them with the foundational knowledge and skills needed to engage critically with AI technologies.

The Importance of Understanding GAI in Education

The pervasiveness of GAI necessitates a shift in education. Schools must prioritise preparing students for a future where AI plays a central role in everyday decision-making. Rather than focusing only on technical skills, educators are encouraged to explore the ethical implications, influence, and societal impact of these tools.

For example, the topic notes include a demonstration prompt for ChatGPT, asking it to explain AI to teachers. The generated response illustrates the practical application of GAI in real-world learning contexts and the kinds of interactions students and teachers may have with these tools.

The notes urge educators to remain curious, open, and engaged with technological advancements. This means developing not just functional digital literacy, but also critical and algorithmic literacy – understanding how these technologies shape perceptions, choices, and opportunities.

AI and Algorithmic Literacy

Algorithms are embedded in everyday life, particularly in platforms like social media. These systems sort and filter content based on user behaviour, tailoring information feeds to individual preferences. While many users are aware that algorithms influence what they see online, few understand the mechanics behind these systems.

Algorithmic literacy, therefore, becomes a critical component of digital citizenship. It involves recognising when algorithmic systems are at play, understanding how they operate, and evaluating the consequences of their use. With algorithms influencing access to information, shopping, entertainment, and social connections, there is a pressing need for educational strategies that promote deeper understanding.

Educators are encouraged to introduce students to the concept of “algorithmic influence” and to develop their critical awareness. Students should learn not only how algorithms work but also how they can perpetuate biases, manipulate emotions, and reinforce digital inequalities. This awareness is especially important given the rise of algorithmic content curation on platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram.

Classroom Tools for Exploring AI

The notes recommend several freely available GAI tools for educators to explore and integrate into learning environments:

  • ChatGPT – a conversational AI chatbot used for natural language tasks.

  • Perplexity – a research assistant using AI to find information online.

  • QuillBot – a paraphrasing tool powered by GAI, which can be used to understand text transformation.

These tools provide accessible entry points for students to explore GAI without needing advanced coding knowledge. However, ethical considerations, such as plagiarism and data privacy, must also be addressed when using them.

Encouraging Reflective Digital Citizenship

The module concludes by emphasising the need for critical digital citizenship. This extends beyond using technology safely and effectively. It encompasses a broader understanding of how AI and algorithmic systems shape the digital world. Students must be taught to question whose interests these systems serve, how decisions are made, and how to challenge or resist unfair algorithmic processes.

Teachers play a pivotal role in guiding this reflective inquiry. They can encourage students to consider who designs algorithms, how they impact marginalised communities, and what it means to live ethically in an AI-driven world.

Summaries of Attached Articles

Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., & Neubaum, G. (2023)

This article presents a comprehensive overview of algorithmic literacy by outlining the challenges users face when trying to understand how algorithms influence their online experiences. The authors explain that while people are generally aware that algorithms exist (e.g. in their social media feeds), their understanding is often superficial. The key components of algorithmic literacy discussed include:

  • Profiling transparency – understanding how platforms collect and use personal data

  • Profiling management – the extent to which users can adjust or control algorithmic outcomes

  • Selective algorithmic memory – recognising how past data can continue to influence content

  • User control – the ability (or lack thereof) to adjust what algorithms show

The article also highlights how difficult it is to study algorithmic literacy due to limited access to platform data and the “black box” nature of AI systems. It calls for a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods in future research to better understand users’ perceptions and experiences.

APA 7 Citation:
Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., & Neubaum, G. (2023). What do we know about algorithmic literacy? New Media & Society, 27(2), 689–706. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221149796

Oddone, K., Garrison, K., & Gagen-Spriggs, K. (2023)

This article discusses the role of teacher librarians in supporting ethical and critical engagement with generative AI. Using the CATWOE framework (Customers, Actors, Transformation Process, Worldview, Owners, and Environmental Constraints), the authors examine teacher librarian responses to new technologies such as ChatGPT. Findings reveal a strong commitment among TLs to:

  • Promote ethical and responsible use of AI

  • Support student learning by modelling inquiry

  • Embed AI literacy across school programs

Key ethical issues highlighted include plagiarism, misinformation, bias, and academic integrity. The authors conclude that TLs can lead school communities in conversations about the ethical use of generative AI and can act as pedagogical leaders in this space.

APA 7 Citation:
Oddone, K., Garrison, K., & Gagen-Spriggs, K. (2023). Navigating generative AI: The teacher librarian’s role in cultivating ethical and critical practices. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 72(4), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2023.2289093

Furze, L. (2023)

Furze explores how teachers can integrate AI ethics into the curriculum by identifying nine areas of ethical concern. These include:

  • Bias and discrimination

  • Data privacy and surveillance

  • Ownership and copyright

  • Environmental impact

  • Misinformation and truth distortion

The article offers practical classroom activities that focus on these ethical concerns using real-life decision-making scenarios. Furze calls for embedding AI ethics across multiple subject areas and stresses that teaching AI ethics is a necessary part of fostering critical, socially aware learners who are prepared for the digital future.

APA 7 Citation:
Furze, L. (2023). Teaching AI ethics. https://leonfurze.com/2023/01/26/teaching-ai-ethics/

Data Science 4 Everyone (2023)

This short video introduces the concept of data literacy, encouraging viewers to question how much of their digital decision-making is actually influenced by algorithms. The video challenges the notion of personal choice by highlighting how data is collected and used to predict and influence user behaviour.

It argues that learning data literacy does not require technical expertise and can empower individuals to engage more thoughtfully and ethically with digital platforms. Understanding how data is used helps individuals make informed decisions, resist manipulation, and engage with technology in ways that align with democratic and human rights principles.

APA 7 Citation:
Data Science 4 Everyone. (2023, October 16). Data literacy: What is it and why does it matter? [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/4Ii_a-inezY

Discussion Forum Activity 4.1

CATWOE is an acronym used in Soft Systems Methodology (Checkland & Poulter, 2006) to help analyse complex problems from multiple perspectives:

  • C (Customers): The individuals or groups who are affected by the system. In education, this is typically the students.
  • A (Actors): Those who carry out the system’s activities – in this case, teacher librarians and educators.
  • T (Transformation Process): The change or transformation that takes place – for example, helping students become ethical and critical users of GAI.
  • W (Worldview / Weltanschauung): The underlying beliefs or perspectives that justify the system – such as whether GAI is seen as a threat or opportunity.
  • O (Owners): Those with the power to stop or change the system – such as school leaders or education departments.
  • E (Environmental Constraints): External limitations that affect the system – including accessibility, age restrictions, privacy laws, or policy frameworks.

Reflective Blog Post: My Worldview on Generative AI in Education

As a teacher librarian working in an international school that caters to students aged 3-18, I’ve always viewed educational technology as a tool that can expand equity, creativity and agency—when used mindfully. My worldview aligns with the idea that digital tools, including Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), can be adapted to empower students, provided they are introduced within an ethical, critically reflective, and well-supported framework.

Oddone et al. (2023) suggest that our worldview as teacher librarians plays an important role in embracing or resisting emerging tools such as ChatGPT, Quillbot, or Perplexity. I found their CATWOE analysis especially useful for understanding how our values influence what we teach and how we respond to technological shifts. Their exploration of “transformation processes”, such as teaching about ethical AI use, lateral reading, and identifying plagiarism, is an aspect that holds real opportunities to elevate our role in curriculum planning and information literacy.

My approach to GAI is cautious but open. I don’t believe that banning these tools outright supports long-term student learning. Instead, I favour a worldview that prioritises transparency, dialogue, and user engagement. I have already considered how best to introduce and model responsible GAI use in the library—such as using Microsoft Copilot to generate starting questions for research and collaboratively fact-check those answers using our curated databases. This practice echoes Oddone et al.’s emphasis on teacher librarians guiding students through the ethical and evaluative use of AI-generated content.

Using CATWOE to reflect on my school’s readiness to support GAI has been interesting! I see students as the ultimate beneficiaries (Customers) and myself as both actors and advocates for ethical use. The Transformation process involves embedding GAI into research and inquiry lessons in ways that promote academic integrity. However, our Owners (school leadership) continue working on policies and clarity, which presents a challenge. There are also Environmental constraints – such as varied access to devices across year levels and concerns about student data privacy.

Ultimately, my worldview acknowledges that if we don’t help students learn to navigate AI responsibly, they will do so without our guidance—and perhaps with greater risk. The teacher librarian’s role in modelling, co-planning, and advocating for ethical technology use has never been more pivotal. We must continue to develop our knowledge and pedagogical strategies to remain confident and future-facing in our practice.

References

Oddone, K., Garrison, K., & Gagen-Spriggs, K. (2023). Navigating Generative AI: The teacher librarian’s role in cultivating ethical and critical practices. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 73(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2023.2289093

Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for action: A short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use for practitioners, teachers and students. Wiley.

4.2: Globalisation of Information and Learning

Students as Global Citizens

As digital technologies continue to shape everyday life, the global interconnectedness brought about by globalisation must be acknowledged and embedded into education systems. Students need to understand that they are part of a digitally connected world. This demands the development of educational programmes that equip learners with intercultural understanding, critical engagement, and responsible digital participation.

Social media is a powerful example of global interconnectivity. However, its use is also shaped by local cultures, regulations, and political frameworks. For example, in China, access to platforms such as YouTube and Google is restricted, and domestic alternatives dominate the social media landscape. These national differences create both challenges and opportunities for teaching digital citizenship in a globalised context.

The digital environment offers both synchronous and asynchronous communication options, allowing learners across the globe to collaborate and share ideas. Social media used for educational networking supports authentic connections and should be recognised as an essential element of a global digital learning environment.

Educator Tools

The eSafety Commissioner provides tools for educators to help students understand digital citizenship. One such resource, Your Digital Reputation (eSafety, 2023), encourages reflection on personal online footprints and the long-term implications of digital behaviour.

Social, Cultural, and Global Perspectives

Understanding digital citizenship requires recognising that digital access and use differ globally. Governments, schools, and educational authorities around the world regulate which tools and platforms are available. For example, while Facebook is widely used across most countries, it is restricted in others. These disparities affect how students engage online and underscore the importance of adaptable and inclusive digital learning environments.

Article Summaries

Harris, Walton, Johns & Caluya (2022)

This chapter explores young Australians’ everyday digital practices and how these relate to digital and global citizenship. The authors argue for an integrated approach that goes beyond risk-based or safety-focused frameworks, incorporating civic participation and cross-cultural dialogue. Despite the potential of digital media to foster global civic engagement, policies and school-based programmes often frame youth digital activity as risky, thereby creating a gap between intended policy outcomes and educational realities. Young people, especially those from marginalised backgrounds, experience lower levels of digital inclusion due to socioeconomic and geographical barriers. The authors call for a broader, more evidence-based understanding of how global digital citizenship manifests in young people’s lives and advocate for digital civic education that better aligns with youth experiences and promotes informed, ethical, and inclusive participation.

APA 7 citation: Harris, A., Walton, J., Johns, A., & Caluya, G. (2022). Toward global digital citizenship: “Everyday” practices of young Australians in a connected world. In P. K. Kubow, N. Webster, K. Strong, & D. Miranda (Eds.), Contestations of citizenship, education, and democracy in an era of global change (pp. 133–148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003197881-9

Miranda (Eds.) Chapter 7

Chapter 7 critiques the limited integration between digital citizenship and global citizenship policies. The authors suggest that these areas remain siloed, failing to reflect the realities of digitally connected youth, especially in diverse, multicultural societies like Australia. While schools are expected to develop global citizenship through digital literacy and intercultural understanding, current programmes often default to cybersafety agendas. The chapter recommends a more integrated and culturally responsive model of global digital citizenship that reflects students’ everyday digital practices, especially among marginalised groups.

APA 7 citation: Miranda, D. (Ed.). (2022). Chapter 7: Toward global digital citizenship. In Contestations of citizenship, education, and democracy in an era of global change (pp. 133–148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003197881-9

Miranda (Eds.) Chapter 12

This chapter continues the conversation about the gap between citizenship education and the lived digital experiences of youth. It critiques traditional nationalistic approaches to global citizenship and highlights how participatory practices are evolving through digital media. The chapter calls for an education system that values young people’s digital agency and supports their social action through more expansive, youth-centred global citizenship frameworks.

APA 7 citation: Miranda, D. (Ed.). (2022). Chapter 12: Citizenship education in global digital spaces. In Contestations of citizenship, education, and democracy in an era of global change (pp. 203–219). Routledge.

eSafety (2023)

This guide provides practical strategies for young people to manage their digital reputation. It highlights how digital footprints are formed, the long-term consequences of online behaviour, and the importance of critical thinking and ethical online engagement. The resource encourages students to actively shape their personal brand with a focus on privacy, authenticity, and responsibility.

APA 7 citation: eSafety. (2023). Your digital reputation. Office of the eSafety Commissioner. https://www.esafety.gov.au/key-issues/staying-safe/digital-reputation

Discussion Forum Activity 4.2

The following prompts are a guide to get you thinking about the importance of global citizenship.

  • Why is it important to foster a global approach to digital citizenship?
  • What are the most important considerations when developing a professional personal brand? Or supporting students to develop their personal brand? What is your school doing in this area?
  • What do you see as typical challenges within a school when balancing ‘educational networking’ with ‘social networking’?

Digital Citizenship in Schools

Having had the opportunity to teach all ages in primary school and now working as a teacher librarian, I have seen first-hand how our students’ online lives reach across various borders. Whether engaging in class Padlets with peers, creating digital portfolios, or following YouTubers worldwide, their digital interactions are inherently global. For this reason, I believe that developing an international approach to digital citizenship is fundamental. Digital literacy alone is no longer sufficient. Educators should equip their students with the intercultural understanding, ethical awareness, and critical thinking skills required to participate meaningfully and safely in a connected world.

An aspect I have taken away from this module is the reminder that digital and global citizenship should not be treated as separate constructs (Harris et al., 2022). Rather than limiting digital citizenship to a checklist of safe online behaviours, we should help students navigate complex social and political dimensions—like misinformation, algorithmic bias, and global inequities in access. This means giving them space to ask difficult questions, reflect on whose voices are represented online, and engage respectfully across differences.

Alongside this, there is growing attention in schools to students developing a positive and purposeful personal brand online. Resources such as Your Digital Reputation (eSafety, 2023) are tools that can be useful in encouraging students to understand how every like, post, or tag contributes to their digital footprint. In my current school, we are beginning to explore this through lessons on online identity, where students reflect on how they wish to be perceived by others, particularly in professional or academic contexts. I see huge value in this, especially as older primary students begin using platforms like Seesaw, Google Sites, and Canva independently in lessons both in and out of class to showcase their learning. However, I think we need to tread carefully—students must be encouraged to be authentic and ethical, not just ‘marketable’. Helping them find that balance between professional identity and personal integrity is, and should continue to be, an ongoing conversation.

One of the ongoing challenges I have noticed is the blurred boundary between educational networking and social networking. Tools like Google Classroom and Padlet are designed for structured academic use but often feel similar to social platforms in design and engagement. This sometimes leads students to misinterpret tone, privacy, and appropriate sharing expectations. At the same time, we want to nurture collaborative learning, creative expression, and intercultural exchange. Schools must continue to promote safe, respectful, and purposeful online collaboration—without resorting to restrictive policies that disengage learners. For this reason, it is crucial that teachers co-construct norms with students, model appropriate digital behaviour, and maintain open lines of communication with families and the wider school community.

Ultimately, teaching digital citizenship must go beyond compliance and into the realm of empowerment. Our students are already online. They are already part of global conversations—whether through gaming, music, activism, or friendship. Our role is to help them show up in those spaces with awareness, agency, and empathy.

References

eSafety. (2023). Your digital reputation. Office of the eSafety Commissioner. https://www.esafety.gov.au/key-issues/staying-safe/digital-reputation

Harris, A., Walton, J., Johns, A., & Caluya, G. (2022). Toward global digital citizenship: “Everyday” practices of young Australians in a connected world. In P. K. Kubow, N. Webster, K. Strong, & D. Miranda (Eds.), Contestations of citizenship, education, and democracy in an era of global change (pp. 133–148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003197881-9

4.3: Guidelines and Policies to Support Digital Citizenship for Learning and Life

Establishing Guidelines in School Contexts

As schools adopt increasingly networked and online learning environments, it is essential to establish clear, flexible, and contextually relevant guidelines and policies. These structures provide the learning community—students, educators, and families—with clarity around expectations for online conduct, responsibilities, and the appropriate use of digital tools. Such frameworks are not intended to be overly restrictive, but should instead serve as living documents that adapt to emerging technologies and evolving learning needs.

Common terminology across different contexts includes:

  • Acceptable Use Policy (AUP)

  • Responsible Use Policy (RUP)

  • Responsible Use Guidelines (RUG)

  • Acceptable Use Agreement (AUA)

  • Internet Use Policy (IUP)

  • Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)

  • Bring Your Own Technology (BYOT)

Each of these approaches serves a similar purpose: outlining behavioural expectations, network access rights, and acceptable digital interactions. In most school systems, these documents are co-signed by students, parents, and staff, reinforcing shared responsibility.

David Warlick’s 2007 overview of school AUPs remains a valuable reference point. Among his key recommendations is the idea that policies should allow room for experimentation and evaluation of new technologies and practices not yet anticipated—acknowledging the rapidly shifting digital landscape.

Policy Development and Alignment

Developing digital citizenship policies must be tailored to the unique needs and values of individual school communities. However, educators also bear a broader responsibility to ensure that school-based policies align with national guidelines and best practice recommendations. For Australian educators, this includes alignment with the eSafety Commissioner’s frameworks, which set benchmarks for policy effectiveness and relevance.

Educators are encouraged to draw upon resources such as:

  • eSafety Commissioner’s Best Practice Framework for Online Safety Education

  • eSafety Toolkit for Schools

These tools help embed eSafety principles into the curriculum, teacher professional development, and school-wide strategies.

BPF Online Safety Education Framework (eSafety Commissioner, 2021)

This framework—developed through research led by Professor Kerryann Walsh (QUT)—offers a comprehensive approach to evaluating and implementing online safety education in Australian schools. It outlines five key elements:

1. Students’ Rights and Responsibilities

Online safety begins with a firm understanding of student rights and responsibilities in digital spaces. This includes their rights to provision, participation, and protection, along with their responsibilities toward others in their online interactions. Effective practice encourages:

  • Recognising the opportunities and risks of digital environments

  • Empowering students to co-design and reflect on online safety education

  • Emphasising responsibility in relational contexts (e.g., peer interactions)

2. Resilience and Risk

Rather than focusing solely on harm, the framework advocates for a strengths-based approach that builds resilience. Not all risk leads to harm, and students should be taught to assess and manage risk appropriately. Key practices include:

  • Acknowledging risk variability by platform, technology, and usage pattern

  • Designing inclusive content that addresses the diverse needs of all learners

  • Encouraging engagement that is culturally and contextually sensitive

3. Effective Whole-School Approaches

Online safety is most effective when supported by a whole-school culture. This includes regular instruction at every year level, delivered by trained, confident educators. Best practices include:

  • Teaching digital safety proactively and developmentally

  • Using engaging and age-appropriate strategies

  • Avoiding scare tactics in favour of balanced, empowering approaches

  • Partnering with families and communities for broader support

4. Integrated and Specific Curriculum

Online safety is not an isolated topic but must be embedded across curriculum areas, incorporating both technical and interpersonal skills. Key inclusions are:

  • Digital citizenship and media literacy to support civic engagement

  • Social and emotional learning, such as empathy and emotion regulation

  • Guidance on help-seeking and navigating online support systems

  • Direct teaching about specific risks (e.g., cyberbullying, image sharing)

5. Continuous Improvement through Review and Evaluation

Finally, online safety education must be regularly reviewed using data, evidence, and feedback. Ongoing reflection ensures programmes remain relevant and effective. Recommendations include:

  • Sharing effective practices among schools

  • Ongoing professional development for staff

  • Annual review of curriculum and strategies

  • Data-informed refinement and enhancement

4.4: Digital Citizenship Programmes and Projects

Developing School-Based Programmes and Projects

This module emphasises the need for schools to implement contextualised digital citizenship programmes that reflect the unique needs of their learning communities. While national and global frameworks offer foundational guidance, each school must interpret and adapt these resources based on its student demographics, technological infrastructure, pedagogical philosophy, and cultural context.

Educators are encouraged to take a proactive approach, designing customised policies, teaching resources, and intervention strategies that go beyond a narrow focus on compliance or digital safety. The aim is to instil in students a well-rounded understanding of their rights and responsibilities in digital spaces.

A key conceptual point in this module is the distinction between “digital citizenship” and “digital safety”. The former encapsulates a broader and more positive vision of online engagement—one that values active participation, ethical interactions, creativity, and critical thinking. The term “digital safety,” while important, is often associated with risk, restriction, and harm prevention, potentially fostering a deficit view of students’ online experiences.

Framing Digital Citizenship Positively

A holistic digital citizenship education programme should integrate the following dimensions:

  • Ethical participation and digital responsibility

  • Civic engagement through digital platforms

  • Digital literacy and critical consumption of information

  • Protection of privacy and personal data

  • Respect for intellectual property

  • Understanding algorithms and their influence

  • Resilience to misinformation and manipulation

  • Creative digital production and collaboration

The goal is to empower students—not just to avoid harm—but to thrive in digital environments.

Resource Guide for Educators

The module provides an extensive, curated list of international and national digital citizenship education resources, platforms, and frameworks. These tools can support programme development, provide curriculum-aligned content, and offer models of best practice. Each of these is freely accessible and has been developed by credible organisations in the field.

Key Resources Include:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *