Youth, heritage, and digital learning ecologies:

Creating engaging virtual museum spaces

Ashley Shaw
Department of Curriculum and Pedagogy, University of British Columbia
Dr. Don Krug
Department of Curriculum and Pedagogy, University of British Columbia

Abstract: This research was conducted as part of a project designed to offer guidance on the
development of a youth oriented online space for a popular Canadian museum of heritage and
immigration. This space would allow young people to learn about heritage, ethnicity, and
cultural identity, and, ideally, aid in the development of a positive ethnic identity. This
current paper reports on literature based research exploring three key areas: how young people
currently use technology and digital media, motivations and practices for pursuing informal
learning online, and the influence on and use of virtual spaces for identity development. Both
theoretical and empirical literature was explored, and it was concluded that to engage youth
such a site must both allow for and encourage participation, communication, and
collaboration. Social media sites, popular with youth, fulfilling these criteria, and supporting
sociocultural understandings of learning and identity development, could offer an excellent
model for the design of such virtual spaces.

Introduction
Young people today are widely believed to be highly engaged consumers of new technologies and digital
media. Indeed, many who wish to attract a young audience turn to the Internet to create virtual spaces,
optimistically employing an if you build it, they will come mind set. While this generation is indeed highly techsavvy, they are also critical consumers of digital media, and often these virtual spaces supposedly catering to them
are ignored or rejected. This paper shares the findings of a literature based research project, commissioned by a
popular Canadian museum of heritage and immigration, conducted to offer guidance on the design of a virtual space
aimed at young people, one designed to help them learn about cultural history, genealogy, and immigration, and to
provide resources to promote the development of their own ethnic identity. While our research also explored
technical design considerations and case studies of similar programs, this paper focuses on our work towards
developing an understanding of how young people currently actually use technology and the motivations behind
their engagement with digital media.
We began with a consideration of context: this space is to become part of a Canadian immigration museum,
a country where multiculturalism is both the reality and the legislated ideal. While it is important to recognise that
most Canadians do participate in a shared national identity, at the same time membership in specific cultural or
ethnic groups is acknowledged and celebrated, and the preservation of cultural heritage is considered highly
important. A goal for this online space, therefore, would be to provide resources for young people to learn about a
variety of different cultures, and to provide a space to help them develop their own sense of ethnic or cultural
identity. Therefore, we focussed our research on examining both empirical and theoretical literature around three
key areas: how young people actually use technology and the Internet, how they use it in pursuit of informal
learning projects, and what role it plays in identity development.

Young People Using New Technologies

This report focused on young people 15 to 25 years of age, a diverse group spanning upper secondary
through post-graduate schooling and early career. While technology use does vary within the group, we found that
Canadians in general are active online participants. According to the Inter@ctive Reid Report (Ipsos, 2012), 95% of
Canadians under 55 have Internet access in some form, and 47% have mobile access. Young Canadians spend three
hours per day online, doing nearly as much school work online as they do offline. They use technology to keep in
touch: most communicate primarily by text or social networking, and feel like they miss out if not online daily
(Ipsos, 2012). Along with holding positive attitudes towards technology and being relatively technologically
confident (Davies & Good, 2009), these young people are positive about the future, ethnically diverse and tolerant,
and self-expressive through a variety of media. They are also civically engaged, respectful of their parents, and
interested in traditional paths towards careers and families (Taylor & Keeter, 2010).
In much popular media, this generation has been given labels like millennials (Howe & Strauss, 2000) or,
due to their high level of engagement with new technologies, digital natives (Prensky, 2001) and the net
generation (Tapscott, 1998). These mainstream authors often suggest that todays youth are vastly different from
previous generations. Implicit in this is the idea of an academic moral panic (Bennet et. al., 2008); expectations of
connectedness, communication, and information on demand mean traditional societal structures, starting with
schooling, must be completely revamped to meet their needs. While these authors are oft-cited in popular literature,
their work generally lacks the empirical data needed to substantiate such claims. Those conducting research in the
area seem to take a somewhat less dystopian view. Buckingham (2007) reinforces that the digital generation,
while in general avid adopters of new technologies, are less interested in technology for itself and more for the
affordances around communication and information that it provides. Bennett et al. (2008) share both empirical and
theoretical studies that illustrate while in general young people are highly involved with technology there is much
variation in engagement and use. What is important to distil from these discussions is that young people do have a
unique understanding of the world, having grown up in times where technology affords instant communication and
information. While there may be a range of practices and rates of participation (by choice or not), most young
people are online in some form, and certain online activities (such as information seeking, communicating, and
participating in social networking) have become the norm.
A number of recent empirical studies have explored how young people are using new technologies and
online resources. The Generation M2 study (Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts, 2010) suggests near pervasive
connectedness: youth spend nearly eight hours per day engaged with media, both at home and on the go. In that
time they consume nearly eleven hours of content, showing that they have become skilled multi-taskers. The
Generations report (Zickuhr, 2010) shows that nearly 80% have home broad band, and nearly as many have mobile
access. While their sample is taken from an American population, other studies (Ipsos, 2009) have found a
remarkable degree of similarity between the Internet practices of American and Canadian youth. Primary online
activities consist of communicating and connecting: 96% email, 83% are on social network sites and 66% use
instant messaging. They are also avid gamers (78%) and consumers of media (80% watch videos, 65% listen to or
download music). Searching for information also occupies much of their time. While all use search engines, college
students and young adults look primarily for news, information, and products, while teens spend more of their time
searching for media content or related information. They believe that the information they find should be presented
in ways that are portable, personalised, and participatory (Zickuhr, 2010). Such immersion with digital media,
and the value put on ownership of multiple types of technology, suggests that young people are creating for
themselves complex digital environments which allow them to communicate and access information almost
effortlessly. Two themes emerge from their interactions: connecting with others and consuming information. For
the purpose of this research, we chose to focus on two specific practices as exemplars of these themes: informal
learning and social media use.

Learning Online
We use the term informal learning to describe the intention and structure of the learning experience rather
than the degree of seriousness, or level of fun, inherent in it (Sefton Green, 2004). Young people are often highly
engaged in this type of learning, motivated by personal interest, self-directed, and often reliant on the internet to

assist in their projects (Davies & Good, 2009). What compels them to pursue learning online is not just the wealth of
information available, but also the ability to interact with others of similar interests, and to share the knowledge
gained (Ito et. al., 2010). Such sharing and interaction is one of the key features of the modern Internet; Jenkins
(2006) describes it as a participatory culture. For many, this has lead to a renegotiation of epistemological
considerations. Dede (2008) describes a Web 2.0 epistemology, where knowledge is constructed by negotiating
compromises among various points of view (p. 80), a seismic shift from the classical view of knowledge as
expertly held factual truth. Echoing this, Eijkman (2008) suggests that Web 2.0 challenges traditional views of
knowledge which privilege the academic expert, especially as it reflects quite openly how humans construct
knowledge naturally, socially, and non-foundationally (p. 100). Knowledge is, to use a term appropriated from
computer science, in perpetual beta, and what is understood as factual today may be renegotiated tomorrow.
Relating closely to this epistemology of knowledge as socially negotiated and constructed, theories of
learning that build upon a sociocultural viewpoint help us understand how young people learn through their online
practices. Particularly relevant is work coming from the Vygotskyian approach, which recognises both the
importance of artefacts (such as technology) and social relationships in building knowledge. Vygotsky (1978)
believed learning to be accomplished through the use of tools, be they physical artefacts, language, or other
people, which provided a scaffold to help the learner progress. Further, he saw learning as profoundly social,
mediated by the tools of relationships, and occurring within particular social and cultural contexts offering specific
affordances and constraints. From their experiences, learners construct a tool kit, made up of resources to draw
upon as they continued their development. Baron (2006) describes the tool kit developed by young people today as
a learning ecology, a set of contexts found in physical or virtual spaces that provide opportunities for learning
(p. 195). For young people today, the technology and digital media they leverage in pursuit of learning is a key part
of this learning ecology, a personal digital ecology, allowing them to access these virtual spaces, where they not
only access information, but also develop and maintain the relationships and social networks that are integral to
learning.

Social Media
One type of web space that young people have eagerly incorporated into their digital ecologies is social
media. An encompassing term, social media generally refers to applications that both allow and expect users to
participate in the generation and sharing of content (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The most common type of social
media are social network sites (SNSs), defined by boyd & Ellison (2007) as:
web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a
bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and
traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system. (p. 211)
Facebook, MySpace, Tumblr, and Pinterest are popular examples of SNSs, and these sites are also the most popular
type of social media with youth; overall, 83% report using SNSs (Zickuhr, 2010), though rates of participation
closer to 95% are routinely found amongst college students (Smith & Caruso, 2010), with most users visiting the
sites daily, if not multiple times per day (Gasten, 2008). With such high levels of participation, it is important to try
to understand what it is that draws young people to these sites and what they do once there.
In a survey of university students, Smith and Caruso (2010) found the top reasons for using SNSs were
staying in touch with friends and sharing media. boyd (2008) found similar affordances attracting young people:
promoting and supporting interaction between friends, and providing a platform for identity display. A study of
Facebook (Gasten, 2008) explored these affordances, finding that young people used it primarily as a method of
connecting with friends and family, spending large amounts of time browsing through and commenting on friends
profiles, and often using it as a primary means of communication. Further, they clearly understood how they
conveyed their own identity through the site, not only by writing (and frequently re-writing) profiles and posting
media, but also through the connections articulated through friend links, mutual wall posts, and shared group
membership.
While many see participation in SNSs as anything but educational, Maloney (2007) picks up on its
excellent fit with sociocultural understandings of learning as discussed above, illustrating how these sites mirror
much of what we know to be good models of learning, in that they are collaborative and encourage an active

participatory role (p. 26). In our increasingly networked society (Castells, 2011), the ability to create and
maintain social networks, and to leverage them in pursuit of learning is an essential skill. Edwards (2009)
introduces the concept of relational agency: possessing the knowledge and ability to look amongst ones
relationships and networks in order to locate specific information. Building on this, Francis (2007) describes the
networks developed through online social networking as globally distributed funds of living knowledge, stating
how they can transmit knowledge as well as offer collaborative spaces in which knowledge can be developed. By
engaging in a variety of online practices (social networking, information searching, remixing and sharing content),
young people are becoming skilled at leveraging their personal digital ecologies in pursuit of self and knowledge.

Identity
Along with being a source for knowledge building, a large part of what engages young people with the
Internet is how well it serves this purpose of providing a space for identity display and development. Many classical
theories of identity continue to hold relevance even within this new medium. Erikson (1968), in his seminal work
Identity: Youth and Crisis, suggests that adolescents undergo a period of storm and stress during which they try on
a variety of different personas as a process of negotiating their own place in the world. Similarly, Marcia (1980)
views adolescence as a time of crisis, suggesting that young people pass through different stages on their way
towards identity achievement. The Internet offers young people spaces in which they can engage in such identity
exploration and testing.
Further, especially in reference to social media, identity as a sociocultural process in which the self and the
surroundings are continually dialogically engaged, seems particularly relevant (Buckingham, 2007). Goffman
(1959) uses the metaphor of a dramatic performance; young people engage in a performance of self, sharing
certain aspects and hiding others, cognisant of context and audience. This idea of conscious consideration of what is
shared, dialogic engagement between self and audience, and reflection and modification based on the feedback
received highlight the relevance of this theory to modern digital media. The importance of dialogue between actor
and audience is echoed by Bruner (1991), who states self-making is powerfully affected not only by your own
interpretations of yourself, but by the interpretations others offer of your version (p. 76). Further, he suggests that
identity development is never a completed project, but is instead constantly renegotiated using the resources
available. Viewing SNSs as such resources can provide a powerful lens as to why these sites are so important to the
identity work of young people. Indeed boyd (2007) speaks of the notion of writing oneself into being, and several
other authors have commented on the affordances of SNSs for identity development, both in the requirement to
present ones self through a written profile, shared media, and articulated connections, and in the continual feedback
received through a dialogic engagement with ones audience (Ellison et al., 2007; Hargatti, 2008; Gasten, 2008).
While to some such social identity work enacted on the Internet may seem disassociated from practices of
learning, Jenkins (2008) convincingly charts the relation between self and mind. Conceptions of self are vital, he
argues, to epistemic understandings and ontological security. What you believe is real or possible is inherently
coloured by who you views yourself to be, and the categories you see yourself to be a part of. Theories of
knowledge as socially constructed also clearly illustrate the linkages between identity, interaction, and learning.
Bruner (1991) discusses how self seems also to be inter-subjective or distributed in the same way that ones
knowledge is distributed beyond ones head to include the friends and colleagues to whom one has access (p. 76).
Baron (2006) brings this idea into our current context, suggesting that understanding how young people engage in
identity exploration online is essential to understanding what motivates them to pursue specific informal learning
projects. As both identity and knowledge construction are social processes, and young peoples engagement with
the Internet is characterised by communication and collaboration, these areas become increasingly intertwined.
An integral part of identity is how one relates to their cultural and ethnic heritage. Phinney et. al (2001)
consider ethnic identity an essential facet of adolescent identity development. Drawing on stage based theories of
identity (such as those of Erikson and Marcia), they suggest that young people begin with an unexamined ethnic
identification, move through a stage of exploring and trying on ethnic identities, and finally, ideally, develop a
secure ethnic identity. Others have clearly illustrated the importance of such a secure ethnic identity to overall
positive self-concept (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Berry (2006) reinforces this point in his work around issues of youth
immigration and identity development. He describes several different paths of adaptation immigrants may follow;

acculturation, or a positive identification with both ethnic and national cultures, is the most likely to result in an
overall positive self-concept.
To achieve of this type of positive ethnic identity, young people need to be exposed both ones own ethnic
culture and to other cultures, so that ideas of difference and similarity can be established (French et al. 2006). This
emphasises the importance of young people exploring their identity in relation to both the culture of origin (parents,
family, and a community identifying themselves with a certain heritage) and the cultures of their peers and a wider
society. While offline, young people may have varying degrees of access to each of these groups, the Internet
allows them to find information relating to specific countries, cultures, and ethnicities, to engage with others who
have already achieved a strong sense of cultural identity, and to try out various identities during their own journey.
Elias et al. (2008) explored the importance of the Internet to the acculturation of young immigrants. In addition to
searching for information about both their natal and adopted cultures, young people used social media to connect
with peers. Many felt that only in conversations with others of similar ethnic identity could they be themselves,
while others enjoyed being able to talk to those in their new country without the potential influence of stereotypes
encountered in face-to-face meetings. In work looking specifically at SNSs, Mainsah (2011) examined the
affordances these spaces offer young people to experiment with multiple ethnic identities. He suggests that many
young people use a variety of media to construct portraits of themselves in a way that challenges ethnic stereotypes
and promotes positive self concept. It would seem, therefore, that the Internet does provide a space where young
people can further their understandings of ethnicity, explore how those understandings are personally relevant to
them, and integrate them into a positive sense of identity and self-concept.

Conclusion
Although we believe that the development of this online space would benefit from further research
(particularly research that works with the young people making up the intended audience), we have put together
initial recommendations based on this first report. It would seem that what could be of most value is a space that
offers affordances similar to those of social media; a place where young people can engage in processes of ethnic
identity development and knowledge construction through dialogic engagement with peers. Concurrently, this
space should provide information on a variety of cultures and ethnic groups, so that they may both learn more about
their particular heritage and develop understandings of what it can mean to be part of a different cultural group.
However, a space where authoritative information is simply disseminated would violate both the theories of social
learning inherent in online practices and the norms and expectations of young people around a participatory culture.
Young people will quickly disengage themselves from such a model; instead one where information is both personal
(perhaps shared as narrative) and collaborative (building upon feedback and contribution) would be most
appropriate.
As we have seen, young people have an expectation that their participation will be not only allowed, but
integral, to the process of knowledge building in an Internet community. They see knowledge, along with the space
itself, in a state of perpetual beta, and they are used to having input into both the content and the technical
affordances of web spaces. Therefore, it is fundamentally important that this space offers young people opportunity
for participation, sharing, feedback, and influence. We would suggest that social media type sites (such as the
increasingly popular Tumblr), where they can consume, remix, and share content, and subsequently give and receive
feedback, could serve at least partly as a model. In addition, information that is both trustworthy and built
collaboratively should be shared; this material should also involve a variety of media and be interactive and
engaging. What is essential, then, is that this space allows young people to explore culture, heritage and ethnicity in
a manner that is meaningful and relevant to them.

References
Barron, B. (2006). Interest and Self-Sustained Learning as Catalysts of Development: A Learning Ecology Perspective.
Human Development, 49(4), 193-224.

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.
Berry, J. W., Phinney, J. S., Sam, D. L., & Vedder, P. (2006). Immigrant Youth: Acculturation, Identity, and Adaptation.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55(3), 1-31.
Boyd, D. (2007). Why youth social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. The John D. and
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning, 119-142.
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.
Bruner, J.S. (1991). Self-Making and World-Making. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 25(1), 67-78.
Buckingham, D. (2007). Introducing identity. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media
and Learning, 1-22.
Castells, M. (2011). The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture (Vol. 1): WileyBlackwell.
Davies, C. & Good, J. (2009). Harnessing Technology: The Learner and their context, 129.
Dede, C. (2008). A seismic shift in epistemology. EDUCAUSE review, 43(3), 80.
Edwards, A. (2009). From the systemic to the relational: Relational agency and activity theory. Learning and expanding with
activity theory, 197-211.
Eijkman, H. (2008). Web 2.0 as a non-foundational network-centric learning space. Campus-Wide Information Systems,
25(2), 93-104.
Elias, N., & Lemish, D. (2008). Media Uses in Immigrant Families: Torn between 'Inward' and
'Outward' Paths of Integration. International Communication Gazette, 70(1), 21-40.
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C. & Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook Friends: Social Capital and
College Students Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication,
12(4), 1143.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. New York:Norton.
Francis, R. (2007). The Predicament of the Learner in the New Media Age: an investigation into the
implications of media change for learning. (Unpublished DPhil thesis). University of Oxford: Oxford.
French, S. E., Seidman, E., Allen, L., & Aber, J. L. (2006). The development of ethnic identity during adolescence.
Developmental Psychology, 42(1), 1-10.
Gasten, A. (2008). The Role of Facebook in the Lives of Oxford PostGraduates. (Unpublished MSc
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

dissertation),

Goffman,E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London:Penguin.

Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose Space? Differences Among Users and Non-Users of Social Network Sites.
Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276-297.
Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation: Vintage.

Iposos Reid. (2009). American vs. Canadian Youth. Retrieved from

http://www.marketingcharts.com/television/american-vs-canadian-youth-lifestyles-values-differ-10588/.
Iposos Reid. (2012). Canadian Inter@ctive Reid Report: 2012 Fact Guide. Retrieved from
http://www.ipsos.ca/en/products-tools/media-content-technology/consumer-trends-product/canadian-interactivereid-report.aspx.
Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Cody, R., Herr, B., & Tripp, L. (2010). Hanging out, messing around, geeking
out: Living and learning with new media. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide: New York:NYU press.
Jenkins, R. (2008). Social identity. Oxford: Routledge.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media.
Business horizons, 53(1), 59-68.
Mainsah, H. (2011). 'I could well have said I was Norwegian but nobody would believe me: Ethnic minority youths selfrepresentation on social network sites. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 14(2), 179193.
Maloney, E. J. (2007). What Web 2.0 can teach us about learning. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(18), 26.
Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (ed.). Handbook of adolescent psychology, (159-187) New York:
Wiley.
Phinney, J. S., Horenczyk, G., Liebkind, K., & Vedder, P. (2001). Ethnic identity, immigration, and wellbeing: An
interactional perspective. Journal of social issues, 57(3), 493-510.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants Part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds.
Victoria. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf
Sefton Green, J. (2004). Literature review in informal learning with technology outside school. Bristol: Futurelab
Smith, S. D., & Caruso, J. B. (2010). The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology,
2010. Key Findings. EDUCAUSE, 13.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The Social Identity Theory of Inter-group Behavior. In S. Worchel and LW Austin (eds)
Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Taylor, P., & Keeter, S. (2010). Millennials. Confident. Connected. Open to Change. Washington, DC: Pew
Research Center.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Zickuhr, K. (2010). Generations 2010. Pew Internet & American Life Project, 16, 11.