As a result of deep mediatization, participation in society requires not only basic skills such as reading, writing and arithmetic, but also fundamental digital skills (Couldry & Hepp, 2016; Koppel & Wolf, 2021). People with low literacy skills also tend to have lower skills in using digital technologies (Buddeberg & Grotlüschen, 2020; Koppel & Wolf, 2021). In Germany alone, one in eight adults is low literate (Grotlüschen et al., 2019). However, although people with low basic (digital) literacy are at risk of social exclusion in various areas (Buddeberg & Grotlüschen 2020; Koppel & Langer, 2020), they have particularly low participation rates in further education (OECD, 2021). The digital divide is intensified by the Corona pandemic, in which digital media is relied upon to sustain educational pursuits. Often, low-literate adults lack the necessary technical and content experience (Buddeberg & Grotlüschen, 2020, p. 205 ff.). However, as a renowned study on literacy in Germany shows, this seems to apply primarily to work-oriented technologies: While adults with low literacy skills use computers and compose e-mails significantly less frequently than the population as a whole, only minor differences can be observed in the frequency of smartphone and tablet use and in the sending of short messages. More regularly than the population as a whole, low-literate individuals send voice messages, make video calls, and use social networks (Grotlüschen et al., 2019, p. 31). Following on from this, a study on the use of WhatsApp in adult literacy shows that it leads to positive learner attitudes (Adelore & Ojedeji, 2017). Accordingly, ideas that adequately address such digital preferences of learners and thus motivate them to participate in adult basic education courses are gaining importance (Koppel & Langer, 2020). The sociological construct of the Digital Taste according to Stephen Reder (2015) offers itself as a theoretical basis for this. In 2015, Reder used PIACC data to derive a four-step Digital Inclusion Pathway, in which the Digital Taste can be seen as playing a certain key role as one component. The individual stages and associated barriers are placed in the context of the current state of digitization, in order to finally consider how the pathway can also provide guidance independently of this. The first stage, which claims to have the necessary access to digital technologies, is followed by the Digital Taste, which is defined as follows: 

"Taste is [...] a sociological concept of an individual's personal and cultural patterns of preference and choice in ways of doing things." (Reder, 2015, p. 6)

Reder credits Taste with the potential to develop interest, desire, and confidence to use digital technologies. The Taste is followed by the stages Readiness and DigitalLiteracy, which is associated with the development of basic digital skills up to professional action and self-learning competencies in dealing with digital media (ibid., p. 6-7). The Digital Inclusion Pathway and the concept of Taste contained thereby offer an exciting first point of reference for the successful use of digital media in adult basic education. However, in order to pursue this track further and thus make it usable for the development of didactic concepts, a theoretical refinement of the concept as well as subsequent specific empirical findings are required. This leads to the research question: 

How is the Digital Taste characterized among learners in adult basic education and what conclusions can be drawn from this for practice?

To answer the question, the ECER presentation will combine theoretical perspectives from sociology and psychology in a model and link them to empirical findings from the GediG project, which is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.  

In order to answer the research question, the elusive concept of the Digital Taste is concretized via further theoretical references. For this, the Digital Taste is embedded in a new model that links it to another sociological construct, 'media-related taste', as a component of Pierre Bourdieu's (1987) habitus theory. Continuing the model, references are made to theoretical approaches in motivational psychology (Bandura, 1977; Brunstein, 2018) that are verbalizable and observable. Secondary analytically evaluated quantitative and qualitative data from the GediG project are then mapped to the model components. Included in the analysis are data from online questionnaire surveys with course instructors (n=34) and course participants (n=72) of adult basic education as well as online expert interviews with course instructors (n=11) and course participants (n=8). The questionnaire survey and the interviews took place in 2021. The number of cases of the questionnaire survey corresponds to the interim status as of October 2021. The online questionnaire for learners was equipped with a video sequence for information about the project and privacy policy, as well as a read-aloud function and icons for better understanding. Both questionnaires were subjected to reliability testing and communicative feedback. The quantitative data were analyzed descriptively via SPSS. The interview partners are evenly distributed within Germany, care was taken to consider different institutions. The eleven interviews at the level of course instructors were conducted with three male and eight female interview partners using guided expert interviews (Döring & Bortz, 2016; Przyborski & Wohlrab-Sahr, 2014). The case selection of the interviews with the course participants was generated from the interviews with the course instructors, who thus had a gatekeeper function (Döring & Bortz, 2016). A total of eight individuals were interviewed in two group discussions and three individual interviews. Due to COVID-19 contact restrictions, the group discussions and interviews were conducted online via ZOOM. All surveys were conducted in a guided manner with the inclusion of special stimulus material suitable for the target group and examined for their suitability via piloting (Przyborski & Wohlrab-Sahr, 2014; Kruse, 2015; Lamnek, 2005). Audio recordings of all interviews and group discussions were transcribed according to pre-established guidelines (Dresing & Pehl, 2018) and subsequently anonymized according to guidelines established in the project. The qualitative data were analyzed via qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz with the aid of MAXQDA (Kuckartz, 2018).

From the empirical data on the characterization of the Digital Taste of learners in adult basic education, conclusions can be drawn for the first time about which factors are essential in the design of digitally supported courses in order to meet the digital preference patterns of the target group. From the perspective of the Digital Inclusion Pathway, this provides the essential foundation for building basic digital competencies. Conclusions were derived from the empirical links to specific components of the multi-perspective theory model and their theoretical interactions in the overall context. The empirical data of the GediG project shown in the presentation are accordingly located in the following measurable and describable subcomponents of the model: access to digital media by course participants, motives and goals, and self-efficacy expectations and related influencing factors. Within the model, the last two aspects are linked to the potential of the Digital Taste described by Reder (2015) to develop interest, desire and confidence in one's own abilities in dealing with digital media. Among other things, the empirical results of the GediG project indicate that digital media, especially social media, mobile devices, and digital assistants, tend to be enjoyed by learners and used in a variety of ways. In contrast to this diverse digital media use by learners, the data also show that associated lifeworlds are hardly taken into account in the courses. Accordingly, it can be assumed that the (further) development of the Digital Taste is not yet sufficiently supported within adult basic education. In order to be able to design digitally supported lessons in this sector more successfully in the future, the knowledge gained from the overall project is to be transferred into a didactic orientation framework. This should make (self-organized) learning with digital media in this area more appropriate and motivating in the future.

Adelore, O. O. & Ojedeji, S. (2017). Effects of WhatsApp Mobile Application as Tutorial Delivery Tool on the Attitudes of Advanced Level Learners in Adult Literacy Programmes: A Case Study of University of Ibadan Model Literacy Programme. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. In Psychological Review 84 (2), S. 191–215. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191. Bourdieu, P. (1987). Die feinen Unterschiede. Kritik der gesellschaftlichen Urteilskraft (28. ed. 2021). Suhrkamp. Brunstein, J. C. (2018). Implizite und explizite Motive. In J. Heckhausen & H. Heckenhausen (Eds.), Motivation und Handeln (Springer textbook, 5th revised and expanded edition, pp. 269 - 312). Berlin: Springer. Buddeberg, K., & Grotlüschen, A. (2020). Literalität, digitale Praktiken und Grundkompetenzen. In LEO 2018—Leben mit geringer Literalität (pp. 197–224). wbv Publikationen. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2016). The mediated construction of reality. Cambridge: Polity Press. Dresing, T & Pehl, T. (2018). Praxisbuch Interview, Transkription & Analyse. Anleitung und Regelsysteme für qualitativ Forschende. Grotlüschen, A., Buddeberg, K., Dutz, G., Heilmann, L., & Stammer, C. (2019). LEO 2018 - Leben mit geringer Literalität. Universität Hamburg. Döring, N. & Bortz, J. (2016). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften. Berlin: Springer. Koppel, I., & Langer, S. (2020). Basic Digital Literacy - Requirements and Elements. Práxis Educacional, 16 (42), 326–347. Koppel, I., & Wolf, K. (2021). Digitale Grundbildung in einer durch technologische Innovationen geprägten Kultur. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 1, 182–199. Kruse, J. (2015). Qualitative Interviewforschung. Ein integrativer Ansatz. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa. Kuckartz, U. (2018). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa. Lamnek, S. (2005). Gruppendiskussion. Theorie und Praxis. Weinheim: Beltz utb. OECD (2021). Continuing Education and Training in Germany. Publishing Paris. Przyborski, A. & Wohlrab-Sahr, M. (2014). Qualitative Sozialforschung. Ein Arbeitsbuch. München: Oldenburg. Reder, S. (2015). Digital Inclusion and Digital Literacy in the United States: A Portrait from PIAAC’s Survey of Adult Skills. PIAAC.