Digital Library

ETL533 Assessment 4: Part D – Critical Reflection

Leave a comment

My understanding of digital literature has grown significantly over the last few months. From my early definitions to the creation of my own narrative, I’ve gained a solid understanding of what digital literature is, why it’s beneficial and how it can be implemented to support my school.

My preliminary definitions of digital literature focused on the distinction between the digital and the digitised (Lysaught, 2022, July 19; Lysaught, 2022, July 25). As my research progressed I consolidated these distinctions by combining Unsworth’s (2006, p.2-3) and Allan’s (2017, p.22-23) categories (Lysaught, 2022, August 7). Like my peers (Curtis, 2022, July 19), I believe digital literature should be quality and meet community needs, which led me to consider what makes quality digital literature (Lysaught, 2022, August 14) and to design my own evaluation criteria where I determined three key aspects: multimodality, interactivity, and connectivity (Lysaught, 2022, August 28). Self-evaluations and peer feedback reveals – despite the amateur multimodal features – mine’s an effective, quality text suitable for its intended purpose and audience:

Evaluation of The Shakespeare Chronicles

However, defining digital literature is arguably less important to teacher-librarians than understanding how to incorporate it effectively. Digital literature provides exciting opportunities to move students from passive consumers to active creators of content  (Morra, 2013, para.2; Kitson, 2017, p.66), and as new technologies and communication tools emerge, students require new literacies to ensure they’re critically consuming and ethically creating texts (Walker et al., 2010, p.214-216; Kearney, 2011, p.169; Leu, 2011, p.6-8; Mills & Levido, 2011, p.80-81, 89; Leu et al., 2015, p.139-140; Serafini et al., 2015, p.23; Combes, 2016, p.4). In 2009 students spent an average four hours a day online (Weigel, 2009, p.38); by 2015 US teens consumed between 6-9 hours of media a day (Common Sense Media, 2015, para.6), while Australian teens now spend an average of 14.4 hours a week online (eSafety Commissioner, 2021, p.4). Digital literature therefore harnesses our students’ preferences and familiarity with technological platforms (Figueiredo & Bidarra, 2015, p.323; Skaines, 2010, p.100-104; Stepanic, 2022, p.2; Weigel, 2009, P.38). Digital literature incorporating interactivity, multimodality, and connectivity can develop ‘nöogenic narratives’ wherein personal growth is achieved by viewing our lives as a story (Hall, 2012, p.97), a key element of the English syllabus (NSW Standards Authority, 2019, p.10). Research shows that educators can exploit digital narratives to create meaningful and authentic learning opportunities for students to create personal and academic growth (Bjørgen, 2010, p.171-172; Dockter et al., 2010, p.419; Hall, 2012, p.99; Reid, 2013, p.38-41; Smeda et al., 2014, p.19; Sukovic, 2014, p.222-226).

However, educators must carefully consider the purpose of integrating digital narratives into their programmes. While research reveals digital texts’ benefits supporting young, emerging, or struggling readers and developing transliteracy (Tackvic, 2012, p.428; Cahill & McGill-Franzen, 2013, p.32-33; Matthews, 2014, p.29; McGeehan et al., 2018, p.58), others raise issues regarding reading comprehension, retention, and attention (Cull, 2011, para.35-38; Goodwin, 2013, p.79; Jabr, 2013, p.5-30; McGuire, 2015, para.30-35). Technology should be used as a meaningful tool, not just as a gimmick. Monsen (2016) explored the idea that we are “quintessentially cyborgs” due to the symbiotic relationship between humanity and technology. My research into digital learning frameworks such as the SAMR model (Lysaught, 2022, August 6) revealed that effective implementation of technology should not replace, but co-exist with and supplement existing print literacies. Printed choose-your-own-adventure narratives arguably improve literacy (Chooseco & Hofmann, 2016, para. 8-9) and can be updated using digital features to form powerful digital texts (Farber, 2015, para.1-2). Thus, my own digital narrative was designed as an immersive, interactive, multimodal resource to develop students’ understanding of life in Shakespearean England while supplementing traditional print resources and online information sources.

Throughout ETL533 I have examined how I currently incorporate digital literature into our school and considered ways to increase this in future (Lysaught, 2022, July 31; Lysaught, 2022, August 7; Lysaught, 2022, August 13). As discussed with my peers (Macey, 2022, September 24; Barnett, 2022, September 27; Facey, 2022, September 29) difficulties arise surrounding cost-effectiveness, storage, access, and user preferences that often impede digital literature’s success in schools. Despite these challenges, after creating my own digital narrative I strongly believe that student-created digital texts can enhance their own learning and connections to content, and integrate well with Guided Inquiry units and literary learning (Lysaught, 2022, January 27; Lysaught, 2022, August 14; Lysaught, 2022, September 3; Lysaught, 2022, September 16). Peer feedback also supports this (Lysaught, 2022, September 3). Due to this unit I am more aware of my students’ discussions around digital literature (Lysaught, 2022, July 25; Lysaught, 2022, August 28), revealing these are powerful texts with which students are already engaging. Literature in digital environments allows teacher-librarians to show our value to our school community, as we can support time-poor staff as they include more captivating, rich resources and utilise digital narratives to support our students with various interests and literacy needs.

 

 

Word count: 806

Reference list: https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/10/04/etl533-assessment-4-reference-list/

ETL533 6.2: Issues in Management

Leave a comment

Do you know what type of lending models and licences are available for the distribution of literary resources? Have you considered the challenges involved for education/libraries with digital literature licensing agreements? What are some issues involved in DRM, and how can they best be handled?

Once upon a time before I began my teaching career in 2011 I was lucky enough to work at a bookstore. We sold physical books as well as CDs of audiobooks. Life was simple. Life was grand.

Technology has dramatically changed the publishing landscape and while increased accessibility and functionality are definite benefits to readers, new lending models, licences and DRMs have irrefutably complicated the situation for schools and libraries.

We currently pay over $3000 each year to provide our students access to a variety of e-books and audiobooks as part of the Wheeler’s consortium. While it was popular during the period of online learning, it’s less popular now and not exactly what I’d call cost-efficient. We’ve had students request certain books on the Wheeler’s e-platform, but the price of these digital resources is significantly higher than if we were to purchase a physical copy, and we lose access to the resource if we drop our subscription. We’re also having issues with security, since our shared iPads are logging in the first user and not allowing new students to login. If we move to another service we’d be faced with different licencing and DRM models. And if I encourage students to create their own personal accounts for services like Amazon Kindle, it’s wonderful that they can link their Goodreads account and become socially connected, but also problematic that their data is being tracked and potentially sold.

A few weeks ago I had one of our Learning and Support Teachers approach me about getting an audiobook for one of our year 8 teachers to play to her class while they read the physical novel, so that she could wander the room dealing with behaviour issues instead of being stuck reading to the class. Whaddayaknow – it was impossible to source a copy of this text as an audiobook! If we had, we’d have been faced with issues around access (what device to play it on? How long do we have access to it? Do we need a subscription?) and if we wanted to create our own audiobook of the teacher recording herself reading, we’d be in violation of copyright laws. Call me old-fashioned, but I just wanted a CD audiobook that the English staff could keep in their book room to accompany the class set of novels. 
Sometimes I really miss the good old days!

ETL533 2.3: Challenges of using digital literature in the classroom

Leave a comment

There is an enormous difference between facility with technology and being able to engage with the content of digital literature as a consumer or a creator. What are some ways (small or large) you could alter your pedagogy to ensure technology and digital literature is embedded in your educational practices?

In this week’s readings I liked the distinction made by Allan (2017) between the different types of digital fiction:

1. eBooks or “paper-under-glass” texts;

2. Narrative or enhanced apps; and

3. “Born digital” multimodal narratives.

This distinction fit nicely with Unsworth’s classifications (via Walsh, 2013) from the Module 1 readings, where he identified three main categories of e-literature:

1. Recontextualised literary texts;

2. Electronically augmented literary texts; and

3. Digitally originated texts.

This also links with previous discussions I’ve read about what counts as digital literature, which emphasise the difference between “the digitised and digital literature” (for more on this, please feel free to check out my blog post).

In our school we have a virtual library with eBooks and audiobooks that our students, staff and parents can engage with, but it’s an expensive subscription (last year’s invoice was over $3000 – more than a third of our yearly budget!) with logistical issues around promotion and access. It also falls into the digitised, ‘paper-under-glass’ or ‘recontextualised literary texts’ category where technology facilitates access rather than exists as an innovative and inherent aspect of the texts. While it was a useful resource during last year’s lockdowns, data suggests that average use each month is down on last year’s figures. This year our school removed the DEAR (Drop Everything and Read) program, so I’ve been trialing a Wide Reading Program with a few Year 7 classes (initially 4, now dropped back to 2). Given Foley’s (2012) findings about student engagement with ebooks, it might be worthwhile creating activities for the Wide Reading Program which target and promote our virtual library.

One of the texts I’ve been investigating for the second assessment is the iPoe app by iClassics Collection. From my engagement with this app so far, it appears to fall under the ‘enhanced app’ or ‘electronically augmented literary text’ categories outlined above. I chose this because a) Poe is awesome fun and b) we have a Year 8 unit on suspenseful stories that this would work well with. I had a great time exploring this app and playing with its features, designed to immerse the reader with the texts’ Gothic emotions, settings, and atmosphere. I think this is a resource that could work really well with our Year 8 unit, though it cost $8.99 for all three volumes/apps, therefore presenting a financial and logistical issue for faculties with tight budgets.

This week I also had a little play with Microsoft Sway, in an attempt to create my own ‘born digital’ narrative in preparation for the final assessment. One of my projects this year has been to build up the Student Media Team I introduced to the school last year, and Microsoft Sway was one of the tools we were investigating for our student-designed newsletter. While it has many useful features and is (mostly) user-friendly, one issue I found while playing with it is that this tool lacks the ability to link to content within the Sway, and thus might not work for my intended ‘choose your own adventure’ style narrative. However, this investigation did remind me that for larger projects teachers might have, it takes time to find the right tools with the right features for their vision. While wonderful guides exist (such as http://www.schrockguide.net/bloomin-apps.html and https://instructionaldesignbykelly.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/the-evolution-of-blooms-taxonomy-and-how-it-applies-to-teachers-today/ from this week’s readings) these take time to investigate and, given the current educational climate, this is time that many teachers simply cannot spare. This is where an innovative, technologically current teacher-librarian could be an invaluable resource for time-poor teachers!

 

 

Allan, C. (2017). Digital fiction: ‘Unruly object’ or literary artefact? English in Australia, 52(2), 21-27.

Foley, C. (2012). Ebooks for leisure and learning. Scan, 31, pp. 6-14.

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment (Ch. 13). In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. Marrickville, NSW: Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).

ETL533 1.2: Evaluating Digitally Reproduced Stories

Leave a comment

After completing the readings from Module 1.2, consider your understanding of ways of evaluating digital narratives in this forum. What are some similarities and differences you identify in the readings? What are the key elements involved in evaluating digital narratives? 

Digital narratives are, simply put, narratives that are told and/or originate in digital forms. Lamb (2011) identified 5 different types of electronic reading environments:

  • ebooks,
  • interactive storybooks,
  • reference databases,
  • hypertext and interactive fiction, and
  • transmedia storytelling.

This contrasts with Unsworth’s three main categories of electronic literature (cited in Walsh, 2013):

  • electronically augmented texts,
  • recontextualised literary texts, and
  • digitally originated texts (including eStories for early readers, linear enarratives, enarratives and interactive story contexts, hyptertext narratives, hypermedia narratives and electronic game narratives).

Clearly, the landscape for digital storytelling is quite complex!

However, Jabr (2013) identified several issues around the different ways we process and remember information on the screen versus on a page, noting that screens drain more of our mental resources and can be more difficult to navigate. Leu et. al. (2015) likewise noted that students’ online reading skills are often limited. McGeehan et. al. (2018) noted that despite the availability of varied, innovative digital features, many publishers fail to use them effectively or use them in ways which deepen conceptual knowledge. I would argue that effective incorporation of digital narratives therefore needs a two-pronged approach, relying on the production of quality, effective digital narratives (an aspect that is often in the hands of publishers) alongside the best-practice utilisation of these resources by teachers. As such, this could be a key area where qualified teacher-librarians could step in to serve their school community by aligning new pedagogies with innovative digital narratives to serve the needs of their students and staff.

When it comes to evaluating what counts as a quality digital narrative, I would argue that many of the criteria for selecting print resources still apply to digital texts: does this resource serve the learning and leisure needs and interests of our school community? However, there are added layers of logistical complexity when considering the incorporation of digital narratives into our school library collections, and teacher-librarians should also consider how they can store, access, and utilise these resources alongside budgetary concerns.

ETL505 2.1: Tools of Library Organisation – Scootle Digital Library

Leave a comment

Comment on Scootle as a starting point when searching for electronic resources.

Scootle appears to be a very useful starting point for electronic resources aligned to the Australian Curriculum. It is easy to navigate, uses a convenient range of filters, and allows users to explore resources based on subject, year, or curriculum outcome. I also like that it takes you straight to the resource or unit of work, though due to the dynamic nature of the internet it would be a lot of work for site administrators to ensure that the links are all correct and still live!

Despite its use as a starting point when searching for electronic teaching resources, I had never heard of Scootle prior to starting this degree so I’m not sure how well it’s advertised and promoted to the wider teaching community. A resource is only useful if users know about it and how to use it.