Key words: Research is critical, creative, formal/systematic/scientific/pure/rigorous, applied, experimental/theoretical, investigating, understanding, interpreting, analysing, confirming/refuting, communicating and cyclical (Leedy & Ormrod, 2015):
(The Research Cycle by Leedy & Ormrod 2015, p. 21).
Researchers follow a process that could be referred to as G. R. Ac. E. Fi. (Gather information, Reflect on the meaning, Arrive at a conclusion, Evaluate the process and conclusion, and finally, put Forward an interpretation).
We must understand the underlying philosophies of researchers such as positivism, post-positivism, constructivism, and pragmatism/realism (Leedy & Ormrod, 2015), as well as their methodologies, assumptions (according to Leedy & Ormrod, 2015, assumptions are facts or ideas accepted as true, usually determined or stated at the start of the research), and methods or design of research in order to validate or apply it into practice.
Information gathering (or organising, summarising, discussing and referencing a ‘research report’) is not the same as ‘research’ because it misses the important step of interpreting or analysing the information or data (Leedy & Ormrod, 2015) and / or hypothesis (a hypothesis being: an open minded speculation, or “a logical supposition, a reasonable guess, an educated conjecture” according to Leedy & Ormrod, 2015 p22).
There are 3 methods of research: 1. quantitative (quantity based), 2. qualitative(qualities based), and 3. mixed method research (utilising both quantitative and qualitative methods) hence the names (Leedy & Ormrod, 2015 p24).
There are 3 paradigms of research: positivism(linked to quantitative / scientific method) using singular reality as a singular truth, interpretism, reality is built by individual(s) within particular context(s) interpreted subjectively by individuals (linked to qualitative), post-positivism says that the nature of being and existence is singular but that can be interpreted differently by each individual within their own context(s) (linked to mixed method research).
Other topics in this module I will cover in my upcoming assessment task:
The reasons behind and processes for creating a quality DLE is much like creating a ‘Learning Commons,’ (which I’ve discussed in two previous posts from ETL503 Resourcing the Curriculum: click here and here).
How do we create a quality DLE?
The article from Chen & Orth (2013) is absolutely amazing, not only because it points out that we must link the school DLE to the home DLE, but also because they outline the key steps to creating a quality DLE starting with 1. forming a group of stakeholders, creating a shared vision and core beliefs, then 2. training, communicating with or informing all stakeholders, followed by 3. implementing the DLE plan of lessons and concepts of digital citizenship and digital literacy, completing the circle by 4. evaluating and reviewing the DLE regularly.
How do we manage the DLE to foster globally connected learning?
As recommended by Lindsay (2016), we need to:
Discuss the digital footprints or ‘branding’ of all students and make sure they are using long-term appropriate and culturally sensitive language and images.
Consider the digital divide and make sure that platforms, discussion tools and global or local connections are provided synchronously (in real time) and asynchronously (offline or pre-recorded).
Create a DLE that offers students opportunities to authentically and collaboratively engage with peers globally. (Lindsay, 2016).
How can we manage the DLE to move students from social media citizens to social media leaders?
Moving from Digital Citizenship to Digital Leadership (Image) by Casa-Todd, J. (2016).
References
Casa-Todd, J. (2016). Rethinking Student (Digital) Leadership and Digital Citizenship [Image]. Retrieved from: https://jcasatodd.com/rethinking-student-digital-leadership-and-digital-citizenship/
Lindsay. J. (2016, July 19). How to encourage and model global citizenship in the classroom. Education Week. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/global_learning/2016/07/how_to_encourage_and_model_global_citizenship_in_the_classroom.html
Chen, E., Orth, D. (2013). The strategy for digital citizenship. NAIS Independent School Magazine (online) http://www.nais.org/Magazines-Newsletters/ISMagazine/Pages/The-Strategy-for-Digital-Citizenship.aspx.
Digital Learning Environments (DLE) and digital citizenship implementation have a few issues and dilemmas that must be considered by teacher librarians, and all educational stakeholders:
Lack of growth mindset: Educators are often reluctant to change. We expect students to have an open mind to proactively embrace new things and attempt to connect to personal learning networks – and recognise that, generally, failure is a part of learning. We expect 21st century learners to be quick to learn and be resilient, yet we ourselves are sometimes close minded, reactive, afraid to fail, and stuck in ruts and ‘old’ methods or tools – as teacher librarians, we must lead in professional reflection, respond to needs and initiate change, particularly in terms of individualising learning plans and environments and recognising that the ways students access information is much different than what it once was (Cooke, 2012).
Communication via DLE is different: We must tailor the methods and means by which we communicate to ensure that we are understood and authentic. Communication in an DLE is different to face to face communication in terms of turn taking, online digital footprints or identities may not be authentic, the level of commitment or willingness to behave ethically vary understanding and clarity can be varied or blurred, and community expectations are different (Cooke, 2012).
Lack of thought into quality control: While there are several methods for measuring teacher quality in recent times, there is no official one way to measure the quality of DLE Digital citizenship lessons or teacher / teacher librarian quality (Cooke, 2012). (NOTE: In fact, 21st century learning skills are themselves very difficult to assess and measure in students. We need to find or design one agreed way of measuring quality teaching!)
Varied degrees of self-regulation, motivation, & overwhelmed, or distracted students: DLE education is often asynchronous or self directed (Cooke, 2012) relying on a student’s ability to self-regulate and motivate. This is sometimes problematic, not only because of individual student ability levels but also because the DLE can be overwhelming, or a place of distraction or ambiguity (see #14).
Lack of a fluid community of practice or PLNs: Wenger (p.2, 1998, in Cooke 2012) specifies 3 dimensions of a community of practice: 1. they are joint enterprises, created and maintained by their members, 2. they feature mutual engagement with all members joining to form a social entity, and 3. members have a shared store of resources and sensibilities that have been communally developed. However, Wenger (p.6, 1998, in Cooke 2012) does caution that communities of practice should take care not to become insular, rather they should attempt to remain ‘dynamic and fluid.’ (NOTE: I have discussed the concept of a community of practice at length in other blog posts: 1 or 2– see tags also).
Content at the cost of engagement and application: Stagnant, repetitive, standardised education, subjects and content are still taught in isolation from each other. Memorising facts and clerical tasks are still, despite being the 21st century, generally considered more important than engaging lessons that link to or apply to real life situations – students should be learning by doing rather than by being told (Wheeler, 2015). (NOTE: Would you rather be treated by a ‘doctor’ who learned medicine by reading about it or would you rather be treated by a doctor who has actual experience treating patients?)
Critical thought is not taught or supported: Inquiry learning and learning through questioning is still not the preferred method of teaching, ill-preparing students for their ‘why’ and ‘how to’ (rather than ‘what’) futures (Wheeler, 2015). “Critical thinking, flexibility, working collaboratively, and creative problem solving are all key components for success in changing environments. But ‘knowing that’ and ‘knowing how’ will not be enough. Students also need to know why” (Wheeler, 2015, Ch.6, p.9).
Educators have all the say: According to Wheeler (2015), instead of taking a ‘flipped classroom’ approach where learning is student led, the majority of educators are still deciding the curriculum and delivery of the content, delivering lessons with one way dialogue and lack of conversation. This means that students can become disengaged, disconnected and disempowered from their own learning (Wheeler, 2015). It is crucial that we design engaging lessons and topics and use varied learning approaches in order to promote the ability in students to generate their own ideas and voices (rather than copying the voices of others) (Williamson & McGregor 2011). (NOTE: How many of us consider ourselves facilitators of student learning? I myself have it in my teaching and learning philosophy…Time to put this into action!)
Lack of digital literacy: as per my previous blog post on Information Literacy and Inquiry Based Teaching: ‘According to the ALA, (2016) we must help our students become information literate individuals who can: “determine the extent of information needed; access the needed information effectively and efficiently; evaluate information and its sources critically; incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge base; use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose; and understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally” (ALA 2016). This is expanded into Digital Literacyby Stripling (2010) who writes: “Digital literacy, itself, is not enough preparation, however, for our students to thrive in today’s global, information-driven world. Students must also acquire the skills of digital inquiry: connecting ideas to personal interests and a desire to know, asking questions that probe beyond simple fact gathering, investigating answers from multiple perspectives, constructing new understandings, expressing the new ideas through a variety of formats, and reflecting on both the process and product of learning” (p16).
Constantly evolving trans-literacy (multi-literate) expectations: educators must be able to prepare students to evaluate, access and effectively, ethically and legally utilise a variety of resources and tools across a variety of platforms (Preble, 2013; Wheeler, 2015, p.175).
The digital divide (as discussed in my previous blog post): the digital divide is closely related to Socio-Economic Status and is not just a lack of access to technological devices or internet, but it is also a lack of the ability to utilise technology, inability to produce content, and/or the lack of the ability to apply digital information and skills to real life applications (Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robison & Weigel, 2006; & Schradie, 2013). (NOTE: this is something imperative for educators to be reflecting upon NOW during this COVID-19 crisis: the digital divide is real and it has an impact on our students whether they are in lockdown or not! Schools MUST CREATE A PLAN for access to and for digital literacy for all students).
Confusion, panic and lack of policy regarding intellectual property, copyright, fair use and Creative Commons: Educators must create a policy for intellectual property, copyright, fair use and Creative Commons. Thus, we must create guidelines at whole-school level that promote intellectual honesty and respect for the work of others as an ingrained community value (Williamson & McGregor 2011, p17). Educators must then model and teach deeper digital citizenship knowledge and understanding of what can be used, re-used, and shared in items produced electronically, based on an age appropriate teaching sequence (such as teaching students how to locate key words and write bulleted notes before paraphrasing quotes, as suggested by Williamson & McGregor, 2011).
Safety in the DLE: The DLE requires educators to help students be aware of safety issues such as cyberbullying, creating a work/life balance, age-inappropriate online communications (eg adult images, videos, ads or ‘chats’). (NOTE: The Australian Government have an e-safety page that is particularly relevant and offers resources to educators). However, we must also teach students how to use social media platforms responsibly (Elkin, 2013; Murray, 2013).
Lack of content curation, aka overwhelmed due to ‘filter failure’ or narrowed view due to ‘filter bubbles’: We must consider how we curate information within our personal learning networks (see #5), and model and teach students how to evaluate the methods for curation so that they aren’t either overwhelmed due to filter failure or creating a narrow world view due to over-stringent filters that act as ‘filter bubbles.’ (Crowdspoke. (2011, June 7).“good curation tools are those that allow you to: Aggregate and gather web pages specific to the topic; Filter content allows the curator to select the best material; Publish to your collection with ease; Share, syndicate and distribute to your audience and the wider community; Allow the curator to edit and add comments as well as providing a comment stream for the audience to nurture discussion around the article; Analytics so you can track the usage of the site; An export facility or a way to back up the curated work” (Adapted from De Rossi, L.C. and Good, R. 2010).
11 further ideas on what to think about from lecturer, Julie Lindsay (in ETL523):
Have we clearly identified our context (eg k-12 NSW Public School in x suburb…)?
Do we have a shared vision?
How can we create personalised learning spaces linked to learning needs?
Have we considered: Hardware / software / networking access?
Have we considered: Understanding / experience access?
Do we know our students’ and teachers’ individual digital profiles?
Are the tools in our ‘digital tool kit’ age appropriate?
What evidence are we using to determine best practice for online, topical, or connected learning?
Do all stakeholders have shared understandings, policies or guidelines?
Is there a PD program or plan to continually evaluate and support the changing environment (eg. do teachers model the digital citizenship behaviours they expect or teach)?
How will this be shared and networked within a global professional network(s) and local context(s)?
References:
ALA (2016). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher education. Retrieved from: https://alair.ala.org/handle/11213/7668
Cooke, N. A. (2012). Professional development 2.0 for librarians: developing an online personal learning network (PLN). Library Hi Tech News, 29(3), 1-9.
Crowdspoke. (2011, June 7). Understand collective curation in under 90 seconds. http://youtu.be/eW775HIlVMg.
Wheeler, S. (2015). Learning with ‘e’s: Educational theory and practice in the digital age. Crown House Pub Ltd. (Chapter 6: A 21st Century Curriculum). Retrieved from ProQuest
Williamson, K., & McGregor, J. (2011). Generating knowledge and avoiding plagiarism: Smart information use by high school students. School Library Media Research, 14.
21st Century learning and COVID-19 – catalysts for change:
With the COVID-19 lockdown, the Digital Learning Environment (DLE) issues are relevant like never before. Teachers who have been allowed to stick to their paper programs, regurgitating content from previous classes that they’ve taught or from purchased sources and shying away from digital tools and applications, must now think on their feet to create online programs to suit their classes and individual students.
The Digital Education Advisory Group, approximately 8 years ago, wrote: “What is now required is a catalyst intervention to bring into recognisable focus the change that the whole community will recognise and welcome as transformation that shapes our future” …”We need to harness the transformative potential of digital technology to support new approaches to innovative learning centred around the development of 21st Century Learning skills. These include creativity and innovation; critical thinking, problem solving, decision making; life-long learning; collaboration and communication; ICT literacy; consciousness of being a local and global citizen; and personal and social responsibility” (Digital Education Advisory Group – DEAG, no date).
“Assuming a world in which the welfare of the young people and the economic health of a society and the political health of a democracy are the true goals of education, I believe modern societies need to assess and evaluate what works and what doesn’t in terms of engaging students in learning. If we want to do this, if we want to discover how we can engage students as well as ourselves in the 21st century, we must move beyond skills and technologies. We must explore also the interconnected social media literacies of attention, participation, cooperation, network awareness, and critical consumption” (Rheingold, 2010 p.24; emphasis added).
“Schools need not only to prepare students to be responsible citizens, but also to prepare them with the technological and communicative skills necessary to engage civic responsibility in a digital age” (Richards, 2010, p.520).
Teacher ability:
It takes a village: I wholeheartedly subscribe to the notion presented by Hollandsworth, Dowdy, & Donovan, (2011) that educators have a duty of care for student safety and security, educational enhancement, ethical and legal behaviours and becoming an effective member of communities, in both the physical and digital environment through policy, leadership and practice.
It does, indeed, ‘take a village to raise a child’ to be a good global and digital citizen, and this process should include all stakeholders: parents, teachers, teacher librarians, administrators, academics, technology professionals and, none the least of which, students. This means that educators must be proactive in effective digital citizenship DLE (including risk awareness et al), as well as in fostering student peer mentor programs, effective student role models, and quality educational faculty/staff DLE ability.
PLC, PLN, PLE, DLE: Furthermore, we as educators need to foster professional learning communities (PLC) through culture of personal learning networks (PLN) and personal learning environments (PLE), including networks within the Digital Learning Environment (DLE) according to ‘Steve Wheeler on future learning environments: professional, powerful and personal’ (YouTube / 2:09 mins) | https://youtu.be/db9PXLqoduQ
Creation of content:
There are some great resources for creating content, as recommended by ETL523 Module 1, including:
Just as most schools have created a school ‘code of conduct’, so too should they proactively (rather than reactively) teach a DLE ‘code of conduct’ (Hollandsworth, et al, 2011). And just as we review and evaluate the quality of our lesson content and physical curriculum, so too should educators have a structured means in which to create, deliver and then evaluate their online DLE digital citizenship curriculum. (I like the ‘writing on the bathroom wall’ analogy, which links toilet graffiti to the banter and issues that sometimes arise in social media platforms or chats-we should have a plan for how to help students handle these situations in both environments as neither are able to be fully policed or ‘filtered’ by adults). A great source of raising awareness in students are the Pause and Think by Commonsense Education.
Furthermore, we need to reconsider the curriculum and how we have created and delivered content in the past: “For educators and the schools in which they teach, the challenges of this moment are significant. Our ability to learn whatever we want, whenever we want, from whomever we want is rendering the linear, age-grouped, teacher-guided curriculum less and less relevant.” (Richardson, 2008, Emphasis added).
Brown, Dehoney and Milichap (2015) surmise that the core dimensions of Next Generation Digital Learning Environment (NGDLE) are:
Interoperability and integration
Personalisation
Analytics, advising and learning assessment
Collaboration
Accessibility and universal design
Lindsay & Davis’ (2012) ‘enlightened digital citizenship model’ recommends we consider digital citizenship in terms of four areas of content:
Safety and privacy
Etiquette and respect
Learning habits – workflow
Literacy and fluency
Social media / Digital footprints (safety / privacy / brand):
We all have a digital footprint and we must model and teach an awareness of this to students. I agree with Richards (2010) who points out that we either teach students how to engage in social media responsibly, or risk them attempting it on their own, which is very much in line with research on sexual reproduction education. Wheeler equates learning about the internet to learning how to cross the road safely – what better place to teach these concepts than in school? (Wheeler, 2015, p.176).
I think it is imperative that this education begins prior to students having a substantial digital footprint, adhering to guidelines like ‘no facebook until you are 13’ – because teaching them to be mindful of what they display digitally after they have already begun displaying themselves, is like trying to teach someone who has just voted in a political election, how to vote. We must teach them early on how our digital footprint or identity is now our (online) personal ‘brand.’
We are identified at home in one way, at work or school in one way, and online or digitally in one way and our identities change through the passage of time. People can forget or not know anything about your identity in the real world, but in the digital environment, your identity is more permanent. Furthermore, the 21st century boundaries between these contexts are now blurred. We need to ask our students and them how to recognise ‘what is your identity?’across these three platforms and throughout time.
We must therefore consider that students (and teachers) need to be literate in (aka be able to have understanding access) social media, which requires: attention, participation (civil or otherwise), collaboration, network awareness and critical thought (or critical ‘consumption’) as according to Rheingold, H. (2010).
Something else to consider is that we have an expectation that students will be capable of digital citizenship, when their understanding of citizenship overall is still developing, particularly at the K-6 level. We must be aware of the way that we have learnt citizenship in the face to face world and how 21st Century learners have not had the same face to face opportunities and foundations that we’ve had. They must learn citizenship face to face and digitally simultaneously…like learning two different languages at the same time! Furthermore, social networks and social media have played a significant part in changing citizenship and previous boundaries and accepted expectations for social behaviour. Some face to face social constructs (such as body language) are not relevant in the digital social environment and as a result, effective use of emoticons or gifs or memes have been created to fill the void.
Delivery of content:
In order to deliver the content or curriculum, the devices and tools chosen must be convenient, consistent, and allow for frequent accessto digital devices (Mann, 1999; Kelley & Ringstaff, 2002; NCES, 1999; and Statham & Torrell, 1999, in Kemker, 2005).
Having access to physical technology (primarily due to SES) is not the only issue. As pointed out by Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robinson & Weigel (2006), teachers who wish to obtain full involvement of their students by creating a ‘participatory culture,’ must also make adjustments to their pedagogy based on:
Individual student ability to participate in the DLE given their varied accessto opportunities, experiences, skills and knowledge,
The varied degrees of understanding mediatransparency (or lack thereof) around how media shape world views, or how to apply filters for the large number of ‘hits’ or ‘tweets’ or emails that one receives so as to not become overwhelmed,
and the varied degrees of understanding, training or socialisation of digital citizenship or ethical expectations for global DLE success.
(Note to self: The issue of access to the internet, devices, applications and digital or social media tools in terms of Socio Economic Status and individual choice was covered in ETL401 and ETL503 and in my blog posts for those courses).
Furthermore, we must plan whether our delivery will be synchronous or asynchronous (or a mixture of the two): “Synchronous discussion is real-time or live communication that takes place on platforms such as instant messengers, audio chat, or video chat. Asynchronous discussion is non-live communication that takes place over time and includes platforms such as e-mail, discussion forums, blogs, and wikis” (Richards, 2010, p.516).
Richards, R. (2010). Table 1. Examples of Web 2.0 Communication Tools. p 517.
Evaluation & quality control:
Digital learning spaces need to be created in conjunction with digital citizenship awareness and incorporating essential attitudes and skills needed to be a productive (digital) learner . However, this means that digital citizenship is not just about recognising online copyright laws, or keeping students safe online. (See my previous post What is digital citizenship?).
Quality tools, lessons (either face to face or digitally) should enable students to be engaged in authentic tasks, connected to the real world, involving all partners of the learning community such as teachers, students, parents, business partners, and higher education experts (Kemeker, 2005). But, what can we use to measure student engagement and connectedness to ensure they are fully active, creative and ethical DLE participants?
Jenkins, et. al. (2006) have a comprehensive list of skills and competencies:
Jenkins, et al., (2006). p56 Core Social Skills and Cultural Competencies [Screen Shot]. Retrieved from https://www.macfound.org/media/article_pdfs/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDFSimilarly, schools can use standards created by the International Society for Technology (ITSE) for assessing student outcomes, assessing teacher quality and assessing leadership quality. In addition, we could use the resources created by BattelleforKids. However, I am not familiar with these and am hesitant to use them in my daily practice when other means are utilised by my employer.
Prior to the DLE, quality standards, each with a scale of 1-5, were created by Newmann and Wehlage (1993) to help teachers assess the “authenticity” of classroom tasks and experiences, Newmann and Wehlage (1993): 1. Higher order thinking, 2. Depth of knowledge, 3. Connectedness to the world beyond the classroom, 4. Substantive conversation, and 5. Social support for student achievement – which is closely linked to the more expanded and also individually scaled from 1-5 Quality Teaching Framework (Gore, 2018):
Dimensions and Elements of the Quality Teaching Model (Gore, 2018)Bitmoji Do It!
I think it is important to consider quality teaching and leadership standards within the context of the DLE, as well as the skills and competencies from Jenkins et al (2006) and possibly the 21st Century Learning skills identified from various sources (see previous blogs via tags).
Gore, J. (2018). Dimensions and Elements of the Quality Teaching Model. [Image]. Australian Council for Educational Research – Research Conference 2018. Retrieved from https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1336&context=research_conference
Kemker, K. (2005). The digital learning environment: What the research tells us. Apple White Paper. Retrieved from (see link).
Lindsay, J., & Davis, V. (2012). Flattening classrooms, engaging minds: Move to global collaboration one step at a time. Allyn and Bacon. Chapter 5: Citizenship. (available on CSU DOMS as a downloadable PDF)
Rheingold, H. (2010). Attention and other 21st century social media literacies. Educause Review 45(5). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/attention-and-other-21st-century-social-media-literacies
Nielsen, L. (2011, August 19).Discover what your digital footprint says about you. Retrieved from http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com/2011/08/discover-what-your-digital-footprint.html
Richards, R. (2010). Digital citizenship and Web 2.0 tools. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 516-522. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7740/fb40e7030935d7b00d5bd07a19ba83c496ff.pdf
Wheeler, S. (2015). Learning with ‘e’s: Educational theory and practice in the digital age. Crown House Pub Ltd. Chapter 12: Literacy in a connected world.
Before I fully delve into the ETL523 Digital Citizenship content, I need to briefly determine what I think digital citizenship is, in terms of being an educator of (young) children.
Merriam-Webster Definition of Citizenship (2020)
Digital citizenship is primarily an add on to citizenship. We must behave in a civilised manner in life, both face to face (citizenship) and online/electronically (digital citizenship). If at first students have no concept of citizenship
– that is, a communal bond and respect for living and working harmoniously together for the greater good –
then they will similarly have no concept of digital citizenship (living and working harmoniously together for the greater good electronically).
Positive Behaviour for Learning (PB4L), Social Emotional Learning (SEL), citizenship/ethics should be integral to every aspect of our 2020 teaching day. We must help students regulate through consistent SEL, relate to them via whole school programs like PB4L, so that we may reason / rationalise with them with lessons on citizenship and ethics (these being Dr Bruce Perry’s 3 R’s as provided by Beacon House, 2020).
Furthermore, I would add that as teachers our rationalisations / lessons must all be able to be reflected upon and evaluated and revised continually using some form of collegial quality teaching standards, such as the Quality Teaching Framework (QTF)…perhaps this could be my contribution to ETL523, to link Digital Learning Environments to the QTF…
The below notes are from reading ETL523 Module 1 ‘What is digital citizenship’:
Digital citizenship therefore, is not just about keeping students safe online, or giving students the skills or devices to access technology. It is helping students become productive members of an digital (learning) environment…digital citizens of a globally digital social society. This is supported by the video by ISTE, (2018) Rethinking digital citizenship.
Furthermore, as detailed by Greenhow (2010), Ribble, Bailey, and Ross (in their book, Digital Citizenship in Schools, ISTE, 2007), consider the 9 elements of digital citizenship to be: digital etiquette, digital communication, digital access, digital literacy, digital commerce, digital law, digital rights and responsibilities, digital health and wellness, and digital security.
Digital citizenship requires technical, individual, social, cultural and global awareness, which must be considered by teachers in the practical terms of students’ understanding the concepts of: safety, privacy, copyright, fair use and legal compliance, etiquette and respect, habits of learning (responsible, reliable management of online activity), literacy and fluency. This is best demonstrated by the Enlightened digital citizenship model of Davis & Lindsay (2012):
Davis, V. Lindsay J. (2012). Enlightened Digital Citizenship Model. Retrieved from Module 1
References
Beacon House, (2020). Dr Bruce Perry’s 3 R’s. Retrieved from https://beaconhouse.org.uk/resources/
Greenhow, C. (2010). New concept of citizenship for the digital age. Learning & Leading with Technology, 37(6), 24-25.
Lindsay, J., & Davis, V. (2012). Flattening classrooms, engaging minds: Move to global collaboration one step at a time. Allyn and Bacon. Chapter 5: Citizenship. (available on CSU DOMS as a downloadable PDF)
Merriam-Webster, (2020). Definition of Citizenship. [Image]. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/citizenship
A key aspect of both L3 and Accelerated Literacy pedagogies in the K-6 Australian classroom is providing ‘quality texts’ for a learning focus as a whole class. No matter what pedagogy is the flavour of the month in a given educational setting, utilising quality texts is the key to unlocking student potential.
In answering the question, ‘what makes a quality text?’ we must keep in mind that it is closely related to ‘what makes a good writer?’ In many classrooms over the last 5 years, I’ve witnessed teacher and administrator despair at the low quality of writing being produced by students…and yet the instructional texts being chosen by schools or educators have most recently been phonics based, ‘guided readers’ or ‘decodable’ readers / texts (see my previous post regarding my feelings about texts used to teach children how to read).
What makes a quality text? Well, I present the idea that: if you give children boring, out of context, un-relatable, poor quality texts in which to learn to read, you will get boring, out of context, un-relatable poor quality writing produced by students.
So, what makes a quality text / quality writer? See the quality book: The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr Morris Lessmore (2012) by W.E. Joyce. (This was also adapted as an award winning short film (Joyce, 2011). This book is something I try to show every class that I teach while being a casual teacher (and otherwise). I show the movie, then I ask the students, depending on time, to explain why some books fly and some do not – ergo, what makes a quality text. They explain: its a book that is funny, exciting, interesting, takes them places they’ve never thought of or been to before, or that creates a picture inside their heads. In one class, they were using the 7 Steps of Writing strategies and could see the link to quality texts and quality writing clearly, answering ‘sizzling starts,’ etc.
Its not hard to help students make the link from quality reading to quality writing…we just have to work on getting rid of those boring books being used exclusively by educators and administrators…
A key factor that is often overlooked in the teaching of reading (such as the L3 / Reading Recovery / Phonics / Decodable readers debates) are the objectives of the K-10 English syllabus:
Image: K-10 NSW English Syllabus Objectives (NESA, 2012).
Of specific interest to me as a prospective teacher librarian, and indeed, all who attempting to grasp the content outcomes of literacy, are the concepts of
‘Students will value and appreciate the importance of the English language as a key to learning‘
‘Communicating through speaking, listening, reading, writing, viewing and representing’
‘The personal enrichment to be gained from a love of English, literature and learning’ and
‘The independence gained from thinking imaginatively, creatively, interpretively and critically.’
As educators, we can get caught up in the content / outcomes / assessments / learning progressions / teaching students ‘how’ to do things like read and write, that we forget the ‘why’ objective(s) of teaching English in the first place: to unlock the door of learning, enabling enrichment of life through independent thought and communication.
Bitmoji Christy – Swoon
While reading Barone (2011), I was impressed by the determination of reading being more than just learning how to decode and learning how to comprehend – something that has been a bugbear of mine over the years while attempting to implement first, the Accelerated Literacy pedagogy, followed by the L3 (reading & writing) pedagogy in my stage 1 EAfS NSW Far West classrooms, the NSW Learning Continuums, followed by the ACARA Learning Progressions, as well as the recent push for teaching synthetic phonics and using decodable readers – leading to the question of whether the school library collection should be ‘levelled’ based on ability. (Learning to read / Reading to learn is something I discussed in a previous blog post). We must engage our students with texts and enable them to become lifelong readers! We must not just focus on the ‘how’ to read, but also the ‘why.’
So often, we explain ‘why’ or ‘what’ we are learning when it comes to writing or math outcomes…why do we not explain the purpose for reading lessons?
Barone (2011) explains the ‘why’ we read, something we should be clarifying in our ‘W.e A.re L.earning T.o’ lesson introductions, in greater detail: “Reading to learn to read: Young children and adults alike engage in reading in order to learn to read. Teachers, parents, or tutors carefully select books that are just right for independent reading or a bit challenging for reading supported by a competent reader. Reading for pleasure: Adults and children read just for the joy of entering an imaginative world. Or they read just for the pleasure and satisfaction of learning something. Reading to enjoy vicarious experiences: Some books allow readers to discover what it was like to participate in a historical event, live in a different environment, or survive hardships. Readers are able to take on the persona of a character to better understand an event beyond their personal realm. Reading to develop background knowledge. Frequently, readers pursue topics that inform them about the world and important events. It is not possible for adults and children to experience everything directly; books offer these opportunities. Reading to understand: Adults and children often read biographies and historical fiction to understand an event or person. Others read to better understand an aspect of science or a scientist and the motivation behind a discovery. Reading to understand who we are: By exploring how characters solve dilemmas, readers can reflect how they might respond to similar circumstances and thus come to know themselves better. Reading to ponder: Adults and children read to explore ideas and beliefs—for instance, the beliefs of a culture or community—to compare them with their own. Reading to appreciate: Adults and children read to appreciate the quality of a book or the art within. They reread a favourite phrase or explore an illustration for the pleasure they derive from it. Reading to engage in conversation: Reading opens opportunities for adults and children to exchange ideas. They argue about a character and why he or she did something. They disagree about whether they both liked the same book or author. Importantly, this exchange allows readers to enjoy and appreciate a book more fully. (and) Reading to solve problems: Books can help readers solve a current problem they are facing” (Barone, 2011, p. 4-5).
We need to consider our ideas of childhood as teacher librarians, because we will be struck by conflict within ourselves and in our school contexts when it comes to 1. curation of resources, and 2. 21st century pedagogical approaches such as curriculum and behavioural ideologies. As stated in my teaching philosophy, I support the view, based on Piaget’s theories, that ‘childhood’ is a social construct and that human beings are, across the world, simply at varying stages of our physical, mental and social development. In terms of nature vs nurture (sometimes referred to as Locke vs Rousseau) I prefer Rousseau’s view of childhood as something curious, charming and valuable…something to nurture.
What is a child / Why as the question? “Events such as the development of mandated curriculum for the non-compulsory years, the implementation of diagnostic tools and assessment regimes in the first years of school, and moral panic of paedophilia are all under pinned by certain views of the child and ideals of childhood” … “(Thus,) it might be timely to re-examine our understandings of children and childhood” (Woodrow, 1999).
What is a child / Then and now / Plurality: “Ever since JOHANN AMOS COMENIUS (1592–1670) published his Didactica Magna (1649) and JOHN LOCKE (1632–1704) produced his treatise Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693), observers of children have been occupied with attempting to understand, document, and comment on what it is and what it means to be a child. … A child has been defined as any person below a notional age of majority, but this has been variously interpreted and there have been many differences throughout history in the ways that societies have come to recognise the exact beginning and end of childhood. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has for its purposes identified childhood as that stage of life experienced by any person between birth and fifteen years. Article 1 of the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that a child is any person under the age of eighteen. … The eighteenth-century philosopher JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU (1712–1778), in constructing an ideal childhood, described what he termed the “age of nature” as occurring between birth and twelve years. For the Austrian-born philosopher RUDOLF STEINER (1861–1925), childhood was a state of physical and spiritual being roughly between the ages of seven and fourteen years, indicated initially by certain physiological changes such as the loss of the milk teeth. … Biological-anthropologists, taking a bio-cultural perspective, regard childhood as a stage in development unique to humans, the function of which is the preparation for adulthood. However, advocates of a new sociology of childhood such as sociologist Alison James have pointed out that: ‘chronological age is sometimes of little use when comparing childhood across very different cultures and societies. A ten year old may be a school child in one society, the head of a household in another. As such, the new sociology of childhood prefers to identify a “plurality of childhoods” rather than one structural conditional term’‘ (Bourke, 2008-emphasis added).
What is a child / Plurality in the law: “This plurality, it has been argued, is partly reflected through the prism of children’s own definition of themselves. … The age at which a person can be considered capable of moral reflection upon their actions has altered over time according to changes in the understanding of childhood. Thus, for example, according to nineteenth-century English common law, it became established that children should be exempt from criminal liability under the age of seven. This was raised to age eight in 1933 and to ten in 1963.” (Bourke, 2008).
What is a child / Then and now: “…proper perspective is something that is sorely missing in debates about the state of children and childhood today. It is easy to forget, for example, that only a few hundred years ago, children could not even be said to have a childhood” (Guldberg, 2009, p.46-47). “Whether or how much parents in medieval times could be said to love their children, today’s separation of a distinct world of childhood with its own clothes, games, entertainment, literature and education is undoubtedly modern. Over the past century or so the family has become increasingly focused emotionally and financially on the welfare of the child in ways that would have been unrecognisable to people in previous centuries” (Guldberg, 2009, p.48). “The modern view of childhood is understood to have been built upon the ideas of two great philosophers, JOHN LOCKE and JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU. Locke’s idea of a tabula rasa – the mind as a blank slate at birth – presents adults with the responsibility for ‘what is eventually written on the mind,’ writes Postman (1994, p.57). From the ‘Locke-an’ conception comes the view of the child as an ‘unformed person who through literacy, education, reason, self-control, and shame may be made into a civilised adult’ (Postman, 1994, p.59). Rousseau, on the other hand, put forward the Romantic view of the child – highlighting the charm and value of children, arousing ‘a curiosity about the nature of childhood that persists to this present day’ (Postman, 1994, p.58)” (Guldberg, 2009, p.50). “Only in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, with the drastic decline in child labour and the advent and extension of compulsory schooling, could childhood really be said to exist in the modern sense. It was not until the 1870 Education Act, which gave rise to a national system of state education, that schooling became a priority in the UK” (Guldberg, 2009, p.51). “In the distant past, people had no choice but to treat children as little adults. Now that we have a more advanced society, it is up to us to protect childhood as an important stage of development rather than ‘pathologising’ it as a dangerous, unhappy time; and to help children on their way into adulthood, rather than seeking to keep them infantile for ever” (Guldberg, 2009, p.56-emphasis added).
What is a child / Children’s rights: “A ‘right’ here is defined as a claim to treatment, according to law or policy; a ‘child’ is defined as a person under the age of 18 years, as per the Children Act 1989” (Daniels, 2000, p.8).
What is a child? “Socially, the child is receptive to the different biases of the culture (they are) born into, and the particular ways in which these are transmitted to (them) by (their) parents or caregivers. Because of this, any search for the ‘natural child,’ over and above the minimum common ground, faces difficulties.” … “ Receptivity to a prevailing culture is itself a constant characteristic of all childhood” (Tucker, 1977, p.99). “The dividing line between ‘childish’ and ‘adult’ behaviour is constantly being redrawn both in minor and major ways, so emphasising the essentially relative and social nature of these terms.” … “In the early nineteenth century…the audience for Punch and Judy shows would consist of people of all ages; it was only by the end of the nineteenth century that children would make up practically the whole crowd” (Tucker, 1977, p.103). “At the same time, typically childish clothes—the sailor suits and frilly dresses of affluent children in former times—are giving way to more adult fashions at increasingly early stages in a child’s life. Soon it may only be the baby in the first year who has his own distinctive outfit” (Tucker, 1977, p.107). To quote PIAGET (in Tucker 1977, p.114-115-emphasis added): “With regard to mental functioning, the child is in fact identical with the adult; like the adult, he is an active being whose action, controlled by the law of interest or need, is incapable of working at full stretch if no appeal is made to the autonomous motive forces of that activity. Just as the tadpole already breathes, though with different organs from those of the frog, so the child acts like the adult, but employing a mentality whose structure varies according to the stages of its development.”
What is a child? / A socially constructed stage of life: Viewing the child as existing through its relations with others and always in a particular context…there are may children and many childhoods, each constructed by our ‘understandings of childhood and what children are and should be’ (Dahlberg, 1999, p.43). “Childhood is understood not as a preparatory or marginal stage, but as a component of the structure of society—a social institution—and important in its own right as one stage of the life course, no more or less important than other stages” (Dahlberg, 1999, p.49-emphasis added).
References
Burke, C. (2008). Theories in childhood. In Encyclopaedia of children and childhood in history and society. Retrieved from http://www.faqs.org/childhood/So-Th/Theories-of-Childhood.html
Dahlberg, G., Moss, P. & Pence, A. (1999). Constructing early childhood: What do we think it is? Beyond quality in early childhood education and care: Postmodern Perspectives. Falmer Press.
Tucker, N. (1977). Summing up: what is a child? In What is a child? London: Fontana/Open Books.
Woodrow, C. (1999). Revisiting images of the child in early childhood education: Reflections and considerations. In Australian Journal of Early Childhood, Vol 24, (4).
Prioritising tasks and making time for personal wellbeing is easier said than done and I have realised this along the course of the case studies. While I was initially judgemental about the head teacher in the case study not following my advice from case study 1, I am more understanding now.
It is very difficult to focus and critically analyse and apply information when you are emotionally distracted by familial or personal issues. It is important to be proactive and have support structures in place before a stressful event occurs, such as recognising possible triggers and identifying coping strategies to deal with those triggers – much like we do as teachers by setting up our classroom structures.
Much like the head teacher librarian in the case studies, I have a lot on my plate. Work for me has been tumultuous for nearly my entire adult life. I have only been employed as a permanent employee for a mere 6 of my 32 years in gainful employment. I have had several genetic defect and life-threatening operations and 2 complicated pregnancies. I have immigrated from the U.S. and have lived for 22 years in Australia without my birth family. I have lived for 6 years in the Far West of NSW and have found the climate (both in terms of weather and work) challenging. Thus, I have had to work very hard over the years to try to prioritise travel and home life over work and career status…not easy when teaching is your passion!
I thought I had it all together!
I’ve tried to develop some hobbies that do not require other humans (photography, gardening, reading, playing with my dog) and learnt to take time to do these hobbies when I am feeling overwhelmed.
I have tried to prioritise my home life over my work life by shutting off and leaving work at 5:00pm each day. This has been made easier by only working 2 days a week and working in a NSW Department of Education Preschool that locks its doors at 3:30 each day.
I also set limits on parts of the house for electronics as to where they are not allowed (e.g. the kitchen/dining areas, toilets and bedrooms) in order to ensure that our family are sharing spaces appropriately and interacting authentically together in these spaces.
I have tried to combat the lack of permanence in my job and lack of power and control over my destiny, by attempting a masters degree in Teacher Librarianship. (Although my work hours have been modified to include this, which adds to my stress).
I try to live life in the moment, focussing on what I need to do in the next minute, rather what I need to do later or tomorrow or in 5 years time. It is great to have a vision, and strategies to achieve that vision and I’m very thankful to finally have this. It is also important to recognise that sometimes the steps towards the vision begin by simply swinging your legs out of the bed to start the day and thinking of nothing else until you’ve achieved that goal.
Photo by Elijah O’Donnell on Unsplash
Then something happens that isn’t expected – as it always does.
Both of my children are on the autism spectrum, and it is likely both my husband and I are also (although only my youngest is the only one to recently obtain a diagnosis of ASD, ADHD and SPD). While I’ve always known that my boys are different and I appreciate and enjoy difference and I was not worried about going to Manly for a week for the diagnosis process, the final diagnosis of my youngest, particularly when there is a major assignment due for my degree, has caused my life to re-enter a state of flummox. What I didn’t plan for, was how to tell him about his diagnosis and how to deal with his emotional state following that discussion.
Thankfully I have my very supportive husband has looked after the children full time to enable me to complete it. Thankfully, we’ve been talking to the children regularly about ASD, so the news, when we can sit down and discuss the plan for delivering it, won’t come as such a shock.
Thankfully, through the support structures were in place through CSU, I had applied for and was granted a week extension on my assignment.
I’ve also located the ‘Personal (Wellbeing) Strategic Plan’ provided by the ETL504 course resources, have saved it to my files and will include it in my repertoire (see also the link in the menu on the left side of this blog). I hope this will help me in the future to be more proactive in my personal wellbeing and possibly help others too.
