Digital literacy can incorporate many aspects. In this blog post it refers to having an understanding of critically evaluating information. There has been immense growth in internet usage, however, it is more difficult to make meaning from digital information (Combes, 2016).
However, despite using the internet frequently adolescents do not possess high skill levels in reading online, in particular locating and critically evaluating information (Leu, McVerry, O’Byrne, Kiili, Zawilinski, Everett-Cacopardo, Kennedy, Forzani, 2011, p.8). This is a worrying trend when most young people trust media from friends, social sites or online which may not be correct, taken out of context or digitally manipulated (Combes, 2016).
The latest report by the Stanford History Education Group (2019, p.3) highlights some worrying results. Just over half of the students believed a bad quality video represented political fraud which was untrue. Only 0.1 % of students sought facts to check the videos credibility. 66% could not distinguish between political adverts and news stories and 96% did not question the credibility of a website based on the author’s bias.
Given the ever-evolving capabilities of technology to develop and distribute fake news, these results are indeed troublesome. Digital literacy is something that the teacher librarian and classroom teachers can work together on to improve results in the future.
References:
Breakstone, J., Smith, M., Wineburg, S., Rapaport, A., Carle, J., Garland, M., & Saavedra, A. (2019). Students’ civic online reasoning: A national portrait. Stanford History Education Group & Gibson Consulting. https://purl.stanford.edu/gf151tb4868
Combes, B. (2016). Digital Literacy : A new flavour of literacy or something different? Synergy, 14 (1).
Leu, D., McVerry, J., O’Byrne, W., Kiili, C., Zawilinski, L., Everett-Cacopardo, H., Kennedy, C., Forzani, E. (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: expanding the literacy and learning curriculum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(1), 5-14. www.doi.org:10.1598/JAAL.55.1.1
My experiences so far of digital literacy are limited (or perhaps I know more than I do and don’t realise it) and somewhat confused. What exactly is digital literacy? Is web 2.0 technology such as blogs, YouTube and social media etc considered digital literacy?
Based on my experiences so far I believed digital literacy to be:
Reading traditional text that has been digitised (e-books)
Listening to audio books
Accessing pdf or html documents from databases for readings
Apps or programs to help students ‘read’ and understand a book via animations, voice overs and music.
However, further reading has drawn to my attention that digital literature is much more than that. Even being able to use the internet effectively is considered digital literature. Digital literature has additional skills to traditional literature. These include finding and evaluating information on line, combining information from different sources and communicating information. (Leu, McVerry, O’Byrne, Kiili, Zawilinski, Everett-Cacopardo, Kennedy and Forzani, 2011, p.7). These are valuable skills for all, particularly students to possess. Many student’s online literacy skills are poor despite the student’s opposing beliefs. One area in which students are weak is in analysing search results, particularly clicking on the first search result (Leu, Forzani, Timbrell & Maykel, 2015). I have seen this myself. When questioning year six students about search engine results many responded they choose the first result. On further questioning the majority did not know that many top results are sponsored ads. They certainly did not check for reliability and validity of websites, with many readily agreeing that they did not check the author or credentials of the website.
Walsh (2013, p.181) introduces the idea of digital texts being multi modal, incorporating images, music, and speech to support communication. Whilst I had seen digital stories on websites such as Story Time Online with the stories being read aloud along with some animation, I have not seen other digital narrative features Walsh outlines (p.187). These include:
non-linear progression of the story,
split screens, ‘mouse over’ effects,
interactive games, and
‘mash up’ features.
She encourages educators to evaluate if or how these features accentuate the story and allow students to engage more with the story (2013, p.185). Students also need to be aware of fact and fiction within these features, such as websites with information that appears real but is not, it is part of the story (Lamb, 2011, p.17).
Then there are considerations of reader navigation on the page, some people have difficulty navigating interactive texts (Lamb, 2011, p. 15) or indeed traditional texts in digital format (Jabr, 2013). Whilst I prefer a traditional view of text on a page for ease of navigation, will it be the same for the younger generation? And what about those students with text learning difficulties, do digital literacy features make it easier for them to comprehend ideas better than straight text does?
From the readings thus far in the subject I can see that digital literacy involves more than I believed of reading on a screen. It includes being able to use the internet successfully as well as choosing effective digital narratives. There is a lot for me to learn about the world of digital literacy.
