Portable Magic

"Books make people quiet, yet they are so loud.” – Nnedi Okorafor

Tag: information literacy

Understanding Digital Literacy

Reflect on your understanding of digital literacy. 

My understanding of digital literacy is clarifying somewhat, as I read my way through the modules in this course. Literacy and being literate is about making meaning, and communicating it, through signs and symbols – the semiotic system. Digital literacy seems to be all this, but in a digital realm – but this definition is also questioned, say Bacalja et al (2022, p. 254). The authors explain why digital literacy, and the teaching of it, is so complicated, especially because it changes so rapidly. I feel you.

Unlike other eras perhaps, we are in a self-conscious phase where we are already defining and labelling our times (rather than leaving that to a far-future generation). ‘Anthropocene’ has done the rounds, but also ‘information age’ and ‘digital age’. It depends on what people want to focus on, and use as the ‘defining’ quality of our time (hence why it’s usually left till much later!).

It seems like we will need more than one label, in the end, as everything is so much more, now. More information, more destruction, more extinctions, more mining, more consumerism, more technology. And yet also, we have stagnated: we seem to have flatlined in our understanding of what we do, including – especially – digital technologies.

I knew that the ‘digital native’ was a myth from my studies in an earlier unit, which aligned with my observations teaching students ages 16-18 for the last 10 years. Reading Fraillon’s (2019) round-up of the data was both vindicating and a bit depressing. But while Fraillon shared the stats for students performing at Level 1 or below, he didn’t say where the rest of students were sitting. For instance, in 2017, 3% of year 10 students were at Level 1 or below – which is actually pretty good, isn’t it? And an improvement on year 8 results. What are the other 97% achieving in year 10? Regardless, in my experience students are digitally comfortable – with scrolling apps.

It also didn’t surprise me to learn that the way we use technology in the classroom is pretty limited (PowerPoint presentations and Word documents, mostly!). What teacher has the time to a) learn a new technology and b) teach it to their students? I use Padlet sometimes in class, but that’s an easy one. I used Diigo with my Literature class last year, when they were researching for their Independent Study folio. Some of them liked it. I have tried, in past years, blogging – it’s all so much work and teachers are already overworked and stretched thin. So many digital technologies don’t actually make life easier, they actually complicate it.

There are some that I need to be more across, though, especially those digital tools that help students with learning needs like dyslexia, or vision impairment.

One of the things that stood out to me in the article by Bacalja et al (2022) is their acknowledgement that schools are being told to emphasise the teaching of a ‘narrow’ understanding of literacy, and to ‘get back to basics’ (p. 255). This results in a focus on what is assessable in a test, which in turn ‘deprofessionalises’ the teacher. I definitely feel this, and see it and hear in the media and political discourse. The more people focus on how ‘badly’ Australian students are ‘performing’ against other countries, the more they point at teachers and say ‘you’re not doing it right’. They simultaneously cram too much into the curriculum while insisting that we focus only on ‘core’ subjects.

Digital literacy is, of course, one of the first things to be squeezed out, along with learning how to touch type (I’m so saddened that this isn’t taught anymore! I type this with my eyes on the screen or on the paper, my fingers flying across the keyboard – such ease! I can keep up with my thoughts this way – what joy!). Yet of course we are also expected to somehow teach these things?

Digital citizenship or digital literacy isn’t covered in teacher training courses at university, of course.

References

Bacalja, A., Beavis, C., & O’brien, A. (2022). Correction to: Shifting landscapes of digital literacy. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 45(3), 389-389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44020-022-00027-x

Fraillon, J. (2019, August 05). Digital literacy: Myths and realities [Paper presentation]. Research Conference 2019 – Preparing students for life in the 21st century: Identifying, developing and assessing what matters. https://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference/RC2019/5august/7

Inquiry Skills in the Australian Curriculum

dennies025 / Pixabay

Module 5.3a: discuss Lupton’s article “Inquiry skills in the Australian Curriculum” and the potential impact of her analysis on the need for an inquiry learning model in your school.

Mandy Lupton (2012) offers an analysis of the 2011 Australian Curriculum in Science, History and Geography – with History and Geography being in the draft stage at the time. Her analysis compares and contrasts the learning objectives, skills and abilities expected of students across different year levels, finding inconsistencies and limitations especially in the Science curriculum.

Inquiry skills in the Australian Curriculum for Science are limited to predicting, planning, conducting, processing, evaluating and communicating data – what’s missing is ‘interpretation’ (Lupton, 2012, p.14). The focus is on gathering data which can better reflect the inquiry process (as opposed to history which emphasises the need to gather information, which implies ‘facts’) (p.15) Science also restricts independent student questioning to a Year 7 start (p.15). Overall, the “role of information literacy is weak” with the emphasis on gathering empirical data through experiments (p.15).

I am especially interested in this as I have selected Year 5 Science for my inquiry learning assignment (Assessment Task 3).  Lupton notes that the US National Research Council identified a need for information literacy but that this has not been reflected in the Australian Curriculum: Science. As such, school science inquiry is not ‘authentic’.

Lupton sees this as an opportunity for the teacher librarian to “unite the strands” of Science Understanding, Science as a Human Endeavour and Science Inquiry Skills (p.15). I am interested at where the crossovers are between the science inquiry skills and the General Capabilities, especially Critical and Creative Thinking (CCT). This could further support Lupton’s view that “a lost opportunity for ACARA” is a new one for teacher librarians (p.18), as the CCT strand fills in the gaps in the Science curriculum’s Inquiry Skills strand.

References

Lupton, M.(2014)  Inquiry skills in the Australian Curriculum v6, Access, November. pages 12-18. https://search-informit-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/doi/10.3316/INFORMIT.584040093322031

Thoughts on Literacy

 KELLEPICS / Pixabay

I never knew ‘literacy’ was such a complex term but, as with ‘information’, it is not as simple as it sounds. I definitely consider the term to be more of a concept (a sophisticated and complex idea) but one that was grounded in something tangible: knowing how to read and write. Of course, listening, speaking and viewing are also literacy skills; all five work together.

Literacy starts with the alphabet and phonics but is not just a recognition and understanding of visual symbols and the sounds they make; the semiotic system includes 5 key modes of communication: visual, linguistic, aural, gestural and spatial. We use all of these in order to construct meaning in our interactions, when we watch a game of footy, listen to music, ask someone for a favour.

Maryanne Wolf (2009) explains that we are not born to read but must create a ‘reading circuit’ from scratch; in turn, literacy reshapes our brains. It is a fascinating concept and a timely reminder to read Proust and the Squid, which I’ve had sitting on my shelf for over 10 years!

But the part of Wolf’s article that really resonated with me, and which makes clear the connection between literacy and inquiry learning, is where she explains the “sophisticated set of comprehension processes” that allow us not only to be literate at the most basic level, but to think beyond the text. This is ‘critical thinking’ and I share Wolf’s concern that new technologies (especially mobile devices) might be reshaping children’s brains in ways that impede their ability to think, if for no other reason than the fact that it does so much for us, quickly and efficiently, so that we do not need to develop that process in our own brains.

Wow. And, wow.

In that context, the integration of critical thinking and inquiry learning in schools can be seen to be even more important – it’s not just about what future employers want. Implied in all this is the risk that we could actually make ourselves, as a species, well, dumber. But the research isn’t there yet, it’s too soon to see the consequences and already people are conscious of a desire to ‘get back to basics’ for themselves and their families. Literacy is a complex term that encompasses a broad scope of contexts and modes, and while ‘Siri’ and other ‘helpful’ devices might have a longitudinal impact on the development of ‘comprehension processes’, it is also true that our world is more complex than ever and new demands are being made on our brains. Context shapes us just as we shape context. Our ability to make meaning from the world around us just got more interesting.

References

Wolf, Maryanne. (2009). Beyond decoding words in Does the brain like ebooks? New York Times [blog]  https://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/does-the-brain-like-e-books/?_r=0

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

Step 1 of 2
Please sign in first
You are on your way to create a site.
Skip to toolbar