Although there is a multitude of literacies that scholar-teachers need to develop in the digital age, there are two specific literacies (perhaps better called digital literacy skills) that are most essential for improvements in research/pedagogy: understanding quality digital literacy experiences/learning and gaining fluency in digital literacy integration with culture.
Teacher-scholars need to learn that not all digital literacy is equal. As Rich (2008) points out, there is “empty calorie” digital literacy and there is productive digital literacy. I see this range of quality as similar to the range of quality in traditional literacy texts/reading approaches. Corio and Dubler (2007) add that digital literacy requires much of the same and more complex literacy practices than traditional literacy. I think disregard towards quality digital literacy comes from the continual lack of its meaningful implementation, harkening back to our educational technology class when we discussed how schools rarely get beyond the tech-as-novelty perspective.
Additionally, teacher-scholars need to master digital literacy as situated and participatory. They need an understanding of digital literacy’s sociocultural elements such that the community/culture/identity development elements of digital literacy are considered affordances rather than new confusions or challenges. Fully reaching this requires continued research (Tierney, 2009) and changes to teacher education/professional development programs, but this is a critical direction in the field. As Tierney (200) explains, “New literacies in all of its forms involves a shaping of self and selves that is integral to understanding the meanings that are used and how they shape engagements and the plays we make with one another” (p. 337).
Sarah,
I think your point about the range of digital literacies in terms of quality is really important, and I think your connection to the ed tech debate is apt. The essentialization of digital literacy (or ed tech) as inherently good or bad seems like a less productive viewpoint than the evaluation of quality along a spectrum. One thing in the Coiro and Dobler (2007) piece that I found encouraging in this regard was the finding that students used prior knowledge of informational website structures and search engines to aid their online reading. This suggests that basic knowledge about the Internet, which is likely attained through even superficial digital literacy practices, could be built upon to help students attain high-quality digital literacy.
Hi Katie, I also thought the discussion of prior knowledge from Coiro and Dobler (2007) was interesting! It made me think about the authors’ participant choice and reflect that different students I’ve taught with different levels of digital literacy prior knowledge probably struggled more than their peers on tech-based assignments because of this. Teaching in a low-income area, I could never assume my students had access to or experience with various tech, but in more affluent areas, I imagine many teachers take their students’ tech prior knowledge for granted.
Not that we haven’t always recognized that lack of exposure and experience with technology influences students’ proficiency, but I found thinking of it in terms of “prior knowledge” more accessible for pedagogical applications. Considering students’ prior knowledge and addressing this as part of lesson planning and implementation is essential. Although I assume some teachers must already do this, if all teachers start tech lessons with assessments of tech prior knowledge, not just content prior knowledge, some instructional challenges could be averted.
Administrators:
Christine Greenhow
Diana
Rand
cainwil1
Ming
Top Posters:
galvins1: 51
richkat3: 50
albertsk: 43
moudgal1: 43
schellma: 41
liraamal: 39
Emilia: 35
zhumengd: 34
Forum Stats:
Groups: 6
Forums: 19
Topics: 97
Posts: 339
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 0
Members: 77
Moderators: 0
Admins: 5
Most Users Ever Online: 58
Currently Online:
1 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)