Literacy

Technology

& Society

Dr Ibrar Bhatt

Lecturer in Education

Photo by ibrar bhatt https://www.flickr.com/photos/87248369@N03/20406599061/

@ibrar_bhatt

i.bhatt@qub.ac.uk

ibrarspace.net

This lecture•Understand how literacy occurs in and through the practices of

people, their networks, and their contexts (i.e. social practices)

•Explore ways to examine digital literacy in context to enhance teaching and learning in TESOL

•Present the theoretical basis of a *new* Faculty-wide module for the MSc TESOL programme at Queen’s University Belfast

Controversies

This debate is not new.

Plato records Socrates’ objection to the practice and technology of writing (‘Literacy’), stating that it would erode memory and cognitive functions, make people rely on data/information and not knowledge, and ultimately have a negative effect on society (Phaedrus)

Educators therefore need to better understand new controversies, and the impacts of technologies on new literacies

Literacies in context: E.g. an air con engineer & manual

Literacy as social practiceLiteracies are:

• Experienced within specific contexts

• Attached to professions, communities, and places

• Part of particular cultural histories

• Mediated by material objects and technologies

Therefore, to understand them, you need a thorough exploration of contexts

Literacy as social practiceWhat counts as Literacy in a ‘social practice’ approach depends on:

• The institutions in which it is embedded

• The processes through which it is acquired

• The practices through which it it is enacted

Therefore, to engage with Literacy becomes a form of critical social inquiry, and has importance for TESOL pedagogies that are sensitive to context

Street (1984) • The 'autonomous model' - Literacy is a technical skill,

autonomous from the social acts in which it occurs, and neutral

• The ‘ideological model’ - Literacy is “always embedded in socially constructed epistemological principles” (Street 2009: 29)

• 'Multiple literacies'

Barton & Hamilton (1998, 2012)

Challenges discourses of literacy that are dominant and simplifying

Ethnographic methods to:• describe literacy practices in a particular

community

• explore literacy as a method of sense-making

• examine literacy’s relationship to quality of life.

Barton and Hamilton (2000) help conceptualise literacy in the following terms:

• Literacy is best understood as a set of social practices; these can be inferred from events which are mediated by written texts

• There are different literacies associated with different domains of life

• Literacy practices are patterned by social institutions and power relationships, and some literacies are more dominant visible and influential than others.

• Literacy practices are purposeful and embedded in broader social goals and cultural practices

• Literacy is historically situated

• Literacy practices change and new ones are frequently acquired though processes of informal learning and sense making

(Barton & Hamilton 2000: p. 8)

Literacy practices like graffiti have a constellation of social practices surrounding them: music, protest, territory, etc.

Photo by ibrar bhatt https://www.flickr.com/photos/87248369@N03/32967559021/in/dateposted-public/

Controversies

In each of these headlines there is a crisis narrative surrounding Literacy, its relationship to Technology, and what that means for our Society

Looking at the headlines, Literacy (or digital literacy) is presented as a ‘problem’.

• We need to find out certain things (collect data) in order to understand this problem better (research)

• There are issues (challenges and opportunities) in teaching contexts (pedagogy)

• Often there is a pre-supposed ‘proper’ way of doing Literacy. Who benefits from this view of Literacy? (critical questioning)

Research – Pedagogy – critique

Researching digital literacy ‘from the ground up’

What kinds of research questions and methods of data collection could you use to explore the problems

within the headlines?

https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3841/14391226325_8c35c2a652_b.jpg

Getting to know a contextExploring people’s subjective experience with language and digital literacy is vital to our understanding of how to develop materials in context. In digital environments, we can examine:

• People’s common habits of use with digital media, over time and in different places

• Their practices across the contexts of classroom, around the campus/school, and at home

• The networks of people and places involved

• The applications, devices and platforms they use

• The digital literacy policies and frameworks in the college/school

• Historical trends with digital media in the lives of people

• Historical trends with digital media in a college/school or community

• How people obtain information, their sources of information, and how they make sense of the world (my current work: curation as a digital literacy practice)

Examining digital literacy as a casePossible methods you can use include:

• Ethnographic methods (e.g. Barton & Hamilton)

• Linguistic Landscapes (Shohamy & Gorter 2009)

• Focussed interviews: technobiographies, day-in-the life, walk along

• Participatory methods (e.g. Venn diagrams, see Bhatt 2017a)

• Multidimensional screen recordings (see Bhatt et al. 2015; Bhatt 2017b)

• Self-tracking applications

• Usability software (my current research!)

Researching (new) digital literaciesCurrent methodological trends in the Social Sciences, Educational Research, and Linguistics

A ‘technobiography’ as an interview method for researchA notable method of gaining insights into how people use language and literacy online. Originating in Kennedy (2003) and elaborated on in Page et al. (2014).

This method can focus on:

• personal practices with digital media (lived experience)

• Online representations of the self

• phases of change over time

• different domains of life

• how habits of use emerge in life

• personal use vs prescribed use.

Activity i) Carry out a technobiographic interview with the person next to you.

Typical questions can include:

1) When did you first use a mouse? Send a text message? Search for something on the Web? Set up a social media profile?

2) What caused this first usage? Was it mere inquisitiveness? Or did you have to?

3) Can you remember the first [essay, email, etc.] that you wrote? How did you write it? Is it different to how you would do it now? What has changed over time?

4) What irritates you most about digital technology?

5) What do you enjoy most about digital technology?

6) Tell me about the first time you used a digital translation app/device. How has your use of these evolved over time?

7) When did you first interact with someone multingually online? How have these practices evolved in your life?

Final pointsResearching digital literacy using a ‘social practice’ approach helps us to look at the funds of knowledge that learners bring to education. And to use those funds to inform pedagogies and a better understanding of learners.

What it means to be digitally literate is always in flux. Focusing a lens on student practices as the locus of inquiry can also contribute to other fields within Language Education, including Mobile Assisted Language Learning (e.g. Pegrum2014), Computer-Assisted Language Learning (e.g. Davies et al. 2011), Networked Learning, and Technology-Enhanced Learning.

References:BARTON, D. & HAMILTON, M. (1998, 2012) Local literacies: reading and writing in one community, London: RoutledgeBARTON, D. & HAMILTON, M. (2000) Literacy Practices. In: BARTON, D., HAMILTON, M. & IVANIC, R. (eds.) Situated literacies: reading and writing in context. London: Routledge. 7-15BHATT, I. (2017a) ‘Classroom digital literacies as interactional accomplishments’, In Researching New Literacies: Design, Theory, and Data in Sociocultural Investigation, Knobel, M. and Lankshear, C. (eds.), New York: Peter Lang.BHATT, I. (2017b). Assignments as controversies: digital literacy and writing in classroom practice, Routledge Research in LiteracyBHATT, I, DE ROOCK, R & ADAMS, J. (2015). Diving deep into digital literacy: emerging methods for research, Language and Education, Vol. 29 (6), 477-492DAVIES G., WALKER R., RENDALL H. & HEWER S. (2011) Introduction to Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL). Module 1.4 in Davies G. (ed.) Information and Communications Technology for Language Teachers (ICT4LT), Slough, Thames Valley University [Online]: http://www.ict4lt.org/en/en_mod1-4.htmKENNEDY, H. M. T. (2003) "Technobiography: Researching Lives, Online and Off." Biography, vol. 26 no. 1, 2003, pp. 120-139. Project MUSEIVANIČ, R., EDWARDS, R., BARTON, D., MARTIN-JONES, M., FOWLER, Z., HUGHES, B., MANNION, G., MILLER, K., SATCHWELL, C. & SMITH, J. (2009) Improving learning in college: rethinking literacies across the curriculum, Routledge, London.PAGE, R., BARTON, D., UNGER J. W. and ZAPPAVIGNA, M. (2014) Researching Language and Social Media: A Student Guide. Abington and New York: RoutledgePEGRUM, M. (2014) Mobile learning: Languages, literacies and cultures, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacmillanSHOHAMY, E. & GORTER, D. (2009) Linguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery. London: Routledge.STREET, B. V. (1984) Literacy in theory and practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Further reading on Literacy Studies:BAYNHAM, M. (1995) Literacy practices: investigating literacy in social contexts, London: LongmanSTREET, B. V. (2009) The future of 'social literacies'. In: BAYNHAM, M. & PRINSLOO, M. (eds.) The future of literacy studies, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 21-37

Dr Ibrar Bhatt

Lecturer in Education (MSc TESOL)

Convener of new module: Digital Literacy &

Communication

@ibrar_bhatt

i.bhatt@qub.ac.uk

ibrarspace.net