Post
#4 Four - What I learned from the Course - Blog post to The Ardent Librarian (my
“professional” blog)
I
delved into modules one to six for this course, and though I would have loved
to have covered more module themes, even within the six I chose, I did not
cover every reading despite putting hours into enjoying numerous articles and
sources - I bet you all can relate. Thanks Karen for the abundance of
reading and learning opportunities. I chose to share my post four in blog
format: the blog I created for the Web 2.0 course I took with Aaron Mueller
(Fall, 2013, I highly recommended it to any and all). Within the blog
context, “we” are not limited to the UBC Connect login and have the potential
to dialog with a larger audience (nevertheless, my “Ardent Librarian” blog is
just a pin prick in the blogging options and I don’t consistently update it at
this time [unlike my school library blog [http://parkviewelementarylibrary.blogspot.ca/]).
But “we” can return to it (the themes, resources, and dialog) with ease
compared to having the discussion held within UBC parameters and vanishing once
the course ends. Plus give me some creative formatting UBC Connect - ugh!
And
so my LLED 459 Trends and Issues in Literacy Instruction learning summation.
I must preface that my contextual reading and learning lens was filtered
through my teacher-librarian role; thus, my responses will reflect this
viewpoint. Short and sweet - not.
Within
the six themes I explored, technology wove its way through everything.
Technology in our learning and everyday experiences is obviously here to
stay and, right or wrong, gaining importance. In Module
One, “Taking Stock of Literacy Today,” the CORE
Education’s Ten Trends 2014 information
source I found to be a dense but compelling journey. Technology
was/is a large theme throughout CORE’s discussion.
As a
teacher-librarian in a fish-bowl type position, knowing about educational
trends is very important. Thus, the “CORE Education’s Ten Trends 2014”
offers a New Zealand and possibly a world opinion of current changes and
possible future movement of education. I invite you to click and explore.
Despite the circular enter-at-any-point graphic portal, I would suggest
starting with the center “Ten Trends 2014 Overview” (5:09) by Derek Wenmoth, CORE e-learning
research and development person.
Overall, the CORE New
Zealand group organized their trends into five main headings - cultural,
technology, structural, economic, and process - and then expanded these ideas
further by looking at two trends for each of these five main themes. Cultural
looks at Living in the Digital now, and Learner Agency; Technology looks
at the singularity and Learning Analytics. Structural looks at the
trends of learner orientation and networked organizations. Process looks
at educational gamification and new approaches to assessment, and so on.
See below diagram.
Overall, CORE discusses the huge changes in
technology and how traditional structural buildings and organizations, the
process of how we get things done, economic, and cultural factors (the inner
core of the circle) are all being changed by technology. The themes that
knowledge no longer comes from traditional places and experts and no longer is
being disseminated to passive learners was the focus. Contemporary
knowledge consumers (who have access to on-demand technology) can get
information from a variety of sources and not only consume it when and where
they want, but also have begun creating, defining, and redefining information (similar
to Cope and Kalantzis’ theorizing of multiliteracies and designing and
redesigning information, module three, multiliteracies). Derek
Wenmoth and CORE writers aim to add to this portal as the year unfolds.
They have begun to flesh out the “Cultural” sub theme and the two trends
- learner agency (Feb., 2014) and living in the digital now (March, 2014).
Learner agency is the
development of one’s ability for independent thought and action. To me
“agency” parallels late 90’s, early 2000 global citizenry, with the new
additions of the buzzwords self regulation and personal initiative.
The new breed of learner, thus, is encouraged or rather unleashed from
his or her [traditional teacher/educational] constraints to be active consumers
and creators (similar to “designers” and “redesigners,” Cope and Kalantzis),
and further encouraged and/or trained to be self evaluators (self assessment).
Living in The Digital Now is more or less the digital revolution
that is taking place; the shift from finding information from traditional
places and people to going online to find information from a variety of authors
and not only consuming that information, but storing, synthesizing, and
recreating it: “Where traditionally we might have looked to institutions of
long standing or to well established experts to solve problems for us,
increasingly now we're sourcing information online, we're curating it, we're
finding solutions, we're doing things digitally.” Because of this
process, and the inevitable coming together of knowledge, minds, and people
(often keyed as globalization) this in turn is creating new cultures.
CORE argues that these new cultures have different sets of rules and
principles for being positive contributing members. CORE prescribes
that these new and emerging principles are what educators really need to
assist students with. Goodness, there was so much more covered, but I
will cease the summary of this one complex info. source here.
As I expected, the themes discussed in this ten
trends portal tended to emerge in the other modules. Module
Two, New Technologies in fact expanded on many of the CORE ideas. Boulos
(2006) (Reflections
of a Digital Native) had
me reflecting on my relationship with the tech department, my digital
immigrant status, and my use of technological use and goals. As
educators, I believe we need to confer more with our tech management and find
that mutual respect of monetary and safety criteria potential vs limitations
and then combine those ideas with what actually works with our clients.
My digital immigrant status has me contextually placed as someone
learning about technology (give or take interest) and working at accruing
skills versus the digital native who has been born into the technology
world and seamlessly uses it daily. The latter seems to be at an
advantage if you’re keeping score.
Marc
Perensky (2012) conveniently challenged this
dichotomy, however, and argued that one does not have to fit into either of
these camps, but rather can be digitally wise. He argues one does
not have to be born into the current day tech world to be digitally literate.
Nevertheless, I am suspicious. Prensky looks close to retirement;
it makes sense he would make a label he could fit himself into that offers the
ability to be part of the “in-the-know” technology group. Albeit, tech
savviness still comes down to hours spent in this area, which younger kids, in
my biases, have more disposable free time to put towards that interest.
Nevertheless, it is not impossible to put in those hours and/or gain that
knowledge and skill for the non digital native group.
Prensky is a big advocate for educational based
games (what CORE referred to as gamification). In fact, he is
creating educational games: Games2Train.
While I love Prensky’s aim to engage learners through this creative
means, how often do these games move beyond lower level thinking (recall and
comprehension) to higher levels of thinking (synthesis and evaluation)?
The article “Venturing Into Games” by D. Jonassen et al points out that Prensky
software tends to be quiz-type games and thus lower level thinking on Bloom’s
Taxonomy. Jonassen states:
“For example, Games2Train
(http://www.games2train.com/games) produces a game maker called Pick-it! for
teachers to construct quiz games. The game maker resembles the television quiz
show Jeopardy, allowing game players to select topics and values and
play against others. The degree of meaningfulness of the learning from these
games depends on the nature of the responses that are required. More often than
not, quiz games require only memorization performance. While memorization of
domain content may be important, these games do not readily engage students in
deeper-level, meaningful learning activities (e.g., application and
synthesis).” Source:
(http://www.education.com/reference/article/venturing-into-games/)
Jonassen points out that more complex games
such as Civilization by Sid Meir (http://www.civilization.com/) takes students
to higher levels of thinking through problem solving, analysis, synthesis and
application. Jonassen lists just this one more complex, deeper thinking
game. How many more of these types of games are on the market; are educators
using them? Can the education system afford them? I do not have the answers to these questions yet, but I
intuitively know more educational games are coming.
Has your head begun to spin? The options, the learning curves, the
cost, the efficacy? Within the education context, who makes
decisions of what to buy and use, who helps us learn all of these resources and
apps? In Howard Rheingold’s article (2012) , “Stewards of
Digital Literacies,” he argues teacher-librarians (t-ls) should be
these stewards (Rheingold, Howard. "Stewards of Digital Literacies." Academic
Search Elite. EBSCO, n.d. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.).
I find this argument professionally exciting, but also daunting.
While I think the 21st century t-l should be the stewards of digital literacies,
this vast task (and knowledge base) combined with traditional literacies,
school and district initiatives (not always the same goals and dynamic in
nature), and the administrative and clerical duties of running a learning
commons is - goodness - what is the needed meaningful adjective? Formidable.
A poem by Shannon Murrells-Allaway
“Stewards of Digital Literacy”
A breath.
Take stock.
Forge through.
A task
inspiring respect,
impressively large,
powerful, and intense
Resoundingly beautiful …
Yesssssssssss - Bring It On.
But
please dear leaders,
open our learning commons
every day of the
school year;
Staff it richly
with professionals;
Train us relentlessly.
Supply us
with
meaningful tools
And resources.
“We” strive to be formidable.
“We” strive to unravel and reknit
Literacy.
----------------------
Someone please break into song!
I now halt the thematic summation of New
Technologies.
Module Three - Multiliteracies
Multiliteracies =’es Literacy on steroids. It is part of each of
the five main themes listed in the CORE Ten Trends: Cultural, Structural,
Economic, Process and Technology. It is the contextual and cultural
knowhow and savviness in all that we do, and with everyone we interact with -
globally. I leave it to Wikipedia to sum up this broadening human
concept. Click and absorb - Multiliteracy.
Module Four - Critical Literacy
While I have a background in semiotics or meaning-making, in
fact a masters from the University of Waterloo, Allen Luke had me learning more
about this concept - awesome. I had to giggle, but my learning and new
synthesis did not come from the course YouTube clip which had me questioning my
background scaffolding about critical literacy and even confused me, but
rather, once again, particularly, from Wikipedia (and from other course
readings too). I have a new respect building for this often credibility
questioned database. Wikipedia describes Luke’s Four Resources Model:
1.
coding competence (the ability to decode text, i.e.
phonics)
2.
semantic competence (the ability to make meaning,
i.e. comprehension)
3.
pragmatic competence (every day, functional
literacy, i.e. writing a check, reading the newspaper, filling out a job
application, etc.)
4.
critical competence (the ability to critically
select and analyze texts, i.e. avoiding scams, determining reliable sources of
information, etc.)
Luke and Freebody assert that no
one of these resources is sufficient by itself but that each is essential.
Further, the resources are not meant to indicate a sequence of instruction.
Different resources should be present in instruction in varying amounts,
depending upon the needs of the students. Luke has also stated that critical
competence, far from being an upper level topic, can begin to be developed in
year one of education and before. [2]
2 Curriculum
services of Canada. (2007). "Dr. Allan Luke: the new literacies"
webcast. Retrieved from http://www.curriculum.org/secretariat/may31.html
In summation, through each of the
course modules I explored, literacy is being defined and redefined. With
Luke, the umbrella definition includes four competences: coding (decoding
text; learning the alphabet at its earliest stages), semantic (meaning-making;
using the alphabet to create words and thus meaning), pragmatic (functional
literacy, utilitarian know-how), and critical (analyzing text for
currency, relevance, authorship, accuracy, and purpose). In Luke’s model,
we start with our preschoolers and primary students, teaching them the building
blocks of literacy. And then we keep building on those skills each year
according to their readiness: culturally, and contextually.
Professionally, this model aligns strongly with me; I see the t-ls as
crucial organizers in standardizing benchmarks from kindergarten to grade 12
regarding these competencies.
Module 5 - Literacy
Jodie Howcroft’s article “The Heart of a
School” captured my attention for this module. She writes for ETFO
Voice the magazine of the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario.
In her article she captures the busy day and programming of a modern
teacher-librarian. Howcroft also captures the correlation between
strong library programming and increased literacy. Howcroft
interviews full-time teacher-librarian Sue MacLachlan from Cathy Wever
Elementary School, Hamilton, Ontario.
I connected to this article because my job and
MacLachlan’s are one of the same. Further, it was fascinating to compare
this full-time Ontario, elementary t-l position with my part-time .4 British
Columbia, rural one. So, I didn’t learn anything new, but connected with
a fellow colleague and revisited meaningful literacy research:
1. “School Libraries and Student Achievement in Ontario”
(Howcroft p. 16).
2. “The Crisis in Canada’s School Libraries” by Dr. Ken Haycock.
(Howcroft p. 19).
As stated above, strong library programming tends to increase student
achievement. Open the library full time, staff it with qualified
teacher-librarians (t-ls), increase spending on books and resources, provide
collaborative time between teachers and t-ls, and the following increase:
reading enjoyment, student achievement, and test scores. With this correlation,
the choice to increase funding to libraries should be one of the “Ten Trends,”
but in reality, in many regions across Canada, the opposite is happening.
Module 6 - Reading in
a New Key: Comics, Graphic Novels and E-books
Gene Yang’s Graphic Novels in
the Classroom was the article I chose for Module 6. This graphic novel style
article will be a useful peer, parent, and even student text to define and
exemplify this genre. The resource lists about useful graphic novels for
the classroom/library, as well as the pedagogical approach resource listings
are very useful as some of the manga graphic novels in particular can be
inappropriate for elementary audiences. As a teacher-librarian this article
was more about reaffirming the creative potential of graphic novels, and adding
to my current resource list. It did act as a springboard for finding
other online educational comics such as Scott
Tingley’s informal, comic-format “how-to” resource about chess: The
Chess Comic . Scott aims to teach young and old the
basics of chess and then more advanced skills through the comic medium.
Post responses on his site are very favourable. I predict we will
see many more educational texts - print and digital - in this format. In
fact, World
Book and Weigl
Educational Publishers are two publishers I’m aware of
working with the comic format.
In
closing:
And so, just like the seven Prezis I found about LLED 459 summation posts
(huge, complex), it is hard to summarize our learning in just a few words.
Literacy has become and will remain a complex, dynamic concept.
Technology has certainly been a profound force in literacy redefinition.
What was left out in many of the articles is the potential for disparity
with the addition of technology to our literacies. Who has access?
Who does not? And while technological access is becoming less of an
issue as prices come down and infrastructure improves, the disparity of
multiliteracy strength, the semantic and critical competencies that Luke
discusses may be the telling characteristic of the have and have-not literate
vs illiterate masses.
