More on Digital Literacies

Why digital literacies and not literacy? Well, because I have come to see them as are two separate concepts. Digital literacies represent “practices of communicating, relating, thinking, and ‘being’ associated with media” (Jones and Hafner, 2012). It moves beyond technological mastery and becomes a way of socializing, communicating, and making meaning. It is about choosing the appropriate tool for the appropriate activity, adapting our skills and the media to fit our desired outcome, mediating social situations, and managing identities (Jones and Hafner, 2012). It is not separate or exclusive of traditional literacy skills, like reading and writing. It is just the opposite. Traditional literacies skills inform, shape and enhance digital literacies. This is one area that I wish more teachers would understand. No one is asking us to give up traditional forms of literacy. This is supported by Bawden (in Lankshear and Knoble, 2008). Literacy, in the traditional sense, is also not isolated from society. Traditional literacy and meaning making skills change depending on the situation, it also relies on idea development, identity formation, encoding and decoding more than just language (Jones and Hafner, 2012). Digital literacies, argue Jones and Hafner (2012), break down boundaries that traditionally defined practices of literacy. Lankshear and Knoble (2008) also use the term digital literacies to address the plurality of definitions and conceptions of digital literacy. One of their arguments is about the relationship between the sociocultural practices that move traditional literacy into literacies. Additionally, it is a more expansive term that better encapsulates all the different forms literacy can take in a digital sphere (Lankshear and Knoble, 2008). A person who is digitally literate is one who is able to match the medium to the information being presented and the audience it is being presented to (Lankshear and Knoble, 2008).

Lankshear and Knoble (2008) cite Gilster (1997) who defined digital literacy as understanding and using information gleaned from computers in multiple formats and from multiple formats. However, this definition is limiting as it does not account for social and cultural influences on literacy. When I speak of digital literacy I conceive of it digital literacy I think of traditional literacy skills in a digital format. It is more akin to information and communications technology, or e-literacy. It goes beyond being tech savvy. Digital literacies is more encompassing of different types of meaning making skills and abilities.

Digital Literacies Arifacts

The Social and Cultural Context of Digital Literacies

In the 1980s a group of scholars helped to shift the concept of literacy away from encoding and decoding language towards a view where literacy was also a social and cultural practice (Jones and Hafner, 2012). Learning to read, both traditionally and in a digital sphere, requires the learner to navigate a complex social system (Lankshear and Knoble, 2008). There are many enculturaliations of a text that allow it to be read in a multitude of ways. Understanding these different enculturations is directly related to how we make and create meaning. For example, the use of hashtags. Hashtags are used on social media cites to group or thread ideas together. These hashtags work as hyperlinks that help the reader or writer to connect with others on the same topic. However, hashtags are now being used ironically to parody writers who use too many. Additionally, they have found their way into speech. Understanding this social phenomenon is integral to help partake in current literacy practices. It is not enough to understand just what a hashtags does or how to create one. It is, essentially, a cultural remix. It is our digital literacy mixing with our social practice to create new meaning. You must be able to decipher its purpose and use it in a way that reflects the social ‘grammar’ of the situation. #complicated.

Digital literacies are also changing our identity. For example, my students openly share all sorts of very personal information freely with me. I think this is a reflection of social media practices that encourage participants to share, share, share. In some ways I suppose this is positive but I wonder what role privacy has in our lives. I also wonder what impact it has on our ego...so many aspects of social media seem to be exercises in narcissism for so many users. How will this impact our society as a whole? What responsibility is there to mediate digital literacy and encourage its use

in a way that positively impacts society? I think this relates to the Jones and Hafner’s (2012) point about what new tools allow us to do but also what they prevent us from doing. If, for example, all our students do everything collaboratively online then will they know how to communicate and mediate a group in a face to face situation? Cliché as it may be, I always think it is about balance.

Teaching our students to be digitally literate is just as important as teaching them to be traditionally literate. We teach our kids how to cross the road, we also need to teach them how to navigate the digital space in which they invest so much time and ceate so much of their identity.

Digital Literacies Leadership

When it comes to digital literacies, we are not just doing old things in new ways, we are actually doing new things that require new skills (Jones and Hafner, 2012). The authors say many of these skills are just picked up -but I do not really agree with that. While I teach digital natives, I have found that a lot of my students actually lack essential skills needed for mediating their world. I think many parents and teachers often assume that they know how to do things. Even something as simple as performing an effective google search they often don't do well.

I consider myself to be a leader in digital literacies in my work place. I mediate meaning in a multiliterate way and I teach my students to do the same. For example, this year I integrated Twitter into one of my classes. I also try to encourage and support my colleagues in adopting new practices in digital media. However, I did not arrive at my current literacy level on my own. I was lead here.

For me, my digital leader with always be Dr Janette Hughes. She was the first person that introduced me to the concept of multiliteracies, digital literacy or digital literacies. She has often mediated ideas for me between academic theory and educational practice. She has inspired me and encouraged me to question what it means to be literate in the 21st century. Before I even understood academically, I understood personally, that literacy was deeper than reading and writing. In my B.Ed I wrote a literacy story that focused on the connection between culture and literacy. She introduced me to the concept of digital story telling and digital poetry which I have continued to explore throughout my time as an educator. Dr Hughes pushed me to reframe how I viewed teaching, my classroom and the concept of literacy. It was through Dr. Hughes that I was first introduced to the New London Group, Lankshear and Knoble, and Carey Jewitt, all of whom I classify as leaders because they have pushed me and others to reconsider traditional notions of literacy and teach our students to be multiliterate ad digitally literate citizens. I’m not sure I will ever feel as digitally literate as Dr. Hughes but I am a life-long leaner who is not afraid to ask how, why or say “show me”.

Conclusion

We need to remember that digital literacies encompass and rely on traditional literacy skills. It is not something done in replacement of old methods but rather in addition to. Many people fear that these new ways of navigating the world are eradicating the old ways -I think it is just evolving. If we don't evolve too then we will have no place in this world. That being said, these new skills, ideas and technologies - these new and emerging forms of literacy-should be used and adopted in meaningful ways. Critical thinking, as Gilster suggests, is overarching.