My improvisational flight into a multiliteracies approach
The New London Group (1996) coined the term “multiliteracies” to address a need for literacy learning across a broad spectrum of skills and knowledge while connecting to available technologies and new communications media. O’Rourke (2001) also addresses the need to engage students through a multiliteracies approach, in which students are enabled to draw upon knowledge and contexts from many disciplines, as well as on multiple communication modalities. Preparing students for a future where they are able to critically think in many contexts also shapes their direction of technology use and social relationships with each other. Students who are encouraged to access broad forms of representation in varying cultural contexts in their studies are better able to participate in a broader globalized society. They will ultimately have a stronger skill-base working across the “plurality of texts” utilized by multiple participants within this global context. Willinsky and Dobson, (2013) p. 15
Beyond suggesting that students simply work in a multi-representational approach, Leander and Boldt (2013) extend New London’s multiliteracies ideology by re-defining the role of today’s students as “practitioners,” or powerful agents who not only understand a multiliteracy world, but whose inherent abilities reach beyond simply reading various texts, extending their interactions with them to design their own “practices, activities, and texts.” (p. 33) Their situated observational study of 12-year-old students Lee and Hunter who freely move from exploring written text to imaginative play, role play, online research and creative production, shows how students who are failing in the traditional sense of literacy within the classroom, in fact, immerse themselves happily for extended periods of time into an imaginative new text world of their own design. If, we as teachers, can incorporate this type of multiliteracies into our own pedagogy, perhaps we will be able to extend our reach into greater student success and knowledge.
Leander and Boldt (2013) not only define texts as representational artifacts of literacy practice, but also describe new forms of texts themselves as “participants in the world,” and advise educators to embrace their usage via a non-representational approach to literacy activity as a living, evolving function that occurs in present time, created from varying interrelations and connections, in essence becoming part of an activity flow. This contrasts with the idea of text-centric literacy that views texts as static, or pre-existing forms of knowledge to be learned rather viewing new texts as experiential. What I take away from this approach is that students today will benefit from inclusion of their real time living experiences into learning design that incorporates kinesthetic and imaginative understanding into the curriculum combined with pedagogical approaches and classroom space, using materials and “movement, play, emotion, and desires that the classroom participants bring with them.” (p. 44) In many recent discussions that I have had with my educator colleagues, we have wondered how to reach more disenfranchised students, and how to incorporate bodily knowledge and hands-on discovery into all aspects of learning to increase relevance and student engagement. This week’s readings have reinforced my belief that now just may be the perfect time to embark on our own improvisational flight into learning design, reminiscent of Leander and Boldt’s (2013) assemblage of research and pedagogy, inclusive of a multiliteracies approach.
(word count 520)
References:
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An international journal, 4(3), 164-195.
Dobson, T., & Willinsky, J. (2009). Digital literacy. The Cambridge handbook of literacy, 286-312.
Leander, K., & Boldt, G. (2013). Rereading “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies” Bodies, Texts, and Emergence. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(1), 22-46.
O’Rourke, M. (2001). Engaging students through ICT: A multiliteracies approach. Teacher Learning Network Journal: Change, Growth, Innovation, 8(3), 12-13.
The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard educational review, 66(1), 60-93.
Wesch, M. (2007), A Vision of Students Today (Video)
Images:
Petukhov, A., Girl chasing seagulls on beach (2011) Image retrieved from Internet https://www.flickr.com/photos/petukhovanton/12231616986/in/photolist-9bCJon-jCSeA3-9NDgMs-dkjkTo-qJUBL3-6R7Cc-9nF16K-7gKrTK/
You make a good point in suggesting that not all students will or can be reached within the classroom. Using a multiliteracy framework is one way to reach these students but you are correct to ask how to reach the disenfranchised student.
There has been some research on this. Annah Healy (2007) suggests the most effective way to reach children is to incorporate this approach at a very young age. She argues that because a child’s world is very visual, this type of approach will resonate well with them. Furthermore, topics chosen must be linked to their lives as well as of interest to the learners. In addition, using a multiliteracy framework must utilize increased levels of problem solving and decision making. By incorporating these approaches within the context of multiliteracy, students will be increasingly engaged not only in the topics presented, but in examining literacy in its entirety.
Healy’s argument is also supported by Lee, Harrison, O’Rourke and Yelland in a 2009 journal article. Based upon a three-year study, the authors suggest engaging in a multiliteracy approach must commence at a young age to have the maximum benefit for the learner. Their premise is learners transition more successfully between preschool and regular school if they are introduced to an ICT and multidisciplinary framework in these formative years. They further argue the success of the learner also rests on the engagement of the educator. Preschool teachers must create a “digital suitcase” which contains a description of the learner’s ICT and multiliteracy likes and dislikes, skills and abilities. The next level teacher should then “unpack the suitcase” and scaffold the learning based on the learner’s ability.
I perused a few other studies which suggested that reaching children at a young age creates the best results in utilizing the multiliteracies framework. While this is certainly the best-case scenario, I wonder how effective this framework is when engaging (or introducing) students to the multiliteracies framework at a higher level?
Resources:
Healy, A. (2007). Multiliteracies and diversity in education. Oxford University Press.
Harrison, C., Lee, L., O’Rourke, M., & Yelland, N. (2009). Maximizing the moment from preschool to school: The place of multiliteracies and ICT in the transition to school. The International Journal of Learning, 16(11), 465-474.
WORD COUNT: 373
Great post Sandra and beautiful picture!
I really like how you explore multiliteracies and what you took from Leander and Boldt’s article. I really enjoyed the scenario of Lee and his friend playing in many different forms of literacy, all outside of school. Language and literacy are the base of communication and so when our students gather, they use these skills to play. Teaching/facilitating this type of play in the classroom is rather unstructured and can lead to teachers feeling like chaos is on it’s way! I am curious how I could inspire my students to explore a topic, through their own chosen form of literacy. ex. Write a story that is linked to your life and your interests, but share it how you like, using whatever platform you desire to explore.
What ideas do you have for projects with your classes this year?
Great post Sandra! I really enjoyed the approach you took to looking at multiliteracies. Since beginning the MET program, I have found myself fascinated with approaches to multiliteracies and the ways in which multimodal pedagogies can assist and effectively improve students learning and engagement.
The ability to provide students with the skills to participate fully in global societies is a common goal amongst educators. This is achieved through course design to help meet the “educational needs of a specific group of learners” (Vaughan et al., 2013, p. 22). Studies have been able to show that the incorporation of ICT and multimodalities has improved student achievement (Tekos and Solomonidou, 2009). Students must feel engaged and interested in their journey of education. If we use out-of-date tools, technologies and content, students will not only be disengaged from material but as educators, we will be failing to prepare students for the workplace. As Willinsky (2002) mentions, we must provide students the opportunities and skills in order to develop their “critical reasoning abilities,” along with the ability to criticise and justify their stance (p. 10). This idea looking at literacies and ICT is furthered by Bolter (2001) in differentiating between printed and online text in stating, “the electronic writing space can represent any relationships that can be defined as the interplay of pointers and elements” (17%). The development of multiliteracy at the school level allows students to filter through content and make connections to create meaning. The ability to incorporate digital technologies into multiliteracy provides students a wealth of resources to draw upon and further add to. It takes away from stagnant text and encourages participation to contribute ideas and information.
References:
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tekos, G., & Solomonidou, C. (2009). Constructivist learning and teaching of optics concepts using ICT tools in Greek primary school: A pilot study. Journal of Science Education and Technology J Sci Educ Technol, 18, 415-428. Retrieved February 15, 2015, from ERIC.
Vaughan, N.D, Cleveland-Innes, M. & Garrison, D.R. (2013). Teaching in Blended Learning Environments: Creating and Sustaining Communities of Inquiry. Edmonton, AB, CAN: Athabasca University Press.
Willinsky, J. (2002). Democracy and Education: The Missing Link May Be Ours. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 367-392. Retrieved June 1, 2015.
Great points Sandra, not all students learn the same therefore it is important to use multiliteracies in the teaching and learning process. The emergence of technology is important and it is being used more in the classroom. “Schools are increasingly making extensive use of the technology
to enhance teaching and learning, especially mobile devices. The availability of high quality
learning resources is highly valued by students but they prefer to access these resources using
mobile devices instead of through institutional systems. Mobile devices have become widely
available, either as smartphones (such as the iPhone and android phone) or tablet devices (such
as the iPad readers) and these have an extensive range of functions, from communication and
internet access to content delivery (such as Apps and e-books)” (Sandars, 2012, p. 535)
Students are more engaged with the technology however it is important for teachers to ensure its effectiveness, “Technology in itself does not embody new pedagogy, it is the way that technology is used to support pedagogical goals that makes it successful” Kervin, Verenikina, Jones & Beath, 2013, p. 136).
However some students will still learn better with books,hence there is a place for books in the classroom, “that just as the late capitalism is still vigorous, so are books and other printed materials in the late age of print are still common and enjoy considerable prestige” (Bolter, 2001).
References
Bolter, J (2001). Writing Spaces: Computers, hypertext and the remediation of print. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, London
Kervin, L., Verenikina, I., Jones, P., Beath, O. (2013). Investigating synergies between literacy, technology and classroom practice. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 36, 136-147
Sandars, J. (2012). Technology and the delivery of the curriculum of the future: Opportunities and challenges.