Am I digitally literate?
Digital Literacy. I first came across this term in an undergraduate subject I took on First and Second language literacies. In that subject, unlike any other, my mind and my heart were challenged by my own beliefs about literacy and literacy aquisition. Thinking about the work of Shirley Brice Heath on community-based literacy practices of school and home (e.g. Heath 1983)still challenges my assumptions about my students, my professional practice, and my own literacy. But what about digital literacy?
Often I am reminded of the timing of the emergence of computers in everyday education settings and homes. Many people even a year older than me did not use a computer until high school. Those a year younger, had access to computers from early primary school. Many of my students don't remember a world without email, the internet and portable devices.
I look at my own personal learning network, and am led to reflect on how my use of technology differs within professional and personal networks. And, could I consider myself digitally literate in either context, or in a 'combined way'. The 5 resources model of digital literacy helps me to reflect on this. Expanding on Luke & Freebody (1999)'s model of critical literacy, they consider 5 'resources': decoding, meaning making, using, analysing, and persona. With regards to my own digital literacy, it is helpful to consider each of these further.
Decoding: I find myself able to navigate the parts of the digital landscape that I access, adapting to the operations, stylistics and modalities of different tools. However, when people use stylistics from a tool I'm not familiar with in an interface I am familiar with (e.g. using twitter stylistics in facebook), I can quickly disengage. As discussed earlier, the amount of information online means that my attention can quickly wander, rather than sustain engagement for the purpose of problem solving.
Meaning making: Professionally, I have been quite limited in my use of technology for 'meaning making'. I use powerpoints and word docs, emails and video conferencing. But I just as readily drive 1hr for a face to face meeting where we can get out the butchers paper and textas to support our brain storming over a cup of tea. Personally, I have had more confidence in using social media sites such as facebook, and creating a blog with my reflections on life where I can link with others. Even this website makes me little uneasy...having my professional self available for 'anyone' to see.
Using: Anyone who knows me knows that technology can frustrate me. I struggle to match my ideas and creativity with the appropriate tools and am consequently often trying to stretch the use of tools beyond what they are designed for. Maybe what this means is that I feel competent with the tools I know, but am not always so willing to go out and explore other options.
Analysing: Analysing is something that comes more naturally to me. Pulling things apart, exploring their components, putting them back together, exploring their whole and their interactions with their environment. In the digital domain, this is evident in my willingness to stretch the capacity of tools to meet 'what I want'. However, I find it more difficulty when it comes to evaluating the huge amount of information that is available.
Persona: Finally, the development of my identity as a member of various online communities is something that I often reflect on. What would it mean to join a university website? Do I need to set up a professional profile page first that is distinct from my personal one? The question of identity can be challenging in many ways as we choose how to portray ourselves to different groups of people. In the digital world, these choices become more stark with the easy accessibility of digital artefacts.
Am I digitally literate? Yes, and no. I can navigate new territory with confidence, but am driven by my own ideas and my own plans rather than being open to the affordances of the various tools available.
Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, CUP.
Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1999). A map of possible practices: Further notes on the four resources model. Practially Primary, 4(2), 5-8 [Online].
Digital Literacy. I first came across this term in an undergraduate subject I took on First and Second language literacies. In that subject, unlike any other, my mind and my heart were challenged by my own beliefs about literacy and literacy aquisition. Thinking about the work of Shirley Brice Heath on community-based literacy practices of school and home (e.g. Heath 1983)still challenges my assumptions about my students, my professional practice, and my own literacy. But what about digital literacy?
Often I am reminded of the timing of the emergence of computers in everyday education settings and homes. Many people even a year older than me did not use a computer until high school. Those a year younger, had access to computers from early primary school. Many of my students don't remember a world without email, the internet and portable devices.
I look at my own personal learning network, and am led to reflect on how my use of technology differs within professional and personal networks. And, could I consider myself digitally literate in either context, or in a 'combined way'. The 5 resources model of digital literacy helps me to reflect on this. Expanding on Luke & Freebody (1999)'s model of critical literacy, they consider 5 'resources': decoding, meaning making, using, analysing, and persona. With regards to my own digital literacy, it is helpful to consider each of these further.
Decoding: I find myself able to navigate the parts of the digital landscape that I access, adapting to the operations, stylistics and modalities of different tools. However, when people use stylistics from a tool I'm not familiar with in an interface I am familiar with (e.g. using twitter stylistics in facebook), I can quickly disengage. As discussed earlier, the amount of information online means that my attention can quickly wander, rather than sustain engagement for the purpose of problem solving.
Meaning making: Professionally, I have been quite limited in my use of technology for 'meaning making'. I use powerpoints and word docs, emails and video conferencing. But I just as readily drive 1hr for a face to face meeting where we can get out the butchers paper and textas to support our brain storming over a cup of tea. Personally, I have had more confidence in using social media sites such as facebook, and creating a blog with my reflections on life where I can link with others. Even this website makes me little uneasy...having my professional self available for 'anyone' to see.
Using: Anyone who knows me knows that technology can frustrate me. I struggle to match my ideas and creativity with the appropriate tools and am consequently often trying to stretch the use of tools beyond what they are designed for. Maybe what this means is that I feel competent with the tools I know, but am not always so willing to go out and explore other options.
Analysing: Analysing is something that comes more naturally to me. Pulling things apart, exploring their components, putting them back together, exploring their whole and their interactions with their environment. In the digital domain, this is evident in my willingness to stretch the capacity of tools to meet 'what I want'. However, I find it more difficulty when it comes to evaluating the huge amount of information that is available.
Persona: Finally, the development of my identity as a member of various online communities is something that I often reflect on. What would it mean to join a university website? Do I need to set up a professional profile page first that is distinct from my personal one? The question of identity can be challenging in many ways as we choose how to portray ourselves to different groups of people. In the digital world, these choices become more stark with the easy accessibility of digital artefacts.
Am I digitally literate? Yes, and no. I can navigate new territory with confidence, but am driven by my own ideas and my own plans rather than being open to the affordances of the various tools available.
Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, CUP.
Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1999). A map of possible practices: Further notes on the four resources model. Practially Primary, 4(2), 5-8 [Online].