What Does It Mean To Be LITERATE?

When asked to define “literacy”, once upon a time the definition would have been simple: the ability to read and write. One of the main goals of our education system, past and present, is to teach students to be literate, right? In the middle school that I teach at, our school goal is, and has been for several years, to improve literacy among students. I'm sure if you compared school goals across districts, you'd find that many schools adopt one along these lines. But has the meaning of literacy shifted as we settle into the Digital Age? Are traditional reading and writing skills valued as much as they were previously? In order to promote literacy we as educators need to think about what it means to be literate in 2010.

So I took to Googling “literacy” – after all, that’s what we in the Digital Age do when we need to know what something means. Here are some of my favorite definitions for literacy in the 21st Century after a quick search.

Literacy is...

• "the ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate, compute and use printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society" (UNESCO, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001362/136246e.pdf)

• "a complex set of abilities needed to understand and use the dominant symbol systems of a culture – alphabets, numbers, visual icons - for personal and community development. The nature of these abilities, and the demand for them, vary from one context to another. In a technological society, literacy extends beyond the functional skills of reading, writing, speaking and listening to include multiple literacies such as visual, media and information literacy. These new literacies focus on an individual’s capacity to use and make critical judgements about the information they encounter on a daily basis. However a culture defines it, literacy touches every aspect of individual and community life. It is an essential foundation for learning through life, and must be valued as a human right." (The Centre for Literacy, http://www.centreforliteracy.qc.ca/def.htm)

• "the ability to locate, evaluate, use, and communicate using a wide range of resources including text, visual, audio, and video sources." (Information Age Inquiry, http://virtualinquiry.com/inquiry/literacy.htm)

• NCREL's enGauge categorizes literacy into eight areas:

-Basic Literacy
-Scientific Literacy
-Economic Literacy
-Technological Literacy
-Visual Literacy
-Information Literacy
-Multicultural Literacy
-Global Awareness
(http://eev2.liu.edu/westburyII/jg/assignments/bette/engage_pdfbrochure.pdf)


And finally, the NCTE explains literacy as follows:

• "Literacy has always been a collection of cultural and communicative practices shared among members of particular groups. As society and technology change, so does literacy. Because technology has increased the intensity and complexity of literate environments, the twenty-first century demands that a literate person possess a wide range of abilities and competencies, many literacies. These literacies—from reading online newspapers to participating in virtual classrooms—are multiple, dynamic, and malleable. As in the past, they are inextricably linked with particular histories, life possibilities and social trajectories of individuals and groups. Twenty-first century readers and writers need to

-Develop proficiency with the tools of technology
-Build relationships with others to pose and solve problems collaboratively and cross-culturally
-Design and share information for global communities to meet a variety of purposes
-Manage, analyze and synthesize multiple streams of simultaneous information
-Create, critique, analyze, and evaluate multi-media texts
-Attend to the ethical responsibilities required by these complex environments"
(National Council of Teachers of English http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition)


So as we evolve our definitions of what it means to educate, what it means to learn something, what it means to know something, it makes sense that our definition of literacy too evolves.

I came across the following on the Canadian Education Association's website (http://www.cea-ace.ca/foo.cfm?subsection=lit&page=fra&subpage=wha&subsubpage=som) and found it good for a laugh. Not sure about its validity, but provides food for thought.

Problem Based Learning - for me?

Focused PBL is defined as a “systematic teaching method that engages students in learning knowledge and skills through an extended inquiry process structured around complex, authentic questions and carefully designed products and tasks” (Buck Institute for Education).

Like a lot of movements in education, it sounds really good in theory but the implementation of it can be a lot more challenging than suggested. It seems that the ‘big wigs’ are constantly jumping from one belief system to the next without really thinking it through and keeping how in mind, rather than just what, when and why. Education continues to be a swinging pendulum. This is reminiscent of the DPA movement (daily physical education). In theory, makes sense: lets keep kids active. In practice, without changes in timetables it didn’t work as planned in a structured schedules seen in middle and high schools.

I really agree with the concept of PBL – it makes so much sense to integrate curricular areas and make the learning meaningful and applicable to students. Real life doesn’t exist in content-specific compartments, so teaching students to explore concepts linked to other curricular areas is not only useful but can be a very powerful learning experience.

So how could PBL be incorporated into my classroom, realistically? Three major roadblocks I instantly think about are compartmentalization of subject area (taught by different teachers), volume of curriculum, and timetable constraints. This seems to be easier for elementary educators as they teach their one class all day, and area responsible for all of the subject areas. Not to say it couldn’t work for me at the higher grade levels, but would definitely require orchestrating. Math is a tricky subject to do this in as concept mastery often has to come before application on skills. The BIE states that PBL is “not appropriate as a method for teaching certain basic skills such as reading or computation; however, it does provide an environment for the application of those skills”.

I love the idea of PBL, but how does it look in high schools where separate teachers teach separate content with a considerably large and specific curriculum, all within a constrained timetable? HELP!

Taking the First Step Towards PLNs

Today in our class (Learning & Teaching with Technology, SFU graduate class), we accessed and evaluated several PLNs. Being able to connect with educators on a global level is a powerful thing – the support that exists in cyberspace is infinite. Being a part of a PLN enables one to make connections with those with similar passions, and the ease with which resources can be shared makes doing so painless (unlike so many Pro-D’s). It is truly inspiring to be able to directly take advice/suggestions/ideas/resources from technology education “gurus”. The more exposed I am to such networks, the more comfortable I am becoming contributing to them. At the same time though, I feel overwhelmed by the wealth of knowledge and information that is available.

My first step in getting connected with other educators who share my interest in incorporating technology into the modern classroom was to join a PLN. I joined “The Educators’ PLN” (http://edupln.ning.com/) and spent hours surfing resources, ideas and tools. It was like an addiction – I couldn’t pull myself away from it! I am very excited to be part of such a knowledgeable community and look forward to implementing some of the tools I have picked up.

“Knowledge, the disciplines, and learning in the Digital Age”

“Knowledge, the disciplines, and learning in the Digital Age”
Jane Gilbert. Educ Res Policy Pract (2007) 6:115-122.


This article was very interesting. It raised some intriguing ideas and forced me to really think about the meaning of education. What is knowledge? What is learning? What is the purpose of education? What do we want the students to know? To learn? I have often wondered if our education system has gotten away from us, like a top spinning out of control, to the point where we aren’t achieving what we originally set out to. We are so busy going through the motions that there is little time to stop and really think through the purpose of those motions. I think that we waste way too much time and energy filling kids’ heads with “crap”. Do they really need to know what we currently teach them? Is having them be able to regurgitate it back to us on a test or a project really a sign of them learning anything at all? Perhaps we need to find a way to start over again and figure out what it means to be a “knowledgeable” member of society and THEN figure out how to educate to achieve that. I think the answer lies in simplicity – basic skills such as questioning, sorting, organizing, hypothesizing, verifying, criticizing, applying, etc. Maybe the focus should switch from “what”, to “how and why”.

Our current system uses technology as a means for finding and/or presenting existing knowledge, with the main focus on the content of the subject areas. I think the use of technology could be key to achieving an age where learners generate knowledge versus simply storing it. Where learners are active producers of knowledge versus passive consumers. Where literacy is multi-nodal and disciplines are not the be-all-end-all, but rather act as a means for us to explore relationships, connections and interactions. (Gilbert, 2007)

Technology can be used across all content areas, and is useful in integrating concepts of different content areas together. Rarely in life does one discipline exist as a separate entity, so doesn’t it make sense that instead of teaching this way we combine disciplines together and focus more on project-based learning involving multiple disciplines? As a high school teacher I find it really frustrating that we separate “knowledge” into individual compartments, organized by content, and then expect students to be able to put it all together themselves in the real world. We are focusing on the end product of what they should have learned, rather than guiding them on the process of learning.

Does out education system need a total overhaul to achieve this?

Putting It All Out There

ISTE's Educational Technology Standards for Teachers

My goal for Fall 2010 is regarding the fifth standard, "Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership". Specifically I want to show growth in the area of participating in local and global learning communities to explore creative applications of technology to improve student learning.




Where I am --> Beginning: Explore and discuss attributes of local and global learning communities where teachers can explore creative applications of technology to improve student learning.

I’ve set this particular goal for myself because it relates closely to SFU’s fifth capacity: Access, evaluate, use and participate in new media interactions in education. This is undoubtedly the most difficult of the five for me to focus on and therefore grow in. I’ve become comfortable joining educational communities – both online and in person – but have great difficulty in contributing to them. I take, but do not give back. I think this is because I still view myself as a fairly new teacher with only six years experience, so I am still like a sponge, soaking up as much information and ideas as possible. I had never really thought that what I thought would matter to people. But, I’m learning that I’m wrong thinking that way. I know many “rookie” teachers who have great ideas and know just as many “veteran” teachers who have given up on their passion and become jaded. I guess it’s just hard to put it all out there for people to see and judge. But maybe people will like what they see :)

"Crap Detection, 101"

Re: Howard Rheingold’s blog post, Crap Detection 101 (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/rheingold/detail?blogid=10&entry_id=42805)

This blog post wasn’t really a ground-breaking revelation, as I think that most people are aware of the fact that you can’t take everything you read/see/hear as gospel, you need to be able to trust the source before believing it. What Rheingold brings up though, is the importance of keeping this skill in check as the access to information today is constantly growing in our society. A major source of this influx of information is due to digital media. Our need to question credibility has not changed, yet the frequency with which we do so has no doubt increased substantially. The web has allowed us access to everything under the sun at our fingertips, from weather forecasts, to illness diagnoses, to celebrity scandals, to political information, to financial advice, -- the list of things relevant to “us” goes on and on and on. It’s important that we be able to differentiate between what is “good” information from a credible source, and what is not.

Some important questions Rheingold encouraged people to ask when reading or listening to new information is: Who is the author? What do other people say about that author? Who are these people saying things about this author? What is the author’s agenda? Is there a bias? Does the author provide sources? How credible do these sources appear?

As educators and parents, our job is to extend this skill of “crap detection” to our students and children, teaching them how to look at information under a detective’s lens. Teaching children this makes THEM active explorers or active detectives… empowering! We should work to create a culture of collaborative inquiry, versus what many of us were raised with, a culture of trusting what you were presented. How many of us were ever told: “Trust me on this one”, or “Because I said so”. Rheingold expressed this shift in the way we present subject material to students; We need to move from giving them info or showing them where the info is, to showing them how to question info and sources and derive meaning from that. Going from:

“Here’s the subject, here’s what you need to know about it.”

to:

“Here’s the subject, what are the questions you need to ask?”

Connectivism

Throughout the course of this program, I’ve had to define what “learning” means to me several times. Every time I’m asked to think about it, I look at it from a different angle and come up with different thoughts on the word/idea/process. Must be all this reflecting they’re forcing us to do!! Learning to me isn’t just about what you know and acquiring new pieces of information, it’s about knowing HOW to connect with sources to enrich yourself and build on your current ideas. I think a lot of learning has to do with attitude – about wanting to open yourself up to the thoughts and ideas of others and do so in a self-reflective manner.

Wow, did I actually just say that? If I met me a year ago, prior to this program, I would not have recognized me.

After watching a few podcasts by some leading education experts, I realized how much learning has transformed over the years and how much people’s ideas of learning needs to change if we want to make learning successful in our ever-changing networked generation. I think we really need to start shifting our perspective from learning being something that a person does individually on an internal level, to something that can be more powerful in a group setting on an external level. In a podcast (The Changing Nature of Knowledge), George Siemens described how knowledge exists external to an individual, and that it is a function of the network itself. If we do not take the network within which learning is occurring into account in our expectations, we as educators are not setting ourselves (and our children) up for the success that can be possible.

To “know” something is so much more that being able to access and regurgitate information from a source. Networks do not only serve as means to locate knowledge, for knowledge can reside in a network! Again, referencing Siemens (from podcast on “Network is the Learning”), in a networked learning environment, when one connects with a new “node” (a person, a database, an info source, etc), the entire network is amplified. The competence of the network is increased exponentially. So not only does the “learner” gain from the experience, but the entire network gains knowledge from each connected interaction.

My "re-worked" concept map of my learning network, created using bubbl.us:
You can click on the +/- on the top left to increase/decrease size. You can also drag the image around to see all aspects of it.