Pick a topic or issue
from the readings that struck you as interesting and reflect on it by
responding to the following prompts:
I was a little confused by the three-dimensionality of Green's
3-D model of literacy so I chose to focus on the journal article by Durrant and
Green (2000) (Literacy
and the New Technologies in School Education: Meeting the L(IT)eracy Challenge?)
I chose the Green article so I could
learn more about the 3-D literacy model and how it could be applied in a
literacy context.
After reading
the New York Times (Rich) article, I was very intrigued by the question Durrant
and Green (2000) asked: "Just how do we go about shifting our strategies
for teaching more or less print-bound literacy to helping our students meet the
fresh demands and challenges of literacies that spring from living in such
technologised and seamless `new times'?”
1.
What is/are
the tools and techniques (or new skills) being put into practice)?
Durrant
and Green (2000) say that traditional literacy tools are still very
important. There are new technologies
and “new cultures” that teachers and students must learn. Durrant and Green focus on an overall future vision
of literacy that student learners need to have rather than just having
individual skills.
Durrant
and Green present their 3-D model of literacy to help achieve a more integrated
and contextual literacy approach and result.
The 3-D model brings together three dimensions or aspects of learning
and practice: the operational, the cultural and the critical (Durrant and
Greene, 2000). This model “derives from
an integrated, sociocultural view of both language learning and technology
learning” (Durrant and Green, 2000).
Durrant
and Green (2000) state that “a comprehensive school program in literacy and IT
needs to include, in both policy and practice, appropriate engagements with all
three dimensions.” This should be done
at the curriculum-planning level. Therefore,
an effective technology curriculum “is one that emphasizes equally learning
technology (i.e. how to use technology), learning through technology, and
learning about technology. Literacy in ‘this
context is best understood as bringing together considerations of language,
technology and learning’” (Durrant and Green, 2000). Durrant and Green think that there is a need
to adopt “a holistic, cultural-critical view of literacy-technology learning
that takes explicitly into account contexts, contextuality and contextualization”
(Durrant and Green, 2000). The Green 3-D
approach begins with an “authentic context of situated social practice” and not
with focusing on student’s technical skillsets (Durrant and Greene, 2000). Durrant and Greene believe that “this basic
principle holds for all learning.”
Durrant
and Green state that it is important for students to be immersed in a learning
environment that integrates “literacy processes for comprehending and composing
a range of texts” (Green diagram). This
corresponds to the current literacy concept of students learning how to understand and compose multimodal texts
on the Internet in the context of an educational environment.
2. The
question raised by Durrant and Green to meet the current literacy challenges ("Just
how do we go about shifting our strategies for teaching more or less
print-bound literacy to helping our students meet the fresh demands and
challenges of literacies that spring from living in such technologised and
seamless `new times'?”) is answered by their presentation of their 3-D model --
that basically has social practice and social context at the core of this model. Durrant and Green (2000) refer to their
literacy approach as a "`situated social practice' model of language,
literacy and technology learning." Durrant
and Green also combine literacy and technology learning as part of their IT
challenge.
As mentioned
previously, the Green 3-D literacy model brings together three dimensions of
learning and practice: the operational, the cultural and the critical. An important concept underlying
the Green 3-D model is that only one dimension of the model focuses on the operational `how-to'
knowledge, which includes “technical competence.” This operational dimension deals
with using language to properly “decode” and “encode” in a variety of different
“contexts.” The operational dimension also involves computer
literacy in the L(IT)eracy context -- in order to make using the computer
operational. The cultural dimension of the
3-D model focuses on using “texts and technology” in a cultural (or world)
context. It further involves “developing
an understanding of content and context” (Green diagram). In other words, the
local, social or cultural context is just as important as the content (or text). The critical dimension of the 3-D model deals
with the social context of power. The
critical dimension also involves “asking critical questions” and “constructing
alternative ‘perspectives” (Green diagram)
Durrant and
Green believe that this 3-D model can be applied to all learning situations and
environments. For example, I found that Nixon
and Kerin (2001) applied the Green 3-D model of literacy to their research,
which examined the resources used by teachers and students during the design and
implementation stage of a literacy English curriculum that also integrated
educational technology (at http://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2001/nix01095.pdf).
3. Why do you
think Green used the visual model to represent his ideas of the three
dimensions of Literacy?
Durrant and
Green (2000) say that: "the crucial point to emphasise here is that none
of these dimensions of discourse and practice has any necessary priority over
the others. All dimensions need to be addressed simultaneously, in an
integrated view of literate practice and literacy pedagogy.” A 3-D diagram enables Durrant and Green to
present their ideas “simultaneously” as an integrated concept map in the form
of a Venn diagram. This type of diagram shows
that all three dimensions overlap each other -- and so are related to and
linked to each other with the same “priority.” In addition, each of the three
dimensions has the same size and space in the diagram. The non-overlapping parts of the diagram
indicate the differences in dimension, but the overall diagram illustrates that
each dimension cannot be considered in isolation, but must be considered simultaneously
with the other two dimensions in drawing any conclusions about literacy or devising
any literacy strategies.
Interestingly, Nixon and Kerin (2001)
re-created Green's 3-D model in a table or matrix format to help in their study
of teachers’ integration into an English/literacy curriculum regarding an Electronic
writing’ project. Nixon and Kerin also used
the operational, cultural and critical dimensions of l(IT)erate practice in
their own study. Nixon and Kerin said
that “we use the three dimensions of the model to interrogate the dimensions of
research ‘literacy’ at work in this project.”
When viewed in
a table format, the viewer could not immediately see that all three literacy
dimensions were inextricably linked and related. Each dimension appeared to be conceptually independent
of the other two dimensions.
How does the
relational visual "hierarchical structure" serve the taxonomy of
levels?
“The
hierarchical structure represents the world in terms of a hierarchical order….Its
main concern is the ranking or ordering of phenomena from the perspective of a
single unifying term” (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2006, p. 84). The hierarchical structure serves the
taxonomy of levels by classifying participants by hierarchy -- in terms of
being superordinates and subordinates. (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2006, p. 79) Subordinates at the same level are equally
distant from each other.
Greene's hierarchical structure is non-hierarchical. Durrant and Greene (2000) say (as aforementioned):
“The crucial
point to emphasise here is that none of these dimensions of discourse and
practice has any necessary priority over the others. All dimensions need to be addressed
simultaneously, in an integrated view of literate practice and literacy
pedagogy.
Green's
visual model could be categorized in terms of hierarchies of concepts (Kress
and van Leeuwen, 2006, p. 82). The more
general idea is represented as similar to greater power. (Kress & van
Leeuwen, 2006, p. 82). Green's model
could also be categorized as a conceptual classification.
How might you
visually structure Jenkins’ “New Digital Literacies?”
The new skills
listed by Jenkins are: Play, Performance, Simulation, Appropriation, Multitasking,
Distributed Cognition, Collective Intelligence, Judgment, Transmedia
Navigation, Networking, and Negotiation (Jenkins, 2006, p. 4). Jenkins (2006) says that “the new literacies
almost all involve social skills developed through collaboration and networking”
(p. 4). I created a diagram that
illustrates that these 11 new literacies are dependent on social skills.
How many
times have you laid out information in a relational conceptual schema?
I have
produced a few flow charts to figure out how a work process flows in my work
department. I created this diagram to
actually visualize how the work would actually flow from one person or
department to another (person or department).
I have also created some organizational charts (for myself) to clarify
position responsibilities and reporting relationships (in my department).
References
Durrant, C. & Green, B. (2000). Literacy and the New Technologies in
School Education: Meeting the L(IT)eracy Challenge? Retrieved from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/literacy+and+the+new+technologies+in+school+education%3a+meeting+the...-a063132991
Jenkins, H.J. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory
Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Chicago, IL: The MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.macfound.org/media/article_pdfs/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual
design. London and New York:
Routledge.
Nixon, H., & Kerin, R. (2001, 2-6, December). Paper
presented at AARE annual conference, Fremantle WA December 2-6, 2001. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2001/nix01095.pdf
