Digital Literacy

In yesterday’s CITL session we discussed what it means to be literate, and to be digitally literate. During the session most people defined the term ‘literate’ as the ability to read and write. This blog post will explore the development of literacy and the extent to which digital literacy is needed to function fully in society in the 21^st century.

Firstly, it is interesting to look at how the concept of literacy has evolved over time. In the 18^th and even some of the 19^th century, societally the most common method of communication was spoken. Many people did not possess the skills of reading or writing, and these were not deemed as vital skills to communicate in society. In 1880 The Elementary Education Act was introduced with compulsory education for 5 – 10 year olds. Due to this act and others preceding it in the 19^th and 20^th centuries, being literate in society developed from being able to speak and listen to also being able to read and write. But how is the concept of literacy developing in our society today?

Policy changes are continuing to affect how being ‘literate’ is developing. The new national curriculum, which comes into effect in 2014, has a change from ICT to Computing. The Computing purpose of study states that pupils should “become digitally literate – able to use, and express themselves and develop their ideas through, information and communication technology – at a level suitable for the future workplace and as active participants in a digital world”. One of the aims of Computing in the new National Curriculum is for pupils to be “responsible, competent, confident and creative users of information and communication technology”.

If this is the case then it is important to look at the implications of this for teachers and the skills that pupils need to have mastered by the time they move to secondary school. Mitchel Resnick (2013)  has been influential in the development of ‘child friendly’ technologies that will allow primary school children to essentially become digitally literate in his view. Resnick makes a distinction between engaging in digital media, for example playing games online, and creating with digital media. Put in very simplistic terms, just as previous generations have been literate when they could both read and write, Resnick suggests that in order to be ‘digitally literate’ in the 21st century, people will need to be confident in creating digital media as well as engaging with it.

In the video above Doug Belshaw states that the ability to ‘remix’ is “at the heart of digital literacy”. This ability to remix is a key part of becoming digitally literate. Belshaw states that generating digital literacies is not a sequential but progressive. We  begin with a basic understanding and this becomes  more detailed as we learn, just as the ability to read and write develop gradually, not sequentially. We don’t learn all words beginning with a, then b, then c. Nor do we read only one genre until we have a full understanding of the literary tools and techniques that characterise it, then move on to another genre. When learning to read and write, we submerge ourselves in literature and gradually build up a relational understanding of literary characteristics and effective literary tools. Once we start to understand these, we can begin to try these tools out ourselves in writing, slowly understanding how to create effective writing and what it is about that style or tool that make it effective. This  progressive learning approach is also necessary to become digitally literate and to have a relational understanding of digital technologies. Understanding a technology is not only understanding how to use it, but understanding it’s benefits, it’s potential weaknesses, how to engage with it and to create with it.

In order to be able to teach digital literacy to the next generation, teachers need to be confident interacting with technology and with effective strategies in place to learn how to use new technologies quickly and effectively. To do this, teachers need to do the very things they are constantly encouraging children to do; to learn, to be open to new ideas, and to be resilient in doing these things until they have a concrete understanding of the tools, effectiveness and limitations of different technologies. Once teachers have more of a relational understanding of technologies they will be in a much better position to teach the new computing curriculum effectively. This may sound daunting to some in the teaching profession, this short article by Sarah Bryne gives some useful tips to teachers on how to teach the new computing curriculum.

Resnick, M (2013) Mother’s Day, Warrior Cats and Digital Fluency: Stories from the scratch community.

Theories of Development and The Effect of Praise on Learning

This blog will look at three key approaches to child development; constructivist, social constructivist and behaviourist, and at the implications of these for teaching.

The Constructivist theory of development pioneered by Jean Piaget (1964) suggests that a child’s age determines the way in which they learn and develop. He states that children develop schemas based on their current experience, and then build on these as they learn; these schemas will get more complex as a child matures. Piaget states that there are 4 stages of cognitive development. Sensorimotor (0-2 years), where a child understands the world around them using their senses. Preoperational (2 -7 years), where language skills develop, but the child is still egocentric. Concrete (7 – 11 years) where they can think logically about events that have happened but they have not experienced (e.g. World War II), but cannot comprehend concepts that are abstract (e.g. love) or hypothetical (e.g. time travel). Formal operational (12 years +) in which children can start to use deductive logic to problem solve and understand abstract and hypothetical concepts.

Much of Piaget’s research was quantitative observations of his own three children, with the rest of his sample coming from the same socioeconomic background. The limited sample size suggests that it would be a little ignorant to generalise these stages to the vast majority children. Individual experiences will also alter a child’s cognitive development. For example, if a loved one dies when a child is in the second stage of development it is likely that they will come to understand the abstract concept of death quicker than a child who has not experienced this. Similarly, it is likely they will start to think about the effect that this death has had on their other relatives, something that Piaget claims they would not do. Therefore a critique of this theory as a teacher is that we may not have high enough expectations of what our students are capable of. Movement away from this theory can be seen in current teaching methods and in the importance placed on differentiating in schools (TS1 and TS5). I see this as a positive change, it suggests to me that the teaching profession gives more credence to encouraging individual development than labelling a child’s abilities based on their age.

Another interesting theory of development is Vygotsky’s Social Constructivist theory (1978). Vygotsky suggested that learning is a social process and that a child’s understanding of concepts is developed through individual experience and interaction with others (both peers or adults). Vygotsky discussed the concept of a child’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZDP). The ‘zone’ is the amount that a child can learn through interaction and experience independently, compared to the amount that a child can learn when they are being prompted, questioned and lead (scaffolded), by a more experienced and informed person, usually their teacher. I have seen application and use of the concept of a ZPD  in schools, for example on a child’s Individual Educational Program (IEPs) and in The Teachers Standards (TS1 and TS5). To me as a teacher it is important to be aware of each child’s individual ability to learn and the amount of support they will need for this.

The Behaviourist Theory, pioneered by Skinner (1938) suggests that the type of response a child receives from their class teacher determines development and behaviour. Skinner states that if a type of behaviour is reinforced then this type of behaviour will increase. He identifies two types of reinforcement, positive reinforcement (awards, stickers or privileges for hard work), and negative reinforcement (a child finishes their work before break because otherwise they have to miss break to finish it). In the second example, missing break is the negative reinforcer. His research concludes that in the long term, positive reinforcement increases ‘good’ behaviour more than negative reinforcement. I agree with this, as it means that the child’s behaviour leads to a positive outcome, rather than from them avoiding something they do not want. I have seen the effective use of this in school, and as child grows older, the positive reinforcements change and become internalised. For example, doing well on a practice SATs paper can encourage a child to continue to revise for their SATs, because the test results act as a positive reinforcer. However, the type of positive reinforcement given by a teacher is likely to affect the child’s development and ability to learn.

Dweck and Mueller’s (1998) research concludes that the type of praise (positive reinforcement) given to a child determines the child’s development. They suggest that if a child is told they are ‘good’ at something, e.g. ‘you are great at maths’, then that child will only want to do maths that they understand, because if they try to learn something more complex and find it difficult, they won’t be ‘succeeding’ anymore. However if a child is given praise in terms of what they have achieved, for example ‘that’s great, you found using the compact method of addition really hard at first, but now you can use it even for difficult sums’, this will foster a love of learning, rather than of succeeding. If what is ‘good’ is not understanding the maths (although this is important), but the process of learning something that was complex, it will encourage the child to become a resilient learner and take on challenges. As a teacher I think it is really important to be aware of the type of positive reinforcement you give a child. This reinforcement needs to encourage them to use strategies that they have developed to learn, rather than to get the answers right. If you do not do this, when your pupils come across something that they find hard to understand, those who have previously always succeeded will give up quicker than those who are resilient learners. Whereas the resilient learners will implement all of the strategies they have in place to help them tackle and understand a difficult concept. I think encouraging and supporting this ability is important for every child, to help them grow into independent, confident learners.

References:

Department for Education (2012) Teachers’ Standards.

Dweck, C & Mueller, M (1998) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1, 33 – 52.

Piaget, J (1964) Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 3, 176 – 186.

Skinner, B. F. (1938) The Behaviour of Organisms: An experimental analysis.

Vygotsky, L. L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.