Digital Literacy and English
Guest Authors: Aleksandra Belka & Monika Gołąb
2nd Year Students at the MA in English Philology, University of Białystok, Poland
Over time as globalisation and internationalisation have become more prominent, the English language in technology has become an inseparable part of one’s life. Performing in a cross-cultural environment is an inherent part of life in today’s world, particularly when taking into account the past few years due to the pandemic and the need for technology input. Moreover, research suggests that students are more engaged with classroom material when it is accompanied by technology (Wurst et al., 2008). Digital literacy is a major fact to be taken into account when teaching, as it allows students to explore the unknown and improve in terms of language and in technology use. It is significant to the learning process that by learning how to take advantage of digital devices in literacy we strive to exist in a knowledgeable and more critical society. The objective of this paper is to present the vast advantages, as well as highlight a few disadvantages of using digital competence and prve its importance in the educational system.
To start with, as observed by Cope and Kalantzis (2009, p. 184), pedagogy of multiliteracies is defined as transformative, which means that learning is, above all, connected with the internal development of the student. Thus, by reinventing themselves in some sense, learners contribute to the creation of a more diversified environment. This approach to pedagogy may help show students how society functions at present, as well as suggest ways in which our actions can be improved (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009, p. 184). It is the student’s choice to decide what they want to gain from it. They can start a talk about current changes in terms of technology or culture. On the other hand, they may also shift their point of view to what the future may hold, for example, by considering issues connected with climate change and conflicts on a racial or religious basis. Moreover, the pedagogy of multiliteracies indicates how important diversity in the classroom is, as it prepares learners to live outside the school. It stands in opposition to the “one-size-fits-all approach” (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009, p. 188), preferred in perspective, in which society is more controlled and less open to differences.
The pedagogy of multiliteracies demonstrates that it is impossible to create one formula which will fit everyone because each individual has their background. Therefore, those who are different will not be able to absorb knowledge because of being somehow excluded from the process. Moreover, in cases in which learners manage to match the ‘requirements,’ they actually lose more than they gain because they are deprived of a chance to try something new and meet different points of view (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009, p. 188). Furthermore, New Literacy Studies are especially interested in how digital practices contribute to the increase in the involvement of the participants. Namely, they become more engaged as instruments/products of Web 2.0, such as wikis and blogs, enable situations in which content is created as a result of collaboration between users (Mills, 2010, p. 257).
To add to this, research by Wheeler and Wheeler (2009) shows that encouraging preservice teachers to participate in creating wikis contributes to the development of their writing skills on an academic level. Because of a large group of recipients, participants make more mindful language choices. Additionally, nowadays, literacies are approached from a sociocultural perspective. It is crucial as it associates them with specific social and cultural contexts, in both digital and physical spheres, which leads to shifts in the perception of the audience (Lammers & Marsh, 2015, p. 278). When students post their written work in online spaces, such as fanfiction sites, they start to view readers not only as “an abstract concept” (Magnifico, 2010, p. 176), which helps them in planning their writing, but also as “a social group” (Magnifico, 2010, p. 176), enabling the author to interact with the audience and, practically immediately, find out what are their impressions of the text.
Also, creating texts online, in many cases, is connected with the anonymity of the writer, which attracts young people as it ensures them that only their work will be assessed and not who they are in private. Moreover, very often, authors pick topics that they would have never chosen if they had to use their real names (Lammers & Marsh, 2015, p. 281). What is unfortunate, it seems that most educators fail to realise that, in school, students write in a way that will provide them a good grade and please the teacher. It should never be the sole reason why they create a text, and they have to be able to express themselves without fear of being ridiculed. Therefore, instructors could propose assignments that will draw from these features. For example, once a month/week, students can be asked to anonymously post their works on a specially created site/blog and receive feedback from the teacher. In such conditions, they will feel free to take risks and look for their own ‘voice.’ After some time, learners may become more confident in completing assignments under which they will have to sign their names.
The following part of this paper will delve into a few drawbacks of digital literacy. Firstly, the explosive development of instant messengers and social media have made it easier than ever to spread information. While this is useful and is an enormous advantage in today’s world this can be also used in negative ways, namely- by spreading fake news and misinformation. This can further lead students to confusion affecting their grades and overall perspective on certain matters. Given the uncontrollable dissemination of information on the internet, an authoritative and trustworthy information source is especially vital in the setting of digital literacies being an integral part.
Due to the unlimited information the internet has to offer one may suffer from information overload. Currently, day-to-day activities are becoming increasingly electronic, for instance making notes, counting or simply checking the time. As stated by Heylighen “People find it ever more difficult to cope with all the new information they receive, constant changes in the organisations and technologies they use, and increasingly complex and unpredictable side-effects of their actions” (Heylighen 2002, p. 1). Thus, the information technology and the amount of interruptions that one encounters throughout the day whilst in the midst of those mentioned daily activities may have a negative impact. This data overload is made worse due to the easy access to publicise inaccurate information.
Educational institutions use the appeal of technology to attract students (Schwartz, 2003). However, due to the vast internet sources available, students have been, to some extent, deprived of the discovery thinking process. As stated by Facione, critical thinking is the act of forcing individuals to reflect thoughtfully, methodically, logically, scientifically, clearly and reasonably (Facione, 2011). McHaney expressed the following: students are more active in learning activities, discoveries independently, build experiences, mastery of the concept of the material being studied and improve elaboration thinking skills (McHaney, 2012). With the internet being at their fingertips it may make students too reliant on technology. Lastly, it should be taken into account that the cost of equipment is high, especially if one needs to be up to date with the latest technology.
Thus, unfortunately, not each social class family will be able to afford technical equipment. Admittedly, even if a piece of technological device is owned it is used for a variety of reasons. To illustrate a study that investigated digital practices in different families, the poorest family had one shared computer, which served as a source of fun in the form of continual instant messaging, games, and music downloads. Members of wealthy families, on the other hand, had exclusive access to their own computers or laptops, which they utilised for work, acquiring information, and managing social elements of their life. Different cultural resources in the families’ homes moderated the different quality and character of digital behaviours (Snyder et al., 2002).
To conclude, there are some advantages and drawbacks of applying the pedagogy of multiliteracies. First of all, the positive aspect is that because of its transformative nature this approach allows learners to choose if they want to discuss matters concerning the realities of society, or focus on ways of improving areas where problems arise. Also, it emphasises the importance of diversity and the appreciation that all students are different, as it enables them to better understand the world. In addition, New Literacy Studies present that taking part in different types of digital practices contributes to increased engagement of participants and may improve the quality of their writing. Last but not least, the sociocultural view on literacies helps students in realising that the audience can be perceived as an abstract notion, helpful in planning the text, as well as a group of people ready to give feedback. Moreover, posting work on the Internet is associated with anonymity, which gives authors the certainty that the evaluation of their text is unbiased.
However, there are limitations connected with digital literacy. Since the access to information on the Internet is practically unlimited, students’ may feel ‘bombarded’ with knowledge. Regrettably, often, they come across unreliable sources, which can lead to disturbance of their worldviews. Moreover, the possibility of immediate receipt of information may limit learners’ contribution to their work as they do not need to discover something on their own. To add to this, because the purchase of equipment is a considerable expense, the acquisition of information online may be problematic for children from families in difficult financial situations. Despite some inconveniences, digital literacy is, undoubtedly, the future of education, as it takes into account the needs of students by preparing them for the reality of the ever-changing world.
References
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An international journal, 4(3), 164–195.
Facione, P. a. (2011). Critical Thinking : What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assessment, (ISBN 13: 978–1–891557–07–1.), 1–28. http://doi.org/ISBN 13: 978–1–891557–07–1.
Heylighen, F. (2002). Complexity and Information Overload in Society: why increasing efficiency leads to decreasing control. Information Society. http://pcp.vub.ac.be/Papers/Info-overload.pdf (30.05.22).
Lammers, J. C., & Marsh, V. L. (2015). Going public: An adolescent’s networked writing on fanfiction. net. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(3), 277–285.
Magnifico, A.M. (2010). Writing for whom? Cognition, motivation, and a writer’s audience. Educational Psychologist, 45(3), 167–184. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233240653_Writing_for_Whom_Cognition_Motivation_and_a_Writer%27s_Audience (31.05.22).
Mills, K. (2010). A Review of the “Digital Turn” in the New Literacy Studies. Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 246–271. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280232602_A_Review_of_the_Digital_Turn_in_the_New_Literacy_Studies (27.05.22).
Schwartz, J. (2003, January 2). Professors Vie With Web for Class’s Attention, The New York Times:http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/technology/02WIRE.html?scp=1&sq=Professors%20Vie%20With%20Web%20For%20Class%27s%20Attention&st=cse (31.05.22).
Wheeler, S., & Wheeler, D. (2009). Using wikis to promote quality learning in teacher training. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(1), 1–10. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200772639_Using_wikis_to_promote_quality_learning_in_teacher_training_Learning_Media_and_Technology_341_1-10 (31.05.22).
Wurst, C., Smarkola, C., & Gaffney, M. A. (2008). Ubiquitous laptop usage in higher education: Effects on student achievement, student satisfaction, and constructivist\ measures in honors and traditional classrooms. Computers & Education , 1766–1783.
