Session Information
16 SES 03 A, Digital Literacy and Problem Solving Competences
Paper Session
Contribution
This paper reports on an action research project on the development of advanced digital literacies with secondary school students in England, taking a multi-generational and agentic approach for that purpose.
The project is found on the observation that policy discourses signalling a shortage of digitally skilled workforces has provided a useful, yet narrow perspective of the knowledge students require to thrive in an ever-changing digital environment. While skills and literacies should not be used interchangeably, the emphasis on technical digital ability tends to overshadow the purpose of engaging more deeply with the complexities of digital cultures (Jenkins, 2019); complexities that require an appreciation for the logic of the digital world and the practices that prevail therein (Costa et al., 2018). This translates into the acquisition of digital cultural knowledge (Costa and Li, 2023), key to the safe and ethical navigation of digital environments. Much like Lareau (see 2015) we conceptualise this form of knowledge as one benefiting from ‘cultural guides’ who can help in the learning of ‘the rules of the game’. To do so, a collaboration with university students was developed to ensure digital literacy learning of school students occurred with the support of ‘fresh contacts’ (Mannheim, 1928/2017) who are bound by cultural rather than biological rhythms. This proposal is in keeping with contestations of a technical-instrumentalist curriculum model (Moore and Young, 2001) and in favour of a humanistic approach, one that privileges learning autonomy (Freire, 2001).
Digital literacies in schools have often taken on a risk perspective approach, supported by practices of surveillance and prevention (see Reilly, 2021). While preventative measures in the context of schools are hard to contest in light of increased perceptions of digital harm and schools’ attentiveness to students’ welfare and wellbeing, such approaches tend to be less effective in helping students deal with digital issues they may face in reflective way. In other words, while digital preventative measures offer more certainties about the practices to follow and those to avoid, it is less focused on exploring the unpredictability of digital practices as reflective of a changing digital environment.
In this vein, focusing less on the “dos” and “don’t” of digital practices and more on the experiences and modes of participation that young people tend to develop online, this project we will discuss via this presentation has attempted to find ways to support young people in dealing with the uncertainties of the digital world while hopeful of the benefits informed, deliberative and reflective practices may bring to young people’s digital lives. The project takes on a stance of ethics and agency, placing students at the centre of such discussions and practices while supported by ‘meaningful others’ who more than being close in age are close in experience and perspective.
Method
The project adopted an action-research approach involving school leaders, teachers and students in schools and academic researchers and university students who came together to support each other in the development of digital literacies understandings congruent with young people’s digital experiences and knowledge needs. This method was chosen to explore a learning environment that moved away from prescriptive approaches and offered space and opportunity for participants to cultivate and reflect on the power of their own agency in the context of digital practices. Action research was key in our approach in that it enabled the exploration of key digital problems schools had identified through practical solutions (Creswell, 2020). Using an iterative approach, the project started via consultation with school leaders and school teachers about what they perceived to be the key digital literacy needs of their students. Two areas were identified as priority with reference to their digital issues database records: sexting and misinformation. The second stage of the project was focused on the develop a thorough research literature review that allowed the researchers to conceptualise digital literacies “as skillsets necessary to effective engagement in digital citizenship and day-to-day practice. These skill sets refer to capacities of opinion formation (digital reasoning), intersubjective understanding (digital being), and cultural adaptation (digital integrity) that require scaffolding, mentoring, and bespoke support in curricula designs reflective of a digital logic” (Costa and Oliver, 2023, p.5). The project then proceeded to design digital literacy sessions that followed principles of digital practices and critical pedagogy, as a reflection of the desk research previously conducted. The sessions were designed to support students’: a) prior knowledge and lived experience of the topics under exploration; b) deliberative action through engaging them in discussions that aimed to consider their views and digital activity; and c) creative input by finishing each session with students’ own, tangible creations as a manifestation of their learning and perspectives on the issues explored. Digital Ambassadors (University students) were then trained to deliver the sessions by being made familiar with the research via ‘reading cards’, going through the lesson plans as a potential target audience and reflecting on possible challenges they might face while delivering the sessions. To get a thorough understanding of the project, a comprehensive approach to elicit participants’ views and experiences was organised in the shape of different data collection formats to cover the voices of the different stakeholders involved.
Expected Outcomes
In light of this project, this presentation explores how digital literacies are leveraged as a discipline-specific form of knowledge (Oliver, 2021) that combines the mastery of deliberative and ethical forms of communication (Habermas, 2022) with the logic of digital environments as a field of social practice (Costa, 2013) embedded in everyday life. Such an approach proposes an appreciation for digital literacies as extending and interconnecting different spheres of action – school, home, vocational and social life. This is an approach that challenges risk-averse approaches often used in schools and at home to ensure online safety, despite its limited impact (Stoilova et al., 2023). Instead, we invite the audience to perceive students as agentic selves, i.e., digital users capable of reflectively exploring digital practices and the experiences they aspire for their future. Speaking to the theme of the conference, this presentation outlines how embracing uncertainty through reasoned debates is key to the development of informed attitudes and the fostering of digitally ethical selves which is in itself a form of digital empowerment.
References
Costa, C. (2013). The habitus of digital scholars. Research in Learning Technology, 21. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21i0.21274 Costa, C., & Li, H. (2023). Digital cultural knowledge and curriculum: The experiences of international students as they moved from on-campus to on-line education during the pandemic. Learning, Media and Technology, 0(0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2023.2218097 Costa, C., Murphy, M., Pereira, A. L., & Taylor, Y. (2018). Higher education students’ experiences of digital learning and (dis)empowerment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3979 Costa, C., & Oliver, M. (2023). The Durham Digital Literacy Project. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16790.93768 Creswell, J. (2020). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, Global Edition (6th edition). Pearson. Freire, P. (2001). Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy and Civic Courage (New edition). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Habermas, J. (2022). Reflections and Hypotheses on a Further Structural Transformation of the Political Public Sphere. Theory, Culture & Society, 39(4), 145–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764221112341 Jenkins, H. (2019). Participatory Culture: Interviews. John Wiley & Sons. Lareau, A. (2015). Cultural Knowledge and Social Inequality. American Sociological Review, 80(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414565814 Mannheim, K. (1928). Das Problem der Generationen. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(1), 81–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-017-0412-y Moore, R., & Young, M. (2001). Knowledge and the Curriculum in the Sociology of Education: Towards a reconceptualisation. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(4), 445–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690120094421 Oliver, M. (2021). What styles of reasoning are important in primary English? The Curriculum Journal, 32(4), 704–721. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.120 Reilly, C. A. (2021). Reading risk: Preparing students to develop critical digital literacies and advocate for privacy in digital spaces. Computers and Composition, 61, 102652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2021.102652 Stoilova, M., Bulger, M., & Livingstone, S. (2023). Do parental control tools fulfil family expectations for child protection? A rapid evidence review of the contexts and outcomes of use. Journal of Children and Media, 0(0), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2023.2265512
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.