Sunday, November 3, 2013

Reading and Discussion #11

Reading Discussion

This quote from the reading stood out to me: “…Much of their media usage is characterized by consumption rather than production, such as watching movies on the PC or the television, playing computer games, listening to music, and reading magazines” (Avila & Pandya, 2013).

In this discussion about the “myth of the digitally innovative teenager,” Avila and Pandya (2013) begin by explaining that many of the today’s youth do not create media products of their own after school, but engage in activities similar to those of the previous generation.  At first, this struck me as possibly a good thing.  An advocate of the outdoors and “old fashioned” social interaction sometimes my feelings toward digital culture is negative.  I thought, “Wait a minute.  Kids are not going home and blogging or maintaining a Tumblr account?  That’s great.  Maybe our online lives have grown too cumbersome.  Maybe it’s time to take our digital involvement and walk it back a little.”  But when I came across quote above, I suddenly remembered that young people, digitally inclined or not, now live in a world where power comes from understanding how to work and produce online.  Watch a video on Bitcoin for just another example of how being digitally innovative can make this happen.  So if we decide to join our young people in returning to more of a consumer than a producer, we may just be taking away their ability to be empowered in a global culture that growing in this digital direction.

Response Questions

1. What is the difference between an "essentialist" "traditionalist" or "autonomous" "perspective of technology and literacy and a New Literacy Studies or "ideological" perspective on technology and literacy? Which perspective do you adhere to? Why?

The "essentialist" perspective seems to have little to do with the teacher learner, and everything to do with how the technology itself can improve teaching and learning. In this perspective, Powerpoint and Prezi might be looked at as ways to facilitate (or "boost") traditional lectures. Those with this perspective choose to view new technology as a either positive or negative supplement to old ways.

The "autonomous" perspective focuses on the person and sees literacy as something a teacher or student has as a skill. This probably assumes that once a person has some level of critical thinking skills she can apply it throughout several areas of life.

The "ideological" perspective sees literacies as a factor in an ideology, and that those literacies are part of a web social and cultural factors.

As for myself, I seem to be stuck in the autonomous perspective right now. I have moved well beyond the traditional views of media technology, and have been teaching from the view that literacy is something a person has or can attain and use as a skill. The ideological model is too new to me, and I have to learn more before I can understand how that really can be true. (It may be true, but I am pleading temporary ignorance.)

2. Give three concrete examples of how the teacher in the chapter supported "new literacy" or "critical digital literacies" practices with blogging.

First, Anne the teacher, did not just use media to supplement a traditional method. She actually connected blogging to all of her Print & Photo class activities. This took media literacy out of the traditional realm, and made it a part of class, school, and community culture. Because of this, the measure of student literacy became more complex than whether they could apply certain thinking skills.

Second, Anne made students take personal ownership for the excellence in the photo blog. No student wanted to be the one to publish substandard work. This counts as a social and cultural context for media production. The class contained a teacher-inspired (deadline driven) value for quality work. Therefore, literacy was a part of this web of conditions.

Third, Anne allowed students to develop a digital publishing culture of their own. Students viewed on another's work (photos, etc.) and were able to share criticism and motivation. This may not be something the teacher did exactly, but her style of leadership permitted it.

Reference

Ávila, J. (2013). Critical digital literacies as social praxis: Intersections and challenges. New York: Peter Lang.

No comments:

Post a Comment