Multiliteracies Mapping

8/19/2019 Multiliteracies Mapping

1/215

Mapping Multiliteracies

University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services ii

Acknowledgements

During the years of this project many people helped make this research possible. There are

the 140 children and their families who allowed researchers into their homes and gave an

insight into their lives. There are the 20 schools and preschools and their principals anddirectors. Finally of course there are the 31 teacher-researchers who gave their valuable time

and efforts:

Amy Gill

Anita Hudd

Annabel Price

Annette Boulden

Beryl Tillet

Carmen Aragon

Colleen de Ceukelaire

Denise Watson

Eileen LoveEleanor Rowe

Ellen Sykaras

Jan Comas

Jeannie Spear

Jenny Chartier

Jo Duldig

Laura Hapek

Lee Duhring

Lyn Norris

Katie Deverell

Kay MathieKelly Perdelis

Kerri Kelsh

Kerry Baldwin

Kerry Hardacre

Keryn Moyle

Pam Edwards

Pam Treasure

Sharon Arney

Thomas Harvey

Trish PrattVizma Betts

The report acknowledges the Australian Research Council for its financial support, without

which the project simply could not have happened. Thanks also to the South Australian

Department of Education and Children’s Services (DECS) for their financial support for each

of the schools and centres, especially enabling the country schools to participate. DECS also

provided a team of outstanding personnel who helped make the project the success it was, in

particular Gerry Mulhearn, Kath Thelning, Sue Emmett and Heather Lawes.

Professor Nicola Yelland deserves special mention for her insight, expertise and for the many

years of experience with ICT that she brought to the project.

Sarah Rose compiled the literature review and also added to the success of the project in her

work as Research Assistant over the past three years. Kathie Stove edited the manuscript and

Rick Tredrea of Document Services at the University of South Australia organised the

printing and formatting.

Thanks to all of you.

Associate Professor Susan Hill

School of Education

University of South Australia

Magill CampusSt Bernards Rd, Magill 5072

[email protected]

A DVD, CD-ROM professional development program accompanies this report. For more

information contact:http://people.unisa.edu.au/Susan.Hill

http://www.thenetwork.sa.edu.au/educators/projects/early_years.htm

ISBN 0-86803-542-4This was a collaborative research project between the Department of Education and Children’s Services(DECS) of South Australia, the University of South Australia and the Australian Research Council(ARC).


2/215


3/215

Mapping Multiliteracies:Children of the new millennium

Report of theresearch project

2002–2004

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIAUNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA


4/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services iv


5/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services v

ContentsAcknowledgements .......................................................................................ii

Executive summary ....................................................................................viiiResearch findings.................................................................................................. viii

Pedagogy .................................................................................................................xTeacher-researchers with mentors.......................................................................... xiFurther research...................................................................................................... xi

1. Introduction................................................................................................2

2. Methodology...............................................................................................5The research design.................................................................................................5The research methodology.....................................................................................12

3. Learning from the literature: A review ................................................... 17

4. The learning stories.................................................................................63In the house with Nicholas......................................................................................63

The Saddle Club.....................................................................................................69Mila and the Koala..................................................................................................74Putt-Putt..................................................................................................................83Battery power .........................................................................................................87Endangered animals...............................................................................................96‘Schmackos’ .........................................................................................................103DVD library ...........................................................................................................107Engaging Taylor ...................................................................................................113WiggleWorks with Dean .......................................................................................120Searching for caterpillars......................................................................................125

5. The findings............................................................................................131

Unanticipated findings ..........................................................................................1396. The multiliteracies map .........................................................................142

The development of the multiliteracies map.........................................................142The multiliteracies map.........................................................................................145Multiliteracies pedagogy in the early years...........................................................147Design elements of multimodal texts....................................................................148The increasing importance of visual texts ............................................................148Bringing prior knowledge to visual texts ...............................................................149Using the multiliteracies map................................................................................151Summary and reflection........................................................................................158

Bibliography...............................................................................................161

Glossary .....................................................................................................167

Appendices.................................................................................................172

A. Expression of interest...........................................................................173

B. Student consent form ...........................................................................179

C. Teacher consent form...........................................................................181

D. 2002 and 2003 participants...................................................................183


6/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services vi


7/215

Executive summary


8/215


9/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services viii

Executive summary

What does the explosion of information, entertainment and access provided by the internet

and the digital revolution mean for the future education of young children?

In the Children of the new millennium project we found that children as young as four yearsof age were choosing to go online to find information quickly. How will computers and the

internet impact on how we learn in the future? What kind of learning will be possible for the

four year olds who are already choosing to learn online in 2004?

The Children of the new millennium research project, 2002–2004, explored four to eight yearold children’s learning with information and communication technologies (ICT). The project

targeted the early years of education and sought answers to the following research questions:

What are the different ways that young children use ICT at home and in the community?

Where do young children use ICT? How many forms of it do they use, to what extent and

how does it relate to other forms of play and exploration? What are the different ways that young children use ICT in early childhood education

settings?

How do young children’s knowledge, understanding and use of ICT develop over time?

What do young children think about ICT and why do they like/don’t like them?

The two-year study involved 31 teacher-researchers at 20 contrastive research sites. Each year

the teachers attended six research development days spaced throughout the year, where they

engaged in research training with research mentors, presented the data collected about

children’s learning with ICT, and critiqued data collected using several analytic frameworks.

Initially the teacher-researchers compiled in-depth case studies of four focus children and

their use of ICT at home and at school. As the study continued they used a learning storymethodology, a narrative approach to understanding children’s learning.

The teacher-researchers were engaged full time in the classroom and spent several hours each

week exploring young children’s use of ICT. Their learning stories were print-based and

electronic, and they comprised the data analysed in this project.

Research findings

Multiliteracies

This project revealed that the traditional content of reading and writing needs to be broadened

to include the use of multiple sign systems that represent meaning. Children in earlychildhood have always used construction, drawing or illustrations, movement and sound to

represent meaning. The newer multimodal technologies merely add to children’s choice of

medium to represent ideas and to comprehend the meanings in a range of texts.

Digital literacies and print-based literacy are not oppositional concepts, both are required. In

fact traditional print-based reading and writing was found to be vitally important. Writing was

significantly important as a memory tool, for planning, designing and recording ideas and

information. Reading was critically important for predicting, scanning, interpreting, analysing

and selecting from the abundance of information. Interestingly the children switched

effortlessly between genres, scanning material for information, following procedures,

searching by scrolling through menus, and interpreting icons and written instructions on tool

bars. In other words, although reading, writing, listening and speaking are paramount, today’s


10/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services ix

students must be able to do more, as they decipher, code break, achieve meaning and express

ideas through a range of media incorporating design, layout, colour, graphics and animation.

Multiliteracies map

The multiliteracies map is an analytic tool for exploring four interrelated dimensions of

multiliteracies:

The functional dimension involves technical competence and ‘how-to’ knowledge. With

multimodal texts this involves the mechanics of how to ‘turn it on’, make it ‘work’,

recognise icons, decode symbols, and read menus.

The meaning making dimension involves understanding how different text types and

technologies make meaning in the world and how they may be used for our own and

others’ purposes. The focus is on the purpose and the form of text to make meaning.

The critical dimension involves understanding that there is no one universal truth in any

story and that what is told and studied is selective. It also involves critical selection of

appropriate technology for a task.

The transformative dimension involves using what has been learned in new ways andnew situations.

Functional user

Locating, codebreaking, using signsand icons

Selecting andoperating equipment

Moving between mediums: cameras, videos,computers

Meaning maker

Understandingmultimodalmeanings

Purpose of textand text form

Connecting to prior knowledge

Critical analyser

Discourse analysis

Equity

Power andposition

Appropriate mode

Transformer

Using skills andknowledge in newways

Designing texts

Producing new texts

The multiliteracies map

Homes and communities

In this research project the teacher-researchers took a Technotour of children’s’ homes that

revealed a use of new technologies by children far greater than teachers had anticipated. In

most cases the children had access to and could use ICT far in advance of the equipment in

many of the schools and preschools.

Computers, next to television, were the most popular form of ICT available in homes.

Children went online to websites linked to television shows, used search engines to find


11/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services x

information and played interactive games online and with game software. New ways of

building on the skills and interests from home emerged when teachers engaged some children

as coaches or mentors in the classroom and capitalised on children’s funds of knowledge by

using similar software in school as at home. This was particularly so for children with special

learning needs.

Geographic location

Regardless of socioeconomic status or geographic location most children also had regular

access to computers, or were able to access them at friend’s houses or their grandparents. In

remote and rural communities ICT was essential for family and business communications

although service and maintenance of technology was a problem in such remote areas.

Pedagogy

In every research site the children gravitated to the computer to play games, to find

information, to explore their interests and to create new texts. In preschool and early school

years, the pedagogy that incorporated ICT was most often inquiry based with questions and

problems arising from the interests of a group of children or from individuals. This learning issimilar to issues-based learning where the children engage and connect deeply with content.

Many teachers wrote of the importance of combining inquiry based pedagogy with explicit

teaching of how to use ICT.

The teacher-researchers wrote about how children today are bombarded with information.

Children are aware of an ever increasing abundance of options about ways to communicate

information and increasing choice about how to access information. With this surfeit of

information the children need to be involved in more relevant tasks and use ‘essential

questions’ so they can recognise and analyse problems, make decisions and develop as critical

and creative thinkers. This problem solving approach to learning allows children to pursue

meaningful tasks in-depth and in a sustained and systematic way.

Many teachers found inquiry based pedagogies engaged children in quests for answers to their

own questions. This inquiry based approach enabled the children to drill down, focus tightly

on questions, sift and scan through to comprehend information that was of interest to them.

Explicit instruction

Explicit instruction was necessary, not only about how to use computers and software, but

also in teaching of frameworks or questions that can support children to deconstruct and

critique multimedia. The teachers and children required a metalanguage to explain how

literacy skills, strategies and problem solving can be used in one medium and transformed

into another type of text.

Engagement

The engagement and fascination children experienced when using computers was clearly

described in the teachers’ learning stories. It was not the multimodal tools alone that made

ICT an engaging, meaningful experience; it was also the way they were used to craft learning

experiences for children in preschools and schools. Designing learning experiences for

children requires skilful, continuous, professional learning.

Situated practice

Situated practice — making learning meaningful and based on real life experiences by

focusing on children’s interests and understandings — was highlighted in the learning stories.

Learning needs to be relevant and meaningful and build on children’s prior knowledge andexperiences. The teachers commented on the need for authentic real life, purposeful


12/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services xi

engagements rather than preconceived isolated activities. In addition the children were able to

quickly locate an enormous amount of resources and material through the use of the

information rich internet. Teachers wrote that the visual aspect of the internet was a valuable

tool to further enhance young children’s understanding of their world.

Relationships between teachers and learners

In the project there was a shift from the teacher as the expert to the teacher as the ‘guide by

the side’. Teachers and children worked collaboratively; many times children coached other

children the same age or younger. In many preschools and schools the children sought out

other children to help them problem solve, rather than going to the teachers. In some schools

Tech Reps were trained in using the intranet and then became coaches of other children in the

school. Such social interaction made learning fun, exciting and engaging. Rather than ICT

being used as an individual activity the teachers found that children chose to work

collaboratively on solving problems as they arose.

Teacher-researchers with mentors

The teacher-researchers in this project ranged from very experienced to first year out ofuniversity and there was a wide range of expertise with ICT which was not age related. The

teacher-researchers focused on practical classroom issues that were relevant to other teachers.

Originally the project began with teacher-researchers who had great proficiency and interest

in ICT but as the project developed and some teachers changed schools and took on other

commitments, it was decided that the existing teacher-researchers invite another from the

school staff to join the project. The research became a mentoring model of paired researchers

at the same school or preschool which provided immense support and learning for both. Many

teachers who began as ICT novices became confident users of technology and wrote of the

importance of teachers as mentors and coaches providing ‘just in time’ support.

In addition the research days with university mentors further challenged and supported

participants’ views about children’s learning. The research development days enabled teacher-researchers to present data and findings and have this challenged by new frameworks,

concepts or relevant research summaries in the presentations by university mentors. Selected

research-based readings extended their thinking. The university mentors also benefited by

participating in the teacher-researcher’s presentations and learning about what young children

were able to achieve with ICT.

Further research

The Children of the new millennium research project raised many issues for further research.It became clear that the multiliteracies map alerted us to the need to develop a practicalmetalanguage to better describe what children can do with multiliteracies. Teachers may

require examples or models of how children’s critical orientation to multiliteracies may bedeveloped and examples of ways different electronic tools and programs may be chosen to

fulfil various tasks. The research also raised important questions about how new technologies

may transform young children’s ways of thinking and learning.

Metalanguage to describe children’s learning with multiliteracies

The teacher-researchers tended to focus on the functional and meaning making aspects of

children’s multiliteracies and found it more difficult to articulate ways to encourage children

to critically analyse the different multimodal texts that engaged the children. This may be

because many of the teachers themselves were caught up with the practicalities of how to

‘turn it on’ and ‘make it work’. In addition all participants in the project found it challenging

to describe ways children’s learning with a particular program or software could betransformed into use with another program. We need to find the metalanguage to describe the


13/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services xii

learning that goes beyond the operational, and includes the textual and visual meaning making

processes of electronic texts. More professional learning in how to use and describe

multimodal learning is essential, for example the techniques used in visual texts and how

words, music and movement communicate meanings.

Practical examples of developing a critical orientation to multiliteracies

Learning to critique the digital media, and consider whether the information is appropriate or

accurate, is extremely important considering the amount of time children are engaged with the

screen. For many children preschool and school is the only place where they can learn to

question the values and intentions of the many software programs and numerous websites.

Teachers need practical examples of strategies they can use to support children to develop a

critical orientation to multiliteracies.

Frameworks to support the choice of appropriate tools for tasks

Teachers were engaged with the functional, operational tools to such an extent that choosing

and using tools appropriately for strategic purposes was not a focus. This is similar to being

so engrossed in the trees that we can’t see the woods — a figure–ground perception problem.This research highlighted the need to develop curriculum models and frameworks that support

teachers to choose appropriate tools and programs for various tasks. Sometimes face-to-face

conversation or pencil and paper are the best tools for the job.

The long term effects of screen based learning

More research is needed into the long-term effects of prolonged use of screen-based learning.

Children as young as two and three years of age are choosing to play with computers for long

periods of time at home; in some learning stories teachers wrote of children whose main

leisure activity at home was playing with the computer for extensive periods without adult

supervision. Add to this long periods of screen-based learning at school and the length of time

interacting with the screen is significant. Long term use may affect children’s health, social

and communicative abilities, and thought processes.

There has been much research on the impact of television on children but the internet, as a

source of information and entertainment, is set to outstrip television. How will interactive

game-based entertainment affect children’s play and learning? How will new technologies

transform children’s’ dispositions or ‘habitus’, or ways of thinking? As children play, think

and learn this learning becomes internalised as structures, schemas or ways of thinking that

can be used in other contexts. How will the increasing engagement with multimodal literacies

change the ways children think and learn?

Professional development for educators is essential in the area of multiliteracies and this is

currently in progress based on the findings of this project.


14/215


15/215

Chapter 1Introduction


16/215


17/215


University of South Australia & South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services 2

1. Introduction

The internet and the digital revolution are at the same level of development as the automobile

was in the 1920s. The access to information through technology will increase as the world

goes online and in ten years a predicted 75–85% of the industrial world will have access to the

internet. The speed at which computers are developing, and the innovations in banking, bill

paying, holiday purchasing and communicating, mean that the internet will move closer to the

centre of everyday life. While e-commerce and entertainment are important, the predicted

future of the internet is to provide information as more and more people turn to it as the

quickest way to verify ideas, news and knowledge.

What does this mean for the future education of young children? In the Children of the newmillennium project we found that young children of four years of age were choosing to goonline to find information quickly. How will computers and the internet impact on how we

learn in the future? What kind of learning will be possible for the four year olds who are

already choosing to learn online in 2004?

The Children of the new millennium research project, 2002–2004, explored four to eight yearold children’s learning with information and communication technologies (ICT).

The time of the study was a time of an exponential leap in the development of ICT for young

children. In a data drenched society the need to be literate and numerate was an ever

increasing aspect of this context. Previous longitudinal studies into children’s literacy

development had found there was increasing use of multimodal texts in homes and

communities, and recommended that teachers engaging in professional development explore

children’s lifeworlds and link this to culturally relevant pedagogies and resources (Hill et al.

1998; 2000). These findings prompted the urgent need to broaden conceptions of literacy

from a print-based orientation to a wider multimodal orientation that encompassed visual and

audio texts, and how these signs and symbols create meanings.

Research into very young children’s use of computers in education was showing some

interesting trends (Downes & Reddacliff 1996; Labbo 1996). Labbo (1996) suggested that the

kindergarten year was a unique time for using computers because this is when children, aged

four and five years, are developing literacy and numeracy skills as symbolic and graphic

meaning makers. At this time children are building concepts and representing meaning for a

range of purposes by juxtaposing different symbol systems such as typographic, linguistic

marks on the page, or symbols on the computer screen.

The Children of the new millennium project targeted the early years of education and soughtanswers to the following research questions:

What are the different ways that young children use ICT at home and in the community?

Where do young children use ICT? How many forms of it do they use, to what extent and

how does it relate to other forms of play and exploration?

What are the different ways that young children use ICT in early childhood education

settings?

How do young children’s knowledge, understanding and use of ICT develop over time?

What do young children think about ICT and why do they like/don’t like them?

Initially the teacher-researchers compiled in-depth case studies of four focus children and

their use of ICT at home and at school. As the study continued they used learning stories, a


18/215



small selection of which has been included in this report; the larger collection will appear on-

line.

The teacher-researchers were engaged full time in the classroom and spent several hours each

week exploring young children’s use of ICT. The teacher’s learning stories were print-based

and electronic, and they made up the data analysed in this project.

This report of the Children of the new millennium project documents the researchmethodology (Chapter 2), the literature reviewed for the project (Chapter 3), the learning

stories (Chapter 4), the research findings (Chapter 5), and a discussion of the multiliteraciesmap (Chapter 6).


19/215



Chapter 2Methodology


20/215


21/215



2. Methodology

This chapter examines the research methodology for the Children of the new millenniumresearch project. It describes the research design, teachers-as-researchers, research sites and

the decision to change an aspect of the methodology from case studies to learning stories.

The research design

The research design for this two year study involved 25 teachers-as-researchers at 16

contrastive research sites in 2002 and 20 teacher-researchers at 11 sites in 2003. Each year the

teachers attended six research development days, spaced throughout the year, where they

engaged in research training, presented data collected in small groups and critiqued data

collected using several analytic frameworks. Initially the teacher-researchers compiled in-

depth case studies of four focus children aged four to eight years and their home and school

use of information and communication technologies. As the study continued a methodology

known as learning stories, a narrative approach to understanding children’s learning was used

(see below). A small selection of learning stories is included in this report and the larger

collection will be available online.

Teachers-as-researchers

The decision to involve teachers-as-researchers enabled the project to focus on issues of

relevance to practitioners and systems. As Lytle and Cochran-Smith (1992) write, research by

teachers represents a distinctive way of knowing that aligns the practitioner’s stance in

relation to knowledge generation in the field. The teachers-as-researchers undertook home

visits and research development days, and compiled data into learning story reports. They

were provided with a research budget for some release time, travel when appropriate, and

materials for the project.

There were 25 teacher-researchers initially selected, a group small enough to share ideas, yetlarge enough to incorporate diverse perspectives and a range of age levels in the early years of

school. It was important to include a range of early-years teachers who work with children

four to eight years of age, combining preschool or kindergarten teachers with teachers in the

early years of formal schooling. The preschool teachers were important to the study because

when it began they were receiving little professional development in the use of computers and

the technological equipment in the preschools usually comprised hand-me-down computers

from the primary school or old discarded computers donated by various community groups.

In the first year of the project the teacher-researchers were paired up with each other, where

possible, so they could set up collaborative support. In the second year of the project, when

some of the teachers moved school and some were not available to continue with the project,

the existing teacher-researchers invited a staff member from their school to join the research

project and buddy or mentoring systems were set up.

Research sites

The research sites and the teacher-researchers were invited to write an expression of interest

to be involved in the study. This meant that teacher-researchers who were interested in the use

of information and communication technologies were involved. Selections were also made on

the basis of geographic and socioeconomic diversity; a preference for a research site with a

preschool teacher, Reception teacher and Year 1 teacher who could work collaboratively

together; clear transition policy between prior to school and school; and evidence of the

educators high level of expertise and/or interest in ICT in the early years.


22/215



When the expressions of interest were received, 16 research sites were chosen, seven in

disadvantaged rural and metropolitan areas. Twenty-five teachers all with varying degrees of

ICT knowledge and skills were selected from these sites, including seven from preschools

(Table 1). In some cases two or three teachers were chosen from the one site to conduct their

research together; at other sites, individual teachers were selected and then grouped with

others from nearby schools. Thus cluster groups formed within a school/centre or within a

local community.

Focus children

In 2002 each teacher-researcher observed four focus children and with attrition at the end of

the year there were 96 focus children. In 2003 it was decided to reduce the number to 40 focus

children — two for each of the 20 teacher-researchers to enable richer descriptions of

learning. The focus children during each year of the project were chosen by random selection

but there was a check for gender balance. The random selection process meant that teachers

often found themselves documenting the learning of a focus child who may not have been

their first choice. Perhaps the child may not have been forthcoming nor familiar to the

teachers, and the family may not have had a close relationship with the school. This meant

that the teacher-researchers at times moved out of their comfort zone to visit children living insituations they were unaware of.

Table 1. Participating schools and centres

School Description 2002 2003

Elizabeth Vale metro disadvantaged 3 teachers 2 teachers

Pennington JPS metro disadvantaged 2 teachers 2 teachers

Woodcroft Heights Presch metro 2 teachers

Greenwith PS metro 1 teacher

Hackham South CPC* outer metro 1 teacher

Grange PS metro 1 teacher 2 teachersFrieda Corpe Preschool* outer metro 2 teachers

Little Hampton PS* outer metro 2 teachers

Inglefarm East PS* metro 2 teachers

Stradbroke JPS metro 1 teacher 2 teachers

Seacliff Kindergarten metro high income 1 teacher 1 teacher

Seacliff PS metro high income 1 teacher

Coromandel CC metro high income 2 teacher

Athelstone JPS metro high income 1 teacher

Mawson PS metro high income 1 teacher

Whyalla Town PS rural disadvantaged 1 teacherNeta Kranz Preschool rural disadvantaged 1 teacher

Miltaburra AS rural disadvantaged 3 teachers 2 teachers

Narracoorte South PS rural disadvantaged 1 teacher

Ceduna AS rural disadvantaged 3 teachers 2 teachers

Total 16 sites,25 teachers,96 children

11 sites,20 teachers,40 children

*New sites in 2003

Phases of the project 2002

The project had three distinct phases. It began by exploring children’s funds of knowledgeregarding ICT in homes and communities. The middle phase was exploring and developing


23/215



frameworks for analysing children’s knowledge and ways teachers may plan for children’s

learning. Finally the project was interested in the kind of pedagogy that best fits early

childhood education and new technologies.

Phase 1 — Exploring ICT in homes and communities

Phase one built on the ideas and work of Moll et al. (1992), where teachers visited homes andcommunities to gather data on the community ‘funds of knowledge’. It was thought that such

information could then be used to build curriculum responsive to local knowledge. This

project worked under the premise that homes had previously unexplored ‘ICT funds of

knowledge’. Thus teacher-researchers visited the homes of their focal children to explore

what ICT were on offer and whether the children had access to them, as well as finding out

what basic knowledge and skills they had of them.

The focus for the home visits during 2002 was on the ICT events experienced by the children.

The teacher-researchers observed the focus children’s ICT use in the home and community.

Having gained permission from the children’s parents or caregivers, some teacher-researchers

chose to video/audio tape the visit, or use cameras to show what was available. Others chose

to conduct questionnaires and informal interviews. This was left entirely to the teacher-researchers’ discretion at the time of the home visits. During the home visit the teacher-

researchers asked the children to take them on a Technotour of the home, demonstrating their

use of the various ICT on offer.

Based on the work of Purcell-Gates (1995), who observed and coded the use of print in

homes, the focus for the Children of the new millennium project was on the ICT eventsexperienced by the focal children. Teacher-researchers assumed the role of participant

observers; for example, to gather data on children’s understanding and knowledge of ICT they

occasionally needed to prompt by asking ‘what can you do now? or ‘can you tell me what you

are doing?’ As Purcell-Gates notes, there are problems with self reporting out of context and

it is only by entering the homes of the children that teachers as field researchers observed how

ICT were used in the home in naturally occurring circumstances.

Phase 2—– Developing the multiliteracies map

To explore what children could do with ICT in the early childhood classroom, one of the

project aims was to produce an observation tool now referred to as the multiliteracies map.The map was originally based on Clay’s 1993 ‘concepts about print’ and was used to

understand, describe and plan a literacy and numeracy curriculum based on what children

could do with ICT, children’s ‘concepts about technology’. The overall design of the

multiliteracies map was informed by research carried out from a range of theoreticalframeworks — developmental psychology, semiotics, critical sociology and a multiliteracies

approach.

Phase 3 — How does children’s knowledge and understanding of ICT developin the early years?

In the third phase of the research we were interested in how children, with help from their

teachers, could develop and design a range of ICT curriculum projects. For example children

produced iMovies, PowerPoint presentations or CD Roms using different sound effects, clipart, animation or other special effects. In this phase the teachers were using the information

from the home visits and the children’s interests to develop curriculum incorporating ICT.

Research development days 2002

Six research development days were held during 2002 where the teacher-researchers shared

their knowledge and skills on research methodology and their knowledge of ICT. The


24/215



university researchers and DECS investigators were also present on these days and provided

mentoring guidance and advice when needed. Each of the six days had a focus as follows:

Day 1: Introduction to the project

Project description, research requirements, selecting focus children, planning home

visits, collecting and analysing ethnographic dataExploring a range of software to be used throughout the project (eg Kid Pix,

Inspiration and WiggleWorks)

Day 2: Conducting home visits

Methodology, ethics, the Technotour

Ethnographic research methods, Dr Sue Nichols, University of South Australia

Day 3: Sharing session

ICT ‘Show and Tell’ — teacher-researchers sharing previous ICT classroom projects

(eg using a digital camera and making slideshows)

New Learning , Professor Nicola YellandDiscussion — ICT issues and dilemmasDiscussion — Teaching and learning using ICT

Sharing information on home visits and planning curriculum using ICT resources


ICT ‘Show and Tell’ — teacher-researchers sharing previous ICT classroom projects

Sharing information on home visits and planning for the curriculum using what

children are learning at home

Developing an assessment tool for exploring children’s understanding of technology


Teacher-researchers sharing their current ICT classroom projects

Reflection — What have we learnt?

Multiliteracies, Dr Helen NixonPlanning for the final report and presentation day.

Day 6: Presentation day

Project findings and teacher-researcher presentations

Teacher-researchers also provided a written report in 2002. These reports were extremely

detailed and thus provided a clear picture of what ICT were available to these children and

what was occurring in the different sites. They included information about:

the site and teaching context

the focus children

how the research was conducted

what was discovered from the home visits and how links were made between the

children’s funds of knowledge about ICT and what happens in school/preschool

issues encountered and actions taken

reflections on their own learning as teacher-researchers and learning with colleagues

concerning children’s learning

what questions are being asked — by colleagues, children, families

implications for the future — for individual learners, class groups, school/preschools


25/215



teachers’ personal views of children’s’ learning and ICT.

Teachers were also asked to account for the funds provided.

Phases of the project 2003

From the written reports and teacher-researcher feedback, the research design and

methodology was modified in 2003. In 2002 it was found that there was far more

collaboration and learning in sites where two or more teacher-researchers were located than in

sites where educators worked on their own. For the next year it was decided that each site

would have two teacher-researchers working together where possible. Many of the same

schools were involved again but since some of the teachers moved, we also invited their new

schools to be involved. The majority of teacher-researchers from 2002 elected to continue on

and so were very familiar with the aims and ideas of the project. Six new teacher-researchers

came on board for 2003, invited by colleagues who had worked on their own in 2002. This

proved to be extremely successful in providing teacher-researchers with someone to share

ideas, act as ‘critical friends’, observe each other’s children and expand their thinking. In

2003, 11 research sites were chosen with 20 teacher-researchers (see Table 1).

The change in the number of children, from four focus children in 2002 to two in 2003 aimed

to increase the depth and quality of the data collected by allowing teacher-researchers to put

more time and effort into observing and analysing individual children. In most cases a new

group of focus children needed to be selected but the schools and children continued to be

from a diverse mix of locations and socioeconomic areas. In two sites teacher-researchers

were able to follow the same children for both 2002 and 2003. This of course provided rich

data to show how the children’s ICT skills developed over time.

The research methodology also changed in 2003. The case studies, in which researchers

record observations and conversations objectively and avoid judgment and opinion, were

meant to focus on the children’s learning but very often became more about the teacher’s

curriculum plans. The methodology was thus changed to narrative learning stories (Carr et al.

2000) in which researchers are encouraged to write their personal thoughts and feelings about

the child’s learning. These learning stories would explore what individual children were

learning and be a better source of information about it.

Learning stories endeavour to capture the child’s and the teacher’s voice. They write in a

more free flowing narrative style about what children are learning. The learning story itself

becomes data which can then be analysed using a framework or lens to assess the learning.

Learning stories are more child centred than case studies.

The learning stories also became electronic as the project developed — the teacher-researchers used digital cameras, video and PowerPoint presentations to record data and to

present their learning stories about the children and ICT. The project team decided also to

compile video footage of the children’s learning stories and also the teacher’s own stories

about their learning.

The project in 2003 had the same three phases as in 2002: visit children’s homes for a

Technotour; refine the framework for understanding children’s knowledge of ICT; and

understand how children’s learning of ICT develops over time.

Research development days 2003

Day 1: Introduction to the project Introducing new participants to the project


26/215



Outlining roles and responsibilities/plans and expectations

Refining the framework analysing how children use ICT

Introducing the learning stories methodology

Discussion on the 2002 focus children and the home visits

Day 2: Future plans and past reflections

Feedback to teachers — 2002 written reports

Plans for future publications eg report, articles, PD training video/CD Rom

Young children and technology — Dr Maureen O’Rourke, Victorian SchoolsInnovations Commission

Discussion — issues arising with ICT and young children

Reflection/discussion — teacher analysis of learning stories


Teacher-researcher sharing session — learning stories

Dr Helen Nixon, University of South Australia

Reflection/discussion — multiliteracies map


Development of the multiliteracies map as a lens for learningReport from Young Children and Learning Technologies conference, Sydney July

2003

Analysing the Learning Stories


Using the multiliteracies map to analyse children’s learningUsing the learning stories to report on children’s learning

Reflection — What have we learnt?

Planning for the final report and presentation day

Day 6: Presentation day

Project findings and teacher-researcher presentations

At the conclusion of 2003 the written report each teacher-researcher presented included three

learning stories using the following suggested guidelines:

focus at least one learning story on a home visit

include photographs, iMovies, PowerPoint presentations, but based each story in the formof a written report

focus each learning story on the child’s learning

provide evidence of their learning, highlighting literacy and numeracy

include the child’s ‘voice’ by using dialogue and work samples.

Teacher-researchers also provided:

a description of the context of each learning story

a summary of their own research throughout the year

their personal reflections.


27/215



Research mentors

Research mentors for the project provided information from their own research, stimulated

discussions, and constructively questioned the teacher-researchers’ learning stories.

Dr Susan Nichols

Dr Susan Nichols discussed data collection and analysis and the approaches required whenundertaking research in both the home environment and the educational setting. She provided

practical examples of various scenarios that could arise and possible dialogue. She explored

various methodologies and strategies for home and community inquiry. The teacher-

researchers analysed field notes from other projects as a way of demonstrating observation

techniques and analysis. Susan spoke of the importance of forming a rapport with both

children and adults in their own home while still remaining objective and not allowing

personal feelings or prejudices to interfere.

Professor Nicola Yelland

Nicola provided video footage, PowerPoint presentations and CD Roms of data she had

gathered in other projects interstate. The data showed children using ICT in exciting andinnovative ways, yet ways that were achievable by the teacher-researchers in this project.

Nicola’s practical examples and informative discussions enabled teacher-researchers to be

aware of how children make meaning with ICT and how they can be used as a powerful

learning tool. Nicola also led question and answer sessions on the issues and dilemmas that

arise when working with young children and ICT.

As the project progressed Nicola supported the teacher-researchers to unpack the

multiliteracies map and demonstrated how it could be used in various situations. She alsoexplored the learning stories in greater depth. Along with DECS personnel, Nicola conducted

sessions on planning for the curriculum using ideas about bringing what was learnt during the

home visits into the classroom. Nicola also kept everyone informed of the most recent

scholarly articles and current trends on ICT and young children.

Dr Helen Nixon

Dr Helen Nixon was invited by the project team to act as a ‘critical friend’, to expand teacher-

researchers thinking about what they were doing and observing in the classroom and any

issues that emerged regarding ICT. She joined the project in both 2002 and 2003 as the

teacher-researchers made brief presentations of what they were doing with ICT in their

centres and schools, after conducting their home visits. Helen provided detailed and valuable

feedback which helped the teacher-researchers to analyse the data they had collected and the

observations they had made. An example of the feedback Helen provided follows.

Woodcroft Heights Preschool1. This presentation raised the very important issue of how we might identify children’s

‘development’ in relation to ICT use and how we might ‘scaffold’ children’s learning

with ICT. Do we use the same strategies as for scaffolding other kinds of learning? Are

we restricted in how well we can do this if we don’t have a good operational or cultural

grasp of the possibilities of the software?

2. You described very well how you attempt to use ICT as part of the accepted ‘cultural’

purposes of the classroom (eg making shopping lists and going shopping). You also

highlighted your goal to support the integration of ICT into areas of classroom culture

other than writing (eg alongside painting easels) but noted that aspects of traditional

classroom structure (eg design of wet areas and placement of power points) mitigate

against this.


28/215



Helen has had many years experience teaching English, literacy and, more recently, popular

culture, the media and ICT. She presented her ideas on making the curriculum relevant and

meaningful to children’s lives, which naturally includes popular culture. Helen shared the

research she has conducted looking at the influence of popular media culture on children. She

also shared iMovies created with children from an inner city Adelaide primary school, wherelarge percentage of whom are new arrivals to the country, new to the English language and

the Australian culture. These iMovies showed the procedures young children used to makesome of their favourite cultural dishes, thus demonstrating how ICT as a form of multimodal

communication can enhance learning.

Dr Maureen O’Rourke

Maureen O’Rourke was Director for Global Futures (Australia) in the Victorian Schools

Innovations Commission, as well as State Coordinator and National Project Manager for the

KidSmart Early Learning Program. Maureen has a particular interest in ICT and young

children and integrating ICT into the curriculum. Maureen demonstrated how the focus for

educators should be on the learning and not the software or the equipment. The particular

focus of her talk for the Children of the new millennium project was the KidSmart Early

Learning Program, which provides computers and professional development to disadvantagedearly childhood settings. Maureen also shared digital portfolios of young children that were

given to parents to demonstrate the learning and interests of the child.

The critical friends in the research project provided valuable, stimulating feedback to the

teacher-researchers and prompted them to question assumptions in the data collected.

The research methodology in this teacher-researcher study was responsive to the concerns of

the early childhood teachers who wished to situate children’s learning within a familiar

context. A discussion of how the research methodology developed follows.

The research methodology

Different types of research need different types of questions and claims. The match of

research methodology to research questions and resulting claims is essential (Duke & Mallette

2004). In this research, involving teacher-researchers investigating the different ways young

children use ICT at home and at school, ethnographic case studies and learning stories were

appropriate for understanding the research questions.

Ethnographic case studies

In the first year of the project the teacher-researchers employed ethnographic methods as they

visited the homes of the focus children to explore and understand what young children could

do with ICT. Inquiring into the funds of knowledge in homes and communities, the project

built on the work of Moll (1992) and his colleagues, and the idea that mediation between thehome and the school was of benefit to teachers in understanding more about the nature of the

children they were teaching. We anticipated that the curriculum the teachers developed would

take into account the ‘funds of knowledge’ that the children were bringing to the school

setting from their homes.

Research training on collecting ethnographic data (Purcell-Gates 2004) gave the teacher-

researchers ways to develop sharp and insightful observations about children’s’ use of and

understanding of ICT. It also explored ways to come to understand the perspectives of others,

and ways to gather data, for instance, using observation field notes, interviews recorded with

audio tape or as field notes, photographs, and children’s work samples. The training also

examined ways to write the ethnographic case studies so that the readers could gain an

understanding of the context, the child in the family situation, and how ICT was used. In thecase studies the focus was on the child in context at home and at school.


29/215



The case studies in the first year of the study had three purposes: intrinsic, instrumental and

building a case study collection (Stake 2000). They were intrinsic because the purpose of the

case study was to understand the child and how ICT permeated home and school. They were

not used to build theory but to better understand new learning with digital technologies. The

case studies had instrumental purpose in seeking out insights and similarities. For example the

case studies shed light on some of the following issues: children’s learning with new

technologies in remote and rural communities, children with English as second language, and

children with special learning requirements. The case studies were also designed to be read as

a collection and explore patterns across the collection.

When the ethnographic case studies of their four focus children were compiled many teacher-

researchers chose to present their data digitally in the form of photographs, PowerPoint and

videos, as well as providing print based records.

Learning stories

In the second year of the project the teacher-researchers, with the project directors, chose to

use a research methodology known as learning stories to better capture young children’sunderstanding of ICT at home and at school.

Learning stories are not the same as case studies or anecdotal records about children. They are

narratives or stories and can take place over time, sometimes days or months. Good learning

stories provide detail about the context and background and engage the reader. They not only

describe actions they also make feelings and interpretations visible (Hatherly & Sands 2002).

When compared with case studies learning stories are less clinical, less concerned with

keeping interpretation out of the recording. Teachers find them more interesting and engaging

than an anecdote and more lively and dynamic than objective field notes. Learning stories can

show progress over time as well as some possible strategies for teacher support. They can be

used with other teachers, parents and children as a site for interesting conversations. Parents

too can be involved in writing learning stories, which can include interviews and dialogue

from children.

Learning stories are narrative or storied approaches to research documentation and have a rich

history in education (see Genishi 1992; Witherell & Noddings 1991; Clandinin & Connelly

1990).

Stories are powerful research tools. They provide us with a picture of real people in realsituations, struggling with real problems ... They invite us to speculate on what might bechanged and to what effect. (Witherell & Noddings 1991, p 280)

Learning stories capture the complexity of situated learning strategies plus motivation. They

can incorporate the child’s voice and emphasise children’s participation and culture (Carr2004). They were of most benefit for this project as they supported the teacher focus on

children’s learning and teachers found they provided valuable insights into how children

learn.

Good stories, be they direct or indirect, give us valuable insights into the sense makingcomponent of learning (Engel 2000).

Learning stories have a theoretical base in sociocultural theory. Socioculturally oriented

writers have described learning as appropriated (taken up) in authentic cultural locations,

defining these as communities of practice (Carr 2001; Lave 1997). The learning stories further

developed by Carr (2004) are a narrative style of observations in everyday settings. They are

designed to provide a cumulative series of qualitative ‘snapshots’, or written vignettes, ofindividual children displaying one or more of five domains of learning dispositions: taking an


30/215



interest, being involved, persisting with difficulty or uncertainty, expressing an idea or

feeling, and taking responsibility or taking another point of view (Carr et al. 2000). Several

teacher-researchers included observations about children’s learning dispositions.

Carr uses the term learning dispositions in a similar way to the sociological concept of habitusa term used by (Bourdieu 1986) to mean a system of dispositions that are acquired by implicit

or explicit learning or funds of knowledge within communities. Habitus also relates to a

historical worldview. This is useful for early childhood educators to grasp the idea that a

particular community, such as early childhood educators, has particular historical views about

what is expected of young children and how young children are viewed as learners, especially

when considering the appropriateness or not of ICT for young children.

In addition in this project the learning stories attempted to capture the context of the learning

environment that appeared to be enabling or constraining learning. Learning stories are at

times quite short pieces or several episodes linked together. After writing the learning story

the teacher-researcher may comment on the child’s (children’s) learning and suggest plans for

future work. Learning stories take a credit rather than a deficit approach to understanding

learning. The stories are of what children ‘can do’ rather than what they ‘can’t do’. Bydescribing strengths and interests teacher-researchers look for positive ways forward.

Learning stories capture the ways individual learners engage in activities, and as the

individual engages in activities their participation changes the activities, while at the same

time they are changed by the activities. Learners recognise, select, edit, respond to, resist and

search for learning opportunities.

The learning stories in this project were compiled as narratives and then the teacher-

researchers used the multiliteracies map framework to analyse the children’s learning.

The multiliteracies map

During the project the teacher-researchers developed a framework for analysing young

children’s learning with ICT (see Chapter 6). The multiliteracies map is a framework for

analysing what children can do with new literacies, and as a way of analysing scaffolding,

support and explicit teaching that needs to occur. The framework is included at this point for

the reader so that when the learning stories are read the teachers’ analysis of the children’s

learning with the multiliteracies map is clear.

The multiliteracies map is made up of four interrelated quadrants. One must be able to:operate or make various technologies function; make meaning from the technology; be able to

critique it and understand its purpose; and take what has been learned and transform it into

new learning.


31/215



Functional user

Locating, codebreaking, using signsand icons

Selecting andoperating equipment

Moving between mediums: cameras, videos,computers

Meaning maker

Understandingmultimodalmeanings

Purpose of textand text form

Connecting to prior knowledge

Critical analyser

Discourse analysis

Equity

Power and

position Appropriate mode

Transformer

Using skills andknowledge in newways

Designing texts Producing new texts

Figure 1. The multiliteracies map

Ethical concerns

This project involved teacher-researchers visiting the homes of selected focus children and

speaking with family members. Consent was sought to use photographs and video recordings.

The names of children and schools were changed in the learning stories.


32/215


33/215



Chapter 3Learning from the literature

A review


34/215


35/215



3. Learning from the literature: A review

Summary

In 2001 when the Children of the new millennium project began there was surprisingly littlewritten about primary aged children and ICT, even less about preschool children. Articles

were found in a number of journals where teachers gave examples of using various ICT

within the classroom but very few research projects had been undertaken, especially in

Australia. As the project continued more articles began to appear and other research projects

were reported on, but these seemed mainly concerned with older children. Information on ICT

and young children continues to be extremely limited, not only in Australia but globally.

Early in the new millennium, Lankshear and Knobel (2003) conducted a review of ICT and

literacy by searching literacy journals as well as specific early childhood and technology

journals. Of 554 articles in nine journals, only 18 were in the broad area of using new

technologies and only five were specific empirical studies related to technology and literacy

(Yelland, in progress). The review highlighted the need for further study and empiricalresearch into the use of ICT in early childhood classrooms, and of appropriate software and

equipment with young children.

Featured in this review are a number of key articles, books and other works of various

researchers organised alphabetically. All these researchers have written far more than is

represented here, and all acknowledge that in the 21st century, ICT skills and multiliteracies

are becoming increasingly necessary.

This review includes writers who caution against the use of computers. The debate about

computers and young children was particularly vigorous in the 1980s when computers were

first introduced into schools and continues to this day. Some concerns are that:

excessive time spent in front of computers leads to health and social problems

most games promote violent behaviour

computers are too abstract, young children need to play with concrete materials to learn

computers are for individual pursuits and not conducive to collaborative work

young children are exposed to inappropriate software and sites

computers minimise the role of teachers in the classroom.

Others write of how new technologies offer exciting and motivating ways for children to learn

and should therefore be presented in new and exciting ways. They suggest that new

technologies and new learning should not be mapped onto old contexts and old curricula. Theuse of computers should not be seen as an ‘add on’ activity, one for those who finish first or

as a reward for ‘good’ behaviour. Yelland, in Shift to the Future (in progress) comments,‘Instead of being a catalyst for change, new technologies have been in the main mapped on to

old curriculum’ – a curriculum conceived before their invention. She suggests:

[We need] a bold new approach to curriculum which encapsulates a notion of design andopportunities for children to explore and investigate in ways that were not possible without the

new technologies … we have a great deal of information about the ways in which newtechnologies are able to transform learning yet curricula in schools remain much as they werelast century … Further, there is an increasing recognition that curriculum decision makingneeds to take note of children’s out of school experiences and build upon them.


36/215



Alloway, N, Freebody, P, Gilbert, P & Muspratt, S. 2002. Boys, literacyand schooling: Expanding the repertoires of practice. Department ofEducation, Science and Training, Canberra.

This extensive report covers such topics as Literacy, Gender and Boys Education; SurveyingTeachers and Parents; The Classroom Interventions and Analysis of Data and Outcomes, but

this review covers only the final chapter– Conclusions and Recommendations.

In the first section of the chapter we synthesise teacher-recommended lines of inquiry and

suggestions for classroom action as well as their recommendations for moving the boys andliteracy agenda forward at systems’ levels. In the second section of the chapter we reflectcritically on the wider patterns of ideas and conceptual frameworks that teachers drew upon asthey articulated their perspectives through interviews, written reports and electroniccommunication with us. In doing so, we highlight some of the problematics associated withdebates about boys and literacy, and draw this report together with our conclusions and

recommendations for theory, research and practice.

Although referring to ‘boys’ and ‘boys’ strategies’ throughout the chapter, the authors make itclear that boys are not to be thought of and responded to as a homogenised group, that not all

boys experience difficulties with literacy learning, neither are all girls are doing well. When

asked to make recommendations to their colleagues that would improve the literacy learning

and teaching of boys, 24 teachers from 12 diverse sites placed the use of technology high on

their lists. Also included was the need to ensure a clear link was made between classroom and

the popular culture and texts of everyday life, so that boys saw the relevance of classroom

learning with life outside school. Teachers suggested incorporating everyday events, popular

culture, electronic technologies, multimedia and multimodal work formations to capture boys’

interests. They encouraged the use of resources (eg texts, videos) that were interesting and

engaging rather than because ‘they meet curriculum and lesson needs’ (p. 198).

Teachers also made recommendations centred on relationships within the classroom aimed at

helping boys become cooperative learners and participants in literacy classrooms, such as

getting to know students more and treating them more as individuals. Other suggestions

highlighted the importance of successful learners having a positive sense of self and dealt

with ways of expanding the repertoires of boys for (re)presenting the self. Teachers

emphasised the need to draw on students personal experiences and suggested a more active

‘hands on’ approach to literacy learning, ‘allowing student ideas and interests to guide part of

their teaching and learning programs’ (p. 199). Teachers also made recommendations for

changes to school systems, which included ‘better pre-service education, more resources

within schools, smaller classes, more teacher-aide time, professional development

opportunities, professional mentoring and improved partnerships with families and

communities’ (p. 199). While none of these suggestions is new, teachers believed that theintroduction of new technologies, and the new literacies associated with them, made them

even more important.

In the second section of the chapter, a theoretical framework for action is created, focusing on

three repertoires: 1. A repertoire for (re)presenting the self; 2. A repertoire for relating; and 3.

A repertoire for engaging with and negotiating cultural knowledges and meanings. Drawing

on the data and outcomes of the project, the authors also make eight recommendations,

discussed at length in the chapter, for future theory, research and practice:

1. that, as part of their ongoing community analysis, schools and teachers acknowledge and

explore the varied social, cultural and ethnic backgrounds that boys bring with them to the

literacy classroom, paying particular attention to the ways that constructions of

masculinity influence boys’ behaviour and learning in literacy


37/215



2. that schools, teachers, researchers and policy makers adopt a practice — and futures —

oriented approach to literacy in their work to improve literacy outcomes

3. that teachers adopt a range of pedagogical strategies in the literacy classroom that are

designed to promote an active, purposeful and democratic learning environment

4. that teachers construct literacy classrooms as active environments for learning by:

maximising ‘hands-on’ learning through multiple textual modes; providing opportunities

for students to take control of their own learning; taking account of students’ backgrounds

and experiences; and focusing on maintaining a productive sense of self among students

as literacy learners

5. that teachers construct literacy classrooms as democratic spaces where authority and

agency are shared; where students are treated with dignity and respect; where students’

knowledges, opinions and contributions are valued; and where students learn to work

collaboratively and cooperatively

6. that teachers engage in work with cultural knowledges and meanings by focusing on the

cultures of the ‘real’ and the everyday, popular culture, electronic technologies and

multimediated texts (in doing this, teachers need to consider systematically the ways inwhich such activities can connect productively with curricular learning, and ways in

which critical, analytic work can be developed in the use of potentially misogynistic and

institutionally hostile materials)

7. that, to improve literacy outcomes for boys, schools need school systems’ cooperation to

provide increased levels of learning support, professional development, and technology

infrastructure and support

8. that future research addresses the effectiveness of the three repertoires model (see above)

for improving literacy outcomes for boys.


38/215



Armstrong, A & Casement, C. 2000. The child and the machine: Howcomputers put our children’s education at risk . Robins Lane Press,Beltsville.

Contrary to the view that technology and computers will transform the education of children

and revolutionise the education system, Armstrong and Casement provide instead anintriguing discussion of the impact of computers and whether they benefit children at all. The

book looks at several issues, misconceptions and illusions on the use of computers in

education, under the following headings:

Educational technology and the illusion of progress

White knight or white elephant: The real costs of computerizing education

The disembodied brain

Online to success? Computer-based instruction and academic achievement

The young reader and the screen

The young writer and the screen

The information maze

Caught in the web: Children’s advertising on the web

The physical effects of computer use

The real world of learning

Finding technology’s place.

The authors discuss the health issues that arise from excessive use of computers: the effects

on the body and posture, headaches, eye problems, as well as the effects of the

electromagnetic fields computers produce. One of the biggest problems is the negative effectscomputers can have on overall physical fitness; children simply sit and play rather than run

around outside. They also point out the dangers of children being exposed to inappropriate

sites on the internet and online advertising.

Armstrong and Casement argue that time and money spent on the constant training of already

overworked and over stressed teachers, could be put to far better use providing more teachers

rather than more technology. They discuss the poor application and use of appropriate

technology and the subsequent poor quality of lessons provided. They suggest the emphasis

on future jobs needing highly skilled computer technicians is over estimated, and question

whether computers really do increase academic achievement.

The authors suggest that computers isolate learners, arguing that students need moreinteractions with teachers and fellow students, not less. They compare computers with

television and emphasise the need to deal with real life not images on a screen — we should

be experiencing life through sights, sounds, smells, tastes and textures. Armstrong and

Casement argue that attributes such as self discipline, self motivation, teamwork and

collaboration are also not developed with computers. They believe that the arts are of

particular concern — liberal and fine arts require skills, such as detailed observation,

reflection and meditation, not acquired through computer use.

The authors devote a chapter to developing readers and the need to firstly become familiar

with oral language and to speak fluently. They suggest using computers from an early age

may inhibit the ability to speak and listen, that high impact graphics turn the focus from the

text to image. They also discuss developing writers, and that computers seem no more

effective than other materials in creating fluent readers or writers. Word processing programs,


39/215



they say, have children focus on formatting and fonts rather than creative writing, and pen and

paper still produce the best writing.

Chapters are also devoted to the internet and the problems that can arise with young children.

The authors acknowledge the vast array of information available online but question its

appropriateness. Children can easily access inappropriate adult or even illegal material, they

are unable to discern what is true or not, and it is extremely easy to plagiarise others’ work.

Advertising is of particular concern. A simple search can be tracked and information collected

on surfing habits that is then used for marketing purposes. The authors comment that children

are exposed to enough advertising outside school, without being bombarded by it in the

classroom.

The child and the machine provides thought-provoking observations and discussions. It raisesmany issues that may affect teachers, policy makers, and parents, not to mention children, but

perhaps their most important message is that there is simply no substitute for real life, hands

on experience.


40/215



Cope, B & Kalantzis, M. 2000. Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and thedesign of social futures. Macmillan, Melbourne.

In 1994, leaders in the field of education from Britain, The United States and Australia met in

New London, Connecticut to discuss the future of literacy education in an ever changing

world. The book Multiliteracies is an overview of the work of this ‘New London Group’ andexplores the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of future literacy teaching — what will need to be taught andhow it should be taught — in a rapidly changing technological world. The word‘multiliteracies’ encapsulates the multiplicity of communications and the media as well as the

increasing salience of cultural and linguistic diversity. Thus a pedagogy of multiliteracies will

embrace the diverse social and cultural contexts of students’ lives and have specific cognitive,

cultural and social effects.

Two major issues emerged from the discussions. The first relates to meaning making and how

meaning is made in increasingly multimodal ways. This is especially so in the media world

and the world of electronic texts, where ‘written-linguistic modes of meaning are part and

parcel of visual, audio, and spatial patterns of meaning’ (p. 5). Making meaning of texts in

such a multimodal world, requires new, multimodal literacies. The second issue relates to the

English language itself and its rapidly changing face. With the advent of the internet, English

is rapidly becoming a world language, helping to create a global village. Yet with increasing

migration and multiculturalism, one standard form of English can no longer be taught and

deemed to be sufficient. The medium itself is changing how we use language. Common

global languages are emerging in the worlds of commerce, politics, the media and

communications, yet acknowledgment of cultural diversity, accent and origin, has never been

more prevalent.

The group developed a theory in which six design elements are used in the meaning-making

process: linguistic meaning, visual meaning, audio meaning, gestural meaning, spatial

meaning, and the multimodal patterns of meaning that relate the first five modes to each other.Also considered are four components of pedagogy: situated practice — drawing on

experiences of meaning-making in lifeworlds, the public realm and the workplace; overt

instruction — through which students develop an explicit metalanguage of design; critical

framing — which interprets the social context and purpose of designs and meaning; and

transformed practice — in which students, as meaning makers, become designers of social

futures. These are not rigid categories nor identified to displace existing practices of literacy

teaching; they are supplements to what teachers already do and provide students with a

multifaceted way of viewing the world.

Considered a work in progress, ‘a programmatic manifesto’ the book is organised into five

parts: Part I introduces the pedagogy of multiliteracies itself and the designing of social

futures; Parts II, III and IV look respectively at the ‘why’, ‘what’ and ‘how’ of multiliteracies,exploring the effects of technological change, multilingualism and cultural diversity; and Part

V explores multiliteracies in practice in three case studies that attempt to put the theories into

practice.


41/215



Cordes, C & Miller, E. 2000. Fool’s gold: A critical look at computers inchildhood . Alliance for Childhood, College Park MD.

The Alliance for Childhood promotes policies and practices that support children’s healthydevelopment, love of learning, and joy in living. Our public education campaig

Multiliteracies Mapping

Documents

Transcript of Multiliteracies Mapping