77.8% of the respondents agreed that the ability for technology to do a number of tasks would impact teaching and learning the most.
Examples such as the convergence of personal technology that allows a mobile phone to be used as an internet device or that a table computer can be used as a reading tool, were
cited. Whereas 44% of the sample agreed that the relationship young people have with personal technology would impact the future of teaching and learning.
These results are highly in-tune with a vast area of current thinking within the wider literacies debate. Discussions about the impact of technology on learning in terms of the convergence of technology, social mobility, copyright and how this could be affected by technology, participation and the technological barrier or divide, identity and the role of technology in the formation of identity, the impact of commercialization and the ubiquitous nature of new technology (Marsh 2008; Buckingham 2008) are ongoing.
When asked if digital literacy should be embedded into all subjects, 77.8% of
respondents agreed with the position strongly advocated by JISC in Learning Literacies in a
Digital Age (2009), that a literacy for the 21st century would be best learnt if digital literacies are embedded into the curriculum and moved out of silos.
When the sample were asked where they thought digital literacy should be positioned and taught with regard to the current curriculum, it was unsurprising that 67% expressed the view that digital literacy teaching should be within the subject specialisms of English, Media Studies, ICT or within the Functional Skills curricula, commonly viewed as 'literacy' umbrella subjects. What was interesting was the extent of those that agreed that the teaching of digital literacy
should be a compulsory element of the curriculum. 88.9% agreed that it should be compulsory, whereas a relatively small 11.1% 'weren't sure' if digital literacy should be compulsory within teaching in FE.
When asked to reflect on their confidence in teaching digital literacy skills within the classroom, 44.4% said they would feel 'confident', despite over half of the sample
previously stating that they had never heard of the term. When asked what would make the sample feel more confident in embedding digital literacy within their teaching, 55% of the sample
22
agreed that in-service training would make them more confident, and 33% stated that a
functional and clear definition of digital literacy would be helpful. 33% of the sample agreed that a national strategy to help support teachers in their use of digital literacy in the classroom would make them feel 'more confident'.
Interestingly, 100% of respondents did not know if their institution had a digital literacy policy.
This response was not unexpected, as there is no overarching national digital literacy policy at work within FE institutions in the UK. However, the very nature of the respondents' work patterns and status within their teaching placements may mean that they do not have access to such policies, or that these policies are not highly prioritised or championed to all staff within their work places. What is worth noting here, as briefly mentioned above, is that digital literacy policies are the concern of institutions themselves and that no overarching policy is in place within the sector. The work of FE goes on
underneath a patchwork quilt of policy that is tied together through a variety of government guidelines and diverse subject curricula. It is an extremely complex job to piece together how digital literacy is being promoted and applied in the FE context.
The focus of this inquiry shifted to explore if the sample would encourage the idea of an
institutional digital literacy specialist to be present within FE institutions to support staff and students in their teaching and learning. 66.6% of the sample were positive and saw the merit of a digital literacy specialist. This was an expected result yet one I hesitantly advocate. By positioning digital literacy as a concern of a dedicated 'specialist' could mean that digital literacy is viewed as separate from the 'main' curriculum, rendering digital literacy as 'extra curricular', a position that JISC (2009) suggests would prove counter-productive.
Whilst this work is a small regional study which has been conducted in an FE provider in one UK region, it has raised some interesting questions
that would benefit from further exploration. What will be interesting to consider would be how the skill of reading translates to what teachers understand as digital literacy, in terms of what it means to 'read' within and across digital media.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44