Literacy as social practice

"The distinctive contribution of the approach to literacy as social practice lies in the ways in which it involves careful and sensitive attention to what people do with texts, how they make sense of them and use them to further their own purposes in their own learning lives" (Gillen and Barton, 2010, p. 9). 

The images in this post provide context for ways in which we can expand our lens on learning environments; a multi-literacy context/offering and example of literacy as social practice. 

       Upon personal reflection and readings regarding literacy, I had mixed feelings within my own experiences in childhood and adolescence in comparison to my adult experiences in literacy. I will elaborate on this further, but I would like to frame my reflections based on the overarching theme of experience and activity. I was drawn to Durant and Greene's discussion in "Literacy and the new technologies in school education" of experiences. Wilber elaborates and emphasized that we must take priority of "an experience and activity-oriented" modality over an instructional curriculum, or teacher as expert. I feel that this contextualizes the premise that learning is relational at the heart. Whether it be digital literacy or other modalities, the common thread is the situated practice. The sociocultural approaches describe that nothing is effective alone, that new literacies, and ways of engaging in learning push the boundaries of expert with the possibility of "co-constructing of knowledge" (Kress, 2010), and the ability to utilize new literacies to "shift authority" while "challenging notions of expert" (Wilber, 2010). These themes are above all, human centered.  

They focus on the fact that humans (not just children and schools, students and teachers) are and can be perpetually learning. Experiences (information) are impacted by the ability to make meaningful connection through levels of engagement. I resonate deeply with the intersectionality of these themes as they are in anti-racist education and in decolonization methodology. The examination of this in the readings touched on thinking that is not “new” and there is a lack of confronting/acknowledging the dismissal of the roots of differing literacies. There is a three-dimensional aspect of knowledge and experience. There are many types of knowledge, Of knowing that has not been touched on the readings.  Breaking down the roles of learner and educator via "programmer & user, producer & consumer" “writer/reader”. There is an importance of the human experience and of self knowing. What is it to learn with all your senses? Despite the fascinating capabilities of technology and examples of HumanLab; my question is: is it all necessary for our K-12 humans (learners) to be immersed in the digital experience as an all encompassing vehicle  of literacy prior to adolescence ?  Does research and data inform "best practice"?  Why doesn’t  human development inform literacy at the different developmental stages? On similar but  philosophical level, can  we walk alongside children as co-collaborators and others without controlling their literacy experience? If we see literacy as a social practice, can we do so in ways that truly support a multi disciplinary , multi modality approach , and not a tech driven approach?

     To further expand on literacy, the premise that learning happens every second, every present moment allows us to ease in the idea that classroom walls do not “gatekeep” knowledge, we are constantly learning ways to adapt and grow outside of the traditional modalities. The idea of deixis “now, present moment”  assures us that the social-emotional perspective is critical in learning, and that information and knowledge is not stagnant. It is also non linear. We can see that this is very much the case in digital geographies and project-based learning. Technology (digital literacies) has the capacity to provide  access for many folks to engage in literacy, building community, and it forces us to change and think reflexively based on real live ever changing data. As discussed in the paper, “Digital Literacies", there is a convergence and collaboration that can emerge from the technology.  These are the ways in which I have a respect for how we utilize technology in our lives and learning spaces. There is also much to be said about multi literacy, using artifacts and objects,  film, stories, art and other modalities to frame our learning that also provides access for neurodivergence. Conversely, I have a critique of technology in the same perspective as I have a critique of patriarchal, conditional  ways of instruction and assessment. I grew up being exposed to a variety of teachers in International Schools. I was introduced to multiple learning approaches that were “academically rigorous”  nevertheless I felt well supported by my teachers who were passionate and interesting people. I was engaged and participatory in my learning experiences and felt empowered and treated like a valued participant in the classroom. As an adult, I turned to many ways of learning outside the traditional methods, Indigenous and ancestral knowledge of my family, whole body somatic learning; I ebbed and flowed between this sought after western intellect, and my untended ways of body knowledge and curiosity. I pushed back against the systems of patriarchal and Eurocentric accepted modalities. As I became immersed in Social Work, Community organizing and providing therapy, I was forced to embody knowledge in ways I was not exposed to. This created a sense of loss and craving for providing those ways of learning in my own children. Experiences of being out in nature, of engaging with the elements and absorbing all the knowledge without the "telling", without the "teaching" but with the conversations that came from the curiosity. I relished in the questions my children, students and clients asked as I asked them the same. I came to see that the ways in which we are exposed to "learning" early in life impact our ways of seeking out knowledge when we are older. Can we learn in ways that support us wholly? Do we care about each other as humans or are we just vessels to absorb information and regurgitate for external motivation to be loved and accepted by parents and society?  Is rote memorization contextual or are we utilizing it without intention. Can we embody the practices ourselves and feel a connection to modalities of literacy?  Do we want to spend time with our students engaging with the hope that they grow to be critical thinkers and empathetic humans? Do we want them be problem solvers, to be stewards of this planet or do we want them to be a consumer in the producer/consumer binary? 

In summary, I end with a quote that supports the approach of authenticity and meaning, the big picture, the "why are we learning this again?" and what is it to understand literacy as a social practice: 

"Importantly, this means that it is counter-productive, to say the least, to start with issues of `skill' or `technique', outside of an authentic context of situated social practice. That basic principle holds for all learning, whether it be learning school Geography, participating in an on-line professional development conference, or becoming competent with regard to some aspect of workplace practice". (Durant & Greene, 2000). 

Stay Curious, 
Tania 

References

Durrant, Cal; Green, Bill (2000). Literacy and the new technologies in school education: Meeting the l(IT)eracy challenge? URL: Literacy and the new technologies in school education: Meeting the l(IT)eracy challenge? (thefreelibrary.com)

Wilber, D.J. (2010). Special themed issue: Beyond ʻnewʼ literacies. Digital Culture & Education, 2:1, 1-6. URL: http://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/dce_editorial_wilber_2010.pdf

Kress, Gunther.  The profound shift of digital literacies.2010.  Digital literacies: A research briefing by the Technology Enhanced Learning phase of the Teaching and Learning Research Programme.  TLRP Technology Enhanced Learning.