Digital Literacy
Nichols and Stornaiuolo (2019) provide an historical perspective on the complex intertwining of concepts surrounding media, information, and digital literacies and propose a definition of digital literacy as an assemblage, a braiding together of concepts across lineages. An expanded model for digital literacy research offers a map that may be useful for my PhD research – examining prescriptive and descriptive elements of technology, content, business models, ownership, governance, and users across socio-economic, socio-historical, and socio-technical domains. While some of these facets may be reflected within the lived experiences with MDL of the participants, it is the exploration of core components, first introduced in the early 1990s that is of interest:
For my research, I can bring clarity to digital literacy practices in OEPr where users are the TEds and the TCs, technologies range across web and place-based resources, and content resides in open locations relevant to courses, research, and scholarship.Both then and now, digital literacy (and digital literacies) has remained centrally concerned with the ways users (e.g. individuals, groups, communities) leverage technologies (e.g. computers, software, mobile devices) to consume or produce content (e.g. textual, visual, multimedia, artifacts). (Emphasis in original.)
Ideologically, digital literacy is a “complex and socio-culturally sensitive issue” (Lemos & Nascimbeni, 2016, p. 2). Digital literacy shifts into social, collaborative, communication and sense-making actions and interactions using a variety of digital devices (Beetham et al., 2012; Belshaw, 2012; Lemos & Nascimbeni, 2016). Digital literacy is therefore further defined as a dynamic process wherein the “creative use of diverse digital devices to achieve goals related to work, employability, learning, leisure, inclusion and/or participation in society” (Lemos & Nascimbeni, 2016, p. 2) are integrated into everyday life (Belshaw, 2012). Digital behaviors, practices, identities and citizenship, as well as wellbeing, are incorporated into this definition (Belshaw, 2012; Hoechsmann & DeWaard, 2015; Lankshear & Knobel, 2007; Spante et al., 2018).
The term critical literacy refers to the use of print and other media technologies to “analyze, critique and transform the norms, rule systems and practices governing the social fields of everyday life” (Luke, 2012, p. 5). Critical digital literacies (CDL) acknowledge power differentials, strive for equitable access to diverse resources, and the reconstruction of transformative potentials (Spante et al., 2018). This definition requires that those within a field of study examine how, why, and where norms, rules, ways of doing, ways of being in relationship to topics, processes, procedures, and each other, are critiqued with a social justice view. Further, examining the spaces and places where those who are marginalized and disenfranchised can find intentionally equitable hospitality (Bali et al., 2019) is an essential element. Luke (2012) further explores how literacy in education utilizes “community study, and the analysis of social movements, service learning, and political activism, …. popular cultural texts including advertising, news, broadcast media, and the Internet” (p. 7). This connects to the concept of educommunication that is discussed in the media literacy section of this dissertation.
CDL and technological competencies are important considerations in FoE where TEds create course content and design learning experiences with an infusion of literacies into methods and core course requirements. Foulger et al., 2017 introduced the teacher educator technology competencies (TETCs) to support the transformation of teaching practices of TEds. While this framework hints at MDL within a TEds overall skillset when using technology, there are other frameworks that may better define the literacies which my research may reveal. Falloon (2020) examined global competency and digital literacy frameworks with a focus on teacher education. Falloon's (2020) research moves beyond the concepts in the TETCs and incorporates facets from the Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) which is prominent in teacher education. Falloon (2020) shares a conceptual framework that incorporates personal ethical competencies and personal professional competencies which may be a helpful lens through which to examine the lived experiences shared by the participants in my research.
Martinéz-Bravo et al., (2022) examined eight international digital literacy frameworks, including well known frameworks including the UNESCO Global Framework, the EU DigComp framework, and ISTE’s NETs. Some of these frameworks are also included in the DQ Institute's Common Framework for Digital Literacy, Skills and Readiness which reflects a global picture of ideas and organizations linked around digital literacies and competencies (link to DQ global standards graphic). Martinéz-Bravo et al., (2022) analyzed these digital competency frameworks for common content, thus providing an integrated perspective. Six facets of digital literacy were found in each of the eight frameworks, outlined as critical, cognitive, operational, social, emotional, and projective dimensions (Martinéz-Bravo et al., 2022). The elements revealed from these compilations of digital literacy frameworks can inform and shape digital literacy work by TEds if they are aware of these facets in their teaching practice.
The overarching conception of digital citizenship subsumes all layers of skills, fluencies, competencies, literacies, and criticality when using, creating, and communicating with digital technologies and resources (Choi et al., 2018; Hoechsmann & DeWaard, 2015). Additionally, citizenship infers activism, engagement, and cosmopolitanism (Zaidi & Rowsell, 2017). Belshaw (2012) posits nine C’s of digital literacy identified as curation, confidence, creativity, criticality, civics, communication, construction, and cultural. These incorporate key citizenship elements. When focusing on digital citizenship and the responsible use of technology, Ribble (2017) proposes nine themes, including access, commerce, communication and collaboration, rights and responsibilities, health and wellness, fluency, security and privacy, etiquette, and law. These are further categorized under three principles of behaviour – safe, savvy, and social (DC Progression Chart, 2017). While citizenship is a worthy area of investigation and may provide interesting facets to reflect MDL practices of TEds, this may need to be a recognized area for future attention as I see this as beyond the scope of this research.
Definitions and practices of critical MDL are continually in flux, since contexts dictate the core and critical elements. In teacher education programs, MDL is shaped by and adapts to the current cultural, social, political, and technological climates. This includes the challenges brought on by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which have some impact on the stories of lived experiences that participants in this research share.