This page is referenced by:

• 1 2022-06-04T15:43:12+00:00 Glossary 17 alphabetic listing of glossary items with links to notes that describe each item plain 2023-06-27T12:14:19+00:00 Here is an alphabetic listing of the glossary items included in this dissertation document. Each item is linked to a note where the item is defined, described, and/or examples provided. These glossary items are also embedded throughout the document as notes within pages, where they provide 'just in time' clarification for you, the reader.
  • Actor Network Theory
  • Affinity Spaces
  • Alternative Dissertation
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI)
  • Black Box technology
  • Block Chain
  • ChatGPT
  • Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS)
  • Creative Commons
  • Cynefin framework
  • Data Gathering
  • Data Analysis - deductive
  • Digital Rights Management (DRM)
  • Educommunication
  • Emirec
  • Episteme / Phronesis
  • Faculty of Education (FoE)
  • #FemEdTech
  • Free and Open Software (FOSS)
  • Homo Faber
  • Hupomnemata
  • Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)
  • Learning Management Systems (LMS)
  • Makerspace
  • Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)
  • Media and Information Literacy (MIL)
  • Open Education
  • Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
  • Open Educational Practices (OEPr)
  • Paywall
  • PDF
  • Platforms
  • Portable Graphics Network (PNG)
  • Post-Intentional Phenomenology (P-IP)
  • Practice - both noun and verb
  • Research Ethics Board (REB)
  • Safety, Security, Privacy, Permission (SSPP)
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Canada (SSHRC)
  • Teacher Candidates (TCs)
  • Teacher Educators (TEds)
  • Teacher Educator Technology Competencies (TETCs)
  • TPACK
  • Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans
  • UNESCO
  • Uniform Resource Locator (URL)
  • Universal Serial Bus (USB)
  • Visitors / Residents
  
   
• 1 2022-06-08T20:49:48+00:00 Digital Literacy 7 defining and describing the concepts of digital literacies plain 2023-06-24T21:43:51+00:00 Digital literacies are defined as the “abilities a person or social group draws upon when interacting with digital technologies to derive or produce meaning, and the social, learning and work-related practices that these abilities are applied to” (Stordy, 2015, p. 472). When considering digital literacies from an autonomous perspective, conceptions related to an individual’s skills, fluencies, and competencies with digital technologies and web-based production. Skills and fluencies focused on the mechanics of how to use digital technologies, and knowledge related to the information required and used when manipulating digital resources. Competencies broadly covered knowledge, skills, attitudes and values (Ally, 2019; OECD, 2018). Competencies subsumed skills, fluencies and knowledge into a fuller conception that included attitudes and values (Spante et al., 2018). Competencies and literacies are frequently interchanged in the literature, depending on geographic contexts (Spante et al., 2018). Accordingly, some research suggested that digital literacy originated from a “skill-based understanding of the concept and thus relates to the functional use of technology and skills adaptation” (Spante et al., 2018, p. 7).
  
            Nichols and Stornaiuolo (2019) provided an historical perspective on the complex intertwining of concepts surrounding media, information, and digital literacies and proposed a definition of digital literacy as an assemblage, a braiding together of concepts across lineages. This expanded as a model for digital literacy research and offered a map that was useful for this 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 was the exploration of core components, first introduced in the early 1990s that is of interest:

  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.)

  For my research, this brought 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.
  
            Ideologically, digital literacy was a “complex and socio-culturally sensitive issue” (Lemos & Nascimbeni, 2016, p. 2). Digital literacy shifted 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 was 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 referred 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 required that those within a field of study examined 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 (Bozkurt et al., 2023). Further, examining the spaces and places where those who are marginalized and disenfranchised can find intentionally equitable hospitality (Bali et al., 2019) was an essential element. Luke (2012) explored how literacy in education utilized “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 connected to the concept of educommunication that was 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 hinted at MDL within a TEds overall skillset when using technology, there were other frameworks that better defined 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 moved beyond the concepts in the TETCs and incorporated facets from the Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) which is prominent in teacher education. Falloon (2020) shared a conceptual framework that incorporated personal ethical competencies and personal professional competencies which provided 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 such as the UNESCO Global Framework, the EU DigComp framework, and the ISTE’s Teaching Standards. Some of these frameworks were also included in the DQ Institute's Common Framework for Digital Literacy, Skills and Readiness which reflected 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 essential concepts that informed and shaped 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) proposed a model with nine Cs of digital literacy identified as curation, confidence, creativity, criticality, civics, communication, construction, and cultural. These incorporated key citizenship elements. When focusing on digital citizenship and the responsible use of technology, Ribble (2017) proposed 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 was a worthy area of investigation and may have provided interesting facets to reflect MDL practices of TEds, this was recognized as an area for future attention, as I viewed this as beyond the scope of this research.
  
            Definitions and practices of critical MDL were continually in flux, since contexts dictate the core and critical elements. In FoE, MDL was shaped by and adapted to the current cultural, social, political, and technological climates. This included the challenges brought on by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which had some impact on the stories of lived experiences that participants in this research shared.