This page is referenced by:

• 1 2020-04-17T18:37:15+00:00 Literacies: Untangling a Concept 14 This is a subsection of the literature review and also a standalone page describing the complexity of the literacy concept. plain 2020-05-04T20:31:32+00:00      Surrounding these definitions of media and digital literacies there exists a veritable Pandora’s box of literacy terminology (Belshaw, 2012) including transliteracies (Sukovic 2016), cosmopolitan literacy (Zaidi & Rowsell, 2017), cultural literacies (Halpert & Chigeza, 2015), place based literacies (Harwood & Collier, 2017; Mills & Comber, 2013); artefactual literacies (Pahl & Rowsell, 2011); information communication literacies (Forkosh-Baruch & Avidov-Ungar, 2019; Horton, 2008); internet or web literacies; technological literacy; multiliteracies (New London Group, 1996); multimodal; multicultural; visual literacy (Collier 2018), transmedia literacies (Jenkins 2010), and re/mix literacies (Hoechsmann, 2019). While this literature review does not specifically examine this tangle of terminologies, they are mentioned here to acknowledge the confusion and recognize potential misconceptions resulting from the conflation of terminology (Belshaw, 2012; Spante et al. 2018).
       As a reflection of critical theoretical frameworks, my research is influenced by conceptions of critical literacies that are “historical works in progress. There is no correct or universal model. Critical literacy entails a process of naming and renaming the world, seeing its patterns, designs, and complexities, and developing the capacity to redesign and reshape it” (Luke, 2012, p. 9). This conception of critical literacy rings true for my research since how TEds "shape and deploy the tools, attitudes, and philosophies of critical literacy are utterly contingent: It depends upon students’ and teachers’ everyday relations of power, their lived problems and struggles, and … on educators’ professional ingenuity in navigating the enabling and disenabling local contexts of policy” (Luke, 2012, p. 9). 
       For this literature review, the primary conceptualization for literacy/literacies will encompass a critical framing of media and digital formats under the term MDL while recognizing that literacies are both an internal, cognitive ability and a social practice, with each requiring action and reflection. This literacy conception will be contextually placed within teacher education and the teaching and learning relating to MDL done in FoE. While Stordy’s (2015) taxonomies of literacies is particularly helpful as a starting point for a preliminary understanding of literacy/literacies, there is potential for further development for generating a phylogenetic graphic to establish origin stories of literacy terminology, integrating information about inherited characteristics, but that required more time than is available for this current review. 
  
   
• 1 media/Taxonomies of Literacies .jpeg 2020-02-15T16:09:11+00:00 Self Directed Study 12 Setting my direction into critical media and digital literacies while examining my own practice as a teacher educator. plain 2020-05-04T17:11:59+00:00 01/07/2019

  "Literacy, the visual technology, dissolved the tribal magic by means of its stress on fragmentation and specialization and created the individual" (McLuhan, 1997, p. 124)

       As McLuhan suggests, "I am created" by literacy. This creation resulted from a deep immersion into the field of media and digital literacy in the field of education that occurred in this Self-Directed course. For this self-directed course, co-designed with my supervisor, I spent time conceptualizing definitions and understanding of what it means to be literate. For four months there was a balanced but intensive schedule of reading, writing, and creating. With ten books and twenty five research articles collected on the course outline, and three writing tasks that included an annotated bibliography, a book review, and a literature review, I knew this course was going to challenge my ability to stick to a personal learning plan. In reflection, I now see the value of this course to develop skills in time management and research organization that is essential for PhD research and dissertation writing. The steps I accomplished in this course confirm my ability to conduct and manage a research plan, extended over a structured period of time. 
  
       From this course, I emerged with three 'literacies' in academic and scholarly work. First, I acquired strategies for finding, managing, and reading to determine a fit for research articles and reference materials. It was during this course that I booked a consultation session with my university librarian to revise and review my research process. I also began using Zotero in earnest to group and catalogue literature references, making note of the ones I could use for the annotated bibliography and the literature review. Second, I focused on defining a research topic by narrowing down on search criteria, cataloguing search terms and details, and ruthlessly eliminating items with little relevance to the stated topic. The annotated bibliography Media and Digital Literacy in Preservice Teacher Education written in February provided a foundation for the literature review Infusing media and digital literacies into preservice teacher education: A literature review I completed in April. Finally, my skill and fluency as an academic author was realized when I discovered the thrill of being cited, which in turn enhances feelings of authorial prowess and reduces the perception of being an imposter. Finding that first citation was accidental and random, but has subsequently occurred in other search results. This renewed confidence encouraged me to submit the book review written for this course to a Canadian journal for publication.
  
       Conceptualizations of literacy are contested and problematic, emerging from researchers and thinkers holding a range of ontological, epistemological and ideological positions (Stordy, 2015). Examining literacy instruction within teacher education is equally challenging since technology usage and web literacies compound and complicate the terrain (Hobbs, 2017; Hoechsmann & Poyntz, 2012). While my primary focus for research continued to connect media and digital literacy to the field of education within the context of faculties of education, an insight from the literature review done in this course foreshadowed a shift in direction that occurred in the Doctoral Seminar 2 course. From DS1 we were encouraged to 'dig where you stand' when determining the direction for your dissertation. While I stand within faculties of education, I do so from a teacher educator's perspective not from the stance of a teacher candidate. For my PhD doctoral work, I recognized the need to 'dig' from a teacher educator's position and perspective.
  
       One piece that evidences deeper understanding of concepts and terminology that resulted from this course is the Taxonomies of Literacy graphic created from research (Stordy, 2015). This exemplies my ability to create "multi-genre work that reflects widely divergent forms of knowledge in a text or series of related texts focusing on a single topic" (Ellingson, 2009, p. xii) and models the crystallization methodology that will inform my research. 
  
       Shortly after completion of this course, I accomplished two additional self-directed academic tasks that emerged as a result of this course. First, I spent thirty days entering, cataloguing and categorizing my references into Zotero (Citation Creation), shared to recognize skills and fluencies in managing research collections. Second, I analyzed my writing using visualization software – Voyant – for the first time (Research Proposal Paper: A Reflection). By selecting these two artifacts as belonging to the step-by-step process of journeying into the PhD program, I acknowledge that these are not neutral choices, but an act of criticism and a means of crystallizing a "path toward pushing or even breaking generic boundaries" (Ellingson, 2009, p. 6). 
  
• 1 2020-04-17T18:28:57+00:00 Literacies 8 This is a page in the literature review and also a stand alone page defining and exploring literacies in general plain 83 2020-05-04T20:03:08+00:00

  Defining Literacy

       Literacy is a human process of making sense of our world, binding our understanding and relationships to each other and our contexts. Literacy is found in the “relationship between human practices and the production, distribution, exchange, refinement, negotiation and contestation of meaning” (Lankshear & Knobel, 2007, p. 2). Within this process, there is reciprocity between practice and meaning-making, between context and language, between reading and writing (Lankshear & Knobel, 2007).
       Stordy (2015) examines literacy/literacies to create a taxonomy that encompasses a multitude of definitions and variations of relevant terms. This taxonomy includes both an autonomous perspective outlining psychological cognitive definitions and an ideological perspective relating to socio-cultural approaches that define literacy/literacies. Stordy (2015) differentiates these into those literacies that integrate no-or-few digital technologies (conventional), those that incorporate new technical elements (peripheral), and those literacies that assimilate new technical stuff with new ‘ethos stuff’ (paradigm), further described in the Taxonomy of Literacies image.
  
  
  
  The taxonomy is grounded in literacy research and provides a working definition of literacies that “captures the complementary nature of literacy as a cognitive ability and a social practice” (Stordy, 2015, p. 472). While Stordy (2015) acknowledges the challenges of and limitations in this framework, and recognizes that the borders between these concepts are fuzzy and permeable, this taxonomy supports the reframing of literacies in a way that clarifies understanding.
  
       Literacy terminology is frequently confused with notions of fluency and competency but these should be regarded as different conceptions. Fluencies is the ability to speak, read, and write in a given language quickly and easily, while competency is defined by having skills and abilities to do a job (“Competency,” OED Online; “Fluency,” OED Online). These definitions are not the same thing, but can be considered to be subsumed within the broader term ‘literacy’. This clarification is made here since research applies these terms interchangeably, yet they are distinctly different conceptions.
• 1 2020-04-15T15:45:53+00:00 Taxonomies of Literacies 1 This is a page in the literature review but also a stand alone description of literacy conceptions plain 2020-04-15T15:45:53+00:00

  Defining Literacy

  Literacy is a human process of making sense of our world, binding our understanding and relationships to each other and our contexts. Literacy is found in the “relationship between human practices and the production, distribution, exchange, refinement, negotiation and contestation of meaning” (Lankshear & Knobel, 2007, p. 2). Within this process, as Lankshear and Knobel (2007) suggest, there is “no practice without meaning, just as there is no meaning outside of practice. Within contexts of human practice, language (words, literacy, texts) gives meaning to contexts and, dialectically, contexts give meaning to language. Hence, there is no reading or writing in any meaningful sense of each term outside of social practice” (p. 2).
       Stordy (2015) examines literacy/literacies to create a taxonomy that encompasses a multitude of definitions and variations of relevant terms. This taxonomy includes both an autonomous perspective outlining psychological cognitive definitions and an ideological perspective relating to socio-cultural approaches that define literacy/literacies. Stordy (2015) differentiates these into those literacies that integrate no-or-few digital technologies (conventional), those that incorporate new technical elements (peripheral), and those literacies that assimilate new technical stuff with new ‘ethos stuff’ (paradigm), further described in Image 1.
  

  Image 1: Taxonomies of Literacies (Stordy, 2015)

  Stordy (2015) defines digital literacies 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” (p. 472). The taxonomy proposed by Stordy (2015) is grounded in literacy research and provides a working definition of literacies that “captures the complementary nature of literacy as a cognitive ability and a social practice” (p. 472). While Stordy (2015) acknowledges the challenges of and limitations in this framework, and recognizes that the borders between these concepts are fuzzy and permeable, this taxonomy supports the reframing of literacies in a way that clarifies understanding.
       Luke (2012) submits that critical literacies “entails a process of naming and renaming the world, seeing its patterns, designs, and complexities, and developing the capacity to redesign and reshape it” (p. 9). From this we can deduce that definitions and practices of critical media and digital literacies (MDL) are continually in flux, since contexts dictate the core and critical elements.  In teacher education programs, MDL is shaped by, and adapts to, current cultural, social, political, and technological climates.
       Literacy terminology is frequently confused with notions of fluency and competency but these should be regarded as different conceptions. Fluencies is the ability to speak, read, and write in a given language quickly and easily, while competency is defined by having skills and abilities to do a job (Cambridge dictionary, n.d.). These definitions are not the same thing, but can be considered to be subsumed within the broader term ‘literacy’. This clarification is made here since some research for this review apply these terms interchangeably.  

  Defining Media Literacy

       Media literacy, from an autonomous stance, is defined as “the ability to access, analyze, evaluate, create, and act using all forms of communication.” (Baker, 2012; Hobbs, 2011; Media Smarts Canada, n.d.; National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE), n.d.; Rogow, 2019). The process of critical inquiry and reflection are central to being media literate (UNESCO, 2013) since “media literate people apply their skills to all symbol-based communication, irrespective of message” (Rogow, 2019 p. 122). These messages are bound by the types of media texts (print, visual, audio, digital) used to create and communicate (Baker, 2012; Hobbs, 2011). Media literacy involves examining the semiotics and symbolism of text messages as part of a meaning-making inquiry (Gee, 2015).
       Media literacy from an ideological stance shifts beyond encoding and decoding media texts to engage in meaning making within socially, politically, and culturally contextualized media consumption and production spaces (Baker, 2012; Hobbs, 2011, Hoechsmann & Poyntz, 2012; Hoechsmann & DeWaard, 2015; UNESCO, 2017). Media literacy is a process of becoming (Gee, 2017), networked (Ito, Gutierrez, Livingstone, Penuel, Rhodes, Salen, Schor, Sefton-Green, & Watkins, 2012), participatory (Jenkins, Puroshotma, Weigel, Clinton, & Robinson, 2009), (D)discursive (Gee, 2015), and complicated (boyd, 2014). Within teacher education, these media literacy processes should be evident in the MDL learning that occurs with preservice teachers.
       UNESCO combines media and information literacies (MIL) into a singular concept that encompasses and subsumes other literacies such as computer, internet, digital, library, news, media and information literacies (UNESCO, n.d.). This MIL framework outlines five laws of MIL (Grizzle & Singh, n.d.) that are presented in a matrix with three components (access, evaluate, create) and includes competencies and performance indicators that can be applied to individual teachers and preservice education at the organizational level (UNESCO, 2013).

  Defining Digital Literacy

       When considering digital literacies as autonomous, conceptions relate to skills, proficiencies, fluencies, and competencies. Competencies broadly cover knowledge, skills, attitudes and values (OECD, 2005). Skills and fluencies focus on the mechanics of how to use digital technologies, and knowledge relates to the information required and used when manipulating digital resources. Competencies subsume skills, fluencies and knowledge into a fuller conception that includes attitudes and values (Spante, Hashemi, Lundin, & Algers, 2018). Competencies and literacies are frequently interchanged in the literature, depending on geographic contexts (Spante et al., 2018). Accordingly, some research views digital literacy originating 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).
       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 (Belshaw, 2011; Lemos & Nascimbeni, 2016; Sharpe & Beetham, 2011). Digital literacy is therefore 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) and are integrated into everyday life (Belshaw, 2015). Digital behaviors, practices, identities and citizenship, as well as wellbeing, are incorporated into this definition (Belshaw, 2011; Hoechsmann & DeWaard, 2015; Lankshear & Knobel, 2008; 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, examining the spaces and places where those who are marginalized and disenfranchised can find intentionally equitable hospitality (Bali, Caines, Hogue, DeWaard, & Friedrich, in press). Luke (2012) further explores how 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). CDL are important considerations in course development and the design of learning experiences when infusing MDL into methods and core course requirements in teacher education programs.
       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, Cristol, & Gimbert, 2018; Hoechsmann & DeWaard, 2015). Additionally, citizenship infers activism, engagement, and cosmopolitanism (Zaidi & Rowsell, 2017). When focusing on digital citizenship and the responsible use of technology, Ribble (2015) proposes nine elements categorized under three principles of behaviour – respect, educate and protect. Although citizenship is a worthy area of investigation and needs to be recognized for future attention, it is beyond the scope of this literature review.

  A Tangled Web

       Surrounding these definitions of media and digital literacies there exists a veritable Pandora’s box of literacy terminology (Belshaw, 2011) including transliteracies; cosmopolitan literacy; cultural literacies; place based literacies; artefactual literacies; information communication literacies (ICT); internet or web literacies; technological literacy; multiliteracies; multimodal; multicultural; visual literacy; and transmedia literacies. While this literature review will not specifically examine this tangle of terminologies, they are mentioned here to acknowledge the confusion and recognize potential misconceptions resulting from the conflation of terminology (Belshaw, 2011; Spante et al. 2018). For this review, the primary conceptualization for literacy/literacies will encompass both media and digital formats under the term MDL while recognizing that literacies are both an internal, cognitive ability and a social practice, with each requiring action and reflection in contextually specific ways within teacher education teaching and learning. While Stordy’s (2015) taxonomies of literacies is particularly helpful as a starting point for understanding of literacy/literacies, there is potential for further development of generating a phylogenetic graphic to establish origin stories of literacy terminology, integrating information about inherited characteristics, but that required more time than is available for this current review.