Every educational experience is a quest for meaning.
Making this meaning is often reliant on our ability to think critically, reflect, deconstruct and reassemble the pieces we find along the way. This awareness and ability has been labelled metacognition.
It’s this type of learning that requires an intrinsic understanding of multi-literacies. These are the literacies required to exist in a digital, networked, dynamic environment, where the sources of knowledge satiation aren’t always airtight. For example, take Lauren’s ambition to achieve her 10km running goal. In order to increase her likelihood of success, she’s learnt how to network with other running mums, embraced a new style of technology in her Garmin running watch and keeps up to date with her network through digital images, facebook and their website. All these involve different literacies; Digital, information, and traditional.
I’ve written a couple of posts on digital and information literacy, but they are only a small element of the multi-literacies framework. So much ‘meaning making’ comes from what we already know and how we assume it will be known to others. However, if we understand a concept one way, in one (or many) forms, it won’t necessarily be so for another. Thus, if we are able to possess a multitude of literacies, we will be able to interpret meaning in many forms, depending on the source.
However, I’ve been thinking about whether one should become multi-literate through NetGL, because of NetGL or before NetGL. Does the structure of a networked learning environment facilitate or necessitate the ability to comprehend many modes of meaning?
Take this course for example. I consider myself multi-literate in that I can understand concepts that are ill-described, apply them to a ‘thing’ contextually and communicate that meaning through another medium. It really helped me create my blog, link my links and support others at the start of this semester. Conversely, I’ve been reading posts from Bec White, and can see that a definite adaptation of technological nous has greatly benefitted her motivation. However, was that due to NetGL or through NetGL?
It seems to me that both can assist the formation of one another, but is one more appropriate to acquire first?
I suppose it comes down to the context.
I suppose too, that as educators it’s something that must be considered anon.
Al
Making this meaning is often reliant on our ability to think critically, reflect, deconstruct and reassemble the pieces we find along the way. This awareness and ability has been labelled metacognition.
It’s this type of learning that requires an intrinsic understanding of multi-literacies. These are the literacies required to exist in a digital, networked, dynamic environment, where the sources of knowledge satiation aren’t always airtight. For example, take Lauren’s ambition to achieve her 10km running goal. In order to increase her likelihood of success, she’s learnt how to network with other running mums, embraced a new style of technology in her Garmin running watch and keeps up to date with her network through digital images, facebook and their website. All these involve different literacies; Digital, information, and traditional.
I’ve written a couple of posts on digital and information literacy, but they are only a small element of the multi-literacies framework. So much ‘meaning making’ comes from what we already know and how we assume it will be known to others. However, if we understand a concept one way, in one (or many) forms, it won’t necessarily be so for another. Thus, if we are able to possess a multitude of literacies, we will be able to interpret meaning in many forms, depending on the source.
However, I’ve been thinking about whether one should become multi-literate through NetGL, because of NetGL or before NetGL. Does the structure of a networked learning environment facilitate or necessitate the ability to comprehend many modes of meaning?
Take this course for example. I consider myself multi-literate in that I can understand concepts that are ill-described, apply them to a ‘thing’ contextually and communicate that meaning through another medium. It really helped me create my blog, link my links and support others at the start of this semester. Conversely, I’ve been reading posts from Bec White, and can see that a definite adaptation of technological nous has greatly benefitted her motivation. However, was that due to NetGL or through NetGL?
It seems to me that both can assist the formation of one another, but is one more appropriate to acquire first?
I suppose it comes down to the context.
I suppose too, that as educators it’s something that must be considered anon.
Al