Monday, October 11, 2010
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Jane's debate summary
At the start...
At the commencement of our debate I hadn't given much thought to the idea of digital storytelling. To tell the truth, the term 'digital storytelling' stirred up nostalgic, black polo-neck thoughts of community filmmakers - lugging huge (granted - analogue) video cameras round Fitzroy laneways in the early 90's.
As the debate began by defining digital storytelling (and digital literacy) my limited perception was replaced with a curiosity about the possibilities of digital storytelling and new literacy.
Jo's perspective as an ICT co-ordinator who uses digital storytelling in her teaching practice has been invaluable in anchoring our debate in practical terms.
Each week our debate had a different focus around the following themes:
*Is the digital storytelling approach practical and effective (for teaching digital literacy)?
*Does it distract from other areas of digital literacy?
*Are there better ways to address dangers/threats online?
*Is it valid to use teaching and learning time to address digital literacy?
Jo and I both agree that digital literacies need to be incorporated into the curriculum. But underlying that affirmative statement is the tsunami of definitions, possibilities and various contexts in which notions of digital literacy (and indeed digital storytelling) can be interpreted.
So what is digital literacy?
One of the commonalities seen in the interpretation of a new technological pedagogy is the sense that issues are as vast and mindbending as the cyberscape itself. Many of the statements that I have read around digital literacy are sweeping and broad, like this example from the 2004 paper “Toward a theory of New Literacies Emerging from the Internet and Other Information Communication Technologies”
“The new literacies of the Internet and other ICTs include the skills, strategies, and dispositions necessary to successfully use and adapt to the rapidly changing information and communication technologies and contexts that continuously emerge in our world and influence all areas of our personal and professional lives. These new literacies allow us to use the Internet and other ICTs to identify important questions, locate information, critically evaluate the usefulness of that information, synthesize information to answer those questions, and then communicate the answers to others.” (Leu, et. al., 2004 p.2)
Educators like Jones-Kavalier and Flannigan put forward a technological determinist view that the expansion of cyberspace into all aspects of modern first world life demands that we define, disseminate and support the instruction of new literacies:
“With the advent of a new millennium and the rapidity with which technology has changed society, the concept of literacy has assumed new meanings.” (Jones-Kavalier and Flannigan, 2006 p.1)
Do we need to teach digital literacy?
The alternative opinion seems to suggest that it probably isn't helpful to spotlight digital literacy as yet another skill set to be added to the bundle. This approach seen in the work of takes the stance that the core skills that have always driven 'old-fashioned' pens'n'paper literacy still apply – it is only the context that is different. This approach is reflected in the McRae article Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness?
Literacy armageddon?
At the more hardcore end of this spectrum are theorists like Birkets (1994) and Postman (1995) who put forward the idea that using computer technology is harmful to the evolution of literacy – leading to:
“...poor concentration skills in dealing with lengthy and deep textual reading, poor writing skills, and a superficial understanding of issues, due to lack of in depth reading.” (Sutherland-Smith 2002)
Commentators like Nicholas Carr (Is Google Making Us Stupid) and Ben Macintyre in this article in the Times: The Internet is killing storytelling also echo the idea that cyberculture is dismantling our past understanding of narrative with hyper-linked, jump cut chunks of torrential information – forcing and moulding our brains to be less receptive to deep thinking:
“Narratives are a staple of every culture the world over. They are disappearing in an online blizzard of tiny bytes of information” (Macintyre, 2009)
iphone babies
If I see another slideshare that features a picture of a baby playing with an iphone I might just scream – or all those 'digital native' type kids with paper signs and passive, plaintive stares – nasty! Are these web presentation cliche's growing as exponentially as the web itself? The purpose of this mini-rant is to highlight the sentiment that these types presentations are peddling – that we can't predict what this exposure to the net and associated info toys will bring the new generation and it is our duty to prepare the next generation for the challenges ahead.
Related to this are the questions raised in our debate is – are these iphone spawn getting so much exposure in everyday life, that we shouldn't bother? – does the school literacy focus also need to be dominated by technology?
In the paper Digital participation, digital literacy, and school subjects, Hague and Williamson review recent studies and make that claim that although children are confident users of new media, their judgement, critical skills and technical ability may not be what it seems. They state that:
“The problem with the 'digital natives' idea, then, is that it often overestimates the amount of knowledge that young people have about digital technologies and digital cultures.” (Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.12)
Based on this view and my own anecdotal experiences, I'd argue for balance and a sense of teaching context, history and culture of technology using all sorts of methods, not just technology.
Key themes in our debate
An Engaging tool. The idea of student engagement (central to a social constructivist approach) was discussed by Jo as a distinct advantage for digital storytelling in meeting digital literacy learning needs. The idea engagement with the process of creating a digital story also seems to fit with a constructionist model as defined by Seymour Papert:
“Constructonism notion of learning by building and exploration through play (from a Piaget perspective) in a context where “... the learner is consciously engaged in constructing a public entity, whether its a sandcastle on the beach or a theory of the universe” (Papert and Hare, 1991, p.)
While engagement is valid argument it is probably worth noting that other activities involving creative expression, lateral thinking and fun are not limited to an online environment but can be equally as useful in teaching aspects of digital literacy. I find myself leaning toward this view as quoted in Hague and Williamson from Burn, A and Durranm J (2007) from Media Literacy in Schools: Practice, production and progression, who note:
“It is also important that young people learn about technologies rather than just being taught with or through them.” (from Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.14)
Cheap and easy. The low cost of using digital storytelling in the classroom and the relative ease of use was another perspective used by Jo to sell the idea of digital storytelling as the best approach for digital literacy. She also suggests that as digital storytelling is close to current practice it is a soft and accessible way to introduce technology to the classroom.
While broadly I agree with these statements, I can see the risk of using the techonology for its own sake, the problems inherent with distractions and focus on a product rather than a process. Rather than relying on what we know, shouldn't the approach be more in line with risk taking and brave changes to curriculum to mirror the astonishing new cyber landspace?
'Developing the digital literacy of young people within school subjects recognises that as the world changes school subjects should too.” (Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.5)
The whole 'best' thing
In the spirit of a debate, I initially put on my argue hat to say that you can't really claim one strategy as the best in an arena as complex and embryonic as digital literacy. Based on comments, collaboration, discourse and research over the last few weeks, I have come to believe that this is true. One of the stated principles of connectivism states that “learning and knowledge rests in a diversity of opinion” (Siemens, 2004) – expanding on this thought I suggest that in the case of digital literacy education, learning rests in a diversity of experience. Areas of learning such as filtering, ethics, safety, authenticity, critical thinking, value should not be limited to one format or subject:
'Already technologies are changing the ways in which we engage with subjects like geography, English, and science. GPS systems, online hypertext narratives and physical simulations and visualisations are all recent developments related to these subjects” (Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.5)
In spite of all my digital storytelling harping, I fully respect and admire Jo's case studies and successes with digital storytelling models in the classroom.
And after all that...
We ended up agreeing on the idea that digital literacy skills need to be addressed in the school curriculum K-12 to meet the forcast work and life skills for the next generation.
Jo has made a case for digital storytelling as one of the best means for teaching digital literacy skills based on the familiarity of narrative, ease of use and engagement. I'd like to support digital storytelling as a great strategy, but would like to see it used as one among many tools (not all of them online) in a unified, whole school approach to addressing digital literacy.
Thanks heaps to Jo and to all who commented for making this debate so lively and enjoyable.
References
Carr N. (2008) Is Google making us stupid? Atlantic July/August 2008 retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/on 25/5/2010
Hague, C and Williamson, B, Digital participation, digital literacy and school subjects: A review of the policies, literacture and evidence, August 2009, Futurelab, www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/.../lit.../DigitalParticipation.pdf
Jones-Kavalier, B.R & Flannigan, S.L (2006) Connecting the Digital Dots: Literacy of the 21st Century, retrieved on 22 May 2010 fromhttp://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/ConnectingtheDigitalDotsLitera/157395
Leu, Donald, J, Jr., Kinzer, C.K, Coiro, J.L, Cammack, D.W, Toward a Theory of New Literacies Emerging From the Internet and Other Information and Communication Technologies, 2004, Retrived from http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/leu/ on 31/5/2010
Macintyre, B., The Internet is killing storytelling, 5 November, 2009, The Times Online, retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article6903537.ece on 31/5/2010
McRae L. 2004 Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness? Online Opinion retrieved from http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2810 on 2/6/2010
Papert, S and Hare,I, Constructionism Ablet Publishing Corp 1991, Chapter 1, Situating Constructionism, retrieved from namodemello.com.br on 2/6/2010
Siemens, G, Connectivism, 2004 retrieved from http://www. connectivism. ca/about. html …, 2008 – devrijeruimte.org on 2/6/2010
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002) Weaving the literacy Wed: Changes in reading from page to screen, retrieved on 22 May 2010 fromhhttps://ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=6437896&site=ehost-live
At the commencement of our debate I hadn't given much thought to the idea of digital storytelling. To tell the truth, the term 'digital storytelling' stirred up nostalgic, black polo-neck thoughts of community filmmakers - lugging huge (granted - analogue) video cameras round Fitzroy laneways in the early 90's.
As the debate began by defining digital storytelling (and digital literacy) my limited perception was replaced with a curiosity about the possibilities of digital storytelling and new literacy.
Jo's perspective as an ICT co-ordinator who uses digital storytelling in her teaching practice has been invaluable in anchoring our debate in practical terms.
Each week our debate had a different focus around the following themes:
*Is the digital storytelling approach practical and effective (for teaching digital literacy)?
*Does it distract from other areas of digital literacy?
*Are there better ways to address dangers/threats online?
*Is it valid to use teaching and learning time to address digital literacy?
Jo and I both agree that digital literacies need to be incorporated into the curriculum. But underlying that affirmative statement is the tsunami of definitions, possibilities and various contexts in which notions of digital literacy (and indeed digital storytelling) can be interpreted.
So what is digital literacy?
One of the commonalities seen in the interpretation of a new technological pedagogy is the sense that issues are as vast and mindbending as the cyberscape itself. Many of the statements that I have read around digital literacy are sweeping and broad, like this example from the 2004 paper “Toward a theory of New Literacies Emerging from the Internet and Other Information Communication Technologies”
“The new literacies of the Internet and other ICTs include the skills, strategies, and dispositions necessary to successfully use and adapt to the rapidly changing information and communication technologies and contexts that continuously emerge in our world and influence all areas of our personal and professional lives. These new literacies allow us to use the Internet and other ICTs to identify important questions, locate information, critically evaluate the usefulness of that information, synthesize information to answer those questions, and then communicate the answers to others.” (Leu, et. al., 2004 p.2)
Educators like Jones-Kavalier and Flannigan put forward a technological determinist view that the expansion of cyberspace into all aspects of modern first world life demands that we define, disseminate and support the instruction of new literacies:
“With the advent of a new millennium and the rapidity with which technology has changed society, the concept of literacy has assumed new meanings.” (Jones-Kavalier and Flannigan, 2006 p.1)
Do we need to teach digital literacy?
The alternative opinion seems to suggest that it probably isn't helpful to spotlight digital literacy as yet another skill set to be added to the bundle. This approach seen in the work of takes the stance that the core skills that have always driven 'old-fashioned' pens'n'paper literacy still apply – it is only the context that is different. This approach is reflected in the McRae article Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness?
Literacy armageddon?
At the more hardcore end of this spectrum are theorists like Birkets (1994) and Postman (1995) who put forward the idea that using computer technology is harmful to the evolution of literacy – leading to:
“...poor concentration skills in dealing with lengthy and deep textual reading, poor writing skills, and a superficial understanding of issues, due to lack of in depth reading.” (Sutherland-Smith 2002)
Commentators like Nicholas Carr (Is Google Making Us Stupid) and Ben Macintyre in this article in the Times: The Internet is killing storytelling also echo the idea that cyberculture is dismantling our past understanding of narrative with hyper-linked, jump cut chunks of torrential information – forcing and moulding our brains to be less receptive to deep thinking:
“Narratives are a staple of every culture the world over. They are disappearing in an online blizzard of tiny bytes of information” (Macintyre, 2009)
iphone babies
If I see another slideshare that features a picture of a baby playing with an iphone I might just scream – or all those 'digital native' type kids with paper signs and passive, plaintive stares – nasty! Are these web presentation cliche's growing as exponentially as the web itself? The purpose of this mini-rant is to highlight the sentiment that these types presentations are peddling – that we can't predict what this exposure to the net and associated info toys will bring the new generation and it is our duty to prepare the next generation for the challenges ahead.
Related to this are the questions raised in our debate is – are these iphone spawn getting so much exposure in everyday life, that we shouldn't bother? – does the school literacy focus also need to be dominated by technology?
In the paper Digital participation, digital literacy, and school subjects, Hague and Williamson review recent studies and make that claim that although children are confident users of new media, their judgement, critical skills and technical ability may not be what it seems. They state that:
“The problem with the 'digital natives' idea, then, is that it often overestimates the amount of knowledge that young people have about digital technologies and digital cultures.” (Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.12)
Based on this view and my own anecdotal experiences, I'd argue for balance and a sense of teaching context, history and culture of technology using all sorts of methods, not just technology.
Key themes in our debate
An Engaging tool. The idea of student engagement (central to a social constructivist approach) was discussed by Jo as a distinct advantage for digital storytelling in meeting digital literacy learning needs. The idea engagement with the process of creating a digital story also seems to fit with a constructionist model as defined by Seymour Papert:
“Constructonism notion of learning by building and exploration through play (from a Piaget perspective) in a context where “... the learner is consciously engaged in constructing a public entity, whether its a sandcastle on the beach or a theory of the universe” (Papert and Hare, 1991, p.)
While engagement is valid argument it is probably worth noting that other activities involving creative expression, lateral thinking and fun are not limited to an online environment but can be equally as useful in teaching aspects of digital literacy. I find myself leaning toward this view as quoted in Hague and Williamson from Burn, A and Durranm J (2007) from Media Literacy in Schools: Practice, production and progression, who note:
“It is also important that young people learn about technologies rather than just being taught with or through them.” (from Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.14)
Cheap and easy. The low cost of using digital storytelling in the classroom and the relative ease of use was another perspective used by Jo to sell the idea of digital storytelling as the best approach for digital literacy. She also suggests that as digital storytelling is close to current practice it is a soft and accessible way to introduce technology to the classroom.
While broadly I agree with these statements, I can see the risk of using the techonology for its own sake, the problems inherent with distractions and focus on a product rather than a process. Rather than relying on what we know, shouldn't the approach be more in line with risk taking and brave changes to curriculum to mirror the astonishing new cyber landspace?
'Developing the digital literacy of young people within school subjects recognises that as the world changes school subjects should too.” (Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.5)
The whole 'best' thing
In the spirit of a debate, I initially put on my argue hat to say that you can't really claim one strategy as the best in an arena as complex and embryonic as digital literacy. Based on comments, collaboration, discourse and research over the last few weeks, I have come to believe that this is true. One of the stated principles of connectivism states that “learning and knowledge rests in a diversity of opinion” (Siemens, 2004) – expanding on this thought I suggest that in the case of digital literacy education, learning rests in a diversity of experience. Areas of learning such as filtering, ethics, safety, authenticity, critical thinking, value should not be limited to one format or subject:
'Already technologies are changing the ways in which we engage with subjects like geography, English, and science. GPS systems, online hypertext narratives and physical simulations and visualisations are all recent developments related to these subjects” (Hague and Williamson, 2009, p.5)
In spite of all my digital storytelling harping, I fully respect and admire Jo's case studies and successes with digital storytelling models in the classroom.
And after all that...
We ended up agreeing on the idea that digital literacy skills need to be addressed in the school curriculum K-12 to meet the forcast work and life skills for the next generation.
Jo has made a case for digital storytelling as one of the best means for teaching digital literacy skills based on the familiarity of narrative, ease of use and engagement. I'd like to support digital storytelling as a great strategy, but would like to see it used as one among many tools (not all of them online) in a unified, whole school approach to addressing digital literacy.
Thanks heaps to Jo and to all who commented for making this debate so lively and enjoyable.
References
Carr N. (2008) Is Google making us stupid? Atlantic July/August 2008 retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/on 25/5/2010
Hague, C and Williamson, B, Digital participation, digital literacy and school subjects: A review of the policies, literacture and evidence, August 2009, Futurelab, www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/.../lit.../DigitalParticipation.pdf
Jones-Kavalier, B.R & Flannigan, S.L (2006) Connecting the Digital Dots: Literacy of the 21st Century, retrieved on 22 May 2010 fromhttp://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/ConnectingtheDigitalDotsLitera/157395
Leu, Donald, J, Jr., Kinzer, C.K, Coiro, J.L, Cammack, D.W, Toward a Theory of New Literacies Emerging From the Internet and Other Information and Communication Technologies, 2004, Retrived from http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/leu/ on 31/5/2010
Macintyre, B., The Internet is killing storytelling, 5 November, 2009, The Times Online, retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article6903537.ece on 31/5/2010
McRae L. 2004 Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness? Online Opinion retrieved from http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2810 on 2/6/2010
Papert, S and Hare,I, Constructionism Ablet Publishing Corp 1991, Chapter 1, Situating Constructionism, retrieved from namodemello.com.br on 2/6/2010
Siemens, G, Connectivism, 2004 retrieved from http://www. connectivism. ca/about. html …, 2008 – devrijeruimte.org on 2/6/2010
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002) Weaving the literacy Wed: Changes in reading from page to screen, retrieved on 22 May 2010 fromhhttps://ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=6437896&site=ehost-live
Monday, May 31, 2010
Really nice link on digital storytelling
http://jakes.editme.com/DigitalStorytellingTwo
This post by David Jakes is called Digital Storytelling 2.0: What's Next? - it puts a really comprehensive case for digital storytelling as a means of teaching digital literacy (especially visual literacy) and lots of interesting links to explore.
This post by David Jakes is called Digital Storytelling 2.0: What's Next? - it puts a really comprehensive case for digital storytelling as a means of teaching digital literacy (especially visual literacy) and lots of interesting links to explore.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Jo's Summary...
Summing up…
Over the past few weeks, Jane and I have be putting forward our ideas and discoveries from a range of sources. We have used a variety of web-based tools to try and get our point across and have hopefully shared our ideas in a way that was interesting to you all! As I see it, two main areas have revealed themselves: the need to teach digital literacy and the challenges involved in changing how teachers teach.
Jane has made some great points about the inherent problems in labelling any technology as the ‘best’, especially in light of how quickly things change in the cyber-world. However, I still hold the view that digital storytelling can develop a wide range of skills, offer a real audience and a convenient platform to practice cyber-etiquette. Is it the best technology? I’m not sure but I’m also not sure there are any other tools that are quite so directly linked to what is already happening in classrooms.
Using what we are already doing is, I believe, key to changing practice in classrooms so that more engaging, relevant and educational tools such as digital storytelling are used. The teachers best placed to easily bring these technologies into their classroom are those who have a constructivist view; letting students learn from each other and build their own understandings. As Chris Waterman comments, “it takes a little bravery….[but] it’s worth letting your students lead”. As teachers, do we really need to know everything before we begin teaching it? It does indeed take bravery to be able to say ‘I have no idea’ to a group of students who are used to you telling them the ‘answer’. In an online environment, teachers can let the students be the leaders but they still require the teacher’s input to encourage reflection and on task behaviour (Maor, 2008). (With digital storytelling this becomes even more relevant if we want students to focus on the content and not get lost in the tool.) Our role as a teacher is changing, and not just curriculum but also pedagogy. Changing teacher practice is an ongoing challenge. Digital storytelling offers easy to use tools and obvious curriculum links, perhaps this could inspire more teachers to work with web 2.0 technologies.
The other main point that has arisen, and that both Jane and I agree on, is the need to include digital literacy as a key area of learning in schools. For 13 years now, experts in literacy education have identified that students can’t really understand what they see and hear on the Internet until they are able to evaluate its sources (Pool, 1997)
“Digital literacy is the ability to understand…and more important to evaluate and integrate information in multiple formats that the computer can deliver”
(Gilster, P quoted in Pool 1997)
Digital storytelling offers an authentic way to introduce evaluative and interpretive skills to our students; to focus on the meaning, content and source behind the initial viewing or reading. Most importantly in my opinion, creating a multi-media digital story allows children to experience the other side of the coin; they get to be the author and experience what goes into a piece of digital literature.
Is digital storytelling the best tool for teaching digital literacy? I’d say it’s one of the best tools we have at our disposal at the moment (but give it a year and we’ll see what else turns up!)
References:
Waterman, Chris. Lead the revolution. [electronic version]. Teacher; n.203 p.6-8/10; August 2009 ISSN: 1449-9274. [cited 26 May 10]
Maor, D. (2008). Changing Relationship: Who is the learner and who is the teacher in the online education landscape? [Electronic Version] Australasian Journal of Technology, 24 (5), pages: 627-638 Retrieval date: April1, 2009 http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet24/maor.pdf
ACMA Report of Media and Society Research Project, (2007) Media and Communications in Australian Families Retrieval date: 26 May 2010 HTTP://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310893
Pool, Carolyn A New Digital Literacy:A Conversation with Paul Gilster (1997) [ Electronic Version] Integrating Technology into Teaching, Vol 55, No. 3, November 1997 Retrieval date: 27 May 2010 http://namodemello.com.br/pdf/tendencias/tecnolnocurric.pdf
Over the past few weeks, Jane and I have be putting forward our ideas and discoveries from a range of sources. We have used a variety of web-based tools to try and get our point across and have hopefully shared our ideas in a way that was interesting to you all! As I see it, two main areas have revealed themselves: the need to teach digital literacy and the challenges involved in changing how teachers teach.
Jane has made some great points about the inherent problems in labelling any technology as the ‘best’, especially in light of how quickly things change in the cyber-world. However, I still hold the view that digital storytelling can develop a wide range of skills, offer a real audience and a convenient platform to practice cyber-etiquette. Is it the best technology? I’m not sure but I’m also not sure there are any other tools that are quite so directly linked to what is already happening in classrooms.
Using what we are already doing is, I believe, key to changing practice in classrooms so that more engaging, relevant and educational tools such as digital storytelling are used. The teachers best placed to easily bring these technologies into their classroom are those who have a constructivist view; letting students learn from each other and build their own understandings. As Chris Waterman comments, “it takes a little bravery….[but] it’s worth letting your students lead”. As teachers, do we really need to know everything before we begin teaching it? It does indeed take bravery to be able to say ‘I have no idea’ to a group of students who are used to you telling them the ‘answer’. In an online environment, teachers can let the students be the leaders but they still require the teacher’s input to encourage reflection and on task behaviour (Maor, 2008). (With digital storytelling this becomes even more relevant if we want students to focus on the content and not get lost in the tool.) Our role as a teacher is changing, and not just curriculum but also pedagogy. Changing teacher practice is an ongoing challenge. Digital storytelling offers easy to use tools and obvious curriculum links, perhaps this could inspire more teachers to work with web 2.0 technologies.
The other main point that has arisen, and that both Jane and I agree on, is the need to include digital literacy as a key area of learning in schools. For 13 years now, experts in literacy education have identified that students can’t really understand what they see and hear on the Internet until they are able to evaluate its sources (Pool, 1997)
“Digital literacy is the ability to understand…and more important to evaluate and integrate information in multiple formats that the computer can deliver”
(Gilster, P quoted in Pool 1997)
Digital storytelling offers an authentic way to introduce evaluative and interpretive skills to our students; to focus on the meaning, content and source behind the initial viewing or reading. Most importantly in my opinion, creating a multi-media digital story allows children to experience the other side of the coin; they get to be the author and experience what goes into a piece of digital literature.
Is digital storytelling the best tool for teaching digital literacy? I’d say it’s one of the best tools we have at our disposal at the moment (but give it a year and we’ll see what else turns up!)
References:
Waterman, Chris. Lead the revolution. [electronic version]. Teacher; n.203 p.6-8/10; August 2009
Maor, D. (2008). Changing Relationship: Who is the learner and who is the teacher in the online education landscape? [Electronic Version] Australasian Journal of Technology, 24 (5), pages: 627-638 Retrieval date: April1, 2009 http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet24/maor.pdf
ACMA Report of Media and Society Research Project, (2007) Media and Communications in Australian Families Retrieval date: 26 May 2010 HTTP://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310893
Pool, Carolyn A New Digital Literacy:A Conversation with Paul Gilster (1997) [ Electronic Version] Integrating Technology into Teaching, Vol 55, No. 3, November 1997 Retrieval date: 27 May 2010 http://namodemello.com.br/pdf/tendencias/tecnolnocurric.pdf
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Just like a bar of chocolate...
I agree with Jane, digital literacy and storytelling offers us juicy ways to do what we have always done. It is attractive to students (we know engagement is key for learning), it encourages different types and kinds of learning (mars bars, twix, violet crumbles), and is cheaply and easily available!
But enough with the analogies!
Digital storytelling encourages students to develop important literacy skills. It lets us piece together all the different curriculum areas in one place. (Sorry, couldn't resist another analogy!!)
Dumpr - Photo Fun
But enough with the analogies!
Digital storytelling encourages students to develop important literacy skills. It lets us piece together all the different curriculum areas in one place. (Sorry, couldn't resist another analogy!!)
Dumpr - Photo Fun
"New" Literacy
This comedy sketch from a Norwegian TV show says it all... I definitely felt like this when I first came across computers, remember the first time you used a word processor!
Does NEW literacy just provokes the same old response?
Does NEW literacy just provokes the same old response?
Fantasic slideshare about digital literacy
This slideshare by Dr. Daniel Churchill (from the University of Hong Kong) give a really clear interpretation of the digital literacy/stragetgy debate.
He includes digital storyteling as one of many stategies that can be used to address the differing needs of new literacy. I think this presentation articulates my position for this debate really clearly - there should not be one 'best' strategy (promoted as the one-size-fits-all solution) for addressing the student's digital literacy learning needs - there needs to be multiple strategies adapted and shaped for differing requirements and audiences.
I particularly like his description of 4 Levels of New Literacy:
1)Personal use
2)Popular use
3)Professional use
4)Innovative use
And there are a lot of useful links and embeds in this presentation! Enjoy.
He includes digital storyteling as one of many stategies that can be used to address the differing needs of new literacy. I think this presentation articulates my position for this debate really clearly - there should not be one 'best' strategy (promoted as the one-size-fits-all solution) for addressing the student's digital literacy learning needs - there needs to be multiple strategies adapted and shaped for differing requirements and audiences.
I particularly like his description of 4 Levels of New Literacy:
1)Personal use
2)Popular use
3)Professional use
4)Innovative use
And there are a lot of useful links and embeds in this presentation! Enjoy.
New Literacy in the Web 2.0 World
View more webinars from Daniel Churchill.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Is it valid to use teaching and learning time to address a digital literacy outcome?
No arguments from me on this week's issue of using teaching and learning time to focus on learning digital literacy skills. That said I am still not convinced that digital storytelling is necessarily the best strategy for addressing all these needs all the time.
Sure it's yummy, but is it good for you?
Like chocolate, digital storytelling can be rich, pleasurable and even nourishing, but too much is not a good thing. Like a 24/7 Willy Wonka diet, relying on digital storytelling to cover all our digital literacy needs will only end in a tummy ache, rotten teeth and tears.
Digital storytelling is only a valid use of teaching and learning time if the teachers are equipped to plan the use of this strategy into a balanced educational program designed around the learner needs and purpose.
“A common scenario today is a classroom filled with digitally literate students being led by linear-thinking, technologically stymied instructors.” (Jones-Kavalier, Flannigan, 2006). Good intentions are not enough. There is simply not enough research yet to support the theory that digital storytelling is the best option for teaching digital literacies.
Superficial, moi?
In the article Weaving the literacy Web: Changes in reading from page to screen Wendy Sutherland-Smith puts forward the arguments of some theorists against the dominance of technology in the classroom:
“Birkets (1994) and Postman (1995) believed the advent of computer technology will lead to an impoverishment of the english language...poor concentration skills in dealing with lengthy and deep textual reading, poor writing skills, and a superficial understanding of issues, due to lack of in depth reading.” (Sutherland-Smith 2002)
This quote highlights some of the arguments for not relying on digital storytelling to deliver all of the classroom literacy strategy. It could be claimed that a student who has spent many classroom hours building a delightfully creative, personal story using web 2.0 technology as a sole strategy is disadvantaged. She/he will have lost opportunities to develop the same depth of understanding compared to a student who spends some time on digital storytelling balanced with offline collaborative and individual exploration of history, archetypes, structure, expression and critical reflection.
Same skills, different medium?
“Using the same skills used for centuries – analysis, synthesis, and evaluation – we must look at digital literacy as another realm within which to apply elements of critical thinking.” (Jones-Kavalier, Flannigan, 2006)
“So”, I can hear Jo say, “why not endorse digital storytelling as the way to teach these hallowed skills?” Analysis, synthesis and evaluation can all be modelled through digital storytelling. To a degree this is correct, but my argument is that it is not necessarily the best approach for teaching all digital literacy skills, all the time.
Digital storytelling best? Don't forget the rest!
For example, Wendy Sutherland-Smith describes a series of strategies she developed around reading and evaluating web-based information, including “snatch-and-grab reading technique” for web pages, refining strategies for key word searching and “chunking technique” to describe breaking down complex topics into logical components. These strategies form an approach to teaching “web literacy and the application of reading to onscreen text” that is just as legitimate an approach for teaching digital literacies as digital storytelling. Blogs, twitter and thousands of web sites also attest to local, strategies for incorporating digital literacy approaches in the classroom. There is no “best” strategy.
New technology and connectivity is vast, exponential and with more regenerating variety than can be expressed. Doesn't it make sense to expand and translate core literacy skills into all aspects of the curriculum to reflect this environment?
Absolutely teaching and learning time should incorporate digital literacy skills, but why should we limit the “delivery” of these skills to one format (or subject) that is mandated as the 'best”? Digital storytelling is one approach that can be utilised, but why define boundaries around the skills required to exist in a boundless online space?
“The greatest challenge is moving beyond the glitz and pizzazz of the flashy technology to teach true literacy in this new milieu.” (Jones-Kavalier, Flannigan, 2006)
References:
Jones-Kavalier, B.R & Flannigan, S.L (2006) Connecting the Digital Dots: Literacy of the 21st Century, retrieved on 22 May 2010 from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/ConnectingtheDigitalDotsLitera/157395
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002) Weaving the literacy Wed: Changes in reading from page to screen, retrieved on 22 May 2010 from https://ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=6437896&site=ehost-live
Sure it's yummy, but is it good for you?
Like chocolate, digital storytelling can be rich, pleasurable and even nourishing, but too much is not a good thing. Like a 24/7 Willy Wonka diet, relying on digital storytelling to cover all our digital literacy needs will only end in a tummy ache, rotten teeth and tears.
Digital storytelling is only a valid use of teaching and learning time if the teachers are equipped to plan the use of this strategy into a balanced educational program designed around the learner needs and purpose.
“A common scenario today is a classroom filled with digitally literate students being led by linear-thinking, technologically stymied instructors.” (Jones-Kavalier, Flannigan, 2006). Good intentions are not enough. There is simply not enough research yet to support the theory that digital storytelling is the best option for teaching digital literacies.
Superficial, moi?
In the article Weaving the literacy Web: Changes in reading from page to screen Wendy Sutherland-Smith puts forward the arguments of some theorists against the dominance of technology in the classroom:
“Birkets (1994) and Postman (1995) believed the advent of computer technology will lead to an impoverishment of the english language...poor concentration skills in dealing with lengthy and deep textual reading, poor writing skills, and a superficial understanding of issues, due to lack of in depth reading.” (Sutherland-Smith 2002)
This quote highlights some of the arguments for not relying on digital storytelling to deliver all of the classroom literacy strategy. It could be claimed that a student who has spent many classroom hours building a delightfully creative, personal story using web 2.0 technology as a sole strategy is disadvantaged. She/he will have lost opportunities to develop the same depth of understanding compared to a student who spends some time on digital storytelling balanced with offline collaborative and individual exploration of history, archetypes, structure, expression and critical reflection.
Same skills, different medium?
“Using the same skills used for centuries – analysis, synthesis, and evaluation – we must look at digital literacy as another realm within which to apply elements of critical thinking.” (Jones-Kavalier, Flannigan, 2006)
“So”, I can hear Jo say, “why not endorse digital storytelling as the way to teach these hallowed skills?” Analysis, synthesis and evaluation can all be modelled through digital storytelling. To a degree this is correct, but my argument is that it is not necessarily the best approach for teaching all digital literacy skills, all the time.
Digital storytelling best? Don't forget the rest!
For example, Wendy Sutherland-Smith describes a series of strategies she developed around reading and evaluating web-based information, including “snatch-and-grab reading technique” for web pages, refining strategies for key word searching and “chunking technique” to describe breaking down complex topics into logical components. These strategies form an approach to teaching “web literacy and the application of reading to onscreen text” that is just as legitimate an approach for teaching digital literacies as digital storytelling. Blogs, twitter and thousands of web sites also attest to local, strategies for incorporating digital literacy approaches in the classroom. There is no “best” strategy.
New technology and connectivity is vast, exponential and with more regenerating variety than can be expressed. Doesn't it make sense to expand and translate core literacy skills into all aspects of the curriculum to reflect this environment?
Absolutely teaching and learning time should incorporate digital literacy skills, but why should we limit the “delivery” of these skills to one format (or subject) that is mandated as the 'best”? Digital storytelling is one approach that can be utilised, but why define boundaries around the skills required to exist in a boundless online space?
“The greatest challenge is moving beyond the glitz and pizzazz of the flashy technology to teach true literacy in this new milieu.” (Jones-Kavalier, Flannigan, 2006)
References:
Jones-Kavalier, B.R & Flannigan, S.L (2006) Connecting the Digital Dots: Literacy of the 21st Century, retrieved on 22 May 2010 from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/ConnectingtheDigitalDotsLitera/157395
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002) Weaving the literacy Wed: Changes in reading from page to screen, retrieved on 22 May 2010 from https://ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=6437896&site=ehost-live
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Digital storytelling: A good tool to address cyber-safety concerns
Click on the 'post a sticky' to add your comment!
Wallwisher is great for collaborative discussions to get key ideas down - free, no registration required :)
Wallwisher is great for collaborative discussions to get key ideas down - free, no registration required :)
Monday, May 17, 2010
Are there better ways of addressing dangers/threats that the online environment poses?
The topic this week is danger! Can digital storytelling as a preferred approach best address the dangers and threats of an online environment? So what are these threats?
Given that our theme links digital storytelling back to digital literacy – maybe the question also needs to address personal skills - is developing the wherewithal to navigate online dangers an aspect of digital literacy?
Cyber-bullying and online predators are acknowledged risks of being active in an online world, but is digital storytelling necessarily the best way to address these issues? Here are some thoughts on...
Digital literacy and online citizenship
In the article Curriculum teaches digital literacy and citizenship ), on his internet safety blog, Larry Magid talks about a not-for-profit organisation in San Francisco who has developed curriculum with a focus on digital citizenship. The curriculum is based on similar work being done by Howard Gardner's Good Play (http://www.goodworkproject.org/research/digital.htm)project which has a focus on behaviour and ethics online for young people. Magid states that the difference in these programs is the acceptance of the young people that the program is designed to protect as participants and creators (rather than just as consumers). The curriculum he is reviewing (by U.S.-based Common Sense Media) covers the following areas:
“Digital life: "How the anytime-anywhere-everywhere nature of digital media requires responsible choices."
Privacy and digital footprints: How to manage privacy online.
Connected culture: How to build respectful one-on-one, group, and community relationships online and protect against cyber bullying.
Self-expression and reputation: Who we are in various online contexts and how to protect your reputation in the process.
Respecting creative work: How to get credit for original creations and respect others' creative property.” (Common Sense Media, 2010)
In examples from the Common Sense Media Privacy and digital footprints curriculum many exercises and activities focus on videos as jumping-off points, off-line games and old-fashioned collaborative discussion. Learning about digital literacy issues, can benefit from the being taught independently from digital tools, allowing space to deconstruct meanings and encourage objectivity.
Other dangers?
If we take a wider view the 'dangers and threats' in the online world – one lightweight technological determinist reading may be about the misuse of the tools themselves.
In the article Using Technology to Enhance Literacy Instruction Ann Holum and Jan Gahala put forward an overview of the arguments for and against integrating technology (including digital storytelling) into the K-12 curriculum. In the overview, they summarise two of the key issues as:
“The “Moving Target” problem” which they attribute to the work of Valdez 1999 (Holum & Gahala, 2001). Essentially this is the idea research on technology is failing to keep up with the changing pace of technology and classroom practice arising from this research can be quickly obsolete.
And the “Scarcity of Comprehensive Literacy Studies. Not only does technology change faster than guidelines for innovations can be established, but relatively few thorough studies have evaluated the efficacy of new technologies for literacy education.” (Holum & Gahala, 2001).
Jo has acknowledged a similar thought in her last post - that using the area of digital storytelling for great cognition needs “further exploration”. The danger in the approach of a digital storytelling focus may be putting all your literacy eggs in one unproven basket.
A couple of final thoughts
Digital storytelling is a part of the approach to a digital literacy curriculum – not the solution itself:
“Consider technology tools as an extension of—not a substitute for—traditional literacy instruction in the classroom.” (Holum & Gahala, 2001).
Be vigilant, the dangers of cyber bullying, safety, digital footprints etc are not necessarily addressed more successfully through the medium that sustains them:
Holum & Gahala quote Healy (1998, p.141),"We must make sure that computer use includes the important step of requiring children to 'elaborate' their knowledge—thinking aloud, questioning, communicating ideas, or creating some kind of original representation about what they are learning"
References
Common Sense Media, Digital Citizenship Curriculum, retrieved on 17 March 2010 from http://www.commonsensemedia.org/how-be-common-sense-school2
Gardner, H, Good Play Project, retrieved on 10 May, 2010 from http://www.goodworkproject.org/research/digital.htm
Holum, J & Gahala, J, Using Technology to Enhance Literacy Instruction, Critical Issue, 2001, Retrieved on 17 May 2010 from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/reading/li300.htm
Magid, L, Curriculum teaches digital literacy and citizenship, Safe and Secure blog, 10 April, 2010 retrieved on 14 May 2010 from http://ow.ly/1x2r2
Given that our theme links digital storytelling back to digital literacy – maybe the question also needs to address personal skills - is developing the wherewithal to navigate online dangers an aspect of digital literacy?
Cyber-bullying and online predators are acknowledged risks of being active in an online world, but is digital storytelling necessarily the best way to address these issues? Here are some thoughts on...
Digital literacy and online citizenship
In the article Curriculum teaches digital literacy and citizenship ), on his internet safety blog, Larry Magid talks about a not-for-profit organisation in San Francisco who has developed curriculum with a focus on digital citizenship. The curriculum is based on similar work being done by Howard Gardner's Good Play (http://www.goodworkproject.org/research/digital.htm)project which has a focus on behaviour and ethics online for young people. Magid states that the difference in these programs is the acceptance of the young people that the program is designed to protect as participants and creators (rather than just as consumers). The curriculum he is reviewing (by U.S.-based Common Sense Media) covers the following areas:
“Digital life: "How the anytime-anywhere-everywhere nature of digital media requires responsible choices."
Privacy and digital footprints: How to manage privacy online.
Connected culture: How to build respectful one-on-one, group, and community relationships online and protect against cyber bullying.
Self-expression and reputation: Who we are in various online contexts and how to protect your reputation in the process.
Respecting creative work: How to get credit for original creations and respect others' creative property.” (Common Sense Media, 2010)
In examples from the Common Sense Media Privacy and digital footprints curriculum many exercises and activities focus on videos as jumping-off points, off-line games and old-fashioned collaborative discussion. Learning about digital literacy issues, can benefit from the being taught independently from digital tools, allowing space to deconstruct meanings and encourage objectivity.
Other dangers?
If we take a wider view the 'dangers and threats' in the online world – one lightweight technological determinist reading may be about the misuse of the tools themselves.
In the article Using Technology to Enhance Literacy Instruction Ann Holum and Jan Gahala put forward an overview of the arguments for and against integrating technology (including digital storytelling) into the K-12 curriculum. In the overview, they summarise two of the key issues as:
“The “Moving Target” problem” which they attribute to the work of Valdez 1999 (Holum & Gahala, 2001). Essentially this is the idea research on technology is failing to keep up with the changing pace of technology and classroom practice arising from this research can be quickly obsolete.
And the “Scarcity of Comprehensive Literacy Studies. Not only does technology change faster than guidelines for innovations can be established, but relatively few thorough studies have evaluated the efficacy of new technologies for literacy education.” (Holum & Gahala, 2001).
Jo has acknowledged a similar thought in her last post - that using the area of digital storytelling for great cognition needs “further exploration”. The danger in the approach of a digital storytelling focus may be putting all your literacy eggs in one unproven basket.
A couple of final thoughts
Digital storytelling is a part of the approach to a digital literacy curriculum – not the solution itself:
“Consider technology tools as an extension of—not a substitute for—traditional literacy instruction in the classroom.” (Holum & Gahala, 2001).
Be vigilant, the dangers of cyber bullying, safety, digital footprints etc are not necessarily addressed more successfully through the medium that sustains them:
Holum & Gahala quote Healy (1998, p.141),"We must make sure that computer use includes the important step of requiring children to 'elaborate' their knowledge—thinking aloud, questioning, communicating ideas, or creating some kind of original representation about what they are learning"
References
Common Sense Media, Digital Citizenship Curriculum, retrieved on 17 March 2010 from http://www.commonsensemedia.org/how-be-common-sense-school2
Gardner, H, Good Play Project, retrieved on 10 May, 2010 from http://www.goodworkproject.org/research/digital.htm
Holum, J & Gahala, J, Using Technology to Enhance Literacy Instruction, Critical Issue, 2001, Retrieved on 17 May 2010 from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/reading/li300.htm
Magid, L, Curriculum teaches digital literacy and citizenship, Safe and Secure blog, 10 April, 2010 retrieved on 14 May 2010 from http://ow.ly/1x2r2
Friday, May 14, 2010
museum box
Hi everyone
I've made a 'museum box' for my next debate piece, however, I'm waiting for the site to moderate and accept it! I guess this extra safety is reasuring for teachers and parents but I have to say it's strange for me to have to wait for something more than a day! In case it doesn't happen, I have attached my written piece here! Thanks for your patience :)
The Attraction of Digital Storytelling
Digital Storytelling is not a distraction but an attraction for many students. As Robin (2008) notes, a digital story can be "an anticipatory set or hook to capture the attention of students". The loose use of the term 'story' means there are many examples of digital explanations, descriptions and instructions appearing online labelled 'digital stories'. However, if the purpose of a digital 'story' is to engage and challenge student's in their learning, does it matter that the structure of the piece strays from the traditional understanding of a narrative (that of introduction, complication, resolution)?
Ellum (2005) comments "Digital stories can take many forms, be derived from different means and have different purposes." I would also argue that the purpose of all digital stories is to enhance and engage the students in their literacy learning. The challenge of these methods becoming a distraction is an ongoing one is classrooms, how do we as teachers maintain students' focus on the topic at hand? Farmer (2004) argues that technology and digital storytelling in particular can 'personalise the curriculum' for students and can lead to higher engagement. Of course the tools used are often fun, engaging and potentially distracting. Would we be using them if they weren't enjoyed?
As Jane mentioned in her previous post, the focus of an activity can be lost (as we often see with Powerpoint) when a child discovers the 'cool' factor of a piece of software. In the case of PowerPoint, the transitions, word art and clip art can often lead to a lack of focus on the content and learning at hand (and to a fractured, inconsistent and inaccurate product). However, Farmer (2004) also mentions this challenge and reinforces the idea that "the focus should be on the story itself, not on digital bells and whistles". She suggests focusing on each step of the storytelling process of brainstorming, scripting, storyboarding, digitising and editing in order to help students remain focused on the learning.
Following a trial of digital storytelling tools at higher education facilities, Lonsdale and Jenkins (2007) concluded that not only were the criteria set for students crucial to the outcome, but also that digital stories could be "a discipline resource to enable further reflection and storytelling to encourage deep learning"
The idea of using storytelling tools to encourage deeper cognition and metacognition, is an exciting and fascinating aspect that needs further exploration!
References:
Robin, Bernard R. (2008) "Digital Storytelling: A Powerful Technology Tool for the 21st Century", Theory into Practice, 47:3, 220-228
Farmer, Lesley (2004) "Using Technology For Storytelling: Tools for Children", New Review of Children's Literature and Librarianship, 10:2, 155-168
Ellum, Louisa ( 2005) "Digital Storytelling as Teaching Tool", Fine Print, Winter 2005, 28:2, 3-6
Jenkins, Martin & Lonsdale, Jo (2007) "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Storytelling for Student Reflection" Ascilite Singapore, 2007 ICT Providing Choices for Learners and Learning.
I've made a 'museum box' for my next debate piece, however, I'm waiting for the site to moderate and accept it! I guess this extra safety is reasuring for teachers and parents but I have to say it's strange for me to have to wait for something more than a day! In case it doesn't happen, I have attached my written piece here! Thanks for your patience :)
The Attraction of Digital Storytelling
Digital Storytelling is not a distraction but an attraction for many students. As Robin (2008) notes, a digital story can be "an anticipatory set or hook to capture the attention of students". The loose use of the term 'story' means there are many examples of digital explanations, descriptions and instructions appearing online labelled 'digital stories'. However, if the purpose of a digital 'story' is to engage and challenge student's in their learning, does it matter that the structure of the piece strays from the traditional understanding of a narrative (that of introduction, complication, resolution)?
Ellum (2005) comments "Digital stories can take many forms, be derived from different means and have different purposes." I would also argue that the purpose of all digital stories is to enhance and engage the students in their literacy learning. The challenge of these methods becoming a distraction is an ongoing one is classrooms, how do we as teachers maintain students' focus on the topic at hand? Farmer (2004) argues that technology and digital storytelling in particular can 'personalise the curriculum' for students and can lead to higher engagement. Of course the tools used are often fun, engaging and potentially distracting. Would we be using them if they weren't enjoyed?
As Jane mentioned in her previous post, the focus of an activity can be lost (as we often see with Powerpoint) when a child discovers the 'cool' factor of a piece of software. In the case of PowerPoint, the transitions, word art and clip art can often lead to a lack of focus on the content and learning at hand (and to a fractured, inconsistent and inaccurate product). However, Farmer (2004) also mentions this challenge and reinforces the idea that "the focus should be on the story itself, not on digital bells and whistles". She suggests focusing on each step of the storytelling process of brainstorming, scripting, storyboarding, digitising and editing in order to help students remain focused on the learning.
Following a trial of digital storytelling tools at higher education facilities, Lonsdale and Jenkins (2007) concluded that not only were the criteria set for students crucial to the outcome, but also that digital stories could be "a discipline resource to enable further reflection and storytelling to encourage deep learning"
The idea of using storytelling tools to encourage deeper cognition and metacognition, is an exciting and fascinating aspect that needs further exploration!
References:
Robin, Bernard R. (2008) "Digital Storytelling: A Powerful Technology Tool for the 21st Century", Theory into Practice, 47:3, 220-228
Farmer, Lesley (2004) "Using Technology For Storytelling: Tools for Children", New Review of Children's Literature and Librarianship, 10:2, 155-168
Ellum, Louisa ( 2005) "Digital Storytelling as Teaching Tool", Fine Print, Winter 2005, 28:2, 3-6
Jenkins, Martin & Lonsdale, Jo (2007) "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Digital Storytelling for Student Reflection" Ascilite Singapore, 2007 ICT Providing Choices for Learners and Learning.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Another View on Digital Storytelling and its benefits
I found this and wanted to share it because it is a powerpoint that reflects on the implementation of a Digital Storytelling program. Interesting points and it gives a procedure to follow also.
The most powerful comment was from a teacher:
The most powerful comment was from a teacher:
“…what is occurring because of that one simple little thing you have done (teaching digital storytelling) is really rather phenomenal. Remember your comment at the beginning of the training about – would it help if I could give you a technology tool that very quickly you could learn and use even if you don’t know anything about technology? I wondered when you said that how it could be done. Well, you did it and it has proven to be effective many times over with an unbelievable ripple effect as it is touching special education, ESL students, recent immigrants, parents of autistic children, and on and on.” – a high school teacher in Texas
A multilevel-approach-to-ds
View more presentations from Joanne Blannin.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
The distraction post (without all the distractions)
The scope of digital literacy
Digital literacy could be said to encompass all/some of the following:
This week Jo has promoted digital storytelling as being a cross-curricular activity, encompassing content, design, technology, art etc. She also discusses the idea of real life perspectives. While I agree that digital storytelling does lend itself to multiple avenues for learning, so do many other activities in the traditional literacy curriculum...A class developed performance, for example, could equally convey powerful personal storytelling, aspects of design (set, props), analogue & digital technologies (lighting, sound) and still address areas of digital literacy in both approach (critical consciousness) and even topic (cyberbullying). It also has the advantage of exposing a class to a challenging situation; creating an environment for personal development and risk taking, beyond the comfort zone of a computer.
Yes, digital storytelling could offer opportunities for validating sources, referencing and intellectual property as students create and publish their material, but as Leanne McRae suggests, this does not currently seem to be the case.
In an opinion piece “Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness”, McRae argues that her current tertiary students “have been betrayed” by a system that favours digital technologies “...educational efficiency and rationalist curricula” over the “fundamental mechanics of writing” and critical analysis. McRae describes the poor quality of work produced by her students in a tertiary assignment. She suggests that balance is required in an educational approach. “Education at its best allows access – not to technology, a screen or a program – but to ideas and a critical consciousness” (McRae, 2004).
Digital storytelling implies a wholehearted celebration and endorsement of Web 2.0 technologies. This buy-in could be said to be a distraction from a major aspect of the digital literacy debate - the fact that these technologies are generated by business as a means to make money. Social networking sites and digital storytelling tools frequently ask for 'subscriptions' and sign-ups as means to collect personal information that may be used for commercial gain.
As Ben Williamson points out in his review of this book Digital literacies: social learning and classroom practices : “Literacies research, for all the recent theoretical, methodological and practical advances ... still offers no coherent response to the educational consequences of technological commercialisation.” (Willamson, 2010).
Promoting digital storytelling as the best means of delivering a digital literacy curriculum, does not address the need for a balanced approach. When the curriculum starts to endorse a focus on digital literacy taught exclusively through an online medium, this comes at the expense of time spent on other types of individual and cultural literacy development.
McRae L. 2004 Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness? Online Opinion
Williamson, Ben (2010) Digital literacies: social learning and classroom practices, Learning, Media and Technology, 35:1, 87 - 89 Retrieved on 6 May 2010 from http://www.informaworld.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/smpp/section?content=a921501708&fulltext=713240928
Digital literacy could be said to encompass all/some of the following:
- technical skills (how to navigate and use systems)
- transferrable skills (across operating systems and software)
- visual literacy (both as a creator and a consumer)
- cultural literacy
- filtering and judgement
- safety and ethics
- critical analysis
- authenticity
- identity
- social communication and collaboration
This week Jo has promoted digital storytelling as being a cross-curricular activity, encompassing content, design, technology, art etc. She also discusses the idea of real life perspectives. While I agree that digital storytelling does lend itself to multiple avenues for learning, so do many other activities in the traditional literacy curriculum...A class developed performance, for example, could equally convey powerful personal storytelling, aspects of design (set, props), analogue & digital technologies (lighting, sound) and still address areas of digital literacy in both approach (critical consciousness) and even topic (cyberbullying). It also has the advantage of exposing a class to a challenging situation; creating an environment for personal development and risk taking, beyond the comfort zone of a computer.
Distraction from the fundamentals?
Yes, digital storytelling could offer opportunities for validating sources, referencing and intellectual property as students create and publish their material, but as Leanne McRae suggests, this does not currently seem to be the case.
In an opinion piece “Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness”, McRae argues that her current tertiary students “have been betrayed” by a system that favours digital technologies “...educational efficiency and rationalist curricula” over the “fundamental mechanics of writing” and critical analysis. McRae describes the poor quality of work produced by her students in a tertiary assignment. She suggests that balance is required in an educational approach. “Education at its best allows access – not to technology, a screen or a program – but to ideas and a critical consciousness” (McRae, 2004).
Distraction from the source and intention?
Digital storytelling implies a wholehearted celebration and endorsement of Web 2.0 technologies. This buy-in could be said to be a distraction from a major aspect of the digital literacy debate - the fact that these technologies are generated by business as a means to make money. Social networking sites and digital storytelling tools frequently ask for 'subscriptions' and sign-ups as means to collect personal information that may be used for commercial gain.
As Ben Williamson points out in his review of this book Digital literacies: social learning and classroom practices : “Literacies research, for all the recent theoretical, methodological and practical advances ... still offers no coherent response to the educational consequences of technological commercialisation.” (Willamson, 2010).
A balanced approach is best
Promoting digital storytelling as the best means of delivering a digital literacy curriculum, does not address the need for a balanced approach. When the curriculum starts to endorse a focus on digital literacy taught exclusively through an online medium, this comes at the expense of time spent on other types of individual and cultural literacy development.
In the article Is Google Making Us Stupid, Nicholas Carr discusses his own questionable adaptation to an online world. He asks the question: “If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with “content” we will sacrifice something important not only in our selves but in our culture.” (Carr, 2008)
McRae L. 2004 Is digital literacy killing critical consciousness? Online Opinion
Williamson, Ben (2010) Digital literacies: social learning and classroom practices, Learning, Media and Technology, 35:1, 87 - 89 Retrieved on 6 May 2010 from http://www.informaworld.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/smpp/section?content=a921501708&fulltext=713240928
More on the issue of distraction
Sorry, I couldn't help myself...
http://www.dvolver.com/live/moviemaker.html
http://www.dvolver.com/live/moviemaker.html
A slight digression
This slideshare covers themes of digital literacy in a purely visual way. An interesting aside to our debate. And it adds yet another perspective to the questions of what digital literacy might actually entail.
Popular Issues in (Digital) Media Literacy
View more presentations from Alec Couros.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
The Adventures of Super Learning Girl and CyberTeach (or does digital storytelling distract from issues of digital literacy?)
Here is an intro to the week 2 theme:
As you can see, I got distracted!
As you can see, I got distracted!
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Some Thoughts...
Does digital storytelling take away from our already crowded curriculum?
Digital storytelling is a cross-curricular activity. Teachers might choose to focus on the content of the story thereby addressing humanities or literacy outcomes, they may choose to look at design and technology aspects or to concentrate on the art concepts involved in communicating in this medium.
In particular, stories already published on the Internet offer real-life perspectives through which we can see the human side of many topics. For example, in this example, the author teaches forgiveness and responsibility through her digital story; this example is about conservation and land use: here the author talks about how art has helped her to overcome personal issues.
As our State's curriculum focuses more and more specific training in skills, rather than just on content, digital storytelling offers authentic experiences in researching, publishing and creating (Jentikoff, 2009). Student's also gain experience in validating Internet sources, learning how to appropriately reference information and about ownership and intellectual property. These cross-curricular skills are often found to be difficult to teach as they require a specific context in order for students to fully understand; digital storytelling offers a concrete, personal and relevant context in order to experience and make judgements about Internet content, research and ownership.
The issue of a crowded curriculum is not new, however, perhaps, from a technological determinist view, our priorities should be shifting to follow the development of storytelling tools. The National Curriculum Board has recognised this:
"Digital and online technologies continue to
profoundly transform how members of Australian
society work, meet, keep in touch, express themselves,
share, build and store knowledge, and access material
for pleasure and learning. Clearly, digital and online
materials present the English curriculum with new
teaching opportunities. Enhancing the access of all
teachers and students to these resources is critical.
(NCB, 2009 p.15 quoted in "Jentikoff (2009))
References:
Jetnikoff, A (2009) "Digital Storytelling, Podcasts, Blogs & Vlogs" English in Australia Volume 44 Number 2 • 2009
NCB (2009) Shape of the Australian Curriculum: English. Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority
Digital storytelling is a cross-curricular activity. Teachers might choose to focus on the content of the story thereby addressing humanities or literacy outcomes, they may choose to look at design and technology aspects or to concentrate on the art concepts involved in communicating in this medium.
In particular, stories already published on the Internet offer real-life perspectives through which we can see the human side of many topics. For example, in this example, the author teaches forgiveness and responsibility through her digital story; this example is about conservation and land use: here the author talks about how art has helped her to overcome personal issues.
As our State's curriculum focuses more and more specific training in skills, rather than just on content, digital storytelling offers authentic experiences in researching, publishing and creating (Jentikoff, 2009). Student's also gain experience in validating Internet sources, learning how to appropriately reference information and about ownership and intellectual property. These cross-curricular skills are often found to be difficult to teach as they require a specific context in order for students to fully understand; digital storytelling offers a concrete, personal and relevant context in order to experience and make judgements about Internet content, research and ownership.
The issue of a crowded curriculum is not new, however, perhaps, from a technological determinist view, our priorities should be shifting to follow the development of storytelling tools. The National Curriculum Board has recognised this:
"Digital and online technologies continue to
profoundly transform how members of Australian
society work, meet, keep in touch, express themselves,
share, build and store knowledge, and access material
for pleasure and learning. Clearly, digital and online
materials present the English curriculum with new
teaching opportunities. Enhancing the access of all
teachers and students to these resources is critical.
(NCB, 2009 p.15 quoted in "Jentikoff (2009))
References:
Jetnikoff, A (2009) "Digital Storytelling, Podcasts, Blogs & Vlogs" English in Australia Volume 44 Number 2 • 2009
NCB (2009) Shape of the Australian Curriculum: English. Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority
Saturday, May 1, 2010
A good example!
This isn't my debate comment but I had to share this with you all - written by an 11 year old boy using Kahootz software to tell the story.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Is cool necessarily best?
Is digital storytelling the most practical and effective approach for teaching digital literacy?
The following slideshare uses prezi (a cool web 2.0 improvement on powerpoint, that sort of reminds me of an animated version of the big posters we used to have to make in primary classes in the 1970's). Mark Woolley's presentation (below) echo's Jo's claim that digital storytelling is a successful (the 'best") strategy for teachers to promote literacy. His glossy, graphically gorgeous piece uses groovin' audio and nice design to bring home his point. Interspersed in the presentation are example of student produced work, including a story "by" a kindergarten student using storybird (www.storybird.com). Storybird is a web 2.0 tool that appears to use clip art and text for individual or collaborative storytelling. The 3 year old who "created" the product presumably had some imput into choosing the clip art that was used, and voiced the story. But how much input she had in creating the story in collaboration with an adult is arguable.
The risk with accepting digital storytelling as the “best” option for teaching digital literacy could mean a lot of parent-friendly product that is all form with minimal content.
“Create a quality product with a minimum of fuss” is one of the statements made to support digital storytelling (in particular, Storybird) in this presentation. The notion of “quality” here is a controversial one. Quality in this digital storytelling model seems to reference the slick look and feel (which, based on samples on the Storybird website is consistent, and limited to the available artwork). The quality of the learning experience and what the process might contribute to digital literacy is secondary to the “product”. As a learning tool for literacy, surely the fuss is what is important – the journey, the hands-on experience, the mistakes? In this example, I suggest that play-doh and a bit of show and tell is a better option for the kinder child to represent and share her beachy story than having an adult guide her through the dinky web 2.0 tool to create a “quality product”. She can develop her own “fussy” and imperfect vision of her beach story from her own perspective, contributing to communication and narrative understanding.
The cyberbulling example from an older student (using DeVolver), also seems very much a “product” featuring limited, stereotypic information in a glossy package. While I am not saying it is not fun and useful for student to explore these programs, what I do believe is that it is not always the “best” approach. In these examples, content seems secondary to the format. If learners are not exposed to alternative means of storytelling in the embodied world (visually, dramatically, poetically, verbally, prose etc.) they will have limited personal literacy resources on which to draw to enrich the web 2.0 widgets that are their inheritance.
Check out my storybird (Digital Storytelling - Is it the "best" chuck out the rest?) here!
Opportunities and multiple intelligences
Jo suggests that digital storytelling allows greater opportunities to teach digital literacy and she mentions Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. At a simplistic level it could be said that, for example, digital storytelling would not be the “best” approach for a kinesthetic learner who needs to “actively explore the physical world around them” and may prefer paper, paste and textas to explore themes of literacy (digital or otherwise), especially when many other aspects of their lives are already immersed in digital technology (mobile phones, ipods, gaming consoles etc). Providing non-digital alternatives should be seriously considered for sharing all aspects of literacy.
Referring to previous technologies like slide projectors and television that were “touted as 'the solution' to American education”, Gardner says “When plugged in, they are all too often simply used to 'deliver' the same old 'drill-and-kill' content” (Garner, 2000 p.33). The opportunity provided by digital storytelling should only be taken if the content is a suitable fit for the purpose and audience.
Gardner says educators need to "...remain clear on what they want to achieve for our children and vigilant that the technology serves these ends. Otherwise, like other technologies, the new ones could end up spawning apathy, alienation, or yet another phalanx of consumers." (Gardner 2000, p.35). This quote is from 2000, but still very relevant today. If a decision is is made to focus on digital storytelling as the "best" way to meet their digital literacy needs - a generation of students may only conceive of storytelling as something that needs to be crafted online, with fancy fonts and polish, legitimised by publishing and consumed and approved by friends & family.
Gardner is also focussed on a project exploring the ethics of digital literacy...but more on this next post.
References
Woolley, M (2010) Literacy Alive – Digital Storytelling for 21st Century learners, retrieved 24 April 2010 from
http://www.slideshare.net/markwoolley/literacy-alive-digital-story-telling-for-21st-century-learners?src=related_normal&rel=470590
Gardner, H, (2000) Can Technology Exploit Our Many Ways of Knowing?, pp.33-35, retrieved 26 April 2010 from http://www.howardgardner.com/MI/mi.html
The following slideshare uses prezi (a cool web 2.0 improvement on powerpoint, that sort of reminds me of an animated version of the big posters we used to have to make in primary classes in the 1970's). Mark Woolley's presentation (below) echo's Jo's claim that digital storytelling is a successful (the 'best") strategy for teachers to promote literacy. His glossy, graphically gorgeous piece uses groovin' audio and nice design to bring home his point. Interspersed in the presentation are example of student produced work, including a story "by" a kindergarten student using storybird (www.storybird.com). Storybird is a web 2.0 tool that appears to use clip art and text for individual or collaborative storytelling. The 3 year old who "created" the product presumably had some imput into choosing the clip art that was used, and voiced the story. But how much input she had in creating the story in collaboration with an adult is arguable.
Literacy Alive - Digital story telling for 21st century learners
View more presentations from Mark Woolley.
The risk with accepting digital storytelling as the “best” option for teaching digital literacy could mean a lot of parent-friendly product that is all form with minimal content.
“Create a quality product with a minimum of fuss” is one of the statements made to support digital storytelling (in particular, Storybird) in this presentation. The notion of “quality” here is a controversial one. Quality in this digital storytelling model seems to reference the slick look and feel (which, based on samples on the Storybird website is consistent, and limited to the available artwork). The quality of the learning experience and what the process might contribute to digital literacy is secondary to the “product”. As a learning tool for literacy, surely the fuss is what is important – the journey, the hands-on experience, the mistakes? In this example, I suggest that play-doh and a bit of show and tell is a better option for the kinder child to represent and share her beachy story than having an adult guide her through the dinky web 2.0 tool to create a “quality product”. She can develop her own “fussy” and imperfect vision of her beach story from her own perspective, contributing to communication and narrative understanding.
The cyberbulling example from an older student (using DeVolver), also seems very much a “product” featuring limited, stereotypic information in a glossy package. While I am not saying it is not fun and useful for student to explore these programs, what I do believe is that it is not always the “best” approach. In these examples, content seems secondary to the format. If learners are not exposed to alternative means of storytelling in the embodied world (visually, dramatically, poetically, verbally, prose etc.) they will have limited personal literacy resources on which to draw to enrich the web 2.0 widgets that are their inheritance.
Check out my storybird (Digital Storytelling - Is it the "best" chuck out the rest?) here!
Opportunities and multiple intelligences
Jo suggests that digital storytelling allows greater opportunities to teach digital literacy and she mentions Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. At a simplistic level it could be said that, for example, digital storytelling would not be the “best” approach for a kinesthetic learner who needs to “actively explore the physical world around them” and may prefer paper, paste and textas to explore themes of literacy (digital or otherwise), especially when many other aspects of their lives are already immersed in digital technology (mobile phones, ipods, gaming consoles etc). Providing non-digital alternatives should be seriously considered for sharing all aspects of literacy.
Referring to previous technologies like slide projectors and television that were “touted as 'the solution' to American education”, Gardner says “When plugged in, they are all too often simply used to 'deliver' the same old 'drill-and-kill' content” (Garner, 2000 p.33). The opportunity provided by digital storytelling should only be taken if the content is a suitable fit for the purpose and audience.
Gardner says educators need to "...remain clear on what they want to achieve for our children and vigilant that the technology serves these ends. Otherwise, like other technologies, the new ones could end up spawning apathy, alienation, or yet another phalanx of consumers." (Gardner 2000, p.35). This quote is from 2000, but still very relevant today. If a decision is is made to focus on digital storytelling as the "best" way to meet their digital literacy needs - a generation of students may only conceive of storytelling as something that needs to be crafted online, with fancy fonts and polish, legitimised by publishing and consumed and approved by friends & family.
Gardner is also focussed on a project exploring the ethics of digital literacy...but more on this next post.
References
Woolley, M (2010) Literacy Alive – Digital Storytelling for 21st Century learners, retrieved 24 April 2010 from
http://www.slideshare.net/markwoolley/literacy-alive-digital-story-telling-for-21st-century-learners?src=related_normal&rel=470590
Gardner, H, (2000) Can Technology Exploit Our Many Ways of Knowing?, pp.33-35, retrieved 26 April 2010 from http://www.howardgardner.com/MI/mi.html
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Digital storytelling is the best digital literacy for teaching and learning - some definitions
Our topic features two substantive (and controversial) terms – digital storytelling and digital literacy.
Wikipedia describes digital storytelling as an emerging term with two generic interpretations. The most common understanding of digital storytelling (according to Wikipedia) is typified by the description on the Australian Centre for Moving Image (ACMI) website as “... autobiographical 'mini movies' created and edited by people like you - using computers, cameras, scanners and photos." ACMI have actively promoted this medium and process through their Digital Storytelling Program since 2002.
Digital Storytelling
The second possible interpretation of digital storytelling is more generic – a one-size-fits-all account – to parphrase Jo: a multimedia presentation with a narrative structure. I can't agree with her proposal that digital storytelling doesn't necessarily require a narrative. Storytelling, regardless of the medium involves the communication of a message, a narrative with a purpose and intent. Digital storytelling may be linear or non-linear, classical narrative or experimental – but it must have a story to tell. Without this aspect, all we are talking about is the random use of digital tools to create an output.
For the purpose of this debate my interpretation of digital storytelling will fall somewhere between the strictly defined ACMI approach and the very generic “any multimedia presentation". Digital storytelling must have a narrative purpose and use one or a number of digital tools (web 2.0, video, software, mobile apps, audio etc).
Digital literacy is far less easy to pin down. I think a definition reaches beyond using and interpreting digital technology. “Digital literacy is usually conceived as combination of technical-procedural, cognitive and emotional-social skills.” (Aviram, 2006, p.1). I suggest that although digital storytelling can address some of the needs for teaching a holistic approach to digital literacy, it is not the “best” or indeed only approach required and will explore this suggestion in future posts.
References
Aviram A. Eshet-Alkalai Y. (2006) Towards a Theory of Digital Literacy: Three Scenarios for the Next Steps European Journal of Open and distance Education
Australian Centre for Moving Image (ACMI), Centre for Digital Storytelling, retrieved 24 April 2010 from http://www.acmi.net.au/digital_storytelling.asp
Wikipedia (2010) Digital Storytelling entry, retrieved 24 April 2010 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_storytelling
Wikipedia describes digital storytelling as an emerging term with two generic interpretations. The most common understanding of digital storytelling (according to Wikipedia) is typified by the description on the Australian Centre for Moving Image (ACMI) website as “... autobiographical 'mini movies' created and edited by people like you - using computers, cameras, scanners and photos." ACMI have actively promoted this medium and process through their Digital Storytelling Program since 2002.
Digital Storytelling
The second possible interpretation of digital storytelling is more generic – a one-size-fits-all account – to parphrase Jo: a multimedia presentation with a narrative structure. I can't agree with her proposal that digital storytelling doesn't necessarily require a narrative. Storytelling, regardless of the medium involves the communication of a message, a narrative with a purpose and intent. Digital storytelling may be linear or non-linear, classical narrative or experimental – but it must have a story to tell. Without this aspect, all we are talking about is the random use of digital tools to create an output.
For the purpose of this debate my interpretation of digital storytelling will fall somewhere between the strictly defined ACMI approach and the very generic “any multimedia presentation". Digital storytelling must have a narrative purpose and use one or a number of digital tools (web 2.0, video, software, mobile apps, audio etc).
Digital literacy is far less easy to pin down. I think a definition reaches beyond using and interpreting digital technology. “Digital literacy is usually conceived as combination of technical-procedural, cognitive and emotional-social skills.” (Aviram, 2006, p.1). I suggest that although digital storytelling can address some of the needs for teaching a holistic approach to digital literacy, it is not the “best” or indeed only approach required and will explore this suggestion in future posts.
References
Aviram A. Eshet-Alkalai Y. (2006) Towards a Theory of Digital Literacy: Three Scenarios for the Next Steps European Journal of Open and distance Education
Australian Centre for Moving Image (ACMI), Centre for Digital Storytelling, retrieved 24 April 2010 from http://www.acmi.net.au/digital_storytelling.asp
Wikipedia (2010) Digital Storytelling entry, retrieved 24 April 2010 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_storytelling
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Digital Storytelling is a practical and effective way to teaching essential literacy skills
Digital storytelling could be defined as a multi-media presentation that follows a narrative structure. Of course, as soon as anything is defined in world of computers and the Internet, it invariably changes! Adams (2009) distinguishes between digital storytelling and an online 'presentation' by requiring a narrative storyline to be included in anything labelled a 'digital story'. However, I would argue that not all digital stories follow a narrative structure, nor do they need to use all forms of multimedia. Online examples (from a quick google search) indicates that a digital story might be an autobiography narrated as an mp3 file, or a powerpoint presentation of a holiday or school excursion or it could be a short film written and created by a group of high school students. The difficulties inherent in defining this kind of use of technology, however, should not deter a teacher from finding the practical, valid and increasingly important values in this tool
The common link between the many and varied forms of digital storytelling is the forms of literacy used to create the story in the first place: reading, writing, planning, drafting, reviewing, refining and presenting. Whether with pen and paper or with Apple iMovie (or any of the myriad other digital tools), these key literacy skills are still addressed.
While few could argue that storytelling has long been a key source of enjoyment, information transfer and social communication, using digital tools to further this tradition is definitely a new way to teach.
Digital storytelling is a teaching strategy - a tool, and as such it is up to teachers to get out of it what they will. Depending on what needs to be taught teachers can scaffold students to create a narrative covering many areas of today's literacy curriculum. For example, planning for writing is an essential and necessary skill to develop in our students, this is easily addressed though digital storytelling: planning to communicate a message in a specific format with a specific audience in mind.
Digital storytelling offers more learning opportunities than traditional pen and paper storytelling. Multiple Intelligences such as visual/spatial, verbal/linguistic and mathematical/logical are addressed as students use images, photos and graphics to enhance their message, prepare scripts and record audio and create a story following a logical sequence and structure. (http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm)
Adams states "Storytelling is a natural fit for kids immersed in movies, television, and video games" (Adams, 2009). Students are using multimedia and online tools to connect, interact and share, why shouldn't we, as teachers, harness these skills to address curriculum outcomes?
References:
Adams, C: 'Digital Storytelling' in: Instructor Nov/Dec2009, Vol. 119 Issue 3, p35-37
The common link between the many and varied forms of digital storytelling is the forms of literacy used to create the story in the first place: reading, writing, planning, drafting, reviewing, refining and presenting. Whether with pen and paper or with Apple iMovie (or any of the myriad other digital tools), these key literacy skills are still addressed.
While few could argue that storytelling has long been a key source of enjoyment, information transfer and social communication, using digital tools to further this tradition is definitely a new way to teach.
Digital storytelling is a teaching strategy - a tool, and as such it is up to teachers to get out of it what they will. Depending on what needs to be taught teachers can scaffold students to create a narrative covering many areas of today's literacy curriculum. For example, planning for writing is an essential and necessary skill to develop in our students, this is easily addressed though digital storytelling: planning to communicate a message in a specific format with a specific audience in mind.
Digital storytelling offers more learning opportunities than traditional pen and paper storytelling. Multiple Intelligences such as visual/spatial, verbal/linguistic and mathematical/logical are addressed as students use images, photos and graphics to enhance their message, prepare scripts and record audio and create a story following a logical sequence and structure. (http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm)
Adams states "Storytelling is a natural fit for kids immersed in movies, television, and video games" (Adams, 2009). Students are using multimedia and online tools to connect, interact and share, why shouldn't we, as teachers, harness these skills to address curriculum outcomes?
References:
Adams, C: 'Digital Storytelling' in: Instructor Nov/Dec2009, Vol. 119 Issue 3, p35-37
Monday, April 19, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
