Digital Media And New Literacies

Literacy has expanded from reading and writing print based materials to a fluid concept that includes: (a) active participation in a digital society (Hobbs, 2010; & Literat, 2014); (b) an understanding of legal, social and ethical issues in digital environments (Kurtz & Peled, 2016); and (c) social responsibility in digital environments (Kurtz & Peled, 2016). Digital literacy is just one of the many new literacies discussed in educational literature in the 21 st century. Changes in information and communications technologies (ICTs) and the digital landscape have driven the changes in how literacy is defined. Educational institutions must align their goals and objectives with the changing digital landscape. Relevant, guiding principles provide a sound framework by which educators are better able to craft meaningful activities for students growing up in and living in a digital media participatory culture (Johnson et al., 2016). This research explored the digital literacy proficiency of first year undergraduate students at Messiah College, to provide baseline data to the College to support efforts to revise guiding

Defining Digital and Media Literacies To be literate in today’s world involves skills that include fairly granular tasks, such as copying and pasting digital content, and more complex work, such as critical analysis and synthesis of information accessed through a variety of texts. Digital literacy takes into account the full range of skills needed to read, write, speak, view, and participate in online spaces. All of these practices require media literacy, which includes the ability to access, analyze, evaluate, create, and participate with media in all its forms. Although various terms are used in literature surrounding these skills (eg, new literacies, web literacies, or multiliteracies), we take the stance that digital and media literacy should be taught as literacy and that the fields of digital and media literacies can no longer exist in isolation from each other.

Paul Gilster defines digital literacy as «the ability to understand and use infor- mation in multiple formats from a wide variety of sources when it is presented via computers» and, particularly, through the medium of the Internet (Gilster, in Pool 1997: 6). He emphasizes what he sees as inherent differences between digital information media and conventional print media. Digital literacy involves «adapting our skills to an evocative new medium, [and] our experi- ence of the Internet will be determined by how we master its core competen- cies» (ibid.). These competencies are not merely «operational» or «technical» competencies, however. Digital literacy involves «mastering ideas, not key- strokes» (ibid.). Gilster identifies four key digital literacy competencies: knowledge assembly, evaluating information content, searching the Internet, and navigating hypertext. He describes each at length in his book, Digital Literacy (Gilster 1997). Gilster claims we need to teach and learn «how to use the Web properly and how to be critical» and that «we all need to learn that skill» (Gilster, in Pool 1997: 8). Citing the familiar image of students using the Internet to find information that they simply cut and paste into a «cobbled- together collection of quotes or multimedia items,» Gilster argues that we need to teach students «how to assimilate the information, evaluate it, and then reintegrate it» (in Pool 1997: 9).

Young people with a higher command of English use their contact with the Internet for leisure activities as a cognitive resource that leads them to a significant learning of the language despite what is commonly thought of their time invested in such activities. It is confirmed that, as suggested by Mei Yi Lin and Ocampo (2008), in learning English as a FL it is necessary to take into account the new informal juvenile literacies; to digital media such as the Internet with its social networks and other audiovisual contents full of emotion and meaning, which may be waiting to be perceived and included in avant-garde educational scheme.

Some researchers paid more attention to designing new models based on Jenkins’s (2009) framework of new media literacies. In order to contribute to the area of technology- mediated language education, Thorne (2008) demonstrated a pedagogical proposal called Bridging Activities, which combined new media literacies and advanced foreign language proficiency education. Through this proposed model, he developed students’ language awareness by using modern technologies or practices, such as messaging, chat, blogs, wikis, remixing, and multiplayer online gaming. Jocson (2015) conducted a design-based action research project to discuss pedagogical considerations in the conceptualization of new media literacies. By positioning himself as a learning partner, collecting print and digital materials, and organizing blogging, group presentations, experiential learning, and digital story, Jocson found that “creative expressions blur the lines between youth cultural production and participatory politic” and “collaboration, participation, and distributed expertise shapes how individuals see themselves in the world and interact with each other as afforded by digital technologies” (p. 31).

Providing teachers with time and support for learning about technology prior to and during integration, builds their metacognitive awareness by supporting the development of questions such as the ones above. The mediational function of the media used in the backpack links the students to other learners, teachers, ideas, and the physical world (Bruce & Levin, 1997). The task rather than the tools is at the center and the user can choose anyone of many possible media to accomplish the task. Media is used for communication. Through the instructional activities of this digital strategy backpack, students communicate with other students, teachers, experts and people around the world through Edmodo, Google Docs, Prezi, Evernote, Weebly, and more. These tools function as meditation for making sense of content and for learning to be a teacher. Media is also used for inquiry. Through the instructional activities of the digital strategy backpack, students access data, connecting to the world of texts, audio and video; they collect data using tools such as Evernote, Edmodo, Google Drive to extend the senses; they analyze data using mobile Apps to make tables and graphs. Media functions for construction through the instructional activities of the digital backpack, students use mobile Apps to construct graphics, animated shows, and short movies. Combining construction and communication, media also functions for expression.

The pa ti ipatio metaphor is particularly useful in professional education because it e phasizes situated ess, o te tualit , ultu al e edded ess, a d so ial mediation (Sfard 1998, 6). It positions learners as individuals interested in the e isti g a d fu tio i g of a o u it of p a titio e s (ibid), thus promoting a different kind of identity from that of a diarist. A key advantage of th e pa ti ipatio metaphor is its focus on a ti ities, i.e., o k o i g , a d ot so u h on outcomes or products (Paavola and Hakkarainen 2005, 538). Sharing personal reflections with peers to improve professional practice allows a dialogic and social dimension in learning to develop, which is in keeping with connectivism. As a new form of literacy, blogging involves a a ti e so ialit (Lankshear and Knobel 2006) whereby learners post, comment, like , embed media, and subscribe to updates – practices that can signal digital eside t status.

With increases in digital communication such as text messaging, emailing and social networking websites, adolescents’ daily literacy experiences cannot be measured solely by exposure to books. A recent Ofcom report (2012) found that all of the British 12-to-15-year-olds who were surveyed used the internet and the majority possessed a smartphone (62%). Time spent online was similar to time watching television (17.1 hours per week) and 80% of these adolescents had social

This process has enabled us to gather rich descriptions of the contexts in which text production occurs. Interviewing students repeatedly over a six month period meant that we spent some considerable time in the three institutions with the result that we were able to observe and interact with participants in the contexts in which they spent much of their life as students. We observed them as they interacted with tutors and moved around the building. We also had opportunities to talk to their tutors 1 who discussed with us aspects of their course and teaching approaches and sometimes made available related paper and digital course material. These discussions with tutors informed us of teacher expectations around uses of electronic and other resources and the kinds of texts students were expected to produce. This helped us to understand more about the attitudes and practices that constituted the different cultures of the institutions, enabling us to make some comparisons between the different contexts. In our ongoing contact with the students we were able to uncover descriptions of the personal not just the institutional contexts of their textual engagement. Our data is not just concerned with students’ use of a particular form of digital communication or resource but how and why and for what purposes they were communicating in any particular context. We have also been able to observe the kinds of texts that students compose in contrasting contexts- in the curricular and personal spheres, both where these blur and overlap and where they remain discrete. This has enabled us to uncover instances where the personal practices of the participants do not always align comfortably with institutionally mandated practices. Our position as researchers, ‘outsiders’ in the institution, rather than being members of staff, has enabled these contrasts to emerge during discussions with our participants

The print media pattern flourished in the pre- internet era, where instant to access news, using smartphones, and online news aggregates was not within the reach of the common man. The development of information access has significantly changed over the years, with the number of smartphone users in India alone has exceeded 20 million. However, the average of print media circulation is dropping down globally, the need for the impact created over digital media is to be studied and results would be helpful for the future of traditional media(newspapers).

nature, at least in the way that students labelled with dyslexia are expected to use them. Often they are seen as ‘special’ solutions to a specific problem; this is reflected in the way Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is referred to as something to be ‘applied’ in the BDA definition of dyslexia with which I opened my introduction. The traditional view tends to see ICT as a way for people labelled with dyslexia to overcome obstacles (Smythe 2010), rather than providing opportunities for them to play to their cognitive strengths (West 2009). Commercial interests have also played their part in promoting ICT as a sort of ‘silver bullet’ for dyslexia. Dyslexic students are thus conceived of as part of the SEN 2 group of learners who could potentially most benefit from digital inclusion (Walker and Logan 2009). However, ‘special’ solutions can exacerbate the stigma of dyslexia and cause resentment and reluctance to engage with learning-enhancing technology (Seale, Draffan, and Wald 2008). Now though, much ‘everyday’ digital technology offers ample opportunity for students to circumvent many of the learning and literacy problems associated with dyslexia. We can readily imagine a teenage student sitting in her bedroom, logged onto a social networking site, chatting with friends about the best way to complete her homework, whilst at the same time making plans to meet up when it’s done. The student is dyslexic, but this isn’t important because evry1 use txtspk & spllngs dnt mata. Her word processor will help ‘correct’ her spelling so that the assignment is acceptable to her teacher. A naturally visual thinker (West 2009), she is adept at the visual semantics and grammar the digital environment demands (Kress 2010; Kress and van Leeuwen 1996), and if necessary, for her work say, she can SMS, instant message, phone or video call a friend (Lankshear and Knobel 2003). She can consult YouTube or her institution’s Virtual Learning Environment for audio-visual presentations of the current topic. All of this is commonplace, everyday routine technology use.

click of a button, a reference to the existence of license terms on a submerged screen is not sufficient to place consumers on inquiry or constructive notice of those terms . . . . [R]easonably conspicuous notice of the existence of contract terms and unambiguous manifestation of assent to those terms by consumers are essential  if  electronic  bargaining  is  to  have  integrity  and  credibility.”)  (footnote   omitted); Serrano v. Cablevision Sys. Corp., 863 F. Supp. 2d 157, 164 (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (“In   the   context   of   agreements made over the internet, such “click-wrap”   contracts   are   enforced   under   New   York   law   as   long   as   the   consumer is given a sufficient opportunity to read the end-user license agreement, and assents thereto after being provided with an unambiguous method  of  accepting  or  declining  the  offer.”).

The word ‘literacies’ in new literacies signaled a shift in thinking about the ways that people make meaning with language. Assigning plurality to literacy to privilege ‘literacies’ opened up what had traditionally been seen as a standardized model of literacy education, to one that acknowledges difference based on situations, subjectivities, and multiple text genres. Making literacy plural signals that there is more than simply one model of literacy, there are many different literacies that shift with contexts, texts, and the identities of people using literacy. Thinking about literacy as a universalized, autonomous entity undermines its diversity and multiple uses and understandings. Yet, what truly differentiated the work of researchers who incorporated such fields as anthropology, sociology, and semiotics in the late 20 th Century was the inclusion of the adjective ‘new.’ New signaled new approaches, new epistemologies, new methods, new theories, new contexts, and new identities for meaning-makers. New studies in the 1980s and 1990s were new because literacy had not been analyzed in the same way and this radical social and semiotic turn offered a new language of description for literacy, viewing literacy as nested within social context (Street, 1994) and redressing an over-emphasis on language and the written word (Halliday, 1984).

The second edition of Literacies continues to provide a comprehensive introduction to literacy pedagogy within today’s new media environment. It focuses not only on reading and writing, but also on other modes of communication, including oral, visual, audio, gestural, tactile and spatial. Increased coverage of grammar, phonics and spelling has been integrated into this edition along with a comprehensive dis- cussion of topics such as Multiliteracies and critical literacy.

Current digital media distribution platforms continue their march towards streaming service-based infrastructures, delivering content to users when and where they want it: laptops, set top boxes, home entertainment systems, and the new ubiquity: mobile devices. This model was first demonstrated by utilizing the multicast backbone technology in the early 1990s and took the better part of a decade to make inroads in changing the way individuals consume broadcast, mainstream, and syndicated video media. It took the advent of streaming technology, high-speed internet adoption, and a willingness from content owners to license their treasured content with upstart streaming media platform companies. Digital music distribution showed consumers, content owners, and distribution channels what can happen when one player effectively creates a new, disruptive technology platform, i.e. Apple’s iTunes Music Store. Now content owners are afraid of a single distributor dictating the methods, prices, and channels by which their content reaches consumers. Today, streaming technology is making a play against the incumbent iTunes transac- tional model of Buy, Download, and Own digital distribution by providing varies models to consumers: integrated advertising-based, subscription-based, and traditional cable “packages” with integrated on-demand streaming, all of which retain no permanence or ownership for the end user. Content owners are treading carefully, trying to avoid the single, dominant point of distribution that Apple achieved in music distribution. The results of this are less optimal from both a market standpoint and especially the experience for consumers. Media companies frequently change the terms of their licenses, or drastically increasing their licensing costs, causing radical fluctuations in the long-term vi- ability of the nascent distribution platforms. Consumers interact with this environment through complicated, multi- party subscriptions, multiple applications or web interfaces, umpteen logins, various bills, and a nebulous under- standing and ability to sit down and watch premium content when and where they want it. The entire market is in its juvenile form, stretching, growing, and trying to find that balance of monetization and the critical mass of consumer adoption required to truly transform media consumption from the real-time, over-the-air broadcast format it has been since television’s inception, to a time-shifted, choose your own, content delivery system based around the internet as the delivery medium. In this paper we idealize the situation by analyzing the largest incumbents for each of the monetization models, provide input into their strength and weaknesses and finally analyze and postulate what we believe will the trends and concerns moving forward into this new digital media panacea.

Understanding the family dynamic surrounding media use is crucial to our understanding of media effects, policy development, and the targeting of individuals and families for interventions to benefit child health and development. The Families, Parenting, and Media Workgroup reviewed the relevant research from the past few decades. We find that child characteristics, the parent-child relationship, parental mediation practices, and parents’ own use of media all can influence children’s media use, their attitudes regarding media, and the effects of media on children. However, gaps remain. First, more research is needed on best practices of parental mediation for both traditional and new media. Ideally, this research will involve large-scale, longitudinal studies that manage children from infancy to adulthood. Second, we need to better understand the relationship between parent media use and child media use and specifically how media may interfere with or strengthen parent- child relationships. Finally, longitudinal research on how developmental processes and individual child characteristics influence the intersection between media and family life is needed. The majority of children’s media use takes place within a wider family dynamic. An understanding of this dynamic is crucial to understanding child media use as a whole.

The digital media & design program requires students to have an understanding of web design as part of their basic requirements. The program does not presently have a course in web design and needs one. This course is also central to the curriculum of the new department of digital media and design and essential to creating the major and minor in this field.

The complex relationship between media and conflict is longstanding. Traditional mass media have been used to amplify and extend viewpoints and ideologies, to persuade audiences at home, and to influence opposing sides in conflict. However, both media and conflict have changed markedly in recent years. Many 21st-century wars are not only about holding territory, but about gaining public support and achieving legal status in the international arena. Governments seek to hold onto power through persuasion as much as through force. Media are increasingly essential elements of conflict, rather than just functional tools for those fighting. At the same time, newer media technologies have increased communication and information dissemination in the context of conflict. In particular, the growth of citizen media has changed the information space around conflict, providing more people with the tools to record and share their experiences with the rest of the world.

Collaboration between CTs and STs with the support of a coach led to an innovative student teaching model. While participants volunteered individually to participate, there was no way for them to fully comprehend at the time of agreement what that commitment would look like when they were in the midst of it. Dyad 2 expressed feeling overwhelmed in the first few weeks, “It was like first week she [Lauren] cried and I was ready to cry. Second week…I was like, ‘What did I commit to?’ Every time I filled out those logs I was like, ‘What did I get into?’ (Ms. Langston, Dyad 2 Exit Interview). But Ms. Langston led the dyad, learned all about the tablet, built student digital repertoires, allowed children to choose apps, create projects, and share them in front of the whole school. By the end of the study Ms. Langston commented, “When I talked to my peers in the building, I feel like I have been so blessed to have this experience because I felt like I got more out of you as my coach,” (Ms. Langston, Exit Interview). This comment mirrored the finding in Scot (2004) that technology coaches assisted teachers with technology and energized the school through these teachers and their updated pedagogy.

age. From this perspective, it has emerged that today the younger genera- tion is generally more active than adults and seniors in its use of comput- ers and the Internet. Due to the costs of connection, a portion of the population cannot use the Internet, whilst those who are able to afford these costs are generally part of a more advantaged class; people with a higher level of education tend to connect to the web for longer periods of time, using its resources to do a much wider range of activities than those less educated; women are more excluded than men, etc. (Le Boterf 2000; Bolt and Crawford 2000; Bimber 2000; Bertot 2003). Di Maggio and Hargittai (2001) and Warschauer (2003) prefer to use the terms digital inequality and digital inclusion to underscore the transition from those who have and do not have the Internet to the analysis of what people do with the Internet and what they are able to do when they use its re- sources. Network society imposes the massive use of digital media, from which to be excluded is of course a source of inequality. However, the in- ability to use digital resources also represents a disadvantage. In line with this reasoning, Hargittai (2002) identifies a second-level digital divide to explain that the more people have access to digital media, the more im- portant other factors become, connected to the ability to take advantage of informative, relational and participatory potentiality. Beyond the theo- retical point of view, it is necessary to deal with a range of competences and skills, each related to technical aspects: the ability to move into digital spaces, to select information, to have a critical and proactive approach to the content mediated by digital media, to interact, etc. In this light, the notion of digital divide becomes a continuum of different unequal levels of access, usage and benefits drawn from new media. This continuum connects two hypothetical poles: on the one hand, the absence of access and, on the other hand, an efficacious use of technology. For understand- ing the changing role of social and cultural factors, we adopt a multidi- mensional and flexible definition of digital divide, declining it into the plural form of divides .