[recherche en littératies multiples - multiple literacies]

Labels: academic, conference, critical literacy, digital literacy, education, literacy, multimodal, reading, research, teaching, university

Labels: academic, conference, critical literacy, digital literacy, education, literacy, multimodal, reading, research, teaching, university

Labels: critical literacy, digital literacy, education, learning, literacy, narrative, story, teaching






Labels: education, learning, multimodal, teaching, television








Labels: bbc, conference, education, events, images, internet, learning, radio
"How to Write and the Question: Is it Still Necessary to 'Write'?"

World of Sociology is a comprehensive, subject-specific guide to the concepts, theories, discoveries, developments and pioneers related to the field of sociology. Coverage includes approximately 1,250 alphabetically arranged topical essays, definitions and biographies, intelligently organized and written in clear, concise and easy-to-understand language.There is no video clip available though...


Labels: creative industries, education, film, learning, teaching, tv, visuality
Yay the National Science Learning Centre in York has wifi...and it's working!Simon Campbell-Jones, former Editor Horizon
BBC Horizon - History of a Science Television Programme
n science is basically *boring* (at least in the mid 60s)
Shamefully I arrived home quite late lastnight and then had to pack for today's trip up to York (Inanimate Alice is up for a Learning on Screen Award and the Faculty of Humanities is paying for me to go up there AND enjoy the 2-day conference!)...so I didn't really have *time* to blog. Is that a better excuse than the dog ate my blog post?
Labels: art, creation, creative industries, creativity, digital art, digital literacy, education, events, ICA, reading, transliteracy


Labels: art, collaboration, communication, digital art, digital literacy, events, presentation
I'm still trying to craft a pedagogically-sound rubric for the assessment of digital narratives (ones undergraduate students create) and am finding it really tricky. Bryan Alexander has been updating his finds on web 2.0 storytelling and education and he also wonders whether there are any rubrics out there tackling both the medium and the content. Since I originally blogged about this, I have come across interesting resources but my latest find is from Sheila Webber at Information Literacy. She shares with us a fantastic resource for developing a module on information literacy. It sounds somewhat similar to the Education Pack I've made for teaching Inanimate Alice."there are five 'chapters' with titles like "Learning Theories and Information Literacy" which provide summaries of some theories and issues, and short reading lists. There are also supporting documents, including an example assessment briefing and mark sheet for an assignment "Design and prepare a training event to develop information literacy skills."
"In developing a website that depicts a controversial subject from a variety of perspectives, we wondered if visitors to the site would be interested in exploring each of the perspectives, or if they would be partial to just one or two perspectives. Would they be partial to the European viewpoint that has predominated for hundreds of years, or would they explore competing views? Although we do not know the backgrounds of our visitors, we do know something about their behavior on the site:
Visitors to the attack scene viewed each culture's tab in roughly equal numbers.
Most of the visitors who viewed each of the non-English cultural tabs, also viewed the English tab: 1,211 of the 1,367 who viewed the French tab viewed the English tab; 1,104 of the 1,272 who viewed the Kanienkehaka tab also viewed the English tab; 997 of the 1,174 who viewed the Wendat tab also viewed the English tab; 942 of the 1,068 who viewed the Wobanakiak tab also viewed the English tab.
866 visitors viewed all of the cultural tabs.
This data suggests that many of the visitors to the website were indeed open to viewing multiple perspectives. But did they learn anything about the event and its competing viewpoints, and did they change in any way as a result of their experience?"
Don't know your learning style or want students to figure out theirs? Have a go at testing yourself at VARK. After doing the test myself, VARK rightly concluded that I'm a multimodal learner though I didn't realise I heavily favour kinesthetic learning...hrmm...will give it a think:Your scores were:
Visual: 10
Aural: 6
Read/Write: 5
Kinesthetic: 12
You have a multimodal (VARK) learning preference.
Labels: assessment, critical literacy, digital literacy, digital world, education, learning, learning styles, pedagogy, teaching, transliteracy, web 2.0
I've been working with a small group of teachers (key stage 3) to design lesson plans that include various types of learners and learning styles. The idea of having students tell stories (i.e. re-tell what they've learnt) seems to play a key role in deep learning. Or, in Dawn Hogue's words, this kind of engagement can push students' learning "up the taxonomy."

Judie Haynes at Everything ESL says auditory learners find these tactics useful:
- interviewing
- debating
- participating on a panel
- giving oral reports
- participating in oral discussions of written material
Labels: education, learning styles, pedagogy, taxonomy, teaching
An oldie but a goodie: how *not* to market:
Labels: advertising, business, marketing, microsoft, social media, social networks
I've just been watching Dan Farber (ZDNet editor-in-chief) interview JP Rangaswami. Rangaswarmi talks about BT and the role of new media and open source. Some interesting quotes:
"In fact if you look at what I’m doing with Facebook, what I’m really achieving, what any of us who wants to use it in an enterprise environment achieves, is to say that you’ve taken what happened at the water cooler or at the coffee shop and made it persistent, made it shareable, made it teachable, made it learnable. That’s a huge win because we’ve spent years talking about the value of the water cooler conversations, of the coffee shops, of the more amorphous softer discussions. Now we have the ability to actually understand what these relationships are, how information and decision making migrates horizontally, laterally through an organization, rather than through the published hierarchies, how people really work, and what people do as part of that work."
"a platform based software driven networked IT services company."
"Now as part of that environment that you’re talking about, the software as a service and exposing the assets to the customer and letting them build upon it, obviously that might deal to some extent with the web 2.0 type technologies, how are you investing in those types of approaches?"
"Well as you would expect, I don’t think I could have joined a firm that didn’t believe in collaborative tools and techniques and at BT it’s pretty much part of our DNA. Collaboration is right at the heart of what we do, we have very very large internal use of blogs and wikis, we have considerable use of IM techniques. We also have a growing ability for ourselves to be able use various forms of, I mean if you look at facebook, I think we’re probably up to 6000 people just on the visible BT."
"I have not failed, I have found 10,000 ways that do not work."
The video of the talk is here. The transcript here and Dan Faber's blog post here.
Labels: business, marketing, social media, social software, web 2.0
Reading Blogstorm and I see Patrick Altoft talking about the possibility of SEO resistant searches. In other words, searches can be powered by what Altoft calls the "social graph" but that doesn't mean the death of SEO, just a different kind of instantiation:"Imagine how hard it would be for a commercial site to get high rankings on a search engine powered by the social graph. The marketing department probably wouldn’t have a clue where to start and are likely to be labelled a spammer at the first social network they target. The only way for a commercial site to see good results would be to hire a social media consultant / SEO to create a long term social media strategy for them.
Search can’t ever be SEO resistant because any signal can be manipulated - a good SEO consultant will figure out what the search engine needs to rank a site highly and give it to them. No tricks just give the search engines what they want whether it’s links, keywords, bookmarks, RSS subscribers or anything else."
"The bottom line is this. Yes, if you want your customers to find you using search, then you have to understand search engine optimization. And you should want your customers to find you using search because search is the entry point on the web. But if you are operating an online business, you absolutely should understand online marketing. I don’t understand people who say it should all just work and they should be able to concentrate on their core business. (Looking at this from a search engine’s perspective, however, I think they should and certainly they are working on ways to make sure it all just works, because it’s in their best interest to provide searchers the best content on the web, whether the owners of that content understand SEO or not, but that doesn’t negate the point.)
If you have an offline business, you have to understand offline marketing and customer engagement. If you are opening new stores and your core skill set is painting, you will likely hire others for other aspects of your business: determining the best location for the store, branding and advertising, merchandising. You will probably ensure your store is attractive, both inside and outside. You’ll arrange merchandise on your shelves so that people know where to find stuff and can easily reach it. You’ll make your aisles wide enough for carts.
You wouldn’t open your paint store with no sign and a broken door in a back alley that had a brick wall blocking the road. Why would you do the same on the internet and then blame Google?"
Labels: business, marketing, search engine optimization, social media, social software, web 2.0
Catching up on some blog reading today and happily found myself reading Ruth Page's excellent Digital Narratives blog... her most recent post couldn't have been better (for me anyway!)
For ages now I've been on the hunt for some rubrics geared towards grading digital stories...I mean, how do we mark for both narrative (and all the aspects including point of view, plot, character, language etc...) AND the digital medium (images used, html, sound, user-interaction etc...). Bryan Alexander has been keeping track of web 2.0 storytelling and education and he also wonders whether there are any rubrics out there tackling both the medium and the content. I've found Meg Ormiston's rubrics at tech teachers and another rubric at the bottom of the "Educational Uses of Digital Storytelling" page. The latter is based on rubrics found here, Dr. Helen Barrett's work and Scott County, Kentucky Schools.

Labels: assessment, critical literacy, digital literacy, education, narrative, pedagogy, rubric, teaching, technology, transliteracy, web 2.0, web fiction

The train's hynotic rumbling took me too far. I was past my stop and in new unexpected surroundings. The weathered platform slick with recent dewy drops. I gazed out the window. "If leaving the train here mind the step down to the platform." The beginnings of my reverie interrupted. I gathered my worn bag which loyally hugged the shiny laptop inside. There was no need to rush, people were still slowly and tentatively making the jump from train to slippery platform. I edged down the carriage, running my hands over the smooth velour interior, raising my eyes to meet his gaze.
