Posts Tagged ‘Digital literacy’

Target: Key processes of ICT literacy

February 11, 2008

Target ImageHere is more from the MCEETYA report on ICT literacy in years 6 and 10 that I referred to in a recent post. Six ‘processes’ of ICT literacy were extracted (pp. 12 – 13):

  1. Accessing information: identification and retrieval
  2. Managing information: organising and storing
  3. Evaluating information: reflecting and making judgements about integrity, relevance, usefulness
  4. Developing new understandings: creating knowledge; synthesing, adapting, applying, designing, inventing, authoring
  5. Communicating with others: exchanging and sharing; creating products to suit the audience and the context
  6. Using ICT appropriately: critical, reflective, strategic decisions about ethics and legals

I like this because it’s not just focusing on being able to use computers and applications, but rather on the whole shebang, including good online citizenship and higher-order thinking.

Bookmark and Share

Target: ICT Literacy Years 6 and 10

February 11, 2008

Target ImageAnother informative report, this time from MCEETYA, and this time looking at ICT literacy in years 6 and 10.

Importantly, the report makes clear its definition of ICT literacy up front. Some definitions focus on computer skills, others on applications for info processing for communication (p. 3). In the MCEETYA report, ICT literacy is defined as having three ‘strands’ (p. 4):

  1. Working with information
  2. Creating and sharing information
  3. Using ICT responsibly

ICT proficiency is taken to mean a “‘challenging but reasonable’ expectation for typical year 6 and 10 students to have reached by the end of those years of study” (p. xi). 61% of year 10 students reached the proficiency standard, whilst 49% reached the standard for year 6.

These figures might seem low to those who think young people are totally tech-savvy and all tooled up for a digital world, but, significantly, it is in being able to use ICTs to demonstrate the higher levels of thinking that they fall down:

Communication is a frequent use at both Year 6 and Year 10 … . However, there was much less frequent use of applications that involved creating, analysing or transforming information. (p. xiv)

In terms of patterns of ICT Literacy, lower scores were associated with (p. xii):

  • Low socio-economic background
  • Indigeneity
  • Remote locality

Gender didn’t come into it.

The report concluded that simple facility with ICTs does not ensure the development of ICT literacy, and that we should be careful about the assumptions we make about how well young people are engaging intellectually with the virtual world (p. 93). The report calls for building ICT literacy through “systematic teaching rather than incidental use” (p. 93). This means, of course, that many teachers themselves are going to have to work on their ICT literacy, and they, too, need to be supported by PD in the workplace.

Bookmark and Share

Target: First years’ experiences with technology

February 8, 2008

Target ImageIt’s a bit old now, but given the dearth of research on what the Net Gen is actually doing at university now that they are starting to arrive on our campuses, I thought that this 2006 Uni of Melbourne study would still be of interest to readers.

The sub-title of the study about first year students’ experiences with technology is “Are they really Digital Natives?” I reckon it’s being a bit clever calling it that, because the answer, according to the findings the study presents, would seem to be ‘yes — pretty much’.

Some stats and general comments:

  • 73% of students had broadband access, 93% had unrestricted access to a mobile phone, and 90% to a desktop computer. (p. 3)
  • Computers were most commonly used for e-mailing (94%), creating documents (88%), general information searching (83%). (p. 3)
  • Emerging computer-based technologies were blogs, file-sharing, social networking. (p. 3)
  • International students use a wide-range of technologies and tools more so than local students. (p. 3)
  • Students were overwhelmingly positive about using ICT in their studies, the main activities being using a computer for study purposes (94%), searching for information (93%), general course admin (84%), and SMS (84%) and IM (75%) communication. (p. 3)
  • Engineering, Architecture and Building and Planning students were more likely to use particular technologies and to use them more frequently that were Education and Arts student. (p. 14)
  • Convenience and control are the most valuable reasons cited by students for using ICTs in course — not learning. (p. 15)

On this last point, and as per the JISC report cited in my previous post, it seems that students have trouble figuring out how these technologies might be used in the academic setting to “optimise learning experiences and outcomes” (p. 16). This means that it’s up to teachers 1) to learn how to deploy these technologies in pedagogically sound fashion, and 2) if they are using certain techs in their teaching, to communicate clearly their expectations for learning and assessment.

Bookmark and Share

Target: Student expectations study

February 8, 2008

Target ImageWho would’ve thought that reading reports could be fun! I’ve been getting stuck into some stuff on Net Gen students and those who are entering university, so I’ll blog the most interesting points from an MP.com point of view.

JISC, in the UK, released its Student expectations study: Findings from preliminary research in September 2007. The study found that

  • “students do come to university with a set of inherent expectations about ICT provision and use” (my emphasis) but that they also expressed a general uncertainty about what universities have to offer. This means that they try “to map their current learning experiences onto this world.”
  • these students have preferences for using technology, see it as core to engaging socially and “regard ubiquitous internet access as the norm.”
  • where it comes to publishing coursework online for public scrutiny, they are cautious.
  • they see technology as part of the bigger picture of learning: it’s not an end in itself and there are other ways of doing things.
  • they believe face-to-face interaction as core to their learning.
  • they often cannot see how “ICT and learning can work together outside the school context.”

This last point is particularly interesting, especially in light of a 2006 University of Melbourne report that found that students’ attitudes to using blogs (and RSS, and web conferencing and social networking software) in their studies were largely ambivalent. (More on this report in my next blog post). Marry this up with the above findings, and I suspect that incoming students simply don’t have enough of an idea of how these things could be used for assessment purposes in their degrees.

Bookmark and Share


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.