Abstract
In this paper we share the results of an analysis of a set of multimodal, digital videos created by nine-year old children in a critical digital literacies project. These digital compositions, made in honour of Cesar Chavez Day, were meant to be about a day in the life of a worker and were meant to allow children to use school and home community members’ lives as curricular content. We focused on the ways that children represented other people’s work and personal lives, what they said they learned, and the affordances of the multimodal composing platform. Ultimately, we argue that such assignments foreground the school community as a source of curricular material and position children as designers of powerful texts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ávila, J. & Pandya, J.Z. (Eds.) (2013). Critical digital literacies as social praxis: Intersections and challenges. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Bedard, C. & Fuhrken, C. (2011). Writing for the big screen: Literacy experiences in a moviemaking project. Language Arts, 89(2), 113–124.
Britton, J. (1970/1993). Language and learning: The importance of speech in children’s development. 2nd Ed. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc.
Buckingham, D. & Harvey, I. (2001). Imagining the audience: Language, creativity and communication in youth media production. Journal of Educational Media, 26(3), 173–184.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.
Comber, B. (2013). Schools as meeting places: Critical and inclusive literacies in changing local environments. Language Arts, 90(5), 361–371.
Design Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.
Ede, L. & Lunsford, A. (1984). Audience addressed/audience invoked: Lhe role of audience in composition theory and pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, 35(2), 155–171.
Flewitt, R.S., Hampel, R., Hauck, M. & Lancaster, L. (2009). ‘What is multimodal data and transcription?’ In C. Jewitt (Ed.), Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (40–53). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. 30th Anniversary Edition. New York, NY: Continuum.
Gonzalez, N. Moll, L. & Amanti, C. (Eds). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gruenewald, D. (2003). Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for place-conscious education. American Educational Research Journal 40(3), 619–654.
Holloway, S., Hubbard, P., Jons, H. & H. Pimlott-Wilson. (2010). Geographies of education and the significance of children, youth and families. Progress in Human Geography, 34(5) 583–600.
Hull, G. & Nelson, M.E. (2005). Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written Communication, 22(2), 224–261.
Hull, G., Stornaiulo, A. & Sahni, U. (2010). Cultural citizenship and cosmopolitan practice: Global youth communicate online. English Education 42(4), 331–367.
Janks, H., Dixon, K., Ferreira, A., Granville, S. & D. Newfield. (2013). Doing critical literacy: Texts and activities for students and teachers. London, UK and New York, NY: Routledge.
Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy, and learning: A multimodal approach. London: Routledge.
Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, L. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Edward Arnold.
Lewison, M., Flint, A.S. & Van Sluys, K. (2002). Laking on critical literacy: Lhe journey of newcomers and novices. Language Arts, 79(5), 382–392.
Luke, A. (2014). Defining critical literacy. In Pandya, J. & Ávila, J. (Eds.) Moving critical literacies forward: A new look at praxis across contexts, pp. 19–31. New York, NY: Routledge.
Luke, A. (1994). The social construction of literacy in primary school. South Melbourne: MacMillan Education Australia.
Luke, A. & Freebody, P. (1999). Further notes on the four resources model, http://www.readingonline.org/past/past_index.asp?HREF=/research/lukefreebody.html
Merchant, G. (2007). Writing the future in the digital age. Literacy, 41 (3), 118–128.
Mills, K. (2011). ‘Now I know their secrets’: Kineikonic texts in the literacy classroom. Australian Journal of Language & Literacy, 34(1), 24–37.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
Pandya, J.Z., Pagdilao, K., Kim, A.E. & Marquez, E. (2015). Transnational children orchestrating competing voices in multimodal, digital autobiographies. Teachers College Record, 117(7).
Pandya, J.Z. & Aukerman, M. (2014). Research and Policy: A four resources analysis of technology in the CCSS. Language Arts, 91(6), 429–435.
Smith, A. & Hull, G. (2013). Critical literacies and social media: Fostering ethical engagement with global youth. In J. Ávila & J. Pandya (Eds.), Critical digital literacies as social praxis: Intersections and challenges (pp. 63–84). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Smolin, L. & Lawless, K. (2010). Using multiliteracies to facilitate culturally relevant pedagogy in the classroom. In D. Cole & S. Pullen (Eds.), Multiliteracies in motion: Current theory and practice, pp. 173–187. New York, NY: Routledge.
Stevens, L.P. & Bean, T. (2007). Critical literacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pandya, J.Z., Pagdilao, K.C. ‘It’s complicated’: Children learning about other people’s lives through a critical digital literacies project. AJLL 38, 38–45 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651953
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651953