It’s Not All About the Learner: Reframing Students’ Digital Literacy as Sociomaterial Practice
Digital literacies are an important area of contemporary research and practice. However, policy and research on this topic relies almost exclusively on capability or competence models of “digital literacy”. These decontextualised, cognitive accounts ignore the insights of New Literacy Studies (e.g. Lea and Street. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–172, 1998), which have shown that focusing on a ‘free floating’ learner, without reference to settings, resources and cultures, fails to explain important aspects of how literacy practices are achieved and enacted. Adopting a sociomaterial account of learning provides an alternative to these narratives about student literacy. From this perspective, ‘literacy’ is an achievement that involves the successful coordination of human and non-human actors—including teachers, other learners, pupils, devices, texts and so on. Drawing on work undertaken as part of a JISC-funded project, we critique mainstream ‘learner-centred’ accounts of digital literacy; outline the theoretical framework on which our work has been based; and present a series of case studies that show how an individual’s ability to act in a digitally literate way depends on much more than an assumed set of stable, internalised qualities. These cases involve data collected by students through multimodal journalling over a period of 9–12 months, and from in-depth interviews that explored what these meant to them. This analysis shows how learners’ practices are shaped by the social and material environments in which they are enacted, and reveals that learners are engaged in an ongoing, improvisatory process of both adapting to the environments in which they work, whilst also adapting these environments.
KeywordsDigital literacies Sociomateriality Actor-network theory Higher education
- Barton, D. (2007). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices (pp. 17–32). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
- Beetham, H. (2010). Review and Scoping Study for a Cross-JISC Learning and Digital Literacies Programme. JISC. Retrieved from www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/funding/2011/04/Briefingpaper.pdf.
- Belshaw, D. (2011). What is ‘digital literacy’? A pragmatic investigation. Doctoral Thesis, Durham University. Retrieved from http://neverendingthesis.com/doug-belshaw-edd-thesis-final.pdf.
- Bennett, L. (2014). Learning from the early adopters: Developing the digital practitioner. Research in Learning Technology, 22, 1–13.Google Scholar
- Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J.G. Richardson’s handbook for theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
- Buckingham, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices (pp. 73–89). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
- Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging approaches to educational research: Tracing the sociomaterial. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Gillen, J., & Barton, D. (2010). Digital literacies: A research briefing by the technology enhanced learning phase of the teaching and learning research programme. London: London Knowledge Lab. http://www.tlrp.org/docs/DigitalLiteracies.pdf.
- Glister, P. (1997). Digital literacy. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
- Goodfellow, R., & Lea, M. (2013). Literacy in the digital university: Critical perspectives on learning, scholarship and technology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Gourlay, L., Hamilton, M., & Lea, M. (2013). Textual practices in the new media digital landscape: Messing with digital literacies. Research in Learning Technology, 23, 1–13.Google Scholar
- Haraway, D. (1991). A cyborg manifesto: Science, technology, and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention of nature. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Mayes, T. (2006). LEX – Methodology report. Glasgow Caledonian University and Open Learning. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearningpedagogy/lex_method_final.pdf.
- Sharpe, R., & Beetham, H. (2010). Understanding students’ uses of technology for learning. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 85–99). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sharpe, R., Beetham, H., Benfield, G., DeCicco, E., & Lessner, E. (2009). Learners experiences of e-learning synthesis report: Explaining learner differences. Unpublished project report, Oxford Brookes University. Retrieved from https://wiki.brookes.ac.uk/display/JISCle2f/Findings.