Abstract
Reading and writing stand front and center in a digital age. Yet the digital turn has yet to permeate schools in anything approaching transformative ways. In no area is this more evident than literacy education, where 20th century reading and writing practices are still the coin of the realm. We argue that literacy practices that occur outside of school, which are now largely digital, have outstripped long-held understandings of what literacy can be. If literacy in formal educational contexts, like schools, is to flourish, it must reach a rapprochement with the digital textuality that is part and parcel of twenty-first century communication. It must also embrace an ethical turn, recognizing the important role that contemporary literacy practices play in civic and democratic action. After reviewing the major theoretical traditions that have shaped research on the relationships and borders of literacy in and out of school, we introduce more recent perspectives that focus on the nature of textuality and authorship in a digital age, such as multimodality and design, and perspectives concerned with changing political and social contexts, including “super diversity” and local-global relationships. We preview what we believe will be the dominant influence on literacy and literacy pedagogy in the near-term future, and that is the global, as our world grows simultaneously smaller via digital connectivity and more divided via ideological and economic disparities. We suggest that literacy educators and researchers, both those whose focus is school-valued forms and those who celebrate youth-centered production of a range of types of texts out of school, should redouble their efforts to craft conceptions of literacy and to support instances of literacy practice that position youth to work to solve local and global problems and to become ethically alert and audience-sensitive communicators, as well as to develop their personal capacities for meaning making.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (1998). Local literacies: Reading and writing in one community. London: Routledge.
Baynham, M., & Prinsloo, M. (Eds.). (2009). The future of literacy studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Blackburn, M. V. (2002). Disrupting the (hetero) normative: Exploring literacy performances and identity work with queer youth. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(4), 312–324.
Blommaert, J. (2010). The sociolinguistics of globalization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Brandt, D., & Clinton, K. (2002). Limits of the local: Expanding perspectives on literacy as a social practice. Journal of Literacy Research, 34(3), 337–356.
Butler, J. (1991). Imitation and gender insubordination. In D. Fuss (Ed.), Inside/out: Lesbian theories, gay theories (pp. 13–31). London: Routledge.
Canagarajah, S. (2013). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. London: Routledge.
Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Cazden, C. B., John, V. P., & Hymes, D. (1972). Functions of language in the classroom. Oxford: Teachers College Press.
Ellison, T. L., & Kirkland, D. (2014). Motherboards, microphones, and metaphors: Re-examining new literacies and black feminist thought through technologies of self. E-Learning and Digital Media, 11(4), 390–405.
Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London: Falmer Press.
Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Heath, S. B. (2012). Words at work and play: Three decades in family and community life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hull, G., & Nelson, M. (2009). Literacy, media, and morality: Making the case for an aesthetic turn. In M. Baynham & M. Prinsloo (Eds.), The future of literacy studies (pp. 199–227). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hull, G., & Schultz, K. (2001). Literacy and learning out of school: A review of theory and research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 575–611.
Hull, G., & Schultz, K. (2002). School’s out: Bridging out-of-school literacies with classroom practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hymes, D. (1964). Introduction: Towards ethnographies of communication. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), The ethnography of communication (pp. 1–34). Washington, DC: American Anthropology Association.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 269–293). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Jewitt, C. (2012). Multimodal teaching and learning. In The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Published Online: 5 Nov 2012. doi:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0815.
Katz, M. L. (2013). Introduction. In M. L. Katz (Ed.), Moving ideas: Multimodality and embodied learning in communities and schools (pp. 1–30). New York: Peter Lang.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Hodder Education.
Kromidas, M. (2010). Cyberculture, multiculture and the emergent morality of critical cosmopolitanism: Kids (trans)forming difference online. In D. Chappell (Ed.), Children under construction: Critical essays on play as curriculum (pp. 233–258). New York: Peter Lang.
Lam, W. S. E., & Warriner, D. S. (2012). Transnationalism and literacy: Investigating the mobility of people, languages, texts, and practices in contexts of migration. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(2), 191–215.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leander, K., & Boldt, G. (2013). Rereading “A pedagogy of multiliteracies”: Bodies, texts, and emergence. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(1), 22–46.
Leander, K. M., & McKim, K. K. (2003). Tracing the everyday ‘sitings’ of adolescents on the Internet: A strategic adaptation of ethnography across online and offline spaces. Education, Communication & Information, 3(2), 211–240. doi:10.1080/14636310303140.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (trans: Nicholson-Smith, D.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Lewis, T. Y. (2013). “We txt 2 sty cnnectd”: An African American mother and son communicate: Digital literacies, meaning-making, and activity theory systems. Journal of Education, 193(2), 1–13.
Lizárraga, J., Hull, G., & Scott, J. (2015). Academic literacies in a social media age: Lessons learned from youth’s transnational communication online. In D. Molle (Ed.), Multilingual learners and academic literacies: Sociocultural contexts of literacy development in adolescents (pp. 105–131). New York: Routledge.
Luke, A. (2004). On the material consequences of literacy. Language and Education, 18(4), 331–335.
Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1997). The social practices of reading. In S. Muspratt, A. Luke, & P. Freebody (Eds.), Constructing critical literacies (pp. 185–225). Cresskill: Hampton Press.
Makalela, L. (2015). Translanguaging as a vehicle for epistemic access: Cases for reading comprehension and multilingual interactions. Per Linguam: A Journal for Language Learning, 31(1), 15–29.
Marcus, G. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.
Moje, E., & Luke, A. (2009). Literacy and identity: Examining the metaphors in history and in contemporary research. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(4), 415–437.
Schultz, K., Hull, G., & Higgs, J. (2015). After writing, after school. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Street, B. V. (Ed.). (1993). Cross-cultural approaches to literacy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Street, B. V. (2003). What’s “new” in New Literacy Studies?: Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5(2), 77–91.
The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
Vasudevan, L. (2015). “A picture can do things words can’t”: Transforming representations in literacy research. In J. Flood, S. B. Heath, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through communicative and visual arts (Vol. 2). New York: Routledge.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Zimmerman, A. M. (2012). Documenting DREAMs: New media, undocumented youth and the immigrant rights movement. A case study report working paper Media, Activism and Participatory Politics Project Civic Paths, Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, University of Southern California. http://ypp.dmlcentral.net/sites/default/files/publications/Documenting_DREAMs.pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this entry
Cite this entry
Schultz, K., Hull, G. (2015). Literacies In and Out of School. In: Street, B., May, S. (eds) Literacies and Language Education. Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02321-2_20-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02321-2_20-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-02321-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education