Thanks and a(nother) tippo to A J Cann for the link (via his soti bookmarks on delicious) to D’arcy Norman’s epigenetics and the institution. This hit me as an approach to conceptualising the relationship between individuals and institutions for a paper I am puzzling over writing, about the utility of participatory media (Web2.0/the social internet) to the support, synthesis and benefits realisation of educational R&D programmes.
This post is one small link in a chain started for me by A J Cann in a post on his Emerge blog, The P word, fed from Science of the Invisible that linked to Michael Wesch’s post, Participatory Media Literacy: why it matters, referring to “… Howard Rheingold’s great little article, Participative Pedagogy for a Literacy of Literacies,” I am reminded of my colleagues at Brookes, who regularly observe that students show a highly uncritical approach to the media with which they saturate their world (and by which it is saturated). Undergraduate use of the Web for learning was studied in a large multi-method research project aimed to evaluate learner experience of e-learning at Oxford Brookes University, Exploring patterns of student learning technology use, reported at Networked Learning 2008.
I read Josie Fraser’s, Notes towards digital literacy, and Terry Wassal’s recent comment on it with interest. This post has stimulated a lot of discussion in the comments and on other blogs. When thinking about the Brookes elearning strategy, I recently took an opposite, narrow view. I do not want to argue against the broad view Josie takes: basically, she’s right, but for the purposes of developing a curriculum place for digtial literacy, I thought it might be helpful to think about what people might have to do to be considered digitally literate. I offer this as my “starter guide” to digital literacies in HE.