scholarly journals Chapter 7. Having a Feel for What Works: Polymedia, Emotion, and Literacy Practices with Mobile Technologies

Author(s):  
Bronwyn T. Williams
Author(s):  
Peggy Semingson

This chapter explores changing definitions of literacy that build on the key concepts of New Literacies and existing Web 2.0 practices such as blogging, social networking, and other shared and collaborative media spaces (Davies & Merchant, 2009). The chapter also describes concrete examples of mobile-based literacy ideas that build on such a framework. The focus on teacher education, and literacy education in particular, examines and considers new definitions of literacy practices with connections to mobile technologies. Although mobile technologies offer possibilities for multi-modal and collaborative literacy practices, it is suggested that we should also stay grounded in some of the principles of print literacies (the prerequisite skills of the reading and writing processes), while also fostering Web 2.0 and New Literacies (as defined and discussed by Lankshear & Knobel, 2003, 2006). Specific examples of Web 2.0 technologies that can be implemented with mobile tools are shared and discussed.


Author(s):  
Kathy A. Mills ◽  
Len Unsworth

Multimodal literacy is a term that originates in social semiotics, and refers to the study of language that combines two or more modes of meaning. The related term, multimodality, refers to the constitution of multiple modes in semiosis or meaning making. Modes are defined differently across schools of thought, and the classification of modes is somewhat contested. However, from a social semiotic approach, modes are the socially and culturally shaped resources or semiotic structure for making meaning. Specific examples of modes from a social semiotic perspective include speech, gesture, written language, music, mathematical notation, drawings, photographic images, or moving digital images. Language and literacy practices have always been multimodal, because communication requires attending to diverse kinds of meanings, whether of spoken or written words, visual images, gestures, posture, movement, sound, or silence. Yet, undeniably, the affordances of people-driven digital media and textual production have given rise to an exponential increase in the circulation of multimodal texts in networked digital environments. Multimodal text production has become a central part of everyday life for many people throughout the life course, and across cultures and societies. This has been enabled by the ease of producing and sharing digital images, music, video games, apps, and other digital media via the Internet and mobile technologies. The increasing significance of multimodal literacy for communication has led to a growing body of research and theory to address the differing potentials of modes and their intermodality for making meaning. The study of multimodal literacy learning in schools and society is an emergent field of research, which begins with the important recognition that reading and writing are rarely practiced as discrete skills, but are intimately connected to the use of multimodal texts, often in digital contexts of use. The implications of multimodal literacy for pedagogy, curriculum, and assessment in education is an expanding field of multimodal research. In addition, there is a growing attention to multimodal literacy practices that are practiced in informal social contexts, from early childhood to adolescence and adulthood, such as in homes, recreational sites, communities, and workplaces.


Author(s):  
Peggy Semingson

This chapter explores changing definitions of literacy that build on the key concepts of New Literacies and existing Web 2.0 practices such as blogging, social networking, and other shared and collaborative media spaces (Davies & Merchant, 2009). The chapter also describes concrete examples of mobile-based literacy ideas that build on such a framework. The focus on teacher education, and literacy education in particular, examines and considers new definitions of literacy practices with connections to mobile technologies. Although mobile technologies offer possibilities for multi-modal and collaborative literacy practices, it is suggested that we should also stay grounded in some of the principles of print literacies (the prerequisite skills of the reading and writing processes), while also fostering Web 2.0 and New Literacies (as defined and discussed by Lankshear & Knobel, 2003, 2006). Specific examples of Web 2.0 technologies that can be implemented with mobile tools are shared and discussed.


First Monday ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Longshore Smith ◽  
Ruhiya Seward

Since the early 2000s, there has been an explosion in the usage of the term open, arguably stemming from the advent of networked technologies — including the Internet and mobile technologies. ‘Openness’ seems to be everywhere, and takes many forms: from open knowledge, open education, open data and open science, to open Internet, open medical records systems and open innovation. These applications of openness are having a profound, and sometimes transformative, effect on social, political and economic life.This explosion of the use of the term has led to multiple interpretations, ambiguities, and even misunderstandings, not to mention countless debates and disagreements over precise definitions. The paper “Fifty shades of open” by Pomerantz and Peek (2016) highlighted the increasing ambiguity and even confusion surrounding this term. This article builds on Pomerantz and Peek’s attempt to disambiguate the term by offering an alternative understanding to openness — that of social praxis. More specifically, our framing can be broken down into three social processes: open production, open distribution, and open consumption. Each process shares two traits that make them open: you don’t have to pay (free price), and anyone can participate (non-discrimination) in these processes.We argue that conceptualizing openness as social praxis offers several benefits. First, it provides a way out of a variety of problems that result from ambiguities and misunderstandings that emerge from the current multitude of uses of openness. Second, it provides a contextually sensitive understanding of openness that allows space for the many different ways openness is experienced — often very different from the way that more formal definitions conceptualize it. Third, it points us towards an approach to developing practice-specific theory that we believe helps us build generalizable knowledge on what works (or not), for whom, and in what contexts.


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yvonne Gillette

Mobile technology provides a solution for individuals who require augmentative and alternative intervention. Principles of augmentative and alternative communication assessment and intervention, such as feature matching and the participation model, developed with dedicated speech-generating devices can be applied to these generic mobile technologies with success. This article presents a clinical review of an adult with aphasia who reached her goals for greater communicative participation through mobile technology. Details presented include device selection, sequence of intervention, and funding issues related to device purchase and intervention costs. Issues related to graduate student clinical education are addressed. The purpose of the article is to encourage clinicians to consider mobile technology when intervening with an individual diagnosed with mild receptive and moderate expressive aphasia featuring word-finding difficulties.


ASHA Leader ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 10-10
Author(s):  
Wayne A. Secord
Keyword(s):  

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
BRUCE JANCIN
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document