How to Teach Multi-Literacies

Shampa Biswas

Shampa Biswas is an Ph.D. Student in Language, Literacy, and Technology (LLT) in the
Department of Teaching and Learning, Washington State University, Pullman and a
graduate writing consultant in the Graduate and Professional Writing Center (GPWC), the
Writing Program at the same university. Her research interests are graduate writing support,
writing tutoring, writing instruction, sustainable literacy development, multiple-criteria
decision-making and teacher education.

Abstract
Teaching multi-literacies has been crucial for preparing students to cope with
the realities of the technological world. However, teacher education programs
are not yet prepared to bridge the gap between traditional literacy and multi-
literacies. This concept paper explores how teaching multi-literacies could
shape future learning practices in schools. The integration of multi-literacies to
classroom pedagogy would help raise standards and reduce literacy gaps in the
classroom.

Teaching Multi-Literacies

New London Group (1996) coined the term “Multi-Literacies.” Multiple

literacies imply multimodal ways of communication, which include
communications between other languages, using language within different
cultures, and an ability to understand technology and multimedia. Symbols,
audios, videos, billboards, or emails/listserv, for example, are integrated to the
social and education media. Applying multi-literacies to teaching offers a new
classroom pedagogy that extends and helps manage classrooms.

One challenge for educators is to help students create a sustainable literacy

development throughout schooling, so that students can develop strong
literacy skills (Ajayi, 2011; Borsheim, et al. 2008; Cummins, et al. 2007).
Multiple literacies (i.e., literacies and new literacies; see Table 1) require that
students integrate technology-enhanced educational tools into their work. Ajayi

38
(2011) proposes that teacher education must prepare teachers to teach multi-
literacies in their schools where there is a critical gap between multi-literacies
and classroom pedagogy (Mills, 2009; Hesterman, 2013; Pennington, 2013).
Given globalization and technological change, teaching multi-literacies is
indispensable to literacy teaching and learning in the 21st century. This paper
explores how teachers can teach multi-literacies in schools.

Integrating Multi-Literacies in Teaching

Newman (2002) suggests that teachers integrate four components of multi-

literacies in teaching: (1) situated practice; (2) overt instruction; (3) critical
framing; and (4) transformed action. Situated practice leads students towards
meaningful learning by integrating primary knowledge. Overt instruction guides
students to the systematic practices of learning processes with tools and
techniques. Critical framing teaches students how to question diverse perceptions
for better learning experiences. Transformed action teaches students to apply the
lessons they learn to solve real-life problems. Teaching multi-literacies can
inform, engage, and encourage students to embrace the multiplicity of the
learning practices (New London Group, 1996). Teaching multi-literacies can
also help teachers blend and apply the following four instructional processes of
multi-literacies in the classroom ensuring successful teaching and advancing
students’ learning processes.

Situated Practice Ensures Meaningful Learning Practices Within a

Community of Learners

Teachers can motivate learners to discuss and share thoughts about classroom
tasks within a small group of students in the classroom; and to connect with
primary language, culture, and experiences in real life. Situated practice suggests
using students’ life experiences to create meaningful classroom activities within
a community of learners (New London Group, 1996; Jacob, 2012; Newman,
2002; Mills, 2009). For instance, online writing space helps both students and
teachers promote online and offline collaboration. Wiki is a powerful example
of how a collaborative platform and webpage can distribute information, save
time, and manage teaching.

39
Teachers can incorporate Word Processors, Facebook, Twitter, Mobile Device,
Wikis, Blogs, and Remixing (e.g., making machinima videos, making movie
trailers, Fanfiction short movies, making music videos, creating fan art, political
remix, etc.) in classrooms (Knobel & Lankshear, 2008; Lankshear & Knobel,
2011; Pennington, 2014). Their informal and formal learning practices with
classmates, friends, and families allow them to practice and understand the
value of classroom activities within a community of learners. Teachers can
potentially help students understand and learn multiple perspectives of their
classmates and teachers.

Overt Instruction Introduces Different Modes of Meaning to Learners

Teachers can provide systematic instructions about classroom tasks towards

the explicit explanation of different modes of meaning by engaging them in
overt instruction. Overt instruction helps learners focus on important features
and gain experiences that allow them to understand systematic, analytic, and
cognizant explanations of different modes of meaning (New London Group,
1996; Jacob, 2012; Newman, 2002; Mills, 2009; William, 2009). Interventions
between teachers and students potentially create different meanings in the
learning process (Ajayi, 2011). Teachers must utilize students’ prior
technological skills in classroom activities.

Both teachers and students can explore possible pedagogies for classroom
activities (Alexander, 2008). For instance, teachers can suggest that students
use ‘graphical concept map features’ for creating an interactive concept-map of
their classroom learning. Afterward, teachers can guide students to clarify what,
why, and how these techniques improve their learning processes in a
technology-integrated environment.

Critical Framing Encourages Learners to Create Own Meanings

Teaching critical framing guides students to derive their own meanings from
classroom activities, which encourages them to think, understand, observe,
interpret, negotiate, and apply their ideas (Evans, 2005) in problem-solving.
Learners can improve their interpretation skills about specific design under the
40
diverse social and cultural context with thoughtful understanding (New
London Group, 1996; Jacob, 2012; Newman, 2002; Mills, 2009). This practice
helps students learn logical interpretation and meaningful expressions of
different learning concepts. Egbert (2007) suggested that analyzing capacity of
students can be built by simply asking, “Why?”

Teachers can teach students in ways that help them realize, comprehend, and
respect diverse knowledge perspectives (i.e., different, dynamic, and conflicting
ideas). Different prospects of critical framing are crucial for 21st century
students to include their pleasure and experience from family, friends, popular
culture, social media, and language in the process of making text. Teachers can
encourage students to notice and analyze practices of communicating
meaningful ideas in schools and communities.

Transformed Practice Engages Learners to Apply Learned Lessons in

Real Problem Solving

Teachers can help students engage in reciprocal conversations that transfer

ideas from one cultural situation to another. Transformed practice suggests
how meaningful learning activities can design social futures (New London
Group, 1996; Jacob, 2012; Newman, 2002; Kalantzis & Cope, 2008; Mills,
2009). Transformed practice might encourage students to connect their
learning experiences with their daily classroom tasks. Technology-aided
educational tools can be used to transform information into knowledge and
fulfil diverse language learners’ styles and needs (Egbert, 2004). For instance,
combining text with graphics, arts, music, and other visual elements in
classroom activities can encourage students to comprehend the learning
process (Ajayi, 2011).

Conclusion

The integration of teaching multi-literacies has a potential to adopt new ideas

and overcome the limitations of traditional learning approaches in the 21st
Century literacies. Teaching multi-literacies opens new pedagogical practices
that create opportunities for future literacy teaching and learning. Multi-
literacies can also help teachers provide equal access to learning for all students.
Moreover, students learn to collaborate by sharing their thoughts with others
41
in online spaces where they can engage in different forms or modes (texts,
video, image, rhymes, and poetry) of learning processes. Consequently, we can
expect students to become more confident and knowledgeable in their learning
context through participatory and collaborative practices.

LITERACY

Attitude and awareness (e.g., attention, participation,

Social recognized
collaboration, critical assumption, network awareness).
ways

Meaningful content Generating, exchanging, and negotiating specific kind of meaning.

Encoded texts Texts are captured, and transferable.

Participation in New literacies, Academic literacy, Bengali literacy, Home literacy,

discourses Facebook literacy, Digital literacy, Moving image literacy, Media
literacy.

NEW LITERACIES Writing source code, Operating digital operators for different
applications (e.g., text, image, sound, animation, and communication
New “technical function); Creating diverse range of meaningful artifacts, Remixing,
stuff” Machinima animations, Music remix practices, Anime music video
(ANM) remixes.

New “ethos stuff” Mindset 1 (bookspace, textual order); Mindset 2 (digital media space);
Web 1.0 (Britannica online, publishing); Web 2.0. (Flickr, Wikipedia,
Wikis, Google, Facebook).

New literacies on Video gaming, Collaborative writing (Wikis, Blogging, Fanfic writing,
the ground Manga producing), and Memeing.

LEARNING and Educational engagement (i.e., using Schoology/ Engrade as teacher

EDUCATION and student communication tools), Theory of new literacies, New
possibilities of information and communication.

Table 1: Elements of Multi-Literacies (literacy and new literacies)

42
References

Alexander, B. (2008). Web 2.0 and Emergent Multi-literacies. Theory Into

Practice, 47(2), 150-160. Doi: 10.1080/00405840801992371.

Ajayi, L. (2011). A multi-literacies pedagogy: Exploring semiotic possibilities of

a Disney video in a third grade diverse classroom. The Urban Review, 43(3), 396-
413.

Borsheim, C. (2008). Beyond Technology for Technology's Sake: Advancing

Multi-literacies in the Twenty-First Century. Clearing House, 82(2), 87.

Cummins, J., Brown, K., & Sayers, D. (2007). Literacy, technology, and diversity:
Teaching for success in changing times. Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson.

Egbert, J. (2007). Asking useful questions: Goals, engagement, and

differentiation in technology-enhanced language learning. Teaching English with
Technology, 7(1). Available http://www.iatefl.org.pl/call/j_article27.htm.

Egbert, J. (2004). Two Faces of Technology Use. Essential Teacher, 1(2), 37-40.

Evans, J. (2005). Literacy moves on: Popular culture, new technologies, and critical literacy
in the elementary classroom. : Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Hesterman, S. (2013). Early childhood designs for multi-literacies

learning. Australian Journal of Language & Literacy, 36(3), 158-168.

Jacobs, G. E. (2012). The Proverbial Rock and Hard Place: The Realities and
Risks of Teaching in a World of Multi-literacies, Participatory Culture, and
Mandates. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(2), 98-102.
DOI:10.1002/JAAL.00109.

Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. I. L. L. (2008). Language education and multi-

literacies. Encyclopedia of language and education, 1, 195-211.

43
Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2008). Remix: The art and craft of endless
hybridization. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(1), 22-33. DOI:
10.1598/JAAL.52.1.3

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and classroom
learning, 3rd Ed. London: Open University Press.

Mills, K. A. (2009). Multi-literacies: Interrogating competing

discourses. Language and Education, 23(2), 103-116.

Newman, M. (2002). The designs of academic literacy: A multi-literacies examination of

academic achievement. Greenwood Publishing Group.

New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multi-literacies: Designing social

futures. Harvard Educational Review. 66 (1), 60-92.

Pennington, M. C. (2014). Trends in Writing and Technology. Writing &

Pedagogy, 5(2), 155-179. ISSN: 1756–5847 (online).

Pennington, J. L., Brock, C. H., Palmer, T., & Wolters, L. (2013).

Opportunities to teach: confronting the deskilling of teachers through the
development of teacher knowledge of multiple literacies. Teachers and
Teaching, 19(1), 63-77.

Williams, P. J. (2009). Technological literacy: A multi-literacies approach for

democracy. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(3), 237-254.

44