Literacy, wot literacy?

I'm sat watching the evening news and I'm listening to a report about a decline in literacy, due apparently to a dwindling interest in book reading. 1 in 4 children will never read a book outside school, intones the BBC news man. Other statistics are thrown at me as I watch the news reporter build his case. 1 in 3 do not own a book and 1 in 6 children will struggle with their literacy, he says. Figures quoted are obtained from the National Literacy Trust he says. The BBC TV reporter goes on to suggest that kids today are "increasingly bombarded with new technology and new distractions" (images of children playing shoot em up computer games flash across the screen at this point), and that "the place of books, literacy and quiet reading ranks highly amongst the concerns of many parents." The BBC reporter balances his report by conceding that "kids do read, but increasingly it's not books." Well, that's helpful. I want to ask - so what do they read? But already, the channel has moved on to the sport.

Here's what I know: Increasingly, sales of books on Amazon are in electronic form, and this year, for the first time, the online store has reported that the sale of e-books has outstripped conventional book sales. But e-books are usually the preserve of adults. Few school children that I know actually read books on Kindle. Most don't own a Kindle or other e-book reader. Do children read other things then - on the Web for example, or on their games consoles? More to the point, what are kids interested in reading? Should they, as is the view of our esteemed Education Secretary Michael Gove, be tasked to read 50 books a year? What a splendid way of turning kids off reading altogether! I know that if I was forced to read a book a week when I was in school, I would very quickly have found a way of losing those books in a ditch somewhere.

I'm sceptical about the BBC news item, and the idea it is propagating that literacy is on the decline. Hasn't it always been thus? I can recall government statistics from when I was at school (oh so many years ago) saying that our country was in trouble, because of the poor standards of 'reading, writing and arithmetic.' I was messaged on Facebook yesterday by another Steve Wheeler (no relation, and certainly no friend) who going by his picture, is probably of the same generation as me, but behaving more in compliance with his shoe size than his age. Out of the blue, on my wall this stranger had written 'Your not Steve Wheeler I am.' By response I kindly pointed out to him that the correct grammatical construction should be 'You're not Steve Wheeler. I am.' He fired back a snide comment. I blocked him. No matter. The key point of this story is that every generation has its literacy problems. Is there really such a decline in literacy? Has it changed all that much from previous decades? If there is a decline, should we really be placing all the blame on 'new technology and new distractions?' There are so many questions. It's a complex issue.

The statement that new technology is distracting, and the implication that it is doing damage to literacy needs to be challenged. I would point those who are sceptical about the role of technology in education, and those who claim that it has had little impact on learning to the time just before Gutenberg introduced his movable type printing press. Literacy - reading and writing - was then the preserve of the elite, and it was zealously protected. Post Gutenberg, it became a world in which all could participate, and knowledge grew exponentially as a result.

Perhaps we should not be asking why children are reading less print books. Instead, maybe we should be asking 'what are the new literacies they will need in the society in which they will grow up and work?' Perhaps we should look more at how the emphasis on literacy is changing to digital literacies (notice the plural) ... the transliteracies and other new skills of communicating across social media and mobile platforms that are already assuming greater import as they transform our society.

No, I don't think the demise of the printed book is nigh. I believe there will be a place for print for a long time to come. And there are still many, many children who continue to read and enjoy books. But print is now having to move aside to make some space as newer methods of mass communication take a more prominent role in our world. The way we represent knowledge, the world around us, society, community, reality, is changing. So there you have it. Those are my thoughts on the topic. Do you read me?

Image source by Guldfisken


Literacy, wot literacy? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

2020 Classrooms

Will we still need classrooms by 2020? If so, what kind of learning environments will they be? Or will students learn on the move, in their workplaces, at home, and through the multiple connections facilitated by new communication technology? This is a difficult question to answer, because school and education, although not synonymous, are deeply ingrained in our culture and have become a key component of our social, political and economic thinking. Implicit in the question are a number of issues, including the relationship between teaching and curriculum, and nature of state funded education and the role of teachers. Also under the spotlight are the demands of society, work, family and community, and how these are balanced against the needs of individual learners.

I recently used Twitter to crowdsource a number of responses to what would be obsolete in education in 2020. The discussion can be found under the hashtag #learning2020. In this post I would like to present some of the tweets, and provide a critical commentary around them, in the hope that it will provide a useful contribution to the discourse surrounding the purpose of education and the future of learning.

The design and configuration of classrooms was a particular concern for several people. Melissa Brown Boyle, an elementary school teacher in the USA, predicted that school classrooms of the future will have "fewer individual student desks and more tables or open floor space conducive to discussion and movement". She also believes in moving learning beyond traditional settings: "open discussion space must be global not just local, virtual links are just as real as graffiti on desks.” She has a point, because often, classrooms are cluttered with furniture, and provide less space for creative activities to be organised. These are sentiments echoed by another teacher, Vanessa Camilleri, who calls for more creative options through flexibility - the global classroom is already there for the making. So, do we need to redesign classrooms to make them more conducive to personalised and creative forms of learning? Evelyn MacElhinney is even more radical. She envisages 'hologram rooms' where students can 'learn in the scenario' and she advocates doing away with tables and chairs completely in schools of the future.

What about the way education is currently conducted? What about the closed nature of the classroom? Mr Colley, a teacher in the UK wants to see closed door classrooms become a thing of the past. He also predicts that teachers will very soon need to determine the differences between cheating and collaboration. Martin Homola, a PhD student in Slovakia, made the prediction that education behind closed doors will be obsolete by 2020. He suggests that 'online, open channels' will be the building blocks of future education. By this, I assume he means that open content, open source and open learning will come to the fore, and schools will be less protective over their content and classroom methods. Theo Kuechel agrees, and hopes to see 'more CC' and less 'C' on learning content in the future.

Sonia Cooper, also a teacher, wanted to see learning environments where each child had one device that 'did everything' including connecting to each other, the teacher, and content for learning. The scots had a lot to say about future learning: Kenny Pieper, an English teacher in Scotland, saw a future where the classroom was replete with iPads, Kindles and other personal tools for learning. Others such as Fraser Speirs, a head of computing, at a school in Scotland, also called for 1-1 technology provision, but added wisely that children should be presented with challenge-based learning. Yet Ian Stuart, a Deputy Head teacher in Scotland, warned that perhaps the "idea of 1-1 tablets in 2020 is like man in 1900 thinking we'd have really fast steam engines by 2000". He's right of course. When gazing into the future, we should certainly not constrain our thinking to current mindsets and conceptions of technology. Instead, we should try to be like the children in our classes - to let our imagination run riot, because from this can come the creative solutions for the problems of the future. What is your vision for 2020 learning?

Previous posts in this series on 2020 Learning include 2020 Learners and 2020 Vision.

Image source by Shuichiro


2020 Classrooms by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.