1. Definition of terms
    1. Digital
      1. Fluency
        1. Fluency & digital literacy (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:7)
      2. Knowledge
      3. Literacy
        1. Critical interaction (Burbules 2002: 83)
        2. Definitions (Gilster 1997: 1, 1-2, 2, 28-29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 130, 230)
          1. Introduced without lists of skills, competencies or attitudes (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:18)
          2. List can be derived from the text (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:20)
          3. Conflated effective use of Internet with digital literacy (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:19)
          4. Somewhat paradoxical definition (p.19)
          5. 4 core competencies to digital literacy (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:20)
          6. Ideas didn't come out of nowhere (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:21)
        3. Example where 'digital literacy' would be necessary (Goldman 1999: 163)
        4. Problem of defining as set of competencies = an affective one: no emotional engagement (Holme 2004: 31)
        5. Involves being able to help shape future forms? (Holme 2004: 236)
        6. Is a shorthand - all that exists are particulars (Clark (1992) in Smith & Curtin 1998: 227)
        7. Involves reader as author (Turkle (1995) in Smith & Curtin 1998: 229)
        8. To do with meaning (Snyder 2002b: 3)
        9. Entails 'production model' instead of 'growth model'? (Franklin (1990) in Bigum & Green 1993: 11)
        10. Gilster's definition predicated on 'performative' definition of literacy (Gurak, 2001:27)
        11. Martin (2005) - about 'succeeding in encounters with digital infrastructures' (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:50)
        12. Erstad (2006) - definition for school-age learners in Norway = mastering challenges of today's society (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:50)
        13. Researchers don't realise how digital literacy affects every aspect of individual's life (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:67)
        14. Cultural aspect to digital literacy (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:73-4)
          1. 'cultural forms' (p.74)
        15. Usually given functional definition (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:76)
          1. But *more* than functional skills (p.77-8)
        16. Involves 'critical understanding' (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:83)
        17. Not to do with hardware (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:92)
          1. Eshet (2002) - Mindset or way of thinking (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:18)
        18. Mentioned by EU 'Lisbon Treaty' in conjunction with '3Rs' (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:102-3)
        19. Tornero (2004) - social aspect (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:112)
        20. Involves confident use of tools (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:131)
        21. Terminology very confused (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:17)
          1. Indistinct usage of term causes ambiguity (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:24)
          2. Fuzzy concept - educational researchers have vested interest in keeping it that way? (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:181-2)
        22. DigEuLit project's definition - somewhat clunky (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:27)
        23. Eshet-Alkalai (2004) - based on 5 other literacies (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:27-8) *Umbrella term!*
          1. Martin (2006) - do not need 'one literacy to rule them all' (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:28)
        24. Blended approach gives four agree components to digital literacy (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:29-30)
          1. Essential requirement for life in digital age (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:30)
          2. Reason necessary (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:155)
        25. Canadian Schoolnet National Advisory Board definition - levels? (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:165)
        26. Key elements, synthesized (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:165)
          1. Levels of digital literacy (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:167)
        27. Relation to identity (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:167)
          1. Quotation from Mayes & Fowler (2006) r.e. shift from skill to identity (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:168)
          2. Being digitally literate involves resisting threats to digital identity (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:174)
        28. Diagram of digital literacy in action (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:172)
        29. Digital transformation = final stage of digital literacy (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:173)
        30. About reading and writing within digital culture (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:177)
        31. Norwegians don't have term 'literacy' (*helps?!*) (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:200 fn1)
        32. Lankshear & Knobel's definition of digital literacy (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:249)
          1. 4 elements to definition (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:255-7)
          2. Link to Scribner & Cole (1981) - idea of 'practice' (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:255)
          3. As much to do with relationships & identity as information (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:256)
          4. Relation to social networking (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:275-6)
          5. Meaning of 'encoded texts' (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:257)
          6. Much easier to deal with social networking sites such as Facebook because of encoding (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:275)
          7. Meaning of 'Discourses' (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:257)
      4. Grammar
        1. Involved in true 'digital literacy' (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:79)
      5. Bildung
        1. (Misc.)
      6. Usage
        1. Above 'competence' in hierarchy, but below 'transformation' - depends upon digital literacy (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:171)
      7. Competency
        1. 2006: Digital Competence & EU (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:109)
        2. 3 different trends r.e. definitions & frames of reference (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:129)
        3. Examples in Norwegian curriculum (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:135)
        4. 3 different forms (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:140)
        5. Needs planning for on a long-term basis (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:142)
        6. Bottom of hierarchy, below literacy (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:168)
          1. Digital literacy predicated upon it (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:169)
          2. Highly contextual (p.171)
      8. 'Literacy', 'Competency' & 'Fluency' are interchangeable (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:50-1)
      9. Table showing differences between definitions of digital & information literacy (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:53-4)
    2. Literacies (related)
      1. ICT literacy
        1. Tends to just mean basic skills (Town 2003: 53)
      2. Visual literacy
        1. Visualization = a new form of literacy (Kress 1998: 55)
        2. Going back to 'pre-literate' age of the image would actually move us two steps forward (Lemke (1993) in Smith & Curtin 1998: 230)
          1. Need to improve both written & visual communication (Eco (1995) in Snyder 1998a: 140)
        3. Developed out of art criticism (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:161-2)
          1. Dondis (1973) - developed out of 'classical literacy' (p.162)
      3. Computer literacy
        1. Essential elements (Eraut 1991: 27)
        2. Definition including communication as well as skills (Kellner 2002: 161, 162)
        3. Early definition as having written a computer program (Nevinson (1976) in Martin 2003: 12)
        4. Has acquired a 'skills' connotation (US National Council Report (1999) in Martin 2003: 16)
        5. Term 'largely discredited' (by 1993!) (Bigum & Green 1993: 6)
        6. Gurbuz, Yildirim, and Ozden (2001) - definition of computer literacy = specific to the context (Johnson, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:33)
        7. Poorly defined (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:76)
        8. Shapiro & Hughes (1996) - paint in broad brushstrokes - 7 components (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:23)
        9. 3 phases - Mastery, Application, Reflective (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:156-7)
      4. Information literacy
        1. Oxford English Dictionary definition of 'wisdom' seems appropriate (Town 2003: 54)
        2. Information 'savvy'
          1. Beyond 'recognition' - involves easily finding, creating and using information (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:47)
          2. Involves 'common sense & awareness' (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:47)
        3. 'More substantial' definitions that have been adopted by countries in Western world (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:52)
        4. Definition by SCONUL (1999) - research, use & evaluation (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:52)
        5. An 'umbrella term' (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:55)
        6. Reactionary argument as to why necessary (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:63)
        7. 6-stage model developed by American Library Association in 1989 (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:21-2)
        8. Definition by US Association of College & Research Libraries based on 5 standards (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:159)
      5. Media literacy
        1. Definition by Tyner (1998) - focused on sense-making (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:160)
      6. Electronic literacy
        1. Four differences between printed & electronic texts (Hannon 2000: 22)
      7. Electracy
      8. Computeracy (Delors 1996a: 174)
        1. Definition by Turkle (1995) in Smith & Curtin 1998: 229
        2. Synthesis of literacy and technology (Bigum & Green 1993: 24-25)
      9. School literacy (Hannon 2000: 40-42)
      10. Functional literacy
        1. Stems from US Army in 1940s (Holme 2004: 13)
        2. Definition of functional literacy (Holme 2004: 12)
        3. Literacy Trust (2001) definition (Holme 2004: 19)
        4. Advantage of concept (Holme: 2004: 17-18)
        5. Problem with concept - 3 core assumptions (Holme 2004: 21)
        6. Problem = has 'banking' concept at its core (Holme 2004: 53)
        7. Strips critical thinking, culture and power for sake of capital accumulation (Giroux in Freire & Macedo 1987: 147)
        8. Political concept (Levine (1986) in Bigum & Green 1993: 16)
      11. Critical literacy
        1. Acquisition of four types of competence - coding, semantic, pragmatic & critical (Luke (1994) in Holme 2004: 55)
      12. Many 'sub-literacies' to over-arching Literacy (Kellner 2002: 163)
        1. Pedagogy behind these new 'sub-literacies' still evolving (Kellner 2002: 163)
        2. Kress against multiplicity of literacies (Kress 2003: 22)
          1. Need 'threefold distinction' in our naming practices (Kress 2003: 23)
        3. Need many different forms of literacy because of social aspect (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:258)
        4. Increasing discussion r.e. 'literacies' (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:1)
          1. Reasons for emphasizing plurality (p.2)
          2. More reasons for emphasizing plurality - with quotations (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:7,9,15)
      13. Transliteracy
        1. Ability to read, write & interact across a range of platforms, tools & media (Thomas 2007)
          1. About all communication types (Thomas 2007)
        2. Derived from verb to 'transliterate' (Thomas 2007)
        3. Contains other literacies (Thomas 2007)
        4. Explains changes in human interaction due to technology (Thomas 2007)
        5. Metaphor for Transliteracy - 'The Problem of Script' by Alan Halsey
      14. Multiliteracies
        1. Proposed by Cope & Kalantzis (in Trayner 2004)
        2. Development of multiple literacies (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:97)
          1. Cynthia Lewis (2007) - new literacies have 'creative' nature (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:98)
      15. Cyberliteracy
        1. A set of concepts and critical views with which to understand today's Internet (Gurak 2001:3)
        2. Involves understanding consequences of technology (Gurak 2001:7)
          1. Means taking a particular stance towards computers (Gurak 2001:8)
        3. Involves understanding political and economic forces that shape information technologies (Gurak 2001:12)
        4. Not print, but not oral either - link to Ong's 'secondary orality' (Gurak 2001:14)
        5. Recognition that Internet = blend of communication types (Gurak, 2001:21)
        6. Means voicing an opinion and being active, not passive user of tech. (Gurak, 2001:27)
        7. Internet filtering makes full cyberliteracy more difficult to attain (Gurak, 2001:63)
        8. Against notions of 'technological determinism' (Gurak, 2001:63)
        9. Cyberliteracy and gender (Gurak, 2001:81)
        10. Cyberliteracy, criticality and rights (Gurak, 2001:126)
      16. Internet Literacy
        1. Eisenberg & Johnson (2002) - capability to access and evaluate online information (Johnson, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:34)
        2. Matching of Internet skills with Bloom's taxonomy (Johnson, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:39-40)
        3. Functional Internet literacy about cognitive tools, not technical tools (Johnson, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:42)
      17. Talk of 'literacies' may not be useful (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:75)
      18. E-Literacy
        1. Didn't take off as alternative because easy to confuse with 'illiteracy' when spoken? (Bawden, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:25)
      19. 'Literacies of the digital' (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:156-67)
        1. Overlap (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:164)
      20. Technological literacy
        1. Definition (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:158)
    3. Pragmatism
      1. James (1995: 77)
    4. Educational research
      1. 10 things (Burbules & Warnick 2006: 491)
    5. Need to avoid appending 'literacy' to various terms (Kress 2003: 23)
    6. Sociolinguistic stance towards language & literacy (Genishi & Glupczynski 2006: 658)
    7. Is 'information technology' just another tool like flint tools for Stone Age cavemen? (Graham 1999: 16)
    8. How to come to a definition - need to decide on what it is we are talking about (Holme 2004: 239)
    9. Literacy involves ability to use variety of technologies, but precise definitions lacking (Johnson, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:33)
  2. Epistemologies & methodologies
    1. Pragmatic method
      1. 'Squirrel' problem (James 1995: 17)
      2. No 'end to enquiry' (James 1995: 21)
      3. Theory of truth
        1. True ideas 'work' (James 1995: 23, 80)
        2. True ideas help us deal with reality (James 1995: 82)
      4. Explains how beliefs spread (James 1995: 64)
      5. No differences that don't make a difference in practice (James 1995: 20)
        1. Dangers of representing things as we wish them to be (Burniske & Monke 2001: 9)
      6. Not possible to formulate universal laws with educational research (Bredo 2006: 13)
    2. Narrative enquiry = new methodology (Connelly & Clandinin 2006: 477)
    3. Difficult to appeal to shared fundamental beliefs (Bredo 2006: 4)
    4. Notions of 'epistemic mentality', 'epistemic identity' & 'epistemic milieu' (Claxton 2002: 24-25)
    5. Hermeneutic method (Bredo 2006: 15, 21)
    6. Danger of over-theorising (Hogan & Smith 2003: 167)
  3. 21st century skills
    1. Need to know HTML? (Burbules 1998: 18-19)
    2. 4 'literacies' needed (Lemke (1997) in Beavis 1998: 244)
      1. Central aims of 21st century literacy education (Snyder 2002a: 181)
    3. New technology, new skills (Dalin & Rust 1996: 9)
    4. Pattern recognition? (Glaser 1999: 89)
    5. US Labor Secretary Robert Reich (1991) - new elite job class of 'symbolic-analytic' workers (Johnson-Eilola 1998: 203)
    6. Time to experiment (Kellner 2002: 166)
    7. Information & IT literacy essential to be successful learner in 21st century (Martin 2003: 3)
    8. New types of student - computer literate, etc. (Langlois (1997) in Martin 2003: 7)
    9. Difference between 'internal' and 'external' mindsets (Rodríguez Illera 2004: 53)
    10. Insider/Outsider dichotomy (Barlow, in Tunbridge (1995), quoted by Lankshear & Bigum, 1999: 458, 460)
    11. Manovich (20007) - 'Remixing' defines 21st century (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:186)
  4. Technology
    1. Side-effects of tech. not always obvious (Postman in Burniske & Monke 2001: 21)
      1. Mustn't allow tech. to decontextualize learning (Kellner 2002: 165-166)
    2. Technology = tools (Burnett 2002: 145)
      1. Not just 'new tool' - needs to be embedded to radically change education (Snyder 2002b: 11-12)
    3. Alters relationships (Bigum 2002: 135)
      1. We are disturbed by immediacy of the Internet (Gilster 1997: 258)
      2. Technology = socially applied knowledge (1998: 53-54)
      3. Boundaries between humans & machines has become blurred, therefore children have 'new needs & new capacities' (Green & Bigum (1993) in Smith & Curtin 1998: 212)
        1. Saturation in virtual worlds commonplace for teens (Smith & Curtin 1998: 221-222)
        2. Technology is almost an extension of ourselves (McLuhan (1964) in Thomas 2007)
      4. Danger of technologies producing 'orthodoxies' (Bigum & Green 1993: 7)
        1. Reduction of literacy to set of constituent skills (Castell & Luke (1987) in Bigum & Green 1993: 12-13)
      5. Agre (1998) - 'Cyberspace' doesn't really exist (Gurak 2001:146)
        1. Agre (1998) - Concept of 'cyberspace' = destructive (Gurak 2001:147)
      6. Link between digital world and physicality (Gurak 2001:152)
        1. Need to be careful - cyberspace is not a physical space (Gurak 2001:159)
      7. Wertsch (1998) - alters social & psychological processes (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:180-1)
    4. Tech. = skills as well as machines (Burniske & Monke 2001: 256-257)
    5. Allows more equality of opportunity (Delors (1996a: 173)
      1. Rassool (1999) - Literacy related to empowerment through technology & therefore inclusion/exclusion (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:181)
    6. Easy to misrepresent what technologies are about (Schrage (2000) in Bigum 2002: 135)
      1. Older generations tend to think that computers replace human interaction & can hamper development (Smith & Curtin 1998: 215)
      2. New tech. doesn't mean end of old - blue & complement each other (Snyder 1998b: xxi)
      3. People don't tend to realize that technology is about choices (Gurak 2001:2)
    7. Tech. can be many things (Cromer 1997: 121)
      1. Ong (1982) - writing becomes 'interiorized' - no longer seen as technology (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:122-3)
    8. Adoption of tech.
      1. How can this be best done? (Bigum 2002: 131)
      2. Needs to be ubiquitous (Cromer 1997: 125)
        1. $200 laptop? (Cromer 1997: 126)
      3. Schools cannot keep up (Cromer 1997: 126)
      4. Difficult - can't attach straw to fire hydrant (Cromer 1997: 121)
      5. Intimidating because we're not familiar with it - outdated models (Gilster 1997: ix)
      6. 3 different phases in usage & adoption (Martin 2003: 12-17)
      7. Prediction about 2010 and computer tech. not being 'alien' (Smith & Curtin 1998: 223)
    9. Threatens schools & education (Dalin & Rust 1996: 9)
      1. Means we need to re-examine nature & purpose of schooling (Kellner 2002: 164)
      2. Will eventually replace some classroom instruction (Lemke 2002: 45)
      3. Schools view technology as efficient way of doing traditional things (David (1992) in Levin & Riffel 1997: 97)
        1. Used to achieve old tasks (Levin & Riffel 1997: 112-113)
        2. Mistake to assume new technology will transform, instead of extend, current practice (Tuman 1992: 5)
      4. Two ways schools can respond (Halpin (1996) in Levin & Riffel 1997: 161)
      5. Schools caught between unifying nature of science & technology, and diversifying nature of culture (OECD 1994: 195)
      6. Digital literacies present education with a challenge (Rodríguez Illera 2004: 58)
      7. Schools seem 'quaint and shaky' (Smith & Curtin 1998: 227)
      8. Impossible to consider notion of technology in education by itself (Tuman 1992: 93)
      9. Disruptive nature of technologies - 'rhizomatic' (Luke & Kaptizke 1999: 480)
    10. Effect on culture (Eraut 1991: 8)
      1. 'Computerisation' doesn't mean enhanced literacy skills (Perie, et al (1999) in Holme 2004: 23)
      2. Not shift in technology, shift in how we use things (Kress 1998: 65-66)
      3. Technologies created in social & cultural context - have effect when adopted by another culture ((Sugimoto & Levin in Hawisher & Selfe, 2000: 133)
      4. Tyner (1998) - Some technologies affect literacy practices long after they fall into disuse (Gurak, 2001: 16)
      5. Book = 'profound communication technology' (Gurak, 2001:17)
      6. Telegraph = 'Victorian Internet' - had many aspects we believe to be unique to modern Internet (Gurak, 2001:18)
      7. Cultural aspect of technology only understood by those who live through changes (Gurak, 2001:18)
    11. Not inevitable (Balle in Eraut 1991: 89)
      1. Arises from socio-economic need, but also from experimentation (Street (1984) in Holme 2004: 145-146)
        1. Dependent upon previous technologies (Sugimoto & Levin in Hawisher & Selfe, 2000: 140)
      2. 'Technological determinism' is wrong (Snyder 1998a: 132)
    12. Is neutral (Balle in Eraut 1991: 94)
      1. Perhaps can change the way we think (Landow (1992) in Hannon 2000: 28)
      2. Technology is not neutral (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:73)
      3. Instrumentalist vs. Substantive view (Johnson-Eilola 1998: 188-189, 189)
        1. Feenburg - 'critical theory' of technology: can't identify +ve or -ve uses outside context (Johnson-Eilola 1998: 207)
    13. Digital literacy not dependent on any one configuration of (Gilster 1997: 230)
      1. Writing cannot be separated from tech. (Snyder 1998b: xxi)
      2. 1993: Literacy and technology began to be linked (Bigum & Green 1993: 4)
        1. Different ways in which links between technology & literacy can be understood (Bigum & Green 1993: 5)
    14. Postman - test of whether technological innovation = useful (Graham 1999: 40)
    15. Computers can be conservative force as well instead of revolutionary by magnifying & reproducing social conditions (Hawisher & Selfe 1998: 12)
    16. Difference of first and second-order changes (Cuban (1988) in Levin & Riffel 1997: 17)
    17. Noble (1986) - fallacy of 'technological determinism' (Gurak, 2001:23)
  5. Schools & education
    1. Purpose of schooling? (Carr 2003: 7)
    2. Schools need to adopt to changes in knowledge (Carneiro 2002: 66-67)
    3. Role of teachers is (or should be) changing
      1. Changes role (Delors 1996a: 174)
        1. More than disseminating knowledge (Delors 1996d: 145)
      2. Role of teachers = stewards (Burniske & Monke (2001: 206-207)
      3. In competition for attention with media (Delors 1996d: 142)
    4. Need to teach 'digital literacy' (Burniske & Monke 2001: 27)
    5. Classroom not a good place to observe 'real' behaviours (Burnett 2002: 142, 143-144)
    6. Schooling = moral enterprise (Claxton 2002: 22-23)
      1. Depends on conception of future (Claxton 2002: 23)
    7. Version of literacy in schools = obsolete (Lemke (1993) in Beavis 1998: 240)
    8. Dewey quotation r.e. real purpose of schooling (Burniske & Monke 2001: 222)
    9. Fundamental tension at heart of 21st century education system (Delors 1996c: 85)
    10. Schools define literate practice (Luke (2003) in Eyman, no date)
    11. Difficulty of 'authorship' and 'ownership' in digital realm - difficulty for students (Gurak, 2001:41-2)
    12. Skills related to computers & Internet can 'evolve' without being taught - studies cited (Johnson, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:41)
    13. Norway's 'Knowledge Promotion Reform' (2006) means first European country with curriculum based on digital skills (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:119-20)
      1. Digital skills = 5th basic skill along with reading, writing, arithmetic & orality (Søby, in Lankshear & Knoble, 2008:120-1)
      2. Affects all students in all subjects in all schools (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:179)
  6. Reasons for variations in conceptions/definitions
    1. Personality types (Misc.)
    2. Geographical differences (Misc.)
      1. Globalisation: Literacy practices not only changed because of digital technology, but because of wider changes (Luke (2003) in Schultz (2005) - forward to Street)
    3. Literacy = 'local' (Holme 2004: 70)
    4. Political outlook
      1. Hoare's 'revolutionary alternative' to conservative education (Hoyles 1977: 48-49)
      2. Marxist perspective (Lefebvre (1968) in Rosen in Hoyles 1977: 202)
    5. Literacy affected by economic, social, political and technological factors (Kress 2003: 10)
      1. Literacy cannot be divorced from ideological roots (Street (1995) in Sloane & Johnstone 2000: 158)
    6. Users constantly remaking technologies involved with literacy (Kress 2003: 18)
      1. New literacies as postmodern constructs (Deibert (1996) in Hawisher & Selfe, 2000: 288)
    7. Understanding of significance of change e.g. Beninger (1984) & 50 claimed 'transformations' of society since 1945 (Levin & Riffel 1997: 7)
      1. Not just about adding another 'literacy' to programmes of study, etc. (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:87-8)
    8. Literacy bound up with identity (Gee (1994) in Trayner 2004)
      1. People increasingly base meaning-making around who they are, or think they are (Castells (1996) in Hawisher & Selfe, 2000: 279)
      2. Gurak - definition of cyberliteracy means seeing world from her point of view (Gurak 2001:6)
    9. Cannot simply define literacy with 'reading' and 'writing' as definitions of these shift (Tuman 1992: 2)
    10. What it means to be 'knowledgeable' depends on your conception of knowledge (Gere (1987) in Tuman 1992: 96)
      1. Literacy can have an 'ought' element to it (Gurak, 2001:21)
    11. Most definitions of literacy are 'perfomative' (Gurak 2001:13)
      1. Ong - concept of 'secondary orality' (Gurak 2001:13-14)
    12. Digital native/immigrant dichotomy (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:59, 60)
    13. Literacy confers social status (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:75)
    14. 'Double meaning' of literacy (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:95)
      1. Claire Bélisle (2006) - 3 different ways 'literacy' has evolved (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:156)
    15. 'Conceptual' vs.'operational' views of literacy (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:2)
      1. Examples of each (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:2-4)
  7. Literacy
    1. How 'digital' & 'standard' literacy are different
      1. Hyperreading (Burbules 1998: 117)
        1. Hypertext - reader part of construction (Snyder 1998a: 126-127)
          1. A teaching & learning tool (Snyder 1998a: 135)
          2. But has no ONE impact (Snyder 1998a: 139-140)
      2. Digital world = open-ended (Abbott 2002: 44)
      3. Standard literacy not enough (Abbott & Ryan 2000: 31)
        1. If literacy changing, any point bother teaching current? Absolutely! (Hannon 2000: 26-27)
      4. Difficult to pin down even standard 'literacy' (Beavis 1998: 244)
        1. Need '3D model' (Durrant & Green (2000) in Beavis 2002: 51)
      5. Digital realm less rigorous? (Beavis 2002: 47)
        1. Counter-argument to 'more books published than ever before' (Kress 2003: 7)
        2. On-screen, things have to 'look good' (Kress 2003: 65)
      6. Highlighting difference is unhelpful (Burbules (1998: 102)
      7. It's difference between either/or & and/and/and (Douglas 1998: 160)
        1. Do we read things the way authors intended online (importance of context) (Sugimoto & Levin in Hawisher & Selfe, 2000: 146, 146-147)
      8. Digital literacy an extension of traditional literacy (Gilster 1997: 230)
        1. Involves using images and writing together (Kress (2003) in Trayner 2004)
      9. Hypertext actually evolutionary, not revolutionary (Gilster 1997: 137-138)
      10. Different 'quality of experience' when going from book to Internet (Graham 1999: 89)
        1. Hoyles - table showing difference between medieval script & print: add 'screen'? (Hoyles 1977: 21)
          1. Screen = dominant medium of communication (Kress 2003: 9)
      11. Literacy just 'different' in 21st century, not going to disappear (Hannon 2000: 21)
        1. Foucault: we are 'pious descendants of time' who judge next generation unfairly (Johnson-Eilola 1998: 186)
          1. If you don't want kids to see something online, need to *educate* them, not try to eradicate it (Barlow, in Tunbridge (1995), quoted by Lankshear & Bigum, 1999: 458)
      12. Millard (1997) - realization of how print & electronic literacy linked (Hannon 2000: 22)
      13. Nature of literacy depends upon technology (Hannon 2000: 22-23)
        1. With information, it's familiarity, not scarcity, that is valuable (Barlow, in Tunbridge (1995), quoted by Lankshear & Bigum, 1999: 457)
      14. Literacy no longer means making physical marks on paper - different order (Hannon 2000: 23)
        1. Images were used to illustrate text, now other way around (Kress 2003: 9-10)
          1. Images tend to accompany text more on-screen (Kress 2003: 65)
      15. Two elements to literacy: how it is produced and how it is communicated to others (Hannon 2000: 23)
      16. Example of how technology can change literacy - email (Hannon 2000: 24)
        1. The 'logic' of the mode of writing shapes final output (Kress 2003: 19)
          1. Writing, speech & images have different 'logics' (Kress 2003: 20)
          2. New 'space' in which to create 'texts' (Snyder 1998b: xx)
          3. Importance of physical way of interacting when creating or editing texts important (Thomas 2007)
      17. Ability to publish to world
        1. Sartre - likens writing in school to firing gun for pleasure of hearing shot go off (Worpole in Hoyles 1977: 184)
      18. Text limits human creativity & expression (Kress 1998: 75)
        1. Combining visual and verbal promotes critical thinking (Fortune (1989) in Tuman 1992: 66)
      19. Digital literacy being developed mainly in out-of-school contexts (Snyder 2002b: 8)
      20. 'Technologizing literacy' brings together two very different fields (Bigum & Green 1993: 24)
      21. Analogy between media & writing breaks down (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:75)
    2. What is 'literacy'?
      1. Social practices
        1. Barton & Hamilton's definitions (2000: 8, 13)
        2. Culture
          1. Not static (Bryman 2004:17)
          2. Popular (Burnett 2002: 141)
          3. Cultural inheritance (Carr 2003: 18)
          4. High culture (Beavis 1998: 240)
          5. Need for 'polycultural input' (Baratz & Baratz (1970) in Hoyles 1977: 178)
          6. Culture shapes everything we do - even when alone (Lemke 2002 36-37)
          7. Need to start from students' own reality (Freire & Macedo 1987: 151)
          8. Literacy and education are cultural expressions (Freire & Macedo 1987:51-52)
          9. Definition of 'culture' (CCCS in Street (1995), quoted by Sloane & Johnstone, 2000: 160)
        3. Can't just look at literacy as 'competencies' - have to factor in cultural & interpersonal contexts (Rodríguez Illera 2004: 49-50)
        4. Definition of literacy by Scribner & Cole (1981) as set of socially organised practices (Rodríguez Illera 2004: 51)
        5. Literacy as a social technology (Luke in Tuman 1992: vii)
        6. Literacy = set of social and cultural practices (not neutral) (Sugimoto & Levin in Hawisher & Selfe, 2000: 133)
      2. Problem in defining literacy similar to Wittgenstein's problem in defining 'game' (Hannon 2000: 36)
      3. 2 central questions (Holme 2004: 1)
      4. Wave/particle duality metaphor (Holme 2004: 7)
      5. Even UNESCO report from 1957 talks of indeterminate nature (Holme 2004: 11)
      6. Perie, et al (1999) - breaks down literacy into prose, document and quantitative components (Holme 2004: 29-30)
      7. Predicated upon literacy practices (Holme 2004: 65, 67)
        1. Vygotskian model accommodating social practice view of literacy within socio-historical model of mind (Holme 2004: 216)
        2. Need 'apprenticeships' (Holme 2004: 236)
        3. Reason for change in literacy is human beings = intentional, therefore change things through the work they do (Kress 2003: 11)
          1. Speech & writing now blended (Gurak 2001:2)
          2. Haas (1996) - 'text sense problem' (Gurak, 2001:19)
          3. How we work affects how we read & write (Gurak, 2001:20)
        4. Need to see literacy as a process rather than a state & recognise its 'multiple character' (Rodríguez Illera 2004: 58-59)
        5. Highly complex phenomena about understanding how culturally significant info is coded (Snyder 2002b: 5-6)
        6. Vary across contexts and within/without educational contexts (Street 2005: 5)
      8. Definition as navigation & intepretation of world (Kellner 2002: 157)
      9. Reason why we need to ask question (Kress 2003: 21)
      10. Defined as term to use when messages made using letters, just as numeracy is communication through the use of numbers (Kress 2003: 23)
      11. Welch (1999) - literacy = 'activity of minds', to do with 'consciousness' (Gurak 2001:9)
    3. Relation to knowledge?
      1. Knowledge always changing (Carneiro 2002: 66)
        1. Knowledge intrinsically social (Muller 2000: 2)
      2. Internet = paradigm shift - analogue/digital metaphor (Gilster 1997: 38)
      3. 'Analogical' literacies - use term in different ways in different spheres - knowledge/skills (Holme 2004: 1-2)
      4. Literacy = knowledge of the use of the resource of writing - everything else is skills (Kress 2003: 24)
      5. Children need not only declarative knowledge but procedural knowledge (Stetsenko & Arievitch 2002: 95)
    4. Views of literacy
      1. Pluralist
        1. Many cultures, therefore many literacies (Hannon 2000: 31)
          1. Difficulty in knowing where one literacy starts and another stops (Barton & Hamilton (1998) in Hannon 2000: 36)
          2. Many forms of music, but we do not talk of 'musics' (Hannon 2000: 37)
        2. Literacy is not a 'neutral' skill - linked to power & identity (Gee (1996) in Hannon 2000: 34)
          1. Need new literacies & new skills to promote active & participatory citizenship (Keller 2002: 155)
          2. The 'world told' is different from the 'world shown' (Kress 2003: 1)
          3. At various points in history, there has been tight control over who can 'broadcast' - and therefore who is literate (Kress 2003: 17)
          4. Politics involved in using technology to communicate & collaborate (Handa (1990) in Tuman 1992: 92)
          5. Castells (1997) - quotation r.e. feminism holds true for literacy? (Hawisher & Selfe, 2000: 277)
          6. Welch (1999) - Literacy always connected to power (Gurak, 2001:21)
      2. Unitary
        1. Can literacy be separated from competency? (Hannon 2000: 31)
          1. Lankshear (1987) - no such 'unitary' referent for literacy (Hannon 2000: 32)
      3. Pluralist/unitary distinction depends on whether theorist conceives of literacy as skill or social practice (Hannon 2000: 37)
      4. Postmodern
        1. Postmodernism in relation to literacy (Holme 2004: 39-40)
      5. Why study of new literacies important
        1. Transformative (Kellner 2002: 154)
      6. Cannot divorce from other factors - technological, social, economic, etc. (Kress 2003: 1)
      7. NLS = New Literacy Studies - 5 guiding principles (Street (1997) in Street, 2005: 4)
      8. 3 different types: functional, cultural & critical (Bigum & Green 1993: 14)
      9. Barton (1994) & Kress (1997) - should be constrained to realm of writing (Buckingham, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:75)
      10. Street (1984) - Two different versions (Rantala & Suoranta, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:96)
        1. Autonomous (p.96)
        2. Ideological (p.96-7)
      11. Tyner (1998) - distinction between 'tool literacies' & 'literacies of representation' (Erstad, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:183)
      12. Cannot 'dissect' (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:269)
      13. Always to do with reading (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:5)
  8. Place in 'Knowledge', 'Information', 'Attention' Society/Economy
    1. No unequivocal meaning for 'information society' (Eraut 1991: 4)
    2. We have moved to informatics - informating-processing society (Balle in Eraut 1991: 85)
      1. Shift from industrial to information society (Luke & Kaptizke 1999: 474)
    3. Need to develop 'right-brain' approaches to cope in new society (Pink in Friedman 2005: 307)
      1. Need for highly-trained & adaptable labour force (OECD (1993) in Levin & Riffel 1997: 78)
      2. Need to be like snooker players - theoretical AND practical knowledge (McCormick 1999: 113)
    4. Six generalizations on experts' structure of knowledge (Glaser 1999: 91-92)
    5. Social advance of knowledge hinges on communication (Goldman 1999: 161)
    6. Change from (e.g.) peer-reviewed journals to 'the network' filtering instantly-published content (Goldman 1999: 177)
    7. Purpose of learning is to be able to apply it (Lemke 2002: 35-36)
      1. Danger of schools becoming a 'bridge to nowhere' (Lemke 2002: 37)
        1. World for which schools were formed no longer exists (Snyder 2002a: 179)
    8. 'Logic of confidence' with schools (Levin & Riffel 1997: 18)
      1. Social change tends to be seen as interfering with work of schools (Levin & Riffel 1997: 46)
    9. Distinctive mark of contemporary living = feeling of uncertainty (Bauman (2001) in Snyder 2002a: 177)
      1. Need 'hold' on present to be able to transform it (Bourdieu (1998) in Snyder 2002a: 178)
        1. 'Radical instability' (Kress (2000) in Snyder 2002a: 179)
          1. Difficult to ensure students literate for future - unknown & educators not fully literate themselves with new tech. (Snyder 2002b: 3-4)
    10. Martin & Madigan (2006) 'explore a range of conceptions of digital literacy and how these conceptions are enabled and supported in different communities.' (Fieldhouse & Nicholas, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:50)
    11. We do *not* live in a 'digital society' just because we are surrounded by digital tools (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:151)
      1. Terms such as 'technological revolution' & 'information society' are misleading (Martin, in Lankshear & Knobel, 2008:152-3)
        1. Best metaphor for social change = solids & liquids (p.153)
        2. Digital tools both means & symptom of social change (p.154)