Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-05T15:03:42.851Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - Literacy and the Learning Sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar  and
Barbara G. Ladewski
Edited by
R. Keith Sawyer
Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Barbara G. Ladewski
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
R. Keith Sawyer
Affiliation:
Washington University, St Louis
Get access

Summary

At the time this chapter is being written, two billion Instant Messages are being sent daily, 92 percent of public school classrooms in the United States have access to the Internet, the College Board is introducing a test of technological literacy, novelists are publishing their works on-line, prize-winning journalists are setting up Web logs and assuming new identities, public spaces are “war chalked” indicating to passers-by that they are at a location where they can piggyback on a high-speed network supported by a business or resident, Wikipedia – a free-content encyclopedia – is available in 57 languages, and the University of Michigan has negotiated with Google to digitize its seven million volume collection to be accessed by anyone the world over. In short, one needn't look far to find examples of the continual reshaping of literacy by virtue of technologies. In fact, the evolution of literacy is a series of sociotechnical changes; from papyrus, to paper, to printing press, to electronic spaces, technologies have influenced how we use and make meaning with text.

To set the stage for this chapter, consider for a moment the multiple forms of literacy that are required to interpret and learn from a typical Web site. On first entering, one must immediately interpret navigational cues and chart a path that will support knowledge building with the site. Frequently, the user can select from among several media links; simultaneously listening to and reading information, and activating simulations, which also must be interpreted.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences , pp. 299 - 314
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alvermann, D. E. (2004). Media, information communication technologies, and youth literacies: A cultural perspective. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1): 78–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvermann, D. E., Hinchman, K. A., Moore, D. W., Phelps, S. F., & Waff, D. R. (Eds.). (1998). Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents' lives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Alvermann, D. E., Moon, J. E., & Hagood, M. C. (1999). Popular culture in the classroom: Teaching and researching critical media literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association and National Reading Conference.Google Scholar
Alvermann, D. E., & Xu, S. H. (2003). Children's everyday literacies: Intersections of popular culture and language arts instruction. Language Arts, 81(2): 145–154.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In Pearson, P. D. (Ed.). Handbook of reading research (255–292). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. (1992). Is working meory working? The Fifteenth Bartlett Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Educational Psychology, 44A(1), 1–31.Google Scholar
Barab, S. A., Bowdish, B. E., & Lawless, K. A. (1997). Hypermedia navigation: Profiles of hypermedia users. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beach, R., & Myers, J. (2001). Inquiry-based English instruction: Engaging students in life and literature. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, S. (1993). The shape of things to come. College Composition and Communication, 44(2), 151–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. London and New York: Routledge Press.Google Scholar
Bolter, J. D. (1991). Writing space: The computer, hypertext and the history of writing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. [Also published in hypertext form.]Google Scholar
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruce, B. C. (1997). Literacy technologies: What stance should we take? Journal of Literacy Research, 29(2): 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burbulus, N. (2001). Paradoxes of the Web: The ethical dimensions of credibility. Library Trends, 49(3), 441–453.Google Scholar
Chandler-Olcott, K., & Mahar, D. (2003). Adolescents' anime-inspired “fanfictions”: An exploration of multiliteracies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(7): 556–566.Google Scholar
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In Scanlon, E. & O'Shea, T. (Eds.), New directions in educational technology. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, B., Pisha, B., Eagleton, M., Coyne, P., & Deysher, S. (2002). Engaging the text: Strategy instruction in a computer-supported reading environment for struggling readers (Executive Summary). Wakefield, MA: CAST.Google Scholar
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.CrossRef
Dillon, A. (1991). Requirements analysis for hypertext applications: The why, what and how approach. Applied Ergonomics, 22(4), 458–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, T. M. (2004). Theory and the design of learning environments: Reflections on differences in disciplinary focus. Educational Technology, 44(3), 13–15.Google Scholar
Dyson, A. H. (1991). Toward a reconceptualization of written language development. Linguistics and Education, 3, 139–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, S. C., & Fish, M. C. (1991). The use of computer-mediated reading supports to enhance reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Computing research, 7(1), 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flood, J., & Lapp, D. (1998). Broadening conceputalizations of literacy: The visual and communicative arts (Visual Literacy). Reading Teacher, 51(4), 342–344.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. (1991). What is literacy? In Mitchell, C. & Weiler, K. (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other. New York: Bergiin & Garvey.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). Bristol, PA: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about leaning and literacy. New York: Palgrave/Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gitlin, T. (2001). Media unlimited. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
Green, B. (1988). Subject-specific literacy and school learning: A focus on writing. Australian Journal of Education. 32(2), 156–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, & Activity: An International Journal, 6(4), 286–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hailey, D. E. Jr., & Hailey, C. (1998). Hypermedia, multimedia, and reader cognition: An empirical study. Technical Communication, 45(3): 330–342.Google Scholar
Hansen, S., Schrimpsher, D., Narayanan, N. H., & Hegarty, M. (1998). Empirical studies of animation-embedded hypermedia algorithm visualizations. (Technical Report No. CSE98–06). Auburn, AL: Dept. of Computer Science & Software Engineering, Auburn University.Google Scholar
Hegarty, M., Narayanan, N. H., & Freitas, P. (2002). Understanding machines from hypermedia and hypermedia presentations. In Otero, J., Leon, J. A., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 357–384). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Hegarty, M., Quilici, J., Narayanan, N. H., Holmquist, S., & Moreno, R. (1999). Multimedia instruction: Lessons from evaluation of a theory-based design. Journal of Educational Multimeda and Hypermedia, 8(2), 119–150.Google Scholar
Hoadley, C. M. (2004). Learning and design: Why the learning sciences and instructional systems need each other. Educational Technology, 44(3), 6–12.Google Scholar
Horney, M. A., & Anderson-Inman, L. (1999). Supported text in electronic reading environments. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 15(2), 127–168.Google Scholar
Hull, G. A. (2003). Youth culture and digital media: New literacies for new times. Research in the Teaching of English, 38(2), 229–233.Google Scholar
Kamil, M. L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.Google Scholar
Kamil, M. L., & Lane, D. M. (1998). Researching the relationship between technology and literacy: An agenda for the 21st Century. In Reinking, D., McKenna, M. C., Labbo, L. D., & Kieffer, R. D. (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world (pp. 323–341). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. L. (1991). Improving human decision-making through case-based decision aiding. AI Magazine, 12(2), 52–68.Google Scholar
Kozhevnikof, M., Hegarty, M., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Revising the visualizer-verbalizer dimension: Evidence for two types of visualizers. Cognition and Instruction, 20(1), 47–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003a). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003b). New technologies in early childhood literacy research: A review of research. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 3(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Multimedia learning environments: Issues of learner control and navigation. Instructional Science, 25, 117–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (2003). Introduction: From digital dirt road to educational expressway: Innovations in web-based pedagogy. Instructional Science, 31(4–5), 227–230(4).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, K. A., Brown, S. W., Mills, R., & Mayall, H. J. (2003). Knowledge, interest, recall, and navigation: A look at hypertext processing. Journal of Literacy Research, 35(3), 911–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leander, K. M. (2003). Writing travelers' tales on new literacy scapes. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 392–397.Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. (1998). Metamedia literacy: Transforming meanings and media. In Reinking, D., McKenna, M. C., Labbo, L. D., & Kieffer, R. D. (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world (pp. 283–301). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. (1999). Typological and topological meaning in diagnostic discourse. Discourse Processes 27(2), 173–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leu, D. J., Jr. (2000). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education in an information age. In Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P., Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 743–770). Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Leu, D. J., Jr., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. In Ruddell, R. B. and Unrau, N. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th Ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
MacArthur, C. A., Ferretti, R. P., Okolo, C. M., & Cavalier, A. R. (2001). Technology applications for students with literacy problems: A critical review. The Elementary School Journal, 101(3), 273–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, C. A., & Haynes, J. B. (1995). The Student Assistant for Learning from Text (SALT): A hypermedia reading aide. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 3, 150–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, M. C., Reinking, D., Labbo, L. D., & Kieffer, R. D. (1999). The electronic transformation of literacy and its implications for the struggling reader. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15, 111–126.Google Scholar
Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K.Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moll, L. C., Veléz-Ibanéz,, C., & Greenberg, J. (1989). Year one progress report: Community knowledge and classroom practice: Combining resources for literacy instruction. (IARP Subcontract L-10, Development Associates). Tucson: University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Muspratt, A., Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (Eds.). (1998). Constructing critical literacies: Teaching and learning textual practice. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar
Myers, J., & Beach, R. (2001). Hypermedia authoring as critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(6), 538–546.Google Scholar
Nixon, H. (2003). New research literacies for contemporary research into literacy and new media? Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 407–413.Google Scholar
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.Google Scholar
Palincsar, A. S., & Dalton, B. (2004). Speaking literacy and learning to technology; Speaking technology to literacy and learning. 2004 National Reading Conference (NRC) Research Address.Google Scholar
Palincsar, A. S., & Dalton, B. (2005). Literacy and learning speak to technology: Technology speaks to literacy and learning. The fifty-fourth yearbook of the National Reading Conference, 54, 83–102.Google Scholar
Purves, A. (1998). The web of text and the web of God: An essay on the third information transformation. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Reinking, D., McKenna, M. C., Labbo, L. D., & Kieffer, R. D. (1998). Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ryan, M. (1999). Cyberspace, virtuality, and the text. In Ryan, M. (Ed.), Cyberspace textuality: Computer technology and literary theory (pp. 78–107). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M. (2004). CSILE/Knowledge Forum. In Kovalchick, A. & Dawson, K. (Eds.), Education and technology: An encyclopedia (pp. 183–192). Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into World 3. In McGilley, K. (Eds.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 201–228). Cambridge: MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, N. B. (1965). American reading instruction. Newark, NE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Soja, E. W. (1996). Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the non-linear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. Nix, D. & Spiro, R. (eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Strangman, N., & Dalton, B. (2005). Technology for struggling readers: A review of the research. In Edyburn, D. (Ed.), The handbook of special education technology research and practice (pp. 545–569). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design.Google Scholar
Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wallace, R. M., Kupperman, J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Science on the web: Students online in a sixth-grade classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(1), 75–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wixson, K. K., & Peters, C. W. (1984). Reading redefined: A Michigan Reading Association position paper. Michigan Reading Journal, 17, 4–7 (see p. 5).Google Scholar
Woodward, J., & Rieth, H. (1997). A historical review of technology research in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), 503–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×