Meaning makers don’t simply use what they have been given; they are fully makers and remakers of signs and transformers of meaning.

Three major innovations over that time have been: to focus less on the teachable specificities of meaning-system and more on the heuristics of learners’ discovering specificities amongst the enormously varied field of possibly-relevant

a pedagogy of Multiliteracies may go one step further, to help create conditions of critical understanding of the discourses of work and power, a kind of knowing from which newer, more productive and genuinely more egalitarian working conditions might emerge

Literacy needs much more than the traditional basics of reading and writing the national language; in the new economy workplace it is a set of supple, variable, communication strategies, ever-diverging according the cultures and social languages of technologies, functional groups, types of organisation and niche clienteles.

And these new literacies are embodied in new social practices—ways of working in new or transformed forms of employment, new ways of participating as a citizen in public spaces, and even perhaps, new forms of identity and personality

the traditional emphasis on alphabetical literacy (letter sounds in words in sentences in texts in literatures) would need to be supplemented in a pedagogy of Multiliteracies by learning how to read and write multimodal texts which integrated the other modes with language.

3literacy curriculum taught to a singular standard (grammar, the literary canon, standard national forms of the language), the everyday experience of meaning making was increasingly one of negotiating discourse differences. A pedagogy of Multiliteracies would need to address this as a fundamental aspect of contemporary teaching and learning.

The evaluative dimension has to do with knowing how to enhance or improve the practice in order for it to better fulfill the interests of those who engage in it and who are impacted by it.

The discourse dimension involves bringing cultural knowledge to bear on the tasks or purposes of the practice in which one is engaged; how to mobilize and co-ordinate the meaning elements.

The technical dimension involves knowing one’s way around the processes and tools for encoding the meaning one seeks to articulate.

It reminds us that texts evoke interpretation on all kinds of levels that may only partially be “tappable” or “accessible” linguistically.

Encoding means rendering texts in forms that allow them to be retrieved, worked with, and made available independently of the physical presence of an enunciator.

They defined practices as “socially developed and patterned ways of using technology and knowledge to accomplish tasks.” That is, when people participate in tasks that direct them “to socially recognized goals and make use of a shared technology and knowledge system, they are engaged in a social practice”

In the sense that each new mix becomes a meaning-making resource (affordance) for subsequent remixes, there is no “end” to remixing. Each remix in principle expands the possibilities for further remix.

These include remixing clips from movies to create “faux” trailers for hypothetical movies; setting remixed movie trailers to remixed music of choice that is synchronized to the visual action; recording a series of anime cartoons and then video-editing them in synchrony with a popular music track; mixing “found” images with original images in order to express a theme or idea (with or without text added); and mixing images, animations and texts to create cartoons or satirical posters (including political cartoons and animations), to name just a few types.

We remix language every time we draw on it, and we remix meanings every time we take an idea or an artefact or a word and integrate it into what we are saying and doing at the time

Lessig (2005) says that every single act of reading and choosing and criticizing and praising culture is in this sense remix, and it is through this general practice that cultures get made.

Lessig (2005) claims that at a very general level all of culture can be understood in terms of remix, where someone creates a cultural product by mixing meaningful elements together (e.g., ideas from different people with ideas of one’s own), and then someone else comes along and remixes this cultural artefact with others to create yet another artefact.

Construction calls on creativity as well as persistence, flexibility, and revision. Construction asks our students and teachers to focus on the power and patience employed during work process…and not just the final resultant work product.

Design in the sense of construction is something you do in the process of representing meanings, to oneself in sense-making processes such as reading, listening or viewing, or to the world in communicative processes such as writing, speaking or making pictures.

Literacy teaching is not about skills and competence; it is aimed a creating a kind of person, an active designer of meaning, with a sensibility open to differences, change and innovation

That is, meaning makers are not simply replicators of representational conventions. Their meaning-making resources may be found in representational objects, patterned in familiar and thus recognisable ways. However, they rework these objects. Meaning makers don’t simply use what they have been given; they are fully makers and remakers of signs and transformers of meaning.

Critically evaluating online information includes the ability to read and evaluate the level of accuracy, reliability, and bias of information

These sites teach early offline reading skills while they also provide important early experiences with navigating an online interface.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, online reading may require even greater amounts of higher-level thinking than offline reading. In a context in which anyone may publish anything, higher-level thinking skills such as critical evaluation of source material become especially important online.

(1) reading to identify important questions, (2) reading to locate information, (3) reading to evaluate information criti-cally, (4) reading to synthesize information, and (5) reading and writing to communicate information.

The new literacies of online research and comprehension frames online reading comprehension as a process of problem-based inquiry involving the skills, strategies, dispositions, and social practices that take place as we use the Internet to conduct research, solve problems, and answer ques-tions.

Lowercase theories of new literacies explore several types of elements: (1) a set of new literacies required by a specific technology and its social practices such as text messaging (Lewis & Fabos, 2005); (2) a disciplinary base, such as the semiotics of multimodality in online media (Kress, 2003); or (3) a distinctive, conceptual approach such as new literacy studies (Street, 2003). Lowercase theories of new literacy are better able to keep up with the rapidly changing nature of literacy since they are closer to the specific types of changes that rapidly take place.

However, this does not nec-essarily mean they are skilled in the effective use of online information, perhaps the most important aspect of the Internet. Studies show that stu-dents lack critical evaluation skills when reading online (Bennet, Maton, & Kervin, 2008; Forzani & Maykel, 2013; Graham & Metaxas, 2003) and that they are not especially skilled with reading to locate information

Finally, each online tool regularly is updated; each time this happens new affordances appear, requiring addi-tional skills and strategies.

Internet is also altering the nature of literacy, generating New Literacies that require additional skills and strategies. Most importantly, it is reshap-ing the nature of literacy education, providing us with many new and exciting opportunities for our classrooms.

In this case, you ask yourself if the technology tools allow educators to redefine a traditional task in a way that would not be possible without the tech, creating a novel experience.

this is an actual change to the design of the lesson and its learning outcome. The key question here—does the technology significantly alter the task?

but with significant enhancements to the student experience. In other words, you ask yourself if the technology increases or augments a student's productivity and potential in some way.

It is a simple, bare-bones, direct replacement.

Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. Substitution and Augmentation are considered "Enhancement" steps, while Modification and Redefinition are termed "Transformation" steps

Rather, solutions lie in the ability of a teacher to flexibly navigate the spaces defined by the three elements of content, pedagogy, and technology and the complex interactions among these elements in specific contexts.

Technological pedagogical content knowledge is an understanding that emerges from interactions among content, pedagogy, and technology knowledge.

The choice of technologies affords and constrains the types of content ideas that can be taught. Likewise, certain content decisions can limit the types of technologies that can be used. Technology can constrain the types of possible representations, but also can afford the construction of newer and more varied representations. Furthermore, technological tools can provide a greater degree of flexibility in navigating across these representations.

FITness goes beyond traditional notions of computer literacy to require that persons understand information technology broadly enough to apply it productively at work and in their everyday lives, to recognize when information technology can assist or impede the achievement of a goal, and to continually adapt to changes in information technology.

Central to Shulman’s conceptualization of PCK is the notion of the transformation of the subject matter for teaching. Specifically, according to Shulman (1986), this transformation occurs as the teacher interprets the subject matter, finds multiple ways to represent it, and adapts and tailors the instructional materials to alternative conceptions and students’ prior knowledge.

PCK is consistent with and similar to Shulman’s idea of knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content.

A teacher with deep pedagogical knowledge understands how students construct knowledge and acquire skills and how they develop habits of mind and positive dispositions toward learning. As such, pedagogical knowledge requires an understanding of cognitive, social, and developmental theories of learning and how they apply to students in the classroom.

Pedagogical knowledge (PK) is teachers’ deep knowledge about the processes and practices or methods of teaching and learning.

his knowledge would include knowledge of concepts, theories, ideas, organizational frameworks, knowledge of evidence and proof, as well as established practices and approaches toward developing such knowledge.

Content knowledge (CK) is teachers’ knowledge about the subject matter to be learned or taught

These three knowledge bases (content, pedagogy, and technology) form the core of the technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework

At the heart of good teaching with technology are three core components: content, pedagogy, and technology, plus the relationships among and between them

Rather, integration efforts should be creatively designed or structured for particular subject matter ideas in specific classroom contexts.

Rather, particular technologies have their own propensities, potentials, affordances, and constraints that make them more suitable for certain tasks than others

Most traditional pedagogical technologies are characterized by specificity (a pencil is for writing, while a microscope is for viewing small objects); stability (pencils, pendulums, and chalkboards have not changed a great deal over time); and transparency of function (the inner workings of the pencil or the pendulum are simple and directly related to their function)

Digital technologies—such as computers, handheld devices, and software applications—by contrast, are protean (usable in many different ways; Papert, 1980); unstable (rapidly changing); and opaque (the inner workings are hidden from users; Turkle, 1995).

Thus, effective teaching depends on flexible access to rich, well-organized and integrated knowledge from different domains (Glaser, 1984; Putnam & Borko, 2000; Shulman, 1986, 1987), including knowledge of student thinking and learning, knowledge of subject matter, and increasingly, knowledge of technology.

The SAMR model  is a useful tool for helping teachers think about their own tech use as they begin to make small shifts in the design and implementation of  technology driven learning experiences to achieve the next level

It advocates for broadened access to learning that is socially embedded, interest-driven, and oriented toward educational, economic, or political opportunity.

Success beyond the classroom requires tangible connections to real-world career and civic opportunities.

Learners need support from peers and mentors to persist through setbacks and challenges

interest helps us pay attention, make connections, persist and engage in deeper learning.

The research is clear: Learning is irresistible and life-changing when it connects personal interests to meaningful relationships and real-world opportunity.

Teachers should also be cognizant that web literacy education also occurs outside of the classroom. Some of the most valuable learning takes place when students gather after school in coffee shops, libraries and living rooms. 

In the 21st century, web literacy unlocks the same opportunities as reading and writing. The student who is able to create online has a limitless array of tools. The student who is able to collaborate with peers on the Web can bring fresh, new perspectives to their work. And the student who can distinguish reliable information from the unreliable will always be at an advantage.

Large and/or group discussion Interactive lecturing and think-pair-shares Flipped classroom Cooperative learning (including team-based and project-based learning) Guided note-taking Guided inquiry for problem-solving

Term papers. Short-answer quizzes. Free-response questions. Homework assignments. Lab projects. Practice problems. Group projects. Among many others…

It continually encourages the instructor to establish the purpose of doing something before implementing it into the curriculum

The backward design framework suggests that instructors should consider these overarching learning goals and how students will be assessed prior to consideration of how to teach the content.

Instructors typically approach course design in a “forward design” manner, meaning they consider the learning activities (how to teach the content), develop assessments around their learning activities, then attempt to draw connections to the learning goals of the course.

I give my students meaningful tasks to help their learning.

Digital skills focus on what and how. Digital literacy focuses on why, when, who, and for whom.

Nonetheless, the larger unit goals provide the context in which individual lessons are planned.

Teaching for understanding requires that students be given numerous opportunities to draw inferences and make generaliza-tions for themselves (with teacher sup-port)

In addition to performance tasks, Stage 2 includes other evidence, such as tradi-tional quizzes, tests, observations, and work samples to round out the assess-ment picture to determine what students know and can do.

Thus, we consider in advance the assessment evidence needed to document and validate that the targeted learning has been achieved.

An important point in the UbD framework is to recognize that factual knowledge and skills are not taught for their own sake, but as a means to larger ends.

The point of school is not to simply excel in each class, but to be able to use one’s learning in other settings

n the first stage of backward design, we consider our goals,

Understanding is revealed when students autonomously make sense of and transfer their learning through authentic performance. Six facets of under-standing—the capacity to explain, interpret, apply, shift perspective, empa-thize, and self-assess—can serve as indicators of understanding.

To hold information-age jobs, people also need to think deeply about issues, solve problems creatively, work in teams, communicate clearly in many media, learn ever-changing technologies.

Using questions and keywords to find the information you need

It also includes having a grasp of security basics, like protecting your online identity and avoiding online scams

They can evaluate web content, and identify what is useful and trustworthy.

Knowing how to read, write, and participate in the digital world has become the 4th basic foundational skill next to the three Rs—reading, writing, and arithmetic—in a rapidly evolving, networked world.

Mozilla focuses on the following goals: 1) develop more educators, advocates, and community leaders who can leverage and advance the web as an open and public resource, and 2) impact policies and practices to ensure the web remains a healthy open and public resource for all. In order to accomplish this, we need to provide people with open access to the skills and know-how needed to use the web to improve their lives, careers, and organizations.

To be an innovative designer, students must understand the basics of problem-solving.