This document discusses changing perspectives on literacy in primary education from "the old" to "the new". It describes how literacy was traditionally taught as isolated skills but now emphasizes diverse communicative practices. It outlines several projects a teacher implemented that incorporated popular culture, virtual connections, and critical analysis to make literacy more meaningful to students. The implications are that literacy learning works best when embedded in real-world contexts and allows students to develop skills for success in today's world.

1. A fixed point in time and pedagogy
Bringing the ‘new’ into the primary classroom
ESRC Seminar Series - 28th May 2010
Martin Waller
Holy Trinity Rosehill C.E. Primary School

3. Context

4. Context
‣ Year 2 Class in the North East of England
‣ Third year of teaching ‘Orange Class’

5. Context
‣ Year 2 Class in the North East of England
‣ Third year of teaching ‘Orange Class’
‣ Our work is based around:
‣ Multiliteracies
‣ Critical Literacy
‣ Web 2.0 Practices - ‘Virtual Worlds’

6. Context
‣ Year 2 Class in the North East of England
‣ Third year of teaching ‘Orange Class’
‣ Our work is based around:
‣ Multiliteracies
‣ Critical Literacy
‣ Web 2.0 Practices - ‘Virtual Worlds’
‣ MA in New Literacies

8. The ‘old’...

9. The ‘old’...
‣ Certain types of activity privileged in the
curriculum

10. The ‘old’...
‣ Certain types of activity privileged in the
curriculum
‣ Literacy conceptualised as a set of discrete
skills taught in isolation, regardless of
context - ‘teacher centric’
(Pahl and Rowsell, 2005; Larson and Marsh, 2005)

11. The ‘old’...
‣ Certain types of activity privileged in the
curriculum
‣ Literacy conceptualised as a set of discrete
skills taught in isolation, regardless of
context - ‘teacher centric’
(Pahl and Rowsell, 2005; Larson and Marsh, 2005)
‣ Focus on print-based decoding skills and
the written word (Unsworth, 2001)

12. The ‘old’...
‣ Certain types of activity privileged in the
curriculum
‣ Literacy conceptualised as a set of discrete
skills taught in isolation, regardless of
context - ‘teacher centric’
(Pahl and Rowsell, 2005; Larson and Marsh, 2005)
‣ Focus on print-based decoding skills and
the written word (Unsworth, 2001)
‣ ‘Autonomous’ view of literacy (Street, 1984)

14. The ‘recent’...

15. The ‘recent’...
‣ National Literacy Strategy and ‘literacy
hour’ introduced to British schools

16. The ‘recent’...
‣ National Literacy Strategy and ‘literacy
hour’ introduced to British schools
‣ Represents deeply conservative ideology of
what counts as ‘literacy’
(Urquahart, 2002: 33)

17. The ‘recent’...
‣ National Literacy Strategy and ‘literacy
hour’ introduced to British schools
‣ Represents deeply conservative ideology of
what counts as ‘literacy’
(Urquahart, 2002: 33)
‣ Told teachers what to teach and how to
teach it

18. The ‘recent’...
‣ National Literacy Strategy and ‘literacy
hour’ introduced to British schools
‣ Represents deeply conservative ideology of
what counts as ‘literacy’
(Urquahart, 2002: 33)
‣ Told teachers what to teach and how to
teach it
‣ ‘Common language’ to describe and
prescribe literacy (Urquahart, 2002)

20. The ‘new’...

21. The ‘new’...
‣ Curriculum needs to be expanded to take
account of diverse communicative practices
(New London Group, 1996)

22. The ‘new’...
‣ Curriculum needs to be expanded to take
account of diverse communicative practices
(New London Group, 1996)
‣ Focus on ‘designs for meaning’ and
identities, cultures and contexts (New London Group, 1996)

23. The ‘new’...
‣ Curriculum needs to be expanded to take
account of diverse communicative practices
(New London Group, 1996)
‣ Focus on ‘designs for meaning’ and
identities, cultures and contexts (New London Group, 1996)
‣ The digital/virtual worlds that children
move within cannot be ignored (Davies and Merchant, 2009)

24. The ‘new’...
‣ Curriculum needs to be expanded to take
account of diverse communicative practices
(New London Group, 1996)
‣ Focus on ‘designs for meaning’ and
identities, cultures and contexts (New London Group, 1996)
‣ The digital/virtual worlds that children
move within cannot be ignored (Davies and Merchant, 2009)
‣ Multiliteracies and ‘Ideological literacy’
(Street, 1984; New London Group, 1996)

26. The ‘now’...

27. The ‘now’...
‣ ‘Awesome disconnect’ between home and
school literacy practices
(Genishi and Dyson, 2009: 4)

28. The ‘now’...
‣ ‘Awesome disconnect’ between home and
school literacy practices(Genishi and Dyson, 2009: 4)
‣ Teachers have pluralist view of multiple
literacies

29. The ‘now’...
‣ ‘Awesome disconnect’ between home and
school literacy practices(Genishi and Dyson, 2009: 4)
‣ Teachers have pluralist view of multiple
literacies
‣ Year 6 children’s views more consistent
with narrowly conceived definition of
National Literacy Strategy

30. The ‘now’...
‣ ‘Awesome disconnect’ between home and
school literacy practices (Genishi and Dyson, 2009: 4)
‣ Teachers have pluralist view of multiple
literacies
‣ Year 6 children’s views more consistent
with narrowly conceived definition of
National Literacy Strategy
‣ Source: Unpublished MA Research completed at the University of Sheffield:
Do children’s perceptions of literacy link with those of their teacher after following the National
Literacy Strategy Framework for Teaching (DfEE, 1998)?

32. “Literacy, I think, is something to do with meaning
and making meaning and getting meaning from
things and that could be speaking, listening or
language. It’s a way of communicating. It’s a skill, it
has to be developed and it can be in several
different forms”
Year 1 Teacher

34. “I think it’s about learning about verbs and different
things and stories. Erm like punctuation and
different kinds of... well English”
Year 6 Child

36. A fixed point in time and pedagogy...
How do we move forward?

40. KiKi Project

41. KiKi Project
‣ Project based around
the text ‘KiKi’s Delivery
Service’ by Eiko Kadono

42. KiKi Project
‣ Project based around
the text ‘KiKi’s Delivery
Service’ by Eiko Kadono
‣ Text of popular culture
in Japan linked to curriculum objectives

43. KiKi Project
‣ Project based around
the text ‘KiKi’s Delivery
Service’ by Eiko Kadono
‣ Text of popular culture
in Japan linked to curriculum objectives
‣ Situated Practice, Overt Instruction, Critical
Framing and Transformed Practice
(New London Group, 1996)

44. KiKi Project
‣ Project based around
the text ‘KiKi’s Delivery
Service’ by Eiko Kadono
‣ Text of popular culture
in Japan linked to curriculum objectives
‣ Situated Practice, Overt Instruction, Critical
Framing and Transformed Practice
(New London Group, 1996)
‣ Planned and delivered with the children

47. Critical Literacy Project

48. Critical Literacy Project

49. Critical Literacy Project
‣ Exploring how texts work, have particular
effects and how power is exercised (Comber, 2001)

50. Critical Literacy Project
‣ Exploring how texts work, have particular
effects and how power is exercised (Comber, 2001)
‣ Also linked to multiliteracies pedagogy

51. Critical Literacy Project
‣ Exploring how texts work, have particular
effects and how power is exercised (Comber, 2001)
‣ Also linked to multiliteracies pedagogy
‣ Work related to being
a “text critic”

52. Critical Literacy Project
‣ Exploring how texts work, have particular
effects and how power is exercised (Comber, 2001)
‣ Also linked to multiliteracies pedagogy
‣ Work related to being
a “text critic”
‣ Subverting texts and
(re)designing them for
real-world use (Comber, 2001)

55. Brer Rabbit and Critical Literacy

56. Brer Rabbit and Critical Literacy
‣ Based around the
‘Uncle Remus’ stories

57. Brer Rabbit and Critical Literacy
‣ Based around the
‘Uncle Remus’ stories
‣ Experienced narrative
through oral, written
and multimodal stories

58. Brer Rabbit and Critical Literacy
‣ Based around the
‘Uncle Remus’ stories
‣ Experienced narrative
through oral, written
and multimodal stories
‣ Discussion in an open and contextually driven
manner

59. Brer Rabbit and Critical Literacy
‣ Based around the
‘Uncle Remus’ stories
‣ Experienced narrative
through oral, written
and multimodal stories
‣ Discussion in an open and contextually driven
manner
‣ Children reinvented texts for a modern day
audience - technology not the emphasis.

62. A Creative Partnership

63. A Creative Partnership

64. A Creative Partnership

65. A Creative Partnership
‣ ‘Virtual meeting’ with
The Wren’s Nest in
Atlanta (USA)

66. A Creative Partnership
‣ ‘Virtual meeting’ with
The Wren’s Nest in
Atlanta (USA)
‣ Video conferencing

67. A Creative Partnership
‣ ‘Virtual meeting’ with
The Wren’s Nest in
Atlanta (USA)
‣ Video conferencing
‣ Experience of literacy
from other culture

68. A Creative Partnership
‣ ‘Virtual meeting’ with
The Wren’s Nest in
Atlanta (USA)
‣ Video conferencing
‣ Experience of literacy
from other culture
‣ Authentic engagement with
the ‘old’ through the ‘new’

70. Twitter

71. Twitter
‣ Web 2.0 becoming increasingly prominent
in society
(Davies and Merchant, 2009)

72. Twitter
‣ Web 2.0 becoming increasingly prominent
in society
(Davies and Merchant, 2009)
‣ We use Twitter as a means of recording
snapshots and reflections of learning

73. Twitter
‣ Web 2.0 becoming increasingly prominent
in society (Davies and Merchant, 2009)
‣ We use Twitter as a means of recording
snapshots and reflections of learning
‣ Reading in this context means not only simply decoding but involves
taking part in the construction of social networks where knowledge is
co-constructed and distributed (Marsh, 2010)

74. Twitter
‣ Web 2.0 becoming increasingly prominent
in society (Davies and Merchant, 2009)
‣ We use Twitter as a means of recording
snapshots and reflections of learning
‣ Reading in this context means not only simply decoding but involves
taking part in the construction of social networks where knowledge is
co-constructed and distributed (Marsh, 2010)
‣ Literacy for real purpose and audience

76. !

77. !

78. !

79. !

80. !

84. Rules and Responsibility

85. Rules and Responsibility
1.
Children must not mention their name or their any of
their friends by names in tweets under any circumstances
2.
Children must not check for replies (To prevent the them
from seeing any inappropriate material that may be viewable)
3.
Children must not navigate away from our Twitter Stream
page and look and other people’s profiles (in case of
inappropriate language use)

87. Literacy Events and Practices

88. Literacy Events and Practices
‣ Literacy events - construction of
interpretations and meaning (Health, 1983)

89. Literacy Events and Practices
‣ Literacy events - construction of
interpretations and meaning (Health, 1983)
‣ Literacy practices - culture and context
(Street, 1997)

90. Literacy Events and Practices
‣ Literacy events - construction of
interpretations and meaning (Health, 1983)
‣ Literacy practices - culture and context
(Street, 1997)
‣ Teachers accountable to statutory curricula

91. Literacy Events and Practices
‣ Literacy events - construction of
interpretations and meaning (Health, 1983)
‣ Literacy practices - culture and context
(Street, 1997)
‣ Teachers accountable to statutory curricula
‣ ‘Simulated literacy events’

92. Literacy Events and Practices
‣ Literacy events - construction of
interpretations and meaning (Health, 1983)
‣ Literacy practices - culture and context
(Street, 1997)
‣ Teachers accountable to statutory curricula
‣ ‘Simulated literacy events’
‣ Designed and mediated by teacher

94. !

96. Implications

97. Implications
‣ All forms of literacy learning should be
embedded within meaningful contexts

98. Implications
‣ All forms of literacy learning should be
embedded within meaningful contexts
‣ Virtual worlds don’t have to be confined to
the ‘virtual’

99. Implications
‣ All forms of literacy learning should be
embedded within meaningful contexts
‣ Virtual worlds don’t have to be confined to
the ‘virtual’
‣ Projects can be linked to statutory
curriculum documents while still providing
children with the skills to succeed in the
world

100. ‣ Email: martinwaller@multiliteracies.co.uk
‣
http://www.changinghorizons.net
‣ Twitter
http://www.twitter.com/MultiMartin
‣ Classroom Tweets
http://www.twitter.com/ClassroomTweets

101. References
Comber, B. (2001) ‘Critical literacies and local action: teacher knowledge and a “new” research agenda’ in Comber, B.
and Simpson, A. (Eds) Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Davies, J. and Merchant, G. (2009) Web 2.0 for Schools: Learning and Social Participation, New York: Peter Lang.
Genishi, C. and Dyson, A. Haas. (2009) Children, Language and Literacy, New York: Teachers College Press.
Heath, S.B. (1983) Ways with Words: Language, Life and Work in Communities and Classrooms, Cambridge: University Press.
Larson, J. and Marsh, J. (2005) Making Literacy Real: theories and practices for learning and teaching, London: Sage.
Marsh, J. (2010) ‘The ghosts of reading past, present and future: material resources for reading in homes and schools’ in
Hall, K., Goswami, U., Harrison, C., Ellis, S. and Soler, J. (Eds.) Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Learning to Read: Culture,
Cognition and Pedagogy, London: Routledge.
New London Group (1996) ‘A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures,’ Harvard Educational Review, Vol.
66(1), Spring 1996.
Pahl, K. and Roswell, J. (2005) Literacy and Education: Understanding the New Literacy Studies in the Classroom, London: Paul
Chapman.
Street, B. (1984) Literacy in theory and practice, Cambridge: University Press.
Street, B. (1997) ‘The implications of the New Literacy Studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice’
Current Issues in Comparative Education,Vol. 5(2), 77-91.
Unsworth, L. (2001) Teaching Multiliteracies Across the Curriculum, Buckingham: Open University Press.
Urquahart, I. (2002) ‘Moving forward Together’: do we need a ‘common language’? Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol.
32(1), 27-44.