Empowering Language Learners in a Changing World through Pedagogies of Multiliteracies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This volume is an assemblage of conceptual explorations of multiliteracies pedagogies and empirical studies based on classroom practices that foster learner empowerment and agency in multiliteracies pedagogy-informed L2 education in varied academic contexts of the world.The volume weaves thirteen chapters organically to show how theory informs practice and how practice further advances theory.It begins with theoretical and conceptual explorations and analyses of pedagogical and philosophical orientations to multiliteracies in Chapters 1, 2 and 3 and unfolds select qualitative studies focusing on multiliteracies-anchored practices in the rest of the volume, collectively reinforcing the fact that recognition of learners' diverse and unique subjectivities, needs, and identities is a centrifugal force of learner empowerment and agency in their learning and literacies development relevant to the current social world.In the introductory chapter, Vander Tavares elucidates the theoretical underpinnings and conceptual principles of multiliteracies pedagogies that foreground the contributing chapters.In Chapter 2, Fei Victor Lim redefines literacies education in the era of diversifying linguistic landscape and media ecology, reconceptualizing multimodality in three dimensions of learning (i.e., multimodality for learning, multimodality as learning, and multimodality in learning) and identifying the desiderata (i.e., considerations for further investigation) for each dimension.In Chapter 3, Tavares critically synthesizes convergencies and divergencies between the New London Group's (1996) pedagogy of multiliteracies and Freirean educational philosophy.Despite the divergent temporal and spatial contexts and sociocultural and sociohistorical conditioning of the theoretical development of the two perspectives, they share a similar onto-epistemological stance, challenging essentialist ideologies and colonial discourses entrenched in many traditional language education se\ings.Delving into empirical studies that connect the dots of theory and practice, in Chapter 4, Kristen Michelson promotes an alternative lens to language assessment that validates learners' interests and agency in the designing of their own learning and assessment.Informed by two French as a second language (FSL) learner cases in university, Michelson argues for a paradigm shift toward process-based, learnercentric/bo\om-up assessment that embraces learners' subjectivities for meaningful language development for their lived realities.In Chapter 5, Noah Asher Golden provides a raciolinguistic analysis of a Mexican American learner's language-learning experience and critical discussions on contrasting ontoepistemological perspectives embedded in different language-learning models and projects, asserting that a raciolinguistic analysis in ELT is an incumbent means to challenge racist nativism.In Chapter 6, Susana Aparecida Ferreira discusses teacher professional development in Brazil that emphasized teachers' recognition of students' racial identities in teaching, contending that multiliteracies theory-informed practice orients teachers to organize their teaching to critically reflect and address learners' current sociocultural and sociopolitical learning conditions influenced by fast-evolving advent of technology and recurrent racism and other forms of injustice in the local and global contexts.Through a case study of a plurilingual FSL learner in Germany, in Chapter 7, Lisa Marie Brinkmann examines pedagogical effects of student-designed portfolios for the development of learner multiliteracies and agency, highlighting that student-generated multimodal and multiliterate design for language learning recognizes learners' diverse capabilities and creative potential leading to meaningful academic performance and achievement with learner-designed curricular goals and strategies.Leonardo Veliz and Eveline Chan continue this account of multiliteracies pedagogy with diversity-oriented perspectives in 103 Reference
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,017 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».