A New Direction for Multiple Literacy Education (Une nouvelle orientation pour l'enseignement de la littératie multiple)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. A broader view of literacy has emerged as part of the larger debate about educational reform across the globe. Many now argue that availing children with additional skills in technological and media literacy will foster creativity, motivate youth, and improve their economic opportunities while increasing the core of high skilled labourers available to meet the needs of the “knowledge᾿ economy. From Canada and England to Australia and New Zealand, media literacy has become part of the core curriculum. Within the U.S., implementation of reform in this vein has been slow and a number of informal education institutions have stepped in to meet the perceived need, augmenting the core curriculum with media literacy and production opportunities. Yet there are serious questions about what skills the children are actually learning and whether the literacy discourse is yet another attempt at ignoring persistent educational inequalities along the lines of gender, race, and class. In this paper, we consider the viability of combining critical media literacy with standpoint theory to strengthen the multiliteracies movement, offering a more critical and empowering pedagogy. To this end, we analyze an exemplary site of this approach in Los Angeles. Une nouvelle orientation pour l'enseignement de la litteratie multiple RESUME. Une vision plus large de la litteratie s’est elevee dans le cadre du debat plus vaste de la reforme de l’enseignement dans le monde entier. Bon nombre avancent maintenant que le fait de faire profiter les enfants d’aptitudes additionnelles en technologie et en media nourrira leur esprit creatif, les motivera et ameliorera leur situation economique, tout en augmentant la base des travailleurs hautement qualifies qui pourront repondre aux besoins de l’economie « du savoir ». Du Canada a l’Angleterre en passant par l’Australie et la Nouvelle-Zelande, la mediatique fait partie du programme de base. Aux Etats-Unis, la mise en œuvre de reformes allant dans ce sens est lente et un nombre d’institutions d’enseignement non institutionnel a emboite le pas afin de repondre au besoin percu, en ajoutant au programme de base des possibilites en etude des medias et de production. Pourtant, il y a de serieuses questions a propos du type d’aptitudes que les enfants apprennent reellement et on se demande si le discours de la litteratie represente une autre tentative de ne pas tenir compte des inegalites qui persistent dans l’education relativement au sexe, a la race et a la classe sociale. Dans cet essai, nous prendrons en consideration la viabilite de combiner de la mediatique critique avec un point de vue theorique afin de renforcer le mouvement des enseignements multilitteratiques, en offrant une pedagogie plus critique et plus stimulante. A cette fin, nous analysons un site exemplaire de cette approche, situe a Los Angeles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".