Enabling eLiteracy: providing non-technical support for online learners

Abstract

As web-based technologies have changed teaching and learning and the support of learning, what it means to be literate has also changed. Reading and writing are now only part of what people have to learn in order to communicate in a technology driven society. A new concept of literacy has emerged that is variously described as e-literacy, digital literacy, silicone literacies, technological literacies, and multi-literacies. This paper offers a synthesis of the literature relating to literacy, e-literacy and e-learning. It discusses current definitions of literacy and e-literacy and applies them to the context of e-learning. This analysis was undertaken as part of a Learning and Teaching Fellowship project within Learning Services at Edge Hill University. The purpose was to identify a range of practical support solutions to enable learners become more e-literate. This paper describes the findings of the analytical first stage of the project and the early second stage: identifying asynchronous discussion as an area of focus and supporting novice e-learners by modelling good practice.

Key words:

• asynchronous discussion
• digital literacy
• e-learning
• multi-literacies
• online learning

Introduction

As web-based technologies have changed teaching and learning and the support of learning, what it means to be literate has also changed, for as Snyder (2002: 3) states:

“Now, for the first time in history, the written, oral and audiovisual modalities of communication are integrated into multimodal hypertext systems made accessible via the Internet and World Wide Web.”

The development of multimedia (the integration of audio, video, graphics and text) on the Internet, alongside associated hardware and software such as video streaming and Podcasting; file compression software and improved transmission mediums like Broadband, have enabled the Internet to become a rich visual and auditory environment. As reading and writing are now only part of what people have to learn in order to communicate in a technology driven society, a new concept of literacy has emerged: e-literacy. E-literacy has been defined as the “awarenesses, skills, understandings and reflective-evaluative approaches that are necessary for an individual to operate comfortably in an information rich and IT-supported environments.” (Martin, 2003:18). Increasing numbers of students now expect to participate in some form of online learning; whether fully online or in a blend of online and face-to-face delivery and also expect to be provided with appropriate support as they develop these necessary e-literacy skills, in the same way that they receive support in acquiring traditional learning-to-learn skills such as time management or essay planning and writing.

Much of the support that is presently provided to online learners is of an operational and technical nature, for example, explaining what button to click to send a message or which password to use to gain access to online courses or resources. There is little as yet that is designed to support the development of “awarenesses”, “understandings” and “reflective-evaluative approaches” described above. Indeed, this paper asserts that these approaches have yet to be fully articulated through phenomenological data and narratives from the student voice.

This paper presents a work in progress as part of an Edge Hill University Learning and Teaching Fellowship. It is very much a journey of discovery in uncharted territory and as such, seeks to establish answers to the following questions:

• Can instructional materials to develop e-literacy be distilled and adapted from the experience of practitioners, research into e-learning, traditional study skills literature and from what is already published for online learners?

• In the rapidly changing and evolving online learning environment, will learners (and those who support them) benefit from opportunities to access these instructional materials?

• What should these instructional materials look like?

The first stage of this journey represents a synthesis of the literature relating to literacy, e-literacy and e-learning that aims to question assumptions about e-literacy and identify areas of focus for future action research and participative observation.

The rising profile of teaching and learning has resulted in a change of focus from teaching to learning and a resultant shift from the traditional behaviourist view of the learner as an empty vessel to be filled with knowledge to a constructivist learner-centred view where the learner constructs their own knowledge through “collaborative learning, authentic tasks reflection and dialogue.” (Mayes, 2001:17). This pedagogical model places skills development firmly within the learner’s programme of study. Nevertheless, Edge Hill University students’ regularly request additional support in a range of study skills from academic writing and information literacy to time and stress management. Instructional materials in developing e-literacy can therefore be regarded as falling within this tradition of support. The second stage of the journey represented in this paper is concerned with applying the lessons learned from the literature and describes the development and impact of one aspect of e-literacy within a study skills and information literacy course delivered and supported wholly online.

Definitions of literacy and eLiteracy

The use of the term ‘literacy’ within the current skills agenda suggests a link to a baseline standard of skills around reading, writing, communication and comprehension. The application of this interpretation of the term to a definition of e-literacy, suggests the simple provision of basic skills that will allow individuals to enter and survive in the e-world. It is worth taking a moment at this point to consider the current definition, or definitions of literacy as the terms are closely linked. According to Deane (2004), whilst adult literacy is widely regarded to be more than just a measure of basic reading skills, there is, surprisingly, no consensus on what an exact definition should be. Boudard and Jones (2003) state that there are two approaches to literacy that involve contrasting definitions. The first is a dichotomous approach, where a literate person is someone who can read and write; an illiterate person is someone who cannot. The second is a cognitive approach that defines literacy as operating within a continuum and which is:

“More than the ability to read, write and do arithmetic. It comprises other skills needed for an individual’s full autonomy and capacity to function effectively in a given society. It can range from reading instructions for fertilizers, or medical prescriptions, knowing which bus to catch, keeping accounts for a small business or operating a computer.”

(UNESCO, 2002).

This definition introduces the concept of what has come to be known as ‘functional literacy’, which is the ability to apply the basic skills of reading and writing to a variety of everyday contexts.

It may be helpful to consider the following questions.

• What does it mean to be functionally literate in this digital age?

• How is the notion of literacy being changed by technology?

• How can we identify the range of skills needed in order to become literate within a technological context?

• How might these skills be facilitated?

The UNESCO definition of literacy described above refers to ‘other skills’ that an individual needs to function effectively in a given society. What some of these ‘other skills’ might be has been the focus of an emerging literature exploring an expanded concept of literacy for the digital age. There is not yet a single term to represent this concept, nor is there a single definition, which is not surprising given the lack of a consensus on the definition of literacy itself. These emerging literacies are known as: ‘digital literacy’ (Jones-Kavalier and Flannigan, 2006, Martin, 2005), ICT literacy (International ICT Panel, 2002), ‘multiliteracies’ (Cope and Kalantzis, 2000), ‘silicone literacies’ (Snyder, 2002), technological literacies (Lankshear, 1997) and ‘e-literacy’ (Martin, 2003). The common feature of these definitions is that the literate individual must develop an ‘understanding’ of the cultures and the contexts of the digital environments in order to operate effectively within them. The challenge this places before individuals is described by Snyder (2002:3) who argues “People have to learn to make sense of the iconic systems evident in computer displays — with all the combinations of signs, symbols, pictures, words and sounds.”

A polarised view argues that those individuals who do not have the ability to apply their school-learned literacy to everyday, non-computer-assisted tasks face further disadvantage if they attempt to access equivalent tasks online. (Brindley, 2000; Carvin, 2000; Cope and Kalantzis, 2000) By placing e-literacy within a social and cultural context, it becomes more than the acquisition of basic e-survival skills and must include what is needed for an individual to be more effective and to succeed in the e-environment and indeed, in their physical world also.

To add a further twist in the discussion to be had about literacy and e-Literacy, there is now evidence to suggest that literacy practices are changing as technology blurs the boundaries between speech and writing. Baron (2000) and Crystal (2001) describe how computer-mediated communication, most notably e-mail, discussion fora and instant messaging are generating a unique language style that is closer to speech than conventional writing. The main features of this new ‘e-style’ are its informality through use of abbreviations and simplified spellings (Baron cites thru instead of through). The use of informality in punctuation has also evolved and includes lack of capitalisation, high use of exclamation marks, frequent use of trailing dots and dashes and use of parentheses to indicate conversational asides. This trend, brought about by technology does not make the development of literacy ‘understandings’ any easier for the individual who must be able to interpret when it is appropriate to be informal and when traditional, formal writing is required. Baron (2000) hypothesises that we will continue to observe basic grammatical punctuation norms while knowing that there is a widening difference between principles and practice. Snyder (2002: 173) goes further and states:

“The development of ICT’s in the context of broader economic and social changes sets the stage for a major paradigm shift in the notions of literacy. There is little doubt that silicon literacies are going to become increasingly prominent in the coming years.”

Unpacking the definitions of e-literacy

A review of the literature about e-literacy does not yet identify the nature of the awarenesses, skills, understandings and reflective/evaluative approaches that Martin’s (2003) definition of e-literacy suggests are needed for an individual to excel in the e-learning environment. However, the e-world that individuals increasingly inhabit extends far wider than as an educational tool for learning and teaching. It offers individuals the potential to undertake commercial transactions and civic duties such as submission of tax returns, partake in the sharing of common interests that encompasses every pursuit from reading groups to e-dating.

Clearly, e-literacy will soon become regarded as a key skill along with literacy and numeracy. According to Crystal (2001: 241), “In a statistical sense, we may one day communicate with each other far more via computer mediation than in direct interaction.” It is, however, beyond the scope of this paper to consider the how we may best develop confident e-citizens and it will focus upon those e-literacy skills specifically required to enable effective e-learners. In this context, e-learning is “learning facilitated and supported through the use of information and communications technology” (Jenkins and Hanlon, 2003). Figure 1 below represents an attempt to unpack the definition of eLiteracy offered at the beginning of this paper as it might relate to e-learners.

Figure 1 Awarenesses, Skills, Understandings and Reflective/Evaluative approaches that constitute eLiteracy.

Clearly a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution to creating learning experiences aimed at developing e-literacy will struggle to work as individuals will arrive with varying combinations of the above awarenesses, understandings and skills. Furthermore, e-learning is not a level playing field and solutions may also differ from one group of learners to another depending upon the nature of the e-learning offered to them. The notion of offering students simple, quick-fix e-literacy guidelines and support such as a 10 Top Tips For Successful e-Learning appears to offer considerably less help than that which is custom-designed to their unique circumstances.

Locating a starting point

Since not all e-learning opportunities are the same, this means that the e-skills students are expected to display will also depend upon the pedagogical approach that is undertaken. Frameworks have been developed to alert educators to the main types of e-learning approaches (Coomey and Stephenson, 2001:41, Weller, 2002:146, Mayes and de Freitas, 2005: 25). They describe similar paradigms for online learning where the range is from teacher controlled through to learner-led activities. The Coomey and Stephenson paradigm grid is replicated in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2 Coomey and Stephenson’s Paradigm Grid for Online Learning.

Coomey and Stephenson (2001) suggest that those students used to clear instructions and narrowly defined tasks in any learning context, not just e-learning, will need considerable help with online learning in any sector above other than in the teacher controlled/task specific sector in the top left section of the above quadrant. This is also argued by Sharp et al (2005) who state that learners work online in the method that is most familiar to them and therefore require considerable support in making the transitions to methods based upon other pedagogies. Consequently, any teacher hoping to draw their learners into effective learning online should take cognisance of their prior experience of learning and e-learning in order that such transitions are well managed. It seems reasonable to conclude that some (if not all) students may benefit from an understanding of the pedagogical model they will be following, reflection on audits of their skills and prior learning and e-literacy guidelines in order that they may effectively manage the transitions between different approaches to e-learning and adapt to their new learning environment.

This emerging view of how and when students might best be supported as they develop e-literacy skills may be understood through reference to the literature on novice to expert skills development. The Dreyfus and Dreyfus’ ‘5 Stage Novice to Expert Model of Skills Development’, which they describe as a “situated and descriptive phenomenological account of the development of skills over time” (Dreyfus and Dreyfus, 2004) describes the stages through which a learner passes as follows:

Novice: Operates by consciously learned, context-free rules. The learner lacks any sense of the overall task. Needs not only facts but an understanding of the context in which that information makes sense. The beginner’s job is to follow the rules and gain experience. An example of rules can be found in Netiquette, the widely publicised guide to communicating in online communities. Crystal (2001) also talks about guidelines for ‘Newbies’ which is a name for those new to computer environments.

Advanced Beginner: As the novice gains experience they can start to recognise components of a situation. Instructional Maxims are used rather than fixed rules. A maxim requires some prior understanding of the domain to which the maxim applies, for example, ‘if something on the web seems too stupid to be true, it probably is’.

Competent: With increasing experience, the number of things to be taken into account can become overwhelming. Planning, analytical rule-guided choice of action (has to make up own rules for action). Learns to restrict themselves to only a few of the wide number of options available. The learner is for the first time emotionally involved in the outcome. ‘Anxiety of choice’ is restricted to the situation and is not general anxiety.

Proficient: Can see the important features of the current situation but not the best course of action. The learner uses principles to guide actions. Still falls back on rules and maxims.

Expert: Intuitive performance of tasks most of the time. Sees what is needed to be done and thanks to wide experience, does not deliberate — does spontaneously what has worked before. The learner has assimilated the tacit knowledge, theory and wisdom that underpins tasks.

Consideration of the online learning paradigm grid together with the Novice to Expert model suggests that the following types of instructional materials might be appropriate in enabling learners’ e-literacy skills development:

• Self-audit questionnaires that identify prior knowledge and skills around e-learning, information literacy and study skills.

• Guidelines or rules for guiding the behaviour of novice e-learners.

• Signposts (visual clues) that facilitate understanding of the online environment.

• A range of tutor-designed annotated examples of activities that make expert thinking and processes explicit to learners with modelling and metacognitive dialogues that surface the expert’s tacit, seemingly intuitive knowledge that is often difficult to express, for as Schon (1991:51) states, “skillful action often reveals a knowing more than we can say”.

Obtaining consensus on what information or content these materials should contain is not straightforward. As a first step, a survey was undertaken of commercial publications using the online bookshop Amazon (http://www.amazon.co.uk) and Dawsons (http://www.enterbooks.com), a major library supplier. There is a thriving commercial literature in ‘How to’ publications that aim to develop learners’ study skills to enable them to succeed in higher education. This survey reveals a focus on developing traditional, face-toface, classroom-based skills and academic writing skills. If covered at all, the skills learners may need to succeed in the online learning environment are given scant attention. Reviewing the current market in study skills publications for online learners reveals a growing body of literature aimed at the developers of online courses but a minimal literature offering support and guidance specifically for online learners.

Areas identified for student guidelines and support

The literature on study skills and e-learning pedagogy and design suggest eight broad areas where e-learners might need support in developing the necessary e-literacy skills.

• IT capability — hardware and personal IT skills and knowledge

• Choosing the right online course for individual students’ needs — being aware of different pedagogical approaches and how these might impact on the learning experience

• Communication skills using asynchronous discussion

• Reflection or articulating and testing one’s understanding.

• Collaborative group work

• Time management/Motivation/Learning Styles

• Information Literacy and critical thinking

• Interpreting non-textual information contained within the online learning environment

While all of these areas are worthy of investigation, communication using asynchronous discussion was chosen as the starting point for the development of instructional materials as it appears to be the most problematic and potentially the most useful as a tool for facilitating learning in the online environment. Anecdotal evidence suggests, however, that tutors are often disappointed with the style, content and frequency of their students’ discussion postings.

Goodfellow and Lea (2005) argue that online discussion makes complex demands on students socially, collaboratively and in the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Discussion it would seem is not a single entity and can therefore be regarded as having at least three key purposes:

• Social interaction and collaboration to enhance the experience of learning.

• Tutor and student interactions that construct academic knowledge through discussion contributions.

• Development of a climate and conditions that will lead to the development of ‘communities of practice’.

In most virtual learning environments, the interactions produced through discussion are all text-based but the contexts may be very different and demand that learners adopt different types of writing and different ground rules according to the academic context. The changing literacy practices described earlier in this paper are evident in the new asynchronous discussion genres that are emerging which incorporate features of both speech and written texts. Crystal (2001) describes what he calls ‘Netspeak’ as a wholly new medium which has, in his opinion, the potential to be bigger than either of its predecessors. This is probably inevitable as in the absence of face-to-face contact, we strive for clues, hints, nuances that extend the meaning of the written word on the page and seek to develop an atmosphere of trust with those with whom we communicate with online.

So what support can be offered to novice e-learners who are asked (or required) to contribute to discussion fora? Guidance in understanding and applying the rules of academic writing, discourse and written interpersonal skills will enable learners to develop a ‘real’ as opposed to a ‘virtual’ presence (Chepya, 2005). By making thinking and process explicit through modelling expert practice, it should be possible to demonstrate positive strategies that; allow learners to proceed in an environment of mutual respect; model how to manage conflict and misunderstanding; how to develop trust between participants.

Developing e-literate communication within an online module

An opportunity to develop and test strategies to develop learners’ online communication skills was provided following a request from Edge Hill’s Summer Enrichment Programme, that Learning Services create a 15 credit module called ‘Spring Board: enhancing academic study skills’.Learning Services to develop an eight week, 15 credit module to be delivered and supported wholly online. The module was advertised within two of Edge Hill’s three academic faculties: Humanities, Management, Social and Applied Sciences and Education and produced a cohort of 185 drawn mostly from those about to enter their second and third years, with a few about to start postgraduate study.

As the module (‘Spring Board’) uses a learning paradigm that was likely to be unfamiliar to the majority of participants, its multi-disciplinary team of librarians, study skills co-ordinator and learning technologist considered the development of the participants’ e-literacy skills to be a priority.

‘Spring Board’ has been developed using a learner-centred, social-constructivist approach that aims to develop participants’ information, critical thinking and study skills through interaction with content, other participants and tutors. Participants would interact with content, undertake activities to test their understanding and in many cases, compare their results with annotated examples that articulated expert thinking. The discussion forum provided opportunities for reflection, questioning and support and was considered essential for the success of the module. Although much of the content is generic, learners are encouraged to reflect upon, question and articulate in discussion how it relates to the demands of their own discipline. Whilst the module is currently being formally evaluated, the quantity of discussion postings [881 over 8 weeks] and the quality of their content, as perceived by the tutors, suggests that this approach was highly effective.

The first two discussion postings (see examples 1 and 2 below), were informed by the literature on discussion guidelines (Coffin et al, 2003, Palloff and Pratt, 2003) and aimed to model good practice that expressed the ‘human element’ or ‘companionability’ advocated by Chepya (2005).

Example 1.

Subject: Welcome to Spring Board

Hello Everyone,

Welcome to Spring Board and the Discussion forum. I hope you all found it easy enough to log in and to get started with the introductory material. The advertisement for this module has had a terrific response and there are loads of you registered on it. Our aim [me, Dawn, Margi and Mark] as tutors is that you have a good online experience and emerge with enhanced study and information skills.

For those of you who have not studied online before, it is a very different experience to face-to-face classroom teaching. We have designed the module so that it isn’t just reading pages — you could get a book out of the library to do that! It is interactive so there are activities to do and we would like you to mix with other people on the course and discuss activities with them too. Some of you have already done that, brilliant!

To get the most out of the module, you will need to log in regularly — at least twice a week — to keep up with the content as it is gradually released and with the discussion messages posted by other participants. My next message will set out some simple good practice guidelines for posting and replying to messages.

If you find that it is difficult to manage online learning with your other commitments, you are not alone. You might find these two web links helpful -they are interactive time planners -watch your life fill up as you complete them! Access them at:http://www.bbc.co.uk/learning/returning/learninglives/time/index.shtml and http://www.studygs.net/schedule/

You will all be assigned to tutor groups and should shortly receive an email from your tutor introducing him/her self to you. If you feel lost or confused at any point, just get in touch with your tutor who will do their best to help you.

Good luck!

Lindsey

Example 2.

Subject: Guidelines for happy discussions

Hello again,

Like I said in my first message, here are some guidelines that we would like you to follow so that the discussion board runs smoothly and everyone stays happy.

Guidelines for Discussion

Be aware that this is an open discussion forum — everyone can read what you post here.

• An informal, conversational style of writing is ok here as it feels more welcoming and friendly. If you like to use emoticons [smileys etc] go ahead, as these can help other participants interpret whether you are using humour or being serious.

• Feel free to thank, acknowledge and support others for their contributions.

• If you strongly disagree with what another participant has written, take some time out before replying. You may interpret it differently after a period of reflection.

• More on disagreeing — if you disagree with what someone has written, it is often helpful to acknowledge their view before adding your own, for example, you could write “a useful idea but …” or, “this idea is good but …”

• Where possible, keep messages short! No scrolling down long pages. Break messages into short paragraphs to make them more easily readable.

I’ll try and keep all my messages after this one as short as possible. Promise! Can you think of any more guidelines? Why not post them here!

Cheers,

Lindsey

Subsequent tutor discussion messages were relatively few, comprising 75 out of 881 discussion postings. The intention was for the discussion forum to be student led, with tutors acting as ‘guides on the side’ rather than at centre stage. Student feedback corroborates the tutors’ view of the success of the discussion forum. The comments below (example 3) are drawn from students’ formal evaluation of the module. It is interesting to note that despite the relative scarcity of tutor interactions, this was not perceived negatively by the student participants.

Example 3.

“There was lots of support and interaction between the tutors and the participants. I felt that my contributions in the discussion area were welcomed and read and responded to. The content and structure of the course has been excellent!”

“Friendly, approachable tutors who always gave help. Feeling part of a learning community -even though I only knew a couple of the other students before the start of the course. Hopefully, my grades will improve further!”

“BEST THINGS: *the support and friendly attitude of other learners and the tutors. *the wealth of information made available. *being able to work at my own pace *Knowing i have really learned things that are going to improve my future study.”

“It also highlighted the fact that I am not the only person seeking reassurance, which was another relief.”

“Talking via discussion boards to people i don’t actually know. Learnt tips from both the course and other students, reflected on what i did well and what i didn’t without worrying. Tutors seemed to be approachable.”

Final Thoughts

This paper represents a work in progress and as such remains a tentative exploration of what it means to be e-literate in higher education where screen-based technologies and networked, computer-based communications and e-learning are now part of the mainstream. It demonstrates that there are no ‘quick fix’ solutions to developing e-literacy to support e-learning, as learners bring various combinations of skills and understandings with them. However, awareness of the demands that different paradigms of online learning place on learners and the support that they might need as a result suggests that a range of self-assessments, guidelines, models and novice-expert annotated materials that recognise unique audiences and contexts will enable learners become e-literate and therefore, more effective e-learners.

The Spring Board information and study skills module developed by Learning Services provided an opportunity to marry the theory identified in the first stage of the Fellowship project with practice. Although much of the module content is generic, the activities aimed to encourage learners to reflect upon and articulate how the various skill sets could be applied within the context of their own discipline. It is recognised that the next step in the development of the module must be to produce subject and level specific versions that are capable of embracing the complex cultural contexts that operate within disciplines. To this end, collaboration has begun with academic colleagues in order to adapt the module to the needs of specific groups of students in the Faculties of Health and Education.

While materials were developed to support e-literacy across eight broad skills sets, the starting point for in-depth analysis was asynchronous discussion because of the demands it places on learners and it’s potential to make the virtual become real. Guidelines embedded within tutor discussion messages that modelled ‘companionability’ would appear to have contributed to the development of a vibrant, student-led, learning community and suggest that the approach adopted is worthy of further research and development. All offers, comments and suggestions that will help shape this form of e-literacy support will be gratefully received!