Punctuated Equilibrium—Digital Technology in Schools’ Teaching of the Mother Tongue (Swedish)

References

• Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52( 2009), 154–168. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arfwedson, G. B. (2006). Litteraturdidaktik från gymnasium till förskola. En analys av litteraturundervisningens hur-fråga med utgångspunkt från svenska didaktiska undersökningar i ett internationellt perspektiv [Literature didactic from upper secondary school to preschool. An analysis of the how-question in the teaching of literature in an international perspective]. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet, 11:2006.
   Google Scholar
• Baek, Y., Jung, J., & Kim, B. (2008). What makes teachers use technology in the classroom? Exploring the factors affecting facilitation of technology with a Korean sample. Computers & Education, 50, 224–234. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bearne, E. (2003). Ways of knowing; ways of showing – towards an integrated theory of text. In M. Styles & E. Bearne (Eds.), Art, narrative, and childhood (pp. ix–xxvii). Oakhill: Trentham Books Limited, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research and critique (revised ed.). London: Lanham, Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Björkvall, A., & Engblom, C. (2010). Young children's exploration of semiotic resources during unofficial computer activities in the classroom. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 10(3), 271–293. doi: 10.1177/1468798410372159
   Google Scholar
• Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M., & Robson, K. (2001). Focus groups in social research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Bolter, J. D., & Grusin, R. (2002). Remediation. Understanding new media. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, Winter 2001, 38(4), 813–834. doi: 10.3102/00028312038004813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahllöf, U. (1971). Ability grouping, content validity and curriculum process analysis. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dale, R., Robertson, S., & Shortis, T. (2004). “You can't not go with the technological flow, can you?” constructing “ICT” and “teaching and learning”. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 456–470. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00103.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delamont, S., & Hamilton, D. (1986). Revisiting classroom research: A continuing cautionary tale. In M. Hammersley (Ed.), Controversies in classroom research (pp. 25–43). A Reader Edited by Martyn Hammersley at the Open University. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Demetriadis, S., Barbas, A., Molohides, A., Palaigeorgiou, G., Psillos, D., Vlahavas, I., … Pombortsis, A. (2003). “Culture in negotiation”: Teachers’ acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools. Computers & Education, 41(2003), 19–37. doi: 10.1016/S0360-1315(03)00012-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmfeldt, J. (2002). Texten, människan och maskinen: Så förändras vetenskapliga domäner [The text, the man and the machine: Changing scientific domains]. Tidskrift för litteraturvetenskap 3, 3–12.
   Google Scholar
• Elmfeldt, J., & Erixon, P.-O. (2007). Skrift i rörelse : om genrer och kommunikativ förmåga i skola och medielandskap [Scripture in transition. About genres and communicative ability in school and media landscape]. Stockholm/Stehag: Brutus Östlings bokförlag Symposion.
   Google Scholar
• Elmfeldt, J., & Persson, M. (2009). Kreativ läsning och mediereflexivitet: ett försök till inringning av en problematik [Creative reading and media reflexivity: an attempt to encircle a problem]. NORLIT 2009: Codex and Code, Aesthetics, Language and Politics in an Age of Digital Media, Stockholm, August 6–9, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Ely, M. (1991). Kvalitativ forskningsmetodik i praktiken – cirklar inom cirklar [Qualitative research method in practice – circles within circles]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O. (2007). The teaching of writing in the upper secondary school in the age of the internet and mass media culture. L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 7(4), 7–21.
   Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O. (2010a). School subject paradigms and teaching practice in lower secondary Swedish schools influenced by ICT and media. Computers & Education, 54, 1212–1221. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O. (2010b). From text to picture in teaching. Journal of Social Science Education (JSSE), 9(3), 15–25.
   Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O. (2010c). Editorial – Educational sciences and a media ecology perspective. Education Inquiry, 3(1), 137–142.
   Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O. (2012). Svenskdidaktikens håg för ungdoms- och mediekulturer [The Swedish didactic field and its inclination for youth culture]. In S. Ongstad (Ed.), Nordisk modersmålsdidaktikk: Forskning, felt og fag (pp. 224–259). Oslo: Novus Forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O. (2014). On the remediation, relativisation and reflexivity of mother tongue education. Education Inquiry, 5(2), June, 171–194.
   Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O. (2015). Reading technologies in the new media landscape. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Erixon, P.-O., Marner, A., Scheid, M., Strandberg, T., & Örtegren, H. (2012). School subject paradigms and teaching practice in the screen culture: Art, music and the mother tongue (Swedish) under pressure. European Educational Research Journal, 11(2), 255–273. doi: 10.2304/eerj.2012.11.2.255
   Google Scholar
• Fast, C. (2007). Sju barn lär sig läsa och skriva: Familjeliv och populärkultur i möte med förskola och skola [Seven children learn to read and write: Family life and popular culture in meeting with preschool and school]. Uppsala: Uppsala studies in education, No. 115.
   Google Scholar
• Friesen, N. (2011). Introduction. media: Digital, ecological and epistemological. E-learning and Digital Media, 8(3), 175–180. doi: 10.2304/elea.2011.8.3.175
   Google Scholar
• Goodson, I. F., & Mangan, J. M. (1995). Subject cultures and the introduction of classroom computers. British Educational Research Journal, 21(5), 613–628. doi: 10.1080/0141192950210505
   Google Scholar
• Greenfield, P. M. (2009). Technology and informal education: What is taught, what is learned. Science, 323, 69–71. doi: 10.1126/science.1167190
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guba, E. G. 1990. The alternative paradigm dialog. In E. G. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm dialog (pp. 17–27). Newbury Park, London & New Delhi: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Hammersly, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography. Principles in practice. London: Tavistock.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, P., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education (JRTE), 41(4), 393–416. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2009.10782536
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayles, K. N. (2007). Hyper and deep attention: The generational divide in cognitive modes. Profession, 2007, 187–199. doi: 10.1632/prof.2007.2007.1.187
   Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S., Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192. doi: 10.1080/0022027032000276961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmberg, P. (2010). Digital argumentation – Datorskrivandets transformering av skolans genrearbete [Digital argumentation – How computer writing is transforming the school's genre work]. Utbildning & lärande, 4(1), 34–57.
   Google Scholar
• Hultin, E., & Westman, M. (2013a). Early literacy practices go digital. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), 4(2), 1005–1013.
   Google Scholar
• Hultin, E., & Westman, M. (2013b). Literacy teaching, genres and power. Education Inquiry, 4(2), June 2013, 279–300. doi: 10.3402/edui.v4i2.22074
   Google Scholar
• Johansson, E. (1977). The history of literacy in Sweden in comparison with some other countries. Umeå: Umeå universitet.
   Google Scholar
• John, P. (2005). The sacred and the profane: Subject sub-culture, pedagogical practice and teachers’ perceptions of the classroom uses of ICT. Educational Review, 57(4), 471–490. doi: 10.1080/00131910500279577
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr, S. T. (1991). Lever and fulcrum: Educational technology in teachers’ thought and practice. Teacher College Record, 93(1), Fall, 114–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr, S. T. (2005). Why we all want it to work: Towards a culturally based model for technology and educational change. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(6), 1005–1016. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00570.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49, 740–762. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Lindblad, S., & Sahlström, F. (1999). Gamla mönster och nya gränser. Om ramfaktorer och klassrumsinteraktion [Old pattern and new borders. about frame factors and classroom interaction]. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige, 4(1), 73–92.
   Google Scholar
• Lundgren, U. P. (1972). Frame factors and the teaching process. A contribution to curriculum theory and theory on teaching. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
   Google Scholar
• Lundström, S., & Olin-Scheller, C. (2014). Playing fiction: The use of semiotic resources in role play. Education Inquiry, 5(1), March, 149–166.
   Google Scholar
• Mackey, M. (2002). Literacies across media. Playing the text. London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McCannon, M., & Crews, T. B. (2000). Assessing the technology training needs of elementary school teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 111–121.
   Google Scholar
• McLuhan, M. (1964/1994). Understanding media: The extensions of man. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Odum, E. P. (1997). Ecology: A bridge between science and society. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Olin-Scheller, C. (2007). Mellan Dante och “Big Brother”: En studie om gymnasieelevers textvärldar (Doctoral dissertation) [Between Dante and Big Brother: A study about the text worlds of upper secondary students]. Karlstad: Karlstads universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Olin-Scheller, C., & Wikström, P. (2010). Literary prosumers: Young people's reading and writing in a new media landscape. Education Inquiry, 1(1), March, 41–56. doi: 10.3402/edui.v1i1.21931
   Google Scholar
• Olson, J. (2000). OP-ED Trojan horse or teacher's pet? Computers and the culture of the school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(1), 1–8. doi: 10.1080/002202700182817
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quantz, R. A. (1999). School ritual as performance: A reconstruction of Durkheim's and Turner's uses of ritual. Educational Theory, 49(4), 493–513. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-5446.1999.00493.x
   Google Scholar
• Rosenblatt, L. M. (1995 [1938]). Literature as exploration. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
   Google Scholar
• Scolari, C. A. (2012). Media ecology: Exploring the metaphor to expand the theory. Communication Theory, 22 (2012), 204–225. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01404.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N. (1999). Differences in educational computer use: The influence of subject cultures. The Curriculum Journal, 10(1), Spring, 29–48. doi: 10.1080/0958517990100104
   Google Scholar
• Sheehy, K., & Bucknall, S. (2008). How is technology seen in young people's visions of future education systems? Learning, Media and Technology, 33(2), June 2008, 101–114. doi: 10.1080/17439880802097642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X015002004
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations for a new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. doi: 10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siskin, L. S. (1991). Departments as different worlds: Subject subcultures in secondary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(2), (May 1991), 134–160. doi: 10.1177/0013161X91027002003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strate, L. (2008). Studying media as media: McLuhan and the media ecology approach. MediaTropes eJournal, I, 127–142.
   Google Scholar
• Strate, L. (2010). Korzybski, Luhmann, and McLuhan. Proceedings of the Media Ecology Association, 11.
   Google Scholar
• Strate, L. (2011). On the binding biases of time and other essays on general semantics and media ecology. Fort Worth, Texas: The New Non-Aristotelian Library Institute of General Semantics.
   Google Scholar
• Sutherland, R., Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Brawn, R., Breeze, N., Gall, M., … John, P. (2004). Transforming teaching and learning: Embedding ICT into everyday classroom practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(6), 413–425. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00104.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svedner, P. O. (2006). Bilaga. Ämnesdidaktisk litteratur i svenska – ett försök till förteckning [Appendix. Subject didactic literature in Swedish – an attempt to list]. In G. B. Arfwedson (Ed.), Litteraturdidaktik från gymnasium till förskola. En analys av litteraturundervisningens hur-fråga med utgångspunkt från svenska didaktiska undersökningar i ett internationellt perspektiv [Literature didactic from upper secondary school to preschool. An analysis of the how-question in the teaching of literature in an international perspective] (pp. 161–172). Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Tyner, K. (1998). Literacy in a digital world. teaching and learning in the age of information. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, D. M. (2001). Pedagogy before technology: Re-thinking the relationship between ICT and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6(4), 251–266. doi: 10.1023/A:1012976702296
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. London: Harvester.
   Google Scholar
• Wibeck, V. (2000). Fokusgrupper. Om fokuserade gruppintervjuer som undersökningsmetod [Focus groups. About group interviews as a method for investigation]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Wikström, P., & Olin-Scheller, C. (2011). To Be continued…Fan fiction and the constructing of identity. In E. Dunkels, G.-M. Frånberg, & C. Hällgren (Eds.), Youth culture and Net culture: Online social practices (pp. 83–96). Hershey – New York: Information Science Reference.
   Google Scholar
• Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data. Descriptions, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, London & New Delhi: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, Winter 2003, 40, 807–840. doi: 10.3102/00028312040004807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar