The slides that I have used for my Day 1 presentation at the College of Education at King Saud University on the 9th of Sept 2013.

1. Dr Palitha Edirisingha
Institute of Learning Innovation
University of Leicester, UK
Based of a research project funded
by the College of Social Sciences,
University of Leicester
Presented at the King Saud University
Riyadh
Saudi Arabia
9 Sept 2013
Digital literacy and
students’ use of
informal online
resources for
formal learning
Digital literacy
and students’
use of informal
online resources
for formal
learning
College of Education, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 9 Sept 2013
Dr Palitha Edirisingha
Institute of Learning Innovation
University of Leicester, UK

2. Digital literacy skills
Key focus of this presentation
Based of a research project funded by
the College of Social Sciences,
University of Leicester

3. The background
Jenkins et al (2008),
Francis (2010)
Adorno (2001)

4. Research questions
• How do university students’ use digital
devices and web 2.0 technologies within their
formal learning context?
• What are the digital literacy issues that might
emerge in using web-based resources and
tools?
• How might we recognise students’ informal
use of these tools and resources as part of
their Personal Learning Environments (PLEs)?

5. Background and theoretical Concepts

6. Why should the teachers be
concerned about this? Can’t students
manage their own learning using new
technologies?

7. Technology opportunists … argue that, with
wide access to information and ideas on the
web, the learner can pick and choose their
education … . An academic education is not
equivalent to a trip to the public library, digital
or otherwise. The educationist has to attack
this kind of nonsense … .
(Laurillard, 2012, p. 4)

8. Educationists must resist the idea that because
of new technologies students can do it for
themselves – instead they create an even more
critical role for the teacher, who is not simply
mediating the knowledge already articulated,
but is more deeply involved in scaffolding the
way students think and how they develop the
new kinds of skills they will need for the digital
literacies.
(Laurillard, 2012, p. 4)

9. Digital literacy skills
What does it means to be literate in
the new media age?

10. Digital literacy in UK Policy
Digital Britain Report (2009)
– sets out the strategy of the UK government in placing
technology at the centre of the country’s economic
recovery
– recognises the importance of people having the ‘…
capabilities and skills to flourish in the digital
economy’ (DCMS, 2009: 1).

11. UK Policy
• Media literacy is ‘the ability to use, understand
and create media and communications in a
variety of contexts’ (Ofcom, 2011b)

12. Digital literacy in Higher Education
policy
Prof. Sir David Melville (2009) Committee of
Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience:
– Although students in HE may well be pervasive
users of social networking sites, blogs, virtual
environments and other multi-media forms, they
lacked deep critical skills to analyse and validate
information on-line.

13. Digital literacy – terms and definitions
– Vary depending on:
• who is funding digital literacy research
• disciplines in which research being carried out /
reported
– information literacy, media literacy, web literacy,
e-literacy, digital literacy, and other…

14. • ‘notion of literacy beyond its original application
to the medium of writing’
• ‘emergent literacies’ – young people’s media
related play’
• ‘visual literacy’, ‘television literacy’, ‘cine-
literacy’, ‘multiliteracies’, …
• Term literacy becoming fashionable: ‘economic
literacy’, ‘emotional literacy’, ‘spiritual literacy’,
• Literacy = competence
(see Buckingham, 2007, p. 43)

15. Digital literacy
The competencies that are required to make
effective use of a range of new media tools
and resources necessary to succeed in a
rapidly changing and increasingly technology-
rich world (Francis, 2008).

16. Digital literacy
• ‘… more than learning how to use a computer
and keyboard, or how to do online searches.’
• Being able to evaluate and use information
critically
• asking questions about the sources of that
information, the interests of its producers,
and the ways in which it represents the world
[…]. (Buckingham (2007, p. 267, in Ryberg and
Dirckinck –Holmsfield, 2010: 173)

17. Buckingham (2007)

18. Representation: the ability to critically assess and reflect on
issues such as authority, reliability and bias, to notice whose
voices are being heard, and whose are silenced.
Language: the ability to understand the ‘grammar’ of various
forms of communication and the codes and conventions of
different genres.
Production: a fundamental understanding of who is
communicating to whom, and why, which also encompasses
awareness of commercial interests and influences.
Audience: An awareness of one’s own position, both in terms of
being targeted by communications and in terms of
participating in communications as a critical recipient, active
cultural consumer and co-producer. Buckingham (2007)
Buckingham (2007)

19. Participatory Cultures
Jenkins et al., (2008) ‘participatory culture’:
– ‘a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic
expression and civic engagement, strong support
for creating and sharing one’s creations, and some
type of informal mentorship whereby what is
known by the most experienced is passed to
novices’ (p. 3).

20. Participatory Cultures
‘one in which members believe their
contributions matter, and feel some degree of
social connection with one another (at least
they care about what other people think
about what they have created).’ (Jenkins et al,
2008, p. 3).

21. Participatory Cultures
Access to such a participatory culture has a
number of beneficial effects for learners
including: opportunities for peer to peer
learning, the diversification of cultural
expression, development of skills valued in
modern workplace, and a more empowered
conception of citizenship (Jenkins et al, 2008).

22. Participatory cultures
Supports the emergence of self-directed
learning activities beyond formal educational
contexts (Francis 2011)

23. Online affinity spaces (Gee, 2004)
• As a critique of the applicability of Wenger’s
(1998) ‘Communities of Practice’ to online
communities. ‘New comers’ learning from ‘old
timers’.
• The importance of ‘space in which people
interact, rather than on a membership in a
community’ (Gee 2004, p. 77).
• ‘Start by talking about spaces rather than
“communities”’ (ibid, p. 78)

24. Online Affinity Spaces
• … ‘particular type of space’ to describe the
nature and patterns of online interactions
facilitated by technological tools.
• having both ‘content’ and ‘interactional’
dimensions.

25. Methods
Method Purpose 1st
round
(2010-11)
2nd
round
(2011-12)
Questionnaire
surveys of
undergraduate and
postgraduate
students
to identify their ownership of
and use of digital devices and
web 2.0 tools (Questionnaire
adapted from Francis (2008))
53 students 41 students
Focus groups (4)
with students (3 – 4
in each group)
to gain a deeper insight into
their use of web 2.0 tools in a
learning context
3 groups,
10 students
3 groups, 11
students
Workshops with
students
to observe their online activities
and digital practices
8 students

26. Findings / themes
Transition into a new academic culture
Access to and use of digital devices, web-based
tools and resources
Approach to an assessed piece of work
Use of web-based tools and resources for their
formal learning

27. Ownership of computer and other digital devices (% reporting)
Note: 2010 – 2011, n= 53; 2011 – 2012, n=41

28. The most important device(s) for your studies / study-related activities
Note: 2010 – 2011, n= 53; 2011 – 2012, n=41

29. The devices used to access internet during term-time
Note: 2010 – 2011, n= 53; 2011 – 2012, n=41

30. Locations where you use computers during term time
Note: 2010 – 2011, n= 53; 2011 – 2012, n=41

31. Top three locations for computer use during term time
(2010 – 2011 data)
University computer rooms
57%
27%
University library
65%
Term-time accommodation

32. Online activities
(2011-12 data)

33. Please go to the following URL to access the
data from the 2010-2011 questionnaire survey
http://goo.gl/kraQF

34. Approaching an assessed piece of work – patterns of
navigation and study environments

35. Mostly used web-based resources and tools for learning

36. Web tools and resources that students use for their formal
learning

37. NON-WESTERN Web tools and resources that students use for
their formal learning

38. Recommendation sites / tools
P(J): I want to mention a special website. It’s a Chinese website and its
name is Douban. I find, it’s a very useful website for me, because if I want
to read a book and I search the book in Douban, I will find the book. There
is specific webpage for this book and some recommendations and some
comments from other readers, their recommendations, their comments
about this book. Besides, this website allow people to use tags about
books, music or films, so members of this website can just search these
tags and they can find relevant resources and besides that, the website
will give you recommendations. If I search a book, and the website itself,
will give some, some most relevant search results about, relevant to
books. It means that, besides the book that I am searching it will display
several books on the same topic, in the same theme, or several books
most of the readers of this book were also interested in. So, for me, I
suppose, it’s a very useful website for learning. But I haven’t found English
websites that have the same function. [2011. FG2]

39. Twitter
Y: I find it quite useful for my academic work because all the
people I know, professors here [at the university], are on
twitter but it is not easy to find these professors on Facebook.
When I follow my supervisor on Twitter I can also see others
who are also following him on twitter who are also professors
so we can have useful conversations. [2012. FG3]
Interviewer: What are the advantages of following your
professor on Twitter?
Y: He always updates on some academic news, what he has
found out, his recommendations ….

40. International Dimension
• Students are embedded in virtual structures
from their country of origin and therefore
bring them with them whilst studying at
Leicester.
• Baidu, ICIBA, Renren
• QQ small group work (language familiarity)
• no limits to size of groups, quick and easy.
• Inclusions/exclusions-Google Wave

41. Participatory Culture
• ‘Participatory culture’ book review
recommendations, Yahoo answers, Baidu
answers.
• Instant message, to contact peers.
• But contested notions of ‘quality’ and
‘authority’ related to peer to peer
information.
• In general a sense of what is an ‘academic’
source and what is not.

42. Participatory Culture
• Creators? Students in our sample keep
updated blogs, contribute and comment on
other blogs.
• Reflexivity, students use these blogs as way to
reflect on their own experience as learners.
• Share and reflect on their experiences as
overseas students. They often get responses
and comments on their blogs.

43. Authority and Status
• YouTube: for one participant useful basis for preparing
an essay, other participants reject it as not an
academic sources they can ‘use’ or ‘untrustworthy’.
• Wikipedia, some sense of the limitations of this
information, but it is often a starting place for
background information and to follow up references.
• See The Guardian, Economist, BBC as ‘reliable’
information they can refer to.
• Dominance of Google infrastructure: Google Scholar,
Google Dictionary, Google Wave Google Books.

44. Resources
• Reflections from the workshop
• Students pooled a huge array of online
sources, some (not all) in their first language,
familiarity from their country of origin.
• They do however, develop new sources as a
result of their study, some through tutor
recommendations others through peers.
• Some gaps in their knowledge e.g. primary
and secondary sources.

45. Recommendations and thoughts
• The cultural context of media literacy needs to be
focused on more closely.
• Participatory cultures vary-Jenkins very much rooted in
US and particular types of activities online (gaming for
example).
• As learners and teachers we need to recognise this
cultural context.
• Provide direction and intervention (where there is
scant access to physical books, the web is seen as a
solution). Not all students have the ability to
determine good quality sources online.
• Do students need a PLE?

46. Literacy / literacies?
• Participatory cultures is argued by Jenkins, (2008)
and see also *Ryberg and Dirckinck-Holmfield
(2010) are ‘transferable’ to the academic context.
• Locating multiple sources, aggregation of
material, editing and revision of material, critical
reflection and evaluation.
• Our research highlights some of these elements
but there is a variation amongst students and still
a need to focus on the ‘critical’ in their
understanding of online sources.

47. Final remarks
• Vertical and horizontal space of the new media
environment raises a number if challenges
• Expert and ‘non-expert’ information
• Moving across ‘expert’ or ‘academic’ information that
flows downwards: reading lists, Library e-link,
alongside peer to peer (horizontal) information.
• Seamless spaces on-line QQ, off-line: group study
rooms in the library.
• Students have useful mobile technology an iPhone
provides multiple uses: mini photocopier, access web
material, arrange group meetings etc.

48. Final remarks
• Vertical and horizontal space of the new media
environment raises a number if challenges
• Expert and ‘non-expert’ information
• Moving across ‘expert’ or ‘academic’ information that
flows downwards: reading lists, Library e-link,
alongside peer to peer (horizontal) information.
• Seamless spaces on-line QQ, off-line: group study
rooms in the library.
• Students have useful mobile technology an iPhone
provides multiple uses: mini photocopier, access web
material, arrange group meetings etc.

49. Challenges

50. Revisiting research questions
• How do university students’ use digital
devices and web 2.0 technologies within their
formal learning context?
• What are the digital literacy issues that might
emerge in using web-based resources and
tools?
• How might we recognise students’ informal
use of these tools and resources as part of
their Personal learning environments?

51. Special thanks to our PhD students for
their contributions and inspirations
• Dimitrinka Atanasova (Media and Communication,
Leicester)
• Mengjie Jiang (Institute of Learning Innovation,
Leicester)
• Nan Yang (University of Trento, Italy)
• Nada Al Saleh (Institute of Learning Innovation,
Leicester and King Saud University, Saudi Arabia)
• Oznur Soyak (Institute of Learning Innovation, Leicester)
• Tony Ratcliffe (Institute of Learning Innovation,
Leicester, residing in Canada)

52. Selected references
Adorno, T. W. (2001). The Culture Industry : Selected Essays on Mass Culture . London: Routledge.
DCMS (2009) Digital Britain: Final Report London: TSO. Available at
http://interactive.bis.gov.uk/digitalbritain/report/being-digital/getting-britain-online/. [Accessed September 2009].
Dijk, J. V. 2005. The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Information Society. London: Sage.
Francis, R.J., (2010) The Decentring of the Traditional University: the future of (self) education in virtually figured
worlds,
Francis, R.J., (2008), The Predicament of the Learner in the New Media Age, DPhil thesis submitted to University of
Oxford.
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated Language and Learning: A critique of traditional schooling, Abington, Oxfordshire: Routledge.
Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clinton, K., Weigel, M., & Robinson, A. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory
Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Cambridge, MA: Comparative Media Studies Programme at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Available at: http://www.projectnml.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf
[Accessed 2 Nov 2010].
Melville, D. (2009) Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World: Report of Committee of Enquiry into the Changing Learner
Experience, Available at: http://www.clex.org.uk/CLEX_Report_v1-final.pdf. [Accessed 29 May 2009].
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ofcom (2011b). UK adults’ media literacy. London: Ofcom.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ofcom (2011b). UK adults’ media literacy.London: Ofcom.

53. Thank you!
College of Education, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia, 9 Sept 2013
Dr Palitha Edirisingha
Institute of Learning Innovation
University of Leicester, UK