"Weaving the Literacy Web" (Sutherland-Smith)

Sutherland-Smith's look at Web literacy’s role in the classroom is, IMO, lovely, balanced, and pragmatic, if somewhat underdeveloped.  She takes an entire section to quell our (read: Arianna’s) biggest concerns about technology in the classroom, writing: “As a teacher operating in both print-based and technology-mediated classrooms, I consider it crucial to institute that critical evaluation of the manner in which technology is used in the classroom.  This means not only evaluating reading and writing products or technology programs, but also investigating whether technology is being used simply because it is technology.  It is, however, implausible that the impact that the Internet is having on society and education can be ignored” (663-4).  We have been arguing whether technological literacy is intrinsically valuable, and if so, whether the English classroom is the place to teach it.  The case she makes for explicit instruction in this skill is compelling.  In her study of Australian schools, she notes that “literacy appears to be industry focussed, as schools prepare the literate being for the workplace by teaching literacy skills deemed necessary for employment” and, of course, it is increasingly the case that technological literacy is just that (663).  So, we could file “can operate a computer/navigate the World Wide Web” away under “Life Skills”  and provide some exposure to technology in the classroom for that purpose.  [Side-bar: I think SEO would be a really good skill to teach in high school!  It’s an advantage in so many different fields now, but a less specialized one than say, coding.]  However, in her discussion of reading strategies, I think Sutherland-Smith gets to something we’ve been dancing around but have not yet had a satisfying discussion about.  Does web literacy require different skills than print literacy (aside from being critical of sources and able to interpret visual texts which, hopefully, we would have been teaching along with print literacy anyway)?  According to Sutherland-Smith, it does.  

It seems like common sense that a reader approaches the web differently than a book, and yet it seems to me that somehow, we both 1.) take the reading strategies needed for approaching either type of text for granted (we don’t realize that we use headings in a textbook, or will stop reading an irrelevant article online and return to our search) and 2.) present digital texts the same way we would a print one in class (we’ll show them an article or graphic or video and have them analyze it, but we don’t focus on how we got there.)  Sutherland-Smith first describes the affordances of web-based text, noting that it is more conducive to non-linear thinking (“‘the seamless shifting from text to text is only possible online’”), requires more sophisticated visual literacy skills (“it was clear that many students could not discern the value of Web graphics” whereas, presumably, in a textbook, novel, or purely visual text, graphics would serve a clearer purpose), and enables “a blurring of the relationship between reader and writer, as readers can add, move, and comment on text and seek clarification from the author” (665).  These three facets of web-texts are actually really rad advantages that I had never considered, and Sutherland-Smith goes on to list the Web-reading strategies necessary for these should-be-obvious but-are-in-fact-overlooked differences.  

Here are the things I take for granted, but should be explicitly taught and modeled for students to develop their Web literacy:

            1. Skimming is your friend.  Figure out if what you’re looking at is relevant, bookmark it, and once you have a “compilation of texts,” read them for detail and “cull” (ew!) what you need.

            2.  “Students need to be explicitly taught how to narrow the scope of their key-word search to find information more efficiently.”  (And to be found more efficiently?  Insert SEO training here!)

            3.-6.  Be aware that students will most likely get frustrated and distracted by sheer information overload.  Use the techniques in the article to help them keep track of their line of inquiry.

            7.  “Students need explicit instruction in how to decode the image and not regard it merely as an ‘illustration...’”  They need “‘to be made aware of the possible ways visual information can be manipulated.  Charts and graphs are not just neutral presentations of facts.’”  That last part we should be teaching anyway, but in evaluating Web-based texts it is of even greater import.

In conclusion, I was quite pleased with this article.  In the future, I would recommend reading it for Week 2, immediately following the articles that define new literacy.  It effectively deals with specific literacy strategies, and does an excellent job of explaining the differences between and import of Web- and print-based literacy, rather than sparking debates about how to fit technology into a curriculum, which could be saved for later in this course.