Darien Rossiter, Faculty of Arts, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Queensland, 4001, Australia. d.rossiter@qut.edu.au
This paper addresses the concept of technological literacy and its increasing importance in the trend towards flexible and technologically mediated learning environments in higher education. The paper reports on a two year Technological Literacy Project currently underway at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT). The project aims to assist academic staff ìinfuseî the teaching of technological literacies into their units, through the development of a range of appropriate web-based resources and strategies. The project complements key teaching and learning objectives at QUT, such as increasing flexible delivery options, by looking at ways in which the necessary skills and understandings which underpin these initiatives, can be embedded into mainstream practice.
Increasingly, technological literacy is becoming a requisite for lifelong learning and being seen by prospective employers and industry groups as an essential workplace skill (Information Industries Taskforce, 1997). Within the higher education sector, therefore, technological literacy is being added to the list of generic capabilities, as an attribute needed by all students to participate effectively in further study and by all graduates to negotiate successfully their transition to the workplace.
It was in this context that the Queensland University of Technology awarded a two year teaching and learning grant to an interdisciplinary team of academic and professional support staff to address the issue of technological literacy from an institutional perspective. The Technological Literacy Project team adopted a broad definition of technological literacy, illustrated in figure 1, as the skills, conceptual understandings and dispositions which enable students to use effectively physical and information technologies for academic, research and vocational purposes (Perkins, 1993, Dyrenfurth, 1991).
Figure 1 Key elements of technological literacy
Approaches to the acquisition of technological literacy
Technological literacy is one of the foundation blocks of
contemporary teaching and learning approaches, such as self directed
and flexible learning (Mason, 1994; Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, &
Turoff,1995; Mitchell and Bluer, 1997). Yet too often, the lack, or
the extreme diversity, of technological skills among students hampers
the learning opportunities offered by teachers and acts as barrier to
effective learning for many students. Recent research conducted as
part of the Technological Literacy Project revealed, for
example, that 93 percent of staff surveyed believed that all
students needed to know how to effectively search and retrieve
information from the Internet, and yet only 50 percent of students
reported that they were confident to do so.
When academic staff therefore are confronted with a situation
where their students have inadequate technological literacy skills,
typically they have one of three options:
The institutional approach has traditionally relied on the first of these options (or a variation thereof), directing students to centrally run skills-based courses in order to get them ëup to speedí as quickly as possible. The onus has been very much on the student to acquire these competencies, independently of their course studies, and universities have concluded that the most efficient way to facilitate this process is through a centralised service which offers, in the main, standardised or generic courses. While the efficacy of this approach from a service providerís perspective is recognised, these type of training programs have often been criticised by the learners as being less effective, either because they are taught out of context or because they offer ìtoo much too soonî or ìtoo little too lateî (Halliwell et al, 1996, ANTA, 1997) .
The Technological Literacy Project seeks to complement these
generic training programs, by assisting those staff who are
attempting to teach IT skills to their students. The primary aim of
the project, therefore, is to improve studentsí
technological literacy indirectly, by providing tools and strategies
which enable academic staff to ìinfuseî the acquisition
of technological skills and conceptual understandings into their
units or subjects. This ìinfusedî or integrated approach
incorporates and extends two of the undergraduate training IT methods
described by Ferron (1993): correlated courses, where computer
literacy is taught in a separate course using the content of another
discipline to convey the necessary skills; and integrated
courses, where computer literacy is integrated into all subjects and
taught in a timely and contextually relevant fashion. While the
literature presents a number of examples of an integrated approach
(Tapper, 1997), this project seeks to build on this concept by
developing resources and strategies to facilitate the
mainstreaming of an integrated approach to the teaching of
technological literacy across the entire institution.
The web offers an ideal environment for developing and delivering a range of tools and resources to assist staff and students in this endeavour. The features of the web ñ immediacy, easily updated, inclusive and interactive - align closely with the philosophical and pedagogical principles which underpin this project. In particular, the project aims to utilise, as much as possible, appropriate resources and ëgoodí practice from elsewhere, but also to foster the ongoing and participatory development of specific technological literacy resources by all QUT constituencies. The resources of the TechLit web site, therefore, include a resource bank (ëLitKití) of existing materials (electronic courses, guides, etc.), and a set of QUT templates, exemplars and case studies created by various stakeholders of the project. Figure 2 illustrates the resources and elements which comprise the TechLit web site.
Figure 2. TechLit web site resources
ìLitKitî (HREF1) is a web based resource bank compiled to provide a helpful list of existing technological literacy resources ( including non web based materials) which can be incorporated into coursework by staff or used independently by students. The underlying rationale of such a bank is to provide an up-to-date and managed potpourri of resources and ideas, thereby offering staff an alternative to ëre-inventing the wheelí by developing materials which have already been created by others. The project team, keen to avoid the static and quickly outdated image of a database, is promoting the idea of an ongoing or ëlivingí resource bank; one which encourages a sense of ownership through the active participation of users contributing to the resources and providing annotations and ongoing feedback. In this way, LitKit aims to be much more than a ëurlí product catalogue, advancing instead the concept of an interactive warehouse of resources where individuals can browse for ideas and hints, gain deeper insights from the comments about how and why a particular resource was utilised, and generally benefit from the contextual information contained therein.
The templates, exemplars and case studies are however, institution specific or home-grown resources, developed by teams of academic, professional and support staff. To date four templates have been developed on the topics: a basic introduction to computers; communicating with computers; information search and retrieval on the Internet; and creating and presenting text. Each of the templates provides a generic framework to convey the essential skills and conceptual understandings related to the topic, but in addition offers staff the means to include specific discipline or knowledge domain examples. The modified templates are then accessible on the web site as ëtutorialsí by the students. Future templates will focus on the clusters of skills and understandings associated with technological literacies such as creating web pages, using spreadsheets and databases - topics which have been identified and supported by staff in recent surveys.
The aim of the case studies and the exemplars (these have yet to
be developed) is to give academic staff a feel for the contextual,
implementation and real life issues involved in the use and
integration of resources. The case studies hopefully will highlight
rich experiences (positive and negative) and tease out a range of
narratives, stories and anecdotes. Exemplars, on the other
hand, can act as ìgood practiceî guides or examples and
are designed to help people move from one set of teaching
philosophies and practices, such as ìI donít want
anything to do with teaching technological literacyî, to
a new approach, such as ìIíd like to integrate the
teaching of email communication skills into my unitî.
The project teamís broad conceptualisation of the term technological literacy has enabled synergies to be identified and explored between technological literacy and other key literacies, information and academic. Together, these three literacies or multiliteracies (Luke, 1997) provide students with the technical and critical foundation to successfully undertake higher education study (Bruce, 1998). The project seeks to exploit the common or overlapping elements between these three key literacies, represented in figure 3, in the development of the web resources and strategies.
Figure3. Relationship between technological, information and academic literacies
For example, the development of the template designed to teach text presentation and word processing skills, is introduced by a preamble which discusses different aspects of academic literacy; in particular writing for a purpose and various writing genres (essays, scientific reports, etc).
Human factors which impact on development and use of resources
The project team intends to develop over the two year span of the
project a mosaic of strategies and resources to enable short and long
term institutional, course and unit objectives to be met. One of the
key strategies, previously mentioned, is academic staff participation
and involvement in the initial development, piloting, and
ongoing creation of resources. The success of the overall approach is
predicated upon academic staff having a sound understanding of the
concepts surrounding technological literacy (Moran, 1995, p. 23 -25)
and of developing a sense of ownership of the materials and processes
which underpin it. It is anticipated that over time individual
members of staff may gradually build up an increasing sense of
ownership of these resources, particularly through their ability to
adapt them to meet their own specific requirements and the needs of
their students. This integrative approach moves some of the onus for
studentsí acquisition of technological literacy onto teachers
- for example, by identifying appropriate resources or designing
content specific learning experiences. These additional teaching
functions and roles have been highlighted by a number of authors,
(Reigeluth, 1996; Gilbert, 1996; Moses, 1997).
Staff have mixed attitudes towards taking on these new responsibilities; while some enthusiasts have consistently championed the ìinfusedî or integrated approach, other staff have been more reticent or cautious. Interestingly, the findings of an academic staff survey at QUT conducted by the project in mid 1998, revealed that when staff were offered appropriate resources to assist them to integrate technological literacy into their units, their support for this approach grew from 53 percent (without resources or assistance) to 75 percent (with resources).
From the outset, therefore, the project team has sought to involve professional, support and academic staff from a range of different disciplines and with different levels of teaching experience and technical expertise. The staff who have taken part in the project to date include academics, library staff, administrators, educational developers, researchers and IT specialists and the ways the team seeks to involve them includes:
A number of these activities have highlighted, once again, the complexity of the professional, cultural and personal interests which are invested in such projects by the various stakeholders. Issues such as different work practices, changing roles, a sensitivity about unintended outcomes or problems, and a tendency to rationalise oneís own actions while emphasising others perceived failings, are factors which have been identified in previous studies and evaluations (Thompson, 1997; Rice, 1997).
Not unexpectedly, some of these factors have emerged in this project, leading at times to what could be described as a cultural dissonance between stakeholders as they grappled with newly forming roles and issues associated with a project which is attempting to foster mainstreaming rather than innovative practice. For example, issues which underpinned peopleís conceptions of instructional and curriculum design, project management, pedagogy and content have all had to be worked through at different ideological and practical levels. This dimension of the project is challenging, but it is also the aspect which is proving to be extremely valuable, revealing new understandings about the process of trying to embed, rather than tack on, the acquisition of technological literacy into the teaching and learning culture and practice.
The staff surveys, for example, highlighted the divergent perspectives and expectations which staff hold about teaching technological literacy skills, especially in relation to how they believe students best acquire or learn technological literacy skills and whose responsibility it is to teach them. The findings indicate that 68 percent of academic staff believe they should have a role in ensuring their students can use computers, but a significant number, 24 percent, do not see this as their role.
Diversity of perspectives and work cultures also characterised the developmental stages of the templates, and consequently a lot of the initial energy of those involved focused on nurturing a common understanding of technological literacy concepts, on exploring issues such as how generic resources can meet specific needs, and on some of the more subtle staff development issues identified above, which ultimately impact on the formation of effective multi-disciplinary teams between academic and professional support staff. The development of the templates, therefore, has not followed the well mapped production or standard systems development process which often distinguishes the efficiency and ìquality controlî models found in a number of higher education or industry environments. The creation of a quality educational resource or ëproductí was important, but not the sole focus of this project. Rather, the project goals were somewhat more ambitious and complex; in attempting to bring together staff with diverse, even disparate experiences, and to inculcate understandings and conceptions of continually evolving or updated resources, rather than ëcompletedí products.
In this sense the development process in many ways resembled a journey of discovery for all participants, as each ventured into the somewhat unfamiliar cultural territory of the other co-developers. The process of learning about othersí cultural values and perspectives is slow, and certainly is not efficient from a development perspective, so at times the project faced what seemed to be never-ending delays and obstacles. Teaching and research commitments interfered with agreed time lines and schedules, developers and designers were co-opted into less familiar pedagogical and discursive explorations, managers and administrators were frustrated by the ever-present constraints of budget and lack of time.
Despite this, the development phase of the project has
generated rich insights into the nature of a collaborative and
interdisciplinary development process, especially into issues which
pertain to late adopters or ë2nd generationí technology
users. Later adopters among academic staff, for example, are
motivated strongly by factors related to the improvement of learning
and to learner needs, and are less concerned with creating the well
polished product that often drives creative or technical staff.
Academic staff or other project stakeholders may at times harbour
unrealistic expectations of what programmers, instructional or
graphic designers can achieve within a given budgetary or time
framework. Furthermore, in the current climate, efficiency and
accountability underpin much of the workplace practice and culture of
development and production units, where staff time must be closely
monitored against job outputs. There is perhaps, insufficient
recognition given by managers and decision makers of the hours needed
by these staff to learn about the workplace cultures and practices of
their university colleagues, an activity which is, in effect, an
essential professional development and training requirement if
we are to move beyond a culture of innovation to a culture which
values embedding new practice.
Forming effective collegiate teams across work cultural divides, between academic and general staff, technical and teaching staff, creative and administrative staff will be an ongoing challenge, not only for the individuals involved, but also for those who would seek to facilitate this process by breaking down the organisational barriers, policies and practices which are inhibiting such changes. Le Grew and Calvert cited in the ANTA (1997) report, argued that ìÖeveryone in our universities should be aware and learning about new development and changing directions all the time. This requires a culture that fosters collaborative developmentî (ANTA, 1997, p.24). If universities are to make the necessary headway in mainstreaming outcomes from initiatives such as the Technological Literacy project, it is the dissemination of this knowledge about the developmental and infusion process to administrators and decision makers, which will be one of the most significant project outcomes.
The use of the Web to facilitate this dissemination process
through discourse and exchange of ideas in electronic discussion
groups and other forums will be examined throughout the remainder of
the project. This aspect will complement, the primary role of the web
in this initiative, as a key strategy to promote acquisition of
technological literacy among students. The web, therefore, is more
than a useful means of providing access to relevant and updateable
resources, for it also offers all staff, particularly the later
adopters, with a model or a framework for improving their own
technological literacy - engaging them in the process of
learning about the web as they explore the potential of the web as a
learning resource.
The author would like to acknowledge the other members of the
project team: Kerry Bagdon, Division of Information and Academic
Services, Michael Ryan, Faculty of Education, Dr Christina Spurgeon,
Faculty Arts ( Jan 1999 -) and Suellen Tapsall, Faculty of Arts ( Jan
ñ Dec, 1998).
Australian National Training Authority, 1997, From Desk to Disk, Staff development for VET staff in flexible delivery, ANTA, Brisbane, Queensland.
Bruce, C., 1998, ìThe Phenomenon of Information Literacyî, Higher Education Research and Development, 17(1),25-43.
Dryenfurth, M., 1991, ìTechnological literacy synthesisedî, in Dryenfurth, M. and K