“In North America, paper-and-pen technologies still dominate, inside-the-head versus social models of learning guide teaching and testing, print seems to remain more privileged than images, and apart from keyboarding and the use of a few other tools of technology, with a few exceptions, the technology changes that are contributing to changes in our lives outside of school are not occurring within the confines of our classroom or school lives” (p. 338).
“In terms of transformation the authors explore the dimensions of these new technologies (especially multimodal and Internet interfaces) to suggest the possibility that the advent of these technologies provides for new ways of engaging with a fuller range of ideas and people (interactively, globally, via alternative multimodal genres)” (Tierney, 2009, p. 326).
Tierney (2009) also concludes that the research often is based too much on how we used to do things before the integration of the Internet. “While touting the need for new models of comprehension, they appeared to anchor their recommendations on the use of these technologies in ways that are linked to more traditional practices” (p. 327). We are having a difficult time getting the research to keep up with the advancement of technology.
Tierney continues to delve into some pretty lofty edu-speak regarding multimodality and metalanguages. “I would posit that a core issue for educators to explore is whether students learn though using languages or by teaching about language-a metalanguage for multimodality-in some form or another” (p. 328). What I was able to gather out of this conclusion is that being able to take meaning out of a number of different sources-text, images, sound-is a skill in itself. In addition to this you add the complexity of the network students can access-considering other people’s ideas-they must become connoisseurs of information. Bringing multiple sources of information together to “remix” and create a new product is an advanced skill of the 21st century.
The nature, role, and engagement with these multimodal elements should include delving into the digital meaning maker as archivist, cultural historian, social critic, activist, public journalist, researcher, and community worker…educators need to recognize the resources, skills, and strategies that might be needed to be mobilized (Tierney, p. 337).
Tierney (2009) also concludes that the research often is based too much on how we used to do things before the integration of the Internet. “While touting the need for new models of comprehension, they appeared to anchor their recommendations on the use of these technologies in ways that are linked to more traditional practices” (p. 327). We are having a difficult time getting the research to keep up with the advancement of technology.
Tierney continues to delve into some pretty lofty edu-speak regarding multimodality and metalanguages. “I would posit that a core issue for educators to explore is whether students learn though using languages or by teaching about language-a metalanguage for multimodality-in some form or another” (p. 328). What I was able to gather out of this conclusion is that being able to take meaning out of a number of different sources-text, images, sound-is a skill in itself. In addition to this you add the complexity of the network students can access-considering other people’s ideas-they must become connoisseurs of information. Bringing multiple sources of information together to “remix” and create a new product is an advanced skill of the 21st century.
The nature, role, and engagement with these multimodal elements should include delving into the digital meaning maker as archivist, cultural historian, social critic, activist, public journalist, researcher, and community worker…educators need to recognize the resources, skills, and strategies that might be needed to be mobilized (Tierney, p. 337).