Advertisement

Learning by Design: Crafting the Knowledge Processes to Enable Pre-service Secondary Teachers to Design Authentic Learning

  • Helen CD McCarthy
Chapter
Part of the Multilingual Education book series (MULT, volume 30)

Abstract

It has been my experience working with university pre-service secondary teachers that some science, engineering, technology and mathematics (STEM) students are sceptical of having to study literacy units within their degree. Their reasoning is that there is no purpose for learning the teaching of literacy as they are far more concerned with honing their STEM subject content knowledge. This chapter will draw on the experiences of first-year secondary students who learned to apply a pedagogy of knowledge processes (Cope B, Kalantzis M: Pedagog Int J 4(3):164–195, 2009) or things you do to know. Knowledge processes are an activity type that represent a distinct way of making content knowledge by oscillating and weaving pedagogical repertoires (Freebody P, Luke A: Literacy as engaging with new forms of life: the four resources model. In: Anstey M, Bull G (eds) The literacy Lexicon, (2nd ed.). Pearson, Sydney, pp 51–66, 2003), including multimodal multiliteracies intentionally designed to help students to understand what they need to do in this world in order to know (Kalantzis and Cope, Literacies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012). The point of sharing the pre-service students’ testimonies is to reveal the transformatory processes they moved through: from healthy scepticism to openly revealing how the new order multimodal multiliteracies (The New London Group: Harv Educ Rev 66(1):60–92, 1996) had an impact on their capacity to develop engaging and authentic literacy pedagogies in ways they had not previously imagined.

Keywords

Multiliteracies, Learning by Design, Multimodality, Knowledge processes 

References

  1. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2016). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander life expectancy. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/home/Statistical+Data+Integration+-+Case+Study:+LIfe+Expectancy
  2. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2014). Foundation to year 10 curriculum: Language for interaction (ACELA1428). Retrieved from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/english/curriculum
  3. Australian Human Rights Commission. (1997). Bringing them home: Report of the national inquiry into the separation of aboriginal and Torres Strait islander children from their families. Retrieved from https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/bringing-them-home-report-1997
  4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2015). The health and welfare of Australia’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples 2015. Cat. No. IHW 147. Canberra: AIHW. Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/584073f7
  5. Beare, H. (2001). Creating the future school: Student outcomes and the reform of education. London/New York: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  6. Connell, R. (2013). The neoliberal cascade and education: An essay on the market agenda and its consequences. Critical Studies in Education, 54(2), 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Designs for social futures. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 203–234). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cope, B., Kalantzis, M. & van Haren, R. (2000). Transforming learning and assessment Retrieved from http://newlearningonline.com/scholar
  10. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillian.Google Scholar
  11. Emmitt, M., Zbaracki, M., Komesaroff, L., & Pollock, J. (2010). Language and learning. In An introduction for teaching (5th ed.). Oxford: South Melbourne.Google Scholar
  12. Ewing, R. (2010). Curriculum and assessment: A narrative approach. Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Freebody, P., & Luke, A. (2003). Literacy as engaging with new forms of life: The four resources model. In M. Anstey & G. Bull (Eds.), The literacy lexicon (2nd ed., pp. 51–66). Sydney: Pearson.Google Scholar
  14. Gee, J. P. (2000). New people in new worlds: Networks, the new capitalism and schools. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 43–68). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Giroux, H. (1989). Schooling as a form of cultural politics: Towards a pedagogy of and for difference. In H. Giroux & P. McLaren (Eds.), Critical pedagogy, the state, and cultural struggle (pp. 125 Freebody–151). New York: State University of New York.Google Scholar
  16. Giroux, H. (1992). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  18. Kachru, B., Kachru, Y., & Nelson, C. (2006). The handbook of world Englishes. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  19. Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2012). Literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kalantzis, M., Cope, B., Chan, E., & Dalley-Trim, L. (2016). Literacies (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kress, G. (2000). Design and transformation: New theories of meaning. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 153–161). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Loader, D. (2007). Jousting for the new generation: Challenges to contemporary schooling. Melbourne: ACER Press.Google Scholar
  23. Prenksy, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Slattery, P. (1995). Curriculum development in the postmodern era. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  25. The New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wadham, B., Pudsey, J., & Boyd, R. (2007). Culture and education. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  27. Wright, D. (2008). The mythopoetic body: Learning through creativity. In T. Leonard & P. Willis (Eds.), Pedagogies of the imagination: Mythopoetic curriculum in educational practice (pp. 93–106). Chicago, IL: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations