Do Web 2.0 tools really open the door to learning? Practices, perceptions and profiles of 11–16‐year‐old students

Screen-based literacy practices in Swedish primary schools

“…Research on children's text activities focuses mainly on tools, text types and perspectives that are new or different in relation to an older text culture, such as discussions of multimodality (see Kress, 2003Kress, , 2010, social media, such as blogs, forums and chat communities (Karlsson, 2002;Richardson, 2006), or specific software and applications like wikis (Sofkova Hashemi, 2013 ing from the emergence of new technologies (Street, 1997), new strategies to master the internet (Leu et al, 2004, Luckin et al 2009), new discourses (Gee, 2003), or new semiotic or multimodal contexts (Hull & Schultz, 2002;Kress, 2003Kress, , 2010. These views on literacy are subsumed in the definitions by Gilster and Martin, referred to in Casey et al (2009) The ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of sources when it is presented via computers.…”

“…Jewitt et al (2009) show that images and sounds became increasingly important in the educational context in Great Britain during the first decade of the 21st century, but teachers and pupils' use of multimodal resources reshaped that what was being learned. Several studies emphasise the tension between the need to use alternative modes of expression and the lack of educational design in digital environments (Cope, Kalantzis, McCarthey, Vojak & Kline, 2011;Luckin et al, 2009). …”

“…Several studies report that government and school policies are often in conflict with technological and social change, focusing too narrowly on conventional reading and writing measures, grammar and language (e.g. Jewitt, 2008;Merchant, 2008;Warschauer & Ware, 2008;Jewitt, Bezemer, Jones & Kress, 2009;Luckin, Clark, Graber, Logan, Mee, & Oliver, 2009;Cope, Kalantzis, McCarthey, Vojak & Kline, 2011). Ultimately, curriculum targets for language education also separate literacy from technology, privileging print-based forms of instruction and regarding technology as something that might help promote acquisition of literacy.…”

An exploration of students' lived experiences of using smartphones in diverse learning contexts using a hermeneutic phenomenological approach

“…Some of this literature suggests that youth are skilled in image manipulation, at both technical and philosophical levels, engaging in mutiple and fluid identity projects online and using the immediacy of smartphones to continually shape their public images (Stern, 2008;Wallace, 2011). Other research findings show however, that the majority of youth are engaged in more mundane activities with regard to the online use and adoption of digital media, using various applications routinely for school-based learning and research (Crook, 2012;Eynon & Malmberg, 2011Luckin, Clark, Graber, Logan, Mee & Oliver, 2009). But it is in the leverage of mobile devices for social and psychological involvement, and particularly smartphones, with their multiple capabilities, that is the most complex and promising area of research (Wallace, 2011;Weber & Mitchell, 2008).…”

“…Such learning as took place, was consciously deep or surface (Marton et al, 1993) but it was crucially, often a relationship or a personal encounter that precipitated an extension of learning from one context to another, contrasting with Lankshear & Knoble's (2011) argument of learning context shift as a personal urge. In emphasis, the mobile practices of the participants in this study, whilst rich and varied, being concerned with the pursuit of inquiry, creative expression, collaboration, production and publishing, were underpinned repeatedly by the notion of 'audience' and 'community' (Crook, 2012;Eynon & Malmberg, 2012;Luckin et al, 2009;Stern, 2008) and participation in communities of practice with people who share their goals, interests and activities (Lave & Wenger, 1991).…”