Tag: web literacy (page 2 of 2)

First draft of Mozilla’s Web Literacy standard now available!

I’m excited to announce that, after some fabulous work by my colleagues and the community, the first draft of Mozilla’s Web Literacy standard is now available:

http://mzl.la/weblitstd

We’ll be launching a ‘beta’ version in June which will be flesh out the competency-level grid and descriptors that make up this tentative first release.

The best way of thinking about the grid is as the areas that we think it’s important to pay attention to when teaching others how to read, write and participate on the Web.

I’d like to thank those who have been involved in this (ongoing) process and I’m very much looking forward to hearing further feedback, which you can give in several ways:

  1. In the comments below
  2. Using this feedback form
  3. On the weekly community calls

Please do feel share to share the URL at top of this post with your networks. It would be good to get as many eyes on this as possible. 🙂

Competency-level grid

Mozilla Web Literacy Standard - first draft

Competency descriptors

EXPLORING
Navigating the Web

  • Navigation – using software tools to browse the Web
  • Web Mechanics – understanding the Web ecosystem
  • Credibility – critically evaluating information found on the Web
  • Search – locating information, people and resources via the Web
  • Security – keeping systems, identities, and content safe

BUILDING
Creating for the Web

  • Composing for the Web – creating content (including text, images, audio and video) making use of Web technologies such as hyperlinks
  • Remixing – using existing (openly-licensed) content to create something new or modified
  • HTML – reading and writing HyperText Markup Language using the building blocks of the Web
  • CSS – reading, writing, testing and applying Cascading Style Sheets to change the visual appearance of HTML
  • Design & accessibility – creating universally effective communications through digital artifacts</li>
  • Coding/scripting – creating interactive experiences through digital artifacts for the Web
  • Infrastructure – understanding the Internet stack and how to host your own data

CONNECTING
Participating on the Web

  • Sharing & Collaborating – providing access to digital artifacts, understanding data ownership and jointly curating or creating content
  • Community participation – getting involved in Web communities, understanding and respecting online norms and practices
  • Privacy – working with intellectual property, examining and understanding the consequences of sharing data online
  • Open practices – championing, creating, and protecting the Web as a platform for democratic, universally accessible innovation

 

Latest version of Web Literacy standard grid (15th April 2013)

Update: For the latest information on the Web Literacy standard work, head to http://mzl.la/weblitstd


The grid below is one that I came up early on Saturday morning after conversations with my colleagues and after reflecting upon last week’s discussion.

Web Literacy standard grid (15th April 2013)

Changes:

  • Visual size of the elements (in attempt to show potential dependencies/conceptual ‘size’ of the competencies)
  • Added an iterated version of the community-created strand descriptors
  • Moved ‘Remixing’ to the Connecting strand as it seemed to fit better there
  • Changed ‘Coding/Scripting’ to ‘JavaScript’
  • Changed ‘Participating in Web Communities’ to ‘Community Participation’ to make it less wordy
  • Changed ‘Sharing via social networks’ to just ‘Sharing’ (to make it less specific)
  • Changed ‘Security/Encryption’ to just ‘Security’ and moved it to the Exploring strand to make it more distinct from ‘Privacy’
  • Merged ‘Web design’ with ‘Accessibiility’

Comments welcome! It would be great if you could make it to our weekly calls. 🙂

Weeknote 15/2013

This week I’ve been:

  • Creating two new grids for Mozilla’s Web Literacy standard work with the community. The first one’s here and the second (updated) one is still just on Flickr at the moment.
  • Planning my PELeCON keynote presentation. You have no idea how long it takes to collate, choose and organise animated GIFs.
  • Hosting the weekly Web Literacy standard community call. You can catch up here.
  • Catching up with people like Laura Hilliger, Tim RichesLucy Neale and StJohn Smith.
  • Editing the Wikipedia article for Open Badges. Only a bit, though. Must revisit.
  • Moderating a Connected Learning TV webinar featuring Liz Lawley and her work around a ‘gaming layer’ for students and academics.
  • Travelling to Plymouth by train, plane and automobile (literally) for PELeCON.
  • Attending, keynoting and running a workshop at PELeCON. The animated GIFs from my keynote aren’t so animated on Slideshare, so you may want to try this Evernote notebook. Photos are here (when they’ve finished uploading)

Next week I’m in Sweden keynoting and running a workshop at the Swedish equivalent of BETT. Better get planning…

Why I

TL;DR: A new service called tldr.io provides extensions for Firefox and Chrome that allow you to summarise content on the Web. These summaries are then available to other users who have the extensions. This adds value for both the person doing the summarising (comprehension) and the person accessing the summary (speed)/


You’ll have noticed that I’ve been using TL;DR at the top of my posts (like this one) for a while now. It’s something that stands for too long; didn’t read and is a nod to the fact that people don’t tend to read long-form content on computer screens. A few weeks ago I happened across a new service called tldr.io. I think it’s awesome.

The best services solve two problems at the same time. So, for example, Luis von Ahn created reCAPTCHA (prove you’re human / digitise books) and Duolingo (translate articles / learn another language). Tldr.io does something similar. One of the best ways of learning something is to summarise it for someone else. And if you’re in a hurry, having a summarised version of something is extremely valuable.

Once you install the Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome browser extension you’ll see either a red or green button in your address bar:

tldr-icon

If it’s red it means that there’s no summary of this page. If it’s green it means that a summary exists. Clicking on the green button reveals that summary. If it’s red then that means you’ve got an opportunity to contribute one and add value! Nice.

The service has an API meaning it can be hooked into websites. Once you’ve installed the extension check out the way, for example, that the tl;dr grey icons appear next to articles on Hacker News – and what happens when you hover over them:

hacker-news2

I like services that fulfil a need and have an obvious value proposition both for the creator and consumer! And this seems like something that could align nicely with the Web Literacy standard work we at Mozilla have been undertaking with the community.

If you were still in any doubt, head over to the latest summaries over at tldr.io and then, once you’ve contributed a summary, check out your impact. Wonderful.

Paper hat goes to the first one to summarise this blog post. Although that would be quite meta. 😉

On ‘rigour’ in definitions of digital and web literacy.

Update: For the latest information on the Web Literacy standard work, head to http://mzl.la/weblitstd


TL;DR version: If we define rigour as something that’s ‘unchanging’ and ‘objective’ then it’s almost impossible to be ‘rigorous’ about digital and web literacy. Instead, I propose that instead of being rigorous that we’re relevant, even if that’s at the expense of some objectivity.


Here’s an interesting one. I occasionally get corralled into Twitter conversations as someone who knows about something or other. Today, it was Miles Berry after being asked why the new draft National Curriculum should include ‘digital literacy’. The assumption by his interlocutor (Bruce Nightingale) was that in order for a subject to be included in a programme of study it should be ‘rigorously defined’ with a ‘body of knowledge’ behind it.

When I asked whether rigour means ‘has a definition everyone agrees on’ Bruce pointed me towards this blog post by Jenny Mackness on ‘academic rigour’. The conversation quickly became too nuanced to do justice in 140-character bursts, hence this follow-up blog post. I hope Bruce has time to reply.

In Jenny’s post she talks about finding definitions of ‘academic rigour’ unsatisfactory. I’d suggest that’s because it’s a kind of Zeugma, an ambiguous term. But let’s just focus upon ‘rigour’. The Oxford English Dictionary (probably the best place to resort when faced with knotty problems of definition) gives the etymology of ‘rigour’ as:

Etymology:  < Anglo-Norman and Middle French rigour, Middle French rigeur, rigueur (French rigueur ) inflexible severity, severity, harshness (12th cent. in Old French), strict application (of laws) (13th cent.), feeling of tingling or prickling (a1365 in medical context), (in plural) repressive measures (15th cent.), cruelty (15th cent.), harshness that is difficult to bear (end of the 15th cent., of cold, etc.), exactitude, precision (1580) and its etymon classical Latin rigor unbending quality, stiffness, rigidity, numbness, numbness of the body in fever, unyielding hardness, frozen condition, quality of being stiffly erect, tautness, inflexibility, sternness, severity, uncouthness < rig?re to be stiff (see rigent adj.) + -or -or suffix. Compare Old Occitan rigor (1461), Catalan rigor (14th cent.), Spanish rigor (13th cent.), Portuguese rigor (14th cent.), Italian rigore (a1320).

I can’t help but think when I see words like ‘harshness’, ‘cruelty’, ‘exactitude’, ‘precision’, ‘rigidity’ and ‘inflexibility’ that we’re using the wrong word here. Applying such stringent measures to an ambiguous term like ‘digital literacy’ is problematic as ‘digital’ pertains to many different referents. To talk of rigour (as defined above), then, is verging on the ridiculous.

But does a lack of rigour around a subject, topic or idea make it less valuable? I’d suggest not. Instead, I’d suggest it’s the terminology we’re using that’s problematic. Let’s take another example: the idea of academic ‘impact’. What, exactly, does that mean? You may well be able to draw up a framework or points for this or that, rewarding academics for performing certain activities and publishing in various places. But what about obvious areas of ‘impact’ that lie outside of that rigid framework? Rigour does not mean relevancy. Sometimes the problem is with the tools you are using rather than the thing you are trying to describe. It’s OK for things to be nebulous and slightly intangible.

Having spent several years of my adult life delving into the murky world of new literacies I’d suggest that (for example) helping young people learn how to use digital devices, how to think computationally, and how to stay safe online are extremely relevant things to be doing. Can we boil these activities down to things to be learned once for all time? Of course not. It’s hard enough when you’ve got a single referent (e.g. the Web)

So, in conclusion, I’ll see your definition of ‘rigour’ and raise you a ‘relevance’. Not everything that is valuable can be measured objectively. Nor should it be.

Image CC BY-NC-SA Josh Clark

Teaching the fourth “r:” webmaking as a vital 21st century skill?

Teaching the Fourth 'R'

On Thursday evening I listened in to a fantastic ‘fireside chat’ with author Cathy Davidson. She was in conversation with Michelle Levesque (mostly) and Mark Surman about what she considers to be the 4th ‘R’: algoRithmic thinking.

Session link: http://lanyrd.com/2012/CathyDavidson

Cathy’s fantastic. She’s an educational celebrity yet sharp, funny and incredibly warm. I had the amazing good fortune to interview her last year about her latest book, Now You See It whilst I was in New York for the Mobility Shifts conference. If you haven’t read that book yet, do so – I highly recommend it.

The audio should appear embedded below and the MozPad/backchannel/liveblog is available here.

More about this by Cathy Davidson:

Web literacy? (v0.1)

Update: Michelle’s now created a diagram from her original post.


Michelle Levesque asked for feedback on this: Mozilla’s Web Literacy Skills (v0.1 alpha). I wanted to respond as soon as possible as I think she’s done some great work here.

I’ve visualised the text in her post and then tweaked it slightly to suggest the direction I’d take it:

Web literacy? (v0.1)

Click through for a larger version on Flickr.

Changes:

  • Added ‘participation’ to Exploring
  • Changed ‘bullshit’ to ‘crap’ to avoid offending some people’s sensibilities
  • Changed ‘Restaurant HTML’ to ‘HTML basics’ in Authoring
  • Combined two blocks to form ‘Reacting to stimulii’ in Building
  • Removed ‘Receipe’ize tasks’ in Building
  • Added ‘Civil liberties’ to Protecting
  • Segmented sections into what would form a ‘Basic’ and an ‘Advanced’ badge’

What do you think? What have I (we) missed?

(if you like this you may also be interested in The Essential Elements of Digital Literacies)

css.php