This is an old concept – the notion of “multiliteracies” dates back to the 90’s at least – but something that I think teachers should continue to think about.  Because literacy (or literacies, depending on how you want to imagine that notion) is changing.

We are noticing changes in our students.  I think we teachers have all had the conversation with colleagues about the ways that our students differ from us.  And, of course, part of this observation  – and this conversation – stems from frustration and negative feelings that are not new to the teaching profession.  However, we can’t pretend that our students’ lives, shaped as they are by digital media like YouTube and social media, are the same as ours.  I grew up in the 80’s when video games consoles and the VCR were the cutting edge.  Our students are able to do all of the things that these tools did with a smartphone, and much more.  That is a huge change, and we can’t pretend that it isn’t affecting our kids.

For example, when I was little (let’s say early elementary school), I wanted to learn about things.  I read an entire Childcraft book (an old reference book) called How Things Work.  There was a lot I didn’t understand, but that investment of time and cognitive energy paid off in strong literacy skills in middle and high school.  I was fluent with print and understanding nonfiction text structure, including diagrams and captions and how they contribute to the meaning of text, from an early age.  When science class started to get challenging, I was able to support my learning through reading and understanding a textbook – something that many of my students struggle with these days.

Today, there is no good reason (except a parent or lack of access) for any child to sit down for 50-60 hours and read a reference book.  We don’t expect kids to struggle with difficult nonfiction text at a young age anymore, unless they seek out that experience for themselves.  Instead, we provide them a simpler, readable text (which might support their development as readers, but might not prepare them for difficult concepts that will require reading fluency as well as persistence and stamina).  Or, we encourage them to watch a YouTube video that explains the concepts for them, without asking or expecting them to work as hard cognitively (or to remember – lots of kids watch excellent videos about challenging concepts, and only remember one or two images, if anything).

While this makes me sad, I don’t want to just rant about kids not being more like me (as sad as that is).

I think, instead, we need to notice that our students have a different kind of literacy than we do.  I’m not sure that it’s completely fair to judge that literacy as inferior, either.  While I think teachers – and the standards we are expected to teach – emphasize linear, text-based learning and understanding, the literacies that our kids come to us with are not completely linear, text-based, and structured the same as ours.  Our students are learning different skills based on different experiences, and these skills suit their chosen media.  If spelling and grammar aren’t an essential part of their interaction with Snapchat, YouTube, or Instagram, they won’t practice and develop these skills.  They might only care about spelling and grammar when it affects their ability to find the things they search for on Google or YouTube.

What kinds of literacy do these kids have?  I think it varies a lot.  I made an argument once in a presentation about “twitteracy,” a term for being fluent at using Twitter.  I think that the balkanization that the Internet makes possible encourages kids to develop their skills at a particular medium or site.  The same kind of political polarization that we complain about as adults affects kids – some of our students are ninjas or nerds (and here the choice of term depends on which community they feel a part of) at deviantart.com, or Fandom, or Snapchat.  Some are livestreaming at Twitch while they play video games, and they are learning how to grow their subscriber base and hoping to earn money while playing video games (wouldn’t that be a great job?).  Some are trying to be YouTubers, which is a messy, competitive, and brutal platform for so many reasons (not the least of which is how successful some people are).

I don’t ultimately have an answer to this.  I know that many of our students are not – or don’t feel like – a “ninja” at anything.  However, they are choosing to invest their time in things that require learning and “literacy,” sometimes massive amounts.  I don’t think that this is the same thing as a “hobby,” either, since it is encouraging kids to develop skills that are different from reading and writing text.

I think my best conclusion to this is for us – the older generation – to make sure that students do their best to learn the older (and still very valuable) notion of print literacy.  I’m not advocating that we toss books and paper aside.  I love those things, and I see a lot of value in both as a useful tool for thinking.  However, I’m not sure that we are adequately measuring and supporting contemporary literacies – including skills that are increasingly valuable and useful – if we focus our energy solely on traditional literacies.