Week 3: Bennett and the view on Youth Citizenship online

Within the readings, we see a concern for the engagement of youth with politics. One way youth engages in politics is through media outlets, whether this be through news, blogs sites, social media networks, or so on. W. Lance Bennett discusses the concern of this change in citizenship in his text: Changing Citizenship in Digital Age  (2008). He states: “A key question thus becomes how to nurture the creative and expressive actions of a generation in change, while continuing to keep some positive engagement with government on their screens” (Bennett, 2008, p. 2).  

As a cultural issue, we question the validity of youth involvement in politics through media.

As an operational issue, we question HOW youth engages in media.

The paradigm of engaged youth emphasizes change in social identity in the growing importance of peer networks and online communities. Along with that, this paradigm emphasizes the “empowerment of youth as expressive individuals and symbolically frees young people to make their own creative choices” (Bennett, 2008, p. 2-3). Through this, we as educators must understand the impact we have on the development of youth identity through their use of the Internet. Education will bring them the sense of proper citizenship. Just like Cathy Davidison, quoted by Bennett, “...we have the unique opportunity to take advantage of peer-to-peer sites for creative, imaginative, activist learning purposes. That is peer-to-peer  sites  for  creative,  imaginative,  activist  learning  purposes... I  want  to  be  attuned  to  what  youth  themselves  say  about  the  alternative  forms  of  learning  and  social  networking  afforded  by  Web  2.0” (2008, p.3).

We must take into consideration the factors of our curriculum influencing our youth. We see all to often a stripping of “independent opportunities for young people to embrace and communicating about politics on their own terms” (Bennett, 2008, p.7). Offer the opportunities, by keeping in mind the communication skills to be taught. Bennett touches on this thought through the suggestions of Howard Rheingold. Rheingold has concerns of youth “living” online lacking the skills to communicate common concerns in effective ways to large audiences, and “suggests building a public communication digital media skill set” (Bennett, 2008, p.8).

All in all, we need to be concerned about communicating to youth effectively in thought of their involvement online. Online tools to express oneself can be used to make a difference. Why not work with them on their identity in this world and let them make an impact?

Bennett, W. L. (2008). Changing citizenship in the digital age. Civic life online: Learning how digital media can engage youth, 1, 1-24.

Week 2: Reflection, Varnelis’s Networked Publics (Intro and Chp1)

“We will never be alone again, except by choice” (Varnelis, 2012, p. 39). 

The quote above sums up the impact technology is having on today’s world. In this discussion, he identifies tools and techniques utilized in the advancements of technology. Our relationships to and definitions of our culture, politics, social infrastructure have transformed. In the first chapter, technologies enable us to be in two places (physical and networked) at once, as discussed by Varnelis in the sense of a public sphere. From Varnelis, we see technology has taken over; “Contemporary life is dominated by the pervasiveness of the network,”(2012, p.15)  This transforms our sense of proximity and distance through the always-on, always-accessible network. 

What struck me most in the text is our reliance on the virtual world/network, the MUST  be connected, attitude. This is done through a variety of avenues (tools), especially our mobile phones. In the public sphere, Varnelis mentions how “minimally social” we can be when using our phones (2012, p. 19). This is something we see everyday, whether it be walking down the street, in the grocery store, riding the bus or subway, a vast majority is on their phone, disconnecting themselves from the social world of reality. Even though we do not interact with those in close proximity, we are not necessarily alone (Varnelis, 2012). The social operation of today’s world is new. People would rather communicate online or on the phone than talk in person, a radical reconfiguration of social coordination. “The telephone was a technology that both encouraged sociability and maintained intimacy at a distance” (Varnelis, 2012, p. 20).

Our use of the mobile redefines our sense of place by “transforming a subway, train seat, a sidewalk, a street corner into a user’s “own room and personal paradise” (Varnelis, 2012, p. 23).  Another incentive these tools and technology is the increase in productivity, agility and awareness. My concern is the lack of human connection and social skills. The loss of appreciation for what you can’t hold in your hand. 

My question is, just we question is it literacy, is it communication? Human connection? There is the sense to appreciate holding contact with those not physically close to you over the networks, but interaction is key to understanding social and life skills. 

Varnelis, K. (2012). Networked publics. The MIT Press. Retrieved from: http://site.ebrary.com.library.esc.edu/lib/empire/detail.action?docID=10251680

Week 1: The Social Practice of Literacy

"The distinctive contribution of the approach to literacy as social practice lies in the ways in which it involves careful and sensitive attention to what people do with texts, how they make sense of them and use them to further their own purposes in their own learning lives" (Gillen and Barton, 2010, p. 9).


Gillen and Barton shed light on the thought of literacy as a social practice, in the sense of their use. From the quote, I take the concern of literacy to focused on the thought of the social practice. This is how literacy takes it place in the world, through the use by people. How we use and interpret literacy changes throughout the times. In the world today, much of literacy is digital. How we take literacy depends on our environment and experiences. Each person will take on the form of literacy in a different way, in most ways, communication. The social practice of literacy lies in the communication.

Within Gillen and Barton's article, Digital Literacies, we see the discussion of digital literacy and identification of the four key competencies: "assembling knowledge, evaluating information, searching and navigating in non-linear routes" (2010). In concern of education, literacy takes on all forms address. Our approach to literacy will determine the environment of approaching communication and interactions through reading and writing. With literacy becoming multimodal, there are more demands of ways of reading and writing. Writing has become more about the relation to the audience (Kress, 2010). Through this, the interpretation of graphics is taken into consideration, along with concern of grammar, words, and syntax. The design of the text takes on a social component of communicating to the audience, challenging the orthodox of what is considered text, and the creation, understanding, and shaping of text (Wilber , 2010).


Digital literacy within my curriculum consists of what will appeal most to the students. I work along with the other job coach to use graphics, pictures, what have you, to get the lesson across to the students. Through practice, we notice what holds the attention of the students. As a artist, I appreciate the presentation of a topic just as much as the content. From this, we are able to present the information to the students in a way that will create retention, and give students something to connect. Each class day, we utilize technology to communicate lessons and give students an opportunity to participate.


We take into account the shaping of language and literacy practices through the development of new tools and technologies. Dana Wilber, in Beyond 'new' literacies, make connections of the language and literacies with tools and technology. With each advancement, our ability to adapt and acquire new literacies emerges (Wilber, 2010). In relation, Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel discuss the concern of functional literacy in their text: Literacies: Social, Cultural and Historical Perspectives. The central point to take into consideration is the effects of being 'literate.' A literate person attains the skills to function in the community, and make it "possible for him to develop new attitudes and to participate actively in the life of his times" (Lankshear and Knobel, 2011, pg. 6).


All in all, literacy promotes functionality and growth. The social practice of literacy takes on different forms to relate and communicate.


Gillen, G. & Barton, D. (2010). Digital literacies: A research briefing by the technology enhanced learning phase of the teaching and learning research programme. Retrieved from: http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/33471/1/DigitalLiteracies.pdf

Kress, G. (2010). The profound shift of digital literacies. Retrieved from: http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/33471/1/DigitalLiteracies.pdf

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). Literacies: Social, cultural and historical perspectives. New York: Peter Lang.

Wilber, D. (2010). Special themed issue: Beyond 'new' literacies. Digital Culture & Education, 2:1, 1-6.