New Literacies: A Dual-Level Theory of the Changing Nature of Literacy, Instruction, and Assessment
New Literacies: A Dual-Level Theory of the Changing Nature of Literacy, Instruction, and Assessment
复制标题
新读写能力：读写能力、教学和评估性质变化的双重理论
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Henry
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. J. Leu;C. Kinzer;Julie Coiro;Jill Castek;L. Henry
识字作为指示语 如今，识字的本质已经变得指示性。这个简单的想法对我们的领域必须开始解决的读写理论、研究和教学具有重要意义。指示语是语言学家使用的术语（Fillmore，1966；Murphy，1986；Traut & Kazzazi，1996），用于定义含义随着上下文变化而快速变化的单词。例如，明天是一个指示词；每24小时“明天”的意思就变成“今天”。识字的含义也变得明确，因为我们生活在一个信息和通信技术快速变化的时代，每一种技术都需要新的识字能力（Leu，1997，2000）。因此，在一个主要由相对静态的图书技术定义的世界中，昨天的识字能力并不能确保今天我们遇到新技术（例如 Google 文档、Skype、iMovie、Contribute、Basecamp、Dropbox、Facebook、Google、foursquare、Chrome、教育视频游戏或数千种移动应用程序）时完全识字。明天的识字将由尚未出现的更新技术以及为满足未来需求而创建的更新话语和社会实践来定义。因此，当我们谈到新的识字能力时，我们的意思是，识字能力不仅在今天是新的，而且是新的。我们生活的每一天都变得新奇。当读写能力变得指示性时，我们应该如何理论化定义我们未来的新读写能力？答案很重要，因为我们的识字概念定义了我们是谁以及我们将成为谁。但这里有一个难题。
Literacy as Deixis Today, the nature of literacy has become deictic. This simple idea carries important implications for literacy theory, research, and instruction that our field must begin to address. Deixis is a term used by linguists (Fillmore, 1966; Murphy, 1986; Traut & Kazzazi, 1996) to define words whose meanings change rapidly as their context changes. Tomorrow, for example, is a deictic term; the meaning of “tomorrow” becomes “today” every 24 hours. The meaning of literacy has also become deictic because we live in an age of rapidly changing information and communication technologies, each of which requires new literacies (Leu, 1997, 2000). Thus, to have been literate yesterday, in a world defined primarily by relatively static book technologies, does not ensure that one is fully literate today where we encounter new technologies such as Google docs, Skype, iMovie, Contribute, Basecamp, Dropbox, Facebook, Google, foursquare, Chrome, educational video games, or thousands of mobile apps. To be literate tomorrow will be defined by even newer technologies that have yet to appear and even newer discourses and social practices that will be created to meet future needs. Thus, when we speak of new literacies, we mean that literacy is not just new today; it becomes new every day of our lives. How should we theorize the new literacies that will define our future, when literacy has become deictic? The answer is important because our concept of literacy defines both who we are and who we shall become. But there is a conundrum here.