EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

EDF3151: Literacy Theory, Policy and Practice

AT2: A Critical Review of an In-service Teachers Literacy Planner
By Bonnie Lilford 25970127

EDF3151 Assignment 2:
1 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

The unit I am a Digital Citizen, is designed for grade six students and
focuses on equipping students with the skills to be safe and ethical digital
citizens. This is implemented by having two areas, part a, data collection
and interpretation and, part b, digital citizens.
Part One:
The unit of work was informed by the local policy, the Victorian Curriculum
and Assessment Authority (VCAA), the national policy, the Australian
Curriculum and the international policy by The United Nations Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). VCAA and the Australian
Curriculum identify levels the students should be able to demonstrate at a
particular point in their learning, as well as advising the next level the
students should be achieving. They discuss literacy and numeracy for
grade six students as building on concepts, skills and processes
developed in earlier years, and teachers will revisit and strengthen these
as needed, and focusing on understanding, fluency, problem solving and
reasoning, in mathematics, (Australian Curriculum & VCAA, 2016). They
state that literacy is important for numeracy with students developing
literacy skills in mathematics, and develop the ability to create and
interpret a range of texts typical to mathematics, (Australian Curriculum
& VCAA, 2016). Throughout the unit of work, literacy and numeracy have
been used to ensure the students are building and strengthening their
skills. VCAA state that at grade six level, students should be interpreting
secondary data presented in digital media or elsewhere, and use
comprehension strategies to interpret and analyse information and
ideas (VCAA, 2016). This was evident in week one and two data
interpretation with the students identifying in the media where
quantitative and qualitative data are used, and analysing and interpreting
the data. Week one and four data interpretation, tasks link to the VCAA
outcome participate in and contribute to discussions...sharing and
evaluating information, (VCAA, 2016). This was demonstrated with the
students discussing the quantitative data and reporting the findings. VCAA
states that grade six students should create a range of imaginative,
2 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

informative, persuasive text types, (VCAA, 2016). In weeks two, three
and four of the unit, students are to construct a reflection piece, write a
one thousand word piece of writing, and construct a digital
presentation and report, which allows them to achieve this outcome.
UNESCO implemented the international policy Educational Goals for All.
These goals are designed to meet the learning needs of all children, youth
and adults. Goal six of this policy is implied throughout the unit, by
improving all aspects of the quality of education and ensuring excellence
of all so that recognised and measurable learning outcomes are achieved
by all, especially in literacy, numeracy and essential life skills, (UNESCO,
2016). This is demonstrated with students participating in a range of
literacy and numeracy activities that incorporate skills for everyday life,
such as being able to engage in a digital environment in a safe and ethical
manner. The students participated in a writing task in week three digital
where they had to construct a one thousand word piece of writing that
discusses how to use technology. Students used their writing skills, whilst
developing life skills by discussing the issues that you may face as a
digital citizen and their experiences with technology.
Traditional literacies are not only reading and writing, but engaging in
print and paper and face-to-face oral encounters, (Anstey & Bull, 2006,
p.19). Students utilise traditional literacy skills when viewing and
engaging with texts that are not only paper based but also digital based.
This may include writing, listening, punctuation and grammar skills, which
are essential for participating in society, (Miller and Schulz, 2014, p.81). In
week three digital, writing, reading and editing skills were used when
constructing the one thousand word piece of writing. The unit of work did
not solely focus on using traditional literacies, it also incorporated digital
literacies. Digital literacies allow individuals to competently work in digital
backgrounds, where they can utilise different cognitive skills, (Lyons,
2015, p.11). Lyons (2015) states that to be literate within the 21st century,
you are required to have skills that range from traditional literacy, to
social literacy and between this digital literacy such as being able to use
technological tools in diverse literacy environments, (Lyons, 2015, p.8).
3 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

Students demonstrated this theory in week four digital, by constructing a
digital presentation and writing a report using their writing and
information communication technology (ICT) skills, including typing,
editing and structuring of the text. This reflected the digital literacy theory
as students were able to use the skills to carry out tasks and solve
problems (Lyons, 2015, p.10) in the digital environment of a computer.
Literacy as a social practice is what people do with reading, writing and
texts in real world contexts, (Perry, 2012, p.54). VCAA state that applied
learning is the real world and applying skills and knowledge that
students have learnt to solve problems, implement a project or
participate in their community, (VCAA, 2006, p.5, as cited in the unit).
The unit focuses on applied learning and in doing so, students are learning
essential skills which they can use in society, and participating in activities
that foster the notion of using reading, writing and texts in real world
contexts.
Blooms taxonomy of learning theory was utilised to inform the activities
for week one digital. Blooms theory is a measurement tool,
(Krathwohl, 2002, p.1) which provides educational goals that can be used
for planning lessons or measuring learning outcomes of students,
(Ramirez, 2016, p.2). There are six categories of objectives that fall under
this theory, which include remembering, understanding, applying,
analysis, creating and evaluating. Blooms theory was evident in week one
digital as it followed levels of low order thinking to higher order thinking.
Students rely on recall, (Ramirez, 2016, p.2) to retell the 4 Corners
program, demonstrating the remembering category. Students achieved
the understanding and evaluating category by showing they have a basic
understanding, by summarising the 4 Corners program, content and
making critical judgements, by discussing the approach to the online
world, (Ramirez, 2016, p.2).
Part Two:
The unit of work has strengths and weaknesses, in particular week one.
Week one does not just rely on one literacy theory, it provides students
4 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

with different theories allowing them to be more engaged in their learning,
and is therefore a strength of the unit. The tasks for week one digital
have been designed around Blooms taxonomy theory, whereby students
have to delve into varying levels of cognitive thinking. Using Blooms
taxonomy is a strength because it supports a differentiated curriculum,
and caters for students needs by having different activities that allow the
students to participate according to their level of ability, (Ziff, n.d, p.1).
Blooms theory offers students the opportunity to build on their critical
thinking and synthesis skills, as well as developing the ability to be aware
of and control their own level of cognitive development, (Athanassiou,
McNett, and Harvey, 2003, p.534). Another strength in week one digital,
is the use of the digital literacy theory. Anstey and Bull (2006) state that
teachers need to assist students in developing the ability to produce,
read, and interpret spoken language, print and multimedia texts, (Anstey
& Bull, 2006, p.19). This is reflected in week one whereby students are
required to use a computer and a program to create a piece of work where
they have to demonstrate or explain steps of being safe online.
Week one digital, allows students to participate in tasks that are both
traditional and digital based. This is a strength as it allows students to be
engaged in their learning as literacy can no longer be about basic print
skills, (Carrington and Marsh, 2005, p.279). By engaging in activities from
traditional writing, a one page summary, to watching the 4 Corners
program, and creating a digital piece of work, students are able to
expand their traditional skills through the use of more inviting resources.
Students who use digital texts are often challenging themselves to
collaborate and communicate with others, whilst also being able to
read, reflect and analyse in ways that allow them to think critically, (Elliot,
2014, p.34). Week one digital, reflects this by giving students
opportunities to challenge themselves by evaluating the digital program
they have watched and creating texts that allow them to think critically
about the steps of being safe online.

5 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

In planning week one, the VCAA policies are not explicitly displayed within
the framework. This is a weakness as you cannot see what the students
learning outcomes are and what they would be achieving if they
completed this activity. As a teacher, this would be a barrier as you would
not be able to determine whether your students are achieving the
outcomes, and would instead have to try and link it with the curriculum
yourself which may be time consuming.
Using digital literacy means that you need to incorporate the use of text
structure to text function, as well as visual skills, (Balkun, 2011, p.34). In
week one digital, students had the opportunity to use a digital program
to create a piece of work, using structure and layouts of text. This may
pose a threat to the students and the teacher as technology can hinder
learning and become distracting, (Balkun, 2011, p.16). Students may
become caught up in the design of what they are doing and disengaged
with their learning. Another weakness is being able to have access to
resources and the ability to use digital texts. Teachers would need to have
an understanding and skills required to assist the students in using digital
resources. Its vital that teachers have the understanding of technology as
literacies are becoming more advanced and complex, (Carrington &
Marsh, 2005, p.280). Using digital technology requires a commitment of
both time and resources, (Balkun, 2011, p.21). Students are required to
use a program on their computer to create a piece of work, and in doing
so would need to have access to a digital resource such as computer,
laptop or Ipad. This poses as a threat to practitioners, as they may not be
able to gain access to these resources, which may result in the students
not participating in the task. Digital texts may be a distraction to students
and may be too complex which affects the time allocated to complete the
activity.
In week one digital and data, students had to construct a one page
summary of the 4 Corners program, and complete surveys and analyse
data. Traditional literacies allow students to build on their basic skills in
reading and writing, however this may pose a threat to the students
6 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

engagement and motivation throughout the task. They can be described
as being dull, dry, inauthentic, rigidly formal and lifeless, compared to
the rich, engaging and creative, new literacies, (Bulfin & Koutsogiannis,
2012, p.333). This reflects the notion of students being disinterested in
completing the tasks as they are forms of traditional literacies. This means
the students may find writing the summary boring and disengaging rather
than participating in something innovative. The activities could still be
used to help the students build on their literacy skills, however the task at
hand should be more engaging.
Reflecting on the unit and my personal experience, I noticed there were
particular aspects of this unit where improvement could be made. When
teaching literacy, we need to consider the experiences and needs of a
learner, by catering for and designing lessons that support this
(Carrington & Marsh, 2005, p.281). I believe there were some aspects of
this unit that were able to reflect this, however there were still areas that I
think need attention. For example, week one data, if students were
struggling to interpret the data, I think there should be an enabling
prompt that could help them or an extending one for those who finished
early, this would demonstrate they are considering and meeting the
learning needs of students. Its important to consider the notion that
literacy can no longer be about basic print skills, (Carrington and Marsh,
2005, p.279). This means embedding both traditional literacies in
conjunction with other literacy theories into lessons, rather than focusing
on learning basic traditional skills. A wide range of theories were used in
the majority of the tasks throughout the unit, however I thought week
three digital, needed improvement as it solely focused on the traditional
literacy theory. Although this is beneficial to students building on their
writing skills, literacy in the twenty first century means we need to involve
students in activities that give them the opportunity to gain skills in areas
such as multimodality and digital citizenship, as well as, teamwork,
collaboration, communication, leadership and critical thinking, (Lyons,
2015, p.4). Week three digital, does not state how the students would be
presenting this piece of writing, so it is assumed that they would be using
7 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

traditional literacies of paper and pen to write, rather than using
multimodal and digital texts.
In terms of improving policy for the unit, I would state which curriculum
outcomes the students would be achieving for the week or each activity.
This helps to give the teacher a better understanding of how their
students are progressing and whether they are meeting the required
outcomes.
In conclusion, this unit of work is very strong with various local, national
and international policies and literacy theories utilised, however it still
encounters several weaknesses. Improvements could be made to make it
stronger and benefit the students.

References:
8 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

ACARA (2016). Australian Curriculum. ACARA:
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

Anstey, M., & Bull, G. (2006). Defining Multiliteracies. In M. Anstey, & G.

Bull, Teaching and Learning Multiliteracies: changing times,
changing literacies (pp.19-55). Newark, De: International Reading
Association.
Athanassiou, N., Mcnett, J.M., & Harvey, C. (2003). Critical Thinking in the
Management Classroom: Blooms Taxonomy as a Learning Tool.
Journal of Management Education, 27(5), 533-55. Retrieved from:
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/19572823
6?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=12528

Balkun, M. (2011). Teaching with Digital Media: Widening the Framework.

Transformation, 22(1), pp.15-24. Retrieved from:
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/10012151
53?accountid=12528&rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo

Bulfin, S., & Koutsogiannis, D. (2012). New literacies as multiply placed

practices: expanding perspectives on young peoples literacies
across home and school. Language and Education, 26(4), p.331-346.
Retrieved from:
http://www.tandfonline.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1080/09
500782.2012.691515#.V0ekGch-_IU

Carrington, V., & Marsh, J. (2005). Digital Childhood and Youth: New texts,
new literacies. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of
Education, 26(3), pp.279-285. Retrieved from:
http://www.tandfonline.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1080/01
596300500199890

Elliott, D. (2014) Levelling the playing field: Engaging disadvantaged

students through game-based pedagogy. Literacy Learning: The
Middle Years, 22 (2), 34-40. Retrieved from:
http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/documentS
ummary;res=IELHSS;dn=318000104098307

9 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

Krathwohl, D., (2002). A Revision of Blooms Taxonomy: An Overview.
Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218. Retrieved from:
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/ehost/detail/detail?
sid=3e99e3e9-c8c5-40c2-9425bee23c8c30c4%40sessionmgr4004&vid=0&hid=4209&bdata=JnNpdGU9Z
Whvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=8550701&db=bth

Lyons, D. (2015). Considering a range of socio-cultural literacy theories.

Retrieved from:
http://moodle.vle.monash.edu/mod/resource/view.php?id=3049865
Lyons, D. (2015). The 21st century- a time of change for teachers and
teaching. Retrieved from:
http://moodle.vle.monash.edu/mod/resource/view.php?id=3049700
Miller, A., & Schulz, S. (2014). University Literacy: A Multi-Literacies Model.
English in Australia, 49(3), 78-87. Retrieved from:
http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/search;res=IELAP
A;search=FTI=yes%20AND%20IS=0155-2147%20AND
%20VRF=49%20AND%20IRF=3%20AND%20PY=2014%20AND%20PG=78

Perry, K. (2012). What is Literacy? A Critical Overview of Sociocultural

Perspectives. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 8(1), 5071. Retrieved from:
http://readinglists.lib.monash.edu/items/3566E6A1-A051-69F0CA0A-39D87A8F02C8.html?referrer=%2Flists%2F753A65BD-A1993776-FE29-7E6F86D1AD7F.html%23item-3566E6A1-A051-69F0CA0A-39D87A8F02C8
Ramirez, T., (2016). On Pedagogy of Personality Assessment: Application
of Blooms Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Journal of
Personality Assessment, pp.1-7. Retrieved from:
http://www.tandfonline.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/doi/abs/10.1080/00
223891.2016.1167059

UNESCO (2016). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organisation. UNESCO:

10 | Page

EDF3151 | Bonnie Lilford 25970127

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-internationalagenda/education-for-all/efa-goals/

VCAA (2016). Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority. VCAA:

http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/

Ziff, B. (n.d). Utilising Blooms Taxonomy in Your Classroom. California

State University Los Angeles Education Specialist Intern Program,
pp.1-6. Retrieved from: http://www.google.com.au/url?
sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjb0bG
Hl_nMAhUCo5QKHbVBBcgQFggbMAA&url=http%3A%2F
%2Fwww.calstatela.edu%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fcenters
%2Fspedintern
%2Fhints11bloomtaxonomy.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHH733pVbdJ9xoHxKT5lCcvrN
4X7Q&sig2=WMxR8zgTvVZIojz4kat8Zg

11 | Page