Comments on: Next Generation Literacy

By: Wanda Taylor

Wanda Taylor — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 16:05:33 +0000

Always interesting to read these posts. I wonder if we super-imposed these responses back 200 years and simply change the subject, if the responses would be the same? The point is always to re-imagine our life, and opportunities, differently as opposed to being stuck in the mindset that we have to transition as oppose to disrupt our thinking. It always boils down to the genius of asking better questions and I, for one, salute those, like Thomas, for their willingness to ask unpopular questions and then follow them to their logical conclusions….or, non-conclusions. Great article about the “spirit of the law and not the law itself”.

By: Cody

Cody — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 02:00:48 +0000

It’s nice to “read” a good blog post, but it would be great if I could somehow “absorb” the information through some other more efficient process.

By: jason.walker

jason.walker — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:47:30 +0000

Tom F. is obviously an authoritative scholar over a giant barrage of technical areas. So give the man credit and at least research his info before you bring an idiots line of thinking into the equation, Matt G.

By: Mohan Arun L.

Mohan Arun L. — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:48:14 +0000

Thoughtful post. Remembering the definition for ‘literacy’ with the UN definition is too long to remember and recall at will, hence i will shorten it and equate ‘literacy’ with ‘know-how’. It sounds much simpler. It also expands the scope of ‘literacy’ well into non-academia. If one looks at the list of 18 constituent types of literacy Tom has given in this post, its ‘all about academia’. What about non-academic literacy? A car mechanic is no less literate than a software engineer if he or she earns more than what a s.e. does. Society has imprinted in our minds, that, a car mechanic is somehow lower in literacy status – or it may simply be because of skills supply and demand factor – but the fact remains that, the concept of literacy needs to expand its scope and content. I just had the privilege of watching a couple videos which may serve as supplementary viewing material for readers of this post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa6v2FQ8E-g (this video is not so good, but the topic is sure interesting, relevant and meaningful to the content of this post – skills needed for the next generation to succeed – watch carefully where he says “mindset over skillset” and quotes studies that the UK is producing far less graduates than the decades of yesteryears.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U (this video is a must-watch – ‘changing education paradigms’ – it covers hw our education system has been based to ’supply’ the industrial revolution, how our classrooms are segregated by gender and how our education mills are following a factory model of producing people skilled in one subject alone, in the name of specialization. What will happen if education mills emphasize multi-disciplinary specializations? May be Tom can cover this in his next education-related post…

By: Doris k.

Doris k. — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:12:02 +0000

Hi, Thomas

Great post. I cited it in my blog (in portuguese), wondering how many new literacies must be taught in new design courses.

By: Gary Lundquist

Gary Lundquist — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:11:11 +0000

Tom,

As noted by others, you are speaking about skill sets and sources, not new forms of literacy. You could add plumbing to your list because plumbers have their own suite of terms.

A better view is fluency. When I play my first X-Box game, I don’t know how to use the system. Over time, I gain skills and become fluent with the language and context presented by the system.

Another is definitions. Word use is changing rapidly on a very wide range of fronts and in every language on Earth. I can loose fluency by not keeping up with a language… whether of ordinary conversation or of the special language of software coding.

That I cannot speak or read Japanese prevents me from becoming fluent and keeping up with changes in their language to achieve and gain literacy in their written works.

If I’d chosen an X-Box speaking Japanese, I would have to learn a new language and become fluent enough to operate the game.

Your UN definition already denies your premise. Think fluency, not literacy.

By the way… love the diagram of sources of information.

Best,

Gary

By: Literacia 3.0 « vislumbres sobre visualidade

Literacia 3.0 « vislumbres sobre visualidade — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:08:45 +0000

[...] futurista Thomas Frey apresenta em seu blog, uma pesquisa que trabalha a noção de literacia a partir do número de palavras que fluem pela [...]

By: Paul M Bauer

Paul M Bauer — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 03:25:10 +0000

Literacy comes from the Latin littera, letters. And I don’t think we should interpret it literally any more than we do “manufacture” which in Latin is “made by hand”, or “technology”, which in Greek is the study of art or craft. Meanings of words evolve with usage, as attested to by the list of 18 “literacies” above. And personally, I have no problem being called illiterate (having very limited knowledge) on some of these topics because I am.

By: admin

admin — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:49:38 +0000

Mimi, some great feedback.

The information I used came from this paper “How Much Information? 2009 Report on American Consumers” – http://hmi.ucsd.edu/pdf/HMI_2009_ConsumerReport_Dec9_2009.pdf

By: Matt Grimes

Matt Grimes — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:17:17 +0000

The skill sets you identified are no doubt going to be important for success in the future. We could say the same thing about previous generations transitioning from riding a horse to driving a car. The one consistent thing I’ve noticed about technology transitions is that the human brain must increase it’s processing speed. There are a lot more inputs to process when driving in modern traffic than ambling down the trail on a horse.

The younger generation is growing up in culture that requires considerable skills in multi-tasking to be successful. It seems that the further we go along the technological curve the faster and more numerous the inputs become. Can we just assume that the brain can automatically keep up the pace?