Doug’s Ed.D. blog

�

I was up at 5am again this morning working on my Ed.D.� It’s hard when it’s so dark and it’s the end of term…

After looking at various research methodologies, I think I’m going to go for a combination of a hermenutic, philosophical and pragmatic approaches in the dialectical tradition. It could all end up a mess, but I think I’m on to something: digital literacies are culturally and very specifically situated, but have broader elements which can be discussed, synthesized and made sense of.

Here’s what I’ve been looking at today – all from the Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research:

• E. Bredo – Philosophies of Educational Research
• N.C. Burbules & B.R. Warnick – Philosophical Inquiry
• F.M. Connelly & D.J. Clandinin – Narrative Inquiry
• C. Genishi & T. Glupczynski – Language and Literacy Research: Multiple Methods and Perspectives

]]>

• Lynn A. Casmier-Paz – Betcha Can’t Read My Mind: The Orientations of Literacy Discourse
• Neil Postman – Technopoly (not available at University of Durham library)
• Anna Brill – Is Literacy Over-Rated?
• H.J. Graff – The Labyrinth of Literacy (not available @Durham) (idea of a ‘literacy myth’)
• S. Scribner & M. Cole – The Psychology of Literacy (University of Durham Education Library 401.9 SCR)
• G. Kress – Literacy in the New Media Age (University of Durham Main Library 379.2 KRE; Education Library 302.2244 KRE)
• Wikipedia – Literacy
• Wikipedia – Computer Literacy
• Wikipedia – Functional Illiteracy
• Wikipedia – Multimedia Literacy
• Wikipedia – Constructivism
  

�

Is ‘transliteracy’ a better term than ‘digital literacy’?

• Wikipedia – Transliteracy�

]]>

I’ve used Gliffy to outline the argument for my thesis proposal. It’s a bit rough and needs some work, but I’ll come back to it later! Click on the image below for a larger version:

]]>