Multiliteracy in Pedagogy: Video Mediated Speaking in Google Classroom

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Laela Hikmah Nurbatra University of Muhammadiyah Malang

Abstract

The use of social networks and online learning platform has been embraced in EFL learning. In regards to that, multiliteracy in this current research is highlighted as educational innovation which can be explored through Google classroom. As a shift mode from traditional learning which simply regards education as a process in transferring knowledge, multiliteracy is seen as endless meaning construction from various resources in various contexts (Rivas & Cardozo, 2018). With the urgency to explore multiliteracy in an online EFL learning platform, this study presents the way video-mediated speaking activities contribute to multiliteracy theoretical framework. In Indonesian context, this study uses multiliteracy as a theoretical framework to analyze video-mediated speaking in Google classroom. In doing so, the paper presents suggestions on how multiliteracy can be developed in digital learning. Conducted in qualitative research design, the data were collected through classroom documents and classroom observation. The result revealed that there are six stages in implementing multiliteracy in speaking class in Google Classroom. Firstly, teacher gave clear instruction; secondly the students gather relevant information; thirdly the students practice their speaking and record the video; next, the students upload the result to the virtual class; then the students review each other's work; and lastly the students and teacher discuss the process in the classroom.

Key words: Multiliteracy, EFL, virtual classroom, Google Classroom, digital world

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Introduction

Internet has enabled people to easily communicate with others; accordingly, it may shape what people believe, see and do (Penuel & O'connor, 2018). Today's Pedagogy has been transformed along with the rapid development of technology and internet of things. In addition, the transformation is urgently required to accommodate the students who are now also known as digital native generation. Indeed, digital native generation can be identified from the heavily used social media and technology in every aspect of life. Students of the 21st century need to be multiliterate with various knowledge and skills to use technological resources in their daily lives (Puteh-Behak & Ismail, 2018). They prefer to use the smartphone along with its various applications for entertainment, academic, social or personal purposes. In accordance with that, teachers are challenged to be able to cope with the learners. Isno (2017) supports the view by stating that 21st century teachers are demanded to have adequate knowledge and understanding of technology utilization in the classroom. That is why the teacher education program also addresses the practice of using technology in language teaching (Hubbard, 2017). They need to expand their expertise by implementing 21st-century learning which is a major shift from the traditional pedagogy. The shift can be done by integrating technology in multiliteracy.

Multiliteracy is the expansion of conventional literacy which mainly refers to the skill of reading and writing the printed media (Thibaut & Curwood, 2018). It means that the traditional concept of literacy only focuses on reading and writing skills without adequately gives room for speaking and listening. This concept was then transformed into the various skills applied in multi modalities (Kent, 2018). New London Group defined multiliteracy as "different kinds of pedagogy, one in which language and other modes of meaning are dynamic representational resources, constantly being remade by their users as they work to achieve their various cultural response (NLG, 1996). Regarding this, Smith, Stornaiuolo and Phillips (Smith, Stornaiuolo, & Phillips, 2018) stated that multiplicity indeed is the key term to understand this contemporary literacy practices. They added that the concept is identified beyond writing and reading various forms of text and the use of technological tools. It identifies the various audio, visual, spatial, gestural and behavioral modes of meaning-making (Cope &Kalantzis, 2009 as cited in Blyth, 2018). In Schroeter's view (2019), multiliteracy goes beyond decoding and encoding text as it is socially situated.

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Multiliteracy can also be recognized in other terms such as new literacies and multiple literacies (Puteh-Behak & Ismail, 2018).

Several studies have advocated multiliteracy in English teaching. Nuroh, Wati, and Rindaningsih (2019), as an example, reported that the use of multiliteracy pedagogy have improved the students' critical and creative thinking. Critical thinking is highlighted because, in their research, the students review all the existing phenomena in their task by looking at cultural and social context. In addition, creativity also exists when they explore their understanding and utilize technological devices or applications.

There are four learning activities in multiliteracy framework: the students experience a text by expressing their opinion, thoughts, and feeling; analyze the sociocultural dimension of the topic; and lastly, apply the knowledge into a new language product creatively (Paesani, 2018). In the context of teaching writing, the implementation of multiliteracy is divided into three stages. The first stage is the teacher introduces the concept of multiliteracy. The second stage is the framework, in which the students participated in steps of writing process. In this stage, students involved in diverse modes of mean making processes such as audio, linguistics, visual, gestural, and spatial. The students are also utilized online application or software in this stage. The last stage is reflection which means that the students write their reflection of multiliteracy framework they have done. (Nabhan, 2019). Multiliteracy framework was also used in the literature class by incorporating students' collaboration and the use of multimodality in the meaning-making process (Nuroh et al., 2019).

However, the implementation of multiliteracy also can be challenging. The first challenge is on the use of technology which is regarded as a potential danger. It was reported that Chinese parents believed that the excessive use of technological devices such as smartphones or computers may lead to the students' failure at school (Kohnen & Adams, 2019). It means that the multiliteracy framework needs to transform the way people perceive technology. The second challenge is on the students' digital skills. It means that the students in their multiliteracy experience may find difficulties in their participation due to their lack of digital skills. Kohnen and Adams (2019) also identified students' digital skill shape their performance in a multiliteracy framework.

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Given that multiliteracy has been advocated for its benefits in the 21st-century learning, the present research focuses on the implementation of multiliteracy pedagogy using video-mediated speaking in Google classroom.

Research questions

Specifically, the present research addresses the question:

1. What are the steps of multiliteracy in video-mediated speaking in Google Classroom? 2. How are the steps implemented in the lesson?

Research objective

The objective of the current research is to suggest how to implement multiliteracy in Google Classroom speaking class. Instead of focusing on conventional literacy highlights reading and writing printed media, the research used multiliteracy which also focuses on other skills such as speaking and listening which can be supported by the Google classroom as a digital learning platform.

Site and participants

This research took place during the odd semester of the 2017-2018 academic year. The research was conducted at the University of Muhammadiyah Malang, Indonesia. Besides, the participants of the research were thirty-six students aged 18-19 years old who enrolled in the Critical Listening subject, who consists of 9 males and 23 females; and the researcher as the teacher. Both students and teachers engaged in Google Classroom as the digital learning platform used for the particular subject.

Research methodology

In order to answer the research questions, qualitative was used as the research design. Qualitative was selected as the researcher intends to describe the phenomenon being investigated. Regarding this, the phenomenon is the implementation of multiliteracy in Google Classroom. To reach the research objective, the researcher employed two research instruments such as class observation and document.

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Particularly, the data of this research was collected through participant observation and document analysis. Participant observation was conducted as the researcher was the teacher of the class who intensively observe the class both virtually in Google Classroom and the conventional classroom. Moreover, the observation was done in order to get data about steps in implementing multiliteracy in video-mediated speaking activity. Additionally, the classroom document was taken as data for this research in the form of the students' posts as well as their comments in the Google Classroom. The data was required in order to know how the students perform on each stage of the multiliteracy practices. The data was then analyzed by coding the text for theme and description. The findings of the research were validated using triangulation which means that the researcher carefully examines each information and the evidence to support the theme. Triangulation is needed to have accurate and credible information in research (Creswell, 2012).

Findings

This research focused on the implementation of multiliteracy in a video mediated speaking in Google classroom. The Google classroom classwork in the Critical Listening is below:

Figure 1: Google classroom classwork in the Critical Listening

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Based on the data analysis, it is revealed that there are six stages in implementing multiliteracy in Google classroom. The implementation of multiliteracy in pedagogy is summarized in the following chart:

Figure 2: Processes of implementing multiliteracy in Google classroom

3. Speaking 1. Instruction 2. Information practice and distribution Gathering Video Recording

4. Video Upload 5. Students 6. Classroom to Google review and discussion Classroom reflection

At the first stage, the teacher provided and distributed clear instructions to the students about the assignment. As revealed in the document, the task given was to find differences among IELTS, TOEFL, and TOEIC. At this stage, the students did not have an adequate background of knowledge about the English testing program; they have heard the terms but did not know exactly what it is. The instruction was provided in both virtual and conventional classrooms. The instruction posted in Google Classroom was given in written form, while more comprehensive instruction was given in the real class, as the teacher did not only display the instruction but also described each point. The purpose of doing so is to ensure that the students clearly understood the instruction so they could perform effectively. Besides, as the task was a pair of work, the students were also instructed to find their partner themselves. The instruction posted in the Google Classroom can be observed in the following capture:

Figure 3: Instruction posted in Google Classroom

CULI Research Seminar 2019

At this stage, the situated practice activities require active intervention of instructors to make the learners engage in authentic activities (Warner & Dupuy, 2017). The intervention was given online and offline. Moreover, some students who missed the information could ask their peers or teachers via online or offline. The same notion is also identified in Paesani' work (Paesani, 2018) which stated that ongoing support from teacher and students are essential to facilitate literacy.

The second step in implementing multiliteracy in Google Classroom is the students, who had limited knowledge of the content of the task, seek relevant information or sources from any media. In this case, their reading skill was emphasized as they have to grasp related information about the English test system in any forms they have previously gathered. The information that they have googled out was varied from written text and videos. The process has exposed the students to literacy activities and various authentic language (Kent, 2018). In doing so, the students then discussed the topic as they need to have a clear vision of the topic. The meaning at this stage is created by combining linguistics and semiotic resources such as visual, sound, gesture, etc (Warner & Dupuy, 2017). This process is an important phase, as the weaker student had a better understanding of the topic with the help of his/ her peers. In other words, the student who had a good comprehension of the topic could assist and motivate the weaker students. They were then created a conceptual framework for their speaking performance. In fact, when the students collaborate in their learning process, their confidence and proficiency level improved (Baroutsis & Woods, 2018).

The third step in the implementation of multiliteracy in Google classroom is the students perform their speaking. In doing so, both of the students recorded the video together. The speaking performance and the recording process was conducted at once since they have previously prepared their performance and the recorded file need to be uploaded in the next step. In regards to this, Puteh-Behak and Ismail (2018) stated that multiliteracy requires the learners' skills and knowledge to use the current technological devices to actively participate in various situation This process might be challenging, as the students might get nervous in front of the camera, so the recording process needs to be done over and over again. The challenge is identified by Kent (2018) who stated that the students need to cope with the task requirements both inside and outside the classroom. Indeed, the complexity of this step can also occur when the students need to edit the video they have

CULI Research Seminar 2019

recorded. The editing process for some students is a simple thing to do; however, for some other students who are not familiar with video editor devices or applications, the process might be challenging. Regarding this issue, Baroutsis and Woods (2018) believe that multiliteracy enhances the students' computational and digital skills as they are required to utilize the tools to have good performance in their learning. The same notion was also identified in the work of Nuroh et al. (2019) and Nabhan (2019) which reported that technology assists students in multiliteracy pedagogy.

The fourth step in implementing multiliteracy in Google Classroom is the students upload the video to Google Classroom which requires them to post the task result on time on the right classwork. The students' submission in the online platform can be evidenced in the following picture:

Figure 4: Students' video submission in Google Classroom

The integration of digital learning platform provides media for the students and teachers to show their engagement with tasks (Warner & Dupuy, 2017). Besides, as the task is a pair work, only one student is obliged to upload the file. However, some students prefer to submit the same video with a different user name. This is not a problem for the teacher as she could still access the file. The students did not want to be listed as the ones who missed the deadline. Thibaut and Curwood (2018) argued that in multiliteracy pedagogy, the students were given flexibility to explore different kinds of tools and practices in the use of technology.

CULI Research Seminar 2019

The next step in implementing multiliteracy in Google Classroom is the students review each other's work. This is an important step as the students can look at each other's work, and they can learn from each other's work. This process is conducted in the classroom, as they directly gave their opinion about their friends' work. In this regard, some students learn not only about the content but also learn how to express their statements. In this case, discussion, sharing, and even movements are identified in multiliteracy pedagogy whether in the digital classroom or the conventional one (Nuroh et al., 2019). This process is interesting because they are aware that some of the students perform well in the video, while some others still produce errors in pronunciation or word choice. In addition, the process has enabled the students to reflect and review their speaking performance. Critical thinking, as well as cross-cultural communication, is also important elements in multiliteracy pedagogy (Julianda, Widiati, & Djatmika, 2018). This process, however, could not be done through Google Classroom because the platform did not allow the students who have submitted their project to look at each other's work.

At the last step, the teacher conducted a class discussion about the content of the task which is the English testing system. The class discussion, moreover, gathers and summarizes the information from the students' presentation. In this meaning-making process, the students had a clear understanding towards the topics. This is the goal of literacy, as the students have gained an understanding towards the topics. Indeed, the concept of literacy emphasizes on the important role of language in process in meaning- making, the uniqueness of the language functions, and the cognitive process such as "interpreting, transforming, and creating text of various genres" (Kern, 2000 as cited in Menke, 2018). He further mentioned that the three dimensions are interdependent as the linguistic dimension is incorporated with the cognitive and socio cultural dimension which requires active learners' participation. Equally important, a teacher at this stage needs to help students determining reliable sources so that they did not get confused. Indeed, confusion resulted from overwhelming information which may not be trustworthy is essential is also reported in Mirra, Moreel and Filipiak's work (2018).

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Conclusion

Multiliteracy is the transformation of conventional literacy which integrates technology in the classroom. The multiliteracy pedagogy in the University of Muhammadiyah Malang is conducted through digital classrooms as well as conventional classroom. In order to implement multiliteracy in the pedagogy, there are six stages such as instruction distribution, information gathering, speaking practice and video recording, video upload, students' review, and reflection, and lastly, classroom discussion. The practices require the teachers' positive attitude towards the pedagogical transformation and also the students' high motivation in learning not only in conventional literacy but also in multimodality.

References Baroutsis, A., & Woods, A. (2018). Materialities , multiliteracies , and makerspaces : Design-based experiments in teacher / researcher collaborations. The Routledge International Handbook of Learning with Technology in Early Childhood. Blyth, C. (2018). Designing Meaning and Identity in Multiliteracies Pedagogy: From Multilingual Subjects to Authentic Speakers. L2 Journal, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.5070/l210235662 Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. In Educational Research (Vol. 4). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004 Hubbard, P. (2017). Technology and Professional Development. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0426 Isno. (2017). Pengaruh Pembelajaran multiliteracy terhadap Kemampuan academic writing dan Teaching skill pada Semester VIII Program Studi Pendidikan Agama Islam Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Tarbiyah Raden Wijaya Mojokerto Isno. TA’DIBIA Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Agama Islam, 7(2), 7–22. Julianda, Widiati, U., & Djatmika, E. T. (2018). Pengaruh Strategi Pembelajaran Inkuiri Berbasis Keterampilan Multiliterasi terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, Dan Pengembangan, 3(2012), 460–467.

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Kent, W. M. V. (2018). Language, Literacy, and Multiliteracies: Preparing Graduate Students to Provide Language Intervention in the 21st Century. Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences & Disorders, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.30707/tlcsd2.2kent Kohnen, A. M., & Adams, B. (2019). Teaching Multiliteracies to Chinese Students: Challenges and Insights. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, XX, 238133691987026. https://doi.org/10.1177/2381336919870262 Menke, M. R. (2018). Literacy - based Curricula in University Foreign Language Instruction : Perceptions from Non - Tenure - Track Faculty. L2 Journal, 10(2), 111– 133. Mirra, N., Morrell, E., & Filipiak, D. (2018). From Digital Consumption to Digital Invention : Toward a New Critical Theory and Practice of Multiliteracies From Digital Consumption to Digital Invention : Toward a New Critical Theory and Practice of Multiliteracies. Theory Into Practice, 57(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1390336 Nabhan, S. (2019). EduLite Bringing multiliteracies into process writing approach in ELT classroom : Implementation and reflection. Ite Journal of English Education, Literature, and Culture V, 4(August), 156–170. https://doi.org/DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/e.4.2.156-170 NLG. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Havard Educational Review, 66(1), 1–15. Nuroh, E. Z., Wati, T. L., & Rindaningsih, I. (2019). Multiliteracy in students of English Department, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo. Tell : Teaching of English Language and Literature, 7(1), 41–50. Paesani, K. (2018). Researching literacies and textual thinking in collegiate foreign language programs: Reflections and recommendations. Foreign Language Annals, 51(1), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12312 Penuel, W. R., & O’connor, K. (2018). From Designing to Organizing New Social Futures: Multiliteracies Pedagogies for Today. From Designing to Organizing New Social Futures: Multiliteracies Pedagogies for Today, Theory Into Practice, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1411715

CULI Research Seminar 2019

Puteh-Behak, F., & Ismail, I. R. (2018). Multiliteracies project approach: Dated or a worthy learning tool? GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 18(2), 312–334. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2018-1802-20 Rivas, J. J. L., & Cardozo, D. A. S. (2018). Video-Mediated Listening and Multiliteracies Videoconferencia , escucha y literacidades múltiples. Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J., 20(1), 11–24. https://doi.org/hhttps://doi.org/10.14483/22487085.12349 Schroeter, S. (2019). Embodying difference : A case for anti- racist and decolonizing approaches to multiliteracies. Studies in Social Justice, 13(1), 142–158. Smith, A., Stornaiuolo, A., & Phillips, N. C. (2018). Multiplicities in Motion: A Turn to Transliteracies. Theory into Practice, 57(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1390334 Thibaut, P., & Curwood, J. S. (2018). Multiliteracies in Practice: Integrating Multimodal Production Across the Curriculum. Theory into Practice, 57(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1392202 Warner, C., & Dupuy, B. (2017). Moving toward multiliteracies in foreign language teaching : Past and present perspectives ... and beyond. (October), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12316