This research demonstrated how an African American mother and son communicated with each other via texting and instant messaging (IM) at home. Data from a 2007 larger ethnographic case study of a family's digital literacy practices were collected and analyzed. Situated within the framework of New Literacy Studies and multi-modality, this research explored: a) how and why an African American mother and son communicated through texting and IM, b) how this family drew on multimodal meaning-making resources, and c) how texting and IM between these family members demonstrated the potential to change the perceptions of literacy researchers regarding the dynamics of family structures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlvermannD. E. (Ed.). (2002). Adolescents and literacies in a digital world.New York, NY: Peter Lang.
2.
AlvermannD. E. (2008). Commentary: Why bother theorizing adolescents' online literacies for classroom practice and research?Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,, 52, 8–19.
3.
AlvermannD. E. (2010). Adolescents' online literacies: Connecting classrooms, digital media, and popular culture (New literacies and digital epistemologies).New York, NY: Peter Lang.
4.
AuerbachE. R. (1989). Towards a social-contextual approach to family literacy.Harvard Educational Review, 59, 165–181.
5.
AuerbachE. R. (1995). Which way for family literacy: Intervention or empowerment? In MorrowL. M. (Ed.), Family literacy: Connections in schools and communities (pp. 11–27). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
6.
BaH., TallyW., & TsikalasK. (2002). Investigating children's emerging digital literacies.Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 1(4), 1–48.
7.
BartonD., & HamiltonM. (1998). Local literacies: Reading and writing in one community.London, UK: Routledge.
BrookeC. G. (2009). Lingua fracta: Toward a rhetoric of new media.Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
11.
BruceB. C. (2002). Diversity and critical social engagement: How changing technologies enable new modes of literacy in changing circumstances. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
12.
BuckA. (2012). Examining digital literacy practices on social network sites.Research in the Teaching of English, 47(1), 9–38.
13.
CairneyT. H. (1997). Acknowledging diversity in home literacy practices.Early Child Development and Care, 127(1), 61–73.
14.
CairneyT. H., & RugeJ. (1998). Community literacy practices and schooling: Towards effective support for students.Canberra, AU: DEET.
15.
CammackD. W. (2002). Literacy, technology, and a room of her own: Analyzing adolescent girls' online conversations from historical and technological literacy perspectives. In SchallertD. L., FairbanksC. M., WorthyJ., MalochB., & HoffmanJ. V. (Eds.), 51st yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 129–141). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
CohenV., & CowenJ. E. (2010). Literacy for children in an information age: Teaching reading, writing, and thinking. (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
19.
ComberB., ThompsonP., & WellsM. (2001). Critical literacy finds a “place”: Writing and social action in a low-income Australian grade 2/3 classroom.The Elementary School Journal, 101, 451–464.
20.
Compton-LillyC. (2003). Reading families: The literate lives of urban children.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
21.
Compton-LillyC., RogersR., & LewisT.Y. (2012). Analyzing diversity epistemologies: An integrative critical literature review of family literacy scholarship.Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 33–60.
22.
CooperM. (1986). An ecology of writing.College English, 48(4), 364–75.
23.
CrawfordP. A., & Zygouris-CoeV. (2006). All in the family: Connecting home and school with family literacy.Early Childhood Education Journal, 33(4), 261–267.
24.
DrouinM. A. (2011). College student's text messaging, use of textese, and literacy skills.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27.1, 67–75.
25.
DrouinM., & DavisC. (2009). Rutxting? Is the use of text speak hurting your literacy?Journal of Literacy Research,, 41, 46–67.
26.
EdwardsP. A. (2004). Children literacy development: Making it happen through school, family, and community involvement.Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
27.
EdwardsP. A. (2010). The role of family literacy programs in the school success or failure of African American families and children. In FisherD., & DunsmoreK. (Eds.), Bringing literacy home (pp. 184–202). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
28.
EdwardsP. A., PleasantsH. M., & FranklinS. H. (1999). A path to follow: Learning to listen to parents.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
29.
EngeströmY. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research.Helsinki, FI: Orienta-Konsultit.
30.
EngeströmY. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In EngeströmY., MiettinenR., & PunamakiR. L. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 377–406). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
31.
GadsdenV. L. (1995). Representations of literacy: Parents' images in two cultural communities. In MorrowL. (Ed.), Literacy connections in families, schools, and communities (pp. 287–303). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
32.
GadsdenV. L. (2004). Family literacy and culture. In WasikB. H., (Ed.), Handbook of family literacy (pp. 401–426). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33.
GeeJ. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. (2nd ed.). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
34.
GeeJ. P. (2010). A situated-sociocultural approach to literacy and technology. In BakerE. A. (Ed.), The new literacies: Multiple perspectives on research and practice (pp. 165–189). New York, NY: Guilford.
35.
GrossT. (Host). (2012, October 18). In constant digital contact, we feel 'alone together' [Radio/Author interview broadcast]. Washington, DC: National Public Radio Books.
HagoodM. C. (2000). New times, new millennium, new literacies.Reading Research and Instruction, 39(4), 311–328.
38.
HawisherG. E., SelfeC. L., MoraskiB., & PearsonM. (2004). Becoming literate in the information age: Cultural ecologies and the literacies of technology.College Composition and Communication, 55(4), 642–692.
39.
HeathS. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities andclassrooms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
JacobsG. (2006). Fast times and digital literacy: Participation roles and portfolio construction within instant messaging.Journal of Literacy Research, 38, 171–196.
41.
JacobsG. (2008). We learn what we do: Developing a repertoire of writing practices in an instant messaging world.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(3), 203–211.
42.
JewittC. (2006). Technology, literacy and learning: A multimodal approach.London, UK: Routledge.
43.
JewittC., & KressG. R. (2003). Multimodal literacies.New York, NY: Peter Lang.
44.
JewittC., & OyamaR. (2001). Visual meaning: A social semiotic approach. In van LeeuwenT., & JewittC. (Eds.), Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 134–156). London, UK: Sage.
45.
JoaquinJ. (2010). Digital literacies and hip hop texts: The potential for pedagogy. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents' online literacies: Connecting classroom and popular culture (pp. 109–124). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
46.
KalantzisM., CopeB., & CloonanA. (2010). A multiliteracies perspective on the new literacies. In BakerE. A. (Ed.), The new literacies: Multiple perspectives on research and practice. (pp. 61–87). New York, NY: Guilford.
47.
KirklandD. (2009). Shaping the digital pen: Media literacy, youth culture, and My Space.Youth Media Reporter, 2, 188–200.
48.
KressG. (2003). Literacy in the new media age.London, UK: Routledge.
49.
KressG., & JewittC. (2003). Introduction. In JewittC., & KressG. (Eds.), Multimodal literacy (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
50.
KressG., & van LeeuwenT. J. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication.London, UK: Arnold.
51.
LareauA. (1989). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education.London, UK: Falmer.
LeuD. J.Jr. (2000). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education in an information age. In KamilM. L., MosenthalP. B., PearsonP. D., & BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 743–770). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
55.
LeuD. J.Jr. (2001). Internet project: Preparing students for new literacies in a global village[Exploring Literacy on the Internet department].The Reading Teacher, 54(6).
56.
LewisC., & FabosB. (2005). Instant messaging, literacies, and social identities.Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 470–501.
57.
LewisT. Y. (2009). Family literacy and digital literacies: A redefined approach to examining social practices of an African-American family. (Unpublished dissertation). University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY.
58.
LewisT. Y. (2010a). The motherboard stories. In PahlK., & RowsellJ. (Eds.) Artifactual literacies: Every object tells a story (pp. 112–113). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
59.
LewisT. Y. (2010b). Intergenerational meaning-making between a mother and son in digital spaces. In Compton-LillyC., & GreeneS. (Eds.), Bedtime stories and book reports: Connecting parent involvement and family literacy (pp. 85–93). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
60.
LewisT.Y. (2011). Family digital literacies: A case of awareness, agency, and apprenticeship of one African American family. In DunstonP. J., GambrellL. B., HeadleyK., FullertonS. K., SteckerP. M., GillisV. R., & BatesC. C. (Eds.), 60th Literacy Research Association Yearbook (pp. 432–446). Oak Creek, WI: Literacy Research Association.
61.
LloydM., & CroninR. (2002). A community of teachers: Using Activity Theory to investigate the implementation of ICTE in a remote indigenous school. Unpublished report, RITE Group, School of Math, Science and Technology Education, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
62.
MaharD. (2002). An uncharted journey: Three adolescent technology experts navigate the school system. In SchallertD. L., FairbanksC. M., WorthyJ., MalochB., & HoffmanJ. V. (Eds.), 51st yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 287–297). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
63.
MarshJ. (2006). Global, local/public, private: Young children's engagement in digital literacy practices in the home. In PahlK., & RowsellJ. (Eds.), Travel notes from the New Literacy Studies: Instances of practice (pp. 19–38). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
64.
MarshJ. (2011). Young children's literacy practices in a virtual world: Establishing an online interaction order.Reading Research Quarterly, 46(2) 101–118.
65.
MarshJ., & ThompsonP. (2001). Parental involvement in literacy development: Using media texts.Journal of Research in Reading, 24(3), 266–278.
66.
McCartheyS. (1997). Connecting home and school literacy practices in classrooms with diverse populations.Journal of Literacy Research, 29(2), 145–182.
67.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68.
MojeE., & LewisC. (2007). Examining opportunities to learn literacy: The role of critical sociocultural literacy research. In LewisC., EncisoP. E., & MojeE. B. (Eds.), Reframing sociocultural research on literacy: Identity, agency, and power (pp. 15–48). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
69.
MollL. C., AmantiC., NeffD., & GonzalezN. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms.Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.
70.
MorrowL. M. (1995a). Family literacy: Connections in schools and communities.Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
71.
MorrowL. M. (1995b). Family literacy: New perspectives, new practices. In MorrowL. M. (Ed.), Family literacy: Connections in schools and communities (pp. 5–10). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
72.
NardiB. (1995). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
73.
Norton-MeierL. (2005). Joining the video game literacy club: A reluctant mother tries to join the FLOW.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(5), 428–432.
74.
PahlK., & RowsellJ. (2006). Introduction. In PahlK., & RowsellJ. (Eds.), Travel notes from the New Literacy Studies: Instances of practice (pp. 9–15). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
75.
PahlK., & RowsellJ. (2011). Literacy and education: Understanding the New Literacy Studies in the classroom.London, UK: Sage.
76.
PahlK., & RowsellJ. (2012). Literacy and education: The new literacy studies in the classroom. (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
RogersR. (2002). Between contexts: A critical analysis of family literacy, discursive practices and literate subjectivities.Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 248–277.
81.
RogersR. (2003). A critical discourse analysis of family literacy practices: Power in and out of print.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
82.
RogoffB. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context.New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
83.
RogoffB. (2003). The cultural nature of human development.New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
84.
RowsellJ., & BurkeA. (2009). Reading by design: Two case studies of digital reading practices.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(2), 106–18.
85.
ScollonR., & LevineP. (2004). Multimodal discourse analysis as the confluence of discourse and technology. In LevineP., & ScollonR. (Eds.), Discourse and technology: Multimodal discourse analysis (pp. 1–6). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
86.
SnyderI., AngusL., & Sutherland-SmithW. (2002). Building equitable literate futures: Home and school computer-mediated literacy practices and disadvantage.Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(3), 368–383.
87.
SteinP., & SlonimskyL. (2006). An eye on the text and an eye on the future: Multimodal literacy in three Johannesburg families. In PahlK., & RowsellJ. (Eds.), Travel notes from the New Literacy Studies (pp. 118–146). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
88.
StewardJ. H. (1972). Theory of culture change: The methodology of multilinearevolution. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
89.
StreetB. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, ethnography and education.New York, NY: Longman.
90.
StreetB. (2003). What's “new” in New Literacy Studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice.Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5(2), 77–91.
91.
TaylorD. (1983). Family literacy: Young children learning to read and write.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
92.
TaylorD., & Dorsey-GainesC. (1988). Growing up literate: Learning from inner-city families.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
TurkleS. (2005). The second self: Computers and the human spirit (20th anniversary ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
96.
TurkleS. (2012). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other.New York, NY: Basic Books.
97.
VasudevanL., DeJaynesT., & SchmierS. (2010). Multimodal pedagogies: Playing, teaching and learning with adolescents' digital literacies. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents' online literacies: Connecting classrooms, digital media, and popular culture (pp. 5–22). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
98.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
99.
WengerE. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
WohlwendK. E. (2007). Kindergarten as nexus of practice: A mediated discourse analysis of play, design, and early literacy. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Iowa, Iowa City.
102.
WohlwendK. E. (2009). Damsels in discourse: Girls consuming and producing identity texts through Disney princess play.Reading Research Quarterly, 44(1), 57–83.
103.
WolfeS., & FlewittR. (2010). New technologies, new multimodal literacy practices and young children's metacognitive development.Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(4) 387–400.
