ETL533 Assessment 4: Part D – Critical Reflection

My understanding of digital literature has grown significantly over the last few months. From my early definitions to the creation of my own narrative, I’ve gained a solid understanding of what digital literature is, why it’s beneficial and how it can be implemented to support my school.

My preliminary definitions of digital literature focused on the distinction between the digital and the digitised (Lysaught, 2022, July 19; Lysaught, 2022, July 25). As my research progressed I consolidated these distinctions by combining Unsworth’s (2006, p.2-3) and Allan’s (2017, p.22-23) categories (Lysaught, 2022, August 7). Like my peers (Curtis, 2022, July 19), I believe digital literature should be quality and meet community needs, which led me to consider what makes quality digital literature (Lysaught, 2022, August 14) and to design my own evaluation criteria where I determined three key aspects: multimodality, interactivity, and connectivity (Lysaught, 2022, August 28). Self-evaluations and peer feedback reveals – despite the amateur multimodal features – mine’s an effective, quality text suitable for its intended purpose and audience:

Evaluation of The Shakespeare Chronicles

However, defining digital literature is arguably less important to teacher-librarians than understanding how to incorporate it effectively. Digital literature provides exciting opportunities to move students from passive consumers to active creators of content  (Morra, 2013, para.2; Kitson, 2017, p.66), and as new technologies and communication tools emerge, students require new literacies to ensure they’re critically consuming and ethically creating texts (Walker et al., 2010, p.214-216; Kearney, 2011, p.169; Leu, 2011, p.6-8; Mills & Levido, 2011, p.80-81, 89; Leu et al., 2015, p.139-140; Serafini et al., 2015, p.23; Combes, 2016, p.4). In 2009 students spent an average four hours a day online (Weigel, 2009, p.38); by 2015 US teens consumed between 6-9 hours of media a day (Common Sense Media, 2015, para.6), while Australian teens now spend an average of 14.4 hours a week online (eSafety Commissioner, 2021, p.4). Digital literature therefore harnesses our students’ preferences and familiarity with technological platforms (Figueiredo & Bidarra, 2015, p.323; Skaines, 2010, p.100-104; Stepanic, 2022, p.2; Weigel, 2009, P.38). Digital literature incorporating interactivity, multimodality, and connectivity can develop ‘nöogenic narratives’ wherein personal growth is achieved by viewing our lives as a story (Hall, 2012, p.97), a key element of the English syllabus (NSW Standards Authority, 2019, p.10). Research shows that educators can exploit digital narratives to create meaningful and authentic learning opportunities for students to create personal and academic growth (Bjørgen, 2010, p.171-172; Dockter et al., 2010, p.419; Hall, 2012, p.99; Reid, 2013, p.38-41; Smeda et al., 2014, p.19; Sukovic, 2014, p.222-226).

However, educators must carefully consider the purpose of integrating digital narratives into their programmes. While research reveals digital texts’ benefits supporting young, emerging, or struggling readers and developing transliteracy (Tackvic, 2012, p.428; Cahill & McGill-Franzen, 2013, p.32-33; Matthews, 2014, p.29; McGeehan et al., 2018, p.58), others raise issues regarding reading comprehension, retention, and attention (Cull, 2011, para.35-38; Goodwin, 2013, p.79; Jabr, 2013, p.5-30; McGuire, 2015, para.30-35). Technology should be used as a meaningful tool, not just as a gimmick. Monsen (2016) explored the idea that we are “quintessentially cyborgs” due to the symbiotic relationship between humanity and technology. My research into digital learning frameworks such as the SAMR model (Lysaught, 2022, August 6) revealed that effective implementation of technology should not replace, but co-exist with and supplement existing print literacies. Printed choose-your-own-adventure narratives arguably improve literacy (Chooseco & Hofmann, 2016, para. 8-9) and can be updated using digital features to form powerful digital texts (Farber, 2015, para.1-2). Thus, my own digital narrative was designed as an immersive, interactive, multimodal resource to develop students’ understanding of life in Shakespearean England while supplementing traditional print resources and online information sources.

Throughout ETL533 I have examined how I currently incorporate digital literature into our school and considered ways to increase this in future (Lysaught, 2022, July 31; Lysaught, 2022, August 7; Lysaught, 2022, August 13). As discussed with my peers (Macey, 2022, September 24; Barnett, 2022, September 27; Facey, 2022, September 29) difficulties arise surrounding cost-effectiveness, storage, access, and user preferences that often impede digital literature’s success in schools. Despite these challenges, after creating my own digital narrative I strongly believe that student-created digital texts can enhance their own learning and connections to content, and integrate well with Guided Inquiry units and literary learning (Lysaught, 2022, January 27; Lysaught, 2022, August 14; Lysaught, 2022, September 3; Lysaught, 2022, September 16). Peer feedback also supports this (Lysaught, 2022, September 3). Due to this unit I am more aware of my students’ discussions around digital literature (Lysaught, 2022, July 25; Lysaught, 2022, August 28), revealing these are powerful texts with which students are already engaging. Literature in digital environments allows teacher-librarians to show our value to our school community, as we can support time-poor staff as they include more captivating, rich resources and utilise digital narratives to support our students with various interests and literacy needs.

 

 

Word count: 806

Reference list: https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/10/04/etl533-assessment-4-reference-list/

ETL533 Assessment 4: Part A – Context For Digital Storytelling Project

The Shakespeare Chronicles is a digital choose-your-own-adventure narrative created using Canva. Also known as a pick-a-path story or a gamebook, these narratives were popular during the 1980s due to their interactivity and appearance of choice for children who otherwise lacked agency (Hendrix, 2011, para.29; Jamison, 2022, para.4). Falling out of favour due to the rise of video games in the 90s (Jamison, 2022, para.46), these printed narratives can be updated for new audiences and technologies in our electronic age by incorporating the digital features which once superseded them (Stuart, 2011, para.1-2; Figueiredo & Bidarra, 2015, p.330).

The Shakespeare Chronicles was designed to support EHS’s Year 7 English Guided Inquiry Design unit ‘Shakespeare’s Bawdy Mouth’. It can also be used to support revision for Stage 5 and 6 English students studying a variety of Shakespeare’s plays. In this narrative, students follow the adventures of an actor in Shakespeare’s theatre company. They are presented with choices to guide the narrative and learn about life in Shakespeare’s time. Utilising interactivity, multimodality, and connectivity – key elements of quality digital literature (Lysaught, 2022, August 28) – it supports students as they explore the following questions:

  1. How different or similar are our experiences to peoples’ experiences in Shakespeare’s time?
  2. Why is Shakespeare considered a significant composer?
  3. How can understanding Shakespeare’s works and the experiences of people living during his lifetime help us understand ourselves and our world?

Due to its historical focus, stage-appropriate language features and dual function as a research pathfinder, this resource allows teachers to meet multiple English and History outcomes, while the inclusion of ICT and the cause-and-effect nature of this interactive narrative allows staff to link to a number of General Capabilities:

This digital narrative taps into what Figueiredo and Bidarra (2015, p.324) call the ‘ludic’ or game-based learning model and draws on students’ predilections towards digital, interactive media (Figueiredo & Bidarra, 2015, p.323; Skaines, 2010, p.100-104; Stepanic, 2022, p.2; Weigel, 2009, P.38). Introduced in the Immerse inquiry stage as a resource to assist student engagement and build background knowledge (Kuhlthau  et al., 2012, p.61-66, 70; Maniotes, 2017, p.8), its secondary purpose as a research pathfinder supports students as they move into the Explore, Identify and Gather stages of Guided Inquiry (Kuhlthau  et al., 2012, p.75-82, 93-98, 109-116; Maniotes, 2017, p.8-9).

Currently the summative assessment for this unit requires students to produce three diary entries from the perspective of someone living during Shakespeare’s time, to be viewed and marked by a teacher. The Shakespeare Chronicles provides a model for students to create their own digital narrative, supporting their digital literacy and social development in interesting and relevant ways with an authentic audience of peers to promote engagement (Dockter et al., 2010, p.419-420; Weigel, 2009, p.40). Multimodal aspects build understanding of life during Shakespeare’s time, supporting students’ use of visual and auditory imagery in their own writing and moving students from consumers to creators of content – a key element of digital literature (Morra, 2013, para.2; Kitson, 2017, p.66).

In designing this resource, I considered the questions posed by Reid (2013, p.41) to ensure my community’s learning needs were being met. EHS is a comprehensive, co-educational public school in South-West Sydney. Enrolments increased 10% in the 2016-2020 period, though decreased in 2021 (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2021a). New housing developments changing our catchment demographics lowered our ICSEA score from 1017 in 2014 to 995 in 2021 (ACARA, 2021a). NAPLAN results are below average (ACARA, 2021b) while Sentral data shows increasing disengagement, with suspensions increasing 96.6% and expulsions 600% since 2014 (Sentral, 2021).

This digital narrative engages students visually and emotionally with the experiences of past people, supporting a variety of literacy needs and growing student independence (Foley, 2012, p.8; Cahill & McGill-Franzen, 2013, p.33, 35-36; Chooseco & Hoffman, 2016, para.8-9; Towndrow & Kogut, 2020, p.4, 14, 147-148). Access to 1:1 devices is limited to shared, bookable banks of often unreliable laptops or iPads, so the resource is accessible on a variety of devices (including student phones) via an easily shared Canva link and can be uploaded to subject learning platforms and the library website for future reference and to support social connection. While our students frequently engage with digital media, they often lack the skills to effectively navigate web content or critically evaluate online information; hyperlinked resources provide students with quality information to use in their own research. Teaching time is limited, as are student attention spans; a short narrative counteracts this peripatetic “grasshopper mind” (Weigel, 2009, p.38), though multiple pathways invite replay and continued enjoyment. Choice encourages interactivity and engagement (Hendrix, 2011, para.19, 29), aiming to overcome disengagement and encourage students to make personal connections with the content (Weigel, 2009, p.40; Bjørgen, 2010, p. 171; Hall, 2012, p.99; Lambert, 2012, p.37-38; Towndrow & Kogut, 2020, p.148).

 

 

Word count: 798

Reference list: https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/10/04/etl533-assessment-4-reference-list/

ETL533 4.2: Digital Tools

Why incorporate digital texts and storytelling into your programs? What new tools or approaches have you discovered that are interesting and worthwhile trying for you?

As a high school teacher with History and English classes, I’m always on the lookout for new ideas and resources that can enhance the my students’ engagement and learning. However, with so many options it can definitely be overwhelming for teachers to consider how to most effectively implement ICT and digital storytelling into their practice! I really enjoyed the questions presented by Reid (2013) which teachers should consider before embarking on this journey:

  • What do you want your e-book to do?
  • What kind of technology do you have access to?
  • What ratio of technology to students do you have?
  • What basic skills and knowledge do your students already have?
  • Which curriculum outcomes do you want your students to achieve?
  • What are the minimum expectations?

It’s crucial to consider these questions in order to ensure our use of digital storytelling and digital resources has a sound pedagogical foundation and avoids falling into the realm of the gimmicky, or being what the SAMR model designates as Substitution.

I’m really intrigued by the possibilities of digital poetry at the moment. One of my year 11 English Extension students has discussed the possibility of writing a suite of poetry for the Extension 2 course in Year 12, and I think that exploring this emerging form could be an exciting pathway for her. I also really like the idea of the digital interview suggested by Kolk (n.d.), which could fit our current year 7 English unit on Respecting Differences and support our students’ developing empathy.

 

Kolk, M. (n.d.). Six ways to implement digital storytelling. Retrieved from https://creativeeducator.tech4learning.com/2016/articles/six-ways-to-implement-digital-storytelling

Reid, K. (2013). Creating e-books in the classroom. In J. Bales (Ed.), E-books in learning – a beginner ‘s guide (pp. 37-43). Australia: Australian School Library Association.

ETL533 Assessment 3: Digital Storytelling Proposal

Working titles: Shakespeare’s Age and Stage OR The Shakespeare Chronicles OR Shakespeare Transformed

Topic: This digital storytelling project aims to help secondary students understand Shakespeare’s life and times through an interactive, multimodal choose-your-own-adventure digital narrative. 

Platform/tool: Canva

Rationale: 

This digital narrative is intended to support the EHS Stage 4 English unit Shakespeare’s Bawdy Mouth, where students explore Elizabethan England to gain an understanding of Shakespeare’s context and works. It could also be used as revision for Stage 5 or 6 English students studying a variety of Shakespearean plays. 

In this choose-your-own-adventure narrative, students will follow the adventures of a young actor in Shakespeare’s theatre company, The Lord Chamberlain’s Men, as they prepare for the opening night of Macbeth in 1606. Students will be presented with choices to guide the narrative and learn about Shakespeare’s life and times. It aims to utilise the three elements of quality digital literature I’ve previously identified – interactivity, multimodality, and connectivity – to support students’ developing understandings. 

Ideally, this resource will also function as a research pathfinder, as student’s choices will be supplemented by hyperlinks to external resources in order to support literary learning and develop their information literacy skills. Currently, students are assessed on their knowledge of this unit via their composition of three diary entries from the perspective of someone in Shakespeare’s time. Students could potentially use this narrative as a model for their own digital diary entries, thus updating the task for a digital environment and supporting student learning needs in the 21st century.

I initially investigated PowerPoint and Microsoft Sway for this task but chose to use Canva for a variety of reasons.  I enjoyed using Microsoft Sway but its inability to link between pages meant that it wasn’t viable for a hyperlinked choose-your-own-adventure narrative. I am proficient with PowerPoint and could utilise many of its features to construct a hyperlinked narrative, but felt that Canva was easier and more appealing for Stage 4 students due to its user-friendly interface, cloud storage, collaborative potential and its wide database of images and graphics. It is also free to access for NSW Department of Education students via their student portal. However, I am finding it difficult to inset audio to different slides since Canva is limited to one audio file per design. 

You can view the work in progress here.

ETL533 Assessment 2 Part B: Critical Reflection of Digital Literature Experiences

In the light of your readings and your experience of different digital literatures write a critical reflection which considers the following issues:
• What makes a good digital text, what counts as one, and what purpose do digital texts serve?
• Compare your experience of reading digital texts with reading print.
• Choose the digital text you most enjoyed and discuss how you might incorporate it into a program at your institution.

As my research into digital literature has progressed, my understandings have simultaneously narrowed and blurred regarding this nebulous topic. I have encountered numerous definitions, categories, and subcategories in my research, including the commonly repeated broad distinction between the digital and the digitised (Strickland, n.d., para. 3; Hayles, 2007, para.10; Bourchardon & Heckman, 2012, p.1; Heckman & O’Sullivan, 2018, para.4). 

Many attempts to define digital literature have focused on what it is not. For instance, electronic literature is not something that can be printed (Strickland, n.d., para.3; Sargeant, 2015, p.455; Wright, 2019, para.2), thereby excluding e-books which digitise existing print texts (Writerful Books, n.d., para.10) as ‘paper-under-glass’ texts (Allan, 2017, p.22) which, while popular with publishers, do not take advantage of many potential features offered by emerging digital platforms (McGeehan et al., 2018, p.62-63). However, excluding these texts from discussions about digital literature arguably ignores their popularity and potential as learning and engagement tools, especially in schools; after all, this unit is called ‘Literature in Digital Environments’ and not ‘Digital Literature’ for a reason, and it would be unwise to eliminate digitised texts from discussion altogether. I personally prefer to read digitised e-books due to the ability to increase font size and define unknown words, yet my favoured features were missing from many of the digital texts I’ve explored so far (Lysaught, 2022a).

Other definitions focus on common features of digital texts, such as their exploitation of digital characteristics (Bourchardon & Heckman, 2012, p.1), their inherent multimodality (Walker et al., 2010, p.219; Mills & Levido, 2011, p.80; Heckman & O’Sullivan, 2018, para.11) or the way they use interactivity and connectivity to position the audience in the process of either constructing meaning or constructing the text itself (Serafini, 2013, p.403; Walsh, 2013, p.181; Bell, 2016, p.295-296; Wall, 2016, p.35; Allan, 2017, p.23-24). These multidimensional features allow readers a different experience to that of reading a traditional unidimensional printed text, with some research suggesting that changes to reading speed and navigation in digital environments can affect comprehension and memory (Jabr, 2013, para.10, 20). Lending data and anecdotal discussions in my school suggest printed texts have maintained their top position as preferred reading materials amongst both staff and students, though this may have more to do with digital poverty, lack of exposure and competing distractions on devices than the potential offered by digital texts.

Another useful categorical framework I used to structured my reviews resulted from my early combination (Lysaught, 2022b, para.2-3) of Allan (2017, p.22-23) and Unsworth’s (2006, p.2-3) distinctions between recontextualised or digitised literary texts, enhanced app or electronically augmented texts, and ‘born digital’ texts. However, my increased exposure to digital literature revealed that often digital narratives defy simplistics attempts at categorisation, with all three reviewed texts blurring boundaries depending on whose definition one applied (Lysaught, 2022c, 2022d, 2022e).

Inspired by my reviewed texts, I decided to play with the multimodal potential offered by this blog to create a word-cloud of my notes so far. Several key ideas emerge, including: a focus on the relationship between readers, authors, teachers and the act of reading; the relationship between technology and meaning-making processes; and new literacies focused on mixed media and formats such as digital devices and internet platforms.

As a result of this research, I conclude that quality digital literature involves the interplay of three core elements: multimodality, interactivity, and connectivity (whether to the world or content of the text and/or to other users and platforms). Early attempts to construct an evaluative criteria (Lysaught, 2022f) have solidified into the criteria below:

😍 = yes, love it!

🤔 = hmm … somewhat?

👎 = not really/not evident

Arguably, defining digital literature is less important in school contexts than how it can be used to support the needs, interests and abilities of the school community. I discussed in each review how these texts could effectively support teaching and learning in my school community (Lysaught, 2022c, 2022d, 2022e). Early in my journey I posited that teacher-librarians could be invaluable in aligning new pedagogies with innovative digital narratives to support time-poor staff (Lysaught, 2022g, 2022b). Anecdotal evidence suggests that digital literature is a powerful tool for engaging students as readers (Lysaught, 2022h). Moving forward, I am interested in harnessing digital literature and its associated social networking to motivate reluctant students (Lysaught, 2022a) as part of my Year 7 Wide Reading Program.

 

 

747 words.

Reference list:

Allan, C. (2017). Digital fiction: ‘Unruly object’ or literary artefact? English in Australia, 52(2), 21-27.

Bell, A. (2016). Interactional metalepsis and unnatural narratology. Narrative, 24(3), 294-310.

Bourchardon, S., & Heckman, D. (2012). Digital manipulability and digital literature. Electronic Book Review.

Hayles, K. (2007). Electronic literature: What is it? https://www.eliterature.org/pad/elp.html

Heckman, D., O’Sullivan, J. (2018). Electronic literature: contexts and poetics. Literary Studies in the Digital Age: An Evolving Anthology.

Jabr, F. (2013, April 11). The reading brain in the digital age: The science of paper versus screens. Scientific American.

Lysaught, D. (2022a, August 13). ETL533 3.2 Exploring digital forms. All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/13/etl533-3-2-exploring-digital-forms/

Lysaught, D. (2022b, August 7). ETL533 2.3: Challenges of using digital literature in the classroom. All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/07/etl533-2-3-challenges-of-using-digital-literature-in-the-classroom/

Lysaught, D. (2022c, August 28). ETL533 Assessment 2 Part A: Review 1 – Over the Top by The Canadian War Museum (n.d.). All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/28/etl533-assessment-2-part-a-review-1-over-the-top-by-the-canadian-war-museum-n-d/

Lysaught, D. (2022d, August 28). ETL533 Assessment 2 Part A: Review 2 – iPoe by iClassics Collection (2012-2015). All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/28/etl533-assessment-2-part-a-review-2-ipoe-by-iclassics-collection-2012-2015/

Lysaught, D. (2022e, August 28). ETL533 Assessment 2 Part A: Review 3 – Dracula Daily by Matt Kirkland (2021). All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/28/etl533-assessment-2-part-a-review-3-dracula-daily-by-matt-kirkland-2021/

Lysaught, D. (2022f, August 14). ETL533 Evaluating digital literature: Deeper considerations. All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/14/etl533-evaluating-digital-literature-deeper-considerations/

Lysaught, D. (2022g, July 19). ETL533 Evaluating digitally reproduced stories. All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/07/19/etl533-1-2-evaluating-digitally-reproduced-stories/

Lysaught, D. (2022h, July 25). ETL533 Assessment 1: Online reflective journal blog task. All you read is love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/07/25/etl533-assessment-1-online-reflective-journal-blog-task/

McGeehan, C., Chambers, S., & Nowakowski, J. (2018). Just because it’s digital, doesn’t mean it’s good: Evaluating digital picture books. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(2), 58-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1399488

Mills, K.A., & Levido, A. (2011). iPed: pedagogy for digital text production. The Reading Teacher, 65(1), 80-91.

Sargeant, B. (2015). What is an ebook? What is a book app? And why should we care? An analysis of contemporary digital picture books. Children’s Literature in Education, 46(4), 454-466.

Serafini, F., Kachorsky, D. & Aguilera, E. (2015). Picture books 2.0: Transmedial features across narrative platforms. Journal of Children’s Literature, 41(2), 16-24.

Strickland, S. (n.d.). Born digital. Poetry Foundation. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/articles/69224/born-digital

Unsworth, L. (2006). E-literature for children: Enhancing digital literacy learning. Routledge.

Walker, S., Jameson, J., & Ryan, M. (2010). Skills and strategies for e-learning in a participatory culture (Ch. 15). In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 212-224). New York, NY: Routledge

Wall, J. (2016). Children’s literature in the digital world: how does multimodality support affective, aesthetic and critical response to narrative? by Alyson Simpson and Maureen Walsh. An extended abstract by June Wall. SCAN 35(3), 34-36.

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment (Ch. 13). In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. Marrickville, NSW: Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).

Wright, D. T. H. (2019, July 10). From Twitterbots to VR: 10 of the best examples of digital literature. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/from-twitterbots-to-vr-10-of-the-best-examples-of-digital-literature-110099

Writerful Books (n.d.). New $10,000 digital literature award. https://writerfulbooks.com/digital-literature-award/

ETL533 Assessment 2 Part A: Review 3 – Dracula Daily by Matt Kirkland (2021).

Dracula Daily (Kirkland, 2021) is an excellent example of a recontextualised or digitised literary text (Lysaught, 2022a). Kirkland has updated Stoker’s original 1897 Dracula for modern readers by recontextualising it as a narrative delivered episodically via a free email subscription. Dracula Daily conforms to many definitions of digitised works (Strickland, n.d.; Hayles, 2007, para.10; Bourchardon & Heckman, 2012, p1; Heckman & O’Sullivan, 2018, para.4), since Stoker’s original was conceived for the print medium. It might also be designated as a ‘paper-under-glass’ text (Allan, 2017, p.22). However, Kirkland’s recontextualisation cleverly utilises many features of the digital environment to enhance readers’ understanding, which is a key consideration when evaluating digital literature (Lysaught, 2022b) and not unique to ‘born digital’ texts.

Firstly, the novel’s content is largely unchanged, but Kirkland enhances the original’s epistolary form by delivering the narrative gradually to subscribers’ inboxes on the date each event occurred (Kirkland, 2022, para.1), helping readers build a sense of time. In the original, it feels like the characters speed through the plot. Dracula Daily is delivered in instalments from May to November, allowing readers to gain a sense of just how much time passes. This also builds on the original’s suspense – a key element of the Gothic genre, since readers must await the next instalment instead of reading ahead. Although this chronological delivery loses some of the original’s dramatic irony, footnotes in misordered entries remind readers of key plot points while the reader’s anticipation of the next portion emulates the characters’ anticipation as they put together the clues about Dracula. While not technically an interactive feature – an element important to digital literature (Lysaught, 2022b) – this digitised recontextualisation allows readers to form a closer vicarious connection to the characters and events than the original. 

Secondly, innovative use of email technology evokes the optimistic modernity present in Stoker’s novel. One of the key tensions in the original is the dichotomy between the modern and the traditional. By updating Stoker’s printed text to a digital environment, Kirkland has recaptured the sense of technological innovation that Mina, Jonathan and the others champion through their use of now-outdated communicative developments such as short-hand, phonographs, typewriters, and telegraphs.

Finally, Kirkland’s daily delivery and recontextualisation of Dracula in a digital format allows the expansion of the novel into other adjacent digital spaces. Towndrow and Kogut (2020, p.14, 148) argue that “digital storytelling is fundamentally an active social process” while Leu et al. (2011, p.6-8) posit that collaborative, social practices are one key difference between online and offline reading experiences. Likewise, Valenza and Stephens (2012, p.75-77) assert the relationship between author, reader, and text is evolving alongside the reading experience due to the rise of socially connected digital communities; Skaines agrees (2010, p.96, 102). Dracula Daily is popular on social media sites such as Twitter and Tumblr, with discussions expanding into new digital spaces and offering readers opportunities to connect with the text and other readers in ways Stoker could never have imagined. Stepanic (2022, p.2) notes Dracula Daily’s social media popularity taps into modern snark and meme culture. In an age of on-demand entertainment consumption, Dracula Daily harkens back to the days of ‘appointment viewing’ and allows for a flourishing “ecosystem” (Stepanic, 2022, p.2) of online content to develop, further enhancing readers’ engagement and interaction with the text in new contexts. It also democratises Stoker’s classic text, opening it up for interpretation and engagement with new audiences on new platforms.

Discussions about Dracula Daily on Twitter reveals that digital texts can move into adjacent digital spaces to enhance reader connectivity.
Likewise, Dracula Daily’s popularity on Tumblr democratises the original novel in digital spaces and keeps it relevant for modern audiences.
Dracula Daily reveals the potential for digital texts to move into adjacent online spaces and foster connection between readers and other texts, as seen through this meme.

However, this expansion into adjacent online spaces raises further questions around how we define and categorise digital texts. While I categorise Dracula Daily as a recontextualised or digitised literary text due to Kirkland’s transformation of the printed original to a digital environment, Kitson defines electronically augmented texts as ones where online resources expand opportunities for commentary, interpretation, and engagement  (2017, p.59). Dracula Daily could arguably be an electronically augmented text, highlighting the difficulty around defining nebulous digital literature. 

This text is certainly not without criticism. The email format and associated substack archive of past episodes is difficult to navigate, lacking the ability to move easily between posts. Kirkland’s digital reworking of Stoker’s original removes many peritextual elements which enhanced verisimilitude, such as the note explaining that all documents were truthful reflections of actual events. However, new peritextual features are added; each episode features funny captions which encourage the cynical, irreverent tone of the aforementioned online discussions and maintain the narrative’s relevance for modern audiences. 

The substack archive with its snarky, humorous subheading summaries of each episode’s content taps into modern attitudes towards reading.

Dracula Daily could potentially use more features offered by its new digital format, such as interactive maps, images, and sounds which could further enhance readers’ engagement and understanding. However, anecdotal discussions with students in my Year 11 English Extension class reveal it’s an engaging way to explore the original; recently I’ve enjoyed having my students run up excitedly to discuss the latest instalment. Dracula Daily could be a meaningful resource to study alongside Stoker’s Dracula, and can inspire similar recontextualisations with other texts as a learning activity to explore how we value literature and how responses to texts change over time.

 

 

814 words.

Reference list:

Allan, C. (2017). Digital fiction: ‘Unruly object’ or literary artefact? English in Australia, 52(2), 21-27.

Bourchardon, S., & Heckman, D. (2012). Digital manipulability and digital literature. Electronic Book Review.

Hayles, K. (2007). Electronic literature: What is it? https://www.eliterature.org/pad/elp.html

Heckman, D., O’Sullivan, J. (2018). Electronic literature: contexts and poetics. Literary Studies in the Digital Age: An Evolving Anthology.

Kirkland, M. (2021). Archive. Dracula Daily. https://draculadaily.substack.com/archive

Kirkland, M. (2022). About. Dracula Daily. https://draculadaily.substack.com/about

Kitson, L. (2017). Exploring opportunities for literary literacy with e-literature: To infinity and beyond. Australian Literacy Educators’ Association. Literacy Learning, 23(2), 58-68.

Leu, D. J. et al (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: Expanding the literacy and learning curriculum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(1), 5-14.

Lysaught, D. (2022a, August 7). ETL533 2.3: Challenges of using digital literature in the classroom. All You Read Is Love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/07/etl533-2-3-challenges-of-using-digital-literature-in-the-classroom/

Lysaught, D. (2022b, August 14). ETL533 Evaluating digital literature: Deeper considerations. All You Read Is Love. https://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/allyoureadislove/2022/08/14/etl533-evaluating-digital-literature-deeper-considerations/

Skaines, R. L. (2010). The shifting author-reader dynamic: online novel communities as a bridge from print to digital literature. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 16(1), 95–111.

Stepanic, S. (2022, May 20). ‘Dracula Daily’ reanimates the classic vampire novel for the age of memes and snark. The Conversation.

Strickland, S. (n.d.). Born digital. Poetry Foundation. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/articles/69224/born-digital

Towndrow, P. A., & Kogut, G. (2020). Digital storytelling for educative purposes: providing an evidence-base for classroom practice. Studies in Singapore Education: Research Innovation & Practice 1. Singapore: Springer.

Valenza, J. K., & Stephens, W. (2012). Reading remixed. Educational Leadership, 69(6), 75-78.

ETL533 3.2: Exploring Digital Forms

Explore innovative digital literature sites. What did you enjoy most? How could you incorporate social networking sites for literature organisation and access, such as Inside a Dog, GoodReads or LibraryThing into your practice?

 

This week I explored a few of the immersive multimedia journalism resources such as K’gari and My Grandmother’s Lingo, and thought that they could be an interesting way to engage students with non-fiction texts and current affairs (typically perceived as ‘boring’ by many teens). I personally found that the multimodal, immersive nature of these resources helped me remember the key points and allowed me to connect the information in the articles to my prior knowledge and experiences very effectively.

I also looked into Beowulf in 100 Tweets, which I thought was a fantastic resource that I could easily incorporate into my Year 11 English Extension program where we look at the relationship between texts, cultures and values. I think that my students would respond well to a similar learning activity where they could take one of the texts we study and recontextualise it as a tweet or social media post to explore the ways that context affects response over time. Beowulf in 100 Tweets also linked really nicely to one that my students showed me this week: Dracula Daily, where the epistolary form of the original novel is harnessed by networking technologies such as email, Tumblr and Twitter. While anecdotal, the conversations in my classroom suggest that these types of recontextualised literary texts can be powerful and engaging learning tools.

There were some resources that I enjoyed less, however. War Horse (the app for the iPad) had a timeline along with some interesting links, videos, and interviews to help readers understand the context, but the text itself was just a digitised version of the print novel (with an accompanying audio version). I didn’t feel that this app utilised the immersive, interactive possibilities afforded by the format to enhance reader experience or support the function of the text as effectively as it could have. Likewise, Alice for the iPad seemed rather gimmicky and its ‘interactive’ elements were distracting rather than elevating my understanding and enjoyment.

I like the idea of incorporating social networking sites into my practice, since it expands my students’ sense of connection to the world of the text and allows them to feel a sense of belonging with other readers. I personally have experimented with tracking my reading journey this year via Instagram, GoodReads and The Storygraph App. While I like the way these resources use my data to help me reflect on my reading preferences and connect me with similar books and readers, I am concerned about the privacy implications of encouraging their use in my classrooms by my students, though it would be a great opportunity to discuss digital citizenship. They also take a lot of time to keep up to date, and you can see from my Instagram experiment that it has fallen by the wayside.

ETL533 2.3: Challenges of using digital literature in the classroom

There is an enormous difference between facility with technology and being able to engage with the content of digital literature as a consumer or a creator. What are some ways (small or large) you could alter your pedagogy to ensure technology and digital literature is embedded in your educational practices?

In this week’s readings I liked the distinction made by Allan (2017) between the different types of digital fiction:

1. eBooks or “paper-under-glass” texts;

2. Narrative or enhanced apps; and

3. “Born digital” multimodal narratives.

This distinction fit nicely with Unsworth’s classifications (via Walsh, 2013) from the Module 1 readings, where he identified three main categories of e-literature:

1. Recontextualised literary texts;

2. Electronically augmented literary texts; and

3. Digitally originated texts.

This also links with previous discussions I’ve read about what counts as digital literature, which emphasise the difference between “the digitised and digital literature” (for more on this, please feel free to check out my blog post).

In our school we have a virtual library with eBooks and audiobooks that our students, staff and parents can engage with, but it’s an expensive subscription (last year’s invoice was over $3000 – more than a third of our yearly budget!) with logistical issues around promotion and access. It also falls into the digitised, ‘paper-under-glass’ or ‘recontextualised literary texts’ category where technology facilitates access rather than exists as an innovative and inherent aspect of the texts. While it was a useful resource during last year’s lockdowns, data suggests that average use each month is down on last year’s figures. This year our school removed the DEAR (Drop Everything and Read) program, so I’ve been trialing a Wide Reading Program with a few Year 7 classes (initially 4, now dropped back to 2). Given Foley’s (2012) findings about student engagement with ebooks, it might be worthwhile creating activities for the Wide Reading Program which target and promote our virtual library.

One of the texts I’ve been investigating for the second assessment is the iPoe app by iClassics Collection. From my engagement with this app so far, it appears to fall under the ‘enhanced app’ or ‘electronically augmented literary text’ categories outlined above. I chose this because a) Poe is awesome fun and b) we have a Year 8 unit on suspenseful stories that this would work well with. I had a great time exploring this app and playing with its features, designed to immerse the reader with the texts’ Gothic emotions, settings, and atmosphere. I think this is a resource that could work really well with our Year 8 unit, though it cost $8.99 for all three volumes/apps, therefore presenting a financial and logistical issue for faculties with tight budgets.

This week I also had a little play with Microsoft Sway, in an attempt to create my own ‘born digital’ narrative in preparation for the final assessment. One of my projects this year has been to build up the Student Media Team I introduced to the school last year, and Microsoft Sway was one of the tools we were investigating for our student-designed newsletter. While it has many useful features and is (mostly) user-friendly, one issue I found while playing with it is that this tool lacks the ability to link to content within the Sway, and thus might not work for my intended ‘choose your own adventure’ style narrative. However, this investigation did remind me that for larger projects teachers might have, it takes time to find the right tools with the right features for their vision. While wonderful guides exist (such as http://www.schrockguide.net/bloomin-apps.html and https://instructionaldesignbykelly.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/the-evolution-of-blooms-taxonomy-and-how-it-applies-to-teachers-today/ from this week’s readings) these take time to investigate and, given the current educational climate, this is time that many teachers simply cannot spare. This is where an innovative, technologically current teacher-librarian could be an invaluable resource for time-poor teachers!

 

 

Allan, C. (2017). Digital fiction: ‘Unruly object’ or literary artefact? English in Australia, 52(2), 21-27.

Foley, C. (2012). Ebooks for leisure and learning. Scan, 31, pp. 6-14.

Walsh, M. (2013). Literature in a digital environment (Ch. 13). In L. McDonald (Ed.), A literature companion for teachers. Marrickville, NSW: Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).

ETL533 Assessment 1: Online Reflective Journal Blog Task

Using your readings and interaction with the subject to date, develop a statement about your current knowledge and understanding of concepts and practices in digital literature environments, tools and uses, within the context of your work or professional circumstances.

As I start ETL533, I’m already struck by its relevance to my experiences as a secondary English teacher. Digital literature is exciting and full of potential, but also fraught with uncertainty due to its complexity and relative obscurity when contrasted with the traditional literary forms familiar to classroom teachers. 

Even understanding the definition of digital literature is more complex than it first appears. Rowland (2021, para.2) notes that digital literature is difficult to determine, while Heckman and O’Sullivan state that it is “ambiguous because it is amorphous” (2018, para.1), evolving as new technologies, forms, and uses emerge. Hayles defines electronic literature as “digital born” (2007, para.10), while the Electronic Literature Organization states it combines literary elements alongside computer technology (Rowland, 2021, para.2) – though this seems outdated, since computers aren’t the only (or even the most popular) tool used to create and access digital resources. I personally like Groth’s focus on digital literature showcasing innovation and creativity via technology (Groth, via Rowland, 2021, para.3). However, users should be aware of the distinction between “the digitised and digital literature” (Heckman & O’Sullivan, 2018, para.4), with traditional printed texts which have been digitised (e.g. eBooks) often not making the cut as digital literature (Wright, 2019, para.2).

Part of the difficulty in defining digital literature is that understandings of traditional literature are also hotly debated (Krystal, 2014, para.1). When exploring this concept with my English Extension students, I often show them a variety of different definitions:

Screenshot from my introductory “Texts, Culture and Values” PowerPoint

We have great fun discussing what counts as “lasting artistic merit” and whose values are evident in the judgment of texts as “beautiful” or “excellent”. I imagine many traditional defenders of the Western Literary Canon would find it difficult to accept that digital literature meets these criteria, despite their potential as tools to engage and extend students in our classrooms (Wall, 2016, p.35). Yet these preconceived notions of what constitutes ‘literature’ also extend to our students. Hayles argues that readers approach texts with expectations formed by their knowledge of print works, and “electronic literature tests the boundaries of the literary and challenges us to re-think our assumptions of what literature can do and be” (2007, para.11). Clearly, the emergence of digital literature requires a paradigm shift as we expand our understanding of literature to include new forms reliant on new technologies and literacies. 

Yet where do we draw the line? If wordless picture books can count as literature, then why not immersive games with textual elements, such as The Witcher 3 or Horizon: Zero Dawn? Hayles notes that the line is far from clear, but perhaps depends on the ways users configure or interpret texts: “with games the user interprets in order to configure, whereas in works whose primary interest is narrative, the user configures in order to interpret” (2007, para.16).

The Witcher 3 allows players to explore and read in-game books – often with cheeky intertextual nods to pop culture. But is it digital literature?

Another challenge in pinning down digital literature emerges from the plethora of potential forms such storytelling can take. In addition to those listed previously (Lysaught, 2022, para.2-5), Rowland (2021) discusses four types of digital literature:

  1. Twitterature
  2. Hypertext
  3. Generators
  4. Video poetry

Several of my Year 10 students have recently raved about Markiplier, who uses YouTube to create exciting, interactive choose-your-own-adventure style narratives. 

As my students’ obsession reveals, digital storytelling can be a powerful way of engaging today’s students.

 

Words: 550

 

Reference list:

Hayles, K. (2007). Electronic literature: What is it? https://www.eliterature.org/pad/elp.html

Heckman, D., O’Sullivan, J. (2018). Electronic literature: Contexts and poetics. Literary Studies in the Digital Age: An Evolving Anthology. https://dlsanthology.mla.hcommons.org/electronic-literature-contexts-and-poetics/

Krystal, A. (2014, March). What is literature? In defense of the canon. Harper’s Magazine. https://harpers.org/archive/2014/03/what-is-literature/1/

Rowland, R. (2021, July 8). What is digital literature? Understanding the genre. Book Riot. https://bookriot.com/digital-literature/

Wall, J. (2016). Children’s literature in the digital world: How does multimodality support affective, aesthetic and critical response to narrative? by Alyson Simpson and Maureen Walsh. An extended abstract by June Wall. Scan 35(3), 34-36.

Wright, D. T. H. (2019, July 10). From Twitterbots to VR: 10 of the best examples of digital literature. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/from-twitterbots-to-vr-10-of-the-best-examples-of-digital-literature-110099