![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
Twenty years after the New London Group’s publication of A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies, we present an analytical literature review that traces the routes and roots of multiliteracies scholarship in Latin America. We found high research activity in Latin America in the areas of literacy education and critical literacy; indigenous, bilingual, and intercultural education; and technology and digital literacy. We argue that the inclusion of scholarship from the global South is essential to the goal of recognizing epistemological diversity. Further, different theories of knowledge need to coexist to transform diversity into cognitive justice. This article is an intercultural effort to widen the scope of literacy education inquiry in historically marginalized areas of the world.
This year marks the 20th anniversary of the New London Group’s (NLG) publication of A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies. The report has been influential in advancing theoretical, methodological, and, to a certain extent, pedagogical projects in the United States. The report contributed to a shift that was occurring in the field of literacy studies from an autonomous to an ideological model of literacy and from literacy events to literacy practices (Gee, 1989; Heath, 1983; Street, 1985). The authors offered a model that would be responsive to the increasing interaction across cultural and linguistic boundaries, the increasing tendency of texts to be modally dense, and issues of equity. Yet, the authors were mainly from the global North and represented worldviews and pedagogical advancements from a vantage point of relative privilege. Newfield and Stein (2000) pointed out that without recognition and inclusion of knowledge and realities of the global South, the multiliteracies project risked being implicated in the very dynamics of power it set out to criticize. Santos (2015) refers to diverse traditions of knowledge that arise from struggles of injustice as “epistemologies of the South.” Here, South is a metaphor for the struggle and suffering that is caused by capitalism, colonialism, and patriarchy. With this struggle comes the epistemological diversity based on new relationships to knowledge rooted in the experiences of the social groups who experience marginalization.
We recently wrote about the intersections of critical discourse analysis (CDA) and multiliteracies in the NLG project (Rogers & Trigos-Carrillo, in press). We learned that literacy scholars from around the world have engaged with and advanced constructs related to multiliteracies such as multimodality, design, and diversity. The multiliteracies framework proposed by NLG coalesced many of these ideas and practices that have deep roots in the struggle of indigenous and oppressed people. Indeed, Latin America, with its history of social movements, has been a vibrant site of multiliteracies work. It is that work that we will explore in this article.
The flow of knowledge has been unbalanced and, as a result, there has been little recognition of the knowledge produced in Latin America or the global South (Jaramillo & Vera, 2013; Tierney & Wei, 2016). This lack of recognition or what Santos (2012) calls the “sociology of absences” became a problem of practice for us as critically oriented literacy scholars (p. 52). Thus began our work of a genealogical literature review that traced the routes and roots of multiliteracies scholarship in Latin America.
Method
Review of Databases and Collection of Scholarship
We conducted an analytical review of the literature that included peer-reviewed articles, academic books, book chapters, and dissertations published in Spanish, English, and Portuguese. Due to the difficulty of obtaining Latin American scholarship, we used different systems of data collection. The procedure was similar to a snowball sampling because of the limited access to scholarship from Latin America in traditional Western databases. We conducted a search in Google Scholar because it provided access to scholarship published digitally through Latindex, Redalyc, and Scielo, the most popular Latin American databases.
We used search terms that captured main ideas inherent in multiliteracies scholarship: multimodality, multiliteracy, design, and digital literacy. The fact that some English words do not have one literal translation into Spanish and Portuguese became a challenge. In particular, the word literacidad (literacy) in Spanish is a neologism that dates from 2004, when Zavala, Niño, and Ames edited a book about new theoretical and ethnographic perspectives to writing and society. The same year, Condemarín (2004) published an article about the use of literacidad and its relevance given the recent incorporation of information and communication technology (ICT) in education. The word used before 2004 was alfabetización (alphabetization). Although the meanings of literacidad are still under debate and its uses are not consistent (Marinho, 2013; Mora, 2012), many multiliteracies scholars have adopted this terminology. In contrast, in Brazil, the word letramento (literacy) has been widely accepted in the academic community since the late 1990s influenced by Soares’s work on literacy education (Abio, 2014).
In order to overcome the translation challenges, we used different translated versions of key words such as “New London Group,” “multimodality,” and “digital literacy” in Spanish and Portuguese. For example, for the word “multiliteracies,” we used the equivalent Spanish words: “multiliteracidades,” “multialfabetización,” and “múltiples alfabetizaciones.” Other words, such as “design,” have not been appropriated in the literature about multiliteracies in Spanish, so we used other words that encompassed similar concepts such as “multimodalidad” (multimodality).
Then, we conducted a more focalized search through Google, Academia, and ResearchGate of identified authors to confirm their list of publications. This list was completed by comparing different bibliographies found in curricula vitae, university webpages, and Google Scholar author profiles and by confirming author’s identification in the first page of each document. Finally, we looked at the reference list of consulted articles and, in some cases, we directly contacted the scholar who recommended other literature. Most of this scholarship was written in Spanish.
Analysis
Our analysis involved the organization of data by country, which included author, affiliation, bibliographical references, and specific references to NLG-related scholarship. Then, we conducted an open coding of the research interests by author (65 authors) and their contribution to the multiliteracies project. Finally, we created main categories of analysis and cross-compared data by author and theme. We uncovered 325 records from all the search efforts.
We inductively read the scholarship, so we could identify multiliteracies constructs that were practiced and theorized within Latin American contexts. We attended to the variation of scholars who published during this time period and their frequency, rate, and location of publication. We identified groups of scholars by country and research areas who consistently assumed a multiliteracies perspective in their research. We also developed an interactive map that helped us to visually locate clusters of research activity in Latin America (Online Appendix 1, also available at https://goo.gl/3WvIGx).
The main limitation of this study is that it is not exhaustive due to the limited access to Latin American scholarship. Another limitation is that we provide a synthesis of contributions that come from countries that are quite different socially, politically, economically from each other and from authors who embrace different theoretical perspectives. As we present the “Latin American voice of multiliteracies,” we also acknowledge the diversity within that construct.
Researcher Reflexivity
Lina Trigos-Carrillo is a scholar from Colombia and speaks Spanish as her first language, is literate in English, and reads Portuguese. She attended the National University of Colombia, a public institution characterized by its diversity and social consciousness. She has worked and conducted educational research in Latin America for more than 10 years. Her interest in the multiliteracies project strengthened when she moved to the United States in 2011, and she experienced being part of a linguistic and ethnic minority. This experience forced her to look back at Latin America and its relationship with the global North from a critical lens.
Rebecca Rogers is a scholar from the United States whose undergraduate and graduate work were at the University of Albany. English is her first language and she can read academic Spanish with time and support. Over the past 15 years, she has studied and experienced social movements and popular education initiatives in Venezuela, Mexico, and Argentina. In 2009, Rebecca was a Fulbright Fellow at the Universidad de San Martín in Argentina where she taught CDA and learned more about the history of multiliteracies and CDA. It is from these experiences and from collaborating with Latin American scholars such as Lina that she has become committed to understanding and disrupting inequities in flows of knowledge across people and institutions.
As an intercultural research team, we recognize and appreciate the common ground and also the difference in our experiences and ways of knowing. This difference provides leverage for us to dialogue about epistemic privilege, epistemological diversity, and cognitive justice. On a more procedural and technical level, our intercultural collaboration permits linguistic and digital access to sources that are not easily available in mainstream databases.
Latin American Influences on Multiliteracies
We identified three clusters of high research activity in Latin America that involve ideas of multiliteracies: (1) literacy education and critical literacy; (2) indigenous, bilingual, and intercultural education; and (3) technology and digital literacy. These studies engage with principles of multiliteracies but also reformulate these ideas. For example, bilingual and intercultural scholars in Latin America have broadened the field’s understanding of what is knowable by acknowledging indigenous epistemologies. Scholars in Latin America have a track record of influencing policy and practice that draws attention to the importance of political impact of the multiliteracies agenda.
We developed an interactive map that visually represents the Latin American “voice” of multiliteracies that can be seen in the quantity and frequency of scholarship included in our review.1 There is a group of scholars whose publications appeared with frequency. However, there are many others adapting and advancing multiliteracies in a variety of disciplines, from sociology to psychology, to political science, to journalism, and to linguistics.
It is important to note that a few of the original NLG authors have had their work translated into Spanish and Portuguese, which has helped with the circulation of ideas (e.g., Cazden, 1991; Gee, 2005; Fairclough, 1997; we compiled a list of translations in Online Appendix 2). However, many of the leading voices of multiliteracies scholarship in Latin America have not had their work translated into English, resulting in an imbalance in distribution of scholarship that truncates the promise of epistemological diversity.
Literacy Education and Critical Literacy
Literacy education has been part of the revolutionary struggle in Latin America (Arnove & Graff, 2008). The 1980 Nicaraguan Literacy Crusade, for example, was born from a desire to democratize society by providing a literacy education that would help people develop awareness of their oppression and develop the tools for liberation (Arnove & Graff, 2008). Yet, the Literacy Crusade was also critiqued for positioning Spanish literacy as the dominant form of language. In the early 1990s, there was a resurgence of social movements in Latin America, many of which were ignited in opposition to neoliberal policies generated in the global North.
The influence of Brazilian educator and scholar Paulo Freire, who brought into educational discussions the notions of social justice, power, and inequality, has been enormous around the globe (Farías, 2005). In the 1970s, Freire developed a notion of reading and writing that included a social and political perspective (Kalman, 2008). Through literacy, people can read the word and the world around them (Freire & Macedo, 1987) and therefore participate in social transformation. In Latin America, there is a solid body of research and programs on popular education based on Freirean scholarship. According to Kalman (2008), “some organizers of informal education programs associate literacy with a more complex notion taken from Freire’s theories of consciousness raising, and orient their efforts towards building a more socially and politically aware population” (p. 527). From this perspective, pedagogy is relevant when it relates to popular practice and knowledge in order to promote political participation (Brito, 2007).
In the last two decades, the number of scholars who conceptualize literacy from critical sociocultural perspectives has increased in Latin America, challenging widespread conceptions of literacy as basic reading and writing skills (Kalman, 2008). Literacy research is connected to social equality, as it challenges elitist school practices (López-Bonilla, 2013) and follows a critical trajectory of the local culture in order to address the Latin American reality and foreign representations about it (López-Bonilla & Pérez, 2009). These efforts encompass a broad scope of areas, such as early literacy (Soares, 2004), academic literacy in secondary education (López-Bonilla, 2013) and higher education (Carlino, 2013; Marinho, 2010), community and collective literacy practices (Kalman, 2004), literacy in rural communities (Ames, 2013), multiliteracies in the school and social inclusion (Rojo, 2009), and foreign language education (Farías, 2005).
Given the diversity of the region, there is an interest in the literacy practices that occur in communities where school is not necessarily the norm. This work analyzes how people access written culture and how this knowledge can potentially influence cultural and educational policy. Kalman’s (2008) approach to collective literacy practice “privileges the relationship of readers and writers with others around text over the direct relationship between individuals and written language” (p. 531). Kalman’s scholarship includes an understanding of power and critique as collectively enacted and distributed.
In another research line, academic literacy is connected to ideology, identity, and social change. As Harvey (2009) stated, “studying academic literacy in all its complexity requires us to accept that we face a social practice in which disciplinary ideologies, thinking frames, and language varieties converge” (p. 628). From a sociocritical approach, scholars have studied academic literacy in secondary education from the students’ perspectives (López-Bonilla, Tinajero, & Pérez, 2006), teachers’ identities (López-Bonilla, 2006), and curricular reform (Tinajero, López-Bonilla, & Pérez, 2007).
Perhaps the most important contribution to the multiliteracies project is the work on critical literacy. Grounded on Freire’s scholarship, a group of Brazilian scholars has particularly advanced the field of critical literacy in Latin America. In 2007, Lynn Mario Menezes de Souza edited the first number of the Critical Literacy Journal. In the preface, Souza (2007) defines literacy “as a socio-culturally situated practice involving the ongoing negotiation of meaning in continuously contested sites of meaning construction” (p. 4); all literacy practice is to a certain extent critical. Then, the word critical is understood as an emphasis to “sites of various socio-cultural crises in the form of continuously contested meaning construction and negotiation” (p. 4), such as citizenship education, development education, foreign language education, and teacher education. In 2011, Souza redefined critical literacy as an act, based on Freire’s conception of critical perception or the reflective act; consequently, the word critical is an emphasis on the temporal and historical aspects of literacy and “its political and ethical role in education” (p. 1).
Embedded within this notion of critical literacy is an emphasis on multimodality that “considers the present needs of the multimodal and hypertextual communication” and the “preparation for a critical and participative cultural and social practice” (Monte-Mór, 2008, p. 1). Furthermore, critical literacies recognize the diversity of situated approaches, which “should often address innovative proposals, such as cross-discipline ones, as a way to respect the new ways of knowledge construction…and develop meaning making” (p. 6). Critical literacies in Latin America are particularly connected to situated meaning construction and political activism.
Another group of scholars have advanced the notion of critical literacies in the context of foreign language learning. In most Latin American countries, students are required to learn a foreign language as part of their school and college curricula, English being the predominant foreign language. Critical language awareness is often incorporated in this context to advance three principles:
first, that teaching is emancipatory; second, that teaching is oriented towards the recognition of difference; and third, an engagement with teaching as an oppositional practice in which all participants are continuously thinking towards the prospects for empowerment, particularly of sectors that have been disempowered or excluded in the past. (Farías, 2005, p. 215)
Critical framing is important in foreign language education because it acknowledges the relationship between language and power; in this case, the recognition of English as a global language and its effects in Latin American local culture and identity. NLG scholarship has informed research on foreign language teacher education and how literacy and foreign language education are related to particular sociopolitical and technological contexts (Mora, 2011).
Other scholars have studied how the rapidly changing ICT influences foreign language teaching and learning from a critical perspective (Farías, Obilinovic, Orrego, & Gregersen, 2014). Research on multimodality also informs changes in foreign language policy and practice in the region (Farías, Obilinovic, & Orrego, 2011; Mattos, 2014). In Chile, there is a group of scholars advancing multimodality studies (Farías, Obilinovic, & Orrego, 2010). These studies include multimodality in foreign language learning (Farías & Araya, 2015), foreign language education curriculum (Abrahams & Farías, 2010), and the analysis of foreign language textbooks (Farías & Cabezas, 2015). Multiliteracies scholarship in Latin America has emphasized local problems that can contribute to enrich global perspectives.
Indigenous, Bilingual, and Intercultural Education
Indigenous, bilingual, and intercultural education is one of the strongest areas of research in Latin America. The linguistic diversity of the region—with 420 indigenous languages, from which 103 are transnational or cross-border—provides abundant opportunities for research. In particular, scholars have advanced ideas related to diversity in indigenous education. Beyond the NLG (1996) call to investigate “what is appropriate education for women, for indigenous peoples, for immigrants who do not speak the national language, for speakers of non-standard languages?” (p. 61), Latin American scholars have immersed themselves in indigenous communities to understand how people use literacy within specific communities (e.g., Heras & Green, 2010).
Studies on indigenous literacy contest the ideal of an official language, largely represented by Spanish in most countries and Portuguese in Brazil. For example, Zavala’s studies of Quechua challenge deficit views of the indigenous peoples by focusing on Quechua use as a resource and a critical approach to intercultural bilingual education. In Peru, there is debate about bilingual education for indigenous people. Consequently, scholars advocate for policies that contribute to the revitalization of indigenous languages and literacy as well as the elimination of deficit ideologies (e.g., Zavala, 2014). A critical pedagogy of intercultural bilingualism engages with the NLG (1996) idea that multiple modes of representation differ according to the culture and context and incorporates situated practice and critical framing. This is particularly relevant in the context of indigenous bilingual education because indigenous linguistic practices often contest hegemonic power relationships and ideologies (Zavala, 2009). For example, writing within indigenous cultures is an activity transformed through the process of cultural translation, intercultural semiosis, and decolonization practices (Andreotti & Souza, 2008). This work challenges the premises of culturalism, literacy, and education raised by the NLG.
Importantly, Latin American scholars have influenced policy and practice; for instance, the implementation of a language policy promoting Quechua in the Peruvian Andes and teacher practice transformation (Zavala, 2015). As a result, teachers become more critically aware and construct “alternative ideologies and subjectivities that contribute to transform the power relationships typically enacted” (p. 16). These studies are exemplary of achieved empowerment among indigenous communities.
In Brazil, Souza (2002) has conducted research on literacy and language in indigenous communities from a critical perspective. His work highlights the multimodal texts produced by indigenous people and the epistemologies behind them (Souza, 2003). Other scholars have done well-known work with the Xacriabá indigenous group, in particular about their numeracy and literacy practices and Xacriabá youngsters’ identity (Marinho, 2013; Mendonça, Lima, & Gusmão, 2016). Additionally, Maher (2010, 2016) has studied linguistic policies and their influence on teacher identity in the Western Brazilian Amazonia. In Colombia, Soler has also studied indigenous bilingualism (Soler, 2013), discourse and representations about indigenous people in textbooks (Soler, 2008), and racism and exclusion in education (Soler & Pardo, 2007).
Latin American scholars have addressed a variety of sociopolitical factors involved in indigenous, bilingual, and intercultural education, such as policy critique and advocacy, gender and social identities, power ideologies, indigenous/intercultural teacher practice, racism, migration, intercultural bilingual programs, and technology use. These scholars advance understandings of diversity, a core multiliteracies construct. First, some studies question the NLG’s notion of culture and reformulate some of their fundamental questions by acknowledging indigenous epistemologies and their relation with literacy. Second, this scholarship has influenced policy and practice in the region, which reinforces the political and critical facet of literacy education research. Finally, Latin American scholars have advanced the pedagogy of multiliteracies by adding other dimensions to the “multi” component of this pedagogy through the incorporation of indigenous knowledge and practice.
Technology and Digital Literacy
In 1996, NLG pointed out “the proliferation of communication channels and media supports and extends cultural and subcultural diversity” (p. 61). However, 20 years ago, access to new communication technologies in Latin America was different to what was happening in the global North. In 2017, the incorporation of digital literacy in formal education is still in transition and its distribution is very unequal. The main challenges that Latin American countries face in the integration of ICT in education are access to electricity, incorporation to policy and curriculum, improvement of radio/television-assisted instruction in rural areas, access to computers and Internet connectivity, effective integration of technology in education, and teachers’ ICT training and qualification (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 2012). In contrast, digital technologies have been adapted to the local communities’ contexts and needs. As a part of resistance to neoliberal policies and practices, people have creatively engaged with digital literacies to forge new social and educational spaces.
The concept of multiliteracies as the interaction with new ICT in educational settings has taken a distinct shape in the region. In Latin America, the recent introduction of ICT in education has encouraged the interest of researchers who endorse a pedagogy of multiliteracies perspective. In 2004, Clavijo and Quintana published a book about the sociocultural contexts of the use of hypertext and hypermedia in first- and second-language education. In 2005, Ferreiro critically analyzed the notion of digital literacy and the role of libraries and schools in digital literacy education.
Thenceforward, scholars have studied multimodal learning and digital literacy in varied contexts and research areas. Clavijo has conducted extensive research grounded in Freire’s critical literacy and NLG pedagogy of multiliteracies. Her work advances the understanding of community digital literacies from an asset-based perspective (Medina, Ramírez, & Clavijo, 2015) and its relation to teacher education (Clavijo & Espitia, 2011). In Mexico, Guerrero and Kalman (2011) studied how ICT educational reform was implemented in Mexican schools and its challenges in particular sociopolitical contexts. Guerrero (2014) also studied the appropriation of ICT and literacy in rural contexts and adult education; and Kalman contributed to the study of technology use in rural communities, teacher learning and digital technologies, and the incorporation of digital literacy in the classroom (Kalman & Rendón, 2014). Contreras-Castillo, Pérez, and Favela (2006) studied online education and the uses of digital technologies.
In Brazil, Abio (2015) has studied teaching and learning Spanish as a second language, particularly, as it relates to digital technology, multimodality, critical and visual literacy, and the study of infographic genres and textbooks. Monte-Mór (2015) reviewed the concept of learning by design introduced by NLG in 1996 in the context of Brazilian education. A consistent thread in these studies is the critical consideration of technology in situated contexts and the understanding of how communities adapt technology as they challenge mainstream use.
Other studies include digital literacies and critical literacy (Vargas, 2015), social networking sites for language learning and multimodal social semiotic perspectives (Álvarez, 2016), the integration of digital writing into academic literacies (Olaizola, 2015), and ICT use in indigenous education (Tinajero, 2015). Across this literature, critical pedagogy and sociocultural situatedness inform the understanding of how technology and digital literacy are integrated in diverse educational settings.
From Epistemological Diversity to Cognitive Justice
In the last decade, multiliteracies scholarship has advanced in Latin America. The spike in activity can be attributed to a number of factors including the fact that scholars in the region have more access to knowledge online, they produce more scientific research, they collaborate more with scholars from the global North, and there are greater numbers of doctoral degrees earned (Luchilo, 2010). The scholarship has provided descriptive studies of multiliteracies, bilingual, intercultural education, and technology and digital literacy in Latin America. It has also advanced some of the original ideas around critique, multimodality, and power.
Yet, multiliteracies scholarship generated in Latin America has been mostly invisible in North America. Scholars from the global North usually benefit from the scholarship produced in Latin America by receiving more citations and prestige, while scholars from the global South receive very little in return. Latin American journals have shouldered the burden of cost to translate articles into English for wider circulation, but journals housed in the global North have not done the same. Indeed, we found few English translations of seminal multiliteracies scholarship by Latin American scholars. Those who want to make their work available to a wider audience have to publish in English and in their first language. Additionally, Latin American scholars also face challenges when trying to publish in English, and they are sometimes rejected without receiving additional resources on how to become part of the dominant academic community (Englander & López-Bonilla, 2011; Flowerdew, 2001).
Freire’s scholarship stands as a clear exception. His impact in the global North can be explained partly as the result of the sociopolitical context in which he lived and the fact that he spent time living in the United States and his work was disseminated in English with the collaboration of North American scholars such as Macedo, Shor, and Giroux. Freire’s ideas have contributed to the development of a social pedagogy that embraces diversity, cultural identity, and popular knowledge as configured in the global South. However, in the 21st century, Latin American education and scholarship still face tensions between the neoliberal demands and intellectual influences coming from the global North, and the resistance legacy enacted through popular education and critical pedagogy (Gisho, 2009).
As a consequence, several initiatives have been developed toward the construction of epistemologies and theories of the South (Jaramillo & Vera, 2013). The epistemologies of the South refer to,
the retrieval of new processes of production and valorisation of valid knowledges, whether scientific or non-scientific, and of new relations among different types of knowledge on the basis of the practices of the classes and social groups that have suffered, in a systematic way, the oppression and discrimination caused by capitalism and colonialism. (Santos, 2012, p. 51)
This initiative emphasizes the global South’s postcolonial resistance to the practices of colonization and subordination enacted by the global North (Jaramillo & Vera, 2013). It represents a call to the global North to embrace non-Western epistemologies and knowledges in their academic community, which implies diverse forms of comprehending the world.
We have provided an example of what happens when we widen the scope of inquiry and search for scholarship produced by historically marginalized scholars and areas of the world. This broadened vista is what is referred to as epistemological diversity, which is the idea that different people have different understandings and ways of acting on the world based on their orientation to knowledge (Santos, 2012). Taking this a step further, we have argued that in addition to recognition, different theories of knowledge need to coexist to transform diversity into cognitive justice (Visvanathan, 1997). We have made the point that theories about multiliteracies generated in the global North have been given priority in our collective understanding of the influence of NLG. The invisibility of scholarship from Latin America in North American scholarship is troubling because of the accumulative impact it has on our field, discipline, and profession. Without access to and recognition of diverse traditions of scholarship, we will continue to reinforce hierarchies of thought, knowledge, and belief systems.
A first step toward cognitive justice is the publication of articles in other languages, in different Englishes, and translations into English of seminal work originally published by scholars from the global South. As Englander and López-Bonilla (2011) recognized, “publishing scientific articles is a crucial activity performed by a scientist to demonstrate inclusion as part of the community of scientists” (p. 395). This requires Editorial Boards to raise awareness of internationalism and issues of knowledge and language bias. Further steps include more reciprocal intercultural academic collaboration, mobility to the South, and integration of non-Western knowledge and epistemologies into the mainstream academic community.
In the area of multiliteracies, scholars from the global South have advanced the original NLG (1996) goal of extending “the idea and scope of literacy pedagogy to account for the context of our culturally and linguistically diverse and increasingly globalized societies” (p. 61) by studying the complexity of literacy practices in communities that face multifaceted socioeconomic and political challenges. Now, the global North should share the responsibility to include diverse epistemologies, discourses, and knowledges into their academic culture and community.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Notes
1.
The URL “https://goo.gl/3WvIGx” will take you to the interactive map we developed to visually display clusters of multiliteracies research activity in Latin America.
Supplemental Material
Supplementary material is available for this article online.
References
|
Abio, G. (2014). Una aproximación a las infografías y su presencia en los libros de enseñanza de español para brasileños. MarcoELE: Revista Didáctica Español Lengua Extranjera, 18, 1. Google Scholar | |
|
Abio, G. (2015). Uso de redes sociales virtuales por profesores de lenguas extranjeras en Brasil. Un estudio exploratorio. Revista EDaPECI, 15, 10–29. Google Scholar | |
|
Abrahams, M., Farías, M. (2010). Struggling for change in Chilean EFL teacher education. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 12, 110–118. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Álvarez, J. (2016). Social networking sites for language learning: Examining earning theories in nested semiotic spaces. Signo y Pensamiento, 35, 35–68. Google Scholar | |
|
Ames, P. (2013). Los usos concretos y los significados de la literacidad en una comunidad rural—un caserío mestizo de la Amazonía: Organización local, identidad y estatus. Scripta, 17, 113–136. Google Scholar | |
|
Andreotti, V., Souza, L. M. (2008). Learning to read the world: Through other eyes. Derby, England: Global Education. Google Scholar | |
|
Arnove, R., Graff, H. (Eds.). (2008). National literacy campaigns and movements: Historical and comparative perspectives (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Google Scholar | |
|
Brito, Z. (2007). Educación popular, cultura e identidad desde la perspectiva de Paulo Freire. In Gadotti, M., Gomez, M., Mafra, J., Fernandes de Alencar, A. (Eds.), Paulo Freire: Contribuciones para la pedagogiía (pp. 29–45). Buenos Aires, Argentina: CLACSO. Google Scholar | |
|
Carlino, P. (2013). Alfabetización académica diez años después. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 18, 355–381. Google Scholar | |
|
Cazden, C. (1991). El discurso en el aula. El lenguaje de la enseñanza y del aprendizaje. Barcelona, Spain: Paidós. Google Scholar | |
|
Clavijo, A., Espitia, M. (2011). Virtual forums: A pedagogical tool for collaboration and learning in teacher education. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 13, 29–42. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Clavijo, A., Quintana, A. (2004). Maestros y estudiantes escritores de hiperhistorias. Una experiencia pedagógica en lengua materna y en lengua extranjera. Bogotá, Colombia: UDFJC. Google Scholar | |
|
Condemarín, M. (2004). Redefinición de la literacidad y sus implicancias en el rol mediador del profesor frente a la tecnología digital. Lectura y Vida, 25, 24–31. Google Scholar | |
|
Contreras-Castillo, J., Pérez, C., Favela, J. (2006). Assessing the use of instant messaging in online learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 14, 205–218. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Englander, K., López-Bonilla, G. (2011). Acknowledging or denying membership: Reviewers’ responses to non-anglophone scientists’ manuscripts. Discourse Studies, 13, 395–416. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Fairclough, N. (1997). Discurso, mudança e hegemonia. In Pedro, E. (Ed.), Análise crítica do discurso: Uma perspectiva sociopolítica e functional (pp. 77–104). Lisboa, Portugal: Caminho. Google Scholar | |
|
Farías, M. (2005). Critical language awareness in foreign language learning. Literatura y Lingüística, 16, 211–222. Google Scholar | |
|
Farías, M., Araya, C. (2015). Hacia una caracterización de los textos multimodales usados en formación inicial docente en lenguaje y comunicación. Literatura y Lingüística, 32, 283–304. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Farías, M., Cabezas, D. (2015). Identity imposition in EFL textbooks for adult secondary education in Chile. In van de Craats, I., Kurvers, J., van Hout, R. (Eds.), Adult literacy, second language, and cognition (pp. 69–88). Nijmegen, the Netherlands: Radboud University. Google Scholar | |
|
Farías, M., Obilinovic, K., Orrego, R. (2010). Modelos de aprendizaje multimodal y enseñanza-aprendizaje de lenguas extranjeras. Universitas Tarraconensis. Revista de Ciències de l’Educació, 1, 55–74. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Farías, M., Obilinovic, K., Orrego, R. (2011). Engaging multimodal learning and second/foreign language education in dialogue. Trabalhos de Lingüística Aplicada, 50, 133–151. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Farías, M., Obilinovic, K., Orrego, R., Gregersen, T. (2014). Evaluating types and combinations of multimodal presentations in the retention and transfer of concrete vocabulary in EFL learning. Revista Signos, 47, 21. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Ferreiro, E. (2005). Librarians and basic education teachers in the context of ‘digital literacy’. IFLA Journal, 31, 35–44. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, 35, 121–150. Google Scholar | |
|
Freire, P., Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar | |
|
Gee, J. (1989). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Introduction. The Journal of Education, 171, 5–176. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Gee, J. (2005). La ideología en los discursos, lingüística social y alfabetizaciones. Coruña, España: Fundación Paideia Galiza. Google Scholar | |
|
Gisho, A. (2009). Pedagogía social en América Latina: Legados de Paulo Freire. Relaciones, Serie: R-Educación, XXIV. Retrieved from http://www.chasque.net/frontpage/relacion/0008/r-educacion.htm Google Scholar | |
|
Guerrero, I. (2014). “Echar tortillas” no requiere clases de informática: Los múltiples recursos necesarios. Revista Interamericana de Educación de Adultos, 36, 67–85. Google Scholar | |
|
Guerrero, I., Kalman, J. (2011). Matices en la inserción de tecnología en el aula: Posibilidades de cambio en las prácticas docentes. Cuadernos Comillas, 1, 84–104. Google Scholar | |
|
Harvey, A. (2009). Acerca de la alfabetización académica y sus manifestaciones discursivas. In Shiro, M., Bentivoglio, P., Erlich, F. D. (Eds.), Haciendo discurso. Homenaje a Adriana Bolívar (pp. 627–645). Caracas , Venezuela: Universidad Central de Venezuela. Google Scholar | |
|
Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Heras, A., Green, J. (2010). Identidades y políticas públicas educativas. Las consecuencias de cambiar de una comunidad bilingüe a inglés como única lengua de instrucción. In López-Bonilla, G., Pérez, C. (Eds.), Discursos e identidades en contextos de cambio educativo (pp. 191–237). Mexico City, Mexico: Plaza y Valdés. Google Scholar | |
|
Jaramillo, J., Vera, J. (2013). Etnografías desde y sobre el Sur global. Reflexiones introductorias. Universitas Humanística, 75, 13–34. Google Scholar | |
|
Kalman, J. (2004). El estudio de la comunidad como un espacio para leer y escribir. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 5, 5–28. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Kalman, J. (2008). Beyond definition: Central concepts for understanding literacy. International Review of Education, 54, 523–538. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Kalman, J., Rendón, V. (2014). Use before know-how: Teaching with technology in a Mexican public school. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27, 974–991. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
López-Bonilla, G. (2006). Ser maestro en el bachillerato: Creencias, identidades y discursos de maestros en torno a las prácticas de literacidad. Perfiles Educativos, 28, 40–67. Google Scholar | |
|
López-Bonilla, G. (2013). Prácticas disciplinares, prácticas escolares: Qué son las disciplinas académicas y cómo se relacionan con la educación formal en las ciencias y en las humanidades. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 18, 383–412. Google Scholar | |
|
López-Bonilla, G., Pérez, C. (2009). Discurso. In Szurmuk, M., Irwin, R. (Eds.), Diccionario de estudios culturales Latino Americanos (pp. 89–92). Mexico City, Mexico: Siglo XXI Editores. Google Scholar | |
|
López-Bonilla, G., Tinajero, G., Pérez, C. (2006). Jóvenes, currículo y competencia literaria. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 8, 1–24. Google Scholar | |
|
Luchilo, L. (2010). Formación de posgrado en América Latina: Políticas de apoyo, resultados e impactos. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Eudeba. Google Scholar | |
|
Maher, T. M. (2010). E políticas de identidade: Currículo e representações de professores indígenas na Amazônia ocidental brasileira. Currículo sem Fronteiras, 10, 33–48. Google Scholar | |
|
Maher, T. M. (2016). From the ethnic to the pan-ethnic: Negotiating and performing indigenous identities. DELTA: Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada, 32, 719–733. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Marinho, M. (2010). A escrita nas práticas de letramento acadêmico. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, 10, 363–386. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Marinho, M. (2013). The local and the global in literacy practices in “traditional communities.” In Kalman, J., Street, B. (Eds.), Literacy and numeracy in Latin America: Local perspectives and beyond (pp. 19–37). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar | |
|
Mattos, A. (2014). Novos Letramentos: Perspectivas atuais para o ensino de inglês como língua estrangeira1. Signum: Estudos da Linguagem, 17, 102–129. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Medina, R., Ramírez, L., Clavijo, A. (2015). Reading the community critically in the digital age: A multiliteracies approach. In Chamness, P., Mantero, M., Hendo, H. (Eds.), ISLS readings in language studies (pp. 45–66). Grandville, MI: ISLS. Google Scholar | |
|
Mendonça, D., Lima, J., Gusmão, C. (2016). O uso da tecnologia no auxílio à preservação do idioma indígena: O caso xakriabá. Revista de Informática Aplicada, 12, 41–51. Google Scholar | |
|
Monte-Mór, W. (2008). Critical literacies, meaning making and new epistemological perspectives. Matices en Lenguas Extranjeras, 2, 1–18. Google Scholar | |
|
Monte-Mór, W. (2015). Learning by design: Reconstructing knowledge processes in teaching and learning practices. In Cope, B., Kalantzis, M. (Eds.), A pedagogy of multiliteracies (pp. 186–209). New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan. Google Scholar | |
|
Mora, R. (2011). Tres retos para la investigación y formación de docentes en inglés: Reflexividad sobre las creencias y prácticas en literacidad. Revista Q, 5, 1–20. Google Scholar | |
|
Mora, R. (2012). Literacidad y el aprendizaje de lenguas: Nuevas formas de entender los mundos y las palabras de nuestros estudiantes. Revista Internacional Magisterio, 58, 52–56. Google Scholar | |
|
Newfield, D., Stein, P. (2000). The multiliteracies project: South African teachers respond. In Cope, B., Kalantzis, M. (Eds.), Multiliteracies; Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 292–310). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar | |
|
New London Group . (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60–92. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Olaizola, A. (2015). Una propuesta para integrar la escritura digital en la alfabetización académica. Suplemento Signos ELE. Retrieved from http://p3.usal.edu.ar/index.php/elesup/article/view/3247/4001 Google Scholar | |
|
Rogers, R., Trigos-Carrillo, L. (in press). Intersecting intellectual trajectories: Multiliteracies and critical discourse analysis. In Serafini, F., Gee, E. (Eds.), Re-imagining multiliteracies: Looking back, moving forward. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Rojo, R. (2009). Letramentos múltiplos, escola e inclusão social. São Paulo: Parábola Editorial. Google Scholar | |
|
Santos, B. S. (2012). Public sphere and epistemologies of the South. Africa Development, 37, 43–67. Google Scholar | |
|
Santos, B. S. (2015). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. London, England: Routledge. Google Scholar | |
|
Soares, M. (2004). Letramento e alfabetização: As muitas facetas. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 25, 5–17. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Soler, S. (2008). Pensar la relación análisis crítico del discurso y educación. El caso de la representación de indígenas y afrodescendientes en los manuales escolares de ciencias sociales en Colombia. Discurso & Sociedad, 2, 642–678. Google Scholar | |
|
Soler, S. (2013). Representaciones de la escritura académica en contextos de bilingüismo e interculturalidad. Signo y Pensamiento, 32, 64–80. Google Scholar | |
|
Soler, S., Pardo, N. (2007). Discurso y racismo en Colombia: Cinco siglos de invisibilidad y exclusión. In van Dijk, T. A. (Ed.). Racismo y discurso en América Latina (pp. 181–228). Barcelona, Spain: Gedisa. Google Scholar | |
|
Souza, L. M. (2002). A case among cases, a world among worlds: The ecology of writing among the Kashinawa in Brazil. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 1, 261–278. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Souza, L. M. (2003). Voices on paper: Multimodal texts and indigenous literacy in Brazil. Social Semiotics, 13, 29–42. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Souza, L. M. (2007). Editor’s preface. Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 1, 4–5. Google Scholar | |
|
Souza, L. M. (2011). Para uma redefinição de letramento crítico. In Maciel, R., Araújo, V. (Eds.), Formação de professores de línguas: Ampliando perspectivas (pp. 128–140). Jundiaí: Paco Editorial. Google Scholar | |
|
Street, B. (1985). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Tierney, R. J., Wei, K. (2016). Knowledge mobilization within and across the People’s Republic of China and the United States: A cross-national study of internationalization of educational research. American Educational Research Journal, 53, 1759–1791. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Tinajero, G. (2015). Barreras internas y externas en la incorporación de las TIC: Estudio de una zona escolar de la modalidad indígena. Entreciencias: Diálogos en la Sociedad del Conocimiento, 3, 345–358. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Tinajero, G., López-Bonilla, G., Pérez, C. (2007). Cambio curricular en el bachillerato tecnológico mexicano: El caso de la disciplina de ciencia, tecnología, sociedad y valores. Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, 15, 1–25. Google Scholar | |
|
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization . (2012). ICT in education in Latin America and the Caribbean. Retrieved from http://www.uis.unesco.org/Communication/Documents/ict-regional-survey-lac-2012-en.pdf Google Scholar | |
|
Vargas, A. (2015). Critical literacy and digital literacies: A necessary relationship? Folios, 42, 139–160. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Visvanathan, S. (1997). A carnival for science: Essays on science, technology and development. London, England: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Zavala, V. (2009). Deconstruyendo la educación intercultural bilingüe: Los aportes de la sociolingüística crítica. Crónicas Urbanas, 14, 7–20. Google Scholar | |
|
Zavala, V. (2014). An ancestral language to speak with the “Other”: Closing down ideological spaces of a language policy in the Peruvian Andes. Language Policy, 13, 1–20. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Zavala, V. (2015). “It will emerge if they grow fond of it”: Translanguaging and power in Quechua teaching. Linguistics and Education, 32, 16–26. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Zavala, V., Niño, M., Ames, P. (Eds.). (2004). Escritura y sociedad: Nuevas perspectivas teóricas y etnográficas. Lima, Peru: Red para el Desarrollo de las Ciencias Sociales en el Perú. Google Scholar |
Author Biographies
Lina Trigos-Carrillo is a postdoctoral fellow at the Campus Writing Program of the University of Missouri–Columbia. Her research focuses on critical perspectives to academic, community, and family literacies of minorities and emergent bilinguals across the Americas. She is a current Fulbright Fellow.
Rebecca Rogers is a professor of literacy studies at the University of Missouri–St. Louis. She is a former Fulbright Fellow at the Universidad de San Martín in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
