metaliteracy, networks and agency: an exploration

Metaliteracy, networks and agency: an exploration

By Paul Prinsloo

Critical literacies in higher education

Presentation at the University of the Western Cape (UWC), Monday 24 November 2014

I do not own the copyright of any of the images in this presentation. I hereby acknowledge the original copyright and licensing regime of every image and reference I’ve used. Images used in this presentation have been sourced from Google labeled for non-commercial reuse, or from Flickr published under a CC license. Where no ownership or license could be established, I indicated the hyperlink address.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

1.Contextualising literacy: searching for a center that holds

2.Making sense of the 21st century: literacy/agency/choice

3.Disclaimer/Acknowledgement 4.Mapping literacies/capabilities5.Mapping some approaches to agency6.Being agentic – a proposal

Overview of the presentation

The range of individual autonomy is expanding, increasingly being “burdened with the functions that were once viewed as the responsibility of the state” (Bauman, 2011, p. 16). Individuals are increasingly faced to respond to socially produced problems.

At no other time has the necessity to make choices been so deeply felt and has choosing become so poignantly self-conscious, conducted under conditions of painful yet incurable uncertainty, of a constant threat of ‘being left behind’ and of being excluded from the game, with return barred for failure to live up to the new demands” (Bauman, 2012, p. 21)

htt

p:/

/id

erel

elib

rary

.wee

bly

.co

m/t

he-

tru

e-st

ory

-of-

the-

3-l

ittl

e-p

igs.

htm

l

Searching for a centre that holds

“…we no longer possess a home; we are repeatedly called upon to build and then rebuild one, like the three little pigs of the fairy tale, or we have to carry it along with us on our backs like snails” (Melucci in Bauman, 2012, p. 22)

Searching for a centre that holds

• Not only have our maps of sense-making from the past been proven to be fragile, but also proven to be the illegitimate offspring of unsavory liaisons between ideology, context, and humanity’s gullibility in believing in promises of unconstrained scientific progress.

• A “crisis of proposals and a crisis of utopias” (Max-Neef, 1991) • In a time “when the old is dying and the new cannot be born”

(Gramsci, 1971, p. 110)

How do we make sense of our choices, realise the potential of the choices we have, live with the reality of the choices we don’t

have and increasing the choices others have in order to live dignified lives?

Making sense of the 21st century

Our understanding of the definition, scope and function of literacies/capabilities/agency is influenced by our understanding of the major discourses of the

current (and future) age and our and contextual sociomaterial positionalities

“A global cocktail of intolerable poverty and outrageous wealth, starvation, mass terrorism with nuclear/biological weapons, world war, deliberate pandemics and religious insanity, might plunge humanity into a worldwide pattern of unending hatred and violence – a new Dark Age” (Martin, 2007, p. 32)

A new dark age?

How does such an understanding of the current age shape our view of the scope, definition and function

of literacy/capability/voice?

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rosetta_and_Philae_at_comet_(11206755953).jpg

A new age of scientific enlightenment?

Disclaimer/Acknowledgement

• My thoughts and work are deeply influenced by the work of Zygmunt Bauman – who has been called the “sociologist of misery” (Dawson, 2012, p. 555)

• Bauman has been accused of not offering ‘easy’ alternatives• On the other hand, Bauman brought considering inequality

and suffering back into the picture like no one else• Bauman’s belief in a utopia “operates less as a view of a

possible world, but rather as a device for critiquing the world: the utopia remains ‘in the realm of the possible’” (Bauman, 1976, in Dawson, 2012, p. 560)

• Bauman’s belief in agency is the belief in individuals ability to say ‘no’ (Dawson, 2012)

Met

a/ d

isco

urs

e lit

era

cy

Rampant consumerism and rapacious capitalism

“From cradle to coffin we are trained and drilled to treat shops as pharmacies filled with drugs to cure or at least mitigate all the illnesses and afflictions in our lives…” (Bauman, 2012, p. 89)• The myth of economic growth• Downward mobility

Local and global (dis)connections &

contestations

Finding local answers to globally produced problems? (Bauman, 1998; Bauman, 2012; Castells, 2009)

A networked age

Not everyone is included, but everyone is affected… “Networks are created not just to communicate, but also to gain position, to outcommunicate”

(Geoff Mulgan in Castells, 2009, p. 26)

Personal privacy and state security

• Collection and use of personal data• Crusades, jihads and the clash of

fundamentalisms• “Ubiquitous mixophobia”

(Bauman, 2012, p. 63) – growth of interdictory spaces & gated communities (Bauman, 2012, p. 68)

Meta/ d

iscou

rse literacy

https://flic.kr/p/5VkJfUhttp://pixabay.com/en/fist-red-communism-fight-161911/ https://flic.kr/p/6D6g18

Understanding literacy as agency

Literacies

Knowledge

Resources

Tools

Capabilities

Capital

A proposal: Being agentic

Choices

Being agentic as an embodied, entangled, relational, networked, mediated and mediating context-specific capability and choice

Different literacies/outcomes/attributes

Information literacy

Media literacy

Digital literacy

Cyber

literacy

Information

fluency

Metaliteracy

Fluencies for a global

digital citizen

Competencies for media and digital

literacy

Multiple intelligences

Five minds of the future

http://danihee.deviantart.com/art/Dog-with-glasses-307795151

Making sense of literacy/capability

Functionings: Things over which I have command –literacies, skills, shaped by choice, habitus, context, need

Capabilities: A selection of functionalities in a particular context, need

Well-being:Being able to make choices (in recognition that choices are constrained by others, values and context)

Critical agency:The freedom to act but also the freedom to question and reassess

A personal understanding: Literacies, agency, well-being – Amartya Sen (1999) (1)

Making sense of literacy/capability (2)Three approaches to the question: What type of education will help

about a better society or a better world? (Walker, 2012) – human capital, human rights, human capabilities (Robeyns, 2006)

Human capital & the logic of productivity

• Privileging economic growth• Educated, skilled workers are more

productive in generating wealth• The brightest and the best will rise to

the top• Economic development prioritised

over social inclusion• Education is not a public good, is

apolitical and is an adjunct to the market

• Increasing gap between economic growth and human well-being

• Increasing inequalities• Continued exploitation of

nature and populations for economic growth

Human capabilities and a logic of freedom & sustainable human development

• What do human beings require for a flourishing life?• Which capabilities will enable us “to choose and to live in ways we

find meaningful, productive and rewarding individually and collectively to the good of society”? (Walker, 2012, p. 388)

• …well-being is not measured by wealth or functioning, but by capability – “the capacity of a person to choose to do one thing and not another… But so long as choice was confined to selection between options determined by others – so long a person’s capability set was determined by social arrangements in which one had no say –then there is no freedom” (Blunden, 2004, par. 22 - referring to the work of Amartya Sen)

Making sense of literacy/capability (3)

Comparison of capital and capabilities “narratives” (adapted from Walker, 2012, p. 391)

On being human Values in policy design

Pedagogies Desirable outcomes

Human capital • Individuals = economic producers/consumers

• Rational• Human differences

are not acknowledged

• Economic growth• Employability• Competitive, free

markets• Training focused

• Adaptive and reproductive

• Banking education• Individualised• Fit

• Skills, knowledge & competencies

• Transferable skills• Lifelong learning• Market

meritocracy

Human capabilities • Full humanflourishing, dignity, well-being & agency

• Participant• Human diversity

valued

• Education is a cultural experience

• Develop human capital but capabilities are the overarching value

• Transformative, dialogic, participatory

• Inclusive• Critical• Voice

• Capabilities• Rich agency and

voice• Social justice• Human rights





A personal understanding: Literacies…

Metaliteracy (Mackey & Jacobson, 2011)

Image retrieved from retrieved from http://metaliteracy.cdlprojects.com/what.htm

Understand format type and delivery

mode

Evaluate user feedback as active

researcher

Create a context for user-generated

information

Evaluate dynamic content critically

Produce original content in multiple

media formats

Understandpersonal privacy,

information ethics and intellectual property issues

Share information in participatory environments

Mackey, T.P., & Jacobson, T.E. (2011). Reframing information literacy as metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, 72(1), 62-78.

Web 2.0 is a huge information warehouse

THE UNIVERSAL LIBRARY

Web 2.0 is a jigsaw puzzle of fragmented interconnected

piecesTHE HYPERTEXTUAL

CONNECTION

Web 2.0 is a vast souk or market of digital services and

productsTHE GLOBAL MARKET

Web 2.0 is a stage for multimodal expression

MULTIMEDIA & AUDIOVISUAL COMMUNICATION

Web 2.0 is a public space or assembly of human interaction

SOCIAL NETWORKS

Web 2.0 is an artificial ecosystem for human

experienceVIRTUAL INTERACTIVE

ENVIRONMENTS

WEB 2.0

Area, M., & Pessoa, T. (2012). From the solid to the liquid: New literacies for the cultural changes of Web 2.0. Communicar. Scientific Journal of Media Communication. DOI: 10.3916/C38-2011-02-01. http://www.revistacomunicar.com/pdf/preprint/38/En-01-PRE-12378.pdf

From the solid to the liquid: New literacies for the cultural changes of Web 2.0

http://www.revistacomunicar.com/pdf/preprint/38/En-01-PRE-12378.pdf

Liquid metaliteracy (Area & Pessoa, 2012; Mackey & Jacobson, 2011)

Mackey & Jacobson (2011) Area & Pessoa (2012)

Understand format type and delivery mode Instrumental competence: “technical control over each technology and its logical use procedures”

Evaluate user feedback as active researcher Cognitive-intellectual competence: “the acquisition of specific cognitive knowledge and skills that enable the subject to search for, select, analyze, interpret and recreate the vast amount of information to which he (sic) has access [to]…”

Create a context for user-generated information

Evaluate dynamic content critically Socio-communicative competence: “the development of a set of skills related to the creation of various text types… and their dissemination in different languages”

Produce original content in multiple media formats

Understand personal privacy, information ethics and intellectual property issues

Axiological competence: “referring to the awareness that ICT are not aseptic or neutral from the social viewpoint but exert a significant influence on the cultural and political environment of our society…”


“The act of learning to read and write start from a very comprehensive understanding of the act of reading the world, something which humans do before reading the words” (Freire, 1989, p. xvii; emphasis added)

“To be illiterate, for Freire, was not only the lack of skills of reading or writing; it was to feel powerless and dependent in a much more general way …” (Burbules & Berk, 1999, p. 52)

Critical consciousness as the foundation for metaliteracy

In order to read the world, I therefore need to be able to map who/what shapes/shaped my world, the reasons for it, how the shape influences where I am and the choices I have, what the rulesof my world are and who benefits from those rules (and my adherence) and how to disrupt and formulate alternative narratives, for myself and for others.

Critical consciousness as the foundation for metaliteracy as agency

Understand format type and delivery mode

Evaluate user feedback as active researcher

Create a context for user-generated information

Evaluate dynamic content critically

Produce original content in multiple media formats

Understand personal privacy, information ethics and intellectual property

issues


META

LITERA

CY

MET

ALI

TER

AC

Y

Different theoretical approaches to agency/literacy

• Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2006)• Human capability approach (Sen, Nussbaum,

Walker)• Critical & transformative (Freire)• Actor-network theory (Latour, Fenwick & Edwards)• Field theory (Bourdieu)

Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2006)

Rejects the duality between human agency and social structure:

“People do not operate as autonomous agents. Nor is their behaviour wholly determined by situational influences. Rather, human functioning is a product of a reciprocal interplay of intrapersonal, behavioural, and environmental determinants.. This triadic interaction includes the exercise of self-influence as part of the causal structure” (p. 165).

Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2006)(2)

Three modes of agency namely individual, proxy and collective. These three modes do not function separately or independently, but “everyday functioning requires an agentic blend of these three forms of agency” (p. 165).

Proxy agency as being required when “people do not have direct control over conditions that affect their lives… They do so by influencing others who have the resources, knowledge, and means to act on their behalf to secure the outcomes they desire” (p. 165; emphasis added).

Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2006)(3)

“Given that individuals are producers as well as products of their life circumstances, they are partial authors of the past conditions that developed them, as well as the future courses their lives take” (p. 165).

Agentic management of fortuity - “People are often inaugurated into new life trajectories, marriages, and careers through fortuitous circumstances” (p. 166).

“They can make chance happen by pursuing an active life that increases the number and type of fortuitous encounters they will experience” (p. 166).

Critique & agency – a sociomaterialistintervention (Edwards & Fenwick, 2014; Fenwick & Edwards, 2014)

Networks as sociomaterial assemblages that are “continually making and unmaking themselves” through and by entanglement with social and material aspects (Fenwick & Edwards, 2014, p. 38).

“Knowing is not separate from doing but emerges from the very matter-ings in which we engage” ( Fenwick & Edwards, 2014, p. 43)

Critique & agency – a sociomaterialistintervention (Edwards & Fenwick, 2014; Fenwick & Edwards, 2014)(2)

“Perhaps education could focus less on subject-centering and more on destabilising and decentering the certainties that have accumulated to authorise particular subjects in particular historical and regional contexts” (Fenwick & Edwards, 2014, p. 47).

Moving “from a rhetoric of conclusions towards a rhetoric of contentions” (Fenwick & Edwards, 2014, p. 48; emphasis added)

Critique & agency - (Edwards & Fenwick, 2014; Fenwick & Edwards, 2014)(3)

“Critique, in other words, has all the limits of utopia: it relies on the certainty of the world beyond this world” (Latour, 2010, in Edwards & Fenwick, 2014, p. 6)

“The critic is not the one who debunks, but the one who assembles. The critic is not the one who lifts the rugs from under the feet of the naïve believers, but the one who offers the participants arenas in which to gather” (Latour, 2004, in Edwards & Fenwick, 2014, p. 9).

Critical agency therefore entails “keeping open the controversies or at least slow down the process of resolving controversies about that of which the world is made” (Edwards & Fenwick, 2014, p. 9)

Image retrieved from http://www.allstaractivities.com/images/soccer-positions.gif

In order to be literate/ a player in the 21st century I need to understand the field, the game, and my

position, and my skills

• Boundaried site• Players have set/

predetermined positions

• Rules are predetermined

• Players have different skills

• What players can do is determined by their position on the field

• The physical condition of the field impacts play

Image retrieved from http://envirolaw.com/wp-content/uploads/black-student.jpg

CAPITAL: What type of “capital” I

have or don’t have • Economic• Cultural• Social• Symbolic

HABITUS: Who and how my past shaped/shapes me:• Genetic makeup• Gender/ Race• Socio-economic circumstances• Parental background• Geopolitical location• Educational experiences• Health• The choices I made in the

past…• My dispositions• Etc.

These are durable and transposable (Maton, 2012)

In order to be literate in a networked and (un)flat world I need to know…

THE FIELD:How does the field in which I find myself in, shape me?

What/who shapes the field?

Who are the (other) players in the field:• Who are they?• How come they are

shapers?• What are the rules?• Who are the referees?

http://envirolaw.com/wp-content/uploads/black-student.jpg

Looking at metaliteracy from a field theory (Bourdieu) perspective

The “field” is not a benign, pastoral space, but rather le champ – a battle field, where players have set positions, predetermined paces, specific rules which novice players must learn together with basic skills.

“What players can do, and where they can go during the game, depends on their field position. The actual physical condition of the field (whether it is wet, dry, well grassed or full of potholes), also has an effect on what players can do and this how the game is played” (Thompson, 2012, p. 66).

[(habitus)(capital)] + field = practice/agency(Maton, 2012, p. 50)

A field theory perspective on agency

My dispositions - how my past and present (and my understanding thereof) shaped and still shape me

The capital that I have acquired in the process (or not)

The field – the context in which I find myself in. This is not a neutral space, but is, itself, shaped by various structures, and agencies of individuals and collectives

My practice/agency and my understanding thereof…

We are not “pre-programmed automatons acting out the implications of our upbringings” (Maton, 2012, p. 50).

“…where we are in life in any one moment [is]… the result of numberless events in the past that shaped our path” (Maton, 2012, p. 51).

Literacy and agency is understanding that the choices we have in any particular moment and time in a specific context, are shaped by the positions we have in that particular social field at that moment in time.

Complicating matters is the fact that the context we find ourselves in (at that particular moment in time), has itself been shaped by and is shaped by other contexts, individuals in an evolving power play.

Being literate in a networked and (un)flat world it is important to know…

HA

BIT

US

FIELD

CA

PITA

L

Image retrieved from http://metaliteracy.cdlprojects.com/what.htm





Being agentic as an embodied, entangled, relational, networked, mediated and mediating context-specific capability and choice

(In)conclusions

1. Being agentic is an embodied, entangled, relational, networked, mediated and mediating context-specific capability and choice

2. We should consider our understanding and definitions of literacy as being fragile, tentative, and until-further-notice-constructs

3. Literacies should open up spaces for being capable and being agentic

4. We should keep the controversies open and slow down the discourses around literacy/structure/agency

5. Pedagogies of hope means embracing the ability to say ‘no’, to transgress, to voice

Paul Prinsloo

Research Professor in Open Distance Learning (ODL)

College of Economic and Management Sciences

TVW 4-69/ 3-15, Club 1, Hazelwood

P O Box 392

Unisa, 0003, Republic of South Africa

+27 (0) 12 429 3683 or +27 (0) 12 433 4600 (office)

+27 (0) 12 429 3551 (fax)

+27 (0) 82 3954 113 (mobile)

Skype: paul.prinsloo59

Personal blog: http://opendistanceteachingandlearning.wordpress.com

Twitter profile: @14prinsp

41

http://opendistanceteachingandlearning.wordpress.com/

References and additional reading

Ahmadpour, K. (2014). Developing a framework for understanding information literacy in the 21st century: a review of literature. A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Master of Education Graduate Department of Education in the University of Ontario Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://faculty.uoit.ca/kay/files/capstones/Ahmadpour_%202014_FrameworkInformationLiteracy_Final.pdf

Apple, M.W. (Ed.). (2010). Global crises, social justice, and education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Archer, M.S. (2003). Structure, agency and the internal conversation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.


Arinto, P.B. (2013). A framework for developing competencies in open and distance learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(1): 167-185.

http://faculty.uoit.ca/kay/files/capstones/Ahmadpour_ 2014_FrameworkInformationLiteracy_Final.pdf



Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1: 164-180. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x

Barnett, R. (2004). Learning for an unknown future, Higher Education Research & Development, 23(3): 247-260, DOI: 10.1080/0729436042000235382

Barnett, R. (2009). Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum, Studies in Higher Education, 34(4): 429-440, DOI: 10.1080/03075070902771978

Bauman, Z. (1995). Searching for a centre that holds, in M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (eds.) Global modernities, (pp. 140-154). London, UK: Sage.

Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization. The human consequences. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Bauman, Z. (2004). Wasted lives. Modernity and its outcasts. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Bauman, Z. (2008). The art of life. Cambridge: polity.Bauman, Z. (2011). Collateral damage. Social inequalities in a global age. Cambridge, UK:

Polity PressBauman, Z. (2012). On education. Conversations with Riccardo Mazzeo. Cambridge, UK:

Polity Press


Blackmore, J. (2001). Universities in crisis? Knowledge economies, emancipatory pedagogies, and the critical intellectual. Educational Theory, 51(3): 353 — 370.

Blunden, A. (2004). Amartya Sen on well-being and critical voice. Retrieved from http:home.mira.net/~andy/works/sen-critical-voice.htm

Burbules, N.C. & Berk, R. (1999). Critical thinking and critical pedagogy: relations, differences and limits, in Critical theories in education: changing the terrains of knowledge and politics, edited by T.S. Popkewitz & L. Fendler. New York: Routledge, pp. 45—66.

Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Coetzee, M., Botha, J-A, Eccles, N., Holtzhausen, N., & Nienaber, H. (2012). Developing

graduateness & employability. Issues, provocations, theory and practical guidelines. Randburg: Knowres Publishing Ltd

Dawson, M. (2012). Optimism and agency in the sociology of Zygmunt Bauman. European Journal of Social Theory, 15(4): 555-570.

Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What Is Agency? American Journal of Sociology,103(4): 962-1023.

Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-network theory in education. London, UK: Routledge.

Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2014). Networks of knowledge, matters of learning, and criticality in higher education. Higher Education, 67: 35-50.

Fountain, R-M. (1999). Socio-scientific issues via actor network theory, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3): 339-358. DOI:10.1080/002202799183160

Freire, P. (1973). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Freire, P. (1989). Learning to question: a pedagogy of liberation. New York: Continuum.Gardner, H. (2008). Five minds for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind. The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY:

Basic Books. Ghemawat, P. (2011). World 3.0. Global prosperity and how to achieve it. Boston:

Harvard Business School Publishing. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Edited by

Q. Hoare and G. N. Smith. New York, NY: International Publishers. Gray, J. (2004). Heresies. Against progress and other illusions. London, UK: Granta

Books. Gray, J. (2014, October 21). The truth about evil. [Web log post]. Retrieved from

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/oct/21/-sp-the-truth-about-evil-john-gray

Grenfell, M. (ed.). 2012. Pierre Bourdieu. Key concepts. (Second edition). Durham, UK: Acumen.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/oct/21/-sp-the-truth-about-evil-john-gray

Kiffer, S., & Tchibozo, G. (2013). Developing the teaching competencies of novice faculty members: a review of international literature. Policy Futures in Education, 11(3): 277-289.

Kreber, C. (2014). Rationalising the nature of ‘graduateness’ through philosophical accounts of authenticity, Teaching in Higher Education, 19(1): 90-100. DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2013.860114

Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2010). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, crl-76r1.

Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2014). Metaliteracy: advancing learning after literacy. Enhancing the Practice of Learning and Teaching, 5(1), p. 3. Retrieved from http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/Assets/Departments%20%28Administration%29/ILT/ILT%20Newsletter%20%285$!2c1%29.pdf#page=3

Martin, J. (2007). The meaning of the 21st century. A vital blueprint for ensuring the future. London, UK: Transworld Publishers.

Maton, K. (2012). Habitus. In Michael Grenfell (Ed.), Pierre Bourdieu. Key concepts.Durham, UK : Acumen Publishing, pp. 48—64.

Max-Neef, M. (1991). Human scale development. Conception, application and furtherreflections. New York, NY: The Apex Press.

Mayer-Schönberger, V. (2009). Delete. The virtue of forgetting in the digital age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/Assets/Departments (Administration)/ILT/ILT Newsletter (5$!2c1).pdf#page=3

Piketty, T. (2014). Capital I the twenty-first century. (Translated by Arthur Goldhammer). Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Prinsloo, P. (2012). Graduateness as counter-narrative: gazing back at Medusa. In M. Coetzee, J-A. Botha, N. Eccles, N. Holtzhausen & H. Nienaber, Developing graduateness & employability. Issues, provocations, theory and practical guidelines (pp. 89-102). Randburg: Knowres Publishing Ltd

Prinsloo, P. (2013). Metaliteracy in beta: a personal view from the South. Presentation in the SUNY Metaliteracy MOOC. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/prinsp/p-prinsloo-7-october2013-final

Robeyns, I. (2006). Three models of education: rights, capabilities and human capital. Theory in Research in Education, 4: 69-84. DOI: 10.1177/1477878506060683

Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Sharkey, T. (2013). Establishing twenty-first-century information fluency. Reference &

User Services Quarterly 53 (1): 33–39. doi:10.5860/rusq.53n1.33. Shilling, C. (1999). Towards an embodied understanding of the structure/agency

relationship. British Journal of Sociology, 50(4): 543-562. Standing, G. (2011). The precariat. The new dangerous class. London, UK: Bloomsbury.Thompson, P. (2012). Field. In Michael Grenfell (Ed.), Pierre Bourdieu. Key concepts.

Durham, UK : Acumen Publishing, pp. 65—82.

http://www.slideshare.net/prinsp/p-prinsloo-7-october2013-final

Walker, M. (2003). Framing social justice in education: what does the ‘capabilities’ approach offer? British Journal of Educational Studies, 51(2): 168-187. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8527.t01-2-00232

Walker, M. (2012). A capital or capabilities education narrative in a world of staggeringinequalities. International Journal of Educational Development, 32: 384-393.

Watters, A. (2012). Unbundling and unmooring: technology and the higher ed tsunami. EDUCAUSEreview, [online]. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/unbundling-and-unmooring-technology-and-higher-ed-tsunami

Webb, D. (2013). Pedagogies of hope. Studies in the Philosophy and Education, 32: 397-41. DOI: 10.1007/s11217-012-9336-1

Wexelbaum, R., & Miltenoff, P. (2014). College students, social media, and metaliteracy. Paper delivered at the Library Technology Conference, St Cloud State University, St Cloud, Minnesota. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1419&context=libtech_conf

White, J. (2005). Howard Gardner: the myth of multiple intelligences. Retrieved from http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/1263/1/WhiteJ2005HowardGardner1.pdf

http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/unbundling-and-unmooring-technology-and-higher-ed-tsunami

http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1419&context=libtech_conf

http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/1263/1/WhiteJ2005HowardGardner1.pdf