2. Contemporary Writing Contexts
Digital
From print environment to digital technologies
Collaborative
From single authorship to collaborative writing
Global
From homogeneous audience to global readership
Translingual
From native language to English as a lingua franca and translingual
forms
3. Pedagogical concerns
What kind of literacy is required in this environment?
Digital literacy: “the practices involved in reading, writing, and exchanging information in
online environments as well as the values associated with such practices – social,
cultural, political, educational” (Selfe & Hawisher, 2002, p. 232).
Multiliteracies: Literacy skills for the multiimodal and linguistically and culturally diverse
environment (New London Group, 2000).
Global literacies: “negotiating multiple systems for communication across literacy
ecologies” (Starke-Meyerring, 2005, p.487)
Translingual literacy: strategic use of more than one language in the same
communication encounter (Canagarajah, 2013)
4. Pedagogical concerns
How to prepare students for written communication
in a world with
- many languages & Englishes
used simultaneously in communication
- hybrid texts
produced in multimedia environment
- hybrid identities
participating in communication?
One answer:
GNLEs
5. GNLEs
“learning environments that represent new visions of globally
networked learning and extend beyond the confines of
traditional classrooms, (…) and challenge students to negotiate
and build shared learning and knowledge cultures across
diverse boundaries (Starke–Meyerring and Wilson, 2008, p. 2)
Examples
• Email assignments (Gerritsen and Verckens, 2006)
• Global Classroom Project – Experiential learning (Herrington,
2010)
• Peer review (Anderson et al, 2010)
Major approaches:
• Intercultural exchange
• Intercultural team project
7. The project:
Creating a Globally Networked Learning Environment with the
objective to increase students’ cosmopolitan outlook
and global literacy skills through information exchange
Participants:
Hungarian and American students
The assignments:
• Writing a “My identities and languages” blog and
commenting on students’ blogs in the other country
• Designing recruiting brochures and usability surveys
Intercultural Exchange
13. Workshop activity
In groups of three or four, discuss the benefits and constraints of
intercultural online collaboration projects within your institutional
contexts. Consider the following questions:
1. What do you see would be a major benefit for your students
from participating in a GNLE?
2. What is your biggest concern about incorporating online
intercultural assignments into your writing classroom?
3. Do you think you could count on institutional support for such
projects? Where could it come from and in what form?
16. Thank you for your
participation!
Don’t forget to sign up on the contact list!
17. References
Anderson, P., Bergman, B., Bradley, L., Gustaffson, M., Matzke, A. (2010). Gustafsson, M., Matzke, A. Peer-
reviewing across the Atlantic: Patterns and trends in L1 and L2 comments made in an asynchronous
online collaborative learning exchange between technical communication students in Sweden and in
the United States. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 24(3), 296-322.
Canagarajah, S.A. (2013). Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. New York:
Routledge.
Gerritsen, M., & Verckens, J. P. (2006). Raising students’ awareness and preparing them for intercultural
business (communication) by e-mail. Business Communication Quarterly, 69, 50-59.
Herrington, T. (2010). Crossing global boundaries: beyond intercultural communication. Journal of Business and
Technical Communication, 24, 516-539.
Lowry, P. B., Curtis, A., Lowry, M.R. (2004a). Building a taxonomy and nomenclature of collaborative writing to
improve interdisciplinary research and practice. Journal of Business Communication, 41(1), 66-99.
New London Group (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. In B. Cope and M. Kalantzis
(Eds.) Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning ad the Design of Social Futures. (pp. 9-37). Routledge: New
York
Selfe, C. L., and hawisher, G.E. (2002). A historical look at electronic literacy: Implications for the educations of
technical communicators. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 16(3), 231-276.
Starke-Meyerring, D. (2005). Meeting the challenges of globalization: A framework for global literacies in
professional communication programs. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 19(4),
468-499.
Starke-Meyerring, D. & Wilson, M. (Eds.) (2008). Designing globally networked learning environments.
Rotterdam: Sense Publishers:
Hinweis der Redaktion
I will focus on the quality of Cosmopolitanism as “universality plus difference” (Appiah, 2008, p. 92), and will point out the strengths of this framework in addressing diversity. I will explain that the major advantage of this framework is in reconceptualizing a communication encounter ( verbal or written) as one where all participants realize the hybrid makeup of their own identity and start from the shared characteristic of hybridity rather than from othering their counterparts as someone belonging to a different culture.
Challenging monolingual assumptions
WEs in comp – BELF in PW2. Standard English problematic concept in compIn PW- Audience focus- but setting a standard for online courses Bokor WEs3. Hybrid text multimedia
WEs in comp – BELF in PW2. Standard English problematic concept in compIn PW- Audience focus- but setting a standard for online courses Bokor WEs3. Hybrid text multimedia
Challenging monolingual assumptions
WEs in comp – BELF in PW2. Standard English problematic concept in compIn PW- Audience focus- but setting a standard for online courses Bokor WEs3. Hybrid text multimedia
When we see communication encounters through a cosmopolitan lens, we move away from viewing divergent language use as mistakes and can accept these as the creative application of a writer’s linguistic resources (Canagarajah, 2006, 2010).
