Challenges and Implications of Multiliteracies in the Singapore Classrooms

After having read, presented and discussed the articles by Tan and McWilliam From Literacy to Multiliteracies: Diverse Learners and Pedagogical Practice and NLG A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures, what got me thinking is actually the challenges teachers face, particularly those teaching in the mainstream Singapore schools. Despite the fact that advances in technology ought to have brought about new ways of learning and teaching, much of what is done in class today has not progressed much from the time when I was still a student. Despite the fact that outside the classroom, students often encounter new modalities and new literacies which demands that they are multiliterate and necessitates an urgent review of language pedagogy, the emphasis of teaching and learning is still on traditional print-based literacy. As I reflected on the question Is multiliteracies merely a 'garnish'?, I began to examine my own classroom practice. In my years of teaching, have I exposed my students to multimodal texts? Very rarely are multimodal texts used. Are my students multiliterate because of what they learnt in the class because of my teaching? I doubt so. Are they even multi-literate in the first place? I need to find that out soon. If it is so important for students to be multiliterate, then why am I (and I suspect not just me)teaching my students in the same way as I was taught when I was a student? High-stakes examinations.

To be successful in the society in future means acing high-stakes examinations which inevitably resulted in the emphasis and importance of traditional print-based literacy. Because the assessment modes do not take into account of the fact that students need to be multi-literate, multiliteracies remains a 'garnish'. Even if teachers are aware of the fact that technological advances require students to be multiliterate to take on new challenges, they are likely to focus on print-based literacy because they teach with an end in mind - students need to pass their PSLE, O levels and A levels/Poly to get to university. Students know that in order to be successful, they need to be literate and literacy to them is traditional print-based literacy because they know how they are going to be assessed.

As evidenced in the article by Tan and Mcwilliam, good intentions and cutting-edge resources are insufficient to overturn long-term entrenched educational cultures. Students, tn terms of their learning practices, are not easily bought because they rather guard against failure than look for new ways of learning. Teachers face pressure from stakeholders and themselves to maintain high levels of print literacy in their students because of assessment modes. It is inevitable then that students are acculturated and socialised to value the types of literacy practices that they, their parents and society believe will contribute to academic success and that translates to a better future.

So, what are my take-aways then? One cannot ignore the mainstream schooling cultures which rewards print-based academic. I am sure as educators, we have our concerns about the digital pedagogy nexus such as the lack of clarity about the benefits of expensive technology, the under-utilisation of technologies in the classrooms, and confusion over whether the main goal of education is improved performance in formal assessment or in a broader sense greater human capacity.