Embracing Multiliteracies Challenges: Navigating Multimodal Literacy in Maritime Vocational Education with the New London Group Framework

Shofie Nurul Azizah; Anita  Triastuti

doi:10.55927/fjsr.v3i9.11611

Authors

Shofie Nurul Azizah Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Anita Triastuti Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55927/fjsr.v3i9.11611

Keywords:

ESP, Literacy Teaching, Multiliteracies Pedagogy

Abstract

In the context of rapidly evolving digital technology and diverse communication modalities, English for Specific Purposes (ESP) instructors must adapt their pedagogical strategies to meet the literacy needs of ESP students. This study, grounded in the multiliteracies framework by the New London Group (1996), examines the challenges faced by a teacher in integrating various communication modes—verbal, visual, gestural, spatial, and multimodal digital texts—within the curriculum of a maritime vocational high school in Indonesia. Utilizing a qualitative case study approach, data were collected through classroom observations and interviews, analyzed via thematic analysis. Findings reveal four significant challenges in implementing multiliteracies pedagogy, contributing to discussions on literacy education and the impact of digital technology in educational settings

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Andrade, H. L., & Cizek, G. J. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of formative assessment. Routledge.

Basturkmen, H. (2010). Developing courses in English for specific purposes. Palgrave Macmillan.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.

Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Routledge.

Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.

Hafner, C. A., & Miller, L. (2011). Fostering learner autonomy in English for science: A collaborative digital video project in a technological learning environment. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 68-86.

Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge University Press.

International Maritime Organization. (1995). STCW 95: Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers. IMO.

International Maritime Organization. (2010). International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW). IMO.

Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy, and learning: A multimodal approach. Routledge.

Kustini, N. R., Purwanti, E., & Anggraeni, A. (2020). Exploring multimedia English: Focusing on multimodal pedagogy and student perceptions. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 16(1), 68-82.

Laadem, M., & Mallahi, F. (2019). Differentiated instruction in English language teaching: A case study. Journal of Language and Education, 5(2), 44-58.

Lam, W. S. E. (2024). Digital media and literacy development. In M. Hawkins (Ed.), Multimodal literacies (pp. 45-62). Routledge.

Mouza, C. (2011). Promoting urban teachers’ understanding of technology, pedagogy, and content (TPACK) in the context of case development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(1), 1-29.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67.

Walsh, M. (2010). Multimodal literacy: What does it mean for classroom practice? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 33(3), 211-239.