DIGITAL LITERACY

Jennifer Rowsell | Editor

Beyond Apps: Digital Literacies

in a Platform Society
T. Philip Nichols, Robert Jean LeBlanc

I
n this column, we explore how attention to plat- particular programs. However, as we heard similar
forms can help educators grapple with dimensions stories across schools and districts, we noticed a
of digital literacy that are often hidden from view in larger pattern emerging. With teaching and learning
day-to-day practice. Apps such as FlipGrid, Kahoot, increasingly dependent on apps, educators and stu-
and Photomath are big businesses in education dents were left at the mercy of software companies
and are increasingly woven into formal classroom whose products were designed without their input
learning. A platform orientation can support teach- or control. The issue was not the weaknesses of indi-
ers in evaluating the possibilities and limitations of vidual apps but the relation between education and
such apps by clarifying their relations to pedagogy, the wider ecosystem of app development.
hardware, and other software. We suggest that this Outside of education, scholars of digital media
approach to digital literacy offers opportunities both have begun to study such relations through the
for reflective teaching and for engaging students in emerg ing f ield of platform studies (Bogost &
authentic inquiry about what it means to live and Monfort, 2009; Gillespie, 2010), an area of research
learn in a society increasingly dependent on digital focused not on individual apps but on the ways that
platforms. hardware and software relate with each other and
Since the launch of Apple’s App Store in 2008, with society writ large. In this column, we draw
few facets have life been untouched by the pro- from scholarship in platform studies to explore key
liferation of digital applications. Education is no features of platforms and the questions they raise
exception. For the last five years, Phil (first author) for digital literacy instruction and learning.
has been part of a team interviewing state offi-
cials, district administrators, and classroom teach-
ers across the United States to study how various Why Platforms?
stakeholders are navigating changing demands for In digital media, the term platform has two mean-
college and career readiness (see Desimone et al., ings. First, it refers to the infrastructure on which
2019). Overwhelmingly, teachers interviewed by apps are built. For instance, a video game platform
this team described the critical role apps played (e.g., Nintendo Switch, PlayStation 4) is the hard-
in how they enhanced lessons and supported stu- ware through which its compatible software is run.
dents, including software packaged with curriculum Second, platform refers to digital spaces that facilitate
(e.g., from Pearson or McGraw-Hill) as well as apps social and economic exchange. Facebook and Twitter,
for classroom management (e.g., ClassDojo, Google for example, are platforms for users to post content,
Classroom), assessment (e.g., Kahoot, Socrative), and interact with others, or make purchases. Srnicek
parent communication (e.g., Seesaw). (2017) described platforms as “digital infrastructures
Across these interviews, teachers talked about that…bring together different users: customers,
the exciting opportunities such apps offer for diver- advertisers, service providers, producers, suppliers,
sifying instruction. However, many also voiced even physical objects” (p. 44). These two meanings
frustrations. In an Ohio district, licensing fees for a
popular program became too high, leaving teachers
scrambling to restructure units that were aligned to T. Philip Nichols is an assistant professor in the
the software. In a Texas elementary school, language Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Baylor
arts teachers lamented a recent software update University, Waco, TX, USA; email [email protected].
that removed favorite features from an app they Robert Jean LeBlanc is an assistant professor in the
Faculty of Education at the University of Lethbridge, AB,
used to support vocabulary practice. Most teach-
Canada; email [email protected].
ers attributed these setbacks to the shortcomings of

The Reading Teacher Vol. 74 No. 1 pp. 103–109 103 doi:10.1002/trtr.1926 © 2020 International Literacy Association
 DIGITAL LITERACY

highlight how platforms never operate in isolation asking, How do platforms work? Unfortunately,
but are defined by their relation with other platforms answering this question can be challenging because
and programs. For example, an iPhone is a platform these dynamics are often hidden beneath the
for the App Store, which is a platform for many apps screen, away from users’ view. As such, it is less
that may themselves be platforms for other activi- common for teachers to talk about a platform’s tech-
ties. Examining platforms means attending not only nical components, except in moments of malfunc-
to individual apps but also to their interrelations tion (e.g., when an app crashes or a clunky interface
with one another and the wider app ecosystem. makes navigation difficult). Nevertheless, technical
Researchers have identified different frame- features have profound implications for schooling as
works for studying these platform relations: the they not only condition how useful an application is
social, technical, and economic. The social aspects but also generate data to measure, assess, and guide
of platforms include the ways people create, con- what happens in (and outside of) schools (Nichols &
sume, or integrate hardware and software into their Stornaiuolo, 2019).
daily lives. This is how casual users tend to talk Finally, platforms have an economic dimension.
about platforms. For instance, when teachers we With the rare exception of publicly funded software,
interviewed described using Seesaw to document most apps are designed to produce value for devel-
student learning or ClassDojo to manage classroom opers and shareholders. The economic perspective
behavior, they were referring to the social function on platforms asks, Who profits from an app’s use,
of these apps. Most resources that aid teachers in and how? This can be straightforward, as when a
evaluating and selecting apps to augment instruc- company charges one-time or subscription-based
tion foreground this social dimension, delineating fees for its product. Often, however, the process is
how the software enables particular activities and less clear. Many apps are seemingly disconnected
practices (Israelson, 2015). This perspective con- from the world of markets and marketers because
siders the question, What do platforms allow their they are free (e.g., games, social media, content-
users to do? sharing services). In such instances, companies
Importantly, platforms’ social functions are generate profit not through direct sales but by mon-
made possible by their technical design. Although etizing data collected through these apps, usually
using an app may seem straightforward, it involves selling it to third parties (Zuboff, 2019). Like the
the complex coordination of many moving parts: technical aspects of platforms, the economic dimen-
the physical hardware being handled, the aesthetic sion is not always discussed explicitly among educa-
design of the program’s interface, the algorithms tors because it, too, is often hidden from users’ view.
that process user data, and the code that runs the Nevertheless, it has significant ethical implications.
software (Berry, 2011; see Table 1). The technical When teachers’ and students’ clicks, swipes, and
dimension of a platform refers to these varied com- likes are mined for salable data, it becomes critical
ponents that structure apps and mediate how users to consider how a platform’s business model might
experience them. Examining these details involves run counter to educators’ aims and values.

Table 1
Technical Aspects of Platforms

Technical component What is it?

Hardware A physical medium (e.g., laptop, tablet, phone) and its related accessories (e.g., charging
cords, keyboards, batteries, cables)
Interface Visible features (e.g., buttons, scroll bars, graphic design) that mediate how users interact
with software’s underlying code
Algorithms Automated instructions that translate user inputs (e.g., personal information, usage history,
click data) into particular outputs (e.g., personalized content, services, advertisements)
Code Machine-readable language that connects hardware and software and structures how an
app operates

The Reading Teacher Vol. 74 No. 1 July/August 2020 104 literacyworldwide.org

 DIGITAL LITERACY

Taken together, these dimensions highlight how data and upload content for educational platforms
there is more to apps than meets the eye. Although such as Kahoot, Seesaw, and ClassDojo.
it is common to talk about social uses of apps, these Social media researchers called this consolida-
functions are always entangled with the technical tion of internet resources platformization (Helmond,
and economic dynamics that also underwrite plat- 2015) and suggested that its simultaneous rise along-
forms. None of these dimensions stands alone. An side the spread of mobile media into more facets of
educator using ClassDojo is not only managing stu- life is now creating a platform society (van Dijck,
dent activities (i.e., a social function) but also invit- Poell, & de Waal, 2018), where platforms are not only
ing the platform’s technical and economic features a feature of everyday life but also a core part of our
into their everyday interactions with students, par- informal interactions, professional routines, and
ents, administrators, and colleagues. Considering civic institutions. Indeed, a glance at the App Store’s
these relations, and the ethical and pedagogical Top Downloads section reveals that platforms have
questions they raise (see Table 2), becomes critical become central to how we do work, leisure, educa-
for understanding the place of apps, platforms, and tion, friendship, play, and even love. An example of
digital literacies in 21st-century classrooms. this platformization in education is the expansion
of Google’s apps for word processing (Google Docs)
and presenting (Google Slides) into a full suite of
The Platform Society resources for schools (Google Classroom). In our
We have suggested that addressing the social, tech- study, many teachers described the central role
nical, and economic dimensions of apps means that Google’s services play in how they plan les-
thinking beyond individual programs and toward sons, organize activities, and provide feedback to
wider platform relations among hardware, software, students. Some even made determinations about
and the broader social world. One reason for this is what other instructional software to use based on
that apps are increasingly designed not to be stand- its compatibility with Google programs (e.g., choos-
alone products but to interact with one another. ing one app over another because it integrated better
Where in the past, programs, websites, blogs, and with Google Classroom).
stores operated independently, today most of these Such examples demonstrate how platformi-
are consolidated into exchanges on just a few sites zation extends into schools, nudging educators
(e.g., Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft). toward instructional decisions based on techno-
Even apps that appear to operate separately from logical, rather than pedagogical, alignment. These
such firms are internally integrated with them. dynamics also clarify why particular apps might
Netflix, Spotify, and Pinterest, for example, are all abandon teacher- and student-favorite features,
hosted on Amazon Web Services, as are the usage or why acquisition by another company might

Table 2
Platform Dimensions and Considerations for Practice

Dimension Central question Some considerations for classrooms

Social What do platforms allow their ■ How does a platform’s intended and actual uses differ?
users to do? ■ How does it reconfigure teaching and learning?
■ How does it alter teacher–student–parent relationships?
■ How does it transform existing practices or necessitate
new ones?
Technical How do platforms work? ■ For whom is the hardware in/accessible?
■ What does the interface make in/visible to users?
■ How is content moderated by algorithms?
■ What default settings are coded into the software?
Economic Who profits from an app’s use, ■ Is the platform publicly or privately owned?
and how? ■ What is the business model of the platform’s owner?
■ What protections are in place for student/teacher privacy?
■ How are the data generated through the platform used?

The Reading Teacher Vol. 74 No. 1 July/August 2020 105 literacyworldwide.org

 DIGITAL LITERACY

alter functions of a popular educational app. In a Classroom Implications

platform society, developers’ primary aim is not
Moving beyond a focus on individual apps to consider
to make programs more compatible with teach-
wider relations of platforms presents rich opportuni-
ers’ instructional practices but to coax teachers’
ties for instruction and practice. We highlight three:
instructional practices to be more compatible
weighing alignments of platforms and pedagogy,
with the logic, scale, and economy of platforms.
considering the meanings of data, and making plat-
The challenges that the Ohio and Texas teachers
forms a site for student inquiry. Each of these has
we interviewed described, then, were not simply
implications for rethinking how we conceptualize
shortcomings of individual apps but frictions that
digital literacies in a platform society.
arise as teaching and learning are reshaped by the
platform society.
Weighing Alignments of Platforms
and Pedagogy
Analyzing Platforms When focused on individual apps, it is easy for edu-
in Literacy Education cators to foreground how the social function of an
For the last few years, we have studied how plat- app aligns with their desires for the classroom. For
form dynamics complicate the meaning, teaching, example, Seesaw allows teachers to document stu-
and practice of digital literacy. We have done so dent learning over time and communicate with
by examining digital platforms across a range of parents—practices well aligned to common educa-
contexts: learning management software (Scott & tional goals. However, a platform orientation makes
Nichols, 2017), social networking between school visible the technical features that shape these social
communities (Stornaiuolo & LeBlanc, 2016), and functions. For instance, if Seesaw becomes the prin-
learning analytics in literacy education (Dixon- cipal means through which growth is documented
Román, Nichols, & Nyame-Mensah, 2019). Through and parent communication occurs, the logic of the
these studies, we have explored emerg ing per- app might remake growth and communication in its
spectives from platform studies and their relation own image: as something recognizable to Seesaw’s
both to the literature on digital literacy and to the algorithms and interface. Over time, parent com-
experiences of teachers and students in today’s munication could be defined more by the form this
classrooms. communication takes (e.g., more images, videos,
Our research has shown that platforms exert or updates via Seesaw) than the substance or con-
competing pressures on educators. The social, tech- tent being communicated (e.g., the richness, depth,
nical, or economic dynamics that, at times, support or meaning of classroom learning). Teachers, then,
educators’ aims for teaching can, at others, contra- might feel pressure to increase the volume of com-
dict their sense of good pedagogy. A platform whose munication with parents and to do so in Seesaw-
social function simplifies classroom procedures, for friendly ways. In other words, although the social
example, may do so using technical features that function of the platform might be helpful, it comes
tether instruction to commercial software or eco- freighted with technical dynamics that can shape
nomic features that compromise student privacy. this function in ways that contradict teachers’ own
Crucially, we have also found that disentangling sense of robust and responsive pedagogy.
these dynamics is challenging, in part, because the This does not mean that educators must abandon
logic of the platform society fuses social, technical, any platform not perfectly aligned to their teaching
and economic elements together in ways that hide philosophy. Rather, by recognizing such misalign-
them from view. Such complexities highlight the ments, teachers are equipped to articulate those
need for an orientation to digital literacy that goes aspects of instruction they wish to preserve amid
beyond using software to access, create, or interpret the pressures of platformization and which forms of
digital content—one that also involves exploring, student learning might be better served by the gen-
analyzing, and intervening in platform dynamics erative inefficiencies of trial, error, and play than by
that are increasingly central to the ways we live, algorithms and analytics (see Figure 1). This orien-
work, and learn. In what follows, we outline some tation allows educators to create a comfortable dis-
considerations for how teachers might model this tance between their instructional practice and the
orientation and engage students in more expansive software they use so that lessons and curricula are
forms of digital literacies. not so tied to third-party apps that, as in the case of

The Reading Teacher Vol. 74 No. 1 July/August 2020 106 literacyworldwide.org

 DIGITAL LITERACY

Figure 1 most important and how they should be used.

Questions Teachers Might Consider in Aligning Platforms, then, may offer a veneer of data-driven
Platforms and Pedagogy objectivity, but little of that data may be usable for
enriching instruction. Further, it is not only this
■ What is the problem for which this platform is the lack of clarity in data that is concerning: platforms
solution? also invite other unintended data practices into
■ How does the platform address this problem
schools. Because most platforms’ orientations to
differently than other platforms (or
data are conditioned by economic interests, they
nontechnological resources)?
■ What new pedagogical or ethical problems might can expose classrooms to the data mining of third-
this platform create? party profiteers (Zuboff, 2019). Indeed, the business
■ How might it reshape relationships among teachers, model for many educational platforms depends on
students, parents, and administrators? such forms of data extraction. Without considering
■ How might its usage need to be amended or these dynamics, classrooms become spaces where
monitored to ensure alignment with educators’ passive and nonconsensual data collection are nor-
values and commitments? malized. Teachers, then, have an ethical responsi-
bility to consider how platforms’ data practices can
be locally monitored and regulated, and how stu-
dent privacy can be protected from the commercial
the Ohio district we interviewed, a lapse in licensing
interests of developers (see Figure 2).
can compromise their capacities to support students.

Making Platforms a Site for Student Inquiry

Considering the Meanings of Data
Research on digital literacy has tended to empha-
Thinking about platforms in classrooms also leads
size the skills and practices students use to navi-
us to ask critical questions about data: What counts
gate, curate, produce, and consume digital media.
as data? How are they collected, and how are they
In other words, it tended to focus on what students
used? Data-driven teaching and learning are central
do with digital technologies rather than how digi-
to educational practice. In the United States, this is
tal technologies (and their social, technical, and
evinced both in policies that require educators to
economic underpinnings) condition these digital
monitor student growth and in the growing trend
activities. A platform orientation offers pathways
of allocating teacher planning time for data analy-
for educators to expand notions of digital literacy
sis. On the surface, the platform society, which is
to include attention to the dynamics that occur
deeply dependent on the production and process-
outside users’ everyday view. Even more, it opens
ing of data, seems well aligned with such priorities.
Many educational apps tout this alignment in their
promotional materials, claiming to provide teachers Figure 2
with more expansive data sets that illuminate what Questions Teachers Might Consider Related
and how students are learning. Yet, what a platform to Platform Data
counts as meaningful data (and what its technical
■ Who profits from the use of this platform?
and economic dynamics are configured to gener-
■ How are those profits generated (e.g., one-time fee,
ate) may actually be very different from the forms of ongoing subscription, free access in exchange for
data educators need to plan instruction and support salable data)?
student flourishing. The data in data-driven does not ■ What privacy protections are in place for teacher or
necessarily mean the same thing to teachers, policy- student user data?
makers, and platform developers. ■ Are these protections compliant with teachers’ legal
This insight is especially important as a grow- responsibilities to students? Are these protections
ing research base has begun to question whether compliant with teachers’ personal commitments to
data analysis, by itself, really leads to improved students’ privacy?
teaching and learning (Hill, 2020). Although it ■ How might these protections change if the platform
is bought or acquired by another company?
would be comforting if more data about student
■ What leverage do educators have to pressure this
performance were correlated with growth, the
platform provider to improve their data use or privacy
reality is that the greater the volume of informa- policies?
tion, the harder it is to discern which data are

The Reading Teacher Vol. 74 No. 1 July/August 2020 107 literacyworldwide.org

 DIGITAL LITERACY

opportunities for teachers to inquire alongside stu- also understanding how they work, who profits from
dents into what it means to live and work in a plat- them, and how the pressures they exert might be
form society. navigated or resisted (see Table 3).
Taking this stance does not mean that stu-
dents, particularly younger students, must engage
in deep analysis of platforms’ algorithms and eco-
Conclusion: Rethinking
nomic interests. Rather, it means creating openings Digital Literacies
to not just work with, but to look at, digital media There is still important work to be done to better
and to critically examine what we find. In our understand the pressures of teaching in platform-
research, we have seen teachers begin productive saturated classrooms. As this column goes to press,
conversations along these lines. For instance, some the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is further pushing
invite discussion about similarities and differences teaching into online spaces, highlighting both how
between drawing on paper, tablets, and laptops to central platforms are to educational practice and why
highlight how technical dynamics shape the social there is need to think through their contradictions.
uses of technologies. Likewise, we have seen teach- In a connective world where apps and platforms have
ers introduce algorithms to students by exploring become necessary educational infrastructure—as
how search engines such as Google or Bing work— essential as the electrical grid or the water utility—
investigations that open doors for future discussions platform studies and their insights provide another
about algorithmic bias and targeted advertising. We angle on these questions. Thinking through platform
have also seen teachers use simple coding software, studies helps us see how each keystroke, swipe, and
such as Scratch, to illustrate for students how soft- username in a classroom contains all kinds of com-
ware is actually composed of code. Such activities plicated social, technical, and economic dynamics.
make visible hidden architectures of platforms that A focus on platforms calls attention to how all of
underpin everyday digital practices. Even more, these activities are intimately bound up with digital
they orient students toward deeper forms of digital relations that are not always immediately visible to
literacy, not only using the tools of digital media but us. As teachers, these understandings may make us

Table 3
Some Opportunities for Student Inquiry

Dimension Lessons related to digital platforms

Social Have students reflect on their own uses of digital technologies. Do they
notice patterns in their usage? Have them imagine a world without those
devices: What would be different? What would they miss or not miss?
Technical Hardware Invite students to write or draw using different forms of hardware (e.g.,
paper, tablet, laptop) and compare the strengths and limits of each. How
does physical hardware change the composing process? Do certain tools
have dis/advantages over others for certain tasks?
Interface Have students use photo-editing software (or paper) to reimagine the
interface for a favorite app. What features would they want to see? What
layout? What are the app’s current limitations, and how might they be
improved?
Algorithms Compare results between different search engines. Inquire with students:
How do search engines work? Why are there differences between them?
How do websites make use of our search histories?
Code Encourage students to explore rudiments of coding using Scratch. Have
them create a story in the app and reflect on their process for doing so.
Economic Introduce the concept of data privacy. Ask: What information are we
comfortable sharing with others (family, friends, strangers)? What happens
to data once they are shared?

The Reading Teacher Vol. 74 No. 1 July/August 2020 108 literacyworldwide.org

 DIGITAL LITERACY

more cautious, but they also allow us to think more Hill, H.C. (2020, February 7). Does studying student data really
raise test scores? Education Week. Retrieved from https://
broadly about the implications of app integration in
www.edweek.org/ew/artic les/2020/02/10/does-study ing-
our classrooms, our schools, and our practice. student-data-really-raise-test.html
Israelson, M.H. (2015). The app map: A tool for systematic
evaluation of apps for early literacy learning. The Reading
NOTE Teacher, 69(3), 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1414
This research was supported in part by Grant R305C150007 Nichols, T.P., & Stornaiuolo, A. (2019). Assembling “digital lit-
from the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of eracies”: Contingent pasts, possible futures. Media and Com-
Education. munication, 7(2), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i2.1946
Scott, J., & Nichols, T.P. (2017). Learning analytics as assemblage:
Criticality and contingency in online education. Research in
REFERENCES Education, 98(1), 83–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034523717
723391
Berry, D.M. (2011). The philosophy of software: Code and mediation
Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism. Malden, MA: Polity.
in the digital age. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stornaiuolo, A., & LeBlanc, R.J. (2016). Scaling as a literacy
Bogost, I., & Monfort, N. (2009). Platform studies: Frequently
activity. Research in the Teaching of English, 50(3), 263–287.
questioned answers. Digital Arts and Culture. Retrieved
van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018). The platform society:
from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/01r0k9br.pdf
Public values in a connective world. New York, NY: Oxford
Desimone, L.M., Stornaiuolo, A., Flores, N., Pak, K.,
University Press.
Edgerton, A., Nichols, T.P., … Porter, A. (2019). Successes
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for
and challenges of the “new” college- and career-ready
a human future at the new frontier of power. New York, NY:
standards. Educational Researcher, 48(3), 167–178. https://doi.
Public Affairs.
org/10.3102/0013189X19837239
Dixon-Román, E., Nichols, T.P., & Nyame-Mensah, A. (2019).
The racializing forces of/in AI educational technologies.
Learning, Media and Technology. Advance online publication. The department editor welcomes reader comments.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1667825 Jennifer Rowsell is the Canada Research Chair
Gillespie, T. (2010). The politics of “platforms”. New Media &
Society, 12(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614 44809 in Multiliteracies and a professor in the
342738 Department of Educational Studies at Brock
Helmond, A. (2015). The platformization of the web: Making University, St. Catharines, ON, Canada; email
web data platform ready. Social Media + Society, 1(2). https:// [email protected].
doi.org/10.1177/2056305115603080

EXPAND YOUR LIBRARY OF DIGITAL PD RESOURCES!

ILA Digital Events provide an opportunity for you to learn from and
connect with experts and like-minded educators at a time and place that’s
convenient for you.
Special discounts are available for ILA members.
Check out what’s new!
literacyworldwide.org/digitalevents

The Reading Teacher Vol. 74 No. 1 July/August 2020 109 literacyworldwide.org