logo

Editorials

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2022): Visual literacies and visual technologies for teaching, learning and inclusion

Visual literacies and visual technologies for teaching, learning and inclusion: Introduction to the Special Issue

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.46bb5c93
Submitted
8 August 2026
Published
15-08-2026

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic triggered a major shift in teaching and learning, particularly within higher education and as a result accelerated the move to technology-enhanced learning and online teaching and learning. This was particularly evident in the increasing use of visual technologies such as video and video-conferencing systems and to a lesser extent augmented reality mobile apps and immersive virtual reality platforms. To fully utilise these technologies within higher education requires a high level of visual literacy, i.e. the ability to understand, create and communicate with visuals (Avgerinou & Pettersson, 2020).

References

  1. Avgerinou, M. D. (2003). A mad-tea party no-more: Revisiting the visual literacy definition problem. In R. E. Griffin, V. S. Williams, & L. Jung (Eds.), Turning trees (pp. 29-41). International Visual Literacy Association.
  2. Avgerinou, M. D. & Pettersson, R. (2020). Visual Literacy Theory: Moving Forward. In S. Josephson, J. D. Kelly & K. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of Visual Communication. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429491115
  3. Barton, D. & Hamilton, M. (2000). Literacy Practices. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton, & R. Ivanič. (Eds.), Situated Literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 7-15). Routledge.
  4. Bendriss, R. (2022). Multimodality in medical education: Perspectives on medical shadowing from an experiential learning curriculum. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.304da1f8
  5. Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. Penguin.
  6. Bower, M., Howe, C., McCredie, N., Robinson, A. & Grover, D. (2014). Augmented reality in education – cases, places and potentials. Educational Media International, 51(1), 1-15. http://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2014.889400
  7. Cassidy, M. F., & Knowlton, J. Q. (1983). Visual literacy: A failed metaphor? Educational Communication and Technology, 31(2), 67-90. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30218097
  8. Dennen, V. P. & Arslan, Ö. (2022). The visual performance of online identity: Instructor presence and persona across tools and settings. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.9e975efc
  9. Farmer, L. (2022). Visual literacy and fake news: Gaining a visual voice. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.b34036b2
  10. Hurley, Z. (2022). Thinking with semiotic-dialogism: Re-orienting augmented reality and visual literacy. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.4e1f8d49
  11. Jenkins, H. (2003, January 15). Transmedia storytelling: Moving characters from books to films to video games can make them stronger and more compelling. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/401760/transmedia-storytelling/
  12. Kędra, J. (2018). What does it mean to be visually literate? Examination of visual literacy definitions in a context of higher education. Journal of Visual Literacy, 37(2), 67-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144x.2018.1492234
  13. Knox, J., & Bayne, S. (2014). Multimodal profusion in the literacies of the Massive Open Online Course. Research in Learning Technology, 21. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21.21422
  14. Maas, M. J. & Hughes, J. M. (2020). Virtual, augmented and mixed reality in K-12 education: A review of the literature. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 29(2), 231-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1737210
  15. Moffitt, P. (2022). Visual forms of mediating artefacts: A research-intervention in engineering education. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.3e816f8f
  16. Newman, J. J. & Bustamante, N. (2022). Developing curriculum for teaching scientific visual communication. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.d4c211f1
  17. New London Group (1996). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–93. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u
  18. Ramirez Martinell, A. (2022). Videoconferences in higher education: The good frame. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.56c9bc54
  19. Sime, J.A. & Themelis, C. (2020). Educators’ Perspectives on Transmedia Identity Management: Re-defining Tele-teacher Presence. Distance Education, 41(1), 70-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1727292
  20. Sime, J.A. & Tsampra, E. (2022). Extracting the story behind the CIELL essays: Inclusive visual design of the webtoons in the CIELL mobile app. Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.122c0187
  21. Sless, D. (1984). Visual literacy: A failed opportunity. Educational Communication and Technology, 32(4), 224-228. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30218147