Introduction

Recent research has emphasized the importance of critical literacy in developing responsible and engaged citizens capable of instituting genuine change in society (Freire, 2018; Giroux, 2021). As a transformative project, critical literacy recognizes the political aspects of education. Literacy with a critical orientation questions problematic assumptions about the production, circulation, and consumption of texts.

The strength of critical literacy lies in creating conditions of possibility by allowing students to question assumptions about texts, maximizing opportunities for authentic dialogue between learners and teachers and engaging in worthwhile community projects for collective action (Banegas & Villacañas de Castro, 2016; Chen, 2020; Huang, 2012; Mambu, 2011; Valdez, 2020).

However, the emergence of the post-truth era in politics, fake news, conspiracy theories and spin proliferating via social media have posed challenges for educators (Frechette,2014; Picton & Teravainen, 2017; Farkas & Schou, 2020). Misinformation has created problematic assumptions about people, practices and concepts. Moreover, communication technology has created echo chambers for communities of practice that may hold problematic beliefs about aspects of society (e.g., flat earthers, anti-vaxxers) leading to misunderstanding and even violence.

As an outcome of curricular reform in 2012, the Philippine education system revised its educational program that increased the basic education cycle from 10 to 13 years old to enable Filipino students to learn skills that would be useful to meet local and global standards (Manaog, 2020). Tertiary institutions had to declutter their curricula by offering fewer general education courses. In the case of English language courses, previously separate subjects on academic reading and writing and speech communication classes were combined into one course called Purposive Communication (GEPCOMM). According to the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), GEPCOMM aims to “develop students’ communicative competence and enhance their cultural and intercultural awareness through multimodal tasks” (p. 1) that would allow students to participate effectively in an increasingly multicultural society (Commission on Higher Education, 2013). Since the official implementation of the curricular reform in 2018, this subject has become the required English language course for all undergraduate students in the Philippines.

Given the problems of misinformation spread online, this paper reports findings of a classroom project integrating critical digital literacy skills in identifying problematic texts. We further argue that incorporating other languages/multimodal resources, structuring arguments and identifying potential opportunities for engagement are essential in developing critical thinking strategies that can address misinformation spread through the internet.

Teaching Context

In our project, participants of the study were 90 undergraduate students at a private university in Manila, Philippines. These students were from the colleges of Education, Computer Studies and Engineering GEPCOMM in English, where they were given the task of identifying online materials (text or image) that reflected two or more logical fallacies. Participants were asked to identify and explain these fallacies in only five to seven sentences. This activity was a group collaboration in which they chose, discussed, and explained their product. Data were analyzed by identifying common themes based on participants’ ability to show their critical thinking strategies when identifying misinformation in online texts.

Results and Discussion

Languages and multimodal resources as a resource

While the internet has democratized the production and consumption of information through first-hand accounts, narratives and reports from the ground, the absence of proper vetting procedures in verifying information and the wide range of sources available for information open possibilities for misinterpreting facts. The prominence of social media as a platform for the creation and convergence of different groups with similar interests have also resulted in problematic ideas which may have gained traction over the years and have influenced political, scientific, and even economic movements. For instance, the emergence of conspiracy theories, alternative facts, and revisionist histories have contributed greatly to conflicts over these platforms. It is critical to examine the use of language and multimodal resources in constructing informational texts.

While other scholars have identified specific features of misinformation in texts such as credibility of source, relevance and currency of information and contributing contexts, the use of language and multimodal resources are equally important in understanding this problem (Alvermann, 2017; Fajardo, 2016; Goodnight, 2009; Navera et al., 2019; Valdez, 2020). Based on our implementation of the project, there were two notable features that were identified by our students in texts that perpetuate misinformation. First, there are other languages in the texts in question. While direct quotations in other languages are part of even reliable news sources, the indication of other languages in these texts appears to be used to sensationalize information or misinterpret actual statements made by personalities involved in the news source.

To illustrate, in Figure 1, Harry Roque, the Philippine President’s spokesperson addresses criticism on the recent government project which dumped dolomite over Manila Bay costing an estimated Php 389 million Inquirer, 2020). The criticism focused on the timing of the project considering that this happened during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. In the example, Roque is quoted using mental health as one of the reasons for pursuing the project. Using Filipino, he argued that it was important for people who visiting Manila Bay appreciate the beauty of dolomite white sand on the shore to help them cope with the mental stress of the pandemic. In this example, two languages (Filipino and English) were used to emphasize a rebuttal of the criticism but, at the same time, veer away from the actual issues the Philippines needed to address.

Figure 1: Sample of students’ perception of use of language (Inquirer, 2020)

Second, the use of multimodal resources in texts which intend to misinform has similar generic characteristics, blurring the lines between fact and fiction. As can be observed in Figure 2, it reflects how PETA advocates for animal rights and welfare. Using a photo of a child smoking tobacco provokes disapproval and, as smoking is compared with eating meat, it implies a strong warning to discourage the audience from eating meat. The first line “You wouldn’t let your child smoke” is emphasized to focus on the organization’s call for people to go vegan. However, the students perceived this as a false analogy between a child smoking and eating meat. Overall, the use of the image of the smoking child, the large fonts that emphasize the message and logo of the organization work together semiotically to encode a message that appears to relate eating meat to smoking.

Figure 2: Sample of students’ perception of false analogy (“Eating meat increases”, 2015)

Structuring of arguments
In our project, one prominent communicative device found in texts that spread misinformation was the use of a problematic argument. With the wide use of social media, information that comes from popular figures in politics and entertainment emphasizes arguments that can stir intense emotions and divisive thinking. These arguments naturalize problematic beliefs about race, sex, class, and religion (to name a few) sometimes leading to stereotypes. In Figure 3, one student chose a meme portraying former US president Donald Trump making a sweeping generalization about Mexican migrants as a source of problems in society (Jacoby, 2016).

Figure 3: Sample of students’ perception of sweeping generalization (Jacoby, 2016)

Opportunities for Engagement

While misinformation greatly skews important social issues that need to be confronted, there are several areas that students and teachers can explore to strengthen critical thinking skills through active engagement. First, although language and multimodal resources combine to create texts, these are not neutral entities that simply encode messages, but are created with underlying agendas. That is, aspects such as the circumstances, motivations, and intended effects should be interrogated. In our implementation of the project, there was a consensus that many texts that spread misinformation are intended to create or sustain divisions among the public.

Second, since texts and contexts are connected, it is important to see the portrayal of certain groups of people in these texts. For instance, an often-cited point in our discussions with our classes is that privileged and disenfranchised groups are identified in these texts. Specific biases or even stereotypes against disenfranchised groups emerge in these fake news texts. Third, while emotions figure in engaging with issues, it is important to see that a statement in texts be examined in terms of its information value rather than its emotional appeal. Overall, while English language classes may be viewed primarily as sites for learning, they can also be viewed as sites for struggle (Akbari, 2017; Huang, 2012; Pennycook, 2017) where facts and opinions about issues are discussed, negotiated and resolved.

Reflections

Given these original insights gained from our teaching practice, there are several directions teachers may want to pursue. First, while English language classes mainly focus on the development of communication skills in the target language, including other languages in understanding the content of informational texts may help learners appreciate the contexts that shape the creation of these documents. Viewing other languages as a resource opens opportunities for teachers and learners to maximize engagement on issues imparted by these texts. Second, while contexts contribute greatly to the creation and reception of texts, it is also important to monitor the changing dynamics of how students access news.

As mentioned earlier, the internet has afforded individuals the opportunity to access information from a vast array of sources. Understanding our learners’ engagements with non-traditional sources of information, which are mainly disseminated via communication technologies, needs to be considered. Third, while effectively dealing with misinformation imparted in texts can be addressed by strengthening comprehension of the structure, content, and language, interrogating assumptions, common sensical beliefs and even motivations in creating these texts need to be part of regular lessons in the English language classroom (Ugalingan et al, 2020). Overall, while an understanding of texts greatly helps to develop an informed citizenry, the demand for collective action also needs to be pursued for positive change.

References

Akbari, R. (2008). Transforming lives: Introducing critical pedagogy into ELT classrooms. ELT Journal 62(3), 276-283. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn025

Alvermann, D. E. (2017). Social media texts and critical inquiry in a post-factual era. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(3), 335-338. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.694

Banegas, D. L., & Villacañas de Castro, L. S. (2016). Criticality. ELT Journal 70(4), 455-457. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw048

Chen, J. (2020). A marginalized third space: English language learners’ cultural capital. MEXTESOL Journal, 44(4). http://www.mextesol.net/journal/index.php?page=journal&id_article=22049

Commission on Higher Education. (2013). Purposive communication preliminaries. https://ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Purposive-Communication.pdf

“Eating meat increases risk of cancer, says PETA”. (2015, February 3). bdnews24.com. https://bdnews24.com/health/2015/02/03/eating-meat-increases-risk-of-cancer-says-peta

Fajardo, M.F. (2016). Teaching critical literacy using multimodal texts to college students in the Philippines [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Wollongong. https://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/4854

Farkas, J., & Schou, J. (2020). Post-truth, fake news and democracy: Mapping the politics of falsehood. Routledge.

Frechette, J. (2014). Top ten guiding questions for critical digital literacy. Journal of Media Literacy, 61(1–2), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/isis-summit-vienna-2015-S3019

Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury.

Giroux, H. A. (2021). Race, politics, and pandemic pedagogy: Education in a time of crisis. Bloomsbury Academic.

Goodnight, G. T. (2009). Critical thinking in a digital age: Argumentation and the projects of new media literacy. OSSA Conference Archive, 58. https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossarchive/OSSA8/papersandcommnetaries/58

Huang, S.-Y. (2012) The integration of ‘critical’ and ‘literacy’ education in the EFL curriculum: Expanding the possibilities of critical writing practices. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 25(3), 283-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2012.723715

Inquirer [@inquirerdotnet]. (2020, September 7). Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque said that the appearance of "white sand" on Manila Bay will do wonders for Filipinos' mental health [Image attached] [Tweet]. Twitter. http://twitter.com/inquirerdotnet/status/1302881371145359360

Jacoby, T. (2016, September 1). Trump’s dystopian immigration speech out of touch with reality. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/01/opinions/trump-speech-on-immigration-jacoby/index.html

Mambu, J. E. (2011) English for advocacy purposes: Critical pedagogy’s contribution to Indonesia. Journal of AsiaTEFL, 8(4), 135-173. http://www.asiatefl.org/main/download_pdf.php?i=115&c=1419301247&fn=8_4_06.pdf

Manaog, N. R. S. (2020, 30 January). Notes on the K to 12 curriculum. The Manila Times.https://www.Manilatimes.net/2020/01/30/campus-press/notes-on-the-k-to-12-curriculum/678242

Navera, J. A. S., Garinto, L. A. B., & Valdez, P. N. M. (2019). Teaching against the meme: Politics, argumentation and engagement in an ESL classroom in the Philippines. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(1), 393–400. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.1.29.393

Pennycook, A. (2017). The cultural politics of English as an international language. Routledge.

Picton, I., & Teravainen, A. (2017). Fake News and critical literacy: An evidence review. National Literacy Trust. https://cdn.literacytrust.org.uk/media/documents/Fake_news_and_critical_literacy_evidence_review_Sep_17.pdf

Ugalingan, G., Valdez, P. N., & Flores, G. M. (2020). Promoting advocacies in an ESL classroom in the Philippines: Insights from an action research project. Journal of AsiaTEFL 17(2), 635-642. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2020.17.2.21.635

Valdez, P. N. (2020). Research in critical pedagogy: Implications for English language classrooms in Asia. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 60, 222-236. https://www.culi.chula.ac.th/Publicationsonline/files/article/Rdxzxhl88RTue21621.pdf