287 Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) pp. 287–305 | doi:10.1002/rrq.392 © 2021 The Authors. Reading Research Quarterly published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Literacy Association. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. A B S T R A C T In recent years, the government of Kenya has implemented programs with the hope of moving the country to middle-income status. The government has implemented the Digital Literacy Programme, distributing tablets to schools across the country, and also a new curriculum, promoting innovative teaching that includes digital literacy, learner-centered teaching, and rel- evance to students’ lives. Our purpose in this research was to explore cultur- ally sustaining teaching methods in line with the Kenyan government’s push for innovative teaching and digital literacy attainment for all students. We used case study methods to describe Kenyan teachers’ perceptions of innova- tive teaching and digital literacy while participating in the Inquiry Initiative, a three-day professional development series. Participants included preschool, primary, and secondary teachers from Trans Nzoia County. Data sources were pre- and post-surveys, participant-generated artifacts, and interviews. Our participants perceived the following needs: new literacies for learners, cre- ativity for learners, collaboration and group work, and creativity to overcome technological challenges. Overall, participants embraced learner-centered teaching theoretically but found that the lack of technological resources cre- ated barriers to teaching digital literacy in a learner-centered fashion. We found that teachers reported mostly using technology for teaching prepara- tion and record keeping rather than engaging students in digital literacy prac- tices. To solve technological challenges, teachers described having students work in groups and using smartphones. Future research could share more creative solutions to technical challenges in low-income countries. If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. (Kenyan proverb) Among the central issues in the literacy field today are the effects of a quickly changing world. Researchers have suggested that students should develop new literacies and new ways of thinking for our digital, global society (Kajee, 2018; Kimani & Onyancha, 2015; Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, Castek, & Henry, 2019), and the Kenyan government has suggested the same (Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development [KICD], 2019). The Kenyan government has prioritized becoming a middle-income country and believes that digital literacy is an important component of growing the nation’s economy and increasing citizens’ well-being. As such, the Kenyan government has charged schools with teaching computer skills and digital literacy to accelerate economic development and innovate pedagogy (DigiSchool, 2018; Makura, 2019). Although literacy researchers and Kenyan government officials agree that new literacies are needed, literacy practices are not the same around Shea N. Kerkhoff Timothy Makubuya University of Missouri–St. Louis, USA Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ mailto: http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1002%2Frrq.392&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2021-03-26 288 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) the world. From a sociocultural view, literacy practices do not develop in isolation but rather are co-constructed as people communicate with other people (Gee, 2000). Literacy involves social and cultural norms dependent on the context of the communication. Following this line of reasoning, literacy practices in Kenya may look different from literacy practices in another country, and what digi- tal literacy looks like in Kenya may be different from what it looks like in the United States, Europe, or Australia (Coiro, 2021), where much of the research has been con- ducted (Ndimande, 2018). There is a need to understand the nuanced digital literacy needs of Kenyan students and share successful practices for integration of technology from teachers’ perspectives. In this article, we present a case study of Kenyan teachers engaged in a professional development (PD) series on learner-centered digital liter- acy instruction. Review of Research on Teaching Styles and Digital Literacy Instruction in Kenya In recent years, the government of Kenya has imple- mented the Basic Education Curriculum Framework, with calls for transformative teaching that nurtures the potential of every learner and promotes seven core com- petencies: citizenship, digital literacy, creativity, critical thinking, self-efficacy, collaboration, and communication (KICD, 2019). The framework calls for teaching to be learner centered, meaning “to think of teaching with learning in the forefront and with the idea that we should consider teaching primarily in terms of its impact on learner learning” (KICD, 2019, p. 16). The curriculum is grounded in sociocultural and constructivist theories in which learning is seen as a social process of constructing knowledge instead of acquisition (e.g., Dewey, 1902/1966; Hattie, 2012; Vygotsky, 1978). Teaching Styles The push for learner-centered teaching is in line with ini- tiatives in other countries in sub-Saharan Africa (Adedeji & Olaniyan, 2011; Tabulawa, 2013). However, in a meta- analysis of studies conducted in sub-Saharan Africa, Schweisfurth (2011) concluded that “the history of the implementation of LCE [learner-centered education] in different contexts is riddled with stories of failures grand and small” (p. 425). In a study conducted in coastal Kenya, Jukes et al. (2017) found that teachers relied on teaching from textbooks with “lecture and whole-class oral peda- gogies” (p. 451). Ngware, Mutisya, and Oketch’s (2012) mixed-methods study of schools in Kenya found that teaching styles varied across English instruction and that engaging students in recitation, in which students were active participants but not constructing knowledge, was the most common teaching activity. The researchers found that other, more learner-centered practices, such as discussions in which students co-constructed knowledge, were theoretically helpful for student learning but com- prised less than 4% of total teaching activities in the English lessons observed. Ngware and colleagues summa- rized their findings as follows: “This implies a heavily teacher-centred and reproductive style that may not develop critical thinking among learners” (p. 47). Part of the failure to enact learner-centered teaching in Kenya stems from an ideology that teachers should be in control of the learning (Anderson et al., 2015; Mutai, 2012). Previous research has found that Kenyan teachers are cautious about relinquishing control to students but willing to change when they see the benefits. For example, in a multiple-case study, Jwan and Kisaka (2017) found that educators in two Kenyan schools were willing to embrace distributed power, even though initially one principal felt it would not be appropriate for her school. In an intervention study with 12 teachers, Anderson and col- leagues (2015) found a willingness of teachers to embrace learner-centered teaching after participating in PD in which innovative teaching was modeled. The study docu- mented “changes in loci of control whereby teachers changed or surrendered their traditional powers in response to active emancipated student learning” (p. 607). The findings pointed to a change in the students, as they were empowered through the intervention to acquire content knowledge outside of the classroom. They then brought their out-of-classroom learning, curiosity, and questions into the classroom, inciting the teachers to become responsive to the change in their students. Based on this conclusion, research is also needed on how stu- dents’ out-of-classroom learning through the internet might cause innovation in literacy instruction as internet access continues to improve in Kenya. This study offers a foundational step for future research in this direction. Digital Literacy Calls and Challenges In addition to promoting learner-centered teaching, the Basic Education Curriculum Framework calls for digital literacy for every Kenyan (KICD, 2019). In 2013, the Kenyan government implemented the Digital Literacy Programme, with the goal of each grade 1 student having a tablet loaded with the national curriculum content (DigiSchool, 2018; Makura, 2019). There have been over 1 million tablets delivered to date. The hope was to radically change how learning takes place in schools. At the time of the study, the government was still delivering tablets, and some tablets that had been distributed were not being used. A KICD report stated, “This was interpreted as either unwillingness by teachers to integrate ICT [infor- mation and communication technology] in the learning 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 289 process or a lack of capacity to do it” (as cited in Wanzala & Nyamai, 2018, para 13). In addition to the challenge of accessing technology, research in Kenya (e.g., Heinrich, Darling-Aduana, & Martin, 2020; Kerkhoff, Spires, & Wanyonyi, 2020) has shown that even when the schools have technology, there are still challenges that mirror those of other developing countries. Challenges to integrating technology in schools in low- income countries have been well documented. Infrastructure problems consist of electrical and internet outages (Muriithi, Horner, & Pemberton, 2016; Richardson, 2011; Stols et al., 2015). School-based challenges include a high ratio of students in a class to computers (e.g., 150:10) and teach- ers’ lack of knowledge on how to integrate technology with learning (Buabeng-Andoh, 2012; Piper, Oyanga, Mejia, & Pouezevara, 2017; Tondeur, Krug, Bill, Smulders, & Zhu, 2015). Another barrier to integrating technology is lack of technical support to deliver training or to fix devices when needed (Muriithi et al., 2016; Ogembo, Ngugi, & Pelowski, 2012). Moreover, an extra challenge in the Kenyan context is an already overloaded curriculum (Anyiendah, 2017; Gudu, 2015; Mutai, 2012) that does not include digital literacy integration across it. If students do not develop digital literacy, research in the United States (Leu et al., 2019) and Kenya (Kimani & Onyancha, 2015) has indicated impediments to academic learning in future years. We know from research that many students need intentional digital literacy instruction to skillfully navi- gate digital texts (Coiro, Coscarelli, Maykel, & Forzani, 2015; Livingstone, Nandi, Banaji, & Stoilova, 2017). Digital Literacy Instruction Digital literacy involves consuming, creating, and com- municating digital products (Spires & Bartlett, 2012; Spires, Paul, & Kerkhoff, 2018). Digital literacy includes the ability to consume texts and acquire knowledge through online reading and inquiry (Kimani & Onyancha, 2015; Leu et al., 2019). Moving beyond acquisition- focused literacy practices, digital literacy also includes the ability to create digital texts by choosing the appropriate mode(s) and to communicate one’s ideas using the affor- dances of digital platforms (Coiro, 2021; Leu et al., 2019), as well as to participate, collaborate, and connect with people across borders (Kerkhoff & Cloud, 2020; Kim, 2016; Law, Woo, de la Torre, & Wong, 2018). Learners cre- ating and communicating digital texts, rather than merely consuming, is in line with the constructivist orientation of curriculum in Kenya. Another affordance of creating and communicating digital texts is multimodality. Multimodal compositions can include text and static images or, through the affor- dance of digital tools, become dynamic with moving images and hyperlinks. As Hull and Nelson (2005) asserted, “multimodality can afford, not just a new way to make meaning, but a different kind of meaning” (p. 225). Through a review of research, Smith, Pacheco, and Khorosheva (2021) found that using multimodal composition to teach literacy can be an effective learner-centered and culturally sustaining teaching practice for students for whom English is a new language, which is particularly relevant in Kenya because most students learn English in school as a third language after their ethnic language and Kiswahili. However, in a study in Kenya, “teachers’ responses reveal[ed] that the multi-media approach is not popular as only a small num- ber use this with their pupils” (Dhillon & Wanjiru, 2013, p. 20). Multimodality provides opportunities to communi- cate using language and images through hybridity and to play with language through remix (Kim, 2016). In addition, creating digital multimodal compositions in school has been found to be motivating for students (Alvermann, 2002; Heinrich et al., 2020). One reason is because digital platforms provide students opportunities to share multimodal compositions with authentic audi- ences. Students can apply their digital literacy in storytell- ing and activist spaces online, making digital literacy an important part of civic and community life, in addition to career preparation (Lee, Meloche, Grant, Neuman, & Tecce DeCarlo, 2019; Lewis Ellison, 2017; Nixon, 2013). Nixon (2013) described collaborative digital storytelling as a meaningful practice to explore issues of identity, such as race and gender, and to bridge storytellers’ home lit eracies to school literacies. An important instructional practice in multimodal composition, such as digital story- telling, is to provide opportunities for learner choice, such as choice of mode, digital tool, and story to tell. Making such decisions is both an essential digital literacy skill and empowering for learners (Lewis Ellison, 2017). Theoretical Framework In addition to the sociocultural view of literacy and learn- ing, we grounded this research in culturally sustaining pedagogy (Alim & Paris, 2017; Paris, 2012) and decolo- nizing curriculum (Subedi, 2013). When enacting cultur- ally sustaining pedagogy, teachers value and recognize the diverse cultural ways of knowing, doing, and communi- cating that students bring to the classroom, and promote students’ development of their cultural literacy practices. Culturally sustaining pedagogy is complementary to de colonizing curriculum because they are both informed by critical (i.e., concerned with power) and resource (i.e., opposed to deficit) frames. A current problem in edu cation is that much of the research (Andreotti, 2010; Ndimande, 2018) and practice (Delpit, 2005; Subedi, 2013) stems from Western European culture. Research that seeks to decenter Western European culture and to bring in traditionally marginalized voices is called decolonization (Assié-Lumumba, 2017), and through this 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 290 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) research project, we hope to contribute to decolonizing efforts in the field. Unfortunately, education in Kenya, as in other low- income countries, suffers effects of European coloniza- tion (Anderson et al., 2015; Commeyras & Inyega, 2007; Gudu, 2015) and modern globalization (Wa-Mungai, 2007). Although the diverse Kenyan cultures and the col- onizers’ British culture are different, Anderson and col- leagues (2015) described the methods currently used in Kenya as “traditional British-modeled curriculum and pedagogy” (p. 600), making home and school different cultures for many students. The cultural differences can be exacerbated by rurality and economic status (Heinrich et al., 2020). Assié-Lumumba (2017), a Nigerian scholar, stated, Contemporary African education has suffered from several fundamental problems. One of them is the forced juxtaposi- tion of the European and the African systems of education on a hierarchical basis, with the European system on the top and the only one considered legitimate. While it was denied agency, the African system was not successfully eradicated by colonial policy. Individuals and groups are forced to resolve the tension between the two without the benefit of consistent, systemic, and sustained policy that attempts to create a constructive dia- logue between them. (p. 16) Legitimizing indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing in educational institutions can, in turn, empower teachers and learners. The Basic Education Curriculum Framework and Ministry of Education plans in Kenya encourage innova- tion (KICD, 2019; Ministry of Education, 2018). The term innovation typically refers to positive change but also has strong connotations of neoliberalism (Bang, 2020; Bang, Faber, Gurneau, Marin, & Soto, 2016). In addition, the word can hold connotations of invention or newness. However, dismantling and unlearning can also create powerful positive changes (Tierney, 2018). It is our asser- tion that dismantling colonial teaching, generating teach- ing methods, resuscitating indigenous and cultural ways (Wa-Mungai, 2007) of teaching, and creating hybrid prac- tices are all possibilities in the spirit of what innovation and innovating can be. In order not to conjure the neolib- eral connotation, we use the terms transformative and transforming instead. Indigenous and hybrid practices hold potential to bridge the home–school cultural divide, transforming students’ learning and lives. Therefore, our purpose in this research was to explore culturally sustaining teaching methods in line with the Kenyan government’s push for learner-centered teaching and digital literacy attainment for all students. However, we are aware of the limitations of reaching this goal as researchers from a U.S. university. In addition, we understand that we are outsiders to the research participants. The first author is of Western European heritage, and the second author is Ugandan American. In doing this cross-cultural research, we looked to Shope (2006), who asserted that although one may not be able to resolve all of the dilemmas inherent in cross- cultural research, that does not mean one should not try. We took Tierney’s (2018) advice that “cross-cultural en gagements should proceed in a manner that is respect- ful  of the histories, ways of knowing, needs, hopes, and values of all” (p. 397). Research Questions Two research questions guided the study: 1. What are the Kenyan teachers’ perceptions of digi- tal literacy? 2. What digital literacy teaching strategies do Kenyan teachers’ perceive (a) as culturally sustaining for learners, (b) as learner centered, and (c) as likely to overcome technological resource challenges? Method This was a collective case study (Stake, 2000). Participants were teachers recruited during a PD series in summer 2019. With the Kenyan government’s initiatives for ICTs and learner-centered methods, there are (albeit limited) resources and support for teachers to utilize the affor- dances of technology to create new and culturally sustain- ing literacy instructional methods in their classrooms. Context The Inquiry Initiative is a PD series focused on an inquiry-based learning approach to literacy, with empha- sis on digital literacy instruction. At a conference in 2015, the first author met Dr. Peter Wanyonyi, the founder of Hope Education Centre and the president of the board of governors of three public schools in Trans Nzoia County, Kenya. Dr. Wanyonyi asked the first author to collaborate as he worked to continuously improve education in his community. Since 2015, the partnership has included PD sessions for preschool, primary, and secondary school teachers in Trans Nzoia County; securement and distri- bution of computers to schools in Trans Nzoia to enhance digital literacy and inquiry possibilities; presentations at U.S. institutions; and research on Kenyan teachers’ per- ceptions of digital literacy and inquiry (see Kerkhoff et al., 2020). In 2019, Dr. Wanyonyi invited both of us to facilitate PD for teachers focused on two Kenyan government pri- orities: learner-centered teaching and full utilization of government-distributed tablets in early literacy instruc tion (KICD, 2019). Dr. Wanyonyi convened a group of  teacher leaders to help design and market the PD. 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 291 Sixty-three schools across Trans Nzoia County, a primarily rural area, were invited to send two teachers to attend any or all of the sessions provided over three days in June. Figure 1 shows the teacher leaders welcoming participants to the PD. Evidence-based principles for PD (Darling-Hammond, Wei, Andree, Richardson, & Orphanos, 2009) and cross- cultural collaboration (Tierney, 2018) were followed, in cluding multiyear engagement, recognition of local teachers’ professional knowledge, and shared leadership. The PD theme and agenda were co-constructed by Dr. Wanyonyi (in consultation with the Kenyan teacher leaders) and the two of us (in consultation with the PD team). Because of unpredictable electrical outages and a lack of electrical out- lets to keep multiple older laptops running, relying on the internet and laptops had proven difficult the previous year. In addition, the teacher leaders specifically asked for PD this year on (a) how to utilize government-issued tablets for instruction and (b) digital literacy in early childhood, as many teachers taught learners ages 3–8. With these consid- erations, we decided to facilitate digital storytelling as the theme for the PD. The agenda (see Appendix A) included whole-group interactive sessions in which new concepts, namely, learner-centered digital literacy instruction and digital storytelling as culturally sustaining pedagogy, were introduced and learner-centered pedagogy modeled. U.S. literacy professors and Kenyan teacher leaders facilitated the whole-group sessions. Each whole-group session was followed by small-group circles differentiated by grade lev- els, where participants discussed the concepts presented, making connections or adaptations to their contexts. Next, everyone enjoyed lunch together, which fostered relation- ship building and sharing of cultural knowledge. Breakout sessions in the afternoon provided choices for participants to explore and capitalized on the PD team’s areas of exper- tise, including using Google Play on government-issued tablets, learner-centered slide deck design, literacy strategies for emerging multilingual learners, culturally sustaining early literacy strategies, and learner-centered apps for differ- entiated instruction. Both of us participated in all aspects of the PD. A major portion of the PD time was designated to Design Studio (Spires et al., 2009), where participants engaged in digital storytelling. Participants worked in groups of five or six during Design Studio to apply their cultural knowledge of traditional storytelling and their new knowledge of digital literacy to create an original multimodal story (see Figure 2). As the teams designed, we modeled learner-centered pedagogical moves, scaf- folding, and formative assessment. The Design Studio structure built on the PD from the year before, which used the New Literacies Institute model by Spires and col- leagues (2009), a hands-on PD with a focus on teachers experiencing inquiry-based learning. Previously, partici- pants conducted project-based inquiry (see Kerkhoff et al., 2020) by gathering, analyzing, and synthesizing print and digital sources to acquire knowledge on an environ- mental cause and create an infographic that shared in formation on sustainability in Kenya. For this study, participants engaged in learner-led, hands-on creation of digital stories based on a traditional Kenyan tale using their personal smartphones (if available), one tablet, and one laptop per group. Participants chose whether to use a tablet or laptop for the story creation. This structure mod- eled the strategy of working in groups to overcome low technology/learner ratios. The process of creating digital stories promoted learner-centered teaching, culturally sustaining peda gogy, and the application of digital literacies. Participants FIGURE 1 Teacher Leaders Greeting Participants at the Inquiry Initiative Professional Development Note. The color figure can be viewed in the online version of this article at http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com. FIGURE 2 Groups of Teachers Working on Digital Stories Note. The color figure can be viewed in the online version of this article at http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com. 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com 292 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) mixed traditional storytelling with their current practice of using slides to communicate in education settings. Within each group, at least one member had used PowerPoint in his or her teaching. For many partici- pants, the shift from the use of slides to convey content information to using slides for multimodal creative writing was new. Combining the cultural artifact of the story and the digital mode of slides created a hybrid practice and a hybrid product. Remixing traditional sto- rytelling and the school-valued mode of slides provided space for hybrid literacies (Knobel & Lankshear, 2008; see Figure 3 for an example). Participants presented their stories on the last day, and they were shared on the Inquiry Initiative website. Building relationships is an important part of the ini- tiative. Before the PD series, the two of us and members of the team toured schools, met teachers, and talked with local government officials to gain a better understanding of the current education context. Principals, board mem- bers, community leaders, and family were invited to lis- ten to the presentations and join in the celebration on the last day. At the end of each day, the teachers provided feedback to us for our study. These informal and formal meetings provided time to build relationships and to see a fuller picture of the assets and needs of the community relating to literacy education. Participants Participants included 91 preschool, primary, and second- ary school teachers from Trans Nzoia County in Kenya. Many participants were not able to attend all three days because of family obligations or because they took turns teaching classes while others participated. Based on an informal poll, 80% of the schools had devices (either computers or tablets), and 70% had internet access. However, as Muriithi and colleagues (2016) reminded us about the Kenyan context, “simple access may not trans- late to ready access at any one time one needs to use the resource” due to sharing limited devices and “constant internet down times” (p. 89). Approximately 15% of the schools represented at the PD had tablets from either the government’s initiative or a nongovernmental organiza- tion donation. Only 3% of the schools represented had used tablets with learners. Two schools had eight tablets each, not a 1:1 ratio for the first graders, which was the goal of the Digital Literacy Programme. A typical ratio at schools that had devices (either computers or tablets) was 1:60. Some teachers had never used a laptop, tablet, or computer before the PD. Three teachers brought their school-issued laptop with them. Participants represented a range of grade levels, from kindergarten 3 to grade 12 (i.e., ages 3–18), and diverse content areas. Many participants taught multiple content FIGURE 3 Participant Digital Story Example Note. The color figure can be viewed in the online version of this article at http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com. 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 293 areas, such as science, English, and Kiswahili. Teachers in Trans Nzoia County have varied educational backgrounds, ranging from a grade 3 certificate to a master’s degree. Preschool and primary teachers’ educational backgrounds often ranged from high school to teachers college, and secondary teachers’ backgrounds ranged from teachers college to master’s degrees. Thirty-four participants con- sented to reporting their demographics collected via the pre-survey (see Table 1). We purposefully chose six par- ticipants for interviews from the pre-survey data to repre- sent a range of grade levels and content areas for a maximum variation sample. Data Collection Data sources were pre- and post-surveys, field notes, participant-generated artifacts, focus group interviews, one-on-one interviews, and follow-up interviews. Table 2 displays the data sources in relation to the research questions. Surveys The first survey was collected on paper as participants arrived to the PD and comprised (a) demographic ques- tions, (b) closed-ended questions about participants’ own digital literacy practices and their knowledge of teaching methods related to digital literacy adapted from the Digitally Literate survey (O’Byrne, Mora, Hagerman, & Wu, 2018), and (c) open-ended questions about partici- pants’ goals for the PD. Thirty-four participants consented to use of their pre-survey for research. The responses informed the direction of the PD and provided informa- tion for this research. Surveys were again collected at the end of the PD (n = 40) with Likert-type scaled items to measure the effectiveness of the PD and closed-ended questions to help answer the research questions. Post- surveys were anonymous to encourage honest responses. Field Notes and Participant Artifacts The research team visited three schools before the PD, during which the two of us took field notes that included researcher observations, summaries and quotes from con- versations, and photographs of the schools and materials. Artifacts developed during the PD were collected from all participants (n = 91) as products of learning. The first set of artifacts were participants’ answers to questions during small-group discussions, collected on sticky notes. During this time, participants also completed a teacher-to- learner-centered continuum (Guthrie, 2011). Results are displayed in pie charts in the Findings section. During Design Studio, heterogeneous groups created digital sto- ries based on a cultural, familial, or folk story. We col- lected the digital stories created in PowerPoint during Design Studio and video recorded the presentations on the last day. The final set of artifacts were created at the end of days 1 and 2 when participants were given oppor- tunities to reflect and provide feedback to the team. These artifacts were collected on sticky notes, or a photo was taken of a whiteboard; text was then transferred to spread- sheets for analysis. Interviews Focus group conversations were organized by grade level taught and included all PD participants. Using the local community structure of baraza, participants sat in a circle, and each individual was given an opportunity to speak (Jwan & Kisaka, 2017; Naanyu et al., 2011). For the one- on-one interviews, six teachers who represented a range of content areas and grade levels within the larger group were interviewed using a semistructured interview proto- col focused on digital literacy. Interviews provided an opportunity for participants to share in more depth than the focus group sessions and to share critiques, as the one-on-one nature is a more socially acceptable space for critique in this cultural context. Interviews were audio TABLE 1 Participant Demographics Demographic Number of respondents Percentage of respondents Age 20 and under 1 3 21–30 11 32 31–40 10 30 41–50 8 24 51–60 3 9 61 and over 1 3 Gender Male 21 38 Female 13 62 Highest level of education Grade 3 or equivalent certificate 7 23 Grade 5 diploma 8 27 Bachelor’s degree 12 40 Master’s degree 3 10 No response 4 Graduated from teachers college Yes 21 78 No 6 22 No response 7 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 294 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) TA BL E 2 D at a So ur ce s D at a so ur ce Co lle ct ed f ro m Co lle ct io n pr oc ed ur e Re la ti on t o re se ar ch qu es ti on (s )a   D at a an al ys is Fi el d no te s of ob se rv at io ns Sa m pl e of t w o pr im ar y sc ho ol s’ c la ss es an d on e se co nd ar y sc ho ol ’s c la ss es Be fo re P D To c on te xt ua liz e da ta w he n an sw er in g bo th r es ea rc h qu es ti on s Re se ar ch er -g en er at ed pr e- su rv ey Al l p ar ti ci pa nt s Du ri ng P D Re se ar ch q ue st io n 1 • Q ua lit at iv e an al ys is o f re sp on se s to o pe n- en de d qu es ti on s • Fr eq ue nc y da ta a nd d es cr ip ti ve s ta ti st ic s of r es po ns es t o cl os ed -e nd ed q ue st io ns O ne -o n- on e in te rv ie w tr an sc ri pt s 6 pa rt ic ip an ts m ax im um v ar ia ti on s am pl e Du ri ng P D Bo th r es ea rc h qu es ti on s • Q ua lit at iv e th em at ic a na ly si s PD a rt if ac ts Al l p ar ti ci pa nt s Du ri ng P D Bo th r es ea rc h qu es ti on s • Fr eq ue nc y da ta b as ed o n th e re se ar ch er - ge ne ra te d ru br ic Re se ar ch er -g en er at ed po st -s ur ve y Al l p ar ti ci pa nt s Du ri ng P D Re se ar ch q ue st io n 2 • Q ua lit at iv e an al ys is o f re sp on se s to o pe n- en de d qu es ti on s • Fr eq ue nc y da ta a nd d es cr ip ti ve s ta ti st ic s of r es po ns es t o cl os ed -e nd ed q ue st io ns Vi de o ca ll Pa rt ic ip an ts w ho w er e av ai la bl e fo r a fo llo w -u p ca ll Af te r PD M em be r ch ec ki ng o f fi nd in gs N ot e. P D = pr of es si on al d ev el op m en t. a R es ea rc h qu es ti on s: 1 . W ha t ar e th e Ke ny an t ea ch er s’ p er ce pt io ns o f di gi ta l l it er ac y? 2 . W ha t di gi ta l l it er ac y te ac hi ng s tr at eg ie s do K en ya n te ac he rs ’ pe rc ei ve ( a) a s cu lt ur al ly s us ta in in g fo r le ar ne rs , (b ) as le ar ne r ce nt er ed , an d (c ) as li ke ly t o ov er co m e te ch no lo gi ca l r es ou rc e ch al le ng es ? 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 295 recorded and transcribed. Protocols for focus groups and interviews are provided in Appendix B. Follow-up inter- views were conducted via social media and video calls to provide member checking of the data and analysis. Data Analysis Surveys From the pre- and post-surveys, we analyzed closed- ended survey responses and selections on the Likert-type scaled items by frequency and descriptive statistics. The statistics provided contextualization and corroboration for the qualitative data. Interviews We first analyzed the interview transcripts using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) to look for patterns to develop themes of teachers’ perspectives on integrating digital literacy and learning-centered teaching into their classrooms in ways that are culturally sustaining in their context. For the first round of coding, we individually analyzed interview transcripts through direct interpreta- tion in each individual instance. We then met and dis- cussed aggregation of instances across participants to develop a codebook, including the codes authentic learn- ing, hands-on learning, and learners need practice. We then used this codebook on HyperRESEARCH, a qualita- tive analysis software program, to code across participants (Stake, 2000). Artifacts, Open-Ended Survey Responses, and Focus Groups Graduate research assistants coded participant artifacts, open-ended survey responses, and focus group tran- scripts according to our codebook. We tested inter-rater reliability on the coding of the artifacts, open-ended sur- vey responses, and focus group data at this stage. This resulted in over 80% coded the same, an acceptable level (Armstrong, Gosling, Weinman, & Marteau, 1997). We met again to collaboratively look for patterns across participants and sources to answer our research questions. We grouped related codes together to develop themes. For example, active learning, authentic learning, interaction, learning by doing, learners need practice, par- ticipate fully, and hands-on were grouped together to form the theme active learning. Collectively across par- ticipants and sources, we organized the data into four overarching themes: perception of the need for (1) new literacies for learners, (2) creativity for learners, (3) col- laboration and group work, and (4) creativity to overcome technological challenges. To increase trustworthiness, we then reviewed the data once more, looking for rival expla- nations (Yin, 2018). Finding little to no disconfirming evidence, the three themes remained and are described in detail in the Findings section. Disconfirming evidence is provided when present. Findings Through qualitative data analysis, we generated four themes to answer the research questions on teachers’ per- ceptions of digital literacy and teaching digital literacy in their context. Participants saw digital literacy as impor- tant for 21st-century careers and related to creativity and collaboration. Each of the four themes is named in Kiswahili and English to honor the language and culture of our participants, to decenter English (if only briefly), and to better communicate the findings cross-culturally. Ufahamu Mpya wa Wanafunzi: New Literacies for Learners The findings of the study show that digital literacy is con- sidered a relatively “new idea in Kenya,” in the words of a high school science teacher. According to three interview- ees, digital literacy is an emerging component in the types of careers they hope their students will have one day. The middle-grades English and science teacher stated, Most of the jobs nowadays, they want you to be perfect in ICT, and if you have that, you are good at computers, doing that work, you can get a job easily compared to a person who is not literate in ICT. She listed typing, printing, email, and internet research as important career skills and added PowerPoint for teach- ing careers. However, a math teacher during the interview shared a different perspective, stating that many desirable careers did not require digital literacy, providing the example of teachers because “most primary schools don’t have computers.” Participants’ perspectives of digital literacy were made more complex through engagement in digital literacies during the PD. In addition to workplace digital literacy, participants felt that creativity (representing 15% of the total codes) and collaboration (representing 22% of the total codes) were important for their students to develop and that integrating technology with instruction provided opportunities for digital literacy practices that fore- grounded both creativity and collaboration. The theme describing creativity for learners is described next. Ubunifu kwa Wanafunzi: Creativity for Learners In the focus groups after the first author’s presentation on digital literacy, each grade-level group expressed the con- nection between digital literacy and opportunities for learners to express and develop creativity. One elementary teacher had received training from the local curriculum 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 296 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) support officer on the new Basic Education Curriculum Framework that promotes creativity, imagination, and problem solving. He stated his enthusiasm to implement these concepts through digital literacy instruction in the interview. In this way, he could transform his practice by asking students to utilize devices and to create digital texts. After being introduced to digital storytelling in the main PD session, the grades 1–4 focus group shared their perceptions that by “having children to come up with sto- ries on their own,” digital storytelling could promote learners’ “creativity and critical thinking.” At the end of the PD, we asked teachers if they believed that digital story- telling would be a culturally relevant way to teach digital literacy. An overwhelming 91% of survey participants believed that digital storytelling would qualify as a cultur- ally relevant teaching method (see Figure 4). One partici- pant enthusiastically stated on the survey, “Awareness on digital storytelling should be created among Kenya learn- ers.” In addition, when asked during the PD, “What did you learn that you will use in your classroom?” 10 out of 36 responses explicitly stated digital storytelling. In addition to digital storytelling, a physics teacher stated in the interview that she believed that the curricu- lum should provide space for learners to practice creative problem solving. She spoke of change from learning being about knowledge acquisition to being about developing the digital literacy skills needed to find information online and construct new knowledge. She imagined a system that is more focused on skills being imparted on the learners and not just giving the information on what existed. They can innovate and come up with the new ideas on their own. So, the teacher now gives the next direction and not just giving them the information. In this way, developing students’ digital literacy skills would enable them to be lifelong problem solvers, able to find and create knowledge relevant to the problem at hand. Another participant described the Science and Engineering Fair that her students had competed in for several years. She described the event as “all about the cre- ativity and innovation among learners, promoting recy- cling materials and the environment and also reducing pollution.” She works with her students to collaborate as a team to identify a problem, read about the underlying sci- entific concepts, design an innovation, and prepare an oral and written presentation. Here, she describes an innovation her students created last year: For example, we look for ways of using plastic instead of it being thrown in the rivers, and we come up with a product that can recycle the plastic. Last year, we were collecting all the plastic bottles and everything. When you melt them when they’re still hot, you pour on an iron sheet. Then when they cool down, they make a plastic tile, which you can use for roof- ing. We have clay tiles, but now we can make plastic tile, and it is waterproof. Water cannot seep into your house. We have solved that problem for the nation. This participant believes that this type of hands-on problem- based learning unleashes the potential of some of her stu- dents who may not always excel at traditional book learning: Some of them have a lot of potential that they have locked in them. So, through the science and engineering process, they unleash, because there is developing the project, writing it down, then presenting to judges. One is talented in the manip- ulation tests. The other one is talented in talking. So, as one is manipulating, the other one is talking about the product. That one helps them to realize their different abilities also. As this participant had her students engage in reading about national problems and then creating and commu- nicating transformative solutions, she had them working in small groups, which leads to the next theme. Ushirikiano na Kazi ya Vikundi: Collaboration and Group Work Through participation in groups to design digital stories, participants noted how writing could happen collabora- tively with peers. Some groups delegated tasks, having two members draw the storyboard, others searching for pictures on smartphones, and another creating the slides. Other groups worked on each stage collectively, taking turns on the laptop when a particular skill was needed. An elementary teacher described how peer learning was a paradigm shift for both teachers and learners that is emphasized in the new Basic Education Curriculum Framework (KICD, 2019) and the training he had received (the same training as mentioned in the Ubunifu kwa Wanafunzi: Creativity for Learners section) that emphasized collaborative learning: “You must teach them on how to learn from others and to learn from themselves. FIGURE 4 Computer Studies Classroom With Six Computers at the Observation Site Note. The color figure can be viewed in the online version of this article at http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com. 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense http://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 297 When they see how others are learning, they also partici- pate.” He explained how previously he had been trained to not allow students to help one another because it was con- sidered cheating but that the paradigm shift viewed help- ing one another as collaborative learning. In the one-on-one interviews, a middle-grades English and science teacher stated that it is typical for schools to have 80 students in a class and only five computers at the school. She proposed stations (e.g., what we modeled in PD break- out sessions) and teamwork (modeled in Design Studio) as a strategy to overcome the challenge of few computers: They could work in groups on the computer as we did. We can have 10 people working on one computer. We are working together as a team, so using it in a classroom, I can put learners in groups, and that will encourage unity, which will bring togetherness. The learners will work together as a team. She went on to say how working in groups relates to the national symbol of harambee, where everyone brings what they have and comes together: This one will bring ideas on what we are to write. The other one is going to do this. You are going to write something before we type. Yeah. And everyone needs to be involved for that work to be complete. She imagined that her stations would involve some groups on computers and other groups working on writing with pen and paper. Her thinking of collaboration was akin to resource- based thinking. She viewed collaboration as a way for all students to contribute from their interests and strengths. In talking about her students, a different participant stated that she “want[s] to focus more on their [learners’] inter- ests and their strengths to boost their academic life.” The focus on all learners was a frequent code in the study. This participant also stated that it is typical in her community for everyone to do their share and that not one person would necessarily be the leader. Another interviewee corroborated this idea: Teamwork is really important. Most of the time, no one is going to be the leader. No, we come together, we share an idea, we can do something together. It makes everybody participate and makes everybody feel appreciated. Everybody is allowed to participate. It really helps a lot. In the reflection activities, one secondary teacher shared that learner-centered teaching that involves collaboration enables “learners with different learning abilities to be incorporated successfully,” and a primary school teacher said that he would share with teachers at his school that “team/group work leads to success.” Overall, participants felt that collaboration among students could be successful in their teaching contexts, and they appreciated experiencing group work during the PD in a context similar to their own contexts. Participants believed that creativity and collaboration were complementary concepts and were important not only for students but also for teach- ers, which leads to the next theme. Ubunifu wa Kushinda Changamoto za Teknolojia: Creativity to Overcome Technological Challenges Participants described using technology to support their teacher duties or to show students teacher-curated digital content. All six interview participants reported using soft- ware for teacher record keeping and the internet to search for curricular content. Only one interview participant reported having students actively using computers; this physics teacher asked students to conduct an internet inquiry to collect and study information. Using technol- ogy as a teacher resource was also seen in the Digitally Literate survey (see Table 3 for results of the survey). Of note is that 65% reported using technology for teaching, and 53% reported using the internet at school, with the rest choosing no or not responding. During our field observations of three local schools, the first primary school did not have internet or devices. The second primary school had eight tablets locked in the head teacher’s office and had not used the tablets with learners. The secondary school had six desktop computers and an LDC projector in the computer lab (see Figure 5). There were no students in the lab during our observation. When asked how many students take a computer class, the teacher reported that she has 60–100 students enrolled in each of her four computer classes, so she does not use the computers when she is teaching theory. When asked if this was typical, a school leader replied, “All learners [at the secondary level] have to take an examination on computer studies, a paper examination. Teachers use paper to teach technology” (field notes, June 4, 2019). Because of the challenges, teachers reported needing to be creative to integrate technology into their literacy classes. Two creative solutions were having students work in groups and using personal smartphones, as such phones are more plentiful in Kenya than computers (Muigai & Mantz, 2019). An early childhood teacher imagined showing videos of animals on her phone so stu- dents could see and hear what different animals sound like. In the interview, an elementary teacher described how she used her personal smartphone in her classroom: I use my phone for grade 1. After downloading a video, like David and Goliath, then I put learners in groups because I have 15 learners. I show five, and then I show the other two groups. We have textbooks also. So, when two groups are looking at the pictures in the book, then the other group watches the video. In addition to using her phone, this teacher presented the creative solution of using stations and groups to overcome the challenge of a lack of devices. We modeled during the 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 298 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) PD how to manage stations and how to work in groups so groups of learners could share available devices. Discussion Our purpose in this study was to explore participant per- ceptions of digital literacy and transformative literacy teaching. Findings revealed the need for learners to engage in new literacies, creativity, and collaboration, as well as the need for creativity to overcome resource challenges. Overall, teachers held a theoretical value of teaching digital literacies to their students in a learner- centered fashion, where all learners used devices to con- struct digital texts, but perceived a lack of resources as a barrier to teaching digital literacy in this way. Our case adds evidence of positive perceptions about learner-centered teaching to Anderson et al.’s (2015) and Jwan and Kisaka’s (2017) cases in Kenya. Guthrie (2011) proposed that learner-centered teaching reforms have failed in many low-income countries because this teach- ing style is individualistic and hence not relevant within cultures that value collectivism. In addition, Tabulawa (2013) highlighted the decades of systematic attempts to reform education in sub-Saharan Africa and the eminent failures of these reforms, most of which lacked the neces- sary cultural impetus that values collectivism over indi- vidualism. However, relating the findings to the cultural symbol of harambee in Kenya provides a new lens from which to view learner-centered digital literacy instruction in this particular Kenyan context. Literacies and the Cultural Lens of Harambee Relating learning-centered teaching of digital literacy to the Kenyan cultural symbol of harambee provides a strengths-based perspective of both the context and the students. Harambee represents teamwork and commu- nity. A participant stated in the interview, Harambee is a big value that we have. We have a saying: “My child is not my child. My child is of the community.” So, when we educate a child in our community, the responsibility is not for that family. It is for everybody. The symbol of harambee means that the community works as a team in education, conceptualizing the sharing of the responsibility of education between parents and teachers because harambee could help break down barri- ers between home and school (Njeru, 2015). Additionally, breaking down home–school barriers could lead to other transformations in teaching. For example, out-of-classroom learning opportunities afforded by the internet hold po tential for reforming digital literacy instruction in class- rooms by reframing the focus from knowledge acquisition to construction and creation. Harambee could also apply within schools in that stu- dents could work as a team to learn. Rather than education being the sole responsibility of the teacher, the responsibil- ity shifts from one individual to the class collectively. Research on using group work for literacy instruction in Kenyan schools has emerged in the last decade. Abuga, Maina, and Meitamei’s (2019) quantitative research in 19 preschools in Kenya found that group work was used fre- quently in reading instruction by almost half of the teach- ers surveyed (n = 45.37% strongly agreed or agreed) and TABLE 3 Results From the Digitally Literate Survey Question from the survey Frequency of responses Do you consider yourself someone who is comfortable with various modes of technology? Yes 24 No 2 Where do you usually acquire your main course information? Textbooks 30 Personal knowledge 22 Internet 19 Via social media/WhatsApp 13 Newspapers 12 In which of the following places do you use the internet? Home 20 School 18 Internet café 16 Community center/ nongovernmental organization 7 Pub 1 I do not use the internet. 2 List the most common websites that you ask learners to routinely visit. Google 4 Digital Schools 2 e-Learning 2 YouTube 2 Familydoctor.org 1 Wikipedia 1 Learn.e-limu.org 1 Pinterest 1 Weebly (taught in the 2018 PD) 1 None 1 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 299 that use of group work had a statistically significant posi- tive correlation with students’ reading ability. In their results, the researchers stated, “Teachers’ high frequency of use of group work activities associated with better reading skills among pre-primary children” (p. 252). Additionally, Dhillon and Wanjiru (2013) found that working in groups created space for primary students to utilize their full rep- ertoire of linguistic resources, which is especially impor- tant in Kenya where the language of instruction is often English instead of the students’ first language. The value of teamwork and community relates to the study’s theme of the desire for more collaborative learning in the partici- pants’ practices, and with the emerging positive results from literacy research on group work in Kenya, collabora- tive learning holds promise both as a culturally sustaining teaching practice and as meeting the government’s push for innovative learner-centered teaching. Harambee also represents coming together, as a par- ticipant explained: Say we want to build up a school, so we shall bring everybody onboard. Then, everybody will contribute a little money. If you do not have money, you can come with a chicken, you can come with eggs or corn. Then, we bring them together, and people will buy it like an auction, and money is raised. That is what we do to raise that building. We call it harambee. In this way, every person brings assets to the group. This relates to the educational innovation of using heterogeneous group work during instruction, previously advocated for in East African contexts by Altinyelken (2010). Heterogeneous group work here refers to mixed-ability pairs or groups of students collaborating together on a common assignment, allowing all students to use their strengths to collectively help one another during the learning process. Highlighting each learner’s strengths may seem individualistic; however, through the cultural lens of harambee, each individual’s strength is seen as an asset for the good of the group. Limitations In this article, we presented qualitative findings from a diverse group of educators in a rural county in Kenya and quantita- tive results from a small sample within the group. As the first limitation of our study, the results of the study cannot be gen- eralized to the whole of Kenya. Future research could deter- mine the transferability of the findings to other parts of Kenya and rural schools in developing countries more broadly. Second, our roles as participants and team leaders during the PD may have influenced participants’ responses during focus groups and interviews, as they may have wanted to please us or to save us from embarrassment in their responses. Third, the study took place during a short time frame during PD, and data sources were mostly self-reports. As such, the data revealed participants’ perceptions and aspirations and, al though positive, did not provide evidence of practice or implementation. Further research using prolonged engage- ment in schools could provide evidence on actual practice. Implications for Future PD and Research Before participating in the Inquiry Initiative, some teach- ers had never touched a computer before. Our commu- nity partner shared, FIGURE 5 Frequency Results From the Post-Survey 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 300 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) In June 2018, about 60 teachers came to attend the training, and it became an eye-opener to the teachers. At this 2019 Inquiry Initiative, some of these teachers returned having not touched a computer since last June. Other teachers were new, having never touched a computer before. In contrast, other teachers attended wielding their own smartphone and laptop with exceptional skill. Currently, there is little opportunity in the county for the teachers with skills to teach others. Whereas teachers at the same school may informally collaborate and share expertise, teachers attending the Inquiry Initiative in 2018 and 2019 were happy for the opportunity to network across the county. We hope to formalize this network to make the work sustainable. In 2019, we and the preschool teachers created an Early Childhood Education Professional Association for the county (see Kerkhoff et al., 2020). The association has continued meeting monthly and has grown in membership. In the future, we hope to create a similar network for the primary and secondary teachers. To meet the need presently, we created the Inquiry Initiative Facebook group with over 240 members to share and collaborate across space, time, and borders. As for research, the findings of the study contribute to the field of literacy education by adding the context of digi- tal literacy professional learning during one-on-one initia- tives in low-resource areas with the case of a rural county in Kenya. Our study adds evidence to Masingila et al.’s (2019) assertion that the number of teachers implementing ICTs is few, and of those who are, most are using ICTs to aid with administrative tasks or instructional delivery rather than asking learners to engage with ICTs directly. Research has suggested that teacher-to-teacher learning can enhance one-on-one implementations (Oliver, 2010), but there has been no research on such networks in rural Kenya. Future research on professional learning about digi- tal literacy in low-resource areas could investigate teacher networks as sites of learning or sites of resistance. In addition to teachers learning from peers, students can also learn from peers through collaboration. A practi- cal application of this study is that computer labs in low- resource areas could be set up to allow for collaboration. For example, in one school we visited, the six computers that the school owned were placed side by side along one wall. When thinking about collaboration as a strategy to overcome resource challenges, computers would instead be spread out and placed in a way that allows for five to 10 students to view one screen. Future research could ex amine culturally sustaining norms for collaboration in Kenyan contexts, effective group work strategies for digital literacy learning, and whether increased internet access results in transformation in Kenyan literacy instruction. Working in groups and using smartphones in school were solutions teachers created to solve technical challenges in this study. However, challenges to internet access and electricity remain common, as is the case in other developing countries (Livingstone et al., 2017). Teacher and learner creativity could possibly be instrumental in support- ing daily gadget charging, storage, and usage. Future research could share more creative solutions to technical challenges, too. As we continue with future PD and research on literacy instruction in Kenya, we continue to draw from postcolo- nial theory with the goal of amplifying local knowledge and cultural relevance. We agree with Lattimer (2015), who when working in Kenya asserted, “The student-centered approach that prioritized local relevance and critical think- ing was seen as fitting within a larger narrative of resistance to colonialism” (p. 66). It is possible that the experiential nature of the PD with teachers exploring side by side in their local context (Lucas & Villegas, 2011), as well as the smaller group discussions in which teachers related the new strategies to their existing pedagogies (Jukes et al., 2017), provided space for transformative and culturally relevant practices to emerge. Our study shows that there is optimism that such PD opportunities can transform teaching and learning in Kenya in organic and sustainable ways. Conclusion Through our researcher-led PD series, we explored culturally sustaining teaching in line with the Kenyan government’s initiatives for innovating teaching and digi- tal literacy implementation. The teachers in our study faced many challenges when trying to meet the ambitious pursuit of digital literacy for all. Our study evidences the creativity and resourcefulness of teachers as they imagine new practices that hold potential for overcoming chal- lenges. Our study also evidences how teachers can mean- ingfully involve their students in creative problem solving using limited resources. Such creativity is at the forefront of supporting learner-centered and culturally sustaining pedagogies necessary for decolonizing Kenyan literacy education curriculum. NOTE This work was supported by the 2019 Elva Knight Research Grant from  the International Literacy Association and by the University of Missouri–St. Louis College of Education and Office of Research and Economic & Community Development. REFERENCES Abuga, M.E., Maina, A., & Meitamei, A. (2019). Effects of group work as a teaching strategy on development of reading skills among pre- primary children in Manga Sub-County, Nyamira County, Kenya. International Journal of Recent Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 6(2), 247–253. Adedeji, S.O., & Olaniyan, O. (2011). Improving the conditions of teach- ers and teaching in rural schools across African countries. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: UNESCO International Institute for Capacity Build- ing in Africa. Retrieved from http://www.iicba.unesco.org/sites/​defau​ lt/files/​Funda​menta​l%20ser​ies%202.pdf Alim, H.S., & Paris, D. (2017). What is culturally sustaining pedagogy and why does it matter? In D. Paris & H.S. Alim (Eds.), Culturally 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense http://www.iicba.unesco.org/sites/default/files/Fundamental series 2.pdf http://www.iicba.unesco.org/sites/default/files/Fundamental series 2.pdf Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 301 sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world (pp. 1–21). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Altinyelken, H.K. (2010). Curriculum change in Uganda: Teacher per- spectives on the new thematic curriculum. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(2), 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijedu​dev.2009.03.004 Alvermann, D.E. (2002). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents. Journal of Literacy Research, 34(2), 189–208. https://doi.org/10.1207/ s1554​8430j​lr3402_4 Anderson, D., Nashon, S., Namazzi, E., Okemwa, P., Ombogo, P., Ooko, S., & Beru, F. (2015). Transformations in Kenyan science teachers’ locus of control: The influence of contextualized science and eman- cipated student learning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(7), 599–617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1097​2-015-9440-5 Andreotti, V. (2010). Postcolonial and post-critical ‘global citizenship education’. In G. Elliott, C. Fourali, & S. Issler (Eds.), Education and social change: Connecting local and global perspectives (pp. 238–250). New York, NY: Continuum. Anyiendah, M.S. (2017). Challenges faced by teachers when teaching English in public primary schools in Kenya. Frontiers in Education, 2, Article 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00013 Armstrong, D., Gosling, A., Weinman, J., & Marteau, T. (1997). The place of inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: An empirical study. Sociol- ogy, 31(3), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380​385​97​03100​3015 Assié-Lumumba, N.D.T. (2017). The Ubuntu paradigm and compara- tive and international education: Epistemological challenges and opportunities in our field. Comparative Education Review, 61(1), 1– 21. https://doi.org/10.1086/689922 Bang, M. (2020, April). Towards midwifing the next world: How can being and doing make openings in these times? Paper presented at the virtual Speculative Education Colloquium. Bang, M., Faber, L., Gurneau, J., Marin, A., & Soto, C. (2016). Community-based design research: Learning across generations and strategic transformations of institutional relations toward axiological innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(1), 28–41. https://doi. org/10.1080/10749​039.2015.1087572 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.​ 1191/​14780​88706​qp063oa Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). Factors influencing teachers’ adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature. International Journal of Educa- tion and Development Using Information and Communication Tech- nology, 8(1), 136–155. Coiro, J. (2021). Toward a multifaceted heuristic of digital reading to inform assessment, research, practice, and policy. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(1), 9–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.302 Coiro, J., Coscarelli, C., Maykel, C., & Forzani, E. (2015). Investigating criteria that seventh graders use to evaluate the quality of online information. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(3), 287–297. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.448 Commeyras, M., & Inyega, H.N. (2007). An integrative review of teach- ing reading in Kenyan primary schools. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 258–281. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.2.3 Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R.C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orpha- nos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A sta- tus report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council; Stanford, CA: School Redesign Network, Stanford University. Delpit, L. (2005). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the class- room. New York, NY: New. Dewey, J. (1966). The child and the curriculum. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1902) Dhillon, J., & Wanjiru, J. (2013). Challenges and strategies for teachers and learners of English as a second language: The case of an urban primary school in Kenya. International Journal of English Linguistics, 3(2), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v3n2p14 DigiSchool. (2018). Milestones achieved. Nairobi, Kenya: Ministry of Information, Communication and Technology. Retrieved from http://icta.go.ke/digis​chool/​miles​tones/ Gee, J.P. (2000). Discourse and sociocultural studies in reading. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 195–207). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Gudu, B.O. (2015). Teaching speaking skills in English language using classroom activities in secondary school level in Eldoret municipal- ity, Kenya. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(35), 55–63. Guthrie, G. (2011). The progressive education fallacy in developing countries: In favour of formalism. New York, NY: Springer. Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY: Routledge. Heinrich, C.J., Darling-Aduana, J., & Martin, C. (2020). The potential and prerequisites of effective tablet integration in rural Kenya. Brit- ish Journal of Educational Technology, 51(2), 498–514. https://doi. org/10.1111/bjet.12870 Hull, G.A., & Nelson, M.E. (2005). Locating the semiotic power of mul- timodality. Written Communication, 22(2), 224–261. https://doi. org/10.1177/07410​88304​274170 Jukes, M.C.H., Turner, E.L., Dubeck, M.M., Halliday, K.E., Inyega, H.N., Wolf, S., … Brooker, S.J. (2017). Improving literacy instruction in Kenya through teacher professional development and text messages support: A cluster randomized trial. Journal of Research on Educa- tional Effectiveness, 10(3), 449–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345​ 747.2016.1221487 Jwan, J.O., & Kisaka, S.T. (2017). Democracy, ethics and social jus- tice: Implications for secondary school leadership in Kenya. South African Journal of Education, 37(3), Article 1339. https://doi.org/10.​ 15700/​saje.v37n3​a1339 Kajee, L. (2018). Teacher education students engaging with digital iden- tity narratives. South African Journal of Education, 38(2), Article 1501. https://doi.org/10.15700/​saje.v38n2​a1501 Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development. (2019). Basic education curriculum framework. Nairobi, Kenya: Author. Retrieved from https://kicd.ac.ke/curri​culum​-refor​m/basic​-educa​tion-curri​culum​-​ frame​work/ Kerkhoff, S.N., & Cloud, M. (2020). Equipping teachers with globally com- petent practices: A mixed methods study on integrating global compe- tence and teacher education. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, Article 101629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.​2020.101629 Kerkhoff, S.N., Spires, H.A., & Wanyonyi, P. (2020). Teaching new litera- cies and inquiry: A grassroots effort to bring about educational change in Kenya. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 64(2), 145– 156. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1067 Kim, G.M. (2016). Transcultural digital literacies: Cross-border connec- tions and self-representations in an online forum. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(2), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.131 Kimani, H.N., & Onyancha, O.B. (2015). Information literacy skills among incoming first-year undergraduate students at the Catholic University of Eastern Africa in Kenya. Innovation, 2015(51), 22–45. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2008). Remix: The art and craft of endless hybridization. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(1), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.52.1.3 Lattimer, H. (2015). Translating theory into practice: Making meaning of learner centered education frameworks for classroom-based prac- titioners. International Journal of Educational Development, 45, 65– 76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedu​dev.2015.09.012 Law, N., Woo, D., de la Torre, J., & Wong, G. (2018). A global framework of reference on digital literacy skills for indicator 4.4.2 (Information Paper No. 51). Montreal, QC, Canada: UNESCO Institute for Statistics. Retrieved from http://uis.unesco.org/sites/​defau​lt/files/​docum​ents/ ip51-globa​l-frame​work-refer​ence-digit​al-liter​acy-skill​s-2018-​​en.pdf 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2009.03.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2009.03.004 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3402_4 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3402_4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9440-5 https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00013 https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038597031003015 https://doi.org/10.1086/689922 https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2015.1087572 https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2015.1087572 https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.302 https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.448 https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.2.3 https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v3n2p14 http://icta.go.ke/digischool/milestones/ https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12870 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12870 https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088304274170 https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088304274170 https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2016.1221487 https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2016.1221487 https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v37n3a1339 https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v37n3a1339 https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n2a1501 https://kicd.ac.ke/curriculum-reform/basic-education-curriculum-framework/ https://kicd.ac.ke/curriculum-reform/basic-education-curriculum-framework/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101629 https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1067 https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.131 https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.52.1.3 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2015.09.012 http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/ip51-global-framework-reference-digital-literacy-skills-2018-en.pdf http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/ip51-global-framework-reference-digital-literacy-skills-2018-en.pdf 302 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) Lee, V.J., Meloche, A., Grant, A., Neuman, D., & Tecce DeCarlo, M.J. (2019). “My thoughts on gun violence”: An urban adolescent’s dis- play of agency and multimodal literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.944 Leu, D.J., Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., & Henry, L.A. (2019). New literacies: A dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In D.E. Alvermann, N.J. Unrau, M. Sail- ors, & R.B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of litera- cies (7th ed., pp. 319–346). New York, NY: Routledge. Lewis Ellison, T. (2017). Digital participation, agency, and choice: An African American youth’s digital storytelling about Minecraft. Journal of Adoles- cent & Adult Literacy, 61(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/​10.​1002/jaal.645 Livingstone, S., Nandi, A., Banaji, S., & Stoilova, M. (2017). Young adoles- cents and digital media uses, risks and opportunities in low- and middle-income countries: A rapid evidence review. London, UK: Gage. Lucas, T., & Villegas, A.M. (2011). A framework for preparing linguisti- cally responsive teachers. In T. Lucas (Ed.), Teacher preparation for lin- guistically diverse classrooms (pp. 55–72). New York, NY: Routledge. Makura, D. (2019, February 27). Digital Literacy Programme on course, says ICT CS [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://ict.go.ke/digit​al- liter​acy-progr​amme-on-cours​e-says-ict-cs/ Masingila, J.O., Khatete, D.W., Maundu, J.N., Foley, A.R., Ndethiu, S.M., & Twoli, N.W. (2019). From implementation to efficacy: Factors affecting Kenyan secondary teachers’ technology integration. Africa Education Review, 16(1), 58–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146​627.​ 2016.1224574 Ministry of Education. (2018). National Education Sector Strategic Plan 2018–2022. Kiambu, Kenya: Author. Retrieved from https://www. globa​lpart​nersh​ip.org/conte​nt/kenya​-natio​nal-educa​tion-secto​r-​ strat​egic-plan-2018-2022 Muigai, N., & Mantz, S. (2019). Global Mobile Consumer Survey: The Kenyan cut. Nairobi, Kenya: Deloitte East Africa. Retrieved from https://www2.deloi​tte.com/conte​nt/dam/Deloi​tte/ke/Docum​ents/ techn​ology​-media​-telec​ommun​icati​ons/Deloi​tte_GMCS_Report_ The_Kenyan_Cut_August_2019.pdf Muriithi, P., Horner, D., & Pemberton, L. (2016). Factors contributing to adoption and use of information and communication technologies within research collaborations in Kenya. Information Technology for Development, 22(Suppl. l), 84–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681​ 102.2015.1121856 Mutai, N.C. (2012). A critical review of oral questioning technique in secondary school English language teaching in Eldoret municipality, Kenya. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Pol- icy Studies, 3(3), 323–330. Naanyu, V., Sidle, J.E., Frankel, R.M., Ayuku, D., Nyandiko, W.M., & Inui, T.S. (2011). Rooting inquiry in tradition: The health baraza as a tool for social research in Kenya. Qualitative Health Research, 21(1), 14– 26. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497​32310​367498 Ndimande, B.S. (2018). Unraveling the neocolonial epistemologies: Decolonizing research toward transformative literacy. Journal of Lit- eracy Research, 50(3), 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/10862​96X18​ 784699 Ngware, M.W., Mutisya, M., & Oketch, M. (2012). Patterns of teach- ing style and active teaching: Do they differ across subjects in low and high performing primary schools in Kenya? London Review of Education, 10(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14748​460.2012.​ 65​9058 Nixon, A. (2013). Engaging urban youth in meaningful dialogue on identity through digital storytelling. In J. Ávila & J.Z. Pandya (Eds.), Critical digital literacies as social praxis: Intersections and challenges (pp. 41–62). New York, NY: Peter Lang. Njeru, M. (2015). Parents as participants in their children’s learning: A tall order for parents in rural Kenya. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(5), 368–371. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.375 O’Byrne, I., Mora, R.A., Hagerman, M., & Wu, G. (2018, November). The Digitally Literate Research Project: Assessing how global educators teach literacies with technology. Paper presented at the 68th annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, Indian Wells, CA. Ogembo, J.G., Ngugi, B.K., & Pelowski, M. (2012). Computerizing primary schools in rural Kenya: Outstanding challenges and possible solutions. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 52(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2012.tb003​71.x Oliver, K. (2010). Evaluating teacher readiness for the implementation of one-to-one computing based on national educational technology standards. The Journal of Literacy and Technology, 11(3), 40–76. Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93– 97. https://doi.org/10.3102/00131​89X12​441244 Piper, B., Oyanga, A., Mejia, J., & Pouezevara, S. (2017). Implementing large-scale instructional technology in Kenya: Changing instruc- tional practice and developing accountability in a national education system. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 13(3), 57–79. Richardson, J.W. (2011). Challenges of adopting the use of technology in less developed countries: The case of Cambodia. Comparative Education Review, 55(1), 8–29. https://doi.org/10.1086/656430 Schweisfurth, M. (2011). Learner-centered education in developing country contexts: From solution to problem. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(5), 425–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijedu​dev.2011.03.005 Shope, J.H. (2006). “You can’t cross a river without getting wet”: A feminist standpoint on the dilemmas of cross-cultural research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(1), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778​00405​282792 Smith, B.E., Pacheco, M.B., & Khorosheva, M. (2021). Emergent bilin- gual students and digital multimodal composition: A systematic review of research in secondary classrooms. Reading Research Quar- terly, 56(1), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.298 Spires, H.A., & Bartlett, M. (2012). Digital literacies and learning: Designing a path forward (White Paper No. 5). Raleigh: Friday Institute, North Carolina State University. Retrieved from https://www.fi.ncsu.edu/wp- content/uploads/2013/05/digital-literacies-and-learning.pdf Spires, H.A., Lee, J., Young, C., Leu, D., Coiro, J., & Castek, J. (2009). New Literacies Teacher Leader Institute. Raleigh: Friday Institute, North Carolina State University. Spires, H.A., Paul, C.M., & Kerkhoff, S.N. (2018). Digital literacy for the 21st century. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and technology (4th ed., pp. 2235–2242). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Stake, R.E. (2000). Case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 435–454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stols, G., Ferreira, R., Pelser, A., Olivier, W.A., Van der Merwe, A., De Vil- liers, C., & Venter, S. (2015). Perceptions and needs of South African mathematics teachers concerning their use of technology for instruction. South African Journal of Education, 35(4), Article 1209. https://doi.org/10.15700/​saje.v35n4​a1209 Subedi, B. (2013). Decolonizing the curriculum for global perspectives. Educational Theory, 63(6), 621–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.​ 12045 Tabulawa, R.T. (2013). Teaching and learning in context: Why peda- gogical reforms fail in sub-Saharan Africa. Dakar, Senegal: Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa. Tierney, R. (2018). Toward a model of global meaning making. Journal of Literacy Research, 50(4), 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/10862​ 96X18​803134 Tondeur, J., Krug, D., Bill, M., Smulders, M., & Zhu, C. (2015). Integrating ICT in Kenyan secondary schools: An exploratory case study of a pro- fessional development programme. Technology, Pedagogy and Educa- tion, 24(5), 565–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759​39X.2015.​1091786 Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psy- chological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Sou- berman, Eds. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wa-Mungai, M. (2007). “‘Is marwa!’ It’s ours”: Popular music and identity politics in Kenyan youth culture. In K. Njogu & G. Oluoch-Olunya 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.944 https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.645 https://ict.go.ke/digital-literacy-programme-on-course-says-ict-cs/ https://ict.go.ke/digital-literacy-programme-on-course-says-ict-cs/ https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2016.1224574 https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2016.1224574 https://www.globalpartnership.org/content/kenya-national-education-sector-strategic-plan-2018-2022 https://www.globalpartnership.org/content/kenya-national-education-sector-strategic-plan-2018-2022 https://www.globalpartnership.org/content/kenya-national-education-sector-strategic-plan-2018-2022 https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ke/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/Deloitte_GMCS_Report_The_Kenyan_Cut_August_2019.pdf https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ke/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/Deloitte_GMCS_Report_The_Kenyan_Cut_August_2019.pdf https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ke/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/Deloitte_GMCS_Report_The_Kenyan_Cut_August_2019.pdf https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2015.1121856 https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2015.1121856 https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732310367498 https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X18784699 https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X18784699 https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460.2012.659058 https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460.2012.659058 https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.375 https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2012.tb00371.x https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244 https://doi.org/10.1086/656430 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.03.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.03.005 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405282792 https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.298 https://www.fi.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/digital-literacies-and-learning.pdf https://www.fi.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/digital-literacies-and-learning.pdf https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v35n4a1209 https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12045 https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12045 https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X18803134 https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X18803134 https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2015.1091786 Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 303 (Eds.), Cultural production and social change in Kenya: Building bridges (pp. 47–59). Nairobi, Kenya: Twaweza Communications. Wanzala, O., & Nyamai, F. (2018, July 22). Big hurdles thwart Jubilee’s laptops plan. Nation.Africa. Retrieved from https://nation.afric​a/ kenya/​news/big-hurdl​es-thwar​t-jubil​ee-s-lapto​ps-plan-69972 Yin, R.K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Submitted April 27, 2020 Final revision received February 6, 2021 Accepted February 8, 2021 SHEA N. KERKHOFF (corresponding author) is an assistant professor in the Department of Educator Preparation and Leadership at the University of Missouri–St. Louis, USA; email kerkhoffs@umsl.edu. Her research focuses on teacher education and critical, digital, and global literacies in K–12 classrooms. TIMOTHY MAKUBUYA is an assistant professor in the Department of Educator Preparation and Leadership at the University of Missouri–St. Louis, USA; email makubuyat@umsl.edu. His research interests include teacher education, health literacy, and promoting wellness. A PPE N D I X A Professional Development Agenda Wednesday 9:00 Greeting of participants (pre-survey 9:00–9:30, buffer zone for people arriving) 9: 30 Who are we, and why are we here? • Welcome by Dr. Peter Wanyonyi, president of the Board of Governors and founder of Hope Education Centre in Kenya • Introductions of Kenyan team members • Introductions of international team members • Icebreaker to allow participants to introduce themselves to one another and the research team 11:00 Tea 11:30 Keynote on digital literacy by an expert from the United States 12:30 Baraza focus groups: What insights or questions do you have about digital literacy with your standard or form? 1:00 Lunch break 2:00 Breakout sessions: Choose one session to attend: • Using Google Play on tablets, by an expert from The Gambia • Integrating technology for learner-centered literacy instruction, by an expert from the United States • Integrating technology for learner-centered math instruction, by an expert from the United States • Content area literacy strategies, by an expert from the United States • Early childhood literacy instruction, by an expert from the United States • Health literacy, by an expert from Uganda 3:00 Keynote by a teacher leader from Kenya 4:00 Design Studio: Choose your cultural story to share. 5:00 Wrap-­up +/∆ Thursday 9:00 Review the +/∆ from yesterday with Dr. Peter Wanyonyi (9:00–9:30, buffer zone for people arriving) 9:30 Design Studio: Storyboard your digital story and create images and audio. 10:00 Keynote on Digital Literacy Programme tablets by an expert from The Gambia 11:00 Tea 11:30 Keynote on learner-centered inquiry, by an expert from Uganda 12:30 Baraza focus groups: What insights or questions do you have about learner-centered teaching with your standard or form? 1:00 Lunch break (continued) 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense https://nation.africa/kenya/news/big-hurdles-thwart-jubilee-s-laptops-plan-69972 https://nation.africa/kenya/news/big-hurdles-thwart-jubilee-s-laptops-plan-69972 mailto:kerkhoffs@umsl.edu mailto:makubuyat@umsl.edu 304 | Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1) Thursday 2:00 Breakout sessions: Choose a second session to attend. 3:00 Breakout sessions: Choose a third session to attend. 4:00 Keynote by a teacher leader from Kenya 5:00 Wrap-­up +/∆ Friday 9:00 Review the +/∆ from yesterday with Dr. Peter Wanyonyi (9:00–9:30, buffer zone for people arriving) 9:30 Keynote by a teacher leader from Kenya 10:30 Keynote on internet safety by an expert from the United States 11:00 Tea 11:30 Design Studio: Create your digital story. 1:00 Lunch break 2:00 Design Studio showcase 3:30 Culminating activity (and post-survey): Dr. Shea Kerkhoff, Dr. Timothy Makubuya, and Dr. Peter Wanyonyi 4:00 Certificate ceremony and group photo 5:00 Reception Note. + refers to positives from the day, and ∆ refers to what should be changed for the next day. A PPE N D I X B Research Protocols Recruitment Protocol Good morning. My name is Shea Kerkhoff, and I am a pro- fessor at the University of Missouri–St. Louis in the College of Education. Dr. Peter Wanyonyi, the founder of Hope Education Centre where we are meeting and president of the Board of Governors of the community school, has allowed for me to come before you to see if you would be interested in participating in a research study we are con- ducting on learner-centered teaching and digital literacy. You will be asked to interview with a research team member for about 20 minutes during the professional de- velopment session, to allow us to observe your professional development time, to participate in two focus group dis- cussions, and to share products related to the professional development with the research team over the course of the next 3 days. You do not have to participate in the research to be in the PD. Being in the PD does not require you to par- ticipate in research. If you are interested, I have consent forms here for you to come up and look over, and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have regarding the research. Focus Group Protocol Participants will be broken into groups by grade level taught: ● Kindergarten and nursery ● Lower primary (standards 1–4) ● Upper primary (standards 5–8) ● Secondary (forms 1–4) Thank you for agreeing to be part of a group discussion about your goals for the professional development session and your context for implementing the training related to literacy, learner-centered teaching, and technology. Partici- pation in this focus group is voluntary and not part of your Professional Development Agenda (continued) 19362722, 2022, 1, D ow nloaded from https://ila.onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/rrq.392 by N igeria H inari N PL , W iley O nline L ibrary on [03/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Professional Development on Digital Literacy and Transformative Teaching in a Low-Income Country: A Case Study of Rural Kenya | 305 responsibilities as a classroom teacher or as a participant in the professional development session. You may choose to stop the group discussion at any time. Would you mind if I audio recorded the focus group? It will help me to stay focused on our conversation, and it will ensure that I have an accurate record of what we discussed. At any point, if you would like me to turn off the audio recorder, just let me know. Any personal identifiers will be removed during transcription. Are you ready to begin? 1. What insights or questions do you have about digi- tal literacy with your standard or form? 2. What insights or questions do you have about learner-centered teaching with your standard or form? Interview Protocol Thank you for agreeing to be interviewed about your goals and instructional processes related to literacy, learner-centered teaching, and technology. Participation in this interview is voluntary and not part of your respon- sibilities as a classroom teacher or as a participant in the professional development session. You may choose to stop the interview at any time. Would you mind if I audio recorded the interview? It will help me to stay focused on o