Running Head: REFINING BASIC SKILLS THROUGH …



Running Head: SUPPORTING LEARNING WITH TECHNOLOGY

Supporting Learning with

Technology in the Classroom

Jorge Ruiz

EED 616

Dr. Tae Chang

Spring 2006

California State University, Northridge

Abstract

As an educator in today’s ever-changing world of new methods of teaching, new modes of learning, and the evolving world of technology, it is of utmost importance that we stay up to date on the happenings of the technological world. Keeping up to date this present day evolution is important to us as educators in two ways; first, it helps us reach out and search for new ways of helping our students succeed in their educational career, as well as helping us grow and develop deeper knowledge as professionals. Second, if used in a comprehensible and strategic manner, technology in many of its forms can be used to support and reinforce the skills and material taught in the curriculum across grade levels. This paper will focus on how technology can be, and is used in many classrooms to both enhance what we teach, as well as create students who become self sufficient and responsible of their own learning.

Before getting into any of the material that is taught in the classroom, let’s begin with some of the most important skills children must learn, and develop in order to become good at what they do, which is, being a student.

Cognitive skills are skills that require the working of a human mind (Liu, 2003). They are mental and broadly ranged from memory skills to procedural skills, from language skills to thinking skills. In general, then can be categorized into lower order cognitive skills such as recalling and listing; and higher order cognitive skills such as problem solving, or hypothesis testing, decision making, and self-reflecting. Another, more common way of seeing cognitive skills is through Bloom’s taxonomy; lower level skills are related to knowledge and comprehension, and higher level skills are related to synthesis and evaluation.

In order to build on such skills in our classrooms, such as my own, we always have a focus when learning through the units of Open Court Reading for example. We begin with our unit openers, and expose students to what is to come for the next five or six weeks, and we give them questions to focus on, or projects to work on knowing that this will build on their interest of such a topic, like the unit on FOSSILS in 2nd grade. At the beginning of the unit, my students are told that as part of learning about fossils, they have 3 weeks to build a diorama at home, with the help of their parents. Unfortunately, my students at the moment don’t have the luxury of being able to do research at school about this topic, and if they’re lucky, only a few can at home. But what if they didn’t have to rely on only a book, cut outs, and what the teacher teaches? How could technology help? How can these cognitive skills build more rapidly with the use of computers?

Project-based learning, deriving its theoretical underpinnings from Dewey’s educational philosophy and constructivist epistemological belief, organizes learning around a project (Liu, 2003). Project-based learning typically starts with an end product, which serves as a driving question compelling students to learn about the central concepts and principles of a topic while engaging in producing and product. Research now shows that technology facilitated project-based learning has a great potential to enhance students’ motivation, and support information gathering and presentation.

Sometimes as a teacher it is very difficult to get away from lecturing on and on, or having any type of creativity to enhance learning, because of scripted program, pacing plans, or any other limitations we are faced with. Yet, with the help of technology, and computers, we can try to get away from that, even if it is for a little while, in order to, and as I stated before, help our students become responsible for their own learning. Barab, Hay, Barnett, and Squire (2001) have developed Participatory Learning Environments (PLE’s), which support natural complexity of content, avoid over simplification or relations, engage students in the construction of products. All of this has been done in response to the limitations of teacher-centered or lecture-based learning environments.

Their PLE’s focus on technology-rich environments that allow students to ground their understanding within their concrete experiences; or what Barab et al. (2001) refers to as technology rich, inquiry-based PLE’s. These types of environments provide opportunities for students to inquire into the phenomena they are learning and not simply receive information about it. They are also designed to support the process of learning, as well as establishing an environment where students work collaboratively.

As we speak about communities of learners, such as PLE’s, where students can use modern day technology to build on the skills being taught, it is also important to recognize and value the fact that our students do not all learn the same way, nor do they put into practice what they’ve learned in the same way. As Rowell (2004) states, ways of talking, or writing in technological activity have not received serious attention, in part due to the school culture of viewing learning as an individual accomplishment, and the assumption that all students should be directed towards identical tasks. An assumption that I am sure we can all agree on, is not leading to many of our students succeeding.

Now that we have seen some examples of the how and why technology should be put into effect, let’s look at the present. How has technology already begun to play a role? And how are we as educators using this tool to assist our students? Also, what are the correct ways to use technology in the classroom?

The uncertainty about what students (and the rest of us) need to know reflects a more general culture change in the understanding of computers (Turkle, 1997). Turkle also states that originally, the goal was teaching students how computers worked and not to write programs; if students could understand what was going on “inside” the computer they would have mastery over it. Now the goal is to teach students how to use computer applications, on the premise that if they can work with the computer, they can forget what’s inside and still be masters of the technology.

Turkle (1997) stated that there is an uncertainty of what “the rest of us” need to know; well, I see those “us” being the teachers. Yes we may know how to work a computer, how to search the internet, but do we know how to use it in a way that will help support our teaching of subjects such as literacy, or comprehension? If the answer is no, well what is to be done? Who should be helping us in developing the skills we need to better assist those who look to us for guidance.

We all feel isolated when we first use classroom computers because we typically have too little guidance or support. I have found that there are various types of support available to us through staff development, technology personnel, and Internet resources (Cammack, Kara-Soteriou, Kinzer, Labbo, Leu, Sanny, and Teale, 2003).

Professional development needs are more complex than increasing educators’ technical literacy (training in how to use Web browsers, for example). They involve building teachers’ knowledge and skills in alternative types of pedagogy and content (Dede, 1997).

Once we, the teachers, have the technical literacy, our knowledge, and the skills that Dede talks about in his article, it is now time to transfer what we have learned over to our students in order for them not to struggle, while using new and innovative ways of learning through technology, which in our case would most likely be the internet. As part of this new style of improving our students’ learning, and before we jump into teaching our daily curriculum with technology as an added support to learning, it is important to make sure, and if necessary, take the time to teach the comprehension skills students will need to navigate with their peers through this powerful thing that is technology.

When observing students interacting with text resulting from an Internet search, they perceive Web text reading different from print text reading. Within Internet environments, many readers are easily frustrated when not instantly gratified in their rapid search for immediate answers (Coiro, 2003). Ii is believed that important questions about reading comprehension on the Internet need to be addressed if teachers are to effectively prepare students for their literacy futures, which I agree with 100%.

Coiro (2005) states that breaking what she calls the online comprehension process into separate steps helps solidify the skills being taught. In an education climate that seeks quality reading instruction and access to technology for all, teachers must pay greater attention to readers struggling with comprehension on the internet – or risk fostering further inequities in online literacy.

Once we have broken through the “online comprehension process,” it is important to truly find the value of using technology in our classrooms. We must try to see past the obstacles, past the limitations, and give ourselves a chance to try and create new learning experiences for our students, who will benefit the most from it. For example, at my school we use Waterford computers, which used to be a district mandated computer based program for the lower grades (K-1st) that consisted of various programs within a computer to teach phonics, blending, the alphabet, and beginning literacy. Obviously as anything new that is brought to us, many of our teachers in those grade levels, including myself, were skeptical. But, we gave it a chance, and wouldn’t you know that not only did the students love it, but it worked! It supported and reinforced what we were teaching, and our students ran with it and grew from it.

In the classrooms we are studying, teachers really do seem to be finding creative, effective ways to incorporate technology into their ongoing efforts to improve education. Their approaches will likely produce improved learning outcomes for their young students (Guthrie & Richardson , 1995).

References

Barab, S., Barnett, M., Hay, K., & Squire, K. (2001). Constructing virtual worlds: Tracing the historical development of learner practices. Cognition & Instruction, 19(1).

Cammack, D., Kara-Soteriou, J., Kinzer, C., Labbo, L., Leu, D., Sanny, R., & Teale,W.

(2003). Teacher wisdom stories: Cautions and recommendations for using

computer-related technologies for literacy instruction. International Reading

Association, 57(3), 300-304.

Coiro, J. (2003). Exploring literacy on the internet: Reading comprehension on the internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. The Reading Teacher, 56(5), 458-464.

Coiro, J. (2005). Making sense of online text. Educational Leadership, 63(2), 30-35.

Dede, C. (1997). Rethinking how to invest in technology. Educational Literacy,

55(3), 12-16.

Guthrie, L., & Richardson, S. (1995). Language arts: computer literacy in the primary grades. Educational Leadership, 53(2), 14-17.

Liu, M. (2003). Enhancing learners’ cognitive skills through multimedia design.

Interactive Learning Environments, 11(1), 23-39.

Rowell, P. (2004). Developing technological stance: Children’s learning in technology

education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14, 45-59.

Turkle, S. (1997). Seeing through computers: Education in a culture of simulation.

The American Prospect, 8(31).

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download