Interactive and Authoring Tools: Infusing Technology in the Classroom - Admission/Application Essay Example

Infusing Technology in the Classroom Computer Equity The United States has witnessed a significant increase in the amount of technology in schools. From 1988 to 1995, the computer-to-student ratio dropped from 1:3 to 1:9 (Office of Technology Assessment, OTA, 1995). Almost 98% of all schools in the United States have at least one computer in the classroom. A survey of recent graduates at Arizona State University West (ASUW) supports the findings of the OTA (1995). Graduates generally felt unprepared to integrate technology into their teaching, and they experienced few models of technology integration in their methods courses (Wetzel, Zambo, Buss, & Arbaugh, 6). The simultaneous increase of educational computers in our schools and of minority Аstudents does not, however, signify equal access to technology for all students. According to U.S. Department of Education (1995) data, nearly 40% of African-American and Hispanic children in Grades 1 through 6 did not use computers, whereas about 20% of their Euro-American counterparts did not. Although the school gap between minority student computer use and majority computer use is closing (Milone & Salpeter, 44), partly because of Title I funding for computer purchases, schools with minority populations still have more students per computer (Trotter, 1997). In fact, a recent study by the Educational Testing Service (Trotter) found that schools with a 90% or higher minority student population have a student-to-multi-media-computer ratio of about 30:1. Moreover, minorities are much less likely to have access to computers at home. Almost 31% of White students in Grades 1 through 6 reports using a computer at home, compared to about 9% of African-American students and 7% of Hispanic students (U.S. Department of Education). Furthermore, low-SES multicultural schools tend to have the fewest computers (Committee for Economic Development, 1995). Unfortunately, proficiency with information technology is strongly related to access to computers beyond the school (Martinez, 396). Yet minority students have less computer experience and are less likely to select occupations that require computer applications (Oakes, 153). As a result, Hispanic children with limited English proficiency have more anxiety, less confidence, and less positive attitudes toward computers than comparable majority students (Bohlin & Bohlin, 24). Access to computers moderates the opportunities that LEP learners have for cognitive, social, and language development. Computers, as Dickinson (1996, 9) suggests, influence how we think, learn, and solve problems. Computers provide students with an understanding of how information is retrieved, managed, and manipulated (Martinez, 399). Interactive technologies can challenge students to be creative, think critically, and make decisions (White & Purdom, 7). In short, computers empower students by providing a tool that helps solve problems, facilitates global communication, makes information available, and challenges human capabilities (Dickinson, 10). Social capital is based on the interaction, connection, and levels of trust individuals have with each other. Without programs or activities that provide interaction, connection, or the building of trust, then the social capital of that community decreases. But the availability of programs doesn't always determine social capital. Instead, the people in that community must be willing to take part in any activities or programs that are available. Social capital could be regarded as the "product" or "outcome" of a sound and sustainable social ecology. Learning (Falk and Harrison 18; Harrison and Falk, 12) is the principal process for building social capital and contributing to the sustainability of human and physical systems among the non-English international students. An Educational Imperative Because minority children are less likely to experience technology at home, the preparation of computer-using binlingual education (BLE) and English as a second language (ESL) teachers is an educational imperative. These teachers will prepare a growing number of language minority children for a technologically complex future. Ultimately, inequitable computer access curtails these children's career opportunities (Johnson, 25), their participation in our society, and their potential contributions. Our nation cannot afford to waste the rich talents and economic promise these children bring to the future. Unfortunately, colleges of education are not providing pre-service teachers with the necessary experiences and knowledge for classroom computer use. Research suggests that pre-service teachers have little computer experience (Cardinale, 2; McAulay, 230). Even more discouraging is the fact that American teachers receive less computer training and are less knowledgeable than teachers in Europe or Japan (Anderson, 23; Siegel, 58). Technology Competency As Rothery (2002, 85) notes, many institutions of higher education continue to have free-standing, discrete technology components, perhaps because of lack of technological expertise among teacher education faculty. Nevertheless, discrete technology courses may result in the marginalization of technology in teacher preparation (Robertson, 6) and the perception that technology is a set of nonessential appurtenances. Moreover, educational applications of computers should not be relegated solely to the individual teacher's creativity, interest, initiative, or good intentions. To assume that teachers will-automatically transfer their existing instructional skills to the use of educational technology overlooks the complexity of monitoring learning activities in a student-centered instructional setting in which groups or individuals are working at separate computer stations. Computer knowledge, though essential, is not sufficient because technology integration in classroom instruction is "a challenging and difficult process" (Hadley & Sheingold, 265). It requires many new skills and competencies, as well as changes in educational ideologies (Robinson, 41). Teachers will not automatically perceive how they can use computers to expand and strengthen student learning. Teachers need both technological competence, as well as the methodological skills for effective classroom implementation of computers. Because what teachers do with computers hinges on their computer experiences (Hadley & Sheingold, 267), pre-service teachers need varied and ample opportunities for hands-on experience with computers, observation of classroom implementation, practice implementing educational applications of computers, and reflective discussion of computer use. They also need to consider how teachers can integrate computers to support a variety of philosophical, curricular, and methodological approaches (White & Purdom, 8). Future teachers need to determine when and how to use computers, assess the effectiveness of computer use with their students (Hurst, 75), and evaluate the appropriateness of software for their students. In addition, they must understand the teacher's role in providing equitable access to computers. Technology, Language Arts and English Learners Teachers have made substantial, although certainly not widespread, use of technology to enhance language arts, particularly student writing (Becker, 2004). The writing workshop approach including planning, drafting, revising, and editing (Calkins, 5; Graves, 3) lends itself particularly well to the use of word processing because the technology facilitates the revising, editing, and publishing processes (Wetzel, 2). The classroom context and purpose for writing have also been important factors in successful writing programs. Where these have been addressed as well, word processing as been found to be an effective writing tool (Cochran-Smith, Paris, & Kahn, 21; Snyder, 50.). Building on this foundation, researchers have found that telecommunications and word processing have led to better attitudes and more enthusiasm for writing and rewriting as well as attention to accuracy (Riel, 35). Further, kindergarten students use of digital cameras and computers to write captions for their pictures has been found to enhance student creativity and imagination (Pastor & Kerns, 45). Researchers using an approach based on student strengths and cultural symbols were able to assist 10 year olds with learning problems in producing multimedia projects including pictures, audio, and text. For ESL learners, computer technology increases self-expression, provides opportunities for the application of English language skills, and stimulates active learning. Soska (2004) indicates that educational technology can help ESL learners develop speaking, reading, and writing skills. Databases and spreadsheets can furnish direct experience in organizing and retrieving information, as well as develop problem-solving skills (Soska, 2004). By providing students opportunities to work cooperatively on concrete tasks, the computer supports group interactions that can increase instructional effectiveness and enhance communication skills (Steinberg, 45). As students construct and manipulate information in the context of peer interaction, concepts and language become strengthened (Bermudez & Paiumbo, 165). Word processors, including some that are bilingual, are an excellent way to further writing development and motivate students to write (Soska, 2004). The word processor frees some children from their handwriting difficulties and allows them to freely express themselves (Simic, 2004). For example, most students interviewed in a multicultural, multiage classroom, Grades 1-3, indicated that they preferred to use the computer rather than paper and pencil for writing because their hands did not get as tired (Chisholm, 163). Moreover, the computer allows ESL students in small group or pairs not only to help each other and provide immediate feedback, but also to develop awareness of the need for clarity in expressing their ideas. Clearly, then, the literature on computers in general classroom, ESL, and bilingual teaching supports the use of this technology in language arts. However, unless ESL students are instructed by computer-literate teachers, they will not benefit from the technology's capabilities. In turn, the presence of computer-literate teachers in ESL elementary classrooms is dependent on computer experiences in pre-service preparation. Works Cited Anderson, R. E. (Ed.). (2003). Computers in American schools. 1992: An overview. (A national report from the International IEA Computers in Education Study). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minneapolis, Department of Sociology. Becker, H. (2004). Analysis and trends of school use of new information technologies [Online document]. Available: http://www.gse.uci.edu/EdTechUse/ c-tblcnt.htm. Bermudez, A. B., & Palumbo, D. (2004,Winter). Bridging the gap between literacy and technology: Hypermedia as a learning tool for limited English proficient students [Online document]. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 14, 165-184. Available: http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/ miscpubs/jeilms/vo14/bermudez.html. Bohlin, R. M., & Bohlin, C. E (2004). Spanish-speaking limited English proficient students and computer anxiety, confidence, and attitudes: Educational implications. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Calkins, L. (2003). Lessons from a child. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. The changing face of America's schools. Forum, 18(4), 1, 5-7. Cardinale, L A. (2002,November). Female pre-service teachers' prior experience with computing. Paper presented at the annual conference of Research on Women in Education, Norfolk, VA. Chisholm, I. M. (1995-1996). Computer use in a multicultural classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(2), 162-174. Cochran-Smith, M., Paris, C., & Kahn, J. (2001). Learning to writing differently: Beginning writers and word processing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing. Committee for Economic Development. (1995). Connecting students to a changing world: A technology strategy for improving mathematics and science education. New York: Author. (Available from the Committee for Economic Development, 477 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10022.) Dickinson, D. (1996,November). Technology. Mindshift Connection: A Bulletin for Successful Teaching and Learning, 1(3), 1. Falk, I. and Harrison, L. 1998. Indicators of social capital: Social capital as the product of local interactive learning processes. Learning Communities: International Journal of Vocational Education Learning. Graves, D. (2003). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemartin Hadley M., & Sheingold, K. (2003). Commonalties and distinctive patterns in teachers' integration of computers. American Journal of Education, 10(3), 261-315. Harrison, L. and Falk, I. 1998. Community learning and social capital: Just having a little chat. Journal of Vocational Education and Training. Hurst, D. S. (2004). Teaching technology to teachers. Educational Leadership, $1(7),74-76. Johnson, D. (2005,November). Using computers to promote development of English as a second language. Unpublished report, Carnegie Corporation, New York. Martinez, M. E. (2004). Access to information technologies among schoolage children: Implications for a democratic society. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(6), 395-400. McAulay, K.J. (2003). Computer use among college undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, 34, 230-231. Mergendoller, J. R. (1996). Moving from technological possibility to richer student learning: Revitalized infrastructure and reconstructed pedagogy. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 43-45. Milone, Jr., M. N., & Salpeter, J. (1996). Technology and equity issues. Technology and Learning, 16(4), 38-41, 44-47. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (May, 2004). NCATE unit standards. Reston, VA: Author. Oakes, J. (2000). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority students in science and mathematics. In C. B. Cazden (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (pp. 153-222). Washington, D C: American Educational Research Association. Office of Technology Assessment. (1995,April). Teachers & technology: Making the connection. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Pastor, E., & Kerns, E. (1997). A digital snapshot of an early childhood classroom. Education Leadership, 54(3), 42-45. Riel, M. (2000). Building a new foundation for global communities. The Writing Notebook: Creative Word Processing in the Classroom, 7(3), 35-7. Robertson, J. (1996). Promoting IT competence with student primary teachers. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 12(1), 2-9. Robinson, B. (1995). Teaching teachers to change: The place of change theory in the technology education of teachers. Technology and Teacher Education Annual, Proceedings of SITE 95,. 40-44. Rothery, A. (2002). IT in initial teacher education at Worcester. DITTE, 4, 83-97. Siegel, J. (2004,February). No computer know-how. Electronic Learning, 13(5),58. Simic, M. (2004). Computer-assisted writing instruction [Online document]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/dabases/ERiC Digests/ed376474.html. (ERIC No. ED 376 474) Snyder, I. (2003). Writing with word processors: A research overview. Educational Researcher, 35(1)49-68. Soska, M. (2004). Educational technology enhances LEP classroom. Forum [Online serial]. Available: http://www.ncbe.edu/ncbepubs/forum/ forum175.html. Steinberg, E. R. (2002). The potential of computer-based telecommunications for instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 19(2), 42-46. Wetzel, K. (2002). Computers and the writing process. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education. White, J. A., & Purdom, D. M. (1996,Autumn). Viewing modern instructional technology through conceptions of curriculum. Educational Technology Review, 6, 5-9. Read More