Technology Integration and Literacy Instruction: Efficacy, Implementation, and differentiation

1. Technology Integration andLiteracy Instruction:Efficacy, Implementation, and differentiation Eryn Porcelli and Rebecca Erickson ELD-306 Fall 2010

2. Technology Integration andLiteracy Instruction “The result [of technology integration] is that students engage in rigorous and relevant learning using the tools of their time to access, analyze, create, and innovate.” (Boone, 2009) • Efficacy: Does it work? • Implementation: How can we use it? • Differentiation: Will it work for us?

3. Efficacy of Technology Integration Does using technology in the classroom really make literacy curriculum more effective?

4. How does technology affect literacy outcomes? • Despite popularity, efficacy is not clear • Many research studies are conducted by the corporations that develop the curriculum, and are not trustworthy. • Eugene Judson, 2009 • Students who used technology regularly in the classroom made small gains in language fluency, but the difference between hi-tech and low-tech classes was very small. • Kingsford University, 2008 • Study sought to evaluate whether the use of Smartboards improved student outcomes, but found that student fluency had much more to do with effective teachers than expensive technology

5. Why isn’t it working as well as we expect? • Student ability • Students often acquire technology skills separately from academic instruction, through recreational use • Technological Literacy (US Dept of Ed): “The ability to use computers and other technology to improve learning, productivity and performance” • Teacher ability • Fewer than 12% of teachers rate themselves as fluent using technology, and less than 2% feel capable of teaching others to use it. (Liang et al., 2007) • Teacher ability is the #1 predictor or student outcomes

6. Implementation How can we use technology in the classroom so that the outcomes are better?

7. What about implementation needs to change? • In many classrooms, computers and Smartboards are available but not utilized. • Students are often sent to a separate instructor to learn technology skills • Technological literacy does not serve to enhance academic instruction • Integration must be seamless • For whole-class curriculum, use project based technology integration rather than “removable” digital media like BrainPop, which more useful for specific student interventions.

8. Case Study: West Virginia • Six specific, developmentally appropriate technology-based tasks are assigned to each grade level • Teachers can implement the tasks however they like, so that technology best fits their curriculum • Example: Digital Picture Book • Language arts: Create a personal narrative • Science: Profile an endangered species • Social Studies: Day in the life of a Native American • In each use, both technological and language literacy skills are used • Writing a cohesive and comprehensible text • Using images to expand on a text • Using technology tools (search engines, word processing) to accomplish an academic goal

9. Digital Storybook Sample When done in PowerPoint, illustrations can even be animated.

10. Differentiation How can we prepare teachers to use technology to reach all students?

11. Why aren’t teachers more fluent in technology? • Most teachers can use basic technology, but in education the available resources are nearly endless! • How do we know what to use, and when? • Which technologies are useful for which students? • Teacher preparedness in technology is tied closely to effective student evaluation • Meeting the needs of every student, with or without technology, can be very daunting.

12. Differentiating Instruction with Technology • Use short internet activities to boost lower achieving students, especially those with attention problems • BrainPop, KidBrain, EduPlace, Scholastic etc. provide short activities that target specific literacy skills.

13. BrainPop Tim and Moby explain how to find the main idea in a passage

14. Using technology in the inclusive classroom • Technology can be an effective intervention for learning disabled students, but only if it is implemented very early on. • Technology provides multi-modal learning opportunities for different kinds of learners • If implemented too late, the student may not be able to catch on to the learning curve of using the technology itself • Falling too far behind in both language and technological literacy simultaneous can make mainstreaming very difficult

15. Summing it all up Technology can help improve literacy outcomes, but only if used thoughtfully by a technologically fluent teacher.

16. Works Cited Baker, Elizabeth (Betsy) A., and Linda D. Labbo. "Preparing Preservice Teachers to Use Technology for Responsive Literacy Instruction." Journal of Reading Education 32.2 (2007): 31-39. Wilson Web. Web. 29 Aug. 2010. Boone, Kathy. "Building Technology Literacy into the Curriculum.” Principal Leadership 10.2 (2009): 68- 70. Print. "Digital Media Benefits Primary Prep.” T.H.E. Journal 36.10 (2009): 1. Wilson Web. Web. 29 Aug. 2010. Judson, Eugene. "Improving Technology Literacy: Does It Open Doors." 58: 271-284 Wilson OmniFile Full Text Mega Edition. H.W. Wilson, 29 Aug. 2009. Web. 12 Nov. 2010. Liang, Guoli, Jihua Song, Guoyu Li, Zhouxiu Wang, Hua Yin, Geping Liu, and Richard T. Walls. "Comparative Study on Technology Preparation in Teacher Education: The U.S. and China." International Journal of Instructional Media 34.3, 2007. Web. 29 Aug. 2010. Smolin, Louanne Ione, and Kimberly A. Lawless. "The Reading Teacher." Becoming Literate in the Technological Age: New Responsibilities and Tools for Teachers 56.6 (2003): 570-77. Wilson Web. Web. 12 Nov. 2010. Weikle, Bobbie, and AzarHadadian. "Preventing School Failure." Can Assistive Technology Help Us to Not Leave Any Child Behind? 47.4 (2003): 181-186. Wilson Web. Web. 12 Nov. 2010. Wood, Ruth, and Jean Ashfield. "The Use of the Interactive Whiteboard for Creative Teaching and Learning in Literacy and Mathematics: a Case Study." British Journal of Educational Technology 39.1 (2007): 84-96.