Return-Path: <nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j1FL5eC14620; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:05:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:05:40 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <130150-22005221521313733@M2W048.mail2web.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "bonniesophia@adelphia.net" <bonniesophia@adelphia.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-TECHNOLOGY:3445] RE: Computer Technology Integration - Discussion Question 2 X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Status: O Content-Length: 4401 Lines: 93 I spent four years as lead educator and program designer for a WIA program whose classroom was a computer lab; our own located in an elementary school, and one at the public library. Each had dramatrically different levels of technology. I found that a lab setting with computers always accessible had its advantages and its drawbacks: our stated goal was to integrate technology into educational goals, and of course to make the transitions as "seamless" as possible. As many have said, the "seamlessness" depended on many factors, including the functioning of hardware, the proficiency of students, the nature of the educational goals, and the motivation/frustration threshhold of the student. There were also the times the technology was a distraction than a reinforcement. Absolutely the technology needs to be modeled first. But if one waited until students were proficient, then how could we differentiate our program from one of the many computer training courses out there, with the exception that our beginning technology, education and, sometimes, functioning levels were lower than others? I was as eager as the students to jump into the technology applications, to demonstrate an educational goal in a different "modality," to reinforce it with different learning styles. That's how I saw the transitioning to technology. But precisely when the transitions were not seamless was when the students would focus more on the technology barriers than on the lesson to be learned. The difference between our program and other computer trainings I have participated in or observed is that each technology application came with a context: "why" do I want to learn a particular technology skill? What will it do for me? How will it make a task easier that cannot be done any other way? Here is where the accessibility issue comes into play. It is most evident that search and research, and communication, is what the computer does well, yet most web sites are not friendly to English learners or relatively new or struggling readers. So, they must be taught to "read" the web page, which we maintained represents a different "kind" of reading than linear line-by-line. Skim and Scan was a bit technique, locating "target" words, understanding the logic of a web page layout. All of which to say: learner appropriate is difficult to achieve, in a multi-level class. But we didn't want our learners to live in the "shell" and then when they would try to access "real world" computers become totally frustrated. We wanted to give them real applications and real tasks. When it worked best was when students began to recognize that computers might not be their first choice to accomplish a particular task or learn a particular skill, when they were able to transition from "technology as panacea" or as their "acceptable" reason for learning, to seeing technology as the fallible--and wonderful--tool it is, not an end, but a means. Bonnie Odiorne, Ph.D. Writing Center, English Language institute Post University, Waterbury, CT Original Message: ----------------- From: Liz Dillon-Marable lizdillonmarable@yahoo.com Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:05:26 -0500 (EST) To: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov Subject: [NIFL-TECHNOLOGY:3442] Computer Technology Integration - Discussion Question 2 Mariann and all, At this time, I’d like to pose the second of our 5 question agenda. It deals with the characteristic of "Learner-appropriate" use of computers. Definition: Learner-appropriate – Learners are able to use the computer technology in the classroom. Are learners able to use the computer technology and the content they access on the computer? Describe a classroom in which you observed learners comfortably using computers for learning. How do you determine whether or not the computer technology used by the learners is appropriate for - their literacy level - their technical level of expertise? Building on David Rosen's question - Is Learner-appropriate access difficult to achieve? If so, how do teachers assure that learners are comfortable with both the technology and the content accessed. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:50:07 EST