Literacy,+Technology,+and+Diversity+Teaching+for+Success+in+Changing+Times+by+Jim+Cummins

GROUP: EHJE- We're on the EHJE!

Eliza Sussman Hilda Prado Jake (Wook Jae) Lee Eric Noble

** Literacy, Technology, and Diversity: Teaching for Success in Changing Times **
Jim Cummins, Kristin Brown, Dennis Sayers

toc

__Introduction__
Cummins argues in his article that technology is essential for increasing literacy (both traditional literacy of reading and writing as well as 21st century literacy), and it is especially important for low income and minority students. He also argues that use of the internet can contribute to "the development of a socially committed and intellectually critical citizenry". So far, according to Cummins, technology has not accomplished either of these goals, and any strides toward them has been minimal. Although we believed that technology would increase these two kids of literacy, we did not think about technology would actually go about increasing these literacies in the classroom when we invested in the technologies.

The true potential of computer access is not realized because of the "teach to the test" manner that classrooms operate in, especially in low income areas, leaving a lack of creativity in its wake. Because of this lack of creativity, the power of technology integration into lessons is frequently overlooked and lost

This article turns its focus to recently developed digital technologies and their potential impact on education. He begins by analyzing the initial goals of technology investments for schools and education, then he finishes by analyzing the different amounts of availability and access for certain groups and what this means for education.

The government has invested massive ammounts of money into educational technology. The US alone spent $90 billion on computer technologies for schools in the 1990s. Two major rationales for these large scale investments are:

1. To promote the development of the kinds of literacy (and numer-acy) skills required to function effectively in the global economy and society of the twenty-first century (henceforth, twenty-first- century literacy skills);

2. To improve traditional learning outcomes for all students, but particularly for low-ncome and minority students who experience disproportionate underachievement.

The government is trying to find a way to merge traditional literacy of reading and writing with 21st century literacy with technology. The article states that "there are enormous possibilities and opportunities ahead for young workers who possess 21st century literacy- that is, the knowledge and skills to take advantage of the new internet-related technologies". Cummins discusses the fact that we have "moved from an era where print dominated the literacy landscape to one where multiple forms of electronic communication are inseparable from literacy development".

Cummins argues that the two main barriers to effective use of technology in the educational setting are:

1. Inadequate teacher preparation 2. Unreliability of equipment

Cummins argues that the main reason low income schools are not taking full advantage of 21st century learning is because of their pedagogy. Cummins says that in low-income schools transmission-based learning is dominant. Transmission-based learning focuses on students internalizing content instead of aiding them to construct their knowledge like in inquiry-based learning which is seen more regularly in affluent schools. Transmission-based learning dominates because of the teacher's need for their students to perform well on the "high stakes" tests that occur during the school year. This divide determines the extent to which technology is utilized.

__Access__
Access is defined by the "digital divide" between high income and low income families. As expected, low income families have less access to new technologies, and the least likely to gain access to new technologies are minority low income students. This specific subset of students are the least likely to have computers at home or internet access.


 * __Statistical data:__**

2001: children who lived in households with computers 83% of non-hispanic white children 46% of black children 47% hispanic children

children who were able to connect to the internet at home 50% non-hispanic white children 25% black children 20% hispanic children

2001: 5-17 year olds who lived in poverty were less likely to use the internet at home (47% likelihood) 5-17 year olds who were not in poverty were more likely to use internet at home (82% likelihood)

1994-2003: the percent of public schools with internet access increased from 35% to near 100% 3% of classrooms in 1994 93% of classrooms in 2003

Marked decrease in access: 2003: ratio of students to computers with internet access in public schools is 4.4 : 1 1998: ratio of students to computers with internet access in public schools is 12.1 : 1

High poverty schools and those with high minority enrollment were less likely to have a school website than more affluent schools and those with low minority enrollment. Impoverished schools that have a website 72% versus 96% wealthy schools Minority schools that have a website 80% versus 94% non-minority schools

To summarize:
 * there is a gap in technology access in relation to poverty and minority group status
 * this gap has narrowed in recent years
 * there is still a significant gap in access at home to computers and internet between these groups
 * low income students benefit less from the technology when they do have aceess because they have not been encouraged by their schools to utilize the technology to its full potential.

__Use:__
Cummins suggests that the way computers and other form of technology used in schools are more significant than access to technology for overall academic performance. According to Warschauer and colleagues (2004), there was a significant difference of utilizing technology in class between low-income students and high-income students. While low-incomes students mainly applied new technology for remedial or vocational use, high-income students frequently utilized technology for academic uses. The analysis of NAEP Mathematics performance by Wenglinsky (1998) reported that using technology to teach lower-level cognitive skills was negatively related to academic achievement and positively related for teaching higher-level cognitive skills. Further studies supported that significant differences emerged in the effectiveness of technologies used in class even though the student-to-computer ratios were similar in those schools.

Warschauer and colleagues also identified performativity as a major difference between high- and low-income schools. Because teachers often assumed that low-income students didn't have home access to computers, the lesson was focused on basic computer skills. Cummins explains such phenomenon that technologies "amplify existing forms of inequality." He further argues that "the initial quantitative disparity between schools in high- and low-income areas with respect to technology access has been largely replaced by a pedagogical divide in the way new technologies are used to support instruction and a corresponding cognitive divide in the way students use the new technologies to support different forms of learning."

__The Apparent Lack of Overall Impact__
Despite of massive expenditure in technology, there is minimal impact on of any overall enhancement of academic learning among school-age learners. Cummins reasons that it is due to our perspective of viewing technology as “simply one component in a complex ecology of learning and teaching.” A recent study from Rand Corporation (Carroll, Krop, Arkes, Morrison, & Flanagan, 2005) showed there were no gains in literacy achievement in California between 1990 and 2003 even though the state went through major curricular reforms along with significant technology investment. In sum, Cummins believes that simply providing access to ICT in schools or homes does little impact to the educational achievement or reducing the gap between high- and low-income students.

__Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies__
Even though overall impact of technology investment on student performance is not significant thus far, there is considerable evidence that under certain conditions ICT can promote academic learning across all ages. Burns and Ungerleiter (2002/2003) concluded from their research on impact of ICT on students:
 * 1) Student attitudes toward computers and computer-related technologies improve as a consequence of exposure to them.
 * 2) The use of ICTs for group work can be beneficial if teachers are able to take into account the complex interplay among the age of the students, the kind of task, and the amount of independence allowed.
 * 3) The use of ICTs for mathematics instruction has a significantly positive effect on teaching high-level concepts to students in grade 8 or above.
 * 4) The majority of the research reviewed is contradictory and/or seriously flawed.

__The Impact of ICT on Reading Development: Meta Analysis__
The National Reading Panel (NRP) focused on 21 published experimental studies in the area of reading, which showed positive results with respect to application. Specifically, the ability of the computer to transform speech to print and the use of hypertext can benefit some students as an alternative in reading instruction. However, little research has been done on the impact of computers on reading. The use of technology seems to be a presentation tool to augment traditional instruction practices. Second language students are using technology to assist in comprehending reading passages and identifying vocabulary. Research done by LeLoup and Ponterio (2003) shows that these students outperform the students not receiving technology assistance.

A more recent meta-analysis of 42 studies was done by Blok, Oostdam, Otter, and Overmaat (2002),that focused on the impact of computer support for beginning reading instruction. The studies were published between 1982 and 2000, only 6 of which overlapped with the NRP review. The authors focused on reading sub skills related to decoding and fluency, excluding studies whose primary focus was vocabulary and reading comprehension. However, the NRP included such studies in its database and also did not restrict the focus to the beginning reading phase. Blok and colleagues found an overall positive effect when only studies involving beginning reading in English are considered. There is the possibility that the positive effect is due to the less regular sound-symbol relationship in English as compared to many other languages. However, they warn against concluding that students do profit from computer-assisted instruction programs when English is the language of instruction. Research on phonological awareness training reviewed by Foster and colleagues (1994) suggests that teacher-based training is more effective than computer-based training. However, technology is evolving and as new products become available the use of more powerful computing functionalities may be more effective.

__Research Involving Commercial Programs__
Studies of commercial computer-supported programs that were not considered in either the NRP or the Blok and colleagues' reviews suggest that some of these systems can be highly effective components of an early reading program. In particular, Scholastic's WiggleWorks beginning literacy system showed highly significant effects among grade 1 students despite the fact that participating classrooms at the time generally had only one computer per class (Schultz, no date). Read 180 is another Scholastic product that is intended for struggling readers. This product entails a similar blend of video, leveled books and individualized computer-supported instruction which has also been very positively evaluated.

An impact study for ELL students done by Scholastic reports strong gains in reading performance. However, these studies have been reported by Scholastic's Research Department rather than being conducted by independent evaluators. There are several other computer-integrated systems such as Accelerated Reader, which also claims to have a great impact on student performance. However, little of this research has been published in refereed journals and the academic jury is still out as to whether Accelerated Reader improves reading performance and/or leads to more independent reading.

Most research done for commercial products are done by their own developers and very little research is done by independent researchers. Thus, the research is biased and tends to show a more positive impact than it may actually have on student improvement. For example, the reading program FastForWord that is used by 450,000 students and designed to improve students' language and reading skills was researched by Rouse, Kreuger, and Markman (2004). They carried out a randomized experimental study to assess the effects of this program using four different measures of language and reading ability. The study showed that although students improved in some aspects of students' language skills, these gains do not appear to translate into increased achievement on broader measures of language acquisition or reading abilities. For example, tarched by Rouse, Kreuger, and Markman (2004). They carried out a randomized experimental study to assess the effects of this program using four different measures of language and reading ability. The study showed that although students improved in some aspects of students' language skills, these gains do not appear to translate into increased achievement on broader measures of language acquisition or reading abilities.

**__[[image:technology-in-the-classroom1.jpg width="350" height="213" align="left"]]Motivation__**
Does a computer-supported learning environment benefit students based on the features of the hardware and software or does the technology simply support student motivation, which results in greater task engagement? Several studies suggest that when students have computers or access technology there is a marked increase in the quality of student work. In the McMillan and Honey (1993) research study, students in an 8th grade class were give laptops to use for the year. They observed improvement in their writing, organizing of ideas, and use of vocabulary. These improvements were attributed to an increase in motivation due to access to the laptop computers. Other studies including Fuchs and Woessman (2004), which focused on the use of e-mail, and Meskill and Mossop's (2000) survey study of ESL teachers using technology indicate technology helps drive motivation increasing motivations. In the case of the Meskill and Mossop study, the ESL students with technology support were able to far outperform ESL students in a traditional classroom context. A general review of the impact of technology on ESL students by LeLoup an Ponterio (2003) also indicate the creation of a positive attitudes towards learning when technology is use.



**__Cost Effectiveness__**
While it is clear that there are a great many useful technologies for the classroom, the questions becomes is the implementation of technology in the classroom cost effective for schools that are out of money. In some cases there are effective teaching programs that are cheaper to implement than a technology solution, but have an equal effectiveness. Check out the Jolly Phonics program for kindergarten ELL students. Also, it does seem clear, at least within the subject of English literacy, most students (ELL and native-English speakers) learn adequate English skills through the implementation of good teacher instruction. This makes, in many cases, the integration of technology in most classes unnecessary and therefore not cost effective. The use of technology based programs can help students with language difficulties and may even be necessary in some student cases to sustain their literary development. Stephen Krashen is skeptical of the implementation of technology to support literacy. He says the success of computer-supported reading programs stems from the encouragement they provide to the student. This same effect could be achieved through increased funding for reading programs and purchasing books. Krashen points to evidence which shows that those who have access to books simply read more and students who are given recreational reading time demonstrate better gains in reading achievement. It is difficult to determine if indeed technology in the classroom is cost effective, but it does seem that at least a limited integration for special needs cases may be helpful.

__**Design Principles for Technology-Supported Instruction**__
Any integrations of technology into the learning environment must align with what is known about how people learn; people learn best in an optimal learning environment. An optimal learning environment should promote deep rather than superficial understanding, invoke and build on learners' prior knowledge, and promote active and self-regulated learning rather than passive learning (Bransford and colleagues, 2000). English literacy is a main component of effective learning among students, especially in later grade content areas. So, when examining technologies to integrate into the instruction of students it must be asked will this technology (1) promote deep understanding, build on learners' prior knowledge, and permit learners to control the learning process, and (2) engage learners in extensive reading, support them in accessing auricular content, and enable them to harvest the language they are reading. The right technology can play a crucial role in improving the education of students, especially among low-income and culturally diverse students. Six design principles for technology in instruction were developed based on Wood's (2001) analysis of computer programs that support vocabulary development. Wood developed five criteria for analyzing these software products:

Criterion 1: Does it relate the new to the known? Criterion 2: Does it promote active, in-depth processing of new words? Criterion 3: Does it provide multiple exposures to new words? Criterion 4: Does it teach students to be strategic readers? Criterion 5: Does it promote additional reading?

From these criteria, the six design principles for technology-supported instruction were derived:

1) Does the technology-supported instruction provide cognitive challenge and opportunities for deep processing of meaning? 2) Does the technology-supported instruction relate instruction to prior knowledge and experiences derived from students' homes and communities? 3) Does the technology-supported instruction promote active self-regulated collaborative inquiry? 4) Does the technology-supported instruction promote extensive engaged reading and writing across the curriculum? 5) Does the technology-supported instruction help students develop strategies for effective reading, writing, and learning? 6) Does the technology-supported instruction promote affective involvement and identity investment on the part of the students?

In a study of educational projects reviewed by Leu and colleagues (2005), it was observed that the most effective projects were those that did not rely on specialized software, but utilized the common presentation, web-creation, photo and video editing software available. Jonassen, who coined the term mindtools to describe these powerful common technologies, argue that technologies should not support learning by instructing learners, but be used as a tool to learn with technology not from technology. Jonassen's framework to analyze computer applications specifies: engagement (active to passive), generativity (focus on creation rather than presentation), and control (residing in the student as compared to the teacher or machine). If a teacher can answer the criteria and questions above affirmatively in relation to their technology integrated lesson it is likely that it will create deep learning.

__Works Cited __
Cummins, Jim and Kristin Brown and Dennis Sayers. //Literacy, Technology, and Diversity: Teaching for Success in Changing Times//. Boston: Pearson, 2006. Print.

WiggleWorks. Retrieved July 5, 2013 from http://www.hobart.k12.in.us/staffdev/SHELL/wwhead.gif  Read180. Retrieved July 5, 2013 from http://www.centralislip.k12.ny.us/imageGallery/PVoigt2613/Read180LOGO.jpg  Software & Assistive Technology. Retrieved July 5, 2013 from http://www.gemmlearning.com/img/content/slider-img-1.jpg  Podcast-ipadio Corporate Website. Retrieved July 5, 2013 from http://corporate.ipadio.com/library-media/images/voice%20to%20text.jpg

"Laptops in a Classroom" image. [July 5, 2013]. Retrieved from http://www.wcsu.edu/technology/techrooms/images/ws219.jpg

Technology in the Classroom image. [July 5, 2013]. Retrieved from []