Technology and Literacy- Article 5

Technology and Literacy- Article 5

In the article, Technology and literacy in early childhood educational settings: A review of research, the author, Cathy Burnett looks at the research that has been conducted on the use of technology in early childhood education.  The article categorizes children’s interactions with technology into three categories:

1.     Technology as a delivery of literacy

2.     Technology as a site for interaction around texts

3.     Technology as a medium for meaning making

When looking at technology as a delivery of literacy the article focuses on reading and interacting with computers to get information.  Many of the forms mentioned help students who are trying to develop aspects of phonemic awareness and letter sounds. Some of the electronic books help students by talking, computerized games, designed to help students with these issues. Using these tools was proven to help English Language Learners tremendously.  Most of the studies showed that there was no difference between materials delivered by a teacher vs. material delivered by technology. However the two must work together to successfully further learner’s literacy abilities.

The next section focuses on technology as a site for interaction around texts. The research shows how technology actually supports collaborative learning among students and how it changes the work produced, as well as the “identity” of the person creating the material.  The two forms that were worked with most in this section included the Internet and word processor.  When working on computers the children interactions evolved over time, becoming increasingly exploratory. Another thing that became evident when looking at technology in this way was the experience that some children already had and could share with other children because of their experiences with technology at home. By using this tools students were able to go beyond the teacher’s request and change fonts and easily insert pictures.

The last section looks at technology as a medium for meaning making. The author points out how by using technology children’s writing improves and they are able to do research in a way that to them seems much faster and more accurate than using text material. Using technology to create presentations is one way that children developed very quickly and were able to put information together in a way that furthered their understanding and ability to explain the material to other students in the classroom.

When looking at all of the research presented in this article is it clear that technology works in different ways for different people. I think the most important thing to remember when looking at using technology in the classroom is that not all technology is equal. Many programs and apps will not help children develop literacy in a meaningful way, but some will. 

Researching Critical Literacy – Article 4

In the article, Researching Critical Literacy: A Critical Study of Analysis of Classroom Discourse, the authors Katie van Sluys and Amy Seely Flint look at critical literacy that addresses personal, social, and sociopolitical aspects of literacy in the classroom. The article uses critical literacies, classroom discourse, and how literacy practices are and can be studied and applied.  The focus of this article is on a conversation between two students in one classroom in January 2003.  The two girls, Shelly and Maria participate in an “invitation” that was created by the teachers after a conversation that had taken place where one student commented, “Deborah’s hair is beautiful now, “ referring to a biracial students’ decision to straighten her hair.

After this conversation was brought up the students had a conversation about fairness, images of Whiteness, and what they, as young people, got to decide about their hair. It seems as though an “invitation” was created by the teacher, which is a folder about the topic with books, photographs, student produced drawling’s, and written artifacts children can use to explore the topic and generate questions. Shelly is a native English-speaking, Caucasian sixth grader and Maria was a native Spanish-speaking, Mexican immigrant who joined the classroom community at the same time as shelly. A few other students participated in the hair invitation, including Amy, an African American sixth grader, Nokomo, a fourth grade Mongolian immigrant, and Fernanda, a sixth grade Mexican immigrant.

The girls had many different discussions about the topic of hair and what it meant to them in many different ways. Most of the girls were able to relate in some way to their own experiences with their hair and hair within their family. The girls dew on various experiences to respond to each other and to understand the books and pictures that were included in the hair invitation. The girls were able to recall people in their loves who had hair similar to or different than what was reported in the texts. The girls used their memories to offer pieces to the discussion. It was easy to see the girls relating hair to culture and how things change over time. The girls talked through understandings of how hairstyles may be indicative of different cultural experiences by talking about how different cultures use braids or beads and how there are different hair types.

When looking at the analyses from the three lenses mentioned in the beginning of the article we can see that they were both big picture ideas and each highlighted the girls attempts to both understand and critique the ways that style can be imposed on non-European contexts. The over arching idea in all of the conversation is the girls questioning how hair is a representation of cultural identity.

Early Literacy- Article 3

In the article, Early Literacy: Towards a unified approach for childcare and school, the author Anders Skriver Jensen discusses the struggle Denmark had when it scored low in 1994 on an international ranking of children’s reading skills. Denmark quickly decided that the results were not acceptable and started taking steps to create a new initiative to improve early literacy. The initiative allowed teachers and schools to have more freedom in the classroom but would still hold schools accountable for their results. Another major aspect of this initiative was to link childcare to education. Making these two items come together in a cohesive way to support students learning was a very important goal. Educators and families were concerned that this would be “too much schooling” so it was decided that they would not focus on testable skills and school the way that many people think of it, but that they would use a holistic approach.

A large focus was placed on teaching in ways that emphasize participation and looking at how literacy is inscribed in complex sociocultural processes. In order for this link to work it took dedication and collaboration from childcare professionals and teachers. One example from the article is of a little boy named Thomas. Thomas is in a kindergarten class and starts to read a book aloud during lunchtime with no prompt from the teacher. Half way through the book he realizes he doesn’t know how to read all of the words. Thomas pauses briefly but then starts to use multiple strategies to work his way thought the story by predicting, using the images in the book, and finding words that make sense. The classroom response is also very important. They laugh when appropriate, nod their heads, and applaud his reading at the end of the story.  Situations like this one where students are reading in a comfortable environment advances their cognitive development and supports experimentation and play.

It is important that students have opportunities like the one explained above. Not only is it important for them to have the opportunities, but to feel comfortable enough to actually take advantage of the opportunity. Teachers must create and environment and community in which children feel comfortable and support each other’s learning. In Thomas’s example because he was so supported by his peers it actually increases his abilities because he now has more confidence about himself as a reader. The article also points out that children must participate in the construction of the lessons and content. Using children’s interests so they can see why something matters and make meaning. Teachers are encouraged to support students and teach them in a way that they are not scared of mistakes. The initiative discourages the use of worksheets or literacy that is out of context and doesn’t flow or make sense to the children.

The overall goal of this initiative is to support childcare professionals and teachers to create project-based, literacy-rich learning environments where every child has a fair chance of making a valuable contribution and rich cultural resources and activities are deployed all while making sure the environment and classroom culture supports learning by all students. Denmark claims to value social competencies, all-round personal development over the pre-set curricula. This initiative does follow all of those things but it does seem interesting that they gave teachers some room to do things their own way but are still holding them accountable for scores. Which to me seems as thought they do still value pre-set curricula in some ways since that is what the national testing is based on. 

Playshop Video

When working with some of the students in a 2^nd grade classroom on a video I found the results very interesting and opposite of what I originally  expected. I started the experience by asking a boy in the class that I thought would be very good at acting out a story. The boy is in the middle to upper range of his class and is always extremely talkative, constantly playing with toys that he keeps in his desk, and never shies. When I started with him and explained that I wanted him to create a story using the toys I had provided he seemed very skeptical. I told him to take a few minutes about to figure out what he wanted the story to be and to let me know when he was ready. He almost immediately said he was ready and played out a 15 second story. He did use some voices and accents but the story was extremely short and I could tell he wasn’t comfortable with the project.

After finishing with him, I went back into the classroom and asked a different boy and girl to come with me and try the project. When I explained it to them they seemed very excited and started working on a story together. I thought maybe by having two children work together they wouldn’t feel intimidated by the task. After the two of them agreed that they had worked out a story they began acting it out. However, the boy quickly started creating his own story. He should have saved the girls character (Woody) from falling off the cliff but instead decided to start a story with his own characters. I ended up stepping in and telling him to bring Woody back to keep the story going. Even then the two of them seemed to create a new story and were not exactly sure how to end it. After three minutes I finally told them it was ok to stop, since it seemed that they would have gone on forever.

I really enjoyed this project and I can definitely see myself using this in my classroom. I think that it would be much more beneficial if the students had more time to create a story and come up with their own characters. I think having them actually create some kind of a script or story to keep track of would be beneficial. I also wish that I had been able to let the students make the video on their own. I also liked seeing everyone else’s video in the class and it gave me more ideas on how to use this project with children. I liked how some people had their students create characters by drawing them as well as creating the background. I also thought it was interesting that the students were actors and actresses themselves in some of the videos.