Wondering how to use technology in the classroom?

Check out this great site with links to hundreds of ideas

http://www.avatargeneration.com/2012/09/pinterest-boards-in-educational-technology/

Want to know more on using computers with ESL students?

The Internet TSL Journal

Teaching ESL Reading Using Computers

iteslj.org/Techniques/AlKahtani-ComputerReading/

Using Technology to Help ESL/EFL Students Develop Language Skills

iteslj.org/Articles/Ybarra-Technology.html

Review of the article: Implementing Language Acquisition in Classrooms

Introduction

‘Implementing Language Acquisition in Classrooms’ was written by Richard P. Carrigan a former administrator, in English Language Learning, at Milo Adventist Academy based in Oregan.  In this article, written in two thousand and nine, Carrigan outlines a number of ways that ‘English as a Second Language’ (ESL) students acquire language.  While his ideas are very relevant he appears to be unaware of the benefits technology, specifically the use of computers.

 Carrigan

Overview

Carrigan provides the reader with a number of teaching methodologies to support the learning of ESL children in the classroom.  He introduces: the idea of language absorption, fluency before accuracy, the order of language acquisition skills and integrating student interests in to lesson planning.  Carrigan advises teachers to provide safe learning environments and be aware of student’s feelings.  Finally he warns against judging ability by language output and stereotyping the ESL child.

Strengths and Weakness of Implementing Language Acquisition in Classrooms

Carrigan article introduces a number of ideas relevant to the teaching of ESL children.  He stresses the importance of first knowing English through listening.  He refers to this as language ‘absorption’.  Carrigan continues by introducing a number of methodologies for ESL teachers.  He outlines the importance of communication based classrooms that focus on expression of language rather than accuracy. Carrigan presents the concept of ‘language in language out’ teaching that “provides opportunities for learners to develop listening skills before reading, reading skills before writing and writing before speaking” (Carrigan, 2009, p2).  He encourages the use of materials that are at an appropriate level and of interest to the learner.  Teachers are urged to create safe places of learning where students feel free to try without fear of failure (Carrigan, 2009, p3).  Carrigan builds an awareness of the ESL student’s emotional needs that begin with excitement and soon give way to despair and frustration. Teachers are further warned to be aware of their body language and general comments and to avoid stereotyping.

While Carrigan has raised some relevant and very useful ideas it is surprising that he has omitted the potential of Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI) with ESL students (Ybarra & Green, 2003, p1).  Computers have been shown to motivate and “maintain learner focus, stimulate problem solving, anchor discourse, and encourage learner directed talk and action” (Meskill, 2005, p55).  In short, they are an excellent resource for encouraging verbal exchange.  Ybarra and Green (2003) note the varied verbal interactions between ESL students using computers, these include: making commands, sharing opinions, suggestions, asking questions and giving responses (p2).  Computers may provide immediate feedback, added practise, increased interaction with texts and improved comprehension (Ybarra & Green, 2003, p3).

Conclusion

Carrigan’s article is a useful resource for creating an awareness of ESL methodologies and the needs of the ESL student.  However, it is important that teachers acquire a variety of teaching methodologies and remain at the forefront of teaching innovations and research.  The use of computers in education and their benefits to ESL learning must not be ignored.

References

Carrigan, R. P. (2009). Implementing Language Acquisition in Classrooms. The Education Digest, 75(4), 57-61 [Electronic version]. Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com.databases.avondale.edu.au/docview/21

Meskill, C. (2005). Triadic Scaffolds: Tools for Teaching English Language Learners with Computers. Language Learning and Technology [Electronic version]. Retrieved from: http://II.msu.edu/vol9num1/meskill/

Ybarra, R., Green, T. (2003). Using Technology to Help ESL/EFL Students to Develop Language Skills. The Internet TESL Journal, 9(3), [Electronic version]. Retrieved from: iteslj.org/Articles/Ybarra-Technology.html

    

       

Access Strategies For Computing

The provision of computers is no longer an option; it is a necessity.  Stager states, “We must respect the role they can play in children’s lives and develop ways to maximize the potential of technology” (Stager, 2005, p2).  Therefore, schools must evaluate the technology available to them and its potential for maximising access for all students.  Options include: Interactive whiteboards, classroom performance systems, stand-alone computers, computer banks, computer suites, laptop trollies and one-to-one laptops. 

Interactive Whiteboards (IW) and Classroom Performance systems (CPS) are two alternatives for providing technology access in the classroom.  Whiteboards may engage students in learning and enhance the learning experience; provided they are used as interactive whiteboards and not just as another form of chalkboard.  A creative teacher might also plan small group activities that involve the use of the interactive whiteboard.  Stager warns against using an interactive whiteboard to “reinforce the dominance of the front of the room and omniscience of the teacher” (Stager, 2006, p5).  Classroom Performance Systems while novel are limiting.  They do little to encourage children to embrace computer technology (Stager, 2006, p5).

One or two computers in a classroom may provide limited access to technology.  Computer usage would need to be carefully scheduled, perhaps including break times, to allow for maximum exposure and equity for all children (Gahala, 2001,  p2).  One or two computers, while useful, are not the ideal.  With thirty children in the average Primary Classroom, a long time would pass between rotations even if the children worked in pairs.  Small group instruction would be difficult with six children crowded around a small screen.  Opening the classroom for extended computer use would mean extra duties for the teacher.  Clearly, if it is within the school budget, computer banks within the classroom would be more suitable.

Computer banks of six to eight computers would have a greater impact, providing access for a larger number of children at one time.  Computer banks enable the teacher to plan for rotating small group activities allowing children to experience technology on a more regular basis and perhaps for a longer period of time (Strategies for Allocating Computers, 2012).  With several children working at the same task the students may support each other when difficulties arise.  Computer banks while a better alternative to single computers have their disadvantages.  Classrooms with thirty children have limited space and wiring for computers is expensive.  Teachers also need to be proficient with computer applications to ensure that groups are able to work independently.

Computers that are set up within a separate area such as the library, a lab or suite are a further option for computer access.  Wiring of one area is a cheaper option to a number of classrooms over a large area.  Labs may provide access to all students before and after school and at lunchtime, however, this would again mean extra duties for teachers.  Having the computers in one area may also be a disadvantage as staff may not feel the need to integrate computers into their class curriculums.  Gahala states that using computers in a lab “may be a barrier to using them on a continual basis as a part of the curriculum” (2001, p2). 

Laptop computers in either mobile trollies or as one-to-one computers are the ideal.  Mobile laptop trolleys may be used to store and recharge the laptops when not in use.  Laptops are easily transported into a variety of settings and may be used for a small group or whole class depending on the activity (Stager, 1998, p1).   Laptops take up less space and can be stored in an area away from the classroom (Gahala, 2001, p2).  They are a “cost effective alternative to building computer labs, buying special furniture and installing costly wiring” (Stager, 1998, p1).  Furthermore they increase student engagement and alleviate behaviour problems associated with more traditional teaching styles (Hu, 2007, p3, Bustamante, 2007, p3).  Laptops, however, are an expensive set of equipment and while portable laptop trollies may suit some schools the terrain in others may make them difficult to manoeuvre.  Laptops that remain only in the school domain do not allow children the time to explore and are not able to be utilised for homework. 

For maximum access to computers students require one-to-one laptops that travel everywhere with them and are not bound to the confines of the school.   “These computers need to be the students’ constant companions, as accessible, as ever-ready, as a carpenter’s hammer” (Barker, 2007, p1).  Individual laptops become an extension of the child enabling him/her to explore, create, collect and collaborate (Stager, 1998, p1, Stager, 2003, p1).  Knowing that students have one-to-one access allows teachers the freedom to plan the curriculum using technology.  With laptops learning may extend beyond school hours and technology is easily integrated into homework tasks.  Maintenance and repairs may be costly and this would need to be factored into the school budget.  Prior to introduction adequate fire walls and policies on acceptable use would need to be in place to ensure the safety of the children.

 

Although one-to-one laptops are the best solution for high access unfortunately the monetary cost of technology and its continual maintenance makes the one-to-one program beyond the reach of many schools.  A school would do well to consider an incremental roll out of banks of six laptops starting with the classrooms of teachers who are enthusiastic about technology.  Laptops could be linked to a server and wireless access points set up around the school to enable internet access in all areas.   Teacher and student files may be stored on the server allowing for greater storage.  During the incremental roll out a plan should also be formulated for the future introduction of one-to-one laptops and ongoing staff training.    

References

Barker, G. (2007, September 13). Logging into the laptop revolution, Sydney Morning Herald [Electronic version]. Retrieved from www.smh.com.au/small-business/logging-into-the-laptop-revolution-20090619-cptx.html

Bustamante, C. (2007, May 4). Laptop program missing keys. The Press Enterprise [Electronic version]. Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: Laptop_program_missing_keys (3)

Gahala, J. (2001). Critical Issue: Promoting Technology Use in Schools. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory [Electronic version]. Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: Critical_Issue_Promoting_Technology_Use_in_Schools (2)

Hu, W. (2007, May 4). Seeing No Progress, Some Schools Drop Laptops. The New York Times [Electronic version]. Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: Seeing_No_Progress_Some_Schools_Drop_Laptops_-_New_York_Times (2)

Stager, G. S. (1998). Laptops and Learning Can laptop computers put the “C” (for constructionism) in Learning? Gary S. Stager Support for Progressive Educators [Electronic version]. Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: Laptops_and_Learning (2)

Stager, G. S. (2003). School Laptops - Reinventing the Slate. Gary S. Stager Support for Progressive Educators [Electronic version]. Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: Reinventing_the_Slate (3)

Stager, G. S. (2005). The High Cost of Incrementalism in Educational Technology Implementation. (World Conference on Computers in Education, Stellenbosch, South Africa) (Electronic version). Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: incrementalism (2)

Stager, G. S. (2006) Has Educational Computing Jumped the Shark? (ACEC 2006 – Cairns Australia – October 2, 2006) [Electronic version]. Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: ACEC_2006_Paper_-_Gary_Stager (2)

Strategies for Allocating Computers [Electronic version]. (2012). Retrieved from Avondale College Moodle, EDUC32400, Issues in Educational Computing: Strategies_for_Allocating_Computers (2)