Online Discussions
Guest Discussion with Mark Warschauer
on NIFL-Technology, February 5 - 23, 2001
From: "Hacker, Emily" <EHacker@fegs.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 11:52:18 -0500
Mark Warschauer, our upcoming guest, has agreed to
subscribe to the list for the two week period, Feb.
5 - Feb. 16, to give us a chance for an open-ended
discussion. He did send me three questions (below)
that he thought could serve as a framework for our
discussion, in addition to the questions that a few
of you have already suggested. I also think it would
be very helpful if everyone planning to participate
in the discussion with Mark reads one of his articles,
to get a sense of his background and approach to integrating
technology into instruction. The article I'd recommend
- because it provides a good overview and is not too
long - is "An Electronic Literacy Approach to
Network-Based Language Teaching," by Mark W.
and Heidi Shetzer, online at http://www.newtierra.com/nblt.html
* Are new information & communication technologies
(ICT) changing the goals of adult literacy education,
i.e., has what it means to be literate changed?
* How can we best make use of ICT to help reach adult
literacy goals (whether new goals or traditional goals)?
* Does ICT only come into play when considering "advanced"
literacies, or do we also need to consider ICT for
basic literacy students? And if so, how?
During the discussion period with Mark (2/5-2/16),
anyone posting messages on OTHER topics please make
sure to label the subject line of your message accurately,
so those following the discussion can stay within
the discussion thread more easily.
From: Mark Warschauer <markw@uci.edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:13:33 -0500 (EST)
Greetings, Emily Hacker had invited me to join your
list for a couple of weeks to discuss issues related
to technology and literacy (see her message below).
I just thought I'd say hello and let you know I'm
here. I would be interested in hearing about people's
thoughts, ideas, and experiences on any of the issues
mentioned below, or other related topics.
From: Tom Stuart (tstuart@wls.lib.ny.us)
Date: Tue Feb 06 2001 - 16:14:20 EST
I found the following passage near the beginning
of "An Electronic Literacy Approach to Network-Based
Language Teaching", by Heidi Shetzer & Mark
Warschauer to be provocative:
"...while previously educators considered how
to use information technology in order to teach language,
it is now incumbent to also consider how to teach
language so that learners can make effective use of
information technology. ..."
It seems to me dialogue around that premise is critical.
I'd like to hear that notion examined closely. Is
it really "Incumbent"? And what do we mean
by "effective use"? for starters. There
are some pretty fundamental means-ends and "who
decides" issues here, it seems to me.
From: Mark Warschauer (markw@uci.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 06 2001 - 16:51:15 EST
Good questions, Thomas. By the way, my approach to
this issue stemmed not from any philosophical or moral
belief, but from my own research with immigrant and
minority students in Hawai'i. Many ESL and language
teachers were operating under this concept of "Computer-Assisted
Language Learning" (CALL), i.e., the notion that
they were using computers to teach language better.
However, from the learners' point of view (based on
extensive interviews), they felt that mastery of information
and communications technology was a very important
goal in and of itself (rather than just a means for
learning language or other subject matter). Of course
that varies according to the situation, and there
may be some learners who do not consider that goal
incumbent. And, as you point out, that still leaves
undefined what "effective use" means (but
I would guess that that can't be defined outside of
specific contexts). I'd be curious what it (effective
use) means in the context that list members are teaching/working
in...
From: Nancy Hansen (sfliteracy@mcleodusa.net)
Date: Tue Feb 06 2001 - 17:26:20 EST
Welcome as a guest to the NIFL listserv, Mark Warschauer.
I administer a community-based literacy council and
am interested in a dialogue about the idea that the
technology of which you write could be the literacy
of the future.
Also,Tom Stuart brought attention to the following
provocative statement:
> I found the following passage near the beginning
of
> "An Electronic Literacy Approach to Network-Based
> Language Teaching", by Heidi Shetzer &
Mark Warschauer
> to be provocative:
>
> "...while previously educators considered
how to use
> information technology in order to teach language,
it is
> now incumbent to also consider how to teach language
> so that learners can make effective use of
> information technology. ..."
>
> It seems to me dialogue around that premise is
critical.
> I'd like to hear that notion examined closely.
Is it really
> "Incumbent"? And what do we mean by
"effective use"?
> for starters. There are some pretty fundamental
> means-ends and "who decides" issues
here, it seems
> to me.
Tom, I would liked to have you tell us what *you*
think "Incumbent" says to those of us in
the literacy field. I question whether or not the
learner has the capability to show "effective
use" of technology. Isn't this truly an issue
when we start talking about adults whose limited knowledge
of technology cannot even begin to happen if we aren't
going to even teach the basics of computer use *first*.
And you are right? Who is going to make the decision
about where and what the information highway reveals
to an adult learner? I would like to address the following
topic:
* Are new information & communication technologies
(ICT) changing the goals of adult literacy education,
i.e., has what it means to be literate changed?
Reading just the 1st 5 pages of your short 13 page
document I can already see where the problems will
lie for the illiterate elder adult of today and the
future. Short and sweet. Simplistic and plain English
certainly isn't the way this publication is written.
Jumping onto the Internet may be easier for those
who have the skills to do so ... to tap "the
electronically-stored information in the world"
which is written in such difficult to understand language
and impossible to read fonts that they cannot get
past the first paragraph and make sense of the piece.
Are we operating thinking realistically? Do we really
understand who the illiterate adult *is*?
I question whether or not the adult who is at the
lowest of low level literacy skills will see the door
to their Right to an Education close on them **again.**
I also sense that there are some providers who may
choose to turn their backs on the older learner who
just wants to be able to read to improve themselves
and increase their ability to do such tasks as read
a street name or find a business on that street. A
person doesn't need the information highway to do
that.
Are we, as educators, ready to accept that there
are many, many adults who are not even close to having
descent enough skills to dare the study of "communications
technologies" quite yet? Will we be willing to
allow them the space to grow *toward* the technology
goals or will we not? Are we bulldozers?
Yes, I believe there is a prevailing need for computer
literacy skill development -- for some adults. I believe
also that the huge world out there awaits them, but
I believe that an adult who is 45-60 years old, who
never even typed on a high school typewriter nor witnessed
the boom of computer technologies in the CLASSroom
will want and require us to help them take it one
step at a time.
You see the lap of literacy instruction in the Laubach
materials we use right now teach us to teach the learner
to "learn to read" as the first step and
then gradually with the help of the materials and
the one-to-one attention the learner receives, "read
to learn" is the next step. That concept is already
there. But it is in more simplistic terms.
I hope that the change in literacy goals that prevails
will not be to push the learner in the direction that
*we* want them to take instead of letting them *choose*.
If the learner is ready for the three broad levels
of electronic literacy skills as described (communication,
construction and research) let's be the persons to
open that opportunity up for the learner who is so
prepared. But those adults aren't any of *my* literacy
students!
I feel as though you are trying to direct this extensive
"read to learn" environment to illiterate
adults who are ill-prepared to jump into the ocean
quite so deeply. When *I* learned to swim, I went
to the shallow end of the pool. I realize that some
jumped off the deep end of that pool and thought nothing
*of* it. But we are not all alike. Nore do we all
use the same tools. Some of us drown in deeper water.
Communication for an adult with limited 0-3 grade
reading skills (which by the way, includes verbal
communications skills as well) is not going to allow
the learner to move directly to "computer-mediated
communication" as described in the "Electronic
Literacy Framework" section of your publication,
I predict.
You also wrote of learning "stylistic and sociolinguistic
features" in order to participate in a conversation.
Think of the man or woman whose memories of reactions
in an overwhelming educational environment is to withdraw
from the group, when confronted with giving an answer
to questions they weren't sure how to answer. How
do you supose this same illiterate soul, albeit now
grown to adulthood, will participate on-line? And
here they can't even see the *faces* of the conversationists
... all they see are those nasty letters flying like
crazy across the screen, too small, too long, too
many vowels, too quick .... Do you really think they
will adapt "sociolinguistic features"?
For people whose thoughts even *keep* up with their
fingertips, it may be a great tool. For those who
need to look up every other word of a short phrase
in order to even *write* it with a lead pencil they
can **erase**, this effort is not going to fare well
in a chat environment, would you agree?
Video? Audio? Yes this might make this whole possibility
plausible ... Or at least it might become a *thought*
for the adult with learning disabilities. But I do
not see the typical adult with needs for literacy
skill development who I serve being able to even survive
in what you are describing.
In another part you wrote about the collaborative
team effort of the Web writers. Footnotes ... links
... traditional texts ... "dynamic form of interaction".
Amazing. I train volunteers to teach their adult how
to write their very first grocery list. Footnoting
huh. Won't even be of interest to the above adult.
The illiterate adult will be overwhelmed and squashed
quickly by the hiarachy of intelligences they imagine
exist out there in cyberspace. They'll picture themselves
a gnat on the screen. Splat!
The question I have for you is whether there a chance
that the days of volunteerism in teaching literacy
will be over? Worse than that, is the truly illiterate
adult going to be shut out and forgotten in our drive
to strut forward today's technological advances as
THE answer to education?
I would welcome comment.
From: Mark Warschauer (markw@uci.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 06 2001 - 17:43:17 EST
Thanks for your excellent points, Nancy. I should
point out that this particular article was written
principally in regard to changing academic literacy
skills, for example for ESL students in university
courses. I welcome thoughts from you and others as
to which of the ideas are applicable in the kind of
introductory literacy courses that you teach for non-reading
adults. According to you, very little of these ideas
are applicable in that context -- and I'm in no position
to disagree with you. In other words, please don't
think that I'm trying to impose a particular model
for the kinds of learners that you teach. Let me hear
from you instead in what ways technology is (or is
not) useful in YOUR contexts....
From: Tommy B McDonell (tommy.mcdonell@nyu.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 06 2001 - 19:33:18 EST
Mark, welcome to NIFL. This is Tommy McDonell from
NYC.
I think unfortunately that how we judge a program
that integrates technology into language learning
depends as Mark says on who you are or who your program
is.
I just came from meeting with a program in NYC that
is just setting up its first small computer lab and
is looking into technology integration. This program
has taught ESL for 40 years. However its board of
directors were not pleased when the offices got computers
because they believed that they weren't teaching ESL
but computers. And many funders are the same.
I firmly believe that one reason my own non profit
did not get funded was because people thought we were
teaching computers and not ESL. Yet had I written
that we wanted money to incorporate sustained silent
reading as Krashen suggests, that might have gotten
funding.
While I believe that technology use leads to greater
self esteem, I believe that what is most important
is that people involved in classes using technology
(not just the Internet, but using computers with Microsoft
Office etc.) speak more English in these classes,
write, more and read more. This is the research I
am involved with now with Miriam Eisenstein Ebsworth
of NYU. I am however doubtful of many of the 'acclaimed'
software packages that claim this increased use of
English.
However, Mark, I wonder about what effect using the
Internet has on second language reading. I wonder
if the amount of multiple hyperlinked texts (certain
pages seem to have more worked linked than not) leads
to cognitive overload. And I wonder how in the programs
you've worked, you prepare students for the reading
they do on or over the Internet.
I also wonder how we as educators of second or foreign
language learning not only evaluate programs that
incorporate technology but decide that technology
is not always the appropriate tool.
Sorry to have rambled.....By chance will you be at
TESOL?
Thanks for being here.
From: Nancy Hansen (sfliteracy@mcleodusa.net)
Date: Wed Feb 07 2001 - 14:44:42 EST
You wrote in the last part of a sentence: Paraphrasing
here - I don't mean to "....impose a particular
model for the kinds of learners that you teach. Let
me hear from you instead in what ways technology is
(or is not) useful in YOUR contexts."
I was so glad to read the above comment, Mark. It's
a good thing that you feel this is an *option*, rather
than a "have to do" for volunteers in various
literacy efforts, because it just isn't going to fit
the truly illiterate student *I* don't think. (See
below an example of the type student a literacy council
serves.)
Another point here is the following statement about
literacy instruction: You wrote that I should understand
that the document I was reading was "...principally
in regard to changing academic literacy skills, for
example for ESL students in university courses."
How do you see this technology literacy skill development
being offered as an option when it comes to the typical
adult with low level literacy skills rather than being
at a college level for their base of knowledge?
It was really ironic. At the exact moment that your
e-mail rolled into cyberspace and entered the Inbox
in this computer, an African woman and her Tutor sat
right **here** at this computer.
This first-time New Reader had never explored the
Internet and had expressed a desire to her Tutor volunteer
for some very basic typing/computer skills. She is
on a job search since she's been laid off from her
job. She feels she can't access further vocational
job training because she has such limited reading
and computer skills.
If she is the typical ESL learner for our area, the
"communications technology" is way above
her capabilities. Here's what transpired: Since it
was the first time at this computer program for both
of these volunteers, I sat with them. They will work
independently their next session. Here's the way we
worked with the educational experience for her: The
ESL student was given three choices and she chose
to explore the Internet.
She needed assistance using the mouse for the first
time, opening the Netscape homepage and identifying
*some* of the different options (news and otherwise)
on that page as a starter. She also needed help with
our bookmarks and finding her favorite radio station's
website. (Note: "some" because this learning
experience is ongoing and will be picked up when she
returns in two weeks.)
We opened her radio station website and found five
news stories headlines consisting of 2-4 words@ from
which she could choose to read aloud. The goal was
to learn some new words as well as learn about community
issues that were on-air today. She could not read
the headlines. With a little help she read them. She
did figure out that when the arrow turned to a hand,
she could click on the blue wording below the headline
of interest. We selected one article that was read
to her.
Learners who can surf the net and locate the world
of technological communication plus the pools of knowledge
available are far more advanced than this ESL learner
I'd say. Several of our pairs come in and explore
websites at the descretion of learner and volunteer
as they set goals.
As an example last week one of our tutors brought
a talking website she'd identified and found it to
be very worthwhile. Yes. Her learner was "reading
to learn." *Some* day both of these types of
learners may gain a little more ability to "do
chat" etc, but certainly not in the immediate
future for either in my opinion.
So much for my comments. Anybody have anything different
to say?
From: Tommy B. McDonell (tbr202@nyu.edu)
Date: Wed Feb 07 2001 - 15:25:58 EST
Illiterate in English or in their own language? I
think there is a big difference between what folks
can do....
I have a feeling I'm reading these entries in reverse
order but...at LEAP beginning students did use the
computer, the Internet and a bit of word processing.
We didn't teach them to type though. They got a bit
of the learning the mouse and the parts of the computer.
They had to eventually say it to the next person...i.e.
This is the mouse, this is a monitor etc. Kind of
a computer/tpr exercise.
But when they got on the Internet, if the English
was too difficult they went to sites that had their
language to begin with. Then they went to children's
sites. They emailed people in their class or in our
evening or day program. And they got 'hooked'. It
wasn't JUST that computers and the Internet gave them
that feeling that they were doing something they know
others do, but it was fun. And every day they, the
beginners, but all of our students, spent an hour
in the day or 45 minutes in the evening using
computers, Internet, email etc.
BUT this technology was Integrated into their lessons,
they weren't used just for the reason to use technology.
A class might look at comparative and superlative
and then look up the tallest buildings in the world,
take notes, and then graphically represent that info
through Excel's wizard.
I've heard when my colleague, Janet Burroughs, and
I have spoken about this and done the lesson at conferences
such as ALT that "oh our students couldn't do
this, yours must have been....". BUT I don't
know about that. I think a lot depends on how you
incorporate the technology into the lesson.
BUT I agree that technology doesn't work for everything.
But some lessons are more fun and therefore more motivating
with technology (not just the computer and Internet).
And when motivated adults will (and kids too) spend
more time learning.
Its sad but a lot of us stop having fun in 'schools...all
the way to doctoral programs...' after 3rd grade....
Alas, LEAP closed due to funding and I miss it...AND
I don't think our students were any different than
other programs, we had all different types. But I
think our philosophy of teaching ESL was different....
From: pmcnaughton@alphaplus.ca
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 11:53:08 EST
I would like to respond to discussion about use of
computers for facilitating adult literacy and ESL
literacy instruction.
1985 - 1990 - I first started using a computer with
adult literacy students in the Canadian Arctic - southern
Baffin Island to Inuit learners functionally illiterate
at equivalent grade 0-3 levels. The greatest success
was with the lowest level student who had always fantasized
about working in an office.
Unable to get enough computer time (on our 1 computer)
we set up an old electric typewriter so she could
continue to work on her keyboarding skills between
computer sessions. She focused so much on letters
and words and getting things perfect she almost began
to absorb literacy skills like osmosis.
1990 - 1995 - I was hired to run the first computer
lab in 1990 at a school board in Ottawa, Ontario (Canada)
for adult literacy and ESL learners. The pace was
phenomenal - 20+ classes a week, all adult literacy
and ESL classes required to go for 1-2 periods a week.
(Eventually multiple computer labs were set up at
various sites.) The greatest strides I believe were
made by the adult literacy and ESL literacy students
at the lowest levels - (I taught many beginner ESL
classes filled with newcomers, mostly women aged 30-60
with no more than a dozen survival sentences in English
and no first language literacy.) THEY LOVED IT - ALMOST
UNANIMOUSLY. The gains they made in learning by working
to find individual letters to type out at first just
their name and address, and slowly individual words,
phrases and sentences they were learning in class
- well it was amazing. After more than 16 years in
adult education I can't think of anything I've done
that was more satisfying. The women (and men) would
line up to get their print out - and as their oral
skills developed they would clutch my hand and tell
me they were going to show it to their son or daughter
or husband and prove that they were learning important
things - that they were not stupid.
The most difficult students in ESL I found were those
at high academic levels, with extensive computer backgrounds
(engineers, programmers etc.) who didn't want to be
waste precious language learning time in a computer
lab. If their teacher wanted an assignment word processed
they would do it at home thank you very much and give
it to her. They didn't want to be included with other
students in their class and be taught the fundamentals
all over again. Understandably. Thus evolved more
specialized classes and options for the variety of
learners.
Now I manage a new on-line literacy site called AlphaRoute
- just launched for use in Ontario, Canada adult literacy
programs - with a comprehensive set of learner tools,
supports and curriculum including on-line curriculum,
email, café discussions, mentor supports etc.
etc. We know through our research pilots that learners
find it a) very empowering b) effective for learning
c) enables them to overcome many barriers which they
face in accessing traditional delivery programs and
the list goes on and on. If anyone would like to see
the research report or a demo of the site please go
to http://alphaplus.ca and click on "AlphaRoute"
on the sidebar. We launched the English and French
AlphaRoute sites this past September and next September
we will be launching the Native AlphaRoute and Deaf
AlphaRoute site.
I'd love to hear what you think. You can email me
directly at
pmcnaughton@alphaplus.ca
From: O'Connor, Susan (S.Oconnor@BrooklynPublicLibrary.org)
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 12:31:41 EST
Good afternoon:
I would like to Echo the above findings. At the Brooklyn
Public Library Literacy Program we use state of the
art technology with adult new readers and writers.
Our 700 adult students range from non-readers to about
a fifth grade reading level. Literacy is about freeing
communication skills and the stories that are within
us and the ability to share with others. We have found
that a project based curriculum that focuses on writing
and reading has successfully been launched by a thorough
integration of technology into the process. Adult
new readers are immediately given computer appointments.
Fully 90% of the 700 students regularly use technology.
In each of the six centers, students, tutors and staff
have access to an array of technological resouces
which includes IMACs and G3's networked to T1 lines
that provide instant access to the Internt, on-line
library catalogues and access to databases, TV, VCR,
monitors, cassette players, digital cameras, projectors,
enhanced software, video and audio collections. We
have published a guide to Technology Use, it is called
the Technology Toolkit and has tried and true lesson
plans to use with adult new readers. In the last fiscal
year, student computer use was 19,909 hours which
exceeded our projections by 20%. Technology is for
everyone and everyone can use it. That is our message.
From: Bennett, Gina (BENNETT@cotr.bc.ca)
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 15:42:53 EST
I, too, would just like to confirm Pauline's message
about the value of using computer technology for adult
literacy learners. My institution -- College of the
Rockies in Cranbrook, BC (Canada) -- was one of the
research pilot sites mentioned in Pauline's note below.
I can testify that many of the students involved in
our pilot had very low literacy levels (i.e. low in
both text literacy & computer literacy). They
LOVED the alpharoute project and were, indeed, empowered
as a result of their participation (Hey,
Pauline; any word on when we can get AlphaRoute out
here in BC???)
As a computer literacy instructor, I have a number
of students with disabilities (both mental & physical)
plus some ESL students, elderly students, and others
who never thought that the computer could become a
part of their lifelong learning. Our computer class
is very much a social environment & the learners
soon see the computer as a powerful communication
tool. In my experience working with this special learner
audience, so much depends on the instructor's enthusiasm,
patience, and knowledge of the incredible wealth of
resources available for low literacy learners.
From: Eileen Trainor (et02@swt.edu)
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 18:49:38 EST
I agree. Some of us have learning differences. In
addition, the generations younger than the boomers
are largely visual learners due to the advent of TV
and video.
When using a computer, you are creating, inputing,
and viewing--I think that is a major reason it works.
The more ways we can engage learners, the better.
Many students may not speak English well, but they
know they want to use the computer.
I sometimes encounter more resistance from the teachers
than from the students.
These are my views and I am no expert.
From: Tommy B McDonell (tommy.mcdonell@nyu.edu)
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 19:42:15 EST
I agree with your comment about I sometimes encounter
more resistance from the teachers. At technology conferences,
such as the Adult Literacy and Technology Conference
that Emily and I attended last year, there are the
believers. Occasionally at TESOL there are people
that do integrate tech in the classroom. But in between
these groups are the "oh my students could never
do that". I'm never sure if people think that
because they can't do it or if they think their students
aren't 'smart'. I'd prefer to think the former.
From: fzparkin@wanadoo.es
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 13:33:19 EST
I think Nancy's posting on the issue of "incumbency"
posed an interesting point of view, but I would like
to tell you about something I have observed in one
of the branches of the Queensborough Public Library
in New York City, which provides service to immigrants
from at least thirty different countries. It is usual
to see a new person, accompanied by a friend who already
knows his way, sign up for twenty minutes on one of
the computers. He sees for the first time how to open
a hotmail account and how to send an e mail message
to family and friends back home.... I think that the
motivation produced by this first encounter is enough
to spark an interest in further and broader use of
the computer----- Baby steps become bigger steps in
time....
From: Tommy B. McDonell (tbr202@nyu.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 16:47:28 EST
Hi. At Marymount and other places BB is used for
both online courses where there is only one or no
ftf meeting and as an auxillary to regular classes.
My concern with this is though and it isn't just about
BB that we seem as educators to only think about online
courses through the Internet or computer conferencing.
It is as if it is the only technology that people
think about. And while online courses are good for
students whose schedules don't fit traditional schools
or for classes not traditionally taught in a program,
I'm not sure that technology works for all classes.
I personally am finding it difficult to come up with
assessing technology in language learning. Almost
all the research I read is qualitative and a large
part of the qualitative studies I read (I am not including
your work in this problem, Mark, but I can't quote
ONLY you in my dissertation work!) a large part of
is anecdotal.
I think we need to do more real research into what
technologies we are using and why we use them and
if there are times when we would be better of using
something else.
Mind you, alas, I'm not smart enough to figure out
how to do that. I'm still trying to come up with my
question for a doctoral thesis methodology!
Ideas?
From: Steve Rainey (srainey@mtnstatesgroup.org)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 17:42:00 EST
As a ESL teacher in a program for adult refugees
in Boise, Idaho, I find this topic fasinating. Several
years ago I became excited about CALL and struggled
to get a computer lab incorporated into our program.
What has become really exciting are the unexpected
benefits of our computer program. What started out
as an attempt to supplement traditional literacy skills
turned completely around in many cases. The computer
has become the true start of not only literacy skills,
but language acquisition overall. In our program,
the computer seems to provide the kind of non threatening
environment that is helpful to all learners, but really
essential to survivors of trauma. Our approach to
the computer lab is different from many programs in
that it is not at all a replacement for the 'listening
lab'. It is its own learning environment, to which
the classroom is as much the support vehicle as the
lab is for the classroom. The best/most difficult
step for us was just that - to rid ourselves of the
preconception that the computer 'lab' was just the
next step in 'language labs', and to allow it the
identity it needs in the 'information age'.
From: Mark Warschauer (markw@uci.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 20:23:56 EST
Thanks for your comments, Steve. Could you elaborate
more? What sort of activities do you carry out there
that provide such a motivating and non-threatening
environment? What is the computer lab's identity?
From: Tommy B. McDonell (tbr202@nyu.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 20:34:35 EST
Also, how is this lab set up? Tommy
From: KathleenBombach@aol.com
Date: Mon Feb 12 2001 - 21:57:51 EST
I think you have hit on several issues in education
right now (not just adult education). One is adherence
to a strict linear interpretation of scope and sequence
(you cannot learn 'a' until you learn 'b' and 'c')
that leads to the creation of artificial barriers
to learning and progressing. It is based in the concept
of tabula rasa and in a misunderstanding of how we
learn. Learners cannot touch a computer until they
learn ABC--they're not ready for it.
The next is the fear that teachers who are not computer
users have of computers, which reflects more than
just lack of professional development. How many of
you learned everything you know about computers and
the Internet from classes? Probably none (you may
have started in a class, but you then became largely
self-taught, yes?). I myself had a 20 minute demonstration
of word processing eight years ago, and I took it
from there.
There is also a fear on the part of some that they
will become obsolete as teachers, replaced by computers.
Put in other words, I think it is a gut fear that
the learners will no longer need the teacher if the
learner can start directing and controlling his or
her own learning through technology. We all think
we want independent learners in control of their own
learning, but subconsciously we are afraid. Through
technology, learners can discover what they want to
learn in fields in which we have no knowledge-based
superiority. The hegemonic position of the teacher
is changed. We can no longer control the definition
of what learners can learn and cannot learn ('Are
ready to learn' or 'need to learn.')
And there is truth to that. When I want to learn
new software, I pick up a book and learn by doing.
When I want to learn about disease microbiology I
do an Internet search. In the past, I would have enrolled
in a class at the university and paid tuition. When
my son brings home a textbook chart of the atomic
table, I go online and find him one that has a dozen
additional elements that his teacher had never heard
of.
Do we fear that our learners will be able to do the
same thing when we say they are not ready for computers?
From: rosie (rmaum@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Feb 06 2001 - 16:22:33 EST
What an honor to have you with us, Dr. Warschauer!!!
I would be interested in discussing issues of learning/teaching
ESL over the Internet, and particularly the sociocultural
impact that such an approach/medium/literacy has on
both learners and instructors. I think it would be
interesting to tackle also the issue of how does the
learner-teacher relation change (or does it?) when
they interact over the cyberspace. Do immigrants'
and refugees' values and attitudes who learn English
over the Internet change? Do instructors' values and
attitudes toward their learners change? The focus
would be on learners and instructors in non-academic
adult education programs.
Thank you!
From: Mark Warschauer (markw@uci.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 06 2001 - 17:47:37 EST
Hi Rosie. My own research on this has been mostly
focuses in academic units or with learners at large.
I've found disparate results. It seems that Internet
use tends to foster more autonomy and control among
learners, but it depends a great deal on the teacher's
own approach. I would be interested from those of
you who have taught in non-academic adult education
programs as to what you've observed.
ps A couple of articles where I talk much more about
teacher-student relations are found at...
http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/heterotopias.html
http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/online.html
From: Tommy B. McDonell (tbr202@nyu.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 12:16:58 EST
Mark, I have some questions for you that are different
from those we have been discussing in literacy. I
will list them below.
I am interested in what you think about those colleges
and universities who have jumped onto the ed tech
bandwagon to teach through blackboard.com and or webct.
My college is using BB but I find that while their
intentions are the very best I worry about both the
evaluation of this use and about the digital divide.
This brings me to a second question. On other boards
I am on (listservs) the question is how to evaluate
technology. I have a fear that people tend to evaluate
how students (esp college and adults) use the technology
rather than produce language.
I wondered if you might address assessment.
From: Mark Warschauer (markw@uci.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 12:31:28 EST
Tommy, it's hard for me to answer your first question,
since I'm not sure of the context. Are these being
used as supplements to regular courses? Are they being
used for special online courses? Who are the target
audiences? Are you concerned that by offering more
learning opportunities online the college is excluding
those who don't have home Internet access?
As for the second question, yes, I agree with you
that the most important evaluation has to do with
learning. This can be done in all the conventional
ways, plus the online component also provides a lot
of new opportunities for evaluation. The permanent
record of communications provides excellent data for
evaluation, especially of language use and writing.
Anyway, there are lots of kinds of assessment, for
different purposes, but I do agree with you that the
impact on learning has to be kept at the forefront.
Thoughts?
From: Hacker, Emily (EHacker@fegs.org)
Date: Wed Feb 14 2001 - 10:12:49 EST
Hi All:
This discussion has been great. Let's keep it going
for Mark's last two days with us. If you've been saving
up any questions for Mark, please ask them by Friday.
In the meantime, below are a list of ESOL web sites
that a subscriber asked me to share with you. They
were originally posted on the CTCNet (Community Technology
Centers' Network) National Discussion List.
Mark, how do you select and evaluate web sites for
ESOL learners? Can you give us an example of one or
two web sites that you recommend for use with language
learners? What specifically makes these sites work,
in your opinion? Can you give us an example of how
you would use the site(s) with learners?
Thanks.
http://www.englishpage.com
They have an on-line newsletter,grammar review and
15 English-foreign language dictionaries. (including
Spanish, Japanese, Chinese and Arabic)
http://www.study.com
English for the Internet Homepage. they have an newsletter,
English, listening and speaking. Grammar and writing,
plus a resource page.
http://www.rong-chang.com
the ESL Homepage this includes and Encarta dictionary
where you can click to hear pronunciations.
http://www.linguistic-funland.com/k-12.html
the Linguistic Funland web page they have a few ESL
sites
http://www.edutel.org
the "Community Net" has English and Spanish
versions of their webpages for lessons in earth sciences
etc.
http://www.englishday.com
Learn English-have fun!!!! this website has wordgames
like crosswords, hangman, ESL wordsoup and English
tests.
http://www.freeEnglish.com
28 lessons in English including grammar,spelling,reading,listening
and vocabulary. A program called English Pro tutorial.
http://www.elfs.com
English Learning Funsite-free (the website has 3 cute
elves on the homepage)
From: Mark Warschauer (markw@uci.edu)
Date: Thu Feb 15 2001 - 16:02:30 EST
I would like to thank, Emily for having given me
the opportunity to join in your discussions the last
couple of weeks. It's been a very good learning experience
for me.
I know that this forum and discussion is ongoing,
but I would like to raise some conclusions based on
the last couple of week's discussion, and then suggest
a few resources.
One valuable lesson is that there is not a single
construct of "literacy" but that there are
many literacies, i.e., many different types of reading,
writing, and interpreting that involve different genres,
styles, media, formats, etc.
A second lesson, closely related to the above, is
that literacy instruction must correspond to the needs
of learners, i.e., we should strive to teach the kinds
of literacies that particular learners need. This
is especially important regarding the use of new technologies.
New technologies can be valuable for many learners,
but not necessarily for all. Excellent examples were
brought up of elderly non-readers who may have very
different priorities than learning how to surf the
web.
A third lesson is that literacy is a moving target,
depending in part on what's deemed valuable in particular
societies. New information and communication technologies
are expanding the requirements of literacy, both for
the workplace and for full partication in civic life.
Skills such as finding and interpreting online information,
skimming and scanning on computer, or communicating
via email, are important new literacies that many
learners will value and need.
A fourth lesson is that, for many learners, the integration
of technology can be a highly motivating experience,
especially when it strengthens learners own autonomy.
Examples were given of project-based learning that
allow learners to pursue their own interests and concerns
while learning new language and technology skills.
A fifth lesson is that integration of technology
can be difficult and demanding, and depends a lot
on teacher preparation. Teachers needs a lot of support
and preparation to be able to integrate technology
well, and that this kind of support and preparation
should be developed as part of a successful program.
As for further resources, let me suggest a few:
(1) The Brooklyn Public Literacy Program has put
together an excellent Technology Toolkit. I understand
that it will soon be available on ERIC. (For further
information, contact list member
Susan O'Conner <S.Oconnor@BrooklynPublicLibrary.org>.
(2) Many of you might already be familiar with Susan
Gaer's Website with lists of technology-based projects
used with adult ESOL learners
(http://www.otan.dni.us/webfarm/emailproject/email.htm)
(3) You might also be familiar with David Rosen's
list of online resources for Adult Literacy, Basic
Education, and ESOL
(http://www2.wgbh.org/mbcweis/ltc/alri/LiteracyList.html).
(4) Those working with ESOL learners in school settings
might find of interest my new co-authored book, Internet
for English Teaching, available from TESOL Publications
(http://www.tesol.org)
(5) I also edit an email news service called Papyrus
News where I send out a few messages a week on topics
I'm interested in, which include, among other things,
the impact of new technologies on language, literacy,
and education. Further info at
<http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/papyrus-news.html>
Mark Warschauer
Department of Education, University of California,
Irvine
markw@uci.edu, http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw
From: Tommy B McDonell (tommy.mcdonell@nyu.edu)
Date: Thu Feb 15 2001 - 16:50:31 EST
I'm sure everyone is like me, Thanks Mark and Emily!!!!
From: Mark Warschauer (markw@uci.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 16 2001 - 14:42:56 EST
(I sent this yesterday but I was told there was a
problem with the server, so I'm resending--excuse
me if anyone receives it twice.)
Those are difficult questions, Emily, because ESOL
learners is such a broad category, and there are also
such a great variety of teaching situations represented
in this particular list community (library tutoring,
formal adult classes, etc.)
Most of the sites that I've used are not suitable
for non-readers and very limited readers. If others
have suggestions in that regard, they can pass them
on.
I think sites can only be selected with particular
goals in mind. For example, if you want your students
to have an opportunity to communicate with other learners
around the world, then's Dave's ESL Cafe (http://eslcafe.com)
is a good site for its chat and discussion forums.
(You could ask a learner to participate in a discussion
forum and report back about it.) If you want your
students to have experience searching, browsing, and
skimming through a site to get particular kinds of
information, then the Internet Movie Data Base (http://imdb.com)
can be a good location (again, for inermediate+ readers).
(You could ask learners to search for information
on their own favorite movies, or to complete a "scavenger
hunt" where they gather information about particular
movies.)
One good site for ESOL teachers is NETEACH-L (http://www.ilc.cuhk.edu.hk/english/neteach/main.html)
-- linked to a listserv discussion of ESL teachers
discussing the Internet.
From: Hacker, Emily (EHacker@fegs.org)
Date: Fri Feb 16 2001 - 16:24:57 EST
Hello Mark:
On behalf of the NIFL Technology and Literacy Discussion
List, I want to thank you for your participation in
our discussion over the past two weeks. Several important
issues came up which I imagine will continue to be
discussed on the list for some time. The issue of
introducing computers to beginning readers and language
learners - when and how - is a key issue, as you discovered.
The contributions that you and several list subscribers
made on that subject have been very valuable. I hope
you will consider visiting again sometime and will
consider the Technology List to be a resource that
you can use in your teaching and research.
|
