Reading, Writing, and Technology: A Healthy Mix in the Social Studies Curriculum
| Abstract In this article, I describe a project that integrated technology into the social studies curriculum by having 9- and 10-year-old students complete Internet-based lessons on each region of the United States. In addition, the students used presentation software to create reports, which they shared with their parents. I discuss what was learned about how reading, writing, and language were used by students as they moved through these activities. Suggestions are offered for those who may wish to undertake a similar project. | Related Postings from the Archives
|
Introduction
Computer and Internet technologies are changing what it means to be literate (Leu, 1997, online document). Because of technology, the way in which readers interact with print has changed, as has the construction of meaning in both reading and writing (El-Hindi, 1998, online document).
Students today must know how to use technology when writing and creating projects that show relationships among pieces of information (Labbo, Reinking, & McKenna, 1998; Leu, 1997).Word-processing programs allow the writer to view the emerging text as malleable (Labbo & Kuhn, 1998): it can be cut, pasted, copied, and deleted with the stroke of a key. The ease with which revisions can be made fosters recursive movement between composing and editing, which may help the writer process ideas (Labbo, 1996). Teachers cannot expect children to move through the stages of the writing process sequentially when using word-processing software. They must accommodate the ways in which the writing process is affected by technology (Baker, & Kinzer, 1998).
To prepare children for our globally competitive society, teachers must provide opportunities for them to use technology while working together to access information, applying information in problem solving, and sharing their solutions (Leu, 2000, online document). Students must become critical consumers of information, and learn to assemble that information in order to create a coherent product. The language children use in their social interactions during collaborative work assists them in developing this more sophisticated thinking (El-Hindi, 1998).
The Internet provides an invaluable source of information. Although its multimedia, nonlinear nature makes considerable demands on the reader, it provides great opportunity for learning as well. One of the most beneficial features of the Internet is that, if used effectively, it can provide depth and context for learning in most subject areas (Coulter, Feldman, & Konold, 2000). The Internet allows the reader to engage in inquiry by exploring nearly unlimited resources. Textbooks are often outdated, but website resources are often current and updated frequently. With the Internet, instruction can become less teacher centered as children’s curiosity drives their learning (El-Hindi, 1998; Henriquez & Riconscente, 1998). All of this makes the Internet particularly suitable for use in the social studies curriculum (Ehman & Glenn, 1991).
For technology to be effectively integrated into any curricular area, the teacher must use great judgment in combining technical know-how with an understanding of the prescribed curriculum and of the students’ knowledge and skills. A recent study found that only approximately one-third of teachers in the United States involves students in using technology to conduct research, solve problems, analyze data, or produce multimedia projects (National Center for Education Statistics, 2000, online document). A majority of the teachers surveyed also reported that it is difficult for them to find websites that meet their classroom needs, and that they do not have time to preview sites or to use software in class. Teachers stated that when they did use the Internet, it was to provide a break from normal classroom activities, to conduct research and find reference information, and to provide interesting opportunities for the students.
Jumping In
The project described in this article attempted to integrate technology into the social studies curriculum in meaningful ways and to explore how reading and writing skills are used by students as they interact with texts created with computer and Internet technologies. It took place in a fourth-grade classroom in an elementary school in the midwest region of the United States. The school has a close working relationship with the Department of Elementary Education at the nearby Ball State University, in Muncie, Indiana, USA. The 25 nine- and ten-year-old children in Mrs. Kelly’s class represented a variety of income levels, cultural groups, ability levels, and understandings of literacy skills and strategies. The project team consisted of myself (a professor at Ball State), Mrs. Kelly, and Sally, an undergraduate student at Ball State who was working on a fellowship.
Because of my interest in how technology affects readers and writers, I had applied for and obtained a small grant to work with one teacher on integrating technology into the curriculum. Mrs. Kelly volunteered to participate in the project because she was interested in discovering how technology might fit into her program. We met several times during the summer vacation to discuss which curricular area would be our focus, ultimately selecting social studies because we believed the structure and content covered in fourth grade -- regions of the United States -- would allow us to create learning experiences that would take optimum advantage of technology.
We began the next phase of planning by reviewing the scope and sequence of the social studies textbook and discussing accountability issues. Mrs. Kelly felt responsible for ensuring that her students gained sufficient information to pass the textbook’s unit tests, so we had to keep this in mind as we planned activities. I also perused the website provided by the textbook publisher but found it to be woefully inadequate in providing links to Internet resources related to the topics covered in the text.
Next, Sally (the undergraduate student, who had an extensive background in technology), Mrs. Kelly, and I brainstormed ideas that involved using technology to facilitate learning about the regions of the United States. We decided to pursue two of these:
According to the originators of the strategy, a WebQuest is an inquiry-oriented activity in which most or all of the information used by learners is drawn from the World Wide Web. WebQuests are designed to use learners’ time well, to focus on applying information rather than looking for it, and to support learners’ thinking at the levels of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (Dodge, 1997, online document). As a teacher designs a WebQuest, she or he sorts through websites, targeting those that are appropriate for students in terms of accuracy of information, clarity, and reading level. Students are then guided to these sites during the course of the quest.
Sally and I set to work creating the WebQuests for the U.S. regions; the results can be found on webpages at the Ball State University site. We wanted to use Internet resources to broaden students’ knowledge of each region beyond what they would gain from reading their textbook, though we adhered to a framework similar to one that Mrs. Kelly was using to guide her movement through the text. Each WebQuest would focus on the people and culture, geography, weather and climate, and natural resources of each region. In identifying the Internet destinations that would be used on the WebQuest, Sally and I took into consideration the clarity and reliability of information presented and also the readability level of the text, the size of the fonts, the interactivity features, and the graphic appeal of each site. To make time for the WebQuests, Mrs. Kelly planned to reduce substantially the number of textbook-related activities she would assign in addition to the prescribed readings.
Past experience with Internet activities had taught us that we would need to make the children accountable for retrieving information when they reached each Internet destination, so we developed an Explorer’s Journals in which children could makes notes about and respond to what they found at each Internet site. We wanted the students to have some choice in which sites they visited, so we made the response modes generic enough to accommodate the information found at the various sites available on the quest. Students responded by writing answers to questions, drawing, completing mathematical calculations (for example, to find differences in temperatures in the weather and climate sections), and by making graphic organizers.
After the first WebQuest was designed and Mrs. Kelly had covered the material for that region in the textbook, we gathered the children in the computer lab and gave them oral directions on how to complete the activity. Mrs. Kelly paired the children up so that there were two children at each computer, with each partnership initially being boy-girl. As soon as the children began to work, however, there were battles for control of the mouse, with the boy in each pair usually winning. We then made a change so that each student could work independently at a computer.
By the time we were ready for the second WebQuest, we had used grant money to purchase a data projector. This made introducing the second and subsequent WebQuests much more effective. The projector allowed us to gather the children on the floor, away from the computers, and to project images of the WebQuest onto a screen they could all readily see. Sally was able to preview the activity and show students where to find information and how to record their findings in their Explorer’s Journals before they moved to the computers to begin working on their own.
After work on the WebQuests was rolling along, we began to plan for the PowerPoint presentations. Mrs. Kelly divided the class into five groups of five students each, one for each region of the United States covered in the textbook. In each group, each student was responsible for preparing a PowerPoint slide around one of the following subtopics:
To help them get started, I talked with the children about how to skim through their textbook chapters and look for key words related to their respective topics. We discussed how to use the table of contents to narrow the search for information, and how to use headings and subheadings, bold print, margin notes, and graphics to get ideas for key words. We gave the children index cards on which to write several key words that they would then use in Internet searches for more information related to their topics.
During the next computer lab session, we taught a lesson on how to use a search engine. We prepared a simple webpage (see Figure 1) with links to the child-safe search engines Yahooligans, Ask Jeeves Kids, and KidsClick! We showed students how to use the key words on their cards and how to use a subject guide. We asked them to find four pieces of important information about their topic from the websites they visited, and to copy each piece of information on a separate index card.
Next, using the data projector, we presented a very short lesson on how to design a PowerPoint slide (see Figure 2 for an example). We asked students to agree on a presentation template with the other members of their group, so that all the slides for one region would have a cohesive look. We also insisted that the students put their textual information onto their slides before they became immersed in selecting graphics, transitions, and sound. Students then needed a great deal of guidance in determining what to type as the key words that would serve as their bullet points on their slide. For each bullet point, they were to summarize the information they recorded on their index cards, and this proved to be one of the most difficult tasks in the project (I offer some advice on the topic of summarizing later in the article). They were also to type the complete information on the note page, which would provide the text they would read during the oral presentation of their information.
 |
|
Finally, we taught students how to use the software’s features to spell-check their presentations and add graphics, sound, and transitions. Once all the slides were completed, we took the student groups in turn to the computer lab, where they could rehearse telling their information as their slides were projected on the screen.
The project ended with a parents’ night, at which the students gave their presentations and refreshments were served. Sally, Mrs. Kelly, and I gave an overview of the project and described to parents what reading, writing, speaking, and technology skills were learned and used while the students completed the activity. Parents were overwhelmingly impressed with what the students had created. They were thrilled that their children were having opportunities to use technology in exciting ways that were enhancing their learning. We posted the PowerPoint presentations on the Ball State University Web server, so parents and students could access them and share them with others.
What Did We Learn?
In describing the outcomes of the project, I focus primarily on literacy. Although there were many outcomes related to technology use, I see technology only as a tool -- that is, the technology allowed for interesting, exciting learning to occur, but I was interested in looking at how the technology influenced how the students read, wrote, and used language.
About Reading
We learned that if a child cannot read well, that lack of skill is intensified when he or she tries to obtain and process information from the Internet. Webpage developers do not seem to take developing young readers into account. Font sizes, colors, and types, the spacing between words, density of text, background graphics and colors, and animated graphics all challenge the less proficient reader. Even when we tried to find sites that were considerate of children, the text was often hard to decipher for many of Mrs. Kelly’s students. Interestingly, however, the children were so motivated by the opportunity to use the technology that they often persevered in decoding text and constructing meaning, beyond what they seemed willing to do when reading from their textbook. When students encountered difficulty reading the information on a webpage, locating information for their journals, or just with navigation, they raised their hands and one of the adults in the room would assist them. It was during these one-on-one help sessions that we realized the causes of the difficulties.
On the other hand, these same webpage characteristics that were challenging for poor readers were interesting to children who possessed exceptional reading abilities. What they read and viewed excited them, and there were many exclamations of “Cool!” “Awesome!” and “Look at this!” from the better readers.
We were pleased that completing the WebQuests required students to use a variety of authentic reading skills and strategies. They had to do a lot of skimming and scanning to find information. They had to interpret directions in their Explorer’s Journals. They had to remember where they had been on the Web and how to get back to the information they needed.
As in exploring the Internet and gathering information, in completing the PowerPoint presentations many reading skills came into play. Students had to scan and skim to find key words in their textbooks. Using search engines, they had to decide if the information they found was appropriate for their topics. They had to summarize information into single bullets for their slides and write brief statements to support their bullet points. Finally, they had to practice reading their information to become fluent for the presentation to their parents. The parent presentation provided a great motivational goal for all of these tasks and created a sense of audience as the students worked on the project.
Finally, we discovered that the Internet allowed students to broaden and deepen their background knowledge and understanding of the content. Mrs. Kelly said that she believed these students learned much more about the U.S. regions than had previous classes that had gathered information primarily from the textbook. Because they had some choices in which sites they viewed during the WebQuests, these students’ interest was higher than it would have been without that choice.
About Writing
Overall, we found that the writing component of the project posed the most difficulty for the students. Students struggled with composing complete sentences on the notes pages of their PowerPoint slides. We discovered that the spell-check option of the software was not helpful in all cases, because students’ spellings were sometimes not close enough to produce the correct spelling as an option. PowerPoint, like many word-processing packages, has a feature that enables the software to check spelling as words are typed; misspelled words are then highlighted in some fashion (in the case of our version of the software, they were underlined in red). It was interesting that rather than clicking to access the spell-check, when PowerPoint underlined a word in red, students just made several attempts at spelling the word until the red line disappeared. We believe this is an authentic method of dealing with misspelled words -- one that many proficient spellers use frequently.
Summarizing caused great problems for students. Despite several lessons on how to summarize, most students resorted to copying information, either from their textbooks or from the Internet -- which was a challenge, since the website text was sometimes dense and the arrangement of desks and computers in the lab gave students limited space for papers and index cards. We worked individually with students to help them with this summarizing tasks.
When children set to work composing sentences on their notes pages, we thought keyboarding would be a nightmarish task for them. It was not -- but composing complete sentences proved to be a challenge. In fact, the keyboard alleviated the problem of poor handwriting that some children had. They were motivated by what they could see on the screen after they had completed a sentence.
About Language Development
Children were exposed to a wide variety of writing styles on the Internet sites they visited, and these styles were different from what they had experienced in textbooks. Through the activity, the children learned vocabulary related to the regions they were studying. Mrs. Kelly clarified the difference between weather and climate, and through the examples on the Internet, students learned the meanings of culture and natural resources. In addition, students learned much new technology-specific vocabulary, including navigate, search engine, spell-check, home page, URL (for uniform resource locator), and reload, and many other words that were used in new ways for them (e.g., insert and graphic). By the end of the project, students were very adept in their use of these terms.
Children also had many opportunities in this project to use language to communicate. As they completed the WebQuests, they shared information, discussed responses, asked for assistance from one another and from the adults, and chatted about what they were seeing on their computer screens. After completing one of the WebQuests, we had a few minutes to discuss what the students had learned as they stood in line to go back to their room. Students summarized and described what they had seen and read. It was fascinating to discover what different students found important, interesting, or noteworthy about the people, events, and locations they had investigated.
About Technology
I believe the children acquired technology skills easily because they were involved in meaningful learning activities. For example, had we attempted to teach the children how to navigate the Web for the sake of navigation, they would not have learned as quickly as they did. In fact, we spent little time (less than we thought we would need) on teaching technology skills. We demonstrated just enough for them to get started, and the students then either taught one another, learned on their own by trial and error, or asked one of us when they hit a snag. This proved very effective. We found that the children took a real problem-solving stance with the technology throughout the project. Their motto seemed to be “When in doubt, click on something and see what happens.”
In summary, the only technology obstacles (other than the difficulty of the text on some of the websites) were those created by the slow speed of the Internet connection in the school, the breakdown of Internet access to the building (this occurred on two occasions), and the lack of appropriate tables on which to use the computers, write, and arrange materials.
Some Advice
For those who are interested in integrating technology into their curriculum, I offer some advice and caveats, in the hope that others may learn from the insights we gained during our project.
Final Thoughts
This project has brought several interesting conclusions to light regarding the integration of technology into a content area curriculum. It appears that technology emphasizes students’ literacy strengths and weaknesses. Those in our project who struggled with traditional literacy tasks found the technology-based tasks even more difficult. The students had to apply literacy skills in ways that required additional, complex technology skills. They seemed to do well with the technology, but not with the literacy skills the activities required. We found that we overestimated the children’s literacy abilities and underestimated their technical savvy. They needed more support in literacy than we provided, but less support in technology than we had planned.
Technology opens up a world of information to children. Social studies curricula are about building knowledge of the world. The Internet allowed these children to see places they had never even heard. Some took a virtual tour of a kiva, an ancient Anasazi dwelling in Arizona, by visiting a site housed at the University of Georgia. They could view live lobsters at the Lobster Cam site, click on an interactive map of Jamestown Village at the Jamestown Gazette ThinkQuest project, or take a virtual trip on the Underground Railroad at the National Geographic site. The images from these sites provided information students could not have gained any other way. Teachers with students who lack broad background knowledge or teachers who work in geographically remote areas must take advantage of the amazing resources available on the Internet.
Students’ reactions to the project were positive. They eagerly anticipated the days they got to spend in the computer lab. When Sally and I were spotted in the building, more than once we heard excited exclamations of “They’re here!” from the students.
In interviews, the students indicated that their most common use of computers prior to the project had been for playing games, followed by looking up information (particularly on CD-ROM encyclopedias). Most said that in earlier years at school they had used computers for word-processing stories they had written first by hand. During our project, students seemed very surprised at the types of information we led them to through the WebQuests. The interesting ways that information was presented via the websites we chose appeared to surprise and delight them. They were especially engaged with sites that had animated graphics, photos, and interactivity features. Overall, the WebQuests were very well received by the students, and each time they finished a WebQuest, they asked us when we would be back for the next one.
After completing her Explorer’s Journal for the Northeast WebQuest, I asked Maddie whether she liked doing the WebQuests. She said,
I liked that you got to pick what you wanted to read about. You don’t get to do that in your social studies book. It’s more fun! In a book, you have to turn the pages, but on the computer you get to click on things to read more stuff.
Maddie also mentioned that there are more interesting pictures on the Internet. She liked that in her Explorer’s Journal she sometimes got to draw or use numbers to answer the questions, something that had not been suggested in earlier social studies lessons.
Portions of creating the PowerPoint presentations were of great interest to the students. They were very intent on getting just the right graphic, planning transitions, and adding sound to their slides. However, as noted earlier, the writing of the notes pages created some real frustration for several of the students. They expressed relief when they had completed their slides. They all seemed very proud of their presentations to their parents, so it appeared that the outcome justified the effort.
An immense amount of preparation is required for technology-based projects. Tasks such as organizing the WebQuests, formatting disks, proofreading PowerPoint slides, scheduling the computer lab, and accessing the Internet sites on the WebQuests took a great deal of time. When Mrs. Kelly was asked what obstacles kept her from using technology, she mentioned training, time, and lack of support. She described her technology training as “a hodge podge, a real hit-or-miss situation.” She had been involved in numerous workshops in which she had been exposed to HyperStudio and PowerPoint, but she believed that unless she had many opportunities to use the programs immediately and over a period of time, she quickly forgot how. She learned most when a knowledgeable technology user came into her classroom and taught her along with her students. Mrs. Kelly said she didn’t really know all the possibilities for using technology as a tool for learning. There was no technology coordinator in her school building, and she felt uncomfortable asking questions of other teachers because everyone in her school was so busy.
Mrs. Kelly conceded that this project took a lot of time away from other instructional activities. I asked her if she believed the trade-off was fair. She replied unequivocally, “Yes.” She viewed her role as a facilitator, and technology was a natural way for her to take on this role with her students as they constructed their own meanings. She was obligated to cover particular skills, standards, and proficiencies in each subject area, but she felt great freedom in how she addressed them in her classroom. Her class was self-contained, so she appreciated being able to use the computer lab to break up the day and involve students in different response modes. It is, however, a real dilemma that whenever technology-based projects are undertaken, there will be less time available for other learning endeavors. The teacher must carefully consider if the learning that occurs in each technology-based project is worth the time commitment.
Parents expressed great satisfaction with the project. There was an excellent turn-out on the night the students made their presentations (all but two students had parents in the audience). I handed out a list of all the technology skills the students used during the project activities. After the presentations, several parents came up to me to express how thrilled they were that their children were having the opportunity to learn these skills. One parent talked about how she believed her child would be more successful in middle school since she was now armed with new skills. Another parent was happy that we had posted the PowerPoint slides on the Internet because she planned to have her child’s grandparents view the presentations there.
Overall, this was a very successful project for me, the teacher, the students, and the parents. I hope it will serve as one example that illustrates how literacy skills, strategies, and knowledge are applied when technology is used as a tool for learning.
References
Baker, E., & Kinzer, C. (1998). Effects of technology on process writing: Are they all good? In T. Shanahan & F. Rodriguez-Brown (Eds.), 47th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 428-440). Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.
Back
Coulter, B., Feldman, A., & Konold, C. (2000). Rethinking online. Learning & Leading with Technology, 28(1), 42-47.
Back
Dodge, B. (1997). Some thoughts about WebQuests. Available (retrieved April 1, 2002): edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtec596/about_webquests.html
Back
Ehman, L., & Glenn, A. (1991). Interactive technology in social studies. In J.P. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning (pp. 522-532). New York: Macmillan.
Back
El-Hindi, A. (1998). Beyond classroom boundaries: Constructivist teaching with the Internet. Reading Teacher, 51(8). Available: www.readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic/RT/constructivist.html
Back
Henriquez, A., & Riconscente, M. (1998). Rhode Island teachers and technology initiative: Findings from the pilot implementation year. New York: Center for Children and Technology. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 424 107). Abstract available (retrieved April 1, 2002): www.edrs.com/Webstore/Detail.asp?q1=@Meta_PubID%20439522&txtSort=Meta_DocID[D]&txtMaxdisplayed=10&txtDocType=ED,EJ
Back
Labbo, L. (1996). A semiotic analysis of young children’s symbol making in a classroom computer center. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 356-385.
Back
Labbo, L., & Kuhn, M. (1998). Electronic symbol making: Young children’s computer-related emerging concepts about literacy. In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, & L. Labbo (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology (pp. 79-91). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Back
Labbo, L., Reinking, D., & McKenna, M. (1998). Technology and literacy education in the next century: Exploring the connection between work and schooling. Peabody Journal of Education, 73(3&4), 273-289.
Back
Leu, D.J., Jr. (1997, September). Caity’s question: Literacy as deixis on the Internet. Reading Teacher, 51, 62-67. Available (retrieved April 1, 2002): www.readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic/rt/caity.html
Back
Leu, D.J., Jr. (2000, February). Our children’s future: Changing the focus of literacy and literacy instruction. ReadingTeacher, 53, 424-429. Available (retrieved April 1, 2002): www.readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic/rt/focus/index.html
Back
National Center for Education Statistics. (2000, April). Teacher use of computers and the Internet in public schools. Washington, DC: Author. Available (Retrieved, April 1, 2002): www.nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000090
Back
About the Author
Susan Tancock is an associate professor at Ball State University (Muncie, IN, USA), where she teaches literacy courses. She also serves as a technology fellow in the Department of Elementary Education, where she assists the faculty in integrating technology into their course curricula. Her research interests include working with struggling readers and understanding how they use literacy strategies when interacting with technology. She can be reached by e-mail at stancock@bsu.edu.
Author's Note: I would like to thank Sally, Mrs. Kelly, and the students for their willing and enthusiastic participation in this project. I learned a great deal from all of them. I would also like to acknowledge that this project was funded by a grant from the Coca-Cola Foundation.
To print this article, point and click your mouse anywhere on the article’s text; then use your browser’s print command.
Citation: Tancock, S.M. (2002, April). Reading, writing, and technology: A healthy mix in the social studies curriculum. Reading Online, 5(8). Available: http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=tancock/index.html
Reading Online, www.readingonline.org
Posted April 2002
© 2002 International Reading Association, Inc. ISSN 1096-1232