Technology as a Second Language - Research Paper Example

?Techsl: Technology As A Second Language: An Analysis Of The Pros And Cons Of Academic Integration Of Multimedia And Web 2.0 Technologies And WhetherTechnology Integration In The Classroom Proves To Enhance Learning Or Impede Academic Development. 1.0 Introduction  Education, has truly, come a long way from the ancient eras, when the taught set out on a long, arduous quest for a teacher, who would condescend to accept him as a disciple and permit him to live with him in poor, sparse habitats and facilitate inculcation of the teacher’s knowledge, wisdom, value and philosophy of life. Over the years, the role of the teacher has changed profoundly with one perspective maintaining that “A teacher touches eternity” while at the other end of the spectrum, it was espoused that “Those who cannot, teach”. The giant strides in technology made by humankind compelled the inclusion and integration of media into the education and learning space. In the present day, the wheel has come a full circle, with the teacher embarking on a search for students, through digital learning technologies. 1.1 Statement of the Problem  Empirical research tells us that welcoming technology into the classroom and modifying the pedagogical techniques accordingly has not proved to be entirely beneficial to the student community with regard to learning, motivation, entrepreneurial and academic performance. While it cannot be denied that it has benefited certain communities among the entire cross-section of learners, others have failed to reap its benefits. While, in many cases, both the teacher and the student are to be blamed for this lapse, the very nature of learning and education, nullifies the usage of technology elsewhere. 1.2 Purpose of the Study  This study is aimed at analyzing the current trends and providing a rationale for embracing technology in the classroom setting. Further, the development of twenty-first century skills among the student contingent is also highlighted. 1.3 Theoretical Framework  A comprehensive review of literature on the subject has been carried out. Theoretical concepts, empirical studies, articles from journals and websites have been collated for purposes of this study. 1.4 Definition of Terms (Technology, n.d.) The branch of knowledge that deals with the creation and use of technical means and their interrelation with life, society and the environment, drawing upon such subjects as industrial arts, engineering, applied science and pure science. (Second language, n.d) A language widely used, especially in educational and governmental functions in a region where all or most of its speakers are nonnative. (Multimedia, n.d.) The combined use of several media, as sound and full motion video in computer applications. 1.5 Research Questions  . History of electronic technology in the classroom. . How has technology enhanced learning?  . How has technology hindered learning?  . Projects and Studies integrating technology into education. . What current technology tools and devices that are used in the classroom are improving learning?  A New York Time report on learning machines (“The Learning Machines”, 2010) retraced the journey of technology into the education sphere. 1870, the Magic Lantern which was the precursor to the slide projection machines, beamed images printed on glass, was the first technological foray into the classroom. By 1950, stereoscopes, a three-dimensional viewing device, gained popularity. The film strip projector followed and the Radio proved to be the backbone of the “schools of air” during the 1940s and 1950s. The overhead projector, mimeograph and the language-lab headset and reading accelerators preceded the invasion of the Television, into the classroom, in 1958. The 1980s heralded the era of computers in education. By 1995, the Internet and the World Wide Web, caught on quickly in the education domain. Today, iclickers, laptops and iPads rule classroom pedagogy. Alexiou-Ray, Wilson et al., (2003) reported the findings of a study which indicated that students did feel that technology makes the class more interesting and that it did provide another perspective on learning. They also found these classes to be fun-filled. However, malfunctioning of electronic devices, questionable quality of information available on the Internet and lack of computer literacy, were the major learning constraints. Students also admitted that computer usage for class-related work was very low. English as Second Language Teachers, Special education teachers and aides, counselors and school office personnel found the use of class websites as a useful platform for better learning. Parents, by and large, reported that the use of e-mails and the Internet, definitely contributed to enhanced student learning and better communication between the parent and the teacher. 1.6 Chapter Summary  This chapter provides the preamble to the paper as well as declares the statement of the problem, at hand. The purpose of the study and the theoretical framework which provides the context has also been brought out. A concise section highlights the definitions of key terms used. The answers to the several research questions raised, sums up the chapter. 2.0 Literature Review Basham, Meyer and Perry (2010) created the digital backpack in the form of a mobile technology platform complete with hardware, software and instruction materials for project based learning, using design based research. An amalgam of foundational technologies, modular technologies and instruction support material, it attempted integrating technology into the curriculum. Clark (1004) strongly believes that media will never influence the learning process in a student. Evidencing comparative experimental work, he argued that computers do not influence the learning process. He went on to explain that usage of any specific medium to deliver instruction does not necessarily yield benefits. Clark (2009) propounded the active ingredient process – a four-stage model – comprising descriptive research, predictive research, generic technology and situated technology to successfully culminate research into practice. In the first stage, both qualitative and quantitative research methods were used to determine new constructs, measures as well as hypothesis testing for developing theoretical frameworks. Predictive research used controlled environments using a differential framework of settings, people and tasks to achieve internal validity. The third stage led to the development of generic solutions by analysis the tested theories. Situated technology, in the final phase, adapted the generic solutions for overall client acceptance. Clark, Yates, Early & Moulton (2010) studied discovery based learning and guided training methods elaborately and analysed the pros and cons of using electronic media for classroom interaction. The findings highlighted the major reasons for the failure of electronic media and the shortcomings of discovery based learning. Clark & Feldon (2005) threw light on five common but questionable principles of multimedia learning. Misconceptions abound that multimedia instruction leads to more learning, is more motivating and that it provides animated agents to aid learning. Further, it is believed that this instruction leads to maximum learning for more students and that it facilitates constructivist and discovery approaches for better learning by students. Clark, Feldon & Yates (2011) designed a six-step cognitive task analysis approach to elicit expertise knowledge and integrated it into instructional design and research. This approach begins with an outlining of the sequence tasks of a job followed by a description of the context, cue, actions and the decision. Information is then gathered on the equipment and standards as well as the difficulties experienced by novices on the job and reasons thereof. This is followed by identification of the conceptual knowledge required and collection of field problems for demonstration, practice and testing. In the last stage, necessary correction action is carried out and the accuracy of the results obtained is verified. They claimed a 30% to 70% gain in learning with cognitive task analysis-based instruction. Cromley (2000) dwelt on the science of thinking and learning. He elucidated the “cognitive revolution” which has brought a new dimension to the domain of learning. Presenting a behaviorist perspective to learning, it encouraged teachers to use real-life examples. It went on to suggest that teaching to be highly effective must be based on research based facts on the working of the mind of an individual. Derry (2008) addressed the human dimension of technology-enhanced learning. He questioned the suppositions made on this issue and indicated that the study of the grounds, nature and origins of knowledge and the limits of human understanding were issues which needed greater attention and understanding in the context of infusion of technology into the realms of learning. Kennedy (2011) pictured the 21st century learning environment and brought out ways and means by which schools and universities embraced innovation in the education sphere. Broadband access to the Internet, wireless connectivity, borderless libraries, instant replay of content etc. have all made the present day classroom, futuristic. Chen, Wei et al., (2008) formulated the concept of a holistic blended learning environment in which physical face-to-face, cyber face-to-face and cyber asynchronous blended models are synthesized into one wholesome model. The research attempted to determine if significant differences existed between physical face-to-face groups (P-F2F) and cyber face-to-face groups (C-F2F) vis-a-vis classroom climate and learning effectiveness. Raven (2000) designed the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices (RSPM) to measure general cognitive ability, problem-solving ability and understanding of the relationships of the various learning concepts. RSPM, over the years, has been considered as a reliable and valid measure of cognitive ability. Merrienboer, Clark & Crook (2002) presented the 4C/ID models, a blueprint for complex learning. This instructional design framework contained four components namely learning tasks, supportive information, Just in time (JIT) information and part-task practice. A ten-point summary highlighted the essence of this learning methodology in clear, concise detail. O’Reilly (2004), the inventor of Web 2.0, a newer version of the World Wide Web, positioned the web as a strategic platform for data capture and control. Its three major components are Rich Internet application, service oriented architecture and social web. Its core competencies include services, architecture of participation, scalability, data source remix, data transformation and collective intelligence. He presented design patterns and business models for next generation software. Social networking, blogs, wikis, mash ups, video sharing were some of the technologies, marked for the future. Anderson (2007) undertook a comprehensive study of the influence of Web 2.0 technologies in education. He raised key educational and institutional issues with regard to teaching and learning, research, publishing and archiving of information. Suggesting a need to harness the visual power of Web 2.0 in the classroom, he pointed out newer dimensions in plagiarism, assessment and grading of the student’s work and pedagogical techniques in the classroom environment. 2.1 Chapter summary This chapter charts the course of the various theoretical constructs and processes studied and validated by experts in the teaching and educational fraternity. It also explores the dichotomy of opinions on the benefits and pitfalls of infusing technology into the educational setting. The influence of the World Wide Web and the Internet on education, too, finds a mention. 2.2 Conclusion There is no gainsaying the fact that technology has become a pre-requisite in the learning environment of today and its usage has become essential, It does lead to enhanced and enriched learning. However, for effective learning to happen across the entire cross-section of socio-economic domains, proper and cost-effective technology is the need of the hour. 3.0 Bibliography 1. Basham, J. D., Meyer, H., Perry, E., (2010) The design and application of the Digital Backpack. JRTE. Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 339–359. ©2010 ISTE International Society for Technology in Education. iste@iste.org. www.iste.org  2. Clark, R. E. (1994) Media will never influence learning [discussion]. Educational Technology Research and Development v. 42 no. 2 p. 21-9 (Pending approval)  3. Clark, R. E. (2009). Translating research into new instructional technologies for higher education: The active ingredient process. The Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 1(1). (Pending Approval)  4. Clark, R. E., Yates, K., Early, S. & Moulton, K. (2010). An analysis of the failure of electronic media and discovery-based learning: Evidence for the performance benefits of guided training methods. In K. H. Silber, & R. Foshay, (Eds.). Handbook of training and improving workplace performance, Volume I: Instructional design and training delivery. Washington, DC: International Society for Performance Improvement. (Pending Approval)  5. Clark, R. E. & Feldon, D. F. (2005). Five common but questionable principles of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Pending Approval)  6. Clark, R.E., Feldon, D., & Yates, K. (2011) Using Cognitive Task Analysis to capture expert knowledge and skills for research and instructional design. Workshop presented at the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (Pending Approval)  7. Cromley, J. (2000) Learning to Think, Learning to Learn: What The Science Of Thinking And Learning Has To Offer Adult Education. National Institute for Literacy. Institute for Literacy under a 1998-99 Literacy Leader Fellow Project #X257I980003  8. Derry, J (2008) Technology-Enhanced Learning: A Question of Knowledge [Part of the special issue, New philosophies of learning]. Journal of Philosophy of Education v. 42 no. 3/4 p. 505-19  9. Kennedy, Mike (2011). 21st-CENTURY LEARNING (American School & University 83 no8 16-18, 20, 22 April 2011). Copyright (2002) Primedia Business Magazines & Media, Inc. All rights reserved. To contact the publisher: www.asumag.com  10. N. -S. Chen., C. -W. Wei., Kinshuk., Y. -R. Chen., Y. -C. Wang. In Handbook on Information Technologies for Education and Training (2008) International Handbooks on Information Systems, 2008, II, 239-259, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-74155-8_13. Bridging the Gap Between Face-to-Face and Cyber Interaction in Holistic Blended Learning Environments.  11. Raven, J. The Raven's progressive matrices: change and stability over culture and time. Cognitive Psychology v. 41 no. 1 (2000) p. 1-48  12. Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E., de Croock, M. B. M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-Model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 39-64.  13. O’REILLY, T. 2005a. What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the next generation of software. O'Reilly website, 30th September 2005. O’Reilly Media Inc. Available online at:http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html [last accessed 07/21/11] 14. Anderson Paul (2007), What is Web 2.0 ? Ideas, technologies and implications for education, JISC Technology & Standards Watch, Feb, 2007. 15. The learning machines, (2010, Sep 15), The New York Times, Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/09/19/magazine/classroom-technology.html . 16. Jennifer A. Alexiou-Ray, Elizabeth Wilson, Vivian H. Wright & Ann-Marie Peirano (2003) Changing instructional practice : The impact of technology integration on students, parents, and School personnel, Retrieved from http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No2/AlexRay.htm 17. History, the history of computers, and the history of computers in education, Retrieved from http://www.csulb.edu/~murdock/histofcs.html 18. Dictionary.com Retrieved July 23, 2010 from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse Read More