Up to what point can technology help schools meet the needs of their students? Do you think a computer program can be flexible enough to allow ELL students to work at their own pace while academically gifted ELL students are able to work at a more accelerated pace? Most importantly, to be able to assist ELL students to work on grade-level curriculum while developing their English language skills? At first, it might not seem promising, but actually the program Kurzweil 3000 is known to assist ELL students with little prior education or with learning difficulties providing great benefits to all type of learners.
Kurzweil 3000 claims to provide powerful learning experiences in a variety of ways. In addition, students who use this program make significant gains academically, including test scores. Most students are able to raise their reading scores from low to passing. As news of the success of this program spreads, more and more schools, colleges, and universities are utilizing it. As a result, the use of Kurzweil 3000 is increasingly been used for all subjects. Not only are students grades improving, more importantly, students are functioning more independently and more confident. This comes as a great benefit to challenged students including, students with special needs, students with disabilities, ELL students, and GT students as so many of them are constantly anxious they aren’t able to perform well. Apparently Kurzweil 3000 gives them the confidence and support they need. One of the most helpful features used by students with disabilities is “Modeling by reading text aloud.” This is a feature where the readings are scanned and they are read by the program as the student listens. It can be repeated as necessary. All those readings can actually be read to you by a computer? Yes, unlimited reading! This feature supports the teaching of fluency. Kurzweil 3000 is said to be transforming the lives of many students. Although most students are hard-workers, due to their learning challenges, their grades often don't reflect their effort or their knowledge. Kurzweil 3000 is known as a program that opens the door to opportunities to students.
To read more about Kurzweil 3000, you can go to the following link:
http://www.kurzweiledu.com/files/K3000%20ELL%20Research.pdf
I enjoyed reading the reference material for the Kurzweil 3000 and can see that this system has an impressive amount of support to enhance and ELL's literacy development. I especially love the idea of having bilingual dictionaries available for learners during the reading process. Additionally, the article made several references to NCLB and the ability to provide for learners with disabilities which would be the greatest benefit of all for the classroom teacher. Having the technology deal with the accomodations seems like an ideal solution, especially if there is tech support for the teacher and students to maintain the integrity of the system. I'm sure that the most important concern with a system such as this will reside with the financial means to purchase and maintain it. I'm guessing that there is always a trade off in how much expense is involved in having this available and knowing how many students will have access to this through the day. Having wonderful eqipment and programs all boils down to the logistics of access to learners in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteTo answer the first question: up to what point can technology help.
ReplyDeleteOne learns reading by reading, it doesn't matter where you do the reading, if it is a book or on a computer screen. So the software is only directly emulating the real world task.
One learns listening by listening, it doesn't matter whee you do it. Again the computer is only emulating the real world situation.
One learns grammar by usage and memorization, the computer could possibly help there but less so than reading.
One learns writing by writing and feedback, the computer will generally do poorly at this task.
One learns speaking (spontaneous, creative speaking in an understandable accent) by speaking and feedback, again the computer will not suffice.
When it comes to acquiring a skill that requires little if any feedback (other than self monitoring and example: sound clips), current program/applications are most definitely adequate.
I am sure, however, that these students could have had a dedicated teacher who could not only have helped them with their reading skills, but also with other skills which required feedback.
Tests do not often grades creativity, so it is not surpassing that any particular tests which grades particulars rather than though would help students increase their scores.
@Terri, have you had the opportunity to see the Kurzwei 3000 in action? Have you used it with your own students? I'd be very curious too see what a review of it based on the evaluation form from last week's homework assignment would turn up. It does sound like it promises a lot of support, but like much software, I wonder if it optimized for certain learners moreso than for others.
ReplyDeleteI have not used this program personally, but I know about it through a friend who works at a lab for Disabled students. He told me a little about it and I thought it would be great to share it since it is also used for ESL students. I will try to get more information on it and will get back to you.
ReplyDeleteHi Terri! This is a very interesting topic and again, like a few posts from last week’s topic, this reminds me of the “digital divide” and how it has come to take on different connotations. My short answer to your question is, yes, technology can meet the needs of English Language Learners (ELLs) students. This of course, is easier said than done and bit more complicated than just having the technology available for our teachers and students to use.
ReplyDeleteTake for example Warschauer, Knobel, and Stone’s (2004) article/study, Technology and Equity in Schooling, where they researched and compared the use of computers between low and high socioeconomic status (SES) schools in California. Their findings were really astonishing: although the digital divide problem of access to computers was seemingly nonexistent as all the schools proved to have access to technology and comparable numbers of computers on site, the different ways in how the schools and the teachers integrated technology into their curriculums was in fact fostering learning inequality between the low and high SES schools. As an example, Warschauer, Knobel, and Stone (2004) found that high SES schools were more likely to assign and have their students perform statistical analysis, research, edit and analyze papers using technology whereas low SES schools were more likely to assign their students perfunctory, individualized remedial work with less focus on higher level thinking and analysis skills using technology. In addition, the authors also found that the low SES schools tended to contain larger populations of ELLs and it was a major challenge to integrate technology to teach ELLs. Teachers cited difficulty with integrating high level thinking tasks like research for ELLs because of language proficiency issues as well as the difficulties with teaching ELLs how to use basic computer applications properly. Lastly and part of the difficulties, low SES schools were also less likely to fund professional development and technical staff as a way to provide a network of support for the teachers and the students learning to teach and use the technology. (We read this article for Dr. Sauro’s curriculum class last semester. I have a copy if anyone would like to read it.)
We can probably apply these very same lessons learned to the Kurzweil program. So now my long answer for you would be that yes, technology may help ELLs of all academic and language proficiency levels. However, and assuming a school can afford it (as Sharon points out) - simply providing a new program or technology is not enough, no matter how amazing the technology is touted to be. Effective integration of the technology into the curriculum (promoting higher cognitive development of the students and skills necessary for academic achievement) and providing a network of support are necessary conditions that if/when missing can cause technology to foster educational inequality for all students, not just ELLs.
You have posed core questions related to CALL (and distance learning in general). Your schools question is one that many administrators are currently evaluating...as Prof. Sauro noted in the podcast...for budgetary reasons. Distance learning exists in the public schools and is part of a growing number of students who are finding alternative ways to engage in the classroom. Some programs have reduced drop out rates by reinventing the classroom from a traditional 8 hour orthopedic desk-work class to more flexible hours. It's not conventional, and in my opinio, reflects a need that is not being met in the conventional classroom, however, man at-risk students take these work-study programs and graduate with their diploma rather tha drop out. In this sense, the self-pacing aspect of distance learning is beneficial, not because it caters to students of varying abilities, but because it caters to students for whom the 8 hour sit down and shut up classroom is frustrating. They can get up when they want to, they can talk, shout, sing, and tae a break when the want to without disturbing their peers or interrupting class. I think this is a good alternative program for at-risk and special pops and can meet a growing demand in schools.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I don't subscribe to the "Gifted" notion and never have. I really firly believe that in the right environment, all students are "gifted" and it is important to foster their strengths in ways that help them grow. When I look at distance learning (and CALL) programs I like to focus on the socio-pedogocial dynamics first.