The Reading
Matrix
Vol3, No.3, November
2003
Reading Electronically: Challenges and
Responses to the Reading Puzzle in Technologically-Enhanced
Environments
Elizabeth
Hanson-Smith Abstract
Reading electronically encompasses
several major puzzles: what is reading, can it
be taught, if so, how can it be taught, and how
can electronic media such as the Internet hinder
or enhance learning to read and teaching reading
to others? Electronic enhancements present excellent
opportunities to practice reading and a variety
of these are examined in detail, including vocabulary
and grammar acquisition activities, such as concordancing;
skimming and scanning; extensive reading in WebQuests;
and chaos management in audio, video, and text
chat. Electronic media, which are categorized
into three main types--text repositories, electronically
mediated texts, and authentic computer-mediated
communications (CMC)--present severe challenges
to learners, while providing a rich storehouse
of authentic reading matter. Several solutions
offer help: Webpage design that takes learners'
needs into account, appropriate teacher education
to exploit electronic media to its fullest, and
an emphasis on inquiry thinking or constructivism.
The Reading Puzzle
Some general agreement
about what constitutes "reading" exists
in the TESOL community. Based on extensive L1
research (especially in English; see Goodman,
1967, and Smith,
1971 ), most L2 researchers concur that reading
involves a complex of skills and higher order
cognitive processes. (See Chun
& Plass, 1997 , for a summary of the L1
and L2 research) As an indication of its complexity
and elusiveness, reading comprehension is often
described in metaphors:
- bottom-up -
decoding through the automatic recognition
of letters, vocabulary, and grammatical structures,
- top-down - understanding
more global meanings, based on the reader's
reasoning skills and prior knowledge, both
of the text andthe world in general, including
socio-culturally embedded meanings, and
- interactive -
the learner actively uses an admixture of
decoding skills, reasoning, and prior knowledge
to interact with the text, building an "analog" mental
counterpart to the meanings embedded in textual
representations. ( Chun & Plass,
1997 , pp. 61-63)
None of these processes
is linear or sequential; they all involve both
short- and long-term memory functions; and one
process or another may come more actively to the
fore mentally to assist the others in the courseof
processing a text. (For excellent summaries of
the reading process, see
Chun & Plass, 1997 ; Purcell-Gates,
1997 ; and Esky,
2002 .)
Less general agreement exists
on the effectiveness of various instructional
approaches in teaching both decoding skills and
the higher cognitive and metacognitive functions
of reading. Susser &
Robb (1990) suggest that reading comprehension
skills simply "do not exist" (p. 2).
Krashen, in a variety of fora, has posited that
the teaching of decoding skills does nothing to
teach comprehension, and that post-reading activities,
such as writing summaries, do nothing to improve
reading speed or comprehension (see Mason
& Krashen, 2002 , for the latest expression
of this idea). For teachers who do use vocabulary
and grammar practiceas part of "reading"
instruction, there is no clear agreement on best
practices. (See Nation, 1994, for most of the
gamut of vocabulary teaching strategies.) As with
vocabulary acquisition, no agreement exists on
a single best approach to grammar development
or even whether to begin with simpler structures
first or the more complex, particularly at advanced
learner levels (see Muckley,
1962 ). (For a balanced summary of these varied
positions on teaching reading as a process, with
a focus on comprehension, see Purcell-Gates,
1997 .)
For the higher level functions
of reading, there is somewhat more concurrence
on good practices: skimming and scanning activities,and
pre-reading prompts (such as a picture or video)
and questions to help with schema building, graphic
organizers to help students successfully process
information, and post-reading questions and activities
or tasks such as essay writing, to help consolidate
understanding. All of these purport to simulate
actual processes used by experienced readers.
As with most higher order language activities,
teacher intervention during reading may disrupt
the process itself (notice how students may become
tongue-tiedwhen their grammar or pronunciation
is corrected while speaking). Since reading does
not "generate a product" ( Esky,
2002 ,p. 8), teachers usually must settle
for related, post-reading products,e.g., answering
comprehension questions, discussing the reading,
or writing an essay using the material that has
been read. We might add that unlike oral communication
problems, breakdowns in reading comprehension
are not immediately recognizable, so interventions
to correct misunderstandings may take place long
after the reader has set aside the text. The problem
with teaching reading, as Esky puts it, is that
"No one can teach someone else to read: The
process is largely invisible and thus cannot be
demonstrated,and it mainly occurs at the subconscious
level and thus cannot be explained in any way
that a reader could make conscious use of"
( Esky,2002 ,pp.
8-9). Certainly, the evidence of studies
in Fiji and Singapore (extensive, in-class, silent
reading of high interest texts over 12-36 months
by several thousand students; see Elley,
1991 , described in Nation,
1997 ) reveals that "bookflood"
students not only did better on examinations based
on vocabulary knowledge and grammar, but also
wrote better. Perhaps even more importantly,they
"enjoyed reading" (
Nation, 1997 ,p. 2).
Overwhelming evidence indicates
that reading is the best way to learn to read,
leaving in doubt the role of teachers in the classroom.
However, Esky notes that besides motivating students
to read more, teachers can teach "productive
reading strategies," and refers to Anderson's
excellent list of strategies, such as activating
students' background knowledge, assisting them
in acquiring more vocabulary, helping them select
appropriate reading materials, checking for reading
strategy use, and so on (
Anderson, 1999 , p. 6, cited in Esky,
2002 , p. 9). One suspects that much of this
effort with ESOL (English for Speakers of Other
Languages) students may be an attempt to counteract
previous instruction in poor reading habits, such
as reading word-by-word, looking up every word
before proceeding, or subvocalizing the text or
"reading aloud" (an oxymoron). Although
one may suspect that reading is a virtually unteachable
metacognitive process that develops holistically
in the presence of readable texts, teachers need
to know which aspects of the process are teachable,
how teachable they are, and what the appropriate
teachable moment might be for any given aspect
with any particular student. I share Susser
& Robb's view (1990), that language instruction
is an essential part of ESOL (English for Speakersof
Other Languages), but that many of the activities
we perform in the reading class are not "a
reading lesson in the strict sense" (emphasis
by the authors,p. 1). I refer to the multiple
definitions of reading, the complex cognitive,metacognitive,
and emotional processes of reading, the difficulties
in intervening in--and even teaching--reading,
and the many possible approaches to reading instruction
as "the reading puzzle."
By the early 1980s, even
as the process approach to teaching reading was
evolving, technology was making itself increasingly
relevant to the solution, or at least to a better
definition of the reading puzzle, first with computer-based
programs to practice various aspects of decoding
skills and cognitive processes, and almost immediately
thereafter, as cyber-communication expanded, with
computer-mediated communicative(CMC) approaches
via the Internet and local intranets. As is generally
the case with computer-assisted language learning
(CALL), early electronically-enhanced approaches
to teaching reading replicated most of the history
of paper-based reading instruction. (For a general
history of CALL development, see Hanson-Smith,
2002 .) The following section of this paper
will look at some electronic approaches to teaching
reading, focusing on the assumptions made about
decoding skills and cognitive development. Because
there are hundreds of pieces of excellent software
and thousands of intriguing Websites intended
to teach reading comprehension and decoding skills,
I can give only a rough idea, tthrough some representative
examples, of the kinds of technologically enhanced
activities available. Since reading teachers have
such widely varying needs and presuppositions,
I have not pre-judged the various electronic activities,
but rather presented a sampling of those that
seem to use electronic media more effectively
than activities that could be done on paper.
Electronic
Access to the Reading Puzzle
Early computer software, which
included all kinds of grammar tutorials and drills,
vocabulary games, and tests, also sought to teach
reading in ways that provided some major improvements
over paper-based instruction. For example, for
vocabulary practice, a number of free or nearly
free programs produce crossword puzzles, hangman,
bingo, concentration, and other types of games.
The teacher enters a word list and the computer
does the work of creating the game or challenge,
replete with attractive sound effects and animations.
An enormous advantage over paper versions is instant
correction and user-tailored help. Vocabulary
games attempt to give additional language exposure
and practice in order to build the automatic recognition
needed to read fluently. (Many of the older, mostly
free games collected by TESOL's CALL Interest
Section can be found at La Trobe University's
CELIA site.)
Computers also excel at creating
and managing tutorial and drill grammar activities,
again with the advantage of providing instant
corrections or hints as the student requires,
and additionally, the possibility of preselecting
appropriate levels or grammatical items to work
on. Multimedia enhancements are intended to motivate
and ensure a more memorable experience. Activities
involve sentence combining by drag-and-dropping
words or phrases, grammar-based games (similar
to those mentioned for vocabulary acquisition),
animated grammar where sentence parts move around,
and others. Hundreds of sites on the Internet
provide access to multimedia games and activities,traditional
grammar drill-and-grill, searchable grammar reference
books,and live tutors. Links can be found easily
at Linguistic Funland (
Pfaff-Harris, 2002 ), and the Ohio University
Language Lab ( Ohio ESL
). A few sites worth a try are Grammar for
English Language Learners at OhioESL
(also has links to grammar resources for
teachers), HyperGrammarfor more advanced students
( Megginson, 1994-96
),and Animated Grammar Tutorials at ESL Blue(s)
for low level learners (
Pritchard, 1999-2002 ). RealEnglish
allows teachers and students to download
short videos and extensive accompanying grammar
exercises, as well as vocabulary and culture lessons.
Cloze passages are often used
to help students with the "psycholinguistic
guessing game" ( Goodman,
1967 ) of reading by encouraging them to predict
words they don't know, rather than stopping to
look them up in a dictionary. While teachers can
laboriously create cloze passages from authentic
texts, by whiting out words by hand, many software
packages, such as Wida's Gapmaster (in The
Authoring Suite ), or the shareware SuperCloze
( Stevens & Millmore,
1990-96 ), allow the user to import text files
and create word, letter, and even whole passage,
cloze texts on screen. Additionally, the computer
can insert the letters or words selected by the
user into the text thus demonstrating to students
that parts of words are of general help in decoding
meanings), and offer hints or a peek at the target
text when users reach frustration levels. Cloze
passages can also be constructed to delete grammatical
markers or punctuation. Jumbled sentences and
jumbled paragraphs are another feature of computerized
text reconstruction software. The unscrambling
activity is intended to help students learn to
recognize the structural markers that organize
longer texts.
Computer software is ideal
for its ability to present texts as timed or paced
readings (the latter with scrolling text): The
teacher or student can set a target reading time,
presumably increasing it with each text (see Figure
1 for an example).The idea is to encourage students
to eventually read fast enough to obtain global
meanings (about 350 words per minute). Timed or
paced reading can increase reading speed, or at
least give students the metacognitive concept
that they can and should be reading faster. In
the classroom, the procedure is laborious: the
instructor writes a series of times on the board
and erases each as the seconds tick off; students
lookup and record the last unerased time left
on the board before turning to comprehension questions.
After everyone completes the reading, the questions
are answered and discussed. The activity takes
up a great deal of class time, but has to be performed
several times a week to produce any improvement
in speed. Moving this type of activity to the
computer lab (or home computer) is a huge bonus.
It can become an almost totally autonomous student
task, and some programs can also keep track of
student progress and generate a report for the
teacher as a double-check.
Skimming (picking up main ideas)
and scanning (seeking specific details) are other
activities generally thought to encourage students
to read more rapidly and purposefully. These are
available in many software packages, either with
pre-set texts and questions or in a teacher utility
that allows the instructor to load in texts and
questions. Skimming is somewhat more difficult
to design, since the questions usually involve
inferencing. A good example of teacher-created
products on the Internet is found in the Wild
Children activities ( Mason,
1997 )generated with Hot
Potatoes software (see Figure 1 ). Here skimming
is combined with timed reading,consisting of a
scrollable text passage with a countdown clock
and a series of questions in a separate frame
which can be answered as the student reads. Wild
Children is one of dozens of teacher-prepared
texts, organized by course level, at the University
of Victoria's English Language Centre Study Zone.
Activities also include other pre- and post-reading
tasks, among them MCQvocabulary questions, interactive
sentence combining using point-and-click to arrange
words, comprehension questions, and composition
topics. The quality of the questions prepared
by teachers is one of the best features of the
site.
Figure 1. Wild Children (
Mason, 1997 ) exemplifies
an Internet-based skimmingexercise for advanced
intermediate students (constructed with Hot
Potatoes ). (English Language Centre Study
Zone, University of Victoria, BC, Canada: http://web2.uvcs.uvic.ca/elc/studyzone/
).
Another kind of reading
activity, one that is almost impossible to do
with paper, is concordancing. The computer software
searches for all examples of a word or phrase
or word ending and then arranges all examples
found as a list on the screen, usually with the
found items in the middle of the screen so that
a sentence context of about 10 words surrounds
each one. A free piece of software, Conc
, provides an example (see Figure 2 ):
Figure 2. Conc showing
a concordance based on "had" in Lewis
Carroll's Alice in Wonderland. Highlighting a
line in the lower window highlights the corresponding
target individual item in the upper window.
Grammar Safari ( Mills
& Salzman, 2002 ) is an online activity
very similar to concordancing, but on a less automated
level.It uses the Find function on any Internet
browser to search an electronic text. When the
target word or morpheme is found, students copy
the sentence by hand. (Copying may afford bonus
practice in sentence structure and handwriting.)
Using the lists of words in context, whether generated
by the computer or written by hand, students can
devise rules, or check their own usage of a structure
in their essays against the authentic examples.
Concordancing is an inductive approach to understanding
vocabulary and grammar for the intermediate-advanced
student, and vast corpora (as well as numerous
how-to articles) are to be found both in software
packages, such as MonoConc
, and in digital text repositories on the
Internet, such as Project
Guttenberg ,the Internet
Archive , and the Internet
Children's Digital Library .
The Authenticity Puzzle
Since one of the teacher's
major functions in the reading process is to motivate
students and help them find good material to read,
the availability of authentic texts at the appropriate
level has always been a major piece of the reading
puzzle. From very early on, the Internet has been
an excellent source of authentic content. I see
Internet-based materials at present as of three
kinds:
(1) Text repositories,
including digital libraries such as Project
Guttenberg , are essentially storehouses for
materials that would otherwise appear in dead-tree-and-ink
format. Included in this category are most online
journals, which essentially replicate the format
of paper journals, with the addition of hyperlinked
references and search capabilities. These types
of texts are generally lengthy and appropriate
for extensive reading. They are often best readby
being downloaded and printed. Some sources for
online libraries are mentioned above
.
(2) Electronically
mediated texts are "accreted"
by authors, both amateur and professional, for
their own purposes, whether informational, emotive,
or propagandistic. These documents are "native"
to electronic media, and include content Webpages,
software, and electronic books. Theyare characterized
by hypermedia and linking. They are intended to
be read largely on screen and/or online. Web content
pages generally target native speakers, although
ESL/EFL and foreign language sites whose intention
is language practice have been created by both
teachers and students and are rapidly growing
in number. Content Webpages appropriate for reading
practice are discussed further in this section.
(3) Computer-mediated
communications (CMC) offer interactive
authentic language on bulletin boards, electronic
lists, e-mail, chat, Weblogs (blogs), etc. Also
native to electronic media, these genres diffe
rin crucial ways from their print counterparts
and present their own perplexities for the reader.
CMC will be discussed in the next section.
Both government and non-profit
organizations and commercial sites offer a wide
range of educational Web-based activities makinguse
of authentic (or semi-authentic) reading matter.
For example, the Learning
Resources site offers Web-delivered instruction
for literacy level adults using CNN San Francisco
news bureau stories. At other sites, lesson plans
for reading online range from simple one-page
text downloads to breathtakingly beautiful photographic
imagesand tons of curricular support both in paper
and online, as for example NASA
Quest 's educational pages, mounted by the
U.S.National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
which help students participatein the exploration
of space. The Discovery Channel, though a commercial
site, has highly interactive, media-rich activities,
for example, Celebrity
Shark Week (see Figure 3 ), where the user
is invited to take on the persona of a tiger shark.
Figure 3. Online activity
from Celebrity Shark
Week at the Discovery Channel online http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/sharkweek2002/sharkweek2002.html.
Dozens of Websites publish
content-based reading lessons that include what
might be called "cognition-priming activities,"
such as the use of graphical organizers, Into-Through-Beyond
activities, schema-building frameworks, vocabulary
activation through media, online dictionary lookup
on the fly (for example, VoCabulary links words
on a Webpage to any one of several online dictionaries
to provide point-and-click lookup; Babel
Fish will translate a Webpage into a handful
of different languages.), pre-reading questions,
post-reading composition topics, and so on. The
best of these activities generally are used to
support the research-and-reading-based inquiry
learning referred to generically as "WebQuest."
Bernie Dodge at UC San Diego
defines a WebQuestas " an inquiry-oriented
activity in which some or all of the information
that learners interact with comes from resources
on the Internet" ( Dodge,
1997 , p. 1). WebQuesting fits well with a
constructivist approach to learning, with task-based
and content-based activities, and with communicative
learning theories, for it is usually performed
as group-or team-based projects. The WebQuest
Page ( Dodge with March,
2002 ) offers hundreds of examples created
by teachers and organizedby U.S. school grade
levels, adult literacy, ESOL, and foreign languages.Each
project follows a carefully worked out, readily
adaptable framework:introduce the problem, set
a task and process, define resources, have students
produce an end product, make explicit the evaluation
criteria (see Figure 4 , left frame). Usually,
the lower the level of student, the more the WebQuest
materials are self-contained within the teacher's
own Webpages. As an example, see An Insect's Perspective
( Tyson, 2000 ),
a WebQuest for second graders, ages 10-11 ( Figure
4 ). In contrast, the more advanced levels are
quite open-ended: students maybe asked to formulate
their own research questions, and then are sent
off to explore the Web (perhaps with a few suggestions
as to appropriate search engines and sites to
hit); learners develop their own responses to
the research through group projects, suchas writing
a paper, or creating a presentation or Webpage
themselves.
Figure 4. Process page from an elementary
school, An Insect's Perspective. ( Tyson, 2000 , http://projects.edtech.sandi.net/grant/insects/ .)
Note the sequence of activities in the frame at left.
Imagination Voyages
( Mills with Melin,
1998 ) is a good example of an ESOL WebQuest for advanced learners at an
intensive English program in the U.S. WebQuests can involve a mix of print
text (library research), physical research (for example,in the chemistry lab)
and Web-based content, and they can be used to motivate students to learn more
about a particular content area; science and social science WebQuests are especially
numerous. Dodge holds regular text chats at the online community, TappedIn ,
where teachers can learn more about how to construct WebQuests appropriate
to their own students. (As of this writing, Dodge is in the process of reorganizingthe
WebQuest Page; new contributions are always welcome.)
I refer
to the abundance of authentic reading matter on
the Web as the "authenticity puzzle"
because authentic materials, those written for
native speakers in the target language, are the
goal for learners, but not always the medium through
which that goal can be attained. In addition,
materials written for young NS learners, for example
fairy tales or comic books, may be at an appropriate
reading level for beginners, but may be puzzling
to those outside of the target culture, or offensively
juvenile to adults. Because billions of documents
now exist on the Web, ESOL teachers have been
using technology to compensate for the difficulties
of reading online, for example in the use of online
dictionaries and translators, as indicated above.
An interesting Internet-based corpora project,
TextLadder(see Ghadirian,
2002 ), is underway in which textsare selected
and assigned levels on the basis of the word frequencies
of target vocabulary. Teachers or students may
then select from targeted levels for various reading
activities. The next section of this paper looks
atsome other ways in which technology has offered
both solutions to and new problems for the authenticity
puzzle.
The Electronic Puzzle
One way to look at the electronic aspects of the
reading puzzle isto compare the differences between reading print and reading
electronically mediated texts (see Table 1).
Table 1: Comparison of Print and Electronic Reading
Reading Paper Print Texts |
Reading Electronic Media |
Reading CMC |
Single or multiple columns |
Scrolling multiple columns and/or frames |
Single scrolling column, but interlaced,
undefined threads; possible simultaneous
audio, video, and multiple chats in several
windows
|
Illustrations |
Embedded or linked graphics, animations, sound files, movies |
Embedded or linked media |
Footnotes, appendices, references |
Links to other pages, other portions of the textor other Websites,
both embedded in the text and in frames, headers, andfooters |
Links |
Limited functions for footnotes and references |
Multiple functions for hyperlinks, e.g., illustration or example,
mode-change (e.g., survey or shopping cart), etc. (see Harrison,
2002 , p. 7); advertising, etc. |
Multiple functions for hyperlinks, perhaps
fewer than in Webpages
|
Static advertising |
Commercial distracters |
animated ads, pop-unders and -overs, buttons,
scrolling banners, etc. May have commercial
distracters, depending on the mail service
provider; spam
|
Although print publications
are clearly moving in the direction ofmore visual
aids and more inventive layout, Webpages still
have a tremendous advantage (or disadvantage?)
in the amount of distracting material the reader
will encounter. If we look at Celebrity
Shark Week in full screen (not just the useable
content, as in Figure 3 ), we see immediately
what an inundation the senses undergo, even without
the movement and color of the online original
(see Figure 5 ).
Figure 5. Celebrity Shark Week with
full complement of hyperlinked distracters, including EMicrosoft® Internetxplorer
browser interface ( http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/sharkweek2002/sharkweek2002.html ).
Not visible in this static
illustration ( Figure 5 ) is the movie running
in the dark square in the "introduction"
section. The "Guilt Free Fast Food ad"
is dynamic and flashes to new information. "Click
here!" and "Go!" messages in bright
colors beckon. The Thanksgiving message in the
frame at right will change on each entry to the
page. Thus, while the visual image is rich and
alluring to the reader, i.e., motivating, it also
presents numerous visual and cognitive distracters.
One of the skills that advanced readers of Webpages
quicklylearn (or try to learn?) is to ignore the
flash and focus on content. Learners have more
difficulty in shutting out, or even sometimes
determining whatis an ad. Even advanced learners
sometimes can become confused about whatis a legitimate
learning path, as any user of the Internet will
attest.In a recent study I conducted with experienced
Internet users (Hanson-Smith,2003), 85% of respondents
( n=27) said they were irritated or distractedby
commercials on the Internet. (Interestingly, only
2% of the respondentshad thought about whether
ads were similarly distracting to their students,
Hanson-Smith, 2003 .)
Hyperlinks are a blessing and
a bane. They can jump us instantly from a text
to a footnote or reference, to an online dictionary,
to a picture or a movie, to another language,
another country, or evenouter space--the possibilities
are almost limitless and incredibly enticing.
Roger Chartier in a recent online conference sponsored
by the Bibliothèque Centre Pompidou declares
the "electronic representation of writing
radically modifies the notion of context, and
as a result, the very process of theconstruction
of meaning" ( Chartier,
2001-2002 ,p. 7). Put more forcefully, no
text on the Web is the same for any two individuals,
because the choice of following a link or not
is based onthe reader's free will. While deconstruction
as a literary critical movementhas tried to show
us how the author's intentions may be hidden and
perhaps ultimately unrecoverable, the task is
additionally complicated in hypermedia. While
the hypertext author constantly makes choices
about presenting resources or structures of thought
that would not fit into the accepted notion ofa
printed text, the reader may choose or not to
follow a link, to reconstruct the author's thought
processes or not. Further, unlike traditional
footnotes or references in printed texts, links
function in many different ways.
Harrison (2002) , describes seven different
functions:authorizing (mailto, or About Us), commenting
(opinions about a site, e.g.,press releases),
enhancing (Site Map), exemplifying (specific examples
ina broader category), mode-changing (Shopping
Cart), referencing (bibliographyor appendix),
self-selecting (For Seniors Only) ( Harrison,2002
, p. 7). The reader, particularly the learner,
may not be fully cognizantof these varying purposes.
Managing chaos no doubt has
tremendous value instretching us cognitively.
However, hyperlinking can often extend us tothe
limits. As teachers who write Webpages ourselves,
we often try to offer aids to help students manage
chaos; however we may end up making the reading
acquisition process (a) slower and more inefficient
or (b)far more complex than it need be. Much interesting
research is now accumulating the role of hyperlinks
in the reading process. To cite just a few: Al-Seghayer
(2001) compared the effectiveness of video
vs. still photos in teaching new vocabulary, finding
in favor of the former. De
Ridder's work (2002) seems to indicate that
the increased clicking evident when visible (as
opposed to hidden) hyperlinks were put into a
text did not slow the reading process,but also
did not increase the vocabulary learned: students
liked to click,but the effects of instant lookup
were not lasting. Perhaps because hyperlinkingcan
be so quick (depending on bandwidth), there is
less interference withthe comprehension process
than with paper dictionary lookup. Altun
(2000) , in a small pilot case study with
two students' reading strategies, found that "navigating
through links is acomplex cognitive activity in
which various strategies are involved" (p.24),
including a number of ways to circumvent poor
design. An astute comment by one of the subjects
was that "Getting lost is not the fault of
usersbut the fault of designer" [sic](
Altun, 2000 , p.20). Both students wanted
to write, that is take notes, as they read, and
felt some frustration that current hypertext environments
do not easily provide for this natural desire
to create marginalia ( Altun,
2000 ,p. 24). Unfortunately, electronic books
do not appear to solve this problem either.
Much still remains to be done
in exploring the effects of hypermedia on learning.
However, numerous articles describe the useof
the Internet, multimedia, hypermedia, and computer-enriched
activitiesas an integral part of good teaching
practices. Bertelsen
and Fischer (2002/2003) , for example, used
multimedia scaffolding to support 10- and 11-year-old
students' experiences with expository text in
a social studies content-based setting. Yerrick
and Ross (2001) report on the use of homemade
computer-based video to help develop literacy
in inquiry-based science instruction. A recent
special issue of TESOL Journal on the theme "Constructing
Meaning with Computers,"is a rich storehouse
of ideas and plans based on constructivist principles.(See
Healey and Klinghammer
's introduction to this issue for a handy
definition of "cognitive" vs. "social"
constructivism,2002, p. 3.) Researchers are in
universal agreement that technology can motivate
students, enhance authentic task-based education,
and lead to autonomous learning. Nonetheless,
how technology gets used--and how much--depends
entirely on teachers' willingness to use a tool
that directly diminishes their control over the
instructional situation.
Another important element in
the electronic puzzle is computer-mediated communication
(CMC), which may include asynchronous bulletin
boards or online discussion groups, student-student
or student-mentor e-mailing, and synchronous chat.
Scaffolding is an important element in both learning
to speak and learning to write and hence, we may
assume, in reading as well. E-mail has for the
last decade been a favorite means to inspire students
to write more, to write about topics that interest
them, and hence to read what others have to say
on those topics. As students read each other's
work and communicate with more advanced learners
or the teacher, they tend to use expressions others
have formulated, thereby building the appropriatevocabulary
to talk about specific subjects. (See Holliday,1999
, for a summary of the extensive research
on student e-mail and language acquisition through
output; and Peyton, 2000
, for an example of intranet chat scaffolding
with Deaf students). More recently, Weasenforth,
Biesenbach-Lucas, & Meloni (2002) have
explained how threaded discussions on bulletin
boards enhanced learning while producing some
unintended consequences, as students on their
own initiative took over and managed their own
group discussions (p. 7). While these researchers
felt that the asynchronous nature of bulletin
board discussion was helpful, giving learners
more time to read and formulate responses, other
teacher-researchers have found synchronous chat
to be even more motivating.
Real time chat has been called
"talk through fingertips" ( Almeida
d'Éça, 2002 , p. 5), and as
it comes into wider use, students learn how to
read and sort through multiple messages, interruptions
of thought, and commingling threads of discussion--a
very different kind of structure from either linear/paper
or hyperlinked text, or threaded (categorized)
messages on an electronic bulletin board--but
one that is still manageable because a written
record is maintained, and participants can learn
ways to indicate the threads of conversation.
Froman academic standpoint, the most useful chat
is probably one focused on a series of discussion
questions closely linked to recent classroom or
online activities. Chat is especially effective
in an environment like TappedIn
, where breakout groups can isolate themselves
as needed (thus cutting down on the confusion
of multiple threads), and whereone can "project"
a Webpage in a secondary browser window for all
to lookat together. Nonetheless, this type of
reading, though powerfully motivating,is often
quite short and disconnected, sometimes overwhelmingly
colloquial,and more like transcribed talking than
other genres of written text. Almeida
d'Éça (2002) provides feedback
from EFL students on their first experience of
the difficulties and rewards of chat:
here is really a little bit crowded, and the screen changing too fast, the
conversation is hardly be focused on one certain topic. That's my opinion.
(Grace1L);
and reading speed (WeiH);
you gotta think fast and type faster in Eng...good way to exercisemy brain
(IrisCh);
it might be the first time and last time that I came here (CherryH);
I enjoy this new semester's "trend".
. . cuz I love using computers...and it's definitely a must in the years
to come (JoycePC).
(TappedIn log, 22 Sep.
2002, quoted in Almeida
d'Éça, 2002 , p. 7.)
Text chat seems
like a good introduction to real talk (unlike
oral conversation, one can stop, scroll back,
and read the previous comments), and it is yet
one more piece of the electronic puzzle. Note
WeiH's comment that "reading speed"
is a consideration. CherryH and JoycePC express
the two poles of chat: hate it or love it. Yet
most users come to the latter point of view with
just a little practice. Jewel
Reuter (2002), a biology teacher, provides
an excellent informal description of using
chat foracademic purposes, but the social elements
of chatare perhaps its most impressive feature,
particularly as the use of audio and video chat
bbecome morecommon and the technology increasingly
accessible.One teacher uusing textand voice chat
simultaneously with students wrote with great
feeling to the Webheads community about both the
technical advantages of combined audio and text
chat and the social benefits of online communities.
Her remarks also include the sense of satisfaction
the teacher feels in giving up control of the
event (the quote reflects the informal, unedited
nature of community discussion):
Last night I had a particularly
rewarding session with a group of ESL learners,
many of who are almost nightly attenders and
who have therefore developed a lovely sense
of shared community. The session revolved around
different country maps which volunteers used
to give mini-presentations using voice chat
on places and things of interest in their countries.
They also answered other participant's questions.Everyone
was very encouraging of each other's efforts
and the interaction between participants felt
very authentic. Although it can be limiting
tha tonly one person can speak at a time [using
the audio channel], the text chat really makes
up for this by allowing those who are not currently
talking to give a running commentary on what
is being discussed. Those who lacked
microphones were all actively encouraged by
others to get them so 'we can hear your voice".
I really felt a sense of mutual respect and
an openness to learn from each other.
I found it very easy to take a back seat role
and let the students do most of the 'talking'.My
role was just to keep things moving, make the
occasional correction or clarification, to make
sure that everyone was sent the web page under
discussionand knew what was being discussed.
. . .
Another feature . . . I really
enjoy is being able to have the simultaneous
voice and text chat. This makes it really easy
to welcome and 'brief' newcomers without disrupting
the flow of the voice chat discussion. It also
allowsless confident learners to take a back
seat and just contribute through the text chat
or to have quiet 'asides' with others in the
chatroom. Itsalso great from the teaching point
of view because it allows you to make smooth
corrections and modelling alternative ways of
expressing ideas.I think what made last night
really special for me last night was how different
students each took the 'expert's' role when
sharing their knowledge of their homelands.
Although none of this stuff is probably new
to all you'old hands' I'm still feeling that
sense of wonderment about it all taking place
in real time even though we are all spread across
all corners of the globe. At one point, a young
Polish lady was talking about her 'place' and
her dog started barking loudly in the background.
This created a lot of amused commentary from
participants because it was such a homely sound
and seemed like it was coming from just around
the corner! It really underlined for me the
feeling of participating in a 'borderless' community.
"Sonja," evonline20002_webheads message
posted December 12, 2002;also cited in Stevens,
2002 .
Chat, because of its social
functions and the generation of a transcript (the
cross-semination of reading and speaking), strikingly
parallels Charles Curran's "counseling-learning"
or Community Language Learning approach (see Curran,
1960 ). Ongoing discussions of chat by the global
online community of practice, Webheads in Action(see
Stevens, 2002 ; and
Steele,2002 ), and
on NetTeach-L , the
electronic list for online teachers, will no doubt
generate increasing amounts of research on this
form of chaos management and its effects on language
acquisition.
Solutions to the Puzzle
In a cardboard jigsaw puzzle, the solution to how
pieces fit sometimes comes in a sudden, brilliant,
unpremeditated flash. The solution to the electronic
reading puzzle is far more difficult andtime-consuming.
This section offers some suggestions as to how
we can better address our learners' need to read
electronic documents.
One piece of the solution to
our puzzle must be to create standards for Websites
that will be accessed by language learners.The
design of Webpages must take into account accessibility
for specialneeds students, organizational patterns
of the target language, the appropriateuse of
visual and auditory linking, and the building
of cognitive and metacognitive skills. Among many
organizations working on standards for technology
ineducation are CAST
(Center for Applied Special Technology);
CETIS (The Centre
for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards;
see Learning Technology
Standards, 2002 ); ISTE (International Society
for Technology in Education; see ISTE
NETS Project, 2000-2002 ); IATEFL
(the International Association of Teachers
of Foreign Languages, a mainly European-based
group); TESOL (Teachers
of English to Speakers of Other Languages); and
other teacher-based organizations. (To participate
in the TESOL technology standards effort,contact
the author.) Since users evaluate Website credibility
largely onthe basis of visual content, rather
than on the breadth, depth, and qualityof information
(see Fogg, et al., 2002
, p. 2), critical thinking must play an important
role in learner and teacher standards.
The importance of critical or "inquiry" thinking
(also referred to as constructivist education, holistic learning, et al.) cannot
be underestimated as part of the solution to the electronic reading puzzle. Educators
in the U.S. have long noted the "fourth-grade slump" where readers
seem unable to parse meanings out of expository text (see Beck & McKeown,
1991 ). Until the fourth grade, reading instruction often mainly focuses
on decoding skills and assumes comprehension will take care of itself. Some
students never make the transition. Themeans to move to inquiry learning
are well exemplified: Brandl,
(2002) offers a paradigm leading from teacher-directed tasks to student-directed
constructivist learning. Crandall et al. (2002) summarize
the use of cognitive strategies for literacy, while Florez
(2000) assures us that even literacy-level learners use strategies such
as predicting, self-monitoring, and, interestingly, social interactions and "coping" strategies:
risk-taking, willingness to laugh at one's own mistakes, validating and reassuring
others, and so on( Florez, 2000 , pp. 2-3), the very
strategies mentioned in Sonja's description of chat quoted extensively above .
Teacher education itself will
have to place even greater emphasis on the importance
of inquiry as opposed to simple fact-finding.
Green & O'Brien (2002)
report that generally teachers set students
to tasks directed at "finding answers to
the questions rather than evaluating the quality
of the information" both in off-line and
online assignments (p. 1). They recommend constructivist
practices that will help teachers produce "active
students facing cognitive challenges" (p.
51). This approach must also be used in educating
reading teachers.Two excellent articles, Boxie
& Maring (2001) ,and Maring,
Levy & Schmid (2002) , describe "cybermentoring"
as a means of delivering literacy tutorials to
K-12 students while training new teachers; activities
they suggest include e-mail, video conferencing,
and instructional Webpages. Perhaps the most interesting
notion of ongoing teacher education can be found
in the "communities of practice," as
developed in the Webheads in Action group, described
in Stevens (2002) ,
Stevens (2002-2003) ,
and Steele (2002) .
For a general discussion of communities of practice,
also see Wenger (1998)
.
One means to bridge the gap
between decoding and comprehension or skill-building
vs. inquiry learning, may be to move gradually
from heavily teacher-supported Websites that model
and guide inquiry thinking, to student-centered
authentic, content-based tasks, what Brandl calls
"learner-determinedlessons" ( Brandl,
2002, p. 93). Certainly, teachers must be
made aware of the differences between teacher-controlled
vs. student-controlled approaches. However, another
paradigms to allow students (and teachers) from
the very beginning to explore technology and find
their own meanings by using it. An extreme example
of this model is the "Hole in the Wall"experiment
in "minimally invasive education" taking
place in India (see
Mitra & Rana, 2003 ; and a recent report
on PBS's FRONTLINE/World,
2002, with further documentation at Kid's-Eye
View, 2002 ). Two educator-researchers at
the Cognitive Engineering Research Centre constructed
a well protected outdoor kiosk containing an Internet-linked
computer next to a New Delhislum. Children were
allowed to explore the computer hands-on, teaching
themselves how to use its drawing software and
browsing the Internet. Children in the 6-12 age
group "fiddled around" with the touchpad,
and accidentally found that it was clickable;
they invented their own terms for the objects
and events they saw, e.g., "needle"
for the cursor, and "Shiva's drum" for
thehourglass "busy" symbol. Within a
fortnight, the children had learned (and taught
others) to make short-cuts, create folders, use
the calculator, and eventually maximize and minimize
windows, read the Hindi Times online, andeven
change the wallpaper setting. The first of the
kiosks was placed in the wall of the Research
Centre's compound, hence the name "Hole in
the Wall,"but over 50 others have now been
erected in a variety of settings where disadvantaged
kids may construct their own learning. The holes
in the wallgive new force to the idea that children
learn best through experiment, trial-and-error,human
interaction, and the exploration of meanings significant
to themselves--in other words, the constructivist
approach. Teacher education in technology can
proceed as well along similar lines. (See Hanson-Smith,
2000 , where teachers in small groups are
turned loose on computers to create presentation
programs with only minimal instruction).
We may well contemplate what
is at stake in teaching students good electronic
reading habits. Steve Lawrence of the NEC Research
Institute offers us some sobering statistics in
a recent article in Nature ( Lawrence,
2002 ): using the Research Index, he cross-referenced
119,924 refereed articles read at conferences
in computer and related scientific disciplines
and found a "clear correlation between the
number of times an article is cited, and the probability
that the article is online" (p.1). In fact,
there was an average of 336% more citations to
online articles than to offline articles across
1,494 publication venues (p.2). Lawrence goes
on to speculate that the free online availability
of articles, online archives, direct connections
between scientists and research groups, hassle-freelinks,
indexing search engines, and so on, can "maximize
impact, minimize redundancy, and speed scientific
progress" ( Lawrence,2002
, p. 3). Indeed, even in the field of ESOL
and literacy education,articles that are offline
are beginning to be increasingly invisible. Students
around the world, whatever their discipline, must
be able to use electronic media efficiently and
resourcefully, and the electronic reading puzzle
must be one of the areas where teachers become
skilled mentors and guides to solutions.
Dr.
Elizabeth Hanson-Smith is professor
emeritus at California State University,
Sacramento. She was lead design for the
Oxford Picture Dictionary Interactive,
and pedagogical consultant for Live Action
English Interactive. A former Board member
of TESOL, she has edited and contributed
to Technology-Enhanced
Language Learning Environments and,
with co-editor Joy Egbert, CALL
Environments: Research, Practice, and
Critical Issues. She is currently teaching
online courses, including co-moderation
of Real English Online, a group supporting
teachers using video and audio online. |
References |