 
### Teaching with Technology 2013: Educators Talking Tech

### Written By Sheila Conrad, Raneen Elbakry, James Fetterman, Julie Fleischman, Ashley Kendell & Kathryn Weller

### Edited By Dustin De Felice

### Copyright 2013 Sheila Conrad, Dustin De Felice, Raneen Elbakry, James Fetterman, Julie Fleischman, Ashley Kendell & Kathryn Weller

### Cover Design by Julie Fleischman

### Smashwords Edition, License Notes

### Thank you for downloading this ebook. This book remains the copyrighted property of the author, and may not be redistributed to others for commercial or non-commercial purposes. If you enjoyed this book, please encourage your friends to download their own copy from their favorite authorized retailer.

### Thank you for your support!

### The work within this text originated in a course on teaching with technology at Michigan State University. This course is offered yearly as part of the Master of Arts in Foreign Language Teaching (MAFLT) degree, which is supported by the Center for Language Teaching Advancement (CeLTA). For more information, please visit <http://maflt.cal.msu.edu/> or <http://celta.msu.edu/>

### The opinions expressed here are the views of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Michigan State University.

# Contents

Introduction

Tech Talk by Educators

Going Paperless: The Benefits and Challenges of iPads in Education, by Sheila Conrad

Blended Learning vs. Online Learning?, by Raneen Elbakry

BYOD: Using Mobile Devices to Improve Student Engagement and Achievement, by James Fetterman

Teaching Anthropology in the Digital Age: The Advantages of Online Anthropology Courses, by Julie Fleischman

The Use of Social Media in the Classroom, by Ashley Kendell

Automated Essay Grading: Proceed with Caution; by Kathryn Weller

Ideal Tech Infused Classrooms

An Ideal Tech Infused Language Environment. By Raneen Elbarky

Promoting Learner Autonomy: The Ideal Technology-Infused Language Classroom. By James Fetterman

Tech-Infused Forensic Anthropology Laboratory. By Ashley Kendell & Julie Fleischman

An Ideal Tech-Infused Composition Classroom. By Kathryn Weller

A Critique of an Existing Facility

The World Language Department at Bettendorf High School. By Sheila Conrad

Talking Tech, Reviews by Educators

Tech & Creativity

Review of "4 Ways To Ensure Students Learn While Creating."

Review of "Creating Innovators"

Review of "The Wikipedia Project: Changing Students from Consumers to Producers."

Tech & Language Learning

Review of "Brave New Digital Classroom: Technology and Foreign Language Learning."

Review of "Jane's Gems: 25 Free Resources for Learning a Language Online."

Review of Perceptions of the Computer-Assisted Writing Program among EFL College Learners."

Tech & Online Teaching

Review of "10 things I learned about teaching on-line classes."

Review of "The case for "e-Supplements" for improving instructional health: Do they make a difference?"

Review of "Online done right: The importance of human interaction for student success."

Review of "Transition from Tradition: 9 Tips for successfully moving your face-to-face course online."

Tech & Literacy

Review of "Digital and Media Literacy: How Can It Support 21st Century Learning?"

Review of "How to Help Teachers Use Technology in the Classroom."

Review of "Implementing 21st Century Literacies in First-Year Composition."

Tech & Tools

Review of "Reaching for the Skype."

Review of "Hand-held mobile interactive whiteboard."

Review of "Product Review: Boomwriter."

Tech & Twitter

Review of "How important is Twitter in your Personal Learning Network?"

Review of "The Effects of Twitter in an Online Learning Environment."

Concluding with Teaching with Technology

About the Authors

About the Editor

###~~~~###

# Introduction

By Dustin De Felice

Each new day is full of challenges and surprises for any educator. Many of these challenges and surprises relate to helping students become better learners. Over the past few decades, there have been an increasing number of tech tools available to educators to help with these challenges and surprises. In fact, within the last decade, there has been an exponentially growing list of tools and possibilities to help with this constant goal of helping learners succeed. In this volume, you'll read the words and stories of educators adapting to and working with technology in ways that make their classrooms, whether virtual or traditional, better places for all stakeholders. These professionals work in unique situations and they have needs and perspectives that show through in their technology choices. In fact, one of the most lasting and enduring features of this tech explosion is the ability to personalize or individualize one's experience with electronic devices from computers to tablets to smart phones. As an educator, I had the distinct pleasure of working with a small group of dedicated professionals who were interested in discussing, experimenting and critiquing technology use in their classroom as well as in classrooms-at-large. The final result of this time spent together is contained in this volume where each individual educator talks about his or her preferences, experiences and, ultimately, classroom practices. We organized our work into four sections beginning with persuasive essays on specific topics within technology and classroom use and ending with reviews of tech talk. Before I outline the four sections, I must mention that this group of professionals included language teachers (Arabic and French), forensic anthropology doctoral students and composition instructors. This broad representation of fields helped us see our own practices through the eyes of our colleagues and led to greater and more inclusive discussions.

In the first section, you'll find persuasive arguments for specific tech tools or specific approaches to classroom use as it relates to technology. **Sheila Conrad** begins with a discussion on the benefits and challenges of using iPads in education within the context of a high school in Iowa. Her article is a timely contribution to the current push for school districts to implement iPads in their classrooms. She also provides a balanced approach to strengths and weaknesses for such implementation. **Raneen Elbakry** continues our discussion by focusing on two different approaches to learning: blended learning versus online learning. Her article also takes us from the K-12 domain and into higher education. She deftly covers a number of articles on the effectiveness of each learning environment and leaves the reader with a clear choice between the two. **James Fetterman** puts the focus on the hardware side of the equation. In his essay, he looks at bring-your-own-device (BYOD) approaches that are becoming fairly commonplace in businesses and are making inroads into schools and universities. While this approach solves many of the problems related to institutions and organizations maintaining their own hardware, it leads to a number of new and, possibly, more challenging disadvantages. His final conclusion illustrates why this approach may be worth overcoming the challenges presented. **Julie Fleischman** moves our discussion to a very specific issue and one that may be surprising given the immense popularity of online course offerings. In her essay, she puts the spotlight on the lack of current research on courses offered virtually within anthropology departments. Her essay also highlights the challenge for anthropology as a field in bringing online courses to fruition. Any discussion on technology would be remiss without some mention of social media. **Ashley Kendell** investigates the use of social media in multiple environments from the elementary to the university classroom. Her essay focuses on the positive side of the incorporation of social media tools into a classroom, especially as it relates to millennials. Her resounding message is that social media is a necessity for interacting with today's students. Our last essay covers technology in an interesting conundrum. **Kathryn Weller** is a composition instructor who has learned very quickly that one of her most difficult and challenging jobs is providing feedback for her students and their compositions. Given how challenging and time-consuming this task is, it is not surprising that there are a number of software programs for automated essay grading. These programs provide efficiency at the cost of other valuable pursuits. Kathryn is very clear in arguing that these types of programs are only successful when used in specific contexts and with the support of a human grader.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

Tech Talk by Educators

# Going Paperless: The Benefits and Challenges of iPads in Education

By Sheila Conrad

When Bettendorf High School started our one-to-one iPad implementation in the fall of 2012, there was excitement in the air. However, as students' grades dropped and teacher morale with it, everyone wondered if it was all a huge mistake. Now two years into the program, we are seeing the positive, as students are collaborating with one another and finding creative ways to represent their learning. There were many hurdles at the start, but the benefits have made the initial challenges worthwhile.

Rhor (2013) observed the effects of the iPad initiative at Burlington High school in the Burlington Massachusetts Public School District through its second year. Students were witnessed taking notes on the iPad, recording in the foreign language classroom, rehearsing in music class, and even taking the Advanced Placement Spanish exam as approved by the College Board, the iPads having replaced the need for foreign language labs and departmental computer labs.

There were also some problems that Burlington High encountered during the beginning stages of its new iPad initiative. One of the issues was that the school's server crashed on the first day. Another was that the students weren't prepared for some of the newly required skills, such as "syncing to the cloud and managing data" (Rhor, 2013). Students' grades dropped temporarily, but thankfully "the distraction level, which had gone up in the first weeks of the program, had dropped off by 9 percent as of January" (Rhor, 2013). In the end, the benefits outweighed the initial concerns. In its second year of implementation, survey results at Burlington High School showed that most of its students believe that "tablets make learning more fun, improve the quality of homework, and help them understand the material better" (Rhor, 2013).

To note other advantages, a February 2012 study referenced by Rhor (2013) found that iPads used in an elementary classroom in Auburn, Maine helped students by improving literacy. Another 2012 study referenced by Rhor (2013) found that 8th grade students with iPads scored higher on math assessment tests than those in a "flipped" classroom approach at KIPP Academy Charter School in Houston, Texas. While an increase in standardized test scores was not the main goal when implementing the iPads at KIPP, they found this to be an added advantage.

Like Burlington High School in Massachusetts, Bettendorf High School in Iowa is in its second year of its one-to-one iPad initiative. Our students have also been able to do great things with the iPads. They take notes and study, record themselves with audio and video, communicate electronically, and create projects collaboratively.

Bettendorf High has also encountered some of the same initial obstacles that Burlington High faced. In our first year, we had on and off problems with the server because of all the new Internet users. As a solution, the school expanded the bandwidth, and we have not had issues with the server since. Also similarly to Burlington High, grades at Bettendorf High dropped at first with the introduction of the iPads in the school. Students had to learn how to manage the distractions that came with having a new device. Teachers and administrators helped by communicating expectations and enforcing consequences for misuse of technology. Even with the challenges we have faced, Bettendorf High has had overall success with student innovation and achievement since becoming a one-to-one school.

To look now at iPad implementation in post-secondary education, Ian J. Shepherd and Brent Reeves of Abilene Christian University have found that the main advantage of iPad integration is "mobility," which they define as "the ability to access all course information from any location, at any time" (2012). Reeves and Shepherd focused their research on their Microeconomics course, which they felt was a perfect fit; Microeconomics involves productivity and efficiency, just what they were hoping to gain from the iPad. Other advantages they found, after two years (four semesters) of researching the effects of the iPad use in their Microeconomics course, included the following:

" -Increased student participation, involvement, and interest in classes

-Increased contact between students and professors

-Increased positive ratings of class quality and experience

-Innovation in teaching practices"

(p.41).

The iPad increased student engagement for Shepherd and Reeves (2012). Students were able to engage more fully in the course, completing and submitting work, collaborating, and learning on the go thanks to the iPad's mobility. Shepherd and Reeves found that their students were "more likely to carry this device rather than a heavy textbook or laptop computer" (2012). Finally, the iPad improved students' comfort levels and productivity with technology, which is an important skill in and of itself.

Benefitting teachers in addition to students, the iPad was found to reduce back end effort (Shepherd & Reeves, 2012). "Spending 20% more time creating good activities and assignments can reduce back end grading effort by almost 90%" (Shepherd & Reeves, 2006) as referenced in (Shepherd & Reeves, 2012). Among the innovative teaching practices used by the teachers were polls, discussions, and blogs.

Some of the weakness found by Shepherd and Reeves include the fact that technology is not fail-safe. Teachers must still have a backup plan for when the technology fails (2012). It can be difficult to get all staff on board, and it takes time and effort to prepare teachers to work with the technology. One other challenge at Abeline Christian University was the students' inexperience with the iPad. Yet as the semester moved on, students became more comfortable with the technology and were able to use it efficiently to "collaborate and corroborate" (Shepherd & Reeves, 2012) regardless of location. As Abeline student Lilly Assaad stated, "It really helps us be prepared for the professional world" (2012).

To compare Bettendorf High School's experience to that of Abeline Christian University, mobility has also been a huge asset for us. Students are engaged, completing and submitting their work all through the device. Teachers don't have to carry stacks of paper home. Certain teachers, such as Keith Bonnstetter who teaches Spanish and Eric Knudson who teaches Health, have piloted testing on the iPads and have found this to be an efficient and effective way of assessing student learning. While there was some resistance at Bettendorf at first, after many Professional Development sessions and opportunities to communicate and resolve our concerns, teachers are now more on board and are finding that the iPad is saving them time after putting in the initial effort to create relevant activities.

There is no denying that the iPad is a popular tool being implemented in school districts far and wide. Apple has stated that "more than 8 millions iPads have been sold to schools and educational institutions worldwide" (Rhor, 2013). Most recently in the news, the Los Angeles United School District, the second-largest school system in the United States, has started one-to-one iPad integration. This particular district has seemingly faced more struggles than most.

According to a Los Angeles Times article by Howard Blume, the Los Angeles United School District faced many challenges during its pilot, including 300 students at three campuses deleting security filters, "allowing them to freely browse the Internet and prompting officials to suspend the use of iPads at these high schools" (2013). Another challenge has been the budget. "The total for the initiative is about $1 billion, with about half the cost going for the iPads and the other half paying for training, improving schools' Internet access and other costs" (Blume, 2013). While officials had "hoped to cover future technology costs with money that currently is used to buy textbooks," the state of California still requires them to purchase traditional textbooks. Finally, "the Pearson curriculum is incomplete. Teachers have been told to use sample units as part of a planned transition, and then make the full switch next year."

While many school districts have seen great benefits since going one-to-one with iPads, Los Angeles still has progress to be made. It is imperative that teachers and media specialists in the school receive proper Professional Development training before, during, and after the integration. It is disconcerting to learn that students in the Los Angeles United School District were using the iPads inappropriately, and this problem could be solved by proper training of staff. According to a very recent article by Bettendorf media specialist Leanne Wagner (2013), "Professional development (PD) is crucial to keep everyone on track. PD should not end when the devices are handed out." It is also important to have tech support available for security reasons and so that "teachers don't feel like they are stranded on a desert island."

While LAUSD has had more than its fair share of issues during its iPad roll-out, there are ways school districts can work to solve the problems that may arise. From Leanne Wagner (2013), we learn that "teachers need time to be able to learn new tools, talk with each other, and plan for the use of technology in their classrooms." She encourages schools to plan out specific Professional Development time so that staff can "discuss, plan, and experiment when it comes to implementing technology." It is also crucial that teachers feel comfortable taking risks and growing as they learn the best way to use the technology to maximize student growth. "Make it clear from the beginning that it is OK to fail when trying something new," she suggests.

At Bettendorf High School, I have seen first-hand some of the frustrations that arise in the initial stages of iPad implementation. It took consistent and continuous Professional Development time, support from our administration and our media and tech specialists, and patience. Thanks to this recipe for success, the staff at Bettendorf High School has been able to overcome the challenges to see great work from our students as they communicate, create, and collaborate together as 21st century learners using their iPads. In the end, our students are and will continue to be better for the experience.

References

Blume, H. (2013). More questions on L.A. unified's iPad program, but few answers. _Los Angeles Times_. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com

Rhor, M. (2013). iPads expand time and space: More schools using tablets to break down traditional learning barriers. _District Administration_ , _49_ (9).

Shepherd, I. J. & Reeves, B. (2012). iPad or iFad - the mobile classroom. _Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 12_ (5), 40-52.

Wagner, L. (2013). Good grief! Be supportive of teachers when implementing tech. _Learning and Leading with Technology_ , <http://tslg1440.blogspot.com/>

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Blended Learning vs. Online Learning?

By Raneen Elbakry

How can I maximize my students' learning achievements throughout their learning journey? That is a question most teachers strive to address by gathering effective tools in order to help them reach their teaching goals. A few decades ago, teachers were introduced to a very important tool that reshaped the learning environment for both students and educators. Technology became a new way to enhance and complement the teaching process. Using technology in teaching, gives promises to improve the learning experience and its outcomes. ICT or Information and Communication Technology have pervaded the fields of education. In recent years the term "e-learning" has emerged as a result of the integration of ICT in the education fields, (Tanyebinik, 2012). The amount of applications and preferences of technology in the education process varies within a wide spectrum from traditional classroom with little technology usage to a complete online class. According the Michigan department of Education, Nicole Greay said, online learning is a structured learning activity that utilizes technology with internet-based tools and resources as the delivery method for instruction, research, assessment, and communication. Following the application of this technology into teaching, some pitfalls have been identified and this has led to the "Blended learning" phenomenon, Tenyebinik 2012. Rovai and Jordan (2004) claimed that blended learning is a mixture of online learning and classroom that contains some of the facilities of online courses with the presence of face-to-face communication. Other researchers believed that the system called blended learning integrates face-to-face instruction with computer mediated one (Graham, 2006; Stubbs, Martin & Endlar, 2006; Akkoyunlu & Soylu, 2006). The effectiveness of blended learning vs. online learning has been debated among teachers and education institutions. The aim of this paper is to argue the superior advantages of the blended learning model over exclusive online learning, considering some academic reviews and statistics that support these arguments. In addition, this paper explores one example review that presents the insignificant differences between blended learning and online learning. However the weakness of this study's analysis (its data collections and findings) will in fact prove the advantages of blended learning over the online format. Accordingly, it's believed that blended learning started to become recognized as the leading education model for the most successful learning experiences.

"Blended or E-Learning?" is a study by, Taybinik that investigates different learning methods and their advantages, such as blended learning, face to face learning as well as online learning. Taybinik claimed that online learning has proven to negatively impact certain aspects of the learning process and its outcomes. Since e-learning environments present some disadvantages, such as inhibiting the socialization process of individuals, resulting in the lack of face-to-face communication; a new environment has surfaced which is blended learning, Taybinik 2012. The fact that there is no immediate interaction between students and teachers in online learning affects the students' motivations toward gaining a deeper understanding for the target skill. For example, students' discussion in a foreign language class enriches the students understanding of using new vocabularies and the different ways they can be used. It will be extremely different when each student listens to audio files that only introduce him or her to the pronunciation of the new vocabularies / linguistic target skills. Students' communication in the classroom positively adds extra resources that teachers greatly welcome, to complement the academic curriculum benefits. Chen and Jones (2007) outlined other advantages of blended learning, such as a deeper understanding of topics by using web-based resources as well as active participation in class. Furthermore, online learning engagement provides an interactive setting for communication among teachers and students in the classroom and may facilitate cooperative activities even beyond the classrooms (Yuen, 2010). Usta, and Özdemir (2007) studied students' opinions about blended learning environments and their findings proved that students generally have positive opinions about them. The results of the study also proved that high interaction between students and instructor exist in this type of environment, which supports the findings of Akkoyunlu and Soylu (2006), which indicated high demands for face-to-face interaction in online learning.

The lack of face to face interaction between students in online classes also eliminates the connections and camaraderie between the students during the course. The existences of these connections make students excited about practicing their understanding for the curriculum, share their experiences, exchange ideas, while having the support they need from their peers. On the other hand, not having these connections opportunity, leads to negatively affect the community bonds and the support that comes naturally in the traditional classroom. Rovai and Jordan (2004) studied a causal-comparative design to investigate the relationship of "sense of community" between fully online, traditional classrooms, and blended higher education learning environments. They found that blended courses create a sense of community among learners that is stronger than both, traditional and fully online courses. Tinto (1975, cited in Rovai & Jordan, 2004) also argued that drop outs are due to inadequate interactions of higher education students with peers and instructors. It makes sense that if and when students lack the support during their learning process, it builds frustrations, which would may affect their decisions regarding continuing their education in online classes. Evidently, an online or web-based learning environment offers a flexibility that cannot be guaranteed in a classroom environment, while face-to-face classes provide the social communication that students need for learning. So, the integration of these two environments into a blended format reserves the advantages of both learning platforms (Akkoyunlu & Soylu, 2006). Hence, it was concluded that blended learning can be considered as an efficient approach of distance learning in terms of students' learning experience, student-student interaction as well as student-instructor interaction and is likely to emerge as the predominant education model in the future, Taybinik 2012.

In another academic study, according to Echo360 study - the ME2U research project (conducted at the University of Sussex), it was found that students using blended learning technology to view recorded content prior to assessment often produced higher scores. This finding highlights the benefit of online resources that are followed by face to face interaction. This blended format provides peer feedback, teacher-students engaging discussion and maximize the understanding for the target taught concept. On the other hand, if students solely depend on technology resources such as electronic communications, e-readers, or audio clips, that will leave students with unanswered questions and knowledge gabs, which will negatively affect their attitude toward their study and their learning quality. There are numerous surveys conducted by educational institutions that shed the light on the effects of blended learning. For example; the Feedback Loop is a student survey program supported by Echo360 that aims to provide both institutions and the higher education industry as a whole with a consistent tool to measure ongoing perceptions about blended learning and lecture capture, taken from www.echo360.com/studentsurveys. Here are some findings from this survey:

84% of surveyed students responded that the ability to study both online and in class improves their understanding of course concepts. The important role blended learning technology plays in helping students retain curriculum is reflected in the considerable number of students using it to reinforce their comprehension of concepts presented in class. In a related survey, the majority of students (68%) indicated that they would recommend a blended learning course as a result of their satisfaction with their learning experience. Another survey in the same study stated that students like to engage in study social media discussions with their peers, nevertheless, they seldom interact with their instructor. One of the advantages of traditional class is that students get to meet their instructors and engage in immediate conversations. Usually, these conversations can adopt some unstructured responses which lead to more communication channels for the students to inquire and gain more knowledge from their instructors.

As stated from the Echo360 publication; Blended learning technology, ME2U Project Findings on Blended Learning:

Blended learning increased student understanding of course material

Recorded content that explained key concepts was rated highly by students

Accessing recordings improved assessment performance of some students

All staff who participated in the project would recommend the technology to colleagues.

It is obvious from this survey that students favored blended learning over only traditional class or only online classes. While online classes give the students the flexibility in completing as many tasks at their convenience , face to face environment give the students the peer support that motivate them while giving them also the opportunity to connect with their instructors as to maximize their knowledge.

One study's findings minimized the effectiveness of blended learning over online learning. This study was conducted by Lim, Morris and Kupritz, University of Tennessee 2009; Online vs. Blended Learning: Difference in instructional outcomes and learning satisfaction. This study investigates differences in instructional and learner factors between two groups of learners exposed to online only and blended delivery formats, respectively, in an effort to compare learning outcomes and other instructional variables between online and blended delivery methods; Lim, Morrise and Kupritz 2009 said. The participants in this study were from the Human Resources Development program from the same university. They came from a wide range of ages and they all had experience with at least one online class. In its review, this study equally pointed out the advantages and the disadvantages of the online learning. Some of the online learning advantages were that it gives access to education regardless of the geographic locations, provides learners with flexibility modes to continue their study and deliver an immediate training solution to the private sector organizations' employee, Morrise Kupritz 2009 said. Conversely, the study pointed out the online learning mode's disadvantages, for example, limitation in students' participation in learning events unless they are active learners by nature and the lack of community belong where students do not find the willingness to share feeling and emotion regarding their study with other students and instructors.

The major thrust of blended instruction is to overcome the shortcomings of online instruction and utilize various instructional sequencing and delivery strategies to enhance learner satisfaction while also achieving increased learning outcomes, Lim, Morrise, Kupritz 2009 said. The researchers suggested some definitions for blended learning, such as: (a) a learning method with more than one delivery mode being used to optimize learning outcomes and reduced cost associated with program delivery, (b) any mix of instructor-led training methods with technology-based learning, and (c) the mix of traditional and interactive-rich forms of classroom training with any of the innovative technologies such as multimedia, CD-ROM, video streaming, virtual classroom, email/conference calls, and online animation/video streaming technology, Lim, Morrise, Kupritz 2009. The study findings indicated that there is no significant difference in the learning outcome between the two modes; however, the significant difference existed in the instructional and the learner factors, Lim, Morrise, Kupritz 2009.

I respectfully argue that these findings do not reflect an accurate conclusion, particularly if we take a closer look at the data analysis for this study. When students were asked about Reasons for High Learning by Delivery Format (Online vs. blended learning format) 66% agreed that the instructional effectiveness was higher in blended learning compared to 47% in favorer of online learning. When students were asked about Reasons for lower Learning by Delivery Format, twice as many students indicated they experiences a lack of understanding with online learning, as well as a lack of interest in learning contents. For fairness, it was also evident that blended learning did not exceed by much in some categories such as lower Learning by Delivery Format, there was insignificant difference when asked about lack of personal effort. Nevertheless, despite the differences between the two formats, the advantages and effectiveness of the blended learning format has a greater impact on the education and the learning process. Further, another pitfall for this study is that the participants only experienced at least one online learning class. The weakness of the dependences on only the online learning format can be magnified or minimized by the nature of the subject taught. As a result, I expect that as participants have more experiences in different subjects, then the disadvantages of the online format will be more apparent, and will reflect in the research data. Accordingly, I anticipate that researchers will be able to make a more precise distinction between online and blended learning formats.

Ever since the technology emerged in our education system, it has always been questionable whether online classes will take over the traditional classroom; or in other words, is the online class format better than the face to face classroom setting? Undoubtedly, within the realm of the technology resources and its contribution to the educational institutions and private organizations, the online learning format brought enormous benefits equally to students and educators. However studies and research findings, as highlighted earlier in this paper, show that both online and face to face classroom setting complement each other for optimum learning experience results. They both generate a better learning format which is blended learning. Although, some studies questioned the range of effectiveness of blended vs. online learning, yet it admits some of the solely online learning disadvantages such as; the lack of motivations, lack of peers support, and heavier workload. On the other hand, the blended learning has proven to increase the motivation for students, connect teacher and students, which leads to more productive communications and increases the students' perceptive of the course contents. With these advantages, it's no surprise that blended learning is experiencing a dramatic upsurge in popularity. Today, student demand for blended learning courses continues to outpace most institutions' ability to meet the growing need, 2012 student's survey, echo360.

References:

Ruth C. (2012). Blended learning is better than instructor-led or online learning alone. Retrieved from  http://www.astd.org/Publications/Blogs/L-and-D-Blog/2012/07/Blended-Learning-Is-Better-Than-Instructor-Led-or-Online-Learning-Alone

Greay, N. (2013). Learning 3.0: Face-to-face – or both. Retrieved from  http://edwp.educ.msu.edu/new-educator/2013/learning-3-0-face-to-face-online-hybrid/

Tayebinik, M. (2012). Blended learning or e-learning? Retrieved from <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2282881>

Echo360, (2012). _Blended Learning Technology: Connecting with the online-All-the-Time Student_. Retrieved from  http://echo360.com/sites/all/themes/echo360/files/Connecting_to_the_Online_All_the_Time_Student.pdf

Lim, D. H., Morrise, M. L., & Kupritz, V. W. (2012). _Online vs. Blended learning: Differences in instructional outcomes and learner satisfaction_. Retrieved from <http://echo360.com/annual-results>

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# BYOD: Using Mobile Devices to Improve Student Engagement and Achievement

By James Fetterman

With the rising development and implementation of new technologies throughout society, reliance on mobile devices and platforms is becoming more commonplace. Today's global citizens are now growing up, learning, living, and playing on such devices. Some K-12 schools and universities are even embracing these mobile devices in order to increase productivity and efficiency in their respective environments. In contrast with university-provided devices, the Bring Your Own Device or BYOD movement is one that relies on the personal devices of teachers and students to improve teaching and learning. BYOD's many benefits, such as improving student engagement, expanding collaboration, and increasing student academic achievement, necessitate the implementation of such a program in schools throughout the country.

In "Mobile learning and BYOD: implementations in an intensive English program" (2013), Al-Okaily describes the measurable benefits of BYOD, including lower costs than other technology integration, high learner engagement, utilization of 21st century skills, personalized learning, and continued learning not limited to the classroom setting. He notes that achieving a 1:1 teaching situation is a low cost investment for the institution; learners contribute and produce more when they use their own devices; students engage in highly sought after skills, such as problem solving, creativity, and collaboration; and continuous engagement occurs when students have "anytime, anywhere access" to their devices. Additionally, Al-Okaily (2003) describes a study conducted in four classes of an intensive English program that had implemented a BYOD model, where students were "encouraged to use their mobile dives for class work, homework, individual and group assignments, communication and course management. They were invited to continuously use these devices as tools both inside and outside the classroom..." (p. 7). Students were found to be more engaged, with 79% of students participating in voluntary assignments when they were available on their mobile devices and 62% of students considered themselves to be more active when using a mobile device during a lesson. Lastly, the author reviews the course instructor's observations, in which students were observed to be more engaged, actively asked for more online practice, showed an interest in course material, and showed marked improvement in academic achievement.

Another argument for the implementation of BYOD programs across educational institutions can be found in Santos' "Key Challenges Associated with Bringing Personal Mobile Devices to the Higher Education Classroom" (2013). In her article, Santos describes the use of students' personal mobile devices to reduce costs and support learning and teaching. She notes that "educational institutions cannot afford to ignore the use of students' personal mobile devices in education." (p. 2). She affirms that these devices help to enhance classroom learning by allowing students to have access to learning resources at anytime, as well as provide opportunities for students to collaborate and interact with each other. She also highlights the capability of instructors to provide a higher degree of differentiated instruction via students' personal devices. In addition to these benefits, Santos also discusses some of the challenges that BYOD programs face, such as network security, network infrastructure, and equity, and provides ways in which those challenges can be overcome.

In his article "The Trials and Tribulations of a BYOD Science Classroom," (2012) Shaun Nykvist acknowledges the availability and impact of portable mobile devices on society and educational environments. However, he highlights some of the particular challenges to educational institutions, teachers, and students when implementing and employing a BYOD program. Nykvist reviews a small case study of a science class that implemented a BYOD policy for the classroom. Some of the main challenges included access to common software, storing and retrieving data, and network infrastructure. He highlights the discrepancies between applications (apps) between Apple iOS and Android platforms, noting that some apps are significantly different between the operating platforms or even nonexistent on one of the platforms. Perhaps the greatest challenge he outlines is in regards to network infrastructure, noting that "in many cases networks were never initially built to handle an extreme load of users on wireless..." (p. 3). Lastly, he notes a possible issue of equality, considering that all students may not have equal access to mobile devices, resulting in an imbalance where some learners can engage fully with the lesson and others cannot.

A commonality found throughout each of the abovementioned articles is the shift in lifestyle toward mobility. Society and its people are more connected now than ever before, and this mobile interconnectedness will only continue to increase. As such, it is imperative that learning and educational institutions mirror the shifts of society with equal rapidity. Al-Okaily (2013) points out that "it would be a great waste of a potentially active learning experience if higher education institutions hesitate to embrace mobile learning." The majority of students in developed countries already have mobile devices according to UNESCO (2012). Some would argue that BYOD is not the ideal solution for this, since equality among users cannot be ensured. Even though a majority of students possess mobile devices, Nykvist (2012) points out that some students may not have access to them. In order to solve this inequality, an argument can be made against implementing a BYOD program; rather, institutions should provide these devices to their faculty and students. However, Al-Okaily emphasizes the difficulty for "...educational institutions to keep up with the rapid advances in technology through the resources they invest. Meanwhile, students, individually stay updated and equip themselves with the latest technological devices on the market." (p. 1). This results in the educational institutions continuously behind their students in regards to mobile devices. It is also possible to offset the inequality if educational institutions have a select number of mobile devices available to provide to their students without such resources.

Another strong criticism against BYOD and for the implementation of an institution-provided device program is that even if students have devices, their devices are of varying platforms, functions, and available apps. This could result in the inability of students to complete assignments in a similar fashion or even prohibit them from attempting the assignment. In order to overcome these various platforms, it is necessary to create device neutral assignments (DNA), which are lessons that can be completed on any device. (Al-Okaily, 2013). Most often this can be done by generically describing the product and criteria. For example, an assignment should say "give a presentation" rather than "give a PowerPoint," or instead of requiring Microsoft Word, use the general terms "text-based" or "word-processing." Another strategy for implementing DNA is to purposely group students. For example, if an activity requires a camera and a laptop, "pair a student with a smartphone with another who has a laptop. Conversely, group students with similar devices." (p. 6). Overcoming the challenge of inequality can be done with planning and minimal capital investment, and results in a more up-to-date, technologically advanced mobile device program than one that is institutionally-provided.

Lastly, the challenge of overcoming network infrastructure and support are among the top concerns for opponents of BYOD programs. Maintaining and upgrading infrastructure to support the heavy load that mobile devices place on networks are of tremendous importance. Oversaturation can easily occur, resulting in the slow transfer of data and the subsequent disruption of learning activities (Nykvist 2012). Santos (2013) argues that these challenges can be overcome by intuitions desiring to accommodate a BYOD program, but they "...will need to upgrade their network capacity by increasing bandwidth, adding wireless access points, and boosting their network management" (p. 2). Although a significant cost can be incurred through the initial implementation of BYOD, the cost to maintain such infrastructure overtime is significantly less.

Regarding IT support, BYOD has also been criticized for the demand that a number of mobile device users with varying devices will place on IT staff to provide technical support for those devices (Sangani 2013). However, Traxler (2005) highlighted that viewing BYOD and its diversity of mobile devices and platforms as too diverse to support at an intuitional level "...will inhibit experimentation and progress..." (p. 184). Echoing these thoughts, Santos (2013) notes that students are often very comfortable using their personal devices and only minimal top-down technical support is actually needed. A support structure with "an emphasis on a student-to-student network type" is suggested (p. 3). Overall, the challenges of network infrastructure and support raises valid concerns for the implementation of BYOD programs, but the relative ease with which these problems can be overcome should not be a deterrent for their implementation.

In conclusion, BYOD programs can serve to improve student engagement, improve operational efficiencies, boost productivity, and expand collaboration. In a study done by Hwang and Chnag (2011), it was found that after various learning activities, learners taught with mobile learning in these ways saw improvements in their learning interest and attitude. A similar study by Rau, Gao and Wu (2008) found that learners in BYOD programs exhibited increased motivation and performance. There is no doubt that mobile learning is beneficial to increasing learners' academic success. BYOD programs are a natural solution, as these programs can be implemented and updated with greater rapidity greater than top-down, device-provided programs from educational institutions themselves.

References

Al-Okaily, R. (2013). Mobile learning and BYOD: implementations in an intensive English program. _Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 10_ (2).

Hwang, G-J., Chang, H-F., (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. _Computers in Education, 56_ , 1023-1031

Nykvist, S. S. (2012). The trials and tribulations of a BYOD science classroom. In Y. Shengquan (Ed.). _Proceedings from the 2nd International STEM in Education Conference._ Retrieved from <http://eprints.qut.edu.au/55777/1/>

Rau, P., Gao, Q., & Wu, L. (2008). Using mobile communication technology in high school education: Motivation, pressure, and learning performance. _Computers & Education, 50_, 1-22.

Sangani, K. (2013). BYOD to the classroom. _Engineering and Technology Magazine, 8_ (3). Retrieved from  http://eandt.theiet.org/magazine/2013/03/byod-to-the-classroom.cfm

Santos, I. (2013) Key challenges associated with bringing personal mobile devices to the classroom. _QScience Proceedings, 16_. Retrieved from <http://www.qscience.com/doi/pdfplus/10.5339/qproc.2013.mlearn.16>

Traxler, J. (2005). Institutional issues: Embedding and supporting. _Mobile learning: A handbook for educators and trainers_ (pp. 174-187). London: Taylor & Francis.

UNESCO. (2012). Mobile learning and policies: key issues to consider. _UNESCO_. <http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002176/217638E.pdf>

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Teaching Anthropology in the Digital Age: The Advantages of Online Anthropology Courses

By Julie Fleischman

Online courses are a specific form of distance education where students and instructors communicate and learn via the Internet. Communication in these courses can be synchronous, where communication occurs in "real time," or asynchronous, where the communication may be delayed and does not require individuals to be online simultaneously (Blake, 2008; Hose, 2007). As we are now in the Digital Age, online education is becoming ubiquitous in institutions of higher-education throughout the United States.

While there has been expansive growth in online education in the past few decades, as Hose (2007) and Blake (2008) note, anthropologists have contributed very minimally to the discussion and implementation of online education. For example, in 2004 in the United States over 80% of public higher-education institutions offered online courses, and in 2006, there were 3.5 million students enrolled in these courses (Blake, 2008; Hose, 2007). However, very little has been published about the extent of anthropology courses offered online, or anthropology departments' interest in pursuing this avenue of teaching and learning.

Why anthropology has been predominantly silent about this issue is unclear, but an extensive literature review on the topic demonstrates that there are no publications discussing online education in anthropology after 2010; and the most recent publication (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010) is a commentary piece without data. This essay will therefore review some of the published literature addressing online anthropology education, and will argue that online anthropology courses are beneficial for both students and educators.

It is certainly possible that timely and relevant discussions about teaching online courses are occurring among anthropologists in their offices, at conferences, or during departmental meetings, but the published literature reflecting these discussions is scares. The banner year for published studies on distance education in anthropology seems to be 2007, with five publications. Between 2007 and 2009 no publications appear—at least none that could be readily identified either through AnthroSource (a searchable database for anthropological research provided by the American Anthropological Association (http://www.aaanet.org/publications/anthrosource/)) or Google Scholar. As noted above, the most recent publication discussing online anthropology courses was published in 2010 in _Anthropology News_ (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010).

Three of the five publications from 2007 will be discussed below followed by the 2010 publication. The most scholarly of these works published in 2007 is the doctoral dissertation by Hose: "The Pedagogy and Politics of Online Education in Anthropology." Hose (2007) conducted an exploratory study which collected information about the extent and types of online anthropology courses that were offered at four-year and above public institutions in the United States. She also reported on teaching methods and strategies that anthropologists use online.

Hose (2007) received survey responses from 84 anthropology department chairs and interviewed 15 instructors of online anthropology courses. At the time of her survey, there were 2,340 students enrolled in 52 online anthropology classes (Hose, 2007). The majority of courses offered online were upper-level undergraduate courses that spanned all four subfields of anthropology (Cultural, Archaeology, Biological/Physical, and Linguistic).

An interesting aspect of her study was the discussion regarding future departmental plans for offering online courses. Garnered from the responses of department chairs, Hose (2007) states that:

The plans for online offerings of anthropology departments were modest compared to the goals of their larger institutions. More than half of the survey respondents noted that adding or increasing online courses was an institutional goal, but less than 18 percent reported that their departments had comparable plans (p. 76).

However, Hose (2007) notes that collectively the survey indicates that department chairs are considering how to respond to the seeming inevitability that anthropology will be taught online in the future.

To conclude, Hose's (2007) results demonstrate that while the number of online courses offered by anthropology departments is fairly low, the range of subjects is broad. Both introductory and advanced courses are taught online, but many department chairs reported that the range of course subjects that are suited to an online environment are few. The author does address these inconsistencies in her data by stating that contradictions are a natural part of exploratory research. Hose (2007) also states that "the majority of the department chairs attributed the absence or low number of online courses in their departments to a lack of interest or technical expertise among faculty, and to concerns about the efficacy of online pedagogy" (p. 88). Thus, at the time this dissertation was published, anthropology departments were not yet wholly embracing the notion of online anthropology education.

The next publication from 2007 addressing online anthropology courses is that written by Alan Simmons. Simmons (2007) conducted an informal survey to assess how distance education was affecting anthropology. Simmons posed this question in his survey: "Do distance education classes offer the same education value as traditional ones?" (p. 28). He found that responses were extremely variable with many traditionalists stating that distance courses are not the same as face-to-face courses, while others argued that distance courses are either equal to, or superior to, classroom-based courses. Additionally, Simmons (2007) wanted to know whether distance education courses, or other electronic or media-based classes, were sufficient for a faculty member's teaching load. In other words, could faculty members only teach online courses each semester or were they required to teach face-to-face courses as well?

Comparable to Hose (2007), Simmons (2007) reports that the survey results from 66 anthropology departments were variable. However, a few facts were noteworthy: the majority of departments surveyed did not participate in distance education to a large degree; nearly half of the departments did not offer distance education in anthropology; very few departments permitted faculty to teach an unrestricted number of distance education courses; and the majority of distance education is undertaken at state universities.

But what does this informal survey tell us about the role of distance education in anthropology? Simmons (2007) concludes that distance education in anthropology has "not caught on too strongly" (p. 29). Perhaps this is because anthropologists do not consider distance education to be worthwhile, or it might indicate that anthropology is lagging behind the curve "and that those departments that do actively engage in distance education are in fact trend-setters" (p. 29). Simmons (2007) concludes that distance education is clearly a trend within higher education, but it is unclear how anthropology will fit into this new paradigm.

The final article to be reviewed from 2007 is that written by Wasson (2007). This article discusses the development and implementation of the first online anthropology master's program in the United States at the University of North Texas (UNT). The online program was launched in 2006 with the goal of serving students who were unable to attend classes on campus, particularly students with diverse backgrounds (Wasson, 2007). One of the biggest concerns with the implementation of this program was quality. As Wasson (2007) states, "we only wanted to create an online master's program if it could be equal in quality to our highly regarded on-campus program. None of us was willing to develop a mediocre program" (p. 30).

In order to develop a quality online master's program, the faculty established two community-building activities that went above and beyond the coursework to facilitate connections between the students and faculty. These activities included a virtual community and a mandatory on-campus orientation before the start of the program. The student feedback about these activities, particularly the orientation, was positive and the students felt that they were more connected to one another and the faculty (Wasson, 2007).

The author concludes with a discussion of virtual pedagogy design. The UNT faculty implemented new approaches to achieve a high-quality online program because the majority of the online pedagogy literature is geared toward designing undergraduate courses (Wasson, 2007). They attempted to reconstruct the same types of discussions and engagement in the online courses that would happen in face-to-face graduate seminars. They formulated discussions that would encourage student engagement with the readings and debate their ideas with one another, and to think critically about the material being presented. Additionally, students were assigned to a group with whom they would collaborate on a project with real-world implications (Wasson, 2007).

The most recent publication addressing online anthropology courses (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010) discusses both the opportunities and challenges afforded by this mode of education. The authors note that many anthropology professors are afraid to teach an online course for fear of what will be lost: "academic integrity, carefully crafted classroom dynamics, or a tangible learning community" (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010, p. 9). Despite these concerns, the authors' goal for this article was to establish a dialogue about the merits of flexible teaching methods, particularly online courses. The conclusions from this article will be discussed in further detail below.

There are many advantages for students, faculty, and institutions that can be gleaned from online anthropology courses. As many of the authors have stated, the primary benefit of online courses is the improved access for students who cannot be present on campus (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010; Simmons, 2007; Wasson, 2007). Whether the inability to attend face-to-face courses is due to family commitments, distance from campus, work schedules, or difficulty parking on campus, online courses inherently circumscribe these challenges by allow students more flexibility (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010; Hose, 2007; Simmons, 2007; Wasson, 2007). Also, as Simmons (2007) notes, online classes are now frequently being taken by local students in addition to those located away from campus. This increased flexibility permits more opportunities for instructors to engage with students of the "digital generation" from around the country or the globe, and for more in-depth anthropological discussions (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010; Hose, 2007). And from the perspective of the instructor, as Hose (2007) states, online education is a form of "mobile teaching" allowing instructors the flexibility to work beyond the confines of their office or classroom.

Panagakos and Paskey (2010) and Wasson (2007) both discuss the benefits of online (asynchronous) classroom discussions. Wasson (2007) argues that the asynchronicity of discussions is one of the fundamental strengths of an online course because it permits students to take their time composing questions and responses. This allows for deeper and more impressive discussions than those in traditional face-to-face classrooms (Wasson, 2007). "All faculty who are teaching graduate online courses [at UNT]," as Wasson (2007) states, "have been struck by the depth of the online discussions" (p. 31). Additionally, online discussion forums can be less confrontational than face-to-face discussions so many students feel more comfortable having debates with their peers and expressing their opinions about controversial anthropological subjects (i.e., ethics in ethnographic data collection, ethics in the study of human remains, or the concept of race) (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010).

Another benefit of online anthropology courses is the ability to keep enrollment numbers high, while simultaneously reducing the physical impact on the campus (Simmons, 2007). As Hose (2007) notes, student enrollment in online anthropology courses can range from 4 to 300 students. In anthropology departments that are continually experiencing reductions in funding and declining enrollment, online courses can attract more students, particularly those that might not otherwise take an anthropology course (Hose, 2007). Anthropology departments can benefit from reaching a broader audience online, and these online students may eventually choose to major or minor in the discipline (Hose, 2007).

However, there are problems with high attrition rates in online anthropology courses (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010). Panagakos and Paskey (2010) state that they have "experienced attrition rates of 20-40% in [their] online classes, compared to 10-20% for [their] traditional classes" (p. 9). As a remedy for attrition, they offer a useful strategy: explain to students up-front that online courses can be challenging and that students must work together with the instructor to make sure expectations are met (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010). Explaining to students that online courses are equally challenging to traditional classes will help prepare them for the work ahead while also dispelling the notion that online courses are sub-standard in quality or are easy to pass with minimal effort.

Panagakos and Paskey (2010) also argue that they are able to cover more material in greater depth in online anthropology courses than in traditional classes. Additionally, they note that they are able to use resources, such as course management systems, more effectively. Online course management systems—Blackboard, Angel, WebCT, or Desire2Learn—allow instructors to collect useful data on student performance, which is more difficult to do in face-to-face courses (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010; Hose, 2007). Online course management systems also allow instructors to detect plagiarism more easily and utilize tools that help decrease cheating on quizzes or exams (i.e., a large databank of questions so each student receives a different version of the exam or quiz) (Panagakos & Paskey, 2010). All of these tools help to foster an interactive and positive experience for both instructors and students.

It must be noted, however, that while online anthropology courses are advantageous there are fundamental weaknesses. A discussion of these weaknesses is beyond the scope of this essay, but the reader should note that they do exist and they must be considered when implementing online education programs. However, it must also be noted that there was not a single publication that exclusively critiqued the development and instruction of online anthropology courses; most of the publications discussed in this paper presented both sides of the argument. Thus, if there are critiques pertaining to teaching anthropology online, without simultaneous advantages, they have not been addressed in the literature.

As online education continues to proliferate, it is important for the field of anthropology to embrace this mode of teaching and learning. There are numerous benefits for students, instructors, and institutions that can be derived from online courses including: improved access for students, flexibility in teaching and learning for instructors and students, informative and in-depth anthropological discussions, comfort for students in conversing online rather than in face-to-face classrooms, and large course enrollments for departments and institutions. Thus, the discipline of anthropology should embrace online education and reach out to a broader audience of students.

Despite these advantages little has been published on the extent of anthropology courses offered online, or anthropology departments' interest in pursuing online courses. It is unclear why there is such a dearth of literature on this topic, but what is apparent is that more research needs to be conducted about online anthropology education. For example, here are a few questions that should be asked in future studies: Are the needs of online anthropology courses different than other disciplines? If so, how might these needs be addressed? Alternatively, is anthropology uniquely suited for the modality of online education? How do students, both undergraduate and graduate, perceive online courses in anthropology? In the Digital Age, and with quantity of online courses increasing, these questions about the state of education in anthropology must be addressed so the discipline can advance in an informed manner.

References

Blake, R.J. (2008). _Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning_. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Hose, L.H. (2007). _The pedagogy and politics of online education in anthropology_ (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (3306870).

Panagakos, A., & Paskey, A. (2010). Flexible teaching methods: The good, the bad and the ugly of online courses. _Anthropology News, 51_ (6), 9-11.

Simmons, A.H. (2007). An informal survey of distant education in anthropology. _Anthropology News, 48_ (1), 28-29.

Wasson, C. (2007). Designing the first online master's program in applied anthropology. _Practicing Anthropology, 29_ (1), 7-11.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# The Use of Social Media in the Classroom

By Ashley Kendell

As the education system continues to evolve in the 21st century, the role of the teacher is destined to change, and education must inevitably transition into a more technologically driven enterprise. Students today are more comfortable having a conversation via text or Facebook than they are in person. But what does this mean for the education system? Is the use of social media in the classroom beneficial for this generation's youth as it enhances student engagement in class materials? Or will social media have negative consequences because it discourages personal interaction and has certain security risks? These are just some of the questions that will be addressed in this essay on the use of social media in the classroom.

The primary focus of this persuasive paper is the use of social media in the elementary and middle school classroom. Unfortunately, my interests lie in teaching at the university level but the vast majority of articles and research have explored the use of social media in the classroom of students of a much younger age. This is most likely due to the higher risk involved with younger students engaging in online activities. Therefore, I chose to focus on this younger age group, but I feel that many of the arguments discussed in this essay are also applicable to older students including high students and potentially even those at the college level. I feel that this belief is substantiated in an article by Ellison (2008) who states that the millennial learners are thought to respond more positively to teaching practices that incorporate social media tools, thereby expanding their learning classroom both geographically and temporally (p. 100). In the early 2000s, individuals within the eight to 18 year age range spent almost six and a half hours a day engaging with some form of media, social media included (Ellison 2008). Ellison (2008) also reports that young people are adept at using multiple forms of media simultaneously, therefore increasing the actual time of exposure to roughly eight and a half hours a day (p. 100). With the youth of today spending such an extended amount of time online interacting with some form of media, including social media, this paper addresses the debate pertaining to the incorporation of social media in the classroom. The outline of the paper will go as follows: first, I will discuss the benefits of incorporating social media into the classroom. Second, I will present the negative side of incorporating social media into the classroom. Finally, the paper will close with a discussion of why social media is a useful teaching tool that should be incorporated into the classroom and the ways in which the negatives of social media can be ameliorated.

The first article "Social Media in the Classroom" by Jenny Harris is an interesting discussion of social media stemming from the recent increase in bans placed on social media by many elementary and middle schools. The author begins the article by outlining a few of the many forms of social media that can be incorporated into the education system, including: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Edmodo, Blackboard, TeacherTube, and WikiEducator (Harris, 2012). As I am unfamiliar with a few of the forms of social media, Edmodo, TeacherTube, and WikiEducator, I was interested to learn that these forms of social media were stated to have been created specifically for education (Harris, 2012). Harris goes on to discuss her belief that social media as an educational trend is being unwarrantedly banned by many school officials due to increasing concern with inappropriate or dangerous situations that students may be exposed to online. Among the dangers of using social media in the classroom are security risks, privacy issues and the risk of exposure to inappropriate content (Lederer, 2012). While these risks are valid concerns, Harris argues that the reasons for supporting social media in the classroom far outweigh these inherent risks, which with close supervisor can be minimized if not completed negated (2012).

Proponents of social media, including Harris, view social media as "an exciting new tool that allows teachers and students to connect in new and different ways when used with appropriate guidelines and privacy settings" (2012). Social media is an effective way to enhance student interactions, as most students are already fluent in technology by the time they are in elementary school. In this sense, social media is a fun and familiar way for students to interact not only with each other, but also with their teachers, principals and mentors. Social media is also particularly useful in cases where students are too shy to participate in class (Harris, 2012).

Finally, Harris' article presents an excellent example of how social media can decrease the workload of the teacher. "Stacy Kitsis, a high school English teacher turned to social media because of her dilemma with an overwhelming amount of homework to grade and provide feedback on. She decided to experiment with social media and partnered her students together and let them provide each other with direct feedback on homework assignments. The students used a blogging site to complete this task. Katsis reported that her students seemed to put forth more effort knowing that another student was reviewing their work and that communication skills and even courtesy were reinforced. She also found her students to be much more candid when asked to discuss introspective topics related to the literature they were studying. She encountered a few hurdles with technical difficulties and was very cautious about Internet security, but the experiment was very successful for her class" (Katsis, 2008, 30-36).

This example is contrary to what I previously believed about social media, that it would increase my workload as a teacher, and I therefore found this argument to be particularly good at conveying the benefits of incorporating social media into the classroom.

In stark contrast to the benefits outlined by Harris, other educators choose to focus on the threats that young children face while engaging on social media including security risks, privacy issues and exposure to inappropriate content (Lederer, 2012). In particular, many educators are concerned with the threat of sexual predators that frequent social media sites and often target young children. And it's not only inappropriate interaction with adults that teacher's need to worry about. Many students that use social media sites have fallen victim to cyberbullying (Lederer, 2012). Cyberbullying has become a hot topic of discussion related to social media sites and is a big enough concern that some critics have even referred to social media as a "weapon of malicious behavior" (Lederer, 2012).

A major critic of using social media in the classroom, Andrew Reiner, presented a different suite of concerns in his article "Only Disconnect" (2012). In his article, Reiner outlines a number of negative outcomes associated with incorporating social media into the classroom. The first negative discussed by Reiner is the possibility of distraction. Reiner suggests that social media has the capacity for complete distraction and disconnection because encouraged involvement in social media provides an "acceptable" diversion from intellectual pursuit. If you ask a student to participate in a discussion on Facebook, you are in turn opening up an avenue for continuous distraction while logged onto the site. After the assignment is complete, the student may be drawn into other social interactions, thereby detracting from the amount of time they have left to do school work. Secondly, Reiner sites a "pressure to conform" (2012). This pressure stems from students feeling as if they must constantly be engaged in social media so as not to fall behind their peers. In integrating social media into the classroom we are unintentionally creating an unnecessary and academically adverse desire to be popular in yet another learning environment. The third critique of social media in the classroom is the development of "risk aversion" (2012). Reiner believes that social media engagement in the classroom supports a culture of avoidance among our youth. When students are less likely to take risks, they are less likely to develop innovative thought processes and foster creativity. Finally, Reiner suggests that social media promotes an intellectual shallowness whereby students are not encouraged to participate in deep social engagement or intellectual exploration (2012). Conversations via Facebook or blogging sites are often truncated and may not abide by grammatical rules.

In a critique of Reiner's criticisms of social media, Dr. Justin Marquis points out some critical components of the debate relating to the use of social media in the classroom that Reiner failed to address in his whole-hearted criticisms. Dr. Marquis argues that while there are some risks to employing social media in the classroom, there are also some real benefits for students if teachers are willing to "embrace disruptive technology in the classroom" (2012). Marquis (2012) first presents the idea of "social constructivism" in the classroom. Social constructivism refers to the idea that knowledge is increasingly becoming a social construction rather than lying solely within the purview of experts. Social media facilitates social constructivism as it allows students to engage with their peers to recreate and restructure academic subjects and work environments. Likewise, social media supports the development of skills that students will use in the job market in the future, skills such as cooperation, and teamwork. Secondly, Marquis talks about the "Breadth of Knowledge" gained from social media (2012). According to Marquis, when using social media students are exposed to a broader base of opinions and worldviews than they would be in a regular classroom. Because of the global reach of social media websites students can communicate with their peers across the globe and this is stated to be the exact opposite of the "shallowness" reported by Reiner. Finally, Marquis discusses the expansion of "technological literacy" that he has observed with the increasing utilization of social media (2012). "Simply put, one cannot be engaged in deep and meaningful uses of technology without developing the sorts of rich 21st century skills such as information evaluation, troubleshooting, mediated communication, and others that will enable connected learners to become valuable contributors to a connected global economy" (Marquis 2012). Technological literacy has expanded to include many forms of social media including Facebook, Twitter, blogging, etc. (Greenhow and Gleason 2012).

So where does this leave us in the debate about integrating social media into the classroom? There are obviously a lot of benefits to integrating social media into the classroom, but are the benefits enough to negate the inherent risk of pushing kids into an online environment? It is my opinion that, yes, we should integrate social media into the classroom. In the technologically based world that we currently live, the use of online tools, such as social media websites, are encouraging students to be more actively involved in their education and acquisition of knowledge (Huff Post 2011). "Through utilizing teaching techniques that incorporate social media, teachers are able to increase students' engagement in their education, increase technological proficiency, contribute to a greater sense of collaboration in the classroom, and build better communication skills" (Huff Post 2011). With all of these benefits, how can we deny that social media is a new and powerful tool to convey knowledge and increase the breadth of student understanding? With that being said, how do we make social media a safer form of student learning?

As mentioned previously, there are social media tools that were created specifically for education including Edmodo, TeacherTube, and WikiEducator (Harris 2012). According to many of the articles, these education-oriented forms of social media appeared to have fewer risks associated with them than do the larger, Internet-based sites like Facebook and Twitter. Online blogging sites that can be monitored to protect against both cyberbullying and predation are also an efficient means of stimulating online interaction within a medium that today's youth is already familiar and comfortable with. Finally, many social media sites, including Facebook, have been working to establish guidelines that will provide information, support and encourage online citizenship, reduce cyberbullying, and increase Internet safety and security (Huff Post 2011). The National Parent Teacher Association has also been working with social media sites to advocate responsible and safe Internet use to kids, parents, and teachers (Huff Post 2011). As so poignantly stated by Elizabeth Delmatoff, a 7th grade teacher in Portland Oregon, when asked about the bans on social media (Kessler 2010): "Don't fight a losing battle. We're going to get there anyway, so it's better to be on the cutting edge, and be moving with the kids, rather than moving against them...Should they be texting their friends during a lecture? Of course not. They shouldn't be playing cards in a lecture, they shouldn't be taking a nap during a lecture. But should they learn how to use media for good? Absolutely."

In conclusion, the risks associated with employing social media in the classroom are far outweighed by the benefits observed by teachers and students alike and many of the major social media sites are working to develop solutions to even further ameliorate the inherent risks. The youth of today have grown up with cell phones in hand, videogames in tote, and an acute understanding of text message slang, tweeting, and Facebook poking. They have always lived in a world of technological advancement and this is not going to change. Therefore, it is time that educators jump on the proverbial social media train before they get left in the dust. Why fight the tides of technological innovation when it is already so engrained in the lifestyles and social interactions of the children we are trying to teach? If we do not use this technology driven tool to our advantage within the education system, it will undoubtedly be used against us when our course materials are boring and students turn to the Internet as a means of distraction.

References

Ellison, N. B., & Wu, Y. (2008). Blogging in the classroom: A preliminary exploration of student attitudes and impact on comprehension. _Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17_ (1), 99-122.

Greenhow, Christine and Benjamin Gleason. (2012). Twitteracy: Tweeting as a New Literacy Practice. The Education Forum 76:463-477.

Harris, Jenny. (2012). Social Media in the Classroom. Columbus State University Wiki Home. Retrieved from http://educationtrendsandissues.wikispaces.com/Social+Media+in+the+Classroom+by+Jenny+Harris

Kessler, Sarah. (2010). The Case for Social Media In Schools. Mashable.com 29 September 2010. http://mashable.com/2010/09/29/social-media-in-school/

Lederer, Karen. (2012). Pros and Cons of Social Media in the Classroom. Campus Technology Website. 19 January 2012. Retrieved from http://campustechnology.com/Articles/2012/01/19/Pros-and-Cons-of-Social-Media-in-the-Classroom.aspx?Page=1

Author unknown. (2011). Social Networking In Schools: Educators Debate The Merits Of Technology In Classrooms. Huff Post Education. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/27/social-networking-schools_n_840911.html

Marquis, Justin (PhD). (2012). The Advantages and Disadvantages of Student Social Media Use. Online Universities.com. Retrieved from http://www.onlineuniversities.com/blog/2012/10/balancing-advantages-disadvantages-student-social-media-use/

Reiner, Andrew. (2012). Only Disconnect .The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Only-Disconnect/134532/

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Automated Essay Grading: Proceed with Caution

By Kathryn Weller

I have only been a composition instructor for two semesters, but I already realize that giving feedback and assessing student writing is one of the more difficult, time-consuming, and tedious tasks inherent in the career and field I have chosen for myself. I can easily see why there is a push to take advantage of technological advances and make this process less onerous for teachers, students, and universities. However, after reviewing several articles discussing automated essay grading (hereafter, AEG) (Reiners et al, 2011), I believe that feedback and assessment is a task that in many academic writing contexts should be time-consuming and difficult; it is a process that is of utmost value to our students and should not be sacrificed. While there are some benefits, both practical and pedagogical, to AEG programs, they should be used with caution, in certain contexts, and only in support of human graders and instruction.

In this piece, I will first give some basic background information about AEG, gleaned from the pieces I have chosen to engage with. I will then engage with the main points made in each article while demonstrating my stances on the issue. I will continue to explicate my stance as I consider the implications for implementing AEG software in various contexts, including my composition courses.

Using computers to assess student understanding of topics is not new to higher education, and is widely accepted by both teachers and students when the context is multiple-choice or similarly objective formats (Coniam, 2009). What is both newer and less acceptable is the use of technology to assess student essay writing, or automated essay grading, (AEG). Programs designed for this purpose use statistics and comparison to assign a grade category to student writing (Coniam, 2009). The primary benefit claimed by proponents of these programs is the time saved by utilizing AEG rather than solely relying on human graders, with the objectivity and standardization provided by AEG as a secondary benefit (Reiners et al., 2011; Coniam, 2009). The main objections to using AEG stem from the belief that computers cannot "read" writing in the same ways that humans can (Perrin, 2013, p. 105) and that AEG programs lack transparency in the ways scores are assigned (Coniam, 2009).

Of the four sources I will engage with in this piece, David Coniam's "Experimenting with a computer essay-scoring program based on ESL student writing scripts" does the best job of explaining how these AEG programs arrive at the conclusions they do, an aspect of this issue I very much wanted to understand better. By examining the computer essay-scoring program BETSY, in which the "B" stands for "Bayesian," Coniam describes how BETSY operates: "BETSY...first classifies texts according to sets of training materials" (Coniam, 2009, p. 264). Coniam characterizes these classification as "surface features", including "average sentence length" and "the order in which concepts appear and the occurrence of certain noun-verb pairs" (Coniam, 2009, p. 264). In order for BETSY to operate, it needs to be "trained" by analyzing 200 "criterial scripts" for each level of operation. It then performs statistical analyses comparing qualities of the writing in question to those criterial scripts and assigns a score (Coniam, 2009, p. 265). This study in Coniam's piece specifically looks at student writing from secondary students in Hong Kong taking an ESL examination and closely examines the analyses prepared by BETSY, concluding that the scores awarded by BETSY correlate with human rater scores as well as human rater scores correlate with each other (Coniam, 2009, p. 276). While I do not doubt that these analyses and conclusions are valid, the use of BETSY in this case is specific to an examination of a candidate's proficiency in English, which is rarely the primary concern in post-secondary education. While BETSY may perform comparably with "human raters" in this context, one assumes from Coniam's piece that the "human raters" are also primarily concerned with the proficiency and accuracy of the student's English, and not the higher-order concerns a college instructor would be looking for. Additionally, the piece notes that it may be possible for an AEG program to "be fooled by writers", but does not seem to believe that this possibility undermines the effectiveness of the program overall (Coniam, 2009, p. 173).

Both Reiners et al. (2011) and Fang (2010) emphasize less the specifics or inner workings of AEG programs and emphasize more the impressions various stakeholders have of the programs, although Yuehchiu Fang takes a much more neutral stance on the subject. In "Perceptions of the Computer-Assisted Writing Program among EFL College Learners", Fang examines the use of an AEG program called MyAccess and the EFL [English as a foreign language] students' perceptions of the program's two modes, that of an "essay grader" and that of a "writing tool". The study found that "the majority of the learners were dissatisfied with MyAccess as an essay grader" but that "the learners' responses to the use of MyAccess as a writing tool were positive" (Fang, 2010, pp. 250-251). The "writing tool" aspect of the program provides spelling and grammar correction, "an explanation of any problems that arise and offers suggestions about how mistakes might be corrected", and feedback on focus, content, and organization in addition to language use and mechanics (Fang, 2010, p. 247). The learners in this study still prefer their teacher's feedback to that of the AEG program but find the program's feedback useful "particularly in the changes for form rather than for content" (Fang, 2010, p. 252). I can see this aspect of AEG programs being useful both for EFL students and native speakers as well as their teachers; if the program helps the students to improve their usage of English and become more independent writers, then teachers would be able to focus less on issues of usage and more on issues of analysis, logic, audience awareness, etc., i.e. the "content" that AEG programs are less able to engage with.

However, according to Reiners et al. (2011), this perception that AEG programs cannot engage with higher-order concerns is inaccurate. In "Six Key Topics for Automated Assessment Utilisation and Acceptance", the authors present as an established conclusion the idea that AEG technology "has proved to be as accurate as human markers in specific applications" (emphasis mine) (Reiners et al., 2011, p. 60), that "it is no longer true for grading essays" that "computers cannot replace humans in tasks that require higher order intelligent reasoning" (Reiners et al., 2011, p. 61) and therefore AEG should be utilized more widely in post-secondary education. The primary focus of this study and article is why these technologies are under-utilized and the most effective ways to overcome these barriers, which include demonstrations to instructors of the operation and effectiveness of AEG programs. However, the authors do not elaborate further on the "in specific applications" aspect of their claim and focus overwhelmingly on the situations in which their assumptions hold true.

As I engage with Dave Perrin's short opinion piece titled "Robo-Grading and Writing Instruction: Will the Truth Set Us Free?" (2013), I will also begin to discuss more of my own conclusions, as several of Perrin's opinions coincide with mine. As might be evident from the use of "robo-grading" in the title, Perrin does not feel that AEG technology can do for student writing what human instructors can. Citing an interview conducted with Les Perelman, a "skeptic" of AEG and a retired university director of writing, Perrin points out that "where [AEG] fails is in recognizing facts, logic, and truth" (Perrin, 2013, p. 104). Perelman "has manufactured essays based on obviously faulty premises and received [a] top score of six" from ETS's AEG program E-Rater (Perrin, 2013, p. 104). As Perrin puts it, "When facts, logic, and truth become dispensable in the assessment of writing, then writing instruction, ostensibly, will become focused solely on the mechanics of writing" (Perrin, 2013, p. 105). In reading and giving feedback on student writing, I often pose questions to the writer like "Why do you think this claim is true?" and "How does this piece of evidence support the claim you are making?" Based on the articles I have read, AEG programs would not be able to recognize that a piece of evidence does not logically support a claim. In post-secondary education, whether in composition instruction or other critical-thinking based courses, it is these types of logical arguments and analyses that make for quality writing, not correct subject-verb agreement or high average sentence length.

Perrin also addresses the subjectivity versus objectivity aspect of the conversation on AEG:

The proponents of robo-grading laud it precisely because it provides some sort of objective quantification of writing, but writing teachers know that a certain degree of subjectivity is inescapable, and indeed even essential to the assessment of writing, as the self cannot be removed from the act of reading (or grading) any more than it can be removed from the act of writing. (Perrin, 2013, p. 106)

I quote Perrin at length because he so perfectly captures my thoughts on the subject. If the purpose of post-secondary writing instruction and education in general is to prepare students to engage with other thinkers in "the real world", then what good does it do students to learn and practice writing for an automated audience? The audience of a student's real world writing will never be a computer but will always be other humans. The objectivity and standardization of writing is counterproductive to learning to write for the real world, where being able to adjust and tailor writing based on different audiences, situations, and experiences, is vital. As Perrin pithily states, students "must be taught to write for diverse audiences, not algorithms" (Perrin, 2013, p. 106).

Coniam's description of BETSY tells us that that particular AEG program needs 200 sample texts in order to assess new texts (Coniam, 2009, p. 265). This indicates that these programs are most useful (or perhaps only useful?) for large-scale writing assessments with narrow and unchanging prompts, as it would be inefficient to retrain an AEG program every semester with new exemplar essays as the prompts evolve over time or to train the program to tailor to individual professors and their expectations of writing assignments. This is reminiscent of Perrin's point about subjectivity being a necessary component of good writing as well as quality assessment. Furthermore, essays written for a human instructor allow students wider varieties of topics to choose from and place greater emphasis on novelty and creativity. For instance, one project in Michigan State University's Tier-One Writing curriculum is a "cultural artifact analysis", in which students investigate an everyday object of their choosing and analyze what significance that object has in American culture. It would be impossible to have a bank of 200 essays on every mundane object students might choose from, and it is a hallmark of quality analysis that the student writer speaks to a new and interesting significance or relationship, not one that is obvious or trite. In short, by reading these few articles on AEG, it appears that these programs value the opposite of what writing teachers' value. In fact, the pieces rarely refer to the actual instruction of writing and see "writing teachers" as merely the group of people who take issue with their technology. Perrin points out the similarity between writing to appease AEG and "teaching to the test", which has similarly been seen as detrimental to student learning and creativity.

While I do not deny the practical benefits of AEG, they only seem appropriate for a very narrow set of writing situations: the writing situation needs to be large-scale in order to be efficient and effective, and the primary intended learning outcome must be that of standard English usage, rather than analysis, logic, or creativity. In situations where large numbers of students need to be evaluated and Standard English usage is and should be the primary concern (such as TESOL examinations), AEG should continue to be developed and utilized. For a context like the Graduate Record Exam, however, even though prompts may be standardized and a large number of students participate, critical thinking and logic should be of more concern than standard usage, and therefore AEG may not be as appropriate.

I fear that the allure of the efficiency of AEG in these situations will overshadow the many pedagogical reasons that AEG should not be adopted wholesale into post-secondary educational contexts. In order to harness the benefits of AEG without sacrificing higher-order concerns, utilization of AEG must remain secondary to or in service of individual human writing instruction, feedback, and assessment. The "writing tool" aspect as discussed by Fang (2010) is an example of this, as it can help native and non-native writers of English become more fluent with standard English while allowing the teacher to focus on giving feedback based on higher-order concerns. Considering how central learning to write is to education and to our lives, we cannot take the easy way out and abandon effective pedagogy just because teaching well is hard to do.

References

Coniam, David. (2009). Experimenting with a computer essay-scoring program based on ESL student writing scripts. ReCALL: the Journal of Eurocall. 21(2), 259-279.

Fang, Y. (2010). Perceptions of the Computer-Assisted Writing Program among EFL College Learners. Educational Technology & Society, 13 (3), 246-256.

Perrin, Dave. (2013). Robo-Grading and Writing Instruction: Will the Truth Set Us Free? English Journal. 102(6), 104-106.

Reiners, T., Dreher, C., & Dreher, H. (2011). Six Key Topics for Automated Assessment Utilisation and Acceptance. Informatics in Education. 10(1), 47-64.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Ideal Tech Infused Classrooms

How often do we take a moment to reflect on an ideal situation in the course of teaching? Given the demands and rapid pace of today's classroom, educators are often pressed for time and are unable to sit back and reflect on what it is they would need or like to have to ensure their students reach their objectives. In this section, you will find educators who have taken the time to reflect on their teaching and imagine an environment where they could achieve their objectives with the use of a tech-infused classroom (whether virtual or traditional). They had no limits and their imagination served them well. **Raneen Elbarky** envisioned a language classroom that invoked energy, involvement, collaboration and innovation. She clearly details various technology tools that can help her students understand the language and culture they are studying, become active participants in communication using the language of instruction and utilize the tech-infusion to build media literacy skills. Her approach relies very heavily on a synthesis between the learner and the educator through these tech tools. In **James Fetterman** 's ideal environment, he chose to focus on using technology to allow language learners to become more autonomous in their pursuit. His approach incorporates social interaction with learners, the educator and fluent speakers from within the language community. Some of this interaction will come directly from online sources while others will utilize collaborative activities within a traditional classroom setting. In both cases, technology is the cornerstone for this autonomous learning strategy. While language learning is immensely beneficial, students and educators engaged in composition course have also benefitted from new technology and **Kathryn Weller** describes an ideal environment for a more efficient and engaging student-centered experience. Her ideal environment is a blending of hardware (like laptops and computer carts) and powerful writing software. Her approach also focuses on basic tools like word processors and presentation software to ensure students are able to push their writing ability beyond the traditional boundaries of a written page. In all of these ideal environments, the enthusiasm and passion for teaching in these educators' words is contagious. Please enjoy their musings!

Return to Contents

#  An Ideal Tech Infused Language Environment

By Raneen Elbarky

The classroom environment is the core element in producing a productive learning experience. This critical element needs energy, involvement, collaboration and innovation form both students and educators to meet the required 21st century skills for a successful learning experience. The students' passive listing and the teacher being the main driving force of the learning process is a thing of the past and does not provide an ideal classroom setting in our time. Tech-Infused foreign language classroom reshaped the learning landscape and process, as it brought the students' attention and participation to the highest level compared to the traditional classroom setting. My ideal language lab is a place where the language curriculum is meaningful to my students and is facilitated using technology. This paper will discuss some important foreign language (learning) topics and the most ideal way that technology can be infused into the learning process. First, the paper will give a brief understanding of the topic, then will explain the task associated with, followed by three different technology tools for each topic that can be infused into the lesson to enhance its effectiveness. The main topics that will be infused with technology are; learning about the target culture, communication within a multi-lingual community and increasing media literacy.

Understanding the Target culture: Learning about the culture of the target language is a very essential part in acquiring a foreign language. When students learn about the target culture, it brings awareness to the target language through social aspect. It also provides a deeper understanding of authentic situations.

Task: Students will communicate with native students from the target community using technology in an effort to learn about their culture. The non-native students will work in groups to create a survey for thee native speakers. The survey will reflect information about how students in the target community use their time. How much time do native students spend in their culture on homework, leisure activities, community service, family chores, ..etc. FL Students will support the survey's findings with pictures, videos , and short presentation.

Technology Tools used:

a-Google Docs. is a great free tool that helps students to add their ideas, recommendations, feedback and finalize any document without being tied to classroom hours. It's simply an electronic file that allows for multiple authors and can be accessed by Google pass. Teachers can also utilize features such as built-in chat and history revision to share documents with their students. In this task students will have the opportunity to collect their information from different resources and compile their suggested questions for the survey in a Google Doc, where they share it with the rest of the group and complete the final product.

b-Ning.com is a platform that connects communities while sharing text, videos, pictures, audio, email and blogs. It also works great on tables and smart phones. Ning provides better privacy for the students than other social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter especially for K-12 students. Teachers need to set up a Ning community for their classes. Although Ning is not a free platform, it is very affordable considering its features and privacy. In this task students will use Ning.com to connect with native students from the target language to learn about their daily routine in order to create helpful survey.

c-Polleverywhere.com: is an excellent website to collect data by creating as many surveys and send it to as many participants as needed. Non native students will use this tool to send their surveys to the native students group. Answer's can be shown real time, anywhere from a pc, tables or smart phones. Teachers and students can see the results live on the web and then it can be embed it in a power point presentation.

2-Communication: FL students should strive to be active communicators in the target language. FL students should always enhance their ability to express their thoughts and understandings, and be able to communicate them orally and verbally.. FL students also need to be able to understand and comprehend information in the target language either by reading or listing to native speaker. Technology can be an excellent and rich environment to enhance communication skills in learning foreign language.

Task: Students will work in groups to research recipes from the target culture. Each student will communicate using the target language to express their own thoughts and preference of a certain recipes to convince the group with. Once every group chooses a recipe, they need to create a presentation using effective technology tools to explain why they chose this recipe, the region it came from and the type of course to share it with the rest of the class.

Technology tools used:

a-Internet Search engine: The sky is the limit when it comes to what can be found on the web.. Search engines come in many names and functions. They also come in many languages which is great for FL students. These features enable the language learner to practice using their target language on these engines which provide more authentic findings. Some of commonly known internet engines are, Google (comes in Arabic ), Bing, Yahoo, Wikipedia, Dogpile... Etc. Students for this task will search the internet about different recipes recopies that relate to the target language / culture.

b-www.Blogger.com: This is such a great tool for FL students and their teachers, as well to for sharing learning experiences or any tasks in a written form. Using blogs in general enhance the writing and reading skills for FL students. Blogger can be accessed easily with a Google pass, which enables readers and participants to engage in productive conversations, and provide feedback and comments on writing pieces. In this task, students will use their blogs to share their chosen recipes with their classmates and teacher. Students can upload their own videos or pictures to support their choice. Students can follow their classmates' blogs from a PC, tables or smart phones.

c-Microsoft Office PowerPoint: Commonly called PowerPoint. It is part of the Microsoft Office suite that enables users to create presentations composed of informational slides where they can use text, graphics and animation. The users can either display their presentation on projection screens or share it as a stand-alone file. In the latest version of MS PowerPoint students can facilitate more features like embed and edit videos, audio files, and picture editing and co-authoring capabilities (great for group work). In this task students will use PowerPoint to crystallize their research work and findings and share it with their classmates in one easy to follow presentation. PowerPoint presentation proves to attract the students attention to the material presented which enrich the communication flow between the students and the teacher during the learning process. Other software can be used for the same purpose Google Drive and Open Office.

3-Media Literacy: The ability to understand, analyze and create personal meaning from the verbal and visual symbols such as in television, radio, computers, newspapers and magazines is called Media Literacy. The importance of the former relies on the opportunities it provides to conclude a clear understanding for the target culture. FL students should collect and evaluate authentic resources to understand how media reflect language and culture.

Task: Students will observe and collect news headlined from the target culture and from their home community as well. Students should seek three different forms of media resources to collect their data. One great source is http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/flash/. One of its features is allowing the readers to have a glance at the front page of many international newspapers. Students should analyze their data and determine what sorts of events are considered important for each culture, and the similarities and differences between the two cultures. Conclusions and data analysis can be presented as graphics, audio and video clips.

Technology tools used:

a-Smart Art: After students collect their data from different media resources, it is very important to organize the data to effectively present and share it with classmates and their teachers. Smart Art graphic is a visual presentation tool for information and data. Smart Art gives the choice for the students to organize their data based on the relation behind each category such as, list, process, cycle or relationship. The flexibility in quickly and easily switch the lay out for any Smart Art graphic layout offer the students the tool to experiment with different layouts until they find the best one that help in delivering their message. Free Smart Art graphics is easily downloaded from Microsoft Office website and it's easily found in the latest version of Microsoft word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook.

b-Comic Generator: Using the knowledge to think critically and with innovation is the best way for FL students to enhance their linguistic skills. Non native students will benefit from using their acquired language to create an authentic conversation using comic generators free websites. Some examples for free comic generators are, Strip Generator at http://stripgenerator.com/ and Witty Comics at http://www.wittycomics.com/ , both of them do not require registrations and easy to type Arabic. It'll help them think and analyze using their target language while enjoying their imagination in creates interesting situations. In this task, students will use comics to illustrate the important news headline in both media in their target culture and their home media. Comic generator appear to bring energy, creativity to the classroom and most importantly give the students more depth for their target language usage which greatly boosts their fluency and comprehension skills.

c-www.Podomatic.com: This website allows users to enjoy as well as create an unlimited number of audio and video files. Podcasting is a powerful tool for any langue classroom environment. It is simply a digital recording that is made available on the internet, that can be downloaded in any personal audio device. There are many links online that provide great instructors on how to use and create podcasting. I found www.FBCINC.com, a complete tutorial for podcasting. This website is a great guide for the students on how to create, record and publish their own Podcasting. In this task, students will search for podcasting that is topic related to one of the headline news that was collected. Students also will create their own podcasting to share their observation and findings about the similarities and the differences between the important media topic between the target and the home culture. Using Podcasting in FL classroom expand the students understanding about the target culture through authentic language used generated by both native and non native speakers.

Technology tools can enhance and promise rewarding results to the FL students. The following Smart Art is one way to illustrate options that empower language classrooms. FL student's option is as flexible as my Smart Art graphic. We always can expand our knowledge and add other technology tool to explore. It's noticeable as well in this Smart Art graphic that all different branches that serve learning language overlap. That is no different from my ideal language lab where many technology tools can be infused in different topic within the foreign language curriculum. There is also a very inspired diagram that illustrate learning language using technology in this link, http://www.educatorstechnology.com/2012/08/teachers-guide-to-21st-century-learning.html where it shows that many resources , tools and gadgets that can influence our learning process and help us as educators to provide the most rich , appealing and effective learning materials to our foreign language students.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Promoting Learner Autonomy: The Ideal Technology-Infused Language Classroom

By James Fetterman

The ever-changing technological landscape in which we live has many implications for the second language classroom and corresponding pedagogy. These developments allow for a classroom that affords second language learners the opportunity to become more autonomous in their target language acquisition. However, in order to ensure that these goals of autonomy and self-direction are achieved, technology must be implemented and utilized in an appropriate manner. It is no longer sufficient or as effective to simply add technology on top of an existing curriculum with the hopes of furthering its objectives. Rather, a technology infused language classroom is one in which technology is woven throughout and integrated into the syllabus. As such, it is important that the second language classroom utilize technology to promote learner autonomy via collaboration and social interaction, self reflection, and the teacher as a facilitator.

In developing a syllabus that successfully integrates technology and language learning, it is first necessary to discuss the abounding quantity of resources available to language learners and teachers. Unrestricted access to these materials and resources, such as authentic texts, can increase learner anxiety and actually inhibit them from taking responsibility for their own learning and developing autonomy (Murray, 1999). Learners cannot be expected to make gains in proficiency if they are simply provided access to a variety of examples, resources, and technological tools. Rather, technology should be interwoven to the learning goals, implemented with guidance, and utilized as a means to support the learning process.

In order to develop learner autonomy and successfully integrate technology to accomplish that goal, technology must go beyond providing learners with resources. The technology-infused language classroom must make use of collaboration and social interaction (Reinders & White, 2011). Students will be required to interact with both their peers in the class and native speakers not enrolled in the class. In order to encourage this interaction outside of the classroom environment, students will be required to create an account for a social networking site, such as Facebook, and post to that account a minimum of three times per week. They should also respond to the various status updates and posts of their classmates. Constructing their identities as a language learners and online persons helps learners to become comfortable expressing themselves in the target language. Thorne (2006) highlights that this use of technology allows learners to use technology for "...ongoing identity formation and personally meaningful communication..." ( Page 14). Additionally, students develop autonomy by deciding what to share about themselves (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).

Language learning through social interaction and technology does not need to only occur online through social networks. Students will also be provided via the instructor and through technological means access to native speakers of the target language. With the wide array of resources that the Internet affords, it is the role of the language teacher to facilitate this social interaction. Students will be provided with electronic pen pals, with whom they will share about themselves, their lives, and their culture, among other things. This will be done in the target language, and the instructor can provide guiding questions or prompts as necessary to encourage discussion. Vygotsky (1978) indicates that learning takes place through social interaction, allowing students to co-construct their knowledge by interacting with each other and building on the experiences of others. Even in a completely online classroom environment, interaction with instructors and classmates is seen as critical and encouraged at all moments possible (Blake 2008). In order to facilitate such discussion, Evans (2009) notes that conversations must be centered around opinions and topics of interest that are relatable to the learners. Moreover, the choices that learners make will change both the language input they receive and their own output, encouraging learners to take responsibility for their learning and developing their autonomy (Reinders & White, 2011). This co-construction of knowledge not only allows for the development of leaner autonomy, but, as Larsen-Freeman and Anderson (2011) point out, written electronic correspondence is available for later reflection and analysis. This reflection is critical to developing learner autonomy and appropriately utilizing technology for second language acquisition.

Social interaction should also not be limited solely to the online world. Students in a technology-infused language classroom will do most of their learning by working in pairs or groups. Students will work in groups or pairs to review each other's social networking posts, to discuss the content posted there, and to share with the class their findings. Using technology as a spring board for discussion and interaction aids learners in developing oral proficiency (Murray 1999). Additionally, technology now affords learners the ability to share their digital media (outcomes of group projects or tasks, such as digital stories or videos) on the Internet, allowing for interaction with others on a global scale (Hafner & Miller, 2011). Multimedia projects such as these and the sharing of such projects further allow for developing learner autonomy, as learners are engaged in the same kind of media and technologies both in the classroom and outside of the classroom (Warschauer, Schetzer & Meloni, 2000). Moreover, these activities provide students the opportunity to be self-sufficient, as noted by Bull and Kajder (2004, p. 49):

It can provide a voice to struggling readers and writers who might not otherwise find an authentic means of expression. It places the technology in the hands of the learner, allowing him or her to control its use within objectives that are carefully constructed by the teacher.

These tasks, accomplished through the integration of technology, promote social interaction and collaboration as well as the development of learner autonomy. Additionally, it is the goal of the technology-infused classroom to promote learner autonomy via reflection. In addition to the reflection afforded via the permanency of electronic correspondence, both via electronic pen pals and social media, the utilization of blogs is also key to promote leaner autonomy and reflection. Learners will update their blogs on a weekly basis, mostly to reflect on their learning progress, their struggles and their successes. Experimentation can also be done with video blogging or "vlogging" as a means of reflection. In either case, reflection on their own learning and commenting on the reflections of others promote the development of learner autonomy, specifically in the areas of proficiency, content, and affect (Hafner & Miller, 2011).

Lastly, because the technology-infused classroom is designed in order to promote leaner autonomy, the traditional role of the teacher must be modified. It is no longer the role of the teacher to distribute information and knowledge, but rather, to design and plan activities that can be accomplished through the use of technology. Because students are actively involved in group work, social networking, creating and accomplishing multimedia tasks, blogging, etc., the teacher must assume the role of facilitator and monitor, reviewing and encouraging student progress and exploration of the language (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011). Because students are responsible for their learning and the learning of others, this interdependence affords the teacher the opportunity to guide them rather than provide whole group instruction.

In conclusion, the ideal technology-infused language classroom is one that affords learners the opportunity to collaborate with each other, working to accomplish group tasks or multimedia projects. It is also one that promotes social interaction via technological means, such as social networking and electronic pen pals. These methods of communication and interaction also allow for self reflection and analysis, as they have a great deal of permanency and are usually catalogued chronologically. Moreover, self reflection and peer analysis are also encouraged via the use of online blogging and video blogging, where students reflect on their progress, struggles, and successes. Overall, it is through the use of technology that learners are able to develop proficiency in the target language with developing learner autonomy as a primary goal of the technology-infused language classroom. It is through the role of the teacher as a facilitator and the interweaving of these various technologies throughout the curriculum that the technology-infused language classroom will promote learner autonomy and language acquisition.

References

Blake, R. J. (2008). Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Bull, G., & Kajder, S. (2004). Digital storytelling in the language arts classroom. Learning & Leading with Technology, 32(4), 46-49.

Evans, M. (2009). Foreign language teaching with digital technology. New York, NY: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Hafner, C. A., & Miller, L. (2011). Fostering learner autonomy in English for science: A collaborative digital video project in a technological learning environment. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 68-86.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques & principles in language teaching. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Murray, D. E. (1999). Access to information technology: Considerations for language educators. Prospect, 14(3), 4-12.

Reinders, H., & White, C. (2011). Learner autonomy and new learning environments. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 1-3.

Thorne, S. (2006). New technologies and additional language learning. CALPER Working Papers Series, No. 7. Pennsylvania State University: Center for Advanced Language Proficiency, Education and Research.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Warschauer, M., Shetzer, H., & Meloni, C. (2000). Internet for English teaching. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Publications.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Tech-Infused Forensic Anthropology Laboratory

By Ashley Kendell & Julie Fleischman

The field of forensic anthropology has largely developed without the benefit of highly integrated technological innovation. The lack of technology within the field stems from a deficiency in readily available funding as well as the fact that current practitioners are still using methods developed decades ago by the forefathers of the field. Ironically, as forensic anthropology becomes increasingly popular due to shows such as Bones and CSI, it is time that we, as practitioners, work to incorporate new technological innovations into our teaching repertoire as well as our practice. The following paper will describe an ideal forensic/osteological student teaching laboratory. Some of these technologies are currently used by forensic anthropologists while others are not widely recognized for their benefits in teaching the next generation of anthropologists.

The ideal forensic anthropology/osteology laboratory to be discussed in this paper is formatted after a traditional TILE classroom. TILE classrooms, or Transform, Interact, Learn, Engage classrooms, are "learning spaces that are designed to support active-learning, peer instruction, and activities that benefit from access to networked computers" (Van Horn et al., 2012, 1). While the lab setting described in this paper is not a formal TILE classroom, we are going to discuss how we would implement several TILE aspects that are most conducive to a forensic anthropology instructional environment. First, our ideal laboratory would be set up in a series of workstations. Each workstation would have room for roughly 4-6 students to sit comfortably and the workstations would consist of a round worktable. Each workstation would have 3 computers that students could share (one computer for every two students in the lab). The workstations would also have an area for specimens to sit. As human skeletal remains are often very fragile, the center of the table would have a padded area for specimens to rest while not in use. The workstations would also have access to an additional lighting source for use when looking for skeletal pathology, such as porotic hyperostosis, which can often only been seen when cross lighting is applied. Additionally the classroom would be designed in such a way that there would not be a defined front to the classroom; instead there would be monitors on each of the walls so that the students could see a monitor no matter what direction their seat was facing. This classroom orientation facilitates student learning rather than instructor lecturing (Van Horne et al., 2012).

Second, the classroom would allow for multiple types of pedagogy. There would be a ceiling mounted projector for the presentation of PowerPoints. A Smart Board would be affixed to one of the classroom walls. The use of a Smart Board, or interactive whiteboard, is an integral part of our classroom because Smart Boards allow you to project PowerPoints, pictures, displays, etc. onto the whiteboard and then gives you the ability to interact with the image you are displaying by highlighting, coloring, or circling a specific feature. This piece of technology is especially useful in a forensic/osteology lab because our field is highly visual. When describing a skeletal feature, such as a mastoid process which is located behind the ear, an instructor could highlight the region on the Smart Board for a colorful visual representation of the feature being described.

Finally, our classroom would be designed in such a way that the instructor station was linked to a live video broadcast that could be projected on each of the monitors around the classroom. This piece of technology is useful because within the traditional lab setting there are rarely multiple examples of skeletal pathology or traumatic injury. With a live video broadcast, the instructor could present a traumatic injury to the entire class without having to pass a potentially fragile bone around the entire classroom.

There are a number of technological advancements that are regularly used in the field of forensic anthropology. The first technology is Fordisc which is an interactive discriminant function program created by two forensic anthropologists, Stephen Ousley and Richard Jantz (Ousley and Jantz, 2005). Fordisc runs with Windows and has a wide range of uses including the classification of adult skeletal remains by ancestry, sex, and stature based upon a series of morphometric measurements that are entered into the program. To facilitate the use of Fordisc in our classroom we would need to incorporate a number of additional resources, including printers at each station for printing Fordisc results as well as a digitizer.

A digitizer is an essential tool in any forensic anthropology lab because it allows for the efficient recording of metric measurements. Digitizers are 3-dimensional measurement tools that allow you to capture a particular location in space while recording this measurement into a computer database, all with the click of a button. Three-dimensional digitizers are most often used in the field of forensic anthropology for collecting coordinate data from cranial landmarks (defined anatomical locations on the human skull). The coordinate data recorded with the digitizer can subsequently be input into the Fordisc discriminant function program where it is used to determine an individual's sex and ancestry. The determination of sex and ancestry are two techniques used in the identification process and also two methods widely taught in introductory forensic anthropology classes.

There are numerous types of currently available, yet underused technology that forensic anthropology/osteology instructors can incorporate into their classrooms. These include digital or online tools such as Poll Everywhere and Visible Body (explained below) as well as the use of a 3-dimensional scanner and conference calls with professionals. All of these technologies are readily available, but as noted above, limited funding and a lack of knowledge about these tools have negatively affected their integration into classrooms.

Including Poll Everywhere (http://www.polleverywhere.com) questions in PowerPoint presentations is a great way to involve students in the learning process. Asking a general question and viewing student responses can prompt larger discussions, or from an assessment point of view, using Poll Everywhere to quiz the students during the lecture is a great way to measure their progress and comprehension of difficult topics. Poll Everywhere is more interactive than traditional lecture quizzes where the students have to raise their hands or shout out answers; this tool allows them to use their laptops or cell phones to interact with the instructor.

Visible Body: Skeleton Premium is a software package that provides 3-dimensional models of bones, joints, and ligaments and has tutorials and quizzes related to the human skeleton (http://www.visiblebody.com/skeletal_download_overview). Because most forensic anthropology/osteology laboratories have limited skeletal material to distribute, this software would allow students to study the skeleton and the individual bones without needing physical specimens (which can be rare if they are real human bone, or extremely expensive if they are replicas). While computer renderings of the human skeleton should not replace actual skeletal remains in a laboratory, it does provide an introduction to osteology and permits students to virtually rotate and analyze bones.

The problem of acquiring skeletal material for teaching can also be addressed using a 3-D Laser Scanner and a 3-D Digital Printer. A single bone specimen, or an entire skeletal collection, can be scanned and uploaded to a computer. The 3-dimensional model that is created will be identical to the original specimen and can be digitally manipulated, or printed to produce multiple copies (although these copies will be made out of plastic so they will feel slightly different than real bone). Dr. Alison Galloway has implemented this process in her forensic anthropology laboratory so that she can increase student access to skeletal material (Lasnier, 2012). The Bioarchaeological Research Center at the University of Bradford in the United Kingdom has undertaken a similar project to digitally scan skeletal remains with evidence of pathological conditions (primarily Leprosy) (University of Bradford, 2013). This project has created a unique education tool for anyone interested in the health of past societies including clinical physicians, anthropologists, archaeologists, medical historians, etc. The bones have been scanned and the images are posted online to be used by students and practitioners alike, and the digitization of these remains allows for broad dissemination of this fragile and rare skeletal material (University of Bradford, 2013). The ability to digitize and then print in three dimensions allows instructors to produce numerous copies of rare or fragile specimens or to upload them on the computer for students to view and manipulate. This is an exceptional opportunity for instructors and students although the technology is extremely expensive.

Another great use of technology for students and instructors might be conference calls with professional forensic anthropologists. A video conference call would allow professional forensic anthropologists to call into a classroom and then students can ask questions of the professional(s). For example, students may want to know what level of education is needed to become a forensic anthropologist or what forensic anthropologists do on a daily basis. This would be a great way for students to learn more about the field from one or more professionals. This video conferencing system would require monitors or televisions so professionals and students can see one another, microphones, speakers, and web cameras. While this type of technology is often used in the business world or in other academic fields, it is not currently used in anthropology, especially in the context of teaching. It would be a wonderful addition and would add real-life experiences for students.

In conclusion, the ideal forensic anthropology/osteology lab is one in which the emphasis is clearly placed upon student learning and hands on engagement rather than teacher instruction. As forensic anthropology is largely a visual and tactile field, the ideal classroom is designed to facilitate student learning through a number of avenues from interactive modules, to visual representations of pathology and skeletal features. As with any scientific field, forensic anthropology is best learned through experience and interaction with human skeletal remains. The TILE classroom is well suited to this method of learning as the students have access to a wide array of learning tools presented by the instructor and also via the Internet in the form of interactive modules. The present laboratory was designed in a way to facilitate student learning through hands on activities and clear visual representations of skeletal features, but also to best utilize many methods of pedagogy so as to reach all types of learners (i.e. visual, tactile, etc.) within a single teaching environment.

References

Lasnier, G. (2012). _Virtual anthropology uses digital copies to increase access for students_. Retrieved from <http://news.ucsc.edu/2012/10/virtual-anthropology.html>

Ousley, S.D., Jantz, R.L. (2005). _FORDISC 3.0 personal computer forensic discriminant functions_. Retrieved from <http://fac.utk.edu/fordisc.html>

University of Bradford. (2013). _Digitised Diseases_. Retrieved from <http://barc.sls.brad.ac.uk/digitiseddiseases/index.php>

Van Horne, S., Murniati, C., Gaffney, J. D. H., & Jesse, M. (2012). Promoting active learning in technology-infused TILE classrooms at the University of Iowa. _Journal of Learning Spaces, 1_ (2).

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# An Ideal Tech-Infused Composition Classroom

By Kathryn Weller

As a college composition instructor, my students and I will benefit from various technologies in different ways than foreign language students might, but the fundamental concepts of using technology to create more efficient and engaging student-centered learning remain the same. In this piece I will describe what I would consider to be the ideal technological resources needed for a college composition classroom. As my interests are in community college and adult literacy instruction, I will focus on this group and their unique needs as my example student population.

The first and most tangible technological resource I would want in this classroom would be a laptop cart for the classroom. This would serve a number of purposes. Having access to the internet's resources during class will allow students to actively engage in various activities, rather than passively listening to a lecture. These activities can include watching, sharing, and analyzing TedTalks or other online videos, searching for and discussing the qualities of credible sources, or more traditional research such as scholarly journals and trade publications. Students may also choose to take notes during class time, and laptops can make this process more efficient (see discussion of GoogleDocs below). All these activities allow students to create knowledge for themselves, finding and discussing examples of course concepts, rather than the professor telling them what "counts" or what is correct.

It is vital that students have access to a computer and the internet during class, but there are several reasons that I would choose a laptop cart rather than students using personal laptops or holding class in a computer lab. As the students I will be working with will be primarily adults both working and attending school, it would be naïve to assume that all students will own a laptop. By asking all students to use the classroom's laptops, no student will have an advantage over another by being able to use their own laptop. (If students do have laptops at home on which they would like to do the majority of their homework, we will discuss how to use GoogleDrive or Dropbox to easily transfer their work from one computer to another.) Additionally, I will be able to have more control over when students are able to be on their computers, which will minimize distractions. Finally, while holding class in a computer lab would accomplish a number of these objectives, we would be restricted by the physical layout of the desks and computers in the lab. As creating an engaging, collaborative, and learner-centered environment is partially predicated on organization of students and workspaces, the flexibility of desks and laptops in our classroom would be more conducive to group-work, sharing, and discussions than a standard computer lab layout.

The laptops should include basic software, such as Microsoft Word and PowerPoint, as well as some visual design software, such as InDesign or Quark, and some video editing software, such as iMovie or Windows MovieMaker, for students to experiment with when working on multimodal composition projects. While students might not become experts with these programs during our course, they may discover a talent or a passion for these types of projects that will stay with them throughout their academic careers and beyond.

In addition to the laptops themselves, several other technology items would be needed to create a successful technology-infused composition course. It is important that the classroom have a projector and speakers that can connect to a computer for sharing documents and videos with the large group. Other applications that would need the projector might include utilizing polleverywhere.com and sharing PowerPoint or Prezzi presentations. We would use a course management system such as Desire2Learn to house course documents, to facilitate assessment, and to aid in communication. However, we would also utilize GoogleDocs for a number of purposes. Students and I can share documents with each other in order to review drafts of writing projects, to post and respond to journal entries, to schedule conference appointments, and to share course notes in case students were not able to attend class. Other than the assessment functions of a course management system, I wonder if GoogleDocs will become a free alternative and replace course management systems in many college and university environments. Finally, email in general (whether through the course management system, GoogleDocs, or standard email systems) will also play a large role in the classroom. If students have questions about the course expectations, they can contact each other for guidance or ask me for clarification through email, which will allow for faster communication. Additionally, while attendance is crucial, due to the course activities and discussions, email and the course management system will allow students who might not be able to attend class to submit projects and assignments without penalty.

If we look to the larger context within which our classroom exists, students will need access to technological resources outside the boundaries of the classroom. Again, as we cannot expect our students to own or have access to the same technologies we ask them to use within the classroom, computer labs and libraries need to have these programs available to students to work on course projects. These labs should be open as close to 24/7 as possible in order to be amenable to adults' work and family schedules. Also, printing should be available at these locations for a minimal cost, although as an instructor I like to require as little printing as possible.

Overall, I hope to create inclusive and technologically-infused classrooms that allow students to utilize the advantages of technology but without creating additional stress or shame for those who would not otherwise have access or the skills to use them. By having a laptop cart in the classroom and implementing additional technological resources in the classroom and in other college contexts, I feel that I can leverage technology to give students the most complete and useful composition coursework possible.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# A Critique of an Existing Facility

In many cases, there are already ideal facilities available to educators. **Sheila Conrad** is fortunate to work in such an environment. In this section, she critiques the World Language Department at Bettendorf High School. Her critique is a welcome addition to this volume on technology as this lab incorporates the best of traditional technology (computer labs, desktop computers and tech-infused classrooms) and the best of new technology since every student and teacher has an iPad assigned to them. As schools reach a saturation point with technology use, we should encounter more situations like the one Sheila describes. For now, read her school's story to see how cutting edge technology is helping her students develop and improve their language skills.

Return to Contents

# The World Language Department at Bettendorf High School

By Sheila Conrad

The World Language Department at Bettendorf High School consists of nine teachers, and between us we teach four languages: Chinese, French, German, and Spanish. Each teacher has his or her own classroom, equipped with a desktop PC, a projector, an interactive Promethean Board, an Elmo, a wireless clicker for presentations, and a CD player connected to classroom speakers. As a department, we also share a computer lab with 28 working desktop computers. Teachers from other departments are also able to sign up to use this computer lab. Finally, every teacher has an iPad and every student also has an iPad. As a department, we share three full sets of headphones.

Our department's goal is to help students develop the skills they need to communicate in a foreign language and to become interculturally competent. One tool that our department uses in conjunction with the Promethean Board is the software ActivInspire. This software permits one to write or draw on the Promethean Board. The teacher can project bellwork or assignments from the computer and have students take turns coming up to the board to write and discuss answers. There are also numerous review games that can be played on the Promethean Board, including Concentration, Hangman, and Pictionary. In order to project artifacts and documents that aren't already on the computer without having to scan a picture, there is also the Elmo document camera.

As of the past couple years, Bettendorf High School has started a one to one initiative with iPads. The main iPad app that all of the teachers in the World Language Department at BHS use is called NearPod. Teachers create presentations in advance on their computers, but when it comes time to do the lesson, they must launch the presentation through the iPad. Students are able to see the presentation on their own iPad screens. Teachers can plan to have interactive features to keep the students involved. Students can be asked to answer open ended questions, participate in polls, draw, and more. Responses can be shared back with the entire class. Teachers can see when students leave Nearpod. Our department currently has Gold Edition status, which allows us to create and make changes to numerous presentations. While creating the presentations takes some preparation time on the teacher's part, it pays off in the end.

Another popular iPad app within the department is Showbie. Teachers upload and assign assignments through the app, students complete and turn in work, and teachers then leave feedback for their students. My favorite component of this app is that students can complete speaking assignments of up to 5 minutes and submit them through Showbie as a Voice Note. I am able to listen to their work anywhere I bring my iPad. I can leave them written or audio feedback.

Many teachers in our department have created Quizlet accounts with various sets of virtual flashcards and accompanying activities. Students express that the games help them on vocabulary quizzes and tests. They are able not only to write but also to listen to the vocabulary words outside of class on their devices. Here are some of our Quizlet accounts: BHS French teacher (all levels): <http://quizlet.com/madameconrad> ; BHS Spanish teacher (Levels I and II): <http://quizlet.com/arothroffy> ; BHS Spanish teacher (Levels III and up): <http://quizlet.com/bonn> ;

Some teachers in the World Language Department use a course management system to organize their lessons. Since every teacher and every student is provided with a Google account by the school, I choose to use Google Drive to share documents and presentations with my students. The BHS World Language Department chairman, Keith Bonnstetter, uses Moodle to organize his links, activities, and lesson plans. When I interviewed him about Moodle, he said, "It's like having a filing cabinet that's open to the students." He also stated that one of the advantages was that students are able to easily know what they need to do for make-up work on the days that they were absent by using Moodle.

While in many ways, Bettendorf High School's World Language Department is successful in its technological endeavors, there are still ways to improve. One of the main problems we have encountered is that students are relying too heavily on translation devices. Although we teachers warn our students from the beginning not to rely on translators and many of us do activities to show how the translators can be incorrect, our students continue to download translator apps on their iPads or use Google Translate. As a result, many of us have asked students to complete certain writing tasks by hand without using technology to have a better idea of what students can do on their own.

Another problem we have encountered is that the school district has certain websites blocked. Some websites work fine on the teacher network but don't work on the student network. Teachers must plan in advance and have a student volunteer test websites a day or two before their intended classroom use. Our media specialists are able to "unblock" websites that we need to use for class, but they have long to-do lists and therefore require advance notice.

One other foreseeable problem is that our PC computers in our lab are getting old. Many of them are slow and a few do not work at all. While the iPads work great for a variety of activities, the computers are still necessary. One can type much faster with the computer keyboard than the iPad screen. I would suggest that our school district either replace the computers within the next two years or look into buying each student an iPad keyboard for typing capabilities.

Another suggestion for improvement I have is that our department look into FaceTime and Skype as communication tools for our students. We would first need to develop contacts in different parts of the world. Then we would need to coordinate communication across time zones.

With the technology available to us, the Bettendorf High School World Language teachers have been able to create global citizens, serving high school students in an energetic, rigorous, and relevant language-learning experience. With the suggested improvements, I think our department can do an even better job of providing for our students. Every student deserves the opportunity to develop 21st century skills with regards to technology and global communication.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Talking Tech, Reviews by Educators

The one hallmark of the information age is that there is seemingly no end to the amount of information available to us as educators. In this section, you'll find reviews by educators who are finding ways to engage with technology in their classrooms. They searched the Internet to find articles that would inspire, motivate or engage them in some new outlet for making their classroom a better place to learn. Some of these articles look at the connection between technology and creativity. Other articles are focused on specific tech tools or applications (specifically social media). Lastly, you'll find topics related to online teaching, language learning and literacy. The one common denominator within all of these reviews is that there is a succinct overview on the usefulness of the particular article according to these seasoned educators. Take their advice and visit the original articles that capture your imagination or interest.

Return to Contents

# Tech & Creativity

Starting us off on this focus on creativity with technology is **Sheila Conrad** , who reviews a McCusker article on ensuring creativity while also learning. Using Bloom's Taxonomy to frame the discussion, four specific strategies are presented to increase the use of technology to help students learn a specific objective. **Sheila Conrad** also reviews a Wagner article on infusing secondary education with innovation. In this article, Wagner calls for a focus on what students can do with the knowledge they have rather than our current focus on only building knowledge. **Kathryn Weller** completes this section on creativity with a review of a Sweeney article on Wikipedia and a focus on students as producers rather than consumers. In each of these reviews, there is a clear focus on utilizing technology to build creativity that is grounded in objective-driven practice with the ultimate goal being the use of higher order thinking skills.

Return to Contents

McCusker, S. (2013). 4 Ways To Ensure Students Learn While Creating. _Edudemic_. Retrieved from <http://www.edudemic.com/learn-while-creating/>

[Review by Sheila Conrad] This article encourages teachers to move away from worksheets in favor of projects which encourage creativity and innovation, guided by Bloom's Taxonomy and incorporating technology as tools. The author, high school social studies teacher Shawn McCusker, focuses on 4 specific strategies for teachers. According to McCusker, incorporating these strategies will ensure that students actually learn while they create, as opposed to just creating a flashy product with little substance. First, teachers must create a clear objective and communicate this objective to students. Second, teachers should encourage their students to select the proper technological tools based on the ideas they want to express in order to meet the course objective. The ideas to be expressed should determine the tools used, not vice versa. Third, teachers should continually ask their students the question, "How will this show mastery of the learning objective?" in order to encourage them to reflect on the creative process and make changes where necessary. The fourth strategy is to evaluate the process through check-ins and peer and teacher review as opposed to only evaluating the finished product.

I think that the article's strength lies in differentiating between using technology to create something visually appealing but which does not meet the objective and the better method, which is using technology to actually help students learn. As educators, we are encouraged to integrate technology in our lessons, but there are right and wrong ways to do so. McCusker does a nice job clearly articulating strategies, which in my opinion, could be used by any teacher in any discipline and at any level. The author sets up all teachers for success with 4 strategies which are mostly easy to understand and incorporate. The one question I still have is how specifically to evaluate the process. I would like to see a rubric for how this could be done to have a better idea of how to employ this strategy.

As a French teacher, I plan to incorporate what I learned from this article into my teaching. The next time I ask my students to do a project, I will start by clearly communicating the learning objectives. Then, I will allow my students to decide how they will meet the objectives and what tools will best help them get there, encouraging them to be creative and innovative. I will check in with them at least three times during the process and continually ask the question suggested by McCusker. I may also choose to involve peer evaluations in the final evaluation and continue to reflect upon how I might evaluate the process in addition to how well the finished product meets the course objectives.

Return to Contents

Wagner, T. (2012). Graduating all students innovation-ready. _Education Week._ Adapted by Wagner from his recently published book, Creating Innovators: The Making of Young People Who Will Change The World (Scribner, 2012). Retrieved from  http://www.tonywagner.com/resources/tonys-latest-ed-week-commentary-graduating-all-students-innovation-ready-now-available

[Review by Sheila Conrad] This article stresses the importance of students as innovators. Tony Wagner praised the schools High Tech High and New Technology High Schools for focusing on building important skills instead of focusing only on the pursuit of academic knowledge. These skills, which Wagner deems crucial for today's global job market, include critical thinking and problem-solving skills, effective oral and written communication, collaboration and initiative, interdisciplinarity, and digital portfolios. More important than what students know is "what they can do with what they know." As educators, we must prepare our students to further develop their curiosity, their creativity, and their imagination. In other words, we must create "innovation- ready" students.

Wagner does a good job of providing justification for this change in mindset. He gives examples of successful projects at High Tech High. 9th grade students work in groups to imagine and develop a plan for a new business, present their plan to local venture capitalists, and sometimes even have their innovative ideas funded as a result! High school Seniors work in groups to do a service-learning project in which they solve a problem in their community. One group was able to create a new, much-needed new and innovative food storage system for a local food pantry. What this article did not fully address is how to change the mindsets of education departments that are still focused on standardized tests rather than the evaluation of higher-level thinking skills. Wagner believes that the Department of Education needs to make major changes, but did not put forth a proposal in how to bring this about.

Thankfully, I teach in a school district that supports innovation. I am able to encourage my students to take creative risks with their work and be supported by my administration. Inspired by this article, I may have my upper-level students build French digital portfolios and will certainly continue to update my own digital portfolio. I can understand the value of innovation and was happy to see that Tony Wagner, although he supports a change in the way we evaluate students, still values the important skills of critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication. I have always valued these skills and plan to create even more opportunities for my students to be innovative and creative with their foreign-language skills.

Return to Contents

Sweeney, M. (2012). The wikipedia project: Changing students from consumers to producers. _Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 39_ (3), 256-267.

[Review by Kathryn Weller] In teaching a research-based composition course, Sweeney became concerned with the implications behind students asking her if they were "allowed" to use Wikipedia (Sweeney, 2012, p. 256). She saw this question as an indication of students' lack of "information literacy", and so she created a research-based composition course that put Wikipedia, with all its pros and cons, at the center of the students' projects (Sweeney, 2012, p. 256). She describes the three stages of the semester-long research projects: First, the students chose a "youth subculture" to investigate, doing research both within and without Wikipedia to inform those decisions (Sweeney, 2012, p. 258), and wrote a research proposal justifying their decision. The second stage was to conduct and write a piece of primary ethnographic research on their chosen subculture. The third and final stage was to become familiar with the "discourse rules" of Wikipedia and to revise and combine their first two written pieces to create a piece they could submit to the Wikipedia entry for that subculture (Sweeney, 2012, p. 259). While students better understood the nuts and bolts of Wikipedia, Sweeney contends that "the improved information literacy combined with enhanced rhetorical awareness from multimedia composing makes for what I consider an effective assignment" (Sweeney, 2012, p. 262).

The article had several strengths, primarily the inclusion of student responses to the curriculum of the course, the practical information concerning assessment of the projects (something educators will always be concerned with, particularly when faced with something new and different), and the appendices, which showed the actual assignment sheets and rubrics Sweeney used in teaching this course. All of these inclusions help ground the ideas of the piece: some instructors might agree that this course would be great "in theory" but ask how it can actually be carried out, and Sweeney has preempted those questions by including this information. She also shows the varying realities of the situation: rather than making this curriculum sound perfect and amazing, she is up front about the possibilities that students' entries might be removed and that there is a distinct possibility of students abusing their Wikipedia privileges. As a composition teacher and scholar, I also agree with her estimation of the assignment as effective: particularly as this course would be the second in a two-course sequence, rhetorical awareness of audience, purpose, and situation are vital, as are the needs to increase multimodal literacy.

I have never taught a purely research-based composition course, but I can easily see incorporating an assignment such as this into that course. I am not sure I would base the entire semester on this one project, but I think that helping students see the realities of the technologies around them is certainly worthy of a unit. What I might do is ask my composition students to choose a Wikipedia article that interests them and analyze it, both for its content (tone, information, sources) and its structural qualities (whether it is semi-protected, why that would be, what kinds of edits have been done and why). I might ask them to do some additional research on the subject of the article, whether independent of the article or by using the sources cited, and then make a case for making certain changes to the article. I have had students cite Wikipedia in the past and I feel that completing an assignment of this type would help them understand more about this cultural and technological phenomenon.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Tech & Language Learning

Starting off this discussion on language learning and technology, **Sheila Conrad** reviews a chapter from Blake's etext entitled "Brave New Digital Classroom: Technology and Foreign Language Learning." In this concluding chapter to his etext, Blake class for rethinking how we incorporate technology into a language classroom. This use of technology must take into account current language learning theory and be coupled with student-centered environments that include multiple points of entry for technology inclusion. One area of obvious technology inclusion is the acquisition of language through online sources. **Raneen Elbakry** reviews a Hart article on 25 free resources for online language learning. While a simple article, it contains 25 "gems" that provide online resources covering skills, culture and authentic life situations. Our final review on language learning and technology is **Kathryn Weller's** review of a Fang article on the use of computer assistance for writing with students learning English overseas. This assistance comes from a specific program used to automate essay grading and a writing tool that provides diagnostic feedback. Given the plethora of choices available to language educators, these articles highlight how the discussion has moved from finding resources to deciding on which ones to utilize.

Return to Contents

Blake, R. J., Chun, D. M. (2008). Chapter 6: Putting it all together. _Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning_ (pp146-161) Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

[Review by Sheila Conrad] In Chapter 6 of Brave New Digital World, "Putting It All Together," Robert Blake re-emphasizes that the type of technology used in the classroom is not as important as the way it is used. Teachers must choose technology that, based on SLA theory, is likely to enhance student learning and help to build intercultural competence. Blake understands that different teachers have different styles, just as different students have different learning styles. There is a variety of educational media out there, and there are multiple entry points for its use. Some of the tech items mentioned include web pages, CALL, online courses, TV, DVDs, online chats/digital conversation or video conferencing with native language speakers, games, blogs, and wikis.

Blake encourages teachers to create student-centered environments. His writing is clear, straightforward, practical, and helpful. I agree with him that students will remember cultural insights more than grammatical nuances. While grammar has its place, we should focus more on helping students develop their 3rd place as language learners and users. He also gives examples of what not to do: Teachers should not set up only transactional approaches, which focus on one's own culture as the reality as opposed to considering another culture's reality. While, "no one entirely free from the effects of previous experiences (p.152)," teachers should be careful to avoid creating ethnocentric activities or activities which encourage or reinforce stereotypes.

For my own classroom, I will choose tech items carefully, based on how they will "empower students to take power of their own learning process (p.149)." I will strive to use a variety of educational media, as is encouraged in the article. I will allow students to drive discussion, as I have with my student Dana who studied in France last semester. I think I could do a better job of encouraging those who are only just coming into their own as language users to make their voices heard by creating more tasks which foster this communication such as group discussions, digital conversations as well as real-life conversations with native language guest speakers, blogs, and more. This will make my classroom more student-centered and empower my students.

Return to Contents

Jane's Gems: 25 Free Resources for Learning a Language Online – By: Jan Hart <http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=2071422>

[Review by Raneen Elbakry] Jane Hart in her monthly Colum for eLear.com shared with the reader a brief conclusion about her own experience learning a foreign language. How she started and what helped her achieve her goals in learning a foreign language. Hart stressed on the positive impact of immersing in the target language. Students can authentically practice their skills while observing and absorbing newer ones that can unconsciously get added to their linguistic knowledge. Hart provides in her article twenty five online resources for language learning. Hart calls these resources Gems, as it indicates the value and the benefit to language learners. Hart lastly describes being immersed in the culture for the target language as being on the job, while practicing and encountering opportunities to learn from real life situations.

As simple as this article is, it's indeed very rich in resources and beneficial for both language learners and educators. What stands out is that it is very direct and simple to understand and does not require any prior knowledge to follow through or experience the resources it provides. Students and educators can navigate these online linked and immediately start enjoying their language learning experience. It would make a great reference from language teachers to their students throughout the process of a certain level or class. The fact that Hart added a glance of her personal experience to her resource list would motivate students to explore and benefit from it.

After exploring all the 25 links Hart provided, I found many of them can be very helpful to my students. I already created a list of the links that I found beneficial and added some feedback to provide to my new and former students. In the future, I plan to introduce online learning assignments to my students, to encourage them to be active learners of their target language. One of the links that I really admired is ConversationExchange.com. This website's core purpose is encouraging communication between students and native speakers. The website gives the opportunity for the students to choose from over three different type of communication, face to face, correspondence as Pen-Pals or virtual via Skype or similar platforms. I like the different communication choices as it fits different personalities, schedules and learning goals (speaking, listening, reading and writing).

Return to Contents

Fang, Y. (2010). Perceptions of the Computer-Assisted Writing Program among EFL College Learners. _Educational Technology & Society, 13_(3), 246-256.

[Review by Kathryn Weller] This piece reports the findings of a study that asked EFL students what they thought of a computer-assisted writing program known as MyAccess (Fang, 2010, p. 246). Fang first gives some background into CALL/CALI for L2 writing instruction, and then overviews the MyAccess program. The program has two main functions, that of an "automated essay grader" and that of a "writing tool offering diagnostic feedback" (Fang, 2010, p. 247). The results of the study are discussed after the parameters of the study are described. The main results of the study were that "the EFL learners favored the writing tool function over the grading function offered by MyAccess" (Fang, 2010, p. 251), and that when concerned with form (and not content), most of the study's participants felt the program had helped their writing improve. These two conclusions lead to the final conclusion, that a large majority of the students in the study feel that would benefit from using MyAccess again in their future studies.

I appreciate how this article clearly states the limitations of the study and includes all the data collected, so that the reader can draw some of her own conclusions. However, I feel some important points may have been left out of this piece and the study itself. First, the piece does not speak much about how the software actually accomplishes what the article claims it does. Second, asking learners if they felt their writing improved or if the program was effective is important, but should be of secondary importance to whether their writing performance improved in a non-CALL context or in a future writing course where the program was not utilized. I would need more information of this kind before I would be convinced that this kind of software can be effective. Finally, late in the piece, the authors bring in a discussion of motivation, which seems out of place and underdeveloped in the context of the piece.

This is an interesting concept for composition instructors to consider. As my primary interests are in the "content" that the program doesn't seem to deal with, according to the article (rhetorical skills like analysis, awareness of audience and purpose, supporting details and examples), I doubt that I would ever use a program like MyAccess to grade essays. However, I could, with a great deal of deliberation, see allowing students to use a program like this to work on more form-based issues, such as spelling, sentence structures, citations (formatting only), and usage. Allowing students to get more guided practice with these issues would seem to be a boon to their writing skills, and as the piece indicates, allow me to spend more time grading the "content" rather than the "form". These issues of form would be much more prevalent if the students were English-language learners, so it's likely that if my student population were largely English-language learners I might be more inclined to try a system like this. However, without really understanding how the programs work, I'd be afraid that some students' language use issues would be too far beyond the project's power to help, or that the program might discourage students or make them overly worry about their language use.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Tech & Online Teaching

With the current push for more online education, this section of reviews highlights some of solutions available to educators making the transition. First, **Raneen Elbakry** reviews an Everson article on lessons learned while teaching online. This article covers aspects of teaching online like workloads, flexibility and communication. **Julie Fleischman** reviews a Sivula article on the use of "e-Supplements," or digital media files used to provide more information about a particular subject. While their use is now commonplace, Sivula has tied them to current educational theory and highlights their possible effectiveness. **Julie Fleischman** also reviews a Boyers article on online teaching that incorporates human interaction. As more courses are moved online, the quality of human interaction can often be removed, especially considering the current trend of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). This article calls for ensuring online courses are a synthesis of interaction and engagement. The final article on technology and online learning is a MacGregor-Mendoza article on making the transition from traditional classrooms to online teaching. **Ashley Kendell** reviews this practical article on ensuring a successful transition that includes tips for attendance, engagement and management.

Return to Contents

10 things I learned about teaching on-line classes By, Dr. Michelle Everson, ww.elearnmat.acm.org <http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1609990>

[Review by Raneen Elbakry] My experience with teaching on-line classes is rather new. I have been reading many articles to enrich my knowledge about this extraordinary new field. I found Dr. Michelle Everson's article in www.elearnmag.amc to be very informative, as it provides a great insight into online teaching, both theoretically and practically. The author summarized her experiences in teaching online classes over a five year period. She crystallized this experience in ten lessons that should guide new online instructors in the early stages for their new online teaching endeavor.

I believe this article is nicely crafted and sets some expectations for teaching online classes, which can be considered advantages or disadvantages in teaching online class. Dr. Everson provides her own experience in how to overcome every challenge with the best solution that benefits the students, as well as fulfills the teachers with their own achievements. One of Dr. Everson's great lessons is the fact that teaching on-line may seem to require more time than in-class. However, teaching virtually provides the flexibility of working any time, which spreads the work load over a period of time instead of being done mostly in the classroom. Another lesson that was highlighted is the importance of the communication between teachers and students. Open communications and consistent feedback (from the teacher to the students) can motivate the class and overcome any barriers inherent in an online / virtual setting.

One lesson that really answered many of my questions is which of the available new technologies should be used in an online class? It seems to be a rapidly growing field and I wondered how can teachers choose from such a great & rich selection of new tools and software's. . Dr. Everson highlighted the importance of focusing on the benefit of the technology tool rather than the appealing features of such tool. That lesson promotes my core understanding for curriculum and assessments design, which called the backward methods. Teachers should identify the curriculum objectives followed by choosing the best tools that can help the students to master certain skills. Besides giving priorities to the learning goals, teachers also should take in consideration the technology tool accessibility for the students. With online classes, students join from around the globe where low internet speeds or other technological barriers may exist.

I learned a great deal from this article, as well as enjoyed it. I consider it a great reference and a troubleshooting resource for my future online teaching journey.

Return to Contents

Sivula, M. (2011). The case for "e-Supplements" for improving instructional health: Do they make a difference? _eLearn Magazine, 11_. Retrieved from <http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=2060097>

[Review by Julie Fleischman] This study assessed whether traditional MBA students' classroom experiences were improved by the use of supplemental electronic material such as PDF Files, Doc Files, YouTube videos, etc. The purpose of this research was to determine whether the use of electronic and digital media in traditional classrooms affected final course and exam grades. The author adheres to the suggestion by other researchers that theoretical frameworks should be used in eLearning environments since theoretical frameworks allow for hypotheses to be developed and tested in future cases. But what theories can be applied to eLearning? A theory drawn from ACT-R states that knowledge can be broken down into smaller more manageable segments to facilitate learning. This is one of the best models for teaching technology: the easier the technology is to use, the more useful it appears and the more positive the learner's attitude. Additionally, Engagement Theory suggests that learning activities should "(1) occur in a group context (e.g. collaborative teams); (2) are project based; and (3) have an outside focus (authentic)." The results of this study found that among students who used the electronic material more frequently their final course and exam grades were higher than the students who used the material less often. The design of this course followed theoretical models for learning, such as breaking the material down into smaller segments, and the students found this to be useful.

This article is slightly outdated given that many post-secondary education classrooms already incorporate PDFs and Doc files, but the study is interesting. It quantifies the effectiveness of supplementary electronic materials in the classroom and the benefits that come with using these materials. Another positive aspect about this article is the incorporation of educational theory. The author does note, however, that there are some limitations to the study. The use of the electronic supplements was not mandatory, which may have had some influence, and there were no controls in the study. Thus, the results are only tentative, and the author suggests that future research should be conducted.

As mentioned above, many of these supplemental electronic materials are already in use in college classrooms. In the classes I have taken as a graduate student, PDFs are the norm and all of my assignments are written using word processing software (Word Doc files). In classes I have taught, I have incorporated YouTube videos into my lectures and occasionally have asked students to email their Doc files to me. Supplementary electronic material has greatly expanded since this article was written so I envision using more electronic material in future courses, especially since it has been demonstrated to improve students' learning. One of my favorite electronic supplements is online journal articles and it is wonderful to have access to them through the library.

Return to Contents

Boyers, JM. (2013). Online done right: The importance of human interaction for student success. _eLearn Magazine, 9_. Retrieved from <http://elearnmag.acm.org/opinions.cfm?aid=2524201>

[Review by Julie Fleischman] This study discussed the need for interpersonal communication in online education. While online courses offer flexibility and convenience, they are often designed without appreciating the role of human interaction in the teaching and learning experience. One such example is the lauded MOOCs, or Massive Open Online Courses, which offer instruction to thousands of students with limited direct communication. These courses may be a great new way to present information to numerous students, but "distributing information," as the author notes, "is not the same as teaching." A quality online course is one that has a reasonable student-faculty ratio where students and the instructor can interact and share ideas. In well-developed online courses, engagement stimulates exposure to new ideas, socio-cultural exchange, and allows for the development of relationships. The author argues that in a properly taught online course students should experience regular and meaningful interactions with the instructor, create a learning community among fellow students, and gain feedback that encourages future growth. In addition to the online course environment being convenient for the student, it is also freeing for the instructor. The instructor is no longer confined by office hours, but can be reached electronically and feedback between the student and the instructor can be beneficial for both parties. However, instructors should always remember that education cannot be separated from the learning community; they must incorporate one another.

I think this is a very important point and a timely article. I was not aware of MOOCs until beginning this course, but the inability to form relationships and interact with either fellow students or the instructors detracts from the learning experience. I appreciate the argument that the author makes: online education is not doomed to fail because it is different from face-to-face learning, but online courses must be structured to incorporate human interaction. Teaching an online course does not mean that an instructor can simply distribute information; for students to learn there must be dialogue and the exchange of ideas. The author provides advice for designing a successful online course and I believe these are valid expectations for the future of online education.

While I am still getting used to the idea of online education, I was a teaching assistant this past summer for an online course. Because the course was already designed, I felt that the required interaction between the students (blogs and discussion questions) was "intuitive." Of course students need to interact with one another! But it was interesting to be responsible for promoting discussions among students and commenting on their thoughts and opinions. It is equally important for the instructor to interact with the students and this is the argument the author is making. I will certainly take this to heart, and if I ever teach my own online course I will be sure to incorporate as much interaction as possible.

Return to Contents

MacGregor-Mendoza, P., (2013). Transition from tradition: 9 tips for successfully moving your face-to-face course online. _eLearn Magazine_. Retrieved from <http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=2509419>

[Review by Ashley Kendell] Great article! I really enjoyed reading Transition from Tradition... by Patricia MacGregor-Mendoza. The article serves as a basic "how-to" guide for moving your face-to-face class to a completely virtual platform. The main topics of discussion are how to get students to show up to the virtual classroom, how to keep students engaged, and how to manage the chaos of an online learning environment. The article is laid out in a question and answer format with each answer followed by a brief discussion of the suggestions provided by the author. As an example, the author's first discussion pertains to the question of "How do you get students to show up?" Subsequent paragraphs include brief discussions of the following suggestions: (1) Make a plan and stick to it; (2) communicate in short, timely messages.

One of the major strengths of the article is the author's use of examples. The article gives examples of weekly schedules, how to write short yet information packed emails and so forth. I found that the article was incredibly easy to follow and extremely useful because there was no doubt about the intended meaning of each topic of discussion or the answers provided. In addition to providing a general overview to mastering the virtual learning classroom the author also presents a couple of ways to incorporate technology into your online learning environment. As an example, there was a brief discussion on the benefits of several LMS platforms and how to improve the efficacy of discussion boards in an online setting (i.e. provide space for open discussion between students so that they can help each other access course materials etc).

I will benefit from many of the suggestions provided in the article when it comes time to teach my online course. The topic that I found most useful was the discussion on managing the potential chaos of an online course. Two of the suggestions that I will definitely implement in my own course are (1) complete the orientation to level up and (2) let students help each other out. What the author means by "complete the orientation to level up" is that instructors should implement a system comparable to a video game where lower levels must be completed before higher levels can be accessed. In this sense, online courses should mandate orientations modules (i.e. orientation video and short exercises that allow students to practice turning in assignments, taking quizzes, etc.) that must be completed before students can access any further course materials. In making the orientation module mandatory, you are ensuring that they read the directions and course outline prior to starting the course and in turn guaranteeing that you receive fewer emails with questions regarding course materials. The second guideline of "let students help each other" suggests that professors open student discussion boards (aka "Student Help Desk") where students can discuss small issues with each other, such as having trouble locating an assignment or finding the directions for an essay, etc. Again, in opening an avenue for students to talk to each other, the instructor allows more opportunities for self-directed learning.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Tech & Literacy

Even with the proliferation of graphic interfaces and touch screen technology, literacy is still an important element of technology use. **Raneen Elbakry** reviews a message from Robinson on a process model based on five steps for leading students to becoming critical consumers of digital information. This task is increasingly more difficult as more students locate resources online. Student use is important for obvious reasons and successful classroom practice stems from the classroom leader: the teacher. **Ashley Kendell** reviews a Burns article on professional development that increases a teacher's technology use. This article also covers an important concept commonly referred to as the "5Js." This framework is an essential way of ensuring technology literacy in current educators. **Kathryn Weller** reviews a Froelich and Froelich article on implementing current literacy practices into composition courses at the university level. This focus moves the composition classroom from a traditional paper into the realm of projects that incorporate multimedia. In all of these articles, the focus is on how different skills are needed for success in a technology rich environment.

Return to Contents

Robinson, J. (2012). _Digital and media literacy: How can it support 21st century learning? Message from the principal's office._

[Review by Raneen Elbakry] J. Robison in this article is giving his readers a glance at Renee Hobb's book "Digital and Media Literacy". J. Robison states that Hobb's book highlights the importance of incorporating Digital and Media literacy in our students' academic achievements in order to succeed in the 21 century. This importance rely on the fact that students usually get motivated using this technology, however, they are still in need of much guidance in how to use digital and media ethically and effectively. In addition, students need to critically evaluate this massive amount of data & tools they receive, before they use it and integrate it into their work. Robison later specifies that Hobb's provides five main steps that shape this route in order to fruitfully reach digital and media literacy. Hobb's called these steps "A process model for digital and media literacy". The process starts by: 1- Guiding students on how to effectively locate relevant information. 2- Encourage students to critically analyze this information or messages. 3- Generating content and not stick to only being an active consumer .4- Students need to reflect on the impact of this information on their daily live. 5- Students need to share their information and help solve problems using their digital and media intake.

I commend the choice of J. Robinson in choosing such a great book to enhance the educators' knowledge and abilities to help their students to succeed in the 21st century and beyond. Hobb's book touches many educators' challenges within a very board spectrum, from K-12 to college settings. The urge and excitement we all have to introduce and integrate technology in the classroom fades away when we face digital and media literacy berries. Some of which is the overwhelming flood of information and the new devices and software and how to guide our students to choose, use and reflect effectively from it. This book is not only beneficial to the educators to help their students, but it's a great reference to educators themselves to enhance their own skills and become a model in digital and media literacy for their students. Also, I greatly appreciate the connection that I seldom encounter in the technology fields, where the author makes a connection between the usage of the technology and the quality of being a fine human being. Hobb's reflects on how it's critical that students should ethically handle their media and digital intake in order to become a noble citizen while being a digital and media consumer and creator.

This article gives me condensed ideas on how to encourage my students to effectively incorporating cyber information into their learning process. I have always been careful when encouraging my students to locate resources or language materials to practice and enhance their target language. I always do this with students who are older and seem to already have a good understanding of digital and media navigations. However, this article gives me a tool – Hobb's book – that I can use to encourage and transform students (who are new to the digital and media world) to benefit and succeed in learning their target language. Initially I'll provide them with trusted links, and then I'll collect their feedback on how comfortable they felt navigating and gathering information. I'll also ask how beneficial this link was to their target language learning. I believe encouraging students to think critically with the information they receive is the best tool to enhance their ability to use this information effectively and make them a lifelong learner.

Return to Contents

Burns, M., (2010). _How to help teachers use technology in the classroom._ Retrieved from <http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1865476>

[Review by Ashley Kendell] The article How to Help Teachers Use Technology in the Classroom by Mary Burns is an interesting reflection on the efficacy of an Austin-based educational organization's (SEDL) professional development framework, which was developed in the 1990s. The framework for teaching teachers how to incorporate technology into their classroom revolves around the "5Js". The "5Js" are: job-related, just enough, just in time, just in case, and just try it. The professional development framework was first applied on 150 teachers in five different states and subsequently on a series of teachers in Indonesia. The study group was comprised of teachers in very different learning environments so as to provide a better assessment of the efficacy of the "5Js" framework across a broader spectrum of classroom environments. The framework was found to be highly effective in both the United States, where technology plays an integral role in both learning and personal development, and Indonesia where teachers' and students' technology skills are minimal, at best. The "5Js" will be outlined in the next paragraph.

The first J, job-related, reminds the teacher that their main job focus is teaching the curriculum, not to introduce a new technology. Therefore, the focus of any new technological inclusion should be primarily on how that technology item will improve the curriculum and not on the technology itself. The second J, just enough, emphasizes the fact that teachers need to demonstrate just enough knowledge about technology as is necessary for them to complete a curriculum-related or instructional task. The author suggests that the teacher should envision themselves as project managers and their students as "technicians" who will learn the intricacies of technology usage. The third J, just in time, states that technology should be incorporated when teachers are both ready to learn and apply the new technological innovation into their classroom. The fourth J, just in case, invokes adopting a just-in-case attitude. Teachers are often afraid of new technology and a just-in-case attitude necessitates having a plan for any technology-related problems. Finally, the fifth J, just try it, reminds teachers and administrators that without application in the classroom, learning a new technology is a waste of time and resources. School systems should therefore implement a system of monitoring teacher application of technology.

One of the weaknesses of the article is that the "5Js" are very broad suggestions for implementing technology. I did feel that the article was a little outdated in that it was talking a lot about incorporating computers into the classroom. I did however find the suggestions about learning technology to be helpful.

One of my favorite parts of the article was the discussion of "just enough" which reminds teachers that they need only demonstrate enough knowledge of a new technology as is necessary for them to complete a curriculum-related or instructional task. The author suggests that the teacher should envision themselves as project managers and their students as "technicians" who will learn the intricacies of technology usage. This suggestion makes the incorporation of a new technology into the classroom seem a little less intimidating!

I think that I can incorporate many of the suggestions in this article into my own teaching repertoire. While the suggestions are somewhat basic, I think that the author does a good job of reminding the teacher that the small details of technological inclusion are important, such as the timing of learning a new technology and the level of understanding the instructor must have. Finally, the author highlights the importance of the school system at large and administration. Administrators must remember to implement a system of monitoring teacher application of technology. If you are asking your teachers to integrate technology into the classroom you must give them some incentive to do so!

Return to Contents

Froelich, M.G., & Froehlich, P.A., (2013). Implementing 21st Century literacies in first-year composition. _Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 40_ (3), 289-300.

[Review by Kathryn Weller] This piece takes a broad look at the implementation of assignments utilizing 21st century literacies (21CL) in first-year composition. The authors begin by looking at the reasons to integrate these literacies into the curriculum, including helping to prepare students for lives in 21st century businesses and society. They then discuss some of the feasibility and practicality issues one must consider when implementing assignments and curriculums based on these literacies. The first iteration of the 21CL initiative included writing papers as well as creating projects using 21CL, such as "a historical narrative in digital audio, a collaborative documentary in digital video, and a showcase d-Portfolio" (Froelich & Froelich, 2013, p.291). While some students appreciated the opportunity to develop these 21CL skills, several found the requirements to be "unreasonable and unnecessary" (Froelich & Froelich, 2013, p. 292). The second iteration retained similar technological choices, but removed much of the structure of the course, allowing students to choose their own projects, partners, and media. While some students were anxious about the amount of freedom the curriculum offered them, the authors found that the projects produced by students "demonstrate a level of engagement rarely found in the traditional composition course [they] taught in the past" (Froelich & Froelich, 2013, p. 296).

This piece looks broadly at bringing new literacies into the composition curriculum, rather than at specific technologies and their advantages or drawbacks. In this case that seems appropriate, although I wonder if including more specific information on specific technologies would encourage reluctant composition instructors to introduce these literacies into their classrooms. However, the piece does include a number of examples of technologies used by students as well as descriptions of the projects completed, which helps to strengthen the authors' arguments. Additionally, the authors' inclusion of the anxieties and issues experienced by their students shows their willingness to continue working on the problems inherent in this endeavor. Overall, I fear this article would encourage those who were already open to 21CL in the composition classroom, but would not have much effect on those who were against these inclusions, for whatever reasons.

In our first-year writing curriculum, we ask our students to create a "remix" of one of their earlier, traditionally composed pieces. This pieces are frequently created using iMovie, and while they allow students to show their creativity, I still haven't figured out how to help students see the rhetorical connections between a traditional paper and a video, not the way that the author's student did: "I started to realize that the project reflected a paper...Though we weren't writing papers like a traditional writing class, we were still writing but in a more unique way" ((Froelich & Froelich, 2013, p. 296). My students mentioned in their evaluations that they felt the remix project was a waste of time, so I clearly did not accomplish the goals of the project. I wonder if rather than crow-barring the remix project into a rather traditional writing curriculum such as ours, if I were to create a curriculum where these 21CLs were a major element throughout, then the projects would not feel as out of place. However, I still feel that traditional composition pieces are vital, and so I am still unsure as to how to resolve these issues.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Tech & Tools

Tools go by many names and many forms (e.g. apps, software, hardware, components, etc.) and **James Fetterman** tackles a few different examples as they work in a classroom.First, he reviews a Martin article on the use of Skype in a classroom. This article includes possible uses of Skype to supplement and/or practice language skills while also promoting cross-cultural understanding. It also highlights the way communication through Skype can allow for authentic conversations with learners and speakers across the globe. In another review by **James Fetterman** , he reviews an article on the use of interactive whiteboards that are not fixed to a wall. Instead, these particular whiteboards are hand-held and allow teachers to solve many of the challenges facing schools in the 21st century. In concluding with our focus on technology and tools, **James Fetterman** reviews an article on Boomwriter, an online group-writing tool by Kapuler. This free service allows students to create stories and share them within their classroom. Students benefit from the ability to present their work as well as the tools available to conduct peer reviews. In each example, the tools present new ways of interacting with classroom activities and provide students and teachers with authentic and motivating interactions.

Return to Contents

Martin, C. (2013). Reaching for the Skype. _The Journal of Communication and Education_ , Retrieved from: <http://languagemagazine.com/?page_id=2565>

[Review by James Fetterman] Throughout the article, Martin discusses the advantages of supplementing classroom interaction and conversation among peers with Skype-based communication. The author argues that these meaningful interactions by students in the target language with native speakers allow them to practice their language skills and promote cross-cultural understanding. Whether Skype is being utilized for class-to-class conferencing or for student-to-student communication, the importance of their authenticity cannot be undervalued. Lastly, Martin outlines the necessity of internet-based communication in an ever-increasingly global society. She notes that as technology advances, teachers need to continue to explore new ways of incorporating it into the classroom in a way that is relevant to language students in the twenty first century.

One of the most apparent strengths of Skype is its ability to authentically connect students to native speakers from around the world to engage in meaningful conversations with relative ease. This opportunity does not require much technological knowledge and students are able to use it in a variety of ways. Even in rural areas where students may not have exposure to native speakers or less commonly taught languages, students can experience and communicate with native speakers in an authentic way. Another positive feature of Skype is that implementing the technology is a relatively low investment compared to many other technologies, only requiring internet access, a computer, a webcam, and a microphone. This reduces the amount of preparation and set-up time, allowing more class time for actual communication.

Overall, I believe that utilizing Skype in my classroom would be a meaningful and authentic way for my students to engage in cross-cultural communication with native speakers. However, as it currently stands in my school, none of the computers (desktops or laptops) have webcams. As such, it would be difficult to implement the student-to-student conversations that the article discusses. In my current situation, it is more effective to engage in class-to-class conferencing with Skype with my personal webcam. The information in this article regarding planning is also of great use to me in preparing lessons so that I will be able to provide students with the necessary practice beforehand.

Return to Contents

"Hand-held mobile interactive whiteboard," 2003. _Teaching Technology for Education, 7_. Retrieved from:  http://www.teachingtechnology.co.uk/TeachingTechnologyIssue7_MOBIview.pdf

[Review by James Fetterman] MobiView hand-held mobile interactive whiteboards are the topic of discussion for the author of this article, which includes a review of the technology for classroom instruction and an analysis of a case study surrounding a United Kingdom school that has implemented them. The whiteboards are not tied to the wall, as are most interactive whiteboards, freeing the teacher to move around the room. The author argues that interactive whiteboards can solve many of the solutions that 21st century classroom teachers are facing, citing information taken from the case study to support this claim. Teachers are interviewed and provide reasons why these mobile interactive whiteboards allow them to focus on teaching instead of troubleshooting and learning how to use the technology. Lastly, the author briefly outlines the future plans that the Sydney Russell School has to equip all of the remaining staff with a personal device.

The advantages of the MobiView hand-held mobile interactive whiteboards are numerous, as outlined by the author. One of the most apparent strengths of this technology is its ability to increase teacher mobility. By allowing teachers to write and access the whiteboard from anywhere in the room, teachers are able to engage proximity in their teaching. Another benefit of the technology is its user-friendly interface. Teachers do not have to spend much time becoming accustomed to the software and learning how to use it. Also, because the technology is mobile, the whiteboards are assigned to individual teachers, allowing them to maintain their customized settings in whatever room they travel to. This reduction in prep time and customizability is especially beneficial to those teachers who share rooms. Lastly, learners are able to receive more personalized instruction and help because they can access the materials from anywhere, allowing them to go back and watch a video or preview an upcoming lesson.

First, I enjoyed reading the comparison between the MobiView whiteboards and the Promethean ActivSlates, as we have the Promethean boards in every classroom in my school district. However, we do not have the mobile ActivSlates mentioned in the article. I think the mobility that the MobiView whiteboards allow is helpful to engage students by using proximity, and allowing them to become more interactive with the whiteboard. One way that I would use this technology would be to incorporate it into a review game dealing with vocabulary or verb conjugation. I typically play a game with personal dry erase whiteboards in which the class needs to complete a series of verb conjugations or vocabulary sentences by passing the whiteboard from person to person in a relay race of sorts. This would be helpful by making the answers instantly visible to the entire class, allowing the opportunity for immediate, corrective feedback if necessary. Additionally, I would be able to use the MobiView whiteboards for a cultural lesson in which students navigate a travel blog or other Internet website one at a time, but viewing and discovering the content as a class.

Return to Contents

Kapuler, D., (2013). Product review: Boomwriter. _Tech & Learning_, Retrieved from:  http://www.techlearning.com/product-reviews/0072/product-review-boomwriter/53816

[Review by James Fetterman] Throughout this article, Kapuler describes an online group-writing tool called BoomWriter. He notes that that BoomWriter is a free service in which students are able to create and write stories, read the stories others in their class have written, and engage in critical analysis by assessing those stories, all in an online and shareable format. The teacher provides a starter passage (prewritten or written by the teacher himself or herself) and students complete the story in segments. He also discusses the ability of the site to engage and motivate learners to write, highlighting the competitive voting aspect, where students are able to vote on the best segments.

BoomWriter is an excellent way to engage students in creative writing and peer reviewing/analyzing. The starter passage is a great way to demonstrate to students the diversity that comes with creative writing, since everyone will start with the same introduction, but progress quite differently. It is also interesting to note that students are able to vote on the winning "chapter" or passage after reviewing the other passages written by their peers for that chapter. Teachers are also able to provide individualized feedback electronically, so feedback is immediate, available, and reviewable.

The implementation of this would be quite different for a language classroom (when compared to an English class), especially if being incorporated at the lower levels. One of the ways I would like to implement this would be in a semester or year-long manner. Students could write one chapter per unit, so as to engage their presentational writing skills in a consistent manner. They could incorporate the particular unit's vocabulary and grammar structures, while still maintaining a cohesive story. This would be a great accomplishment for students at the end of the year to have completed a book in the target language, and it could even be ordered and sent to them.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Tech & Twitter

The influence of social media continues to grow and their applications within classrooms are constantly begin debated. **Julie Fleischman** reviews a Lalonde article on the importance of Twitter in learning through peers and colleagues. In this article, the benefits of using a social media like Twitter are brought to the forefront because of the ease of connecting to a wider audience. **Ashley Kendell** reviews a Rath article on using Twitter to bolster a learning community online. One of the most interesting findings from this study is that for all its benefits, students reported they would prefer a course where Twitter was not a requirement. Both of these reviews point to the ever-changing nature of social media and provide a good starting point for educators interested in incorporating such a tool within an online course.

Return to Contents

Lalonde, C. (2012). How important is Twitter in your personal learning network? _eLearn Magazine, 9_. Retrieved from <http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=2379624>

[Review by Julie Fleischman] This article is derived from the author's Masters thesis research which addressed the connection between Twitter and Personal Learning Networks (PLN). A PLN is an informal network of people with whom you connect for the purpose of learning. This study is based on Skype interviews conducted with seven K-12 and higher education teachers who used Twitter in their PLN, and the primary research question asked "what role does Twitter play in the formation and maintenance of Personal Learning Networks?" The results found that Twitter allows participants to have instantaneous conversations and connectedness with members of the PLN; Twitter provides broad access to collective knowledge within and outside of their PLN (network effect); Twitter-specific functions such as retweets, hashtags, and lists can help expand PLN membership; and Twitter was found to be an excellent platform for amplifying a person's thought to a larger audience which resulted in motivation to post more frequently. While using Twitter is not necessary within a PLN, the scope and scale of a PLN is drastically increased by using social networking tools such as Twitter. One of the primary benefits of Twitter is the ease of establishing a large network of people from which to learn. Through Twitter, a PLN is no longer private which allows for connections, collaborations, and exchange of knowledge, discussion, and debate with a wider audience.

The primary strength of this article is its foundation in empirical research, although the participant sample size is extremely small. While minimal, it was also helpful that the article defines the functions of Twitter and how these specific functions improve collaboration and networking. This article certainly highlights the benefits of using Twitter for informal learning and how the "open space" of Twitter communication can benefit members of PLNs. Twitter also allows for instantaneous connections and discussions which the participants felt were important for their learning. While one does not need to have a Twitter account to have a PLN, this article demonstrates that Twitter plays a powerful role within a PLN.

I feel that Twitter could be a useful tool in a college classroom, particularly outside of class. Students could send tweets about the course content to have large discussions or ask for clarification from their classmates, which would facilitate their personal PLN. They could also interact with the professor to expand their understanding of a particular course-specific topic. While I am not currently on Twitter because it seems overwhelming, I could see how it might be useful for students who already have Twitter accounts. It is certainly a technology item I might consider using in the future.

Return to Contents

Rath, L. (2011). The effects of Twitter in an online learning environment. _eLearn Magazine_. Retrieved from <http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1944486>

[Review by Ashley Kendell] The article The Effects of Twitter in an Online Learning Environment is a case study of the efficacy of Twitter in bolstering the sense of community in an online environment. The present study was conducted on graduate students enrolled in the master's program in Information Design and Technology at the State University of New York (SUNY) Institute of Technology, sample size 39. The researcher was the course instructor and the duration of the study consisted of 13 of the 15 weeks that the course was administered via an online learning management system (Angel). Prior to the beginning of the study, 77% of the participants had never used Twitter. The results of the study indicate that of the students who chose to participate in the poll (it was not mandatory), 86% found that Twitter helped bolster their sense of community in the virtual classroom. Forty percent of respondents stated that Twitter helped them to acquire course-relevant information. Interestingly, at the end of the study, even with the majority of students agreeing that Twitter increased the sense of community in the virtual classroom, a large number of students said that they still preferred courses where Twitter was not a requirement (73% were indifferent to Twitter and 23% would prefer to not use it in the classroom).

In the present study, the author highlighted the many benefits of using Twitter in an online learning environment. The benefits of Twitter include, but are not limited to: increasing the sense of community in an online class, providing a means for students to acquire course-relevant information outside of the virtual classroom, establishing a platform for class discussion, and the development of stronger connections with fellow students. In addition, the present study suggested that professors who employ Twitter in their online courses often noted higher levels of enthusiasm and participation in their online classes that use Twitter than in classes that don't employ this method of social networking. It is interesting, however, to note that students polled in the present study still preferred to use discussion boards over Twitter when communicating with their peers. This finding may be slightly skewed because Twitter participation was not a mandatory assignment for the students polled in the present study.

As someone who has never used Twitter, I found this article very enlightening! In the future I hope to teach both classroom-based and online courses and I now have a better understand of the benefits of incorporating Twitter into the virtual classroom. I have struggled to increase the sense of community in my online courses at MSU and I think that Twitter may be a valuable tool that I can use in conjunction with my learning management systems (WordPress and Angel). After reading this article, I learned that when used in conjunction with a LMS, Twitter can function as an extension of the discussions originating in the LMS or can act independently as a platform of class discussions and virtual interactions.

Return to Contents

###~~~~###

# Concluding with Teaching with Technology

As the diversity of articles, essays and tools demonstrate, there is no one answer to technology use in education. However, all of the above discussion points to three unavoidable conclusions. First, the biggest issue facing current technology use is no longer on what to use, but on how to use it. Second, there is no right answer to which tool is the most effective. In fact, a student-centered classroom would be best served by allowing multiple entry points for technology use and inclusion. Finally, technology is absolutely worthless unless the educator has taken the time to understand it, plan for it and reflect on it. Thank you taking the time to read our work. You are welcome to contact each of us or contact the editor directly. You will find that information in the following section on the authors and editor.

Return to Contents

###

Thank you for reading our work. If you enjoyed it, won't you please take a moment to leave us a review at your favorite retailer? You can also contact each of us if you have any suggestions, comments or praises!

# About the Authors

  **Sheila Conrad** graduated Summa Cum Laude from the University of Northern Iowa in 2008 with a dual degree in French Teaching and Middle Level Education and a minor in Creative Writing. Her primary research interests are in the areas of listening comprehension and instructed second language acquisition. Sheila is going into her fifth year as a French teacher at Bettendorf High School where she teaches all levels of French: Levels I, II, III, IV, Culture and Conversation, and A.P. In addition to teaching, she is the school's France Trip coordinator, French Club Sponsor, and Scholastic Bowl Coach. Her interests outside of French and teaching include reading, writing, walking her dog, watching hockey, watching movies, participating in Zumba, and traveling.

conradsh@msu.edu

  **Raneen Elbakry** grew up in Alexandria, Egypt and received most of her education there, including a B.S. in plant pathology. After graduating, she worked in Alexandria University's research department with responsibilities in working with many visiting professors from various American universities. After moving to New Jersey twelve years ago, she started teaching Arabic at multiple non-profit organizations. In her spare time, she loves hiking with her husband and their 9-year-old twins, who speak Arabic and English.

elbakryr@msu.edu

  **James Fetterman** attended Messiah College in Grantham, Pennsylvania, where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Spanish as well as Primary and Secondary Education. He also studied for six months in Valparaíso, Chile, at La Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso. He is currently a high school Spanish teacher in Sterling, Virginia, where he teaches classes designed for both nonnative and heritage-speaking students. His current interests include language assessment and interlanguage of second language learners.

jfetterm@msu.edu

  **Julie Fleischman** is an anthropology doctoral student at Michigan State University studying physical and forensic anthropology. She received her MS in Forensic Science in 2011 and her MA in Anthropology in 2013 from Michigan State University. Her research interests are focused on skeletal trauma resulting from human rights abuses and personal identification. fleisc36@msu.edu

  **Ashley Kendell** is a doctoral student in the Anthropology Department at Michigan State University. Her focus is physical anthropology with special interests in forensic anthropology and skeletal biology. Ashley completed her M.A. in physical anthropology at California State University in 2010 and she plans on completing her PhD in 2016. Her long term goal is to become a professor of anthropology.

  **Kathryn Weller** Kathryn Weller is completing her master's degree in Critical Studies in Literacy and Pedagogy from Michigan State University. A native of Chicago, she hopes to return there to teach composition at a community college.

Return to Contents

# About the Editor

  Dr. Dustin De Felice has more than a decade in the Adult Education field, applied linguistics and language teaching. He has taught in East Lansing, Michigan, Tampa, Florida, Chicago, Illinois and Cuernavaca, Mexico. In his current position, he is a proud faculty member in the Master of Arts in Foreign Language Teaching program at Michigan State University (<http://maflt.cal.msu.edu/>) and is constantly amazed by the brilliance in his students and colleagues. You can find more of his work at <https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/dustindefelice>

Return to Contents
