Using Technology to Using Technology to Enhance Literacy of ELLEnhance Literacy of ELL’’ss

Clara NoralesClara NoralesED 7202TED 7202TDr. Sharon A. ODr. Sharon A. O’’Connor-PetrusoConnor-PetrusoFall 2012Fall 2012

Table of ContentsTable of ContentsIntroduction

Statement of the ProblemReview of Related LiteratureStatement of the Hypothesis

MethodsParticipantsInstrumentsExperimental DesignProcedure

ResultsDiscussionImplications

Statement of the ProblemStatement of the Problem* ELL’s are having a hard time when it comes to learning the English language.

* The computer is an excellent resource for giving students the chance to practice English skills without worrying about the response of other classmates or even the teacher. (Dukes, 2005). * Technology can also improve students’ motivation to learn (Butler-Pascoe,1997).

Review of Related Review of Related LiteratureLiterature

Supporting Theorist:

*The World Wide Web has great potential for providing ELL’s the visual and aural stimulation to render new concepts more comprehensible (Cummings, 2009).

*According to Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory, learning is facilitated through interaction with the social environment (interpersonal learning) rather than intrapersonal learning.

Review of Related LiteratureReview of Related LiteraturePros:Pros:*Using technology with English

Language Learners (ELL) enables students to construct meaning in a digital environment (Healey & Klinghammer, 2002).

*Computers can also aide in vocabulary development as well as verbal language development (Green, 2005).

Review of Related LiteratureReview of Related Literature Cons:Cons:Technical Difficulties: Technology doesn’t

always work. Computers crash, hardware fails, bulbs burn out…all when you least expect it. (Kuroneco, 2008)

In schools with access to technology, the computers most frequently remained underused or figuratively in the closet (Ware, 2008).

Teachers and pupils needs training in order to use the technology to its full potential (Higgins, Smith, Wall, & Miller, 2005).

Statement of the Statement of the HypothesisHypothesisHR1: To integrate technology

based instruction activities to fifteen sixth grade students, for 45 minutes per day over a four week period. This will increase student’s literacy levels as measured by test scores in the English Language Arts test.

ParticipantsParticipants15 Sixth-Grade students attending P.S.

Xin Brooklyn, N.Y.9 males 6 females11 - 12 year oldsBilingual Self Contained12 below reading level readers3 on reading level

InstrumentsInstrumentsConsent forms: Principal, Teacher, Parent/GuardianSurveys: Students’ Demographics, TechnologyTests: ELA Reading (multiple choice), Listening, Writing.Technology

◦Laptops with internet connection◦Electronic Storybooks - http://www.magickeys.com/books/◦Educational Website – Achieve 3000

Experimental DesignExperimental DesignPre-experimental design

◦One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design Single group is pretested by reading a

traditional printed text Exposed to the treatment

Reading electronic storybooks through the internet on classroom laptops

Reading Comprehension through the internet

Post-tested after exposure to the treatment◦Symbolic Design

OXO

Threats to Internal/External Threats to Internal/External ValidityValidity* History* Maturation* Testing/Pre-Testing sensitization* Instrumentation* Mortality* Statistic Regression* Differential Selection of Subjects* Selection-Maturation interaction

* Ecological Validity* Multiple Treatments* Experimental Effects* Specificity Variables

ProcedureProcedure

2/20/12: Participants completed Student Surveys 1 and 2

2/27/12-/29/12: Pretest administered

2/27/12: Participants introduced to electronic storybooks

3/26/12 - 3/28/12: Posttest administered

ResultsResults

Students Pre-Test % Post-Test %Percent

Change %

Mean 48 49 1

Median 47 52

Mode 46 34,54

Range 39 47

Students

Pre-Test Score %

Post-Test Score %

A 50 54B 65 68C 46 34D 32 45E 71 71F 32 32G 55 66H 47 54I 48 42J 46 49K 46 53L 52 24M 37 34N 55 56O 36 52

ResultsResults

Results: CorrelationsResults: Correlations

rxy=0.20

Bell CurveBell CurveResearch Data Analysis

Student Pre-Test Post-Test A 50 2 4 54 5 25 B 65 17 289 68 19 361 C 46 -2 4 34 -15 225 D 32 -16 256 45 -4 16 E 71 23 529 71 22 484 F 32 -16 256 32 -17 289 G 55 7 49 66 17 289 H 47 -1 1 54 5 25 I 48 0 0 42 -7 49 J 46 -2 4 49 0 0 K 46 -2 4 53 4 16 L 52 4 16 24 -25 625 M 37 -11 121 34 -15 225 N 55 7 49 56 7 49 O 36 -12 144 52 3 9

Mean 48 V =

115.07 Mean 49 V =

179.13

Pre-Tes t Sc ores SD =10.73 Post-Tes t Sc ores SD = 13.38

DiscussionDiscussionThe result of this study did not

support the original hypothesis which stated that the use of technology was going to help students increase their literacy levels as measured by test scores in the English Language Arts test.

ImplicationsImplicationsConduct with same sample over

a longer time period.Posttest (multiple choice

questions) may have been too difficult.

Conduct during test preparation sessions.

Ardeshiri, M., Cohen, Sarah & Cummins, J. (2008). Computer-Supported Scaffolding of Literacy Development. Pedagogies: An International Journal. 4, 4-21. Arslan, R.S., Sahin-Kizil, A. (2010). How can the use of blog software facilitates the writing process of English Language Learners? Computer Assisted Language Learning. Volume 23 (3), 183-197.Baturay, M., Daloglu, A., &Yildirim, S. (2009). Effects of Web-based Spaced Repetition on Vocabulary Retention of Foreign Language Learners. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 34, 17-36.Black, R.W. (2009). English Language Learners, Fan Communities, and 21st Century Skills. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Volume 52 (8), 688-697.Cagiltay, K., Saran, M., & Seferoglu, G. (2009). Mobile Assisted Language Learning: English Pronunciation at Learners’ Fingertips. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 34,97-114.Cummins, J. (2009). Transformative Multiliteracies Pedagogy: School-base Strategies for Closing the Achievement Gap. Multiple Voices foe Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners. Volume 11(2), 38-56.Cummins, J. (2011). Literacy Engagement – Fueling Academic Growth for English Learners. The Reading Teacher. Volume 65 (2), 142-146.Daud, N. M. & Husin, Z. (2004). Developing critical thinking skills in computer-aided extended reading classes. British Journal of Educational Technology. Volume 35 (4), 477-48. Dukes, C. (2005). Best Practices for Integrating Technology Into English Language Instruction. Seir-Tec News Wire. Volume 7 (6), 3-6.Fitzgerald, G., Kelly, P, M.K., & Zha, S. (2006). An Investigation of Communicative Competence of ESL Students Using Electronic Disscussion Boards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. Volume 38 (3), 349-367.Foulger, T. S. & Jimenez-Silva, M. (2009). Enhancing the Writing Development of English Language Learners: Teaching Perceptions of Common Technology in Project-Based Learning. Journal of Research in Childhood Education. Volume 22 (2), 109-124. Granoff, S. & Whiting, J. (2010) The Effects of Multimedia Input on Comprehension of a Short Story. TESL-EJ: Teaching English as a Second Language or Foreign Language. Volume 14 (2), 1-10.Green, Timothy. (2005) Using Technology to Help English Language Students Develop Language Skills: A Home and School Connection. Multicultural Education. Winter 2005, 56-59.Higgins, S., Smith, H.J., Wall, K. & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive White Boards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. Volume 21, 91-101.Kuroneko, (2008). The Basics: Chalkboards, Flipcharts, Whiteboards, and Overhead Projectors. blog.classroomteacher.caLacina, J. (2004/2005). Promoting Language Acquisitions: Technology and English Language Learners. Childhood Education. Volume 81 (2), 113-115.

ReferenceReferencess

Li, J. (2010). Learning vocabulary via computer-assisted scaffolding for text processing. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Volume 23 (3), 253-275.Lopez, O. S. (2009). The Digital Learning Classroom: Improving English Language Learners’ academic Success in mathematics and reading using interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education. Volume 54, 901-915. O,Connor-Petruso S. (2010). Descriptive Statistics Threats to Validity(Power Point Slides) Retrieved from Padron, Y. N. & Waxman, H.C. (1996). Improving the Teaching and Learning of English Language Learners through Instructional Technology. International Journal of Instructional Media. Volume 23 (4), 341-354. Ranalli, J. (2008). Learning English with The Sims: exploiting authentic computer simulation games for L2 learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Volume 21 (5), 441-455.Rance-Roney, J. (2010). Jump Starting Language and Schema for English Language Learners: Teacher-Composed Digital Jumpstarts for Academic Reading. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Volume 53 (5), 386-395.Rubinstein-Avila, E., Sox, Amanda. (2009). WebQuests for English Language Learners: Essential Elements for Design. Journal of Adolescents and Adult Literacy. 53 (1), 38-48.Snyder, I. (1999). Literacy and technology studies: past, present, future. ACER Research Conference October 1999: Improving Literacy Learning. 1-16.Son, J. (2007). Learners Experiences in Web-based Language Learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Volume 20(1), 21-36.Ware, P. (2008). Language Learners and Multimedia Literacy In and After School. Pedagogies: An International Journal. 3, 37-51. Warschauer, M. (2007). Laptops and Literacy: Learning in the Wireless Classroom. Journal of Literacy and Technology. Volume 8 (1), 49-53.White, E.L. & Gillard, S. (2011). Technology-Based Literacy Instruction for English Language Learners. Journal of College Teaching & Learning. Volume 8(6), 1-5. Buckle Down, New York, 2nd. Edition. (2011). English Language Arts, 6 grade. Triumph Learning Students Technology Survey,http://www.google.com/search?q=students+technology+survey&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a