Means, B. (2010). “Technology and education change: focus on student learning.

”
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 285-307.

Research Article

Summary:
This article describes a study that was conducted to analyze the effects of technology
implementation on student gains. Thirteen schools participated in this study to determine if there
was any difference in achievement gains for students whose teachers utilized technology
software as part of their reading and math instruction. Two particular questions were the focus
of the study:

What classroom-level practices are associated with higher achievement gains in

classrooms using reading or math software? and
What school-level practices are associated with higher achievement gains in classrooms
using reading and math software?

Unfortunately, this study did not reveal any notable differences in gains as part of this study.
However, there were some notable recommendations and future study implications revealed.
First, schools who experienced higher gains reported that most of their teachers utilized the
reports associated with these software programs to direct their instruction or to help in their
differentiation practices. Second, higher gains schools also reported that their teachers utilized
the computer software lab time to direct their instruction practices: teachers would note what
students asked questions about or struggled with and made connections when they went back
into the classroom so there was a direct connection between the software and the other
instructional resources (text and other print resources). High gains schools also reported that
their teachers had good support from the principal, excellent IT support, and collaboration
between teachers.

Critical Evaluation:
This study reveals several critical factors when teachers use technology as part of their
instruction. First, teachers must use the reports that provide formative assessment of where
students are with regard to content and/or skills. Several teachers who participated in this study
commented that the advanced or gifted learners seemed bored with the software and that the
software was more applicable for remediation purposes. It is essential that instructional
developers keep in mind that no resource is a “one size fits all” solution to any classroom.
Differentiation should be available for all levels of learners. Another observation that I made
during the course of reading this article was the lack of professional development that teachers
had on the software and how to connect the software instruction to their own classroom
instruction. The article specifically states, “Sound guidance on how to implement technology in
ways that produce student learning gains is integral to efforts to use technology as a lever or
educational change.” Obviously, the more connections students see between what they do in a
lab situation and what they are exposed to in a traditional classroom will reinforce classroom
concepts and the more that teachers believe that technology can affect achievement, the more
they will use technology purposefully in their instructional practices.
Yan, J. (2008). Social technology as a new medium in the classroom. The New

England Journal of Higher Education, Winter, 27-30.

Professional Practice Article

Summary:
Jeffrey Yan, co-founder of Digication and professor at Rhode Island School of Design
(RISD), discusses several social technologies and how they are being implemented at RISD to
reinforce the benefits of allowing students to connect on a global level to share work, ideas, and
achievements in a format that is not available in the confines of traditional classrooms. Yan
discusses Blogs, Wikis, and On-Line Learning Communities. He validates the use of these tools
by providing examples of e-portfolios that allow students to house their work in a central
location, share their work with others, and become “authors and publishers.” Blogs can open the
door for classroom discussion outside of class, and wikis provide a forum for students to
collaboratively work on class projects and continuously add layers of content knowledge
throughout the course. On-line learning community tools can be beneficial to both teachers and
students, depending on the purpose of the learning community. One particular on-line learning
community that Yan discussed is Elgg. This community allows schools “to run their own
servers.” Each of these Web 2.0 technologies reinforces skills that are necessary for students to
be effective 21st century participants.

Critical Evaluation:

I quickly developed a level of respect for Yan when he acknowledged the difference between
academic and social networks in discussing Facebook and Myspace and school-based social
networks. He credits students with being able to understand the difference between the two.
Many teachers already utilize these Web 2.0 tools; however, there are still some schools who
have blocked teachers’ ability to incorporate these technologies into the classroom. Yan’s
examples at the Rhode Island School of Design provide a sound argument as to how these tools
can be effective in traditional classroom settings. Another connection that I made to Yan’s
article was the practicality of housing students’ work in an E-portfolio format. Access to e-
portfolio benefits both the student and the teacher. Teachers can utilize e-portfolios to share
student work and provides an opportunity for students to showcase the best of their work. As
long as teachers are clear with their expectations regarding the use of these tools, and students
are ethical users of others’ ideas, these web 2.0 tools can create a global network that exposes
students to knowledge and ideas they might never have experienced. I have incorporated wikis
into my AP Language community and have found that students enjoy creating the design of their
pages and this strategy allows us to chunk the material into sections where students can create a
visual space to teach their literary period to the rest of the class. They are more inclined to go
into their classmates pages to read this material and see how they present it rather than the
textbook or other didactic formats.
Hemphill, L. (2010). Using technology to support a wide range of instructional
Practices, approaches and methods. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 37(2),
55-60.

Professional Practice Article

Summary:
Hemphill focuses on emerging technologies that can enhance reading, writing, and speaking
skills. Included in this article is a discussion on a teacher’s technology toolbox, how to plan for
technology, and emerging technologies such as graphic organizers and concept maps, online
photo sharing, blogs, wikis, and podcasts. This article is a complimentary piece to Yan’s;
however, Hemphill takes the discussion a step further in highlighting how these technologies can
be used “to support instructional practices and strategies.” In Hemphill’s discussion of planning
for using technology, she suggests using a model such as the ASSURE model to ensure that
teachers are planning rich units of instruction using these technologies and she makes the
comment that when using technology as part of instruction, teachers will notice that more time
for planning becomes necessary. Hemphill provides a good list of technologies from which
teachers can use while providing purposes for using them.

Critical Evaluation:
Although this is yet another article of what seems an endless list of emerging technologies, I
chose it because Hemphill’s connection between instruction and these technologies encompasses
all of the content areas. Reading, writing, and listening skills are necessary for students to be
successful in all areas. All disciplines should be providing opportunities for students to work
collaboratively, to construct original meaning/understanding from what they encounter in order
to become critical thinkers and evaluators, and they should read and write in all classrooms.
These skills are often focused on in the English classroom but not enough, especially in social
studies and science where the textbooks are often difficult to read and understand and where
lecture is often overused to share content material. Graphic organizers and maps can be used in
all content areas, and blogs offer a place for students to both discuss content and demonstrate
understanding. Both Hemphill and consulting author Pamela Godt work at the university level
preparing teachers to work with reading and technology. Their recommendations provide
teachers with options on how to meet the diverse needs of their students while meeting required
state standards. This practice is being taught to new teachers; however, veteran teachers should
make an effort to change the nature of their classrooms to allow 21st century approaches to
teaching/learning.
Myded, M.N., Keserbioglu, T., and Arabacioglu, S. (2010). Students’ opinions regarding
the usage of computer technologies in constructivist learning environment. International
Journal of Human Sciences, (7(1), 1115-1123.

Theory-into-Practice Article (This is also a study)

Summary:
This article reveals the results of a five week study of eights graders in science classes using
technology. The study compares 24 students in a experimental group with 23 in a control group.
One group was instructed using a teacher-center approach (control group) while the other group
experienced constructivist learning based activities (experimental group).

To fully understand this study, the following questions should be considered:

(1) What are students’ purposes in using computer technologies? (2) What do students
understand about the concept of computer technologies? (3) Do students want to use
computer technologies in science and technology courses, and why? (4) How can
computer technologies be used in science and technologies courses? and (5) What
are the students’ opinions about the usage of computer technologies in science and
technologies courses? (1116)

Students’ original opinions were gleaned from a survey whereby they responsed to the above
mentioned questions. In responding to question #1, 16 participants revealed that they use
computer technology to “reach information faster when doing [their] homework; 12 participants
in the control group said they used computer technology to “do homework when the teacher
gives homework.” Responses to questions #2 revealed that 13 participants in the experimental
group think that computer technologies are used “to learn new information,” while 7 of the
control group responded the same. Questions #3 revealed that both groups enjoy using computer
technologies in the classroom; however, 5 from the experimental group state that using computer
technologies helps them learn the subject better, while 8 of the control group state that it makes
understanding the subject matter easier. Question #4 revealed that 8 in the experimental group
feel that they use computer technologies for research-communication, while 6 in the control
group use computer technology for the same purpose. Question #5 revealed that only 4 in the
experimental group feel that using computer technology provides long-lasting learning, while 8
in the control group feel that using computer technology provides long-lasting learning.

The results from the study reveal that students do feel that using computer technologies in the
science classroom does have benefits for them. Since science is such a concept-driven area, it
would make sense that a constructivist approach to learning the material would help students to
better understand. Unfortunately, this study did not reveal what kinds of technologies the
students utilized in either of the groups.

Critical Summary:
Because this was a study conducted in Turkey and the translation of the paper was not fluid, the
study was a little difficult to understand. There was an assertion in the abstract that stated that
there “were some changes in the opinions of students in the experiment and control group related
to the usage of computer technologies in science and technology courses”; however, it was not
reported what they changes were. The implications are that the students responded during the
pre-survey and then participated in a post-survey after being instructed differently in the control
and experimental groups; however, there wasn’t any comparison of the data. Being a teacher
myself and seeing firsthand the differences in students’ understanding when they work through
something and come to a personal understanding, only reinforces that a constructivist approach is
certainly more beneficial. If specific technologies can be used to enhance the learning
environment, it would seem that would only strengthen the learning. It is interesting to note that
one statistic in the study was that 14 participants in the experimental group said they didn’t have
any idea why they want to use computer technology is the classroom. Perhaps if the students
were told up front the purpose of what they were doing (the W in UbD), they might have
responded differently and more purposefully.
Pitcher, S.M. et al. (2010). The literacy needs of adolescents in their own words.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(8), 636-641.

Research Article

Summary:
This article examines the reading needs of eight adolescents in order to determine if the reading
instruction and strategies used with each student meets that student’s individual reading
instruction needs. The eight students who participated in this study were from diverse
backgrounds, schools, and differed in the reading instruction programs that were used in public,
private and home-school learning environments. The study used personal interviews from the
students, their parents, and reading assessments to do an analysis of whether the students were
reading below grade level, whether they understood reading strategies, what kind of reading they
did, their individual learning styles, and the kind of reading instruction they received in their
classrooms. In all cases the eight participants were not receiving reading instruction and
practicing reading strategies that directly aligned to their strength, weaknesses, or interests. The
conclusion of this study recommended that further research should be completed focusing on the
barriers that impede the success of literacy instruction. One of the major barriers evidenced in
this study was the implementation of technology to expand current reading instruction programs.
The majority of the participants revealed that they spend a lot of time on computers and do not
seem to have difficulty understanding what they read using this medium; however, the programs
they experience in school are scripted, print based reading programs that only utilize the lowest
level of thinking: knowledge.

Critical Summary:

I chose this participation article because I was interested in what students had to say about
reading instruction. Currently I am a literature teacher who aspires to become a media specialist.
In both cases, reading instruction, whether it is for instruction or pleasure, is a primary
responsibility. As such, I think it is important to know what individual student needs are and
work to create a rich reading environment that attempts to meet the diverse needs of a student
population. Since this study highlights the lack of technology used in reading instruction, I think
that is important for reading teachers and/or specialists to be familiar with programs that
currently exist that could be embedded into the reading instruction. Several of the participants
are visual learners and found it difficult to move from elementary reading material that provided
visuals to help with their comprehension of the story to 100% text-based reading material. One
of the strategies that was recommended was the use of graphic organizers as a reading strategy.
Since these students are computer-based visual learners they could use Inspiration or a similar
graphics program to create their own visual to help outline their understanding of the story.
Podcasting, Photo story, and Moviemaker are also programs that teachers could utilize to allow
students to visually represent their understanding of the material. Lastly, perhaps these students
could read some of their stories on-line through e-versions or on a hand-held device like a Nook
or Kindle. I know from firsthand experience that the more visuals you include in reading
instruction to compliment the written word, the more successful student seem to be in
understanding the purpose of the story.
Putman, S. M., and Kinglsey, T. (2009). The atoms family: using podcasts to enhance
the development of science vocabulary. The Reading Teacher,63(2), 100-108.

Research Article

Summary:

The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to address the lack of research on podcasts; second,
to address the lack of research on vocabulary instruction in the content areas—specifically
science. The study focuses on two specific questions:
1. How does access to weekly podcasts of science-specific vocabulary
affect fifth grade students’ vocabulary development compared to those
who receive only regular instruction?
2. Do fifth-grade students given access to podcasts view them as effective
in enhancing their vocabulary development?

This study included 58 fifth-grade students who chose to participate in the study. Half of the
participants were randomly selected to receive the podcasts while the other half received
traditional vocabulary instruction. Prior to beginning the study, it was determined that all of the
podcast participants had access to a computer outside of school. The podcasters were
encouraged to listen to the podcasts at least one a week to review instruction, to use the podcasts
to review the class material throughout the instructional period, and to access the podcasts
weekly as part of their normal school day. The podcasts were created to engage the students,
provide opportunities for the students to interact with the material, and provide an informal,
almost conversational learning situation. Although the researchers admit that more research
needs to be completed on this topic, this study revealed that the group using the podcasts had
significantly higher scores on vocabulary tests. Although some people might argue that there are
several factors that might have contributed to this success, the post-surveys of the students who
had utilized the podcasts revealed that the podcasts helped them to learn their vocabulary,
provided a resource outside the classroom, and the podcasts made learning science vocabulary
more interesting.

Critical Summary:
I chose this article because I am personally interested in incorporating podcasts into my own
teaching practices. Whether it’s vocabulary, writing, or class discussion of the reading material,
I agree with the participants that we need a source of instruction that transcends the classroom.
As the title of the article suggests, the researchers utilized music and melody to make a dry
subject engaging and easier to remember. While creating these podcasts initially would take
time and creativity, they could be stored and used for a long period of time. I also liked the idea
of allowing students to create and share their own podcasts; for auditory learners this would
provide one opportunity for them to learn and demonstrate their understanding utilizing their
specific learning styles. One additional point that was made in the article and might be a point of
concern regards those students who might not have a computer and access to the podcasts. The
suggestion was to store the podcasts on a mp3 player or other less costly device and allow
students to check these out on a daily basis. This, of course, requires educators to know their
students and their students’ individual needs.
Gill. .R. (2008) “The comprehension matrix: a tool for designing comprehension
instruction. The Reading Teacher, 62(2), 106-113.

Personal Practice Article (Gill dedicates one section to comprehension theories and a study is
referenced)

Summary:
This article was written by a professor from Murray State University. The focus of the article is
discussion regarding reading strategies and the lack of reading instruction in the classroom. Gill
asserts that an overwhelming body of research and reading comprehension texts are available,
yet reading comprehension instruction is rare. The article includes a comprehension matrix that
breaks reading comprehension instruction into pre-reading, during-reading, and post-reading
instruction. Gill also offers factors to consider when thinking about reading comprehension
instruction. Those factors include the reader, the text and the reading situation (activity)
(purpose). A survey included in Gill’s article reveals that students are able to comprehend more
when they choose to read something of interest, they have a specific purpose for reading, and
they are undistracted by worries/chores/or noise. Readers also admit that they have difficulty
comprehending when they have to read an assigned text, they know little about the topic, or the
text is dense. Readers prefer a reading selection that is divided by major and minor topics, it has
illustrations, and has ample white space around the text.

Gill describes the process of reading, including pre, during, and post reading activities. She
discusses what goes on during those stages and offers suggested activities to ensure students
engage in the text and that they can demonstrate their comprehension after reading. Most of
Gill’s suggestions involve the teacher creating pre, during, and post reading activities that are
direct in setting a purpose for reading so that students understand what they should be focusing
on during their reading.

Critical Summary:
Most of what Gill says about reading comprehension instruction is pretty common knowledge,
especially for a literature teacher. Unfortunately, it’s amazing the number of reading teachers
who fail to ensure that students know the purpose for reading, other than the teacher told them to
read this selection. Gill does not mention using technology to complement reading
comprehension instruction. However, with today’s “net” generation, I believe that students
could comprehend more if they were demonstrating or teaching via some graphic, a presentation,
or even the creation of an avatar who matches a character in a story. Social studies and science
teachers could use blogs and wikis as a place for students to collaborate and share as they are
reading. Sometimes just letting students talk to each other about what they are doing
demonstrates whether they comprehend or not. This is also a place for students to post questions
that they have about the text. I try to get my own students to jot down or put a post-it in the text
when they get lost or don’t understand something, but they don’t. They just complain that
something didn’t make sense. I would like to create a blog where they could post questions just
to see if anything would change.