Word.

I am very excited about using new technologies to foster literacy. I found Swenson et al (2006) to be an extremely interesting read, and caught myself nodding along at times as I read. This article addresses some of the complications I have found in working with “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001); these students are so wholly immersed in their digital lives that the antiquated interface of books with paper seems uninteresting and devoid of meaning. Swenson et al point out that students spend the time equivalent of a full time job each week interacting with various forms of media. How can a book, a seemingly static artifice devoid of hyperlinks, actually tell us anything?
All pessimism aside, I have seen fascinating projects utilizing a blend of new and old technologies. I have seen the digital equivalent of the ‘commonplace books’ that Swenson references in her article. I have also seen the adaptation of business technologies to didactic practice, and been enthralled by the power of computers to convey information elegantly.
Some may be surprised to hear me praise the rise of digital texts; at one time I was practically a Luddite, clinging to my battered Smith typewriter or lugging around an old Skywriter to do my correspondence. I actually used carbon paper to make copies of documents I was typing. Now, I know this may date me a bit; I am not actually that old, but I have seen the remarkable spread of communication technology during my adult life, and I find it fascinating. The amount of information available is difficult to fathom. Examining the Leu et al document and its veritable cornucopia of hyperlinks was staggering. The ease with which one goes from information source to information source, from database to library stack to periodical reference boggles my mind. This may be the root difference between gen X and the digital natives of today; they expect nothing less than this synergy of interface and information, and when they have it, they can create amazing things. It is up to the rest of us to try and keep up.

—Ludlow

Leu, D. J., Leu, D. D., & Coiro C. (nd). Teaching with the Internet K—12: New Literacies for New Times. Accessed April 5, 2008 from http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~djleu/fourth.html.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(55), 1-6.
Swenson, J., Young, C. A., McGrail, E., Rozema, R., & Whitin, P. (2006). Extending the conversation: new technologies, new literacies, and English Education. English Education, 38(4), 351-369.

The ubiquitous quality of technology in our lives is starkly contrasted by the availability of technology in the classroom.  While we have podcasts and blogs, streaming media and complicated presentations as an active part of our private lives, the use of technology in the classroom on a practical basis seems to be limited at best.

I see fantastic resources available to us in the university; technology and instruction was a fantastic class that really opened my eyes to the possibilities inherent in the available tech provided by simple office suite programs.  When I am in the classroom, however, I have to scramble for an LCD projector, dual task the standard housekeeping roles of the laptop with the demands of running a presentation, and utterly discount the possibility of streaming video; the pipes just aren’t fat enough.

Give the schools five years to catch up; do you think they will?  I hope they do, but while we wait, I will continue the scramble to expose our visual learners to all that I can in the way of technology.  Even the old standby of the overhead projector has immense power with these students.  Put something up on screen in front of them, and they shift into an absorption mode of being; they sop up the information, and seem to be better able to retain what they learn when they SEE it.  Have any of you observed this?