TEACHING AND LEARNING
WITH MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGY
PATTY BECKER (FALL, 2000)
Computer-based environments that utilize multiple media to deliver instruction
in the schools are the subject of great debate. Multimedia
instruction has been equated with “multi-learning” through it’s use of
text, graphics, photographs, sound, voice, animation, and video. It
is reported to: increase understanding and application, allow for active
participation in the learning process,motivate
and maintain attention,accommodate
for special needs, and increase independent work(Olesky, 1995). On
the other hand,Dr. Jane M. Healy(1998),
educational psychologist,addresses
the need for research on it’s affect on children’s physical health, learning,
and development. She questions
it’s value as an educational tool versus it’s use to entertain and appease
“children of the media.” This
paper will explore both sides of the issue, outline strategies/interventions
to facilitate successful integration of technology with curriculum, apply
the research with information acquired at the sessions “Quick and Easy
Literacy Activities” and “Visual Strategies Make and Take,” and outline
current and future uses of the computer for teaching and learning.
Business agendas and parental pressure may drive the integration of technology
and curriculum more than the prospect of improved learning(Nelson, 2000). Hypermedia
learning has not been proven more effective than book learning, and computer
use has done little to improve student achievement(Healy, 1998). Students
need challenge, not entertainment(Vail, 1999) to learn, and the instant
gratification that multimedia “edutainment” provides may encourage intellectual
passivity(Stoll, 1999) rather than foster creative thinking and problem-solving
skills.
Healy(1998) believes that there is no critical period for learning computer
skills, and does not recommend it’s use with children under the age of
seven. If computer use is
introduced too early and too intensely,she
feels it may interfere with developmental tasks, teach inappropriate learning
habits, and lead to poor motivation and internal focus. Children
that are drawn to computers may be susceptible to “computer addiction,”
and may exhibit symptoms of social withdrawal, obsessive behavior,and
difficulty with age-appropriate physical activity and imaginative play
skills. There are features
of multimedia-based instruction that may be problematic for students with
learning disabilities, as they may not have the ability to select, regulate,
or control their own learning experiences, or may not demonstrate the memory,
attention, and comprehension necessary to efficiently and effectively navigate
and explore the visual information presented to them(Wissick and Gardner,
2000). Finally, reading from
a computer screen is slower, more fatiguing, less accurate and subject
to overload(Healy, 1998), than compared to reading from a book.
Advantages to sharing traditionally teacher-based responsibilities with
computers include increased:(1)
individual attention, (2)support
for students to progress at their own rate, and (3) ability to integrate
subject matter.Individual as well
as group or classroom activities that foster interaction and teamwork can
be facilitated by the teacher(Roth, 1999). Healy(1998)
notes that “one of the most promising uses of computer technology with
young children...is as a supplement to a well-planned literacy program.” Children
can be motivated to talk together, write, read, and collaborate in creating,
printing, and rereading their own stories. The
“Young Children’s Literacy Project” at Vanderbilt University designed and
implemented MOST (Multimedia Environments that Organize
and Support Text). The
project utilized oral language, computers, print, and videodisks to practice
“mental model building” of story structure and sequence. Oral
and written text was elicited and recorded by a teacher, video was used
to review and resequence story pictures, and books were created to take
home(Sharp and Risko, 1993). Another
program developed at the Learning Technology Center at Peabody College
of Vanderbilt University called the “Little Planet Literacy Series” combines
CD-ROM technology with “old-fashioned storytelling.” Children
in kindergarten through second grade create their own narration(oral and
written) for the computer program, and use paper, pencils, and books to
do related activities. Results
have shown increases in reading comprehension, and reading/writing fluency
and complexity(Fox, 1999). Many
strategies and curricular activities have been developed and successfully
implemented with
IntelliPics, a multimedia authoring tool. IntelliPics
can accommodate a variety of learning ability levels and styles to develop
reports, adapt or modify stories, create and use overlays and switches,
develop and administer quizzes, and review thematic units and vocabulary(Feit
and Hoberman, 1998).
To successfully integrate technology with curriculum,Wissick
and Gardner(2000) recommend that educators select materials that are content
related and accommodate individual needs, consider “video game” features
that distract or deflect learning, and base choices on a theoretical framework
for instruction. Computer instruction
should: (1) teach basic skills through automaticity and overlearning, (2)
allow for high levels of mastery learning for all styles and rates, (3)
build context and memory to assist in the transition to higher order thinking,
(4) structure the environment with objectives, feedback, and explicit examples,
(5) provide realistic problems and situations, (6) assign roles to accomplish
cooperative tasks, (7) give visual and auditory clues to enhance reading
comprehension, and (8) provide models for management and research. Educators
should provide organizational guidance, activate prior knowledge, and support
computer instruction with nontechnological activities as well. Healy(1998)
offers similar recommendations, and also warns parents and educators to
discourage impulsivity and trial/error responding, be aware of excessively
stimulating software, insist on physical breaks, and assure cognitive/developmental
appropriateness. Because “dialogic
reading” of picture books has positive effects on children’s language and
reading skill development, Healy particularlyencourages
verbal discussion before, during, and after computer use.
Nancy Marks’ “Quick and Easy Literacy Activities” follow many of these
instructional guidelines. Her
IntelliPics-based
programs utilize familiar children’s stories to teach and reinforce prewriting
and reading skills, sentence structures, vocabulary, articulation, concepts,
sequencing, rhyme, associations, and descriptive and figurative language. She
notes “Please be sure to purchase these books or have them in your school
library if you use these activities. It
is important to connect the activities with the books and draw the children
into activities away from the computer in the real world.”The
activities provide children opportunities to individually or collaboratively
write, print, listen to, respond to, read and re-read adapted or modified
stories. Overlays allow for
individualized participation, and quizzes/games check comprehension.All
activities can be printed out to produce hard copy books for children to
take home.Use of the Boardmaker
software was emphasized in “Visual Strategies Make and Take” to support
children with autism. Many
children with and without disabilities, however, could benefit from visual
schedules, transitional markers, and representations of abstract concepts/vocabulary
to assist and support their learning. Children
do not necessarily interact with this software, but rather with the product. These,
and similar strategies, could be utilized to provide the “scaffold” children
need to efficiently and effectively use other forms of multimedia technology.
In my position as a speech-language pathologist in the public schools,
I often rely on books to provide a context for learning speech sound targets,
rhyme, vocabulary, grammatical structure, and question comprehension, much
like Nancy Marks. I follow
book reading with an art, music, motor, dramatic play, or game activity
that reinforce my learning objective. In
regards to technology, I rely on my home computer for administrative tasks
such as report and IEP writing, and for “surfing” and seeking out web sites
that provide lesson plans, journal updates, continuing education/professional
development, and parent resources. At
work, I have not incorporated computer-based instruction into my lessons
for several reasonsincluding: (1)
inaccessibility, (2) lack of training in the newest software applications,
and (3) skepticism as to the “developmental appropriateness” of computer
use in an early intervention program. Recently,
the district that I work in received a technology grant and implemented
an extensive plan to increase the integration of technology in the curriculum. Because
of this grant, accessibility and training issues have changed.In
addition to the current workshops I have attended through WATI, district
support staff have provided training in the use and application of KidPix,
Inspiration,
and the digital camera. I hope
to attend future training in multimedia presentations such as Power
Point. While my skepticism
regarding developmental appropriateness remains unchanged, I have been
inspiredby my research and workshop
training to explore use of organizational tools such as Inspiration,
multimedia authoring tools such as IntelliPics, and visual strategy/augmentative
communicative tools such as Boardmaker in my work with elementary-age
children. Inspiration
will provide my students with another means for visually mapping key words
and concepts. IntelliPics
will supplement book reading and provide another means for extending, supporting,
and interacting with targeted speech sounds, vocabulary, and language. Boardmaker
will simplify the time-intensive production of visual support systems for
the children who need them to understand and communicate within their school,
home, and community environments. Hopefully,
these applications of my recently acquired skills will serve to enhance
the programming I provide, and stimulate myself, my colleagues, and my
students to continue to forge bravely(but cautiously!) ahead into the world
of multimedia technology.
REFERENCES
Cuban, Larry.(1999)High Tech Schools,
Low Tech Teaching.Education Digest,
64, January, pp. 53-54.Condensed
from AFT on Campus, 18, October 1998, p. 14.
Feit, Suzanne and Hoberman, Cyndy(1998).Inclusive
Curriculum Adaptations Using IntelliPics.Closing
the Gap, October/November.Retrieved
from http://www.closingthegap.com.
Fox, Sherry(Ed)(1999).Innovations
in Literacy.ADVANCE for Speech
Language Pathologists and Audiologists,
June 28, p. 15.
Healy, Jane M.(1998).Failure
to Connect: How Computers Affect Our Children’s Minds-forBetter
and Worse.New York, NY: Simon
and Schuster.
Healy, Jane M.(1999).Why Slow Down
the Rush Toward School Computers?Education Digest,
64, November, pp.32-37.Condensed
from The School Administrator. 56, April 1999,
pp.6-10.
Nelson, Susan A.(2000).Technology
in Schools: Whose Best Interest?Education
Digest, 65, May, pp.45-47.
Olesky, Walter(1995). Education
and Learning.New York, NY: Facts
on File, Inc.
Roth, William F.(1999)Computers
Can Individualize Learning AND Raise Group Interaction Skills.Education
Digest, 64, November, pp.27-31.
Sharp, D.L.M., and Risko, V.J.(1993).Integrating
Media to Enhance Story Comprehension of Young,
At-Risk Children.Paper presented
at the Annual Meeting of the International Reading
Association, San Antonio, TX.Abstract
by the National Center to Improve Practice
in Special Education Through Technology, Media, and Materials.Retrieved from
htttp://www2.edc.org/NCIP/library/mm/Sharp.htm.
Stoll, Clifford(1999).High Tech
Heretic - Why Computers Don’t Belong in the Classroom and Other
Reflections by a Computer Contrarian.New
York, NY: Doubleday.
Vail, Kathleen(1999).Student Learning:
Make it More Than Fun and Games 101.EducationDigest,
64, January, pp.55-57.Condensed
from The American School Board Journal, 185,
April 1998, pp. 56-58.
Wissick, Cheryl A. and Gardner, J. Emmett(2000).Multimedia
or Not to Multimedia?That is the
Question for Students with Learning Disabilities.TEACHINGExceptional
Children, Vol 32, No 4, pp.
34-43.