Research and Rationale
English language arts is more than just reading and writing; it is
comprehending, synthesizing information, analyzing sources, and communicating
through written and oral language. As Dede (1996) observed, technology use has
moved students from the information age to the communication age where learning
environments enable students to evolve from information receivers to
information creators. Technology is transforming our understanding of English
language arts, both in terms of how students learn and how teachers should
utilize it in the classroom. Consider composition, for example. We know from
research in print literacy that writing can be delineated into various stages:
prewriting, drafting, revision, and publication. Moreover, we also know that
those writing stages are not fixed, linear sequences. Gardner and Johnson
(1997) state that:
Writing is a fluid process created by writers as they work.... In
actuality, the writing process is not a highly organized linear process, but
rather a continual movement between the different steps of the writing model.
Writing involves complex, recursive steps and processes (Hayes & Flower,
1980; Graves, 1975; NWP & Nagin, 2003; Sperling & Friedman, 2001).
Composition and the teaching of writing were revolutionized when word processing
was introduced (Hawisher, 1989; Dalton & Hannafin, 1987; Selfe, 1990;
Wresch, 1984). For example, the word processor's capacity to store text
fundamentally changed the way revision could be done. Prior to nonlinear
technology, the writer would have to literally rewrite the copy during the
revision stages. With the word processor, the text could be saved, allowing the
writer to copy and paste the text in a nonlinear manner. The technology
facilitated the writer's natural recursive writing processes by enabling him or
her to jump around in the text, moving from drafting, to editing, idea
generation, and back to drafting.
Technology is enhancing our understanding of what a "text" is. Traditionally,
the reading of and writing with print have been the foundations of our
understanding of literacy. However, consider how our understanding of text is
enlarged when we include nonprint documents as well. For example, visual
artifacts (such as art, photographs, graphics, and movies) can and have been
considered texts which can be read and written in meaningful ways (Danesi,
1994; Dondis, 1973; Fox, 1994; Messaris, 1994).
In the 1996 NCTE/IRA standards for the English language arts, seven of the 12
standards listed have overt references to the reading of, writing with, or
applications of nonprint texts. Standards 1 and 6, especially, emphasize the
reading and writing of a variety of texts. Standard 1 (reading) states that
students should "read a wide range of print and non-print texts...." and
Standard 6 (writing) states the need for students to "apply knowledge of
language structure, language conventions, media techniques, figurative
language, and genre to create, critique, and discuss print and nonprint texts"
(Smagorinski, p. viii-ix).
These competencies have been addressed not only by national professional goals
but also by our state standards. Reading Applications, Research, and
Communications Standards (numbers 4, 9, and 10, respectively) have overt
references to nonprint texts. If we consider that the same skills necessary to
read and write print texts are similar to reading and writing nonprint texts
(Burke, 2001; Goodman, 2003; Krueger & Christel, 2001; Teasely &
Wilder, 1997), other state standards can be seen in light of both print and
nonprint texts (Reading Processes, #3; Reading Applications: Literary Text, #5;
Writing Process, #6; Writing Applications, #7; and Writing Conventions, #9).
Integrating technology into the English language arts classroom allows for more
learner-centered practices where the students develop their own meanings and
draw on their past experiences. Integrating technology into the classroom
allows for more student individualization of work and for more creativity and
access to information. Reading and writing are ultimately different aspects of
the same process of meaning making. Scholes (1985) states that "the reader is
always writing and the writer is always reading."