Use it or lose it

Corey Johnson

Something must be done about the utilization of Web-based technology resources in schools. Too often I visit campuses where computer equipment sets idly collecting dust. While computers are the main gateways to Web-based resources, dusty equipment is a clear and obvious indication that barriers exist to the land of plenty we commonly refer to as the World Wide Web. Web-based applications and resources continue to emerge at rapid rates as the debate over technology utilization and student achievement cycles around conflicting reports and research findings. These factors lead me to believe that we are focusing on the wrong stages of technology implementation.

The U.S. Department of Education reported that 25 percent of district Title II, Part A funding was spent on professional development for teachers. At a minimum, this indicates that training is being offered in the initial stages of a professional development model. However, there are weak or missing links throughout many professional development programs that continue to prevent us from ultimately increasing student achievement through technology integration.
We must find ways to provide teachers with on-going training and support. Richard DuFour provided a study guide for the Best Practices for Enhancing Student Achievement that utilizes Personal Learning Communities. Personal Learning Communities offer both support and training by connecting professionals who are dedicated to increasing student achievement. PLCs are a great way to collaborate with other professionals around the world and make use of equipment that is currently underutilized. Web-based technologies provide an atmosphere that fosters mutual learning and continuous development. PLCs may reinforce knowledge gained during professional development workshops, increasing the odds of teachers using skills rather than losing them.

Guest Blogger: Corey is an Instructional Development Specialist with Federal Express Flight Training. Prior to joining FedEx, Mr. Johnson worked as an Instructional Trainer at the West Memphis School District. Corey holds a M.S. in Instructional Design and Technology from Mississippi State University and is currently completing research residency requirements towards his Educational Doctorate Degree in Instructional Design and Technology from the University of Memphis.

Paradox? Using verbal language to define visual literacy

Robert M. Branch

by Robert M. Branch

Visual literacy deserves a syntax and grammar distinct from the parameters that define verbal literacy, such as syntax and grammar. Ergo, a paradox occurs when we use verbal language to define visual literacy.

Verbal literacy is most commonly defined as the ability to read and write, and a means of interpreting data and information into knowledge and ideas. A verbally literate person understands spellings, grammar, and syntax for a chosen language. Educators tend to associate verbal literacy with the fundamental success of a student in the classroom, and the success of an ordinary citizen to function in society. However, visual literacy is also necessary for the success of an ordinary citizen to function in society.

There have been many published definitions of visual literacy since Debes (1970) defined visual literacy as “a group of vision-competencies a human being can develop by seeing and at the same time having and integrating other sensory experiences” (p. 27). Rezabek (1999) noted that visual literacy could also be defined as the ability to accurately interpret and create messages (mostly in text form) that are transmitted through the sense of sight. I prefer my definition (Branch, 2000) of visual literacy as “the understanding of messages communicated through frames of space that utilize objects, images, and time, and their juxtaposition” (p. 383).

While there are similarities between verbal literacy and visual literacy, educational research suggests that visual literacy is informally introduced when an individual is becoming verbally literate. Thus, visual literacy has emerged as a domain of knowledge worthy of its own definition, independent of verbal literacy language, however, systematic inquiry about ways images can be formed to construct a common visual language, independent of verbal language, remains unformed. The challenge now is to reconcile the paradox of using verbal language to define visual literacy.

References
Branch, R.  (2000).  A taxonomy of visual literacy.  In A. W. Pailliotet, & P. B. Mosenthal (Eds.), Advances in reading/language research Volume 7: Reconceptualizing literacy in the media age.  (pp. 377-402).
Debes, J. L.  (1970).  The loom of visual literacy: An overview, 1970.  First National Conference on Visual Literacy (p. 16).  New York: Pitman.
Rezabek, L. L.  (2005).  Why visual literacy: Consciousness and convention.  TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 49, 19-20.

Guest blogger: Dr. Robert M. Branch currently serves as a Professor and Interim Department Head for the Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology at The University of Georgia. His teaching emphasizes student-centered learning while his research focuses on diagramming complex conceptual relations. He is a member of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), American Educational Research Association (AERA), International Visual Literacy Association (IVLA), International Society for Performance and Instruction (ISPI). Rob’s publications include the Educational Technology and Media Technology Yearbook, a Survey of Instructional Development Models, and Taxonomy of Visual Literacy.

Matching new literacies with new learning environments

Sharon Smaldino

by Sharon Smaldino

As part of the 21st Century Partnership (www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.php) with a number of states, there is an emphasis on ensuring that students have learning opportunities that prepare them for their futures. Media literacy is one topic area within the suggested curricular areas and it is evolving as technologies related to social media and mobile technologies advance. Both teacher education and K-12 schools need to address these new literacy skills within learning situations. In order to harness the potential benefits from social media and mobile technologies, educators need to help students develop new media literacy skills that span across reading, writing, research, technology, critical analysis, and interactions with other participants.

Beyond the matter of core subject content is the ability for K-12 students to become literate in the ways of gathering information, interpreting the data, and engaging in communication with a variety of audiences. Theses students are encouraged to seek a variety of sources for their information, reaching beyond the traditional resources and seeking information across a vast array of experts. The need for clear and competent communication is critical for them. Further, a work-ethic that fosters interest in working collaboratively with teams of peers and experts expands the opportunities for learning. And, finally that students need to become reflective about their learning process to understand better how academic knowledge is a related component to future career choices.

photo credit: dougbelshaw

K-12 students need guidance and to become aware of their collective responsibility within online learning communities that they take a role. Without a systematic approach for addressing these new media literacy skills, many schools across the nation view that student participation in social media sites and cell phone use are distractions or in some cases harmful to formal school activities. However, there are an increasing number of schools that have embraced these technologies for their potential benefits and purposefully began using these technologies for educational purposes.

Teacher education programs need to embrace a philosophy that encourages their candidates to think beyond the limits of the current resource sets and into the new generation of technologies that embody social networking tools, such as the new mobile resources. The challenge is to find ways to not only model the use of these tools, but to find ways to address reluctance on the part of schools to include them. Clearly, there is a need to move outside the traditional approach to teaching technology integration courses and into the new century’s view of media literacy. It may be time to shift our perspectives on how IT faculty fit into teacher education and advocate for a more integrated approach within the curriculum. It may be time to no longer offer the “course” but rather as faculty, to become a member of the instructional team for teacher education coursework.

About the Author: Dr. Sharon E. Smaldino holds the L.D. and Ruth G. Morgridge Endowed Chair for Teacher Education in the College of Education at Northern Illinois University (NIU). She was a professor of Educational Technology at the University of Northern Iowa for many years prior to moving to NIU. In her current role, she is focused on working with faculty and P-12 teachers to integrate technology into the learning process. Dr. Smaldino has served as president of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) and on the board of directors for the International Visual Literacy Association. She is currently serving as the editor of TechTrends, an AECT publication.