Literature Review: Teaching and Learning for L(IT)eracy: the use of Information Communication Technologies to support achievement of literacy outcomes for students with learning difficulties

Authors Avatar
Literature Review

Teaching and Learning for L(IT)eracy:

the use of Information Communication Technologies

to support achievement of literacy outcomes for students with learning difficulties

Penelope Coutas

June 4, 2004

Literature Review:

Teaching and Learning for L(IT)eracy: the use of Information Communication Technologies to support achievement of literacy outcomes for students with learning difficulties*

Introduction

Recently, there has been increasing pressure by the Commonwealth and State governments for educators to focus on and improve the literacy skills of Australian children (see DEST, 2004; DEYTA, 2000; EDWA, 1999). By the end of their compulsory years of schooling, students must be sufficiently literate to function and communicate in everyday society. The ways in which we function and communicate in society, however, have been transformed in the past decade by advances in Information Communication Technologies or ICTs. ICTs are not just computers and peripherals, but include any technology that allows for communication and dissemination of information (EDWA, 1999). Hence, there has been increasing emphasis for all students not only to be literate, but also what some have dubbed 'l(IT)erate' (van Kraayenoord, 2002; Paveley 1999). In the following, I will review recent literature on the topic of using ICTs to support literacy for students with learning difficulties in order to summarise and synthesise the arguments and ideas of leading educators and theorists in the field. I became interested in this topic after seeing time and time again students who were identified as being 'at risk' totally engaged with computer tasks and producing much higher level work with the aid of a desktop computer than they did with pen and paper. Why is this the case? What can we as teachers do to better facilitate achievement of fundamental literacy outcomes with ICTs? What is 'best practice'? What are the disadvantages and issues that arise? How do we facilitate inclusive literacy learning with the aid of ICT? There is an vast amount of information available on these topics, and so this review cannot hope to cover the available literature in great depth. The following will instead provide a starting point for investigating this topic, and an overview to encourage reflective practice. Although contemporary literacy programs in Australia have not yet begun to creatively explore the full potential of ICTs, this is slowly changing. We should facilitate and implement ICTs into 'everyday' learning and teaching processes, assessment and programming so that all students are not only literate, but l(IT)erate, and so be able to fully participate in our technological age of information.

Who are Students with Learning Difficulties?

In 1998, the then Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA) introduced policies and guidelines for identifying 'students at educational risk' (SAER) of not achieving the 'major outcomes of schooling' (DEYTA, 1998). However, as Holt (1999) and others (Nicholls & Rennie, 2001; Herring, 1999; Rother, 2003) have argued, the labels 'students at educational risk' and 'students with learning difficulties' are problematic because there are no unique identifying features, and all students may be 'at risk' at some time during their schooling. Generally, SAER are those who struggle with fundamental academic tasks such as reading, writing, spelling, maths and language and have difficulties in meeting school expectations of behaviour.(Holt, 1999, p. 3). Recent literature now suggests that SAER may never achieve the outcomes of schooling in the same way as other 'mainstream' students, and this is completely acceptable (van Kraayenoord et al., 2000). Instead, teachers should adapt learning and teaching strategies that cater for their different types of intelligences, learning styles and individual needs in order for them to achieve the best possible outcomes, particularly in the area of literacy (Elkins, 1999; Blamires, 1999c; Holt, 1999). The use of ICTs to facilitate literacy learning has been effective in many different situations and with many different students of diverse abilities, for many different reasons. Integrating and facilitating ICTs to support achievement of literacy outcomes, then, should not be denied for students with learning difficulties, and the benefits explored (Blamires, 1999a; van Kraayenoord et al., 2000).

Defining Literacy

If identifying who students with learning difficulties are is problematic, defining literacy is even more so. As de Lemos (2003, p. 3) argues, how one conceptualises and defines literacy influences the prevalence of literacy difficulties. Van Kraayenoord (2002) has summed up the two dominant views of literacy as 'learning to read and write' versus 'reading and writing to learn' - one focusing on phonics and word recognition, the other on situated word use. Australian works on the topic of literacy often cite Freebody and Luke's (1990) 'Four Resource Model' as a favourite model of literacy learning (Wray, 2001; van Kraayenoord, 2002; Louden et al., 2000). I feel, however, that the definition of literacy given by Blamires (1999a, p. 27) is the most straight-forward and summative conceptualisation: 'that being literate essentially means being able to respond successfully to the information demands of the society you are a part of.' Being literate is of vital importance, and so any strategy or process that can be used to improve or better facilitate literacy learning should be implemented, including the use of ICTs.

In the more recent literature, there is also an emphasis on 'new literacies' and 'multiliteracies' (van Kraayenoord, 2002; Chalk, 2004; Snyder, 1999). Literacy today does not only concern print media. We live in a society saturated with the mass medias of computer texts, magazines, television programs, multimedia advertising, mobile phones and radio. Life and work are now requiring new blends of skills and practices, and new ways of thinking (Blamires, 1999c). Students must be l(IT)erate in order to have the best possible life chances and to interact fully in society (Morgan, 1998). Students with learning difficulties are said to have more restricted life chances than 'mainstream' students due to their generally low literacy levels (DEYTA, 1998). Using ICTs to support both literacy, and so also facilitate l(IT)eracy, is just one way of ensuring students with learning difficulties have more options and life chances (Blamires 1999c; Davidson & Koppenhaver, 1999; Goldsworthy et al., 2000).

Children of the ICT Revolution

ICTs, especially personal computers, are often cited by educators and policymakers as magic-workers in literacy programs, providing great access to all students. They are seen as being 'nonthreatening,' 'individualised,' 'self-paced,' 'high-interest,' and 'cost-effective' (Davidson & Koppenhaver, 1993 p. 234). Some writers have gone so far as to claim that they can replace the classroom teacher (West, 1997), and in some cases of distance learning, they already have (Nicholls & Rennie, 2001). Blamires (1999a) claims that ICTs can help overcome skill-level barriers to learning, diSessa (2001) says computers can make us smarter, if not wiser, and other researchers dedicate pages to the motivational qualities of learning with ICTs.
Join now!


Motivation and engagement are frequently identified as the major benefits of using ICTs to support literacy learning (Hardy, 1999; Kingham & Blackmore, 2003; Andrews, 2003). A common view is that in using computers, students are so engaged and motivated by a viewing text that they hardly realise that they are accessing, reading, decoding and analysing information (Andrews, 2003). Why is it so engaging? As outlined earlier, ICTs are everywhere in society, and part of our everyday lives. Hence, the use of ICTs in teaching and learning experiences relates to the real lives of students. Van Kraayenoord (2002, p. ...

This is a preview of the whole essay