Literature Review

Article 1: What does Research Really Say about iPads in the Classroom?

By: Jeanne Carey Ingle & Tanya Moorehead

The article looked at when and how iPads are effective in the classroom. They came up with some interesting information. Working with younger teachers, they began to realize that making the assumption that these digital natives would be tech savvy was incorrect. Sure they could navigate through social media, but to use APPs and incorporate them into their lessons was another story. They needed training. Researchers also came to this conclusion regarding the students. The iPads enhanced learning, but not because of the devices but the access to tools that promoted project based learning. Students also became engaged and even the reluctant learners became interested. Using the tools on the iPad meet the needs of many types of learners to promote Universal Design. Teachers who are apprehensive with technology, will not get comfortable with it. If you are not comfortable with something, you won't do it. Teachers need training and time to use technology so they feel confident to introduce new technology. 

The article was bang on for me. I see students everyday on their devices just for the sake of social media. They do not know how to use their devices for educational purposes and to make the assumption that they do know how and just choose not to, is tragic. This means most of us are not showing students what tools they can be using. We also know teachers need time and training to get comfortable with technology. If they are given guidance and the equipment they need, they will be willing to incorporate new teaching strategies. We have students in grade 7/8 that have had iPads of their own. I would be curious to see what they have learned and if they are continuing to use their tools after grade 8. 

Article 2:
Understanding Dyslexia and the Reading Brain in Kids

Holly Korbey, October 1, 2015

The article talks about how dyslexia is a different brain organization that needs different teaching methods. It is the responsibility of those who teach to find methods that will work for the student with dyslexia. Childhood development professor Wolfe, talks about the idea of cerebrodiversity. Our brains are not uniform and learning differently. Wolfe and a colleague designed a simple test to quickly see if there is a problem in the reading circuit as early as kindergarten. The test is called Rapid Automatized Naming/Rapid Alternating Stimulus.(RAN/RAS). Students are timed on how fast they can recognize letters, numbers, colors and objects. This test cannot diagnosis a reading problem, but it can be a start to require further evaluation. Reading is a wonderful process that can go wrong at any time, and students with dyslexia need intensive intervention early. Reading is not a natural process. Our brains do not have a reading center. In order to read, the brain has to make new circuits between parts that were originally designed for something else. And to become a fluent reader, the circuits run almost automatically. Every brain has to learn from scratch and many things can happen with this process. Dyslexia, which used to be called word blindness is a neurobiological condition where there is a failure to read words. Phoneme awareness, knowing sounds that go with the letters is a major problem in the dyslexic brain.Fluency is also a problem. Comprehension can also be an issue and this is critical issues regarding reading. Reading fluently with comprehension does not happen through osmosis and teachers and parents need to support the student who needs intervention. The brain is not broken, it just learns differently.

I like the idea of cerebrodiversity and that our brains learn differently. Teachers and parents cannot make the assumption that reading is innate but rather something we all have to learn from scratch. Anything can go wrong in the process and if we assume all students learn the same way and are just stubborn when they don’t meet our expectations, the child suffers.

Article 3:

Take the Pencil out of the Process

By Leslie Brown

This article looked at how the energy put into handwriting for some students takes away from the thinking about the content and quality of their written response. Students finding printing laborious may write a few words as possible, and shorten their answers, so they don’t have to be involved in the activity of writing for long.  The article talked about research discovering significant neuroanatomical differences in the cerebellums of persons with ASD that may cause differences in their movements and execution of motor tasks. Teachers should take this research into consideration when asking a student to complete a pencil to paper activity. The article also talked about how teachers should not assume that someone with efficient fine motor skills for other types of activities should be able to develop handwriting skills. The article went on to say that different neural pathways are involved that do not include the movements and processes involved in manipulating a writing instrument. When a student struggles with the pencil, there is an interference with intellectual output. The option is quite simple...introduce the keyboard. Printing for your name, address and telephone may be important but with personal communication devices available, keyboarding is a relevant skill. As the article says, “texting is part of our culture”.

The article also talked about the importance of keyboarding in regards to opening communication for those that are nonverbal. The article talks about Amanda Baggs who is ASD and the possibilities of voice output technology. When a person with ASD can write their message and have the computer translate to verbal speech, this opens up another avenue of communication.

Following the principles of the Universal Design for Learning can guide educators to allow the use of materials and strategies to promote learning for all students.

Article 4

Learning from Text

By Dave. L. Edyburn

By grade 4 the focus in schools shifts from learning to read to reading to learn. Because fluent readers require little cognitive energy to recognize text, it is difficult to imagine the frustration some people encounter with reading. Then multiply the frustration for every class and every year spent in school. Students then develop a low self esteem because of the difficulties they face everyday. We have to ask ourselves as an education system, “How much failure data do we need documented to know a student can’t do the task?” If a student is reading at a grade three level and can’t read a grade seven textbook, will they have success with the text? This one size fits all attitude about education makes it almost impossible for students with reading difficulties.

The article discusses when we need to decide the best course of action: remediation or compensation? If we recognize that remediation has failed, compensatory approaches may be needed to produce the performance level needed. Because the question of remediation versus compensation is not considered often, struggling students leave school without learning to read. They enter the workplace without compensatory strategies to help them overcome the inability to read. When there is routine failure in academic performance, assistive technology should be considered.  The article talked about teaching a student who was print disabled like they were visually impaired. This would mean that all text would be available in audio format. This made me stop to think...it really is a simple as that for some solutions. Teachers and special education teachers need to embrace compensatory strategies if that is the reality of the student.  We are doing a great disservice to students who are struggling with reading and not improving over the years with remediation, to continue with remediation. We need to teach these students assistive technology that will help them achieve success. If not, we continue to make these students feel helpless and frustrated in school everyday, until they are so defeated they want to give up. I see is every year in high school.

Article 5

Assistive Technology and Universal Design for Learning: Two Sides of the Same Coin

By David H Rose, Ted S Hasselbring, Skip Stahl and Joy Zabala

This article looked at the role of assistive technology and Universal Design improving education for students with disabilities. How can these two approaches support one another to benefit the student? The article looked at how AT and UDL being different are complementary. Advances in one approach helps advancements in the other.

Universal design creates products or environments that accommodate individuals with a wider range of abilities, while AT technology is created to help an individual overcome barriers. The AT is usually designed to increase opportunities for independence. Looking at education AT helps an individual student overcome barriers in the curriculum or environment while UDL targets the curriculum.

The article gave an example of a wheelchair ramp and how it could benefit more than just someone in a wheelchair. Parents with young children, someone carrying luggage or someone who is temporarily disabled (broken leg) could also use the ramp. The assistive technology to help those in wheelchairs can be used by the general public. We need to be looking at both perspectives: AT and UDL.

When looking at the AT perspective, the problem is considered an individual problem. For example if a student struggles with the text in history class, AT such as audio, can be valuable because it provides the student to overcome their limitations and increases independence. The UDL perspective sees a problem with the environment: the history curriculum’s reliance on printed text.

The article talked about having high quality AT in the classroom so teachers can concentrate on the learning not on the production of accessible materials. There was a discussion on how hard it was to get access to texts digitized and the “ red tape “ involved and that certain States have begun to incorporate flexible digital version of text books.

As UDL matures, it will get better by incorporating many of the AT technologies just like captioning is built into every television.  

The few pages of this article went to depth about the difficulties of accessing digital textbooks and that  students with reading difficulties  don’t have access to the curriculum. It made me reflect on just how much technology is out there and the access we have as teachers and students. We may not be able to digitize a whole textbook, but through programs like Google Read and Write, we can utilize pretty much anything on the internet. Having access to APPs and programs, that are user friendly can accommodate those individuals that need support but they can also be a benefit to others who just want another way to express their learning:)