Article Critique #3:

A Synthesis of Three Articles Regarding the Use of Technology in Educational Settings

By Svetlana Gibson ETEC 500 Section 65A Dr. Stephen Carey March 29, 2010

ETEC 500 - Article Critique 3 Svetlana Gibson This literature review is based on three articles: Young Childrens Engagement With Digital Texts and Literacies in The Home by Christina Davidson, Middle School Students Technology Practices and Preferences: Re-Examining Gender Differences By Lisa M. Miller et al, and A Small Study of a

YearThree Writing Program by Beck and Fetherston. All three articles employed various qualitative research methods and used varying number of participants. In this critique, I will provide a more in-depth review of the Davidson article, and then look again at the Miller et al and the Beck and Fetherston articles. Finally I will highlight the common theme that emerges from this body of research literature.
As teachers, especially of young children, we are called upon to be educators, parents, counselors, nurses, nutritionists - the list is endless. Christina Davidson of Central Queensland University, in Young Childrens Engagement with Digital Texts and Literacies in the Home: Pressing matters for the Teaching of English in the Early Years of Schooling, contends that we should also be anticipators of what young children do at home and then reproduce those interactions at school, at least when it comes to employing new technologies in the school setting. The authors states that [c]urriculum frameworks and documents that inform English instruction in the early years illustrate that the teaching of English for young children maintains a strong emphasis on knowledge and skills pertaining to print and printbased tests. Largely, new technologies appear as add-ons in the core work of teaching about printbased texts, rather than the constructive elements of new ways of doing things and new ways of being. (Davidson, 2009. p.36) The article is well organized and easy to read. It provides a lengthy introduction and draws on a wide variety of recent research on the topic presented and related areas. In the Theoretical Perspective and Methods, the author provides a good explanation of what ethnomethodology is for this is the type of research used for this study. Ethnomethodology attempts to understand peoples ordinary actions. 1

ETEC 500 - Article Critique 3 Svetlana Gibson According to ethnomethodology, members of society bring about an ordered existence as an everyday and local accomplishment. Members orient to sense-making in ways that provide for order, seek to find it, and account for its absence in orderly ways. (Davidson, p.40) Ethnomethodologists seek to find, describe and explicate the methods by which members do this as an ordinary and everyday way of doing life (p. 40) One of the most effective ways to do this is to examine social interactions. Davidson uses Conversational Analysis in this study, which focuses on sequential analysis of talk. (Davidson, p.40) Central to the approach is the repeated reviewing of recordings of naturally occurring activity, detailed transcription of recordings and reporting of analysis that provides transcripts as evidence. (Davidson, p.40) I found the detailed description of ethnomethodology very interesting and intriguing for I have not had a lot of exposure to this type of research. The course text only briefly mentions it in the table of common qualitative research approaches but does not explore it any further than that. Data collection for this research consisted of recordings of children under the age of eight from four families, although only small excerpts of recordings from one family were provided with detailed annotations and analysis. I found this helpful. All three excerpts were of a father and two boys using the internet to find information about lizards. The older boy was 6 years and 6 months and his younger brother was 2 years and 11 months. The mother was also present and engaged in the activity. The intent of the activity is to show the mutual accomplishment of what was meaningful during computer use, how interactional resources produce socially recognizable actions and activities, and how childrens social actions shifted seamlessly between technologies and text as they oriented to doing things about lizards as an aspect of their primary Discourse or everyday activity in this family (Davidson, p.48) The article highlights the importance of pursuing information which often entails the seeking of knowledge of others in order to know more (Davidson, p.49) It also points out, based on the lizard activity, that the adult is not always the one with all the information. The benefits of working with one adult and a small group of children have been known for a long time but I question how feasible it is in a classroom 2

ETEC 500 - Article Critique 3 Svetlana Gibson setting, especially in a public school. This is where I take issue with the authors conclusion that understanding social interaction that constitutes digital practices in the home may be a powerful tool in attempts to transform literacy practices in the early years. (Davidson, p.50) I do not take issue with the fact that we can learn from how children interact at home but from the point of view of feasibility. How practical is this in a real-life classroom setting? The authors assertion that educational settings such as classrooms should also encompass the use of technologies in ways that do not create a divide between the old and new; allowing children to experience and use various technologies in ways that harness out-of-school literacy practices and provide instruction that encompasses and adds to understandings of them in authentic ways (Davidson, p.50) is all and great in theoretical terms but lacks practical application suggestions. I feel that the article would have been strengthened if the authors had been able or willing to put forth some applicable classroom activities. In looking back at the Beck and Fetherston article, where the researchers used a criteria based writing evaluation, and the Miller article where she used a multi question questionnaire, I discovered my own bias for research with large number of participants. It is also evident that the topic of computers and children is of high interest as we all try to figure out how to harness the potential of this constantly evolving technology. The Fetherston article focused on the benefits of computers in writing and in motivating students to write. After reading various research articles, I found that I prefer papers which include the actual data collected and provide a solid explanation of the methodology. Some articles, Davidsons for example, focused on ethnomethodological research which I found to be much more difficult to analyze and lent itself to more than one interpretation of the facts provided. The Miller et al article I found to be sensitive to socio economic differences in the student sample, which I appreciated because I have worked in an inner-city school and can relate to the vast differences in achievement,

ETEC 500 - Article Critique 3 Svetlana Gibson attitudes and issues which both teachers and students face in that particular setting. I found Davidsons article to be presumptuous and very broad as it based its finding on a very small sample. After reading numerous articles, I have become aware of the importance of variables when dealing with qualitative research and subjects who are constantly in flux. In conclusion, I absolutely agree and see in my own children the seamless transition from the old technology of text to the new digital technology. I would tread lightly because I also know how isolating and detrimental to childrens development a lack of face to face interactions can be. I see computer as a tool, just like a pencil and paper and feel it should be used as such. We need to educate our young children how to use computers responsibly and how to become critical consumers of the information found on the Internet. Furthermore, we need to educate the parents because the tools that have become so prevalent in culture today were not readily available when most parents were in school. Therefore, the parents use of the technology is haphazard at best it lacks the clear critical need and outcome that is required in educational technology use. That being said, I think that all the articles Ive read point to one conclusion. While technology promotes interest in education, it is not the silver bullet some educators once believed it was. Technology is a tool, but nothing beats work ethics and the basics.

ETEC 500 - Article Critique 3 Svetlana Gibson

Bibliography Beck, N., & Fetherston, T (2003). The Effects of Incorporating A Word Processor Into a Year Three Writing Program. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, pp 139 161.

Davidson, C. Young Childrens Engagement With Digital Texts And Literacies In The Home: Pressing Matters For The Teaching Of English In The Early Years Of Schooling. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8 , 36-54. Retrieved March 12, 2010 from http://education.waikato.ac.nz/research/files/etpc/files/2009v8n3art3.pdf

Miller, L. M., Schweingruber, H., & Bradenburg, C. L. (2001). Middle School Students Technology Practices and Preferences: Re-Examining Gender Differences. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(2), 125-140.