Running head: INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION

Integrating Strategies for Online Literacy Instruction in a High School Alternative Program Karen Jones ETEC 532 Section 65A Dr. Alexander de Cosson April 7, 2013 (Word count: 2496)

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Integrating Strategies for Online Literacy Instruction in a High School Alternative Program Learning disabilities affect 3% of BCs K to 12 school population (BC Ministry of Education, 2012). As new technologies emerge, new literacy skills are needed to access digital environments, yielding both opportunities and challenges for struggling students (Castek, Zawilinski, McVerry, OByrne, & Leu, 2011). Our urban high school alternative program

recognizes benefits of using technology to instruct students with behavioural and literacy issues, and is supported by computers in every classroom. However, while our students prefer using technology, their poor background knowledge, tendency to plagiarize, and propensity to hastily finish work without applying critical reflection has highlighted the need for a comprehensive approach to improving literacy skills. The following will investigate frameworks for the selection and use of digital resources, as well as strategies and benefits supporting online reading comprehension of students with learning difficulties. In light of these findings, I will then propose a new vision of Internet-based literacy instruction in our alternative setting. Literature Review The purpose of this literature review is to investigate frameworks and instructional pedagogies supporting online literacy instruction of struggling students considered to possess barriers such as learning disabilities (LD) that may affect the acquisition, organization, retention, understanding or use of verbal or nonverbal information (BC Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 46). It then identifies common themes in light of their application within our alternative setting. Frameworks Guiding the Selection of Technology for Literacy Instruction Developments in supportive technology have shown promise in literacy instruction of students with learning disabilities (Cheung & Slavin, 2012; Kennedy & Deshler, 2010). However, for effective integration, teachers need assistance choosing technologies to match

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION students Individual Education Plan (IEP) goals and to create accessible lessons (Blackhurst, 2005). To this end, the literature yields two frameworks that target special needs learners. Frameworks described by Kennedy and Deshler (2010) and King-Sears, Swanson, and Mainzer (2011) see technology as a means of individualizing instruction according to student needs. Kennedy and Deshler (2010) address the limitations students with LD may have in their processing speed, working memory, and overall reading performance by integrating Mayers instructional Design Principles for selecting multimedia into the framework. The framework of King-Sears et al. (2011), on the other hand, focuses on integrating technology for LD students

across multiple classrooms and assessing its effectiveness. Both complement each other, with the second framework being more practitioner-friendly and in accord with my philosophy of creating accessible environments for all students. Instructional Models for Integrating Digital Technologies to Support Literacy New pedagogies have come out of studies on New Literacies that consider the changing nature of literacy in response to new communication technologies (Lankshear & Knobel, 2008; The New London Group, 1996). Two such instructional models are Internet Reciprocal Teaching (IRT) (Leu et al., 2008) and iPed (Mills & Levido, 2011). IRT focuses on the input side of how the Internet impacts reading comprehension, while iPed pedagogy integrates digital media production output into literacy learning. Both are the result of multiyear studies observing technology-enhanced classes containing at-risk students, and share the assumption that there are comprehension differences between traditional print-based and digital media. Instruction in both models progresses stepwise. IRT moves students from direct, whole class instruction of basic Internet skills in Phase 1, through group work and strategy exchange in Phase 2, to independent inquiry and online sharing in Phase 3, providing checklists for progress assessment.

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION IPed instruction involves linking texts to students cultural knowledge, co-creating, challenging, and sharing that encourages students to become both creative producers and critical consumers of user-generated Web content including wikis, cartoons, blogs, and video (Mills & Levido, 2011, p. 89). Both models recognize the need for direct instruction and scaffolding that many learners with learning disabilities require before they can work independently. Synthesis of Themes Coming out of the larger context of New Literacies is the view that online reading comprehension is a separate process from offline reading, which requires skills to locate,

critically evaluate, synthesize, and communicate information in multiple formats (Henry, Castek, OByrne, & Zawilinski, 2012). Case studies of Castek et al. (2011) found weak offline readers tended to be more capable online due to supportive aspects including multimedia, shorter units of text, ability to choose links, and search skills that students have developed outside of school. These findings are supported by Manderino (2011) who noted use of multimodal resources resulted in equal reasoning scores between high school students of higher and lower reading ability. The author attributed this result to motivating and ameliorating aspects of multimedia that addressed gaps in background knowledge more quickly than written text, a finding that is of interest in our context. A second theme in the literature is the role collaboration plays in supporting struggling readers. King-Sears et al. (2011) noted social interactions with peers could reduce frustration and loss of confidence often experienced by students with LD. Similarly, Leu et al. (2008) remarked how working together in small groups to collectively solve problems and share strategies may further support struggling readers. Heterogeneous groupings of competent students in the iPed study scaffolded the learning of weaker peers, who in turn trained others (Mills & Levido, 2011).

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION The case study of Henry et al. (2012) investigated the impact of IRT on student roles. Analysis

indicated peer collaboration was the primary way in which at-risk students exchanged strategies, with struggling readers becoming active experts, showing greater engagement, and increasing their academic achievement. The third aspect that the literature reflects is the integration of technology for technical, practical, and critical engagement in literacy instruction rather than as an isolated focus of instruction (ORourke, 2001). Computer-assisted instruction programs that have dominated remedial literacy instruction in the past have not produced educationally meaningful effects in K12 reading (Maccini, Gagnon, & Hughes, 2002). Using digital multimedia to motivate struggling learners, combined with authentic problem-solving in collaborative student-centred learning environments may be the most effective literacy intervention strategy. Case Study Nature of the Context Station Stretch Program provides a separate setting within the Richmond School District for forty grades nine and ten students who have been unsuccessful in high school. Our students are divided into three classes and are taught the core courses in traditional classroom formats. Students at Station Stretch receive social, emotional, and educational support, and have IEPs that address behavioural and academic strengths and needs. Many of our students are unmotivated, quickly frustrated, and avoid tasks they consider too hard. Their learning may be impeded by difficulties with visual perception, oral receptive language, organization, and memory. Their assignments frequently lack structure and depth, with little development of ideas or attention paid to grammar, spelling, or presentation. Although most are familiar with digital environments, few know how to use them in educationally productive ways. Current use of Technology at Station Stretch

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION

Home access to computers may be limited, thus lessons are structured to ensure adequate time for assignment completion in school. Students work independently or in small groups on computers to complete the majority of assignments, and are assumed to know basic word processing skills. We use the Internet for multimedia instructional resources, as well as computer-based activities and simulations. Technology also provides choices for varied assignment output, as many of our students have poor handwriting and drawing skills. Besides word processing, mind mapping and presentation software, Web 2.0 tools are used for cartooning, creating digital posters, and collaborating on group documents. This year staff collectively designed a self-directed project for use in English to expose students to digital storytelling. We also have a class set of iPads that we have yet to use. Our learners respond best to routine and lack the skills for self-directed study, which precludes my ideal of a student-centred classroom. I deliver instruction in front of the class and use paper-based multiple-choice assessment, which reduce opportunities to personalize the curriculum. As well, students poor literacy and social skills have made me reluctant to collaborate with others outside our classroom. We would like to develop a comprehensive plan for addressing these issues that is adaptable to changes in technology and curriculum. Integrating Online Literacy Instruction A framework is an essential first step to developing a new approach to using technology. I propose that our implementation of online literacy instruction emulate the TECH framework of King-Sears et al. (2011) described below, and incorporate recommendations from Kennedy and Deshler (2010) to: Provide explicit literacy instruction;

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Select multimedia materials for literacy instruction that extend existing pedagogy, foster working memory abilities, and encourage active learning, but limit extraneous processing; and Shape instruction to reflect the specific literacy demands of subject matter. Target needs and learning outcomes. The staff has identified certain student characteristics we would like to address through this pedagogical revision: poor background knowledge, tendency to plagiarize, problems with attention, weak reading comprehension skills, problems with written output, and poor peer relations.

Learning outcomes we would like to focus on include: following conventional grammar, spelling, and punctuation rules; developing competency with digital literacy skills; using multimodal literacies to communicate meaning; practicing peer collaboration; creating authentic products; and developing critical literacy skills. Examine technology and instructional choices for online literacy integration. Within this framework, the staff will use a combination of IRT and iPed pedagogies to develop a stepwise instructional model that can be applied within social studies, science, English, and math curricula to address the aforementioned learning outcomes. The process will progress over four

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION terms from simple online tasks supported by whole class teacher-directed instruction to inquirybased student-centred projects. Efforts will be made to organize curricula into interdisciplinary topics with relevant and authentic applications. Stage 1: Guided Basic Skill Instruction. Initially, the teachers role will be to model Internet and computer strategies, and introduce procedures for group discussions. Students, individually or in small groups, will be given mini-lessons covering curriculum to practice iPad and computer skills centring around effective searches, scanning for information, and learning

basic email, word-processing, and navigational techniques. Appendix A outlines some technical skills students should possess at the end of Stage 1. Stage 2: Evaluating Resources. As students become proficient in basic skills, the focus will shift to evaluating multimedia resources for accuracy, reliability, and bias, including identifying the intended consumers, and assumptions about gender, age, social class, ethnicity, belief systems, silences, and whose interests are served by the text (Mills & Levido, 2011, p. 84). Learners will choose how they present their critiques using text, audio, or video tools, which will provide the technological focus of this stage (Appendix B). As critical competency develops, students will reflect on the cultural messages implicit in their own multimedia products using questions in Appendix C as a guide. Stage 3: Co-Creating. In this stage, the focus will be on creating group solutions to common problems posed within curricular contexts. To start, the teacher will demonstrate collaborative digital tools and provide examples of final products, with students working in homogenous or heterogeneous groupings designed to target weaknesses or share strengths. Students will research and discuss solutions, exchange strategies, critically evaluate information, then synthesize and share their group product. Technologies will include communication and presentation tools using computer and iPad applications (Appendix D).

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION

As the term progresses, teachers and students will share responsibility for presenting new strategies. Self-help times may follow instruction during which students will be required to seek assistance independently through the learning materials and peers, but not the staff. The checklist in Appendix E may be used to support planning and evaluation of class progress through stages 2 to 5. Stage 4: Inquiry. Skills learned in the previous stages will be applied with the additional requirement that students, individually or in groups, develop and solve their own questions surrounding specific curricula, and select what they consider to be the most effective mode of final product presentation. Stage 5: Sharing with a Larger Audience. Sharing and discussing group digital products within a secure online class setting will occur throughout stages 3 and 4, and will expand to include larger local and global audiences. As individual students may need additional literacy supports to match their IEPs through stages 1 to 5, inconspicuous functionalities available in browsers, smartphones, and iPads can fulfill the need for (King-Sears et al., 2011): speech-to-text, text-to-speech screen readers, electronic texts, and video and audio capture and editing software as alternatives to text production. Handling Integration and Assessment. Leu et al., (2008) outline a number of formative and summative online assessment methods that measure knowledge of Internet strategies, curriculum, and reading comprehension abilities commensurate with the instructional methods described in stages 1 to 5 (Appendix D). While paper-based assessment may still have a place in this pedagogy, it is important to measure online skill

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION and process-based learning outcomes including critical evaluation, synthesis, and communication. Challenges and Barriers

10

The key impediment to implementing this plan is the timeframe of our program. We acquire new students four times a year into either grade nine or ten then promote them according to individual progress, which makes the stepwise progression of instruction problematic. The time students attend Station Stretch varies from two to six quarters; presumably some may not have the background necessary to develop independent inquiry skills. To address this, teachers will need to build in skills review at the beginning of each term. The additional time required will prove challenging due to our mandate to cover the grade nine and ten curriculum in one year, something that is already hard to achieve within our fifty-minute classes. This may be compounded by poor attendance, which could negatively affect group functioning. Ongoing support for this project will have a forum during our weekly Friday meetings when staff reviews student progress and program issues, a key step in overcoming perceived barriers. Leveraging change by mutual support is an effective way to maintain and develop new technology initiatives, an observation reinforced by Zhao and Frank (2003). Conclusions Learning disabilities that impede effective communication may prevent students from being active participants in our global information society. However, from a social constructivist point of view, disabilities are not rooted in persons but instead arise from interactions between persons and their environment (Porter as cited in Ginsberg & Schulte, 2008, p. 85). Collaborative, critical, and reflective learning environments that situate online literacy instruction within the curriculum may extend accessibility to all learners, in essence,

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION

11

taking the special out of special needs. Alternative programs may be well suited to initiating this type of educational reform by their small enrolment and flexible nature. In the book, Disrupting Class, Christensen believes that in order to move to technology-based student-centric learning within the traditional system, technologies need to incubate within a smaller setting first in order to solve important problems that may occur (Christensen, Horn, & Johnson, 2008). By addressing the literacy needs of our learners through innovative integration of technology, our staff believes our program can be a centre for local and global change.

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION References

12

BC Ministry of Education. (2010). Literacy foundations: English language arts. Retrieved from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/irp/course.php?lang=en&subject=Literacy_Foundations&cour se=Literacy_Foundations_Overview_-_Full_Document&year=2010 BC Ministry of Education. (2012). District Reports - Reporting on K to 12. Retrieved September 30, 2012, from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/reporting/district_data_summary.php Blackhurst, A. E. (2005). Perspectives on applications of technology in the field of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 175. Castek, J., Zawilinski, L., McVerry, J. G., OByrne, W. I., & Leu, D. (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: New opportunities and challenges for students with learning difficulties. In C. Wyatt-Smith, J. Elkins, & S. Gunn (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on difficulties in learning literacy and numeracy (pp. 91110). Springer Netherlands. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8864-3_4 Cheung, A. C. K., & Slavin, R. E. (2012). How features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 7(3), 198215. Christensen, C., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill. Ginsberg, S. M., & Schulte, K. (2008). Instructional accommodations: Impact of conventional vs. social constructivist view of disability. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2), 84 91. Henry, L. A., Castek, J., OByrne, W. I., & Zawilinski, L. (2012). Using peer collaboration to support online reading, writing, and communication: An empowerment model for

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION struggling readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(3), 279306. doi:10.1080/10573569.2012.676431 Kennedy, M. J., & Deshler, D. D. (2010). Literacy instruction, technology, and students with

13

learning disabilities: Research we have, research we need. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(4), 289298. King-Sears, M. E., Swanson, C., & Mainzer, L. (2011). TECHnology and literacy for adolescents with disabilities. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(8), 569578. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2008). The twoness of learn 2.0: Challenges and prospects of a would-be new learning paradigm. Learning 2.0: From Preschool to Beyond. Retrieved from http://everydayliteracies.net/files/Montclair_Talk.pdf Leu, D. J., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, B. D. K., Henry, L. A., & Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press. Retrieved from http://www.newliteracies.uconn.edu/iesproject/documents/LeuetalFinalChapter.doc Maccini, P., Gagnon, J. C., & Hughes, C. A. (2002). Technology-based practices for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(4), 24761. Manderino, M. L. (2011). Reading across multiple multimodal sources in historical inquiry (3551262). University of Illinois at Chicago, United States -- Illinois. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT). (1285537239) Mills, K. A., & Levido, A. (2011). IPed: Pedagogy for digital text production. Reading Teacher, 65(1), 8091. ORourke, M. (2001). Engaging students through ICTs: A multiliteracies approach. Teacher Learning Network Journal: Change, Growth and Innovation, 8(3), 1213.

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION The IES Research Team. (n.d.). The TICA Research Project Website. Teaching Internet Comprehension to Adolescents. Retrieved March 9, 2013, from http://www.newliteracies.uconn.edu/iesproject/documents.html The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1). Retrieved from

14

http://wwwstatic.kern.org/filer/blogWrite44ManilaWebsite/paul/articles/A_Pedagogy_of _Multiliteracies_Designing_Social_Futures.htm Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807840. doi:10.3102/00028312040004807

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Appendix A Modifed TICA Basic Skills (Stage 1) Checklist1 (The IES Research Team, n.d.) Most of the students and all of the groups in my class know how to:
Computer Basics Turn a computer on/off Follow classroom and school rules for computer use Open programs and files using icons Open the Groups folder from desktop Create/open a new folder/file and save on desktop Change the name of a folder Launch a word processor and open a word processing file Type an entry in a word processing file Copy, cut, paste, delete, and format text Name a word processing file and save it to a specific folder Open a new window Open a new tab Web Searching Basics Locate and open a search engine Use a search engine for simple key word searches Type addresses in the address window Use the refresh button Use the BACK and FORWARD buttons General Navigation Basics Maximize/minimize windows Toggle between windows E-mail Basics Locate and open an e-mail program Attach documents to e-mail messages Compose, edit and send email messages Receive and reply to messages iPad Basics Turn an iPad on and off Navigate between apps using the home button Take photos with camera and record video Take screenshots with the home and power button Select, copy, and paste Share using email Comment

15

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Appendix B Digital Tools Used for Student Production During Stage 2 Text/Images Pixton comics (computer) Powerpoint presentations Inspiration & Idea Sketch mindmaps Blogs Wikis (Wikispaces) Audio/Video Glogster multimedia posters Podcasts (Audacity or Garageband) VoiceThread Voki Avatar Vuvox collages

16

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Appendix C Evaluating Digital Resources During Stage 2 (Mills & Levido, 2011, p. 84) 1. Evaluating Websites: What is this website about? What is the purpose of the website? Who created the website? Who will benefit from the website? What are the features of the website? What does the website suggest about people of different ages? What does the website suggest about people of different genders? What does the website suggest about people from different cultures? Can you trust the information in this website? Why or why not? What do you like or dislike about the website? Do you have a different view? Why? 2. Evaluating User Created Content: Why am I creating this blog? What features (e.g., words, images, audio) will best suit my purpose? Who is my intended audience? Who else potentially has access to my blog? What information about myself should I share or hide? How does my blog build on the contributions of my peers in the discussion thread? How do my blog entries show respect for my teacher and others in my class (e.g., manners, language use)? What do my blog entries say about people of different ages, occupations, and cultures? Whose views have I included or left out? Why? Who benefits from my blog? Why?

17

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Appendix D Group Collaboration Tools Used For Stage 3 Communication tools School-based email (Edmodo, gmail) Instant messaging (iPads) Co-collaborative Tools iMovie or video-editing software (Videolicious) Wikis Voicethread Google Docs

18

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Appendix E Checklist of Online Literacy Skills for Stages 2 to 5 (The IES Research Team, n.d.)

19

TICA Phase II Checklist1 Most of the students and all of the groups in my class know how to:
UNDERSTAND AND DEVELOP QUESTIONS

Lesson Evidence and Comments

Teacher-Generated Questions Use strategies to ensure initial understanding of the question such as: rereading the question to make sure they understand it. paraphrasing the question. taking notes on the question. thinking about the needs of the person who asked the question. knowing when to review the question. checking an answer in relation to the question to ensure it is complete. Student-Generated Questions Determine what a useful question is, based on a variety of factors that include interest, audience, purpose, and the nature of the inquiry activity. Determine a clear topic and focus for questions to guide the search for information. Modify questions, when appropriate, using strategies such as the following: narrowing the focus of the question. expanding the focus of the question. developing a new question that is more appropriate. Lesson Evidence and Comments

Use strategies to monitor an understanding of the question such as:

LOCATE INFORMATION Locating Information By Using A Search Engine And Its Results Page

Locate at least one search engine. Use key words in a search window on a browser that has this.

Use several of the following search engine strategies during key word entry:

topic and focus quotation marks single and multiple key word entries phrases for key word entry paraphrases and synonyms Boolean

advanced search tool Copy and paste key words and phases into the search engine window while searching for information.

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION

Read search engine results effectively to determine the most useful resource for a task using strategies such as: knowing which portions of a search results page are sponsored, containing commercially placed links, and which are not. skimming the main results before reading more narrowly reading summaries carefully and inferring meaning in the search engine results page to determine the best possible site to visit understanding the meaning of bold face terms in the results understanding the meaning of URLs in search results (e.g. .com, .org, .edu, .net) knowing when the first item is not the best item for a question monitoring the extent to which a search results page matches the information needs. knowing how to use the history pull down menu. Select from a variety of search engine strategies to locate useful resources when an initial search is unsuccessful: Knows the use and meaning of the "Did you mean...?" feature in Google.

20

Monitors and knows when an initial search is not successful. Adjusts search engine key words according to the results of a search. narrows the search. expands the search. reads search results to discover the correct vocabulary and then use this more appropriate vocabulary in a new search. Shifts to another search engine.

Bookmark a site and access it later. Use specialized search engines for images, videos, and other media sources.

Locating Information Within A Website Read more carefully at a site to determine if the required information is located there. Predict information behind a link accurately to make efficient choices about where information is located. Use structural knowledge of a web page to help locate information, including the use of directories. Recognize when you have left a site and know how to return back to the original site. Know how to open a second browser window to locate information, without losing the initial web page. Lesson Evidence and Comments

Quickly determine if a site is potentially useful and worth more careful reading

Know how to use an internal search engine to locate information at a site.

CRITICALLY EVALUATE INFORMATION Bias and Stance

Recognize that all websites have an agenda, perspective, or bias. Identify bias, given a website with a clear bias.

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION

Identify the author of a website whenever visiting an important new site.

21

Use information about the author of a site to determine how information will be biased at that site . Reliability Investigate multiple sources to compare and contrast the reliability of information. Identify several markers that may affect reliability such as: Is this a commercial site? Is the author an authoritative source (e.g., professor, scientist, librarian, etc.)? Does the website have links that are broken? Does the information make sense? Does the author include links to other reliable websites? Does the website contain numerous typos? Does the URL provide any clues to reliability? Do the images or videos appear to be altered?

Understand that Wikipedia is a reasonable, but imperfect, portal of information.

Identify the general purpose of a website (entertainment, educational, commercial, persuasive, exchange of information, social, etc.) Identify the form of a website (e.g. blog, forum, advertisement, informational

website, commercial website, government website, etc.), and use this

information when considering reliability. SYNTHESIZE INFORMATION

Lesson Evidence and Comments

Synthesize information from multiple media sources including written prose, audio, visual, video, and/or tables and graphs

Separate relevant information from irrelevant information. Organize Information effectively

Manage multiple sources both on and offline including:

Choose tools to meet the needs of managing information (file folders, electronic file folders, notebooks, email, etc.) Cite sources Take notes with paper & pencil, when appropriate. Take notes with a word processor, when appropriate. Type notes using short cut strokes such as highlight/cut/copy/paste Lesson Evidence and Comments

COMMUNICATE INFORMATION

Understands that messages have consequences and will influence how others react.

Uses online and offline writing/editing tools such as a word processor, spell

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION

checker, dictionary, thesaurus, outlining tool, pdf, spreadsheet, concept mapping software, etc. Uses a wide array of Internet-based forms of communication, such as: email and attachments blogs wikis Google Docs instant messaging websites presentation software

22

Is aware of the audience and the relationship between audience, purpose, medium, message. Uses formatting such as headings and subheadings to communicate the organization of information within informational text.

Knows how to include multiple-media sources within messages.

1

These skills and strategies inform and guide instruction during Phase Two but they are not intended to limit instruction. New skill and strategy needs will emerge within each classroom. Each teacher must respond to (and document) those additional skill and strategy needs during the year.
2

The evaluation of dispositions will be done from the teacher side, checking to make certain that these are included during instruction, largely because it is hard to evaluate if each student has these dispositions in place and regularly uses them.

INTEGRATING STRATEGIES FOR ONLINE LITERACY INSTRUCTION Appendix E Sample Assessment Methods For Online Internet Reading Comprehension Skills (Leu et al., 2008, pp. 1112)

23

Formative Assessments of Online Reading Comprehension Strategy Use Formative Assessment of Students Emerging Knowledge of Internet Strategies (FASEKIT). Once every three to four weeks, students are given approximately fifteen minutes to list the most important strategies they employ when using the Internet. For each strategy, they are also asked to explain why that strategy is important and when they might use it as part of their online reading experience. Curriculum-Based Information Challenges Jeopardy-style blog challenges; mystery email challenges that integrates samples of descriptive writing and personal letters to evaluate the development of new literacy strategies as part of a unit on narrative writing; Wikipedia activity that challenges students to share information they researched with a worldwide audience; informational website challenges designed to prompt prediction and inferential reasoning skills; and interactive blog discussion that assesses ability to share critical evaluation strategies used to determine which informational websites were reliable and which were unreliable. Performance-Based Assessments of Online Reading Comprehension Ability Online Reading Comprehension Assessment (ORCA). These rubric-guided measures ask students to search for, locate, critically evaluate, synthesize, and communicate solutions to online information requests using instant messaging, email, and blog technologies in an online quiz interface.