Caverly, D.C. (1995). Technology in learning assistance centers: past, present, and future. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Institute for Learning Assistance Professionals. University Learning Center, University of Arizona: Tucson, AZ. Reprinted with permission.
Technology in developmental education has a long and productive history. Beginning with the pen 5000 years ago, the book 500 years ago, and the computer 50 years ago, education has incorporated each new technology into its mission and has generally improved as a result. Before we go much further with this latest paradigm shift (Kuhn, 1970), it is time to consider where we have been with technology in developmental education, where we are now, and where we might go?
To answer these questions, let me begin by defining technology, then review a theoretical continuum for using technology in developmental education, and finally examine the research on technology in developmental education using this continuum to answer each of these three questions.
In order to understand technology in developmental education, one must understand the interface between humans and machines. Often novices to a technology are overwhelmed by each new invention that comes along. In an attempt to learn it, they try to analyze each part before they use it. While I agree with Macaulay (1988) that understanding the principles is useful to mastering the technology, they can still use the technology to better their lives while they are coming to understand it. They use high-tech machines in their daily lives when they drive, use kitchen appliances, or even use an automatic teller machine without concern for the underlying principles. So, too, they can come to understand the function of technology in developmental education as they are coming to understand its form.
Because of the scope of this paper, this discussion will be limited to computers as an exemplar of the current technological innovations that are enhancing developmental education. However, as will be seen later, computers are just the external framework of a much larger information technology including audio, video, CD-ROM, hypermedia, telecommunications, and ubiquitous computing.
Taylor (1980) in his seminal book provides a useful continuum through which all technological applications can be considered and the research can be organized. This continuum can also serve to explain how technology has been used in the past 50 years, how it is being used presently, and how it can be used productively into the future.
Taylor (1980) defines the use of computers in education as fitting into one of three roles: the computer as tutor, tool, or tutee. While these three roles in developmental education have been introduced elsewhere (Broderick & Caverly, 1988), it is time to explicate these roles further. Taylor defines the computer as tutor where the computer is programmed by experts in a subject area. Here, the computer presents information to be learned, prompts students to respond, evaluates their response, and from this evaluation determines what to present next. Often, the computer also keeps records on students' performance, has access to a wide range of material to be presented in a pre-specified scope and sequence, and individualizes to accommodate a variety of student differences.
Taylor (1980) defines the second role of the computer as tool where the computer has some useful capability programmed into it, such as processing words, calculation via spreadsheets or statistical analyses, and organization via data bases. These applications save students time and intellectual energy by relegating menial tasks to the computer. Both the computer as tutor or tool requires neither students nor instructors to learn much about the computer, only to use them.
Taylor (1980) defines the third role of the computer as tutee where the students teach the computer. Originally this was programming computers using languages such as BASIC or LOGO. Here, students can acquire some sense of control over the machine. Moreover, there are several other benefits. First, because it is difficult to teach what one doesn't understand, the student/tutor must learn before or while he/she is teaching the computer. Second, by taking broad ideas and narrowing them down to the logic of the computer, the human tutor is forced to learn how his/her own thinking works. By teaching the computer to be a tutor and a tool, students gain insights into their own learning. Thus, "...the focus of education in the classroom [shifts] from end product to process, from acquiring facts to manipulating and understanding them" (Taylor, 1980, p.4).
Learning Theories and Technology
While this continuum has provided a useful means of integrating computers into education in general, understanding how past and present learning theories fit into this continuum can help us determine a functional, adaptive use of technology in developmental education. Table 1 puts into perspective these learning theories by delimiting their philosophical positions, the psychological interpretations of these positions, the educational applications of these interpretations, and the technological adaptations of Taylor's (1980) continuum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philosophical |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Psychological |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pedagogical |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technology |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 1: Heuristic for Technology in Developmental Education
Rationalism/Radical Constructivism/Discovery
Historically, a rationalist philosophy held sway as philosophers such as Descartes argued that the world was rational and could be explained through logical, consistent, deductive thought (Fabricius, 1983). New knowledge comes from deductive logic using innate ideas to explain new experiences and to "discover" new knowledge by adding or changing these ideas.
A natural psychological interpretation of this philosophy was radical constructivism whereby learning was explained as occurring when students construct a viable knowledge. Learning is an adaptive function of the structures individuals understand about the world within the range of experiences they have had with the world. Evident of this viability is equilibrium where cognitive schemata are consistent with experience, though also dynamic like the balance of a cyclist or a tightrope walker. Given disequilibrium, where task demands challenge viability of knowledge, schemata change. New, inconsistent experiences cause disequilibration, or perturbation in the existing schemata, which in turn cause accommodation, which in turn cause equilibration after which we can say students have learned new knowledge (von Glasersfeld, 1988).
Educationally, this interpretation has been applied in early childhood education through the Montessori approach and in developmental education through discovery reading approaches (Morrison, 1990 ; Caverly & Broderick, 1991). Here, students read, discuss, and write about narrative books as they come to understand the reading process.
Using the computer as a tool in developmental education is using it through a rationalistic / radical constructivist / discovery approach as students come to discover an understanding of reading, writing, study skills, and math. For example, using word processing with developmental readers and writers improves both their reading and writing abilities as they read and discuss their own texts rather than someone else's. The use of grammar and spelling checkers will improve only those grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors they typically make, not everyone. They can discover the role and function of the author through reading/writing their and peer's prose (Broderick & Caverly, 1987, 1992a; Broderick, et al., 1988).
Empiricism/Behaviorism/Transmission
With the emergence of the scientific method in the early 17th century came a new philosophical position known as empiricism. Empiricism argues that knowledge comes from inductive reasoning of experiences or observations. The mind is a tabula rasa; that is, devoid of knowledge before experience. Truth (i.e., knowledge) comes from verification via experiences as knowledge exists in the world (Fabricius, 1983).
The psychological interpretation of an empirical philosophy was that all knowledge lies outside the students' mind. Through shaping, scheduling, and reinforcement, overt behaviors like reading, writing, study skills, and mathematical computing could be developed. Based upon Pavlov and Skinner's work with animals, a scientific learning theory emerged in the early part of the twentieth century called behaviorism.
Educationally this psychological theory was applied by theorists like Gagne (1975) who argued knowledge to-be-learned (i.e., reading, writing, math, study skills) should be broken down into discrete, sequential skills ranging from the simplest to the complex. Learning these skills occurred through an external agent, such as the instructor, "transmitting" these skills to students, drilling and practicing these skills until mastery was achieved, and then by providing reinforcement, scheduling, and shaping students were motivated to learn and remember these skills.
Using the computer as a tutor was a natural extension of this educational adaptation. Much of the educational software builds on this position breaking a complex skill like reading into separate tutorial or drill/practice packages with appropriate behavioristic reinforcement where necessary (Broderick & Caverly, 1992b; Caverly & Broderick, 1988; Suppes, 1980). Most of today's developmental educators were trained in this empiricist / behaviorist / transmission philosophy. Consequently, most of the computer applications in developmental education are from this perspective (cf., Nwankwo, 1992). Students' skills in reading, writing, math are diagnosed and then appropriate courseware is completed until mastery of the skills are documented by the tests (Broderick & Caverly, 1992b; Caverly & Broderick, 1988).
Phenomenologicalism/Constructivism/Holistic
Still, not everyone was happy with either of these extreme positions whereby the structural elements of knowledge existed in the object (empiricism) or in the subject (rationalism). Kant, in particular, argued that a more reasonable position would be an interaction between the subject and object during experience. The subject must grasp what the object contains; the object must corroborate what the subject knows (Fabricius, 1983). With this argument, Kant opened up a new realm of knowing which he labeled phenomenologicalism. He did this by concentrating on the mental elements of knowledge which allow us to identify structure in objects. For example, if we go to a gravel pit where some stones have already been separated by a 1/4" screen, we would generate any number of thoughts. Empirically, we might assume since those stones we see are the correct size, all of the stones are indeed 1/4". Or, we might rationalistically think that there is some logic to the pile of stones. In both cases, however, we did not consider the role of the screen. The screen is the phenomenonlogical realm. The structure within our mind which gives form to this experience. This phenomenon of structure is constructed by the interaction of subject and object giving meaning to this experience. Our knowledge is given an objectivity because of the structure we impose (i.e., construct) onto experiences using temporal (categorization, listing, comparison/contrast) or spatial (cause/effect, sequence) dimensions. Once objects are perceived through space and time they are understood through these mind's structures, knowledge is gained, and the individual has gained knowledge.
Two psychologists in particular have interpreted this philosophy to explain learning and called it constructivism. Piaget argued constructivism occurs within the individual through inner speech. For Piaget, mental structures must interact internally with sense data for there to be learning. Learning is interactive and constructive through ordering and synthesizing through the senses. Reality is constructed to become the phenomena we experience (Fabricius, 1983). Vygotsky (1962) similarly argued that constructivism takes place, but through social interaction rather than individually. Through collaboration in a meaningful social interaction, an individual constructs a group meaning of a complex idea which is in turn personalized to an individual meaning.
Duffy (1991) helps to specify these learning perspectives by arguing that deconstructivism (or discovery learning ) is accepting all views or constructions as viable. A more useful alternative is testing one's constructions against those of one's peers via collaborative activities; what Vygotsky (1962) labeled social negotiation of meaning. What separates individual vs. social constructivism is pre-specification of knowledge. That is, we must decide whether information is provided by the learning context or whether knowledge is provided by the expert instructor? A transmission view would suggest that knowledge is provided by the expert instructor. A radical constructivist or discovery view would argue all knowledge is constructed from information provided by the context. Social constructivism, on the other hand, builds upon the unique sets of experiences brought by the learner with those of the social context and those made relevant by the current educational experiences. For example, transmission learning would give graduate students a readings list and test them over the content of the readings as a qualifying exam. Assessment has nothing to do with student needs or desires, only the committee's view of the content domain. Note also, it has nothing to do with what students will have to do as a Ph.D. A constructivist strategy would have the graduate student (or undergraduate for that matter) gathering papers over several years of study. It would be up to students to define an issue or focus within specified topic areas. Evaluation would then be on how well students considered and evaluated the various perspectives on that issue. In this latter constructivist experience, there is no pre-specification of knowledge for which students are to learn. The environment is authentic, and the role of the instructor is to guide and model. Learner control is an integral part of the environment.
Educationally, constructivism has emerged as Constructivist in reading instruction (Bergeron, 1990), process writing in writing instruction (Broderick, et al., 1987), and essence in math (Blais, 1988). Only recently has this educational philosophy emerged into practice in developmental education (Caverly, Mandeville, & Nicholson, 1994; Nist & Meeley, 1991). As will be discussed later in this paper, using the computer as a tutee through hypermedia and telecommunications can help developmental students construct a social understanding of the concepts of reading, writing, and mathematical computing.
Rationalism has faded as an educational philosophy, but empiricism and constructivism still are quite prevalent particularly in developmental education. Table 2 can help the reader distinguish between these two positions.
Which position is better is a moot point. Rather, which position you apply to using technology in developmental education is dependent on your philosophy of education (Caverly & Broderick, 1991).
Research and practice on the use of technology in developmental education over the last several decades helps to provide answers to the questions posed above. From my review of the literature, the computer as a tutor is where we have been, the computer as a tool is where we currently are, and the computer as tutee is where we are going.
Where we have been: The computer as tutor
Technology as tutorials are no stranger to developmental education. We acquired reading/writing/math films and tachistoscopes in the 1930s and 1940s, kits, teaching machines, and programmed texts in the 1950s and 1960s, and we still are acquiring the ever-present workbook. As each new technology emerged, our budgets were strained as we sought after the best technology for our learning centers and remedial/developmental classes. Unfortunately, many of these were relegated to our educational closets as each in their own way found disfavor. A major reason for this disfavor was the lack of research evidence that any of the technology was effective (Boylan, 1987).
Now with computer technology having a strong presence in some developmental education programs, while still yet emerging in others, we must question its effectiveness. Much of the published research reviewed how to acquire, use, and evaluate computer technology in developmental education. This literature might be organized into how-to publications for instruction in reading (Alexander, 1984 ; Cowles, 1988; Thompson, 1980; Turner, 1993; Wepner, 1990) writing (Boyd, et. al, 1982; Broderick & Caverly, 1987; Burns, 1984; Douglas, 1993; Durham, 1987; Giles, 1993; Hanson, 1990; Hunter, 1983; Johnson, 1986; McAllister, et. al, 1987; O'Hear, 1991; Pomper, 1986; Posey & Ward, 1991; Schwartz & Bridwell-Bowles, 1988); math (Flower & Craft, 1981; Johnson, 1992; Laffey & Helt, 1981; Nagaratte, 1989; Rotman, 1987); study skills (Hannafin, 1992); or how-to use technology in a learning center environment (A comparison of traditional vocational training with a vocational training model infusing remedial academic skills training, 1986; Barton, 1993; Bowen, 1992; Burnett, 1989; Lengel, 1986; Malinowski & Huard, 1989; Murray, et. al, 1988; Petry & McClain, 1981; Sax, 1972; Smith, et. al, 1981).
For over a decade, developmental educators have been taking advice of their mentors (Akst, 1984; Christ, 1982; and more recently Bill Broderick and myself) and have acquired computer technology in record numbers using it as computer assisted instruction (CAI) to supplement their developmental classes through drill and practice software, or provide primary instruction in learning centers through tutorial or simulation software. How effective such acquisitions have been depends upon where you look. Using achievement, attitudes toward instruction, motivation for learning more about a content area, and learning time as dependent variables, CAI proves to be an effective supplement to regular instruction though there was an inverse relationship with more gain in elementary school than in high school than in college. Using a meta-analysis techniques for college populations, the effect sizes has been low but positive averaging (.31) for achievement and (.22) for attitude. That is, summaries of research suggest that CAI raises the experimental groups performance about 10 percentile points over that of the control group (Broderick, et. al, 1987; Fulton, 1993; Kulik, 1983a; 1983b; 1985; Kulik & Bangert-Drowns, 1983-84; Kulik, Kulik, & Cohen, 1980; Kulik & Kulik, 1985; 1987; 1991; Niemec & Walberg, 1987; Reinking & Bridwell-Bowles, 1992; Waxman, 1992). In general, across educational levels, word processing enhances the quaintly of writing, and the ease of editing, though not necessarily the quality of writing. Computer simulations, educational games, and databases enhance problem solving skills. Computer based laboratories and simulations give students a deeper understanding of math and science concepts. Databases improve students ability to process large amounts of information. Perhaps the greatest successes, however, has been computers providing access for special populations to writing and reading, or for remote populations via distance education. These gains compare favorably to other interventions though some argue individual tutoring is more cost effective (Jamison, Suppes, & Wells, 1974).
When looking at the use of technology in reading in developmental education specific, CAI has had a significant improvement in most of the studies on posttests in terms of achievement as well as on attitude toward computers, but little or no transfer beyond the computer lab to improved reading performance in other classes or improved habits or attitudes (Dixon, 1993; Havlicek & Coulter, 1982; Kester, 1982; Lang, 1992; Mikulecky & Adams, 1988; Walker, 1992; Wepner & Feeley, 1987; Wepner, 1989). Six studies, actually found no improvement or worse performance on posttests measuring achievement (Balajthy, 1988; Balajthy, et. al, 1985; Burke, et. al, 1992; Feeley & Wepner, 1986; Read, 1992; Taylor & Rosecrans,1986).
Similarly, the use of technology in writing significantly improves performance on posttests measuring the grammar, punctuation, and spelling skills, but there is usually only a slight improvement in the quality of writing (Rudisill & Jabs, 1976; Tillett, 1992; Zoller, 1975).
Significant improvement came when using CAI to teach math in developmental education settings when using as dependent variables achievement on posttests, transfer beyond remedial setting, or attitudes (Bengis, et. al, 1991; Cox, 1987; 1990; Crumb & Monroe, 1993; Gucker, 1992; Hajdukiewicz, 1992; Judd, et. al, 1971; Plomp, Reinen, & Pilon, 1990; Reglin & Butler, 1989; Sherman, 1975; Wood, 1992).
Similar gains came when using CAI to teach study skills in developmental education. Several studies documented significant growth in achievement and transfer for teaching library skills (Champion, 1986; Lawson, 1987; Madland & Smith, 1988; Sugranes et. al, 1986), semantic maps (Blanchard, et. al, 1985), note taking (Shell, Horn, & Severs, 1988, cited in Bialo, 1990), and general study skills (Brown & Forristall, 1983; 1986; Gadzella, 1982; 1991). Two studies found no gain when using CAI for study skills (A comparison of traditional vocational training with a vocational training model infusing remedial academic skills training, 1986; Herrmann, 1982).
An interesting phenomenon that occurred in marketing CAI to developmental education in the late 1980s was the development of Integrated Learning Systems (ILS). Here, a technology firm would create a group of CAI into one system typically delivered over a local area network (i.e., a group of computers networked together with the software accessed from a server) with computer managed instruction (i.e., a diagnostic-prescriptive system for identifying the developmental student's weakness, computer directed remediation of the weakness, monitoring and re-teaching if necessary, and report generation of student performance and attendance). Several systems emerged including PLATO, CCC (Computer Curriculum Consortium), Skills Bank, Academic DeskLab, Jostens, PALS (Principles of Alphabet Literacy System), WASATCH CRS (Computer Resource Systems), and WICAT (World Instruction for Computer-Assisted Teaching) which is more holistic in educational theory (Turner, 1993). While the research on ILSs is rather sparse, it generally mirrors the research on stand-alone CAI. That is, there are some documented successes when looking at achievement and attitude on posttests, but there is little if any transfer beyond the computer lab to success in other classes (Becker, 1992; Freer, 1986; Maddux & Willis, 1992; Peterson & Williams, 1990). However, caution is warranted when considering these systems as most of the research that used post-secondary populations and promotes ILSs was completed by the marketing firm of the ILS and is less than adequate (Braun, 1990; Olson & Krendl, 1990-1991).
It would seem on the surface that using the computer as a tutor seems to be viable strategy for developmental education. However, looking deeper into these research studies, there were some disturbing negative trends that emerged in these CAI tutorial applications suggesting that the computer as a tutor may be limiting. CAI seems to widened the gap between rich and poor, male and female, and Anglo and other ethnic populations (Becker, 1983-1984 cited in Kleifgen, 1989). Moreover, there is a distinct Matthew effect (i.e., documented gains in low level skills, but also results in the academically rich getting richer and the academically poor getting poorer; Waxman, 1992) associated with CAI where traditionally underserved minority populations generally were limited to low level drill and practice rather than the higher thinking skills of problem solving or simulation.
This need not be the case, however, as useful gains can occur when using computers as more than just tutors. Setting up a collaborative learning environment can make it successful. The quality of writing can be improved via both a process writing model and the use of a computer. The computer can encourage social interactions because the screen makes the text visible to others and the ease of revision allows the group to discuss and test alternatives. Group work with writing engenders spoken and written language with both fostering reading and writing of the text. This positive effect is true for both Anglo and ESL populations (Mehan, Moll, & Riel, 1985).
Other research has found that limited English proficient populations (LEP) can improve linguistically and academically when given access to problem solving tasks, word processing, communications software, particularly when using it collaboratively (Diaz, 1984; Mehan, et al., 1985; Sayers, 1989). Female students have increased interest in and access to technology when computers are integrated into language arts with group writing becoming an entry point for computer literacy for females (Hawkins, 1985). Electronic mail (e-mail ) can provide a forum, a real audience, a goal, and a motivation for using all literacy skills as students share with others their knowledge (Levin, Riel, Boruta, & Rowe, 1984).
In conclusion, the computer as tutor can be of some help to developmental education but might be only in a rather limited way. Much of this lack of success may be the result of a limited application of computer technology. Overall, developmental education has been shown to effective when using standardized tests and local evaluation criteria, but only having limited effectiveness when using transfer to other courses, or academic retention (Bonham & Kulik, 1990). This may be the result of developmental education generally following an empiricist perspective. Using the computer as tutor through CAI also builds on an empiricist perspective. It is not surprising, then, that using computer technology in the same manner will demonstrate similar limited gains (Henderson, 1992). A detrimental side-effect of such limited results is computer backlash with decision makers expecting more from the technology than a computer as tutor can give (Maddux, Johnson, & Willis, 1992).
Perhaps, we need to redefine how we are using technology in developmental education. Often it is assumed by the naive that all high-tech is good. Using this assumption has two limitations: (1) it makes the developmental educator dependent on the technologically elite to decide what is valuable; that encourages a dependency of a majority on a few; (2) technology has not necessarily improved personal happiness and contentment in the majority (Puk, 1992). Technology is more than computers. Perhaps, a better definition of technology for developmental education is "knowledge based know how" (Puk, 1992, p.115); that is, a systematic method of achieving a practical purpose. Therefore, using the computer as tutor has limited applications because we have used computers to transmit knowledge rather than using computers to create knowledge. The research findings above suggest that while old ways of using computers are sufficient, it is not good enough.
Where we are now: The computer as tool
Where we are now with computer technology is using it as a tool. That is, using computers and other technologies to discover new knowledge via a rationalist perspective. While computer tool technology (such as word processing, data bases, spreadsheets, desktop publishing, and telecommunications) have existed in developmental education for years (Broderick, et al., 1988; 1992), students have learned about the technology rather than using the technology to learn. When we have taught students how to use the technology to learn, research results has been positive for improving writing (Burns, 1984; Deutsch, 1988; Ludovici, 1992; Perez, 1992). In these studies, word processing was used along with CAI and developmental students discovered how to write.
Still, only a few examples of computer as tool in developmental education at the college level have emerged in the literature. Here, computer tool technology was used to teach students about ordination and relationships (Caverly & Broderick, 1993, April; Caverly & Nicholson, 1993, October; Caverly, Sundin, Nicholson, & Oelke, 1990, October), to teach in studying textbooks (Hannafin, 1992), and to improve reading and writing (Caverly, McKool, & Peterson, 1994, March; Kleifgen, 1989; O'Hear, 1991). Similar results for math and study skills have not yet evolved in the literature.
Given the potential of computers as tool technology, more research should be done. On the other hand, perhaps our research efforts should go into exploring the computer as a device for communicating. That is, using the computer as a tutee.
Where we are going: The computer as tutee
Where we are going with technology will be the third role of Taylor (1980), that of the computer as tutee. Hypermedia and telecommunications are changing the classroom and the workplace for which we are preparing developmental students (Kearsley, 1990; Malone & Rockart, 1991; Strudler, 1992). Technology is becoming what one author calls a "cognition enhancer" for the worker (Dede, 1989, p.23). Technology creates an empowering environment as the workplace is adjusted with the machine doing many of the routine, mundane tasks and the human doing higher level thinking. Technology has even entered the workplace of previously low-skilled jobs such as the auto mechanic or the shoe salesperson. Hypermedia allows the auto mechanic to diagnose a problem in an ever increasing complexity of the automobile. It will allow a shoe salesperson to measure your feet with a laser, display shoe styles and colors via a compact disk, and produce a custom-made shoe via computer aided manufacturing (Dede, 1989).
In the longer run, our environments will change to where ubiquitous computing will be common; that is, where the computer of the 21st century will consist of "tabs, pads, and boards" (Weiser, 1991, p. 98). Much like the environment dramatized on Star Trek: The Next Generation ™, computers will be almost invisible. Networked together and changing in each new environment we will have a post-it note size "tab" like Picard's badge. Activated through voice command, this badge will allow us to communicate with any number of 100 or so microcomputers per room while at the same time monitoring our location for others to communicate with us. We will have legal size "pads", like Data's tricorder, that will allow us to document our individual thoughts through a keypad as we make sense of environment. Information added to our pad will be automatically "uploaded" to a main computer available to everyone, if desired. We will have bulletin-board size "boards", much like the main view screen, where information can be presented to a group with each member contributing their unique perspectives, as does Riker, Troi, and Geordi. Together they come to a communal understanding. This community of learners will be extended to every aspect of our environment as "away teams" will collaboratively seek and understand new information. Virtual reality, the hot new technology of today, will be relegated to entertainment as in the holideck. Thus, rather than a machine to be mastered, computers will be ubiquitous and omnipresent in our homes, workplaces, and schools. All the parts of such a ubiquitous system are present today in research labs such as the described by Weiser (1991). By the turn of the century, they we be as commonplace as the telephone.
What will this mean for developmental students at the turn of the century. Let's take a typical student called Cori. As she wakes up in the morning, she unplugs her "pad" that her parents purchased when she matriculated into college. Reading her e-mail messages about writing home, she replies by requesting money. Pressing a function key she reviews her schedule for the day realizing she has a paper for English Literature due later in the week. An hour later she is sitting in her Chemistry class taking notes using a stylus onto her "pad" as it converts her scribbles into Helvetica typed font. Her professor solves an equation on the "board" and it is automatically downloaded into her notes for the day. Having a free period, she sits under a large oak tree to begin her Chemistry lab experiment in the simulation provided on her pad. She presses another function key, confused as to whether to add a base or an acid, and reviews the videotape of the morning lecture automatically archived in the library. Because the experiment takes longer that she expected, she is ten minutes late for her Japanese class. Rather than entering class late, she presses another function key and attends the class through the interactive video placed discretely placed at the top of her pad. She is able to catch up with the class in five minutes reviewing the videotape in fast forward with the "dead air" of pauses automatically deleted. Because she was catching up with the class, she was unable to participate. Now that she is in real-time, however, she views the professor through one window, her classmates through another window, the board through yet another window, and joins in the pronunciation of past tense verbs.
After lunch, she returns to her room to continue working on her paper for English Lit. Accessing the library through another function key, she searches through electronic databases and reads electronic versions of books and journals on her topic about southern gentlemen in Faulkner's novels. She found one text in the Cambridge University library suggesting Rhett Butler, from the movie Gone with the Wind , was the prototypical southern gentleman. So, she accesses the movie from an archive in Kyoto, Japan and searches through finding short video clips to adds to her hypermedia paper. Logging out of the library, her pad automatically updates her bibliographic data base using MLA style for all the sources she found. Happy with her progress, she sends an e-mail copy of her outline to the other four members of her learning group producing this hypermedia paper.
Her friend, Jake, comes to her door requesting help with his paper. She sees that he has a reasonable draft, so she teaches him about grammar and spelling checkers. She suggests that he visit the campus learning center to learn more about using electronic databases. Turning Jake down for a date for dinner, she decides to attend an aerobic exercise class with the members of the Star Trek crew in the virtual reality gym. Finished with her exercise, she returns back to her dorm room, but realizes she left her pad in the locker room. She doesn't worry about theft, however, because of the "tab" inside her pad is monitored by the campus police. She leaves an e-mail message on her roommates' pad reminding herself to pick it up after Tectonics class. Exhausted after a full-day, she falls asleep wondering what tomorrow will bring.
Learning in higher education and on the job will thus shift from acquiring information to discussing and synthesizing knowledge. This knowledge will be constructed collaboratively in learning groups and gathered from hypermedia data bases through telecommunication. The learning strategies needed by students of tomorrow will include extracting and tailoring knowledge through creativity, flexibility, problem solving, decision making (often with incomplete data), complex pattern recognition, information evaluation and synthesis, holistic thinking, and even stressful ethical choices (Dede, 1989; Kay, 1991).
Students, like Cori, who will be successful in school and the workplace will be those able to dynamically explore and represent information, be able to experiment and problem solve, be socially awareness and exude self-confidence, have effective communication skills, have a positive orientation to the future, be a comfortable computer user, be an independent seeker of knowledge, yet still be able to work in collaboration with others, (Apple Classroom of Tomorrow, 1991; Braun, 1990; Dede, 1989; Held, Newson, & Peiffer, 1991; Hornbeck, 1990; Lee, 1990; Lieberman & Linn, 1991; Office of Technology Assessment, 1988; Olson, 1990; Spiro, et. al, 1988; Tierney, Kieffer, Stowell, Desai, Whalin, & Moss, 1992). Given this kind of education, the result will be a student educated in ways current standardized instruments may not be sensitive enough to measure (Kozma, 1991; 1992; Mitrani & Swan, 1990).
To prepare developmental students, like Jake, for this world, our instructional models will need to be adapted. We will need to use the computer and other technologies as a social constructive tutee (Brooks, 1990). That is, we will need to teach developmental students how to use the technology as a prosthetic device or extension of their minds to explore ideas beyond their immediate location in space and time. This definition extends Leuhermann's (1980) definition of the computer as tutee and using the technology as a fabricator of ideas. Here, we are moving away from the transmission model and the discovery model to a social construction model of learning through technology (Duttweiler, 1992).
Such an educational environment can be created where learning can take place (Duffy, 1991). This environment would be characterized by rich contexts, authentic tasks, collaboration, evaluation via a variety of perspectives, abundance of tools for communicating, access to real-world problems, emphasis on reflective thinking, modeling of problem solving by experts, and apprenticeship/mentoring to guide learning. To better understand this future, let's explore hypermedia and telecommunications and the current research using it for the construction of knowledge.
Hypermedia
Hypermedia might be defined as an information landscape consisting of a computer as an access point to text and graphics through data bases, audio and video through CD-ROM (compact disk read only memory), and other forms of data through telecommunication (Caverly & Broderick, 1993; 1989). In many ways, hypermedia emulates how we think using multiple nodes of information allowing for multiple paths for divergent thinking (Dede, 1989). Ideally, this paper would be in a hypermedia format where the reader could peruse it in his/her own way, reading the same articles as did the author, searching through additional articles using electronic data bases as did the author, even conversing with the author via electronic mail (see my e-mail address at the beginning).
Research is beginning to document the effectiveness of hypermedia for constructing an understanding of complex concepts such as literature analysis (Lang, 1992), answering imbedded questions while reading (Gillingham, 1992; Reinking, 1993), and the teaching of developmental learners (Hull & Rose, 1989; Hull & Rose, 1990; Hull, Rose, Fraser, & Castellano, 1990; Hull, Rose, Greenleaf, & Reilly, 1991; Reilly, Hull, & Greenleaf, 1992).
Developmental educators should extend this research by teaching developmental students how to construct hypermedia stacks (in Macintosh terms) or books (in IBM terms) about reading, writing, math, and study skills. As they work with their peers and the developmental educator constructing these hypermedia documents, both the developmental educators and students would become expert in these literacy skills.
Telecommunications
Another technology of the future will be telecommunications. The workplace of the 21st century will require workers who are information brokers; that is, workers who can search, access, evaluate, organize, and share ideas and perspectives on a variety of topics across cultural, economic, scientific, environmental, and political boundaries (Cummins & Sayers, 1990).
Developmental students can develop these abilities by exploring their world via telecommunications (Caverly & Broderick, 1993, in press; Caverly, McKool, & Peterson, 1984). While no examples of research on college developmental students exploring telecommunications could be found, several research studies were found using elementary and secondary students. Here, younger developmental students use telecommunications to communicate with peers around the corner and around the world. Using word processing, data bases, modems, and Internet (a world-wide telecommunication network), students explored, organized, and shared joint projects ranging from newspapers, to environmental position papers, to comparisons of living standards (Diaz, 1984; Jensen, 1992; Mehan, et al., 1985; Ross, Smith, Morrison, Ericson, & Kitabchi, 1989; Sayers, 1989; Zoni, 1992). The research results suggest that developmental students improved both linguistically and academically, particularly ESL students. A prominent component of these examples was the integration of technology and collaborative group work. Through social constructivism and technology, developmental students were better able to understand their world.
Perhaps the most obvious use of telecommunications today is distance education. The new majority of undergraduates are part-time, older, as well as varied in mobility, child care, job requirements, age, experience, economic, and ethnic characteristics. Some colleges are already using information technologies to offer academic programs to them via four ways: (a) direct instruction using textbooks, lectures, videotapes; (b) real-time conversations conversing with faculty, peers, and/or experts; (c) time-delayed conversations where these same players can exchange ideas over time and distance; (d) learning by doing working on realistic problems by acting and reflecting (Enrmann, 1990).
Distance instruction has been used for years via correspondence courses (Engler, 1978). Video now is enhancing distance education giving students the opportunity to pause, rewind, and view at comfortable times and places. For example, the National Technological University is one of the ten largest engineering graduate programs in the country though it has no buildings. Rather, it is a collaboration between 29 universities around the country using ITV (Instructional Television) classrooms to teach classes broadcast live to 275 industrial sites around country via satellite dishes. Real-time conferencing provides opportunity for students in various locations to work together to solve problems, debate with one another and the instructor. Recently, audiographing conferencing has emerged where students equipped with phone lines, audio equipment, computers, and modems can see and hear simultaneous images of all participants. Time-delayed conversations have been made available via fax or voice mail (and now Internet) to participate in a course at their own rate. Working on realistic problems allow students to act and reflect fostering deeper thinking. A modem based course is taught where each week a new problem is presented for students to learn enough to solve the problem, try out solutions, and communicate with the instructor as well as other students on potential answers (Ehrmann, 1990; Office of Technology Assessment, 1989). In the future we will have to prepare developmental students for the social and literary strategies that will be necessary for these technological innovations.
Education has gone through several evolutions. Writing as a tool emerged 5000 years ago and it transformed education from an oral transmission mode to freeing it over time and distance, but has required everyone to learn to write. The inventing of the printing press roughly 500 years ago made print widely available, but requires everyone to learn to read. Now, almost 50 years ago, the invention of the computer and its related technologies has had a similar profound impact on education. Everyone who will be successful as we move through the information age will have to learn how to learn through technology.
Some have estimated a learning curve for effectively integrating technology in the classroom is from 4 to 6 years (Anandam, et. al, 1991; Ely, 1990; Fulton, 1993; Sandholtz, Ringstaff, & Dwyer, 1990). Therefore, we must begin today learning to use the computer as tutee as we prepare developmental students for the future. Only then, as we help each other, will technology be truly integrated into developmental education.
A comparison of traditional vocational training with a vocational training model infusing remedial academic skills training. (1986). (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 281 034).
Office of Technology Assessment (1988). Power On: New Tools for Teaching and Learning. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 295 677).
Office of Technology Assessment (1989). Linking for Learning. A New Course for Education. Summary. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 310 766).
Apple Classroom of Tomorrow (1991). Philosophy and Structure and What's Happening Where. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 340 349).
Akst, G. (1984). Computer Literacy: An Interview with Dr. Michael Hoban. Journal of Developmental & Remedial Education, 8(2), 16-19, 31.
Alexander, C. (1984). Microcomputers and Teaching Reading in College: Issues and Some CUNY Applications. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 251 800).
Anandam, K., et. al (1991). Project SYNERGY: Software support for underprepared students. Software implementation report. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 803).
Balajthy, E. (1988). An investigation of learner-controlled variables in vocabulary learning using traditional instruction and two forms of computer-based instruction. Reading Research and Instruction, 27(4), 15-24.
Balajthy, E., et. al (1985). Introduction to Computers & Introduction to Word Processing: Integrating Content Area Coursework into College Reading/Study Skills Curricula Using Microcomputers. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 273 941).
Barton, S. (1993). A technology intervention and support program for associate degree students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 17(4), 325-41.
Becker, H. J. (1992). Computer based integrated learning systems in the elementary and middle grades: A critical review and synthesis of evaluation reports. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8.
Bengis, L., et. al (1991). SEEK and College Discovery Summer Programs: Prefreshman English-As-A Second Language, Postfreshman, and Science, Mathematics & Technology Institutes. 1990 Evaluation Report. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 340 801).
Bergeron, B. S. (1990). What does the term Constructivist mean? Constructing a definition from the literature. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22(4), 301-329.
Bialo, E., & Silvin, J. (1990). Report on the Effectiveness of Microcomputers in Schools. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 177).
Blais, D. M. (1988). Constructivism: A Theoretical Revolution in Teaching. Journal of Developmental Education, 11(3), 2-7.
Blanchard, J., et. al (1985). An Investigation of Computer-Based Mathemagenic Activities. Texas Tech Journal of Education, 12(3), 159-74.
Bonham, B. S., & Kulik, J. A. (1990). Research on Developmental Education: An Interview with James A. Kulik. Journal of Developmental Education, 13(3), 16-18.
Bowen, R. C. (1992). Infusing Technology into Education. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 759).
Boyd, G., et. al (1982). Remedial and Second Language English Teaching Using Computer Assisted Learning. Computers and Education, 6(1), 105-112.
Boylan, H. (1987). Educating all the nation's people: The historical roots of developmental education; Part I. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 341 434).
Braun, L. (1990). Vision: TEST final report: Recommendations for American educational decision makers. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Broderick, B., et. al (1987). Research in Developmental Education: The effects of computer-based instruction. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 341 433).
Broderick, B., & Caverly, D. C. (1988). The computer as tool. Journal of Developmental Education., 12(1), 30-31.
Broderick, B., & Caverly, D. C. (1992a). Another look at the computer as tool. Journal of Developmental Education., 16(1), 36-37.
Broderick, B., & Caverly, D. C. (1992b). Another look at the computer as tutor. Journal of Developmental Education., 16(2), 34-35.
Broderick, W. F., & Caverly, D. C. (1987). Computerized Writing Instruction in Developmental Writing Programs. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 341 433).
Brooks, J. G. (1990). Teachers and students: Constructivists forging new connections. Educational Leadership, 48(6), 68-71.
Brown, W. F., & Forristall, D. Z. (1983). Computer-Assisted Study Skills Improvement Program. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 234 295).
Brown, W. F., & Forristall-Brown, D. Z. (1986). Assessed Effectiveness of the Computer-Assisted Study Skills Improvement Program (CASSIP) as Reported by Program Directors. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 275 954).
Burke, M., et. al (1992). Computer-Assisted Vs. Text-Based Practice: Which Method Is More Effective? (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 350 046).
Burnett, H. J. (1989). Five centers model: Integrated labs for instructional technology and student assessment. Community & Junior College Libraries, 6(2), 17-23.
Burns, H. (1984). Recollections of first-generation computer-assisted prewriting. In W. Wresch (Ed.)The computer in composition instruction (pp. 15-33). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Caverly, D. C., & Broderick, B. (1988). The computer as tutor. Journal of Developmental Education., 12(2), 32-33.
Caverly, D. C., & Broderick, B. (1991). A holistic or skills computer lab. Journal of Developmental Education., 15(1), 38-39.
Caverly, D. C., & Broderick, B. (1993). Telecommunicating for improving developmental education. Journal of Developmental Education., 17(2), 36-37.
Caverly, D. C., & Broderick, B. (1993, April) Computers in developmental education: Adapting tools, collaborating tutorials, reflecting tutees. Paper presented at College Reading and Learning Association, Kansas City, KS.
Caverly, D. C., Mandeville, T. P., & Nicholson, S. A. (1994). PLAN: A study-reading strategy for informational text. Unpublished paper.
Caverly, D. C., McKool, S., & Peterson, C. (1994, March) Journaling through E-Mail: Exploring Reading and Writing Among First-Year College Students. Paper presented at College Reading and Learning Association, San Diego, CA.
Caverly, D. C., & Nicholson, S. (1993, October) Authentic assessment today for success tomorrow. Paper presented at Conference on Academic Support Programs, Houston, TX.
Caverly, D. C., Sundin, S., Nicholson, S., & Oelke, E. (1990, October) Empowering T.A.S.P. developmental readers through computers. Paper presented at Conference on Academic Support Programs, San Antonio, TX.
Champion, B. (1986). Computer Assisted Instruction and Bibliographic Instruction: Preliminary Data on the Use of PLATO in the BI Program of the Humanities and Social Sciences Library, University of Alberta. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 284 576).
Christ, F. (1982). Computers in Learning Assistance Centers and Developmental Education: Beginning to Explore. Journal of Developmental & Remedial Education, 6(1), 10-13.
Cowles, M. H. (1988). Reading in the Two-Year College. Focused Access to Selected Topics (FAST) Bibliography No. 5. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 299 545).
Cox, G. L. (1987). Lake Michigan College's Remedial Mathematics Laboratory Evaluation. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 316 421).
Cox, G. L. (1990). Characteristics Related to Student Performance in a College Remedial Self-Paced Mathematics Laboratory. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 316 422).
Crumb, G. H., & Monroe, E. E. (1993). CAI Use by Developmental Studies Students. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 310 410).
Cummins, J., & Sayers, D. (1990). Education 2001: Learning networks and educational reform. Computers in the Schools, 11, 1-29.
Dede, C. J. (1989). The evolution of information technology: Implications for curriculum. Educational Leadership, 47(1), 23-26.
Deutsch, L. (1988). Word Processing: A Motivational Force in Developmental English. A Comparison of Two Developmental English Classes. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 295 702).
Diaz, S. (1984, November). Bilingual-bicultural computer experts: Traditional literacy through computer literacy. Paper presented at American Anthropological Association. Denver, CO.
Dixon, R. A. (1993). Improved Reading Comprehension: A Key to University Retention? (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 359 498).
Douglas, M. A. (1993). A Successful Individualized Writing Lab Module. Journal of Developmental Education, 16(3), 24-26, 41.
Duffy, T. M., & Bednar, A. K. (1991). Attempting to Come to Grips with Alternative Perspectives. Educational Technology, 31(9), 12-15.
Dunkel, P. (1990). Implications of CAI effectiveness research for limited English proficient learners. Computers in the Schools, 7(1,2), 31-52.
Durham, T. (1987). Learning disabled college writers project, evaluation report, 1985-1986. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 286 188).
Duttweiler, P. C. (1992). Engaging at-risk students with technology. Media and Methods, 29(2), 6-8.
Ely, D. P. (1990). Computers in schools and universities in the United States of America. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 150).
Engler, N. (1978). An A for ASEP. Appalachia, 11(5), 26-32.
Enrmann, S. C. (1990). Reaching students, reaching resources: Using technologies to open the college. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 171).
Fabricius, W. V. (1983). Piaget's Theory of Knowledge: Its Philosophical Context. Human Development, 26(6), 325-34.
Feeley, J. T., & Wepner, S. B. (1986). Rate Improvement in College: The Computer vs. Traditional Text. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 282 182).
Flower, K. W., & Craft, W. J. (1981). Computer Assisted Instruction Techniques for Screening Freshmen. Engineering Education, 71(5), 353-55.
Freer, D. (1986). PLATO across the Curriculum: An Evaluation of a Project. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 23(1), 70-75.
Fulton, K. (1993). Teaching matters: The role of technology in education. In D. Carey, R. Carey, D. A. Willis, and J. Willis (Eds.)Technology and teacher education 1993 (pp. 1-6). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Gadzella, B. M. (1982). Computer-Assisted Instruction on Study Skills. Journal of Experimental Education, 50(3), 122-26.
Gadzella, B. M. (1991). A CAI Study Skills Program. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 211 059).
Gagne, R. M. (1975). Essentials of learning for instruction: Expanded ed. Hinsdale, Ill. : Dryden Press.
Giles, T. D. (1993). Ideas in Practice: The Search Key as a Grassroots Grammar Checker. Journal of Developmental Education, 16(3), 28-31.
Gillingham, M. G. (1992). Goal-Directed Reading of Complex, Embedded Hypertexts: Effects of Goal and Interest on Search Strategies and Selective Attention. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 204).
Gucker, G. (1992). A Successful Individualized Math Course. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 8(2), 41-49.
Hajdukiewicz, W. (1992). Use of PLATO for Math. In K. Anandam (Ed.) Project SYNERGY: Software support for underprepared students: Year Two Report Miami, FL: Miami-Dade Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 804).
Hannafin, K. M. (1992). Technology and the Support of At-Risk Students. Journal of General Education, 40(2), 63-79.
Hanson, L. (1990). Computer-Aided Remediation for Grammar, Punctuation. Journalism Educator, 44(4), 43-49.
Havlicek, L. L., & Coulter, T. (1982). Development of a Junior College CMI-Computer-Managed Instruction Reading Instruction Program. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 214 613).
Hawkins, J. (1985). Computers and girls: Rethinking the issues. Sex Roles, 13(3/4), 165-180.
Held, C., Newson, J., & Peiffer, M. (1991). The integrated technology classroom: An experiment in restructuring elementary school instruction. The Computing Teacher, 18(6), 21-23.
Henderson, A. H. (1992). Technology and teacher education: Paradigm shift in instruction? In D. Carey, R. Carey, D. A. Willis, and J. Willis (Eds.)Technology and teacher education 1992 (pp. 612-615). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Herrmann, T. (1982). Effective Tutoring in a PSI Course. Person vs. Computer. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 233 251).
Hornbeck, D. W. (1990). Technology and Students at Risk of School Failure. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 175).
Hull, G., & Rose, M. (1989). Rethinking remediation: toward a social-cognitive understanding of problematic reading and writing. Written Communication, 6(2), 139-154.
Hull, G., & Rose, M. (1990). "This wooden shack place": The logic of an unconventional reading. College Composition and Communication, 41(3), 287-298.
Hull, G., Rose, M., Fraser, K. L., & Castellano, M. (1990). Remediation as social construct: Perspectives from an analysis of classroom discourse. College Composition and Communication, 42(3), 41-71.
Hull, G., Rose, M., Greenleaf, C., & Reilly, B. (1991). Seeing the promise of the underprepared. The Quarterly of the National Writing Project & The Center for the Study of Writing and Literacy, 13(1), 6-13, 25.
Hunter, L. (1983). Basic Writers and the Computer. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 237 975).
Jamison, D., Suppes, P., & Wells, S. (1974). Effectiveness of alternative instructional media. Review of Educational Research, 44, 1-67.
Jensen, E. (1992). At-risk students online. Computing Teacher, 19(4), 10-11.
Johnson, D. M. (1986). Revision and Satisfaction Using the Bank Street Writer. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 276 059).
Johnson, M. L. (1992). A Cost-Effective Strategy for Integrating Technology into the Advanced and Remedial Mathematics Curriculum in the Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 344 643).
Judd, W. A., et. al (1971). An Investigation of the Effects of Learner Control in Computer-Assisted Instruction Prerequisite Mathematics (MATHS). (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 053 532).
Kay, A. C. (1991). Computers, networks, and education. Scientific American, 265(3), 138-148.
Kearsley, G. (1990). Instructional Technology and Worker Learning Needs. Contractor Report. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 337 588).
Kester, D. L. (1982). Is Micro-Computer Assisted Basics Skills Instruction Good for Black, Disadvantaged Community College Students from Watts and Similar Communities? A Preliminary, Fall Semester 1981-82 Mini Audit Report Suggests Caution. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 219 111).
Kleifgen, J. A. (1989). Computers and opportunities for literacy development. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 311 120).
Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-212.
Kozma, R. B., & Croninger, R. G. (1992). Technology and the Fate of At-Risk Students. Education and Urban Society, 24(4), 440-53.
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolution.
Kulik, C.-L. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1985). Effectiveness of Computer-Based Education in Colleges. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 263 890).
Kulik, C.-L. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1991). Effectiveness of Computer-Based Instruction: An Updated Analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7(1), 75-94.
Kulik, J. A. (1983a). Effects of Computer-Based Teaching on Learners. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 246 877).
Kulik, J. A. (1983b). Synthesis of Research on Computer-Based Instruction. Educational Leadership, 41(1), 19-21.
Kulik, J. A. (1985). Consistencies in Findings on Computer-Based Education. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 263 880).
Kulik, J. A., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1983-84). Effectiveness of Technology in Precollege Mathematics and Science Teaching. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 12(2), 137-58.
Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C. (1987). Review of Recent Research Literature on Computer-Based Instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12(3), 222-30.
Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C. L., & Cohen, P. (1980). Effectiveness of Computer-Based College Teaching: A Meta-analysis of Findings. Review of Educational Research, 50(4), 525-44.
Laffey, J. M., & Helt, S. (1981). Managing Diversity: Application of Computer Management to Mathematics Instruction. Journal of Developmental & Remedial Education, 4(2), 17,21.
Lang, S. (1992). Creating a community of learners using hypertext. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 350 600).
Lawson, V. L. (1987). Students' Preference for Bibliographic Instruction: Library Tour vs. a Computer-Assisted Instruction Program. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 335 055).
Lee, M. L. (1990). Educators and Programs Reaching Out to At-Risk Youth. Media and Methods, 26(3), 12, 14-15, 50-51.
Lengel, J. G. (1986). Developmental Stages in School Computer Use: Neither Marx Nor Piaget. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 280 287).
Levin, J. A., Riel, M., Boruta, M., & Rowe, R. (1984). Muktuk meets jaccuzi: Computer networks and elementary schools. In S. W. Freedman (Ed.) The acquisition of written language (pp. 160-171). New York: Ablex.
Lieberman, D. A., & Linn, M. C. (1991). Learning to learn revisited: Computers and the development of self-directed learning skills. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23, 373-395.
Ludovici, E. (1992). Use of CSR for Writing. In K. Anandam (Ed.) Project SYNERGY: Software Support for Underprepared Students. Year Two Report Miami, FL.: Miami-Dade Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 804).
Luerhmann, A. (1980). Should the computer teach the student, or vice-versa? In R. Taylor (Ed.)The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee. (pp. 129-135). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Macaulay, D. (1988). The way things work. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Maddux, C. D., Johnson, D. L., & Willis, J. W. (1992). Educational computing: Learning with tomorrow's technologies. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Maddux, C. D., & Willis, J. W. (1992). Integrated learning systems and their alternatives: Problems and cautions. Educational Technology, 32(9), 51-57.
Madland, D., & Smith, M. A. (1988). Computer-Assisted Instruction for Teaching Conceptual Library Skills to Remedial Students. Research Strategies, 6(2), 52-64.
Malinowski, P. A., & Huard, S. D. (1989). A Writing Course Designed for Developmental College Students. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 313 096).
Malone, T. W., & Rockart, J. F. (1991). Computers, networks, and the corporation. Scientific American, 265(3), 128-136.
Mandeville, T. F., Caverly, D. C., & Nicholson, S. (1993) Staff Development through Collaboration, Reflection, and Adaptation. Paper presented at College Reading and Learning Association, Kansas City, KS.
McAllister, C., et. al (1987). The Electronic Learning Laboratory: Evolving beyond CAI. Journal of Developmental Education, 10(3), 14-17.
Mehan, J., Moll, L. C., & Riel, M. (1985). Computer in the classrooms: A quasi-experiment in guided change National Institute of Education.
Mikulecky, L., & Adams, S. M. (1988). The Effectiveness of Using Interactive Computer Programs To Model Textbook Reading Strategies for University and Community College Psychology and Biology Students. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 302 810).
Mitrani, M., & Swan, K. (1990). Placing Computer Learning in Context. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 141).
Morrison, C. (1990). A literary, Constructivist college reading program. Journal of Developmental Education, 14(2), 8-12, 18.
Murray, T., & Others, A. (1988). An Analogy-Based Computer Tutor for Remediating Physics Misconceptions. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 299 172).
Nagaratte, U. P. (1989). An Implementation of a Systems Approach to Individualized Instruction in Mathematics. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 8(2), 47-55.
Niemec, R., & Walberg, H. J. (1987). Comparative effects of computer-assisted instruction: A synthesis of reviews. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 19-37.
Nist, S. L., & Meeley, D. (1991). In R. F. Flippo and D. C. Caverly (Eds.) Teacher directed comprehension strategies (pp. 42-85). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Nwankwo, V. (1992). Part two: Software implementation studies. In K. Anandam (Ed.) Project SYNERGY: Software Support for Underprepared Students. Year Two Report Miami, FL: Miami-Dade Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 804).
O'Hear, M. F. (1991). Involving Students: Interactive Computing in a Reading/Study Skills Course. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 8(1), 15-20.
Olson, B., & Krendl, K. A. (1990-1991). At-Risk Students and Microcomputers: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 19(2), 165-75.
Olson, J. B. (1990). Learning improvement results from integrated learning systems for underachieving minority students. In J. G. Bain and J. L. Herman (Eds.)Making schools work for under-achieving minority students: Next steps for research policy and practice (pp. 241-255). Westport, CA: Greenwood Press.
Perez, E. (1992). Use of Realtime Writer for Writing. In K. Anandam (Ed.) Project SYNERGY: Software Support for Underprepared Students. Year Two Report Miami, FL.: Miami-Dade Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 804).
Peterson, D. L., & Williams, D. A. (1990). PALS: An Advanced Technology Literacy Experiment with Delinquent Youth. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 337 319).
Petry, J. R., & McClain, R. (1981). Evaluation Report on the Dyersburg State Community College Project: Title III, Strengthening Developing Institutions. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 220 114).
Plomp, T., Reinen, I. J., & Pilon, J. (1990). The Evaluation of Remedial Computer Use for Mathematics within a University Setting in Botswana. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 321 755).
Pomper, M. M. (1986). Trial and Error: The Use of Computer-Aided Instruction for Basic Readers and Writers. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 324 667).
Posey, E., & Ward, D. (1991). Ideas in Practice. Computer-Supported Writing Instruction: The Student-Centered Classroom. Journal of Developmental Education, 15(2), 26-28, 30.
Puk, T. (1992). Technology, technology education, and teacher education: A rose by any other name? In D. Carey, R. Carey, D. A. Willis, and J. Willis (Eds.)Technology and Teacher Education Annual (pp. 115-118). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Read, G. (1992). Use of CSR for Reading. In K. Anandam (Ed.) Project SYNERGY: Software Support for Underprepared Students. Year Two Report Miami, FL.: Miami-Dade Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 804).
Reglin, G. L., & Butler, D. (1989). Effects of a Computer Assisted Instruction EEE Seminar on Mathematics Achievement and Academic Self-Concept of Students at a Predominantly Black College in a Rural Community in the South. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 306 949).
Reilly, B., Hull, G., & Greenleaf, C. (1992). Using hypermedia cases in teacher education. In J. W. a. D. A. Willis (Eds.)Technology and Teacher Education Annual (pp. 28-33). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Reinking, D. (1993). A new focus for the national reading research center. The Computing Teacher, 20(6), 29-31.
Reinking, D., & Bridwell-Bowles, L. (1992). Computers in reading and writing. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.) Handbook of Reading Research (pp. 310-340). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Ross, S. M., Smith, L., Morrison, G. R., Ericson, A., & Kitabchi, G. (1989). The Apple Classroom of Tomorrow Program with At-Risk Students. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 308 837).
Rotman, J. W. (1987). The LCC Developmental Math Lab: An Evaluative Review. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 289 535).
Rudisill, V. A., & Jabs, M. L. (1976). Multimedia Instruction in Basic English. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 128 056).
Sandholtz, J., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1990). Teaching in high-tech environments: Classroom management revisited. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 172).
Sax, S. E. (1972). Computer-Assisted Instruction and the New Student. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 069 153).
Sayers, D. (1989). Bilingual sister classes in computer writing networks. In D. M. Johnson and D. H. Roen (Eds.)Richness in writing (pp. 120-133). New York: Longman.
Schwartz, H., & Bridwell-Bowles, L. (1988). A selected bibliography on computers in composition: An update. College Composition and Communication, 38, 453-457.
Sherman, J. F. (1975). The Development of a Computer Assisted Math Review for Physical Science Survey Students at Brevard Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 137 084).
Smith, J. D., et. al (1981). PLATO in the Community College: Students, Faculty and Administrators Speak Out. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 214 549).
Spiro, R. J., et. al (1988). Cognitive Flexibility Theory: Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-Structured Domains. Technical Report No. 441. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 302 821).
Strudler, N. B. (1992). Schools, restructuring, and technology: Implications for teacher education. In D. Carey, R. Carey, D. A. Willis, and J. Willis (Eds.)Technology and Teacher Education Annual 1992 (pp. 140-143). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Sugranes, M. R., et. al (1986). Computer Assisted Instruction Remediation Program for Credit Course in Bibliographic Instruction. Research Strategies, 4(2), 18-26.
Suppes, P. (1980). Impact of computers on curriculum in the schools and universities. In R. P. Taylor (Ed.)The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee (pp. 236-247). New York: Teachers College Press.
Taylor, R. (1980). Introduction. In R. Taylor (Ed.)The Computer in the School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee (pp. 1-10). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Taylor, V. B., & Rosecrans, D. (1986). An Investigation of Vocabulary Development via Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI). (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 381 168).
Thompson, H. W., et. al (1980). Computer Assisted Instruction: An Innovative Approach to the Development of Comprehension at the College Freshman Level. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 197 307).
Tierney, R. J., Kieffer, R., Stowell, L., Desai, L. E., Whalin, K., & Moss, A. G. (1992). Computer acquisition: A longitudinal study of the influence of high computer access on students' thinking, learning, and interactions. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 354 856).
Tillett, W. (1992). Use of PLATO for Writing. In K. Anandam (Ed.) Project SYNERGY: Software Support for Underprepared Students. Year Two Report Miami, FL.: Miami-Dade Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 804).
Turner, T. C. (1993). Literacy and machines: An overview of the use of technology in adult literacy programs. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 356 408).
von Glasersfeld, E. (1988). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Walker, D. (1992). Use of PLATO for Reading. In K. Anandam `1 Project SYNERGY: Software Support for Underprepared Students. Year Two Report Miami, FL: Miami-Dade Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 804).
Waxman, H. C. (1992). Restructuring urban schools with technology: Implications for students at risk of failure. In D. Carey, R. Carey, D. A. Willis, and J. Willis (Eds.)Technology and Teacher Education Annual (pp. 132-136). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Weiser, M. (1991). The computer for the 21st century. Scientific American, 265(3), 94-104.
Wepner, S. B. (1989). Using computers in college reading courses? Journal of Developmental Education, 13(1), 6-8, 24.
Wepner, S. B. (1990). Do computers have a place in college reading courses? Journal of Reading, 33(5), 348-54.
Wepner, S. B., & Feeley, J. T. (1987). College Students' Reading Efficiency with Computer-Presented Text. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 281 190).
Wood, J. (1992). The Application of Computer Technology and Cooperative Learning in Developmental Algebra at the Community College. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 352 099).
Zoller, P. T. (1975). Composition and the Computer. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 127 611).
Zoni, S. J. (1992). Improving Process Writing Skills of Seventh Grade At-Risk Students by Increasing Interest through the Use of the Microcomputer, Word Processing Software, and Telecommunications Technology. (In ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 350 624).