|
"It was the best of time; it was
the worst of times." So starts one of the world's
great novels, A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens.
This sentence also reflects one of the dilemmas faced
by many developmental educators. The dilemma occurs
when your administrator has given you permission to
create or upgrade a computer center to supplement
your successful Learning Assistance Center. Or, when
your administrator has dumped 20 computers in your
room and told you to make good use of them. What do
you do? How can you use these computers most effectively
to assist college students learning reading, writing,
math, and/or study skills? Is there other technology
in which you should invest time and energy? This paper
will answer these and other questions by chronicling
how two learning assistance center directors followed
four steps to integrating computers and other technology
into their learning assistance centers. The term technology
will be used in this paper generically to include
computers and other devices that might by used in
a learning assistance center.
Four Steps
To integrate technology into a learning
assistance center, you begin by defining how you believe
students learn and what you do to help them learn;
that is, you begin by considering your instructional
model. Second, you conform the roles of technology
to fit that instructional model. Third, you select
software that supports those roles and model. Fourth,
you select hardware to deliver the software. Following
these four steps can be the most effective means of
integrating technology into a learning assistance
center. How do these four steps translate into practice?
Step 1: Determine Your Instructional
Model
How do you believe students learn?
What is it you do to assist this learning? Say you
want to teach someone how to play tennis. Where do
you begin? Do you first become an expert, learn all
you can about the strokes, the rules, the equipment,
the strategy of the game before you begin working
with students? Before you see students, do you determine
the sequence in which your students should learn these
concepts? For example, do you decide students should
first learn the forehand, then the backhand, then
the serve? When you teach the forehand, will you start
with the three different types of "grips",
when and where each is appropriate, and how to shift
to these grips from the "ready position?"
Then, will you teach your students how to move from
the ready position to bringing the racket back, turning
the shoulders until they are perpendicular to the
net, proper feet positions as you step into the ball,
and how to hit through the ball finishing with a high
follow through? Will you make them practice these
concepts by hitting forehands with a ball machine
over and over again until they reach a level of mastery?
When finished, will you then move on to a similar
process with the backhand? When all the skills of
the forehand, backhand, serve, volley, and lob are
mastered, will the students be able to play a game?
On the other hand, do you simply go
out with the students and let them begin hitting the
ball with you? Do you hit the ball to one side or
the other discussing with them and their peers what
you are doing as you hit the ball, comparing what
they are doing that is the same or different, and
what else they might do? Next, do you have them play
a game of doubles where they try hitting the ball
while at the same time evaluating what they and their
other three peers are doing? Do you then return as
a large group to discuss what they saw, to decide
what worked and what didn't, and to come to some consensus
as to how to hit the various strokes? Finally, do
you assign them to play a few games of singles with
a peer again evaluating what they and their peer were
doing and what they might do to improve?
These are two distinctly different
means of teaching a series of skills like tennis.
One is not necessarily better or worse than the other;
just different. Countless players have learned from
either perspective. However, within each scenario
there are specific assumptions about the content you
are teaching, how students learn, and how you teach
that content within each of these perspectives. How
you teach reading, writing, math, or studying follow
these same assumptions? Before you integrate computer
technology into your learning assistance center, you
must consider these assumptions, so you can most effectively
use the technology.
The first tennis scenario is what is
called a skills model of instruction and learning.
It follows certain three basic assumptions. First,
a skills model assumes that knowledge of a process
(like reading, writing, computing with math, or studying)
can be broken down into an identified scope of skills
that must be learned. This scope of skills evolves
from dissecting whatever process we are teaching into
separate parts. Thus, a skill like reading is broken
down into a scope of vocabulary, comprehension, and
rate skills which are in turn dissected into the four
word recognition skills of how to use context clues,
structural analysis, phonetic analysis, and dictionary
skills. These subskills are in turn dissected into
sub-subskills, if you will, with structural analysis
word recognition subskills separated into Latin and
Greek prefixes, roots, and suffixes. Learning occurs
when students master enough of these parts to attain
the whole.
A second assumption of this skills
model is that there is a hierarchical sequence in
which these skills are to be learned. To extend our
example, instruction following this model would teach
word recognition skills before comprehension skills
which are in turned learned before rate skills. Thus,
students might be taught structural analysis skills
before dictionary skills, roots before prefixes, Latin
roots before Greek roots. This sequence of skills
provides a convenient ruler against which students
can be compared. We can then diagnose where they fall
along this ruler, measure their progress, and document
their growth as they learn and master the scope of
skills. Moreover, workbooks (in print or on computer)
can be created or identified for each level of this
ruler to provide the appropriate skill instruction
and practice.
A third assumption of this skills model
is that these separate skills are best learned through
a instructional sequence consisting of transmission
of this scope of skills from the expert teacher who
has extensive knowledge to the students who have little
or no knowledge. This instructional sequence begins
with an assessment of the level of skill mastery.
Second, students are told how to perform each separate
skill usually through a series of steps transmitted
to them. Third, students practice these separate skills
in a structured, hierarchically graded, sequence of
skill books until mastery is reached. Often, student
mastery is assessed after instruction and practice
to document growth. If mastery is not reached, reteaching
is provided.
Most instruction within existing learning
assistance centers follow this skills model. For most
directors, it is logical and intuitive that to teach
complex skills like reading, writing, math, or studying,
one should break these processes down into simpler
skills, teach those simpler skills, and then build
up to more complex skills. However, for some learning
assistance center directors, this instructional model
is not only illogical, it is disturbing. These directors
question whether the sequence of instruction should
be controlled by the teacher. They find the material
in a skills model too simplistic and not authentic
when compared to the task demands of college. They
argue the assessment ruler is arbitrary and usually
applied in an isolated context. They conclude from
such a skills model that ownership for learning the
scope and sequence of skills lies with the teacher,
not with the student. As a result, a teacher using
a skills model must constantly try to motivate the
students to learn what the teacher wants them to learn,
not what the students want to learn. The latter tennis
scenario above is indicative of these learning assistance
center directors. They believe in a more holistic
model of instruction and learning. Much like the skills
based directors, they follow certain assumptions.
First, there is a similar scope of
strategies to be learned for the complex processes
of reading, writing, computing, and studying. However,
this scope does not follow a specific sequence. More
complex techniques can be learned and used before
simpler techniques. To extend our example above, students
are allowed to read using whatever resources they
have available. Then, word recognition techniques
are introduced whenever the strategies the students
are using are no longer effective.
Second, the tasks and materials used
for instruction are authentic. Students learn to read,
for example, in college textbooks, not "dumbed
down" workbooks. If the material is difficult
to understand for the students, supportive scaffolding
is provided until the student can develop strategies
to take over the scaffolding. Scaffolding consists
of predictable material depending upon the techniques
being learned, peer and instructor support, and a
gradual release of responsibility model of instruction
(Caverly,
Mandeville, & Nicholson, in press; Pearson
& Gallagher, 1983) with the students taking on
more responsibility for their learning as they become
more proficient.
Third, strategies are collaboratively
constructed within a scaffolded, social learning group.
Strategies are internally constructed approaches of
a series of techniques for processing print in reading
and writing, numbers in math, or learning tasks in
studying. Techniques are external applications of
these internal strategies (i.e., external verbalizations
of internal strategic approaches). Learning begins
as instructors engage students' prior knowledge about
their strategic approaches to an authentic task thus
assessing their performance. Learning continues as
the instructor models his/her strategy for approaching
the authentic task through thinking outloud how he/she
applies certain techniques (their interpretation of
their strategic approach) to authentic material prototypical
of the techniques being learned (i.e., highly structured
text if text structure is being learned). From this
series of think-alouds and modeling, students and
instructor construct a consensus of specific techniques
to apply for the given material.
Next, the students in a guided practice
environment apply these techniques within somewhat
less than prototypical authentic material (i.e., text
not as structured). Here, students experiment with
these techniques, collaboratively discussing how the
techniques work with peers, concluding a group interpretation
of these techniques, and sharing these group interpretations
with other groups to compare and contrast.
Third, students apply these group interpreted
techniques individually in an independent practice
environment within material from their other classes
(i.e., sometimes prototypical, often not). Each student
constructs his or her own, unique interpretation comparing
and contrasting to the group interpreted techniques,
thus creating a personal strategic approach to the
authentic task.
This holistic based approach to instruction
is significantly different from a skills based approach
(see Fig. 1). To restate;
neither is better than the other, just different.
Successful growth on the part of the student within
a learning assistance center occurs when you identify
a particular instructional model and orient all your
instruction around it. Failure occurs when you try
to be eclectic and flip flop between the two models
trying to use the best of both worlds. The result
is students who are confused where sometimes they
must wait to be taught while at other times they can
learn on their own; where sometimes their prior knowledge
is ignored, while at other times it is respected.
When students are confused as to their role, instruction
cannot be successful. Therefore, Step One to integrating
technology into a learning assistance center is affirming
your instructional model at the commitment within
relativism level of cognitive and ethical development
(Perry, 1970).
Step 2: Conform Computer Roles to Instructional
Model
Having identified and affirmed an instructional
model, the next step is to adjust how you utilize
technology within your learning assistance center
based on your instructional model. This adjustment
falls into one of three roles: using technology as
a tool, as a tutor, or as a tutee. Using the technology
as a tool is where it helps you teach and your students
learn. There are four general tools for your use as
a teacher: diagnostic tools, management tools, production
tools, and utility tools. Using technology as a tutor
is where the computer can be used to teach skills
to students. Here, there are three general types of
tutorial software: drill and practice, tutorial, and
simulation. Using technology as a tutee is where we
as instructors or students teach the technology to
do our bidding as it helps others construct an understanding
(from a skills perspective) or helps us construct
an understanding (from a holistic perspective).
Step 3: Select Software
After you have identified your theoretical
orientation and understand the roles of technology
for supporting that orientation, you should begin
to select software. Notice that you should buy software
before you buy hardware. Below you see which software
would be purchased by a center director from a skills
perspective compared to a center director from a holistic
perspective.
Step 4: Select Hardware
After you have identified the software
that you would use to fit your instructional model,
the next step is to select hardware to deliver that
software. Choosing hardware last focuses your decisions
on the most important component of technology, the
software, and also reduces your start-up costs. Too
often, hardware is chosen first. The result is you
are forced to acquire software that is compatible
with the hardware, and you are often forced by the
software choices to change your instructional model.
Consequently, you are using technology in a way that
is inappropriate to your belief system.
A Tale of Two Center Directors
Now that the steps to integrating technology
into a learning assistance center have been delineated,
let's consider how two different center directors
selected software and hardware. Meet Bill and Dave;
no relation. Both are well trained and have been working
with developmental college students for over twenty
years. However, both have different instructional
models as to how they teach and how students learn.
The result is their learning assistance centers are
distinctly different. Each would argue their success
is better, but that's another story.
Having affirmed their instructional
model, they identified specific software. Then they
identified hardware to deliver the software.
Technology as Tool: Diagnostic
Bill believes in a skills based instructional
model, so he would select specific tools to fit that
model. Since diagnosis is an important first step
in a skills model, Bill selected diagnostic software
tools that help him identify the strengths and weaknesses
of the students who come to his center. For example,
to screen students, Bill uses Accuplacer. Through
a series of questions at the beginning, this software
identifies a starting level, in reading for example.
Then, as the student gets answers correct or incorrect
the software selects easier or harder passages. After
about 17 questions, the student's performance levels
off and the software is able to identify reading level.
Bill also uses diagnostic software for reading and
study skills. He chooses from E-LASSI, Guides, Informal
Reading Placement Test, Survey of Reading/Study Efficiency,
or the Vocabulary Placement Test. These instruments
identify strengths and weakness and often provide
an individual printout for each student.
Dave, on the other hand, believes in
a holistic instructional model, so diagnostic tools
are much less important. Rather, they are needed only
to provide a means of documenting current performance
and change in that performance over time. Specific
grade levels, percentile scores, and pre/post tests
are less important than the students' understanding
of their performance now and where it could be. Thus,
Dave uses software such as the Grady Profile to set
up a portfolio for each student documenting his/her
performance. Then, he uses other diagnostic software
collaboratively with the student as together the student
and instructor decide what they want to know about
their current performance.
Technology as Tool: Management
Other software is selected by Bill
to manage both his students' performance and his materials.
For example, student attendance is monitored through
a spreadsheet using either Excel or Works. Material
is classified by skill taught and readability level
through a database such as FileMaker Pro, FoxPro,
or Works. Materials are graded for readability level
by Fry Readability Formula or the grammar checker
in Word. Bill uses statistical software such as SPSS
or StatView to document change in student performance.
Dave uses most of the same tools to
manage his students' performance in his center. However,
since the material comes from authentic materials
from the students' other classes, no material management
is needed.
Technology as Tool: Production
Bill uses specific software to produce
drill and practice worksheets (Crossword Magic, Word,
WordSearch, Works), drill/practice and tutorial software
(Drill, Drill Maker, LinxLite, Linx Industriar), and
tests (Exam Builder) for his center. He uses production
software to produce a center newsletter (Pagemaker)
by scanning in documents (OmniPage) or by creating
graphics (Canvas). He uses other software to produce
slide show and video conference presentations (Director,
Impact, MORE, Persuasion, PowerPoint, PrintShop).
Dave uses much of the same software
in the same manner for his personal use, though no
worksheets, drill/practice, or tutorial courseware
are produced. Moreover, he teaches students to work
in groups as they use this software to document their
understanding of what they are learning by producing
presentations to share with other students. The process
of producing a presentation cements the concepts for
the students.
Technology as Tool: Utilities
To make their technology more efficient,
both Dave and Bill use utilities. These range from
screen savers (After Dark), to virus checkers (Symantec
AntiVirus for Mac, PC-Rx, Virex), to compatibility
programs which allow one to use DOS based programs
in Macintosh and vice versa (Access PC, Mac-in-DOS,
RunPC, SoftPC), to compression programs increasing
the size of the RAM and the ROM (AutoDoubler, RamDoubler,
Stuffit Delux), to machine controlling software where
from one machine you can control another (Timbuktu),
to repairing tools which will recover hard disk crashes
or deleted files (Crash Barrier, Norton Utilities).
Technology as Tutor: Drill/Practice
A major component of Bill's skills
based center is drill and practice. Thus, much of
the software he uses can be classified here. Specific
programs Bill uses are programs for practicing vocabulary
skills (STUDYMATE-The Grade Booster, Word Attack),
reading comprehension skills (High Steps to Comprehension,
Intellectual Pursuits, Practical Comprehension, Skills
Bank II), writing skills (Practical Gramrnar I, n
III speuit Plus), and math skills (Algebra Drill and
Practice I, II, I7l Algebra 1-6, Calculus 1-6, Statistics
I, II).
Drill and practice is not relevant
to Dave's holistic center, though documentation of
guided practice and independent practice is important.
Thus, he uses a simple word processor that comes free
with Macintosh named TeachText through which students
write weekly journals about what they are learning.
Technology as Tutor: Tutorials
Tutorials are also an important part
of Bill's skills based center. As we have said, students
are diagnosed for their skill weaknesses, assigned
a tutorial from the database of programs available,
and then reports are generated by the computer keeping
track of their performance. Specific programs Bill
uses for reading include: Analogies Advanced, Analogies
College Bound, Analogies Tutorial, Comprehension Connection,
Figurative Language, How to Study for Tests, Learning
Plus, Primary Steps to Comprehension, Reading &
Writing Connection, Steps to Comprehension, Reading
Realities At-Risk Series, and Urban Reader. Tutorials
Bill particularly likes for teaching students how
to read and study college level texts are Textbook
Marking Strategies, Tips for College Test Taking,
Using your Biology Textbook Effectively, and Using
your Psychology Textbook Effectively.
A fifth (SEEN) Bill has found particularly
useful for teaching critical reading and writing.
Bill also likes three programs for teaching writing
Essential Grammar, Essential Punctuation, and Nuts
and Hyperbolts. Bill has found only one he likes for
math: First Year Algebra.
Again, tutorials play little or no
role in a holistic center since the students construct
their own knowledge of reading, writing, math, and
study strategies from using computer tools. Therefore,
Dave uses no tutorial software in his center.
Technology as Tutor: Simulations
Computer simulations attempt to emulate
real-life reading, writing, math, and study tasks.
Since authentic tasks are not a priority in a skills
based center until the students are ready, there are
only a few that Bill uses in his center. These programs
focus on research papers (Research Paper Writer, Writer's
Helper) and writing for learning disabled students
(Write this Way/LD). Other software Bill likes for
teaching problem solving are the Carmen San Diego
series (Where in the World, USA, Time, America's Past,
Space is Carmen San Diego).
Simulations are a large part of a holistic
center, so the majority of programs Dave uses are
classified here. There are specific programs which
model for students how to engage their prior knowledge
(Idea Fisher, Idea Liner, Inside Information, Mindlink),
how to differentiate between main idea and subordinate
ideas and then how to create semantic maps of these
ideas (Learning Tool, MORE, Inspiration), the steps
involved in creating research papers (EndNote, Research
Paper Writer, Writer's Helper), and how to work collaboratively
when completing business writing (Collaborative Writer).
Other programs simulate how glossaries can sometimes
be beneficial while at other times hinder understanding
(Beethoven, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). Finally,
Dave uses a reasonably good simulation of the critical
reading process when reading essays (Critical Thinking:
Reading & Writing Across the Curriculum).
Technology as Tutee: Telecommunications
A third role of technology in a learning
assistance center is that of a tutee. That is, where
the student teaches the technology to do his/her bidding.
Typically this is thought of as programming a computer,
but this is an outdated notion. Rather, technology
as tutee is utilizing the full power of technology
to access people and information in remote sites via
telecommunication and then to construct knowledge
from that information by documenting what was learned
through the creation of multimedia and hypermedia
tutorials. As we prepare students for the learning
demands of an information society, the reading and
study strategies required when using telecommunications
as well as the writing and math problem solving skills
for producing multimedia and hypermedia will become
basic skills. Bill and Dave saw this future coming
and adapted their learning centers accordingly.
Bill found telecommunication software
that would allow access to the information highway
acquiring both public domain (Kermit, Mosaic, and
ProComm) as well as commercial software (Mail, Microphone).
From a skills model of instruction, however, Bill
primarily used the telecommunications to develop his
professional knowledge via electronic mail (e-mail)
by joining discussion groups like LRNASST
(LISTSERV@LISTSERV.Arizona.edu), subscribing to electronic
journals like New Horizons (listserv~alpha.acast.nova.edu),
accessing information from databases like ERIC Abstracts,
or downloading free software from archived collections.
He also teaches his students how to extend their library
research skills by teaching them how to access remote
libraries all over the world via GOPHER (Caverly
& Broderick, 1994).
Dave saw extended use of telecommunications
for his students. From his holistic perspective, the
same software is being used for his professional development
by sharing ideas through professional discussion groups,
subscribing to electronic journals, or accessing information
and software from databases. Moreover, he teaches
his students how to access information in remote libraries.
However, from his holistic perspective,
Dave saw the potential of telecommunications as providing
an opportunity for students to construct knowledge
via guided practice in groups made up of peers in
their local environment as well as peers around the
world. For example, to extend sustained silent reading
required of all students attending his center, Dave
arranged for an electronic penpal at a college across
the country where weekly book talk discussions would
center around a common book both were reading. For
his English as a Second Language students (ESL), Dave
arranged for them to practice their developing reading
and writing language skills in an authentic context
as they discussed sports, movies, or music with similarly
leveled ESL students in Japan and Hong Kong (announce-sl@latrobe.edu.au).
Not only are his students learning a skill necessary
for success in an information society, they are empowered
with skills many of their non- remedial peers have
yet to develop.
Technology as Tutee: Hypermedia
A final use of technology in learning
assistance centers is the development of multimedia
and hypermedia. Bill uses specific software (Authorware
Professional, Fourmat, Impact, Lesson Writer, MORE,
Persuasion, PowerPoint, and Quest) to develop multimedia
tutorials where students are led through print, graphics,
sound, and video as they learn skills. He uses the
other software (Authorware Professional, HyperCard,
HyperStudio, Linkway, PLUS, Textbook Toolbook, and
Toolbook) to develop hypermedia tutorials for students
to explore on their own the same print, graphics,
sound, and video.
Dave, on the other hand, sees the potential
of hypermedia as a medium for students (not just instructors)
to document their coming understanding of reading,
writing, math, and study strategies. Dave has arranged
for developmental students to work in small groups
as they take a particular strategy and develop a hypermedia
presentation or tutorial for other students to use.
Through developing hypermedia, students apply developing
reading, writing, research, problem solving, math,
and time management skills.
Hardware Configurations
After the software has been acquired,
step four is to acquire hardware to deliver the software.
Specific configurations of hardware can be recommended
regardless of platform preference (i.e., PC-DOS or
Macintosh). What and how much technology you acquire
depends upon your resources and your use of the machines.
A useful heuristic would be to think of a minimum,
effective, and cutting edge configurations.
Minimum Hardware Configuration
At minimum, you should include a set
number of computers varying with your model of instruction.
If you follow a skills model of instruction, you would
need one computer for every student who you might
expect would attend the center at a particular time
since each student will be working individually. If
you follow a holistic model of instruction, you would
need one computer for every three students since the
students will be working collaboratively in small
groups. Each machine would have a central processing
unit (CPU; i.e., the computer itself), a monitor (color
preferably), and an extended keyboard (one including
a numeric keypad). If you lean toward PC-DOS based
computers (i.e., IBMs and clones), then at the time
of writing a machine with a 486 based processor with
4mB of RAM and 250mB of ROM would be minimum. If you
lean toward Macintosh, then at the time of writing
a machine with a minimum 68030 processor with 8mB
of RAM and 250mB of ROM would be minimum. Peripherals
would include one printer (DeskWriter or DeskJet)
for every four machines.
Effective Hardware Configuration
If your resources allow, an effective
hardware configuration would be more pragmatic today
and would be able to grow in the future. This configuration
would include a similar number and type of machine,
though these machines would be networked together
with one machine designated as a network server. This
server computer could deliver software to and store
files for each machine on the network as a dedicated
server. Or, the server could only store files while
the software is located on each machine within a distributed
network. A similar number of printers would be included
in this configuration. Additional peripherals would
be part of this configuration and would be available
to the instructor only or both the instructor and
the students depending upon your instructional model.
These peripherals include a 2400 baud modem for every
computer as well as CD-ROM drives for every other
computer.
Cutting Edge Hardware Configuration
If your resources allow, you should
develop a computer center that is cutting edge now
as it will become minimum within five years. Again,
this configuration would include a network wired with
ethernet or preferably fiber optics and the same number
of computers and printers. CPUs would be upgraded
to PowerPCs or PowerMacs which are (currently) top
of the line processors and allow PC or Mac software
to be used in either machine. Each machine would have
an internal CD-ROM drive, removable hard disk drive
(e.g., PowerUser Syquest Drive), internal 8mB of RAM,
500mB of hard disk, and an internal modem hardwired
to your mainframe. In addition, at least 3 machines
would be designated hypermedia production machines.
These machines would have a removable hard disk drive,
internal 16mB of RAM, lgB of hard disk, an internal
FAX/modem hardwired to your mainframe, sound and video
input/output cards, and a read/write CD- ROM drive.
Additional peripherals would include a color scanner
(Microtek), video camera, and projection device (Desktop
Projector 2800).
Balancing Technology
Technology has a strong promise for
improving instruction in a learning assistance center
(Caverly,
1994). From a skills based perspective, it can
diagnose weaknesses, identify specific remedial regimens,
monitor the students' progress providing easier material
when the students are struggling and harder material
when they are succeeding, and generate reports for
students and instructors documenting growth. From
a holistic perspective, it can provide a medium for
modeling, guided practice, and independent practice
as students use reading, writing, speaking, and listening
to develop their skills. However, technology cannot
do everything. From a skills perspective, students
must be debriefed after working through the software
to foster transfer to college learning demands. From
a holistic perspective, the instructor must also model
for the students and then arrange for guided and independent
practice. Simply, the technology cannot teach by itself.
The instructor must be part of the instructional equation
as technology provides yet another tool in the arsenal
of the director of the learning assistance center.
Bibliography
Broderick,
B., & Caverly, D. C. (1987). A system for choosing
developmental education courseware. Journal of Developmental
Education, 11(2), 28-29
Broderick,
B., & Caverly, D. C. (1988). The computer as tool.
Journal of Developmental Education, 12 (1), 30-31.
Broderick,
B., & Caverly, D. C. (1989a). Moving on with computers:
Telecommunicating. Journal of Developmental Education,
13 (2), 32-33.
Broderick, B., & Caverly, D. C. (1989b). Starting
up with computers. Journal of Developmental Education,
13 (1), 28-29.
Broderick,
B., & Caverly, D. C. (1990). Creating your own
courseware with software authoring programs. Journal
of Developmental Education, 14 (1), 32-33.
Broderick,
B., & Caverly, D. C. (1992a). Another look at
the computer as tutor. Journal of Developmental Education,
16 (2), 34-35.
Broderick,
B., & Caverly, D. C. (1992b). Choosing IBM for
your computer center. ~ Journal of Developmental Education,
15 (2), 36-37.
Broderick,
B., & Caverly, D. C. (1993). Choosing and purchasing
software. Journal of Developmental Education, 17 (1),
4041.
Caverly,
D. C. (1994, January). Technology in developmental
education: Past, present, future. Proceedings of the
Winter Institute for Learning Assistance Directors
and Professionals. Tucson, AZ.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (1988a). The computer as
tutor. Journal of Developmental Education, 12 (2),
32-33.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (1988b). Types of courseware
and how they differ. Journal of Developmental Education,
11(3), 28-29.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (1989a). The computer as
tutee. Journal of Developmental Education, 12 (3),
30-31.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (199Oa). Hypermedia in
developmental education. Journal of Developmental
Education, 14 (2), 32-33.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (199Ob). Masters in the
use of computers in developmental programs. Journal
of Developmental Education, 13 (3), 32-33.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (199la). A holistic or
skills computer lab. Journal of Developmental Education,
15 (1), 38-39.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (199lb). Learning through
hypermedia. Journal of Developmental Education, 14
(3), 32-33.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (1992). Choosing Macintosh
for your computer center. Journal of Developmental
Education, 15 (3), 4041.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (1993a). Another look at
the computer as tutee. Journal of Developmental Education,
16 (3), 38-39.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (1993b). Telecommunicating
for improving developmental education. Journal of
Developmental Education, 17 (2), 36-37.
Caverly,
D. C., & Broderick, B. (1994). Advanced Internet
for developmental education. Journal of Developmental
Education, 17 (3), 37-38.
Caverly,
D. C., Mandeville, T. P., & Nicholson, S. A. (in
press). PLAN: A study- reading strategy for informational
text. Journal of Reading.
Christ, F. (1982).
Computers in Learning Assistance Centers and Developmental
Education: Beginning to Explore. Journal of Developmental
& Remedial Education, 6 (1), 10-13.
Christ, F. (1983a).
Computer competency for developmental educators. Journal
of Developmental & Remedial Education, 7 (2),
26-27.
Christ, F. (1983b).
Computer software for instruction. Journal of Developmental
& Remedial Education, 7 (1), 6 + .
Christ, F. (1983c).
Techtalk: Choosing a computer for instruction. Journal
of Developmental & Remedial Education, 6 (2),
10+.
Christ, F. (1983d).
Techtalk: Selecting software for instruction. Journal
of Developmental & Remedial Education, 6 (3),
12-13.
Christ, F. (1984a).
Improving knowledge on your own campus and through
user groups. Journal of Developmental Education, 8
(1), 22-23.
Christ, F. (1984b).
Managing information for developmental educators.
Journal of Developmental & Remedial Education,
7 (3), 28-29.
Christ, F. (1985a).
Computer accessories for increased power and versatility.
Journal of Developmental Education, 8 (3), 28-29.
Christ, F. (1985b).
More accessories to expand computer usefulness. Journal
of Developmental Education, 9 (3), 28-29.
Christ, F. (1985c).
Telecommunications research and working with your
computer. Journal of Developmental Education, 9 (1),
26.
Christ, F. (1986).
Junk mail, periodicals, and computer usage. Journal
of Developmental Education, 10 (1), 24.
Christ, F. (1987a).
Computer technology: Its challenges are our opportunities.
Journal of Developmental Education, 11(1), 28.
Christ, F. (1987b).
Some observations on professional use of computers.
Journal of Developmental Education, 10 (3), 30.
Henderson,
A. H. (1992). Technology and teacher education: Paradigm
shift in instruction? In D. Carey, R. Carey, D. A.
Willis, and J. Willis (Ed.) Technology and teacher
education 1992 (pp. 612-615). Charlottesville, VA:
Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. (1983). The instruction
of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 8, 317-344.
Perry, W. G.
J. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development
in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart,
and Winston.
|
