Wednesday, October 4, 2017

Teaching with Technology

Technology has become commonplace in classrooms across the world. From computers, to interactive whiteboards, to smartphones, technology is augmenting learning in increasingly complex ways. From the new Digital Technologies curriculum from the Ministry of Education, to blended and online learning initiatives in tertiary institutions, technology also has the capacity to significantly impact the manner in which ESOL teachers do their jobs.

However, there are significant barriers when adopting technology. For example, equipment can be costly, many online services have associated charges, and appropriate professional development can be elusive. That being said, technology has the capacity to allow for personalized learning, enhanced collaboration, and more time on the provision of feedback.

In order to ensure that technology affects learning in a positive manner, it is critical that educators have a strong understanding of the many ways in which it can alter the teaching and learning process. Thankfully there are a range of frameworks which can be used to guide and understand the implementation of tech tools.

One such framework is the SAMR framework[1], by Ruben Puentedura. SAMR stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition. Essentially, this framework helps teachers identify the outcome of employing any particular tech tool. Technology may act as a direct substitute, with no functional change. Conversely, technology may allow for extensive redefinition of a task; allowing for previously unavailable pathways of learning. When employing technology in the classroom, it is important that we are adding value.

In Yong Zhao’s 2015 article [2]on the need for a paradigm shift to cultivate 21st century learners, he pointed to several ways in which technology could be of benefit. These included personalized learning, ownership of the learning process, and enhanced collaboration.
Fortunately, there are a number of tools available that allow us to achieve these types of benefit, while modifying or redefining ESOL learning.  This article introduces a web-based reading platform as well as a collaborative tool.

Readtheory.org [3]is an online platform which allows teachers to form classes and have students complete level-appropriate reading comprehension tasks. The tasks are computer-adaptive; as students get more answers correct, the reading will become more challenging. Student level is based on an initial reading comprehension task. As a teacher, the real power of this tool comes through in the progress reports which teachers can access. Teachers can see how many tasks students have completed, how many tasks were above the pre-test level, as well as the students lexile level. In addition, teachers can see which question types students have struggled with (e.g. key ideas, details, structure, or integration of knowledge). All in all, this provides some powerful insight into our students’ reading abilities.

Padlet [4]is a collaborative tool which can be accessed via a computer or smartphone app. Padlet promotes itself as “paper for your screen,” and it very much is. One way to think of it is like ‘sticky notes’ which can be posted on a wall. I’ve used Padlet to provide grammar practice. I ask students to post examples of correct usage of a given tense. Students then write these into Padlet. The power of Padlet as a tool, however, is that students post in real-time. Students see others’ contributions as they are making their own and can offer feedback on incorrect language (or notice errors in their own post). This makes for a truly collaborative, engaging experience.

That being said, technology does have potential drawbacks. Many of these are barriers to implementation. For example, the cost of equipment or online services. In addition, finding the right tool for the job can be a challenge given the abundance of available tools. In order to navigate these barriers and overcome the potential pitfalls, online communities are a great help. On Facebook, there are groups such as #AusELT. In addition, there are blogs such as “Nik’s QuickShout.”

By using technology in an intelligent way, we can truly redefine the classroom experience.



[1] elearning.tki.org.nz/professional-learning/Teacher-inquiry/SAMR-model
[2] http://zhaolearning.com/2015/04/06/a-world-at-risk-an-imperative-for-a-paradigm-shift-to-cultivate-21st-century-learners1
[3] https://readtheory.org
[4] https://padlet.com

Talking the Talk: Is it time for a Christchurch Language Policy?

A review of Professor Joseph Lo Bianco’s visit to New Zealand

By Daryl Streat – Lincoln University

Christchurch, in more ways than one, is a city with a changing face. While the city is the process of physically transforming its buildings and scenery, the more significant change is in fact occurring amongst its residents. From 2001 to 2013, Christchurch became a much more diverse city. What’s more, there are high levels of diversity at young ages. In 2013, it was reported that almost 40% of 0 to 4-year-olds identified as non-European. The earthquake rebuild has only increased the speed of this diversification.

The has made Christchurch a much more vibrant city, with a strong mix of cultures and languages encountered daily. If significant action is not taken to maintain this diversity (and especially language) then we risk losing some of what this great city has become.

A suitable language policy, to sit alongside our new Multi-Cultural strategy, would be a significant step in the right direction. A robust language policy would not only re-affirm the importance of te reo Māori and New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL), but would go a long way to ensure adequate ESOL provision for new arrivals and help maintain minority languages within the community.

Language policy in New Zealand
Of course, this has been attempted before. The Ministry of Education authored Aoteareo: Speaking for Ourselves, as a step towards a national language policy. But that was 26 years ago! Professor Joseph Lo Bianco’s visit to New Zealand served to spark discussion around the need for a coherent language policy to support all languages, both nationally and in Ōtautahi, Christchurch.

Professor Joseph Lo Bianco
Professor Joseph Lo Bianco, University of Melbourne, is a leading expert in national language planning. He helped author Australia’s multilingual national language policy and has developed language policies for a range of countries.

On August 23rd, Professor Bianco spoke at Auckland University of Technology on the importance of a national language policy for New Zealand.  This presentation was part of a series of talks sponsored by AUT, TESOLANZ, Asia New Zealand Foundation, COMET Auckland, NZALT, Victoria University of Wellington, and the Royal Society Te Apārangi. Professor Bianco showed how language policy development is a multi-faceted problem as planners must deal with a wide range of views.

Professor Bianco pointed out how language is a cultural, community, and educational resource. This resource serves all parts of the community. However, without adequate support, languages can disappear, or never develop in the first place.

What next?
Language policy in Ōtautahi, Christchurch must reflect our city. Not only must a policy affirm a place of importance for te reo Māori, and NZSL, but Christchurch must foster the conditions under which the languages of our newest residents can be protected. And finally, as stated in Languages in Aotearoa New Zealand (the Royal Society of New Zealand, 2013), we must ensure equitable access to ESOL.


If a multi-cultural, integrated society is something that the Christchurch City Council (CCC) wants to bring to fruition, then the CCC must take the language question seriously. For where language is not fostered and protected, culture struggles to survive.