Chromebook is a laptop computer that is dependent on the Google Chrome Internet browser. In other words, a Chromebook is used by connecting to the Internet through Google apps such as Google Classroom, Google Docs, gScholar, and WeVideo. Many school districts are integrating Chromebooks because they are cheaper and easier to maintain as compared with laptops using Windows or Mac software. In addition, students and teachers can access their work (e.g., documents, presentations, photos, and e-mail) through any computer just by using the Chrome browser and signing into their Google account.
During the 2014–2015 school year, I worked with educators from a small public school in a rural area in the northeastern part of the United States. The school district had received a grant to purchase six Chromebooks for each classroom. The faculty noticed a large portion of its literacy instruction was focused on print text and paper-and-pencil literacy practices. This was a cause for concern because the recommendations outlined by the Common Core State Standards Initiative emphasize a balanced instruction with both print and digital media literacy practices. For example, the Common Core indicates students should be able to use technology thoughtfully and digital media strategically “to enhance their reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language use. [And that] they are familiar with the strengths and limitations of various technological tools and mediums and can select and use those best suited to their communication goals.” As a result, Chromebook integration was meant to support the notion that digital media are blended throughout daily literacy instruction rather than used as an add-on special assignment.
Three-week integration framework
In order to give teachers consistent support and freedom to play with the Chromebooks, professional development was broken into three-week intervals. During the first week I met with third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade teachers in a face-to-face environment. The second week was conducted through an online environment. The third week involved a classroom application environment. This three-week integration framework rotated 16 times during the school year.
Week One: The face-to-faceenvironment allowed me to introduce an instructional method using a gradual release model. For example, I would model how to plan and conduct a close reading of a print and digital text. Then, I would invite the teachers to share their process for close reading. Next, we experimented with different reading paths: linear (top-to-bottom and left-to-right) and nonlinear. Finally, working in pairs, teachers took turns practicing explicit instruction of close reading. The session always ended with time for teachers to discuss the benefits and challenges of the instructional method. They also collaborated in small grade-level groups to integrate the method into their literacy instruction.
Week Two: The onlineenvironment gave teachers the opportunity to continue to build their technological pedagogical content knowledge, also known as TPACK. Using a Google Classroom platform, I posted one or two relevant professional journal articles written for practitioners; short video segments that modeled the instructional method within the classroom; and discussion questions for teachers to share their thoughts. For instance, Bridget Dalton’s article in The Reading Teacher entitled “Multimodal Composition and the Common Core State Standards” provided a bridge between theory and concrete examples. As teachers used the Google Classroom platform for their own learning, they began to feel more comfortable using this tool in their classroom.
Week Three: The classroom application environment held teachers accountable for adjusting their weekly lesson plan to include a hybrid model of literacy instruction. As defined by this school district, a hybrid model contained direct, collaborative, and individual instruction using both print and digital texts. As teachers took risks and explored integrating Chromebooks, I created a Google Doc where teachers could post feedback on their successes and challenges. This document allowed teachers to receive immediate support from administrators, teachers in other schools, and instructional coaches.
Challenges
Despite the success of the three-week integration framework, there were a few challenges to keep in mind. First, some teachers lacked basic technology skills and became overwhelmed. However, the face-to-face and online environments could be differentiated to meet the needs of the teachers. Being able to offer different levels of professional development may have provided better support to meet each teacher at his or her comfort level.
Regardless of proficiency, most teachers struggled to envision a hybrid classroom. They continued to use familiar print text and paper-and-pencil literacy practices instead of adjusting their instruction to include online inquiry and multimedia text sets. Without consistent instructional support from literacy coaches, technology staff, and administration, teachers may not have changed their instruction.
Even though teachers suggested that Chromebook integration increased student engagement and motivation, there were also digital citizenship issues to address. For example, while providing revision feedback on a Google Doc, one student disagreed with a peer and deleted those comments. Likewise, another student was writing inappropriate comments in a collaborative writing assignment. Finally, students were clicking on videos that were off topic. Fortunately, the cloud storage saves all of this activity and provides evidence when talking with students about what they might do differently in the future. From these experiences, teachers realized the importance of also teaching digital citizenship in the 21st-century classroom.
This three-week integration framework could be applied to any topic or any type of technology integration. I would love to learn more about the integration framework your school district uses for professional development. Feel free to send an e-mail to the address linked below.
Julie B. Wise is a doctoral student at the University of Delaware. You can follow her on Twitter. This article is part of a series from the Technology in Literacy Education Special Interest Group (TILE-SIG).