Christopher Dean, Will Hochman, Carra Hood, and Bob McEachern

We request financial support to begin using a mobile classroom of lap top computers to teach writing at SCSU. We plan, as a pilot study, to develop a computerized classroom explicitly for use by English Department at SCSU. We hope that this pilot study will allow us to learn about the potential for teachers and students to study and understand computer-integrated literacy instruction across the curriculum at SCSU, and, most importantly, to get students to engage in critical literacy practices concerning the use of computers. We do not expect all English faculty to participate in the study; however, we offer, even in the pilot stage, an open invitation to all of our colleagues to begin using the computerized class and to continue analyzing its learning potential. We envision this classroom as a place where students and teachers can learn to use computers in a humane and critical way–a place. Following the innovative design of the Foreign Language Laptop classes and based on our experience and research, we are confident that we can configure a computerized classroom where the learning that happens in our classes in English, Education, and Technical Writing classes can be extended electronically.

As literacy teachers, we think that the convergence of computer literacy and academic literacy has accelerated to the point were we must learn more about how technology affects our students’ literacy progress–both for good and for ill. In her introduction to Technology and Literacy in the Twenty-First Century (1999), Cynthia L. Selfe challenges educators to understand that "the real work facing teachers involves transforming our current limited discussions about technological literacy into more fully informed debates acknowledging the complex relationships between technology, literacy, education, power, economic conditions, and political goals." In other words, we must advance past the point of seeing computers simply as useful tools and learn to understand how deeply computer technology is transforming our lives, and also to be critical of the way that computers, and the people who design them, either reduplicate, or challenge, previous power structures. As Cynthia and Richard Selfe point out in "The Politics of The Interface: Power and Its Exercise in Electronic Contact Zones," the very desktop of computers signal, with their iconic representations of office materials like files and desks, that all users, regardless of race, class and ethnicity, are entering, "a world constituted around the lives and values of white, male, middle and upper-class professionals" (Selfe and Selfe 487). We need to prepare students to critique the implied affirmation of capitalist ideology that is present here–at the same time that we show them the way that computers, and the World Wide Web, open up discursive space that can be liberatory and progressive. Ultimately, we want to argue that a computerized writing and learning space will allow us to critically and historically situate computerized literacy, creating something that Paulo Freire, Ira Shor, and other liberatory pedagogues would recognize as "critical literacy."

A local answer to this global challenge of creating critical literacy is for SCSU to more widely incorporate computer literacy into liberal arts education–while we also learn to more deeply debate the most salient issues of computing and learning. This is a debate that we envision teachers in our department, both those that use the lab and those that do not, will continue to engage in.

Students who have difficulty staying in our college may need the support of a writing environment where computers are integrated into their instruction. Beginning a college education with instruction that encourages key boarding skills, teaches academically sound computer use, and offers challenging opportunities to use the Internet critically can enable college students at SCSU,without (many of whom lack adequate computing experience) to catch up in terms of basic computer literacy. Students at SCSU deserve an education that is up to date and politically sophisticated, and they also need to have an opportunity to learn skills and knowledge that are portable to work places and graduate schools in which language, politics, and issues of power are discussed. . Eventually, we may not need special computerized classrooms to achieve this goal, but at this stage of faculty development and SCSU critical literacy levels, it is clear that we need to focus situate some of our computer resources in places where first-year students are most likely to access them. Using computers dedicated for writing instruction would enable English teachers to find and create learning resources that will help students learn workplace and critical academic literacy skills simultaneously.

The English department recently hired seven, full-time compositionists and has a talented group of writing teachers interested in exploring online resources. Supporting their work with innovative and effective online writing classes will continue to improve our teaching, and our students learning, here at SCSU. Many colleges and universities in Connecticut now offer writing instruction in computerized environments to a growing percentage of our state’s students. Quinnipiac University recently announced that all incoming freshmen will be required to purchase a laptop computer. CCSU already uses one dedicated writing classroom and has plans for 2-3 new ones. Rae Schipke, CCSU’s Composition Coordinator, estimates that approximately 25% of her full and part-time faculty teach writing classes using the computer resources available to Central’s English and Journalism departments. We have the pedagogical and technological acumen to use computers to teach writing at SCSU–we simply need computerized learning space and support.

Not all writing students will want to learn to write on a computer and not all teachers will teach with computers. We, the proposers of this document, understand and respect the fact that these computers will be available to all teachers but not mandated. We want to offer computerized classroom instruction to students who want to learn to use a computer while learning to write, as well as provide more powerful learning opportunities to students and teachers who are already computer literate. Learning to write in a computerized environment offers a number of distinct learning benefits for our first year students: .

1) One of the most important elements of all Composition classes at SCSU is learning to rewrite, which computers can powerfully facilitate.

2) The computer environment can provide students with a non-traditional classroom that often encourages alternative modes of communication.

3) Computers can create non-traditional learning forums.

4) Computer resources are not panaceas, but when integrated as part of literacy instruction, they can expand teaching and learning opportunities not widely available at SCSU.

5) A friendly and supportive introduction to computers at an initial stage of students’ college careers can improve the quality of a student’s learning experience at SCSU.

6) Computerized writing classes may facilitate collaborative learning in a variety of ways

7) The computerized classroom may begin by supporting composition classes but could also support Tech Writing, English Education, L-Courses and Literature courses.

See Appendix B for a full explanation of these seven points.

The reasons that professors use computer assisted writing classrooms are that computerized literacy instruction can

1) effectively improve retention of marginal students (including offering a wider range of resources for learning disabled students and students who have non-traditional literacy challenges),

2) prepare students for learning challenges across the curriculum,

3) increase the variety of learning resources available to writing students and teachers,

4) attune teachers and students to the ways technological literacy influences and changes traditional literacy,

5) encourage students to engage in critical work around the uses of computers, for good or ill, in our institutions of higher learning and our lives, and

6) prepare students for post-graduation learning and working challenges, and we all know that better prepared students produce better alumni..

If this proposal is adopted, some of the instructional benefits for SCSU will be:

1) The development of a regional reputation for advanced writing instruction and use of up-to-date technology that will support our President’s vision of establishing our academic preeminence.

Each of the proposal writers have already contributed research and presented ideas about teaching writing with computers to the field. Teaching in a computerized writing environment will support our university’s pursuit of recognition for innovative instruction and cutting-edge research.

2) The ability to offer our students the best possible resources and the development of a variety of comfortable learning contexts that can effectively reduce learning anxiety.

. Many of our first-year students lack literacy confidence. Students can gain confidence when they perceive that their writing instruction is supported with a wide range of technological resources. Caring writing professors who know how to use technology will be more able to ensure that students are not frustrated with technology and encouraged to advance their skills with competent, on site instruction. Also by situating our students’ learning within a context of critical literacy and humanistic literary endeavor, we can help our students become savvy critics of the more far-fetched claims made by some about the learning potential of computers.

3) More focused help for students with typing and word processing skills is necessary, as is familiarizing students with communication and research resources on the Internet–this type of instruction as part of a first-year learning experience will improve some students ability to address literacy concerns across the curriculum.

Many first-year students lack technological literacy. More deeply integrating technology into initial literacy learning that is required of entering students at SCSU can simultaneously address both technological and traditional literacy concerns. The teaching and learning achieved from this proposal could eventually migrate into L-Courses to ensure that literacy instruction at SCSU is including technological literacy at various stages of students’ literacy progress.

4) The four proposal writers agree to teach as many of their classes as possible using the requested technology, which will ensure that the computers will be used at a rate that exceeds typical computer class use at SCSU. The Ad Hoc English Department Tech Committee also agrees that we will not only teach each other how to maximize the learning benefits of the technology in our classroom, but we will welcome colleagues into the learning space and support faculty development as powerfully as possible.

5) Some of the most effective pedagogical advances today are deeply integrated into technology.

See Appendix C for a full explanation of these five points.

Spring 2002: To improve writing instruction in computerized environments, Information Technology will allocate funds to purchase one mobile writing lab with 24 wireless networked laptop computers loaded with Microsoft Office Suite and Internet browsers, two printers, and an overhead projector. Current market research shows that Apple is the most cost-effective vendor for mobile laptop classrooms. SCSU already supports a similar configuration for the Department of Foreign Languages.

Spring 2002: Arrange scheduling with Bob Drobish so that the proposer’s fall classes will meet in class space designated for the mobile computerized writing classroom. There are already four full-time English faculty members who are committed to teach writing in a computer classroom, and there are several other full-time and part-time writing teachers who are very interested in using a computer classroom to teach writing and researching.

Summer 2002: Set up a portable computerized writing classroom in Engleman hall that uses a laptop cart and network system. Implementing a configuration similar to the Foreign Language Department set-up has several distinct advantages for us at this time:

1) Networked laptops in classrooms can become portable learning stations that effectively connect students to their teacher, to each other, and to the Internet.

2) A mobile, laptop classroom rather than a lab with desk top computers will de-emphasize the technology and allow students to use thinking about literacy and technological literacy more fluidly. This would allow students to begin developing what Cynthia Selfe calls "multilayered literacy" a literacy in which people "function literately within computer-supported communication environments" by layering "conventions of the pages and conventions of the screen."

3) Classroom space is limited–particularly in Engleman hall. Therefore, portable technological resources will permit more effective scheduling and ensure that the technology can be used by those teachers and students who it will best serve.

Implement a workshop to train teachers to make pedagogical transitions with new and existing technological resources.

Fall 2002: Begin writing instruction in computerized classrooms.

Spring 2003: Continue teaching writing in computerized classrooms and offering workshops for faculty development.

Summer 2003: Issue assessment report.

1) Obtain Information Technology funding to purchase and maintain software and hardware that effectively support a process-based approach to teaching writing.

2) Ensure that the class resources are administered on a policy level by the Chairperson of the English Department, the Composition Coordinators, and teachers of Composition.

3) Provide scheduling access and technological support to all interested writing teachers.

4) Develop a group of teacher and/or student writing/computer consultants to help continue the convergence of traditional and technological literacies so that all users of the learning space are effectively supported.

5) Ensure that the teacher training, technology, and furniture choices create a comfortable learning environment.

6) Provide adequate technical support.

7) Provide a budget that will be administered by an English faculty member and will support the software, hardware, and technical assistance listed in the above goals.

Computerized writing classes could become an important part of our emerging General Education Program. They could give teachers in our nascent Composition Program opportunities to use technology, so that we may learn to teach composition in new ways. Typical first-year literacy work, from freewriting to final drafting, is supported with creative and critical thinking, research, revision and collaborative activities that can clearly and effectively be enhanced with computers. Class text publishing, for example, encourages class collaboration and promotes activities like rewriting, editing, and developing reader awareness. Cooperative learning can be supported by the fact that students can work as part of a class network and have easy access to each other’s screens. Perhaps most important, a computerized writing class opens access to new worlds of information and interaction. In today’s world, using computers to teach students how to connect and enhance their various writing worlds is becoming a necessary and important aspect of literacy work. Experienced teachers and computerized learning communities can help our students negotiate new and traditional learning contexts in a more fluid way, and these same teachers and learning communities can help us ensure that our general education program provides the most up to date and useful literacy instruction.

This proposal should not be understood as a replacement for all regular writing classes. However, we should install computers in a classroom dedicated to teaching writing at SCSU as soon as possible.

The following "table sketch" is intended to quickly highlight some of the ways writing skills and computers skills are linked.

2) Encourage students to practice writing as often as possible

3) Enable students to experience a variety of writing strategies and audiences

4) Promote a process-based and reading-intensive approach to writing

5) Develop critical reading of student texts and Internet resources

6) Encourage writers to learn and share effective composing strategies

7) Encourage teachers to promote successful learning activities

8) Improve technological literacy of students and teachers

1) One of the most important elements of all Composition classes at SCSU is learning to rewrite, which computers can powerfully facilitate. Students are constantly encouraged to rethink their work so that revision goes beyond merely correcting grammar and spelling. A computerized classroom facilitates rewriting because it allows students to edit and cut and paste with ease. Computer assisted writing also creates networked opportunities for students to practice re-visioning their ideas collaboratively. We are not alone in our belief, and such prominent compositionists, such as Gail Hawisher, have written persuasively on this subject.

2) The computer environment can provide students with a non-traditional classroom that often encourages alternative modes of communication. Learning to write in a networked computer environment can make students more collaborative. Peer response can be facilitated because texts are easily shared and manipulated. In the November, l990 issue of Computers and Composition, W. Webster Newbold, in his article, "Computers and Writing Assessment," says that networking enables students to think beyond "what the teacher wants." When students experience "writing as communicating with people like themselves, which is fostered by networked-based activities, they begin to be able to assess their writing more realistically and successfully." Computer writing can help students prepare for work environments where computers are networked and projects often the result from collaborative thinking.

3) Computers can create non-traditional learning forums. Using existing WebCT resources can help make in-class work more effective and also help make class space available from the Web outside of class time. Students and teachers will learn to question technological resources and create customized, "hybrid" classrooms that fuse the best aspects of traditional and computerized instruction. Increasing the variety of discourse contexts enables a greater range of potential for class participation. Students who normally do not contribute in face-to-face conversations, might contribute in online discussions. For an extended discussion of the tenor, tone, and effect of online discussions, see Levin, Donitsa-Schmidt, and Zellermaayer’s Winter 1996 article in the Journal of Research and Development in Education.

4) Computer resources are not panaceas, but when integrated as part of literacy instruction, they can expand teaching and learning opportunities not widely available at SCSU. Teaching academic literacy with existing word processing resources may enable students to learn the mechanics of English more effectively. We want to teach students how to critically interact with spelling and grammar checkers, how to learn to write coherently and collaboratively in individual and networked contexts, and to learn to become better rewriters and presenters of their ideas. It should be noted that spelling and grammar checkers, as well as other emerging software, can be used as learning tools, not merely as text wizards that magically "clean up" writing. However, integrating traditional and computer literacy resources requires practice and insight to see the heuristic potential of a word processor’s features. To read a fuller discussion of these issues, see the earlier work by Gail Hawisher in the 1980s on word-processors and revision.

5) A friendly and supportive introduction to computers at an initial stage of students’ college careers can improve the quality of a student’s learning experience at SCSU. By instituting computerized writing classes, we can teach students how computers can support the large amount of writing that their college experiences will require, as well as create a learning environment that will encourage students to explore other technological opportunities at SCSU. Synthesizing basic English and Computer Science goals at the early stages of the first-year learning experience can help us to achieve more advanced learning goals across the curriculum while empowering new students with supportive writing and computing experiences.

6) Computerized writing classes may facilitate collaborative learning in a variety of ways. The most important research in Making the Most of College: Students Speak Their Mind (2001) by Richard J. Light supports the idea that students can learn a great deal from each other. Compositionists like Ken Bruffee have stressed collaborative learning for this reason. Bruffee’s writing pedagogy is centered on moving learning communities into the "conversation of human kind." Not only are student and teacher screens visually available to the class community, but also networking, large screen presentation, email, and online discussion allow for students and teachers to interact with each other in a variety of ways that are not readily available in a traditional classroom.

7) The computerized classroom may begin by supporting composition classes but could also support Tech Writing, English Education, L-Courses and Literature courses. We expect to focus the computerized writing classroom on composition instruction, but we believe that student needs and faculty interests will enable us to explore further ways computers may support critical literacy instruction at SCSU. We intend to use our initial experience to help colleagues learn to use technology more effectively, as well as ensure that the laptops are used as much as possible.

Finally, we want to make a cautionary note: Computers are not a panacea. As Christopher Dean’s dissertation research points out, "If we begin to understand our students’ experiences with computer mediated communication during and prior to our composition classes, perhaps we can begin to understand why certain students flourish in CMC [Computer Mediated Communication] and others don’t." Although we are enthusiastic about the potential learning benefits achieved with computers as learning resources, we believe that paying attention to the drawbacks as well as the benefits is key to this proposal. Carefully registering writing students for computerized classes and supporting faculty research online will make the possibility of the above learning benefits more likely.

1) The development of a regional reputation for advanced writing instruction and use of up-to-date technology that will support our President’s vision of establishing our academic preeminence. Each of the proposal writers have already contributed research and presented ideas about teaching writing with computers to the field. Teaching in a computerized writing environment will support our university’s pursuit of recognition for innovative instruction and cutting-edge research.

2) The ability to offer our students the best possible resources and the development of a variety of comfortable learning contexts that can effectively reduce learning anxiety. Many of our first-year students lack literacy confidence. Students can gain confidence when they perceive that their writing instruction is supported with a wide range of technological resources. Caring writing professors who know how to use technology will be more able to ensure that students are not frustrated with technology and encouraged to advance their skills with competent, on site instruction. Also by situating our students’ learning within a context of critical literacy and humanistic literary endeavor, we can help our students become savvy critics of the more far-fetched claims made by some about the learning potential of computers.

3) More focused help for students with typing and word processing skills is necessary, as is familiarizing students with communication and research resources on the Internet–this type of instruction as part of a first-year learning experience will improve some students ability to address literacy concerns across the curriculum. Many first-year students lack technological literacy. More deeply integrating technology into initial literacy learning that is required of entering students at SCSU can simultaneously address both technological and traditional literacy concerns. The teaching and learning achieved from this proposal could eventually migrate into L-Courses to ensure that literacy instruction at SCSU is including technological literacy at various stages of students’ literacy progress.

4) The four proposal writers agree to teach as many of their classes as possible using the requested technology, which will ensure that the computers will be used at a rate that exceeds typical computer class use at SCSU. The Ad Hoc English Department Tech Committee also agrees that we will not only teach each other how to maximize the learning benefits of the technology in our classroom, but we will welcome colleagues into the learning space and support faculty development as powerfully as possible.

We have a unique opportunity to enhance our existing Composition program with computers. Instead of using desktop computers and limiting the classroom to one particular classroom, we believe that using laptops and a mobile cart will afford more scheduling and space opportunity to ensure that the technology is used as much as possible and in as many ways as possible. For more information about how laptops are increasingly used in education in Connecticut, see "Getting Serious About High Tech: Computers in the Classroom Were Just the Beginning. Now Students Get Laptops…" by David Parker in the front page of the Connecticut Section in May 20, 2001 N.Y. Times, and see Dr. Daniel Soneson, Director of the Foreign Languages Learning Lab.

1) Improve the thinking and language skills of students

2) Encourage students to practice writing as often as possible

3) Enable students to experience a variety of writing strategies and audiences

4) Promote a process-based and reading-intensive approach to writing

5) Develop critical reading of student texts and Internet resources

6) Encourage writers to learn and share effective composing strategies

7) Encourage teachers to promote successful learning activities

8. Improve technological literacy of students and teachers

The major responsibilities of the lab coordinator will include:

• Research field development of writing teachers who use computers as part of their pedagogy (50)
• Implement and facilitate use of the laptop classroom and support transitions into new teaching space for all interested English Department members so that pedagogy and technology are manageable (50)
• Research and trouble shoot computer technology that supports writing instruction including helping teachers to use existing software and network resources such as Word, Web Browsing/Composing, WebCT, MLA Editor, etc. and helping teachers and students easily use existing hardware (50)
• Conduct faculty development workshops for faculty teaching in the laptop classroom (50)
• Act as liaison between Academic Computing and English Department to ensure that the laptop classroom is technologically functioning and serving the computing needs of teachers and students. Approximately half this time alottment will be dedicated to troubleshooting and half will be dedicated to coordinating technical support (50)
• Serve on Ad Hoc Tech Committee
• Attend Coordinator Meetings
• Support Writeon Discussion List (10)
• Support Composition Web Page (15)
• Develop computer and writing goals for the potential to use web-based instruction for the entire composition program, the potential for an online writing center, the potential for electronic portfolios, the potential for additional classes with computers, etc. (20)
• Stay critically attuned to drawbacks of using computers to teach writing (30)
• Lead writer of pilot study and assessment reports (25)

(350)=approximate hours to perform responsibilities per semester

Appendix DF–Budget: Approximated Total Requests [$67,064.20]

1) Use of existing university wide Microsoft Office site license and WebCt site license [$0.00]

2) Reassigned time for a coordinator (1 course per semester)–See Appendix E [$6,000.00]

3) Each English faculty member agreeing to teach a majority of his or her teaching load with the mobile computer classroom will receive a one time stipend of three credits of reassigned time to learn to adapt teaching to new resources. [$9,000.00]

4) 2-4 rooms in Engleman clustered around the portable laptop cart, wired for wireless networking, and preferably containing tables and chairs instead of desks. [$2,000]

5) The iBook Wireless Mobile Lab (15-Pack + 1) includes:1 teacher's iBook (12.1" diagonal TFT XGA display) with CD-RW/DVD-ROM Combo drive - standard with 128 MB memory and preloaded with an AirPort card, 15 student iBooks (12.1" diagonal TFT XGA display) with CD-ROM drives, with 128MB memory and an AirPort Card, 1 HP LaserJet 1200N Ethernet Laser Printer, Apple Network Assistant Software, 1 AirPort Base Station, 1 Bretford Mobile Cart, a powerstrip, and 2 Belkin Ethernet cables. iBook Wireless Mobile Lab (15-Pack + 1) with 3-Year AppleCare Protection Plan B6354LL/B [$22,427.00]

6) 8 Additonal Laptops [$12,000.00]

7) 22 charging stations 4 T4153LL/A (5 pack) and 2 individual T4033LL/A [$615.90]

8) 2 Routers [$2000.00]

9) 22 VST USB Low Profile Floppy DriveT2247LL/B $1422.30]

10) HP LaserJet 4100N Ethernet Laser Printer T3630LL/A [$1,599.00]

11) Sony Projector [$8000.00]

12) Utility cables, software, printer cartridges and paper [$2,000]