Children, Literacy and the Uk National Grid for Learning

Abstract

This article presents a critical assessment from the standpoint of early childhood literacy of Britain’s ambitious and costly on-line learning resource, the National Grid for Learning. It provides an overview of the aims, scope and administration of the Grid, together with typical examples of content available for users in the early childhood age range (0–8 years).The authors argue that the Grid is headed in an unfortunate and counterproductive direction so far as young learners are concerned.The argument claims that in its current form the Grid is likely to generate boredom among young people in terms of Grid-promoted on-line literacy practices, and to foster mislearningof important new forms of literacy, such as email and interactivity. Furthermore, Grid activities and approaches dumb down literacy acquisition, particularly acquisition of ‘new literacies’, and impede development of personal responsibility for on-line actions. The authors claim that a major change in mindset will be necessary to reform the Grid in ways that are compatible with the official policy goals and aspirations behind its development. Examples are provided of more productive alternatives, together with concepts, principles and data supporting the judgments and suggestions advanced.

New Technologies in Early Childhood Literacy Research: A Review of Research

“…The nearest any of the studies come to the latter is in some of the larger research projects where teachers and learners were faced with creating web-pages and occasionally pondered aspects of effective design. Yet, as we show elsewhere with reference to the example of Alex and his Koala Trouble stories (Lankshear, 1997;Lankshear and Knobel, 2002), young learners can become highly proficient and self-conscious 'insiders' of discourse communities as 'writers' and 'readers' alike.…”

“…Four studies can be assigned reasonably unambiguously to Quadrant 3 (Abel, 2001;Lankshear and Knobel, 2002;Lyke, 2001). One (Bills and Thomson, 1999) can potentially be assigned to either Quadrant 3 or 4, with Quadrant 3 seeming much more likely.…”

“…The eclectic group of five remaining studies respectively address the collateral effects of using the Wiggleworks program with Kindergarten/Grade 1 learners (Ross et al, 2001), the use of hypermedia authoring software in process writing with 6-9 year olds (Mott and Klomes, 2001), the measured effects on reading levels and positive reading attitudes of using networked computers in 24 Kindergarten and Grade 1 classrooms (Casey, 1999), the measured effect of computer-aided instruction on the conventional reading skills of first grade students by whole group and by gender (Erdner et al, 1996), and an investigation of the literacy education resources available for early years learners on Britain's National Grid for Learning (Lankshear and Knobel, 2002).…”

“…Indeed, one of the very few studies of which we are aware in the early childhood range that can be used to indicate what is at stake here is our own limited study of an Australian child, Alex (Lankshear, 1997: 183-187;Lankshear and Knobel, 2002;Lankshear and Knobel, 2003). Alex (then aged 5) collaborated with his father to produce a series of distinctive hyperlinked narratives about the adventures of a koala named Max.…”

Young Children's Knowledge Building and Literacy Development Through Knowledge Forum®

“…We also know that young children can profit from specific competencies that are developed through familiarity with computer technology (Calvert, Rideout, Woolard, Barr, & Strousse, 2005;Haugland, 1992). Some child advocates, however, are concerned that technology may be misused in early childhood classrooms, causing children to become bored or to experience actual decline in literacy learning (Lankshear & Knobel, 2002). Still others caution that introducing children to computer technology at a very young age may cause a decline in children's imaginative play (Christensen & Kelly, 2003;Miller, 2005).…”