The Fifth C: Computers, Special Interest Group Session, CCCC 1998

Special Interest Group, SG1.8, CCCC, 49th Annual Conference,Chicago. Palmer House Hilton/Salon III, 3rd Floor. 2 April 1998.

Sponsored by the CCCC Committee on Computers in Composition andCommunication

Notes from Group 1-B, typed by Eric Crump
How should such literacy moneys be spent in English composition program? What kinds of literacy and technology projects should be funded? What guidelines can we suggest to ensure that money is spent on a wide range of literacy values and practices?
eric: are there literacy moneys?

barb: michigan got 8 mil from govt. most of it earmarked for professional devel & training in schools. missing link is higher ed making connex with political process, with communities.

dickie: as a group, we can make a diff by including prof devel & k12/community connex in our grant applications.

winnie: two sources, govt and institutional. money follows money. local policy needs to account for access/equity.

john slatin: we need to rethink what access means. we tend to think of ourselves as source of knowledge, source of literacy? not a viable model. we have to get the top admins and develop officers and trustees to understand the health of the institution depends on health of k12. our institutions are competing not only with each other but with emerging other means of delivering education. if we don't get more connected, more dynamic, we're dead. technology is the way we reach our constituencies.

dickie: need to involve students at every level.

eric: service learning.

john: recommend people sponsor projects that involve collaboration between education and community, using technology to support cooperation. support for community building should persist beyond specific project boundaries.

barb: structure/culture in k12 not amenable to collaboration.

dickie: support at 3 pts. when they learn, when they plan to integrate to class, and when they are in their classes. team approach, ownership.

barb: get political. effective ways can be inexpensive. we have the capability to make outreach cost effective.

eric: lobby locally for structural change, educate about cost effective outreach.

john: we as a field need to learn to talk about money. we have to be able to talk in terms of cost effectiveness.

dickie: look beyond our own disciplines, partner up.

john: as rhetoricians. we need to learn better how to interact with grantors.

pete: partnerships with local ISPs? they have tech infrastructure, we have ideas.

dickie: grants should include providing access to underrep/traditionally excluded groups.

what do k12 schools need? money?

john: they need time. they can get money for technology. need support for prof devel.

Dickie: Projects that

  • support teams of stakeholders to learn together -- students, teachers, technicians....
  • those teams should be "supported" while they
    1. learn to use the technology
    2. plan to implement the technology into the curriculum
    3. implement the technology innovation over time