Software in the Classroom: Basic Tools

Word processors are one of the earliest forms of software introduced into classrooms and have been a persistent tool in education settings. They have been said to increase productivity by allowing students to save time on menial tasks that don't improve learning. For example, with word processors mistakes can be easily deleted and retyped as well as sections of text moved, for simple editing. They allow students to do more, with the addition of colour, fonts, tables and images to make texts more attractive which offers students a sense of satisfaction with their work. Spreadsheet software allow for more efficient work with numbers which is beneficial to teachers and students. The same can be said for powerpoint which allows for the sharing of knowledge in an organised and engaging format, depending on the creativity of the user. A lot of these processing tools are now web based (i.e. Google Docs) and allow other students to add information in order to support collaboration, but also allows for monitoring by teachers to assess student contributions. 
There is debate over which stage in a student's education they should begin using word processors. Research had shown that communication changes when word processors are introduced as writing tools (Shilling, 1997). A case study by Stake (1994) investigated word processing in beginning writers (Year 1). The first author in the study observed classrooms examining changes in students behaviour and communication about writing projects (Patton, 2002). The participants in the study had already had computer experience, either at home or through a kindergarten program. The study concluded that the students preferred computers for writing, expressing concern with the mechanics of handwriting and efforts involved in letter formation. It's my opinion that word processing skills can be taught at a young age, so long as they are taught in parallel with hand-writing so that fundamental skills, that are glossed over with the efficiency of word processing, are not lost. 
Many of the participants in the case study stated they enjoyed hunting for letters on the keyboard. Whether keyboard skills need to be taught in schools depends on the stage that such technology are introduced into classrooms. Most students will have had experience with keyboards at quite a young age, but there method of typing is what is often referred to as the "hunt and peck" method. Trubek (2011) argues that learning touch typing is a "cognitive automaticity" which takes a burden off our working memory and so allows for higher-order thinking when writing. Studies have shown that word processing only improves writing when there has been good writing instruction and sufficient time to learn word processing procedures (Snyder, 1993). 
Robyler (1997) reviewed research that found student's who used word processor in essay type questions and writing tasks tended to receive lower grades than those who submitted hand-written tasks. However, it is difficult to determine if this is a result of the inadvertent bias of the examiner or the caliber of students who opted to hand write the writing tasks. Research by Wolfe (1996) on the influence of word processor on quality of assessment showed that essays produced on word processors were neater, longer, had a more formal tone than those that were hand written. The level of experience in computing also appeared to correlated with the quality of word-processed essays. The quality, length and number of complex sentences in essays produced by students with little experience with computers being scored less than hand-written essays by the same students. There appears to be conflicting research on the impact of word-processors on assessment. 
A common concern raised with increasing use of word-processing technology is the impact of auto-correct on spelling abilities of students. Goldberg, Russell and Cook (2003) showed that students who use computers in writing tasks generally had improved outcomes than those who used paper-based methods. They showed that students engage more with editing their writing, give and receive feedback more frequently from their peers and benefit from early input from teachers. Mark Goldring, chief executive of Mencap, the charity for people with learning disabilities, commissioned a survey in the UK which found that "With over two-thirds of Britons now having to rely on spell check, we are heading towards an auto-correct generation” (Paton, 2012). The study found that just a fifth of people over the age of 18 could correctly pick out a series of potentially tricky words from a list. The survey concluded that teenagers and those in their early 20's were the worst spellers.  Ian McNeilly, director of the National Association for the Teaching of English, says however blaming technology is "an easy, knee-jerk reaction - though an entirely understandable one" (Paton, 2012). It is not unlikely that auto-correct is a contributing factor to decline in spelling abilities of students, but this can be counteracted with further focus of the curriculum on spelling, even in later years of education as well as a balance of word-processing and hand-writing. 

References 

Goldberg, A. Russell, M. Cook, A. (2003). The effects of computers on student writing: A meta-analysis of studies from 1992-2002. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 2(1), pp.1-51

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Paton, G. (2012, May 22). Over-reliance on technology in undermining spelling skills. The Telegraph. Retrieved from  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9280203/Over-reliance-on-technology-is-undermining-spelling-skills.html

Robyler, M.D. (1997). Technology and the oops! effect: Finding a bias against word processing. Learning and Leading with Technology, 26(6), pp.51-53. 

Shilling, W.A. (1997). Young children using computers to make discoveries about written language. Early Childhood Education Journal, 24 , pp.253-259.

Snyder, I. (1993). Writing with word processors: A research overview. Educational Research, 35(1), pp. 49-68. 

Stake, R.E. (1994). Case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln(Eds.),  Handbook of qualitative research, pp.236-247. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

Trubek, A. (2011, August 15). Out of Touch with Typing [blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.technologyreview.com/s/425018/out-of-touch-with-typing/

Wolfe, E. (1996). The influence of student experience with word processors on the quality of essays written for a direct writing assessment. Assessing Writing, 3, pp.123-147.