Green River Community College
English as a Second Language Program
Introduction to the Technology Competencies
3rd Draft - June 2, 2000 -
See note below for attribution of this document.
View the competencies and the rubrics used to measure them.

History: In the summer of 1999, the staff from the Office of Adult Literacy of the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges gathered together professionals from across Washington State to begin a three-year project of revising the assessment system for basic skills of ABE/GED and ESL. The first task was to rewrite the competencies that already existed and to align them with new federal levels and guidelines as well as fit these competencies into the emerging Equipped For the Future framework.

The task for the technology area was quite different as competencies for this area were not, until then, in existence. Technology had become an increasing important instructional area as our students need basic technological skills to be effective learners, parents, workers, and community members. Designing instruction for this important area would ignore the needs of students, the mandates of the federal government, and offer the benefits of integrating technology into our programs of study. Consequently, a team was created to write these competencies and also engage in the same sets of tasks as the other teams, i.e. revision of competencies, setting up an assessment process based on rubrics, piloting these products, and revising them to the needs of the state and the students.

The technology group has generated three majors drafts of the competencies and considers the 3rd draft as complete for the moment. Revision should be expected.

 

Shared Understandings: In order for those who use these competencies to understand the intent of the group who wrote them, it is important to establish some shared understandings. The group hopes possible misunderstandings. might be cleared-up before the implementation of a new set of competencies begins.

  1. The technology team believes that we are not teaching technology in and of itself. The purpose of teaching technology at all is to further and enhance study in the basic skills of ABE/GED and ESL. We believe that students will be better prepared to study, work, and live in a modern society if they possess access to and use of an essential set of technological skills.
  2. These competencies apply to both ABE/GED and ESL. The competencies are divided out by level and in three main categories: Knowledge and concepts; independence; and technical abilities. These levels and categories can all be applied to the content of the different topics of study in ABE/GED and ESL.
  3. The levels of the technology competencies do not correlate with the levels in either ABE/GED or ESL. A student nearly ready to pass all the components of the GED may be at level one of technology. On the other hand, a new immigrant may have been a computer programmer in his home country, but may be at the beginning level of learning English.
  4. Students will move through these competencies at a different rate than they progress through competencies in ABE/GED and ESL.
  5. The competencies in and of themselves do not determine how they are to be taught. It is up to each program to determine how to fit technology instruction into the structure of its curriculum. A number of models for instruction exist. For example, a teacher may have a computer or two in a given classroom and be able to integrate technology into the class throughout the quarter. A teacher may also take her class to a computer lab once a week, or a program might have a special class or lab just for learning technology.
  6. Each program instructor will have to develop a plan for integrating the technology competencies with content. The best instruction is that which is based in content. Language teaching is best done in relationship to units of study on a given topic that incorporates other elements such as technology. For example, students in the process of learning writing, may also learn how to use a word processing program. Teachers and students must then maintain dual goals of instruction. For the ESL teacher instruction in English always comes first, but there is also an opportunity for teaching technology.
  7. Computers and other technological devises are just tools that may reinforce or offer a different modality for instruction.
  8. Placement in basic skills programs is not determined by technological expertise. There is no initial assessment instrument for technology placement. Students are eligible for taking these classes based on their assessment in and need for basic skills.
  9. Since the funds which support these classes come from the Office of Adult Literacy, instruction must be tied to the improvement of basic skills. These classes do not substitute for college level classes, such as an introduction to computers. The group hopes that students who become technologically competent will articulate into computer skills training, but it must be clear there is to be no duplication of classes in vocational/ transfer programs.
  10. It is understood that flexibility is needed for different programs in stand alone or integrated classes. Because of the quickly evolving nature of technology it is understood these competencies will have to be updated.

Note: This is an introduction to technology competencies and rubrics which were generated as part of a process initiated by the Office of Adult Literacy (OAL) of the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges of the State of Washington. OAL called together ABE and ESL professionals from around the state to help revise its assessment system for ABE/GED/ESL. The first meeting was held at The Evergreen State College in the summer of 1999.  The task for our team was to write new competencies and rubrics. We completed that task at the fourth retreat in the spring of 2000 at the Dumas Bay Center on Federal Way, Washington.

Team members were John Avery, team leader from Green River Community College, Beverly Tice-Deering and Marcella Pendergrass of Seattle Central Community College, Barbara Wright of Bellevue Community College, Beth Blanchard and Dan Craddock with the Private Industry Council, Carol Marie Stiffler with Goodwill Industries, Charleen Fitzgerald of Pierce Community College, Donna Jullich of Peninsula Community College, and Susan Sandmeier of Columbia Basin College.

Return to ESL Faculty Main Page         Return to the GRCC ESL Main Page