1. The study at a glance

At Abbotsdale, 24 Year 5 students and their teacher operate as a community of learners on cross-curriculum theme-based units of work, where new technologies are integrated seamlessly into activities which have been designed to provide focussed language and literacy education opportunities, as well as to extend language and literacy competence across the curriculum. The school has well-developed Technology and Language policies. The Year 5 teacher, Robert, has a strong theoretical grounding in constructivist learning theory, is well informed about the English P-10 syllabus, and is very much at home with new technologies. He has taught at the school for 10 years and has good knowledge of his students, which he draws upon in theoretically informed ways to tailor and implement pedagogical tasks and activities. Robert relates pedagogical theory and practice very effectively, and the students were all visibly engrossed in their learning throughout the periods we observed. They produced an impressive range of learning outcomes according with syllabus guidelines and requirements in English and other key learning areas, in the course of completing a unit of work on the theme of inventions and inventors. While learning tasks and experiences within the unit of work at most approximated to 'real life' social practices, the pedagogy was rich in 'life like' practices and 'focused learning episodes'.

2. The site

Abbotsdale is a pre - Year 7 school in Foxton, a town located 160 kms north of a state capital, and serving 15,000 urban, semi-rural, and rural inhabitants. The student catchment area is served by 14 schools: 10 primary (8 state, 1 Catholic, 1 other) and 4 secondary (2 state, 1 Catholic, 1 other). There is also a Technical and Further Education College, a community organisation ('Centreplace') that provides adult education in mainly social areas, and an Open Access Support Centre. This study focuses on a Year 5 class of 24 students - 11 girls and 13 boys. Their teacher, Robert, had been teaching for 22 years, the last 10 of them at Abbotsdale, admitting to enjoying his work greatly and feeling very much at home in the town.

From 1992-94 Abbotsdale was designated a Band A disadvantaged school under a government project. This entitled it, on the basis of its size (approximately 220 students), to $30,000 per year additional funding to resource initiatives designed to enhance learning among disadvantaged students. It was redesignated B2 between 1994-97, which entitled it to no additional funding. Abbotsdale was subsequently redesignated B1 for 1997, making it eligible for a grant of up to $5,000 for special innovative programs - many of which, throughout the state, involve new technologies.

Abbotsdale has 35-40 preschoolers and 190-200 Year 1 - 7 students, taught by 10 teachers, with the assistance of 'two and a bit' paid teacher aides. Classes are a mix of single year (Years 1, 5, 6, 7) and composite (Years 2-3, 3-4, 1-7) groupings. Robert's classroom occupies a self-contained wooden building some distance from the main block, raised on tall stumps to catch the breeze. At first sight it has an air of tradition and 'old worldiness' about it, but this impression is quickly dispelled on entering the classroom. A bank of three computers with processing speeds equivalent to 486 and 586 PCUs range across the back of the room. Two are fitted with quad speed CD-ROM players, and the third is linked to the Internet via a local public provider. What looks at first like a fourth computer in a front corner of the room is, in fact, a reconditioned monitor wired to a video recorder and stereo speakers. The speakers are also connected to a 'ghetto-blaster' type audio player, which is used each day by the student whose turn it is to play a favourite 'single' to the class. A much-used blackboard stretches across the front of the room. Beneath the windows down one side of the room are shelves packed full of print resources. Robert's desk is parallel to these shelves, set a metre in from them and near the back of the room. Students have their own desks, arranged in lines of six or seven, where they sit during 'whole class' segments of lessons. Much of the time, however, they work in small groups inside or outside the classroom. The room has no wasted space; there is just enough room for the 24 students. There is a homely, welcoming feel to the space, and it quickly becomes apparent that all participants enjoy learning and working here.

Foxton's population is overwhelmingly Australian born. 1991 figures indicate that just 1.7% spoke a foreign language. Of the 7.5% of foreign born citizens, only one third were born in non English-speaking countries. 12.96% of over the urban 18 year olds registered in the workforce were unemployed in 1991, as were 10% in the adjourning semi rural area. Family incomes are uneven. In the adjourning semi rural area, from which Abbortsdale draws many of its students, 34% of the population had combined family incomes of under $20,000 in 1991, with the largest single category (17% of the total for whom total income figures were available) being in the $16,000-$20,000 range. 7.5% of complete returns were for family incomes over $60,000, and almost 3% were over $100,000.

3. The policy context

(a) Abbotsdale's technology policy

Robert is the school's technology coordinator and was responsible for its Technology policy. The policy follows the national Statement on Technology for Australian Schools (Curriculum Corporation 1994) in distinguishing between technology as 'a learning area' and technology as 'learning technology', referring to computer uses in classrooms.

Abbotsdale's technology policy observes the 4 strands identified in the national Statement: viz., designing, making and appraising; materials; information; and systems. Technology is not taught as a discrete subject in primary schools in the state. Abbotsdale's policy is to undertake designing, making, and appraising activities in relation to materials, information, and systems within other subject areas - e.g., specifying, gathering, sorting and analysing information needed in classroom activities (heights, news, distances, opinions, issues), recognising the impact of information on learners' lives, etc. The learning aim is to alert students to technology as a way of thinking, acting, proceeding - a form of practice - engaged by humans in all times and places, within the various spheres of their daily lives. Students should learn to think and act in 'technological' ways, just as they learn to think and act from aesthetic, moral, economic, scientific, and other points of view.

The school aims to provide a balance of activities across the four technology 'strands': activities which are relevant to learners' experiences, useful within their social milieu, provide opportunities for developing individual interests, extend learners' experiences, and make connections among the different subject areas. These in turn are intended to: promote abilities in problem solving and analysis; develop information processing and computing skills; build understanding of the role of science and technology in society, along with mastery of scientific and technological skills; foster understanding of and concern for balanced development and global environmental integrity; and develop a capacity to judge well in moral, ethical, and social justice matters.

With a teacher librarian from a neighbouring school and the region's learning technology project officer, Robert framed a careful sequence of skills and conceptual learnings designed to make optimal use of the school's learning technology resources. Since Abbotsdale has computers in every classroom it is possible to provide opportunities to master aspects of word processing (including keyboarding), desktop publishing, and data processing on a continuous sequential basis from Years 1 to 7, with activities in later years building on and maintaining practice in 'skills' acquired earlier. Aspects of information processing and communications needing specialised equipment and expertise - e.g., scanning, communicating via modems, etc. - are handled in classes where teachers have the necessary access - in Years 5 to 7. By maintaining and disseminating an up to date resource base, Robert ensures teachers are informed about what resources are available, so that they can plan their programs most effectively. The same process provides a basis for developing principled and strategic approaches to long term resource planning and purchasing.

Concepts and skills are related within the learning sequence. Opening files, changing fonts, manipulating graphics, and the like, are simultaneously skills and concepts. As such, they are to be acquired as far as possible within appropriate - natural and functional (Gee 1996) - contexts. Hence, learning to open and save files as an element of word processing might occur 'as part of [students'] day to day activities in English and other subjects' and not as 'a "technology" lesson on opening and saving files' (Abbotsdale Technology Policy: 6). The policy recommends a particular scope and sequence for acquiring concepts and skills in word processing and desktop publishing during Year 5.

It is suggested that in Year 5 Word Processing cover 'changing view', 'borders', 'finding text/replace', 'lists - bullets', and 'save as'. The suggested aspects for Desktop Publishing in Year 5 are 'adding/deleting pages', 'alignment of frames', 'borders', 'button bar', 'columns', 'DTP vs WP - differences', 'importing graphics', 'line widths', 'manipulating graphics', 'pasting graphics from clipboard', 'retrieve document', 'rulers', 'save document', 'text boxes/frames', 'text effects', 'text wrap', and 'tools'.

(b) Abbotsdale's language policy

Abbotsdale's language policy, expressed in its English Program statement, is based closely on the state's Years 1 - 10 English syllabus. Learning is based on a text-context model of language, according to which meaning is realised through purposefully constructed texts generated within functional contexts. Texts are conceived as being spoken, written, non-verbal, visual, or auditory in type. The relationship between text and context is understood in terms of cultural context and social context.

All language is seen to arise within activities called genres, which are engaged at the level of cultural context. Genres are described as falling into two broad categories: literary - comprising narrative and non narrative types; and non literary - encompassing transactional, report, and expository genres. The key point here, so far as language and literacy education is concerned, is that the particular generic activity one is engaged in at a given time calls for a particular kind/quality of language/text production. Language use is seen as being effective and appropriate to the extent that it conforms to generic conventions. Hence, the broad class of transactional genres, for example, includes activities which negotiate relationships, information, goods and services, and procedures. Such activities range, for instance, from greeting a person (a relationship genre of transaction), to buying and selling (a goods and services genre of transaction), to framing a questionnaire (an information genre of transaction), to providing instructions (a procedural genre of transaction). Language varies accordingly. To realise effectively and appropriately one's purposes in using language calls for 'getting the language right' (in generic terms).

At the same time, variables arising in the social context impact on language use at the level of register. Variations occur around three aspects: 'field' (which has to do with the subject matter); 'tenor' (which involves roles and relationships); and 'medium' (written, spoken, visual, etc.) and 'mode' (e.g., film, telephone, newspaper). At the level of field, language varies depending on whether, for example, one is communicating about people as opposed to things, or food as opposed to molecules. At the level of tenor, language will vary between, say, speaking to a 'superior' and speaking to a 'peer' or a 'subordinate', or between when one is operating in a formal or official capacity and when one is in a non formal setting. At the level of medium, spoken language, for example, varies from written language, and at the level of mode one's phone voice and language will vary from one's speech as a newsreader, public speaker, and so on.

Even at this level of generality it is easy to see how curriculum subjects other than English/language provide settings for learning, practising, and refining language use (e.g., producing a 'report' in science, relating 'facts' in social studies, etc.). Hence, teachers other than English/language teachers facilitate language learning; the multi-subject or cross-curriculum teacher functions in an important way as a language teacher as well as a subject teacher when s/he moves across timetable/subject slots.

Against this background, Abbotsdale identifies its language learning aims in terms of 'functional' and 'operational' aims. Its functional aim is to help students learn to use language effectively in order to participate as confident members of family and community, engage in further study, and take part in a range of recreational pursuits. Its operational aim is to develop students' abilities to produce and understand written and spoken English fluently, effectively, appropriately, and critically for a wide range of personal and social purposes.

The policy claims language is best developed through modelling and scaffolding, recognising individual learning styles and rates of learning, offering meaningful experiences across a range of genres, promoting positive attitudes toward language use through explicit celebration of students' language skills, valuing and building upon prior experiences and attainments, and valuing cultural, gender, class, physical, and intellectual diversity.

Three types of learning activity are to be planned in accordance with the characteristics and learning styles of the students, within three identifiable phases of language development. All types of activity and all phases of development should be taken into account and planned for in order to maximise independent control of language skills and understandings. The types of activity are called 'real life', 'life like', and 'focused learning episodes'. Real life activities involve exposure to genres and their embedded language uses in situ. Life like activities are classroom approximations to 'the real thing'. Focussed learning episodes involve detailed practice of specific elements of language use, such as drafting and redrafting a particular kind of text until it is produced 'properly'. The three phases seen as leading to independent control are an 'incidental' learning phase, an 'explicit' learning phase, and an 'extended' learning phase. Incidental learning usually involves prior exposure to a genre and its associated text types outside the formal planned teaching and learning setting. Classroom learning, in other words, should build on prior outside experience as far as possible. The explicit learning phase involves introductory and planned exposure to the object of learning. Extended learning will occur within and outside the planned learning setting. The teacher's role here is to help maintain the language, provide continued support, and present opportunities for extended focusing on skills and understandings.

4. The practice

(a) The human participants

Year 5 are twenty four energetic and mainly outgoing 11 to 12 year olds (11 girls and 13 boys). There is always energy, but never disruption in this class - although the same students prove capable of putting other teachers off their stride when they go for specialist subject instruction. No one child stands out as 'precociously able', and while some seem to struggle more than others, we find no evidence of students unable to stay in touch with their learning tasks. Similarly, while some are visibly more 'involved' in their learning than others, no child is significantly disengaged from the activities at hand. They come from low to lower-middle income families, with the median on the low income side. There are certainly no trappings of prosperity, let alone affluence, on display. Robert knows these students well - personally and experientially. His own social class origins, as the son of a labourer-janitor-groundsman-handyman, parallel in significant ways - albeit 30 years earlier - those of many of his students.

Robert is also very much at home with new technologies, having actively followed their evolution during the past two decades. The machines in his classroom originally had CPUs of 286 and 386. Replacing components, he has built them to 486 and 586 capacity, installed CD-ROM drives, and wired one to the Internet. He also troubleshoots other teachers' computer hassles, and oversees software acquisitions.

In a busy life revolving around a close-knit family, Robert also studies part time for his PhD, investigating the role of teachers and technologies in promoting development of higher order thinking skills in children with intellectual disabilities. In this work Robert draws on theories and research from the areas of constructivist perspectives in learning theory, development of self and beliefs about self, and principles and practices of inclusiveness, bringing them into conversation with theory and research concerning technology and computer applications in learning.

From time to time a Year 7 student, Amanda, attends class to act as a peer tutor for the Year 5 students when there are new 'skills' to be learned. Amanda first enrolled at Abbotsdale in Year 2, when the school introduced an inclusion program. She had been formally assessed as 'mildly to moderately intellectually disabled'. Reports indicate she found school a fearful place and withdrew - at times, to the point of total avoidance - from social interactions and many school tasks, especially those involving reading and writing. Although her reading had improved on arrival at Year 5, she still withdrew and avoided writing whenever she could, other than direct copying from books. She did, however, show keen interest in and facility with computers. Robert built on this, designing an individualised program for Amanda aimed at enabling her to develop a repertoire of language and literacy processes, understandings, and competences while she worked on computers. Robert hoped this program would also enhance Amanda's interactional skills, confidence, and personal esteem.

Activities and 'learnings' were carefully sequenced, beginning with 'games' type activities to build confidence in using basic commands, running programs, and turning the computer on and off. Then came introduction to technical features of desktop publishing software via a series of intensive tutoring sessions. These were organised into manageable chunks and deflected attention away from the text being produced collaboratively by Amanda and Robert - given Amanda's fear of writing with conventional tools. These sessions introduced a range of page borders and the notion of selecting borders to express particular ideas, and moved by degrees to experiment with colours, sounds, and scanned images in Amanda's final texts. These were used to present information relevant to the class and were displayed in the classroom and about the school.

Amanda soon became recognised by her classmates as an expert in desktop publishing, and her advice and help was sought regularly by other students. Robert formalised Amanda's expertise by coaching her in a number of peer tutoring strategies and having her run 'workshops' for groups of students during class time. Her ability to communicate with others, her attitude towards - and productivity in - reading, writing and viewing, speaking publicly, and her confidence in herself as a learner improved dramatically. By the end of Year 5, her reading abilities were ranked seven standard deviations above the norm for her class. When she moved to Years 6 and 7 Robert continued to use her regularly for peer tutoring work. In the 'snapshots' that follow, Amanda was responsible for teaching the Year 5 students how to use the desktop publishing software to design and produce posters and invitations, and how to use a scanner to import photographic images into texts.

(b) The non-human resources

The main material resources employed during the unit of work were:

- class sets of theme-based resource books on inventions and inventors, and other books held in the classroom

- structured printed worksheets, exercises, guidelines, etc., prepared by the teacher to guide independent and small group work

- the library

- 2 X 486 CPU desktop computers fitted with quad speed CD-ROM players

- a hand-held scanner

- 1 X 586 CPU desktop computer with Internet access and equipped with Netscape web browsing software

- a colour enabled Desk Jet printer

- a range of software including CD-ROMs (encyclopaedias, etc.); movie making and animation software; desk top publishing and word processing packages; graphics software; problem-solving and games-type software

(c) The immediate learning context

Robert's principal strategy for embedding new technologies in classroom language and literacy education is via a theme-based approach to cross-curriculum planning. During the period in which we observed the class, they were engaged in a unit of work on 'Inventions'. This involved a range of projects and tasks developed within and across different learning areas: English, Maths, Science, Music. Exploration of this theme was grounded in a kit of commercially produced classroom resources, but Robert supplemented these with computer software programs, reference books and, increasingly, Internet resources.

In keeping with Queensland P-10 English syllabus guidelines, the students produced individual written reports on an invention or an inventor as the major outcome for the unit of work. This was assessed by Robert who had provided careful guidelines making explicit the structure and content of the report genre (according to the English syllabus), and which scaffolded production of the report. The students also gave oral presentation of their reports, using artifacts they had produced as props for their presentations. The presentations were peer assessed as well as teacher assessed, Robert taking the peer assessment into account in his final evaluation. Students had to draw on explicit knowledge of the report genre to make informed assessments; hence, this aspect too was part of the learning process.

Within the larger context of producing reports, students produced an array of texts, notably, a 2-3 minute movie, a poster advertising the move, and an invitation to attend the movie premiere. In addition, they worked individually and in their small groups to generate a range of other texts integral to these larger productions: e.g., scripts for their movies, lists of criteria for effective posters, statements from different points of view where they looked at issues surrounding inventions and technologies from various perspectives (if this machine will increase production but eliminate jobs, how would you evaluate it from the standpoint of an employer, a displaced worker, etc?). Finally, a lot of oral discussion, conversation, summation, critique, and the like went on around the structured activities designed to stimulate and guide text productions.

The unit of work as a whole, then, comprised a complex array of integrated, interlocking, and interrelated text-based activities. These informed and built upon each other, culminating in the production of reports which drew upon the total range of texts produced.

(d) The modus operandi: 'rotations'

Robert used the pedagogical device of activity rotations to handle such themes. Large chunks of time were set aside each week during which small groups (3-6 students) moved through a cycle of activities and tasks in different spatial locations. Rotation-based work involved two 90 minute segments of time divided by a break. Each 90 minute segment was broken into three 30 minute blocks. Each block was devoted to a different kind of activity, typically drawing on different communications technologies. Reading theme-related materials (sometimes aloud to a teacher aide), for practice as well as for getting information relevant to their projects, accounted for one block. Working in groups with pen, paper, task sheets, pre-set tasks, and discussion, comprised a second block - and was often concerned with preparing ideas and components to be implemented at the computers. Work at computers made up the third block. Robert's plan was that during rotations the class would move through two complete sequences of activities, to maintain a rate of focused progress, ensure continuity, and provide integration of reading, writing, discussing, and computing activities. Following rotation sequences the class typically came together to discuss issues, problems, discoveries, etc.

(e) Some typical 'snapshots'

Sally and Kate sit at one computer. The 'Welcome' page for Microsoft's 3D Movie Maker program is playing a cheerful greeting. The girls seem unsure of how to enter the program, and James shows them how to locate their movie file and open it. The girls play through their movie - featuring an invention - until they reach the scene on which they are currently working. They consult the script overview they had written in previous rotation sessions and begin discussing character placement, actions and speech, background music and sound effects.

James returns to his group who is sitting on the floor looking through a stack of newspapers in search of news reports on inventions. When found, the reports will be analysed according to criteria based on the English syllabus context-text model of language use, and listed on a task sheet supplied by their teacher and discussed earlier as a whole class. James and Hank argue over whether the 'bubble house' described in one article is an invention or not.

Another group of students is engrossed by a software program that requires them to construct on-screen a 'working' apparatus that enables a ball to travel from point A to point B. They discuss possibilities, test out their ideas, and cheer when they add a successful component to their design.

Mark, Brendan and Liam sit at the third computer, which has an Internet connection, and use a search engine to locate invention-related sites. This is the first time this group has used the Internet, and Robert has supplied them with a task sheet requiring them to fill in particular information about the web page (e.g., its location or URL, the invention showcased, etc.). The group locates a comprehensive and well designed Japanese web site presenting a range of wacky inventions, including dusters for cat's feet so that the cat can clean your home while you're at work, a hat that incorporates a roll of toilet paper for dispensing 'tissues' to people with severe colds, and the like. While reading and laughing their way through the text, they comment on some of the syntax used and discuss with Robert whether or not the writer speaks English as a second language.

Other groups of students are variously engaged in practising for their upcoming oral presentation of their report on an invention, reading aloud to a teacher's aide, or working on independent projects (e.g., constructing an invention from found objects that will water both the plants and the gardener during hot afternoons).

At regular intervals the groups circle to the next activity.

During a second round of activities, a group of students are at the computer with the desktop publishing software. They are learning how to create text boxes, and insert text, graphics, and borders, in order to make posters advertising their movies, and personal invitations to attend the premiere. (As with the scripts and character development for their movies, the ideas and content for the posters and invitations have been discussed and mapped out during previous writing and discussion segments of the rotations. This conceptual work has been done with assistance from structured activities provided by Robert - worksheets and question prompts - pertaining to language features of the genres involved. Robert also fields questions as he movesabout the room. Many activities involved in the unit of work require students to reflect on their work by describing the processes they used to solve a difficulty encountered in, say, using 3-D Movie Maker, or to evaluate the pluses, minuses, and interesting aspects of a piece of software.) The group is being introduced to the desktop features by a gentle and unassuming Year 7 student, Amanda. Amanda patiently demonstrates how to perform needed functions, drawing on the students'existing knowledge of computing functions. One student sits at the computer, mastering the routines while aiming for the textual effects desired - with suggestions from the others on choice of fonts, borders, etc., and technical responses from Amanda when requested.

Meanwhile, other groups of students are variously engaged in searching through newspapers for reports on inventions which they will use to analyse the structure of the genre; practising for their upcoming oral presentation of their report on an invention or inventor; reading aloud to a teacher's aide; or working on independent projects (e.g., constructing an invention from found objects that will water both the plants and the gardener during hot afternoons). Robert circulates among the groups, monitoring their progress and providing advice or feedback when asked.

Robert's classroom practices are a mix of conventional - even quite traditional - and innovative, technologised approaches to teaching and learning. For example, the traditional 'morning news' session is still very much in evidence in this classroom, as is the longstanding practice of students delivering 'lecturettes' (now delivered as an 'oral report' to bring it into line with the content scope of the Queensland English syllabus). In addition to rotation sessions, Robert uses a variety of class grouping strategies (e.g., whole class, partners, large group, etc.) and content delivery strategies (e.g., organising for a local astronomer to set up his powerful telescope on night at school and inviting students and their parents along to participate).

While students clearly learn about technology in this class, greatest emphasis is placed on learning through or by means of the technologies available to them. This holds especially for aspects of language and literacy education in the class. Robert describes new technologies as providing new contexts in which to learn. He insists that the technologies in his classroom not become ends in themselves but, rather, that they be used to maximise learning and students' practice of 'higher order skills'. For example, while talking about the benefits of having Internet access in the classroom, Robert focuses on the time freed up by Internet research compared with time spent searching manually in local libraries. This extra time, in his opinion, can be used to develop students' report writing and information handling skills and processes, rather than squandered in the often labourious process of locating and collecting information from more conventional sources (e.g., school and local libraries, etc.). These skills and processes include evaluating the information gathered, synthesising data gathered from different sites, thinking about social implications and issues related to the area of investigation, extracting relevant data and working it into a particular genre for a particular purpose (e.g., an oral presentation to peers, etc.), then working on a computer to draft and polish the final text.

To meet English syllabus requirements, Robert carefully incorporates real-life and like-like learning opportunities and resources for his students into classroom language and literacy events. For example, life-like learning experiences are engaged when students are required to design and produce - using desktop publishing software - a poster advertising their movie and invitations to the movie's premiere in addition to constructing scripts for their group's movie made using Microsoft's 3-D Movie Maker software. In terms of making the genre of these text types explicit to students, Robert asks each group questions such as, 'What else will you need on the poster if it's telling people about the movie?', rather than simply telling students the conventional structures and content of the text. Such questions encourage students to think explicitly about the purpose of the text they are constructing and the audience for whom it is intended. Although no actual samples of movie posters seemed to be available within the classroom, movie-going or video watching is a popular pursuit in Foxton. In this set of activities, Robert clearly expected students to draw on their understandings of the real-life social and textual practices associated with movies.

The final posters for the students' animated movies suggested most students were able to produce texts providing enough information about the movie to stimulate interest. They included eye-catching and thematically appropriate graphics, were well set out and were highly readable. The posters were all distinctive, bearing the stamp of their creators. The students were proud of these posters and of the choices of language and images they had used by deliberate design 'to get people in' (Mark discussing the poster for his group's movie, Mr Mad Invents a Cab). Here the desktop publishing program clearly took a backseat to teacher and students focusing on the poster text, its purpose, and the social practices with which it is associated out-of-school.

Interestingly, there were no wall charts of technology-related instructions listing the steps to follow in creating, saving, opening files, how to import and edit graphics, or how to use different fonts effectively. Indeed, Robert has much to say against lessons that focus on technology at the expense of learning, creativity and exploration, and has ensured that the school's technology policy explicitly steers teachers away from lessons comprising 'how to make a file' or 'this is how you use the mouse'. This is not to say, however, that students are not taught about technology in his class. Nevertheless, technical sessions are deeply enmeshed within larger, more meaningful practices in the classroom - Amanda providing an elaborate case in point.

5. Distinctive features of the practice

a) Theory and practice

Practices in this Year 5 classroom were characterised by an emphasis on learning through technologies whilst learning about technologies. The pedagogy was strongly informed by theory. A mix of conventional - traditional, even - and innovative approaches to teaching and learning were employed to integrate use of computer technology into activities in a manner which was as 'invisible' and seamless as possible. Robert described new technologies as providing 'new contexts' in which to learn. He insisted that the technologies in his classroom not become ends in themselves. Instead, they were employed in ways designed to maximise learning in general, and the development and practice of 'higher order thinking skills' in particular. Classroom activities were scaffolded in a variety of ways. Some employed questions prompting students to reflect individually or in groups on a process or tool and/or to evaluate it (e.g., a piece of software, a reference book). Others employed guide sheets assisting students to work from cognitively simple knowledge (e.g., through literal content questions) to more complex understandings (e.g., through questions requiring students to evaluate, extrapolate, analyse and/or synthesise content and processes). These ways enacted Robert's constructivist theories of learning, and presented opportunities to experiment, explore, play, take risks, and solve problems using resources of more conventional and new technologies.

b) Motivation and independence: the logic of scaffolds

Discussing effective language and literacy teaching strategies, Robert emphasised the role of the teacher in helping students to become motivated and independent learners. 'Scaffolding' is a key concept in Robert's talk about his approach to teaching. His conception and practice of scaffolding enriches the 'teaching-learning' model championed in the Queensland English syllabus. The syllabus promotes demonstration, modelling, the provision of opportunities for collaborative and - later - independent work, and the like. Robert keeps learning outcomes to the fore and provides students with carefully sequenced tasks that repeatedly build on the already known yet also include aspects of 'higher level tasks' in ways that stretch and challenge the student's abilities to complete increasingly more sophisticated tasks (cf. Vygotsky's zone of proximal development; Anderson 1995: 19). In this way, Robert adds a cognitive dimension to the teaching-learning process that may well be underplayed in the English syllabus.

At the same time, Robert usefully tempers aspects of the English syllabus that promote making the structural and linguistic features of genres explicit to students. All too often this approach is reduced to a prescription for teaching text types in classrooms (Knobel and Lankshear 1995). In Robert's case, however, he either constructs a 'scaffold' or overview of a genre from whole-class discussions and student input, or provides students with a structural analysis of a text type and encourages them to explore - or, in his words, 'experiment with' - the ways in which this structure varies according to a person's purpose, audience, deadlines for completion, and so on.

Scaffolding is looking at the genre and examining its format or structure. It's also concerned with examining how this genre is most effectively presented by looking at how other people have effectively presented that particular genre. That's using shared knowledge - knowledge that's already available to the students. You really can't simply say to students, 'This is how biography is, and you must follow this format exactly'. Instead, you start by exploring the general format that most other people have used, and then let the students investigate other ways of doing it.

This approach to genres adds important cognitive dimensions to explorations of texts and the social practices with which they are enmeshed (cf., Moll 1992; Olson 1994).

c) A pedagogy of questioning

Robert actively cultivates a culture of inquiry, exploration and self-evaluation, encouraging students to be(come) self-motivated and successful learners. He explains his approach and emphases in terms of social constructivist theories of learning. Social constructivism calls for paying close attention to each learner's construction of knowledge, their schema for organising this knowledge, their existing and potential interests and motivations, and for providing scaffolded learning opportunities. Robert's theory of learning is especially evident in his 'pedagogy of questioning', where he scaffolds student learning through the questions he asks: questions which evoke responses requiring students to build on what they already know by means of extrapolation, synthesis, prediction, deduction, and so on.

Robert bolsters this pedagogy of questioning with overt expectation that students will be self-directed learners, increasingly independent of their teacher yet able to work collaboratively with peers. This principle is enacted in the rotation approach. Groups of students work independently for most of the time during these sessions, with Robert's work consisting largely of circulating among the groups, monitoring progress, encouraging students to reflect evaluatively upon their work, and helping to trouble-shoot problems when asked. In the latter role he mainly discusses the task with each group in the manner of a collaborator or onlooker, rather than as an instructor or final arbiter of meanings and products.

d) Meta matters

In all of this Robert focuses on developing students' meta-level understandings of problem-solving processes and strategies. Work using 3-D Movie Maker software is accompanied by task sheets requiring students to list and consider factors involved in producing an animated movie; reflecting on the various 'plus', 'minus', and 'interesting' things encountered while making the movie; describing ways the group solved specific problems; etc. This evaluative and analytic work extends to wider uses of technologies inside and outside classrooms. 'Point of view' exercises invite students to analyse and discuss the impact of technologies on consumption and employment. In addition, as noted above, students are required to evaluate their own and others' work with recourse to criteria sheets and checklists developed and compiled in class. These lists also, of course, serve as scaffolds for completing other teacher-set and self-directed tasks.

In many ways the P-10 English syllabus in Queensland aims precisely at promoting the kind of meta-level processes and understandings Robert addresses in his pedagogy. In terms of the state's language and literacy expectations, Robert overtly aims to address aspects of the five theoretical models underpinning the syllabus: namely, skills approaches; growth and development and process approaches; cultural heritage approaches; genre and functional grammar approaches; and critical literacy approaches to language and literacy. Robert adds a further layer to these approaches to knowledge and competence by embedding them in practices employing new technologies and explicitly coupling them with technological know-how.

e) A community of learners?

The English syllabus advocates development of a classroom culture that enlists teacher(s) and students (and other participants) as members of 'a community of learners' (DEQ 1994a; Freebody 1992). Abbotsdale's Year 5 class indeed operated very much as a community of learners, enacting a culture of collaboration within which the students exercised a lot of initiative. During small group and whole class sessions students regularly turned to each other for assistance, feedback, and advice: turning to Robert only when a problem or question proved beyond their own means. It was common during rotations to see a student break away from his or her own group/activity at the request of another and, for example, demonstrate how to access a given file or background scene within 3D Movie Maker, or help with identifying the genre of a particular text. Students were actively encouraged to display and share their expertise for mutual benefit. This was especially evident in peer tutoring sessions run by Amanda to introduce students to new software or hardware, and new applications of familiar software. Robert also actively encouraged collaborative approaches to problem solving through the kinds of activities he structured for students (e.g., pairs searching newspapers for reports; group productions of animated movies), and through his own involvement in shared activities (e.g., helping a student search the Internet and library for information on the Acropolis).

6. Issues

a) The whole story?: authenticity, apprenticeship and appropriation

Robert explains his teaching practice in terms of his commitment to social constructivist theories of learning. Our observations of Year 5 suggest there is indeed an impressive congruence between his theory and practice in this respect. We believe, however, that a complementary theoretical account can be provided which rounds out the case more fully.

The push in the Queensland English syllabus for including real-life and life-like activities in classroom language and literacy education, and for promoting language use as a focus of study echoes similar trends in research-based educational reform initiatives abroad: especially in circles within North America where a need for greater 'authenticity' in education is being asserted. Much of this is couched in terms of students 'owning' their work and, thereby, taking responsibility for their learning. Issues arise here.

In their account of what an 'authentic' classroom curriculum might look like, Shirley Heath and Milbrey McLaughlin (1994: 472) criticize classroom pedagogies which 'create "authenticity" artificially rather than study contextually authentic curricula - authentic to youth - in supportive organizational structures'. They argue that classroom educators can learn much from examining effective grass-roots organisations like the Girl Guides, Girls Club, and drama groups. These provide rich social contexts and opportunities for 'learning to learn for anything' everyday by means of '[cognitive and social] apprenticeship, peer learning, authentic tasks, skill-focused practices and real outcome measures', such as completed public projects, performances, displays and exhibitions (ibid.). Heath and McLaughlin believe these characteristic features of effective authentic learning converge in Barbara Rogoff's (1990; also Rogoff 1995) account of learning through sociocultural activity.

Rogoff advances three planes of analysis for interpreting and evaluating learning. These are apprenticeship, guided participation, and participatory appropriation. They correspond with community, interpersonal, and personal processes. While these planes are mutually constituting, interdependent and inseparable, identifying them individually enables particular aspects of a learning process to be brought into sharp focus for analytic purposes.

According to Rogoff, 'apprenticeship' operates within a plane of community and institutional activity and describes 'active individuals participating with others in culturally organized ways' (1995:142). The primary purpose of apprenticeship is to facilitate 'mature participation in the activity by less experienced people' (ibid.). Experts - who continue to develop and refine their expertise - and peers in the learning process are integral to Rogoff's account of apprenticeship (Rogoff 1995, p. 143). Both categories of participant find themselves 'engaging in activities with others of varying experience' and moving through cycles of learning, teaching, and practice (ibid.). Investigating and interpreting sociocultural apprenticeship focuses attention on the activity being learned (with its concomitant skills, processes, and content knowledge), and on its relationship with community practices and institutions - eschewing traditional conceptions of apprenticeship as an expert-novice dyad.

'Guided participation' encompasses 'processes and systems of involvement between people as they communicate and coordinate efforts while participating in culturally valued activity' (ibid.). It involves a range of interpersonal interactions. These include face-to-face interactions, side-by-side interactions (which are more frequent face-to-face interactions within everyday life), and other interactional arrangements where activities do not require everyone involved to be present. Hence, for Rogoff, 'guidance' is provided by 'cultural and social values, as well as [by] social partners' who may be local or distant (1995, p. 142; also Rogoff 1984).

'Participatory appropriation' refers to personal processes of ongoing and dynamic engagement with learning through socially contextualised and purposeful activities that ultimately transform the learner. Rogoff uses this concept to describe processes by which people 'transform their understanding of and responsibility for activities through their own participation' (Rogoff 1995, p. 150). Here analysis focuses on changes that learners undergo in gaining facility with an activity, as well as acceptable changes learners make to activities in the process of becoming 'experts', enabling them to engage with subsequent similar activities and their social meanings.

b) Application to Abbotsdale

Robert's Year 5 class is by no means a grass-roots youth organisation. It operates within institutional constraints not necessarily present within the youth group settings investigated by Heath and McLaughlin, or in the contexts researched by Rogoff. Nonetheless, 'apprenticeship' or 'learning to learn' work done within these original group learning contexts usefully informs our understanding of Year 5. Robert's students are not just learning content but, rather, are 'learning for'. His classroom operates more like a community of learners engaged in purposeful sociocultural activity than a class of individual students following individual, teacher-directed learning paths.

Communities of learners share contexts and purposes for learning. For Robert, computer technologies in the classroom provide 'new' contexts for learning. Students work collaboratively on computer-based tasks, negotiating how they will complete the task, discussing problems encountered, and generally seeming to respect each team member's contributions to group and whole class activities. Students are involved directly in learning from each other: through peer tutoring, negotiating task requirements, discussing and solving problems, and peer evaluation processes. Robert disavows 'transmission' approaches to teaching and learning.

Well, instead of, say, having a unit of work where you stand out the front and tell students the content and they either memorise it or complete activities or complete drill and practise software in that area, [I was attracted to the idea] of thinking about what students' interests were, and what their skill level was, and then to provide them with opportunities to explore the areas of knowledge that the units covered. As well as that, [it's important] to provide tasks that students could see would be worthwhile and to give some sort of scaffolding in the form of genres and processes that they can use. I found especially useful that idea that you just can't say to them, "Well, we're going to investigate Leonardo da Vinci" and then let them get on with it. (Robert, interview)

The learning tasks encountered daily in Year 5 also involve students with varying degrees of expertise collaboratively negotiating task requirements, solving problems, and producing worthwhile outcomes (mostly within the boundaries of the classroom).

With new technologies come also new genres and new opportunities for exploring and learning about the world. One student chose to study the Acropolis for his independent project. Very little information could be found in either the school or local libraries. The Ancient World CD-ROM contained barely a paragraph of information. As he recounted this event, Robert explained that in the past he has been forced to tell the student to abandon the search for information. This time, however, student and teacher keyed 'acropolis' into a search engine on the Internet. The first site they visited comprised a detailed black and white drawing of the Acropolis. Whenever the student clicked on a different part of the drawing, detailed information would appear about this part of the Acropolis; what it was used for, details about the construction, architecture and ornamentation, and the like. In such ways, new technologies in the Abbotsdale Year 5 classroom provide meaningful contexts in which learning can be embedded, as well as making available new genres to be explored and interacted with.

Furthermore, these technologies and the ways they are used in class provide Abbotsdale learners with contexts and opportunities for 'mature participation' in a range of useful processes and activities with real world applications (Rogoff 1995: 142). The adult-level software used daily in class ranged from Microsoft Publisher, which is used by countless numbers of small businesses and community groups to present and disseminate information, to Microsoft's 3-D Movie Maker, which requires sophisticated understandings of visual narratives, fluency in manipulating available program functions, and fine-tuned dexterity with the keyboard and mouse. Beyond mastering performative aspects, Robert's students were expected also to explore the capabilities of each software program and to share new knowledge or hints with classmates.

c) A qualification

With respect to 'authenticity', few 'real life' experiences or outcomes were observed in class. There were, however, plenty of connections between the tasks engaged in class and students' everyday lives, funds of knowledge and interests (cf. Moll 1992).

Like many school projects, the animated movie production is not a 'real-life' activity, in that students did not prepare their movies for an audience beyond the class. Even so, this activity is 'life-like' and builds purposefully on students' experiences out-of-school, providing them with a platform for considering genres and social practices associated with making movies. One student explained that working with the animation software wasn't simply about learning how to use the software. Rather, it was like learning how to make movies like 'professionals' do. Even if his analysis of movie making is somewhat oversimplified, the way he talked with his team mates, discussed options, and maintained a storyline of sorts using speech, images, movement and props, suggests he was making connections between his own movie and his understandings and experiences of 'real' movies and Hollywood.

(d) Apprenticeship, guided participation and participatory appropriation

In this classroom the roles of teacher, learner and collaborator were never static or fixed. At times Robert spends a lesson or two teaching a particular concept (e.g., news report genre, graphing) to students. At other times these concepts and processes become 'reference points' - particularly, where introducing new software is concerned. Students use each other as learning resources - exemplified by Amanda and the Year 5 students and, for example, when Sandra shows James how to access a particular inventor on the CD-ROM, or Andrea and Kathryn are overheard discussing how Jack could have improved his oral report presentation. There are strong resonances of Rogoff's description of apprenticeship here, with participants moving through cycles of activity, teaching and practice (cf. Rogoff 1995: 143).

Likewise, guided participation appears to be an organic component of the teaching-learning process here. Robert's focus on scaffolded learning ensures students are well-equipped with supported opportunities for learning and practising what they are learning. Support for learning takes a variety of forms, including networks of interactions occurring around each activity. These networks comprise students within each task group sitting near each other during whole class lessons, their teacher and other adults present in the classroom (such as parents, or experts - like the astronomer Robert invited to visit - who share their expertise with the students), other school personnel (e.g., librarians), as well as others from outside the school (such as Foxton librarians, parents, family friends, community members). We observed very little whole class work in Robert's classroom. Students generally worked in pairs or small groups, discussing, arguing, negotiating solutions to problems, evaluating strategies and outcomes, tabling information they had located and the like. This was especially evident in computer-mediated text production.

Once students appeared to have mastered the basic concepts or components of a process, task or genre, they were encouraged to experiment with it and explore how it could be changed in ways that made it more effective for a particular purpose. For example, after introducing students to the conventional generic structure and linguistic features of biographies - in keeping with English syllabus guidelines, Robert provided them with a range of printed and digital biographies and opportunities so they could play with the genre. While some students appeared to prefer conventional approaches to biography writing, others chose to blur genres (e.g., diary biographies) or experiment with narrating from different points of view, and so on.

Robert's practice of providing students with reference guides or sets of open-ended questions that help them structure their approach to completing a given task can also be seen in terms of guided participation. Robert produced a booklet that guided students through the process of researching and presenting an information report, a set of worksheets that asked students to analyse a task or activity (e.g., the 'Plus, Minus and Interesting things' and 'Consider All Factors' response sheets described earlier). As noted above, students evaluate the work of their peers using criteria developed from their suggestions as to what counts, for example, as an effective oral report (e.g., well researched, interesting, presenter varies voice and maintains eye contact, etc.). Robert encourages the students to use these reflections to inform their subsequent presentations. Most students delivered their presentations with poise and confidence, and experimented with the genre in interesting and effective ways. One student began her report on Zeppelins by greeting the class in German and introducing herself as a young girl who had seen the crash of the Hindenberg.

Given that we observed Abbotsdale's Year 5 classroom only intermittently over three months, it is difficult to claim that 'participatory appropriation' has occurred across all tasks and for all students. We can claim only that there appeared to be a lot of learning about and through language and literacy going on in this classroom, with students themselves taking major responsibility for much of it. Very little time was spent on behaviour management, and students appeared to know exactly what they were doing.

7. Implications

(i) The Abbotsdale case highlights the value of teachers informing their practice with mature and cogent theory. It is, we believe, no coincidence that Robert has been able to draw on the litany of approaches to language and literacy education that have flecked the Queensland primary education scene over the past two decades and integrate them into a coherent practice. He is, in fact, a teacher-researcher and a researcher-teacher: currently doing his PhD part time, subjecting his own classroom pedagogy to rigorous theorised scrutiny. At a time when teachers in the state are faced with a complicated hybridised English syllabus, much of which is informed by complex theory, saddled with ever-escalating assessment and reporting demands, and where the profession is beleaguered by widespread charges of failing to perform its role adequately, Robert never appeared pressured in his work.

(ii) Robert's work also benefits from his grounded familiarity with computer technologies. He has been around computers for a long time and understands their 'logic'. In an interview he told us of one 'computer' assembled by a friend which basically involved a motherboard attached to a piece of timber. The literal and metaphorical 'laying bare' the technology here, effectively demystifying it, provides a graphic illustration of how and why computers hold no impeding mysteries for him. Long years of working with computers, with lots of space for experimentation along the way, have brought the kind of fluent mastery of performance that James Gee (1996) associates with the mode of acquisition, as opposed to learning. As with becoming a fluent performer in any social practice - as indeed with fluent and proficient language and literacy performances themselves - there is no real substitute for extended immersion in 'mature' forms of social practices (Gee, Hull and Lankshear 1996) in which new technologies are organically embedded and deployed.

(iii) Robert practises sound principles of incremental change and building on proven foundations. When a unit of work 'works' effectively, he adds to it rather than moving on to largely new approaches. He says that the inventions unit works well for him, and so he will add new content to its basic format in the years ahead - keeping an eye to student interests and experiences; holding the 'core' intact, but making enough modifications to keep students engaged and to maintain his own interest. His social constructivist view of learning keeps him sensitive to the individuality of students, and alert to the demands of maintaining challenging and rewarding learning environments (DEQ 1994b).

(iv) Furthermore, Robert lives out his theory in his larger professional life. He participates in communities of practice beyond his immediate workplace, being an active member of the QSite computing network. He has also helped galvanise a community of learners and practitioners within his own home. The family has established a 'networked cyberoffice' and the children are actively involved in mastering a range of computer-mediated practices. His son, Jack, has produced a sophisticated and fascinating multi media presentation of the Simpsons, which we have described elsewhere (Knobel and Lankshear 1997). A daughter, Janet, has received an award in the US for her Web site based on her interest in guinea pigs . Within this context, Robert exemplifies the spirit of Seymour Papert's 'case of Joe' (Papert 1993: 65-66; also Lankshear and Knobel 1997: 154, see below). Having obtained Microsoft PowerPoint software, Robert passed it to Jack to work out how it operated and what could be done with it. Jack (and his peers at school) experimented with the program and produced his sophisticated Simpsons presentation - which he continues to modify and 'update'. By such means - without this being in any way the primary purpose - Robert can become au fait with new programs and applications without necessarily having to do all the work himself.

(v) Finally, Abbotsdale students benefit from the fact that the school's technology policy is coherent, comprehensive, and integrated with other policies - notably its language policy. As the main architect of the technology policy, Robert has been able to inform it not only with a mature theory of learning generally, but with a sophisticated understanding of language and literacy-related learning more specifically. He would be a highly competent language and literacy educator in the context of any technology. But, positioned as he is in relation to computer-based technologies, he is able to enhance his language and literacy teaching with informed technological expertise, just as he can enhance his technology-related teaching by coupling it to a sound approach to building language across the curriculum.

These capacities are, we believe, absolutely integral to viable notions of access and equity in relation to 'new' technology-mediated educational opportunities. As we have argued elsewhere (Knobel and Lankshear 1997), access is about much more than the physical availability of infrastructure alone. To have access on equitable terms to social practices mediated by new technologies has a lot to do with communities of learners being initiated into activities in the presence of genuine familiarity and expertise, where fluent performance can be acquired through immersion in practices with supportive guidance, structuring, explaining, and modelling by 'masterly' performers - and, of course, where opportunities exist for movement between roles as described by reference to the work of Rogoff.

8. Conclusion and recommendations

We are aware that there is a fine line involved in presenting such cases as Abbotsdale: between making informative and, even, inspirational cases available, on the one hand, and frightening off less experienced and less confident teachers by evoking a sense of the daunting prospects involved in 'getting up to speed', on the other hand. We believe, however, that what may appear daunting is not necessarily as 'out of reach' as may appear at first blush.

The important thing is to be well grounded in something, and for many teachers this may be a matter of building from a sound base in language and literacy theory and practice. Papert's 'case of Joe' is instructive here and worth repeating. Joe was faced with having to use the Logo program in class, and was fearful.

From the time the computers came I began to be afraid of the day my students would know more about programming than I ever will. Of course, at the beginning I had a big advantage. I came fresh from a summer workshop on Logo, and the students were just beginning. But during the year they were catching up. They were spending more time on it than I could. Actually, they didn't catch up the first year. But I knew that each year the children would know more because they would have had experience in previous grades. Besides, children are more in tune with computers than we grown-ups.

The first few times I noticed that the students had problems I couldn't even understand, let alone solve, I struggled to avoid facing the fact that I could not keep up my stance of knowing more than they did. I was afraid that giving it up would undermine my authority as a teacher. But the situation became worse. Eventually ... I said I didn't understand the problem - go discuss it with some of the others in the class who might be able to help. Which they did. And it turned out that together the kids could figure out a solution. Now the amazing thing is that what I was afraid of turned out to be a liberation. I had no longer to fear being exposed. I was. I no longer had to pretend ... I realized that my bluff was called for more than computers ... I could no longer pretend to know everything in other subjects as well. What a relief. It has changed my relationship with the children and with myself. My class has become much more of a collaborative community where we are all learning together (Papert 1993: 65-66).

We have seen in the case of Abbotsdale - and other examples are abundantly available elsewhere - that students themselves can assume powerful roles as 'experts' capable of apprenticing and guiding their peers and teachers within authentic communities of learners. There is much to be said for us as teachers becoming more like Joe, and drawing on funds of knowledge available elsewhere within their formal pedagogical settings in order to access expertise.

This, however, should not be seen as a licence for education systems to be(come) laggardly about their professional development responsibilities. Neither can the fact that access involves much more than mere physical availability of infrastructure be(come) a ground for administrations to hold back on preventing gaps in provision among schools from becoming unacceptably wide - especially given that for many students school remains the only place where they can get their hands on 'new' technologies.

That some learners have greater physical access to tools (or physical access to greater tools) than others inescapably sets up conditions for unequal opportunities and outcomes - especially when the tools in question are part and parcel of esteemed and rewarded social performances. As formal education becomes increasingly devolved to local levels, it becomes absolutely essential to establish guarantees that limit physical access differentials as far as possible. Anything less is socially unjust.

At the same time, mere technical proficiency accounts for rather little of the variation between the ways educators mobilise new technologies within language and literacy education. Even if technical training - i.e., training in applications and processes - were held constant, literacy events drawing on these technical proficiencies would vary greatly. We have known this for a long time in relation to other learning technologies but have failed to build the insight into inclusive and democratic educational practices. If anything, the current technicist fetish evident in language and literacy policy emphases are taking us in the opposite direction. Many current approaches to remediation, diagnosis, assessment, and reporting privilege code breaking and limited aspects of text participation over other essential dimensions of becoming successful readers (cf., Freebody 1992). This creates contexts in which different 'cultural capitals' and funds of knowledge can play out in ways that intensify unequal opportunities for access to social goods (Gee 1996; Lankshear 1996). Under such conditions, current demands for more professional development and inservicing are often under-informed, and betray a "magical consciousness" (Freire 1972) of the powers of training packages.

As with the issue of access, however, this does not mean holding back on demands for more and better professional development and inservice teacher education - or, for that matter, preservice teacher education! Quite the opposite. It means, rather, that we need to make better informed demands, and to meet these demands with better informed responses. This entails widening our focus on the issues surrounding the role and place of new technologies within education generally, and literacy education specifically. Apart from anything else, efforts to better prepare ourselves for integrating new technologies into successful and inclusive language and literacy education must include serious engagement with practices, theory, and research which identify and explain differences among 'ways with words and Windows' (Knobel and Lankshear 1997), and the social, economic, and cultural legacies of these differences under present conditions.

References:

Anderson, N. (1995). When Technology and Equity Become Partners. Wide Bay, Queensland: SPSS Regional Project.

Curriculum Corporation (1994). A Statement on English for Australian Schools. Carlton, Vic.: Curriculum Corporation.

Department of Education, Queensland (DEQ) (1994a). English in Years 1 to 10 Queensland Syllabus Materials: Syllabus for Years 1 to 10. Brisbane: Department of Education.

Department of Education, Queensland (DEQ) (1994b). Principles of Effective Learning and Teaching. Brisbane: Department of Education

Freebody, P. (1992) A socio-cultural approach: Resourcing four roles as a literacy learner. In A. Watson and A. Badenhop (eds) Prevention of Reading Failure. Sydney: Ashton Scholastic, 48-60

Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Gee, J. P. (1996). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. 2nd edition. London: Taylor & Francis.

Gee, J. P., Hull, G. and Lankshear, C. (1996). The New Work Order: Behind the Language of the New Capitalism. Sydney and Boulder, CO.: Allen & Unwin and Wesyview Press.

Health, S. B. and McLaughlin, M. (1994). Learning for anything everyday. Journal of Curriculum Studies 24 (3): 471-489.

Knobel, M. and Lankshear, C. (1995). Learning Genres: Prospects for Empowerment. Brisbane: National Language and Literacy Institute of Australia, Queensland ESL/Child Literacy Node.

Knobel, M. and Lankshear, C. (1997). Ways with Windows: what different people do with the same equipment. Invited Keynote Address to Australian Literacy Educators' Association National Conference. Conference Proceedings. Darwin: ALEA.

Lankshear, C. (1996). New times, old ways: will we miss the literacies boat to the new millennium? Invited Public Lecture: Winter Lecture Series. Melbourne: Melbourne University Faculty of Education.

Lankshear, C. (1997). Changing Literacies. Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (1997). Literacies, texts and difference in the electronic age. In C. Lankshear, Changing Literacies. Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press, 133-63.

Moll, L. (1992). Literacy research in community and classrooms: a sociocultural approach. In R. Beach, J. Green, M. Kamil and T. Shanahan (eds) Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Literacy Research. Urbana: NCRE/NCTE, 211-44.

Olson, D. (1994). The World on Paper: The Conceptual and Cognitive Implications of Writing and Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Papert, S. (1993). The Children's Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. New York: HarperCollins.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, apprenticeship. In J. Wertsch, P. Del Rio and A. Alvarez (Eds), Sociocultural Studies of Mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.