I’m glad to be back at my keyboard after handwriting the first part of this activity. In my everyday life, I both write by hand and use my laptop for typing, depending on the task. For any written work that needs to be submitted or read by others, I turn to my laptop and type it. For lesson planning and note taking, I use my iPad and Apple pencil to write by hand with the advantage that it is already digitalized and easy to manipulate. I enjoy that Goodnotes, the app I use on my iPad for lesson planning, spell-checks my handwritten notes and allows me to copy and paste and move chunks of my printing around.
Although I didn’t find this task difficult, I noticed that I needed to exercise a lot of focus, which was a lot slower than typing 500 words. It took me about an hour to complete the writing. It was considerably slower because I was not only thinking about what I would write but also concentrating more on the spelling, grammar and the actual act of forming the letters. When I type, I quickly get my thoughts out and then go back to fix spelling and grammar, usually with the assistance of the program I am typing in. There is no concern about making a mistake and being unable to fix it. Being out of practice with cursive, I found my hand cramping up, and by the end, I really needed to concentrate on fine motor movements.
In terms of editing, I’ll admit I did have a draft to organize my thoughts and ensure I had everything the way I wanted. The most common mistake I made for this copy was the formation of letters, particularly n and m. To fix mistakes, I used a blue pen eraser (a tool that lifts ink from the page) to correct errors before rewriting over them.
After completing this task, I started questioning how the means of producing text influence thought processes and learning. With handwriting, I think before I write, but with typing, it almost happens simultaneously, and when I am done typing, I go back and refine my thinking. I am not sure which is better, but perhaps it depends on the purpose of the activity. There is something to be said about how writing legibility with pen and paper slows down the process. It could be argued that this is beneficial for thinking, forcing the writer to take the time and be more careful with their thinking. However, at the same time, typing, if you are proficient at it, allows for a fast, non-stop flow of thought that can later be easily edited.
As I reflected on the cognitive aspects of handwriting vs. typing, I came across some interesting research that sheds light on how these two processes engage the brain differently. The experiment used EEG data from 36 university students under two conditions – writing words in cursive or typing the words. It was found “that whenever handwriting movements are included as a learning strategy, more of the brain gets stimulated, resulting in the formation of more complex neural network connectivity. It appears that the movements related to typewriting do not activate these connectivity networks the same way that handwriting does” (Weel et al., 2023, p. 7). As a primary teacher interested in the science of learning, these findings are incredibly relevant to my teaching practices.
References: Van der Weel, F R Ruud, & Van der Meer, Audrey L H. (2023). Handwriting but not typewriting leads to widespread brain connectivity: A high-density EEG study with implications for the classroom. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1219945-1219945. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1219945
I created the output for this voice to text task on Seesaw, an learning portfolio application that I use with my students. I created a journal entry through the Seesaw app on my iPad that uses Apple’s speech to text functionality.
A couple of summers ago I had a really scary experience. There was a large group of us probably between 12 and 15 people who were side-by-side and quitting and dirt biking back into a remote area to go fishing for the day we travelled for probably an hour and a half to two hours stopping for a quick lunch when we finally came to the spot that we were looking for it was a deep fishing hole with, a stream on either side of it as soon as we arrived, my son decided that he was going to head off to the other side to fish off the bank. Everyone else was getting up getting lawn chairs out find a fishing gear, but Sheldon had already had out to the other side , he gets to the other side and steps up onto the land. I noticed that a bear was in the bush and had stood up on two legs was about 12 m away from the bear and the bear hadn’t noticed my son yet so and I was so in shock that I couldn’t even get the word bear out of my mouth all I could do was in a quiet voice say Sheldon back up Sheldon back up , I knew exactly what I how I wanted this to play in my hat. I wanted Sheldon to slowly back away get back on this side of the water and for the bear to not even notice him however shot and looked at me like I was crazy and like what And then someone from the group finally finally saw the bear and said Bear and Sheldon started to back away without panicking, however instead of running away as we expected Bear to do dropped down all four and started centring towards my son at this point someone in the group yells run and Sheldon drops his fishing gear into the water and gets turned around and starts running the best he can in waste deep water Away start to walk towards the Bear because we don’t know how this is all gonna play it. I was freaking out. I picked up a rock not sure what it was gonna do with. It didn’t know what was gonna happen. Someone in the group airhorn and blast that off and it enough that he changes course and takes off running into the forest , my son seemed to the whole experience saying it was no big deal. However it is changed the way that I feel about being in the forest forever. I was never afraid of bears before. I always thought that they would leave us alone every time we go hiking or camping , I am that person who is terrified that we are going to come across the bear
How does the text deviate from conventions of written English?
This text was created using the dictation feature on my iPad. I noticed that it attempted to include some punctuation and even adjusted as I spoke. However, it missed several places where there should have been commas or periods. Additionally, it didn’t include quotation marks around direct speech. For example, it should have read, “Sheldon, back up, Sheldon, back up.” The structural organization is also lacking due to the absence of paragraphs.
What is “wrong” in the text? What is “right”?
There are many places in this text where things don’t make sense. It doesn’t reflect exactly what I said. For example, quitting should have been quadding, had out should have been headed out, play in my hat should have been play out in my head, and centring should have been sauntering. Some of these “mistakes” are so drastic that it might be hard for a reader to figure out what was actually meant. For instance, where it reads, “…even notice him however shot and looked at me …” it should be: “…even notice him. However, Sheldon looked at me …”
Additionally, there are missing words, such as get up which should be getting set up, and the phrase my son seemed to the whole experience is missing the word indifferent, which is crucial to the story. Some words are also misspelled in context; for example, waste should have been waist.
What’s right, however, is that there are no outright spelling mistakes—the technology correctly spells all the words it thinks it hears.
What are the most common “mistakes” in the text and why do you consider them “mistakes”?
The most common mistake in this text is the lack of periods and commas. These are mistakes because the absence of punctuation affects the flow of the text. It doesn’t reflect how I spoke the words, and it makes it harder for the reader to break the information into manageable chunks. This, in turn, negatively impacts readability and comprehension.
What if you had “scripted” the story? What difference might that have made?
If I had scripted the story, I probably would have spoken more slowly and with greater emphasis on each word. Instead of focusing on what I was going to say next, I would have paid more attention to speaking each word clearly. This might have made the text more accurate, but I still think it would have been far from perfect.
A scripted version would likely have been more thought out and organized. There would have been more details, and I’d probably have used more adjectives and adverbs. I would have taken time to carefully consider each word choice and thought about which phrasing sounded best.
In a way, oral storytelling also follows this process: as a story is told repeatedly, it can improve, much like how written work is edited before being shared. The key difference is that with oral storytelling, the improvement comes through spoken repetition, while written work can be edited silently.
In what ways does oral storytelling differ from written storytelling?
Oral storytelling is an art form in itself. Storytellers possess a unique talent to captivate audiences and pass on knowledge. However, it is inherently inconsistent—each telling can vary slightly. As Ong notes when discussing oral cultures, “They can tell you the story accurately, they can use formulas, but every time they tell it, it’ll be a little bit different” (Abe Adound, 2014, 2:54).
In contrast, written storytelling tends to be more consistent. While it allows for more precision, it can lack the tone, cadence, and tempo that oral storytelling naturally enables. This is especially true when written by less experienced storytellers who may not focus on the rhythm and flow of their words.
Lera Boroditsky’s SAR lecture from May 2017 was fascinating and thought-provoking, prompting numerous connections to my own experiences and ideas. She begins (00:35) with a powerful image—language as a ‘magical’ ability unique to humans. This struck me immediately, especially as she explained how language allows us to plant ideas in one another’s minds. For me, this concept resonated deeply with my role as a teacher. The words I choose in the classroom are not just communication tools; they are seeds that can shape how students think and view the world. I reflected on my responsibility to use language thoughtfully, knowing that it can either nurture or limit a student’s ability to think critically and creatively. As I watched the rest of the presentation, I continued to make connections mostly with my teaching experience.
At the 11:18 mark, Boroditsky discusses how different languages organize time. She shares an example from the Aymara people of the Andes, who view the past as in front of them and the future as behind them. This perspective is grounded in the idea that the past is known and the future is unknown. I found this notion compelling. It made sense—yet, of course, I had never considered it, likely because my own language shapes my thinking. In English, we say ‘looking back’ when referring to the past and ‘looking forward’ when discussing the future. These expressions have shaped my perception of time to such an extent that I never imagined an alternative way of thinking about it.
All the talk about how different languages organize time led me to reflect on a change I made in my classroom a few years ago—one that relates to how we perceive information and the language we use. The hundred chart is a common tool for developing early numeracy skills, particularly in grades K-2. In most classrooms, the chart looks like this (Figure 1), where students learn to see patterns, such as counting by 2s, 5s, and 10s, and to explore math concepts like ‘one more/one less’ and ‘ten more/ten less.’
Figure 1
A Typical Hundred Chart
However, there is a problem when students use directional language in relation to the chart. For example, if a student is asked to add 10 more while pointing to 46 on a typical hundred chart, they would move their finger down the chart to land on 56. While the number is increasing, the visual movement on the chart contradicts the language—’ up’ for increasing and ‘down’ for decreasing—which can create confusion. This ‘directional conflict’ can be especially problematic for students with disabilities (Randolph & Jeffres, 1974, p. 203, as cited in Bay-Williams & Gletcher, 2017). In response, I began using a bottom-up version of the hundred chart (Figure 2).
Figure 2
A Bottom-Up Hundred Chart
Now, when students talk about adding 10 more, they move their finger ‘up’ the chart, and the language matches the movement—’ going up’ corresponds with the number value increasing. Bay-Williams & Gletcher (2017) suggest that this alignment between language and visual representation helps students more easily grasp concepts of ‘more’ and ‘less.’ This change has made a noticeable difference in my classroom. By matching the directional language to the chart’s visual movement, students gain a better understanding of mathematical concepts. And while this solution works well for English speakers, it highlights how language plays a crucial role in shaping our cognitive processes. For example, in right-to-left languages, a different hundred chart orientation would be necessary to align with their directional language. This reinforces the idea that language influences not just communication but the way we think and understand the world around us.
Boroditsky says that “the kind of language that swims around you, the grammatical forms that swim around you and that are in your environment change what you attend to, even when you’re looking at new events, unrelated to what you’ve just been hearing about” (SAR, 2017, 33:52). In this example, Boroditsky is referring to test subjects identifying who committed an act, with their perceptions shaped by the grammatical structure of the language they had been exposed to prior to the experiment. However, this also resonated with me in terms of the power teachers wield. The words I choose, the order in which I say them, and even my tone may influence what my students focus on and how they interpret information. It’s mind-blowing to consider the extent of that impact.
At the 34:05 mark, the conversation shifts to the language of counting and numbers, which is something I have often thought about. In grade 2, the expectations for students jump drastically—from knowing numbers 1 to 20 to knowing numbers 1 to 100. This is a huge leap, and it has caused me to wonder how other languages handle counting. The only other language I am somewhat familiar with is French, and I have wondered if the French approach to numbers over 50 allows French students to have a better, worse, or the same number sense of numbers between 50 and 100. When counting in French, understanding the computation behind larger numbers is essential. For instance, the number seventy-two is translated as “soixante-douze” (sixty-twelve), making me wonder whether this method helps French speakers develop better number sense.
Additionally, in my experience teaching grade 1 students to count between 11 and 20, I’ve often felt that there should be a better system. Numbers 11 and 12 are especially tricky, 13-15 are slightly easier, but even 16-19 present challenges. What exactly is a “teen”? Why don’t we have a counting system that works more like “10-1, 10-2, 10-3” to help students build a clearer understanding of numbers 11-19? Schiltz et al. (2024) discuss this in terms of “the transparency of the number system of a particular language (e.g., in Russian’ ‘one-ten’ for ’11’ is transparent, while “eleven” in English is not)” (p. 2416). From my experience teaching grade 1 students, I have found that the English words for 11 to 19 make numerical thinking more challenging for young students. I suspect that Russian-speaking students, with their more transparent system, might develop number sense more easily.
At 42:47 in the recording, Boroditsky explains one method of researching for causality between language and thinking. This process involves training people to speak in new ways and then observing changes in their thinking. I find this idea fascinating, and it reminds me of the work I do with my students around growth mindset language. Instead of letting a child say, “I can’t do that,” I encourage them to say, “I am still working on learning how to do this,” or “I can’t do this yet.” To help emphasize the power of the word “yet,” I use the picture book The Magical Yet by Angela DiTerlizzi. This book introduces students to “a most amazing thought rearrange-er” (DiTerlizzi & Alvarez, 2020, p. 8)—the magical creature known as The Magical Yet. The story shows how language can change how we think, or as the book puts it, how it can act as a “thought rearranger-er.”
During the Q&A session, Boroditsky responds to a question from the audience about whether teaching literature can enhance brain development. The answer given by Boroditsky is that “there’s some suggestion that reading fiction improves your theory of mind, so theory of mind is this ability to read other people’s minds and infer their intentions and think about what it is they might be thinking” (SAR, 2017, 53:32). This was an intriguing concept for me to hear. As an elementary teacher, I practice this every day. I read to my students, and we discuss the characters’ emotions and motivations. Although research on this is still in its early stages, hearing Boroditsky’s statement reinforced just how powerful literature can be.
Although not in chronological order, I have saved what I think is the most powerful statement of the talk for the end. At the 18:38 mark, Boroditsky states, “Language has this causal power. You can change how people think by changing how they talk” (SAR, 2017). This is the key takeaway, and as an elementary educator, I find it extremely profound and encouraging.
DiTerlizzi, A., & Alvarez, L. (2020). The magical yet (First ed.). Disney-Hyperion.
SAR School for Advanced Research. (2017, June 7). Lera Boroditsky, how the languages we speak shape the ways we think [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGuuHwbuQOg
Schiltz, C., Lachelin, R., Hilger, V., & Marinova, M. (2024). Thinking about numbers in different tongues: An overview of the influences of multilingualism on numerical and mathematical competencies. Psychological Research, 88(8), 2416-2431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01997-y
Welcome! I’m so excited to be starting this journey into ETEC 540 with you. My name is Natalie Keizer, and I live in northern BC where I teach grades one and two. This is my ninth MET course.
I’ve taken a picture of the contents of my daily backpack, which moves between sitting by my desk at home and by my desk at school
What is your daily need for the items in your bag?
Items in this bag can be categorized into two groups, things I use every day and things I carry just in case I need them.
Things that come out of the bag every day:
Macbook and charger (missing from photo) – I use this every day in teaching; starting in the morning, student attendance is sent to the office electronically. Throughout the day, student learning is enhanced with images and videos facilitated by using my Macbook. Lesson planning and resources are found and stored here as well.
iPad and Apple Pencil – I also use these every day. I take notes and present lessons with my iPad.
UFLI Manual – University of Flordia Literacy Institute. This resource is used daily to deliver research-based systematic phonics instruction to my students. I pack it back and forth between home and school for planning and prepping purposes. I wish there was a digital version of the manual, as it is relatively bulky.
Daily Canadian Math Worksheets – This work gets completed and checked daily. Students are learning to review the previous day’s work and learn from any errors they made.
Things that I carry in case I need them:
Advil – I teach grades one and two; I think this one is pretty self-explanatory.
Halls Relief Cherry Flavour Lozenges – Teachers never know when they will lose their voice, feel a coughing fit coming on, or start coming down with the inevitable cold and flu.
External Hard Drive – I keep a backup of all my resources. Better safe than sorry.
Rechargeable Hand Warmers – Teaching in northern BC, we go outside for recess and lunch as long as it is not colder than -20°C, so I need a way to stay warm. Missing from my bag are my toque, mitts and snow pants, which I keep at school.
Equate Ultra Soft Lens Wipes – Although I have glasses, I wear my contacts at school. I keep these in my bag for my students who have glasses.
*There is also the drawing that a student gave me the other day, which is an outlier and doesn’t really fit into either of these categories.
How might these items be considered “texts” and what do they say about you, the places you inhabit, the cultures with which you engage, and/or the activities you take up?
Many of the items in my bag can be considered “text.” The UFLI manual is literally text but also creates future readers by helping them create meaning out of the weird symbols that we call graphemes, written symbols that represent a sound. Text is only possible because we have readers; someone needs to interpret it to give it meaning. The students’ work and the drawing from the student show how text develops through the years and how students progress as they interact with text. If you were to compare student work from September to January, you would see how students become more confident with text after repeated exposure. The items in my bag speak to my role as an educator. Anyone who explored my MacBook or iPad would see my dedication to teaching young students and facilitating their engagement with text.
Thinking about the title of the course, what are the “text technologies” in your bag, if any? What do these items say about how you engage with language and communication?
My Macbook and iPad are two key “text technologies” in my bag. They not only allow me to view the text of others to get ideas about teaching, but they also allow me to create my own text in the form of lesson plans, notes, TTOC plans, emails to colleagues and parents, and more. In my view, these tools have significantly improved my language and communication skills.
Text technologies like Grammarly and ChatGPT, accessed on the devices in my bag, have been particularly helpful in refining the messages I want to communicate. Applications such as email and Seesaw have revolutionized how I communicate with parents. When I reflect on my own elementary school experience, my parents had very little contact with my teachers. In contrast, today, if a student is going to be absent, parents can email me directly, and I can quickly send them the work their child will miss. I also maintain a class website and send out a weekly newsletter using Canvas to keep parents informed about what’s happening in class.
While some educators argue that this level of communication blurs the work-life boundary and leads to expectations of constant availability, I strive to keep communication with parents open. I believe it’s important to be as helpful as possible, especially when parents are actively invested in their child’s learning.
The lack of notebooks or writing utensils also shows my reliance on digital technologies for text communication. I was in a meeting the other day, and someone asked, You didn’t bring a pencil?” almost in shock, and they were ready to provide me with paper and pencil. I had to explain that I would write it all down on my iPad.
What do the items in your bag say about the literacies you have?
The items in my bag show that I have strong digital and technical literacy skills and also point toward strong educational literacy. I use the devices in my bag to facilitate my teaching and foster communication and engagement with students and their families.
How does the narrative of the (private) contents of your bag compare with the narrative produced by the image you have of yourself or the image you outwardly project?
I think the contents of my bag align well with the image I project outwardly. The other teachers at my school tease me for always being the go-to person when they have technology issues. Last month, there was a security scare at the school, and when the principal was telling everyone at a meeting, she mentioned the VPN and then said, “I don’t know what that is.” I piped up and told them, and they jokingly rolled their eyes and said, “Of course, Natalie knows that.”
I also pride myself on being prepared and organized; I think the items in my bag reflect that. Although thinking about it more, maybe I should add a notebook and pen, just in case someone else needs it.
What would this same bag have looked like, say, 15 or 25 years ago?
Fifteen years ago, my bag would have looked very different. At that time, I was not teaching and had three children under the age of five. My bag would have been filled with diapers, formula, changes of clothes, wipes and snacks.
Twenty-five years ago, I was in the final year of my education degree at Acadia University. My bag would have contained a much heavier laptop—a bulky IBM Thinkpad. I would also have had an ethernet cable and a telephone cable to connect to the internet. In addition, there would have been binders, pens, and textbooks.
How do you imagine an archeologist aiming to understand this temporal period might view the contents of your bag many years in the future?
This is a tricky question because how an archaeologist views the contents of my bag would depend mainly on what the future holds. Have communication needs led to the development of tools so advanced that our current technologies have become obsolete? Would the laptop and tablet still be operational, or would all that text be lost forever?
Another question is whether we are still reading text in the same way. With the rapid advancement of AI and potential changes in literacy practices, it’s hard to know for sure. If reading remains the same, the student work and the UFLI manual would offer some insight into how we taught our youth. However, it would only provide part of the picture, as instructional methods vary widely from one classroom to the next.
