ID Meets IT Part 9: MOST Learning Environments

On reading Bransford's article about Multimedia environments that Organize and Support Text (MOST), I found it discouraging to realize how little progress we've made in the past 20 years in adapting technology to support the natural reading process of our struggling learners. I've recently worked for several years in a Title I school with a disproportionate number of disadvantaged students, many of whom had reading problems described by Bransford et. al, and who are also subjected to the same decontextualized drills mentioned in the article. What has changed since Bransford's time, however, is that these drills are now packaged and sold as popular "standards-based" software programs (read: isolated practice of basic skills), and this form of remedial instruction is now delivered by computers instead of skilled professionals. The problem with this is best summarized by this excerpt:

Overall, at-risk students receive repetitive instruction on things they do not know—instruction that does not allow them to utilize the rich sources of everyday knowledge that they bring to the classroom (e.g., Palincsar & Klenk, 1991). Knapp and Thrnbull (1990) argued that typical instruction for at-risk students tends to:

• underestimate what disadvantaged students are capable of doing;
• postpone more challenging and interesting work for too long—in some cases, forever; and
• deprive students of a meaningful or motivating context for learning or using skills that are taught.

The solution to this deficit driven approach proposed by Bransford et al. is a little counterintuitive at first glance. Rather than focusing on traditional approaches using oral and written language, the MOST models makes use of "multimedia technologies that allow the interaction of print and oral language with video and audio media." The following passage, short yet powerful, pinpoints the shortcomings of traditional instruction in closing the language gap between at-risk students and their peers: 

Because they are less likely than their developmentally average or advanced peers to understand all the vocabulary used by their teachers and story authors, they are less likely to benefit from purely verbal descriptions of background information, which could help their subsequent comprehension.

The authors argue that the incorporation of multimedia elements not only facilitates the process of conceptual and language development, but the process of learning to read as well.  Unlike the previous models examined, the MOST model provide little in the way of prescriptive practices to be followed by teachers. However, based on a list of features provided by Bransford, it's apparent that the increasing ubiquity of educational technologies in classrooms may already be supporting the inclusion of MOST environments. My elementary school, for example, was fortunate to be provided with a SMART Board for each classroom and this tool alone has done an impressive job supporting MOST environments for the typical classroom teacher. I've know several teachers who have created slideshows with images and video clips to support both narrative and non-fiction texts. At the elementary level, myself and several other teachers have incorporated multimedia infused literature through the use of animated storybooks from sites like Tublebooks. My wife has also used sites like Starfall to embed phonemic awareness activities within the context of a story. Although, these examples are limited, I do believe they demonstrate how even within a traditional classroom setting, tools such as the SMART Board can facilitate the incorporation of multimedia elements to support instruction.

As appealing as the MOST environment is, I see several barriers to widespread and rapid adoption of this approach. The first rests on an assumption brought up by Bransford and one I've seen with a strong foothold among the teachers I've worked with over the years. The assumption is that skills development, including those required for reading, must follow a strict hierarchy from "the basics" to "higher-order thinking". When translated into curriculum, this means that teachers will work with students on basic skill mastery before progressing activities that require more complex thinking, i.e. authentic and likely more engaging activities. Unfortunately, struggling students may spend disproportionate lengths of time working on "the basics" and, as I tend to agree with Bransford, this emphasis on can create misconceptions about the goals of reading, and ultimately turn them off to it altogether is they see books as simply "something you look at and say the words." Another barrier I see to this approach, though I believe there is a misguided logic behind it, is that since reading is achievement is measured entirely through short passages silently read, the MOST model may be seen as technological crutch that students will not be able to rely on when it come time to take the big test. Finally, there is a problem I mentioned in a previous post, and one I feel applies here as well. Designing media rich lessons is beyond the reach of many teachers, and even for the tech savvy teachers it would still be a time consuming process. Perhaps because of the reasons mentioned above, prepacked software programs that focus on isolated skills have become so appealing.

However, I do believe their is hope. While print-based literacy skills and literature will, and should, still have place in contemporary society, much of our print-based environments are already migrating to multimedia ones via the web. Although they require a new set of skills, they are also capable of supporting traditional ones. Reading the news online is not only a potentially more dynamic experience, with embedded video and photo galleries to accompany articles, but is also becoming increasingly common. And the advent of mobile computing through smartphones and tablet devices such the iPad, has made available a countless array of educational apps and storybooks that extend the reading experience beyond static text, allowing not only the support of multimedia elements, but also the creation of products that allow readers and learners to extend the reading experience and connect with others.  Hopefully, with the increasing presence of multimedia environments and rise of mobile computing devices, I think that schools will begin to recognize that our educational standards need to reflect these new literacies and prepare our students, especially for those at risk, to learn from them and with them. Otherwise, I fear, the language gap discussed by Bransford will also be joined by a widening digital divide.


Bransford, J. D., Sharp, D. M., Vye, N. J., Goldman, S. R., Hasselbring, T. S., Goin, L., O'Banion, K., Livernois, J., Saul, E., & the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1996). MOST Environments for accelerating literacy development. In S. Vosniadou, E. DeCorte, R. Glaser, & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 223-255). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.