Kids feel bored learning how to type

Hello,

My Prep students (age 5-6 years old) get bored easily during Computer Lab time, where they learn how to type using the software called "Type To learn". I found out that even though it's very simple and combined with various typing games, the kids would easily feel bored and it doesn't seem to excite them. Can anybody please give some inputs, I'd be glad to hear from you guys

Thanks :)

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Andrew Robitaille on May 26, 2008 at 6:05am

I successfully taught keyboarding skills to Australian 1st grade students (age 6-7). They knew their letters by then. The key to the success was to take it slow and to practice in short increments. Add variety to the lessons. I would frequently do different kind of typing lessons, incorporating typing software, websites, games and even a blank word processor page. I spent six months on the home row alone. (I only saw the students once per week.) This enabled them to get a solid foundation on the home row before moving onto other letters. They were confident typists by the time we moved to the top and bottom rows. We only typed for about 5 minutes each lesson. Sure, some of the students still got bored with it, but most of them persisted well because they knew the typing component of my lesson was reasonably short. Do everything you can to make it fun and to add variety to it. Oh, and by the way, Typershark was a huge hit with them!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian Love on May 27, 2008 at 8:22am

We use the Type to Learn Software in my school district, I reward kids with keys from old keyboards when they earn a certain percentage on each mission. I agree with Karen regarding BBC's Dance Mat Typing, my kids like it alot. I've also used SuperHyperSpiderTyper from Funschool. I think they key is to vary how you teach these concepts.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Erik Johnson on May 28, 2008 at 11:33am

I'm not sure where you teach, but in my district follows standards that teach typing in 2nd grade. Ages 5-6 work on skills, but being that their hands are small and attentions short, we don't formally practice typing at that age like we do at 2nd grade. I might have a look at the standards for that age and if typing is indeed intended to be taught for your young group, they might simply need more regular practice. I know that with a fourth grade group I had, typing for 10 minutes a day was FAR superior to the occasional work done other wise. Good luck.

Erik

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Peggy Sheehy on March 3, 2009 at 7:23am

Please join the "Global Lean"

blog at http://globallean.edublogs.org
AND NING http://globallean.ning.com

Give the world a voice in a joyful celebration of diversity!

Thanks! Peggy Sheehy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Oliver Quinlan on September 20, 2009 at 4:24am

Thanks for all the advice in this thread. I am checking out all your links now. We have just started a 1:1 netbook environment for my class of 8 year olds. I asked them to complete a survey about their use of ICT and their skills, and many of them said they felt they were slowed down by their lack of typing skills and that they would like to learn to type more quickly.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Inger Altermatt on September 20, 2009 at 4:53am

Hi,
I think you have more than half the battle won when they see a point to it. For whom is the speed anyway? It is often a question of the focus. If it is a dry old, wow kids, guess what, we are going to practise our typing skills so that one day you can type fast - who cares? Obviously it will not excite the students. Distant rewards are not part of the 5-6 year old game plan, nor is it part of their job description. You can make it more exciting for them with simple competitions that have a focus on something else that holds their interest, but also builds up the typing skills as a bi-product. Please let us stay away from controlling their learning over skills that will take care of themselves as they see the need for them.

Learning is for the students and their immediate needs at 5-6 years old, not for some distant possibility.

Good Luck I am sure you will find a way to achieve your goal with this in other ways that are more connected to their reality.

:)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Erik Johnson on September 20, 2009 at 3:29pm

Inger, I don't know that I follow. You seem to think that speed and typing are not important for young kids and then go on to think that tasks where typing practice is built in is good. Then, you point out that 5-6 year old students only need to learn what is relevant now and not for their future. Clarify?

Erik

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Inger Altermatt on September 20, 2009 at 4:01pm

No I believe that what is relevant for them now helps them to develop the skills they will need for the future in their own time and in their own context. As we move into more clearly defined learning for the 21st century and technology evolves, perhaps these students may not have a great need for typing skills. Hence who says typing will be relevanrt for their future. THEIR future as WE see it now or THEIR future as THEY see it over time.

Are we really talking speed and typing skills like piano playing that needs ongoing practise or are we talking learning letters and their sounds - which also may not have a place in their future - do we know? We also don't know that it won't, so the skill is worth learning, but how high is it on our list of priorities for the skills of a 5-6 year old? That will be highly contextualised and highly individual. Our curricula are crowded enough, this skill can be baked into their general IT work, and it is a skill that can be learned at anytime.

Don't know that this has clarified things for you, but I guess I am of the belief that we learn best when we are ready to construct whatever into our own learning not on an externally imposed timetable. Remember Shift Happens.

Inger

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Erik Johnson on September 20, 2009 at 4:22pm

Inger,
Interesting. You have a great futurist-type thing going. I understand most of what you're saying, but I also think that we can't teach the way you're describing. "IT work" is very limited and irregular so kids will learn the keys, or the latest manner of manipulating technology (to consider Shift), but they will not do so well unless they do so often (teacher imposed or not). And while I agree with all of your other high interest/ project based alignment, without practice in keyboarding, kids will be limited in their opportunities to have these high-interest projects because of the time penalty teachers gain from assigning such projects. Realistically, kids must practice the piano before they realize they like Mozart and decide to play some of his work. Currently, kids need keyboarding and they need regular developmentally appropriate instruction so they can handle the projects that the imagine in their futures.

So, I do understand what you're imagining, and it's good for futurist direction, but it's not what I would recommend to a teacher's 09-10 curricular design.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Inger Altermatt on September 20, 2009 at 4:52pm

Erik,
Interesting, is this part of learning persistance and perseverance for the the future? You have made some interesting assumptions there.

If we realign to a teacher's 09-10 (or in this case 08-10 for the original question) curricular design, then I can only comment that it gets back to presentation of the task in hand. What can we do to make it less boring? and boring is an interesting word that has multiple connotations. Life is made up of a lot of boring elements if you choose to see it that way. Boring can also be stimulating - stimulating to find a better way to make it more appealing - highly contextualised and individualised. Not necessarily the teacher's domain.

We are still talking 5-6 year olds. It smacks of taking teacher control of learning based on assumptions of what is important for the learner. The key word being assumptions. It certainly gives us control to do this.

Inger

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Erik Johnson on September 20, 2009 at 5:20pm

Inger,
I really like the conversation ... I think. I'm trying to understand your thought process, but you are really confusing in areas, and other areas I just do not agree (that teachers' domains do not include individualization, for example). It's not your vocabulary, or your alternative spellings (that's actually nice to see), but your tangents. Hopefully the post creator gets something from this, but I'm out.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Inger Altermatt on September 20, 2009 at 5:38pm

That's ok, my tangents have never been obvious, even to me - sometimes haha, but the conversations was fun. As least we got a bit of engagement going. Hmmm engagement as opposed to boring. Perhaps the tangents had something to do with that :P

Wondered if you would notice the spelling. I work on the Macquarie Dictionary and among other things we don't use the ize ending we spell it ise - a real pain when you are writing report cards and the spell check wants to self correct to ize. In the general scheme of things we are but a minority. =)

Am I into Ken Robinson creativity? - maybe! Or erratic confusion for some!

Individualisation not the teachers domain? huh! I work with IEP's day in day out and differentiation - where does individualisation not come into that?

=) =P.

Oooh what is post creator? new terminology for me.

Anyway I am at the antipodies ( which I am sure you have already worked out one way or another) and I am on my first day of spring holidays - two weeks, so I am off to enjoy some of it.

Really enjoyed the engaging conversation.

=)

Inger