Introduction
Today’s learners live in an era of increasing choices
of media and the means of acquiring information. Emerging and
upgraded technologies promise improved tools to manage and manipulate
multimedia, information, and data. Traditional classroom delivery
models, in which teachers are the primary dispensers of knowledge,
are still largely employed. The potential for technology to
help people learn much more than objective facts or rules had
been largely ignored in classrooms until the early 21 st Century
(Winn & Synder, 2001).
In the past decade, however, more attention has been focused
on diverse technology applications that support active, student-centered
learning. Learners collaborate as they engage in self-directed
tasks that require critical thinking, problem solving, or meaningful
knowledge integration (Hannafin, Hall, Land, & Hill, 1997).
The use of technology for teaching and learning continues to
evolve from computer-assisted drill and practice instruction
to highly interactive multimedia learning environments.
Computers are more than just tools for acquiring content or
skill more efficiently. Technology makes it possible to create
complex learning environments that enhance the learning process
(Pea, 1985). Effective technology integration, in which computers
and other technologies reorganize the learning environment,
should be viewed as a process rather than an approach (Becker,
1994; Hadley & Sheingold, 1993).
In developing and implementing a semester-long connections
course for middle school learners, Creative Research Experiences
And Technology Exploration (CREATE), which I started in 2001,
my teaching team has grown to comprehend the potential for technology
to help students construct meaning for themselves. A connections
course is a specialty course designed to extend students’
learning beyond their four core academic courses: Language Arts,
Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies. I built my course
on constructivist-based activities in which learners have opportunities
to perform and learn in multiple modalities and across multiple
domains.
To best serve my students in grades 6 through 8, I have embraced
certain delivery models, such as project-based learning and
the Six C’s of Motivation (Campbell, Flageolle, Griffith
& Wojcik, 2002; Wang & Han, 2001). CREATE, which originated
at Dacula Middle School, employs constructivist, learner-centered
projects, in which students apply various technology tools to
extend their learning and knowledge in Digital and Media arts,
Geography, History, Science, and the Language Arts. Students
use presentation technologies to share the results of their
studies and investigations.
I design projects that attempt to address real-world scenarios,
provide for student choice and flexibility, and find harbor
within a desired range between sufficient challenge and opportunity
for student mastery. I am a facilitator who strives to create
collaborative learning opportunities that address established
standards, my district’s Academic Knowledge and Skills
(AKS), while maintaining a focus on student mastery, not grades.
The projects for my CREATE students incorporate various technology
tools, software, and Internet-based programs. My learners seek
and apply knowledge across two platforms, Apple MacIntosh and
Microsoft Windows. As I research project content for my learning
activities, I continuously seek practical answers to two critical
questions: "What is working best in today’s multimedia
classrooms?" and "What technologies available to me will best
serve my middle school learners?"
As students progress through my program from sixth to eighth
grade, they begin to acquire the AKSs that allow them to move
beyond my published project expectations to higher learning
levels. I am comfortable with that, and I encourage students
to push themselves as far as their knowledge will take them.
To ultimately reach that desired level, the students must begin
by applying basic skills using the technology tools available
to them.
As with all classes, my sixth grade students arrive at CREATE
with varying degrees of abilities and experiences using technology
tools. I believe it is important to expose them to the tools
available to them and create opportunities for them to realize
the possibilities for using those tools. They learn best by
applying those tools within a meaningful context. Therein lies
a challenge.
In years past, I have created a sixth grade project, typically
eight days in length, designed to give students hands-on exposure
to many of the tools available to them. I’ve developed
a storyline, or theme, by which the use of these tools can be
interconnected.
One project, “CREATE of the Caribbean,” was connected
content-wise to the Caribbean region. Another project, “The
Seven Voyages of Captain Oway,” focused on a mythical
sea explorer who sails to explore the world’s seven continents.
The projects achieved my goal of having the sixth graders learn
and apply six or seven different tools, primarily software applications,
on Windows-based personal computers, including digital cameras,
Excel, Word, Publisher, Netscape Composer, and Inspiration,
among others.
During post-project written reflections and feedback, some
students reported the structure of these projects to be somewhat
disjointed. Such comments did not surprise me. Despite my attempts
to seamlessly weave these applications within a motivating content
theme, the design appeared to be somewhat linear and methodical.
My attempt to incorporate several technology tools perhaps appeared
too forceful.
Purpose of the Study
I propose to examine the education/instructional technologist
profession’s best practices in incorporating multiple
technologies within a content theme for beginning technology
students. The purpose of this study is to develop a flexible
model by which future CREATE sixth grade students will learn
and apply several technology tools within a unified content
theme in ways that extend learning and are not disjointed. The
implementation of this model will serve as a treatment. The
study will also discuss ways to implement a model designed to
integrate multiple technologies into a project-based learning
format.
Research Questions
This study will address the following research questions:
- How are student attitudes, behaviors, and knowledge influenced
when a multiple tools are used in conjunction with different
software or Internet-based programs?
- How are student behaviors and knowledge influenced when some
students work with one particular technology tool while other
students in their group work with a different technology tool,
during a project designed around a common theme?
- What are the effects on student behaviors and knowledge when
some students work individually on a computer during particular
sections of a project while others collaborate in small groups,
versus all working individually on the computers?
Assumptions
The first assumption is that multimedia programs like CREATE,
in which the teachers and students have access to various technologies
on a regular basis, will continue to exist and expand. The second
assumption is that most sixth grade students will enter a public
school multimedia technology program at an introductory or beginner’s
level, in terms of familiarity with the school’s technology
offerings. The third assumption is that the participants will
be present on a regular basis during the study’s implementation
and will not move or have excessive absences.
Limitations
This study is being conducted with middle school students.
Its findings may or may not apply to students in the elementary
or high school grade levels. The student participants in this
study are identified as gifted. This wholly gifted population
within a single classroom is not typical of most middle school
connections courses.
Importance of the Study
The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)
has developed National Educational Technology Standards (NETS)
for students in grades 6 through 8. ITSE developed these standards
in partnership with a several organizations and educators across
the United States (see, Appendix A). As a teacher who directs
a multimedia curriculum-connected extensions program based on
constructivist theories, I view the ITSE standards as a guide
for what my middle school students should be able to experience
during the three semesters they take my course.
My students should have meaningful opportunities to demonstrate
and perform these national educational technology standards.
Students need to use content-specific tools, software, and simulations,
to support their learning and research. They need to be able
to apply productivity and multimedia tools and peripherals to
support their personal productivity, group collaboration and
learning throughout the curriculum. Today’s students need
to select and use appropriate tools and technology resources
to accomplish a variety of tasks and to solve problems. It is
important that students design, develop, publish, and present
products using technology resources that communicate curriculum
concepts to audiences.
The results of this study will present a model for other teachers
who recognize the importance of these goals and who desire to
effectively introduce a myriad of technologies now available
to their beginning technology students.
Literature Review
Introduction
The literature reviewed focuses on ways in which technology
can be effectively infused into curriculum and instruction. The
literature presents a variety of strategies, pedagogical approaches,
and theories. This chapter will focus on teaching strategies supported
by existing literature, which fall into certain theoretical categories.
In reviewing the literature, I sought the education/instructional
technologist profession’s best practices in integrating
multiple technologies into a project-based learning format.
The Project-Based Learning (PBL) theory centers on constructivist
approaches to teaching and learning. The teacher strives to help
all learners acquire higher-level skills that allow them to more
readily analyze, make decisions, and solve "real-world" problems
(Newby, Stepich, Lehman, & Russell, 2000). The learner, supported
by the teacher-facilitator, constructs meaning while engaged in
collaborative projects, which require reflection and sharing with
other learners. Most often during PBL, real-world problems or
questions serve to organize the student-centered learning activities.
These activities result in products or artifacts (Blumenfeld,
Soloway, Marx, Krajcik, Guzdial, and Palinccesar, 1991).
The integration of technologies into a PBL-based course is increasingly
important. Technology integration may be defined as using computers
and related peripherals effectively and efficiently in the general
content areas to enable students to learn how to apply computer
skills in meaningful ways. Technology integration organizes the
goals of curriculum and technology into a coordinated, harmonious
whole (Dockstander, 1999). During the past decade, the technology
options accessible to students have increased dramatically. Students
who had little success with traditional instructional methods
show an increased level of interest when learning with technology
(Wetzel & Zambo, 1996).
Multimedia is not limited to computers, but is commonly delivered
to users via personal computers. When students use interactive
multimedia within a PBL context, a dynamic learning experience
for students can occur. The use of multimedia, possible through
the integration of computers, software, and other technologies,
encourages learners to explore topics in more depth (Howell &
Silvey, 1998). Using multimedia enhances learning on criteria
such as content acquisition, skill development, learning efficiency,
and satisfaction with instruction (Falk & Carlson, 1991).
Instructors can use the interactive and dynamic potential of the
World Wide Web to promote critical and active thinking (McKeachie,
1999).
Certain philosophical perspectives may aid in framing the context
of CREATE, my PBL-based course. First, learners are active in
constructing their own knowledge. The interests of these learners
often guide how the curriculum is developed and designed. Many
projects within the CREATE course are designed so that students
integrate and apply multiple technology tools to develop a product,
which they share with others using presentation tools. This format
encourages a learning community. Teacher-researchers involved
in technology integration have discovered the value of an “ongoing
exchange” between teacher and students of ideas, learning
highlights, and “unexpected things that worked” (Wright,
1998).
Characteristics of Effective Technology Integration
Certain descriptive themes emerge in examining the elements most
common to effective technology integration. Two British educational
organizations, the British Education Communications and Technology
Agency (BECTa), and the Developmentally Appropriate Technology
for Early Childhood (DATEC) developed criteria for age-appropriate
uses of technology. DATEC guidelines published in 2002 suggest
that when integrating technology within the classroom and curriculum,
certain conditions should exist:
- The application should be transparent and intuitive to the
user.
- The learner should be in control of the technology.
- Software selections should exclude violence and stereotyping.
- The application should encourage collaboration and play.
It is important to select technology that aligns with standards.
Technology is effectively integrated into instruction when the
skills and knowledge introduced with the technology applications
align with curriculum content standards, such as Gwinnett County’s
Academic Knowledge and Skills (AKS). The teachers who effectively
integrate technology become curriculum developers. Means &
Olson (1997), in a qualitative analysis of nine case studies of
schools where technology was used to conduct inquiry-based learning,
report that successful technology integration involves teachers
reshaping their curriculum. In deciding which technologies will
best support learning, teachers will systematically pose questions,
examining when it is appropriate and useful to integrate technology,
and when it is not (Pope & Golub, 2000).
Key questions for teachers to ask themselves as they reorganize
curricula in terms of the technology application(s) they have
selected include:
- What does the technology offer students in terms of developing
concepts and content?
- How does it help students to carry out inquiry processes?
- How will students work together collaboratively or cooperatively?
- What is the relationship between technology and other instructional
materials?
- What new knowledge of my content or discipline, teaching,
or of technology do I need in order to foster new learning in
my students?
- What knowledge processes, and skills do students need before
using the technology? (Means & Olsen, 1997)
Students need training in how the technology tools work if they
are to be able to use those tools to learn the curriculum content.
Technology is effectively integrated when teachers enable their
learners to acquire proficiency with a technology application
before beginning a content standards-based project. Providing
a “practice window” when using specific software can
help students better understand concepts (Heller, 1991).
The teacher-facilitator needs to prepare and reflect on which
technologies will best support learning. Teachers need time to
design, experiment with, and receive feedback from students and
colleagues regarding the strengths and weaknesses of challenging,
complex lessons involving technology (Means & Olson, 1997).
Offering staff development, paid planning opportunities, and creating
windows of time during the workday for teachers to develop projects
incorporating multiple technologies is important to the process
of effective technology integration.
The least successful technology projects are those in which
teachers are dependent on resources to which they do not have
easy access and are beyond their abilities to teach. Teachers
should develop detailed plans for integrating technology using
the resources available to them. In a study of 118 recipients
of technology innovation grants, Zhao, Pugh, Sheldon, and Byers
(2001) discovered that teachers who successfully implemented innovative
technology-infused projects met five conditions. Specifically,
the teachers:
- Knew whether the technology application they wished to use
required additional equipment, Internet and network connections,
and software to work effectively.
- Knew how to use to applications they selected and had access
to the additional resources.
- Had access to timely technical guidance.
- Used technology applications consistent with their own teaching
practice and delivery style, the school culture (individualistic
or collaborative), and their district’s curricular goals.
- Had colleagues willing to support and mentor them as they
implemented their technology-infused projects.
One successful method to accommodate conditions to successful
technology integration is described in a three-stage plan. A staff
development plan for high school teachers was designed to accommodate
both experienced technology users and beginners (Manuel &
Norman, 1992). The first stage was a one-day Technology Fair,
in which various technologies were introduced to the learners.
The exhibits allowed learners to see how certain technologies
work, explore possible applications, and view products created
by those technologies. A questionnaire was distributed to learners
to ascertain their interest in the technologies they explored.
The second stage, a Technology Day, was designed to give the
students hands-on experience with the technologies or programs
of their choice. Extra facilitators, experienced with the technologies,
assisted learners working with various programs. The third stage,
a Technology Week event, provided the learners with an opportunity
to explore a particular technology in more depth and learn how
to integrate various technologies into future projects.
Instructional Delivery Models
This section discusses some of the accepted models for integrating
multiple technologies into instructional design. Characteristics
of the models discussed include relating skills to content, using
multimedia as both a teaching tool and a learning tool, and using
technology to support, rather than direct, the learning process.
Eisenberg & Johnson (1996) suggest that there are two requirements
for developing a model for effective integration of technology
skills. First, the skill must relate directly to the content area
and to the classroom assignments. The second requirement is that
the skill itself needs to be tied together in a systematic and
logical model of instruction.
Accepted models for incorporating multimedia into instructional
design fall into two categories. One category involves using multimedia
as a tool for teaching concepts. Another category focuses on using
multimedia as a tool for self-directed student learning. Falk
& Carlson (1992) define Model T (employing multimedia as a
teaching tool) as when the instructor selects specific aspects
of an application to enhance the presentation or coverage of a
particular topic. The instructor uses multimedia as a teaching
tool to integrate computer graphics and text, video, still images,
and audio into flexible classroom presentations. Model L (using
multimedia as a learning tool), most often involves the learner
(working alone or with others), sitting at a computer, interacting
with instructional or educational material, typically in a self-directed
manner (Falk & Carlson, 1992). In today’s learning environment,
Model L, which can take place inside or outside of a classroom,
may employ the Internet, streaming video, Flash movies, QuickTime
movies, compressed audio files, interactive quizzes, games, surveys,
desktop publishing, web building software, and digital photograph
programs, among other options. Model T is teacher-directed use
of multimedia programs. Model L is curriculum-driven, in which
the learner makes choices offered by the media being used. Both
models involve interactivity elements.
A third model, based on scientific inquiry, is a model in which
technology can support rather than direct the learning process
(Goddard, 2002). Inquiry process skills such as observing, collecting,
organizing, identifying variables, testing hypotheses, inferring,
and concluding, can be supported via technology. The model provides
structure but allows students to feel in control of their learning.
Goddard also suggests that the best delivery of technology by
educators may be found within a framework for technology-based
teaching and learning that focuses on engagement. Engagement occurs
when the teacher creates an environment that encourages student-teacher
feedback, cooperation among students, and active learning. As
technology is employed, teachers must provide prompt feedback,
emphasize time on task, and communicate high expectations. Communicative
technology, in forms such as e-mail, web databases, graphic organizers,
discussion boards, and presentation medium, becomes the interface
between the user and effective learning.
Other research related to instructional delivery discusses features
of effective technology integration. Projects involving technology
should involve students in the research process, require in-class
presentations, and employ simulations (Chickering & Gamson,
1987). Schneiderman (1992), focusing on software, recommended
that designers offer error prevention and simple error correction,
provide informative feedback, and enable frequent users to the
shortcuts. These guidelines also apply to technology-infused curriculum
design.
Conclusion
In this chapter, I have reviewed ways in which technology can
be effectively infused into curriculum and instruction. The existing
literature presents a variety of strategies, pedagogical approaches,
and theories. Teaching strategies supported by existing literature
fall into certain theoretical categories as to the best practices
in integrating multiple technologies into a project-based learning
format for beginning technology students. Existing studies reveal
that students need support and scaffolding when applying new technologies.
Technology infusion in all projects should align with standards
and involve technologies to which teachers have access. Teachers
need planning and training time to experiment and refine technology-based
curriculum designs. Reflective feedback from students during and
after implementation of a project is important to a successful
learning experience.
Methods
Overview
The primary intervention of this study was implementation of
the project. The methodologies employed during this study included
project web pages, online discussion forums, online work space,
a pre-project questionnaire, a reflective journal, an online post-project
reflection form, and examination of student work. The discussion
board provided online workspace for students throughout the project.
Group members communicated about project materials and needs,
and responded to project-related questions posted by the teacher.
The questionnaire assessed student readiness and understanding
prior to implementing the project and allowed the researcher to
compile a technology use profile of the study participants. The
reflective journal provided a vehicle for teacher reflection.
It provided guidance, encouragement, questions, and exercises
to support reflective thought. The journal was written over time
and included information about place, time, anecdotes, and commentary.
The reflection form was distributed at the conclusion of the project
to gain insights and feedback from students. Examination of student
products and artifacts was used to see if goals and objectives
were met, and provide a gauge as to whether the proper amount
of time was allotted for the project.
Participants
The participants in this study were sixth grade students at a
middle school in the southeastern United States. This school was
named a School of Excellence in 2004. The school of 1,735 students,
located in a traditional farming area that has experienced a boon
in housing developments during the past decade, consists primarily
of students from middle-income families. The school’s student
racial demographic mix is Caucasian, 63 percent; African-American,
21 percent; Hispanic, 11 percent; Asian/Pacific Islander, 3 percent;
Multiracial, 2 percent; and American Indian, less than 1 percent.
Seventy-seven percent of the school’s population is enrolled
in the free/reduced price lunch program.
The students were enrolled in CREATE, which is classified as
a gifted class, for the spring semester, 2005. There are two sixth
grade, two seventh grade, and two eighth grade classes per semester.
Each sixth grade class (two classes total) typically consists
of 36 students, served by two gifted certified teachers, including
myself. Half of the students in each class (18) are assigned to
my roll and I determine their grades. The other 18 students in
each class are assigned to my teammate’s roll. One class
meets every other day on an ongoing weekly rotation schedule.
This is known as the “A” class. The second class also
meets every other day (on the days the “A” class doesn’t
meet), again on an ongoing rotation schedule. This class is called
the “B” class.
The student demographic mix in CREATE is about 85 percent Caucasian,
6 percent Asian, 5 percent Hispanic or other ethnic groups, and
4 percent African-American. Approximately 75 percent take three
or four gifted academic classes. Although CREATE is classified
as a gifted class, 25 percent of its students are not enrolled
in the school’s gifted program.
For this study, I selected as my participants the students in
the sixth grade “B” rotation group who are assigned
to my roll and who I worked with directly during this project.
All 13 students in the sixth grade “B” rotation group
who participated in this study are classified as gifted.
Instruments
Project Online Work Space
I introduced my project with several tools designed to facilitate
communication, allow for a structured discussion board, and provide
online workspace for posting work. A project webpage, embedded
in an existing CREATE website, hosted the links to the tools students
accessed and used throughout the project. These tools are described
below.
QuickTopic Instant Discussion Space was used to create single-topic
web forums. During each day of the project, the participants accessed
a QuickTopic discussion board, on which I posted one in a series
of content-related topics, usually with a related website link.
The participants read a short introduction, and then followed
the instructions, which typically asked them to access the posted
website. Participants interacted as directed at the website, then
returned to the QuickTopic discussion board, added their original
comments, and viewed the discussion threads created by the student
postings.
A Strategic Learning and Teaching Environment (SLATE) web page,
accessible to students, also included workspace in the form of
a structured message board. This web tool was used to help my
students achieve instructional objectives at the early stage of
the project. SLATE constructed web activities have specific characteristics:
- Teacher-written context, tying the student's activity to
the instructional objectives, other disciplines, and real world
issues.
- Teacher-selected web links, annotated by the teacher to guide
the student's use of the web resources.
- Workspace that may include multiple-choice or discussion
questions (answers are e-mailed to the teacher), or a structured
message board where students discuss issues from the web links.
The use of a threaded discussion forum is an appropriate and
meaningful integration of technology and education. (Caswell,
2001).
- A tool for Assessment, in the form of a teacher-constructed
rubric with a rubric calculator that the teacher and students
may use to gauge progress based on indicators of performance.
At the onset of every class meeting (throughout the project’s
duration), I directed the students’ attention to a new discussion
board prompt or question, designed to build knowledge about the
project’s content. The students accessed the QuickTopic
web forum (which does not require password access) via the CREATE
website. During the project’s first week, the students used
password access to respond to the SLATE webpage discussion forum.
Students responded online either during class or prior to the
next class meeting.
The students also responded to survey-type questions posted
to the CREATE website, which were designed to provide ongoing
reflection and feedback about the project, its structure, and
its required tasks. (see, Appendix B). These reflections helped
me gauge student response to the project and its design.
Participants also worked within an Internet Classroom Assistant
(ICA), a web-based classroom environment that allows students
and teachers to collaborate and share project-related ideas. The
Internet Classroom Assistant, which I administered and monitored,
and to which the students accessed via a teacher-provided username
and password, has specific features:
- The Documents page allowed students to post their work within
the ICA, for teacher and peer viewing. Their work could be written
on a Word document and copy/pasted onto the Documents page,
or written directly onto the Documents page.
- The Links Sharing page allowed me to post relevant annotated
links for the students to read and access. Students could also
post and share website links with group partners or for the
larger class to view.
- The Message feature allowed students to communicate with each
other (specifically group partners) via an e-mail-type format.
Students could check the names of the class members whom they
intended to receive and read their message. Students were made
aware that a copy of each message they submitted was also sent
to me, as the ICA class administrator, for monitoring purposes.
- The Class Schedule feature allowed me to post assignments
and reminders related to project objectives and due dates. Students
could access these messages at any time.
- The Conferencing Topics page permitted me to post and share
copies of project-related articles and readings of interest.
Students read and responded to these readings, as directed.
Student Questionnaire
I prepared an online pre-project questionnaire to the participants
in my class. The purpose of this survey was to determine the students’
experience in using various technology tools, their attitudes
about collaborative learning using different technology tools,
and their experience working in a project-based classroom (see,
Appendix C).
Reflective Journals
I wrote in a reflective journal, which I used to develop ongoing
research questions as well as to answer them (see, Appendix D).
Patterson and Shannon (1993) suggest that the teacher-researcher
should write for at least a week and then begin looking for patterns
and surprises. The journal helped me think about my teaching approaches
and helped me make sense of what happened in the classroom (Isakson
and Williams, 1996).Implementation Procedures
The implementation of the project, which took place during twelve
class meetings, was the primary instrument. Students were introduced
to the project, “Pigboats and Bottom Dwellers” on
the first day, and oriented to the project web pages, the QuickTopic
Discussion Board, SLATE web page, and the Internet Classroom Assistant.
They also completed the online pre-project questionnaire. I began
my reflective journaling on this day.
The project, an exploration of submarines, submersibles, and
the sea life and shipwrecks found deep below the surface of our
earth’s vast oceans, was designed to incorporating multiple
technologies within a content theme for beginning technology students.
The project’s storyline was that marine archeologists, alerted
by the crew of a submarine, used submersibles to identify the
remains of a ship, the Nerer Weyfonna, near a ridge along an ocean
floor in deep ocean waters. From scant evidence found at the site,
the archeologists believed the ship sailed sometime between 1820
and 1920, but little else was known. Six surviving artifacts,
excavated from the ship’s ruins, gave evidence that the
ship had anchored at six ports around the world before it sank,
enroute to a seventh port. A wax sealed bottle, containing remnants
of a sailor’s handwritten journal, had been in vault storage
for decades in a British museum. Due to publicity about the ship’s
discovery, the journal pages were eventually linked to the Nerer
Weyfonna, and provided clues as to what the ship’s crew
may have encountered in its final three days. One page in the
tattered yellowed journal included a sketch of what historians
believed to be the ship’s main flag. This storyline provided
a theme for the project’s components and justification for
the software and technology tools students learned and applied
as they worked during the project. Below is a summary of other
tools students used during the project:
- The Internet (World Wide Web). Students searched for drawings,
photographs, or images, to represent six different artifacts
from six different places in the world. The artifacts had to
match the time period in which they decided “their”
Nerer Weyfonna sailed (for example, it set sail in 1868 and
sank in 1869). They used the Internet to research the actual
origins of the selected artifacts and provided information about
each. Students established login files and created folders for
storing pictures.
- Microsoft PowerPoint. PowerPoint slideshows provided a vehicle
for displaying several components of the project. Each artifact,
with appropriate origins and descriptions, were displayed on
slides. Also displayed was an illustration of what each student
crew (team) believed their Never Weyfonna looked like, with
descriptions, based on their chosen historical period. They
also posted onto slides drawings or pictures of three deep ocean
creatures (real and/or mythical) that the crew of their Never
Weyfonna allegedly spotted during the ship’s final three
days.
- Microsoft Publisher. This desktop publishing software was
used to chart the route of the Never Weyfonna. Students scanned
a map from an atlas (using a classroom scanner), or inserted
a map they located and downloaded from the Internet. They used
the drawing and line tools to show the ship’s ill-fated
voyage, from its port of departure to its final resting place
in an ocean of their choosing. They also used Publisher’s
text tools to label the ports of call and the latitude and longitude
of the location where the ship sank.
- Microsoft Word. Students used Word to create notes needed
for other tasks and to write three journal entries (providing
details about what happened during the last three days of their
ship’s voyage). They later copied and pasted their journal
entries onto the Documents page of the Internet Classroom Assistant,
where peers could read them online.
- Microsoft Excel. Students collected data posted on the Internet
Classroom Assistant’s Conferencing Topics page related
to an article they read online about which ten countries stake
claim to the most ocean waters. They used that data to create
a spreadsheet and a graph to visually communicate their data
findings.
- IBM Record Now. Students used this CD burner software to
burn images or photos they would later use on the Apple MacIntosh
computers to create graphics of their Nerer Weyfonna flags.
- Macromedia Fireworks. Students designed and created graphics
of flags they believed flew over their Nerer Weyfonna. They
then burned a copy of their graphic from the MacIntosh computers
(which do not have Internet access in the CREATE lab) onto a
CD-RW for posting on a website.
- The discussion boards and online communication tools (QuickTopic,
Landmark SLATE, and the Internet Classroom Assistant, which
included the Messaging tool) provided venues for studying and
reflecting on deep sea life, submarines, marine archeology,
sunken ships, ocean physics, and deep sea exploration.
During the second and successive days, I relied on qualitative
research strategies to provide additional sources of data. In
addition to the ongoing online discussion board, the reflective
journal, and the student questionnaire, I conducted classroom
observations. On the twelfth day, the day following the final
workday, students completed an online post-project reflection
form. (see, Appendix E)
I also examined examples of student work, which helped provide
evidence bearing on research questions (Hancock 1993; Anderson,
Herr, and Nihlen 1994).
Results
and Discussion
Student Proficiency
At the onset of the project, students completed an online survey,
designed to assess their computer experience and computer use
proficiency. While all students reported using a personal computer
at home, more than one-third of those students did not have a
personal e-mail account. More than three-fourths of the students
reported that they could open and check e-mail, download and save
pictures, create folders, and save documents or pictures inside
folders. Only one-third said they could burn a CD or use a digital
camera to import or export pictures. Nearly two-thirds of the
participants said they could successfully use a browser to locate
a specific Internet directory. Less than half reported playing
educational games on their home computer, but 85% said they play
computer-based video games. No student in the research group had,
until this project, participated in a project-based course, linked
to technology or otherwise. Only one participant (8%) reported
having posted to a web forum, such as a discussion board (See,
Appendix F).
Discussion Board
The QuickTopic discussion board, free and simple to use, proved
useful for guiding students to think about our topics of focus
during the project. I logged in using a user name and password
to generate and post a daily topic. Students accessed the discussion
board directly from a link I created on the project webpage. I
selected short articles for reading or posted websites that took
students to a simulation, such as driving the Civil War-era submarine,
The Hunley. Students visited the links I placed in the
QuickTopic board, and then returned to the discussion board to
enter their answers, comments, and reflections. All but one of
the participants reported that they read at least some of their
peers’ postings, other than their own. All participants
reported that the discussion board helped them learn more about
the topics and increased their knowledge about submarines and
deep-sea life. All participants also reported that they preferred
using the discussion board to access an online article or multimedia
activity, and then post responses online, over reading traditional
magazine articles or book chapters and writing responses. The
reasons for these preferences varied. “I would look at other
responses, beside my own, and I would want to see what the other
people thought about the topic that day, and if they agreed with
me,” said one student. Other opinions about the discussion
board, reported by the students:
- Could save time by using the discussion board, and use that
additional time to work on other elements of the project.
- Provided easy access from home to what they missed when they
were absent.
- Found the online sites more interesting and interactive that
what they could read in a magazine article or book.
- Preferred information on the online sites to information
in articles they could locate and read in a magazine or book,
which students suggested might be outdated.
- Could reread the topics at home, and receive their parents’
help, if needed.
- There was less paper with which to keep up, and the information
was always available.
“I now know much more about life in the deep seas,”
said one respondent. “From what we discussed on the QuickTopic
and the things we did on the web, I have now greatly increased
my knowledge about deep sea life and pigboats [a slang term for
submarines].”
SLATE Webpage
The Landmark SLATE webpage, assessable via a link on the project
webpage, was used in the project’s early stages for a specific
purpose: To introduce the students to marine life of the deepest
ocean waters and compare and contrast those creatures to well-known
mythical sea creatures and sea monsters. The benefit of this page
was to assemble several annotated websites in one location, followed
by student workspace (similar in design to postings on a discussion
board). Students accessed the sites, studied pictures, and read
articles (all of which concerned deep sea creatures or mythical
sea serpents). They then used a SLATE class password (given to
all by the teacher), and entered their responses and reflections
in the online workspace. I was able to easily post my responses
and comments to their posted entries in the same section.
All participants reported that the SLATE page and workspace
proved useful and helped them better understand the creatures
of the deepest ocean waters. The students’ reasons for approving
of the SLATE page focused primarily on the convenience of having
multiple pre-screened resources in one place with a discussion
board available to post findings, which anyone in the class could
read. Some students worked in pairs during the Landmark SLATE
segment of the project. “You could talk to team members
about your decisions,” said one student. Another student
noted that the web forum “not only teaches you personal
skills, but teamwork skills.”
The SLATE page would not be practical for doing a daily topic
(as was the QuickTopic discussion board), but it did prove to
be an effective one-time tool for assembling multiple websites
(chosen by content) with a convenient student-to-student and teacher-to-student
interactive web forum. The QuickTopic discussion board is designed
for student response to a single topic, with or without a website
link. The SLATE page offers space for several content-related
website links, followed by online discussion space for student
comment.
Internet Classroom Assistant
The many interactive and communicative features of the Internet
Classroom Assistant (ICA) made it an important tool during this
project. Students accessed the classroom assistant via teacher-chosen
usernames and passwords, and posted their work in the ICA Documents
page. This provided them an authentic venue for posting their
journal entries, with an audience of peers as readers.
The Send Message tool (which works like an e-mail tool within
the password-protected class site), allowed students to send me
and other classmates project-related questions. I was able to
respond to questions in writing, typically between class meetings.
I also could provide comments to students about their postings,
which facilitated teacher-to-student feedback. Some students communicated
with one another during small group phases of the project, such
as when they were researching their artifacts or designing their
flags. Even as they sat at computers across the room from one
another, team members were able to communicate without getting
up from their seat. All communications were archived and sent
to an e-mail account I designated for this project, so there was
very little “useless chatting.” When this did occur,
I printed a copy, showed the student, and it rarely reoccurred.
The Links Sharing page was used, but only twice, because most
website links to articles of interest or specialty websites were
shared on the daily discussion board. Had I not used the QuickTopic
discussion board, I could have achieved a similar objective using
the ICA Links Sharing page and Documents page.
All participants responded that they felt the ICA communication
tools were useful in achieving project objectives. One wrote that
the ICA, because access is restricted to students in the class,
provides a comfortable “sense of protection.” As another
student put it, “You don’t worry about hackers hacking
into an educational e-mail-type Internet site and looking at your
personal information.”
More than 85 percent reported that posting assignments to the
Documents pages was better than submitting a printed assignment
directly to a teacher. “You could post your opinions and
assignments for the teacher,” said one student. Most students
used phrases like “a good idea” or “cool”
to describe their views on posting their work online. “When
I posted my assignment I felt good, because anyone could see my
final product,” a student said.
Other Project Tools
PowerPoint (part of the Microsoft Office software package) was
the favorite non-Internet-based timesaving tool for these students,
according to post-project reflections. Students used PowerPoint
to display their ship’s artifacts, ship representations
and, for several, their ship’s routes. Others used Microsoft
Publisher to create their ship’s routes. Several compared
Publisher’s drop-and-drag features as similar to using an
Apple MacIntosh, which they praised for its ease of use. For creating
graphics, Macromedia Fireworks (on the Apple computers) was the
students’ overwhelming favorite (as opposed to Paint or
Paint Shop Pro).
All the participants used Microsoft Excel to graph the top ten
ocean territorial claimants, although the students had the option
of using an online graph-making program or PowerPoint’s
chart creation tool. The objective throughout the project was
to expose them to as many technology tools as possible, allow
them to choose their tools (with guidance), and help them learn
for themselves how to use the software to achieve their objectives.
More than 92 percent of the respondents said they felt that all
the tools they used seemed necessary or were useful in one way or
another. “The technologies we had were used well, because
it all made a fun and creative project. None of the tools seemed
unneeded because I used all of them to help.” One student
called the SLATE page unnecessary, because it was used only briefly
and there was another discussion board available [the QuickTopic
tool]. Another student said the Message Tool (e-mail) feature of
the ICA was least important to the project, “because everyone
was in the same room” while the teams worked.
Conclusions
Effective technology integration, in which computers and other
technologies reorganize the learning environment, is a process
requiring continuous refinement. This study examined the most
effective practices in incorporating multiple technologies within
a content theme for beginning technology students.
Middle school students today, even those with limited technology
proficiency, are likely to have exposure to computers and have
experience performing basic computer functions by the sixth grade.
While a significant percentage of sixth graders may not have personal
e-mail accounts, most will claim to understand communication tools
such as e-mail and instant messaging. The majority are receptive
to learning new technologies and using Internet-based tools and
software programs that they perceive will save them time, lesson
their paper load, and engage them in fun or “cool”
ways to interact and learn.
The students in my study fit the profile described above. At
home, these students are much more likely to play Internet-based
or software-driven video games on their computers than educational
games. Nearly two-thirds describe the use of computers and technology
tools as “fun.” All said they use computers to help
with schoolwork and homework, at least “sometimes.”
Teachers with access to classroom computers, a school media center,
or school-based productivity labs, have many options now available
to them for delivering Internet-based projects to their students.
There are low-cost or free website creation programs, discussion
boards, weblogs, classroom assistant programs (designed for local
or distance learning applications), and a myriad of multimedia-driven
interactive web programs for educational use. Many of these programs
address teacher concerns: Student privacy and safety, administrative
control, accessibility, and dependable ease of use.
This study sought to introduce a flexible content-rich delivery
model by which sixth grade students will learn and apply several
technology tools within a unified content theme in ways that extend
learning and are not disjointed.
Students should have meaningful opportunities to demonstrate
and perform recognized educational technology standards, such
as the National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for students
in grades 6 through 8, developed by The International Society
for Technology in Education (ISTE). Students need to use content-specific
tools, software, and web-based simulations, to support their learning
and research. They need to be able to apply productivity and multimedia
tools and peripherals to support their personal productivity,
group collaboration and learning throughout the curriculum. Today’s
students need opportunities to select and use appropriate tools
and technology resources to accomplish a variety of tasks and
to solve problems. It is important that students design, develop,
publish, and present products using technology resources that
communicate curriculum concepts to audiences.
The results of this study presents a model for other teachers
who recognize the importance of these national educational technology
standards and who desire to effectively introduce a myriad of
technologies now available to their beginning technology students.
Recommendations
To effectively introduce various technology tools within a project-based
course, students should be kept at the center of learning, and
should be held responsible for constructing their knowledge of
how and when to use various technology tools for specific purposes,
depending on the task at hand. To ensure that curriculum content
is incorporated into a project involving the hands-on application
of technologies unfamiliar to the student, an online discussion
board tool should be implemented. Teachers must carefully select
engaging and interesting websites that are rich in the desired
content, and support their learning objectives. A teacher-facilitated
discussion board prompt, with a clearly stated introduction, directions,
and a website link, can be posted each day or every other day.
Ideally, for convenience and consistency, students would access
the discussion board from a project webpage. They would be trained
to read the prompt, engage in the linked website, and return to
the discussion board to post their reflection. If a student is
behind in other aspects of the project, or needs extra time on
a software program used to complete part of their project, then
allow the student to access to the discussion board outside of
class, by a due date set by the teacher.
If a teacher is not prepared to regularly update and maintain
a class website or project webpage, two free and convenient options
are The Landmark Project’s SLATE pages or Nicenet.org’s
Internet Classroom Assistant. If the teacher does maintain a class
website (as I do), then such tools as these can still be used
and linked to the teacher’s website. Programs such as these
provide password security, online space for posting student work,
comments, and reflections, and other communication tools. Students
with no prior experience in these tools quickly understand their
use and appreciate their convenience. They also state that they
enjoy seeing their work published online for classmates or parents
to read.
The most effective way to build academic content into a project
in which the goal is for students to learn and apply a variety
of technologies is to develop a storyline. Everything the students
create with the assistance of various technology tools is done
in support of the overall theme and plot of the story. In “Pigboats
and Bottom Dwellers,” I built the project around the ill-fated
voyage of a fictional ship, the Nerer Weyfonna, which sailed and
sank sometime between 1820 and 1920. With an engaging storyline,
students are excited about the project. In this project, students
created Nerer Weyfonna flags using the Internet, Paint, and Fireworks.
They used Publisher or PowerPoint to chart the ship’s route
on a world map. They used the Internet to research artifacts from
around the world, tied to specific historical periods, and displayed
and described them on PowerPoint. They wrote the journal entries
of the ship’s final three days and posted them to a webpage.
Throughout the project, the students accessed a discussion board
and read and wrote about deep-sea creatures, mythical sea monsters,
submarines (from the Civil War to modern day nuclear subs), ocean
life, and learned about the ridges and vents along the world’s
oceans floors. Websites included interactive maps, submarine simulators,
first-hand accounts of submarine life, and 360-degree virtual
tours of World War II era submarines and a modern nuclear submarine.
Students also analyzed data and created graphs using Excel, which
shows which countries claim the most ocean waters. To assist with
communication and to build a community of learners, students used
an e-mail-like message tool, online workspace, and web forums
to share ideas about what they learned.
Pre-project questionnaires, to access student computer experience
and technology proficiency, and post-project reflections, are
important elements of the project. These survey tools allow for
formative evaluation and participant reflection. Eleven of the
thirteen participants in this study (85 percent) said they would
recommend this project, as it was designed, for future sixth grade
students. Comments ranged from “it is easier to be organized
and turn things in” to “the best project I’ve
ever done.” The two students who said they might not recommend
this project both termed it “hard work.”
Specific Recommendations
Below are recommendations for designing a project, built around
specific content, in which the goal is to help students learn
and apply several technologies during the project. This model
will help insure that the application of various technologies
is not performed out of context within the project’s stated
objectives.
- Decide on the primary content you wish the students to explore
during the project (such as deep sea life). The content should
align with the standards and teaching objectives of your school
system, based on the grade level(s) you teach.
- Write a storyline (such as the ill-fated voyage of a ship
which traversed the oceans) that links your content objectives
in ways that interest your learners and “hooks”
them into the project.
- Become familiar with the technology tools (software, Internet
programs, and hardware) available to you at your school, within
your classroom, media center, or in the productivity labs. Technology
infusion, which should align with national and local standards,
should only involve technologies to which teachers have access.
- Make sure you are able to understand and apply these programs
before introducing them to your students. Teachers need planning
and training time to experiment and refine technology-based
curriculum designs. Ideally, this planning and training should
take place before a project is implemented.
- Make the technology coordinator at your school aware of your
project design and goals before your implement the project,
so that support is more likely to be available to you should
you need it.
- Construct and implement a pre-survey or pre-test for your
students prior to beginning the project, to assess their experience
with the technology tools you will introduce.
- Preview the project with your students before you begin.
Provide them the overall objectives and how all of the project’s
elements fit together to achieve the final products. When you
implement the project, realize that some students will work
faster than others, so account for these realities with enrichment
activities or extra work time outside of class for students
who need it.
- Make use of free and existing web-based tools, which allow
you to implement a discussion board, online web-based workspace,
and provide webspace for presenting student products. Students
will respond positively to these tools, remain engaged with
the content, and have less paperwork with which to keep up.
- Preview and test all websites and website links on the computers
on which the students will work before introducing these websites
to the students.
- Throughout the project, provide mini-lessons on specific
applications of software for students who are not familiar with
the software. During these mini-lessons, allow the more experienced
students to continue their work. A projector linked to a computer
and screen is useful for conducting large or small group mini-lessons.
- Design specific elements of the project so that the technology
tools the students use fit the project’s goals, but are
not used out of context. For example, only teach students to
use a spreadsheet program to create a graph, if making a graph
will better help the students visualize and learn the content.
- It is best, when possible, to present more than one option
for achieving a task. Allow the students to choose the tools
they think will best help them achieve their objective. The
most successful project is one in which the teacher facilitates
and encourages, but allows the learner to control the technology.
- To insure that students do not feel overwhelmed when learning
many technologies within one project, students need support
and scaffolding when applying new technologies. Reflective feedback
from students during and after implementation of a project is
important to a successful learning experience.
With the right blend between content integration and an engaging
storyline, the technical applications will appear transparent.
Students, constructing meaning as they work at a level that challenges
them, will be highly motivated by guided choice of content and
tools, personal decision making, collaboration with peers, and
the consequence of seeing the products of their efforts viewed
and appreciated by others.
References
Anderson, G., Herr, K. & Nihlen, A. (1994). Studying
your own school: An educator's g uide to qualitative practitioner
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
Becker, H. J. (1994). How exemplary computing-using teachers
differ from other teachers: implication for realizing the potential
of computers in schools. Journal of Research on Computer in
Education. 26(3), 291-321.
Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Guzidial,
M., & Palincsar, A. (1991).
Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting
the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4),
369-398.
Campbell, L., Flageolle, P., Griffith, S., & Wojcik, C.
(2002). Resource-based learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging
perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved
June 27, 2004, from http://www.coe.uga.edu./epltt/RBL.htm..
http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/RBL.htm
hp://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/RBL.htm
Caswell, T.C., (Sep/Oct 2001) The Threaded Discussion Forum:
A Case Study in Technology Integration. Washington: 75(1),
26.
Chickering, A. & Gamson, Z. (March 1987). Seven principles
for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association
for Higher Education Bulletin, 3-7.
Falk, D. & Carlson, H. (1991). Evaluating the effectiveness
of multimedia applications in human service and teacher education.
Multimedia Review. 2(3), 12-17.
Dockstader, J. (January 1999). Teachers of the 21 st Century
Know the What, Why, and How of Technology Integration. T H
E Journal (Technological Horizons In Education), 26(6), 73-80.
Eisenberg, M., & Johnson, D. (1996). Computer skills for
information problem-solving: Learning and Teaching Technology
in Context. Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.
Syracuse, NY. (ED393-463).
Falk, D. & Carlson, H. (1992). Learning to teach with multimedia
(September 1992). T H E Journal (Technological Horizons in
Education), 20(2), 96-102.
Goddard, M. (2002). What do we do with these computers? Reflections
on technology in the classroom. Journal of Research on Technology
in Education, 35(1), 19-26.
Hadley, M., & Sheingold, K. (1993). Commonalities and distinctive
patterns in teachers' integration of computers. American Journal
of Education, 101, 261-315.
Hancock, J. (1993). Sow a thought, reap an action. In L. Patterson,
C Santa, K. Short, and K. Smith (Eds.), Teachers are researchers:
Reflection and action. (pp. 71-85). Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Hannafin, M., Hill, J., & Land, S. (Winter 1997). Student-centered
learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implication.
68(2), 94-100.
Heller, R.S. (1991). Toward a student workstation: Extensions
to the Logo environment. Journal of Educational Computing
Research , 7(1), 77-78.
Howell, J. & Silvey, O. (November 1998). Interactive multimedia
training systems. In Craig, R. (Ed.), The ASTA Training &
Development Handbook, Fourth Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Interim Report of the Developmentally Appropriate Technology
in Early Childhood (2002). London: Institute of Education. Retrieved
July 5, 2004 from http://www.ioe.ac.uk/cdl/datec/intrim2.pdf.
Internet Classroom Assistant (ICA Webpage). Available website
at http://www.nicenet.org/.
Isakson, M., & Williams, D. (1996). Allowing space for not
knowing: A dialogue about teachers’ journals. In Donoahue,
Z., Patterson, L., and Tallell, M.(Eds.), Research in the
classroom: Talk, texts, and inquiry (pp. 10-35). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Landmark for Schools (SLATE). Available website at http://www.landmark-project.com/.php.
Manuel, J., & Norman, G. (October 1992). Three steps to
technology immersion: Helping high school teachers adopt new technology.
T H E Journal (Technological Horizons In Education).
20(3), 82-83.
McKeachie, W. (1999). Teaching tips: Strategies, research,
and theory for college and university teachers (10 ed). Boston:
Houghton-Mifflin.
Means, B., & Olson, K. (1997). Technology and education
reform. Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Contract
No. RP91-172010. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved June 18, 2004, from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/SER/Technology/title.html.
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/SER/Technology/title.html.
Newby, T., Stepich, D., Lehman, J., & Russell, J (2000).
Instruction technology for teaching and learning: Designing instruction,
integrating computers, and using media. (2 nd ed.) Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
Patterson, L., & Shannon, P. (1993). Reflection, inquiry,
action. In Patterson, L., Santa, C., Short, K. Smith, K. (Eds.)
Teachers are researchers: Reflection and action. (pp.
7-11). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Pea, R. (1985). Beyond amplification: using the computer to
reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist,
20, 167-182.
Pope, C. & Golub, J. (2000). Preparing tomorrow’s
English Language Arts teachers today: Principles and practices
for infusing technology. Contemporary Issues in Technology
and Teacher Education [Online serial], 1(1). Retrieved June
22, 2004, from http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/english/article1.htm.
QuickTopic Instant Discussion Space. Available website at http://www.quicktopic.com/.
Shneiderman, B. (1992). Designing the user interface: Strategies
for effective human-computer interaction (2 nd Edition).
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Wang, S. & Han, S. (2001). Six C's of motivation. In M.
Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and
technology . Retrieved June 19, 2004, from http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/6csmotivation.htm.
Wetzel, K., & Zambo, R. ( Winter 1996) Innovations in integrating
technology into student teaching experiences. 29 (2),
196-215.
Winn, W., & Synder, D. (2002). Cognitive perspectives in
psychology. In Johassen, D.H. (Ed.), Handbook of research
for educational communications and technology (pp. 112-142).
New York: Simon & Schuster MacMillan.
Wright, J. (1998). Computers and young children: A new look
at integrating technology into the curriculum. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 26(2), 107-109.
Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. (2002). Conditions
for classroom technology innovations: Executive summary. Teachers
College Record, 104 (3) 482-515. Retrieved June 20, 2004,
from http://www.tcrecord.org/Collection.asp?CollectionID=77. htt
Appedix A
ISTE National Technology Standards (NETS)
for Students
The technology foundation standards for students in Grades 6
through 8 are to be introduced, reinforced, and mastered by students.
All students should have opportunities to demonstrate the following
performances.
Prior to completion of Grade 8,
students will:
1. |
Apply strategies for identifying and solving
routine hardware and software problems that occur
during everyday use. (1) |
2. |
Demonstrate knowledge of current changes in
information technologies and the effect those
changes have on the workplace and society. (2) |
3. |
Exhibit legal and ethical behaviors when using
information and technology, and discuss consequences
of misuse. (2) |
4. |
Use content-specific tools, software, and
simulations (e.g., environmental probes, graphing
calculators, exploratory environments, Web tools)
to support learning and research. (3, 5) |
5. |
Apply productivity/multimedia tools and peripherals
to support personal productivity, group collaboration,
and learning throughout the curriculum. (3, 6) |
6. |
Design, develop, publish, and present products
(e.g., Web pages, videotapes) using technology
resources that demonstrate and communicate curriculum
concepts to audiences inside and outside the classroom.
(4, 5, 6) |
7. |
Collaborate with peers, experts, and others
using telecommunications and collaborative tools
to investigate curriculum-related problems, issues,
and information, and to develop solutions or products
for audiences inside and outside the classroom.
(4, 5) |
8. |
Select and use appropriate tools and technology
resources to accomplish a variety of tasks and
solve problems. (5, 6) |
9. |
Demonstrate an understanding of concepts underlying
hardware, software, and connectivity, and of practical
applications to learning and problem solving.
(1, 6) |
10. |
Research and evaluate the accuracy, relevance,
appropriateness, comprehensiveness, and bias of
electronic information sources concerning real-world
problems. (2, 5, 6) |
|
Appendix B
Student Reflection Prompts
Prompt 1 (after Day 2)
- What has challenged you the most in participating in this
project so far?
Please explain your answer and provide a specific example(s),
if possible.
Prompt 2 (after Day 4)
- We are now mid-way through this project. Do you feel the
use of the technologies tools and software programs you have
used so far work well together? Why or why not? (Please explain).
Prompt 3 (after Day 6)
- Which of the different technologies that you have been working
with during this project are most helpful to you? Which technologies
seem out of place or not necessary to successfully completing
this project? Please explain you answers.
Prompt 4 (on Day 8)
- As you prepare your presentation, what aspects of the project
most surprised you? Why? Which technologies are you most glad
you worked with? Please explain your answers.
Appendix C
Student Pre-Project Questionnaire
Name _____________________________ Grade ______ Session _____
Using computers and technology is fun. ___Yes ___Sometimes ___No
Computers help me with schoolwork/homework. ___Yes __Sometimes
__No
Do you have a computer at home? ___Yes ___No How old is it?
________
__PC ___desktop ___multiple computers
___ Mac ___ laptop ___ networked computers
Do you have the Internet on your computer at home? ___ Yes ___
No
__ dial-up ___ broadband (DSL/cable modem/satellite) ___ don’t
know
Internet Browser ___ Internet Explorer (IE) ___ Netscape
___ AOL ___ other:
Do you play video games on your computer at home? ___ Yes ___
No
Type/name of games: ___________________________________
Do you play educational games on your computer at home? ___Yes
___ No
Type/name of games: ________________________________________
Do you have your own e-mail address on your computer at home?
__ Yes__ No
Have you taken any project-based technology classes? ___ Yes
___ No
Type/name of class: _________________________________________
Which of the following computer-related tasks can you successfully
accomplish.
___ Check email
___ Burn a CD
___ Download/Save a file from the Internet
___ Browse to a specific directory on a computer
___ Create a new folder and save a document inside that new
folder
___ Attach a specific file to an email
___ Post to a newsgroup
___ Scan a picture and insert picture into text document
___ Export/Import pictures from camera to a computer
___ Upload a webpage and images successfully
Please check all that
apply |
I feel comfortable using
this software |
I have this software on
my home computer |
I would like to learn more
about this software |
Microsoft Word |
|
|
|
Microsoft Excel |
|
|
|
Microsoft PowerPoint |
|
|
|
Microsoft Access |
|
|
|
Microsoft Publisher |
|
|
|
Microsoft Outlook |
|
|
|
Microsoft FrontPage |
|
|
|
AppleWorks/ClarisWorks |
|
|
|
Open Office |
|
|
|
Corel WordPerfect |
|
|
|
Lotus SmartSuite |
|
|
|
Macromedia Dreamweaver |
|
|
|
Macromedia Fireworks |
|
|
|
Macromedia FreeHand |
|
|
|
Macromedia Flash |
|
|
|
Adobe Photoshop |
|
|
|
Adobe Illustrator |
|
|
|
Adobe Acrobat |
|
|
|
Adobe InDesign |
|
|
|
Adobe PageMaker |
|
|
|
Adobe Premiere |
|
|
|
Adobe GoLive |
|
|
|
Apple – iMovie |
|
|
|
Apple – iPhoto |
|
|
|
Apple – iDVD |
|
|
|
Apple – GarageBand
|
|
|
|
Apple – iTunes |
|
|
|
Apple – Keynote |
|
|
|
Apple – FinalCutPro
|
|
|
|
Paint Shop Pro |
|
|
|
Print Shop |
|
|
|
Netscape Composer |
|
|
|
Inspiration |
|
|
|
Kidspiration |
|
|
|
Other (please list): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your time!
Appendix D
Reflective Journal Questions
-
Were all members of a group actively engaged
when small groups shared resources or worked together on a
task?
-
What strategies did students employ where
they perused and read web pages for research or to process
information?
-
Does computer technology increase student
motivation?
-
Does participation in an online collaborative
project affect motivation?
-
How can multimedia be used as an assessment
tool?
-
How are students whose computer skills are
weak using computers in the content areas?
-
How are student attitudes influenced when
a particular strategy or use of software is implemented?
-
How are student behaviors influenced when
a particular strategy or use of software is implemented?
-
How is student knowledge influenced when
a particular strategy or use of software is implemented?
-
How are students affected when web pages
and discussion boards are used to facilitate communication
between home and school?
-
What are effects of having students work
in pairs versus working individually on the computer?
-
How can a discussion board increase student
use of technology?
- How will putting information on a class website affect student
achievement, attitudes, or behavior?
- How can the use of databases improve students’ understanding
of content knowledge?
- What are the effects of using different software programs
on the continuity and flow of a project?
Appendix E
