ACADEMIC OUTCOMES AND NEW LITERACIES EVIDENT DU RING A DIGITAL STORYTELLING UNIT WITHIN A SECONDARY ENGLISH CLASS: A CASE STUDY By REBECCA SHIELDS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2014
2014 Rebecca Shields
To my parents, family, and friends for their unceasing love and support throughout this journey
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my loving family members for their constant love and support. My parents have been by my side for each and every step of this process. They have constantly supported me and provided assistance througho ut my many adventures in life. They have always believed in me and encouraged me to continue forward even when I thought there was no l ight at the end of the tunnel. For being the best role models and parents anyone could ask for, I thank you deeply. I would also like to thank my two sisters, Erin and Robyn, for their encouragement and reminders to laugh. I thank my committee co chairs, Dr. Kara Dawson and Dr. Barbara Pace, for their commitment to guiding me through this process and reading countless dra fts. Their expertise and guidance have pushed me to continue to learn throughout this process and reach beyond what I thought I was capable of doing. I learned from you both daily. I thank my other committee members, Dr. Eileen Oliver and Dr. Sondra Lo ri Smith. I greatly appreciate the time and expertise you extended to me. I appreciate you challenging me to think outside the traditional norms of Language Arts research. I am grateful for the encouragement you both extended to me. I thank my greatest supporters, Jennifer Laurie and Misty You have been there for me from the beginning of this journey; your encouragement and steadfast support have been constant reminders that this goal is attainable. Thank you. I thank the administration, teachers, and students of the school in which this study was conducted. I would especially like to thank the teacher who so graciously shared her classroom as well as her time with me. She worked tirelessly to support this study. I acknowledge her many contribut ions to this study and appreciate the effort she put into making it possible.
5 I thank my fellow cohort members. Going through this journey with each of you has been a blessing, and I have truly enjoyed our time together. Your endless support and motiva tion does not go unnoticed. I would specifically like to extend a special thank you to Dr. Anna Baralt, Dr. Katrina Johnston, and Dr. Meredith Coughlin. Each of you has gone above and beyond to help me from our very first semester together. I know I wou ld not be here without each of you and your unfailing willingness to give your time and energy to read drafts and provide feedback and encouragement. Thank you. Finally, I would like to thank Jennifer Hogan for teaching me that hard work and dedication ca n lead to great things. The commitment to excellence you demanded and instilled in us has stuck with me, and your influence on my life has played a pivotal role in guiding me through this journey. For your leadership and always requiring the best of me, I sincerely thank you.
6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 9 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 10 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ........................... 11 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 15 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 16 Conceptual Framework of Digital Storytelling ................................ ......................... 17 Statement of Problem ................................ ................................ ............................. 21 Significance of Study ................................ ................................ .............................. 24 Research Questions ................................ ................................ ............................... 25 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ .......................... 26 Digital Storytelling Overview ................................ ................................ ................... 27 New Literacies Overview ................................ ................................ ........................ 29 Conceptual Framework ................................ ................................ ........................... 30 Benefits of Digital Storytelling ................................ ................................ ................. 33 Engagement ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 33 Motivation ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 35 Writing Skills ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 36 Multiple Literacies ................................ ................................ ............................. 37 21 st Century Skills ................................ ................................ ............................. 41 Deep Learning Tool ................................ ................................ .......................... 43 Best Practices of Digital Storytelling ................................ ................................ ....... 46 Planning ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 47 Modeling & Elements ................................ ................................ ....................... 48 Writing ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 49 Collecting Materials ................................ ................................ .......................... 5 1 Storyboard and Narration ................................ ................................ ................. 51 Editing ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 52 Teacher Facilitation ................................ ................................ .......................... 53 Sharing ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 54 Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 55 Implementation of Digital Storytelling ................................ ................................ ...... 55 Factors ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 56
7 Steps ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 57 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 57 3 METHODS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 60 Pilot Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 60 Context ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 61 Instructional Overview of Current Study ................................ ................................ .. 64 Pre Writing ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 65 Writing ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 67 Post Writing ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 67 Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 68 Research Questions ................................ ................................ ............................... 69 Research Design ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 69 Data Collection ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 71 Observations ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 71 Student Reflections ................................ ................................ .......................... 74 Final Artifacts ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 75 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 76 Trustworthiness of Study ................................ ................................ ........................ 78 Credibility ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 78 Transferability ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 79 Dependability ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 79 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 80 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 81 4 FINDINGS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 85 Participants ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 85 Project Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 86 Findings for Research Question 1 ................................ ................................ .......... 87 Working with ICTs and Multimodal Texts ................................ ......................... 89 Locating Information ................................ ................................ ....................... 107 Evaluating Information Usefulness ................................ ................................ 112 Collaborative Practices ................................ ................................ ................... 116 Findings for Research Questio n 2 ................................ ................................ ........ 118 Writing Standards ................................ ................................ ........................... 122 Production and Distribution of Writing Standards ................................ ........... 131 Presentation of Knowledge and Ideas Standards ................................ ........... 138 Language Standards ................................ ................................ ...................... 140 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 144 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ...... 146 Summary of Findings ................................ ................................ ............................ 146 Discussion of the Findings ................................ ................................ .................... 149 Working with ICTs and Multi modal Texts ................................ ....................... 150
8 Locating Information ................................ ................................ ....................... 152 Evaluating Information Usefulness ................................ ................................ 154 Collaborative Practices ................................ ................................ ................... 157 Academic Outcomes ................................ ................................ ...................... 159 Implications for the Field ................................ ................................ ....................... 161 Results Warrant Digital Storytelling Units ................................ ....................... 162 Multiple Technology Platforms ................................ ................................ ....... 162 Library of Resources ................................ ................................ ...................... 163 Techn ology Assumptions ................................ ................................ ............... 164 Expand Literacy Experiences ................................ ................................ ......... 164 Need for Collaborative Skills ................................ ................................ .......... 165 Implications for the Local Context ................................ ................................ ......... 165 Cross Curricular Units ................................ ................................ .................... 166 Technology Inventory ................................ ................................ ..................... 167 Infrastructure ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 167 Professional Development ................................ ................................ .............. 168 Technology Curriculum ................................ ................................ ................... 170 Parent Awareness ................................ ................................ .......................... 172 Implications as a Practitioner Scholar ................................ ................................ ... 173 Change Agent ................................ ................................ ................................ 175 Professional Development ................................ ................................ .............. 176 Culture Shift ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 176 Implications for Future Research ................................ ................................ .......... 178 Generalizability ................................ ................................ ............................... 179 Digital Storytelling at the Secondary Level ................................ ..................... 179 Teacher R eluctance ................................ ................................ ....................... 179 Reluctance Factors ................................ ................................ ........................ 180 Academic Achievement ................................ ................................ .................. 180 Subject Areas ................................ ................................ ................................ 181 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 181 APPENDIX A STORYBOARD TEMPLATE ................................ ................................ ................. 183 B STUDENT FINAL ARTIFACT RUBRIC ................................ ................................ 184 C OBSERVATION PROTOCOL ................................ ................................ ............... 189 D IRB APPROVAL ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 190 E PARENTAL CONSENT ................................ ................................ ........................ 191 F CHILD ASSENT ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 192 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 193 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 206
9 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 The observation protocol and rule s for inclusion ................................ ................ 82 3 2 Criteria and standards used to create final artifact rubric ................................ ... 83 4 1 Student digital story overview ................................ ................................ ............. 87 4 2 Combination of themes overview ................................ ................................ ........ 89 4 3 Student u se of extra features ................................ ................................ ............ 101 4 4 Rubric criteria fields and scores breakdown ................................ ..................... 119 A 1 Student artifact rubric ................................ ................................ ....................... 184 C 1 Observation protocol ................................ ................................ ........................ 189
10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4 1 Example of student feedback on rough draft ................................ ...................... 92 4 2 MLA example formatting style sheet ................................ ................................ ... 93 4 3 MLA properly formatted student document ................................ ......................... 94 4 4 MLA heading error within a student document ................................ ................... 94 4 5 MLA font error within a studen t document (Veranda Size 8) .............................. 95 4 6 MLA spacing error within a student document ................................ .................... 95 4 7 Student document that contains major formatting error ................................ ...... 95 4 8 Student Google Drive account ................................ ................................ ............ 97 4 9 Movie export within Toontastic ................................ ................................ ......... 102 4 10 Movie export within iMovie ................................ ................................ ................ 102 4 11 Google Drive share feature ................................ ................................ .............. 103 4 12 Teacher feedback on student rough draft ................................ ......................... 105 4 13 Teacher feedback on student final draft ................................ ........................... 106 4 14 Student use of communication through LMS ................................ .................... 106 4 15 Advanced search option within the Google search engine ............................... 110 4 16 Preliminary Google photo search layout ................................ ........................... 113 4 17 Example music selections within iMovie for iOS ................................ ............... 114 4 18 Student storyboard ................................ ................................ ........................... 127 4 19 Student storyboard example without drawings ................................ ................. 134 4 20 Screen shot of upload page within Google Drive app ................................ ....... 136 4 21 Share option within Google Drive app ................................ .............................. 136 4 22 Share option within Toontastic application ................................ ....................... 137
11 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ACT IRB American College Testing Institutional Review Board ISTE International Society for Technology in Education LMS Learning Management System NCTE National Council of Teachers of English
12 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of F lorida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education ACADEMIC OUTCOMES AND NEW LITERACIES EVIDENT DURING A DIG ITAL STORYTELLING UNIT WITHIN A SECONDARY ENGLISH CLASS: A CASE STUDY By Rebecca Shields Augu st 2014 Chair: Kara Dawson Cochair: Barbara Pace Major: Curriculum and Instruction The purpose of this study was to identify the academic outcomes and new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom Students wro lesson and created digital stories that utilized pictures, music, and narration. The following research questions were used to guide the study: (a) In what ways, if any, are new lit eracies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom? (b) In what ways, if any, do students meet English 12 objectives related to the writing and language standards during a digital storytelling unit? Q ualitative data were c ollected and triangulated through observations and field notes, reflections, and final student artifacts. Data were analyzed using the constant comparative method to identify common themes and patterns. The findings revealed four main areas in which new literacies were evident: working with ICTs and multimodal texts, locating information, evaluating information usefulness, and collaborative practices. Furthermore, the academic goals of the unit were met as evidenced in both student writing and the digita l stories.
13 Students worked with and manipulated information and multimodal text using ICTs to create and share their projects. They located information for use within their projects as well as to solve issues that arose throughout the process. Once stude nts were able to located information, they had to evaluate its usefulness within each situation to determine if it was beneficial or pertinent their needs. Furthermore, although these were individual projects, the unit was social in nature, and students w ork collaboratively to provide feedback, opinions, and help through the project. These transferable skills transcend knowledge that can be tested with a pen and paper, and these learning behaviors will help them work efficiently and effectively in modern society. Student gains in motivation and new literacy skills and content mastery warrant more project based learning such as digital storytelling. However, assumptions should not be made regarding student technology skills such as emailing, file structure and search techniques. Instead, teachers need to continue to teach these skills within the classroom to provide professional experience with these types of literacies. Furthermore, schools must seek to build a robust inventory of devices and platforms, while establishing a robust infrastructure to support these devices during projects. Finally, professional development and support are key factors in the success of teacher implementation of these units; therefore, schools that want to make the shift to allowing students to interact with new literacies, need to make sure they have a solid professional development plan and ample support for teachers and students. Researchers have shown that students need new literacy skills in order to live and work in m odern society; therefore, teachers must consider new methods in order to
14 meet this need. Based on the results of this study, digital storytelling is a method of providing students with the opportunity to interact with new literacy skills within a secondar y English classroom without sacrificing traditional objectives and academic outcomes.
15 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION T the growing importance of 21 st century skills, teachers need to understand how technology can be used as a valuable learning tool (Ohler, 2009). However, the simple act of adding a computer to a lesson is not enough and has little effect on the classroom environment (Robin, 2008). Th erefore, t eachers must integrate meaningful technology that creates authentic learning experiences engage s and motivate s student learners, and also prepar es them to live and work in the real world (Sadik, 2008). While not new to education, literacy is an other topic of great discussion among educators. According that all students benefit from learning ways that allow them to participate fully in public, community, and econo this goal. Education and literacy are at a crossroads. Never before have we as a society seen a concept adopted so quickly or by as many people at one time as we have with technology interacting with academic content and with the rapid expansion of technology in education and the world these interactions are becoming more complex (Karchmer Klein & Shinas, 2012; Spire, Morris, & Zhang, 2012). As a result, the idea of literacy is ever evolving. Since expectations for what students need to learn and be able to do are also changing s tudents need t his new set of skills more than ever before (Anstey & Bull, 2006; Ka rchmer Klein & Shinas, 2012; Leu, Kinzer, Cioro, & Cammack, 2004 ; New London Group, 1996 ).
16 According to Tan and Guo (2010), this new skill set goes beyond traditional literacies, such as reading and writing, to include new literacies related to communica ting and working with multimedia and technology. Consequently, t eachers need to find way s to ensure their students are developing competencies based on the ever changing nature of literacy pedagogy through authentic learning environments (New London Group 1996; Street, 2003; Tierney, Bond, & Bresler, 2006). Digital storytelling is becoming a popular method for students to work with multimedia and technology through hand s on activities (Anderson, 2010; Barrett, 2006; Gregory, Steelman, & Caverly, 2009; Hu ll & Nelson, 2005; Robin, 2006; Rossiter & Garcia, 2010; Sa dik, 2008; Skouge & Rao, 2009). Background Digital storytelling is the act of joining traditional storytelling with modern multimedia tools (Ohler, 2005) ; it is a powerful medium because it weaves music, narrative and voice together, thereby giving deep dimension and vivid color to have shown that digital storytelling is a dynamic way to do the following: e ngage and motivate students (Li & Morehead, 2006; Malin, 2010; Ohler, 2005; Robin, 2006; Sadik, 2008; Skouge & Rao, 2009; Sweeder, 2008; Ulbig, 2010); i ncrease writing skills (Gakhar & Thompson, 200 7; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009); a llow students to demo nstrate their understanding in creative ways (Robin, 2008; Skouge & Rao, 2009 ; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011); p rovide an outlet for students to work with 21 st century skills (Czarnecki, 2009; Robin, 2008); u tilize multiple types of literacy (Churchill, P ing, Oakley, & Churchill, 2008; Li & Morehead, 2006; Ohler, 2005; Robin, 2008 ; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011).
17 The majority of these studies were conducted at the elementary and higher education level s However, a pilot study conducted by the current rese archer during the 2011 2012 school year on the digital storytelling within an English 12 classroom revealed the same benefits applied at the secondary level. The focus of the pilot study was to examine student engagement and motivation (Harris, 2010; Pike Smart, & Ethington, 2012; Skinner, Zimmer Gembeck, & Connell, 1998). Consistent with previous studies, p ilot study results revealed that digital storytelling had a positive effect on student engagement, motivation and subject area content based on the course of study at the secondary level. Based on these results, one of the teachers who participated in the pilot advocated for using digital storytelling again during the 2013 2014 school year, but with a slightly different focus. As of 2012, the state of Alabama requires that all schools implement common emphasizes fostering multiple types of literacy, or new literacies, to prepare students for success in college and modern s ociety. These new standards require students to be literate in more than just reading and writing. Digital storytelling provides an opportunity to interact with literacy beyond the traditional definition of literacy. Therefore, this current study focus ed on the academic outcomes and new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom. For the purpose of this study, academic outcomes included students meeting course and assignment objectives as aligned by the state c ourse of study. Conceptual Framework of Digital Storytelling As stated by Moore Hart (2008), when technology is implemented into the curriculum to support the content, it has a positive effect on learning. T echnology
18 enhances course content and, thereby connects students to the learning process (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; Keengwe, Onchwari, & Wachira, 2008; Sweeder, 2008). The act of igital storytelling combines the age old methodology of storytelling with the modern day implementation of technology to engage students in authentic activities that enhance learning. Therefore, digital storytelling is rooted in constructivism in which le arning integrates the use of meaningful content (Heo, 2011). Constructivism places the responsibility of learning in the hands of the individual, as he or she learns through personal experiences (Heo, 2011). Technology allows teachers to employ constructi vist principles by promoting a student centered atmosphere (Norum, Grabinger, & Duffield, 1999). A student centered classroom promotes student responsibility and ownership; thereby making the learning more meaningful to the student (Anderson, 2010). Acco rding to Anderson (2010), when students take ownership of their learning, they become highly motivated and engaged in the learning process. Digital storytelling facilitates learning opportunities for students to solve real world problems throughout the lea rning experience, which makes the content more meaningful and relevant (Heo, 2011). As students participate in digital storytelling activities, they develop critical life competencies, such as collaboration and critical thinking skills (Carr & Jitendar, 2 000; Kieler, 2010). These skills, along with others embedded in the digital storytelling process, can be considered constructivist strategies (Barrett, 2006; Nanjappa & Grant, 2003; Sadik, 2008).
19 According to Thesen and Kara ate, students must do more than simply read and write; they must comprehend, apply, analyze, synthesize, (pp. 99 100). Ohler (2009) further suggested that being literate in volves being able to read and write using current media. To equip students with the technological skills they will need in the future, schools must provide opportunities for students to transform their knowledge and skills by interacting with literacy in new ways (Anstey & Bull, 2006; Mullen & Wedwick, 2008). In other words, students need to interact with multiple types of literacy. The literacy of today incorporates a blend of literacies to develop well informed and well rounded citizens (New London Gro up, 1996). The convergence of multiple types of literacy has become a key tenant to literacy today (Jenkins, 2006; Potter, 2010). It is this convergence that teachers must acknowledge in their professional practice. Literacy can no longer be compartment alized into the separate areas of written and spoken language, media literacy, visual literacy, and digital literacy. Rather, multimodal in nature. This more dynamic view of literacy allows students to extract meaning from and work with all types of text by interacting with different types of signs or symbols, known as semiotic systems As noted by Anstey and Bull (2006), the five semiotic systems include linguistic, visual, a uditory, gestural, and spatial. T he linguistic mode, written and spoken word, was the primary semiotic system of literacy pedagogy in years past; however, this is no longer the case (Anstey & Bull, 2006; Jewitt, 2008). According to Connor and Sullivan ( 2012), it is the job of teachers
20 to work with and express their ideas in a variety of ways with a variety of tools (Siegel, 2006). N ew literacies which include techn ological tools like digital storytelling, are locate information, critically evaluate the usefulness of that information, synthesize information to answer those qu estions, and then communicate the answers to other (Leu et al., 2004, p. 1572)? The literacy of today requires the blending of all five semiotic systems, so that discrete ro multiple semiotic systems are used to communicate are referred to as multimodal texts. It is within these multimodal texts in which mean ing making within literacy is based instead of relying solely on linguistics or the traditional definition of literacy (Anstey & Bull, 2006; Jewitt, 2008; New London Group, 1996). Literacy now requires an understanding of all five semiotic systems as well as how they interact with one another and provide me aning (Anstey & Bull, 2006). Multimodal texts, including print, video, still images, audio, and music, provide students with new ways of expressing th eir ideas and knowledge (Spire et al. 2012). Digit al storytelling incorporates all types of literacies and multimodal texts. By working with multimodal texts, students can interact with new types of communication. The digital revolution, however, has changed the ways in which
21 individuals access and commu nicate information (Marcus, 2009; Morrell, 2012; Wolfe & Flewitt, 2010). T echnology has becom e an increasingly popular method for students to communicate with their peers and the world (Spires et al. 2012). Leu et al. (2011) suggest that information and communication technologies ( ICTs ) are important because of the information they can provide, but new literacies are required to effectively use th is information. Statement of Problem The aim of this current study was to identify academic outcomes and ne w literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom. As stated by the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) (2009): Fundamental changes in the economy, jobs, and businesses have reshaped industry and the nature of work. Today, employees engage with a technology driven, diverse, and quickly changing global economy that requires new and different skills. Literacy demands have changed along with these changes in society and technology. (p. 15) Society is now capa ble of obtaining digital information quickly According to Morrell (2012), the speed of transmission is only going to get faster. As educators, it is important to prepare students for this digitalized society so that they can function in the real world b oth professionally and personally (Mills, 2010). By implementing new literacy practices in the classroom, students are exposed to these new forms of literacy and therefore more comfortable with using them outside of school (Cervetti, Damico, Pearson, 2006 (p. 410). Forzani and Leu (2012) noted that new literacy instruction is not only important literacy instruction needs to be implemented into the classroom.
22 Based on these new expectations, teachers need to prepare students to live and work in a world that requires problem solving skills and the ability to collaborate and interact with multiple types of text s technology and people in a v ariety of situations (NCTE, 2009 ). Therefore, teachers must bring new literacies into the curriculum. Yet many teachers still vi ew content, literacy, and technology as isolated sets of skills that can be taught separately (Draper, Smith, Hall, & Siebert, 2005). Teachers who use p roject based learning techniques on the other hand, regard these skills as fluid and recommend that st udents be given opportunities to work with content, literacy, and technology together in real world situations in order to create college and career ready students. elements to the traditional definition of simply reading and writing (Buschman, 2009; Hsu, & Wang, 2010). L iteracy now includes the ability to communicate and express thoughts effectively using technology (Cope & Kalantzie, 2000; Gallagher & Nteliglou, 2011; New L ondon Group, 1996; Street, 2003). In other words: [t]o be literate today often means being able to use some combination of blogs, wikis, texting, search engines, Facebook, foursquare, Google Docs, Skype, Chrome, iMovie, Contribute, Basecamp, or many oth er relatively new technologies, including thousands of mobile applications, or (Leu et al. 2011, p. 6) These skills and tools are becoming increasingly pervasive in the classroom; thus, teachers must recognize the growing importance of new litera cies (Hsu & Want, 2010; Karchmer Klein & Shinas, 2012). However, new literacy practices can be complicated for teachers who are comfortable with their current practices. Additionally, current high stakes testing still assess traditional literacies (Kellin ger, 2012; Wimmer,
23 Skramstad, & Khan, 2012). Consequently, traditional literacy pedagogy remains the primary form of literacy instruction. As demonstrated in the literature, however, students are becoming increasingly disengaged with these type s of practic es (Alvermann, 2008; Clark, 2010; Connor & Sullivan, 2012; Honan, 2012). Teachers may be uncertain about implementing new literacies into their classrooms; however, students need to work with these new skills in order to be successful. Experts have recomm ended that teachers challenge their conventional views of literacy (Ran tala & Korhonen, 2008; Tierney et al. 2006). In 2010, the state of Alabama completely revised the English / Language Arts state standards. As of 2012, the state requires that all sc hools implement these standards course objectives are a combination of traditional standards and the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social s tudies, Science, and Technical Subjects Th e new focus emphasizes fostering multiple types of literacy, or new literacies. New literacy practices entail more than simply apply ing technology to a lesson; it requires teachers to challenge their students in new ways while still covering the traditional objectives and skills (Honan, 2012). In order to meet the requirements of the Common C ore and engage students in meaningful ways, teachers must find ways to implement content, literacy, and technology skills i nto authentic and purposeful lessons. This new challenge of creating college and career ready students while still covering course content and objectives has become a common obstacle in Alabama classroom s Therefore, the purpose of this study was to id entify the academic
24 outcomes and new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom. Significance of Study At a time in which educators and stakeholders are increasingly calling for reform s with in the educational syste m, it is imperative that studies be conducted regarding teachers who are implementing innovative lessons in order to help inform future decisions regarding curriculum and instruction In order to meet the new college and career ready standards educators must identify ways to promote effective instruction that incorporate new literacies while still meeting traditional objectives. To better understand how to implement new literacies in education, it is important to implement and assess the effectiveness of new and innovative methods of instruction. Thus this study strived to identify the academic outcomes of using digital storytelling as a means of implementing new literacies. By identifying new literacies and academic outcomes, future educators may be p repared to determine whether digital storytelling best fits their lesson needs as well as identify the best methods for introducing this technology at the secondary level. Finally, by exploring the impact on student achievement this study identified the i nfluences digital storytelling has beyond new literacies to ensure that students are also meeting the traditional academic objectives. Educators need to focus on fostering new literacies among their students that rite (Anstey & Bull, 2006). This study consider ed whether or not digital storytelling introduced these types of skills into the classroom and foster ed new literacies. Therefore, the significance of this study is the
25 analysis of academic outcomes and new literacies associated with the implementation of digital storytelling into a secondary classroom to help inform future educators Research Questions This qualitative study explore d the academic outcomes and new literacies associated with the use of digital storytelling in the secondary classroom. A case study approach was used to conduct this study. For the purpose of this study, the following information, evaluate the information, synthesize information to answer questions, and concern for this study was to identify the academic outcomes and new literacies evident during a digital story telling unit within an English 12 classroom. In order to analyze this concern the following research questions were answered. 1. In what ways, if any, are new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom ? 2. In what ways if any, do students meet English 12 objectives related to the writing and language standards during a digital storytelling unit?
26 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW While not new to education, digital storytelling is quickly becoming a popular method of enhanci ng student learning (Anderson 2010; Barrett, 2006; Gregory et al. 2009; Robin, 2006; Sadik, 2008; Skouge & Rao, 2009). Digital storytelling is the act of joining traditional storytelling with modern multimedia tools (Bolch, 2008). Benmayor (2008) state d that digital storytelling provides a good blend of creativity, play and analytical thinking; therefore, it works well with project based learning. Project based real w orld experience and hands on discovery (Anderson, 2010, p. 20). As a form of project based learning, digital storytelling is a powerful way to: (a) engage students (Li & Morehead, 2006; Malin, 2010; Robin, 2006; Sadik, 2008; Skouge & Rao, 2009; Sweeder, 20 08), (b) improve writing skills (Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009), (c) facilitate differentiated instruction (Benmayor, 2008; Kieler, 2010; Sweeder, 2008), (d) demonstrate understanding in creative ways (Robin, 2008; Skouge & Rao, 2009 ; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011), and (e) provide an outlet for students to learn 21 st century skills (Czarnecki, 2009; Fredricks, 2009; Malita & Martin, 2010; Robin, 2008) and media literacy (Church ill et al. 2008; Li & Morehead, 2006; Robin, 2008; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011). This literature review focused on the benefits of digital storytelling and how it is best implemented into the curriculum. This focus was chosen in order to acquire a full understanding of the rationale and best practices of digi tal storytelling as a means of project based learning and implementing new literacies because both are becoming widely used in all levels of education. A synthesis of this information provides not only
27 an overview for digital storytelling and new literac ies but also a rationale for its implementation. This review addresses the benefits of digital storytelling and then explores the implementation of digital storytelling as a form of project based learning. To consider these questions, a search of the li terature was executed using the following key terms: digital storytelling, project based learning, technology integration, digital stories, storytelling, media literacy, and digital narratives. These key terms were searched within several databases, inclu ding Wilson Education, EBSCO, ERIC, JSTOR, and EdITLib. Articles were sorted by overall theme to help organize the information in a logical pattern. For the purpose of this literature review, a specific grade level was not selected. This review consider s literature from the primary l evel through higher education. T he number of resources for each level was limited, this decision was made in order to develop a full understanding of the benefits and best practices of digital storytelling. However, it shou ld be noted that most literature on digital storytelling is focused on the pri mary and high education levels. Digital Storytelling Overview Traditional storytelling is a powerful teaching strategy that has been used for many decades to share experiences an d explore ideas (Skouge & Rao, 2009; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011). Digital storytelling is a proven instructional method that helps students improve writing skills, understand narrative form, improve visual literacy, and develop communication and public speaking skills (Dillingham, 2005; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). Malin (2010) noted that without the ability to visualize a story, students lose their connection to it. According to McDrury and Alterio (2001), storytelling is a natural human practice, and
28 music, narrative and voice together, thereby giving deep dimension and vivid color to storytelling is based in the traditional methodologies of storytelling (Garcia & Rossiter, 2010; Sheneman, 2010). Digital storytelling has been referred to as the modern day application of storytelling, one that can be utilized across different subject areas and levels (EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 2007; Garcia & Rossiter, 2010; Heo, 2011). Digital storytelling and project based learning are proven methods for technology rich learning; therefore, the combination of the two is a compelling way for teachers to implement meaningfu l technology to motivate and engage students (Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Robin & Pierson, 2005). According to the EDUCAUSE Learning content, including images, sound and video, to create a short movie, typically with a not simply narrating a set of pictures. It is the process of using words and pictures to anywhere and shared with people everywhere (Meadows, 2003; Robin & Pierson, 2005). Once a video is uploaded to the Internet, digital stories can potentially reach millions of people worldwid e (Chung, 2007). Therefore, students can create projects that reach far beyond the classroom to a worldwide audience (Borneman & Gibson, 2011). This new, larger audience may motivate students to produce their best work while improving their ability to an As technology continues to change and develop, digital storytelling is a constantly evolving practice (Rule, 2010; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011). Further, with
29 decreasing costs of technology digital st orytelling is more accessible than ever before (Meadows, 2003; Resnick, 2002; Robin, 2008). The number of teachers using digital storytelling continues to increase, yet Dogan and Robin (2008) have warned that regardless of the focus, subject area content, writing, or technology, digital storytelling needs be tied directly to curriculum. New Literacies Overview In the traditional sense, literacy is limited to reading and writing; however, the definition of literacy has been expanded to include the ability t o communicate with others in a variety of ways and through a variety of texts in order to fully function in modern society ( Hobbs, 2011 ; Mayer, 2008; New London Group, 1996). Thus, literacy today means being able to work with all types of text s including print based, media based, and even gestural (Anstey & Bull, 2006). Based on this contemporary notion of to 2006, pp. 20 Scharber (2008) noted that many teachers still rely on print based literacies, which is counterintuitive to what students use outside of the classroom. This outdated approach to literacy has faced harsh criticism, as educati on needs to bring in new types of texts (Jewitt, 2008; Sefton Green, 2006). This does not suggest that new literacies replace traditional literacies. Instead, Connor and Sullivan (2012) argued that there needs to be a blend of both old and new literacy p ractices in which each informs the other. Morrell (2012) proposed that new literacy practices work best when they do not abandon but embrace traditional literacies. R. Selfe and C. Selfe ( 2008) observed the following:
30 students no longer live in a this or that culture (as in choosing between writing or multimodal composing), but, rather, in a both this and that culture... one that expects both writing and multimodal composing to be ( p. 85) By merging traditional literacy instruction with new approaches that include enhanced literacy skills, teachers should be able to keep pace with the ever changing world of technology. Further, these complementary approaches can promote more comple x literacy skills sets among students (Karchmer Klein & Shi na, 2012; Wilber, 2012; Wimmer et al. 2012). This study takes traditional literacy practices of research and writing and builds on these traditional literacies by applying a multimedia component. For this study, students will create digital stories and thereby interact with new literacies Conceptual Framework As stated by Moore Hart (2008), when technology is implemented into the curriculum to support the content, it has a positive effect on lea rning. According to the experts, technology makes course content meaningful, and in return, connects students to the learning process (C arr & Jitendra, 2000; Keengwe et al. 2008; Sweeder, 2008). The act of storytelling has also been shown to connect stu meaning age old methodology of storytelling with the modern day implementation of technology to engage students in authentic activities that enhance lea rning. Therefore, digital storytelling is rooted in constructivism in which learning integrates the use of meaningful content (Heo, 2011). Constructivism places the responsibility of learning in the hands of the individual, as he or she learns through per sonal experiences and doing (Heo, 2011). Technology
31 allows teachers to employ constructivist principles by promoting a stud ent centered atmosphere (Norum et al. 1999). A student centered classroom fosters student responsibility and ownership; thereby ma king the learning more meaningful to the student (Anderson, 2010). According to Anderson (2010), when students take ownership of their learning, they become highly motivated and engaged in the learning process. Digital storytelling uses authentic activiti es to implement the principles of constructivism (Sweeder, 2008). It creates a learning opportunity for students to solve real world problems throughout the learning experience that makes the content more meaningful and relevant (Heo, 2011). As students participate in digital storytelling activities they develop critical life skills, such as collaboration and critical thinking (Carr & Jitendar, 2000; Kieler, 2010). These skills, along with others embedded in the digital storytelling process, can be consi dered constructivist strategies (Barrett, 2006; Nanjappa & Grant, 2003; Sadik, 2008). D igital storytelling provides a comprehensive opportunity for students to learn by doing, it provides an opportunity for project based learning. Project based learning is based on student learning communities and aligns with student needs and learning styles (Anderson, 2010; Percy, 2003). Project learning opportunities than the traditional teacher 07, p. 1). In project based learning, students learn skills by completing hands on tasks. In this way, students become active participants in their own learning. Researchers have found that active participation has a positive impact on student learning en vironments (Eskrootchi & Oskrochi, 2010; Griffiths, Oates, & Lockyer, 2007). It is highly
32 recommended that teachers who implement digital storytelling units also have an understanding of project based learning. Since digital storytelling is rich in multim edia, the principles of multimedia learning apply to digital storytelling as well (Heo, 2011; Robin, 2006; Sadik, 2008). Researchers have shown that student interest increases and organizational skills improve through the use of multimedia projects (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; Nowaczyk, Santos, & Patton, 1998; Robin, 2008). Ulbig (2010) discovered that visual images used in the classroom not only increased student engagement, but also improved student recollection. Hibbing and Rankin Erikson (2003) purported that multimedia positively impacts student retention and comprehension of new content. The research literature is replete with examples in which multimedia presentations have had a positive influence on learning and students learn better through the combi nation of seeing, hearing, and doing rather than just hearing alone (Mayer, 1997; Smith & Woody, 2000). Based on cues more quickly than auditory information. While B artlett and Strough (2003) and Smith and Woody (2000) both identified higher student grades in courses that utilized multimedia, Smith and Woody (2000) noted that multimedia had a much greater effect on visually oriented students. Further, the authors sug gested that the use of multimedia might even hinder students who prefer auditory information. Researchers have established that students enjoy classes that utilize multimedia (Nowaczyk et al., 1998); therefore, the use of multimedia may outweigh any poten tial drawbacks within the learning process (Bartlett & Strough, 2003).
33 Benefits of Digital Storytelling The benefits of digital storytelling are widely documented in the literature and are comparable across academic levels. The most widely discussed ben efits are student engagement (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; Kearney, 2011; Robin, 2008) and motivation (Kajder, 2004; Kieler, 2010; Sweeder, 2008). Improvement to student writing is also cited as a key benefit in the literature (Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Sylveste r & Greenidge, 2009). Furthermore, digital storytelling introduces students to multiple types of literacy (Dogan & Robin, 2008; Li & Morehead, 2006) and 21 st century skills (Czarnecki, 2009; Moore Hart, 2008; Robin, 2008), specifically creativity and coll aboration (Garcia & Rossiter, 2010; Percy, 2003; Robin, 2006; Sadik, 2008; Sweeder, 2008). Digital storytelling has been shown to connect students to course content (Harris, 2007; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011), while presenting students with deep learning opportunities (Kieler, 2010; Robin, 2008; Sadik, 2008). Each of these benefits dealing with new literacy instruction is discussed in greater detail throughout this section. Engagement Student engagement is a widely discussed benefit of digital storytelli ng and project based learning, which Eskrootchi and Oskrochi (2010) emphasized as a key factor in successful learning. Throughout a digital storytelling unit, students are engaged in project based learning with a specific purpose; therefore, they have a de sire to succeed both inside the classroom and beyond (Percy, 2003). Additionally, researchers have noted that students who interact with a project based learning unit are able to transfer the skills and knowledge they acquire to other situations (Mitchell Foulger, Wetzel, & Rathkey, 2009). Carr and Jitendra (2000) observed that students engaged in
34 project based learning were actively using and improving basic skill sets within authentic and meaningful situations. As stated by Anderson (2010), project ba sed and gives the instructor the opportunity to encourage teamwork, problem Hoadley, Gordin, and Means (2000) argued that active engagement, participation in gro ups, frequent interaction and feedback, and connections to real world context were deciding factors in what and how students learn. Project based learning has been shown to address all of these factors (Percy, 2003). Furthermore, a key finding in the lite rature is that digital storytelling increases student engagement (Barrett, 2006; Kearney, 2011). When digital storytelling is implemented as a project based learning unit, engagement is a noteworthy benefit. Teachers are able to engage students, while st ill promoting deep understanding of the content (Barrett, 2006; Dogan & Robin, 2008; Heo, 2011; Roby, 2010; Sadik, 2008). because he or she was immersed in the learni ng process. As students work with the content, they form connections that create deeper understanding of new concepts (Heo, 2011). According to Ulbig (2010), engagement within a course improves student learning and retention of new information. Robin (2 006) argued that due to the active nature of project based learning and digital storytelling, student recollection and comprehension improved. Multiple authors have noted that digital storytelling engages both the student working on the project as well as the audience which helps to create meaning for both parties (Barrett, 2006; Gracia & Rossiter, 2010; Kearney, 2011).
35 According to Gregory et al. (2009), students engage in the digital storytelling Kajder (2004) suggested that students are also given the opportunity to work as artists, programmers, screenwriters, and designers. Dogan and Robin (2008) corroborated this students can communicate and express themselves in ways they have never been able to before. Additionally, digital storytelling can be used to engage students in a variety of curricula, like social studies and science (Harris, 2007; Thesen & Kara Soterio u, 2011). Digital storytelling provides students with an opportunity to look at themselves through head (2006) indicated that digital storytelling allowed their students to be engaged in reflection throughout the process, an important trait to possess in modern society (Churchill et al., 2008; Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Malita & Martin, 2010). McDrury an d Alterio (2001) advised that teachers develop a comprehensive understanding of different storytelling methods in order to use r eflection as a learning tool. Motivation Sweeder (2008) established that digital storytelling increased student motivation bec ause they were a part of the process, thus, making the curriculum more significant to them. Students are provided opportunities throughout the digital storytelling process to make decisions (Kajder, 2004). Ivey (1999) asserted that students become motiva ted when they are allowed to make decisions and bring in texts that appeal to their interests. Students have responsibility throughout the digital storytelling process that not only motivates them, but also leads them to take ownership (Anderson, 2010; Per cy,
36 2003). Mitchell et al. (2009) have warned that ownership can be lost if the teacher is too involved in the decision making process. Students need to have as much responsibility and choice as the unit will allow. Teachers have found that shared owner ship promotes learning through discovery, collaboration and the sharing of knowle dge among students (Blumenfeld et al. 1991; Moore Hart, 2008). Carr and Jitendra (2000) asserted that implementing a project based unit had a positive effect on student lear Finally, multimedia motivates students because it makes the information more accessible for stu dents at all levels (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; Kieler, 2010; McLellan, 2006). Researchers in the areas of technology and writing have established that students become motivated in the writing process when technology is available (Sadik, 2008; Thesen & Kara S oteriou, 2011). Further, Warschauer, Arada, and Zheng (2010) discovered that students who had daily access to computers with an Internet connection not only wrote in a variety of formats, but also wrote better than their peers who did not have access to th is level of technology. Regardless, Moore Hart (2008) established Writing Skills Digital storytelling provides an opportunity for students to create genuine products while eng aging them in the writing process (Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). These genuine products go beyond the traditional notion of writing to incorporate new literacies as students are writing about meaningful text that they are connecte d to personally. Because students are engaged in this process, they are more likely to improve their writing skills and, consequently, become better writers
37 (Ballast, Stephens, & Radcliffe, 2008; Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Nelson, Hull & Roche Smith, 2008) Digital storytelling can serve as a source of encouragement for individuals who struggle with the processes of writing and revising and engender positive feelings towards writing overall (Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). Kajder (2004) noted that digital s torytelling helped improve student writing in her classroom. Through digital storytelling, students obtain a sense of audience awareness which lower level writers commonly lack (Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). Sadik (2008) also observed that student writin g became more complex as they felt more comfortable with both writing and technology. While many students may have the skills and experience necessary for digital storytelling, Ohler (2009) has indicated although many students might already have experienc e with technology, they still need help working with a new type of media and the narrative process. Meadows (2003) further noted that while the technology involved in digital storytelling might not be easy for everyone, it can be learned. Multiple Lite racies Throughout the process of digital storytelling students are given the opportunity to work with many types of literacy (Robin, 2008). Specifically, students work with digital, media, visual, language and performance literacy (Churchill et al., 2008; Dillingham, 2005; Fredricks, 2009; Li & Morehead, 2006; Robin, 2008; Roby, 2010). This combination of literacies supports new literacies, and exposes students to new literacy skills. that many teachers still rely on print based literacies, which is counterintuitive to what students use outside of the classroom. Thesen and Kara Soteriou (2011) contended be able to write and use technology to tell their story. According to Thesen and Kara Soteriou
38 comprehend, apply, analyze, synthesize, evaluate, and create in order to ma neuver 100). Ohler (2009) further suggested that being literate is also being able to read and write using current media. Schools need to provide opportunities for students to gain the technological skill s that they will need in the future (Mullen & Wedwick, 2008). In a ddition to working with multiple literacies, students participate in real world situations fostering new skills that are useful in life (Ohler, 2009). Researchers have also noted that dig ital storytelling and project based learning provide these types of authentic learning experiences for students while still maintaining traditional learning goals and course content (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; Eskrootchi & Oskrochi, 2010). Dogan and Robin (200 8) documented that teachers who implemented digital storytelling into their curriculum saw improvements among their students in ). According to Nation (2008), students learn through discovery activities that promote critical thinking and problem solving skills in real world situations. Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989) noted that these authentic learning opportunities help studen ts apply their knowledge to the outside world in ways that textbooks cannot. When students begin to work in authentic learning environments they see the relevance of the knowledge and skills they are acquiring as well as the importance of real world issue s that affect them personally (Carr & Jitendra, 2000). These real world situations make course content significant to student and help students further engage in the lesson (Gakhar & Thompson, 2007).
39 Multiliteracies bring in all types of texts. Anstey an d Bull (2006) define requires teachers and students to become active participan ts in society in an effort to change it and become influential in the future (Jewitt, 2008). Multiliteracies look at how ll, 2006, p. 55). Therefor e, multiliteracies look beyond the classroom and looks at literacy both within the school and out into the community which allows students to interact with texts that they will need in all areas of their lives (Callow, 2008; Jewitt, 2008). Therefore, in a ddition to working with m ultiple types of literacy, students participate in real world situations fostering new skills that are useful in life (Ohler, 2009). Life experiences inform literacy. Students use their past experiences as resources when they ar e engaged in literacy practices and meaning making which includes social and cultural resources, technological experience, and all previous life experiences, as well as sp lifeworld and school world experiences are a part of making (Anstey & Bull, 2006). Because of this, it is increasing ly important that teachers allow and help students to use their literacy identity when interacting with different types of texts as a starting point for meaning making (Anstey & Bull, 2006). It should be noted,
40 however, that each individual is unique in his or her own way, and bring s a different blend of cultural experiences and background knowledge (Kalantzis & Cope, 2004); therefore the way a text is interpreted by one individual might be different from another individual and it might even be interpreted differently by the same individual on a different date or time (Anstey & Bull, 2006). According to Anstey and Bull (2006), this r When dealing with multiliteracies, students should use their literacy identity and prior experiences to look for intertextuality within the text. This includes all types of text, resemble the characteristics of another, causing the consumer of the text to make links with the work as it relates to their prior knowledge and experiences. According t o Anstey and Bull (2006), intertextuality and the ability to make these connections is an important part of multiliteracies. Another important area of multiliteracies is that students be critically literate. ng the ability to analyze texts, identify their origins and authenticity, and understand how they have been constructed in order to students to be educated in all areas b efore taking any action, while also allowing students to develop many skills needed in order to function in their lifeworld now and in the future (Anstey & Bull, 2006; New London Group, 1996). Ultimately, this is a good
41 skill for students to possess and can be beneficial in multiple areas beyond their school life. In the end, the concept of multiliteracies and creating multiliterate students should be a main goal of educators. With the ever impossible to predict the knowledge the students will need in the future. However, it is possible to teach them basic knowledge, strategies, attitudes, and behaviors that will changing media is chan ging the way we communicate; therefore, there is no one perfect way of teaching literacy but rather educators need to incorporate an eclectic group of literacies within their classroom to make multiliterate students (New London Group, 1996). By addressing both the defining of literacy and the implications of the practices needed for the many and varied contexts of a 21 st 21 st Century Skills In addi tion to challenging students and building different types of literacy, digital storytelling provides students with the opportunity to work with and develop 21 st century skills (Czarnecki, 2009; Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Malita & Martin, 2010; Moore Hart, 20 08; Robin, 2008). Twenty first century skills have recently received a great deal of attention in education, and digital storytelling is an avenue for students to actively obtain these skills (Robin, 2008). In 2007, The International Society for Technolo gy in Education (ISTE) created the National educational Technology Standards and Performance Indicators for Students (NETS*S) The authors of these standards Innovation; (2) Communication and Collaboration; (3) Research and Information
42 Fluency; (4) Critical Thinking, Problem Solving, and Decision Making; (5) Digital 121). Furthermore, the Par tnership for 21 st Century Skills (2009) challenged teachers to reflect on whether or not their students were working beyond the content to develop new skills to become: (a) critical thinkers, (b) problem solvers, (c) good communicators, (d) good collaborat ors, (e) information and technology literate, (f) flexible and adaptable, (g) innovative and creative, (h) globally competent, and (i) financially literate. Czarnecki (2009) and Dogan and Robin (2008) suggested that digital storytelling provides an opport unity for students to acquire many of the skills that students are expected to possess in the 21 st century. Specifically, digital storytelling provides an opportunity for students to create and produce creatively (Robin, 2008). According to Resnick (2002 ), creativity is important now more than ever before, and new technologies are affording opportunities for students to think and work creatively in the classroom. Recent reports have identified synthesis, creativity, play, and passion as several of the mo st influential factors in a ties for both work and play throughout the process (Garcia & Rossiter, 2010). At the end of a digital storytelling unit, Sadik (2008) found that students had creatively used the technological tools to enhance their final presentations. Similarly, Sweeder (2008) observed that creativity was present in many forms throughout the digital storytelling process.
43 Digital storytelling promotes collaboration among students, which helps students develop personality and creativity (Kieler, 2010). Sadik (2008) indi cated that students were willing to share and work together throughout the story writing process. Warschauer et al. (2010) witnessed similar results in their study in which students shared and worked with each other and developed a strong sense of ownersh ip. Ohler (2009) asserted that this sharing helps to create a community of learners. Students who work cooperatively during the story writing process found that it provided inspiration, feedback, and enjoyment to the process and encouraged them to try ne w things (Robin, 2006; Sadik, 2008; Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011). This cooperative community among students creates a mutual respect among learners. According to abl e to benefit from this skill throughout life. Through digital storytelling and project based learning, students learn the importance of collaboration and compromise need to support the development of effective collaboration and communication skills if we wish to prepare children for their futures in a workplace wher e these skills are so important (p. 111). McDrury and Alterio (2001) noted that when students begin to sha re their stories with each other, they understand and begin to make meaning of past events, which also helps them prepare for future situations. Deep Learning Tool In addition to connecting students to one another, digital storytelling connects students w ith course content (Kieler, 2010). It offers students the tools they need to succeed both in and out of the classroom, while making a connection between what they do at home and at school ; therefore, it brings new literacies into the classroom
44 (Thesen & K ara Soteriou, 2011). Multiple researchers have suggested that digital storytelling gives students a voice (Benmayor, 2008; Rule, 2010; Sylvester & in a society saturated digital storytelling made social studies content come alive while also making it meaningful. Furthermore, this connection helps make the content become more thus, making it more significant to the students (Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011). As a form of project based learning, digital storytelling promotes student comprehension and understanding, as students are working directly with the content instead of pass ively taking in information (Downing, Kwong, Chan, Lam, & Downling, 2009; Percy, 2003). This hands on approach to learning allows students to see immediate results and receive constant feedback, which promotes deeper understanding of the content (Anderson 2010; Eskrootchi & Oskrochi, 2010; Gakhar & Thompson, 2007). As students work with the project, they discover new knowledge through questioning and exploring which helps them bridge new knowledge with prior knowledge (Anderson, 2010; Carr & Jitendra, 20 00, Percy, 2003). As stated in cognitive theory of multimedia learning, students organize and filter new information based on their level of prior knowledge (Mayer, 1997). Project based learning provides students with an opportunity to improve higher ord er thinking skills like problem solving, self monitoring and expression (Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Kieler, 2010; Malita & Martin, 2010; Mitchell et al., 2009; Percy, 2003). Garcia and Rossiter (2010) noted that because
45 of these opportunities, project based learning also provides students with an opportunity to gain valuable self understanding. lifelong learning (p. 50). In order to complete a well written script, students must possess a deep understanding of the content (Roby, 2010). Further, digital storytelling can bring to light what students comprehend or fail to comprehend (Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011). Sadik (2008) observed that students not only thought deeply abo ut the topic but also worked hard to create a story that communicated what they knew. According to Robin (2008), the combination of visual images and written text benefits student comprehension. Digital storytelling is a powerful tool that combines both of these elements. Students who work with digital storytelling do not just express the facts and details from the content, but rather they are engaged in the content and reflect throughout the process (Sadik, 2008). Borneman and Gibson (2011) indicated th at students analyze both the auditory and visual content throughout the digital storytelling process. The combination of visual and auditory cues helps students comprehend more complex information (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 2007 ). Students must use higher order thinking skills to convey their thoughts and understanding through physical depictions and the written word (Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Heo, 2011). Sadik (2008) reported that teachers found digital storytelling fosters und Czarnecki (2009) found similar results with improved student communication. According to Skouge and Rao (2009), students are proud of what they have
46 accomplished at the end of the unit. They have a certain ownership of the process and their product; therefore, the learning that occurs throughout the unit becomes more important to the student (Li & Morehead, 2006). Gregory et al. (2009) noted that students who work with digital st orytelling have earned higher grades in addition to showing signs of improved computer skills. Best Practices of Digital Storytelling There are several best practices outline in the literature to help guide teachers through a digital storytelling unit. Th e use of best practices when designing or developing a lesson utilizes prior experiences and research in order to create the most effective unit possible. Therefore, having a solid understanding of best practices and how to implement them will increase th e likelihood of a digital storytelling unit producing the benefits discussed above. Recently, some have used the term best practices interchangeably with the terms scientifically based practice or evidence based instruction (Ferri, Gallaher, Connor, 2011) The passing of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 brought the idea of evidence based practice, which is popular in the medical field, to the field of education (Spencer, Detrich, & Slocum, 2012). Assistant Secretary for the Office of Educational Rese arch and Improvement, Grover Whitehurst (2002), defines evidence The literature for best practice s in a digital storytelling unit can be divided into sub categories including: (a) planning, (b) modeling and elements, (c) writing, (d) collecting materials, (e) storyboard and narration, (f) editing, (g) teacher facilitator, (h) sharing, and (i) assessme nt. Each of these sub categories is discussed in greater detail within this section.
47 Planning Digital storytelling units take time; therefore, proper planning must take priority before the unit is implemented (Moore Hart, 2008; Sadik, 2008; Sweeder, 2008) Teachers need to plan the unit from beginning to end to address the objectives and introduce s tudents to basic writing skills such as grammar and structure (Sweeder, 2008). Once students have a grasp of the project, they can begin the process by select ing content that is of personal interest to them (Kieler, 2010). Students need to consider whether or not their chosen content will be meaningful to both themselves and to their audience (McLellan, 2006). At this stage, Kieler (2010) suggested that teach ers allow students to share and discuss their ideas with one another to encourage interaction among the students and to help build an emotional connection with the material. During the planning stage teachers must be aware of the time required for proper i mplementation of digital storytelling (Moore Hart, 2008). Teachers have indicated that time constraints are a major challenge when implementing digital storytelling and that this should be considered before the unit begins (Sadik, 2008). Dogan and Robin (2008) also found time to be one of the biggest obstacles for teachers in implementing a digital storytelling unit. Based on time constraints, Kieler (2010) realized that she had not given the unit enough time and saw poor results among her students. Pri or to implementation, Garcia and Rossiter (2010) suggested that teachers think about what they hope to accomplish with the unit to ensure that it aligns with the time requirements of a digital storytelling unit.
48 Modeling & Elements The digital storytellin g process can be new to both teachers and students. By modeling new concepts and skills, teachers can help students better understand not only what they are going to be doing, but also what they can do (Bandura, 1977, 1986; Kajder, 2004, Robin & Pierson, 2005). Thesen and Kara Soteriou (2011) encouraged teachers to model and show examples of digital stories in order to help students social learning theory, students learn t hrough observation and modeling. Robin and Pierson (2005) identified modeling as a successful teaching strategy since it allows students to see before they do, and this strengthens their final products. In addition to modeling, Moore Hart (2008) and Kiel er (2010) suggested that teachers show and discuss with their students good and bad examples of digital storytelling before beginning the unit. While these discussions take time, students can implement what they learned directly into their own projects (K ajder, 2004). Teaching technological skills to a beginner can be difficult (Skouge & Rao, 2009); however, the concept of modeling a task first and learning through observation has proven to be a valuable tool for teachers (Thesen & Kara Soteriou, 2011). As previously noted, digital stories can con tain many components including voices, music, sound effects, images, and video (Rule, 2010). By modeling these elements first, students can observe how to utilize these new tools and concepts (Moore Hart, 2008) Garcia and Rossiter (2010) noted that a digital story does not have to contain all of these options. By modeling and reminding students of this, they can get a good understanding of all their creative options. Furthermore, the Center for Digital Story telling developed seven elements that comprise a digital story to help teachers and
49 students create effective dig ital stories (Lambert, 2007). When utilized, these seven elements can help guide a student to creating a powerful digital story. The Center f or p oint of view ; a dramatic question ; e motional ; t he gift of your voice ; t he power of the soundtrack ; e conomy ; p acing Introducing these elements to the stu dents before the process begins allows students to process the information and implement them into their own projects. Writing While the digital elements are an important aspect of digital storytelling, it is vital that students first focus on writing thei r story (Kieler, 2010). Technology can be a useful way for students to develop new skills and to engage with the material and with one another. H owever, the script needs to be the main focus (Gakhar & Thompson, 2007). Based on multiple sources, a well d eveloped script is the most important aspect of a good digital story (EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 2007; Gakhar & Thompson, 2007; Kieler, 2010). In fact, Borneman and Gibson (2011) suggested that students use the involves writing and editing; 20% includes begin writing before they are presented with the technology (Mullen & Wedwick, 2008; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). S trong writing helps student stories come alive without relying solely on the technology (EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 2007).
50 As students are writing their scripts, they should be collaborating together and working with their teacher facilitator. Kieler (2010) proposed that the story should answer a dramatic question and suggested the use of collaboration to help writers refine this element of their story. Additionally, Roby (2010) advised that teachers support students by asking pertinent and thought p rovoking questions. Teachers can also use short individual meetings during this time to check on student progress (Kearney, 2011). As students are writing, they should use short, positive sentences to portray the elements in their story (Grady, 2010). L ambert (2007) suggested that students limit their stories to between 250 and 375 words. However, stories may need to be longer in order to fulfill unit objectives. In any event, students need to find a point of view and maintain that point of view throu ghout the story (Kieler, 2010). Ohler (2005) noted that story mapping during the writing stage has several uses page diagram showing how the essential components of the story are incorporated into the overall flow of the parts of the story to ensure that it is both logical and fluid. Story mapping can also help students develop a strong visual depiction of the ch aracters and think about the theme of their story. A story map is a valuable tool for teachers as it provides an artifact that teachers can quickly assess to provide immediate feedback to students. Finally, Ohler a box that a story needs to fit into, but a flexible guide aimed to help storytellers understand their stories and tell them in compelling,
51 Collecting Materials Once the stories are complete, students will begin to collect the med ia they are going to utilize in their digital story (Kajder, 2004). As students select images, they should not simply show a visual of what is being discussed. Rather, their image selection should consist of appropriate images that expand on the message of their story, and go beyond a simple representation of the words (Johnson, 2009; Kearney, 2011). Roby (2010) identified this stage of the process as an appropriate time to introduce copyright rules to students, since most images found on the Internet ar e copyrighted. Kearney (2011) and Robin (2006) suggested the use of copyright free media that can either be created by the students or found using an archive of public domain images. Regardless of the source, all images should be given credit. Sylvester and Greenidge (2009) recommended the end credits as a good place to display this information. These same deliberate choices should be utilized when selecting the music or sound effects that will be used behind the narration (Kearney, 2011). Appropriate music is vital to a good digital story because it helps to set the mood and evoke emotions through tempo and style (EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 2007; Roby, 2010). Consistent with image selection, students should select music that complements their stor y. Storyboard and Narration Much like a paper outline, a storyboard can be used to plan out the various elements of a digital story (Fredricks, 2009). Storyboarding is a process in which 66). Similar to story mapping, storyboarding helps students place their media in a
52 logical order and look for existing gaps and areas that need to be rearranged (Fredricks, 2009; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). Storyboarding requires t hat students think both visually and creatively (Sweeder, 2008). Therefore, storyboards are helpful as students begin to blend the visual and auditory elements of their stories (Chung, 2007). Upon completion of the storyboard, students should rehearse a nd record their narration. According to Sylvester and Greenidge (2009), story delivery should reflect both power and emotion. Students should work to perform their stories while recording this narration so that it does not sound too rehearsed. This will a 290). Once all of these tasks have been completed, students are finally ready to combine the various elements of their digital story. Editing The editing phase is when all of the previously created and collected components are put together. The first step of the editing process is to import all of the elements for the digital story into the selected editing software (Chung, 2007). Elements may include pictures, v ideos, music, sound effects, and student narration (Rule, 2010). Once all of the elements are loaded into the software, students can begin to experiment with the many creative choices that each software program provides. The editing stage can be the mos t exciting aspect of the process for students and the most disconcerting one for teachers. Teachers may be anxious because they are not familiar with the editing software or the options available to them. There are several free editing programs that can be used to create digital stories, like Windows Movie Maker or Macintosh iMovie that come pre loaded on many computers (Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009; Gregory et al., 2009). Thesen and Kara Soteriou (2011) further
53 recommended Photo Story as an effective and free tool. The use of additional resources, like online tutorials and instructional YouTube videos, can help both teachers and students throughout the digital storytelling process (Mullen & Wedwick, 2008). Teachers who are not familiar with the various editing programs can take advantage of these resources before beginning a digital storytelling unit. Teacher Facilitat ion Teachers can create authentic learning situations by serving as facilitators, shifting the focus from teacher to student. It is imp ortant, therefore, to create a learning environment that supports active student involvement while still providing adequate feedback and support to help guide the student through the process. Cook and Weiland (2010) suggested beginning with an activity th prior knowledge and builds a framework for the student to refer back to throughout the process. Students can use this base to explore the content and build new knowledge that supplements their previous knowledge At this time, teachers should work with students t o help guide them toward unit objectives. During this process, the teacher must become a facilitator and allow students to learn through discovering new knowledge on their own (Anderson, 2010; Cook & We iland, 2010; Percy, 2003). Students learn by doing which allows them to solve their own problems and manage issues that arise (Nation, 2008). Students actively participate in their own learning, making the shift from a classroom in which the teacher diss eminates knowledge to one in which students are empowered. In this model, the teacher works as a guide and companion in the learning process (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; Resnick, 2002). This creates a student centered classroom in which students are engaged i n activities that make learning meaningful and individualized (Churchill et al.,
54 2008; Warschauer et al., 2010). These meaningful tasks are essential in helping students connect the content to their personal experiences and to navigate their own journey ( Cook & Weiland, 2010; Griffiths et al., 2007). Trauth Nare and Buck (2011) warned that student centered classrooms may make it easier for teachers to not give ample feedback or provide the support students need to work with higher order thinking skills. T herefore, proper and continuous feedback is required in a project based unit to the end goal (Trauth Nare & Buck, 2011). Trauth Nare and Buck (2011) stated that proper feedback should be both positive and detailed to help st udents meet predetermined benchmarks and essential outcomes. Sharing Once students have finalized their products, their final videos are ready to be whole class can be intim idating for some students; however, student collaboration throughout the process should help establish unity and trust among the students (Benmayor, 2008). Sharing can present a good opportunity for students to provide feedback and suggestions to their pe ers in a safe and supportive environment (Kajder, 2004). With the addition of the read/write web, students can now share their stories with the world (Borneman & Gibson, 2011; Chung, 2007; Meadows, 2003). Skouge and Rao (2009) have suggested that student s take pride in their stories by sharing them with awareness of audience, purpose, and form, an awareness not always demonstrated by reenidge, 2009, p. 291). Finally, Karchmer (2001) observed that student motivation increased when they knew that their work was going to
55 be published on the web. Yet, teachers should be aware of district policies before publishing any student work to the Internet (Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). Assessment Assessment of digital stories can be difficult for teachers since traditional 2008). Even with new assessments, teachers nee d to ensure that they place priority on content assessment as compared to technology assessment (Borneman & Gibson, 2011). Trauth Nare and Buck (2011) suggested that teachers use formative assessment throughout the project to keep students focused on the end goal. As defined by Black and Wiliam (1998), formative assessments can help shape the teaching and learning process. In order for formative assessments to be effective, teachers must provide students with feedback that helps to shape their learning a nd moves them towards the objectives of the unit. Johnson (2009) suggested that By sharing expectations upfront, students can be mindful of these elements throughout the process and produce more effective and complete digital stories. A detailed rubric can be a valuable tool for both teachers and students in a digital storytelling unit. Sample rubrics are available to teachers through the Center for Digital Storytelling website. Implementation of Digital Storytelling There are several factors that determine whether or not a teacher will implement a digital storytelling unit. Acco rding to Abbitt and Klett (2007), teacher efficacy with technology is a major determinant to implementing a digital storytelling unit. Teachers
56 may be unsure about their own technology skills, and therefore hesitant to implement technology into their curr iculum. Ongoing professional development and teacher support are vital to the implementation of any technology based unit, specifically a digital storytelling unit (Dogan & Robin, 2008; Pianfetti, 2001; Sadik, 2008). Once digital storytelling has been se lected, teachers can begin the process of implementing it directly into their curriculum. To facilitate this process, Ohler (2008) devised a series of phases and steps to implement a digital storytelling unit. The different factors and the step by step p rocess are discussed within this section. Factors Teacher technology efficacy has been shown to be a main factor in whether or not technology integration is successful (Abbitt & Klett, 2007). Heo (2011) described teacher technology self efficacy as how a teacher views his or her ability to use technology in the classroom. In order for teachers to integrate digital storytelling, they must view technology as an asset and be comfortable using it in the teaching and learning process (Hew & Brush, 2007). Mult iple researchers have identified that some teachers believe technology integration is too difficult or time consuming (Brzycki & Dudt, 2005; Hew & Brush, 2007). Further, there are teachers who have suggested that effective implementation of technology in the schools is too involved to accomplish (Sadik, 2008). Hew and Brush (2007) argued that this resistance is due to a lack of proper training in technology. As previously mentioned, teachers need ongoing and continuous professional development to help th em become comfortable with properly integrating technology into their curriculum (Dogan & Robin, 2008; Sadik, 2008). Eastburn (2008) established that ongoing professional development had a positive effect on both teacher and student outcomes. In addition to professional development,
57 their willingness to implement technology (Dogan & Robin, 2008; Margerum Leys & 2002). Ohler (2009) indicated that the benefits of technology were significant enough to support ongoing training and support for teachers. Steps Kajder (2004) outlined a six step process for creating a digital story that provides specific details from start to finish. Churchill et al. (2008) and Gakhar and Thompson (2007) both stated that a digital storytelling unit can be implemented through planning, production, and presentation. Regardless of the number of steps or how they are titled, the process for creating a digital story is fairly consistent throughout the literature. In his book, Digital Storytelling in the Classroom: New Media Pathways to Literacy, Learning, and Creativity Ohler (2008) divided the digital storytelling process into five pha ses. His phases take the student from planning, through the three production stages, to the presentation and sharing phase. Ohler (2008) puts an emphasis on mapping out the entire story during the planning phase and completing a storyboard as a visual ou tline before entering the three phases of production where students will gather their elements, edit them together, and complete their final digital story. After students have fully completed their digital stories, they are then able to share their storie s with their class, community and even the world (Ohler, 2008). Summary Digital storytelling and project based learning offer clear and compelling benefits to the field of education. As stated in this review, both are proven methods for increasing st udent engagement and motivation. Additionally, digital storytelling is an
58 approach that appeals to students in ways that engage them with the curriculum. As student interest grows within a digital storytelling unit, students become connected to the conte nt and develop a sense of ownership that makes the learning meaningful. Further, students learn knowledge and skills in these authentic learning environments that they can use far beyond the walls of their classrooms. All of these support the notion of n ew literacies in the classroom. Research on digital storytelling is limited. The majority of the literature is based on the primary and higher education levels, leaving a void at the high school level. Additionally, the literature is highly anecdotal wi th most of for more research driven literature that critically examines all aspects of digital storytelling. Furthermore, content specific research needs to be cond ucted as digital storytelling becomes more prevalent in all types of classrooms. By using digital storytelling as a means of project based learning, teachers can engage students in authentic learning while also focusing on writing and technology skills w hich are both important when discussing new literacies Digital storytelling can be beneficial as a stand alone unit. However, by implementing digital storytelling as a form of project based learning students can reap the benefits of both digital storyte lling and project based learning while acquiring many of the skills necessary for success in have a comprehensive understanding of project based learning since it p rovides the foundation for digital storytelling. The decreasing costs of technology have made digital storytelling accessible now more than ever. Digital storytelling may be the format teachers need to teach both
59 content and the skills students need for t he 21 st century; however, more rigorous research is needed before this claim can be made. In order for technology integration and digital storytelling to be successful, teachers need continuous support and professional development to develop the skills n ecessary to successfully integrate technology into their classrooms. While technology is a key element in digital storytelling, the writing process must come first for in order for the digital story to succeed. Digital storytelling units take time; teach ers must be willing and able to model the desired skills and outcomes for their students throughout the process. Despite the time required, the benefits of a digital storytelling unit can be s.
60 CHAPTER 3 METHODS This chapter describes the design, implementation, and evaluation methods used in this study. The chapter begins with a description of the study, followed by an instructional summary, participants, and setting. The chapter conclude s with an overview of data collection and analysis methods. Pilot Study A pilot study on digital storytelling was implemented during the fall semester of the 2011 2012 school year. This pilot study implemented the best practices of instructional design at the secondary level in order to evaluate digital storytelling. Based on this model, an instructional design framework was used. Elements of this framework included analysis design, development, implementation, and evaluation. This framework incorporat ed the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (2010) model based on its classroom focus. The pilot study was implemented prior to the current study due to a lack of research on digital storytelling at the secondary level. This pilot focused on student motivation and en gagement, content and writing objectives, and perceptions and implementation of digital storytelling at the secondary level. Data were collected through observations and student and teacher focus group interviews. (1979) constant comparative method looking for common themes. Results were consistent with findings from previous studies on digital storytelling at the primary and higher education levels within the literature Additionally, the pilot revealed that stud ents were more motivated and engaged when digital storytelling was used consistent with research outside of the secondary classroom T he following themes were derived from pilot study data:
61 Beneficial to student motivation and participation ; beneficial to student engagement ; b eneficial to student content knowledge and writing skills ; beneficial to s tudent creativity and collaboration ; Based on the findings of the pilot study, I determined t hat digital storytelling could be an effective tool for secondary teachers. As previously noted, digital storytelling requires time and planning, but the benefits have been shown for all involved Participating teachers were pleased with the results and expressed an interest in implementing digital storytelling in futu re academic years However, the pilot study did not look directly at new literacies or academic outcomes. Although the broad nature of the pilot study pr ovided positive results Common C ore requires new literacies be covered within the classroom while st i ll meeting academic objectives. Therefore, the current study was implemented to look digital storytelling and student learning outcomes and new literacies. Context This digital storytelling project was implemented in two senior English 12 classes in a pub lic Alabama high school. F aculty and staff in this school are dedicated to helping each student reach his or her unique potential and the community is involved and supportive. For the purpose of confidentiality, the pseudonym was used for the par ticipating teacher. The English 12 classrooms were populated by 10 to 15 students who were diverse with a mix of gender, race, and academic levels. Despite this diversity, the small community school fosters an environment of familiarity between students each student reach his or her unique potential, and therefore were supportive of digital
62 storytelling a s a new way to engage learners. All of the classes were structured in a tra ditional style, with desks in rows facing toward the board. Additionally, all of the classrooms were equipped with an AV package, including: a projector, screen, digital presenter, DVD player, and computer station. Participants Participants within the study included high functioning academic students as well as students with learning disabilities. Due to the school s relatively high number of students taking AP English during their senior year, the students populating the regular English 12 courses ten d ed to perform lower academically or lack academic drive. Student participants were either 17 or 18 years old and had varying levels of proficiency with writing and technology skills. The majority of students had no experience with video production or dig ital storytelling. Study participants represented a convenience sample, and included students from the two English 12 courses taught by Mary Students were informed of their ability to opt out of the study, and no financial or school based rewards were given for participation. Although all students were required to participate in the digital storytelling unit, students were not required to participate in the research study. No incentives were used to convince or coerce students to participate. The tea cher Mary, who participated in this current study, had participated in the pilot study as well. Mary indicated that she was pleased with the pilot study results; therefore, she wanted digital storytelling to be the main focus of th e current unit. Specif ically, the teacher noted how well digital storytelling integrated into many of the new College and Career Ready standards like being able to work with multiple types of
63 text for a larger audience Thus, the focus of digital storytelling shifted from eng agement to academic outcomes and new literacies. At the time of this study, Mary had been teaching for 16 years, and this was her eighth year at this current school. She expressed a willingness to try new and innovative lessons and was excited about imple menting digital storytelling in her classroom. Her only prior experience with digital storytelling was the aforementioned pilot study in which I covered the majority of the technical aspects of the unit. In this current academic year Mary was eager to a ssume more of the technical instruction during the unit. She was comfortable with technology; however, she ha d had no experience with p hoto or video editing software. Project The specific project guidelines implemented for this study were created to meet course objectives, with modifications based on the results of the pilot study. For example literature. Although students still completed digital stories implemented through best p ractices found in research, their topic s were organization that promotes writing about personal core values and provides a mechanism for students to share their writing. Students addressed topics that were import ant to them based on their own personal experiences. Therefore, students were to write an essay describing real events from their lives, and then expand on those event s and how they led them to develop a core belief that guides their life today. This req uired students to work with personal feelings rather than beliefs that may have been
64 passed on to them from a family member or peers. The essay was personal and require d students to write succinctly with specific and powerful examples. Additionally, due to the personal nature of the writing, students worked individually on their essays and digital stories. Students wrote and revised their own scripts and created a visual outline in the form of a storyboard Students created their final product in the fo rm of a digital story or short movie using music, images, sound effects, and narration. To create digital stories students used personal technology devices or school provided iPads with iMovie and Toontastic application s pre downloaded. Instructional O verview of Current Study Based on the results of the pilot study, the original instructional design was revised to focus on new literacies and academic outcomes, as compared to student engagement, while still fulfilling the unit objectives. Mary and I cre ated the new project guidelines and revisions in three formal planning sessions and several informal individual planning discussions. Although the specific essays that the students were writing had changed, the current unit still implemented the same best practices based on the literature. As previously mentioned the new state standards require teachers to produce college and career ready students who can work with a variety of texts. In order to help meet these standards, a unit with a digital storyte lling component was created. The unit objectives required students to research their future plans while working with both traditional and new literacies. Previous research on digital storytelling revealed that inadequate project time frequently leads t o poor results (Kieler, 2010); therefore, two weeks were allotted for the
65 project to provide enough time for students to create quality products. Mary selected this timeframe based on her previous experiences and knowledge of the time students would need to complete the research and writing. A week and a half was devoted to research, writing, and revising. As suggested by Sadik (2008), additional time was provided for students to compile their digital stories which made this a two week project. Since th definitive due dates within the two week period were implemented. To further help Mary and the students, the unit was divided into four parts: pre writing, writing, post writing /editing a nd assessment During these four stages students brainstormed their ideas about major events in their lives that lead to a realization or change in how they believed. The students then took these ideas to create a rough draft and received feedback from both other students and the teacher. After initial revisions on their rough draft were completed students began to gather photos that would be editing into their digital stories along with music and recorded narration. The revision process was a continuo us process as students made necessary changes throughout the writing and post writing/editing phase. Once students had completed their final digital stories and made their final revisions they submitted their digital component and a final draft of their e ssay to the teacher and presented them to the class. Each phase is discussed in greater detail below. Pre Writing Several new concepts and technology were introduced within the unit ; therefore, teacher modeling was used to help guide students towar d desired outcomes. Most of the teacher modeling was conducted at the beginning of the unit to guide students through the project and to help get them started on the process.
66 Before students began to write their digital stories, they recorded significan t events in their lives. Based on th e se events, student s picked one to examine in more depth. This brain Further, student s examined these real life experiences to determine how they influenc ed a personal belief in their lives Students used this belief to create a framework for their essay and created a sequence of events that lead to this realization. Each story was real and stories were T his I B Once students had created a rough outline of their stor ies they moved on to the writing stage. In order to help the students make this connection, they were encouraged to take the belief out of their thought process at first and focus on important events from their lives which organization encourages writers to think of a story first and then consider what lesson consisted of a string of events from their lives that lead to their chosen belief instead of the contrary. It is this sequence of events that lends itself to creating a storyboard and Students wrote personal essays that recounted real events from their life. They described these events in a narrative and then drew up on that narrative to create a conclusion about how it affected their personal belief system. Thus, due to the personal nature and narrative form of writing, this project is ideally suited for digital storytelling
67 Writing I devoted to writing. According t o the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (2007), the script or story is the most important element of a good digital story. This timing was also chosen in an effort to follow the 80/20 rule by Borneman and Gibson (2011), in iting and editing; 20% includes applying the Mary used formative assessments to monitor student progress and provide help and guidance as needed (Kearney, 2011; Trauth Nare & Buck, 2011) As defined by Bla ck and Wiliam (1998), formative assessments are used to help shape the teaching and learning process. Furthermore, students completed rough drafts as official check ins that allowed Mary to assess student progress and make formal recommendations. R ough drafts were submitted which allowed Mary to provide immediate feedback on each draft that the students could refer back to while writing Post Writing Once scripts or written narratives were completed, stude nts created storyboards to visually outline their digital stories. Storyboarding is a process in which students lay A storyboard template Created by Porter (n.d.), was used b y students to lay out the visual and auditory elements of their stories (Appendix A). Students were also encouraged to revise and edit their stories one last time during this stage to ensure that they were ready to be recorded (Kajder, 2004). After the storyboards were completed, students were introduced to the technology involved in creating their final products. It should be noted that the technology was intentionally not introduced to students prior to this point because Mary
68 wanted to minimize distr actions during the writing process. Additionally, Mary did not (EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 2007; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). Students were provided a brief overview of the software in a whole group setting, and specific questions were answered individually following the presentation. Technical assistance was offered to help students move smoothly through the editing process; however, students were encouraged to expl ore and solve problems on their own. Mary served as a facilitator providing quick check ups and guidance to ensure that students were progressing. Once the digital stories were completed the students presented their essays to the class. At the conclusion of each presentation other students and guest teachers provided feedback. This feedback provided a final opportunity for students to fine tune their essays, before given the option website. Th is opportunit y to share their work with the world provide d students with a real world connection to the project and an authentic learning opportunit y that foster ed ownership and personal accomplishment s (Heo, 2011; Robin, 2008) Assessment Both formative and summati ve assessments were used to ensure that students were progressing toward the final objectives. As previously mentioned, formative assessments are assessments for learning, while summative assessments are assessments of learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998). To inform students of her expectations (Chung, 2007), Mary distributed an assessment rubric at the beginning of the project Mary and I created the rubric (Appendix B) to help students navigate through the project and to provide Mary with a formal grading s cale. The rubric was
69 created based on the literature on new literacies and state standards. Each criteria field of the rubric was selected and developed to specifically assess these elements. A variety of new literacies and standards were assessed in or der to fully assess the final products. Furthermore, this information provide d data for the study. To create this rubric, two sets of meetings were held with Mary to determine which aspects of the project to include and how to score them by level. These meetings were instrumental in ensuring that all of the important details were included in the rubric. Additionally, these meetings confirmed that both Mary and I followed the same protocol Research Questions This qualitative study explored the academi c outcomes and new literacies associated with the use of digital storytelling. For the purpose of this study, academic outcomes were identified by students meeting course and assignment objectives, while y to find, use, and manipulate information in order to communicate (Leu et al., 2004). The overarching focus for this study was to identify the academic outcomes and new literacies evident when implementing digital storytelling at the secondary school lev el In order to analyze these the following research questions were answered. 1. In what ways, if any, are new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom? 2. In what ways, if any, do students meet English 12 objectives related to the writing and language standards during a digital storytelling unit? Research Design Qualitative research is a common practice within the field of education. ses on meaning ful
70 seek to describe, explain, and/or understand a new concept (Anderson, 1990; Sherman & Webb, 1990). Furthermore qualitative research involves analyzing a concep t or issue in a natural setting by explor ing a situation or process directly (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998) There are many forms of qualitative research. For the purpose of this investigation, a case study approach was selected. Case study research allows the 1994, p. 3). This approach also allows for the case, or the unique factors within the study, to be observed in a natural setting (Stake, 1995). Each case is contai ned within predetermined boundaries or considerations. Smith (1978) referred to this condition as a bounded system. Merriam (1998) described this approach as placing a fence around what is going to be studied. Thus, a case can be a person, a place, a pr ogram, a policy, or some other unique situation. For this study, the case was an English 12 classroom. The qualitative case study approach was chosen for this study based on the desire to gather in depth data from actual classrooms and educational practi ces (Creswell, 1998; Merriam, 1998, 2001; Stake, 1995). Fitzpatrick, Sanders, and Worthen (2004) discussed three characteristics of a case study, which include focusing on a specific case, wanting a thorough understanding of an issue, and using multiple methods of data collection. Yin (1984) further delineated case studies into three types: exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory. Exploratory case studies allow the researcher to study a program or concept without having research questions before the s tudies begins R ather it allows the researcher to develop the research questions throughout the process. The goal of
71 d escriptive case studies is to describe what happened through implementation of a new concept or program. Finally, explanatory case stud ies are used with casual relationships. Based on these definitions, the current study can be considered a descriptive case study Data Collection Data were collected using field notes, observations, and reflections, as well as student artifacts (digital s tories) in order to develop an understanding of the academic outcomes and new literacies evident within a digital storytelling unit Observations Process For this study, I conducted participatory observations (Patton, 1987; Spradley, 1979). Patton (1987) identified six main advantages to observational fieldwork as a form of evaluation during a qualitative study: (a) to understand the context; (b) to reason is inductive in approach; (c) to see things; (d) to gain information about participants or to pics that they may not talk about otherwise; (e) to move beyond selective perceptions; and (f) to access personal information, knowledge, and experiences. The decision to conduct participatory observations was made in order to allow for follow up questi ons directly with students both in the moment and throughout the observations to gain better understanding of what wa s being observed. In order for students to view me as part of the class, I frequently attended class before the study began. Once the unit and study began, Mary and the students were accustomed to my presence; thus, they were more likely to act natural fostering trustworthiness and credibility within the study. In order to obtain a complete picture, I took notes of observations throughout t he unit. Observations were guided by concepts of new literacies and the research questions on academic outcomes of implementing a
72 digital storytelling unit (Hagood, 2009; Leu et al., 2004) The literature and standards were used to create an observation p rotocol (Appendix C). Therefore, o bservations of student behavior, classroom activities, and conversations were recorded within the observation protocol, which were used to furthe r the understanding of the case According to Patton (1987), field notes (p. 70). Field notes are much more in depth than casually watching a situation and making notes of what happened. Proper field notes take time to perfect; thus, I practiced taking field notes before the study be gan. During this time, the observation protocol was revised based on practice observation results. In the classroom, I sat at a desk in the back of the classroom. I was free to move around the room, and Mary allowed me full access to her classrooms with out limitations. Field notes were reviewed, expanded upon, and reflected on at the end of each day to ensure that they were comprehensive and provided a full picture of the case. I made note of what students did and said, while also writing down question s that arose during the class. After each class, I elaborated on these observations while they were still fresh i n my mind in order to document the most accurate picture. I also expanded upon what had occurred in the classroom to complete what Bogdan and Biklen (1998) referred to as reflective field notes. All notes were kept in a central location and reviewed throughout the study to search for themes or patterns. field not es as descriptive ; contain ing what people said ; includ ing reactions, and reflections ; and finally, includ ing initial anal ysis and/or working hypotheses. A copy of the observation protocol was
73 always present during my observations to help guide the observations Multiple drafts of the protocol were tested within the English 12 classroom before the study began. Data Collection Instrument / P rotocol The observation guide was primarily develop ed based on the 10 central principles of new literacies and examples of new literacies as outlined by Leu et al. (2004); as well as the three characteristics of new literacies developed by Hagood (2009). In addition, supporting information and ideas from New London Group (1996) and Gee (1996) were utilized. Each criteria relate d directly back to the literature of new literacies. The 10 central principles according to Leu et al. (2004) are as follows: 1. t he Internet and other ICTs are central technologies f or literacy within a global community in an information age; 2. t he Internet and other ICTs require new literacies to fully access their potential; 3. new literacies are deictic; 4. t he relationship between literacy and technology is transactional; 5. n ew li teracies are multiple in nature; 6. c ritical literacies ar e central to the new literacies; 7. n ew forms of strategic knowledge ar e central to the new literacies; 8. s peed counts in important way s within the new literacies; 9. l earning often is socially co nstructed within new literacies; 10. t eachers become more important, though their role s change, within new literacy classrooms. Hagood (2009) describe d the three characteristics of new literacies as follows: 1. Multimodal in nature, including linguistic, visual, gestural, and audit ory texts semantic systems; 2. Situated social practices, which are culturally, ling uistically, and textually based; 3. Identities, which connect text users to text uses.
74 I created the observation protocol b ased on these principles and characteristics to help guide my observation s. Each category was created to reflect priorities in the literature regarding new literacies and to ensure that all areas of new literacies were being observed. Table 3 1 located at the end of the chapter, depicts each category of the observation protocol, rule for inclusion for that category (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994 ), and the literature on new literacies in which that category was created. Each category was carefully created to provide an understanding of the new literacies that students encounter or do not encounter during a digital storytelling unit. Based on new literacies literature, a series of examples of new literacies practices was compiled and assembled to create the observation protocol below Student Reflections Proce ss For the school in which the study was conducted, student reflections we re a common practice, and teachers often use d reflections as a quick check of the unit and to make changes in courses for the following year. Therefore, reflections were a natural source of data. For the purpose of this study, reflections were used to provide Mary with information on the unit as well as data for the study. Reflections also provided students an opportunity to explain their thought processes for their choices of im age s music, and final product s the reflection process, reflections were used to supplement data received from the Data C ollection Instrument / Protocol Students were asked to reflect on the project using the following five prompt statements or questions: 1. w rite about your experience with the digital storytelling project. 2. w hat were the positive aspects of this unit?
75 3. w hat challenges did you face during this unit and how did you overcome them? 4. w hy did you choose your This I Believe topic? 5. w hy did you make the selections in music and images that you did for your digital story? These prompt statements and questions were created by Mary an d me to provide feedback on the unit and to allow students an opportunity to explain their choices while providing data for the study Each student completed the reflection proce ss after the unit was completed and wrote their answers on a reflection sheet provided by Mary. Final Artifacts Process Final artifacts were also reviewed as a data source According to Creswell (1998), within a case study it is important to acquire several forms of data. for developing a rich description of the classrooms because they show ed artifacts were analyzed to support emerging themes and other findings within the study, while also providing data on academic outcomes u sing state standards and objectives which are discussed in greater detail in the next section The student artifact rubric (Appendix B) used on the final artifacts was created jointly by Mary and me Data Collection Instrument / Protoco l The rubric wa s based on new literacies literature and the state standards in addition to the specific This I Believe format. Each element was selected to fulfill goals and objectives for the unit. All writing standards associated with narrative writing w ere addressed as well as the production and distribution standards and several language standards from the Alabama English 12 course of study Furthermore, in order to attend to new literacies several elements
76 were added to the rubric based on the lit erature. The rubric was revised and tested within the English 12 classroom before the study began. In order to test and refine the rubric, Mary and I applied the rubric to digital stories from the pilot study to determine if the rubric returned the desi red information written piece of the rubric Based on the results of these tests, the rubric was revised and adjusted in order to gather the data necessary to address t he research questions Each element relate d directly back to a state standard, new literacies, and/or digital storytelling literature. Table 3 2 located at the end of the chapter, describes the criteria used to design ea ch section of the rubric and incl udes the st andards for reference purposes Data Analysis Data analysis was an ongoing and constant process. According to Merriam (1998), it is common within case study research for data collection and analysis to occur concurrently throughout the study. Data were read and re read throughout the process, and analyzed using the constant comparative method (Spradley, 1979). Observations throughout the data (Berg & Lune, 2012, p. 187). Analysis of codes was a continuous process. Data with similar codes or characteristics were grouped together. These groups or themes were then reviewed to see how each of them addressed the research quest ions. Once a code was saturated, common themes were determined and then cross referenced with one another to determine their impact on student literacy. Codes with little support or less convincing evidence were eliminated.
77 In order to evaluate the res earch questions that focused on new literacies and academic outcomes of implementing digital storytelling at the secondary level, data from observations, reflections, and student artifacts were analyzed and divided into categories. The reflection response s and observations were separated on coding sheets. A different coding sheet was created each time a new code or concept presented itself in the data. This process continued until a coding sheet had reached saturation. According to Creswell (2005), satu have identified the major themes and no new information can add to your list of themes separated by theme the findings were divid ed bas ed on the research questions S tudent artifacts were analyzed at the conclusion of the unit. In order to help guide the evaluation of the final product, a rubric was created by me and Mary and used to evaluate student work based on state standards (Appendix B). Each digital story included a written component that was narrated with music and pictures These digital stories were exported into a movie file and uploaded to YouTube, Google docs, or the element was reviewed individually and as a whole product for cohesiveness using the criteria established in the rubric. Examples of elements that were evaluated included use of picture movement, transitions, audio quality, music and sound effects, and ov erall flow of the project, as well as, language, organization, pacing, exposition, and narrative techniques of the written piece that was narrated. These elements relate back to new literacies and the ability to work with multiple types of texts, as well as, the state standards for writing.
78 Trustworthiness of Study The goal of this is study was to identify the academic outcomes and new literacies present during a digital storytelling unit at the secondary level. When referring to a qualitative study, Lin coln and Guba (1985) use d the terms trustworthiness, credibility, and transferability instead of the quantitative terms of validity and reliability to establish credibility. However, despite what term is being used each study needs to ensure measures are taken in order to show credibility. Therefore, multiple measures were utilized to ensure trustworthiness, credibility, and transferability of the data Prior to the beginning of the study, approval was granted by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Office of Research Compliance (Appendix D). Student participants were able to opt in or opt out of the study by signing an informed consent form (Appendix E). Students were notified that there would be no penalty for not participating and that partic ipation was strictly voluntary. Students who were under the age of 18 also provided parent/guardian approval through a signed parental informed consent form (Appendix F). Mary also signed an informed consent form before participating in the study. All p articipants were ensured that their data would be confidential and pseudonyms were used in order to further protect their privacy. In addition, approval was granted by the local school system in which the study took place Credibility In order to further establish credibility and trustworthiness of the study, several additional steps were taken. I spent a great deal of time with the participants in the classroom in order to build trust and to confirm that my observations were consistent. By spending exte nded periods of time in the field, I was able to learn the culture of the classroom and confirm data that were used in the study (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
79 Triangulation was another method I used to establish credibility within this qualitative study (Creswe ll, 1998; Stake, 1995; Yin, 2003). Triangulation is the use of multiple sources in order to fully develop and support findings within a qualitative study (Yin, 2003). By using multiple sources to support a concept I was able to fully support the findings of the study because the findings reach ed beyond on e person or instance. In order to achieve triangulation in this study, I utilized observations, reflections, and student artifacts as well as multiple participants Transferability Transferability refers to the finding s ability to be applied in other contexts or transferred to other settings. Due to the nature of qualitative research, it is less imperative to establish transferability than it is within quantitative research; however, it is still importa nt that measures be taken to help others understand the process, implementation, and methods by providing thick descriptions (Krefting, 1991; Rudestam & Newton, 2007). Therefore, detailed descriptions about the study w ere developed and provided for others to review and determine if the findings c ould be generalized within other context s Dependability Dependability is related to the ability to reproduce the findings. A common strategy to achieve dependability is to provide rich descriptions of the stu dy (Rudestam & Newton, 2007). Therefore, this chapter provided thick descriptions of the research methods, data collection, analysis, and study implementation These descriptions were reviewed by peers to ensure the narrative of the study could be follow ed and understood by an outside reader
80 Limitations Limitations are present in all studies and may impact the ability to transfer results of th e study across other settings and contexts. Although the digital storytelling unit was required for all stude nts within the English 12 course, participation in the study was not required. Therefore, participants in the study were comprised of students who return ed parent permission and IRB consent forms within courses. In addition, students were given th e opportunity to opt out of the study; thus, participation was strictly voluntary. These conditions may limit the transferability of findings beyond the students who participate d in these two English 12 classes. Another limitation of case study work is bi as. Although bias, according to Mills (2010), is in some form expected, it can be reduced if the researcher acknowledges it throughout the study. Additionally Stake (1995 ) identified a limitation of case studies in which respondents supply the answer th ey think the research wants to hear. In order to minimize these limitations, I spent time within the classroom before the study in order to make my presence less of a distraction and more of their normal class day. Furthermore, participants were regularly reminded that their answers would be confidential and that their names would not be used. Participants were also informed that their teacher would not be aware of their answers and they were encouraged to answer truthfully without any worry of academic or personal harm or penalty. Finally participants were reminded that their data may be helpful to future classrooms. Therefore, several assumptions were made about the study. The first assumption was that students, teachers, and administrators would be truthful in their answers. The second assumption was that students would conduct themselves in the
81 same manner as they would if I w ere not present. Finally, it was assumed that the students who returned their consent forms and participated in the study c reated an accurate representation of the senior class Summary The purpose of this study was to identify the academic outcomes and new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom. Chapte r 3 outlined the study and t he methods used in order to provide credible data. A case study approach was used to frame the data within the natural classroom setting, and multiple forms of data were collected to provide a deep understanding of the topic. Furthermore, the use of seve ral types of data triangulated the results to increase transferability.
82 Table 3 1. The observation protocol, rule for inclusion, and supporting literature Category Rule for Inclusion Maykut and Morehouse (1994) Supporting Literature Using Se arch engines to locate information related to the project Student use of a search engine effectively beyond the basic word search in order to retrieve relevant information Hagood (2009); Leu et al. (2004) Evaluating information usefulness to the project S tudents actively thinking about the information they have gathered and if it would properly portray the message they are trying to convey and its usefulness Leu et al. (2004); New London Group (1996) Using word processing effectively to format a document Student use of a word processing program to properly format their document by changing font, margins, spacing, etc. Hagood (2009); Leu et al. (2004) Using email effectively to communicate and transfer information Student use of email to communicate effec tively and share information Leu et al. (2004); New London Group (1996) Identify important questions to ask in order to solve issues encountered during the project Students actively creating and asking relevant questions needed in order to solve a problem during the project Leu et al. (2004) Locate information to answer questions Student use of the resources around him or her to find the answers need to move forward when an issue has occurred Leu et al. (2004) Using ICTs to share/publish information Stud ent use of ICTs to upload and/or share their personal creations with others Leu et al. (2004) Creating and working with alternative texts, including multimodal texts Student creation and interaction with alternative texts using multiple formats Hagood (20 09); New London Group (1996) Using collaborative practices Student demonstration of the social nature of literacy by collaborating with each other to enhance their final product and/or answer questions Gee (1996); Hagood (2009); New London Group (1996)
83 Table 3 2 Criteria and standards used to create final artifact rubric Category Standard(s) Supporting Literature Main Idea / Exposition 21.) Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well chosen detai ls, and well structured event sequences. Lambert (2007) Mechanics / Gramma r 36.) Demonstrate command of the conventions of Standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing. Senses 21 d. Use precise words and phrases, telling deta ils, and sensory language to convey a vivid picture of the experiences, events, setting, and/or characters. Plot / Organization 21 c. Use a variety of techniques to sequence events so that they build on one another to create a coherent whole and build t oward a particular tone and outcome (e.g., a sense of mystery, suspense, growth, or resolution). [W.11 12.3c] 21 e. Provide a conclusion that follows from and reflects on what is experienced, observed, or resolved over the course of the narrative. Persona l Experience 22. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. Lambert (2007) Language 35. Demonstrate command of the conventions of Standard English grammar and usa ge when w riting or speaking. 37. Apply knowledge of language to understand how language functions in different contexts, to make effective choices for meaning or style, and to comprehend more fully when reading or listening. Narrative 21. Write narrati ves to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well chosen details, and well structured event sequences. Music 33. Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. Leu et al. (2004); Hagood (2009); Lambert (2007)
84 Table 3 2 Continued Category Standard(s) Supporting Literature Images Standard 33 (see above) Leu et al. (2004); Hagood (2009); Lambert (2007) Narration Standard 33 (see above) Leu et al. (2004); Hagood (2009); Lambert (2007) Technical Elements 24. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce, publish, and update individual or shared writin g products in response to ongoing feedback, including new arguments or information. Digital Citizenship Standard 24 (see above) Leu et al. (2004); Hagood (2009) Final Product Elements / Editing 33.) Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. Leu et al. (2004); Hagood (2009); Lambert (2007) Storyboard 23. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience. Leu et al. (2004); Hagood (2009); Kajder (2004) Final Product Upload 24. Use technology, in cluding the Internet, to produce, publish, and update individual or shared writing products in response to ongoing feedback, including new arguments or information. Leu et al. (2004); Hagood (2009)
85 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS This chapter presents the results of the study In order to obtain these results the following research questions were examined: (a) In what ways, if any, are new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom? (b) In what ways, if any, do stud ents meet English 12 objectives related to the writing and language standards during a digital storytelling unit? In order to address these questions, data in the form of observations, student reflections, and final student artifacts were analyzed. For both research questions, data were analyzed using the constant comparative method (Spradley, 1979). Observations were analyzed using the observation protocol (Appendix C) created from the state standards and new literacy literature. Student artifacts were analyzed using a rubric (Appendix B) also created from state standards and previous literature. Data were constantly analyzed throughout the process and several new literacies and academic outcomes were evident These themes are presented in this chapte r. Participants Nineteen of the 26 students who completed the digital storytelling unit participated in the study. Seven students opted out of the study, for a total participation rate of 73%. The teacher, Mary, who participated in the study, teaches two regular English 12 classes. Observations for this study were completed in one of these two classes; however, digital stories from both classes were analyzed to increase the number of analyzed stories providing data. I observed 11 of the 19 students who participated in the study. The remaining eight students were recruited from the second English 12 class in order to increase the number of analyzed digital stories. Further, all
86 of the students in the class that was observed returned IRB consent forms to participate in the study. The composition of students who participated in the study was diverse with a mix of gender, race, and academic levels. Students ranged in age from 17 to 19. Nine students (47%) were female; while 10 students (53%) were male. The racial composition of students included nine Caucasian students (47%), eight African American students (42%), one Hispanic student (5%), and one Multiracial student (5%). Seven students (42%) received free or reduced lunch. The average GPA among part icipants was a 2.74, ranging from 1.16 to 3.75. Average English scores for participants in grades 9 through 11 was 77%. Project Overview hat seeks to engage individuals through the writing and sharing of essays about a core value that guides their daily lives. These essays are based on personal experiences that create a narrative that leads to the understanding of a personal belief and gui wrote on a variety of topics including patriotism, finding yourself through what you love, meant to be brief. The recommended range is between 350 to 500 words in order to keep the essay concise and on point. Students used computers to create their written piece and iPads to create their digital component. Additionally, students used either Toontasti c or iMovie for iOS in order to edit their final product. Table 4 1 outlines the topics, software used, and word count of the 19 analyzed digital stores.
87 Table 4 1. Student digital story o verview Essay Topic Software Used Word Count 1 Team sports teach life lessons iMovie 500 2 Turning no into a positive iMovie 562 3 The spirit of Patriotism iMovie 398 4 Bad owners make bad dogs iMovie 315 5 Caring for others is important iMovie 490 6 Everlasting love iMovie 441 7 Finding yourself through what you love iMovie 32 9 8 Humility and self determination lead to success iMovie 466 9 Pets can be comforting Toont astic 580 10 Brotherhood Toont astic 487 11 Hard work and perseverance lead to good things Toontastic 536 12 Friendship is vital for life Toontas tic 514 13 The struggles of being an illegal immigrant Toontastic 485 14 Help those in need Toontastic 422 15 Build on your past Toontastic 740 16 The importance of participating Toontastic 420 17 Respect Toontastic 449 18 Laughter heals Toontastic 4 60 19 Remember to laugh Toontastic 486 Findings for Research Question 1 This section reveals the findings related to research question 1 which evaluated new literacies evident during the unit. Hsu and Wang (2010) posited that new literacies are needed to effectively work in the 21 st century. The observation protocol and student reflections were used to organize th ese data. Based on the literature, the following categories were selected to form the observations protocol: 1. using search engines to l ocate information related to the project; 2. evaluating information usefulness to the project; 3. using word processing effectively to format a document; 4. participating effectively in online discussion boards;
88 5. using email effectively to communicate and transfer i nformation; 6. identifying important questions to ask in order to solve issues encountered during the project; 7. locating information to answer questions; 8. using ICTs to share/publish/organize information; 9. creating and working with alternative texts, including m ultimodal texts; and 10. using collaborative practices. After completing the observations, I discovered that the results within several categories were intertwined. Therefore, I determined that several of these categories could be combined and condensed into a total of four main categories in order to present the results. The following new literacy categories are discussed within this chapter after combining multiple criteria from the observation protocol into one of the following four categories : Working wi th ICTs and Multimodal Texts, Locating Information, Evaluating Information Usefuln ess, and Collaborative Practices. These themes, along with a brief explanation of each, are described within this section. Working with ICTs and multimodal texts describes the use of ICTs to share, publish, organize, or create information, as well as, working with multimodal texts to communicate. This theme is a combination of categories three, four, five, eight, and nine from the observation protocol as well as the artifa ct rubric. Locating information depicts the use of search engines and other resources to locate information for the project, answer a question, and/or solve a problem. This theme is a combination of categories one, six, and seven of the observation proto col. Evaluating information usefulness describes the act of determining the usefulness of information to the
89 situation or process. This theme was derived from category two of the observation protocol. Finally, collaborative practices portray the act of working together. This theme was derived from category ten of the observation protocol. Table 4 2 displays the final themes and the areas of the observation protocol which informed these themes. Table 4 2 Combination of t he mes o verview Theme Observati on Protocol Criteria Working with ICTs and Multimodal Texts (3) using word processing effectively to format a document; (4) participating effectively in online discussion boards; (5) using email effectively to communicate and transfer information; (8) us ing ICTs to share/publish/organize information; (9) creating and working with alternative texts, including multimodal texts; Locating Information (1) using search engines to locate information related to the project; (6) identifying important questions t o ask in order to solve issues encountered during the project; (7) locating information to answer questions; Evaluating Information Usefulness (2) evaluating information usefulness to the project; Collaborative Practices (10) using collaborative practic es. Working with ICTs and Multimodal Texts The most prominent new literacy evident during the digital storytelling unit was working with ICTs and multimodal texts. In order to complete the written component of their digital story, students used both Mac intosh and Windows computers. Of the 11 students observed, nine students (82%) used Windows computers and two students
90 (18%) used Macintosh computers. Eight of the students who used Windows computers used school provided laptops with one student choosing to use a personal computer. Both students who used Macintosh computers used personal devices. However, all students used school provided iPads to complete the digital component of the digital storytelling unit. The school provided iPads were equipped w ith two pre installed editing applications, Toontastic and iMovie. Both iPad applications had limited features as compared to their computer counterparts, but still offered an adequate outlet for video editing within the classroom. Nineteen digital stor ies from two English 12 classes were analyzed in order to ensure data were complete. Of the 19 digital stories analyzed, 11 students (58%) chose to use Toontastic and eight students (52%) used iMovie for iOS. Other ICTs that comprised the observation pro tocol included discussion boards and e mail. Although commonly used within the classroom observed, discussion boards were not used directly during this digital storytelling unit and therefore did not provide data for this investigation. Four instances re garding e mail occurred during the 12 observations. Although a relatively low occurrence rate (33%), these instances are included within the data because they revealed an area of need within the unit. Two other ICTs observed being used during the digital learning management system. Students were observed interacting with these ICTs in three main areas: creating their digital story, sharing their digital story, and communicating. Creating their digital story. In order to create their digital stories, students were observed interacting with new literacies in four phases. These phases overlapped
91 and students moved freely between them. These three phases included writing, saving, and editing media. Stud ents used Google Drive in order to type and format their written piece to be shared with Mary. The school in which the study was conducted provides Google apps accounts for all students, which allowed students to maintain Google Drive folders, and email ac counts as well as access other Google features. Nine of the 11 students observed (81%) chose to work directly on the computer while writing their rough draft. One of the 11 students (9%) moved to the hallway to use dictation software to recite his story directly into the computer in order to get his ideas out before beginning his revisions. The remaining student (9%) opted to hand write her rough draft before beginning to type it into the computer. After completing an initial draft, 10 of the 11 studen ts worked directly on the computer within Google Docs to make edits and revisions. The remaining student worked within Microsoft Word 2010. Once students made their initial revisions and felt comfortable with their first ure within Google Docs to share their draft with a peer. The student with whom the draft was shared made comments directly on the essay in Google Docs for consideration and review. Comments included grammar mistakes, flow considerations, and other suggest ions that students thought would help strengthen the piece. Ten of the 11 students (91%) successfully completed this process. The remaining student did not submit her draft for peer review. Figure 4 1 is an example of student feedback on another student s draft within Google Docs.
92 Figure 4 1 Example of student feedback on rough draft Another new literacy evident during the writing phase of the digital storytelling unit included formatting using a word processing program. C ompositions were constructed using the Modern Language Association (MLA) format guidelines. Mary supplied students with an example of a properly formatted MLA document through the school learning management system. Figure 4 LA example formatting style sheet.
93 Figure 4 2. MLA example formatting style sheet Students were instructed to use this document in order to format their own documents; therefore, they had to use basic formatting tools from the word processing toolbar ability to replicate MLA formatting within their own documents, the 19 digital stories were divided into the following three categories: properly formatted documents, documents with minor formatting errors, and documents with major formatting errors. Properly formatted documents included documents that were successfully formatted in MLA style. Figure 4 based on MLA style.
94 Figure 4 3. MLA properly formatted student document Documents with minor formatting errors included documents that contained small errors such as minor heading, font, or spacing issues. Figure 4 4 is an example of a heading error, Figure 4 5 is a n example of a font error, and Figure 4 6 is an example of a spacing error. Figure 4 4. MLA heading error within a student document
95 Figure 4 5. MLA font error within a student document (Veranda Size 8) Figure 4 6. MLA spacing error within a studen t document Documents with major formatting errors showed little or no MLA style formatting. Figure 4 7 is an example of a document with major formatting errors. Figure 4 7. Student document that contains major formatting error
96 Of the 19 digital stori es that I analyzed, 11 were properly formatted within the MLA style (57%). Five documents contained minor formatting errors ( 2 6 %), and three documents contained major formatting errors ( 16 %). Therefore, the vast majority of students were able to replicate MLA formatting within a word processing program with minor or no errors Mary did not discuss formatting during class. Instead, students were expected to use their prior knowledge and previous experiences in order to achieve the desired outcome. Withi n the observed class, students appeared to be comfortable using the word processing program on the computer and in the Google Docs version. None of the students appeared to be confused and no major issues surfaced with students during this phase. Due to the use of Google Drive for peer review, 10 of the 11 students continued to use Google Docs to format their final product since they had already typed their draft in Google Docs. Nine of the 11 worked directly in Google Docs from the beginning of the proj ect. The student who used dictation worked within Microsoft Word for Mac before transferring his document into Google Docs using the copy and paste feature. Furthermore, the student who hand wrote her first draft typed her story in Microsoft Word 2010 and was the only student who did not complete the student revision section of the unit. The students I observed using the Google Docs word processing program to format their documents appeared to be comfortable with its conventions and navigated through the program with ease. Furthermore, these students encountered little or no issues during the formatting process.
97 The second area in which I observed students interacting with new literacies was through the process of saving media to be used in their digital stories. Specifically, students saved images to be used later in their digital stories to their Google Drive folders. All 11 students (100%) within the observed classroom were able to successfully complete this task. Students uploaded images to their s chool provided Google apps account before making selections for their final projects. Of the 19 digital stories analyzed, 17 students (89%) used the Google search engine to locate and save digital images. The remaining two students, both female, chose to use personal photos from their Facebook and Instagram accounts. Both of these students were able to successfully save photos from their social media accounts to their Google Drive accounts for later use in their digital stories. The use of Google Drive material, as well as to store their chosen media, revealed an area of need. Student file structure within Google Drive was disorganized. Students did not know how to use folders and had many Figure 4 Figure 4 8. Student Google Drive account
98 This filing system proved to be ineffective for students and caused innumerable problems. On three occasions I observed students clicking through and opening multiple untitled documents before locating their desired draft. When asked why they did not use folders to organize their documents, several students responded that they had never reall y thought about it before or had ever used them, so they were not familiar with how folders worked. Another student admitted that she did not know how to create a folder or move a document into a folder. There was consensus among many of the students tha t they too shared this concern. Mary used this discussion as an opportunity to show students how to rename their documents within Google Drive. Although students appeared to make improvements in using the file structure after Mary demonstrated how to do t Of the 19 student participants, two students (11%), both female, named their documents within their Google Drive accounts. The remaining 17 students (89%) had several Four of the 19 students (21%), three females and one male, had at least one folder in their Google Drive accounts. The remaining 15 students (79%) had a long string of documents, presentations, and images for all of their classes, as well as personal documents, organized in no particular order. Although students were not organizing their documents effectively in their Google Drive folders, they were ac tively using folders to save work for multiple classes. Thus, students were able to use Google Drive to save information, documents, and presentations; however, their organization and file structure caused issues in retrieving material. Only two of the f our students who
99 had folders in their Google Drive accounts used them to properly organize their documents. The remaining two used the folder, but also had a long string of documents that were not in a folder. As students worked on gathering and saving im ages, they reflected on copyright issues. At the beginning of the unit, Mary discussed copyright issues. Due to the limited amount of time to complete the digital component, students were allowed to use images from the Internet in their projects. Howeve r, fair use was discussed and students were educated about photo watermarks, or photos in which a faded mark is placed on the photo denoting copyright. Mary informed students not to use these photos in their projects. Furthermore, students created a docu ment that cited all photos used. Students had done this previously and selected appropriate photos to use as well as documented these photos as they completed the process. Another area in which students interacted with new literacies was during the editi ng process. Students used multiple components to create their final digital story, including photos, music, and narration. These elements worked together to convey their desired message, and students worked with the components in a variety of ways. Student s uploaded selected images into their chosen editing program from their Google Drive account Students then arranged photos in the desired order that they laid out during the storyboarding phase. Students also selected their preferred music to accompany their stories. All 19 students (100%) used stock music available in their chosen editing program to avoid the use of songs with lyrics that would distract from the narration. Students recorded their narration and began finalizing the length of time thei r photos
100 would appear to match the recorded narration. Stock music was also preferred because it does not violate copyright rules and is provided by the programs to be used within edited projects. The ability to upload, manipulate, and combine all of the different components into one final digital story that conveyed their desired narrative and message are all considered to be valuable new literacy skills. Both Toontastic and iMovie offer advanced editing features beyond adding and editing pictures, musi c, and narration. Fourteen of the 19 digital stories analyzed (79%) utilized additional features of the editing program. These features included adding text or titles, picture movement, and animated features. The five digital stories that did not includ e additional features were produced by students who used Toontastic. Six of the 19 students (32%) added text or titles to their stories. For the purpose of this study, the use of text and titles included any use of typed or handwritten words within the project. Four of these six students (67%) used iMovie and two students (33%) use Toontastic. Students used the text feature to introduce their topic and/or to enhance an idea within a photo. Five of the 11 students who used Toontastic (45%) used the ani mation feature. This feature was not available within iMovie. Animation was defined as adding a cartoon character or special effect that provided animation or movement of a character or special effect over the picture. Two of the five students (40%) use d the animation feature to animate certain elements from their stories, such as adding falling rain. Three students (60%) used the animation feature for entertainment purposes, such as having a character move around the screen. However, none of the studen ts who used the animation feature in Toontastic for entertainment used this feature to add to the theme or purpose of their
101 stories. Eight students (100%) who used iMovie for their digital stories used the picture movement feature. Picture movement was n ot available within the Toontastic application. Picture movement included zooming in or out of a photo or panning across a photo from side to side. Picture movement was used to add interest and/or to emphasize a specific area of a photo. Table 4 3 displ ays a breakdown of the extra features utilized in the digital stories. Table 4 3 Student u se of extra f eatures Feature Toontastic Users iMovie Users Purpose text/t itles 2 4 title 3 enhance photo 2 both 1 animation 5 N/A animate story elements 2 entertainment 3 picture movement N/A 8 a dd interest and emphasize photo 8 n o extra features 5 0 N/A Sharing their digital story The second area in which students were observed working with ICTs is through the process of sharing. The 11 student s who used Toontastic to create their digital stories uploaded their final videos directly from the program to Toontube, the video sharing website directly linked to the Toontastic application. At the time of this study, Toontube was the only method of sh aring allowed by the Toontastic application. Figure 4 9 shows the export option within the Toontastic application. Students who chose to use iMovie exported their final video to the iPad camera roll, and then uploaded videos to their Google drive accounts and shared them with the teacher.
102 Figure 4 9. Movie export within Toontastic Figure 4 10 is a screenshot of the export feature in the iMovie application, and Figure 4 11 shows the share function in Google Drive that students who used iMovie utilized to share their stories with Mary. Figure 4 10. Movie export within iMovie
103 Figure 4 11. Google Drive share feature All 19 of the student digital stories that were analyzed for this study were successfully shared through either Toontube of Google Drive As previously mentioned, students shared their written digital stories with other students in order to receive peer feedback before making revisions. Ten of the 11 students observed (91%) were able to successfully complete this task. Additionally, stud ents shared their written drafts with Mary through the school learning management system. Students formally submitted a rough draft, a final draft, and a draft to be sent to ublication. All of the students within the observed class were able to successfully upload and share a rough draft and a final draft through the learning management system. Of the 19 digital stories analyzed, 16 (84%) uploaded their final revised essay t
104 The student essays were still under review when this was written. Communica ting The final way in which students interacted with ICTs throughout the digital storytelling unit was through the act of communicating. Students used the learning management system to communicate with Mary. As previously mentioned, students submitted a rough draft and a final draft through assignments created by Mary online within the learning management system. Mary use d this outlet to communicate with students and provide feedback on both drafts. Figure 4 12 is an 13 is an
105 Fig ure 4 12. Teacher feedback on student rough draft
106 Figure 4 13. Teacher feedback on student final draft Students also used the learning management system to communicate with Mary about versions between their rough draft and final draft. Figure 4 14 sh ows an example of this type of student communication through the learning management system. Figure 4 14. Student use of communication through LMS Students worked extensively with the learning management system since it was the format in which they subm itted all written work during this project. Additionally, it was the mechanism students used to receive feedback from Mary on their work. There were four instances in which student e mail use occurred during my observations. During the first instance, the student was unaware that he had a school
10 7 provided e mail address. When the student was asked to use his school e mail to Another student who was asked to do the same thing had t o be instructed regarding how to login and send an e mail. During the third observation, a student was asked to e mail her rough draft to Mary because she was having trouble uploading her draft to the learning management system and class time was almost o ver. The student know how to access her e mail or password. The fourth observed instance of e mail involved a student successfully sending an e mail from her mobile devi ce. In all four of these instances, students appeared to be confused and uncomfortable with the process. This discomfort appeared to be related directly to the use of e mail and its format, as all of these students showed signs of disdain towards the e mail format in general. Even the student who was successful sending an e mail mail. Although students were very experienced with regard to sharing through social media and texting, they seemed to struggle with traditional e mail. The ability to use e mail effectively, however, is an important, real life skill and new literacy. Locating Information The second most prominent new literacy evident during the digital story telling questions and use search engines and other resources to locate information to answer questions and/or solve problems. Furthermore, this new literacy included the ability to locate information for use within their digital storytelling projects.
108 In order to provide a more authentic learning environment, Mary worked more as a facilitator as recommended by the literature on best practices from Chapter 2. She purp osefully gave students space to complete self directed work. Students worked together and individually to locate information. The primary occasions in which students were observed locating information throughout the project included gathering photos to u se in their projects and looking for information that would help resolve an issue they had encountered during the process. Gathering photos. The first instance in which I observed students locating information was through the use of the Google search eng ine, which students used to search for materials for their projects. Students used the Google search engine to locate photos to complete their digital stories. All 11 students in the observed classroom used the Google search engine to look for photos. I n order to complete these searches, students searched for specific photos that they had previously outlined in the storyboarding phase. Students searched directly in Google images using specific word choices. Students sorted through photo options to find desired photos. Furthermore, I observed students adjusting the search as needed if a desired photo did not present itself within the original search. After an initial search, two students decided to use personal photos from their social media accounts b ecause they were not satisfied with the options within Google. The remaining nine students continued to use the Google search engine in order to locate photos. Because of the limited amount of time that Mary could check out the iPad cart, students used p ersonal and school provided laptops to find all of their photos before they began the editing process on the iPad. Students used Google Drive to
109 upload and save their photos before transferring them to the iPad. The nine students who used Google images t o locate their pictures were successful in saving these pictures to their Google Drive accounts and importing them to their editing program and the remaining two students were able to successfully save their images from their social media accounts to Googl e Drive Students learned quickly that they would need to be specific in conducting a riends two other instances of students using specific words instead of vague word choices within their word searches. As students in the observed class worked through their list of photos needed for the project, their searches became increasingly more specific and students appeared to be more comfortable with the process. Two of the students I observed during this process searched multiple topics or word choices before they found a specific photo to use. Therefore, students utilized a trial and error approach to finding photos by refining their search terms to locate desired photos for their digital story. Additionally, four students seated on the left side of the room foun d the advance search option in which they were able to control the size of the photos that the results would return. This allowed them to remove all of the small photos that would be distorted when enlarged. Figure 4 15 is an example of how these students used the advanced search option.
110 Figure 4 15. Advanced search option within the Google search engine One student within the group sitting on the left side of the room was the first to notice this option. He proceeded to share this feature with the thr ee people seated around him. All four students continued to use this feature throughout their image search process. However, they did not share this information with the students across the room. When the remaining seven students came upon a small photo within their searches they would skip over it and continue to search for another photo. Therefore, the advanced search feature saved a few students time and frustration. I did not observe the use of other advanced features over the course of this unit. Most students seemed content to sort through a large number of photos. As previously mentioned, students were allowed to use photos as long as these photos did not contain a watermark or a specific notification not be reproduced. Students maintained a do cument containing citations for all of the photos they used within their projects. Solving an issue. Occasionally, the technology itself provided an opportunity for students to work on locating information. When the technology or the software did not
111 wo rk as expected or when students did not know how to perform a certain function, they would have to locate information that could help them. In order to find the necessary information, students would have to ask the right question or questions to find the desired information. Students found several ways to locate the information they needed throughout the digital storytelling unit. Although many students came to the same conclusions, they often found it in different places. The first option for most stu dents was to utilize Google, or as one student d (St udent R eflection 16). I observed this strategy numerous times throughout the project. Students used the Google search engine to find different forums and other specialty websites to learn how others had accomplished what they were attempting to do. This process directed many Although YouTube is blocked at the school where the study was conducted, I observed two students using their personal devices on their cellular signal to watch videos. Another student indicated that she usually just waited until she got home to find the YouTube video that walked her through the required steps to produce the desir ed button to obtain additional information. Although each of these options led to the same content, the method of delivery was different and students had their own perso nal inclination s for which method they preferred to receive information. An informal verbal survey within the observed class suggested that five of the 11 students ( 45% ) preferred YouTube help videos. Of those five students four students ( 80% ) were male and one student ( 20% ) was female. Five
112 of 11 students ( 45% ) preferred online website written directions. Of the five students who preferred online website directions, four students ( 80% ) were female and one student ( 20% ) was male. The remaining female student preferred to use the program s built in help system when an easy answer was not immediately available Although the class was almost evenly split between using website directions and watching a YouTube video, the female students leaned towards t he use of written directions while the male students preferred using YouTube videos. A ll 11 students identified Google as their first step in locating quick and easy solution s Although the steps were different the outcomes were the same. I observed st udents using Google to locate various types of information during each of my observation days throughout the unit. Mary allowed students to locate information on their own; this provided students with opportunities to interact with, develop, and create po sitive feelings towards the new literacy skill of locating information. Although not always in the same manner or location, students found ways to locate the information and/or resources they needed in order to move forward with their projects. Eva luating Information Usefulness Once students were able to locate information, they had to evaluate its usefulness for their specific needs. Therefore, codes within this theme were related to the act of determining the usefulness of information to a given situati on or process. The two main ways in which I observed students evaluating information were through material selection and problem solving. Material selection. In conducting this project, students had to evaluate information on a much deeper level. Previ ous projects were one dimensional but
113 students now had to evaluate multiple dimensions and determine how this information contributed to this project as a whole. As students worked on their digital stories, they evaluated pictures and decided which ones t hey would include in their project to visually tell their story. I observed all 11 students (100%) sorting through images and carefully making photo selections. Students sorted through multiple photos in order to choose the best one for their stories. I did not observe any students selecting the first photo they came upon. Rather, students scrolled through hundreds of photos before making a selection. Figure 4 1 6 shows an example of a typical photo layout for students to begin their selection. Figure 4 16 Preliminary Google photo search layout As students reviewed photos, they worked quietly and seemed focused on the process. Students worked diligently and stayed on task. As previously noted, students considered multiple images before making their final selections. In personal reflections, students commented on the process of image selection stating that they made their (Student R eflection 1). Other students (Student R
114 theme (Student R eflection 18), and specific i (Student R eflection 9). Therefore, students took time to evaluate the usefulness of each photo within their specific stories. In addition to photos, students had to evaluate the usefulness of their music selections to determine which music fit the tone and mood of their stories. Students used stock music in each application for their musical selections because it did not contain words that would distract from their narration and did not infringe o n copyright issues. Figure 4 17 shows stock music selections available within iMovie for iOS. Figure 4 17 Example music selections within iMovie for iOS Students used headphones to sort throug h music options and to evaluate which one to use in their own digital stories. In three instances I observed students changing their music selections after they inserted a song and decided that was not a good fit for their digital story. As students refl ected on this process, one st udent commented that he made his music selection (Student R eflection 19 ). (Student Reflection 13) Similar to the process of photo selection, I did not observe students selecting the first song they listened to; rather, all students sorted
115 through multiple songs before making their final selections. The iMovie application offered more diverse op tions in terms of musical styles than the less sophisticated Toontastic application. When looking for photos and music for their digital stories, students had to assess each component separately and determine how they would work together in their final dig ital story. Therefore, students had to evaluate the usefulness of each component both individually and in combination. These activities provided hands on experience with evaluating the usefulness of information on multiple levels and provided several opp ortunities for students to interact with new literacies. Problem solving. Furthermore, students evaluated the usefulness of information to solve a problem. As students were locating information on Google, help websites, YouTube, and other web based resou rces, they had to determine if the information they found would be useful within their own personal situations. Students evaluated information and decided if they needed to keep looking or if the information they found was sufficient enough to try. Stude nts used prior knowledge and previous experiences to determine if this newfound information would address their issue or lead to a desired result. After evaluating the information in relation to what they already knew, students made a decision regarding whether or not they would try this solution. Students did not always make the right evaluative decision in these situations, but they learned something new each time. When things did not work in the manner they expected based on their previous evaluation of the situation, students used this new information to refine their search for solutions. The students I observed during this process did not
116 appear to be unsettled by this outcome but transitioned easily into a new, refined search. Students tried new a pproaches until they came upon a solution that adequately addressed their problems. The processes of locating and evaluating information were ongoing and cyclical. As students worked on their projects they were constantly searching for new information an d evaluating its usefulness. When searching for a solution to a problem, students had to determine if the information would be useful. Locating and evaluating information is important in real world situations; this digital storytelling unit provided stud ents with hands on experiences with both of these new literacies Collaborative Practices The final theme derived from research question 1 was collaborative practices or the act of working together. Students worked together in a variety of ways on this pr something, this project was social in nature. According to the students, collaboration made the project more enjoyable. Therefore, students wanted to work on their projects mo re frequently. The two main areas in which I observed students collaborating with one another were through asking for an opinion on their digital story to improve their work and collaborating to solve a problem. Asking opinions. Although students complet ed their own projects individually, I observed each student working with other students throughout the process. One ch other on individual projects (Student R eflection 13 ). Stud ents discussed photo and music options with their neighbors. All instances of students asking for opinions occurred between one student and the students around him or her. I did not observe any
117 students crossing the room in order to ask for another stude was looking for a sports news show type of song and had the students around him vote on three different options. Overall, much like the pilot study, students seemed to have fun working together during the digital storytelling unit even though they were creating individual final products. Students put a great deal of effort into their projects and stayed focus withou t becoming overly distracted during their collaborations peer review process. Students supplied questions and suggestions for other students to consider related to their pr ojects. Although this process was more formal tha n nature. Students used informal language in peer reviews and focused heavily on flow, punctuation, and spelling within the document. Solving a problem. Furthermore, students worked collaboratively on solving problems. If the technology was not working correctly or working as they expected, students were not hesitant to ask another student for assistance. One student co (Student R eflection 4) while another student adde (Student R eflection 6). One student was getting frustrated when she could not hear any sound from her project. A st udent next to her quickly showed her the mute switch on the side of the iPad; he did this instinctively and without hesitation.
118 Additionally, when students discovered something new or found a solution to a problem, the first thing they did was share it w ith students next to them. Students were constantly sharing information and trading ideas throughout the process. Frequently, another student had solved an issue or problem before Mary could make it across the room. Students learned from each other and on two separate occasions, Mary noted that she was grateful they worked it out together because it was something she did not know how to do. Findings for Rese arch Question 2 This section describes the findings related to research question 2 regarding acade mic outcomes. For this research question, I used the observation protocol and final artifact rubric to analyze data. For the purpose of this study, academic outcomes included students meeting course and assignment objectives as aligned with the state cou rse of study. I assessed academic outcomes using the final artifact rubric that I created using the state course of study standards. In order to address research question 2, the 19 digital stories were assessed separately using the rubric by both me and Ma ry. Based on these assessments, the final average produced an average grade of 84%. The student average during the semester in which the unit was taught was a 75%; therefore, student grades within this unit w ere nine 2 grade within the semester The criteria fields with the highest averages were final product upload, digital citizenship, personal experiences, and plot. The criteria fields wit h the lowest averages were senses an d mechanics/grammar. Table 4 4 provides a breakdown of the rubric along with the final average of each criteria field for both me and Mary.
119 Table 4 4 Rubric criteria f ield s and scores b reakdown Criteria Field Standard (s) Addressed Field Description My Ave rage Average Main Idea / Exposition 21. Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well chosen details, and well structured event sequences. Story contains a c lear main idea and exposition laid out in logical order 8.47 8.05 Mechanics / Grammar 36. Demonstrate command of the conventions of Standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing. Use of correct conventions such as capitalization, punctuation, spelling and/or sentence structure 8.32 7.47 Senses 21 d. Use precise words and phrases, telling details, and sensory language to convey a vivid picture of the experiences, events, setting, and/or characters. Use of senses within the narrativ e to describe personal experiences, including sight, sound, taste, touch, and hearing 7.95 7.26 Plot / Organization 21 c. Use a variety of techniques to sequence events so that they build on one another to create a coherent whole and build toward a particu lar tone and outcome (e.g., a sense of mystery, suspense, grow th, or resolution). 21 e. Provide a conclusion that follows from and reflects on what is experienced, observed, or resolved over the course of the narrative. Use of organization and sequencing t o create an well organized essay in logical order with a conclusion 8.74 8.16 Personal Experiences 22. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. Use of personal exp eriences to create a narrative 8.53 8.42
120 Table 4 4 Continued Criteria Field Standard(s) Addressed Field Description My Average Average Language 35. Demonstrate command of the conventions of Standard English grammar and usage when w riting or sp eaking. 37. Apply knowledge of language to understand how language functions in different contexts, to make effective choices for meaning or style, and to comprehend more fully when reading or listening. Use of specific language and sentence types in bot h speaking and writing 8.26 7.79 Narrative 21. Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well chosen details, and well structured event sequences. Use of narrative elements to create a full picture of th e setting, events, and ideas 8.53 7.84 Music 33. Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. Us e of deliberate music choices to match story meaning and tone 7.84 8.21 Images Standard 33 (see above) Use of deliberate image choices to match story meaning and tone 8.11 8.47 Narration Standard 33 (see above) Use of voice and tone to tell story that ca n be clearly understood 8.16 8.58
121 Table 4 4 Continued Criteria Field Standard(s) Addressed Field Description My Average Average Technical Elements 24. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce, publish, and update individual or sh ared writing products in response to ongoing feedback, including new arguments or information. Use of features within the editing program to create a complete final product 8.00 8.53 Digital Citizenship Standard 24 (see above) Use of technology and eleme nts ethically and with proper documentation 9.11 9.16 Final Product Elements / Editing 33. Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reaso ning, and evidence and to add interest. Use of music, images, and narration as a whole piece to properly tell their story 7.84 8.42 Storyboard 23. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approac h, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience. Use of storyboard template to create a visual outline for the digital component 8.16 8.16 Final Product Upload 24. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce, publish, and update individual or shared writing products in response to ongoing feedback, including new arguments or information. Use of technology to export, upload, and share student final products 10.00 10.00
122 The standards assessed through the rubri c were divided into the following four areas: writing standards (standard 21), production and distribution of writing standards (standards 22 24), presentation of knowledge and ideas standards (standards 33), and language standards (standards 35 37). Writ ing Standards The unit assessed writing standard 21 which states that students should be able Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well chosen details and well structured event sequences (Alab ama Department of Education, 2010). Standard 21 also includes the following sub standards in which students need to be able to create a sequence of events using precise words and phrases, such as sensory language and details, to create a complete narrativ e that includes a conclusion (Alabama Department of Education, 2010) The criteria fields from the rubric that addressed standards 21 included main idea/exposition, narrative, plot/organization, and senses. Main idea/Exposition. The main idea/exposition criteria field addressed es included being specific and brief and using real experiences from their lives to create a personal essay about a use of words that were comfortable to the student and required students to name their beliefs within their essays for the reader. This set of guidelines provided a structure to help students express their main ideas while laying out a narrative exposition based on real events from their lives. The
123 ave rage score within the main idea/exposition category was 8.26 out of 10; thus, students were able to express their main idea clearly through the exposition using supporting details which were laid out in a logical order. Expressing the main idea and exposi tion are important elements when creating a written narrative; therefore, this criteria field related directly back to standard 21. Students expressed their main ideas through the statement of their beliefs; however, they had to support these ideas through the use real events from their lives to build a narrative exposition. Student essay 1 provides an example of a student who began with his belief statement and developed that idea to build an exposition that became more specific. This sequence provided a logical order of events: I believe that sports are more than just a hobby or a fun way to exercise. Sports can provide an individual with a sense of responsibility. Team sports are special in particular because they not only provide a sense of purpose, b ut a sense of unity. .Sports have helped me personally develop an improved work ethic. During football season, many nights I anything, but I make myself open my backpack and che ck to see what homework I have. of honor then the politicians they watch over and o ssay 3). and I think that with a little self determination and perseverance that everyone could make it far, but your success is nothing wit hout hum ssay 8).
124 students were able to build upon their ideas in the exposition and provide a conclusion in the same format. A third student co mposed the following: I believe in participating in different organizations because it enhances person from fully developing opinions of different things they might like or not like becau se they never experience it. A person would not be able to make as many connections with other people that share the same interest with them. I believe in participating because a person who is involved is engaged with themselves a nd their community. (Stu dent E ssay 16) By providing a structured format for students to state their main ideas, students were able to focus on creating an exposition that followed a narrative structure and built upon itself allowing the reader to follow the events that led to t he main idea or belief. Narrative. elements effectively within their stories. Through the process of creating their digital stories, students were able to hear and see their stories beyond words on a page. This format allowed students to interact with their work in new ways that revealed errors in pacing, descriptions, and word choice but also allowed time for revision. The average grade within the narrative category of the rubric was 8.12 out of 10; therefore; students purposely used elements within the narrative structure. Thus, this criteria field also addressed standard 21. Narrative elements utilized within student essays included point of view, description, setting, charact erization, and atmosphere. Point of view is an important narrative element that refers to the narrator in the story. Due to the personal nature of these essays, first person point of view was utilized where the narrator was involved in the story. One stu dent noted:
125 Once when I was fourteen, I wanted to make a little money. I asked one of my aunts if I could babysit, and she said no because she thought I was too young and irresponsible. I was a little upset, but mainly just wante d to prove her wrong. ( Student E ssay 2) This example demonstrated first person point of view through the use of the Students also utilized description within their stories to paint a picture for the reader. Student 5 said: The day I went to help people were hurt, crying, homeless, careless they people there came to help start rebuilding homes again. There were nearly 200 peop le out the re helping. (Student E ssay 5) The use of details in the previous example allows the reader to see the helplessness of the situation they were there to help clean up. Although difficult to demonstrate within a short excerpt, pacing was evident within the use of repetition, structure, and length creates pacing as the reader falls into a rhythm and detects sentence pattern and repetition of words. For example: Even though there are days I still feel hurt by dad I feel blessed knowing that my heavenly father will never leave me. God is constant with everything. When your life becomes overwhelming, God will help you through it. When you feel abandoned, God will never leave you. When you do not feel worthy enough, God says you have a purpose. I believe in the father who is constantly ther e. I believe in God. (Student E ssay 6) Narrative elements also included the ability to create the setting in which the story takes place and possible conflict. Student 7 noted: We were winding dow n the three and a half hour practice with a little scrimmage at the end and the offense failed to run a play right numerous times. I could tell by the facial expressions on my teammates faces that we were going to be practicing for a while longer, but som ething inside of me took over and I started saying words of encouragement to help the team fi nish practice strong. (Student E ssay 7)
126 In the previous example, the student is able to create a setting of a football practice that is not going very well by s etting up the hours and describing to the reader what was happening at the practice. Characterization is a narrative method used to describe character traits or the personality of a character within a story. Characterization can be direct, where the wri ter explicitly tells the reader about the character, or indirect, were the writer leaves it up to the reader to find out. The following is an example of direct characterization as it explains the character of aunt Miranda to the reader: I admire my aunt Miranda because no matter how much money she made she would always be humble and give back to her family. When the house she grew up in burned down she had another house built right on top of it for my granny. (Student E ssay 8) In the previous excerpt, the reader has an understanding of the character aunt Miranda and her determination; therefore, this is an example of characterization. The final narrative element demonstrated in student essays was atmosphere and dialogue. When people came over it was a lways chaos. Dogs were barking, cats were running around, the neighbors would get annoyed and people ssay 9) In the previous exampl e, the student was able to describe an atmosphere of chaos and also use direct quotes of dialogue to reinforce her point. Overall, students used a variety of narrative elements to tell their stories. Plot/Organization Organization and sequencing are imp ortant concepts to ability to form organized, well constructed essays; this criteria specifically addressed standards 21c and 21e. Standard 21c involves working wit h sequencing of the events, and Standard 21e requires students to provide a conclusion to that sequence of events.
127 I observed improvements in sequencing by students through the creation of a visual outline in the form of a storyboard. The storyboard phas e of the project provided an opportunity for students to see their stories in a new way, and it forced students to think about and plan in advance their stories in order to complete the different boxes and elements of their assignment. One student made t he following comment about the number of drafts she from one scene in ord er to sequence to the next. Therefore, they organized their stories through a sequence of events and used this outline when working on the digital component of their projects. By breaking their stories into a sequence of events, students were able to vis ually see the flow of their stories and determine what worked and what did not. Storyboarding allowed students to create a narrative that flowed from beginning to end, and thereby com plete their concepts. Figure 4 1 8 shows an example of a student storyboar d. Figure 4 18 Student storyboard
128 A number of students used this storyboard space to reorganize their thoughts things that ma de revisions easier than before (Stud ent R eflection 5). Within the rubric, sequencing and conclusions were addressed in the plot/organization category which had a final average of 8.45 out of 10; therefore, students were able to organize their essays in a logical sequence that also contained a complete conclusion that written work. My life was changed on an ordinary Monday morning in seventh grade when I agreed to go to a bible study with my friend. .As I got older, life would have gotten through it wi thout God guiding me. (Student E ssay 6) Elementary school friendships revolved around coloring, making up games, dress up, and pigtails. Middle school was when friendships become a competition, unlike elementary school where I was just glad to have someone to walk in line with. .Finally high school came around, where I have met a group o f my closest friends. (Student E ssay 12) There are many thi ngs in life that can be looked at as a guideline to life. For some people it may be school, for some it may be church, but for me it is baseball. .For example, the starting point is in tee ball where the ball is sitting and is easy to hit. Then [you] w ork your way up to pitching machine and then to kid pitch and if you are lucky college and maybe even the pros. I believe my l ife is like baseball. (Student E ssay 15). All three of these excerpts are examples of sequencing because the sentences build upon one other and create a series of events create a narrative work. The following excerpts are examples of conclusions from student essays: Never allow it to slow you down because it is nothing but an opportunity. When one door closes, God opens another. With self determination and (Student E ssay 2)
129 Football teaches us a lot of things. It teaches young men discipline, determination, overcoming adversity, commitment, and other things that t the best out in me. (Student E s say 7) From the coal mines to the front line of the military field; from the baseball fields to the tennis courts; from the local barber shop, to the donut hole. Everyone comes together as a group or a family to work and accomplish a goal or a specific so mething and this is what I believe in being a true oying the good times. (Student E ssay 10) Each of these examples brings the narrative to a conclusion by summing up their main point and leaving th which is a vital part of narrative writing and; therefore, contributes to standard 21. Students successfully created a sequence of events that led to a conclusion and a narrative piece of writing Senses. through the use of multiple senses. Standard 21d includes the ability to use sensory language to create a vivid picture in an essay. Based on rubric scores, the senses senses category was 7.61 out of 10. Although students employed the use of some senses in their essays, students struggled with the use of multiple senses to describe t heir experiences or to move their stories along. Student descriptions within their essays relied heavily on two primary senses, visual and auditory. The following are examples of students that utilized visual and/or auditory senses within student essays: The tornado went right across her house. The top of her house was ripped off nothing was around her but woods, glass, cars, and other destroyed and hope for the best. She described the sound of the tornado as a train. It was so loud her ears were ringing. The winds were so strong that she was not sure how she held on through that. (Student E ssay 5)
130 She followed me everywhere. She cried for me, and slept inside my head. She groomed me and was very talkative, and whatever was on her mind, you bes t believe she meowed. (Student E ssay 9) I remember one day I was sitting in the lunchroom with my friend and I overheard a girl talking about a ssay 12) His sh oes were very dirty and scuffed up. (Student E ssay 14) One student also included the sense of touch as he described how hot it was and about my character by doing what I lov e, playing football. I remember like it was yesterday. It was a hot summer day, 90 or so. So hot I was dren ched during warm ssay 7). However, I observed that students made little use of senses beyond visual and auditory descriptions withi n their final drafts. Overall, students met the writing standards during the digital storytelling unit. included specific details to describe their beliefs. Additionally, stu dents used sequencing to make their essays meaningful for the reader. The point of view of these essays was personal with a broad appeal. Since the topic was personal, the narrative speaker was clear, and the progression of ideas was natural. This narra tive technique, flow easily. Students merged their essays with videos to enhance both the tone and the meaning of the topics in their essays. Additionally, students us ed precise language and sensory details to make their beliefs come to life for the reader. This essay assignment compelled students to reflect on a powerful event in their lives that formed a life lesson
131 that they could share with others. Based on the re quirements, standard 21, and its sub standards, were adequately covered within the digital storytelling unit Production and Distribution of Writing Standards The digital storytelling unit encompassed standards 22, 23, and 24 in the course of study product ion and distribution writing standards. Standard 22 states that students roduce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience (Alabama Department of Educat ion, 2010). and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience (Alabama D epartment of Education, 2010). Finally, standard 24 states that se technology, including the Internet, to produce, publish, and update individual or shared writing products in response to ongoing feedback, includi ng new argument s or information (Alabama Department of Education, 2010). Similar to the previous set of standards, I also observed positive results with the production and distribution writing standards. One student stated that this project ole project and was more interesting to view an d present. (Student R eflection 2). Furthermore, students had to complete a written piece before they could make a visual presentation. As noted by one student, For students whose writing was not yet complete when they started making their digital stories, they had to go back and revise their stories. Otherwise, their digital videos would not make sense. Thus, students were constantly revising their stories throughout this process in order to create a more cohesive piece of writing. Additionally,
132 criteria fields that address ed the production and distribution of writing standards were personal experiences, storyboard, and final production upload. Personal experiences. The personal experiences criteria field assessed heir essays and to build an organize their essays in an appropriate manner that wa s consistent with the style of writing. Therefore, the category in the rubric that was used to assess standard 22 included the previously discussed plot/organization category as well as the personal experiences category. The plot/organization category sc ored an average of 8.45 out of 10, and the personal experiences category from the rubric scored an average of 8.4 out of 10. Therefore, it was evident to me that students were able to develop a clear plot line through the use of personal experiences that met the desired purpose of the assignment. Students used personal experiences in their narratives to create an exposition of the essay was to reveal a core belief th personal experiences in their essays satisfied this requirement of the essay. Below are a few examples of personal experiences from student essays: When I first started learning how to read in kindergarten, I did n ot catch on as fast as everyone else. I was told that I could not go to first grade unless I learned how to read. (Student E ssay 2) One day in particular my faith in God was tested more than ever happened before. That day I watched my dad walk out the fron t door and
133 filled me as someone who I thought would always be in my life left me. My heart was broken. I found myself asking God why me? Why was he putting me through this? There was a pa rt of me that w as so angry with him. (Student E ssay 6) Last September, one of my close friends then moved to a different state, was killed in a car accident because of a drunk driver late at night on the highway. At the hospital, before he passed away, I w as talking to him. He was not able to speak too much so I tried to make the best of it and pass the time by laughing about the stupidest things, which seemed to work at the time. I feel that he and I ended our time together in one of the best possible ways I believe that laughter heals. (Student E ssay 19) describe the events, while also inserting how it made them feel and/or how they reacted. Therefore, these students were able to pull events from their lives and describe them in a manner that relayed their point to the reader. Storyboard. visual outline for their final projects and a roadmap for making an y necessary changes. Standard 23 focuses on the ability to strengthen a piece of writing through planning, revising, and editing. Therefore, this standard was addressed in the storyboard phase, which provided students an opportunity to create a visual ou tline to see how the elements of the story would fit together as a final product. Students used a storyboard template ( see A ppendix A) provided by Mary in this section of the unit. This template helped students decide what type of photo they would use, what narration would go with the photo, and what type of music they would use to accompany the photo. Through this process, students were able to see the sequence of events within their narrative and make any necessary revisions. One student commented tha
134 Based on the steps of planning, revising, and editing, the storyboarding category of the rubric was used to analyze standard 33. After I evaluated the 19 digital stories, the storyboard c ategory scored an average of 8.16 out of 10. Students utilized the storyboarding phase to demonstrate a clear plan and to make revisions as needed to produce a completed final product. Not all of the students were comfortable with drawing their storyboar ds and opted to complete their storyboards with written words. Regardless of preference (i.e., drawing vs. written words), I observed students completing revisions at the same rate in this phase of the project. Fourteen of the 19 (74%) students drew on th eir storyboards, while the remaining five students (26%) used words. Although different paths were taken, all of the students utilized planning, revising, and editing as part of the storyboarding phase. Figure 4 19 shows sections of a storyboard from a student who used words instead of drawings for his storyboard Figure 4 19 Student storyboard example without drawings
135 Final product upload. The final product upload criteria field addressed al products with others. Standard 24 states that students need to be able to use technology and the Internet to produce and publish written products. Students were afforded several opportunities to interact with this standard. In creating their written pieces with Google Docs and another word processing program, students used technology and the Internet to produce written work. In addition to sharing drafts with other students for feedback, students were required to submit their final versions via the school learning management system. All 19 students (100%) were able to complete this task. Furthermore, students used Google Drive or Toontube to upload and share their completed projects. For this rubric, the category of final product upload that address ed standard 24 was the highest rated area. Students averaged a perfect 10 out of 10 (100%) because all of the students were successful in completing this task. Therefore, students were able to successfully share their work through multiple outlets. Since the project called for the teacher to serve as a facilitator, students were able to figure out how to share and upload their projects on their own. One student stated: The part once w always have a teacher or professor right there. I stressed at first but once (Student R eflection 7) Although Mary was available for help when needed, I only witne ssed two of the 11 students in the observation classroom specifically ask the teacher for help with upload ing their p roducts. Figure 4 2 0 shows an uploaded page in the iOS app for
136 Google Drive that students used. Figure 4 2 1 shows the share option within the same app. Figure 4 20 Screen shot of upload page within Google Drive app Figure 4 21 Share option within Google Drive app Figure 4 22 shows the share option in the Toontastic application, which is how several students chose to share their digit al stories
137 Figure 4 22 Share option within Toontastic application Technical elements. In addition to sharing digital stories, standard 24 was assessed in the technical elements category. In this category, students demonstrated their ability to use t he technical elements of the program to create their products. The average score in the technical elements category of standard 24 was 8.26 out of 10. Therefore, students were able to demonstrate the ability to use different technical elements of the edit ing program to produce a completed final product This digital storytelling unit provided students with multiple opportunities to work on writing standards, including the production and distribution of their final products. stablished specific criteria for students to follow in creating their essays, which in turn, made the process easy and straightforward for students to follow. In order to create digital products from their essays, students were compelled to plan, edit, an d revise their essays multiple times. This iterative process helped students understand that without the written component, the visual piece would not be effective.
138 student s in other classes in which their digital stories were shared. Additionally, a possible publication. Thus, students had opportunities to produce and share their written pi eces with others. For the categories that comprised these rubric scores, I found positive results with the production and distribution of writing standards. Presentation of Knowledge and Idea s Standards In the area of presentation of knowledge and ideas, the digital storytelling unit Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, a n d evidence and to add interest (Alabama Department of Education, 2010). The criteria fields related to standard 33 included images, music, narration, final product elements/editing, and digital citizenship. Images, music, and narration. The images, mus ic, and narration criteria fields to utilize deliberate choices to match the meaning and tone of the story and synthesizing them in the process. Standard 33 related directly to h several types of digital media throughout the process of creating their digital stories including pictures, music, and narration. Categorically, rubric score averages were 8.29 out of 10 for images, 8.03 out of 10 for music, and 8.37 out of 10 for narra tion. Therefore, students demonstrated deliberate and justified choices regarding image and music selections. Students also recorded narration that sounded genuine and clear and used appropriate pacing in tone. Final product elements/Editing. In creatin g their final products, students had to consider knowledge and idea elements individually and as whole and weave them
139 together to create a whole piece that was cohesive and told their stories appropriately. Students had to select images that would best re lay the message of their essays, and they had to pair their essays with images. Additionally, students had to choose appropriate background music for the message and use a proper tone of voice during their narration. For the creation of the digital comp onent, students had to tell their stories through media. Therefore, they had to strategically choose which media to use and how to use it. In the rubric, the category of final product elements/editing considered how each element was woven together to cre ate final digital stories, as articulated in standard 33. Scores were consistent across elements with an average of 8.13 out of 10. Therefore, students were able to create final products that blended together the elements of music, narration, and pictures of their stories. Throughout this process, students developed a concrete understanding of mood and tone and an opportunity to see and hear their words in new ways. One student commented that you are spe (Student R eflection 10). Several students reflected on their music and image choices and noted that they matched these elements with the mood a nd tone they were trying to convey. Therefore, students were able to make appropriate selections within the media categories to fit their stories. Digital citizenship. Throughout this assignment, students worked directly with multiple types of media and made planned and deliberate choices regarding these media to convey specific messages that would enhance their final projects. Mary
140 emphasized that students were expected to use technology and media components ethically. Therefore, this standard also cov ered the digital citizenship category from the rubric since students had to demonstrate ethical use of technology when creating their final videos. The average score in the digital citizenship category of the rubric was the second highest, with an averag e of 9.13 out 10. Therefore, students demonstrated ethical uses of technology and photos as well as other media they encountered throughout the unit. Students were expected to use technology solely for the purpose of this unit and to keep a document citin g the photos they used in their projects. I did not observe any of the students using technology inappropriately or unethically in their photo searchers or during the editing phase of the unit. Language Standards The language standards assessed in the di gital storytelling unit were standards 35, 36, 37. The writing phase of the unit provided opportunities for students to work with these three language standards and their sub standards. Standard 35 states that Demonstrate com mand of the conventions of Standard English grammar and usage w (Alabama Department o f Education, 2010). Demonstrate command of the conventions of Standard English capitalization, punctua tion, (Alabama Department of Education, 2010) Finally, standard 37 focuses on the ability Apply knowledge of language to understand how lang uage functions in different contexts, to make effective choices for meaning or style, and to comprehend more fully when r eading or listening and includes sub standards that deal with syntax (Alabama
141 Department of Education, 2010). The criteria fields tha t addressed the language standards are mechanics/grammar and language categories. Mechanics/Grammar. The mechanics/grammar criteria field assessed grammar conventions such as capitalization, punctuation, and spelling as well as mechanics such as flow a correct English grammar conventions. Therefore, this standard was assessed through the written final draft using the mechanics/grammar category of the rubric. This criteria fie ld was the second lowest average among the 15 sections within the rubric. The average score within this category was 7.89 out 10. Although this outcome is still a as cap italization and punctuation. Students utilized spell check throughout the process therefore I did not observe errors in spelling in the 19 final products. Punctuation errors, however, were the most prevalent and persistent problems in student writing sa mples. For example, student essays 2 and 12 contained comma errors. The following is an excerpt from student essay 2: Although I have been told no the fear of being told it again sometimes prohibits me from doing what I planned, and that is not a good wa y to be. However I learned that being down is neve r really a bad thing. (Student E ssay 2) last a lifetime ssay 12). Students also showed error s in sentence. For example, Student 3 said: A gunship pilot I once talked to who was borderline suicidal, an alcoholic, erve and when you
142 ssay 3) Errors in capitalization would automatically correct themselves in Microsoft Word and most other word processing programs; however, Google Docs does not autocorrect autocorrecting these issues but unfamiliarity with Google Docs could be the reason that many of these errors occurred. Furthermore, sentence structure, especially sentence right. Like undernourished, abused, tired to a tree, or being i (Student E ssay 4). Finally, I observed flow errors with student essay mechanics. Flow errors included run on sentences which is the combination of multiple sentences into one. Stud ent 13 wrote: why does it seem that the ones who are being pulled over are the they look illegal, if I had be en born in Nigeria or Japan or any other place second glance at me they would just be watching out for the Hispanics so uth of the border. (Student E ssay 13) Flow errors also included awkward sentences that disrupted the flow of the It was about 7:30 at night I was sitting on the couch wat ching a (Student E ssay 18). Due to the fairly basic nature of these grammar errors, most can probably be attributed to laziness or lack of familiarity with the Google Docs word processing program and its inability to autocorrect.
143 Lan guage. English grammar when both speaking and writing. Students had multiple opportunities to intera ct with standard 35 through both their written pieces and narration of their final digital stories. Therefore, standard 35 touched on both the language criteria field as well as the mechanics/grammar criteria field. As previously mentioned, the mechanics /grammar criteria field had a low average score and was an area in which students struggled. However, in this digital storytelling unit, students had to move beyond the written word and narrate their stories for their videos. In this way, students also wo rked with grammar usage for writing and speaking and comprised a portion of standard 35 of the rubric. The average score within this category was 8.03 out of10. Therefore, students demonstrated the ability to use a variety of sentence structures and spec ific word choices within their essays. The narration phase was beneficial because students were not afforded many opportunities to speak in different situations. In this unit, students worked on voice inflection, pacing, and telling their story as well a s speaking in a professional manner during their presentations. One student commented on the benefit helped because we are so used to texti ng. It really made you h ear it (Student R eflection 13). I observed one student bragging about his ability to get through the narration in one take; however, most students were observed specifically re recording sections of their narration because they were not satisfied with th e way it sounded when
144 final products. in different contexts and to make appropriate choices within these contexts. When assessing the syntax of their digital stories, the language category of the rubric was consistent with previously posted scores with an average of 8.03 out of 10. Students had to understand what was appropriate for dif ferent audiences (i.e., formal and informal presentation). Students recorded their own voices and could include inflection, emphasis, and dialogue when necessary; therefore, the video product was less formal than the written essay. Since students create d their more formal written pieces first, they avoided common syntax mistakes they typically make i through editing and revisions. This process provided students an opportunity to practice speaking with thorough and well developed sentences, a skill that students will need in real world situations and in the workforce in order to be successful. Summary Based on the evidence from this study, I concluded that new literacy skills and positive academic outcomes were evident during a digital storytelling within a secondary English 12 classroom. Students worked with and manipulated information and multimodal text using ICTs to create and share projects. Students located information for their projects as well as to solve issues that arose throughout the process. Students evaluated this information based on its usefulness within each situation. Although these were individual projects, the unit was social in nature, and students worked
145 collaboratively in multiple ways. Finally, I observed positive results on the academic outcomes of the unit in both their writing and their ability to create digital stories.
146 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The purpose of this study was to identify the academic outcomes and new literacies evident during a digital storytelling u nit within an English 12 classroom. In order to analyze th ese phenomena the following research questions were used to guide the study: (a) In what ways, if any, are new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within an English 12 classroom and (b) In what ways, if any, do students meet English 12 objectives related to the writing and language standards during a digital storytelling unit? Data were collected through observations, reflections, and final student artifacts. Data analysis metho ds were described in Chapter 3, and study findings were described in Chapter 4. This chapter will discuss the findings, implications in the field, implications for the local context, implications as a practitioner scholar, and implications for future rese arch. Summary of Findings Finding ways to implement new literacies into the classroom may be difficu lt for some educators because implementation is a practice that veers away from traditional teaching methods. While it is not a one size fits all solution, digital storytelling is an innovative method for bringing new literacies into the classroom. This study specifically identified several new literacies that were evident during digital storytelling unit within a secondary classroom. New literacies include d: working with ICTs and multimodal texts, locating information, evaluating information usefulness, and engaging in collaborative practices. Furthermore, positive results were observed in both academic outcomes and unit objectives.
147 Students were given mu ltiple opportunities to interact with ICTs and multimodal texts including different types of technology and uses of these technologies. Specifically, students interacted with ICTs while creating their digital stories, sharing their digital stories, and co mmunicating with one another. To create their digital stories students used Google Drive and word processing programs to write, share, and edit written drafts before using iPads to create videos. Students found, saved, and edited photos using the Interne t, a computer, and an iPad. Additionally, students coordinated their musical selections with narration to create complete digital stories. Upon completion of their digital stories students interacted with ICTs to share their stories with the teacher as successfully completed these tasks. Students also interacted with ICTs through communication. Students struggled with using e mail programs to communicate; however, they easily navigated the learn ing management system and Google Drive to mail led to this area of struggle among the students. Suggested revisions on how to strengthen this within the unit are located with in the next section. Students were required to locate information and evaluate the usefulness of this information for their projects. Additionally, students were expected to locate, evaluate, and gather materials for their videos. These tasks compelle d students to solve issues that arose during the process by asking appropriate questions, finding correct information, and evaluating the usefulness of this information. For situations in which the answers did not work, students had to continue searching. Through this process students were able to solve problems and learn independently; thus, making the
148 learning more personal. Therefore, students were working within a project based learning classroom and learning through authentic situations and hands on activities (Anderson, 2010). Finally, students worked collaboratively and shared knowledge throughout all phases of the project. They asked and shared opinions with each other and worked collaboratively to solve problems. Therefore, students were able to practice real world skills that will benefit them throughout their lives. These transferable skills transcend knowledge that can be tested with a pen and paper; these learning behaviors will help them work efficiently and effectively in modern society. As students work in authentic situations, they are able to learn in a manner that translates into a real world context and allows them to interact with these skills in a way that will be far more beneficial to them than through traditional educational pr actices. Furthermore, with an average final grade of 84%, students had a thorough understanding of unit objectives. Using the rubric that I created from the state standards, I analyzed each category individually. The criteria fields with the highest a experiences, and plot. The criteria fields with the lowest averages were senses and mechanics/grammar. Students struggled to use descriptions beyond what they could see and he ar and rarely included other senses such as touch, smell, or taste. This lapse could be due to the fact that most of the situations they used within their essays did not provide a lot of options with the other senses. Also, the use of Google Docs could h ave attributed to the lower averages in mecha nics and grammar. Students rel y heavily on Word Processing programs that automatically correct or at least point out
149 possible errors in mechanics and grammar. Google Docs only underlines spelling errors and do es not automatically correct other errors like capitalization. The lack of these features could be a possible explanation for the lower averages in mechanics and grammar criteria field; however, these are skills that the students should know and should ha ve been corrected during the revisions stage of the project. Pointing out this feature within Google Docs might serve useful during the process. Overall, results in each area were positive. Students were given the opportunity to advance their writing be yond a one dimensional product that only the teacher sees to a multi dimensional movie that they could share with their peers and the world. Students said that they enjoyed the project and worked harder on it than they usually would when writing an essay. Students tried new techniques and were engaged throughout the process, including presentations by other students. Therefore, the project was a success for on multiple levels. Discussion of the Findings The majority of students indicated that they enjoye d the digital storytelling unit. At the same time, they successfully met unit objectives. Because they enjoyed the project, students said that they worked harder and spent more time on it, which indicates a higher level of motivation. These results are c onsistent with the pilot study as well as previous research findings that associated digital storytelling with increased levels of student motivation and participation (Dogan & Robin, 2008; Moore Hart, 2008; Sweeder, 2008). This project was unique and dif ferent, as characterized by students converting their written work to a digital video format that incorporated pictures, music, and narration. By learning in a new way, students seemed less bored than they have been
150 with other, repetitive school assignmen ts. One student stated that he thought it was a 1). The results of this study demonstrated that students interacted with new literacies by working with ICTs and multi modal texts, locating information, evaluating information usefulness, and engaging in collaborative practices. Working with ICTs and Multimodal Texts Students were provided numerous opportunities to interact with multiple types of ICTs throughout this unit As new technologies make their way into the classroom, it is important that students understand how to use them effectively. Leu et al. (2004) argued that learning is not just a technology issue but also a literacy issue. Therefore, educators must int egrate new literacies into their classrooms by allowing students to interact with ICTs to develop new skills while at the same time implementing a traditional curriculum. This current study found that digital storytelling was an outlet for fostering this new type of learning. Sadik (2008) reported similar results in a digital storytelling unit; student motivation and engagement increased, and students developed greater ICT skills. ack of basic technology skills. In education, there is a general consensus that students are universally tech savvy. The findings of this research study, however, suggested that students are only savvy with certain types of technology. For example, studen ts were extremely proficient with the technology they employed for personal use (e.g., social media, texting, gaming, apps). With regard to professional uses of technology (i.e., emailing, organizing files), however, students struggled to use these techno logy tools appropriately. Findings from
151 this current research suggested that students need more practice with professional uses of technology. In education, educators may find it tempting to use t echnology less educational projects However, students need to develop basic technology skills in building file structure (e.g., folder creation), proper titling of a document, and proper email etiquette (e.g., appropriate language and proper use of the subject field). The proper use of email can and should be incorporated into technology based school, Wendt (2013) noted that many students lacked these skills. The author cy learning in the general curriculum at the secondary level type of literacy and technology integration was a primary goal of this unit; however, Mary overlooked the basics during the planning phase of this project. Technology skills could have easily been added to this digital storytelling unit, but she presumed that they were concepts the students already knew and could implement. Although students were able to develop and work with new skills throughout the duration of this process, educators cannot assume that students already possess the basic skills they need to successfully complete tasks involving technology. Despite this deficit, students found ways to achieve their desired outcome. They used prior knowledge from their experiences with personal devices and applied it to this new learning situation. Students also found creative ways to solve problems and successfully created and shared their final prod ucts. When given the space and
152 amount of creativity and energy to their projects and benefitted from the broad parameters of the assignment Locating Information L ocating i nformation is an important new literacy for students to possess in order to work in modern society (Hagood, 2009; Leu et al., 2004). New situations arise daily that require people to locate information. American College Testing ( ACT ) one of the leading assessment companies in the United States, recently added a new assessment to their list of available services ACT, locating information is one o 2013). ACT has reported that the abi lity to locate information is a critical skill in the workplace and highly desirable by employers. T his current study found that digital storytelling provided numerous opportunities for students to practice the skill of locating information thereby produ cing an authentic learning opportunity. Instead of simply dispensing knowledge and having students practice locating information in isolation, this skill was incorporated directly into the project. Therefore, students were working directly within a proje ct based learning classroom (Anderson, 2010). Students experienced hands on, authentic learning at a deeper level, thus, making the learning more meaningful (Carr & Jitendra, 2000). Students expressed appreciation for the freedom to customize their own projects and to locate information and materials on their own, which fostered ownership and made the project more meaningful (Anderson, 2010; Sweeder, 2008). One student own learning experiences. By allowing students to work independently, locate
153 information, and structure their project the way they desired, the unit created an opp ortunity for students to create personal projects that meant more to them than simple essays. Students desired to try new things, and they welcomed the challenge as long as they could see the relevance of what they were doing. One student stated: I know I will have to use a lot of technology in the future, especially with the way technology is heading. A lot of times I would be frustrated during this project because the iPad or app would mess up. But I just kept working and it worked out, and it was goo d for technology in college and Keengwe et al. (2008) noted that in order for technology integration to be effective, it must be meaningful and relevant. Most of the students in th is current study found this unit to accomplish both of these goals. By giving students the freedom to independence and sense of adventure, the project naturally led students to l ocate information. Additionally, the unit allowed students to intuitively learn from and locate information in their own ways. Using multiple search methods, students identified strategies that were most conducive to their learning style. Robin and Piers on (2005) observed that allowing students to use technology on their own to work on authentic problems and projects made learning experiences more powerful. Students in this current study learned how to find new information, frequently through the process of trial approach to learning made the learning experience more meaningful for students. Further, this practice of locating information using multiple methods reinforced the theme of endured learning, a concept all educators strive for within their classrooms
154 Eva luating Information Usefulness Once students located the information they needed, they had to evaluate its usefulness and determine if it was something they cou ld use. If not, students were compelled to continue their search. According to Leu et al. (2004) and Hagood (2009), evaluating the usefulness of information is another vital new literacy. Furthermore, Anstey and Bull (2006) state that it is increasingly important that teachers allow students to interact with different types of texts in multiple ways as a starting point for meaning making and to help students to use their literacy identity, or past experiences as resources when they are engaged in literate practices. Therefore, students become empowered and create their own knowledge and solutions. The majority of time students spent evaluating information for this project involved evaluating the usefulness of an element within their project or evaluating information to solve a problem. Students who completed this project spent time fully evaluating all elements of their project to ensure the quality of their final products. Students worked diligently to create final products for which they could be proud According to Gregory et al. (2009), students are much more inclined to work hard to create a movie than they are to create a traditional composition piece. This was evidenced by the time that students took to evaluate each element of their projects. T hey did not simply select the first photo they 7). Students searched for photos to fit their stories and evaluated the usefulness of these photos as related to their stories.
155 Furthermore, students carefully selected their music to fit the t one and mood of their stories and re recorded their narrations if they were unsatisfied with all or part of it. 19). Students viewed parts of their story multiple times to evaluate and ensure that each element reflected the highest quality. Because projects were multidimensional, they required students to evaluate the written piece as well as multiple elements of the process so that the project would work seamlessly together. Students were motivated through this hands on approach. Even though the project was rigorous, students were motivated to do the work because they saw the benefit to what they were doing. S tudents found the assignment to be more relevant and interesting than just writing papers for their teacher to read. One student stated: interesting for the teacher to grade to [ sic (Student Reflection 2). To promote authentic learning, the research literature encourages students to be enga ged in relevant tasks in order to develop an interest in this type of work (Churchill et al., 2008; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). The digital storytelling unit required more time and effort from students, but students demonstrated that they were willing t o put forth the effort. st century classroo m. Several students in
156 this current study commented that they will likely use this type of technology or something similar to it in college. It is also likely that they will create another digital story before the end of the school year. Therefore, stude nts saw the unit as relevant; it had a purpose and, therefore, was worth the extra time and effort they had to invest in the project. Students not only had to evaluate information that was used in their projects, but they also had to evaluate information related to the process. For example, when students encountered a problem or issue, they had to search for and evaluate information in order to solve the issue or address the problem. According to Barrett and Wilkerson (2004), the ability to solve proble ms is important when creating digital citizens who are ready to live and work in society. Interestingly, it is this same type of learning experience that frequently scares educators. Many educators are still intimidated by the use of technology because they see it as too difficult and problematic (Percy, 2003). However, when students encounter problems with technology, it provides them with an opportunity to work with several new literacies including asking questions, locating information, and evaluatin g information. When teachers fail to incorporate technology into their curriculum, they miss teaching moments and deny their students the opportunity to interact with this new literacy. Many classrooms fail to provide real life problem solving opportuni ties for students (Brown et al., 1989) Yet, this deficit persists in many schools. During this digital storytelling unit, students were faced with real world situations and were able to solve these problems on their own. Teachers do not need to fear tec hnology because
157 students can locate and evaluate solutions on their own while interacting with new literacies Collaborative Practices Collaboration among students was another new literacy skill that students experienced through this project. Literacy it self is communicative as a way to gather and share information. Students helped their classmates answer questions and learn new strategies that they had already encountered or learned as a result of the process. Students collaborated naturally without p rompting from the teacher. Despite the individual nature of creating a digital story, many students worked with other students throughout the project. This finding is consistent with other research studies that also found digital storytelling produced a high degree of teamwork. Notably, teamwork is another ACT workforce development skill focus (Anderson, 2010; Barrett & Wilkerson, 2004; Johnson, 2009; Kieler, 2010). It should be noted that most collaborative practice was the result of solving an issue w ith technology or program software. Although this process ultimately improved student projects because they were able to fix a problem, students did not collaborate to dif ferent components. Therefore, this is an area that revealed itself for possible improvement. Students provided feedback when another student solicited it or when it was a part of the unit through peer reviews. However, students did not ask for feedback often on the writing component of the assignment. Students were far more likely to seek opinions on the digital components of the project, including photos and music. Additionally, students seemed much more willing to provide criticism on another
158 components of the assignment as compared to their confidence within their own writing ability. Regar dless of the reason, students were able to learn from each other, which complemented the work of the teacher. Students tended to work with the student next to them or a student who was readily available. There did not appear to be any social or cultural implications regarding student interactions by gender, ethnic group, or aptitude. As students finished their own projects they began to help others as needed. If a student asked Mary a question and she was working with another student there was always a student willing to put down what he or she was currently doing to help. Students used their own experiences to help other students; therefore, life experiences informed literacy. Students used their past experiences as resources to engage in literacy pra & Bull, 2006). Students generally attempted to resolve the issue on their own before asking a nearby student or Mary. The amount of time a student would work individually bef ore asking for help varied from student to student; asking the teacher for assistance Because digital storytelling uses authentic activities to implement the principles of construc tivism (Sweeder, 2008), this type of cooperative learning method brought constructivist strategies into the classroom (Nanjappa & Grant, 2003). Additionally, Roschelle, Pea, Hoadley, Gordin, and Means (2000) noted that the use of project based learning al ong with technology provides an opportunity for students to learn
159 constructively. By allowing students to interact with one another and construct their own knowledge through authentic learning situations, students were engaged throughout the process with the content and with each other to construct unique meaning (Carr & Jitendra, 2000; Johassen et al., 1999). When educators use a constructivist model in their classrooms they are supporting deep learning opportunities (Barrett, 2006). Therefore, by allow ing students to work collaboratively and create their own knowledge, students were able to make a personal connection with the content in meaningful ways Academic Outcomes When evaluating a unit or new instructional implementation it is also importan t to evaluate unit outcomes. It would be disingenuous to describe a digital storytelling unit dents processed the information throughout all phases of the unit, and were deeply committed because they knew that the final product would be shared with their teacher as well as their peers. Meadows (2003) suggested that the strength of digital storytel ling lies in its ability to be shared with others. As previously discussed, the unit brought together new literacies such as locating, evaluating and communicating information, as well as infused authentic learning situations into the classroom. At th e same time, it also addressed traditional curricular objectives. Throughout the process students were able to blend traditional content with new literacies by writing an essay and producing a complete video product with narration, music, and pictures. E skrootchi and Oskrochi (2010) proposed that this combination of traditional and modern literacies complete a project based learning unit.
160 would be overshadowed by fun and ex citing digital components of the unit. This is a common fear among teachers with this type of unit (Percy, 2003). In this study, the digital component enhanced the project while still being grounded in traditional writing and language objectives as studen ts created a written component before the digital piece. According to Tan and Guo (2010), the ability to use new technological tools in addition to working with traditional literacies is the new idea of literacy. Technology issues seemed to be the greates t weaknesses identified by the students and Mary; however, once fully evaluated it was determined that the technology challenges often produced valuable learning opportunities. When the technology failed, students were compelled to operate in a real world situation. This unit demonstrated that things do not always work the way we expect them to within our daily professional lives. Students were required to search, locate, and implement a response. Therefore, even though many students identified technolog y problems as the greatest weakness of the project, most students and Mary still found the project to be worthwhile. Similarly, Sadik (2008) found that teachers liked digital storytelling despite any observed drawbacks because it developed student underst anding. In this current study, students successfully fulfilled the unit objectives; thus, the unit was worth the time and energy of planning and implementing it. Finally, s tudents worked in a real world context and, ultimately, shared their projects with o thers outside of the classroom. As such, students communicated with a significantly larger audience than just their teacher and classmates by submitting their
161 learning oppo rtunity for students; one that resulted in a number of academic outcomes within the written objectives within the course of study. The findings of this study suggested that digital storytelling is a viable implementation tool to incorporate new literacy s kills in authentic learning situations. Therefore, the educational mindset is changing with regard to how teachers must incorporate technology into their curriculum Implications for the F ield Creating college and career ready students has become esse ntial in education to pave a path of success for our students. Yet, many educators are still unwilling to adapt their methods of teaching in order to incorporate new literacies (Connor & Sullivan, 2012). As a result, many colleges and workforce leaders c ontend that students do not possess the new literacy skills needed to be successful, such as locating information and working together. The literature on new literacies recognizes a need to continue teaching traditional literacies, such as reading and wri ting, but notes that modern students will also be required to navigate beyond these traditional literacy skills and communicate in new ways through innovative technologies (Leu et al., 2004; New London Group, 1996). By implementing a project based unit an d moving to a student centered constructivist classroom, educators can address these new literacies while still engaging students in traditional literacies (Eskrootchi & Oskrochi, 2010; Heo, 2011). Based on this study, the following implications for the f ield were found: Positive s tudent gains in motivation and content mastery warrant more project based learning such as digital storytelling; there is a need and benefit for student acquaintance with multiple technology platforms (e.g. iOS devices, Chromeboo ks, PCs, mobile iOS and Android devices, etc.); the creation of a centralized library of resources for teachers to access as they plan a digital project based unit would be extremely beneficial;
162 Teacher assumptions chnology skills such as emailing, file sharing, file naming, etc., but instead lessons should be int entional and provide orientation, training and practice in such fundamentals; an e mphasis and value needs to be placed on peer editing as a critical collaborative skill set. Results Warrant Digital Storytelling Units Based on the findings of the study, digital storytelling can be an effective tool for implementing new literacies in the secondary classroom without sacrificing academic outcomes. Students were motivated and engaged during the unit, and they enjoyed working on this unit because of the hands on nature that allowed them to interact with the content and new skills and literaci es. Therefore, the first implication for the field is that student gains in motivation and content mastery warrant more project based learning such as digital storytelling. This assignment required time and planning, but the benefits made it worthwhile. Multiple Technology Platforms With the growing number of iOS applications and basic editing programs, like movie maker and iMovie, teachers can implement digital storytelling without the fear of using the technology. Most of these programs and applicati ons are intuitive, and there are a number of online tutorials for teachers and students to use as resources. Even if a teacher is uncertain regarding his or her own technology skill level, students can frequently find a way to locate the answers they need to solve problems on their own. Therefore, teachers can implement a digital storytelling unit as long as they have time and access to the necessary technology, including a few computers, iPads, iPhones, iPod touches, and/or android devices.
163 Both Micros oft and Macintosh now provide free video editing software pre installed on their computers. Additionally, iOS and Android both offer free editing applications that can be installed on their devices like the one used with this project, Toontastic. The iMov ie iOS application, also used in this unit, was easy to use and produced professional looking videos; however, there was cost for this program. Despite the cost, it is still a recommended solution for schools that use iPads to create multiple video projec ts. With the growing number of hardware and software products on the market, student interaction with multiple formats will become vital in modern society as students graduate and have to adapt in the real world. Therefore, the second implication is the need and benefit for student acquaintance with multiple technology platforms. Library of Resources If educators are still leery, the literature provides a step by step outline for implementing a digital storytelling unit through the writing, pre productio n, production, post production, and assessment phases. A more detailed description of best practices for each of these phases is provided in Chapter 2. I found that these best practices led to positive results. By understanding and following best practic es in the literature, teachers can avoid many of the problems that can arise when implementing a project of this complexity. These resources are scattered; therefore, a centralized library of how to videos, supplies needed, and best approach for workflow of the project would be helpful for many educators. The Center for Digital Storytelling is a great starting point and provides some good information; however, this site is expansive and can be hard for teachers to find the specific information. Therefore the third implication is the creation of a library of resources specifically for teachers to access and walk them
164 through the process as they plan and implement a digital project based unit would be extremely beneficial. Technology Assumptions Students i n this study struggled with basic technology use. Mary did not include practice within the unit for e mailing or saving or sharing documents in traditional ways. use of technology in their daily lives that they would already possess these skills. This, however, was not the case. Therefore, the next implication for the field is that emailing, f ile sharing, file naming, etc., but instead intentional measures to provide orientation and/or training and practice in such fundamentals. Expand Literacy Experiences The results of the study showed that new literacies were evident during the digital stor ytelling unit; however, there were areas that still needed to be further developed. One main concern was the formal use of technology for organization and communication. Students needed to understand how to organize their files and perform basic tasks li ke saving, moving, titling, and locating a file or folder. Furthermore, students needed experience with other real word technology uses, such as e mail. Not only do students need experience with how to actually use e mail, they also need to understand pr oper email etiquette and acceptable language to use within e mail. Technology skills have become increasingly important in modern society; therefore, students must obtain and continue to practice these skills in order to be marketable in the future. Time s are changing, but technology is changing even faster. Students
165 experiences. Need fo r Collaborative Skills The ability to work together and collaborate effectively is an important skill in the 21 st century. The results of this study found that students collaborated in a variety of ways; however, more direct interaction with purposeful co llaboration is needed. Students collaborated naturally on solving problems and asking opinions; however, students will need to be able to work collaboratively on specific situations for a variety of reasons and purposes within the workforce. By creating purposeful opportunities for students to work together on a specific task, students will interact in real world situations. A specific area in which to accomplish this is through peer editing and the ability to provide feedback. Providing opportunities f or students to practice giving and receiving constructive criticism beyond the one time utilized within this unit will provide a valuable opportunity for students to practice this new literacy. Therefore, the final implication for the field is that an emp hasis and value needs to be placed on peer editing as a critical collaborative skill set Implications for the Local Context There are several implications that relate to the local context in which this study occurred. The findings from the study were po sitive in both new literacy implementation and academic outcomes. Thus, digital storytelling proved to be a viable option for this local Alabama school to implement the new state standards as part of creating college and career ready students. The follo wing are the implications within the local context: The school should create cross curricular project based learning units should be developed.
166 the school should seek to build a robust inventory for access to multiple devices and platforms; the school shou ld seek to establish a robust infrastructure to support the number and kinds of devices and the kinds of tasks that could challenge bandwidth; the school should implement instructional technology professional development led by practicing teachers with suc cess stories and other technology leaders with an emphasis on best practices; the school should implement an articulated technology curriculum for students to develop and practice basic skills in word processing and digital communication for professional u se; the school should seek to create parent awareness that deepens their understanding of this digital shift in educational practices as an additional layer of support for new instructional practices. Cross Curricular Units A recommended next step for thi s school would be to consider cross curricular projects. The school in which this study was conducted is a proponent of multiple content collaborative projects. In fact, some classes, such as government and economics have already been combined into one c lass period in which students attended one class on Mondays and Wednesdays and the other on Tuesdays and Thursdays with courses rotating every other Friday. These courses would be an appropriate starting point for the school to consider in using digital s torytelling to create interdisciplinary projects. Additionally, this cohort of teachers are already familiar with working together; thus, they would already have a level of comfort with one another to create the project and could plan during their collabo ration time which was already set aside during the school day. Although each project would need to be adjusted to fit each individual implementation, the findings of this study showed that the benefits of digital storytelling or other digital projects re ached beyond a specific implementation. Although both the
167 pilot study and the current study took place within English 12 classrooms, the units were different. The benefits, however, remained the same. By following the general best practices for implement ation, digital storytelling units could be individualized for each classroom, moving beyond only creating stories to doing other types of digital projects. Alt hough the s tudents creating these cross curricular projects would not be creating digital storie s, but rather digital projects, they would still be able to work with the same new literacies. Therefore the first implication within the local setting is that cross curricular project based learning units should be developed. Technology Inventory The sch ool has the needed technology to implement digital storytelling in more comprehensive ways. Every teacher in the school was provided a laptop and every department has access to several laptop carts for students. Furthermore, the school has several iPad c arts available for teachers to check out and use directly in their classroom. Finally, as noted in this study, several students took advantage of the computers and mob ile devices to use throughout the school day. Digital storytelling could easily be implemented throughout the school based on its abundance of digital devices, and, as previously mentioned, students will need to work with multiple platforms in order to be come familiar with different devices and functions. Therefore, the school should seek to build and maintain a robust inventory of access to multiple devices and platforms for the growing population of students. Infrastructure Another implication that come s with implementing more digital units is the
168 additional strain that will be placed on the schools infrastructure will need to be addressed by the IT department at the schoo l. As more devices attach to the network, the technology department needs to be prepared to handle any problems that may arise quickly and efficiently. Being able to have access to the Internet and other online resources is crucial for these types of uni ts; thus, it is important to assess these needs in advance to avoid hindering the projects once implemented. Therefore, the school should seek to establish a robust infrastructure to support the number and kinds of devices and the kinds of tasks that coul d challenge bandwidth. Professional Development One area that would need to be addressed in order to implement digital storytelling and/or digital projects is teacher technology professional development. The support period. However, these sessions are primarily dedicated to demonstrating new technologies. While teachers with advanced technology skills and teachers who have a desire to use technology find these sessi ons to be interesting and helpful, many teachers are still confused about how to actually implement these new technologies. Therefore, this time should be utilized to inform teachers about best practices in digital storytelling and project based learning units. The utilization of best practices appeared to be key factors in the success of both the pilot study and the current study. By helping teachers stay abreast of current technologies while also demonstrating best practices of use, each teacher would form a better foundation from which they could grow and use technology more effectively in their own classrooms. Therefore, these sessions need to make a shift from how to sessions to being based in professional development best practices.
169 Professional de velopment is the go to method for learning within a professional context and is the foundation of change in education (Hall & Hord, 2011). Therefore, professional development is vital to implementing new digital projects. According to Desimone (2011), pr ofessional development provides opportunities for teachers to not only gain new knowledge and skills, but also to improve their practice and grow personally and professionally. The school in which this study took place is already on the right path by prov it allows teachers to learn in a non threating environment in which they are comfortable and makes it easy for teachers to quickly implement these new ideas (Borko, 2004; Fullan, 2010; Gusk ey, 1986). Furthermore, it is site based which has shown to be more successful than district wide professional development (Guskey, 2000). However, according to Desimone (2009) and his five critical features of professional development, which include con tent, focus, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective participation, the school is not currently following the best practices of implementation. Theref ore, the school should shift it s focus to best practices of implementation creating a teache r centered, hands on form of professional development This model closely resembles the best practices of project based learning and moving the learning to more authentic situations. In order to help move in this direction, these sessions could be led by teachers who have had success in the classroom implementing these types of units. Involving teachers from the beginning will allow them to make a connection with the material and the process (Lieberman & Miller, 1981). Furthermore, this provides an oppor tunity for teachers to learn from other implementers that can speak from personal experiences
170 (Fullan, 2010). This also will allow for the professional development sessions to be dynamic and customized to the fit the needs of the school, which is an impor tant factor for success according to Guskey (2000). Therefore, instructional technology integration professional development led by practicing teachers with success stories or other technology leaders with an emphasis on theory and unit set up instead of technology how to lessons would be beneficial to the school. The technology support staff on a need basis can answer specific questions on how to to use the technology or teachers could use the many resources previously mentioned to find the answer on the ir own. Therefore, theory will guide the professional development and it will change to a constructivist model in order to promote behavior change. Technology Curriculum Based on the results of the study, students need more basic instruction on using tech nology for professional use. The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) has created a set of technology standards for students that teachers need to be informed of and trained on to allow them the best opportunity to implement these stan dards into the classroom (ISTE, 2007). Students struggled with e mail and other forms of technology use that they do not use within their daily activities. The students felt comfortable with finding answers about technology and enjoyed working to create the video; however, they did not want to work on their file structured and would rather text than e mail. Therefore, a need for implementation of an articulated technology curriculum for students to develop and practice basic skills in word processing and digital communication for professional use is warranted. This updated technology curriculum would provide students an opportunity to interact with these professional uses of technology that they avoid or do not encounter during their daily technology use
171 Specifically within the context, I came up with some suggested revisions to strengthen the unit. These revisions are based on areas in which students struggled or could use more practice and/or interaction. These areas include the use of e mail, proper file structure, and proper search techniques. Students struggled with the use of e mail. Therefore, additional measures to provide real world experience with e mail and other forms of communication would be beneficial to any digital unit. Adding e mai l and modifying the unit to include practice in these areas would provide hands on opportunities with new literacies that students will need in the real world. Some ways to add e mail to the unit would be to have students e mail their paper to another stu dent for a second set of peer revisions. Students could then interact with e mail again when returning the paper. Therefore, this solution provides an opportunity for students to interact with additional new literacies. Students would work with new Word Processing features, such as comments and/or track changes, downloading an attachment, uploading an attachment, and proper e mail etiquette. Therefore, this addition would be beneficial as it would not be cumbersome to add to the unit but the outcome may provide several benefits. Students also struggled with developing and maintaining an organized file structure during the digital storytelling unit Revising the unit to include a lesson on proper file structure and a teacher check up on their current fil e structure would allow students to begin to create good file and document habits. In the real world, being able to properly save, name, and move documents is an important skill. Many work environments do not allow time to search for a document. Therefo re, being able to use
172 proper file structure is an important new literacy that will prove beneficial for the Finally, although students worked extensively with the Google search engine, their searches coul d be more efficient and according to Leu et al. (2004) speed counts. Students need to be able to locate, evaluate, use, and communicate that information in a quick and efficient manner (Leu et al., 2004). Therefore, adding a lesson on proper search techn ique would be beneficial for the students both within this project and in the real world. All of these revisions will take minimal effort and time by the teacher, and the benefits outweigh the effort and time needed to implement them. Being able to commun icate over e mail, properly save and find documents, and search effective and efficiently are skills that are utilized daily within the real world. T hese are vital new literacies that can be worked seamlessly into a digital storytelling unit. Adding a le sson on these skills would allow the students to interact with new literacies in a purposeful manner that would make students more competent in modern society. Parent Awareness As previously mentioned, the local context of this study involves a tight knit community. Parents are very active within the school and keeping them informed is vital to the success of any change within the school. The school prides itself on tradition and this sometimes can lead to a lack of change and doing things as they always have been done. Therefore, an implication for the local context is a need for parent awareness that deepens their understanding of this digital shift in educational practices as an additional layer of support for new instructional practices would prove b eneficial. In order to do this, parents need to be educated on the changes within the school in a
173 manner they are comfortable with and is non threatening in nature. This process needs to be implemented slowly and intentionally. One possible method would be to approach the parents in a setting they are comfortable, such as athletic events. Parents in this context attend multiple athletic events a week and are more than willing to talk school matters during these events. This would provide an informal ba ckground for these conversations; therefore, they could be casual and tailored for each set of parents. Although this process would take time, the outcome is worth the time invested. By creating parent awareness, the school would be proactive instead of reactive which leads to greater results when dealing with change, especially in a community that is hesitant to change Implications as a Practitioner Scholar After the data were analyzed for this study, the findings of the pilot study were further reinf orced. Similar to the pilot study, the majority of students enjoyed working on this project. Students indicated that they had fun playing with the program features and figuring out how to add visual and audio effects to their projects. Multiple students also commented on the freedom they were given to choose their own topic. Students found this project to be more than just a grade and wanted their project to be outstanding when shared with the class and others One student commented: W orking with tech nology is always good because even if in the future you be more comfortable with how technology programs work and they all have a similar way of doing things. (Student Reflection 10 ) Another student said that he was grateful for the opportunity because he did not have technology at home and he enjoyed creating this project on an iPad (Student Reflection 11).
174 It should be noted that not all of the students were enthusiastic a bout the project. Although most students had a positive experience there were some students who were more e xcited than others. When asked about what he did not like or what he felt were weaknesses of the project, one student responded that the assignmen t was too much work. Another student identified time constraints as the greatest challenge. This project had similar levels of student engagement and motivation as the pilot study, but it also was able to utilize new literacies within the unit. As a pra ctitioner scholar, I found the findings may lead to additional areas of work. The New London Group (1996) created a new framework of literacy over 15 years ago in which members called for a redesign of literacy pedagogy. Although they did not provide pra ctical classroom applications, The New London Group set the stage for subsequent scholars, such as Gee (2003), Leu et al. (2004), and Hagood (2009) among others, to build upon these ideas and to provide specific examples for educators. The New London Grou p (1996) called for literacy practices to become more relevant to the wants and needs of 21 st century students so that they could survive in the real world and modern workforce. Based on these results and the previously discussed implications for the loca l context, the following implications as a practitioner scholar were revealed: To s erve as a change agent for a shift to implement new literacies; to change the focus of professional development for teachers in regard to instructional technology integratio n by showcasing success in digital lesson strategies for teachers; to create a culture shift to move beyond comfort zone to new and more engaging practices.
175 Change Agent Although a new literacy pedagogy was illuminated by the New London Group in 1996, educ ators are still leery about implementing new literacies in the classroom; changes toward this new pedagogy appear to be extremely slow moving. The findings of this current study revealed that new literacies were evident during a digital storytelling unit. Additionally, students possessed the ability and desire to learn most of the technology on their own. Therefore, I hope this research will help others make a shift towards implementing new literacies without alienating teachers who are uneasy about their technology or bound to their current teaching styles. In order to become a change agent, I need to begin a culture shift by advocating for these types of lessons, informing others of the success from both the pilot study and the current study. This will begin to create positive impressions on these types of units and allow teachers to become more open to the idea of implementing them within their own classroom. When looking at making changes within the school context, there needs to be a focus on innovat ion (Hall & Hord, 2011). Innovation deals with a school or organization implementing new ideas or products (Damanpour, 1987). This process is not an easy one as teachers can be resistanct to these changes; however, teacher reluctance can be managed (Folg er & Skarlicki, 1999; Dent & Goldberg, 1999). To begin to make this type of change within my professional practice there are two related areas that need to be addressed and researched. Professional development can be helpful in this area and further rese arch on culture change would be beneficial to helping me become a change agent within my school (Ertmer, 1999).
176 Professional Development The first area that will help me become a change agent is professional development. By examining different professio nal development models and best practices, I hope to change the current views of technology training among the teachers and create specific goals with a more focused plan for attaining those goals within my context. According to Desimone (2009), professio nal development is able to shift teacher attitudes and beliefs by expanding their knowledge and skill set. Therefore, professional development can alleviate current teacher frustrations and confusion within the current model of technology training. Guske y (1986) found teachers are more likely to implement innovative practices when they are afforded opportunities to observe other teachers successfully implementing such practices Therefore, I hope to be able to change the focus of professional development in regard to instructional technology Beyond the pilot and current research, I must review the best practices of professional development in creating a culture shift among t eachers. According to Hall and Hord (2011), change is not possible without professional development and Desimone (2011) similarly believes that it is vital in order to promote teacher change and advancement within the classroom. Based on my experiences w ithin two different classrooms and two different units, I am confident with my ability to directly address teacher fears. With the right professional development model, I believe I could make an impact in creating a culture shift within my professional pra ctice and local context. Culture S hift The second area relates to creating a culture shift. When considering this type of shift, schools need to understand look directly at research on inn ovation and change
177 (Rogers, 2003 ). Although there are several mod (2003) Theory of Diffusion of Innovation appears to be a model that would fit well within my local context as a practitioner scholar. This model focuses on the process of innovation adoption within a social system an d is made up of five different stages including knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. However, it focuses heavily on the implementation stage. There are significant questions related to this specific goal including how to encourage teachers to venture outside or their comfort zone and try new things as well as how to foster buy in from teachers who are reluctant to change. These are questions that I believe need to be addressed within my work as a practitioner scholar. Both the pilot and current study revealed positive results regarding the use of digital storytelling at the secondary level. The next step is to take these results to teachers who might not be as receptive to trying new things as Mary from this current s tudy or Susan from the pilot the study. Therefore, the first implication related to culture shift is to move beyond our comfort zone in order to create new and more engaging lessons within our practice. This then creates a follow up implication that we m ust then consider addressing the need for a culture shift for students. Because some believe this type of lesson is time consuming, which can translate into meaning it requires more active participation of the student because of the need to creatively pro duce something unique, I must also explore the students role within a culture shift. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, this also needs to be addressed within the parent community. In order to create a true culture shift I will need to consider all an gles including school employees, students, and parents. There are several different change theories, but they all involve an
178 effective/personable leader, making a compelling argument for the change, getting community buy in, empowering others to effect th e change, and continuing support for the change (Hall & Hord, 2011; Rogers, 2003 ). Therefore, professional development and change should center on content focus, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective participation (Desimone, 2009). As a pr actitioner scholar, I need to dive further into these theories and best practices in order to become a change agent within my local context Implications for Future Research This study examined new literacies and academic outcomes evident during a seconda ry digital storytelling unit. Although the concept of new literacies is not new to education, it is certainly becoming more prominent due to the nature of common core standards and, for the purpose of college and career readiness, the adoption of these s tandards by many states across the county. Therefore, it is imperative that research on new literacies continues in order to inform classroom implementation while also providing evidence and support to educators who are interested in implementing new lite racies in their curriculum. In order to advance the field of new literacies and digital storytelling there are several areas that would benefit from field based research. The following implications for future research are suggested: a larger and more str atified population for generalizability of the findings; more study on the secondary level; uncover the factors that contribute to teacher reluctance; balance the above thought with researching strategies that would adequately address the reluctance factor s among teachers; deeper evaluation of academic achievement within project based learning units;
179 Generalizability This study was conducted with one teacher and her two regular English 12 classrooms. In order to gain a better understanding of new literacies, future researchers are encouraged to conduct studies with a larger population pool. A larger population pool from multiple classrooms, including multiple grade levels and d ifferent geographical locations, would ensure that the results could be generalized across multiple areas and situations. Diverse settings would also increase the transferability of the study results. Therefore, a larger and more stratified population ne eds to be researched for greater generalizability of the findings. Digital Storytelling at the Secondary Level Another area for potential research involves the challenges associated with implementing digital storytelling within the secondary classroom. C urrently most of the research studies were conducted within a primary or higher education classroom, research on digital storytelling and new literacies at the secondary level is still needed. Due to the age difference and classroom differences the chall enges that face students and educators are not consistent; therefore, the results of the studies within a different educational level do not always translate well within the secondary classroom. Consequently, future research in this area is needed. Teache r Reluctance to implement technology or larger scale projects that utilize technology. Although research already exist in this area, the ever changing nature of instructio nal technology and teachers continuing reluctance calls for continuing research in this area specific to
180 each context. Ertmer (1999) splits reluctance into two different types of barriers, first order and second order barriers. According to Ertmer (1999) first order barriers are extrinsic and deal directly with things outside of the individual, such as monetary barriers. Second order barriers are intrinsic and deal directly with things inside the individual, such as beliefs. Therefore, future research w ould also be beneficial regarding ways in which school administrators and technology support specialists could encourage and motivate teachers to move beyond these barriers and try something outside their comfort zone. The challenges these administrators face in relation to their with those challenges, successfully or unsuccessfully, is an area that could also be explored. Reluctance Factors An implication related to th e teacher reluctance previously mentioned is the need for researching strategies that would adequately address the reluctance factors that affect teacher implementation. This includes what factors play into their reluctance and factors that come into pla y to help them overcome that reluctance. As the educational community begins to make the shift from traditional instructional methods to implementing new literacies understanding teacher reluctance and the factors that contribute to and address that reluc tance will provide to be vital information in the success of schools to be able to make that shift. Academic Achievement The topic of academic achievement could also been investigated at a deeper level. This current study focused on the new literacies evi dent as well as academic outcomes; however, these outcomes could be expanded upon. Until education moves
181 away from high stakes testing, future research on academic achievement will always be needed. Subject Areas Finally, digital storytelling has been utilized within other subject areas; however, its main use remains in the English classroom. Evaluating the use of digital storytelling in other subject areas is needed, especially at the secondary level. This current study could lead to research on int erdisciplinary projects through collaborations among multiple subject area teachers in cross curricular experiences for students. With the growing number of schools providing technology for their students, the need for digital storytelling research is app arent. Summary Literacy has been a main tenant of education since the first schools opened their doors, and many teachers are still teaching traditional literacies through traditional formats. It is easy to see how educators can fall into routines by rep eatedly doing the same thing day after day. Students, however, want new, authentic learning opportunities that are meaningful and relevant. Digital storytelling is a proven method of providing such relevance for the classroom (Churchill et al., 2008; Czar necki, 2009; Ohler, 2009). Researchers have shown that students need new literacy skills in order to live and work in modern society; therefore, teachers must consider new methods in order to meet this need. Karchmer Klein and Shinas (2012) noted that s tudents need to learn this new set of skills now more than ever before. Based on the results of this study, digital storytelling is a method of providing students with the opportunity to interact with
182 new literacy skills within a secondary English classro om without sacrificing traditional objectives and academic outcomes
183 APPENDIX A STORYBOARD TEMPLATE
184 APPENDIX B STUDENT FINAL ARTIFACT RUBRIC Table A 1 Student artifact rubric Criteria Advanced Proficient Needs Improvement Warning Score Main Idea / Exposition Main idea is personal, but shows a universal appeal. Author clearly demonstrates passion for the main idea that resonates throughout the essay. Exposition engages the reader by laying out the main idea and suppor ting details in a logical order. Story contains a clear setting and point of view that orients the reader with the main idea. Main idea is personal, but shows little universal appeal. Author clearly demonstrates passion for the main idea that resonates through most of the essay. Exposition engages the reader by laying out the main idea and supporting details in a logical order most of the time. Story contains a setting and point of view that orients the reader with the main idea. Main idea is somewhat personal, but lacks universal appeal. Author demonstrates some passion for the main idea that resonates through some of the essay. Exposition engages the reader by laying out the main idea and supporting details in a logical order rarely. Story contains s ome setting and point of view that orients the reader with the main idea. Main idea is not personal. Author demonstrates little or no passion for the main idea but it does not resonate through the essay. Exposition does not engage the reader by laying ou t the main idea or supporting details in any logical order. Story contains very little or no setting and point of view to orients the reader with the main idea. Mechanics / Grammar Contains little to no errors in conventions such as capitalization punctuation, spelling. Contains some errors in conventions such as capitalization, punctuation, spelling. Contains numerous errors in conventions such as punctuation, spelling. Contains serious of errors in conventions such as punctuation, spelling. Se nses Rich idea development, engages reader, and most senses are employed: sight, sound, taste, touch, and hearing. Strong idea development, and some senses are employed. Appropriate use of language, limited development of ideas, and few senses are employ ed. Inappropriate use of language, minimal or no idea development, and no senses are employed.
185 Table A 1. Continued Criteria Advanced Proficient Needs Improvement Warning Score Plot Information is very organized and well constructed. Ideas foll ow a logical sequence to form a clear transition from one idea to the next. Purposeful use of multiple techniques to string the events together, while also setting a clear tone. Has a complete conclusion that fully sums up all elements of the narrative whi le connecting the reader previous elements. Information is mostly organized and most of the ideas follow a logical sequence. Use of multiple techniques that strings some of the events together, while also setting a clear tone. Has a conclusion that ties t ogether most of the ideas from the piece. Some information is organized and some of the ideas follow a logical sequence. Use of few techniques to string the events together. Sets a tone. Has an ineffective conclusion that does not fully connect the r eader to previous elements in the piece but ties together some ideas from the piece. None of the information is organized and the assignment does not follow a logical sequence. Does not have evidence of any sequencing techniques to string the events t ogether or set a consistent tone. Has little to no conclusion that does not sum up previous elements from the narrative and provides no connection for the reader. Personal Experience Essay uses details that make a small personal experience, but have a w ider perspective. Essay uses some details that make a small personal experience, but have a wider perspective. Essay uses few details that make a small personal experience that do not have a wider perspective. Essay uses no details that make a small person al experience that do not have a wider perspective. Language Uses specific language that avoids abstractions. M ultiple types of sentence structure It uses some specific language. Mostly varied sentence structure There are few examp les of specific lang uage used. No specific language is used. Uses little to no varied sentence structure
186 Table A 1. Continued Criteria Advanced Proficient Needs Improvement Warning Score Narrative Purposefully use of narrative structure elements such as pace, des criptions, experiences, and/or reflection. Use of complex and meticulous words to create a full picture of the setting, events, ideas, etc. Use of narrative structure elements such as pace, descriptions, experiences, and/or reflection. Use of detailed word s to create a mostly full picture of the setting, events, ideas, etc. Little use of narrative structure elements such as pace, descriptions, experiences, and/or reflection. Use of some detailed words to somewhat of a picture of the setting, events, ideas, etc. Use of few or no narrative structure elements such as pace, descriptions, experiences, and/or reflection. Does not use detailed words and does not create a picture of the setting, events, ideas, etc. Music Demonstrates deliberate and justified choi ce of music that matches story meaning and tone. Demonstrates deliberate and justified choice of music that mostly matches the meaning and tone. Demonstrates some deliberate and justified choice of music that matche s some of the meaning and tone. demonstrate deliberate and justified choice of music and match the meaning and tone. Images Demonstrates deliberate and justified choice of music that matches story meaning and tone. Demonstrates deliberate and justified choice of music that mos tly matches the story meaning and tone. Demonstrates some deliberate and justified choice of music that matches some of the story meaning and tone. demonstrate deliberate and justified choice of music and match the story meaning and tone. Narration Narrator sounds comfor table, and delivery is smooth. A ppropriate pacing and tone Narrator sounds comfortable, and delivery is smooth. M ostly clear and good pacing and tone Narrator sounds somewhat comfortabl e, and delivery has some faults. P acing and tone are not utilized Narrator sounds uncomfortabl e, and delivery has faults P acing and tone are not utilized.
187 Table A 1. Continued Criteria Advanced Proficient Needs Improvement Warning Score Technical Elements Demonstrates abil ity to use all aspects of the editing program to produce an engaging and complete final product. Multiple functions from the program are used. Demonstrates ability to use most aspects of the editing program to produce an engaging final product. Some func tions from the program are used. Demonstrates ability to use some aspects of the editing program to produce a final product. Few functions from the program are used. Demonstrate s ability to use little or no aspects of the editing program to produce a fina l product. No functions from the program are used. Digital Citizenship Demonstrates ethical use of technology and photos are properly cited. Demonstrates responsible use of internet resources and most photos are properly cited. Demonstrates responsible use of equipment and software, and some photos are properly cited. Demonstrate s responsible use of equipment. Final Product Elements / Editing Final product blends music, narration, and pictures to convey main idea and tone and to enhance understandin g without using too many elements that would overload the viewer. Final Product mostly blends music, narration, and pictures to convey main idea and tone that somewhat enhances understanding without using too many elements that would overload the viewer. F inal Product has moments of disjointed elements and only somewhat conveys the main idea and tone. Too many elements are used and they are distracting to the viewer. Final product uses basic features and music, narration, and pictures to conv ey main idea. Storyboard Storyboard draft demonstrates clear understanding of visual features, and final draft is produced through revisions. Storyboard draft demonstrates some understanding of visual features, and final draft is produced through revi sions. Storyboard draft demonstrates little understanding of visual features, and some needed revisions were done. Storyboard draft demonstrates no understandin g of visual features, and few needed revisions were done.
188 Table A 1. Continued Criteria A dvanced Proficient Needs Improvement Warning Score Final Product Upload Student is able to upload final product for review cleanly. Student is able to upload the final product but the format is incorrect causing quality issues. Student is unable to upload video, but is able to submit his or her final product in another form. Student unable to upload final video. Student Total: /150
189 APPENDIX C OBSERVATION PROTOCOL Table C 1 Observation protocol Category Rule for Inclusion Supporting Litera ture Using Search engines to locate information related to the project Student use of a search engine effectively beyond the basic word search in order to retrieve relevant information Hagood (2009), Leu et al. (2004) Evaluating information usefulness to the project Students actively thinking about the information they have gathered and if it would properly portray the message they are trying to convey and its usefulness Leu et al. (2004), New London Group (1996) Using word processing effectively to fo rmat a document Student use of a word processing program to properly format their document by changing font, margins, spacing, etc. Hagood (2009), Leu et al. (2004) Participate effectively in online discussion boards Student use of a school selected learn ing management system (LMS) to communicate their ideas to other students in the class and respond to others. Hagood (2009), Leu et al. (2004), New London Group (1996) Using email effectively to communicate and transfer information Student use of email to communicate effectively and share information Leu et al. (2004), New London Group (1996) Identify important questions to ask in order to solve issues encountered during the project Students actively creating and asking relevant questions needed in order t o solve a problem during the project Leu et al. (2004) Locate information to answer questions Student use of the resources around him or her to find the answers need to move forward when an issue has occurred Leu et al. (2004) Using ICTs to share/publis h information Student use of ICTs to upload and/or share their personal creations with others Leu et al. (2004), New London Group (1996) Creating and working with alternative texts, including multimodal texts Student creation and interaction with alternat ive texts using multiple formats Hagood (2009), New London Group (1996) Using collaborative practices Student demonstration of the social nature of literacy by collaborating with each other to enhance their final product and/or answer questions Gee (1996) Hagood (2009), New London Group (1996)
190 APPENDIX D IRB APPROVAL
191 APPENDIX E PARENTAL CONSENT Department of Gator Instruction PO Box 12345 University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32600 0000 Parental Consent Dear Parent/Guardian, I am a graduate s tudent in the School of Teaching and Learning at the University of Florida, conducting research on digital storytelling and new literacy skills at the secondary level under the supervision of Dr. Kara Dawson. The purpose of this study is to identify the ac ademic outcomes and new literacies evident during a digital storytelling unit within a secondary English class. Digital storytelling is the act of adding media, such as music and pictures, to create a video out of a written story. The results of the stud y may help teachers better understand the benefits of digital storytelling and allow them to implement technology more effectively in the future. These results may not directly help your child today, but may benefit future students. With your permission, I would like to ask your child to volunteer for this research. The English 12 classes this year will be completing digi tal stories during their future plans unit Students will be observed during the unit, asked to reflect on this process and their digit al stories will be reviewed. Student names will not be attached to the comments or reflections in any way, and their identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Participation or non participation in this study will not affect the ch ildren's grades, school standing or placement in any programs. All students will participate in the digital storytelling unit as part of the English course; however, participation in the study is voluntary. You and your child have the right to withd raw consent for your child's participation at any time without consequence. There are no known risks or immediate benefits to the participants. No compensation is offered for participation. Results of this study will be available in June upon request. If y ou have any questions about this research protocol, please contact me at 205 871 9663 or Dr. Dawson at 352 273 4177 Questions or concerns about your child's rights as research participant may be directed to the IRB02 office, University of Florida, Box 112 250, Gainesville, FL 32611, (352) 392 0433. Ms. Rebecca Shields I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily give my consent for my child, _________________, to participate in Ms. Shields' study of digital storytelling. I have received a copy of this description. ____________________________ ___________ ________________________ _________ Parent / Guardian Date 2nd Parent / Witness Date
192 APPENDIX F CHILD ASSENT Child Assent Dear Student, My name is Ms. Shields and I am a student at the University of Florida. I am trying to learn about the benefits of digital storytelling on new literacy skills. Digital storytelling is the act of adding media, such as music and pictures, to create a video out of a written story. I will be working with and observing the English 12 classes at Homewood High School. All students will complete a digital story as part of their English course; however, participation in the study is optional. If you decide to participate in the study, you will be asked to reflect on the process, and your digital stories will also be reviewed. There are no known risks to participation, and all responses will be kept anonymous. he study at any time. Other than the researchers, no one will know your answers, including your d in the study. I also want you to know that whatever you decide, this will not affect your grades in class or teacher interactions. Your parent / guardian said it would be OK for you to participate. Would you be willing to participate in this study? ____ Yes _____ No ________________________________ Print Name ________________________________ ______________ Signature Date
193 LIST OF REFERENCES Abbitt, J., & Klett, M. (2007). Identifying influences on attit udes and self efficacy beliefs towards technology integration among pre service educators. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 6 (1) 28 43. ACT. (2013). The condition of work readiness in the United States. Retrieved January, 2014, from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/ConditionWorkReadiness.pdf Alabama Department of Education. (2010). Alabama course of study: English language arts. Montgomery, AL: Author. Retrieved August, 2013, from http://web.alsde.edu/general/ALCCS_Alabama_English_Language_Arts_Course _of_Study.pdf Alverman classroom practice and research? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(1), 8 19. Anderson, J. (2010). Interdisciplinary project based learning leads to success. Tech Direction s, 70 (4), 20 21. Anstey, M., & Bull, G. (2006). Defining multiliteracies. In Teaching and learning multi literacies: Changing times, changing literacies (pp. 19 55). International Reading Association. Ballast, K., Stephens, L., & Radcliffe, R. (2008). T he effects of digital storytelling on sixth grade students' writing and their attitudes about writing. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 875 879). Chesapea ke, VA: AACE. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory New York: General Learning Press. Barrett, H. (2006). Researching and evaluating digital storytelli ng as a deep learning tool. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 647 654). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Barrett, H., & Wilkerson, J. (2004). Conflicting paradigms i n electronic portfolio approaches. Retrieved June, 2012, from http://electronicportfolios.com/systems/paradigms.html Bartlett, R., & Strough, J. (2003). Multimedia versus traditional c ourse instruction in introductory social psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30 (4), 335 338.
194 Benmayor, R. (2008). Digital storytelling as a signature pedagogy for the new humanities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7 (2), 188 204. Berg, B., & Lune, H. (2012). Qualitative research methods for social sciences. Needham Heights, MA: Pearson. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5 (1), 7. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3), 369 398. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S.K. (1998). Qualitative research for e ducation: An introduction to theory and methods (3 rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Bolch, M. (2008). Show and tell. T.H.E. Journal, 35 (5), 28 30. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researc her, 33 (8), 3 15. Borneman, D., & Gibson, K. (2011). Digital storytelling: Meeting standards across the curriculum in a WWII/Holocaust unit. School Library Monthly, 27 (7), 16 17. Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the cult ure of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32 42. Brzycki, D., & Dudt, K. (2005). Overcoming barriers to technology use in teacher preparation programs. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13 (4), 619 641. Buschman, J. (2009). Information l The Library Quarterly, 79( 1), 95 118. The Reading Teacher, 61 (8), 616 626. Carr, T., & Jitendra, A. K. (2000). Using hypermedia and multimedia to promote project based learning of at risk high school students. Intervention in School and Clinic, 36 (1), 40 44. Cervetti, G., Damico, J., & Pearson, D. (2006). Multiple literacies, new literacies, and teacher education. Theory into Practi ce, 45 (4), 378 386. Chung, S. K. (2007). Art education technology: Digital storytelling. Art Education, 60 (2), 17 22.
195 Churchill, N., Ping, L. C., Oakley, G., & Churchill, D. (2008). Digital storytelling and digital literacy learning. Retrieved June, 20 12, from http://blog.scs.sk.ca/learningresources/digitalliteracy.pdf Clark, J. E. (2010). The digital imperative: Making the case for a 21 st century pedagogy. Computers and Comp osition, 27 (1), 27 35. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards Retrieved January 2013, from http://www.cores tandards.org and new literacies. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 85( 6), 221 225. Cook, K., & Weiland, I. (2010). A sugge sted project based environmental unit for middle school: Teaching content through inquiry. Science Scope, 33 (8), 46 50. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (2000). Multiliteraicies. London: Routledge. Creswell, J. (2005). Educational research: Planning conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2 nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall. Creswell, J. (1998). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2 nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Czarnec ki, K. (2009). How digital storytelling builds 21st century skills. Library Technology Reports, 45 (7), 15 19. Damanpour, F., & Schneider, M. (2006). Phases of the adoption of innovation in organizations: Effects of environment, organization and top manager s. British Journal of Management, 17 215 236. Desimone, L (2009). Improving impact studies of teacher professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38 (3), 181 199). Desimone, L. (2011). A primer on effect ive professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 92 (6), 68 72. Dillingham, B. (2005). Performance literacy. The Reading Teacher, 59 (1), 72 75. Dogan, B., & Robin, B. (2008). Implementation of digital storytelling in the classroom by teachers trained in a digital storytelling workshop. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 902 907). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
196 Downing, K., Kwong, T., Chan, S., Lam, T., & Downing, W. ( 2009). Problem based learning and the development of metacognition. Higher Education, 57 (5), 609 621. literacy or content? Confronting the literacy content dualism. Act ion in Teacher Education, 27 (1) 12 21. Dresden, J., & Lee, K. (2007). The effects of project work in a first grade classroom. A little goes a long way. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 9 (1). Retrieved June, 2012, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v9N1/dresden.html Eastburn, C. (2008). Teaching the write way. T.H.E. Journal, 35 (7), 16. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2007, January). 7 things you should know about digital storytelling. Retrieved August, 2012, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7021.pdf Ertmer, P. (1999). Addressing first and second order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educati on Technology Research and Development, 47 (4), 47 61. Eskrootchi, R., & Oskrochi, G. R. (2010). A study of the efficacy of project based learning integrated with computer based simulation STELLA. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13 (1), 236 24 5. Ferri, B. A., Gallagher, D., & Connor, D. J. (2011). Pluralizing methodologies in the field Learning Disability Quarterly 34 (3), 222 231. Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2004). Program ev aluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (3 rd ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon. Folger, R., & Skarlicki, D. (1999). Unfairness and resistance to change: Hardship as mistreatment. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12 (1), 35 50. For zani, E. & Leu, D. (2012). New literacies for new learners: The need for digital technologies in primary classrooms, The Educational Forum, 76 (4), 421 424. Fredricks, K. (2009). Tell me a story. School Library Monthly, 26 (4), 33 35. Fullan, M. (2010). M otion leadership: The skinny on becoming change savvy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin SAGE Company. Gakhar, S., & Thompson, A. (2007). Digital storytelling: Engaging, communicating, and collaborating. In R. Carlsen et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Info rmation
197 Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2007 (pp. 607 612). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Gallagher, K., & Ntelioglou, B. Y. (2011). Which new literacies? Dialogue and performance in youth writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54 (5), 322 330. Garcia, P., & Rossiter, M. (2010). Digital storytelling as narrative pedagogy. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 1091 1097). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Gee, J. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourse. London: Farmer Press. Grady, M. L. (2010). First things first: Writing strategies. Journal of Women in Educational Leadership, 8 (1), 51 52. Gregory, K., Steelman, J., & C averly, D. C. (2009). Techtalk: Digital storytelling and developmental education. Journal of Developmental Education, 33 (2), 42 43. Griffiths, G., Oates, B., & Lockyer, M. (2007). Evolving a facilitation process towards student centered learning: A case study in computing. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18 (4), 459 467. Guskey, T. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15 (5), 5 12. Guskey, T. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oak s, CA: Corwin Press. Hagood, M. (Ed). (2009). New literacies practices: Designing literacy learning. New York: Peter Lang Publishing. Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2011). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc Harris, R. (2007). Blending narratives: A storytelling strategy for social studies. The Social Studies, 98 (3), 111 115. Harris, L. (2010). Delivering, modifying or collaborating? Examining three teacher conceptions of how to facilitate student engagement Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice,16 (1), 131 151. Heo, M. (2011). Improving technology competency and disposition of beginning pre service teachers with digital storytelling. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 20 (1), 61 81.
198 Hew, K ., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K 12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55 (1), 223 252. Hibbing, A. N., & Rankin Erickson, J. (2003). A picture is worth a thousand words: Using visual images to improve comprehension for middle school struggling readers. The Reading Teacher, 56 (8), 758. Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39 (5), 12 17. learning at home. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 35 (1), 82 98. Hsu, H., & Wang, S. (2010). Using gaming literacies to cultivate new literacies. Simulati on Gaming, 41 (3), 400 417. Hull, G. A., & Nelson, M. E. (2005). Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written Communication, 22 (1), 224 2671. ISTE. (2007). National educational technology standards for students. Retrieved August, 2013, from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/20 14_ISTE_Standards S_PDF.pdf Ivey, G. (1999). A multicase study in the middle school: Complexities among young adolescent readers. Reading Research Quart erly, 34(2), 172 192. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: NYU Press Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. Review of Research in Education, 32 (1), 27. Johnson, E. (2009). Elem ents of a novel and photo story. School Library Monthly, 26 (4), 11 12. Kajder, S. B. (2004). Enter here: Personal narrative and digital storytelling. The English Journal, 93 (3), 64 68. Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2004). Designs for learning. Educational Media International, 38 (1), 38 93. Karchmer, R. A. (2001). The journey ahead: Thirteen teachers report how the Internet influences literacy and literacy instruction in their K 12 classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36 (4), 442 466. Karchmer Klein, R. & Shinas, V. H. (2012). Guiding principles for supporting new literacies in your classroom. The Reading Teacher, 65 (5), 288 293.
199 Kearney, M. (2011). A learning design for student generated digital storytelling. Learning, Media and Technology, 36 (2), 16 9 188. Kearney, M. (2009). Investigating digital storytelling and portfolios in teacher education. In G. Siemens & C. Fulford (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2009 (pp. 1987 1996). Chesape ake, VA: AACE. Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Wachira, P. (2008). Computer technology integration and student learning: Barriers and promise. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17 (1), 560 565. Kellinger, J. J. (2012). The flipside: Concerns about might take, The Educational Forum, 76 (4), 524 536. Kieler, L. (2010). A reflection: Trials in using digital storytelling effectively. Gifte d Child Today 33 (3), 48 52. Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research : The assessment of trustworthiness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45 (1), 214 222. Lambert, J. (2007). The digital storytelling cookbook Berkeley, CA: Center for Digital Storytelling/Digital Diner Press. Lapp, D., Moss, B., & Rowsell, J. (201 2). Envisioning new literacies through a lens of teaching and learning. The Reading Teacher, 65 (6), 367 377. Larson, L. C., & Miller, T. N. (2011). 21 st century skills: Prepare students for the future. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47 (3), 121 12 3. Leu, D., & K inzer, C. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction with networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly, 35 (1), 108 127. Leu, D., Kinzer, C., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies em erging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. In R.B. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5 th ed., pp. 1570 1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Leu, J. D., McVerry, J. Cacopardo, H., Kennedy, C., & Forzani, E. (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: Expanding the literacy and learning curriculum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55 (1), 5 1 4. Li, L., & Morehead, P. (2006). Digital storytelling: Self efficacy and digital literacy. In T. Reeves & S. Yamashita (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E Learning
200 in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2006 (pp. 2159 2164). C hesapeake, VA: AACE. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1981). Synthesis of research on improving schools. Educational Leadership, 38 (7), 583 586. Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Malin, G. (2010). Is it still consi dered reading?: Using digital video storytelling to engage adolescent readers. In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2009 (pp. 2593 2597). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Malita, L. & Martin, C. (2010). Digital storytelling as web passport to success in the 21st century. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2 (1), 3060 3064. Marcus, S. (2009). New basics for new literacies. Journal of the American society for information scienc e and technology, 60 (9), 1933 1938. Margerum Leys, J., & Marx, R. (2002). Teacher knowledge of educational technology: A case study of student/mentor teacher pairs. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26 (4), 427 462. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions. Educational Psychologist, 32 (1), 1 19. Mayer, R. E. (2008). Multimedia literacy. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. Leu (Ed.), Handbook of Research on New Literacies. (pp. 359 375). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practical guide. London: Falmer. McDrury, J., & Alterio, M. (2001). Achieving reflective learning using storytelling pathways. Innovations in Educat ion & Teaching International, 38 (1), 63. McLellan, H. (2006). Digital storytelling in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 19 (1), 65 79. Meadows, D. (2003). Digital storytelling: Research based practice in new media. Visual Communic ation, 2 (2), 189 193. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Merriam S. B. (2001). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
201 Mil ls K. Review of Educational Research, 80 (1), 246 271. Mitchell, S., Foulger, T. S., Wetzel, K., & Rathkey, C. (2009). The negotiated project approach: Project based learning without leav ing the standards behind. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36 (4), 339 346. Moore Hart, M. A. (2008). Supporting teachers in their integration of technology with literacy. Reading Horizons, 48 (3), 177 200. Morrell, E. (2012). 21st century literacies, cr itical media pedagogies, and language arts. The Reading Teacher, 66 (4), 300 302. Morrison, G., Ross, S., Kemp, J., & Kalman, H. (2010). Designing effective instruction. New York, NY: Wiley. Mullen, R., & Wedwick, L. (2008). Avoiding the digital abyss: Ge tting started in the classroom with YouTube, digital stories, and blogs. The Clearing House, 82 (2), 66 69. Nanjappa, A., & Grant, M. (2003). Constructing on constructivism: The role of technology. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Edu cation, 2 (1), 38 56. Nation, M. L. (2008). Project based learning for sustainable development. Journal of Geography, 107 (3), 102 111. National Council of Teachers of English (2009 ). Literacy learning in the 21 st century (A Policy Research Brief). Urba na, IL: Author. Nelson, M. E., Hull, G. A., & Roche Smith, J. (2008). Challenges of multimedia self presentation. Written Communication, 25 (4), 415 440. The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliter acies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educ ational Review, 66 (1), 60 92. Norum, K., Grabinger, R. S., & Duffield, A. J. (1999). Healing the universe is an inside Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7 (3), 187 203. Nowaczyk, R. H., Santos, L. T., & Patton, C. (1998). Student perception of multimedia in the undergraduate classroom. International Journal of Instructional Media, 25 (4), 367 382. Potholes and possibilities digital literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52 (1), 66 68.
202 Ohler, J. (2005). The world of digital storytelling. Educational Leadership, 63 (4), 44 47. Ohler, J. (2008). Digital storytelling in the classroom Thousand Oaks, C A: Corwin Press. Ohler, J. (2009). New media literacies. Academe, 95 (3), 30 33. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Partnership for 21 st Century Skills. (2009). Curriculum and in struction: A 21 st century skills implementation guide Tucson, AZ: Author. Retrieved August, 2013, from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/p21 stateimp_curriculu minstruction.pdf Patton, M. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Percy, B. (2003). Grabbing technology by the tail. T.H.E. Journal, 31 (1), 48. Pianfetti, E. S. (2001). Teachers and technology: Digital literacy through professional development. Language Arts, 78 (3), 255 262. Pike, G. R., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (2012). The mediating effects of student engagement on the relationships between academic disciplines and learning outcomes: An extension of Hol lands theory. Research in Higher Education 53 (1) 550 575. Porter, B. (n.d.). Story boarding template. Retrieved July 2011 from http://digitales.us/sites/default/files/ story planning template.pdf Potter, J. W. (2010). The state of media literacy. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 54 (4), 675 696. Rantala, L., & Korhonen, V. (2008). New literacies as a challenge for traditional knowledge conceptions in school: A case study from fifth graders digital media production. Simile, 8 (2), 1 15. Resnick, M. (2002). Rethinking learning in the digital age. In G. Kirkman (Ed.), The Global Information Technology Report: Readiness for the Networked World (pp. 32 37). Oxfo rd: Oxford University Press. Robin, B. (2006). The educational uses of digital storytelling. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 709 716). Chesapeake, VA: AA CE. Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into Practice, 47 (3), 220 228.
203 Robin, B., & Pierson, M. (2005). A multilevel approach to using digital storytelling in the classroom. In C. Cr awford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2005 (pp. 708 716). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Roby, T. (2010). Opus in the classroom: Striking CoRDS with content related digital storytelling. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 10 (1), 133 144. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5 th ed.). New York: Free Press. Rossiter, M., & Garcia, P. A. (2010). Digital storytelling: A new player on the narrative field. New Directions for Adult & Continuing Education 126 (1), 37 48. Roschelle, J., Pea, R., Hoadley, C., Gordin, D., & Means, B. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer based technologies. Children and Computer Technology, 10 (2), 76 1 01. Rowsell, J., Hamilton, M., & McLean, C. (2012). Visual Literacy as a Classroom Approach. Journal Of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 55 (5), 444 447. Rudestam, K., & Newton, R. (2007). Surviving your dissertation (3 rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rule, L (2010). Digital storytelling: Never has storytelling been so easy or so powerful. Knowledge Quest, 38 (4), 56 57. Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational Technology Res earch & Development, 56 (4), 487 506. composing public service announcements. Theory into Practice, 47 (1), 83 92. Sefton Green, J. (2006). Youth, technology, and media cultu re. Review of Research in Education, 30 (1), 279 306. Sheneman, L. (2010). Digital storytelling: How to get the best results. School Library Monthly, 27 (1), 40 42. Siegel, M. (2006). Rereading the signs: Multimodal transformations in the field of literac y education, Language Arts, 84 (1), 65 77. Skinner, E. A., Zimmer Gembeck, M. J., & Connell, J. P. (1998). Individual differences and the development of perceived control. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 254 (63), 2 3
204 Skouge, J. R., & Rao, K. (2009). Digital storytelling in teacher education: Creating transformations through narrative. Educational Perspectives, 42 (1), 54 60. Smith, L. M. (1978) An evolving logic of participant observation, educational ethnography and other case s tudies In L. Shulman (Ed.). Review of research in education. Itasca, IL: Peacock. Smith, S. M., & Woody, P. C. (2000). Interactive effect of multimedia instruction and learning styles. Teaching of Psychology, 27 (3), 220 223. Spencer, T., Detrich, R., & Sl ocum, T. (2012). Evidence based practice: A framework for making effective decisions. Education & Treatment of Children, 35 (2), 127 151. Spire, H., Morris, G., & Zhang, J. (2012). New literacies and emerging technologies: Perspective from U.S. and Chines e middle level teachers. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 35 (10), 1 11. Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Hold, Rinehart & Winston. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Street in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5 (2), 77 91. Sweeder, J. (2008). Differentiating instruction through digital storytelling. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 967 974). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, P., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structu re of technical material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119 (1), 176 192. Sylvester, R., & Greenidge, W. (2009). Digital storytelling: Extending the potential for struggling writers. The Reading Teacher, 63 (4), 384 395. Tan, L. & Guo, L. (20 into new literacies practices. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53 (4), 315 324 Thesen, A., & Kara Soteriou, J. (2011). Using digital storytelling to unlock student potential. T he New England Reading Association Journal, 46 (2), 93 100. Tierney, R. J., Bond, E., & Bresler, J. (2006). Examining literate lives as students engage with multiple literacies, Theory into Practice, 45 (4), 359 367.
205 Trauth Nare, A., & Buck, G. (2011). Ass essment for learning. The Science Teacher, 78 (1), 34 39. Ulbig, S. G. (2010). A picture is worth what? Using visual images to enhance classroom engagement. International Journal of Instructional Media, 37 (2), 185 200. Beginning to put the pieces together: A technology infusion model for teacher education. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 18 (4), 112 123. Warschauer, M., Arada, K., & Zheng, B. (2010). Laptops and inspired writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adu lt Literacy, 54 (3), 221 223. Wendt, J. L. (2013). Combating the crisis in adolescent literacy: Exploring literacy in the secondary classroom. American Secondary Education, 41 (2), 38 48. Whitehurst, G. J. (2002, October). Evidence based education. Paper presented at the Student Achievement and School Accountability Conference. Retrieved July, 2012, from http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/methods/whatworks/eb/edlite slide003.html Wilber D. (2012). Trying to get ahead of the curve: Raising and understanding current themes in new literacies practices, The Educational Forum, 76 (4), 406 411. Wimmer, J. J., Skramstad, E., & Khan, I. (2012). Incorporating, utilizing, and manipulating new lit eracies in the classroom, The Educational Forum, 76 (4), 438 441. Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers' use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educ ational Research Journal, 39 (1), 165 205. Wolfe, S. & Flewitt, R. (2010). New technologies, new multimodal literacy practices and Cambridge Journal of Education, 40 (4), 387 399. Yin, R. (1984). Case study rese arch: Design and methods (1 st Ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2 nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3 rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
206 BIOGRA PHICAL SKETCH Rebecca Shields is an English /language a rts teacher at Homewood High School in Homewood, Alabama. She earned an Ed. D. from the University of Florida in curriculum and instruction with a concentration in educational tech nology in 2014. She holds a B. A. in telecommunication and film (2005) from the University of Alabama and a M.A. in English/Language arts secondary education (2008) from the University of Alabama at Birmingham. She is interested in research around technology integration and o nline education at the secondary level.