October 2012 Volume 15 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Kennewell, S., & Morgan, A. (2003). Student teachers’ experiences and attitudes towards using interactive whiteboards in the teaching and learning of young children. Paper presented at the Proceedings of Young Children and Learning Technologies Conference, International Federation for Information Processing, Sydney. López, O. S. (2010). The Digital Learning Classroom: Improving English Language Learners' academic success in mathematics and reading using interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 54(4), 901-915. LeBlanc, G., & Bearison, D. J. (2004). Teaching and learning as a bi-directional activity: investigating dyadic interactions between child teachers and child learners. Cognitive Development, 19(4), 499-515. Lin, Y.-C., Lin, Y.-T., & Huang, Y.-M. (2011). Development of a diagnostic system using a testing-based approach for strengthening student prior knowledge. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1557-1570. Lin, Y. T., Huang, Y. M., & Cheng, S.C. (2010). An automatic group composition system for composing collaborative learning groups using enhanced particle swarm optimization. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1483-1493. Loveless, A. M. (2003). The interaction between primary teachers’ perceptions of ICT and their pedagogy. Education and Information Technologies, 8(4), 313-326. Ministry of Education, Republic of China. (2009). Plan for Expansion of Investment in Public Construction to Revitalize Economy. Retrieved September 18, 2009, from http://english.moe.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=10909&ctNode=784&mp=1 Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7. Schmid, E. C. (2008). Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1553-1568. Slay, H., Sieborger, I., & Hodgkinson-Williams, C. (2008). Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just "lipstick"'? Computers & Education, 51(3), 1321-1341. Smith, F., Hardman, F., & Higgins, S. (2006). The impact of interactive whiteboards on teacher–pupil interaction in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies. British Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 443-457. Thompson, J., & Flecknoe, M. (2003). Raising attainment with an interactive whiteboard in Key Stage 2. Management in Education, 17(3), 29-33. Torff, B., & Tirotta, R. (2010). Interactive whiteboards produce small gains in elementary students' self-reported motivation in mathematics. Computers & Education, 54(2), 379-383. Wall, K., Higgins, S., & Smith, H. (2005). ‘The visual helps me understand the complicated things’: Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards. British Journal of Education Technology, 36(5), 851-867. Warwick, P., Mercer, N., Kershner, R., & Staarman, J. K. (2010). In the mind and in the technology: The vicarious presence of the teacher in pupil's learning of science in collaborative group activity at the interactive whiteboard. Computers & Education, 55(1), 350-362. Wood, R., & Ashfield, J. (2008). The use of the interactive whiteboard for creative teaching and learning in literacy and mathematics: a case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 84-96. 367
Hung, C.-M., Hwang, G.-J., & Huang, I. (2012). A Project-based Digital Storytelling Approach for Improving Students' Learning Motivation, Problem-Solving Competence and Learning Achievement. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (4), 368–379. A Project-based Digital Storytelling Approach for Improving Students’ Learning Motivation, Problem-Solving Competence and Learning Achievement Chun-Ming Hung 1 , Gwo-Jen Hwang 2* and Iwen Huang 1 1 Department of Information and Learning Technology, National University of Tainan, No. 33, Sec. 2, Shulin St., Tainan city 70005, Taiwan // 2 Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and Education, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, 43, Sec.4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, 106, Taiwan // hcm@live.htps.tn.edu.tw // gjhwang.academic@gmail.com // huangi@mail.nutn.edu.tw * Corresponding author (Submitted May 18, 2011; Revised September 5, 2011; Accepted September 25, 2011) ABSTRACT Although project-based learning is a well-known and widely used instructional strategy, it remains a challenging issue to effectively apply this approach to practical settings for improving the learning performance of students. In this study, a project-based digital storytelling approach is proposed to cope with this problem. With a quasiexperiment, the proposed approach has been applied to a learning activity of a science course in an elementary school. A total of 117 Grade 5 students in an elementary school in southern Taiwan were assigned to an experimental group (N = 60) and a control group (N = 57) to compare the performance of the approach with that of conventional project-based learning. A web-based information-searching system, Meta-Analyzer, was used to enable the students to collect data on the Internet based on the questions raised by the teachers, and Microsoft’s Photo Story was used to help the experimental group develop movies for storytelling based on the collected data. Moreover, several measuring tools, including the science learning motivation scale, the problem-solving competence scale and the science achievement test, were used to collect feedback as well as evaluate the learning performance of the students. The experimental results show that the project-based learning with digital storytelling could effectively enhance the students’ science learning motivation, problem-solving competence, and learning achievement. Keywords Project-based learning, Elementary education, Digital storytelling, Learning motivation, Problem-solving competence Introduction With the popularity of information technology and the rapid development of global knowledge, scholars and academia have started to pay more attention to technological instruction. Researchers have tried to develop various computerized systems or guiding strategies to assist students in improving their learning performance (Hsieh et al., 2011; Hwang, 2003; Panjaburee, Hwang, Triampo, & Shih, 2010). Chu, Tse, and Chow (2011) have indicated that effective instruction is required to cultivate the key competences of students; particularly, technological instruction which promotes student-centered learning presents a great difference from traditional direct instruction. Many scholars consider Project-Based Learning (PBL) as an excellent form of instruction to encourage the self-learning of students (Chang & Lee, 2010; Gerber, Cavallo, & Marek, 2001; Glover, 1993; Green, 1998; Moursund, 1999; Scott, 1994). David (2008) mentioned that project-based learning could provide students with more learning chances and interpersonal interactions, as it conforms to the requirements of technological instruction. Barrows (1996) indicated that students should look for more efficient learning methods based on their background knowledge and skills, and project-based learning, as a favorable learning strategy, could guide students to the application of knowledge and problem solving. Schmeck and Lockhart (1983) considered learning strategies as the methods applied in the learning process to assist learners in acquiring, managing, and integrating knowledge, as well as solving problems independently. It can be seen that project-based learning is such an approach that situates learners with higher order cognitive processes in the modified version of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, such as “analyze”, “evaluate” and “create” (Anderson, Krathwohl, Airasian, Cruickshank, Mayer, Pintrich, et al., 2001; Bloom et al., 1956). Shih, Chuang and Hwang (2010) further revealed that project-based learning could be a student-centered learning model to promote the learning achievement of students. Moreover, Mayer (1987) considered that learning strategies ISSN 1436-4522 (online) and 1176-3647 (print). © International Forum of Educational Technology & Society (IFETS). The authors and the forum jointly retain the copyright of the articles. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than IFETS must be honoured. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from the editors at kinshuk@ieee.org. 368
Page 1 and 2:
October 2012 Volume 15 Number 4
Page 3 and 4:
Supporting Organizations Centre for
Page 5 and 6:
Peer Evaluation in Blended Team Pro
Page 7 and 8:
The contribution entitled “Semant
Page 9 and 10:
with the group exploration activity
Page 11 and 12:
Data collection This study collecte
Page 13 and 14:
Table 2. The mind mapping activitie
Page 15 and 16:
On the contrary, the students in th
Page 17 and 18:
Elwart-Keys M., Halonen D., Horton
Page 19 and 20:
Zualkernan, I. A., Raza, A., & Kari
Page 21 and 22:
In summary, a large base of school
Page 23 and 24:
Usability deals with how easy it is
Page 25 and 26:
As Figure 5 shows, the adoption mod
Page 27 and 28:
Adoption Factors of Adoption An ari
Page 29 and 30:
that the particular way of using th
Page 31 and 32:
Stoyanova, E. (2005). Problem posin
Page 33 and 34:
The impact of peer assessment has b
Page 35 and 36:
e used for the setup of diagnostic
Page 37 and 38:
RQ2: Does assessing solutions of ot
Page 39 and 40:
Both components, authoring tool and
Page 41 and 42:
Supervision We enhanced the player
Page 43 and 44:
Stepanyan, K., Mather, R., Jones, H
Page 45 and 46:
international group of experts and
Page 47 and 48:
1. Web application development over
Page 49 and 50:
In Mike’s terminal window, run
Page 51 and 52:
Chen, L.-C., & Lin, C. (2007). Comb
Page 53 and 54:
To address these drawbacks some app
Page 55 and 56:
LOM LOM objects Universia RDF repos
Page 57 and 58:
Obtain DBpedia categories. In this
Page 59 and 60:
This is not the usual result since
Page 61 and 62:
The algorithm returns a set of DBpe
Page 63 and 64:
shows. However, the benefit of expl
Page 65 and 66:
Conclusions An approach for the ext
Page 67 and 68:
Zhao, G., Ailiya, & Shen, Z. (2012)
Page 69 and 70:
Apart from these, a project “SimS
Page 71 and 72:
Autonomy is related to the sense of
Page 73 and 74:
practice” for practicability, and
Page 75 and 76:
secondary school students in Singap
Page 77 and 78:
desirable; the event endurer is the
Page 79 and 80:
Gartner, A. (1971). Children Teach
Page 81 and 82:
experience and the guidance which i
Page 83 and 84:
is further augmented with the numbe
Page 85 and 86:
shown in the central part of Figure
Page 87 and 88:
useful when choosing a learning pat
Page 89 and 90:
competences helped them to specific
Page 91 and 92:
model (Maier & Schmidt, 2007) as an
Page 93 and 94:
Margaryan, A., Milligan, C., Little
Page 95 and 96:
Being a Digital Native, however, is
Page 97 and 98:
Pre-adolescent information seeking
Page 99 and 100:
The significance of the study rests
Page 101 and 102:
The middle school site followed a s
Page 103 and 104:
A similar process for the middle sc
Page 105 and 106:
have developed a new design model
Page 107 and 108:
Davidson, J., & Wright, J. (1994).
Page 109 and 110:
Mostmans, L., Vleugels, C., & Banni
Page 111 and 112:
productive and needing more time to
Page 113 and 114:
the location of computers: In eleme
Page 115 and 116:
Accordingly, informants in the BOM-
Page 117 and 118:
Goodman, L., MacCallum-Stewart, E.d
Page 119 and 120:
Chen, M.-Y., Chang, F. M.-T., Chen,
Page 121 and 122:
information systems (system quality
Page 123 and 124:
participant’s usage intentions we
Page 125 and 126:
service quality of IS functions. We
Page 127 and 128:
the e-Portfolio system. Therefore,
Page 129 and 130:
other colleges/universities to avoi
Page 131 and 132:
Cho, C.-W., Yeh, T.-K., Cheng, S.-W
Page 133 and 134:
them search for resources, they wer
Page 135 and 136:
A user’s tags can be visible or i
Page 137 and 138:
a month. Note that, since social ta
Page 139 and 140:
(Fujimura et al., 2007). The aim of
Page 141 and 142:
Rainie, L. (2007, January 31). 28%
Page 143 and 144:
Moreover, teacher pedagogical belie
Page 145 and 146:
However, Singer and Maher (2007) ex
Page 147 and 148:
Data analysis After collecting data
Page 149 and 150:
interpretations of effect size of c
Page 151 and 152:
places to develop teaching skills,
Page 153 and 154:
Kajder, S. B. (2005). Preservice En
Page 155 and 156:
Huang, Y.-M., Liu, C.-H., Lee, C.-Y
Page 157 and 158:
organized in a didactic way that co
Page 159 and 160:
Front-end subsystem A front-end sub
Page 161 and 162:
possible location of the visitor, t
Page 163 and 164:
Procedure Figure 7. The participant
Page 165 and 166:
Results of user satisfaction evalua
Page 167 and 168:
Table 8. The comparison of the PSQ
Page 169 and 170:
system for recommendation purpose i
Page 171 and 172:
affiliation network models as a col
Page 173 and 174:
Choosing the most suitable viewer i
Page 175 and 176:
visualization, user-friendly operat
Page 177 and 178:
Figure 3. Example of cutting tool w
Page 179 and 180:
imported in Adobe Acrobat Pro Exten
Page 181 and 182:
10 points, if it fully meets the re
Page 183 and 184:
The overall competitive assessment
Page 185 and 186:
Ramos Barbero, B., García Maté, E
Page 187 and 188:
connected devices such as iPods and
Page 189 and 190:
The common constructivist themes su
Page 191 and 192:
Data analysis Data was gathered fro
Page 193 and 194:
...I do my downloads through iTunes
Page 195 and 196:
podcasts. In Case Study 2, although
Page 197 and 198:
Rüdel, C. (2006). A work in progre
Page 199 and 200:
issues in undergraduate economics c
Page 201 and 202:
money market affect the equilibrium
Page 203 and 204:
Through the simulation program the
Page 205 and 206:
However, group A presents a better
Page 207 and 208:
Thus, we can confirm the advantages
Page 209 and 210:
Clark, D., Nelson, B., Sengupta, P.
Page 211 and 212:
centered approach to learning inste
Page 213 and 214:
Research question and population Th
Page 215 and 216:
Learning effectiveness was analyzed
Page 217 and 218:
that have turned experimental equip
Page 219 and 220:
Lee, H.-J., & Lim, C. (2012). Peer
Page 221 and 222:
Message Analysis Frameworks Existin
Page 223 and 224:
social messages, whereas the latter
Page 225 and 226:
This finding has significant implic
Page 227 and 228:
These results imply that students e
Page 229 and 230:
Lee, H.-J. & Kim, I. (2011). Develo
Page 231 and 232:
We have successfully experimented o
Page 233 and 234:
Figure 1. Analysis of the XO-1, the
Page 235 and 236:
Figure 4. The most popular coping s
Page 237 and 238:
other way too, when children were a
Page 239 and 240:
judge or ridicule them. It is impor
Page 241 and 242:
Acknowledgements This research rece
Page 243 and 244:
Tambouris, E., Panopoulou, E., Tara
Page 245 and 246:
participatory or collaborative prac
Page 247 and 248:
My Desk is a workspace personal to
Page 249 and 250:
While the notion of grouping learne
Page 251 and 252:
Teacher controlled Teacher controll
Page 253 and 254:
opinion of collaboration facilities
Page 255 and 256:
Acknowledgements Work presented in
Page 257 and 258:
Tsai, P.-S., Hwang, G.-J., Tsai, C.
Page 259 and 260:
owsing, title browsing and author b
Page 261 and 262:
The simple search function Figure 4
Page 263 and 264:
The author browse function Figure 8
Page 265 and 266:
Comparisons of usage feedback betwe
Page 267 and 268:
Conclusions In the past decades, va
Page 269 and 270:
Appendix A: The final version of qu
Page 271 and 272:
as validity should be investigated.
Page 273 and 274:
of the assessment results across th
Page 275 and 276:
Figure 1. Teachers were allowed to
Page 277 and 278:
Table 3 summarized the Pearson’s
Page 279 and 280:
achievement test scores. Given thes
Page 281 and 282:
Russell, J. D., & Butcher, C. (1999
Page 283 and 284:
Attitude 4-5. Reflection on peer pe
Page 285 and 286:
universities participate in new mar
Page 287 and 288:
Agreement on a joint diploma/degree
Page 289 and 290:
1. Awareness of the benefits for st
Page 291 and 292:
Institutional resistance to change
Page 293 and 294:
Business model A business model can
Page 295 and 296:
The identity provider is responsibl
Page 297 and 298:
Sample scenario Business layer The
Page 299 and 300:
executed to fulfil collaboration ag
Page 301 and 302:
Cadima, R., Ojeda, J., & Monguet, J
Page 303 and 304:
Centrality metrics measure the exte
Page 305 and 306:
Results Social Networks During the
Page 307 and 308:
performance of the executives educa
Page 309 and 310:
Song, S., Nerur, S., & Teng, J. (20
Page 311 and 312:
We also propose a specific implemen
Page 313 and 314:
assessment outputs gathering during
Page 315 and 316:
is an authoring platform created wi
Page 317 and 318:
Figure 4. Example of an assessment
Page 319 and 320:
ate of errors in “Level 3” foll
Page 321 and 322: The evaluation of reusing pedagogic
Page 323 and 324: Shute, V. J., & Spector, J. M. (200
Page 325 and 326: Literature Review Cognitive apprent
Page 327 and 328: questions. Meta-Analyzer has been r
Page 329 and 330: presentation as a conclusion. Simil
Page 331 and 332: Interaction effect between cognitiv
Page 333 and 334: References Abouserie, R., & Moss, D
Page 335 and 336: Oloruntegbe, K. O., Ikpe, A., & Kuk
Page 337 and 338: Young, M.-L. (2012). An Exploratory
Page 339 and 340: use is simply an expedited form of
Page 341 and 342: In order to elicit narratives about
Page 343 and 344: Findings The study shows that deliv
Page 345 and 346: With the changes in the teaching en
Page 347 and 348: Bostrom, R. & Heinen, J. S. (1977a)
Page 349 and 350: Lindgren, R., & McDaniel, R. (2012)
Page 351 and 352: those that allow for less agentic a
Page 353 and 354: whether the adoption of a novel des
Page 355 and 356: AEM Course Features. A subset of po
Page 357 and 358: Figure 4 shows the average pre and
Page 359 and 360: Ford, M. (1992). Motivating humans:
Page 361 and 362: Liang, T.-H., Huang, Y.-M., & Tsai,
Page 363 and 364: TSL1: Teacher as a coach TSL2: Teac
Page 365 and 366: instructional event (the upper part
Page 367 and 368: Table 3. The results of the chi-squ
Page 369 and 370: simultaneously complied with ISL an
Page 371: Finally, several pedagogical implic
Page 375 and 376: theory of Piaget (1950) and the soc
Page 377 and 378: Learning activities The unit of “
Page 379 and 380: subgroup in the control group neede
Page 381 and 382: When asked about the differences be
Page 383 and 384: Delialioglu, O., Cakir, H., Bichelm
Page 385 and 386: Anderson, T., & McGreal, R. (2012).
Page 387 and 388: This belief in the correlation of r
Page 389 and 390: and sometimes to compel, faculty to
Page 391 and 392: Part time versus full time faculty
Page 393 and 394: The open universities have a partic
show all

October 2012 Volume 15 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?