Action Research Project - iMET

Action Research ProjectAchieving Balance in Educational Technology:Using Web Quest to Balance Direct Instruction andProblem-Based Learning in Today’s ClassroomLaverne Denyer and Wendy PeacockCSUS iMET“A large part of the art of instruction lies in making the difficulty of problems largeenough to challenge thought, and small enough so that, in addition to theconfusion naturally attending the novel elements, there shall be luminous familiarspots from which helpful suggestions may spring.” - John Dewey, 1916Area of FocusThe goal of this Action Research project and accompanying Literature Review is togain understanding of and the need for a balance between direct instruction andproblem-based learning as effective educational practices for today’s classroom.Included in the review of relevant literature is an investigation of an instructional modelthat integrates that balance into its instructional design.

Denyer and Peacock 4story. The other part is the education of the whole child: the thinker, the problem solver,the collaborator, the analyst, the critic, and the creator of new knowledge. As educators,we are worried thatThus, we are primarily concerned with three things:1. How to best facilitate students’ learning,2. How to ensure that learning is relevant to students, and3. How to facilitate our students in becoming lifetime learners.As part of those concerns we want to know:1. Which curricular delivery strategy best encourages students to thinkcreatively, analytically, and critically?2. By what process do we facilitate learners’ independence from the educationalinstitution in order to become authentic, lifelong learners?3. How do we help ensure that our students are prepared for the workforce?As action researchers, our research questions are narrowed specifically to theconstructivist educational practice concerning the PBL model called Web Quest.Our research questions are:1. Is the Web Quest an effective curriculum delivery tool?2. Does the Web Quest model make curriculum more accessible to all (efficacy)students?3. Is the Web Quest an effective model for the integration of technology into thecurriculum?4. Does the Web Quest model engage students as a curricular activity?

Denyer and Peacock 6for the challenges they will face in the future (USDE, 2000).” Paramount to thosechallenges is ensuring that students “become proficient information and technologyusers (USDE, 2000).” It is imperative that we seek new teaching models that preparestudents with “21 st -centry literacy” skills and demonstrate a “meaningful, unifiedapproach to providing students with the skills they need for their futures… (USDE,2000).” These skills must move beyond a simple checklist of isolated technology skillsto incorporate higher-level critical thinking, information literacy, and collaborative skills.Thus the rationale for this action research project becomes a search to find the besteducational models to accomplish this task.Review of Literature“…what we know and believe about human learning will determinehow we use instructional technologies…” Tiene, 2000IntroductionIn the search to help students become active learners who find relevance in theireducation, the action researchers have a good grounding in learning theory. This reviewis an exercise in backward mapping. Years of collective experience as teachers andlearners formed the authors’ perception that constructivism fosters effective educationalpractices. However, the need to understand the academic bases for such beliefs isnecessary. At first glance, educators can be stereotyped into two categories:traditionalists who believe that direct instruction through teacher delivery is the bestmethod for imparting knowledge and those who are constructivists who believe that

Denyer and Peacock 7knowledge can’t be taught but must be constructed by the learner through educationalexperiences, discovery, collaboration, and problem solving.In the maze of literature written about education, the investigation narrowed tothree sequential theories: behaviorism, cognitive theory of information processing, andconstructivism, that appear to have the greatest influence on modern educationalpractices. Since the overriding purpose of this review of literature is to prepare itsauthors for the action research project, the scope of investigation into learning theoriesis not meant to be all encompassing. In each of the theoretical areas, the authorsinvestigate leading theorists who make important contributions to their particular branchof learning theory. Although the list of contributors to educational theory is vast and thescope of this review cannot include them all, those of the theorists included and quotedfor supporting evidence are Skinner, Ausubel, Gagne, Piaget, Dewey, Vygotsky, andThornburg.Following the Introduction, the structure of this paper progresses with a descriptionof Behaviorism, Cognitive information processing, Constructivism, and Problem-basedLearning. Following each theory is a section called Implications of “Theory X” onEducational Practices. These sections interpret the impact of each particular theory oneducation and how one theory builds on or dovetails with another. The Conclusiondiscusses how the Web Quest is an appropriate PBL model as evidenced throughsupport from the review of relevant literature.BehaviorismBehaviorism, which hit its height of popularity in the 1950’s, focuses on observablebehavior. Behaviorism has its roots in the works of Ivan Pavlov who is famous for

Denyer and Peacock 10consequence. Often steps of intervention are designed to redirect undesired behaviorrather than to instill positive behaviors.The weakness for educational practice exposed here is that the classroom becomesfocused on teacher-centered behavior management rather than on student-centeredlearning. It reveals an attitude of the teacher in control and the students needing to becontrolled. The teacher is responsible for filling the students’ mind with facts andinformation. What comes to mind is the image of the perfect traditional classroomsetting with desks lined up in rows, the teacher at the head of the class, and thestudents sitting silently and orderly. With so much energy focused on control, bothphysically and mentally, little energy or thought is left for focusing on engaging studentsin concepts and activities that motivate them to learn independently. Student initiative,motivation, and responsibility don’t fit into this picture. No wonder student’s find littlerelevance to his or her education.Another legacy of Behaviorism establishes the foundation for programmedinstruction and heavily influences the advent of direct instruction. Direct instruction ishighly structured and relies on programmed instruction “which is characterized by threekey principles: breaking instruction into extremely small steps, making active responsesat each step, and behavior is learned (and recurs) when it is reinforced (Tiene, 2000).“One clear effect of Behaviorism on educational practice is the “emphasis on writingobjectives (learning objectives, behavioral objectives, performance objectives) for alllessons (Tiene, 2000).” It has been the experience of the action researchers that manyschools and districts that require teachers to submit lesson plans insist that these

Denyer and Peacock 11objectives be included. One can look at Madeline Hunter’s lesson plan format, stilltaught in many teacher preparation programs, and see the influence of Behaviorism.Behaviorism, and subsequently programmed instruction, has also impacted thedevelopment of Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) (Roblyer, 2000). Programs likeAccelerated Reader and Accelerated Math are examples of CAI found in classrooms.CAI relies heavily on the programmed instruction model with its step-by-step instruction,immediate response, and regular reinforcement. The problem with most any earlyremediation software programs is that they are very linear (Tiene, 2000) and requirerepetitious practice until the program determines that the student has gained mastery.Unfortunately, with many CAI programs if teacher intervention is not immediate,students often repeat the same faulty practice without understanding why their resultsare incorrect. Therefore CAI, even for skill and drill type activities, without teacherstudentor small group interaction loses its effectiveness.While behaviorist theories encourage developing structure in classroom practicesand lesson planning, one of behaviorism’s main drawbacks is that it concentrates ononly observable behaviors. Many educational theorists find this approach “too limiting”and feel that it places too much emphasis on lower-order skills such as memorization. Itis very difficult to teach higher thinking skills such as synthesis, analysis, and evaluationbased on behaviorist principles. By the 1970s, critics felt that “behaviorism was unableto effectively address a critical issue: How do people think (Tiene, 2000)?” Sincethinking cannot be directly observed, educational theorists need to investigate ways inwhich people gain knowledge. Behaviorism does not address the “cognitive aspectssuch as memory, problem solving, hypothesizing, and more could not be the sum total

Denyer and Peacock 12of behaviors engaged in (Tiene, 2000).” Theorists need something more flexible andexpansive than behaviorism.Cognitive Theory of Information-ProcessingCognitive theorists believe there is a need “to address central cognitive processeslike memory, attention, and logical reasoning. Thus, cognitive psychology was born outof the need to understand more about human thought process (Tiene, 2000).”Information-processing theorists were the first to hypothesize how humans learn andremember. The human information-processing model asserts the basic idea thatPeople process information through a series of different systems: the sensorysystem, the short-term memory, and the long-term memory. Our sensory systems,like sight, hearing, and so on take in stimuli from the environment. Next anattention and control system helps determine which information is processed andacted upon (Roblyer, 2000).The sensory register is very short, only a few seconds. If the learner does not payattention to the sensory information it is lost. Therefore, attention getting becomes veryimportant and has a significant impact on teaching practices (Roblyer, 2000).Sensory information is “channeled through a limited-capacity system calledworking (or short-term) memory (Tiene, 2000).” “It is where we do most of ourconscious thinking, but it seems not to be very large, and it takes time and effort tosuccessfully transfer information from working memory to long-term memory (Tiene,2000).” If information entering the short-term memory is not acted on (rehearsal,meaningful learning, organizing, elaborating, imagery), then it too is lost (Roblyer,2000). However, information acted upon (processed or practiced) is transferred to long-

Denyer and Peacock 13term memory where we hold most of what we know (Roblyer, 2000, Tiene, 2000).Cognitive researchers hypothesize that information is stored in long-term memory asthree types of “memory: episodic (memory of events), semantic (memory of meaning),and eidetic (memory of visual images) (Tiene, 2000).” Information-process theoristsalso believe that in order for information transference to be successful, new informationmust be linked in some way to prior knowledge that already exists in the long-termmemory (Roblyer, 2000).It becomes important then to design instruction toaccommodate students’ connection to prior experience and knowledge.Ausubel, Gagne and other researchers understood the importance of theseconnections.They used behavioral and information-processing theories to expanddirect instruction models. Gagne, who prefers a bottom-up approach to learning,believes lesson design should ensure “students learn lower-order skills first and buildupon them (Roblyer, 2000).” Much like Skinner before him, Gagne sees learning as ahierarchy of skills. He feels that “lower-level skills provide a necessary foundation(building-blocks) for higher-level skills (Roblyer, 2000).” Ausubel, who prefers a topdownapproach, advocates the use of advanced organizers as a way to provide learnerswith a frame of reference on “which to hang new information (Roblyer, 2000).” Theseideas are the beginnings of implementation of formalized stages in the learning process.Although their approaches are from different perspectives, Ausubel, Gagne andother cognitive psychologists believe that prerequisite skills are necessary for furtherlearning and build on behaviorist principles to further develop their theories. Cognitivetheorist Benjamin Bloom uses “Skinnerian principle to develop methods that becameknown as mastery learning (Roblyer, 2000).” Bloom’s Taxonomy, which is well knownamong educators, classifies cognitive skill into a hierarchical schematic. Bloom’s theory

Denyer and Peacock 14of learning hierarchy establishes “ascending levels of thinking: Knowledge [recitinginformation], Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation (Tiene,2000).” Educators often use Bloom’s Taxonomy in lesson planning as a linear andsequential approach to achieving learning objectives.Robert Gagne manifests his version of learning hierarchies in his Nine Events ofLearning. In ascending order, those hierarchies are gaining attention, informing thelearner of the objective, stimulation recall of prerequisite learning, presenting newmaterial, providing learning guidance, eliciting performance, providing feedback aboutcorrectness, assessing performance, and enhancing retention and recall (Roblyer,2000). While developing a hierarchy of skills, it is easy to see that the behavioristtrainingmodel heavily influences the sequence Gagne created. Behaviorists andcognitivists shared the belief that learning is sequential and linear; furthermore, “…directed instruction is grounded primarily in behaviorist learning theory and theinformation-processing branch of the cognitive learning theories (Roblyer, 2000).”Implications of Information-Processing on Educational Practices“The information-processing model implies certain things about how we shouldteach people of all ages.” Additionally, “the goal is to get information and skills enteredand consolidated into long-term memory in such a way that the learners can retrieve itwhen they need it (Tiene, 2000).” Thus, cognitive theory has significant impact onteaching practices. Educators, whether advocates of direct instruction or constructivism,must pay special attention to developing activities that gain attention and aid thetransfer of data from short-term memory to long-term memory. Gagne, who built on bothbehavioral and information-processing theories to form his own learning theory, believes

Denyer and Peacock 17their own identities as learners (Tiene, 2000).” Both behaviorism and cognitive sciencestress the structure and sequences of learning as well as the role of the teacher ineducation (Tiene, 2000). Constructivism, on the other hand, emphasizes the “learner’sinitiative in the learning process through self-discovery, individuality, and independentthinking (Tiene, 2000).” Constructivists see learners as developing and growing overtime through interactions with their environments. Constructivists, particularly Dewey,see children as learners not as blank slates “passively waiting to receive knowledge(Roblyer, 2000).”They see learners as “active inquirers who are shaped by theirenvironment while simultaneously shaping their environment (Dewey, 1916).”Constructivists hold that all learning is social (Dewey, 1916). Authentic learningcannot be separated from the learner’s background [culture and family belief system],experiences, and attitudes (Roblyer, 2000). Like Dewey, Vygotsky believes that learningoccurs in a social context and “knowledge is acquired through social interaction,becomes individual knowledge and individual knowledge grows and becomes morecomplex (Roblyer, 2000).” Students learn in accordance to their own potential, buildingknowledge through collaboration and social activities.Gardner blends these ideas with his own perspective on learning and he buildsupon the social aspect of constructivism. He looks to what the learner brings to thelearning experience and “attempts to define the role intelligence plays in learning(Roblyer, 2000).” Key to Gardner’s theory is the belief that “intelligence is culturedependent,intelligent behavior is likely to take different forms in children from differentethnic backgrounds (Roblyer, 2000).” Gardner’s theory includes eight differentintelligences: 1) linguistic, the use of language effectively, 2) musical, the understandingand use of musical structure and composition; 3) logical-mathematical, the recognition

Denyer and Peacock 18patterns and logical reasoning; 4) spatial, perceptions of the world in visual terms; 5)bodily-kinesthetic, use and manipulation of body skills; 6) intrapersonal, awareness ofone’s own motives and heightened metacognitive abilities; 7) interpersonal; awarenessof motivation in others’ behavior; 8) naturalist; discrimination among living things (Tiene,2000). Gardner’s ideas on the eight intelligences anticipate how students best processinformation into learning and influence how important educational environments are tolearning.For constructivists environment is also essential to learning and is twofold. On onehand there is the learner’s social environment mentioned above, and on the other handthere is the physical learning environment that is designed to include atmosphere andartifacts that stimulate imagination and inquiry (Dewey, 1916, Thornburg, 2000, Tiene,2000). Dewey and others held that it is through this interaction with their environmentthat learners work to construct new knowledge. Learning experiences are enhanced inrich environments that encourage exploration and inquiry.The importance of social and physical environment dovetails into another majorprinciple of constructivism - that of shared intelligence. Children “learn by interactionwith others, testing ideas, and modifying those ideas as necessary (Teine, 2000).”Distributed learning, collaborative learning for sharing knowledge, is a primary attributeof constructivism. Through collaboration learners develop a “learning community” basedon shared interest, “add to one another’s knowledge, challenge one another’s ideas,and work together to find solutions to their inquiry (Teine, 2000).” Through interactionand collaboration with others, learners work at constructing and reconstructing theirknowledge by making connections to prior knowledge and adapting (or self-correct) newinformation to refine their knowledge.

Denyer and Peacock 19Jean Piaget studies children’s cognitive development. He identifies a series ofstages through which children progress as learners. Those stages include: sensorimotorphase (birth to 2 years) in which the child establishes a sense of self; preoperationalphase (3-7 years) in which the child uses simplistic and erroneous cues fordetermination of meaning; concrete operation phase (7-11 years) at which childrendevelop more sophisticated concepts; and the formal thinking phase (11 years and on)where the learner develops abstract thinking (Tiene, 2000). Key to Piaget’s theories isthe belief that children are innately active and motivated learners. As a child progressesfrom one developmental stage to the next, s/he attempts to assimilate new informationinto his/her schema (world view) of understanding or changes that schema to fit the newinformation (Roblyer, 2000). Vygotsky developed the learning principal called the zoneof proximal development (ZoPD). The zone of proximal development means “that at anygiven time, children are primed to learn and develop in certain ways, if appropriatelyassisted by an adult (Tiene, 2000).” According to constructivists learners will not learnoutside their current ZoPD. Students must challenge and master new content to moveoutside one range and into another as they construct new knowledge. Thus whilestudents do advance from one ZoPD to another, they will always be learning andalways in a zone of proximal development. Vygotsky believed that teachers must“provide good instruction by finding out where each child is in his or her developmentand build upon the child’s experience (Roblyer, 2000).” This principle is what Vygotskyrefers to as scaffolding.As the connotation of the word suggests, scaffolding provides an externalsupporting frame while a structure (knowledge) is built. With scaffolding, the teacherfacilitates the “novice learner while developing understanding of a new concept then

Denyer and Peacock 20gradually removes supports as the learners constructs their own knowledge (Tiene,2000).” As students, novices in their exposure to the concept, become moreexperienced and capable of performing the task, the teacher’s support is lessened andthe students take more responsibility for their performance. Scaffolding characteristicsinclude clear directions [how to meet expectations], clarified purpose [continuous sortingand sifting of information to match problem/question], clarified process [pathway toinformation], clarified expectations [standards and rubrics], identified sources, focusedinquiry, and momentum toward insight and understanding (McKensie, 1999). Theintense support and guidance at the beginning gives students confidence as theyprogress and become more independent learners.Constructivism is also grounded in the principle that learning is situational; that is,learning occurs when “learners solve problems, perform tasks, and learn new materialin a context that makes sense to them (Roblyer).” Learning does not occur effectivelywhen the content is delivered in isolation of context. One of the major criticisms of directinstruction is that it is isolated into single subject courses and fragmented informationbits. Constructivism encourages a more interdisciplinary approach in which the learnersconnect to integrated knowledge based in the long-term memory. This contributes to therelevance of content. Clearly, constructivism has the “potential to foster a radicallydifferent approach to teaching as well as exciting new uses for technology in theclassroom” (Teine, 2000).

Denyer and Peacock 21Implications of Constructivism on Educational PracticesIn his work Democracy and Education, Dewey states,To learn from experience is to make a backward and forward connectionbetween what we do to things and what we enjoy or suffer from things inconsequence. Under such conditions, doing becomes a trying; anexperiment with the world to find out what it is like; the undergoingbecomes instruction—discovery of the connection of things (1916).Constructivists strive to help educators understand how to facilitate learners makeconnections in learning. They go beyond information processing to look at howinformation can be transferred from sensory to short-term to long-term memory. Theybelieve that while information can be imparted to the learner, it cannot become newlearning until the learner makes it his or her own. Try as hard as they may, teacherscannot make students learn; learners must initiate learning in order to gain knowledge.Cognitive science aims at helping educators understand how the mind processesinformation for learning. Cognitivists and Behaviorists show how structure in presentinginformation can aid learners in attaining mastery of new information and concepts. But,it is the constructivists who show the educator how to facilitate learners in makingconnections between past learning and present learning. “The teacher’s role shifts fromthat of an authority who provides information to one of a facilitator, who asks questions,suggests, resources, encourages exportation, and learns alongside the student (Teine,2000).” This is supported by the current concept of the teacher moving from “sage-onthe-stage”to “guide-on-the-side.”Many of our educational practices are based on the antiquated needs of anindustrial society. Many educators now believe that the world is changing too quickly to

Denyer and Peacock 22define education in terms of specific information or skills; they believe education shouldfocus on more general capabilities such as “’learning to learn’ skills that will help futurecitizens cope with inevitable technological change (Roblyer, 2000).” “When students inthe class of 2015 graduate, many of them will take jobs that did not exist when theyentered school and will use technologies not yet invented (Roblyer, 2000).” Popularbelief estimates that 80% of the jobs our students will perform have not even beendeveloped. The question becomes then, how do educators prepare their students forchanging requirements of a workforce when no one really knows what tools they willneed?The tools of a communication-based society are far different than those of anindustrial society. A large part of the dilemma facing educators in this communicationbasedsociety is how to educate students so that they become skilled workers in aworkplace that is changing at such a fast pace. During the industrial age, workplaceskills were fairly consistent over long durations. However, with the advent of technologyand the information age, workplace skills have changed drastically. Now with thecommunication age, workplace skills and technologies are changing more rapidly thananyone could have imagined 20 or 30 years ago. The task of education is to developlearners who can adapt to a future that cannot be predicted.In its paper, e-Learning: putting a world-class education at the fingertips of allchildren, the United States Department of Education set information literacy as aprimary skill for the future and as a priority for education. The USDE outlines the new“21 st -century literacy” as “information problem-solving skills, such as how to definetasks, identify information seeking strategies, locate and access information, determineinformation’s relevance, organize and communicate the results of the information

Denyer and Peacock 23problem-solving effort and valuate the effectiveness and efficiency of the solution(USDE, 2000).” Reports and studies of the last decade (Nation at Risk, 1983; America'sChoice: High Skills or Low Wages, 1990) point to “high numbers of students enteringthe labor force without the requisite academic and work-related skills needed tosucceed in an increasingly competitive workforce (WestEd, 1997).”Industry has led the push for reforms that equip students with the adaptable, higherlevel skills needed for a "high performance," decentralized workplace where workerstake on greater responsibility, collaborate effectively, and become more involved indecision-making processes. In recent years, several national reports such as theCommission on the Skills of the American Workforce, 1990, underscore industry'sdemand for employees with competencies in these areas (WestEd, 1997). The questionfor educators then becomes: how do we best prepare students for the workforce in lightof such a rapidly changing tools and necessary skills?The solution is that educational practices must move learning beyond isolated skillsets into higher order critical thinking skills. In short, we must to teach our students howto think. This brings to mind an old cliché: Give a hungry man a fish and he’ll be hungrythe next day. Teach a man how to fish and he’ll never be hungry again. To put the oldcliché into context, it might be rephrased as: Teach a student a skill and he or she canuse it toward a specific task. Teach a student how to think and he or she can addressany task.Constructivism emphasizes facilitating thinking rather than memorization ofcollected data. Direct instruction methods alone can no longer meet the needs ofstudents propelled into the new global society and economy. “Clearly, 21 st century

Denyer and Peacock 24educators will have to deal with issues that their predecessors could not even haveimagined and must have skills and knowledge not previously recognized (Roblyer,2000).”Problem-Based Learning (PBL)“How do we provide sufficient structure to keep students productivewithout confining them to strait jackets that destroy initiative, motivation,and resourcefulness?” - Jamie McKenzie, 1999Project-based learning is a “model for classroom activity that shifts away fromthe classroom practices of short isolated, teacher-centered lessons and insteademphasizes learning activities that are long-term, interdisciplinary, student-centered,and integrated with real world issues and practices…(USDE, 2000).” Problem-basedlearning is synonymous with project-based and inquiry-based learning. Its definingcharacteristics are that students focus on investigating and engaging in problem-solvingactivities that focus around central concepts and principles of a particular or inter-relateddiscipline (Tiene, 2000). The key to PBL is “to develop meaningful problems to solvethat require learners to acquire the underlying knowledge (Tiene, 2000).” Meaningfultasks are designed to encourage and support student autonomy and real-worldoutcomes. PBL is a more engaging, thought provoking, and interdisciplinary approachto learning that encourages students to participate in a community of inquiry and tostruggle with an ambiguous, complex and unpredictable questioning environment.In PBL the problem for inquiry is the first component the students encounter.Essential to the principles of PBL is that the problems are “presented in a realisticcontext (Tiene, 2000)” and that students work on the problem at his/her appropriate

Denyer and Peacock 25abilities (ZoPD). Although constructivism requires no prior preparation or study, “ theproblems are structured in such a way that learners must identify what they need toknow in order to solve the problem (Tiene, 2000).” Students join in collaborative groupsto share what they know (distributed knowledge) and identify research questions.In contrast to more traditional approaches of learning, students involved in PBLparticipate in tasks that are multi-faceted, challenging, complex, and extended toprojects over longer periods of time. Students are encouraged to do their own problemsolvingand critical inquiry. They are put in charge of their own time and taskmanagement as individuals and as group members. They are responsible for evaluatingtheir work throughout the project and are accountable for determining ways ofdemonstrating their own competence. Reflection time is essential to the process and“ensures that students integrate their new knowledge and skills (Teine, 2000).” PBLstimulates students to participate in developing and stretching their own real-worldcompetencies. This is an authentic learning approach that is compelling and engaging.Implications of Project Based Learning on Educational PracticesThere are many positive aspects of PBL for educational practices. Since it isstudent-centered PBL content is compelling and personally relevant for students. PBLallows time for more focused and in depth investigation and processing of information inthe area of interest to the student. It also allows for a greater diversity in learningmodalities and greater transfer and retention of information (Thomas, 1998). Studentsare put in charge of their own learning experience. Thus the content becomes moremeaningful and applicable to real world situations. As opposed to the isolated approachof direct instruction, PBL provides a more holistic approach to curricular delivery.

Denyer and Peacock 26Problem-based learning encourages collaborative, self-directed learning. Thelearning is more internalized and transferable to other areas of the learners’ lives. Itoften provides a situation where students are called upon to explain or defend theirposition. This is a shared experience closer to the work environment they will faceoutside of the school setting.Students are also encouraged and empowered to use and expand theirtechnological skills. They must use their research skills, write their findings and usegraphic arts tools to display their work. Students are able to see tangible andproductive products for their efforts. Going beyond the paper and pencil worksheetsand tests, students are able to produce a final product that demonstrates their effortsand growth. The seamless integration of technological skills is most effective throughthis learning environment. It encourages “just-in-time learning” and mastery.In addition, the outcomes are more productive and personal. PBL activities helpimbed lifelong learning skills into the students’ skill sets. It promotes “higher-ordercognitive skills and problem-solving strategies (Thomas, 1998).” Through a metacognitiveapproach students develop initiative, persistence and autonomy. Studentslearn to plan, carry out, monitor and evaluate their own work.An interesting aspect of PBL is the way it can change the relationship betweenteachers and students. It moves the teacher from lecturer and director of instruction toa resource provider and participant in the overall learning activities. The teacher doesnot have to always be the expert but can be an advisor and even colleague in the questfor knowledge and understanding. Students are asked to work collaboratively andindividually as they carry out self-directed learning activities rather than rote instructions.They are asked to communicate, show affect, produce and take responsibility rather

Denyer and Peacock 27than listen, behave and speak only when spoken to. They become independentlearners and producers. They learn time and task management skills. Throughencouragement and guidance from their teacher, students are put in charge of their ownlearning experience. This allows them to engage in “sustained, autonomous, lifelonglearning” with deeper mastery of complex ideas and processes (Thomas, 1998).The assessment process is based on performance and gains over time rather thanin direct comparisons with other students. Students are required to demonstratethrough projects their own learning rather than to reproduce data. It moves beyondtests to tangible accomplishments. The teaching strategies focus more on the processthan the actual outcome.However a single learning model is not the answer to all educational practiceneeds. If used as the only educational modality PBL could consume so much time on alimited number of concepts that big chunks of important curricular material would besacrificed. Traditional direct instruction techniques help students cover more material ina shorter period of time. This allows them to address more of the curriculum standardsand “cover a relatively large amount of information (facts, concepts, events, issues) injust a few weeks (Thomas, 1998).” The inclusion of traditional tests and worksheetsprovides direct and measurable feedback to teachers, students and parents. All of thiscan be viewed as a positive aspect of this methodology. Unfortunately, although theinclusion of curriculum standards can be well addressed by direct instruction, it can betoo focused on specific skill-sets and neglect others.At the same time, through direct instruction students may not be internalizing thematerials and may not be grasping full concepts. With less time for cognitiveprocessing of information it can often be simple memorization for the test with little or no

Denyer and Peacock 28lasting effect on student comprehension. Without an opportunity to apply learning,students often fail to capture and make it their own or to make cognitive leaps to applythe knowledge beyond the immediate situation.PBL moves the focus of the curriculum away from content coverage and buildingblockskills in isolated chunks, and moves beyond facts to an understanding of conceptsand principles. PBL encourages a deeper understanding of the concepts and principlesand the development of complex problem-solving skills. The scope and sequence of thelearning process is less fixed and is based more on student interest and learning styles.It moves students into broad interdisciplinary inquiry rather than a narrow, disciplinebasedfocus that proceeds in carefully controlled blocks of learning that evolve intolarger units of complex problems and issues. The PBL approach is believed to be amuch more stimulating and engaging approach to authentic learning. Thus includingPBL activities that “encourage active inquiry” (Thompson, 1998) and stimulate studentsto process and incorporate life-long learning skills is an important educational practice.It is worth revisiting McKensie’s question, “How do we provide sufficient structureto keep students productive without confining them to strait jackets that destroyinitiative, motivation, and resourcefulness (1999)?” In response, project-based learningoffers a solution to his question. The United States Department of Education definesPBL as a teaching methodology that “shifts away form the classroom practices of shortisolated, teacher-centered lessons and instead emphasizes learning activities that arelong-term, interdisciplinary, student-centered, and integrated with real word issues andpractices…(USDE, 2000).” The USDE paper, e-Learning: Putting a world–class

Denyer and Peacock 29education at the fingertips of all children, also states that PBL “…is one way in whichtechnology can support teachers in helping students to engage in learning (USDE,2000).”Based on the original research concerns, the authors of this paper came to theseconclusions concerning the benefits of direct instruction and Problem-based learning:1. Direct instruction is a sound educational practice that helps impart essentialinformation for foundational concepts and skill development.2. PBL is an educational practice that encourages students to think creatively,analytically, and critically.3. PBL facilitates learners’ independence from the traditional educationalinstitution to encourage authentic, lifelong learners.4. PBL advances students’ preparation for the workforce through its social andcollaborative techniques.It is through a balance between the direct instruction and the constructivist educationalenvironments that teachers can develop the most productive learning environment fortheir students. There are many ways to teachers to achieve such balance; however thegoal of this research paper is to discover the most effective curriculum strategy forfostering such balance. The conclusion of this paper looks at the Web Quest as aneducational strategy that develops a balance between these two practices.ConclusionIt is essential to consider the pros and cons of both project-based learning and directinstruction models when developing curriculum units. Each has benefits as well asshortcomings. Neither approach is the panacea for all learning environments. The

Denyer and Peacock 30wisest approach is to balance the integration of a workable number of productiveproject-base learning activities with more traditional teaching strategies. The Web Questis the PBL model this action research project found to be the most effective in itsapproach to student inquiry because of its balance between direct instruction andconstructivism.First, a description of the Web Quest (WQ), a PBL strategy, is appropriate. A WebQuest is a web-based strategy for curricular delivery characterized by the followingelements:1) An introduction that sets the stage and provides some background information.2) A task that is doable and interesting.3) A set of information sources, materials, and links needed to complete the task.4) A process that is broken out into clearly described steps.5) Guidance on how to sort, sift, and organize the information and evaluateprogress and product.6) A conclusion that provides closure to the web quest and reflects learning.(Dodge, 1995)Web Quests are extremely flexible in their design, adapting to undertaking either shorttermor long-term inquiries for single or interdisciplinary content that is centered mostlyon collaborative but occasionally individual settings (Yoder, 1999).A Web Quest designed lesson or unit requires students to use information literacyskills in pursuit of answers to inquiry.The 21 ST Century Workforce Commission concluded that nothing less that thefuture of America’s 21 stcentury economy depends directly how broadly anddeeply Americans reach a new level of literacy that includes not only strong basic

Denyer and Peacock 31academic skills but also thinking, reasoning and teamwork skills, as well asproficiency in using technology (USDE, 2000).In its paper, e-Learning: Putting a world–class education at the fingertips of all children,the USDE defines necessary information literacy skills as: task definition, informationseeking strategies, information location and access, and the use, synthesis, andevaluation of that information (USDE, 2000). Information literacy is an importantconcern for educators in an information-based society. A Web Quest is “one way inwhich technology can support teachers in helping student to engage in learning (USDE,2000).”As stated above, the Web Quest is good blend between direct instruction andconstructivism. The task, process and evaluation components of the Web Quest satisfythe need for direct instruction. They are clearly defined by behaviorists and cognitivescientists as essential prerequisites to learning. The structure progresses from smalland familiar tasks to those that are new and more complex (Yoder, 2000). The WebQuest’s open and flexible structure also stratifies the need for student inquiry and sociallearning. John Dewey wrote, “Not only is social life identical with communication, but allcommunication (and hence all genuine social life) is educative (1916).” This socialaspect of learning is evidenced in the collaborative nature of the Web Quest. Withintheir inquiry groups, students tap into prior knowledge and share it with other groupmembers. There is greater “buy-in” as students work toward common interests andgroup results. Since students choose their own approach to a topic, they find theireducational experience more relevant.The Web Quest also includes scaffolding techniques that bridge both practices. Thescaffolding approach of early intensive support then dissipates a students gain skill and

Denyer and Peacock 32confidence encourages the learners’ independence. The scaffolding support that isintegrated into the Web Quest makes it a natural fit for both direct instruction and PBL.The Web Quest process also deals with the efficacy issue. Constructivists also viewscaffolding as important to the learning process. “…Scaffolding requires continuoussorting and sifting as part of a “puzzling” process – the combining of new informationwith previous understanding to construct new ones (McKenzie, 1999).” Reconstructingthe jigsaw puzzle, as it were, the support and guidance built into the quest help studentsaccess difficult material. Pre-selected investigative resources from the Internet alongwith supplemental materials help sift through the myriad of information available. Onceliteracy and technology skills are taught, accessibility to content is equal for all students.Because of its flexible and open design, the Web Quest accommodates for students’ZoPD (zone of proximal development), thus allowing students with differing learningstyles to access content at multiple levels.“Some educators assert that today’s television-oriented students are increasinglylikely to demand more motivational qualities in their instruction than students in previousgenerations (Roblyer, 2000).” Television, video and computer-generated gamescontinually impact the social interaction of our students. The legacy of social learningstressed by many educational theorists (Thornburg’s campfires and Dewey’s sociallearning) has undergone significant changes for our new generation of students.Educational practices must adapt to those changes. The traditional “stand and deliver”model of the “sage on the stage” no longer captures students’ attention: many are activelearners who demand personalized and relevant learning experiences.Through the investigation the relevant literature, the Web Quest emerged as anextremely effective curriculum delivery strategy, especially when combined and

Denyer and Peacock 33balanced with traditional methods. Using technology as the delivery tool, the WebQuest provides the engagement, flexibility, and motivation that 21 st -century studentscrave. Using the PBL Web Quest model, educational practices can now meet thestudents “where they live,” rather than where educators used to live.Description of ProjectThe Web Quest project topic was the development of a personal poster designed to actas an enhancement for the student Career Search Portfolios. The poster would includethe following components: Personal Mission Statement, Personal Code of Ethics,Personal Motto and an individual Icon. Additionally each student was asked to create adigital slide presentation explaining their poster and present it to the class utilizing theLCD projector and good presentation skills. Colleges, scholarships and employers arebeginning to require statements from applicants of their personal ethics, goals and lifeoutlooks. This tool puts that all together in a graphically interesting package.The project was designed as a self-reflective tool to enable students to setpersonal goals and develop a set of guidelines to help them as they transition into theworld of work. “Every act has potential moral significance, because it is, through itsconsequences, part of a larger whole of behavior (Dewey, 1916).” Further, the “conceptof education as a social process and function has no definite meaning until we definethe kind of society we have in mind (Dewey, 1916).” This project was designed to helpstudent/participants define their desired role in society.

Denyer and Peacock 34SettingTwo comprehensive high schools are the settings for this action research project.The first iteration of the study took place at Marysville High School in Marysville,California. The class was an advanced virtual business with a strong career component.This project was an addition to the career readiness package, which each studentdeveloped. One of the researchers was the teacher for the class. It was in this class thatthe Web Quest project went through its developmental stages.The second setting was at Rio Linda High School in Rio Linda, California. This, toowas a business class, but with a more general focus and had neither the virtualbusiness component nor the strong emphasis in developing a career readinesspackage. The teacher for this class was not part of the research team, but was avolunteer trying out the program and providing research subjects. This second projectwas conducted approximately three weeks after the completion of the first iteration.PopulationEach class was in a school district within the lower economic level of the statepopulation. Both groups were high school students, mostly seniors. Both groups were inbusiness classes. The Marysville high school group was an advanced course with anemphasis on the virtual environment. It also contained a significant component ofdeveloping a career search portfolio. The Rio Linda High School’s business course wasmore of a standard business format without the virtual environment component.Therefore the virtual aspect of the Web Quest was less familiar to the Rio Linda groupthan the Marysville group.

Denyer and Peacock 35TimelineBoth iterations of this study took place within the last quarter of the school year2000-2001. Each research project followed completion of the Mission Statement WebQuest.The first iteration, at Marysville High School, took approximately six (6) weeks.Students completed the project during class and individually outside of class time. Otheractivities were concurrently occurring, so this project was not the sole focus of thestudents. During the first week of the project, students were oriented and trained on howto use the Web Quest site and the expectations for successful completion of the project.Following the first week, an average of two days per week were spent in class workingon the project. During the fifth week students were given free work time that theyindividually split between this project and other class assignments. Then the final weekwas spent on presenting, discussing and evaluating student products. The survey tookplace a week after the completion of the project.The second iteration, at Rio Linda High School, took approximately three (3)weeks. Here, too, students completed the project during class and individually outsideof class time. However, due to time constraints and a need to complete the projectbefore the end of the year, the class focused on this project primarily throughout theentire three weeks. The survey took place immediately following the completion of theproject.Methodology and Data CollectionPrior to the actual data collection, each student in each class was required tocomplete the Web Quest as a class project prior to the Action Research component.

Denyer and Peacock 36Upon completion of the product and presentation to the class, the student MissionStatements were posted in the room and each student evaluated her or his own plusthree others.Students were then told about the Action Research project. The purpose andprocess of the research was explained. The survey date was announced. Studentparticipants were informed that participation in the Action Research portion of theoverall project was voluntary with no rewards for participation or punishments for nonparticipation.Each student was provided with an Experimental Subject’s Bill of Rightsand a Consent form with instructions to read them, to take them home, and to havethem signed and dated by a parent-guardian as well as sign and date the formsthemselves. The forms were to be returned immediately to the teacher-researcher. Theresearchers signed and dated the forms. Copies of the completed forms were given tothe student participants.Then on the announced day students were given the address for a web-basedproject survey. Students were directed to access the site to copy the file to theirindividual computers, including their own names in the file title. Students then weregiven class time to complete the survey. Student participants were given approximately30 minutes to complete the survey. When they were done, they printed a copy andsubmitted it to the teacher-researcher. As participation in the research surveycomponent was voluntary, Marysville High School only provided nine (9) responses,while Rio Linda High School provided twenty (20). In some cases, students discussedtheir responses to the survey with the teacher-researcher.The responses were collected and collated by the researchers. Once the raw datawas collected, the responses were entered into an Excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet

Denyer and Peacock 37calculated the number of yes and no responses for each question. For questionseliciting a written response another Excel spreadsheet was developed and theresponses entered.Finally, the researchers reviewed and evaluated the resulting data. This was aqualitative analogical study of student responses to problem-based learning using theWeb Quest format for the project. Although the yes/no responses were collected andcounted, the survey also included written opinion responses. The actual productscreated for the Web Quest project were not a part of the research.Discussion of Findings“Men live in a community in virtue of the things which they have in common; andcommunication is the way in which they come to possess things in common.”– John Dewey, 1916As researchers the purpose the Web Quest project content was two fold: the firstwas academic, to enhance students’ learning demonstrated through a web-based PBLportfolio activity, and the second was affective, to provide students the opportunity toreflect on their character as they leave the adolescent community and enter into theadult community. The academic purpose is addressed in this section of Discussion ofFindings. The affective purpose is addressed in the following section of Reflection.The academic purpose of the Web Quest project is to have students create anenhancement for their individual Career Search Portfolios. Students also work toimprove and demonstrate their language skills, technology skills and artistic expression.Prior to the actual research project, students were given an assignment to create a

Denyer and Peacock 38Personal Mission Statement poster and digital slide presentation. Since more and morebusinesses, colleges and granting institutions are asking applicants to provide similarartifacts; the researchers believe that it is a valuable project worth students’ time. Theformat of problem-based learning, specifically using the Web Quest format seems aninnovative and productive delivery modality. The built-in opportunity for self-reflectionprovides the impetus for students to reconstruct understanding.The supposition was that students would benefit from PBL structure using the WebQuest model. The results of the follow-up action research project indicated that theoriginal supposition is accurate. Our original questions were:1. Is the Web Quest an effective curriculum delivery tool?2. Does the Web Quest model make curriculum more accessible to all students?3. Is the Web Quest an effective model for the integration of technology into thecurriculum?4. Does the Web Quest model engage students as a curricular activity?The survey was divided into three areas:Students’ previous experience with internet-based activitiesHow well the Web Quest format work for studentsResponses to the Web Quest formatWhen the data was correlated and analyzed, it was evident that students found thisformat accessible, engaging and relevant.Every student replied that s/he had previously done research using the World WideWeb as a resource. Yet only one had previous experience with their entire assignmentbeing posted on the web as a 24/7 resource. All but one indicated that the resource lists

Denyer and Peacock 39were helpful, and each student participant used the provided resources and found themhelpful. These responses would indicate that, although the process and resourcemedium was new to them, the students adapted quickly to the Web Quest format, usedit efficiently, and appreciated the format and provided resources.Student participants indicated that they appreciated seeing student samples asexamples of what they were expected to produce. They often made comments on thesamples provided by the researchers. They asked questions about the individualstatements and stated that they were impressed by the fact that the researchersteachers would participate in the assignment and were willing to share personalthoughts in that format. An important observation was that this raised students’ opinionabout the credibility of the researcher teachers’ interest in the project. This was anunexpected yet valued response to the project.Unanimously the student participants agreed that the chunking of assignments intosmaller, more manageable, components was a significant asset. It appears thatbreaking down the assignment into smaller assignments provided a greater sense ofsuccess and was less overwhelming than one gigantic task. Although the researcherswere not specifically researching this aspect of the Web Quest strategy, it was aserendipitous and positive observation worth noting and applying to future Web Questassignments.All students indicated that having the assignment available on the web on demand(24/7) is beneficial. As one student put it, when it’s on the web “You can't lose it.” Thisprovided for just-in-time learning opportunities and greater convenience for thestudents. Judging by their individual and collective behaviors, this increased theeffectiveness of the project. During the latter stages of the project, one student said that,

Denyer and Peacock 40“I wish more teachers would post their lessons on the web like this. It’s always available,and I can go over the materials any time I want. That makes it easier to understand andto get the work done.” He seemed sincere and repeated similar comments severaltimes. One of the written survey responses stated that s/he liked the format forassignment information “because if I didn’t understand at school I can read it myself.”Some felt that “it was good” and “it was easy to get around,” while others felt that “it washard to find things.” The researchers’ agreed that the entire web page was easier tonavigate and understand toward the end of the assignment. It was in a state of evolutionthroughout the Marysville iteration. By the time the Web Quest was presented to theRio Linda class, it was refined and much easier to navigate and use.There were mixed responses to the question asking about the self-learning andself-motivation portion of the assignment. Some students felt that they were not goodworkers on their own, and found it hard to meet the deadlines. They said that theywanted more direct guidance and an external imposition of the work ethic.Student/participant comments included: “Some people need to be guided,” and “…itdoes not feel like the teacher is teaching but the computer is.” While at the same time,others were delighted with the opportunity to work on their own at their own pace.Comments included: “It lets you think on your own,” “Teaches you to be responsible,”“It's nice to have the freedom,” “It's good because you can take your time.” and “It wasmore like work.” From these responses the researchers conclude that studentsappreciate the format but also need a bit more individual guidance throughout theprocess. Although this format is designed to develop personal responsibility and positivework habits, they still want to know that they are guided and encouraged to succeed.

Denyer and Peacock 41Surprisingly there was a mixed response about whether students missed havinglectures as part of the process. Although each of the researchers included preliminaryand intermediate lecture/discussion sessions geared to the project (i.e. searchtechniques, writing techniques, etc.) some of the students felt the loss of clearly directedinstruction. They appeared to have adapted to the “teacher in charge” paradigm and theinstructional modalities. Having to be in charge of their own learning activities waschallenging to them.The small group activities were generally well received. Positive student/participant responses included: “I can get more work done,” “Learned how to work as ateam,” “Less people to deal with,” and “Made it fun in the workplace.” They worked welltogether and completed the tasks within the assigned timelines. As observers duringtheir work sessions, the researchers observed that the students were workingcooperatively and that they appeared enthusiastic about the assignment.The response of students to the included stories and inspirational artifacts waspositive. Unanimously the students responded that these were helpful. The stories werecovered in class, and the immediate responses observed by the researchers werepositive. Students responded well to the notion of writing their own life’s book and takingcharge of the content that it would include. They made individual positive responsesabout the inspirational articles and even were found to revisit the stories throughout theprocess. Overall this particular approach appears to have had the desired result ofinspiration and support for the learners as they walked through the process.Overall the various types of scaffolding devices were helpful throughout theproject. Students all responded positively that rubrics were helpful to have as theyworked on the project. There were no questions about the language used in the lesson,

Denyer and Peacock 42as they were observed using the glossary of terms to help them understand thevocabulary. The worksheets were used by most and seemed to help students focus onthe questions at hand and direct their own thinking. At first, students felt that they “had”to complete every worksheet. When they discovered that the worksheets were optionaland not to be submitted to the teacher, students used them differently. Suddenly theworksheets became a tool rather than an “assignment.” Students’ attitudes changed;the worksheets were no longer products but process assignments as witnessed whenstudents printing multiple copies as they changed their thinking. The researchers wereoften consulted about individual concepts and asked about ways of responding toworksheet questions. When students found that they could use the segments of theworksheets that helped them and ignore the rest, they evidenced surprise then pleasureat their own freedom of self-determination. Since examples, worksheets, directions,evaluation tools and a variety of resources were available at all times, questions wereminimal about “what do you want us to do?” Students knew what they were expected todo at all times.Data Display

Denyer and Peacock 43Table 1:AR Student Survey ResponsesQuestion Yes No Total % Yes % No1 20 1 21 95.24% 4.76%2 3 18 21 14.29% 85.71%3 3 18 21 14.29% 85.71%4 16 5 21 76.19% 23.81%5 17 4 21 80.95% 19.05%6 17 3 20 85.00% 15.00%7 20 0 20 100.00% 0.00%8 18 1 19 94.74% 5.26%9 18 2 20 90.00% 10.00%10 17 3 20 85.00% 15.00%11 20 0 20 100.00% 0.00%12 4 14 18 22.22% 77.78%13 8 0 8 100.00% 0.00%14 18 2 20 90.00% 10.00%15 16 3 19 84.21% 15.79%16 13 7 20 65.00% 35.00%17 11 5 16 68.75% 31.25%18 18 2 20 90.00% 10.00%19 13 5 18 72.22% 27.78%20 15 5 20 75.00% 25.00%21 14 3 17 82.35% 17.65%22 10 0 10 100.00% 0.00%23 14 0 14 100.00% 0.00%Table 2:A R Student Survey Responses - DetailedStudent #Question #Scet1123Yes/No123456789101112131415161718192021TotalsY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20N 1 1Y 1 1 1 3N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18Y 1 1 1 3N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18

Denyer and Peacock 4424567891011121314Sect3151617181920212223Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16N 1 1 1 1 1 5Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17N 1 1 1 1 4Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17N 1 1 1 3Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20N 0Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18N 1 1Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18N 1 1 2Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17N 1 1 1 3Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20N 0Y 1 1 1 1 4N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8N 0Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18N 1 1 2Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16N 1 1 1 3Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11N 1 1 1 1 1 5Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18N 1 1 2Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13N 1 1 1 1 1 5Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15N 1 1 1 1 1 5Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14N 1 1 1 3Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 19N 0Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14N 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

Denyer and Peacock 45Table 3:Student Survey Written ResponsesWhat are your responses to the Web Quest Format?# Y N Response15YDid you like this format for your assignment information? Why or Why not?• Because if I didn't understand at school I can read it by myself• Easily accessible• You could always have access to it 24/7• It was good, it was easy to get around• Easy to find and read• The format was easier to understand• Very easy• Because it was helpful and made the assignment easier• The information was always available and always in the same place• Very organized• It was easy to follow• It was quite easy and productive• Helped me to do what I don't know• Broken down into sections• You don't feel as pressuredN • It was very hard to find things• I think Advanced Composition class should have more to do with personalexperimentation• because it was hard to do it because sometimes the Internet was down• I didn't like this assignment at all. There was too much work.16YDo you like this type of directed self-learning and self-motivation? Why or Why Not?• It lets you think on your own• Teaches you to be responsible• It's nice to have the freedom• It's good because you can take your time• You can learn more on doing the activities• Because I can go at my own pace• It made me take another look at my life and what I want to do in the future• It lets everyone go at their own pace• Gives people more choices• It gave the ones who want to learn a chance• Because if you have a question, it is hard to move forward if no help is around• You learn more that way• Especially because it helped me get to know more about myselfN • I am not really a good worker on my own. I have to have due dates from teacher• Some people need to be guided• Because it does not feel like the teacher is teaching but the computer is• Because it was still self-directed and we had different heroes• I am able to get all the self motivation I need as long as able to explore and learn thethings that interest me• I work better alone• I liked being taught in class and not looking for information all over the InternetDid you like the small group activities? Why or Why Not?

Denyer and Peacock 4617Y• I can get more work done• Learned how to work as a team• Less people to deal with• Made it fun in the workplace• Because you can do more things together in a group• I like group work, allows for the creativity of ideas• Very fun• It was fun to work in groups• Other ideas and methods are helpful• I just like working in small groups• Social interaction and more people for ideas• It didn't help me at allN • They weren't organized• Don't do it in small groups• I work better alone• I like to work with people but this way was more productive• Too small18YDid you like the individual work activities? Why or Why Not?• You don't need to stay on top of other people• It gave me a chance to get things done• They were ok• I had fun with them• It was easy• I was easy to do it by myself• I allowed me to work by myself which is sometimes needed, but again I like to working ingroups• Allows concentration• Then I don't end up doing all the work• It lets you think to yourself and express your own ideas• So people won't bother me. Also having to rely on other people• I can do what I wanted to do• I'm more of an individual workerN • Harder to get done than group• I would rather work in a group• I work better aloneDid you like the look and feel of the web site? Why or Why Not?

Denyer and Peacock 471920Y • Colors look good and easy to use• Easy to get around• It was lots of laughs• Towards the end• Besides how hard it was to find things at first• The website looks like it was made by a professional, and it is easy to learn the lessons• It was easy to use and understand• It looked professional and it was easy to use• It was easy to follow• Was easily accessible• It was clean and also had a lot of information• You use your own thinking skills• Well laid out• Greatly put togetherYN• I can do better• Windows kept popping up• Boring• It could have had more graphics and color to catch my attention• The background colors could be a more exciting and technologicalDo you like this type of lesson format? Why or Why Not?• Easy to understand• Accessible in class or at home• Yes because the information will still be there• The format was fine• Because if you can find it you can do it at home• It was easy to understand and easy to do• It was an excellent format• It is easy to follow and understand• Very organized• It was cool and easy to follow• More lab time, less lecturing• Goes step by stepN • Could have been better• Already said, preferred the self inventory and self performed tasks• I don't like posting my work on the web• Because the Internet didn't always work• I would prefer more teacher interface and assistance• Like I said in 15, I didn't like this assignment at all21YWould you prefer to have more lessons posted on the web like this? Why or Why Not?• So I can do them quicker• You can work on them anytime• It was easier to find• Helpful• To show how other people did this lesson• Because if I was absent I could just go later to keep up• So I can go to work in the evening• Because I can get my assignments on the web• It is easy to follow and understand• Easy to follow, lots of fun• It's kind of fun• Easier and more convenientN • it got the job done but I believe better formats can be designed• There was way too much work

Denyer and Peacock 4822YDo you feel that having everything laid out and always available was more convenient? Why orWhy Not?• Easy to do work, even if it was late• It makes certain tasks a whole lot easier• It is convenient• Helpful• It was easier to do the lessons and it was faster• It was to look at• Because I could check back to see if I was doing it right• It us more accessible and always in the same place• Yeah it made it a lot easier• It allowed you to work ahead and see what you needed to get done• It was convenient. I liked how it was laid out• More helpful• Easier to get information• Easy to do on your own timeN • Same same, I'm used to what I'm used to23YDo you like having samples of your work for other students' use? Why or Why Not?• I will give them• Because you can show what you are doing• To show them how I did my lesson• For reference• It made it easier to finish the work• The other students help me hopefully I can help others• So they can use my examples to further understand• So it will help other people through• Sure so they can see what I did and learn from it• Examples are always good• It was great. I liked using some of the examples of this work. So why not let them usemine?• If it helps them with ideas, then it's ok with me -- give you more of an idea of what you aresupposed to doN • I don't think my work is good enough• I like to have them think like I had to• Don't like having things I've done being examined by other people just to point outmistakes• Because I don't think that I did a good job

Denyer and Peacock 4924What was the hardest thing about working with a web-based assignment like this?• Couldn't use teacher questions• Sometimes the net was down• Working the e-mail• It was just getting it done• When the Internet goes down• Finding it• Hard to find it and hard to keep up• Sometimes the Internet wasn't available• Creating a motto was the hardest thing• Doing it• The Internet didn't always work• Having access to a computer• Lots of motivation• Not always computers that go on line• Frustration of it not being from a teacher's mouth; harder to understand via text• There was way too much work and it was hard to get started• It looked very different because it loaded very slow, so it took forever• When the web was slow or when the web was down2526What was the best thing about working with a web-based assignment like this?• Can look at directions of the lessons• Easy, Fun• The accessibility of the assignments• You would never the lose the information• You can't lose it• Not having lectures• It was there for you• Just working to get it done• Internet is fun• I had skills with PowerPoint• I figured out more about me and got to be creative• It was always convenient to find once you have a computer• Using a computer to do school work• It could be accessed anywhere• There was nothing good but the examples were good• It was really fun to work with• You could do it at home on your extra timeWhat were some skills you already had that made this activity work?• Knew how to get on web and work with the sites

Denyer and Peacock 50• I knew how to use just about all the tools I needed• I'm very good with computers• Internet and word processing experience• Computer skills• My thinking skills and learning skills• Computer skills• Web building• Knowing how to work the Internet and what I want to do in the future• The skills to put together things to work well• Graphics design, computer programs, word processor usage• Working with computers and the Internet• PowerPoint knowledge, Internet formality, writing skills• Using PowerPoint and Word, also making graphics• My skill about web pages• The knowledge of how to go around the web27Did you like this format for your assignment information? Why or Why Not?• Not much• Variety of computer skills• Leadership• I had to focus on getting the work done• Net and web finding stuff• PowerPoint• Drawing skills for my logo• Patience• Working the Internet and knowing how to answer questions honestly• The skills how to make the things in the individual project• Spreadsheet, database and goal setting• How to use the Internet and of course typing skills• Photoshop familiarity and Flash 5• I didn't need other skills• Paying attention to myself at what I'm all about28Do you have any other comments?• I enjoyed the class, and learned a lot about what can be done on the net• It is pretty good.• Nice assignment, wasn't too hard or too easy. I enjoyed it.• It was a great experience. I had much fun doing this assignment• That is pretty much everything• Next time, try guiding the student through with not only examples, but explanations• This assignment was hard and a lot of work. There were good examples that made it alittle easier.• I say this has nothing to do with an advanced computer class.• I enjoyed it because it puts who I am and what I'm all about in writing

Denyer and Peacock 51Chart 1:AR Student Survey Responses230.00%100.00%0.00%100.00%2117.65%82.35%25.00%75.00%1927.78%72.22%10.00%90.00%1731.25%68.75%35.00%65.00%1515.79%84.21%Questions131110.00%0.00%22.22%0.00%15.00%90.00%100.00%77.78%100.00%85.00%% No% Yes910.00%90.00%5.26%94.74%70.00%100.00%15.00%85.00%519.05%80.95%23.81%76.19%314.29%85.71%14.29%85.71%14.76%95.24%0.00% 50.00% 100.00% 150.00%Responses

Denyer and Peacock 52AR Student Survey Responses230.00%100.00%0.00%100.00%2117.65%82.35%25.00%75.00%1927.78%72.22%10.00%90.00%1731.25%68.75%35.00%65.00%1515.79%84.21%Questions131110.00%0.00%22.22%0.00%15.00%90.00%100.00%77.78%100.00%85.00%% No% Yes910.00%90.00%5.26%94.74%70.00%100.00%15.00%85.00%519.05%80.95%23.81%76.19%314.29%85.71%14.29%85.71%14.76%95.24%0.00% 50.00% 100.00% 150.00%Responses

Denyer and Peacock 53Evaluation“Not only is social life identical with communication, but all communication(and hence all genuine social life) is educative (Dewey, 1916).”The Action Research project has concluded that since the student participantsdeveloped a tool that they can take out into the world with them, they took more pride intheir work and took a more personal interest in the outcome. They made comments thatthis project was more like being in the workplace and made more and more sense asthey went along. The student participants liked the repeated opportunities for selfreflectionand self-evaluation. The overall atmosphere during the presentations was oneof pride and a sense of accomplishment.Now it is true that this is not qualitatively measurable data. It is difficult to identifythe variables and to measure the outcomes in probability ratios. But the qualitative andanalogical responses were remarkably positive. Student reactions throughout theproject were encouraging and the final products were awesome.Responses to survey questions and anecdotal observations unreservedly revealthat students do benefit from problem-based learning activities. They learn to work bothcooperatively and individually to complete projects that have relevance and meetcurricular standards. They are actively engaged in learning rather than passiverecipients of bits of knowledge. Having the information and resources available ondemand provides students with just-in-time learning that the students themselvesrecognize as a benefit. Since not all students learn in the same way at the same time,students still continue wanting direct instruction and teacher contact and want some

Denyer and Peacock 54lecture/discussion activities to support the Web Quest. This is a viable and valuableteaching strategy as long as it is tempered with more traditional modalities. Deweysupports this when he says, “The educator’s part in the enterprise of education is tofurnish the environment which stimulates responses and directs the learner’s course. Inthe last analysis, all that the educator can do is modify stimuli so that response will assurely as is possible result in the formation of desirable intellectual and emotionaldispositions (Dewey, 1916).”Reflection“Education and training are central to how nations will fare inthe future. Strong nations and strong communities willdistinguish themselves form the rest by how well their peoplelearn and adapt to change. The task of education must thereforebe to provide the young with the core knowledge and core skills,and the habits of learning, that enable them to learn continuouslythrough out their lives. We have to equip them for a future that wecannot really predict.”-Prime Minister Goh Chock Tong, Sinapore (USDE, 2000).As stated previously, the purpose of the Web Quest project content was twofold:the first was academic, to enhance students’ learning demonstrated through a webbasedPBL portfolio activity, and the second was affective, to provide students theopportunity to reflect on their character as they leave the adolescent community and

Denyer and Peacock 55enter into the adult community. The researchers wanted to “gift” students with thisopportunity to create relevance from their experience as adolescents.The word “gift” is not meant as a grandiose statement of the researchers’teaching abilities but more as an attitude held toward students. In fact, it brings thethinking back to one of the original concerns regarding the education of the whole child:the thinker, the problem solver, the collaborator, the analyst, the critic, and the creator ofnew knowledge. Reflecting on Dewey’s quote above, “the whole character is identicalwith the man in all his concrete make-up and manifestations,” we would be remiss in ourresponsibility as educators if we did not guide our students toward self-reflection.Because assessment and accountability is currently at the forefront of education,all too often the emphasis is on the measurable “what” rather than the ”who” as theproduct of education. The “who” is overshadowed by the “what: What is the learningobjective, what is the learning outcome, what is the test score, what is the API, etc.Motivated by the apprehension of the current testing and accountability frenzy, the goalwas to bring the “who” out of the shadows and into the light. When the researchers satdown at Star Buck’s to discuss what the focus of the Web Quest would be, theimmediate desire was to create a quest that would lead students to somethingmeaningful that they could take with them when they leave high school – somethingthey would find relevant.In addition to the Web Quest, looming in front of the researchers was the ActionResearch project and Literature Review. There was no clear idea where theseendeavors would lead, but there was inkling that something would reveal itself. In truth,the authors still saw these assignments as isolated projects necessary for successfulcompletion of a Master’s degree. What the researchers discovered was that they were

Denyer and Peacock 56immersed in PBL and that all their learning was fitting into a much larger picture thanwas originally conceived.When the researchers returned to college it was to gain a master’s degree andsubsequently earn higher pay. Simultaneously, the researchers’ instincts nagged thatthere is a better way to educate. That instinct led the authors to the iMET program. TheiMET program is mentioned because it is crucial and intrinsic to the researchers’educational experience. The program is what it teaches. It immerses its cohortmembers in constructivism, providing an environment of an educational communityengaged in common interests, collaborative efforts that distribute knowledge,connections that build new knowledge, and opportunities to reflect on what has beenlearned. Given this atmosphere, like magic the Web Quest, Action Research, andLiterature Review evolved into discovery and construction of new knowledge that led toimplementing new educational practices. To use a well-worn metaphor all theingredients went into the bowl, got stirred a bit, left to rise on its own, then put to heat inorder to produce something delectable - a better way to educate.Clearly, the iMET experiences, process and results of this project and the follow-upstudy made an impact. Although this was a great deal of work to develop the first time,it is a continuing resource available for future assignments. The student responsethroughout the project and resulting projects were highly motivating to both researchers.Each will continue to include more project-based learning activities and more WebQuest activities in the future. Each researcher agrees that it is well worth the energy todevelop and deliver curriculum using these strategies.As Dewey wrote,Experience in order to be educative must lead out into an

Denyer and Peacock 57expanding world of subject matter, a subject matter of factsor information and of ideas. This condition is satisfied onlyas the educator views teaching and learning as a continuousprocess of reconstruction of experience (1916).Building on this notion of an expanding world and a continuous process ofreconstructing individual experiences, students respond well to this type of learningenvironment and tend to exceed the teachers’ original expectations. Give themdirections, turn them loose, support them through the process, and watch the wondersdevelop.ReferencesBrooks, J. G. & Brooks, M.G. (1993). The case for constructivist classrooms.Alexandria, VA. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Dewey, John. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press.Dodge, B. (1995). Some thoughts about WebQuests. San Diego State University.Available: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtec.596/about_webquests.html. [2001].Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces, probing the depths of educational reform.Bristol, PA: The Falmer Press.Gagnon, G. W. & Collay, M. (1996). Constructivist learning design.Available: http://www.prainbow.com/cld/cldp.html [July, 2001].Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences myths and messages.Phi Delta Kappan. v77.Graumann, Peter. (1993). Project-based learning: five teacher-tested ideas.Technology & Learning, v14.

Denyer and Peacock 58Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (2000). Models of Teaching. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Marks, Jon. (2001). An introduction to problem-based learning. Center forProblem-Based Learning. Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy. Available :http://www.imsa.edu/team/cpbl/what is/slide1.html. [July, 2001].McKensie, J. (1999).Scaffolding for success. The Education Technology Journal,FNO, V9, No4. [July, 2001].Roblyer, M.D. and Edwards, Jack. (2000). Integrating educational technology intoteaching. New Jersey. Prentice-Hall Inc.Russell, Tom. (1999). Untitled, Queen’s University. Kingston, Ontario, Canada.Available:http://educ.queensu.ca/~russellt/how teach/action.htm. [July, 2001].Sandholtz J. H., Ringstaff, C. & Dwyer, D. (1997). Teaching with technology;creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.Tiene, Drew and Ingram, Albert. (2000). Exploring current issues in educationaltechnology, New York: McGraw-Hill.Thornburg, D. (1995). Scissors, Stone, and Paper. Thornburg Center. Available:www.tcpd.org/thronburg/handouts.html [July, 2001].Thornburg, D. (1995). Campfires in Cyberspace: promordial metaphors forlearning in the 21 st Century. Thornburg Center. Available:www.tcpd.org/thronburg/handouts.html [July, 2001].Thomas, John. (1998). Project-based learning. Novato.Buck Institute forEducation.U.S. Department of Education, O. o. E. T. (2000). e-Learning: putting a worldclasseducation at the fingertips of all children. Washington, D.C.

Denyer and Peacock 59Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.WestEd. (1997). High Stakes: key challenges for California schools and the roleof technology. California Education Symposium. WestEd.Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. ((1998) Understanding By Design. Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development. Available: http://www.udel.edu/pbl/Wolk, Steven. (1994). Project-based learning: pursuits with a purpose.(Strategiesfor Success). Educational Leadership, v52 n3 p42.Yoder, M. B. (2000). The student web quest. ISTE. Available:http://www.iste.org/L&L/archive/vol26/no7/features/yoder/index.html