Instructional Use Of Blogs And Wikis - Shifflet

THE INSTRUCTIONAL USE OF BLOGS AND WIKIS FOR K-12 STUDENTS

RENA A. SHIFFLET

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Curriculum and Instruction ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY 2008 THE INSTRUCTIONAL USE OF BLOGS AND WIKIS FOR K-12 STUDENTS

i

Rena A. Shifflet 221 Pages

May 2008

The purpose of this study was to investigate how blogs and/or wikis were used by K-12 classroom teachers, how these teachers determined when and why to use these technologies with their students, and teachers’ perceptions of how these tools affected students and student writing. With the understanding that technology and the resulting literacies are changing at an ever increasing rate, this researcher chose to look deeper into the intent for utilizing these tools for student instruction. Using a qualitative case study approach, eight K-12 teachers were interviewed for this study. In addition, teacher-generated and student-generated blogs and/or wikis were examined. Data analysis suggested that the availability of an authentic audience was significant motivation for participants to choose to use blogs and/or wikis with their students. Evidence of other perceived student impact is also discussed. Since blogs and wikis are web-based applications and considered to be forms of technology, this study also probed to find the reasons behind teachers’ determination to use technology in lieu of other methods of instruction. Evidence from this study suggested that the participants’ intents for using a blog or wiki were in accord with their determination of when to use technology for instructional purposes. The researchers’ pedagogical beliefs were also in play. These findings add a deeper complexity to previous knowledge about the influence of pedagogical beliefs on the instructional use of technology.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First I must thank my participants. I continue to be awed by the generosity of educators to share their knowledge and experience in order to help others. Their willingness to allow me to question and probe their instructional use and beliefs about technology serve as a testament to their motivation to be life-long learners. I have no doubt that their stories will serve as an inspiration to others. A very special thank you goes to my dissertation chair, Dr. Cheri Toledo. When I first met Cheri five years ago, I knew I had found a kindred spirit. She not only understood, but shared my passion for teaching and learning with technology. Over time she has been my teacher, mentor, collaborator, advisor, and most of all a cherished friend. While her role as chair may have ended, her other roles have not as I will have the good fortune to continue to work with her in higher education. I would also like to thank my other committee members, Dr. Ellen Spycher and Dr. Tony Lorsbach. Every doctoral candidate should be as fortunate as I was to have this perfect committee. They offered me direction when I felt totally lost. They offered me encouragement when I thought there was no end in sight. Their comments and suggestions helped to make my work richer. They will always have my deepest respect and admiration for their abilities and professionalism as educators. Most importantly, I must express my sincere appreciation for my family, especially my husband, Michael. He never once questioned why a retired teacher would want to pursue yet another degree. He did everything in his power to make it easier for me to concentrate on completing this work; from doing household chores, making dinner, iii

iv running errands, to spending hours and hours alone. He was a constant source of faith and encouragement. There is no possible way I could have done this without him. As for my daughter Katie, who has also chosen to enter this marvelous field of teaching, I hope she will always pursue her dreams and challenge herself. She has always made me proud to be her mom. Thank you. Two words that imply so much, but often fall short of expressing the reality of the heart-felt emotion they are intended to express. To all of those who helped, encouraged, and cheered me on this journey, both on Earth and from above, these two little words will have to suffice; for no amount of words can covey my gratitude for your kind and seemingly endless support and generosity. R. A. S.

v

CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

i

CONTENTS

v

TABLES

x

FIGURES

xi

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION The State of Writing Literacy and Technology Literacy in the Context of School Current Research Summary Statement of the Problem Research Questions Purpose of the Study Operational Definitions Significance of the Study Organization of the Study II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Student Writing Quality of Student Writing Student Attitudes Quantity of Student Writing Writing Process Revision The Teaching of Writing Electronic Writing Writing with Weblogs

1 1 3 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 12 13 14 14 15 18 20 22 24 25 31 35

vi Research on Weblogs in Education Empirical Research Anecdotal Accounts Wikis Constructivism Constructivism in Education Constructivism, Writing, and Technology Summary III. METHODOLOGY Qualitative Case Study Design Role as Researcher Participant Selection Data Sources Collection Procedures Data Analysis Summary IV. DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS Katie

39 39 40 43 47 49 53 56 59 59 61 62 63 65 65 68 69 69

Determination to Use Technology Katie’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Preparation Student Impact Concerns Overview

71 71 72 73 73 76 77

Mike

79

Determination to Use Technology Mike’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Preparation Student Impact Concerns Future Uses Summary Grant

80 80 83 83 83 85 86 86 87

vii Determination to Use Technology Grant’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Preparation Student Impact Overview Rita

87 88 90 91 92 92 96

Determination to Use Technology Rita’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Preparation Student Impact Overview Evan

97 97 100 101 101 102 103

Determination to Use Technology Evan’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Preparation Student Impact Concerns Overview Donna Determination to Use Technology Donna’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Impact Concerns Overview Jeff

103 104 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 112 113 114 114 115 116

Determination to Use Technology Jeff’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Preparation Student Impact Overview

117 117 118 119 120 121

viii David Determination to Use Technology David’s Project Description Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Student Preparation Student Impact Overview V. DISCUSSION Research Question 1: How Participants Used Blogs and/or Wikis in the Classroom Research Question 1a: What was the Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis? Research Question 1b: How and to What Extent Do These Tools Support Constructivist Learning Theory? Learning is Relevant and Meaningful to Students Activities Should Be Authentic and Are Often Problem-Based Student Inquiry is Encouraged to Promote Knowledge Construction Enable Learners to Interpret Multiple Perspectives Collaboration is Encouraged Encourage and Accept Student Autonomy Research Question 2: Student Preparation to Use Blogs or Wikis Audience Awareness Online Safety Writing Style Differences Comment Modeling Digital Ethics Procedural Instruction Collaborative Ownership and Accountability Research Question 3: How and to What Extent are Blogs or Wikis Structured to Promote or Enrich Student Writing? Access to an Authentic Audience Authentic Purpose Opportunity to Write Publishing Forum Application of Language Skills Use of Mentors

122 123 123 126 127 127 131 136 136 139 146 147 148 149 149 150 152 154 154 156 156 157 158 158 158 159 159 163 164 165 165 165

ix Collaboration Venue Research Question 4: How Do K-12 Teachers Perceive These Tools Have Impacted Their Students?

166 166

Katie Mike Rita Grant Evan Donna Jeff

168 169 169 170 170 171 171

Summary Limitations Conclusions

172 172 173

Audience Commentary Student Writing Intent Implications Final Thoughts

173 174 176 177 179 180

REFERENCES

182

APPENDIX A: Consent Letter

201

APPENDIX B: Example of Scribe Post

203

APPENDIX C: Class Survey for David’s Mathematics Class

218

x

TABLES Table 1. Participant Demographic Information

Page 70

2. Breakdown of Tool Uses

137

3. Participant Quotes Illustrating Determination to Use Technology, Intent for Using Bogs or Wikis, and Pedagogical Beliefs

140

4. Participant Beliefs that Promote a Constructivist Learning Environment

147

5. How Do Teachers Prepare Their Students to use Blogs or Wikis?

155

6. How and to What Extent are Blogs or Wikis Structured to Promote or Enrich Student Writing?

160

7. How Do K-12 Teachers Perceive These Tools Have Impacted Their Students?

167

8. What is the Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis?

168

xi

FIGURES Figure

Page

1. Post from Katie’s class blog

75

2. Blog with New Zealand kindergarteners

76

3. Mike’s post on his blog

81

4. Post from Mike’s class blog

84

5. Comments from Mike’s students

85

6. A pioneer journal post

89

7. Screen shot of a self-initiated writing post

94

8. Screen shot of Kitty’s original post on Gordon’s blog

95

9. Screen shot from a junior high class blog in reference to Kitty’s post

96

10. A student post and comments for the area of a geometric figure

99

11. A student post in Rita’s class and two comments

102

12. Collaborative book blog

105

13. A book review post by a student

107

14. Blogging on blogging example

126

15. Post from David’s class blog

130

16. First post from David’s professional blog

132

17. Second post from David’s professional blog

133

18. A comment from a university blogging buddy to one of Katie’s students

151

xii 19. Class blog with one-way vs. two-way commenting

152

20. Rita’s post on making quality comments

157

21. A post from Evan’s book blog

162

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter will present the background of the problem, which includes: the state of writing, literacy and technology, and literacy in the context of school. In addition, the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the research questions, the definition of terms, and the significance of the study will be presented. The State of Writing Writing today is not a frill for the few, but an essential skill for the many. (National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges, 2003, p. 11) The National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools and Colleges, conducted a series of annual reports to Congress as an endeavor to monitor writing in the classroom, as well as the workplace (National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges, 2005). The Commission released its benchmark report, The Neglected “R”: The Need for a Writing Revolution, in 2003. Their goal was to identify and define the role of writing in education and make recommendations for its improvement at all levels of instruction. In the analysis, the Commission found time to be a significant challenge to the teaching and learning of writing. Citing data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) conducted in 1998, the amount of time fourth graders spent writing was equal to 15% of the time they watched television. As for seniors in high school, less than half were required to write a paper with three or more pages as a monthly English assignment. Teacher responsibility for 120 to 200 students on a daily or weekly basis was 1

2 the reason given for the departure of the once traditional, senior research project. While data for the 2002 NAEP Writing results showed an increase in scores rated as basic for fourth and eighth graders, scores for twelfth graders declined. However, this is still a cause for guarded optimism as 76% of high school seniors did not achieve a proficient level: the ability to demonstrate “competency over challenging subject matter, including subjectmatter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to subject matter” (National Center for Education Statistics, 2003, p. 2). Fourth and eighth grades also had a high number of students who did not attain a level deemed proficient. It is not that students are unable to write; it was that they do not have the ability to write at an expected level of mastery in today’s world (National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges, 2003). This report called for the nation’s leaders to place writing at the center of the school agenda and provide the necessary resources to support and sustain this initiative. In the massive school improvement venture, which began with A Nation at Risk (1983), writing did not receive the attention it deserves. The Commission equated writing to learning, as student writing not only served as a means to demonstrate knowledge; it was also a means for knowledge construction. “Writing is how students connect the dots in their knowledge” (National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges, 2003, p. 3). In 2004, the Commission released its second report to Congress, Writing: A Ticket to Work…or a Ticket Out. Data for this report was obtained from a survey of 120 major American corporations responsible for employing almost 8 million people. The report classified jobs into three categories: salaried, service, and hourly positions. While writing

3 was a universal requirement for all service employees, between one-third and one-fifth of all service employees were required to write in their profession. As for salaried employees, writing was determined to be a gatekeeper. Without adequate writing skills, such employees would not be around long enough to even be considered for a promotion. The Commission emphasized the importance of writing skills for individuals across all segments of the population in order to prevent low-skill, low-wage positions from becoming their destiny. Writing: A Powerful Message for State Government (2005) was the third in the series of reports from the National Commission on Writing. Survey data were obtained for 49 of the 50 state human resource directors. The ability for government employees to write in a clear and accurate manner was found to be more critical than for those in the private sector; as the audience for government employees can range from constituents with advanced degrees, to those who have dropped out of school. For this reason, writing ability plays a significant role in the hiring and retention of state employees. The latest work from the National Commission on Writing addressed writing and school reform. This report highlighted the tension and frustration felt by educators to meet the requirements mandated in No Child Left Behind. “The views expressed by these participants were uncompromising: Standardization of curriculum and scripting of instruction devalue teaching and diminish opportunities to embed best writing practice in the classroom” (National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges, 2006, p. 13). Despite the expressed, restrictive demands of standardization, members of the 2004 report, Writing: A Ticket to Work…or a Ticket Out, acknowledged and supported the

4 recommendation of the 2003 Commission for more instructional time devoted toward writing. Technology also received considerable attention and discussion from the 2004 Commission. Beyond the original view of technology as a possible means of increasing time for writing, the Commission viewed technology as a means of connecting with peers outside the local community. In addition, the Commission encouraged teachers to take advantage of the motivational factor of blogs and instant messaging to help student develop and promote competency in writing. Agencies have also solicited the opinions of the general public. In 2005, the National Writing Project commissioned Learning to Write, Writing to Learn: Americans’ Views of Writing in Our Schools, a national public survey to determine America’s stance on writing and writing education. Respondents viewed writing as a priority and believed writing instruction should begin early in a child’s education and occur consistently across all disciplines. They contended the amount or type of writing instruction should not be dependent on a student’s career choice, as the ability to write well was essential for developing reading, communication, and thinking. The public saw writing as a critical skill necessary to reach a desired level of success in life. These reports provide a good indication of the state of writing in America and attest to the importance of writing in every aspect of life. The 2003 Commission acknowledged that while citizens may not consider themselves to be writers, they do not dismiss writing as an essential component of their professions. However, the modern workplace requires a new language (New London Group, 1996) brought on by key, dramatic changes: global economic change; a move from a top-down management style to one of teamwork and collaboration; and revolutionary changes in technology (Klantzis

5 & Cope, 2001). Klantzis and Cope (2001) suggest preparing students to be assertive partners in this contemporary worklife, instead of the submissive, regimented labors of the industrial age. Globalization of the marketplace and new communication technologies find the traditional, stagnant definitions of literacy insufficient (International Reading Association, 2002; Tyner, 1998). This presents a challenge for today’s literacy pedagogy. Literacy and Technology “Literacy is the flexible and sustainable mastery of a repertoire of practices with the texts of traditional and new communications technologies via spoken language, print, and multimedia” (Luke & Freebody, 2000, p. 9). While this definition of literacy may appear useful, Anstey and Bull (2006) assert it is missing the critical component of context; contexts that would include work, social, civic, cultural, and community activities (p. 20). An individual must know what is required, perform as expected, and conduct himself appropriately depending on the literacy necessary for that situation (Luke & Freebody, 2000; Warschauer, 1999). Being literate will depend on an individual’s ability to combine and recombine existing literacies for new contexts created by an ever changing world (Anstey & Bull, 2006; Luke & Freebody, 2000). Throughout history, the essence of literacy has changed as a direct result of new forms of communication and technology (Anstey & Bull, 2006; International Reading Association, 2002; Klantzis & Cope, 2001; Leu Jr. & Kinzer, 2000; Tapscott, 1998). “Literacy is rapidly and continuously changing as new technologies for information and communication repeatedly appear and new envisionments for exploiting these technologies are continuously crafted by users” (Leu Jr., 2000, p. 743). Leu (2000) credits the pressure to remain competitive in today’s global economy as the impetus behind these

6 continually changing technologies and a guarantee for a perennial cycle of change. He points out that as the speed and efficiency of these new technologies facilitate, encourage, and even necessitate communication, users envision unique uses for these new technologies; in effect lessening the time between cycles of change. The 21st century rode in on the coattails of a technological revolution unlike any that had came before, and affected every aspect of life (Brown, Bryan, & Brown, 2005; Kellner, 2000; Klantzis & Cope, 2001). Whereas the preceding revolution was a result of harnessing the mechanical powers of steam, this latest upheaval, deemed the knowledge revolution, emerged from the power of information, knowledge, and networks (Warschauer, 1999, p. 9). Current literacy demands require more than mastery of traditional printed text literacies. Literacy today requires not only the ability to consume multimodal texts (Huijser, 2006; Klantzis & Cope, 2001), which include audio and visual text and images, but the ability to produce such multimodal texts as well (Anstey & Bull, 2006; Brown, Bryan, & Brown, 2005). In 1996, the New London Group coined the term multiliteracies to address the effects of technologies, such as multimedia and hypermedia, as well as increased globalization and social diversity. This group maintains that pedagogical practice of multiliteracies can prepare students to be actively engaged in their social futures and be designers of such futures as well. Klantzis & Cope (2001) view multi-literacies as vehicles to enhance and expand the instruction of literacy for the 21st century. Warschauer (1999) maintains that literacy is not “a set of context-neutral, valuefree skills that can be imparted to individuals” (p. 1). The influences of societies, cultures, and contexts cannot be ignored, for it is these influences that meld with technological changes to delineate literacy (New London Group, 1996). Increased access to the Internet

7 is one of the most significant factors affecting reading and writing in the world today (Corio, 2003; International Reading Association, 2002; Leu & Corio, 2004). The potential information and computer technologies (ICTs) resulting from the potency of the Internet have served as the catalyst for an increase in new literacies (Leu Jr., 2000; Luke & Freebody, 2000; Warschauer, 1999). This ever-growing inventory of new literacies is continually evolving as those literacies considered new today will be replaced by even newer literacies tomorrow (Leu Jr., 2000). Literacy in the Context of School Tyner (1998) suggests just as an agreement could not be reached for a definition of literacy in previous years, technology will continue to cloud efforts to define these new literacies. Due to the constant flux of literacy, it is important to keep in mind that any attempts to redefine literacy must be more than simply adding on to existing literacy practices (Hagood, Stevens, & Reinking, 2002, p. 82). Hagood et al. (2002) contend that while adult perceptions of literacies do not reflect those used by adolescents in their personal lives, adults impose their traditional curricular, school, and worked-based literacies onto adolescents nonetheless. This creates a disconnect between those literacies used by students in school and those they use outside of school. This can create a barrier when teachers want to relate to their students within the context of school (Kinzer, 2003). Teachers who want to signify acceptance and valuing of their students’ everyday literacy practices are best able to do so by demonstrating an understanding of the literacies that form an important part of students’ lives. Lack of knowledge about IM, avatars, activeworlds, text messaging, MP3 downloads, and the like distances teachers from the students they want to reach. And not knowing how to use the Internet to facilitate learning makes one less of a professional than one could be. (Kinzer, 2003, Teachers as Relevant in Students’ Eyes section, ¶ 2)

8 This disconnect between what students view as literacy in school and literacy at home enables a second conflict between the haves and the have nots (Hagood, Stevens, & Reinking, 2002; Kellner, 2000; Kinzer, 2003). Students’ technological capacities and competencies are directly influenced by their social and school contexts (Ba, Tally, & Tsikalas, 2002). Students who are unable to overcome the absence of new literacies in their lives outside of school “will be left out of the emerging economy, networked society, and culture” (Kellner, 2000, p. 249). The undeniable fact that technology is altering nearly every facet of our social, educational, and professional lives (Kellner, 2000), coupled with the fact that technology facilitates educational possibilities not easily accomplished without it (Kinzer, 2003), makes a strong case for the inclusion of technology in literacy instruction. Kellner (2000) cautions that it is not technology itself that matters, but rather how that technology is used. Educators must determine how to utilize information and computer technologies (ICTs) to effectively address the educational and social demands of multiple literacies as they prepare students for an increasingly interdependent and global world (Brown, Bryan, & Brown, 2005). “The education pendulum continues to swing. Technology, however, leads the way in creating new tracks for the pendulum as it expands the Greek community of literates to include a global network of lifelong learners” (Brown, Bryan, & Brown, 2005, Conclusion section, ¶ 3). Current Research In Writing into the 21st Century: An Overview of Research on Writing, 1999 to 2004, Juzwik, Crucic, Wolbers, Moxley, Dimling, and Shankland (2006), analyzed the research on writing. In an analysis of the types of problems studied in the research, technology surfaced as a significant area of concern. Yet very few studies examined

9 technology as the central factor to be investigated. “Given the rapid changes in digital technologies in the recent years, we would expect technologies and writing to be a high priority on the agendas of writing researchers” (p. 469). In addition, Juzwik et al. (2006) found postsecondary and undergraduate students to be the dominant populations of the studies that were analyzed. The authors felt this was disconcerting as significant language acquisition and development take place at P-12 levels. Likewise, Williams and Jacobs (2004) and Trammel and Ferdig (2004) make note of the lack of refereed published material on the educational uses of blogs. There is, however, an abundance of articles, books, and other resources written by education practitioners on the topics of blogs and wikis (i.e., J. Oravec, 2003; V. Richardson, 2003; Seitzinger, 2006). While there may be a shortage of empirical research regarding blogs and wikis in K-12, it is not the case for higher education, especially in conjunction with pre-service teacher education (i.e., Boling, 2005a; Du & Wagner, 2007b; Sade, 2005; Wrede, 2003). In this learning environment, blogs are often used as a replacement for the traditional reflective journal, as they serve to reinforce this accepted practice (Williams & Jacobs, 2004). Summary The ramifications for education are substantial as unimagined technologies make it nearly impossible to predict what literacies will be necessary twelve years from now when the current class of Kindergarteners graduates from high school (International Reading Association, 2002); a situation that Antsey & Bull (2006) describe as a “climate of constant change” (p. 18). Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, and Cammack (2004) describe literacy as a moving target (p. 1584), continually changing societal expectations for a literate citizen.

10 As these expectations change, the definitions of literacy must also change in order to meet such shifting demands. Professional and personal success will rest on the ability to effectively and critically utilize new literacies generated from information and communication technologies (International Reading Association, 2002). Much remains to be learned before educators, administrators, and parents can provide all students with the environments necessary to become literate, productive citizens of the 21st century (Penrod, 2007). Statement of the Problem The ability to write is receiving greater emphasis in all aspects of life: social, professional, and educational. Despite this awareness, students across grade levels are unable to perform at an accepted level of mastery on national tests. Globalization of the world’s market, along with rapid advances in communication technologies, has made the traditional definition of literacy insufficient. The ability to read and write text on a paper medium, while still important, is not enough to succeed in this ever-changing society. In Chapter II, the review of the literature will show that student writing improves when they write for an authentic purpose and an authentic audience. This literature review will also show that students learn best in constructivist learning environments where they can collaborate with experts as well as peers, and take ownership of their learning. Blogs and wikis have the potential to provide the type of environment that can facilitate student writing and enhance the construction of knowledge, but there is little empirical research available to substantiate this claim. Research Questions 1. How are K-12 teachers utilizing blogs and/or wikis in the classroom?

11 a. What is the intent or purpose for using blogs and/or wikis? b. To what extent do these tools support constructivist learning theory? c. How do teachers prepare their students to use blogs and wikis? 2. To what extent are blogs or wikis structured to promote/enrich student writing? 3. How do K-12 teachers perceive these tools have impacted their students? Purpose of the Study This study was designed to examine how blogs and wikis are being used by K-12 classroom teachers. As the review of the literature in Chapter II will show, it is widely accepted that technology is highly motivating for students. This study attempted to ascertain if teachers go beyond this fact when selecting to use blogs and/or wikis. In addition, their intent or purpose was investigated to determine whether it is based on a foundation of educational theory, learning standards or is simply a matter of entertainment. This study was an effort to fill the existing lack of research regarding the use of these tools as well as provide an insight into the thought processes teachers may use to determine when and why to use technology with students. This study showed that blogs and wikis have the potential to offer student writers an authentic audience other than their peers and classroom teacher. Goddard (2002) points out that computers should serve as a tool to provide curricular support and create learning environments that support real-world applications, inquiry, and communication. These suggested purposes are among instructional practices closely aligned with constructivism (Rakes, Flowers, Casey, & Santana, 1999). This association between computers and constructivism was examined for a connection to the use of blogs and/or wikis for student writing. Operational Definitions

12 Weblog or blog: in its simplest form “is a website with dated entries, presented in reverse chronological order and published on the internet. The word ‘blog’ is both a noun and a verb” (Duffy & Bruns, 2006, p. 3). Wiki: “a collaborative Webspace where anyone can add content and anyone can edit content that has already been published” (Richardson, 2006, p. 8). Constructivism: “a theory of knowledge that offers particular explanations of how we come to know what we know” (Ng, 2006, p. 99). Constructivist learning environment: [contexts] in which knowledge-building tools (affordances) and the means to create and manipulate artifacts of understanding are provided, not one in which concepts are explicitly taught…a place where learners work together and support each other as they use a variety of tools an learning resources in their pursuit of learning goals and problem-solving activities. (Hannafin & Hill, 2002, p. 77) Literacy: “the ability to communicate in real-world situations, which involves the abilities of individuals to read, write, speak, listen, view, and think” (Cooper, 1997, p. 7). Technology: used in reference to computer-like devices for the purposes of this study. Significance of the Study After an extensive literature search, no empirical studies were found on the use of blogs or wikis to support student writing in a K-12 setting. Researchers have also acknowledged the lack of research on these tools. While there has been a barrage of studies analyzing technology and student writing, this is the first study to investigate the teacher’s intent for using blogs and/or wikis with students and whether these tools are used to support or promote a constructivist learning environment.

13 The data from this study will add significant information to the current knowledge base on technology and writing, as it targets two specific writing genre, blogs and wikis. Knowing the processes that teachers follow to determine when and how to use these tools can help K-12 educators, administrators, curriculum integration specialists, instructional technology coordinators, and researchers gain insight into using blogs and wikis for student writing. In addition, the results can help teacher educators to better prepare preservice teachers on the instructional use of blogs and wikis in the K-12 classroom. Organization of the Study The remainder of this study is organized as follows. Chapter II will present a review of the literature as it pertains to these relevant topics: word processing and student writing; technology and writing; writing with weblogs; wikis; constructivism; constructivism in education; and finally, constructivism, writing and technology. Chapter III will describe the research design, data collection, and data analysis. Chapters IV will present the results of the case studies, and Chapter V will discuss the summary, conclusions, and recommendations for further research.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE This chapter will address the relationship between the use of computers and student writing. First, this literature review will present a thorough investigation of studies that conducted a comparison between the utilization of paper and pencil and the utilization of a word processor for student writing. While no single instructional approach can be applied to all learning contexts (Chapman, 2006), factors found to enhance student writing will be addressed. Next, an examination of existing studies on the educational uses of blogs and wikis in a K-12 setting will be presented. The relationship between the characteristics of blogs and the factors found to enhance student writing will also be explored. Finally, the relationship between constructivism and constructivist learning environments and blogs and wikis will be reviewed. Student Writing Writing can be considered a very personal form of communication. It involves taking an idea and giving it life through a combination and sequence of words. For students, writing is often viewed as a long and rather arduous task (Beck & Fetherston, 2003) in which they are often hindered by the process of conveying the thoughts in their mind onto a blank sheet of paper (Kahn, 1987). This sense of frustration is compounded when their returned work is “bleeding from the margins with red-penciled abbreviations” (Jenkinson, 1988, p. 712). 14

15 As computers and word processing programs began their migration from the business sector to education, many looked to these tools as possible solutions to these common problems (Kulik, 2003a). Ease of use (Beck & Fetherston, 2003; Kelly, 1990), readability both on the computer screen and the finished hardcopy (Kurth, 1987; Owston & Wideman, 1997), revision capabilities for small and large amounts of text (Beck & Fetherston, 2003; Bradley, 1982; Moeller, 2002) elimination of the need to recopy (Kantrov, 1991), as well as the onboard editing tools included in most word processing software (Daiute, 1983; Jones, 1994), made computers and composition appear to be a perfect match. Philosophically and practically, word processing fits with current educational thought and pedagogy. There is probably no other single technological application that seems to be as well designed for the educational purposes to which it is put. Simply, there is no other alternative that will allow students and teachers to operate in composing, editing, revising, and publishing with so little compromise. (Kamil, Intrator, & Kim, 2000, p. 773) Several studies, beginning in the 1980s, were conducted to address these suppositions. These studies analyzed a variety of factors including: both quality and quantity of student writing; student attitudes toward writing; quality and quantity of revisions; in addition to the writing process itself. Quality of Student Writing Quality of student writing was determined by comparing the results of student writing with paper and pencil against that of students using a computer-based word processing program. Several studies utilized an overall holistic score as the indication for the quality of student writing. While this holistic approach is widely accepted by language arts instructors, Hunter, Jardine, Rilstone, and Weisgerber (1990) suggested a

16 “more atomistic approach” (p. 43), as this may help future researchers identify the effect various teaching methods have upon student writing. Owston, Murray, and Wideman (1991) conducted a controlled study to determine the effect of word processing on the quality of student writing and revisions. Eighth grade students who had previous experience with the application and its editing features were selected as the sample group. Drafts and final revisions originally done with paper and pencil were transcribed and printed. Trained raters consistently scored papers written with a word processor significantly higher than those that were handwritten in each of four separate scales: general competence, focus/organization, support, and grammar/mechanics. Contrary to findings by Cochran-Smith (1991) that more experienced writers benefit more from the use of a word processor than those with less experience, Owston et al. contended, “the fact that students at all levels of language arts achievement showed similar levels of writing quality again when using word processors has both theoretical and practical significance” (p. 26). In 1997, Owston and Wideman examined 52 third grade students from a high access school with a ratio of one computer for every 3 students and 56 third grade students from a school with a ratio of 1 computer to every 15 students. Over the course of 3 years, students attending the high-access site (HAS) displayed increased motivation and less distraction when using a word processor than when writing with paper and pencil. After only 2 years, researchers observed that compositions written by HAS students were three times as long as those of students attending the low-access site (LAS). In addition to an increase in the length of writing, HAS students also displayed a significant increase in the quality of writing.

17 In a quasi-experimental design, 281 ninth graders in a language arts class were the subjects of a study to determine the effects computer technology had on student writing proficiency as well as student attitude toward writing (Lyons, 2002). The experimental group of students had access to laptop computers for all writing exercises the entire school year; while the control group was only allowed to use paper and pencil. It is important to note that both groups received the same instruction and were required to complete the same assignments. While statistical analysis showed a greater increase in writing proficiency for the experimental group, Lyons cautions this may be due to uncontrolled factors. Students in the experimental group had access to grammar and spell check functions on the laptop, while the control group was limited to dictionaries. In addition, the experimental group may have received richer, more effective writing instruction. The studies described thus far in this review are only a few of the hundreds of studies done over the last 25 years. As a means to synthesize these findings, three key meta-analyses were performed: Cochran-Smith (1991), a qualitative design; BangertDrowns (1993), a quantitative design; and Goldberg, Russell, and Cook (2003), a mixed methods design. In the meta-analysis of 32 studies conducted by Bagert-Drowns (1993), the effects of word processing on the quality of student writing were evaluated. Twenty-eight of these studies, which contained quantitative information, were used to compare the quality of student writing using word processing against those with paper and pencil. Thirteen of these studies showed students using word processors produced higher quality compositions. Statistically significant results favoring word processing were found in 10 studies, while only one study revealed significantly negative results. “Given such percentages,

18 one would attribute strong and reliable positive effects to the use of word processing in writing instruction” (Bangert-Drowns, 1993, p. 77). Cochran-Smith (1991) suggested potential problems with research results regarding the impact of word processing on the quality of student writing. She felt enough measures had not been taken into account for the influence of other interrelated variables such as teacher instruction and the context of the writing assignment. Despite this assertion, Cochran-Smith did find an increase in both the frequency of writing as well as the overall quantity of writing for students of various ages. By far she felt word processing had the greatest potential effect on student attitudes toward writing. The most important reason to consider student attitudes toward writing with word processing is its potentially powerful mediating effect on allocation of time spent on writing, willingness to revise and edit, and the quantity of test produced. As I have augured repeatedly, it is the interrelationship of these factors that is the most interesting and probably the most important consideration in research on word processing and writing. (p. 144) Due to the major changes in computer hardware, networking capabilities and word processing software, Goldberg, Russell, and Cook (2003) reviewed 26 studies from 1992 to 2002 in their meta-analysis. Although the findings supporting word processing were significant, they were not as measurably profound as those of Bangert-Drowns (1993). Yet this analysis revealed the effect of writing with computers on the quality of student writing was larger for middle and high school students than students in elementary school. Student Attitudes There are countless testimonials in teaching and computing magazines purporting the perceived benefits of word processing for individual writers as well as groups of

19 students (Hunter, Jardine, Rilstone, & Weisgerber, 1990). A positive student attitude for writing is seen as one of these benefits. “In addition to broadly positive attitudes toward writing with word processing, students often report that they believe their writing improves with word processing” (Cochran-Smith, 1991, p. 143). Along with a perception of improved writing quality, Snyder (1993) found students believe computers increase their capacity to write. Beck and Fetherston (2003) studied the attitudes about writing both with and without computers for Year Three students in Australia. This mixed methods research study investigated seven students and their teacher over a 6-month period. Two hand written compositions and two compositions created using a word processing program were evaluated using an analytic scoring system. Students in the study equated good writing with neat work. If their handwriting was clean and neat, then their composition was considered to be good. Teacher praise for such a final product only served to reinforce this belief and created a discontent for manual writing assignments. When using pen and pencil to compose a story, Beck and Fetherston (2003) observed that students became easily distracted in a short amount of time. This study revealed a marked difference in student attitude when utilizing a word processor. Students were able to stay on task for longer periods of time and would often give up their recess time to work on their stories. The students' attitudes towards writing and the writing process changed throughout the period of this investigation. At the start, simply mentioning the word writing made the students cringe with distaste. At the end, however, when the students were able to use the word processor to assist them in their story development, they could not get enough. They began to enjoy the writing process due to the ease with which the word processor enabled them to complete the writing tasks. (p. 154)

20 Quality of student writing was also investigated. While Beck and Fetherston (2003) concluded that writing produced via word processing was of higher quality, it is important to consider the software program used for this study. In addition to the typical editing features of other word processing programs, Story Book Weaver Deluxe (1994) adds extensive graphic capabilities. Students can select from a wide variety of backgrounds and other graphics to create a picture. Students in this study were familiar with this program and were not distracted by these multimedia enhancements. If students were not familiar with this package, there could have been a chance that they would not achieve a great deal of writing, rather be taken by the pictures and sounds that are so appealing. Their familiarity of this package ensured that the students writing development was affected positively by the incorporation of the word processor. (p. 158) Lyons (2002) administered an attitudinal writing survey to the ninth grade subjects of her study designed to evaluate positive attitudes, as well as negative attitudes toward writing. The attitudes of the experimental group were found to be slightly higher than those of the control group for writing with and writing without a computer. These results suggest a positive effect of technology use on the attitudes of students toward the process of writing. Student attitudes toward the use of word processing for composition can significantly influence such writing factors as time on task, motivation to revise and edit, and the quantity of generated text (Cochran-Smith, 1991). Quantity of Student Writing Hunter et al. (1990) contended the length of student writing is not indicative of the quality of the work. A longer composition does not necessarily make it better. In a study of 28 sophomore and junior high school students, Kurth (1987) found no significant difference in the number of words written by students with or without the use of the

21 computer. The nature and purpose of the writing assignment were more influential on the length of the composition than the tool that was used. Similar results were found by Padgett (2000) who examined 16 fifth-grade students. For 5 days, half of the class used a word processing program to compose their daily journal entry, while the other half used paper and pencil. Writing methods were reversed every week over the course of 4 weeks. While Padgett determined an increased interest in writing when using computers, no significant difference in quantity of words emerged. Dybahl, Shaw, and Blahous (1997) found inconsistent quantitative results in their study of two fifth-grade classrooms. The number of sentences, a measure of fluency, as well as the number of words was used to define the quantitative variable. In a writing sample taken in November, the experimental group had a higher total for both the number of sentences and the number of words. However, the data sample from May revealed no significant difference in the total number of words. Dybahl et al. questioned using quantity as a variable to determine the effect computers may have on writing fluency. As both teachers and students begin to internalize the notion that form (including length) follows function, researchers who continue to attempt to explain quantity through a consideration of method (the computer versus the hand) may be studying a secondary, but not a primary contributor to the writing. (p. 49) Some studies do report positive outcomes for quantitative results when using word processing. Jones (1994) and Keetley (1995) both found stories written with a word processor by early elementary students to be significantly longer than hand-written stories. Nichols’ (1996) investigation of sixth graders determined their electronic compositions contained more words as well as more sentences than the control group.

22 While Peterson (1993) found similar results, her comparison of class interaction with the method of writing provide an interesting consideration (p. 60). High school seniors wrote on topics assigned by their teacher 1 day a week for 5 weeks. In a class-to-class comparison, one of the classes using paper and pencil had a slightly higher average word count than the experimental group. Peterson attributed this to the writing topic, as each group’s assignment was unique. Writing Process While most studies examined the effect word processing had on student writing as opposed to their performance with paper and pencil, Jones (1994) approached his research design from a different angle. He questioned whether the use of a word processor influenced a student’s pencil and paper writing ability and skills. In a counterbalanced pretest-posttest study, 20 second grade students received the same treatment but in reverse order. After 8 weeks, Jones found “an overall improvement in the quality of their writing” (p. 52) as well as stories of longer length when word processors were used for both the experimental and control group. After reverting back to paper and pencil, the scores for the experimental group also increased, suggesting skills acquired while using word processing for writing were carried over to compositions done with other tools. Jones contended using computers facilitates the mechanical aspects of the writing process for students giving them more time to compose and revise their work (Cochran-Smith, Kahn, & Paris, 1990; Kahn, 1987; Simic, 1994). Baker and Kinser (1998) found a difference in the writing process when students wrote using computers. The writing process for students that used paper and pencil was more linear. First an outline was created, followed by various drafts, before a final

23 document was produced. For students using computers, there was no prescribed set of steps. Students began to revise their work well before the first draft was ever completed. For them, revision was a recurring process, similar to the findings of Owston, Murphy, and Wideman (1991). Cochran-Smith, Kahn, and Paris (1990) made the claim that the benefits of word processing can be dependent on the instructional context for which it is used. Depending on these conditions, word processing can be beneficial to students, especially for beginning writers. When students are hampered by poor fine motor skills, letter production necessary for the writing task can be a chore. Cochran-Smith et al. suggested word processing eliminates this obstacle and can actually “unmask competence” (p. 238). The opportunity to focus on composition may reveal abilities otherwise hidden by a focus on the mechanical production of letters. While Kahn (1987) found a positive effect for young students when using a word processor, she also found “a ripple effect” (p. 12) on both the process of writing and the attitude of students toward writing as an activity. Compositions written on a computer were better developed with fewer gaps between ideas than most stories written in the traditional manner. This difference was attributed to a circular revision process where students would add or delete content as they wrote. Without the physical pain of holding a pencil to write for extended periods of time, as well as the mental pain of revising and recopying hand-written work, students indicated a preference to use a word processor for writing because they found it to be easier and more amusing.

24 Revision The focus of revision studies vary. Some are centered on the gross number of revisions, while others measure the type of revisions. Bangert-Drowns (1993) pointed out that counting the gross number of errors can be misleading. A simple count does not identify the significance of the revision; a simple correction that retains the meaning or a more extensive correction that changes the meaning. More importantly, the total number of revisions may be substantially lower as many revisions occur throughout the writing process; changes that “disappear on the final paper copy” (Bangert-Drowns, 1993, p. 85). This may give some credence to the fact that findings on the effect of word processing regarding the quantity or quality of revisions are inconclusive. Both the work done by Hawisher (1986) with college freshman and the study done by Kurth (1987) on tenth and eleventh graders, found no difference in the number or quality of revisions made by students using a word processor compared to students using paper and pencil. However, Daiute (1986) found junior high students using computers made fewer revisions than when they used a pen. She attributed this result to the fact students revised differently when using these particular writing tools. When using a word processor, students tended to add text as an extension to what was already on the paper rather than revising existing text. When the burdens of recopying were lifted, student writers tended to interact less with what they had written in a draft than they did when they revised with pen and had to recopy. It appears that these students skimmed over their texts enough to catch mechanical errors but not enough to rework the text at any higher level. (p. 153-154) Findings by Owston, Murphy, and Wideman (1991) and Grejda and Hannafin (1992) were more positive. Using eighth graders well versed in word processing, Owston

25 et al. determined papers written with a word processor were of higher quality than handwritten papers. In addition, data revealed these students continuously revised and edited their work throughout the writing process. The majority of these revisions were done on the initial draft, making the variance between draft and final copy less noteworthy. This ability to alter text at will gave students a sense that their writing is in “a fluid state” (Beck & Fetherston, 2003, p. 152). Students were willing to try new things knowing nothing was permanent and a few keystrokes could replace the original text. This ease of revision, contrasted with the laborious task of erasing indelible pencil strokes or the recopying of work associated with traditional writing methods, earned the label felicitous tool by Cochran-Smith et al. (1990). While the ability to eliminate the necessity of recopying successive drafts is viewed as a major benefit of word processing, “the very same feature may discourage students from doing substantive revisions because they don’t have the same opportunities to revise as they recopy” (Kantrov, 1991, p. 64). When students use spelling and grammar checks as the major and often sole proofreading method, the results can be anything but desirable (Moeller, 2002). Coined the fairytale syndrome (Boiarsky, 1991), students allocate a magical power to computers. “My computer said that was right. I didn’t think so, but I couldn’t believe my computer could be wrong” (Luffman, 2001, Pros and cons section, ¶ 1). In addition, the sleek clean look of a freshly printed copy can give the illusion of perfection (Jackowski-Bartol, 2001). The Teaching of Writing Dybahl, Shaw, and Blahous (1997) cautioned that the mystical powers of the computer helped to conceal the key to effective student writing; the teacher. “The most

26 important ingredient in any composition program is a teacher who is knowledgeable about the composing process” (Kurth, 1987, p. 18). The computer and word processing program are merely tools to assist students in writing. How these tools are used in the instruction of writing is ultimately the role of the teacher (Kahn, 1987; Kantrov, 1991). Teachers who integrate computers into their writing classes really are teaching more than just what they would teach if they did not use computers or if they relied only on fancy software. They are teaching a new way of thinking about and working with writing—a way of thinking of text as fluid and movable, a way of thinking about communication as dynamic and purposeful. (Rodrigues & Rodrigues, 1989, p. 23) As shown, a considerable number of studies have attempted to analyze writing instruction and the use of technology in an attempt to identify effective methods of improving student writing. Due to the complexity of this process, no single instructional method can be applied to all situations and conditions (Raimes, 1991). However, there is mounting evidence that specific techniques can indeed enhance student writing (Chapman, 2006; Ward, 2004). Writing instruction should be designed on the premise that writing is a social activity and as such should be entrenched within a social context (Chapman, 2006; Heap, 1989; NCTE Executive Committee, 2004; Young, 1994). Heap (1989) suggested writing in the classroom is systematically distinct from the free flowing process often associated with writing. For students, writing is a task; an assigned duty which can result in positive or negative endorsements from the teacher. Between teacher and students, and between students as well, there is an enforceable distribution of rights and responsibilities, and rules, regarding what is to be done (e.g., writing assignment), where it is to be done (table, desk), and how it is to be done (as quietly and as well as possible). (p. 150)

27 There are other influential factors affecting student writing other than this “normative encapsulation of writing in the classroom” as described by Heap (p. 149), such as interactions with the teacher or other students, even interactions with tools and resources that may assist with the writing process. Such interactions create a sense of community and establish conditions for writing as a social endeavor. However, this social activity should not be thought of as a discrete entity apart from the context in which it is set. If we want students to be effective communicators, to be successful engineers and historians, then we cannot separate form from content, writing from knowledge, action from context. We should not teach writing generically, in a vacuum, as if it were a skill unconnected to purpose or context. (Young, 1994, p. 61) Just as children learn that social contexts often dictate their spoken language, the same realization must take place in their understanding of written language (NCTE Executive Committee, 2004). It is incumbent upon the teacher to be mindfully aware of the cognitive and social aspects of student writing (Heap, 1989; Young, 1994) and consider them complimentary rather than competing positions (Chapman, 2006). Young (1994) and Farmer (2003) discussed the importance of student writers as members of a community who share in conversations, problem solve, and exchange information. It is within this social context of mutual interest and knowledge that students learn to communicate effectively as they learn different contexts place different demands upon them as writers (p. 61). All of us who make meaning through writing and reading—scholars, teachers, students—do so in community with others who share our interests in the knowing and the knowledge making processes that constitute our fields of inquiry. Writing is collaboration. It cannot be otherwise. (Reither & Vipond, 1989, p. 866)

28 There must be an increase in the opportunity for students to not only share ideas and collaborate with others, but also an increased opportunity to respond to the ideas of others (Chapman, 2006, p. 21). In this way, writing becomes a means for students to explore their personal thoughts and ideas while influencing and being influenced by those of their audience (Harris, 1992), essentially “creating an open forum for the creation of knowledge” (Gay, Sturgill, Martin, & Huttenlocher, 1999, Conceptual Context section, ¶ 1). Students oftentimes find themselves writing for an imaginary audience, one contrived by the teacher for a specific writing assignment (Bos & Krajcik, 1998; Cohen & Riel, 1989; Heap, 1989; Lankshear & Knobel, 2003). When, in fact, educational theory and research support authentic activities, those more closely resembling real-word activities, that are situated in authentic contexts (Danielson, 2000; Hartman et al., 1995). “By contextualizing the skill in communicative settings, students are more likely to utilize skills learned in classrooms outside of school” (Cohen & Riel, 1989, p. 156). Designing writing tasks within a learning environment that are targeted to a specific, legitimate audience will serve to establish such authenticity. Cohen and Riel (1989) conducted a study to determine seventh grade students’ ability to direct their writing toward a specified audience. In the design of the study, one composition was to serve as their midterm evaluation and receive a grade. Students had one class period to complete an essay on one of four topics: a recent sports game; a major power or water supply failure; an increase in costs due to inflation; or the military reserve duty of their father (p. 149). Another assigned work was written to other students who were part of the InterCultural Learning Network. This composition, completed after the midterm exam, had the same four topic choices. These pieces were later translated and

29 wired to students from other countries. All compositions were typed and then scored by two independent raters. Contrary to the teachers’ assumption that the midterm essay would receive a higher rating, compositions written for their international peers were scored higher by more than half a standard deviation. Compositions written for an authentic audience, an audience of their peers, were richer in detail, better organized, contained fewer mechanical errors, contained a more thoroughly developed theme, and were written more neatly. When writing for their teachers, students assumed they shared common background knowledge and were not as detailed in their descriptions and writing as they were when writing for their peers. The default audience for most student work, the classroom teacher, may be inauthentic in that the teacher already knows most of the material being communicated, and may not respond to writing in the same way that an audience interested in the writing’s content would. (Bos & Krajcik, 1998, p. 2) The motivating factor in this case did not prove to be a significant grade but instead an authentic audience combined with an authentic task. A similar study conducted by Krause (1995) compared work written by college freshman to an email listserv against that work written for an assigned essay. The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a carryover in the quality of writing. Would those who wrote well for the online audience, members of the listserv, write equally well for the offline audience, the instructor? While the online writing proved to be better constructed for the targeted audience, there was no carryover in quality to the offline assigned essay. Krause contended the online writing appeared to be more authentic to

30 both the students and raters; but when the audience became that of the default teacher, “the sense of audience and purpose deteriorated dramatically” (p. 14). An authentic audience has proven to be a factor in the early primary grades as well. Wollman-Bonilla (2001) examined the Family Message Journals of four case-study first graders to determine if these students demonstrated audience awareness in persuasive writing tasks. Students used their Family Message Journal to communicate their wishes to parents, such as asking for a dog, ordering books, or getting help with homework. Wollman-Bonilla monitored student journals for an entire school year. She found students demonstrated audience awareness regardless of their writing ability or cognitive development. This result was attributed to writing for a real-world, as well as a familiar, audience. Several positive outcomes have been found when students are given a specific audience for which to write. Students have been found to experience: increased motivation and achievement (Littrell, 2005; Pearson & Wilkinson, 1986; Sommers & Collins, 1984); improvement in writing quality (Cohen & Riel, 1989; Kulik, 2003a; Spitzer, 1990); deeper content knowledge (Danielson, 2000); increased comfort with and competence in writing (Harris, 1992; Warschauer, 2004); and adjustment in their writing in order to better suit the targeted audience (Bos & Krajcik, 1998; Reed, 1996). Despite these benefits, typical writing assignments for students have no concrete, authentic audience (Lankshear & Knobel, 2003). Students usually learn to write in schools by first writing words, then isolated sentences, and only later paragraphs—all outside of a communicative context. They are often asked to write about things and events (like the perennial “How I spent by summer vacation” assignment) with no specified purpose (other than to

31 practice writing) and addressed to no one in particular (other than the teacher as evaluator). (Cohen & Riel, 1989, p. 143) An authentic audience is “concerned exclusively with the meaning of the speaker’s message” (Johnston, 1999, p. 60). The fact the sole audience is that of the teacher with an emphasis on evaluation, does not go unnoticed by the students (Lowe & Williams, 2004). Electronic Writing Even though the necessity of an authentic audience appears throughout the literature, educators find the classroom environment restricts the ability to create writing applications founded by authentic, rather than concocted, circumstances (Cohen & Riel, 1989). Today a tool once used as an alternate writing instrument, now has the potential to remove this restriction. The classroom teacher and student peers need no longer be considered the only available audience for student writing, for all physical limitations have been removed. Students can now collaborate, construct knowledge, and build learning communities with students from all around the world (Weiler, 2003). The process of writing—and teaching writing—is in the midst of a tectonic change. The change is in the new technological tools writers use, and in how these tools affect composition and the relationship between writer and audience. (Yancey, 2004, p. 38) Computers were once thought to be tools of isolation that would prevent students from collaborating and communicating with classroom peers and condemn them to a life of solitude (Kamil, Intrator, & Kim, 2000; Spitzer, 1990). However, computers have been found to be more of a catalyst as they serve to increase collaboration and communication, especially in the field of writing (Bump, 1990; Dickinson, 1986; Hawkins, Sheingold, Gearhart, & Berger, 1982; Spitzer, 1990). Taking this a step further, Hermann (1990) found computers have the potential to make learning more collaborative and

32 student-centered. Now, “the pedagogical task becomes one of devising teaching strategies that capitalize on this cooperative classroom atmosphere” (Hawisher, 1988, p. 17). The connection between writing and learning has been well established (Danielson, 2000; Mayher, Lester, & Pradl, 1983). “Writing stimulates thinking, and in thinking, one comes to formulate ideas, opinions, and new knowledge” (Zacharias, 1990, p. 6). It is this connection between writing and the construction of knowledge that is a fundamental reason for using student journals (Fulwiler, 1987). When journals are used as a personal writing space, very much like a diary, students can reflect on their inner thoughts and feelings. However, when journaling is used “to facilitate the learner’s ability to discover connections, describe processes, express emerging understanding, raise questions, and find answers” (Danielson, 2000, Writing to Learn section, ¶1), its true power for learning emerges. The use of journals is not restricted to English or language arts teachers. Instructors from across the disciplines use student journals for more than a mere summary of facts (Applebee, 1977), but also as a means to gain insight into the child’s understanding and assimilation of the information (Kerka, 2002; Killion, 1999; Medway, 1987). “To fully understand any discipline or subject, students must learn to write in the subject, to understand the conventions used and the unique kinds of vocabulary which characterize it” (Danielson, 2000, Writing to Learn section, ¶2). While students can use oral language to express their understanding of the content, writing about the content can present a richer representation, as students have time to think, reflect, and determine the best way to express themselves (Littrell, 2005; Medway, 1973)—something they cannot do when responding to an oral question during a class discussion. This representation of

33 the students’ understanding in their own voice, gives instructors a permanent record of their constructed content knowledge (King & LaRocco, 2006, p. 3); a voice some students are not comfortable expressing orally in class (Connor-Greene, 2000). A dialogue journal may be used as a device to establish a consistent form of communication between the teacher and student (Kreeft Peyton, 1997; Wang, 1993). This genre offers students a chance to write on topics of personal interest and can transpire over an extended period of time, rather than starting a new daily topic (Staton, 1982). In an effort to promote conversation, grammar and convention errors are not brought to attention (D'Arcy, 1987; Kreeft Peyton, 1997). Instead, the teacher models correct usage in her response (Kreeft Peyton, 1997). While McIntyre and Tlusty (1995) asserted the cyclical process of writing, reading, and response “creates a dynamic discourse that produces shared, mutually constructed knowledge” (p. 2), there are some limitations. First, there is the cumbersome exercise of physically collecting and returning the journals (King & LaRocco, 2006; Longhurst & Sandage, 2004). While the journals are in the possession of the instructor, the students are unable to create a new reflection or continue an existing discussion (King & LaRocco, 2006; Phipps, 2005; Wickstrom, 2003). By the time the journals are returned to the students, teacher responses may lose their potential impact as the student can lose interest in the entry topic (Wickstrom, 2003). “Thus one of the most promising tools for fostering reflectivity is undermined buy logistical and social realities” (McIntyre & Tlusty, 1995, p. 3). Technology has brought journaling from a paper-pencil activity to an electronic experience, e-journaling. Discouraged by the paper nightmare, Longhurst and Sandage

34 (2004) decided to take a step into the 21st century. Looking for a solution that required no new learning on the part of the student or instructor, Longhurst and Sandage used an existing and familiar tool as the format for student journals, email. As a writing device, email offered “many of the best practices educational researchers recommend for successful course design: fast feedback; personalized feedback; clear application of reading assignments; and active learning” (p. 71). However, it lacked one important component. The teacher remained the sole audience for the students’ writing. King and LaRocco (2006) conducted a study to determine the viability of using ejournaling to promote teacher and student reflectivity. A course management software piece was used as the instrument for the e-journals. Graduate level students were required to submit at least one journal entry per week. Journal entries remained private and were subject solely to teacher comments. Course instructors adjusted the subsequent lesson based upon questions and comments made by the students in their e-journals. At the conclusion of the semester, the authors found both the students and teachers benefited from the e-journal exchanges. While early entries demonstrated the students’ inexperience with journal writing, as the semester progressed, students often posted more than the required entries and posted comments in response to those of the instructors. Students also reported a more thorough understanding of the course content and were more readily able to apply this knowledge to circumstances outside the classroom. Instructors found the immediate and convenient access to these electronic journals enabled them to gain a deeper insight into their students’ thinking which served to enhance their teaching. E-journals provided a mechanism for supporting student learning as well as meeting individual learning needs (King & LaRocco, 2006, Discussion section, ¶ 2).

35 Writing with Weblogs As indicated thus far, computers have directly impacted student writing, from eliminating the dread of rewrites and enhancing the revision process, to making electronic journaling a vehicle for student/teacher communication and providing a viable context for student introspection. The Internet and the abundance of web-based applications have taken this influence to a new level. The very nature of the word as a form of communication is changing. We no longer laugh, we LOL….We do not simply read text, we click on it. No longer are we limited to the confines of the printed page, but our words and ideas travel around the world in seconds. Peer reading is not confined to the same circle, the same room, or even the same continent. Blogs and chat rooms have replaced the water cooler, student commons and meeting room. (Yoder, 2007, p. 141) One such web-based application is the weblog. Jorn Barger is credited for conceiving the term Weblog in 1997 (Blood, 2000; Huann, John, & Yuen, 2005). At that time, Weblogs were strictly link-driven sites and required the ability to code HTML (Blood, 2000; Downes, 2004; Richardson, 2006). It was Dave Winer who gave the Weblog its true power when he created the ability to "edit this page" (Blood, 2000, p. 8). The shift from one-to-many had begun. We could all write, not just read, in ways as never before possible. For the first time in history, at least in the developed world, anyone with a computer and Internet connection could own a press. Just about anyone could make the news. (Gillmor, 2005, p. 24) The word Weblog is a combination of the words Web and log, leading many to associate the genre of Weblogs to online journals (Ferdig & Trammell, 2004). However, Downes (2004) and Sevelj (2006) pointed out that a blog is defined by its format not its substance. It is the characteristics of a blog that perhaps put it closest to realizing what

36 Gillmore (2005) described as, "the original, read/write promise of the Web" (p. 28), the creation of content. The characteristic that ultimately differentiates a blog from a Web page is the way information is displayed on a blog. Bloggers create posts, or entries, which are chunked bits of content arranged in reverse chronological order with the most current at the top. This helps the reader to find new additions quickly as blogs can be updated frequently. Bloggers insert hyperlinks to other blogs or online sites as a reference to bits of content within their post. This in essence extends the audience, as it stretches the conversation outward and helps to provide support for the author's thoughts and opinions (Drexler, Dawson, & Ferdig, 2007). Traditionally, students view their writing as a private exchange between the teacher, who serves as their evaluator, and themselves (Palmeri & Daum, 2001). The ease of publication associated with blogs adds a needed improvement to the basic audience of teacher and student, access by the public (Lowe & Williams, 2004). This public arena provides a conducive environment for the construction of knowledge. “Knowledge construction is discursive, relational and conversational in nature. Therefore, as students appropriate and transform knowledge, they must have authentic opportunities for publication of knowledge” (Ferdig & Trammell, 2004, p. 14). While students may not be enthused at the process of writing, they are often motivated by the anticipation of being published (Alber, 1999). For many blogvangelists, authentic audience is high on the list of reasons they choose to use blogs with their students. It is the ease and simplicity of publishing with blogs that provides students access to the highly desired, immediate, and authentic, audience characteristic of sound pedagogical practice (Bos & Krajcik, 1998; Reed, 1996;

37 Spitzer, 1990).“Web publication gives students a real audience to write to and, when optimized, a collaborative environment where they can give and receive feedback, mirroring the way professional writers use a workshop environment to hone their craft” (Kennedy, 2003, p. 11). While class peers and teachers may serve as a familiar audience, publication on the Web invites a totally unfamiliar audience; one unrestricted by location or time zone (Bos & Krajcik, 1998; Brooks-Young, 2005; Cohen & Riel, 1989; Ferdig & Trammell, 2004; Lowe & Williams, 2004). It is often awareness of this unfamiliar audience that motivates students to be more precise in their writing (Cohen & Riel, 1989; Reed, 1996), and helps to establish a sense of ownership (Ferdig & Trammell, 2004; Godwin-Jones, 2003; Lowe & Williams, 2004). Two unique characteristics of blogs serve to facilitate knowledge construction: public commenting and archived posts (Huann, John, & Yuen, 2005). Utecht (2007) emphasized blogs are about the conversation, not the writing (p. 31), and it is the ability to receive comments about this conversation that deepens the student’s understanding and knowledge construction. Lankshear and Knobel (2003) suggested feedback or comments from others can challenge the student to “regularly update and evaluate his or her point of view on a topic or issue… to produce persuasive arguments, crisp analyses and so on” (p. 18). Comments can not only affect the author, they can affect the reader as well. As comments are left, they become a part of the conversation and serve as a type of peer-review (Moeller, 2002; Wang, Fix, & Bock, 2005). These comments may take future visitors on a different course, as they choose to pursue the thoughts and ideas of those who came before them.

38 While blogs have been compared to journals (Duffy & Bruns, 2006; Huffaker, 2005b; Oravec, 2002; Weiler, 2003), there is a fundamental difference between these two forums for writing: journals are linear, and blogs have the ability to hyperlink (Sevelj, 2006). However, it is not the tool itself, but rather how the elements of that tool are utilized. “Blogs as journals do not engage students any more in the learning process than a regular journal would. A journal is simple: a student writes, the teacher reads” (Utecht, 2007, p. 32). Without these interactive components of a blog, online journals are merely an electronic copy of the paper version. The differences between blogging … and writing as we traditionally think of it are clear: Writing stops; blogging continues. Writing is inside; blogging is outside. Writing is monologue; blogging is conversation. Writing is thesis; blogging is synthesis…none of which minimizes the importance of writing. But writing becomes an ongoing process, one that is not just done for the contrived purposes of the classroom. (Richardson, 2006, p. 31) Feldman (2001) suggested it is the interactivity of the hyperlink, the ability to click on a word and be instantaneously hurled to another place and time, that provides the attraction for many to the World Wide Web. For students, these hyperlinks can help to create and enhance relationships between the content and the intent of the author (Bolter, 2001; Feldman, 2001). These hyperlinks provide an even deeper, functional purpose. They serve as a roadmap for the conversation that ensues as “bloggers link to other bloggers, creating an interwoven, and perhaps interdependent, online community of writers and readers” (Huffaker, 2005b, p. 337). A feature called trackback will inform a blogger when a link points back to his post. This often deepens the conversation as ideas are exchanged and refined through reader comments. This roadmap is always available through another type

39 of hyperlink known as a permalink, a portmanteau for permanent link. Even after a blog post has been archived and is no longer visible on the main page, it can be found via its permalink; making it easy to search for specific content. Research on Weblogs in Education Technorati, a blog search engine, has been tracking blogs since November of 2002. According to Sifry (2006), the number of blogs doubled every 3 months between 2003 and 2006, 100 times larger than when Technorati first began counting. On July 31, 2006, the official number reached 50,000,000. Currently, there is no way to calculate exactly how many of these are educational blogs; however, Downes (2004) indicates this number would be “equally impressive” (p. 16). This trend appears to have carried over into the research of weblogs. According to Lamshed, Berry, and Armstrong (2002), there are a wealth of studies on blogs and the nature of blogging. While there is adequate research on the use of blogs in higher education, little empirical research has been done to study the use of blogs in K-12 education (Fiedler, 2004; Wang, Fix, & Bock, 2005; Williams & Jacobs, 2004). The majority of documentation available on the subject of blogs in education at this level is anecdotal. Empirical Research In a mixed methods study using 10 eighth-grade female subjects, Littrell (2005) compared similar activities using two different journaling tools, blogs and traditional paper/pencil. Littrell focused on three aspects: the frequency and length of journal entries in addition to determining which method was preferred. Voluntary subjects were separated into two groups. Each group received the same book to read, but used a

40 different journaling tool. After 2 weeks, the groups switched methods and continued writing about the assigned novel. This entire process was repeated using a second book. Data revealed a 50% increase in the number of blog posts as compared to the number of entries in the paper/pencil journals. Blog entries were on average 30% longer than entries using the traditional method. All the participants expressed a preference for writing on the blog. Reasons for this preference included: ease of use; having time to formulate a thorough response; being able to clarify a position or idea; publishing for an audience; being able to express their thoughts freely without criticism; and the ability to personalize their space. Littrell concluded that blogs “served as an impetus for writing, giving participants a chance to develop their thoughts and ideas about the literature being read, which in turn segued into their continued writing” (Littrell, 2005, p. 44). Anecdotal Accounts Ted Nellen (2000) found the Internet to be ideal for the very diverse population of students in his Cyber English class. “I use the Internet in my classroom because it solves so many problems, bridges so many gulfs, inspires so many fertile minds, provides so much information, introduces such a large audience” (p. 220). All student assignments were completed on the Internet and later published to a personalized Web page. This site served as the student’s Webfolio. For Nellen and his students, the Internet offered many advantages. Rather than waiting until a composition was finished for any feedback, Nellen, as well as peers and mentors, was able to monitor student progress throughout the writing process. This helped to reinforce good writing practices and avoided the discovery of major problems after the writing process had been completed. Hypertext was also seen as an advantage for the readers of these compositions, as it gave immediate

41 access to any resources or information used by the author, creating a much richer experience. Dissatisfied with the participation levels in their online discussion forums, Williams and Jacobs (2004) conducted a study to determine the feasibility of using blogs in an MBA course. While participation was voluntary, students did receive credit for doing so. Fifty percent of the 102 students elected to participate in the blog. Of the 50% who chose to abstain, two major reasons emerged for this choice: the participation points were not worth the effort, and there was a sense the student had nothing worth contributing. It is interesting to note that some students made a differentiation between participation and contribution; reading the blog but not posting a response was viewed as participation. Overall, a strong majority of students felt the MBA blog facilitated their understanding of the content and increased the level of meaningful intellectual exchange. Both the qualitative and quantitative findings of this study supported the use of blogs as an effective tool for teaching and learning. Although anecdotal, Shelbie Witte (2007) described the power of blogs on her students. In an effort to recreate a project she learned about while attending a conference, Witte set up a blog as a tool to promote literacy for her eighth grade students. The Talkback Project proved to be highly successful as pre-service teachers from a nearby university collaborated with the students via the blog. The interest extended to Iraq as a parent requested permission to participate. When a student inadvertently mentioned the name of the town in one of his posts, the administration shut down the project. Rather than kill the entire venture, communication continued through the exchange of paper journals.

42 Students let the administration know about their frustration with this change. One student wrote, “It’s like we’ve gone back to using leeches instead of nuclear medicine” (Witte, 2007, p. 94). Another said, “By taking away our access to the Talkback Project blog, you have taken away my voice” (Witte, 2007, p. 95). The soldier in Iraq felt the questionable content should have been removed rather than shutting down the whole project. The passionate pleas from the students resulted in an alternative location for the blog on an internal server, enabling a powerful conversation to continue. In Blogs as a Tool for Teaching, Steven Krause (2005) described his “outright failures” (p. B33) with this new writing genre. To create a structure for collaboration, Krause divided his graduate students into groups and assigned each to a blog. Wanting his students to experience open and free writing, assignments centered on general topics covered in the course. No specific directions or guidelines for the posts were given. Much to the dismay of Krause, the energetic and engaging interaction he expected did not take place: postings were inconsistent; some students rambled for long lengths; while others merely provided hyperlinks to other websites. When asked what might be the reason for the lack of interaction, many students proposed the expectations were too vague. Krause suggested the failure was due to a lack of desire on the part of the students. He maintained an author writes because he wants to, not because he has to. Will Richardson (2003) writes of a completely different experience; one that has become the inspiration for many other educators (e.g., Borja, 2005; Kennedy, 2003). Richardson used a class blog as an online discussion tool with his high school Modern American Literature class. His goal was to extend the in-class discussions that took place. Students were given a specific number of required posts and were required to comment

43 on posts by their peers as well. The expectations were clear. To add to the experience, Richardson did not limit the conversation to the members of the class. Not only were parents invited to read and share in the discussion of The Secret Life of Bees, so was the author, Sue Monk Kidd. Even students who were reluctant to share their opinions in class, found a voice in the blog. With an authentic audience in place, an engaging discourse ensued. A study performed by Du & Wagner (2007) was designed to determine whether “online learning logs could serve as a significant predictor for overall course performance” (p. 5). For the course of the semester, college seniors were required to post their reflections on what they had learned and read for the week as well as their thoughts on information posted by others in the class. Performance variables in this study included the blogs which served as learning logs, the final exam, all other coursework, and overall performance in the course, which excluded the blogs. The blogs proved to be a significant predictor of exam performance at the .02 level of significance, and a predictor of overall course performance at the .07 level of significance. It is interesting to note that a relationship between all other course work and the final exam performance did not prove to be significant. Du & Wagner posited that coursework should not be considered a routine predictor of performance. Wikis Wiki is the shortened form of wiki-wiki, the Hawaiian word for quick (Parker & Chao, 2007; Richardson, 2006). The term was contrived by Ward Cunningham in 1994 as a name for his newly designed collaborative Internet tool (Augar, Raitman, & Wanlei, 2004; Evans, 2006; C. Wang & Turner, 2004). For such a small word, a wiki fills an

44 enormous void. The basic premise of a wiki site is "to become a shared repository of knowledge, with the knowledge base growing over times [sic]" (Goodwin-Jones, 2003, RSS and Wiki section, ¶ 4). A wiki is basically a Website where groups, rather than individual users, can easily create and edit pages (Parker & Chao, 2007). This degree of collaboration is not easily achieved. Blogs and wikis are both known as social web tools because they facilitate collaborative creation of content open to the public (Anderson, 2007). Despite this basic similarity, there are several noticeable differences beginning with the fact they serve different purposes. If your intent is to invite participation but keep the content unchanged, a blog would be the best tool. If you are looking for as much collaboration as possible from as many people as possible, then a wiki is the tool for the job (Mader, 2007). Feedback is another area of variance. While both forms allow for public input, Mader points out a blog does so by enabling comments, and a wiki allows the user to add or make changes directly to the content. Wikis have yet to find their way to research agenda or be utilized as an instructional method by educators (Evans, 2006; McDowell, 2004). However, Reinhold (2006) believes educators are starting to realize the potential of wikis to facilitate “collaborative finding, shaping and sharing of knowledge, as well as communication, all of which are essential properties in an education context” (p. 47). Such is the case with Richard Watson, a professor at the University of Georgia. When Watson couldn’t find a quality textbook to use with his course in XML, he decided to create his own (Gibson, 2006). This wasn’t a typical textbook, edited, published, and sold. This was written by his students, published on a wiki, and free to the public. Each student was responsible for

45 researching and writing one chapter and served as the editor for preceding and following chapters to provide continuity. “Rather than accepting information passively from a standard textbook, students learned the material more thoroughly and with more enthusiasm by creating their own” (Evans, 2006, p. 30). Watson was surprised at the reluctance of other colleagues to use this collaborative textbook. It is interesting to note, however, that Watson worked with international students to translate this wikitext into Chinese and Italian. Again in the context of higher education, Mitchell, Posner, and Baecker (1995), performed an ethnographic study of eight sixth-grade students in an attempt to determine the effects of a synchronous collaborative editor, quite similar to a wiki. The students were divided into two groups and given the task of creating a magazine on prejudice over a 12-week period. The process of cooperative writing presented more challenges to these inexperienced writers than using the technology. As students came to understand that writing as one cohesive unit was different than writing as separate units in parallel, they began to take advantage of the benefits found in a synchronous writing tool. This became evident when students took ownership of the piece and would make significant changes to the text regardless if they were the person who entered the information. The authors determined that the technology did have a distinct impact on the collaborative writing process for the students in this study. Familiar with previous research that examined the use of a computer for creative writing, Desilets and Paquet (2005) performed a case study to analyze using a wiki for a web-based, hypertext story. Students in grades 4-6 volunteered to meet after school as part of an extracurricular activity. Students gathered into groups from two to six members to

46 write a story. These stories were non-linear in nature and very similar to the “Choose your own adventure” books. As the story progresses in these well-known books, the reader chooses which event should next occur, creating a different story with each reading. Stories of this genre in paper form require the reader to leaf through the pages looking for the number that matches their selection. Using a wiki, the reader simply clicks on his choice and is immediately taken to the correct page with no interruptions or distractions. Desilets and Paquet (2005) noted a distinct, collective sense of ownership on the part of the students as they would not hesitate to work on whatever needed to be done regardless of their designated task. The asynchronous nature of the wiki enabled the instructors to collaborate with their students through comments of encouragement as well as criticism, which received immediate attention from the students at the next session. The authors felt this writing activity capitalized on the unique structural capabilities of a wiki for the purposes of collaborative web-based storytelling. The use of wikis does bring about issues of trust with many educators (Evans, 2006; Ferris & Wilder, 2006; Lamb, 2004). It is difficult to accept credibility when the content is open to insertions and deletions at the whim of the general public. Wikipedia is one of the best well-known examples. Vandalism is a continual nuisance, but the collaborative nature of a wiki leads to a strong sense of common purpose and ownership (Lamb, 2004). Evans (2006) makes the point, “while Britannica is a frozen monument to past scholarship, the Wikipedia is living, growing and rapidly improving” (p. 31). Still, one of the most common uses for wikis is writing instruction (Lamb, 2004) as it offers several advantages over that of traditional writing instruction: feedback from an authentic audience; a space for review of information and continued discussion; as well as serving

47 to promote collaboration and a sense of community (Ferris & Wilder, 2006; Forte & Bruckman, 2006). Constructivism Say the word constructivism, and the mind can become dizzy trying to sort through an uncanny variety of descriptors: cognitive, cultural, information-processing, radical, situated, social, sociocultural, even trivial constructivism (Davis & Sumara, 2002; Murphy, 1997; Steffe & Gale, 1995). Constructivism stems from the Latin word construere, which "means to 'interpret' or 'to analyze,' with emphasis on a person's active construing of a particular meaning or significance" (Mahoney, 1991, p. 96). Contrary to popular belief, constructivism is not a theory of pedagogy (Fosnot, 2005b). Rather, it a theory of learning; more specifically, a theory of how an individual learns; an epistemology (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Davis & Sumara, 2002). Historically, many philosophers and theorists have been connected to this wide variety of constructivist leaning theories. Perhaps one of the earliest, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) declared while knowledge begins with experience, it is not always a direct consequence of an occurrence. He contended that an individual must have a priori knowledge, knowledge independent from the event, in order to construe new associations among events or experiences (Brooks & Brooks, 1999). To Kant, "a tabula rasa psychology was self-contradictory, for unless certain rational categories are posited a prior, neither 'experience' nor 'mental association' is even possible" (Olssen, 1996, p. 277). However, it is Giambattista Vico (1668-1744) who receives credit for first articulating ideas that later led to constructivism (Mahoney, 1991; Regina Public Schools & Saskatchewan Learning, 2004; Warrick, 2004). Vico's "battle cry" was "the truth is the

48 same as made" (von Glasersfeld, 1984, p. 27), for man could only know what he has constructed for himself (Parkinson, 2004; Simon, 1999). Thus there could be no reality outside what the mind had experienced. Jean Piaget (1896-1980) had a significant influence on the theory of constructivism (Brooks & Brooks, 1999) and is thought by some to be the original constructivist (Oxford, 1997; Warrick, 2004). It was from Kant's work that Piaget derived a basis for his epistemological beliefs (Prawat, 1996; Warrick, 2004). Like Kant, Piaget believed humans actively construct their knowledge through experience. However, Piaget posited distinct, internal processes that equip individuals with not only the ability to learn but the motivation to do so: assimilation, accommodation, and equilibration (Akyalcin, 1997; Simon, 1999). Assimilation takes place as an individual associates new occurrences with previous knowledge and concepts. Existing cognitive structures must be altered in order to accommodate this new information. Equilibration is reached once a cognitive balance has been reestablished. It is this constant, reoccurring struggle to accommodate the new with the old that Piaget felt was critical to the learning process. While the term "constructivist" never appeared in any of Piaget's work, he still considered himself to be one (Davis & Sumara, 2002; Warrick, 2004). Piaget later influenced another theorist, Ernst von Glasersfeld (1917- ). This is evident in von Glasersfeld's focus on how an individual comes to know, along with his limited acknowledgement of the social processes involved in the construction of knowledge (Phillips, 1995). Further inspiration from Piaget is manifested in von Glasersfeld's epistemological beliefs, where "learning is characterized as a process of self-organization in which the subject reorganizes his or her activity in order to eliminate perturbations"

49 (Cobb, 2005). It is the radical constructivist's view, as espoused by von Glasersfeld, that there is no reality outside the mind; no reality outside an individual's experience (Oxford, 1997; Warrick, 2004). We alone create the reality within our own minds. Unlike Piaget, Vygotsky (1896-1934) believed learning was dynamic and should not be associated with developmental periods. More emphasis was placed on the social context of learning (Knight, 2003). Vygotsky viewed language as the key to both the development of human thought and culture alike (Alpay, 2003; Liu & Matthews, 2005; Simon, 1999; Tudge & Winterhoff, 1994), for it is language that facilitates both individual thought and social interaction. Vygotsky believed more could be learned by studying students in social situations (Alpay, 2003; Warrick, 2004). He contended "what students could do with the assistance of others was more indicative of their intellectual development than what they can do on their own" (Simon, 1999, p. 18). It is this gap between what a student can do independently and what he is capable of with assistance that Vygotsky has labeled the zone of proximal development: "The distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). It is important to note that this zone is not a well-defined space and is a direct result from the course of social interaction (Tudge & Winterhoff, 1994). Constructivism in Education In the early part of the 20th century, a 'change in behavior' was thought to define learning. Thus, teaching was characterized as clear communication with appropriate learner practice, reinforcement, and motivation. Disciplines were broken down into skills and concepts, sequenced from what was considered simple to complex tasks, and assessments were designed to measure changes in

50 behavior. We thought of the mind as a muscle in need of exercise and affected by practice. (Fosnot, 2005a, p. 276) Fosnot (2005a) has summarized a quite familiar teaching model, which, for many, continues to dominate their classrooms. To develop a richer understanding of constructivism, it should be compared to another popular learning theory, objectivism, sometimes known as behaviorism (Murphy, 1997). Objectivists believe knowledge of a true and reliable world exists outside the knower (Jonassen, 1991).The student's mind is seen as a blank slate. For those who hold this theory of learning, the teacher is in complete control as she actively transmits her interpretation of the world to the submissive student through direct instruction (V. Richardson, 2003). From the constructivist perspective, this in essence entails abandoning the mechanistic "channel of transmission" as a metaphor of linguistic communication, in which, located at one end there is a transmitter (the source of knowledge) and, at the other, a receiver (the student). (Larochelle & Bednarz, 1998, p. 8) This bestowal of information is usually done through scripted lessons carefully outlined in written performance objectives (Scheepers, 2000). Student knowledge is measured in the amount of truths a student acquires (Airasian & Walsh, 1997). Failure to recall a given truth of a prescribed learning objective will result in repetition of the content until it is mastered. According to Applefield, Huber and Moallem (2000), the epistemology of knowledge and the theory of learning have experienced a paradigm shift as constructivist perspectives on learning have become widely adopted over the past 20 years (p. 36). Windschilt (2002) has suggested the "practice" of constructivism is not a "simple application of instructional strategies in which the teacher is the principle actor and the

51 students are objects upon whom action is taken" (p. 132). Educators who choose to follow this practice face conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political, dilemmas. First and foremost, a teacher must have a thorough, conceptual understanding of constructivism in order to coordinate constructivist objectives for learning with appropriate instruction and assessment. This is a key cultural dilemma. A lack of understanding can cause confusion between an activity and an idea. "Educators sometimes revert to catch phrases—such as 'hands-on learning,' 'active engagement of the learner,' and 'depth over breadth'—without explaining how these concepts can be applied in the classroom and without attributing them to constructivism" (Hackmann, 2004, p. 698). Windschilt (2002) asserts this transformation requires educators to both think and act as a constructivist. Only when additional educators and educational researchers have sought to understand education from practical and historical perspectives will they better recognize why these important ideas, currently referred to as constructivism, often have such immense rhetorical appeal but then quickly disintegrate as they cross the threshold of the classroom door. (Null, 2004, p. 187) Pedagogically, constructivism is more demanding of teachers than other traditional theories of learning. Creating learning environments and activities that facilitate constructivist principles for student learning require teachers to be knowledgeable of multiple methods for students to explore various concepts. The process of scaffolding activities in increasing difficulty helps students become more autonomous (Murphy, 1997; Savery & Duffy, 1995). In addition, these new learning activities no longer fit into the easily created, easily administered, easily graded, multiple-choice tests. More complicated assessment tools that measure a students' application of knowledge rather than knowledge acquisition are required.

52 The ability to solve problems, think creatively, be flexible, and work collaboratively is demanded of today's college graduates (Casner-Lotto & Barrington, 2006). Windschilt (2002) determined these abilities can be the outcome of learning in a constructivist environment. The world of high-stakes testing compounded the issue (Brooks & Brooks, 1999), and forced some schools to use scripted curricula in hopes of meeting Annual Yearly Progress (AYP). Armed with the task of preparing citizens for the 21st century, instructors continue to use texts and other materials that stress basic skills. Bruner (1971) cautioned about the effect of testing, a significant political dilemma: A method of instruction should have the objective of leading the child to discover for himself. Telling children and then testing them on what they have been told inevitably has the effect of producing bench-bound learners whose motivation for learning is likely to be extrinsic to the task—pleasing the teacher, getting into college, artificially maintaining self-esteem. (p. 123) The culture of the constructivist classroom not only changes for the teacher, it also changes for the student. As one of the constructivist tenets, teachers are expected to become facilitators of learning rather than simple disseminators of information. For the students, this means they will have more control of their own learning, a role that some may find more difficult and may even resist (Perkins, 1992). Students will also have to learn new ways to perform. They will have to learn to think for themselves, not wait for the teacher to tell them what to think; to proceed with less focus and direction from the teacher, not to wait for explicit teacher directions; to express their own ideas clearly in their own words, not to answer restricted-response questions; to revisit and revise constructions, not to move immediately on to the next concept or idea. (Airasian & Walsh, 1997, p. 7) Constructivist teachers face a political dilemma, the task of convincing coworkers, parents and the community, that students can and do benefit from this type of instruction. The basic skills curriculum is very familiar to many of these stakeholders, for

53 it is often the way they were taught. "In the public eye, the idea of constructivism suffers the same handicap as previous progressive philosophies because it is often framed as a questionable alternative to what already exists" (Windschitl, 2002, p. 157). Constructivism, Writing, and Technology In contrast to the mimetic approach to education where students are expected to parrot back information as a means of demonstrating acquired knowledge, constructivists evaluate students on production; “what they can generate, demonstrate, and exhibit” (Brooks & Brooks, 1999, p. 16). If students are to have the opportunities necessary to generate, demonstrate, and exhibit their writing, teachers must create learning environments that accommodate and promote such outcomes. One can argue that all of this is indeed possible in the traditional classroom using traditional teaching methods. Considering the elements that can enhance student writing, authentic audience, collaboration, and writing for an authentic purpose, traditional methods of writing instruction cannot create such an environment. Enabling learning environments that foster these desired components of student writing is easily accomplished through the use of technology (Kulik, 2003b; Spitzer, 1990). Blogs and wikis can provide students with the social environment to establish learning communities and foster communication with authentic audiences outside of their immediate school surroundings (Duffy & Bruns, 2006; Richardson, 2006). While blogs and wikis share these powerful characteristics, they also have unique qualities of their own. Blogs offer students the ability to become producers of content by publishing their writing (Brooks-Young, 2005; Ferdig & Trammell, 2004; Polly, 2007). Yet the process doesn’t stop here, as the public has the ability to interact with the author by posting a

54 comment, in effect extending or refining a conversation (Du & Wagner, 2007a; Richardson, 2006). Personal publishing allows for public expression in a previously unprecedented manner. Learners reflectively and creatively publishing [sic] form and join networks related to their ideas, themselves and their peers. Learners have an audience which they can express themselves to and empathise [sic] with. (Farmer, 2003, Traditional Teaching and Learning Models section, ¶ 3) For some, the possibility of such discourse makes blogs one of the most vital web-based applications (Huffaker, 2004). This public exchange of dialogue also provides benefits to the individual, as it affords them an opportunity to reflect on their thinking and possibly amend previous thoughts and ideas (Brecia & Miller, 2005; Quinn, Duff, Johnston, & Gursansky, 2007; Richardson, 2006). Blogs offer reticent students time to contemplate and formulate their responses; something not often possible in a face-to-face situation (Wolsey, 2004). In addition, blogs serve as an archive of student work, allowing students to monitor their thoughts over time as well as what others have written (Huann, John, & Yuen, 2005; Huffaker, 2005a; Wang, Fix, & Bock, 2005); promoting an “internalization of knowledge” (Huann, John, & Yuen, 2005, p. 3) which empowers students to take ownership of their learning (Ferdig & Trammell, 2004). According to McDowell (2004), wikis offer a level of collaboration that is “not easily achieved in a traditional or digital setting” (p. 8). He compares this web-based application to an “enhanced electronic whiteboard” (p. 6) which allows the general public or a selected group to both create and modify content. Despite the commanding presence of wikis in the business area (Evans, 2006), educators are just beginning to see their potential to “facilitate collaborative finding, shaping, and sharing of knowledge, as well

55 as communication, all of which are essential properties in an educational context” (Reinhold, 2006, p. 47). The online nature of wikis removes all barriers of time and space, increasing the potential for teachers and students to collaborate on an article or other piece of writing (Parker & Chao, 2007). Wikis further enhance the writing process by allowing continual input and the ability to provide comments over time; rather than on one occasion, the final draft (Duffy & Bruns, 2006). When members of such a group can work together to discuss issues and share their knowledge, “wikis can serve as a knowledge platform for a community of practice” (Schaffert et al., 2006, p. 8). Technology can enable powerful learning environments and can facilitate the essential principles of a constructivist classroom suggested by Vygotsky: learning and development is a social, collaborative activity; the zone of proximal development (ZPG) can serve as a guide for curricular and lesson planning; school learning should occur in a meaningful contexts; and out-of-school experience should relate to the child’s school experience (Maddux, Johnson, & Willis, 2001, p. 139). Of all the technological tools available today, blogs and wikis offer significant potential in helping to address these principles (Wang, Fix, & Bock, 2005). This call for authenticity in student writing is echoed in the writings of Vygotsky. In Mind in Society (1978), Vygotsky contended that writing must be purposeful for the student and situated within an authentic context; and that writing instruction is often directly opposed to this philosophy. Teaching should be organized in such a way that reading and writing are necessary for something. If they are used only to write official greetings to the staff or whatever the teacher thinks up (and clearly suggests to them), then the exercise will be purely mechanical. (p. 117)

56 Vygotsky continues, “Writing must be ‘relevant to life’ (p. 118). Fulwiler (1987) emphasizes the research of many scholars such as Vygotsky (1962), Moffett (1968, 1982), Britton (1970, 1975), Emig (1971, 1977), Elbow (1973, 1982), Shaughnessy (1977), and Berthoff (1983), in establishing the importance of language and its role in assigning meaning for humans (p. 1). This connection between thought and language is founded on a set of dynamic assumptions: 1. When people articulate connections between new information and what they already know, they learn and understand that new information better (Bruner, 1966). 2. When people think and figure things out, they do so in symbol systems commonly called languages, most often verbal, but also mathematical, musical, visual, and so on (Vygotsky, 1962). 3. When people learn things, they use all of the language modes to do so— reading, writing, speaking, and listening; each mode helps people learn in a unique way (Emig, 1977). 4. When people write about new information and ideas—in addition to reading, talking, and listening—they learn and understand them better (Britton, 1975). 5. When people care about what they write and see connections to their own lives, they both learn and write better (Moffett, 1968). (Fulwiler, 1987, p. 5-6) When teachers are able to design learning environments capable of implementing these principles, students are able to experience writing as real writers do; becoming engrossed in the true essence of writing (Matthews, 1996). Summary The vast amount of research analyzing the use of computers for student writing focused on word processing. Results concerning quality and quantity of writing, revision, and student attitudes were discussed. While these results varied for quality of writing, quantity of writing, and revision, increased motivation and positive student attitudes

57 about writing were common. The ease of revision, elimination of both the physical pain of writing for long periods, and the need to recopy, are credited for this increase in motivation and positive attitudes. Many researchers discussed the disconnect between the activity of writing and the purpose for the writing. This situation was perpetuated as teachers generated nonsensical purposes for assignments and often served as the only audience for student work. The literature showed writing for an authentic audience with an authentic purpose influenced student writers. In addition to increased motivation, students experienced other benefits from authenticity such as: improved quality in writing; deeper content knowledge; and increased comfort and competence in writing. With the onset of the Internet, electronic forms of writing simply served as electronic versions of traditional writing activities. Electronic journals retained the advantages of journaling, such as the facilitation of knowledge construction, and removed the cumbersome aspects of collecting and returning paper varieties. Yet they still lacked the aspect of an authentic audience in an authentic context. Weblogs, which have often been compared to electronic journals, can offer these missing components of authenticity. Blogs, as they are sometimes known, have the additional benefit of serving as an archive of learning, but perhaps their most powerful characteristic is the potential for publication. When students publish their blog posts, their work becomes public and is available to every reader on the World Wide Web. Readers are able to respond to student writing in the form of comments. These comments provide a means of extending the conversation, as the student can reflect on his initial thoughts, expand this thinking, or modify it entirely; all based on responses from an authentic audience. While the research

58 on the use of blogs in higher education is abundant, the vast majority of the writing on K12 use is anecdotal. This literature supports the assertion that blogs have the potential to create authentic learning tasks for authentic audiences. Available research on the use of wikis in K-12 education is also slim. Like blogs, wikis offer students opportunities to publish for an authentic audience, but collaboration is the key advantage to using this tool. By removing the barriers of time and space, wikis enable group contribution to and modification of the content instantaneously. While many see this access to content manipulation as an advantage, some are concerned such access affects the validity and reliability of the content. Constructivism maintains knowledge is constructed on the part of the learner. Knowledge cannot be bestowed upon the child by the teacher. Constructivist learning environments have the potential to provide elements that can enhance student writing; elements such as authentic audience, collaboration, and writing for an authentic purpose. Such environments are not easily created using traditional methods of writing instruction. Technology can facilitate the principles necessary for a constructivist classroom, and enable powerful learning environments. Of the many technological tools available today, blogs and wikis offer significant opportunities to establish constructivist learning environments and enhance student writing. Chapter III will present the methodology for this study.

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY The purpose of this study was to investigate how blogs and/or wikis were used by K-12 classroom teachers; how these teachers determined when and why to use these technologies with students; and their perceptions of how these tools affected students. The association between blogs, wikis, and student writing, and the association between computers and constructivism were also examined. In order to fully address these questions appropriately, the qualitative case study approach was selected as the research method. This chapter will serve to provide a clear description and purpose of the design and methods used for this study. The following questions and sub-questions were examined: 1. How are K-12 teachers utilizing blogs and/or wikis in the classroom? a. What is the intent or purpose for using blogs and wikis? b. How and to what extent do these tools support constructivist learning theory? c. How do teachers prepare their students to use blogs or wikis? 2. How and to what extent are blogs or wikis structured to promote/enrich student writing? 3. How do K-12 teachers perceive these tools have impacted their students? Qualitative Case Study Design Qualitative research is a form of inquiry that looks at participants in their natural setting, with the goal of understanding how these participants have created meaning through their own experiences (Merriam, 1998). Savenye and Robinson (2004) note 59

60 qualitative research methods have a long history of use in the study of educational technology. Asking different questions about new technologies may, in fact, offer a deeper understanding of what is really happening when these new technologies are used with students (Savenye & Robinson, 2004, p. 1174). Like Bogden and Biklen (2003), Merriam (1998) believes qualitative research is concerned with process instead of resulting outcomes. “The interest is in process rather than outcomes, in context rather than a specific variable, in discovery rather than confirmation” (p. 19). When contextual conditions are believed to be a significant factor to the phenomenon of the study, Yin (1994) advocates the use of the case study method, as this method is most effective in examining contemporary phenomenon when it is not possible to manipulate behaviors (p. 8). Savenye and Robinson (2004) perceive another strength of this methodology is its ability to provide insight into how new technologies are used by students and teachers without distraction or interference. It is these assets that make case study design so attractive to educational researchers (Merriam, 1998). When determining a research strategy, Yin (1994) suggests three conditions be considered: the type of research questions to be asked, the amount of control the researcher has over the events, and whether the focus is on contemporary or historical events. Keeping these conditions in mind, the case study has a distinct advantage when the study involves how and why questions about contemporary events of which the researcher has little to no control (Yin, 1994, p. 9). In addition, Merriam (1998) suggests that a case study approach has the unique potential to uncover knowledge not probable with other methods (p. 33), making it possible to identify and explain specific educational issues and problems of practice (p. 34).

61 These are the conditions this researcher took into account as she analyzed research strategies for this study. The emphasis of this study was on the use of blogs and/or wikis by K-12 teachers in conjunction with student writing, a highly contemporary event involving rather new technologies. While analyzing how blogs and/or wikis were used, this researcher also investigated how teachers determined these were the appropriate tools to use. The emphasis on how questions satisfied another of Yin’s (1994) conditions. Finally, this researcher had no control over any behavioral events. By utilizing a qualitative approach, this study may provide insight into “ ‘what is really happening’ when technology is used” (Savenye & Robinson, 2004, p. 1174). Based on these reasons, a case study approach was an effective method to answer the questions posed in the study. Role as Researcher As the ultimate responsibility for the acquisition and analysis of data is that of the researcher (Merriam, 1998), accuracy, depth, and breadth of data is of primary concern (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003). The question of subjectivity arises as the data interact with the reality of the researcher, before it becomes part of the report (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Merriam, 1998). This requires that researchers clearly acknowledge their point of view within the study (Creswell, 2005; Denzin, 1997), for …no matter how much you try you can not [sic] divorce your research and writing from your past experiences, who you are, what you believe and what you value….The goal is to become more reflective and conscious of how who you are may shape and enrich what you do, not to eliminate it. (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003, p. 34) Glesne (1992) warns of an emotional attachment between the researcher and her topic of study. The researcher must be able to differentiate a topic that will have an

62 intrinsic interest for others, from a topic which has such deep personal issues that the researcher may be seeking justification for or even vindication from previous experiences or actions. As a classroom teacher for 24 years, this researcher anxiously sought ways to enhance student learning with technology. However, when more sophisticated web-based applications, such as blogs and wikis, became available, this researcher had already left the classroom to become the district technology coordinator. In this capacity, she was responsible for maintenance and advancements in the network, professional development for teachers and staff, as well as student instruction. While this researcher has come to accept the fact that not all teachers share her vision or passion for technology use, she must constantly monitor how her experiences, opinions and/or prejudices may affect every aspect of this study. “How you pursue your own subjectivity matters less than that you pursue it” (Glesne & Peshkin, 1991, p. 106). Participant Selection While a case study can provide a rich, thick description of the phenomenon being examined (Merriam, 1998), Guba and Lincoln (1981) caution oversimplification or exaggeration of this thick description can mislead the reader and facilitate incorrect conclusions. Guba and Lincoln continue to advise that a case study is merely one piece of a puzzle and not necessarily a depiction of the whole. Merriam (1998) suggests an analysis of multiple cases within the same study that are varied in nature can provide a more convincing interpretation. “The inclusion of multiple cases is, in fact, a common strategy for enhancing the external validity or generalizability of your findings” (Merriam, 1998, p. 40).

63 Participants for this study were K-12 educators who were currently using blogs and/or wikis with their students. In an effort to enhance the external validity of this study, eight participants, representing various grade levels, were pursued. Keeping in mind that using blogs and/or wikis is not a common practice among K-12 educators, looking for random participants would have been very time consuming. Technology coordinators and other educational technologists at the state and local levels were contacted by phone for a potential list of participants. These individuals were in the position to know which staff members were using these tools. This purposeful sampling (Creswell, 2005) was necessary in order to find individuals in a timely manner who were able to provide data for this study. Suggested participants were contacted through email and informed of the nature and involvement of the study. Every attempt was made to find teachers from a broad representation of grade levels. A letter of consent (see Appendix A) was mailed and signed by each participant. Data Sources Yin (1994) and Patton (1990) advise multiple sources of evidence be used to collect data as this helps to increase the strength of the study. Interviews often serve as one source of evidence in qualitative studies. Interviews are an essential tool when it is not possible to observe behaviors, determine a person’s conceptual understandings, or replicate an event (Merriam, 1998). Patton (1990) believes interviews enable a researcher to “find out what is in and on someone else's mind” (p. 278). Because the answers to many of the stated research questions were not achievable through observation, interviews were one source of evidence for this study.

64 Merriam (1998) cautions that highly structured interview formats may interfere with the perceptions and beliefs of the participant and actually reveal those predetermined by the investigator. Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest a study based on the opposite extreme can also be detrimental, as it can make cross-case analysis more difficult. A semi-structured interview format was utilized in this study. While specific information was required from all participants, this questioning procedure was flexible and allowed the researcher to address whatever situation arose during the interview (Merriam, 1998). To encourage a deep understanding, a one-on-one semi-structured interview format was used in this study. The examination and analysis of artifacts served as a second source of evidence. These artifacts included blogs and/or wikis created by the teacher and/or students which could be viewed by the public. Access to non-public blogs posted to school servers was also procured by the researcher. Blogs offer an additional advantage as they serve as an archive of interactions from the time the blog was created. A deeper analysis was conducted of how this tool was used over time and if the intent of the instructor remained consistent or changed. Member checking or informant feedback served as the third form of analysis. According to Creswell (2005), “Member checking is a process in which the researcher asks one or more participants in the study to check the accuracy of the account” (p. 252). In addition to checking for accuracy, participants have the opportunity to check for understanding (Creswell, 2005) and clarify their position by revising or adding additional information (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Lincoln and Guba (1985) indicate member checking is “the most crucial technique for establishing credibility” (p. 314) in a study, as

65 participant analysis adds to “the transparency of the research” (Fossey, Harvey, McDermott, & Davidson, 2002, p. 729). Every participant in this study received a complete copy of the transcript for all interview sessions. Participants were asked to make any corrections, changes, or additions to clarify their intent and present a more clear and accurate representation of their responses. Collection Procedures Unless otherwise requested, interviews were conducted using a free Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) service tool called Skype. Each participant was interviewed a minimum of two times. The first interview was used to gather some demographic information and overall use of blogs and/or wikis. This initial interview provided an opportunity for the participant to become familiar with Skype and the interview process in general. A second interview was conducted to obtain additional information as well as clarify any responses from the first interview. All audio exchanges from every interview were recorded with permission of the participant. After the interview process was completed, the researcher examined blog and/or wiki artifacts available online. Detailed notes of observations were made. The instructor was contacted via email when clarification was needed. While four of the participants used both blogs and wikis with their students, this study analyzed their primary tool of choice for the purposes of this investigation. Data Analysis Bogden and Biklen (2003) maintain good researchers rely on their theoretical perspective to guide them as they collect and analyze data. The philosophy of education

66 held by this researcher is based on interpretivism, specifically constructivism. It is this researcher’s belief that knowledge is constructed by the individual and is not totally dependent on social situations. As there is no universal truth, there is no search for "lawlike generalizations" (Willis, Thompson, & Sadera, 1999, p. 6). The goal is to understand how teachers' own reality of the effectiveness of technology impacts their instructional use of these tools and if this reality has been altered by their experience with them. Interpretivism places an emphasis on the context of the research (Willis, Thompson, & Sadera, 1999). One purpose of this study was to investigate how teachers determine why and how to use technology with their students, an articulation of their intent. This researcher also hoped to learn what types of activities using blogs and/or wikis were designed and if these occurred within a constructivist learning environment. It would not be feasible to examine these questions about the design and integration of technology outside of the context in which they were positioned. It was the theoretical perspective of interpretivism that served as a guide for this researcher as she collected and analyzed data. In contrast to behaviorism, which views students as empty vessels waiting to be filled with knowledge transmitted by the teacher, constructivism views the acquisition of knowledge as that which is actively constructed by the student (Murphy, 1997; Vygotsky, 1978). Constructivists contend there is no reality outside the individual. Knowledge is not merely a transfer of information directly into the memory, but rather the creation of an interpretation by the student. Knowledge cannot be discovered but is housed within the mind of each individual, based on the individual’s interpretation of past experiences, beliefs, and acquired knowledge, (Jonassen, 1991; Kim, 2001). This concept precipitates the existence of multiple truths and realities (Murphy, 1997).

67 It is important to remember that constructivism is a learning theory and not a prescription for a learning strategy or a teaching methodology (Moore, 2004; V. Richardson, 2003). However, Perkins (1992) notes, "If learning has this constructive character inherently, it follows that teaching practices need to be supportive of the construction that must occur" (p. 49). This can be accomplished through the design and implementation of learning environments. Brooks and Brooks (1999), Ferguson (2001), and Sprague and Dede (1999) suggest teacher beliefs that can promote such constructivist learning environments: •

Learning is relevant and meaningful to students.

•

Activities are problem-based with a focus on real-world issues.

•

Student inquiry is encouraged to promote knowledge construction.

•

Enable learners to interpret multiple perspectives.

•

Collaboration is encouraged.

•

Student autonomy is encouraged and accepted.

While teachers were asked about their use of blogs and/or wikis with students, the focus was on the factors participants used to determine how and why they choose to use these tools. The data was analyzed to see whether they enabled and supported a constructivist learning environment as described above, or if they follow a technocentric approach as outlined by Salomon (2000). Salomon (2000) professes just because it can be done, doesn't be that it should be done. He describes a technological paradox whereby technology has become domesticated. By his definition this means technology is only used when it fits into the current

68 philosophy of knowledge transmission. Students are allowed to learn from technology, not with technology. Its use as an effective and unique tool to construct, communicate, and design is suppressed (¶ 6). While technology has the potential to provide rich learning environments, Salomon contends there is a vast difference in its potential, how it is actually being used in education, and how educators should be using it. "Education is far too important to society to be wiggled by a technological tail. Let technology show us what can be done, and let educational considerations determine what will be done in actuality" (¶ 29). Data retrieved from one-on-one interviews and artifacts were analyzed using the constant comparative method. As the name would indicate, the data were constantly evaluated and compared (Merriam, 1998). This process provided the groundwork for the emergence of tentative categories. These tentative categories were reviewed against the data and, after constant comparison, led to more refined patterns and themes. A cross case analysis was conducted using individual case results. Summary A multiple-case study approach was used to analyze the intent of K-12 teachers to use blogs and/or wikis with their students, in particular for student writing; how these teachers determined when and why to use these technologies with students; and their perceptions of how these tools affected students. The association between the use of blogs and/or wikis and constructivism was also examined. Data were gleaned from oneon-one semi-structured interviews, member checking, and review of teacher and/or student blogs and wikis. Using a constant comparative method, data was continually compared and analyzed in an effort to refine emergent categories, themes and/or patterns.

CHAPTER IV DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS This chapter will provide detailed information about each of the eight participants used in this study. (See Table 1.) Demographic information for each participant; determination to use technology; blog and/or wiki project descriptions; intent or purpose for using blogs and/or wikis; preparing students to use blogs and/or wikis; student impact; possible concerns about using these tools; and an overview will be presented for each participant. Katie Located in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan, this P-8 school had a population of around 300 students; 25 of which attended Katie’s first grade class. She describes her local area as middle class with some government subsidized housing. It is interesting to note the composition of this class did not have a diverse ability spread. The topperforming first grade students were placed in the first/second grade split class, a practice that happens in this school whenever the numbers do not justify two sections of first grade. For Katie, this meant there were fewer students who were described as “the keeners” who could “do all the stuff really quickly.” With 16 years of experience, Katie had won several awards for her work with students and had presented in a K-12 online technology conference.

69

Table 1 Participant Demographic Information Grade/ Subject

Years of Experience

Class Size

School Population

Trainer

Conference Presenter

Classroom Computers

Computer Labs

Toola

Years of Tool Use

Katie

1st

16

25

292

no

yes

6

1

blog/wiki

4

Mike

3rd ESL

18

20

510

yes

yes

9

1

blog/wiki

2

Grant

5th

18

17

620

yes

yes

4

1

blog

4

Rita

5th

6

24

722

no

no

blog

1

Evan

JH Social Studies

14

135 daily

700

no

yes

1

7

blog

2

David

HS Math

15

70 daily

1100

yes

yes

1

3

blog/wiki

4

Donna

HS Science

28

110 daily

1500

yes

no

1

5

blog

1

Jeff

HS English

24

87 daily

3300

Yes

yes

1

11

wiki/blog

4

class is in the lab

a

Primary tool is listed first

70

136

71 Determination to Use Technology Katie was very selective in her determinations to use technology. She analyzed the desired outcome in order to determine the instructional tool to be used. For Katie, technology was not viewed as the driving force but rather a supporting tool. You have to always be weighing what’s the best way that I can teach this so the kids can understand it. There are times when a paper thing is a better tool, but often times it’s not. Often times, the technology is better. Katie’s Project Description Katie saw the possibilities for using a blog with her students when she attended the local educational technologist’s session at their professional development workshop. She approached him to see if he thought this might be possible with first graders. He had been looking for a teacher ready to accept the challenge, and a partnership was formed. This first grade teacher also used the main blog page as a portal to individual student blogs. Katie was able to give students individual time at the computer by using blogging as one of her centers during guided reading. While Katie was conducting small group reading sessions, students were able to work independently on their blog posts at the computer center. As students did not receive assistance while writing, Katie inserted an editor’s note to help readers who did not speak “emergent writer.” She did not correct their work. She simply provided a translation in parentheses. The main page of the blog also provided information about what the class had studied, work they had done, trips they had made, special projects, and other events. Katie used a number of video and audio tools to display the students’ work and inform the audience. A slideshow presented drawings while each student told about their work. A

72 video, taken by a student, showed a number-family activity done during math. Twentyfive students wrote almost every day with only six classroom computers. Katie also had a class wiki dedicated to primary math. Katie’s wiki was collaborative and open to other interested schools for participation. Various pages in the wiki represented general math concepts such as number, patterns, and addition. Schools that joined the wiki added content to the pages in the form of pictures, slide shows, and videos. Katie did not use the wiki on a daily basis. Wikis were designed to enable others to contribute unique content. Katie explained her students understood the difference between the purpose of these two tools. “They know you can’t just make a blog just to learn something, but you could make a wiki about that and ask people to contribute. They definitely understand.” With 25 students, six networked computers served as one of the centers during guided reading. At this center, Katie’s students worked independently on their blogs, often choosing their own topic for their post. Katie worked throughout the first semester teaching students blogging mechanics, often scheduling multiple sessions in the computer lab, so her students could reach this level of independence. Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Prior to using blogs, Katie used a website to inform parents of the day’s activities. One student spent the final 10 minutes of the day to write about the day’s events. Katie made it readable for parents by adding editor comments and posted it to the webpage. When Katie first began using blogs, this same practice continued. The blog had simply replaced the purpose of the website, only in a different format. She wanted something more engaging; something that used higher order thinking skills. She wanted a place

73 where her students could write, not just about the day’s events. What was once intended to be a reflection of what was happening in her classroom, was “turning more and more into a sharing of our learning rather than just what we did.” Student Preparation Katie was asked if she was teaching her students any differently now that she used blogs with her students. Katie made it clear that the only difference she perceived was the fact she used technology. I don’t really see my classroom as that different than other people’s classrooms. I just see that we’re doing things on technology, using technology instead of pencil and paper. We’re still learning how to write and read in the same way. For Katie, blogs and wikis were a way of supporting her instruction and the students’ learning, not a separate subject or element. The technology was seamless. Student Impact Katie found the access and interaction with an authentic audience, people other than the teacher, classmates, or parents, was a very motivating factor for her students. They became much more interested in writing knowing that someone else was reading their work. Her students wanted to know what Katie wrote on the main page of the blog whenever something new appeared, and they wanted to see the blogs of all the schools who partnered with them as blogging buddies. Katie attributed this cycle of writing, reading, and commenting for her students’ recognition of themselves as writers. “Knowing someone has read your work 121 times, gives a lot more purpose to your writing than writing in your notebook.” While Katie could not say that her students were better writers, she was not the least bit hesitant to associate the blogging process with students’ increased motivation to

74 write. This was substantiated from a different source, as Katie recounted the story of a student she taught for two consecutive years at different grade levels. These were, incidentally, the first 2 years she used blogs for student writing. In a conversation with Katie, a child’s mother said she was convinced her son’s love of writing was a direct result of the blogging they did in class. Katie also made use of mentors with her first grade students. She established a partnership with students taking an early childhood writing class at a neighboring university. This was a special relationship as both groups of students were learning from one another. The university students assisted their first grade blogging buddies to improve their grammar and writing skills, which in turn helped them to learn about writing instruction for early childhood learners. Katie presented the university students with the rubric used to assess student writing skills at the end of the year. As a part of their course assignments, these university students were required to make comments on their first grade blogging buddy’s blog. Katie hoped knowledge of specific goals and outcomes would enable the university students to make knowledgeable and intelligent comments that would serve to reinforce the learning taking place in the classroom. Perhaps that is exactly what happened, but reading the post in Figure 1, one might have reason to believe a first grade student reversed roles and acted as the university student’s mentor.

75 Someone is Watching You I continue to be amazed at the power of our big blogging buddies at the University of Regina. Each morning, I show the students the comments that were made the night before, putting them up on the Smartboard at the front of the class. There is a common theme to these comments--some positive remarks along with some suggestions for improvement. This morning we noticed that one of the buddies had not started her sentence with a capital letter, even though remembering to use a capital letter was one of her comments to my student. My children all thought this was quite funny. This afternoon as the students blogged, another student wrote “You for got to make a. Kapidl I no your tring to do a wundrful gob .Tri to kep on going”. (For those of you who do not speak emerging writer, it says “You forgot to make a capital. I know you’re trying to do a wonderful job. Try to keep on going.” This is a perfect parody of the kind of comments that the “big” blogging buddies make. The power of modeling!

Figure 1. Post from Katie’s class blog

Katie had further evidence this was a successful partnership when her students began monitoring their own writing to produce the results brought up in the comments of their university blogging buddy. Today before we blogged I said, OK what are your blogging buddies looking for in your writing? Because instead of saying, “What I am looking for?” it’s much more powerful that they know, oh, there’s blogging buddies looking for this. They quickly said, “Oh, they’re looking for periods. They’re looking for capitals letters. They’re looking to see if we sounded out our words.” They knew. They just listed off. The interchange of blog comments between Australia, New Zealand, and Katie’s class often provided rich, relevant learning opportunities. Students in Katie’s class were able to learn about extraordinary topics such as volcanoes and sharks from students who thought these were common, every day things. She recalled two incidents with kindergarten students from New Zealand. (See Figure 2.) Katie’s students had talked about

76 volcanoes in class so they wrote about them in their blogs. The New Zealand students wrote back to say they actually had a volcano near their school, and they could see it spewing ash when it erupted. Katie described her students’ reaction as “over the wall.”

Figure 2. Blog with New Zealand kindergarteners

Katie’s students gained more than knowledge about two distinct things in nature. They learned about differences in culture and geography from other first grade students who may look just as they do but live in very different worlds. Concerns Giving first grade students access to the Internet can raise all types of concerns with everyone involved: parents, teachers, and administrators (Boling, 2005b). For Katie, the fact that the future is impossible to predict made it even more important that students

77 are not only exposed to this digital culture, but are taught how to use it responsibly as well. I think that I have no idea what the world is going to be like by the time they graduate. But without a doubt, the world is going to be continually more digital in some way. Perhaps blogs won’t even be around by the time they graduate from high school, but they may have morphed into something else. So I think we have to give them that exposure to a constantly changing environment like the Internet and teach them appropriate use of the tools, appropriate conduct online, starting at a young age. I think that’s really important. As part of this instructional strategy for using the Internet, students are only allowed to use their first name. When pictures are posted, no name is visibly associated with that picture. Katie will, however, give credit to the student who filmed the video or took the picture. She also uses a blogging tool that allows her to moderate comments, to approve or disapprove of them before they are publicly posted to the blog. Every student blog post must also be approved before it is published to the blog. If students write a comment which may be considered hurtful to another student, Katie will use that as a teachable moment and discuss why such statements are inappropriate. While Katie understood the need for such precautions, she believed much of the concern about child predators finding victims online is not as dangerous as another practice that parents often applaud. I don’t know what the law is in the United States, but if you were in a public place here, the newspaper could go and take your picture and get the name and post it at anytime without your permission. So, who are the students more in danger from? Someone who is in the same city, or someone who lives in Timbuktu? Overview

78 Katie called herself a “very odd duck” for the fact she did not use technology outside of the classroom applications. “I’m not a techie person.” Katie talked about how her blog had changed since she started 4 years ago. The first year we did it, I didn’t put on any pictures or anything. I wrote. They wrote. It wasn’t very interesting to look at all. And then the next year, I finally figured out how to put pictures on. Then you learn new things as they come along. Katie had several intentions for using blogs with her students, but making and receiving comments was not one of those intentions. Commenting was another discovery Katie made after she had started using the blog. Initially I was just looking to get the kids’ stuff online. I didn’t even realize it (the commenting feature) would be there to tell you the truth. But once I realized it, then I realized what a powerful thing it was. Katie did not anticipate how much her students would learn from their blogging buddies by receiving comments. They learned about sharks and volcanoes from the New Zealanders and a fire safety poem from students in Australia. All of this learning was like a domino affect, leading to even more questions and continued exchanges of information. Katie now expects this type of learning to happen simply because her students blog. While Katie’s blog has transformed over time, she said her expectations have always been exceeded. “It’s always just gone above; the results have been way beyond what I expected could happen.” She gave the example of a wiki she created to collect 1,000 signatures. She wanted her students to get a visual representation of what 1,000 looked like. The students put their names on it. The parents put their names on it. Katie wrote about it on the blog, and 21/2 months later, they had 1,000 signatures. As an instructor, Katie felt the connections she made were a benefit. “It’s the connections you make outside your classroom. You’re really inviting the world into your

79 classroom to help you teach these kids; sort of sharing the burden.” She also felt this connection was important to her students’ learning as well. “For the long term, I think it’s really important for them to see the potential of how they can learn and how they can connect to other people.” By taking advantage of the complete blogging process where students are writing, an audience is reading and commenting on their work, Katie believed her students felt they were authentic writers which validated their work. “I think they’re much more interested in writing and they’re much more aware of themselves as writers because they have an audience than kids were in my class before we blogged.” As far as continuing to use blogs and wikis with her students, Katie left no doubt that this practice would continue. “I can’t imagine doing this [teaching] without it.” Mike Mike was an elementary teacher for 18 years. At the time of this study, he was a third-grade teacher of a class of 20 English language learners, ELL, students. As a sheltered ELL class, Mike explained his class size was a bit smaller, allowing him more time to focus on language development. Mike's school had a total student population of 510 with a low income rate of 40%. Located in the suburbs of a large Midwestern city, Mike described his school as being "on the other side of the tracks. They're the mores and we're the lesses on this side." This low income rate enabled his school to participate in the Enhancing Education through Technology, E2T2, Grant. This grant provided his district with technology hardware, software, and professional development. Mike served as the lead teacher for the grant. His responsibilities included attending regional and state trainings in order to provide in-house training for the teachers in his building. Mike also

80 taught a graduate level class about using technology with ELL students for a local university. Determination to Use Technology When determining whether to use technology, Mike always considered his students. When I want them to do a project and I kind of look at…is this the best way of doing it? Or can they do it more efficiently or just as effectively? How can it be useful? How can we get the kids more involved? Basically, what are the benefits? He understood how the age of his third-grade students can place limitations on the activities he designed. The typing ability of students, especially ELL students, can be somewhat restrictive. It takes a long time for them to type anything. Not just because they are ELL, just this age. Being ELL does make it a little slower, but mostly because they have to search for the letters all the time. Mike considered this factor when he designed his blog to be a class blog that did not include individual student blogs. Mike’s Project Description While Mike's school district provided professional development for its teachers, his first exposure to blogs was at a mini-conference. Mike immediately saw a way to use his students' excitement about technology and his goal to improve their literacy in a manner he had not done before. Because anything on the computer, my kids, they go nuts. They love it. So, getting them on there, and I write the posts. They're reading it. They'll sit there and read that before they read a book. So it's a chance to get them reading something. The blog also offered an opportunity for his students to post positive reinforce-

81 ment of their peers' accomplishments. This is quite visible in the students’ responses to Mike's posts. After posting congratulatory remarks to several students for passing their daily math test, Grace was one of three students to post similar remarks to her peers. She wrote, "I am passing every day. Daria is passing every day. I want everybody to pass on Friday." Another function of the blog was to communicate with his students when he was not in the classroom. As a trainer and the lead teacher for the E2T2 Grant, Mike often missed school for professional development. Not only did he catch up on what was going on in the class, his posts offered an opportunity to share information about his location. While attending a workshop in Springfield, Mike uploaded some pictures of the state capitol to his blog. He asked the students questions about some of the photos. A link to information that would lead to the answer was included. Students would then post their answers to the questions in their responses. (See Figure 3.)

82

Figure 3. Mike’s post on his blog After blogging for about a year, Mike also started using wikis with his students. As part of their E2T2 grant training, teachers created a technology project that aligned with the Illinois Teaching Standards as well and the International Society for Technology in Education, ISTE Standards. This resulted in a collaborative effort with a first-grade teacher in his building to design a wiki. Mike’s third-grade students served as “language coaches” for these first-grade writers, helping them to make corrections, leave a comment, or ask a question about what was written. “It gives my kids a chance to edit the first-grade posts and actually know what some of the mistakes are. They get to be the language coaches in this situation.” By serving as the language coaches for first-grade students, Mike’s ELL class had an opportunity to learn grammar through error analysis in a meaningful way (Gilbert, Goldstein, Jacobs, & Winn-Bell Olsen, 1997) and gain confidence in their second language abilities.

83 A second wiki enabled Mike’s students to collaborate on various writing activities. Through this partnership, students worked together to create, edit, and revise content. Mike saw this collaborative endeavor as a benefit to his students. In this case, they are collaborating as peers and creating meaning and understanding together. Since their language proficiencies are closer, they are working in their ZPD, zone of proximal development, from Vygotsky or their l+1 from Stephen Krashen. This is just beyond their proficiency level, so they are learning something new because it's not totally a foreign concept. So, a student may learn something about putting in periods to break up a long sentence, because they already know that a period ends a sentence and a sentence is a thought. If a peer shows them a run-on sentence and shows them how it's two thoughts, learning takes place. While Mike’s primary tool of choice was the blog, he used a wiki to provide other opportunities for his students: collaboration, reflection, as well as practice and application of their second language. As with blogging, time and scheduling were issues for Mike, so the wikis were not as developed as he wanted them to be. He was not satisfied with the amount of writing his students did and hoped to see both the amount of writing and the amount of publishing increase in the future. Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis In addition to improving literacy, Mike saw the blog as an opportunity to praise his students' efforts. I do the posts and give them in the morning when they first come in. They've got seven computers set up that can access it. So they can come in. They can read the posts, read comments, and like I said on the introduction to mine: It's just a blog for my class of third graders. I'll celebrate their accomplishments and brag about them. So just a place where I can kind of encourage them, and they're actually reading, responding, leaving comments back. So, it's literacy, and just a place to pump them up a little bit. Student Preparation

84 Commenting is a unique feature associated with blogs. Posting a comment to a public blog essentially invites anyone in the world to make a comment. For Mike, this was considered a significant reason for utilizing student blogs. He used this aspect as a motivational factor for students to do their best writing. Mike discussed what it meant to make your writing public with his students. We talk about this. This is out there. The world can see it, so you want to do your best. Before you put it up there, you’re going to want to do everything to make it as correct as you know how. Student Impact Mike found increased student motivation to be primary factor that impacted his students. He found they were more likely to read the blog than read a book. Students would also endeavor to read more difficult passages when reading text on the screen. “If it’s on the computer, they will attempt to read things they wouldn’t read in a book.” Students were excited to see their name on the blog and read what Mike and their classmates would say about them. This enthusiasm helped to push students beyond the language obstacles faced by ELL students; as well as keyboarding challenges faced by almost all third-grade students. Mike used his blog as a means to encourage and promote student learning. He complimented them on their success and provided words of encouragement to help students realize difficult goals. (See Figure 4.)

85

Figure 4. Post from Mike’s class blog

These types of posts served as a model for his students. They soon began encouraging their classmates as well. (See Figure 5.)

86

Figure 5. Comments from Mike’s students Concerns Mike did not indicate he provided direct instruction about online safety, yet he did express a concern about exposure to inappropriate comments. While his blog was public, he alone had the ability to create and post original content. The students provided input through the commenting feature. Every comment had to be approved by Mike before it was posted to the blog. This assured no inappropriate messages were ever made public. Access to technology is a definite concern for Mike. Of his 20 students, only 4 report having a computer at home and 2 of those have Internet access. It may be the only contact with a computer they have, really. So I want them using it as much as possible, for as many different things as possible. This is one of the new things on the Internet, so even if they’re not posting a lot, just leaving comments, they’re at least experiencing it a little bit. It’s exposure for them.

87 Knowing students had limited access at home, also limited the way Mike used the blog. If he knew more parents could see it, he would use it as a communication and support tool as well; informing parents of classroom events and providing instructional support links to online resources. I could do blog posts daily, but they could only see them in school. Just finding the time to get them to the computers to read and comment is a challenge. Future Uses Mike expressed a desire to do more with wikis with the intent of having his students create more of the content. He tossed around ideas to do book reviews or have a class Wikipedia. As he made possible suggestions, the subject of access came up again. “With my class too, I’m thinking since a lot of them don’t have access at home, even just to a computer, anything that they can do with a computer now is just going to help them.” Summary Increased opportunities to write were vital for Mike’s third-grade ELL students. Mike used both blogs and wikis to present multiple means for his students to engage with the English language. Varying student schedules and difficulty in keyboarding were significant factors in Mike’s determination to only allow student input through comments. In a partnership with first-graders, Mike’s students served as language coaches, supporting first-graders as they edited their work on a class wiki. This collaborative effort helped Mike’s students apply their skills and gain a sense of empowerment by assisting younger, less capable students. An additional wiki enabled Mike’s class to collaborate on various writing projects. Mike felt the peer editing process and occasional group conferencing with him created additional methods for practice, support, application of language skills, and continued opportunities to read and write.

88 Though all these learning situations were available, Mike still came back to his initial intent. “I like it for my original purpose, just to kind of brag about them and encourage them, and communicate when I’m gone.” It is interesting to note that Mike is still assessing and reflecting on his intent. “So it's kind of an experiment. I'm still trying to figure out a good and a better way of using it. I think that the benefits are there; the literacy.” In addition, Mike was exceedingly aware that consistency is an important factor; one which he felt had not been achieved. “I didn’t do as much as I should have. I need to make sure that we are writing more. As Jason Ohler said, ‘When they write, they think.’ I need to make that happen.” Grant Over the course of Grant’s 17-year career as an educator, he has taught every grade from first through fifth and served as a staff developer. At the time of this interview, Grant had been in a fifth-grade position for 3 years. A P-5 building located in a northeast suburb of New York, NY, Grant’s school was one of four in the district and had a student population of 620 students. Grant described the local area as being very diverse. “We definitely have two sides of the track in our district; a wealthy side of town and a not-so-wealthy side.” Thirty to 40% of the student population was designated as ESL, and 20% receive Free and Reduced Lunch services. Grant is also an award recipient for his work with blogs and student writing. Determination to Use Technology Grant’s determination to use technology stems from his experience as a first-grade teacher. Theories he formed about student learning applied to his current students.

89 I used to teach first grade and I often go back to that experience, because I learned pretty quickly that if I can get the kids together, talking together, socializing in cooperative groups, whatever you want to call it, things worked out better. Grant saw blogs as “a natural extension” of the benefit students experience through collaboration and cooperation. His choice of how and when to use technology, was based on the potential for such connections. “Ultimately I think the tools that really grab me are the ones that can make connections between kids and that they can share things among themselves.” Grant’s Project Descriptions The majority of content found on the main page of Grant’s class blog portal was intentionally stagnant. It provided information about classes that collaborated with his students, books read in class, directions about posting a comment, online safety, teacher assignments and links to individual student blogs. Grant, another self-taught educational blogger, first became aware of blogs and wikis online as he watched how they were being used by other teachers. In his analysis, he determined much of the material on class blogs was classroom-based and difficult for an outside party to understand. Then he came across the work done by Anne Davis (http://anne.teachesme.com), another educational blogger. Her students were blogging about the news Grant saw that as a viable solution that addressed his concern. Grant considered the news a universal topic. He hoped the fact that more people could identify with the news would spark the general public’s interest and facilitate its ability to comment on the students’ writing. This led to one of multiple uses for his blog, student posts about the news. Because Grant found it difficult for all his students to access one of the four classroom computers, the class usually completed their blog post

90 about the news once a week in the computer lab. Another purpose for the blog was to display student compositions for formal writing assignments. Most of the time these pieces were submitted electronically; however, the pioneer journal entries were handwritten and scanned. (See Figure 6.)

Figure 6. A pioneer journal post

Yet another type of writing found on student blogs was self-initiated student writing projects. These projects came in various forms, but were more likely to be a script for an interview or a screenplay and were often completed by a student at home.

91 Grant recently initiated another district-wide blog. Any fifth grade student could post a review of a book they had read. As students prepared to go to the library, they could go through the reviews to find a book they someone had recommended. Fifth grade students also posted responses to prompts about books assigned in class; all with the intent for students to write about their reading. Unlike the class blog, this was not public and was password protected. Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Commenting is a unique feature associated with blogs. Posting a comment to a public blog essentially invites anyone in the world to make a comment. For Grant, it appeared to be an essential reason to use blogs with his students: “If I didn’t have other classrooms commenting to the work they’re doing, then I probably wouldn’t be doing it.” Grant utilized the analogy of using a fishing worm as bait with his students. He explained that a post is like a worm. It must be fat and juicy in order to lure the audience into making a comment. Collaboration was also an important consideration for Grant. “Whatever helps the kids correspond with each other; collaborate and communicate with each other; I think that helps. Blogs for me were just a natural extension of that.” It is interesting to note that the importance of collaboration extends to his profession as an educator as well. This was evident as Grant explained the reason he continued to use the same blogging tool, even though others had more advanced features, was due to the strong user support forum. As a member of several networks, Grant felt he knew the educators with whom he collaborated better than the ones in his school.

92 In addition to the potential for commenting and collaboration, blogs offer students an audience other than the classroom teacher, their peers, or parents, a feature Grant found valuable. So valuable in fact, Grant often searched for other schools with which to exchange comments. Grant would have his students comment on the blogs of other classes in the hope they would reciprocate. You’ve got to work really hard to set up connections to other classrooms so you can get a tangible audience going. If you don’t, the kids right away are not going to see the point. It’s going to be like a fancy bulletin board. Student Preparation Grant’s strategy to prepare his students to use blogs was more about the purpose than the tool. Since the students were writing a review of a news article or event, Grant instructed them on how to construct a summary. He also prepared them on another writing technique, how to construct a meaningful comment. Grant used an actual comment made to a student blog as a model. During this weekly activity, the class discussed the effectiveness of the comment, and how they might apply the writer’s techniques to improve both their posts and comments they made to others. Knowing his student’s writing would be exposed to a larger, more public audience, Grant talked about the impression this would make on the readers. “We talk about that it’s going to have a greater audience; to make sure that you proofread your work.” Grant also had discussion with his class about the differences between more formal writing, and the informal writing style many of his students used, Internet Messaging, IM. “Just talking about this is a formal type of writing that people are going to see and judge you based on how you write.”

93 Student Impact Grant witnessed some positive changes in student writing. Some students found blogging to be more engaging, which motivated them to write more. Some students gained an increased ability to target that writing toward a specific audience. Yet Grant was not convinced that this was fundamentally true. It’s still up in the air for me whether it actually improves their writing. Gosh, what I really should be doing this for is to help them get to be better writers really, and I’m not quite sure about that. Grant was another participant in search of proof that might substantiate the supposition that blogs had a positive impact on student writing. He was currently working on a research design with a professor and another classroom teacher. An authentic audience proved to be motivating for this fifth grade class. Grant described a reaction from a student when he realized just how far away his work was being read. “I had this boy Jason, and he just turned around from his computer and said, ‘Man! People from China are reading my stuff!’” Yet Grant does not believe this enthusiasm is shared by all of his students. From his observations, Grant felt his stronger writers “naturally gravitated” toward blogging; while those who ”struggled” were aware of their weakness and hesitant to make their work visible to the public. Grant hoped his research would reveal tangible evidence to indicate whether or not blogging for a global audience actually improved student writing. Overview Before using blogs, Grant had attempted to provide an outlet for his student work by posting their projects on a Webpage. He even went to the trouble of first creating an

94 email link and later a discussion board link to provide a method for commenting on each student’s work. Feedback was a critical goal. I was spending a lot of time, these were first graders too, digitizing their work, putting it up there, and manually trying to put in the email links; underneath each work there was an email link under it so anybody that came and visited, parents in particular at that point, could email a link. I would copy and paste those comments underneath the work. When blogging tools finally appeared that enabled him to moderate any comment made to a student’s blog, Grant found a tool that matched his goal of providing his students with an authentic, participatory audience and his need to keep students safe online. Grant’s blog assignments varied from prompts about instructional topics to student posts about self-selected news articles. A third option for posting was also available. Embedded in Grant’s formal writing curriculum were self-initiated writing projects. Students often chose to complete one of these projects on their own time. In order to publish their work on the blog, they had to go through the formal writing process of drafting, revising, and editing. After their work was published, some students took it to another level. They turned their piece into a script; practiced the part with their friends during recess or lunch; and then videotaped their play. Students then took the video and embedded it into the blog post with their writing project. “I’ve always had writing projects, but it’s never taken off because we didn’t have this publishing forum…They get so charged about it.” It was these self-selected writing pieces that gave students the freedom to choose, ensuring that they read and/or wrote about a topic of interest to them. (See Figure 7.)

95

Figure 7. Screen shot of a self-initiated writing post

Grant had many questions about the value of blogging with students. “I still don’t know whether it’s worth all the work, to be honest. I think the kids enjoy it. But it takes a

96 lot of instructional time, and it’s not something I’m held accountable for.” Part of his concern was based on the fact other fifth-grade teachers were not blogging with their students, so they had to be using their instructional time differently. I’m doing that, and the other fifth grade classrooms are doing something else. I assume they’re doing something about the mandated curriculum that I’m not doing. I can make the argument that hopefully it is helping them write, think, and read. Yet he continued to be pleased by his students’ enthusiasm when they received comments on their work, and their excitement about the connections and collaboration they had with students from around the world. Further doubt came after reading the post of Will Richardson, an educational blogger that Grant followed. Richardson was looking for examples of posts where students connected to what they were reading by discussing that author’s work in their own blog. This was not a skill Grant thought his students could demonstrate. “My kids do not do that. They write in an isolated lab or classroom. They’re putting it out there and if they’re lucky they get a comment back from one of these kids that we’ve set up.” It is interesting to note that one of Grant’s students’ posts about the news (See Figure 8.) caught the attention of junior high class somewhere in cyberspace. (See Figure 9.)

Figure 8. Screen shot of Kitty’s original post on Gordon’s blog

97

Figure 9. Screen shot from a junior high class blog in reference to Kitty’s post

To address some of these concerns, Grant was in the process of designing an action research study to find some quantitative evidence of the effect blogging had on student writing. Perhaps Grant will find some of the answers he is seeking to support a practice he felt he could rationalize, “I think in my mind that I can rationalize spending the time with the kids doing this;” but had difficulty justifying. Rita Rita, a fifth-grade teacher in one of several K-5 buildings, taught in a large suburban district of Atlanta. She described her class of 24 students as very diverse. At the time of this study, Rita also served as the “blogging” teacher for the other two fifth grades in her building. A rotation cycle was established, and science and social studies were taught to Rita’s class by the other instructors. In 6 years of teaching, Rita had completed both her Masters and Specialist degree in Education. Rita explained a specialist degree was the equivalent of having all the course work done for a terminal degree in education.

98 Determination to Use Technology Rita was a unique participant. As with all the other participants in this study, she was a regular classroom teacher. However, she also assumed the responsibility for teaching a class devoted to using blogs for the other two fifth-grade classes. Rita’s determination to use technology is fundamentally based on her preparations for this class. I think it’s a matter of planning what kind of lesson I’m going to do and what kind of standards I’m going to incorporate. With blogging, it’s just how far can I go? There are so many things out there I can do. Rita’s Project Description Rita was influenced by the work of Anne Davis, an educational blogger, but in a much more personal way (http://anne.teachesme.com). Davis had actually done some student blogging projects with Rita’s class the previous year. When Davis went on to other ventures, Rita decided to continue the work Davis had started. Only this time, all fifth-grade students would be involved as Rita took on the roll of blogging instructor. Students from the three classes were placed on a rotating schedule and met with Rita two times a week. In order for this to work, Rita’s regular classroom students received instruction in science and social studies from the other fifth-grade teachers. As the students now came more often, Rita had to expand some of Davis’ previous ideas. One factor that increased the popularity of blogs was the simplicity of use; knowledge of html coding language was no longer necessary to post information, graphics, and hyperlinks to the Internet (Blood, 2002). Yet one still has to know procedures for accomplishing these tasks, even if it was only a matter of knowing which buttons to push. Specific time scheduled for blogging instruction, enabled Rita to instruct her students on

99 the features of their blogging tool, plus wide variety of techniques and procedures to enhance their blog. A single blog served as the portal for the all three fifth-grade classes. Rita kept the audience informed about the blogging topics in her posts located on the main page of the blog. Links to individual student blogs, recent comments, archived posts, other classes who read and commented on their blogs, and current event resources were also available on the main page. Rita saw this as an excellent opportunity to reinforce the skills and expand on some of the topics that were covered in the other subject areas. Blog prompts were designed for students to apply skills in a more creative manner. For example, students drew geometric shapes and asked their classmates to find the area. While completing this task, students also learned how to insert and manipulate a graphic. (See Figure 10.) Students also practiced the skill of “true blogging.” They first read another student blog they found interesting. Then they hyperlinked to the original post in their blog and wrote a reflection of how they connected to what they read.

100

Figure 10. A student post and comments for the area of a geometric figure

101

Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Rita had a specific intent for a specific event; an intent that served a dual purpose. First, Rita was looking for a way to enhance their writing curriculum and make it more relevant for the students. “My biggest goal, my biggest hope for this was to reinforce things we were learning in the regular classroom but in an innovative way.” Second, Rita wanted students to have the opportunity to review and extend concepts covered in other content areas. Writing was the fundamental premise for using blogs with Rita’s fifth-grade students. According to Rita, traditional writing instruction, based on the five-paragraph essay, was very “formulated and rigid.” She saw blogs as a way to apply writing skills learned in the regular classroom in an innovative and creative way. “Overall I wanted it to be an exciting way for us to review things we were learning in the classroom and go deeper with.” Rita considered blogs to be a bridge between knowledge students acquired about the formal writing process and the application of that knowledge to the more engaging writing form of blogging; a process she was certain would improve student writing. Rita viewed blogs as a means to make writing relevant to her students. She believed blogs had the potential to create opportunities to apply writing to “real-life situations.” All student posts were written in response to a prompt or topic, yet these assignments allowed for degrees of student choice and opportunities to relate to personal experiences. Assignments were often an application of concepts learned in various content areas; such as their reaction to a movie about the peril of our planet, a plan to

102 conserve water, the description and properties of a geometric shape, or analogies. Many posts involved the use of student created graphics or the manipulation of existing graphics; all which required creativity on the part of the student. Student Preparation Rita found the relaxed atmosphere of the computer lab often resulted in “lazy speech,” such as using slang words or inserting emoticons. She felt these might even be behaviors they had acquired from using computers at home. Rita stressed the fact the blogging class had the same high expectations of the more formal style of writing used in language arts. For some students, this was a daily struggle. Student Impact Personal blogs enabled these fifth-grade students to invite other members of the audience to share their perspectives on topics or projects the students wrote about on their blogs. (See Figure 11 as an example.) This interaction established opportunities to gain a different perspective from other students, as well as the general audience. Rita’s word for the impact of authentic audience on her students was ownership. “There’s a little bit more ownership because they know so many people can read their work, and the feedback they get.” There was a sense that students wanted to “show off” their work in the hopes of soliciting more comments. This spurred a higher student interest, which Rita believed motivated them to demonstrate what they knew. Rita also felt blogging gave a voice to students who were hesitant to speak up in the regular classroom, a fact that was not missed by the other fifth grade teachers who worked with these students. “In particular, students that maybe in the regular classroom

103 are very reserved or low performing, we have seen some students like that who have produced some really good work in the blogs.”

Figure 11. A student post in Rita’s class and two comments Overview In essence, Anne Davis served as a mentor for Rita. Davis would come at scheduled times during the week to work with Rita’s class. Rita chose to continue this practice of teaching and learning centered on blogging and how it could support other educational topics. This created a unique environment, one very different from the students’ other scheduled classes. Their physical surroundings were different and so was their task. “They’re not just writing on paper and turning it in, and then they get a grade,

104 and that’s kind of the end of it. What they put on their blog is there for everyone to see and make comments.” Rita felt encouraged by the students’ work. Changes in scheduling made it possible to establish a blogging class. If the same opportunity did not exist next year, Rita planned to continue using blogs in her classroom, but she would focus their use in language arts. Students were not the only ones to benefit from using blogs. Despite the challenge of being “one step ahead of the kids,” Rita also saw a personal benefit in using blogs with her students. I think blogging helps me continue to grow and learn as a teacher. I am in some ways, out of my comfort zone when planning lessons and activities for my blog class. I learn new things about technology and teaching. This instructor saw value in this tool for all parties involved. Evan Evan, a 14-year veteran, was the eighth-grade American History teacher for a Midwestern junior high which housed 700 students in grades 8 and 9. As a suburb of Kansas City, MO, this upper-class suburban area was growing at such a rapid rate, it was difficult to build schools fast enough. Evan’s class size ranged from 23 to 30 students per class. Evan had also conducted workshops and presented at local and national conferences. In addition, Evan served as an instructor for a neighboring university teaching a masters level class, Technology for the Classroom, both face-to-face and online. Evan also earned the honor of teacher of the year for his state. Determination to Use Technology

105 When asked how he determined to use technology for student instruction, Evan’s response was simple.“It comes down to when I can get access for them on the computer.” Several stationary and mobile computer labs were available, but they still required advance scheduling and planning due to heavy usage. A one-to-one student to computer ratio was Evan’s idea of an ideal teaching and learning environment. As I tell a lot of people, if they would give me one-to-one computers, that would dramatically change my curriculum. If you want to set me loose, give everyone of my students a computer they can take home every day. We’ll be able to get a lot more done. We’ll be more efficient and we’ll get more actual education done. When and if that happens, it will change my curriculum a lot…If I had one-toone, I wouldn’t use the textbook. I would have enough resources available, at my disposal; just through government sites and different sites. I wouldn’t need the textbook at all. The only thing a textbook is for me right now is an anchor that kids can take home. Evan anticipated that when the new high school was built, it would be a one-to-one environment and this initiative would eventually trickle down to the junior high. Evan’s Project Descriptions Evan is another teacher who was impressed by the words of David Warlick, an educational blogger and speaker (http://davidwarlick.com/2cents). After hearing him speak at a conference, Evan read Warlick’s book and followed his blog. Warlick posted notes and slides from all his presentations on his blog and journaled about the experience. Evan was impressed that he could “keep track” of what Warlick was doing without actually being present. This sparked Evan’s interest and he began to experiment with blogs and other Web 2.0 tools. Most of what I do with Web 2.0 has been self-taught; just experimenting and reading. That’s a big thing that Will Richardson talks about too; learning the tools. It’s a lot easier now to walk into a workshop and learn about blogging or podcasting than it was 31/2 years ago. There weren’t very many people teaching it.

106 There weren’t very many people doing it. Most of the blogging and podcasting has been self-taught, experiment, trial and error; things work or don’t work. For the last 2 years, Evan has maintained a collaborative book blog on an historical fiction novel for young adults. This included an open invitation for any school in the world to join the blog and participate in the 4-week project. There are, however, a few factors that make this project quite unique from other similar projects. First, the author of the novel was an active participant in the blog. She moderated comments from the participants and asked some very deep and probing questions as well. (See Figure 12.)

Figure 12. Collaborative book blog

She also answered questions about her writing: how she decided on the characters she used; how much was factual; how much was fictional; and whether or not there would be a sequel. Second, the novel took place during a time period that was a required topic in the curriculum; an important consideration for Evan. Third, the setting for these actual

107 events was the town where the school was located; an opportunity for Evan’s students to learn more about their local history. Evan received a grant to purchase 350 books, one for every student in the school and a few copies that could be checked out by parents and other community members. Three or four questions were posted each week. Students were only required to comment on two of these posts any time during the project, but they were free to comment more often and ask questions of the author. Evan also posted other content that was pertinent to the historical events in the novel: video clips, other websites, and podcasts done by the author. As a culminating activity, each student was required to produce a final product in the form of a movie poster, an alternate ending to the story, an alternate book jacket, an interview with one of the characters, or a poem. These were also posted on the blog and open to comments from the audience. As a sustained silent reading activity, students read every day for 20 minutes. In an effort to create an opportunity for his students to talk about the books they read, Evan built a different type of book blog for students. Once every 2 weeks, students could submit a book review and rating of a novel they had read recently. (See Figure 13.) Any student in the school could then view these reviews and submit one of their own. What I used to do is put a bulletin board up in the back of my room. But now it’s in a place where you can be in the library and check it out. You could be at home. Other people beyond just my students can look at it if they wanted to see some suggestions for eighth grade reading. I think a lot of times adults try to push books on eighth grade readers. This is a way for eighth graders to tell other eighth graders what they liked or didn’t like about books.

108 Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Evan had a specific intent for a specific event. Evan needed a physical place where over 300 students, some in a different time zone or hemisphere, could share in a conversation and exploration of an historical novel with the author; “a virtual space where you’re not limited by the confinements of physicalness or time.” His students interacted with other participating classes from across the nation, as well as with the other 300 fifth-graders in Evan’s school. Technology was the vehicle students used to share ideas, discuss concepts, or propose differing opinions.

Figure 13. A book review post by a student

Student Preparation Internet messaging (IM) was the by-product of a need for economy; to converse rapidly using text, rather than voice, with the popularity of digital communication

109 (Shortis, 2007). Teachers soon became anxious about the invasion of IM into more formal English and language arts classes (Howard & Monfils, 2007; Ross, 2007; Roussin, 2008). This too was a concern for Evan. He spent time to address the need and purpose for different styles of writing. I think students today have more of a variety of languages they use. They have their IM language, and they have their verbal language when they’re in the hallway with each other. Then they’re supposed to have formal language that they use when they write their term papers and things. Just kind of talking about audience; we’re not going to be talking in IM. We’re actually going to use full word and sentences and things like that. I think that’s a big part of it. Just talking about this is a formal type of writing that people are going to see and judge you on based on how you write. Audience consideration was an additional factor for Evan. By having a professional blog, Evan understood the far-reaching capabilities of a blog and the impact a public audience can have on you as a person and author. He considered it important for his students to understand this power. Part of it is having the students understand that what they post is going to be global and try and do the best work possible, because they know that it’s not just going to be Mr. Evan reading it; it’s going to be possibly thousands of people. I think that that increases their desire to write better when they know they’re going to have a larger audience. Student Impact “Blogging is writing.” For Evan, there was an obvious connection between a Web 2.0 tool and a task performed by every K-12 student. Even before Evan introduced his class to blogging, writing was a prominent element in his classroom. Evan indicated there was however a difference in the way writing was evaluated and discussed. In some cases, they might have been writing the same amount, but it’s not being read the same. It’s not being discussed the same. I probably didn’t do as much of a quality job of giving feedback. It’s a lot richer type of writing now than it would have been before.

110 Evan saw a direct correlation between opportunities to write, an outcome of blogging, and the potential to help students’ ability to communicate. Evan also utilized a mentor in his book blog project; the actual author of the novel being discussed through the blog. Evan’s mentor did more than just communicate with students through comments. She served as Evan’s partner, posting and answering questions, as well as moderating and facilitating comments. Evan found the author’s participation in the blog to be a valuable asset. “I know some students wrote more in comments or corresponded with the author more than they would have if they just would have read the book traditionally.” This type of interaction would not have been possible without the basic features found in a blog. Evan concluded his students were motivated to write more accurately due to the fact their work was now visible to a larger, more global audience. “I think it increases their desire to write better when they know they’re going to have a larger audience.” Knowing the novel’s author was as a participating audience member motivated some students to actually write longer posts than they did for other occasions. Perhaps the factor which had the greatest impact on the students was the removal of the barriers of time and space. Students who were more reserved and reluctant to speak in class were no longer contained by four walls with all eyes on them. I definitely saw that some students were able to have more of a discussion online than they would in a physical classroom by raising their hand and speaking in front of the class. They had a voice they don’t necessarily have in a traditional classroom… For such students, it seems like a dichotomy, there’s more freedom posting to the blog than there is to raise your hand in class.

111 They were free to think, write, and edit until they were satisfied with their work before they had to make it public. As for time, students no longer had to wait for a specific period of the day to ask a question or share a thought. As soon as a student had a spontaneous or creative idea, he could write a post or comment on the blog, extending the discussion beyond the confinement of the classroom walls or school day. Concerns Evan reiterated the concern of many classroom teachers, that of Internet safety. To combat that problem, he used controlled measures. Evan and the author served as the gateway to the blog. They approved comments before they were ever made public. Evan did not allow students to even use their first name and required them to use a pseudonym. Everything is filtered when I do the book blog through me. It’s approved or disapproved through me. Nothing is posted without my approval. I eliminate the safety issues. I think the issue with blogs is: how do I make it secure so it’s not open to people who would use it for the wrong things. Evan conveyed the purpose for the blog is the discussion, and not simply for students to see their names in print. “It’s not about the name of the person. It’s about the actual discussion.” Access to technology is also a concern for Evan. He does not have the desired level of access at school, and he is also unsure of the students’ accessibility at home. Evan considered this inequity of access a limitation. Everything that I do with computers now is basically an enhancement. I can’t really ensure that every student has access outside of my classroom. So I can’t engrain the technology into my curriculum as much as I could if it was 1-to-1. Overview

112 Evan gained first-hand experience with blogs by maintaining a professional blog. Evan saw the opportunity to collaborate with teachers from around the world as a benefit and considered it his “personal learning community.” Evan extended the importance of collaboration onto his student blog projects: other schools could participate in the collaborative book blog and any student in the school could submit a book review for the library blog. It is easy to understand why Evan would like to have a one-to-one computer environment, as blogs were not the only form of technology Evan uses with his students. He also used podcasting and digital stories to enhance his curriculum and student learning. In addition, Evan served as an example and mentor for other educational bloggers. All of his conference presentations as well as his classroom materials were posted on line via his professional blog. Many of these had an accompanying podcast which provided a narration or explanation. The cornerstone of Evan’s blog projects was the collaborative book blog. Evan searched for 3 or 4 years before he found a book that met his criteria of relevance to the curriculum. The book he ultimately found not only was directly related to the social studies curriculum, this piece of historical fiction actually took place in the city in which the school is located. As an additional element of relevance, the book’s author was an active participant in the book blog. Students interacted directly with the author; asked questions of the author; responded to questions posed by the author; while the author also commented on the students’ blog posts. Direct contact with the author helped students to deepen their understanding of the historical events as well as the author’s intent for writing the story. This connection also afforded them the opportunity to gain an

113 understanding of how an expert in the field works. Using a tool such as a blog facilitated this authentic, real-world activity. Donna Donna was a high school science teacher for 28 years. At the time of this study, she taught anatomy/physiology and advanced placement, AP, biology to 110 students. Her high school, located in a Midwestern city, had a student population of 1,500 students and had recently attained a low income rate of 40%. She served as a district technology trainer, as well as a trainer for the Technology Feast, a week-long technology summer camp for K-12 teachers. Donna had also been awarded Technology Teacher of the Year by a state educational technology organization. Determination to Use Technology Donna's determination factors were centered on the students and making learning meaningful and relevant to their lives. I'm looking for ways to make the curriculum relevant; tied to some of the issues the kids are facing. If it helps kids learn the material, or expands their knowledge, or prepares them for the real world, and it's related to technology, you know I look for it. I use it. In addition, Donna had investigated the literature to support an action research project she was conducting. She found evidence that supported the impact audience can have on student writing. “The research that I did indicated that kids tended to write better, and do a better job when they know more than just the classroom teacher is going to read their response.” Donna’s Project Descriptions

114 Donna's first exposure to blogs and wikis was at a conference where she heard educational bloggers Will Richardson and David Warlick speak (http://davidwarlick.com/ 2cents). She was moved by the ideas she heard at the conference. "I mean I was so, I mean just awed by that man [Will Richardson (2006)]. The fact that his students studied the Secret Live of Bees with the author of the book, it brought the world into the classroom!" Donna created one class blog. However, she utilized the same blog for two individual projects which were modifications of previous assignments that did not involve this type of technology. The first centered on Taylor's story. Taylor was a high school student who committed suicide while attempting to stop using steroids. Students researched the effect of steroids on the human body. Facts found to be questionable were substantiated or refuted by other sources. In addition, they created action plans which might enable schools, communities and families to help prevent steroid use by high school students. The second project involved the Kennewick Man, a 9,000 year old skeleton. A debate raged between Native American tribes and scientists over the ownership of the remains. Scientists wanted to study the remains, while the Native Americans wanted them to be repatriated. Students studied both sides of the argument. They then selected a position, supported by at least three pieces of data. This topic was even more relevant as Native American skulls and artifacts had been found in a local attic the previous summer. Students were able to compare and contrast how these incidents were resolved. For Donna, helping students to understand the significance of being well informed on both sides of an issue was a key consideration in her intended design.

115 I've got kids starting to think like scientists. I don't want them making choices and decisions without being informed. I think that's one life skill…If they take that away from my class, then I think I've been successful as a classroom teacher. They have to be able to study all sides of an issue before taking a position. Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Donna strategically designed the blog projects to be centered on open-ended, controversial topics. “I wanted to focus in on issues that were open ended. There was no right or wrong answer. I didn't want them to think that they could just give me what they thought I wanted.” Students were expected to study an issue from multiple perspectives before they determined which side of the issue they supported. Problem-based activities required students to investigate truths and myths about steroid use to generate possible ideas to assist schools, communities and/or parents to stop the use of steroids by high school students; a very authentic and relevant project. Student Impact Donna, who had conducted the same project with paper and pencil, said there was a definite improvement in the quality of writing done on the student blogs. She felt students did a better job of supporting their arguments, because they were reading the posts from other classmates. In addition, knowledge of arguments and suppositions made by their peers contributed to richer class discussions. Donna also found access to an authentic audience influenced their students’ writing. Donna recently conducted some action research on student writing. In her review of the literature, Donna found an audience other than that of the classroom teacher did help to improve student writing. She was using blogs in an effort to find evidence that this held true for her students.

116 Concerns At a state technology conference, Donna had heard some statistical information about Internet predators that concerned her. I mean, one in five kids are solicited by some kind of a predator when they're online. That concerns me. I mean I don't have a problem with teaching kids how to be safe and all of that stuff. I just don't want that exposure to occur because they've worked on a project for me. I couldn't live with that. To address this concern, Donna’s class analyzed several articles about Internet predators and other online safety issues. Together the class formulated a “Safe Blogging Policy” which was signed by every student. All other participants, except for Mike, instructed their students about online safety issues. Some allowed their students to use their first name only, while others required students to use a pseudonym. Donna was also very apprehensive about the freedom her students would have to post comments in a public environment such as a blog. “It is a risk doing a technology project with kids the first time because you don’t' know, I mean they're teenagers. God only knows what they're going to come up with sometimes.” The blogging tool Donna used does allow comment moderation, but this feature would only work as a class blog; which is exactly how this project blog was designed. Setting up individual student blogs using this particular blogging tool was another concern. Donna had received some spam directly related to a blog post using the word, steroids, something she did not want her students to experience. I didn't want to expose kids to other inappropriate emails and responses from people and stuff too. With Blogger, if you post it to Blogger, you run that risk. It's just like what I got with the steroids posting. I wasn't ready for that.

117 These concerns have prompted Donna to consider using Moodle, a content management system, in order to be able to control outside access. As a result, her blog is no longer public, so no screen shots have been included. Overview This was the first time Donna used blogs with her students, and she considered it “an experiment.” This project was related to some action research she was doing for her Masters degree, looking at the impact of blogs on reading scores. However, bad weather conditions forced schools to cancel classes several times. This in turn impacted her teaching schedule as she had to make adjustments for the lost time, coupled with the fact she started mid-year. Because of these factors, Donna felt the implementation of her blog projects did not go smoothly. She relied heavily on information acquired from her review of the literature when deciding to use blogs with her students. “I spent a lot of time researching the connection between writing and reading and thinking. It [blogging] brings together those three.” Her research on writing also added credence to using a blog for its ability to provide an additional audience. Because in my research, one of the important things that research was showing is that kids tended to do better with their writing if they know more than just the classroom teacher was going to read it. That's one of the reasons I went with a public. At the time of this study, this blog was public, but no outside comments were made from the available world-wide public audience. The only other persons reading the students’ work were their peers. Donna indicated this was enough of a change, from teacher as the sole audience, to have some positive impact on their writing and class discussions. Jeff

118 Jeff was a high school English teacher with 23 years of experience. He taught two classes: a typical sophomore English class and a "skills level" sophomore English class. Most of the students in the skills level class were instructional learning disabled, LD, students, many of whom had multiple handicaps. This was a suburban high school with a student population of 3,200. One of two campuses, Jeff described it as a middle class, white-collar school. In addition to teaching, Jeff served as a curricular technology consultant for two periods a day. His duties included assisting other teachers in the use of technology. Jeff also acted as the cooperative education trainer for his building, presented at state and national technology conferences, and had been recognized by the educational blogging community. Determination to Use Technology Jeff's determination for technology use was based on the curriculum, not the tool. According to Jeff, technology should not be used for the sake of using technology. It should be used in support of good curricular objectives. By providing a compelling reason for the use of technology, Jeff felt this helped the students acquire a deeper understanding for the purpose of the activity. Collaborative learning was the key factor in choosing a wiki as the tool for Jeff’s Literature Circles project. Going back with collaboration, the idea of negotiating meaning and working; going back and forth to add; to get kids to read and critique and go back and modify; I think this is a huge skill. Can you do that on paper and pencil? Sort of, but this is one case where the ability to make a clean delete and start over, and have multiple people be able to edit the same item; I think this is very valuable. Jeff’s Project Descriptions

119 Jeff's first exposure to blogs and wikis came at a technology conference. Unlike other participants in this study, Jeff did not see an immediate use for these tools. To be honest with you, I really didn't see the draw. I didn't see what the catch was. I didn't get it. And until I could wrap it around something that my students could use, then I'll make the decision on that. Now that part, I finally figured it out. Literature Circles were one of the required curricular components of sophomore English. Students read self-selected books in groups of three or four. Jeff felt his students merely "jumped through the hoops" and did not gain anything from the process. Rather than having typical group discussions associated with this method, Jeff created an individual wiki for each of the novels. Students in each group worked to create a study guide similar to CliffNotes or SparkNotes for their novel. As a class, they analyzed the structure of this type of study guide to determine what information was critical to someone who was unfamiliar with a particular novel. The wiki served as a collaborative work space for students to create and build their resource. At the end of the term, students took a test on one of the novels they had not read using the collaboratively created wiki as a resource. To add to the complexity, it had to be created in a different class than the one they attended. In a different and relatively new venture, Jeff created a blog for each student. These blogs resembled an electronic journal and acted as a private communication tool between Jeff and each individual student. This blog served a dual purpose as students were allowed to post drafts of essay questions from the final test for feedback from Jeff. In the past, Jeff’s tests had been open book, and the students could take them home overnight. This time, the students were presented with the test questions the day they began work on the novel.

120 I’ve been reading more Marzano and Stiggins. They always talk about working backwards. Start with the test; work backwards as you develop your objectives to go to there. I said, “I’m giving them a night to work on this test. Why don’t I give them the test before we start reading the book?” That way our discussion can have a real bearing. Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis Jeff’s assignments were designed to place the responsibility on the shoulders of his students to support the learning of their classmates. Their task was to build a resource to be used by other students in that course, and not necessarily the same class. If they can create text that their peers can use, not just be entertained by, but to use… “I’m going to be better off; I need to listen to you.” All of a sudden that makes the creator of that text much more accountable and more powerful and more, “I better be sure about what I’m doing because I’m being held to something. I’m not just doing it for the teacher.” A wiki was used as the writing space where students could collaborate to create content. Students negotiated meaning; read and critiqued each other’s work; and modified content in order to build an authentic resource to be used by students other than themselves. Student Preparation As defined in Chapter I of this study, a wiki is: “a collaborative Webspace where anyone can add content and anyone can edit content that has already been published” (Richardson, 2003, p. 8). When multiple students collaborate to create a final product, this can perpetuate concerns regarding accountability. Jeff understood the difference between the theory and the reality of using a wiki. The theory is you create this place for a kid to create his document, and everything works out wonderfully, and everyone participates, and everybody edits. The reality is you’re going to have one kid who does nine tenths of the work; two or three kids who don’t do anything; and one kid who does a meager output on a couple of things. Kids are afraid to edit each other. Because you put that on there, who am I to change what you put on there?

121 To address this reality, Jeff assigned revision roles to each student in a group working on that wiki. In essence this gave each group member a license to change someone else’s work without creating a sense of guilt for the editor or embarrassment for the author. This also helped to establish a sense of group ownership for the wiki and not ownership of individually contributed content. Jeff felt providing revision roles and other assigned duties created a vested interest for students and ensured a higher quality of work. Audience awareness was still a factor even though Jeff’s students did not create a wiki for the general public. Since these products were intended to be used by students in other classes for their exam, the audience was in essence their local high school peers. This explicit purpose for the wiki created a specific, targeted audience, and helped to define their task. To write for the world wide world is easy because the world is anonymous. If you’re writing to a specific person or a specific group of 10 people, you need to be much more careful. Those people can confront you and can question you and are relying on your wisdom for whatever you’re doing to steer them the right way. If you’re writing to the whole world, you can assume that maybe no one is ever going to look at it. Jeff’s view about writing for a public audience was much different than that of the other participants in this study. Student Impact Jeff had previously done a paper-pencil version of his wiki project. It was originally designed as a traditional type of assignment done individually by each student. When students completed the assignment this time as a group on the wiki, Jeff also found an improvement in the quality of student writing. This improvement was not a natural outcome of using a wiki. The prospect of working collaboratively in a group was not

122 welcomed by all the students. “The idea of having to collaborate with other people on a common writing space was new ground for them. It was uncomfortable because there was a lot of negotiating that had to go on.” To alleviate some of the frustration and confusion, Jeff assigned specific roles for each member of a wiki. Students now had a direction, something Jeff described as “a charge.” Students not only felt comfortable editing someone else’s work, they allowed another group member to modify their contribution. The mindset changed from work belonging to the person who wrote the words, to work belonging to the group who shared thoughts and ideas. With clear expectations for individual as well as group performance, increased student accountability was evident. Overview Jeff had a firm fundamental belief about using technology for student instruction. He believed the curriculum should be the determining factor for choosing to use technology and not the technology itself. I think sometime tech teachers tend to put the cart before the horse. They say, we’ve got this wiki, or we've got this software, how can we fit this into the curriculum? That's wrong. I’ve got this curriculum, and these are the learning behaviors I need my kids to have. After determining an essential connection with the curriculum, Jeff felt it was also necessary to determine if technology could fulfill those objectives better than a more traditional method. As Jeff stated so succinctly, “If it’s a project that’s better done individually, then don’t do a stinking wiki!” Jeff did not directly address authenticity in his instructional design for the use of wikis. Jeff considered authentic purpose was a prerequisite for authentic audience. “If

123 you really want to have a true audience, you’ve got to have them writing for a purpose.” Most of his wiki projects were designed not only to make students dependent on one another to complete the project, but also dependent upon the collaborative work of others to complete a related independent task. Collaboration was not a natural process for Jeff’s students. He talked about the difficulty with accountability and ownership; not everyone took equal responsibility for the work and when they did, they often did not like another person manipulating their work. “I've got my part in and that's it. It’s like an assembly line mentality. I did my job and whatever happens down the road, it's not my concern.” Jeff used the analogy of progressing from a quilt to a comforter to help his students grasp the idea of collaboration. “A quilt has got a lot of different things from a lot of different people writing. It's got to be all uniform, and it's got to flow together.” Jeff found the easiest way to address the sense of separate identities in a group project was to take an active part in the development of the wiki. As a participant, he could provide leading questions and constructive comments to guide students as they constructed a unified piece of writing. A lot of times kids were posting and not reading what each other was writing. They're popping something independently and not even reading what each other said… I had to formulate some sort of a structure to encourage them to collaborate more as opposed to just put mine in and the heck with the rest of it. Using wikis worked well for Jeff. They were collaborative in nature, requiring the input of several students to complete the task. This proved to be uncomfortable for some students, yet Jeff considered this association with cooperative learning and technology to be a “natural step.” Not simply because students were working together, but because they

124 shared in the experience of creating something unique and more complex than if they had created individual pieces of writing. Something as simple as having multiple people being able to edit one document, all of a sudden creates a whole new realm of behaviors; a whole new realm of what you would expect kids to do, and it raises the bar as far as expectations. David With 15 years of experience, David was a high school mathematics teacher in a large urban city located in the Canadian province of Manitoba. His course load included eleventh-grade advanced placement calculus, tenth-grade consumer mathematics and twelfth-grade pre-calculus. This 9-12 high school with a population of 1100 students also served as an English as an Additional Language, EAL, magnet school. For more than one third of his school, English was an additional language and not necessarily the second language. For some students, it was their third, fourth, fifth or higher language. This large range of cultural diversity presented a challenge for educators. When they write their work, often they struggle with the language; never mind, in my case. I teach mathematics, so that’s a language unto itself. They’re really struggling learning two languages at once; which is a bit of a challenge. David has been a conference presenter at the national and international levels. He was also one of the originators of a K-12 online technology conference. This annual 2week conference is totally free. Unlike typical conferences, no synchronous attendance is necessary for this annual conference. All of the presentations are free and archived for future retrieval. Determination to Use Technology When asked how he determined when to use technology for instructional purposes, David explained that his pedagogy is structured around some general principles. At the end

125 of his four minute response, David was able to articulate everything he had just described in one sentence. So how do I make decisions about what technology to use? If it will do anything to facilitate this network of pedagogy, amplify what the students are learning, help create an authentic audience for them, give them the means to make their thinking transparent, and enable them to watch it, do it, teach it, then I’m going to snag it. David’s Project Descriptions When the list of sessions for an upcoming local professional development day came around in the winter of 2004, David thought there had to be more than using tools in the Microsoft Office Suite and understanding email. So David asked the committee if he could prepare an additional session on harnessing the power of the Internet. As he was preparing for his session, he happened to stumble upon Alan Levin’s BlogShop. “For me, the blog was like, Wow! This is a great way and means to aggregate all this content that’s dispersed widely over the Internet; to share it with my students.” David learned everything he did with his students, through his “personal learning network,” contacts he had made online. Some blogs are designed as a class blog where students comment directly to the teacher’s post or prompt. The blog created by this mathematics teacher was much more complex. The main page of David’s class blog not only served as a portal to each individual student’s blog, but also served as a vehicle for students to access all the mathematical resources from current and previous terms. All course content found on past and current blogs was student generated. Each night, one student served as the class scribe. It was their task to literally recreate the lesson and material covered that day in class; “to annotate it and articulate it so that

126 someone who wasn’t there should be able to follow your work and understand it.” Scribes used examples, illustrations, and other work captured from the SMART Board during class. They also brought in other resources or examples to assist in their explanation of the day’s events. Other class members would then examine the scribe’s work. They might ask questions, correct an error, or even suggest an alternate solution. (See Appendix B for an example of a scribe post.) While the daily scribe posts enabled students to ask questions of one another, the Blogging on Blogging, BOB, feature allowed students to ask questions of the master himself. Sometime previous to the test, students were required to “post a reflection of where they are in their learning.” This might be a simple statement saying they wished they had done all the assignments or studied more. Some even apologized for having to spend more time on homework for another subject. If students took advantage and wrote about a concept that remained confusing or difficult to understand sooner that the night before the test, David addressed these concerns in class the next day. David also included a chat feature on his course blogs. Students are able to chat in real time, or leave a message that could be read by others at a later time. “Learning math is like learning a language, and you don’t learn a language unless you use it. If the only place they use it is in class with me, well that’s not nearly enough exposure.” As you read these conversations, along with the BOB posts and comments, it is clear the language of math has been extended beyond the classroom walls. (See Figure 14.) David used both blogs and wikis with his mathematics classes. David created a “wiki solution manual.” This wiki was filled with a variety of problems from every unit that might be found on the final exam. In a 2-week time period, students had to

127 accomplish two tasks. First, they must make a significant contribution. They must “completely solve a problem including a detailed annotation of the steps involved.” Second, they must perform a constructive modification. This task required them to edit someone else’s work; not their own. They could correct several minor errors or one significant error. They could also add a graphic for clarification. The focus was always on making their thinking transparent.

Figure 14. Blogging on blogging example

Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis When David first became aware of the existence of blogs, he immediately viewed it as a means to aggregate online content for his students, “a clearing house of

128 information.” David also valued his “personal learning network;” other educators who share his passion for teaching and learning. It was through these connections that David’s own learning became amplified; connections he felt every educator should use “to get educated on a daily basis.” Through interactions with other educators, David’s blog became something entirely different. David was no longer in charge of locating and posting the content. As scribes, students now “generated the lion’s share of content.” It also became a place for his students to not only share their learning, but their misunderstandings. More importantly it created an atmosphere where students could correct these misunderstandings in a non-threatening way. I think it is also important for them to see how work is done by students who understand the stuff well, and to see how I solve the problem. So they need to see all of that, because I think they need to be exposed to the way an expert thinks about it. They need to be exposed to the way a novice thinks about it. That’s got to tweak their thinking, so they move from novice, to apprentice, journey person, and expert. Student Preparation David was the only participant who extended Internet safety into the broader topic of digital ethics. In addition to requiring students use pseudonyms, David discussed some possible consequences of online behaviors. He used some highly effective videos about Internet predators, cyber bullying and digital dirt. Guidelines for student bloggers were also posted on the main page of his class blog. It is interesting to note that David did not enable the chat box until these topics have been fully discussed and understood by the students in class.

129 David also used several web-based applications with his blog. He said he spent about 5 minutes explaining the application to his class; then they went home and set it up. David grudgingly gave up instructional time for this purpose. “Even those 5 minutes, I’d rather someone else was teaching them that.” Student Impact While David will tell you that professional mathematicians make their “bread and butter” by writing, he will also tell you that he had a great disdain for using it in the classroom with his students. He found the idea of writing journals to be very artificial, contrived, inauthentic, and strained. In contrast, he found blogging to be natural form of expression because his students were writing about the content. So by having to blog about it on a regular basis, using the language, using the terminology, and articulating it well enough for an interested learner to learn it as well…that’s authentic. That’s real. When I started, I didn’t do this to bring writing into the mathematics’ classroom. That’s not why I started doing it. That’s been a corollary consequence. It’s not been the main focus. The main focus is learning the mathematics and articulating what you’ve learned. While writing may indeed be corollary, David has established one practice he found does challenge his students’ writing. David invited several mentors to participate on the blog, again with specific goals in mind. Student teachers from a nearby university, along with another math teacher, and a professor of mathematics, got students to delve deeper into the content, with the goal of justifying their reasoning and clarifying their work. He had yet another mentor with a totally different task. Her job was to focus on the quality of learning by encouraging students to reflect on the purpose for their writing. This was all accomplished through the blog’s comment feature.

130 When students in David’s math classes wrote a scribe post, they were in essence writing the textbook. For these students, audience awareness had a very different meaning, not the generic public audience but a more professional one. Members of the audience that read their work included, teachers, educational professional development leaders, graduate students writing their thesis, and college professors from around the world. People often wrote to David asking permission to use information from the blog in their work or presentation. They were surprised to find out it was the work of the student and not the teacher. Students felt a great sense of ownership and pride in this real-world application of their efforts. The scribe post is a required assignment. It is interesting to note that the quality of the post had no bearing on the grade. If they completed it, they received credit. Even David was often surprised at the amount of effort and detail that went into a post. It’s amazing the work they do. It’s not like it’s for mega marks, but they’re challenged within the class to do something worth recognition. So the motivation to do well in class, to write a good scribe post, is really intrinsic. David admitted that all of his students were not receptive to blogging. One student refused to complete his assigned scribe post for almost the entire semester. He finally acquiesced and created a post so incredibly rich, it was published in a print journal. David attempted to address different learning styles by adding various plugins to his blog, third party applications that added functionality. Answer Tips made every word on the screen clickable. Double click a word, and a window with definitions opened. Scroll to the bottom and a link for more opened an entire page of information about that word, filled with links to other references. Increasing the accessibility to the language of mathe-matics had a strong impact on a large percentage of EAL students in David’s classes.

131 Everybody has different needs. No one learns the same way. There’s such a wide variety of resources available to them that they can pick whatever resource they need that works best for them. If they need video, they’ve got video. If they need pictures, images, they’ve got images. If they need to talk with someone about it, I’ll be adding the functionality of what I call a chat box to the blog. Such features were not added to make his blog more appealing to the visitor. They were added to make learning mathematics more accessible to the student. These features served an instructional purpose, to “drench the blog in content.” David described another impact attributed to the use of blogs with his students: the understanding of time and space for learning had changed. Traditionally, students had to be physically present in a room during a specific time of day to learn the content. With David’s blog, students were able to engage in learning mathematics at a time and place, in a preferred environment that was most convenient for them. “Time and space are no longer constraints for learning. You can learn anywhere any when.” David was keenly aware of the impact of blogging on his students. At the end of every semester, he had his student evaluate the effectiveness of the course, including the use of blogs. He published the results of the survey on the blog just as they were submitted. (See Appendix C for class survey for David’s mathematics class.) When asked to provide a condensed description of the impact blogging had on his students as he knew it to be, David replied, “It was like a neutron bomb going off. I don’t mean that in a violent sense. In terms of the ….the excitement, the impact, the far-reaching impact that you never imagine would have happened.” Perhaps this spontaneous post at the conclusion of the class explains the impact of blogging from the perspective of a student. (See Figure 15.)

132

Figure 15. Post from David’s class blog Overview For David, technology was a means to accomplish his goals as an instructor. He also saw it as a device to provide his students with an authentic audience and an authentic context as well. “I look at the technology as a way to enable students to create an audience for them to illustrate what they’ve leaned in a meaningful way.” David’s scribe post assignment delegated responsibility to the student. As the assigned scribe, each student’s post became a page in their digital textbook. This was one of the resources classmates used to complete assignments and prepare for various exams. The relevance of these posts increased as the work of some students was used by mathematicians and educators in professional venues, with full credit given to the students for the product of their endeavors. The scribe post was actually an initiator of learning, an initiator of a conversation about mathematics, not the culminating activity. The scribe for that day took on the role of expert. They interpreted the content, prioritized the material in levels of difficulty,

133 providing additional support or explanation for that which they deemed more difficult; often with a sense of humor. This post was the launching point for questions or suggestions by fellow classmates; the outcome of a calculated intent. Learning is an active process, not a passive process. If you have a passive attitude towards it, you won’t be successful. By getting them engaged and working with the content and wrestling with it by a variety of ways and means, then I hope we’re amplifying some of their learning. They’re digging in deeper to the content, and hopefully they’re retaining it better. In an earlier reference, David talked about the importance of his personal learning network. David also had a professional blog, which was an active part of this network. Here he often engaged, and at times enraged, in a conversation with other educational bloggers. “It’s through those interactions with people in my personal learning network that my own learning is amplified a lot.” In many of David’s posts, he discussed the work of his students, as well as the work of other students. (See Figure 16.)

134

Figure 16. First post from David’s professional blog

David felt reflection on learning was critical for his students as well. Having an audience and receiving comments on their work, was one way for his students to engage in this reflective process. So it’s not just my eyes that look at their work. The kids see that because other people can then leave those comments. That’s another part towards encouraging them toward metacognition; reflecting upon where they are in their learning; trying to get better at it.

135 This was a fundamental purpose for the Blogging on Blogging post required of each student at the end of a unit, just prior to the test. David understood the importance of reflection on the part of the instructor. This was a frequent topic on his professional blog. (See Figure 17.)

Figure 17. Second post from David’s professional blog This constant reflection was evident when David discussed a possible future use for the blog. When a student’s scribe post was selected to be displayed in the Carnival of Mathematics, a blog dedicated to mathematics, this sparked an idea. All submissions to a

136 carnival blog are voluntary. Each submission is reviewed for its merit before it is accepted. David considered having students nominate a post each week for submission to the carnival, another way of exposing student work to the knowledgeable, scrutinizing eyes of other mathematicians. There’s a couple things that will come from that. One is my students looking at each other’s work with a critical eye, looking for the best work; which will do wonders for the self-esteem of that student, but also encourage other students to rise to that challenge. Second, if it gets published in the Carnival of Mathematics, and there’s no reason why it wouldn’t, then that will draw a different audience with much more sophisticated mathematical eyes to look at the student’s work; perhaps leaving a random comment here and there; highlighting some of the good work done by the other kids; underscoring that sense of audience that I try so hard to get across to my students in a very real way that by me speaking, I could never accomplish. David also had some thoughts about the future of blogging as well. He described an analogy that suggested blogs were in their primary form, whose future was unpredictable as they may morph into something totally different, perhaps only slightly representative of their original form. We’re so early in this process of educational blogging. Dave Cormier is a blogger out in eastern Canada, Prince Edward Island. He describes it like this, I thought was very apt, he says: way back when in the 20s or 30s when the first car or automobile was made and brought on the road, the model T, they didn’t call it a car. They called it a horseless carriage. They called it a horseless carriage, because the word didn’t exist. We look at that today and say: horseless carriage, how quaint. You obviously didn’t have the language for it. I think that where we’re at right now. Where we’re at right now is we’re living in the time of the horseless carriage. Because people are going to look back and say: They called it a blog. How quaint is that? We’re not at the end of something. We’re at the beginning of something. We’re at the beginning of something really big. Like the change that this is leading to, not in education and in our society as a whole, it’s the kind of seed change on the order of magnitude that the Gutenberg press was to literature and to literacy. We really have no idea where this is going to go. This may help to explain why David felt he is in “constant beta;” searching for the best way to “amplify my student’s learning and to facilitate their success.”

CHAPTER V DISCUSSION An essential purpose of this study was to investigate how K-12 teachers are using blogs and/or wikis in the classroom. Rather than just summarizing the types of activities done, this researcher chose to look deeper into the intent for utilizing these tools for student instruction. As blogs and wikis are web-based applications and can be considered a form of technology, this study also probed to find the reasons behind teachers’ determination to use technology in lieu of other methods of instruction. This chapter will address and discuss each research question. Conclusions will be presented, and implications for the use of blogs or wikis in K-16 education will be considered. Research Question 1: How Participants Used Blogs and/or Wikis in the Classroom Three generalizations regarding the use of blogs and/or wikis were determined: support of a specific project or event; a separate class; and a seamless tool to support learning. (See Table 2 for a breakdown of tool uses.) While five of the participants used blogs and/or wikis as an instructional device for a specific event or project, Mike used his class blog as a communication tool. It was his method of boosting his students’ selfconcept by praising and encouraging their efforts in class. He used the fact his students were highly motivated by technology as a way to offer increased opportunities to read and write. This was an ongoing project that was used when time allowed, or when Mike was out of the classroom to communicate with his class.

Table 2 Breakdown of Tool Uses Posts made to main page

Portal to individual student blogs

Comments

Students make or receive comments

Seamless tool

Teacher

Yes

Audience

Make & receive

Blog

Event or project

Teacher

No

Students

Make

Rita

Blog

Class

Teacher

Yes

Students

Make & receive

Grant

Blog

Event or project

Teacher

Yes

Evan

Blog

Event or project

Teacher

No

Donna

Blog

Event or project

Teacher

Student Wikis

Event or project

Blog

Seamless tool

Primary Tool

Use of blog and/or wiki

Katie

Blog

Mike

Jeff David

Students & audience Students & audience

Make & (receive on final project only)

No

Students

Make

Students

N/A

N/A

N/A

Teacher and students

No

Students & audience

Make & receive

Make & receive

137

138 Grant’s blog was also ongoing, but it was a routine, scheduled event. Every week Grant’s students wrote about an event in the news. The blog also served as a showcase for other student work and projects. Evan, Donna, and Jeff used a blog or wiki for a specific project; a project that was directly connected to curricular content. Rita’s students met 2 days a week for a class specifically designed to use blogs. For David and Katie, blogs served multiple purposes, all centered on student learning. In addition to narrative blog posts, Katie used various forms of audio and visual media to showcase student learning. Students not only displayed their work, but they often explained and/or reflected on it as well. She also invited university students studying student writing to act as mentors for her students. Katie’s class blog was used across all content areas, and was not limited to just language arts. Katie described blogs as “a way to demonstrate our learning and a way that makes learning transparent.” The daily scribe post was the main function of David’s class blog. This was an opportunity for these high school mathematics students to analyze, interpret, and recreate the day’s lesson well enough for any interested party to understand. David saw the blog as a tool to support learning by including features like a chat box, links to outside resources, translation and dictionary tools, and instructional videos on the blog. David also arranged for experts to mentor his students in order to deepen their knowledge and understanding of mathematics. Like Katie, David’s blog served as a window into his students’ learning. It is interesting to note that, in this instance, the age of the students did not impact the approach teachers chose. Katie, a first grade teacher, and David, a high school mathematics teacher, both saw blogs as a way to visualize their students’ thoughts; to

139 make their thinking transparent. In order to provide opportunities for students to reveal their thinking, both Katie and David allowed students to post original content to the blog; David on the main blog page and Katie via individual student blogs. For their students, blogging was an expected activity, not an event associated with a specific project or event. This mindset contributed to the seamlessness of the technology. Research Question 1a: What was the Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis? Various studies have analyzed the association of a teacher’s beliefs and their use of technology. According to Pedersen and Liu (2003), a teacher’s implementation of technology is influenced by the educational beliefs she has acquired over time. Zhao, Pugh, Sheldon, and Byers (2002) found that when a teacher’s pedagogical beliefs were consistent with her choice and implementation of technology, the chance for successful completion and execution of the project were significantly increased. Evidence from this study on the use of blogs and wikis suggests that while the intent to use the tool serves as the foundation for the design of the activity, there is perhaps an even more fundamental connection; a connection between the determination to use technology, the intent, and a teacher’s pedagogical beliefs. (See Table 3 of participant quotes.)

Table 3 Participant Quotes Illustrating Determination to Use Technology, Intent for Using Blogs or Wikis, and Pedagogical Beliefs Determination to use technology “Is this the best way of doing it, or can they do it more efficiently or just as effectively?” Mike

Intent for using blogs or wikis “I’ll celebrate their accomplishments and brag about them. So just a place where I can kind of encourage them, and they’re actually reading, responding, leaving comments back. So it’s literacy and just a place to pump them up a little bit.”

Aligned with pedagogical beliefs “I wrote a book for children called Build Yourself for Success: A Kid's Guide to Success.”

“My blog is mainly reflection about what is happening in our classroom. And it’s turning more and more into a sharing of our learning rather than just what we did.”

“Blogs and wikis are just one more tool that I use in my classroom to support learning These tools give us a way to demonstrate our learning in a way that allows transparency, feedback and a global audience.”

“I think it’s a matter of planning what kind of lesson I’m going to do and what kind of standards I’m going to incorporate. With blogging, it’s just how far can I go? There’s so many things out there I can do.”

“Writing is kind of my first goal as far as …Doing writing with our 5th graders in a more creative way.”

“I find when they’re interested in something, they’re just more successful. They learn more. They get involved in our lessons more. I find motivation is just a real hard thing.”

Determination to use technology

Intent for using blogs or wikis

“How can it be more useful? How can we get the kids more involved? What benefits are we looking for? Basically what are the benefits?” “I don’t do things just because of the technology. I just use the technology to support whatever I’m doing.”

Katie

Rita

“You have to always be weighing what’s the best way that I can teach this so the kids can understand it.”

“Overall I wanted it to be an exciting way for us to review things we were learning in the classroom and go deeper with. All those things you don’t have time for in a regular classroom.”

(table continues) Aligned with pedagogical beliefs

140

141

Grant

“Ultimately I think the tools that really grab me are the ones that can make connections between kids and that they can share things among themselves.”

“Whatever helps the kids correspond with each other, collaborate, communicate with each other; I think that helps. Blogs for me were just a natural extension of that.”

“If I can get the kids together, talking together, socializing in cooperative groups, whatever you want to call it, things worked out better.”

“It comes down to when I can get access for them on the computer.”

“Just to have a virtual space where you’re limited by the confinements of physicalness or time.”

“Everything that I do with computers now is basically an enhancement. We do things with studycasts, blogs, and stuff, but I can’t really ensure that every student has access outside of my classroom. So I can’t engrain the technology into my curriculum if it was 1-to-1.” “Literally, if I had 1-to-1 I wouldn’t use the textbook. I would have enough resources available, at my disposal, just through government sites and different sites. I wouldn’t need the textbook at all. The only thing a textbook is for me right now is an anchor that kids can take home.”

Evan

Donna

“If it helps kids learn the material, or expands their knowledge, or prepares them for the real world, and it’s related to technology.”

“I wanted to focus in on issues that were open ended. There was no right or wrong answer. I didn't want them to think that they could just give me what they thought I wanted.” “I’m really doing the research and finding out what the research studies say and what the experts say.” Intent for using blogs or wikis

(table continues) Aligned with pedagogical beliefs

141

Determination to use technology

“I have always loved doing this; picking a topic or an issue, researching this; and I used to do this by spending my summers in the library. Then finding all I can about that and just studying something.”

142

“I don’t start with the technology, I start with cooperative learning.”

Jeff

“I try not to do technology for the sake of doing technology. If I can come up with good objectives that using the technology is going to fulfill better than not using it, then I use it.”

David

“So, how do I make decisions about what technology to use … if it will do anything to facilitate this network of pedagogy, amplify what the students are learning, help create an authentic audience for them, give them the means to make their thinking transparent, and enable them to watch it, do it, teach it, then I’m going to snag it.”

“I was more intrigued with wikis though. Just with my connection between cooperative learning and technology. That is the perfect melding between those two.”

“Well, the number one reason, year in and year out, people loose their jobs is their inability to work with their coworkers. It has nothing to do with their skills or anything else. It's their inability to work with their co-workers. If our role in education is to develop a work force, then we need to be developing collaborative skills. With the advent of technology, if you're not using wikis and things like that, you're missing a big part of collaboration with technology.”

“I look at the technology as a way to enable students to crate an audience for them to illustrate what they’ve learned in a meaningful way.”

“Cause you can’t really understand what someone is thinking or what’s going on in their head; until they show it to you or illustrate it to you. So I want to find different ways to make what’s going on inside students’ heads transparent to me and to each other.”

142

143 Katie used technology to support instruction and student learning. In addition to individual student posts, a variety of plugins were used to exhibit student work and inform the audience. “My blog is mainly a reflection about what is happening in our classroom. And it’s turning more and more into a sharing of our learning rather than just what we did.” This was a simple yet effective way for students to demonstrate their learning and make their thinking transparent. Mike looked for an effective way to use technology to benefit his students. He chose a blog to help promote positive self-concepts for his students. Evidence of a connection to his pedagogical beliefs can be found along the side of the class blog where Mike inserted a note about a book that he wrote. This book was written for children to help them develop good attitudes and positive thoughts about themselves and their future. It was evident this underlying philosophy had profoundly influenced his designed purpose to "celebrate their accomplishments and brag about them;" an effective way to build self-esteem. Rita’s case was unique as the use of technology was predetermined. The primary purpose for the class was to use blogs as an instructional tool that could support all the content areas, especially writing. “Writing is kind of my first goal; doing writing with our fifth graders in a more creative way.” Rita found blogs to be very motivating and interesting for her students; factors she felt promoted student learning. “When they’re interested in something, they’re just more successful. They learn more.” Grant looked for technology that facilitated connections between students and enabled shared understandings and ideas. His projects were designed to enable students to collaborate and communicate with an outside audience. “If I can get the kids together,

144 talking together, socializing in cooperative groups, whatever you want to call it, things worked out better.” Blogs were the ideal device for Grant to accomplish his goals. Evan’s book blog enabled over 300 local students and others from various states and countries to have a virtual space to build an understanding and share ideas. Yet Evan felt limited by his access to technology. Scheduling lab time did not allow him to act on his pedagogical belief that technology should be engrained into his teaching. I’ve told people before. If you want to set me loose, give everyone of my students a computer they can take home every day. We’ll be able to get a lot more done. We’ll be more efficient and we’ll get more actual education done. If they would give me one-to-one computers, that would dramatically change my curriculum. Evan considered his current use of computer technology to be an enhancement, not a true representation of his ideal leaning environment. Donna was currently working on her Master's Degree in instructional technology. For her current action research project she was studying the impact of blogs on ACT reading scores. The research she read directly influenced her intent. I'm really doing the research and finding out what the research studies have to say, and what the experts say. One of the important things that research was showing is that kids tended to do better with their writing if they know more than just the classroom teacher was going to read it. Donna's interest in research was not newly acquired. This was an interest she had for many years. "I have always loved doing this; picking a topic or an issue, researching this; and I used to do this by spending my summers in the library. And then finding all I can about that, and just studying something." Educational research was clearly a driving force behind Donna's design for instructional technology. Donna’s blog on Taylor’s story also met her fundamental criteria in the decision to use technology, as it expanded student knowledge of the real-world issue, teen steroid use.

145 Jeff was very conscientious about reflecting on his choice to use technology. While he made a concerted effort to use technology to improve instruction and student learning, cooperative learning was the primary design influence for Jeff. Well, the number one reason, year in and year out, people loose their jobs is their inability to work with their co-workers. It has nothing to do with their skills or anything else. It's their inability to work with their co-workers. If our role in education is to develop a work force, then we need to be developing collaborative skills. With the advent of technology, if you're not using wikis and things like that, you're missing a big part of collaboration with technology. I don't start with technology, I start with cooperative learning. These ideals were perpetrated further in his role as curricular technology consultant and cooperative education trainer for his school. Cooperative learning was central to Jeff’s instructional decisions. David was quite definitive in determination to use technology for student learning. If it will do anything to facilitate this network of pedagogy, amplify what the students are learning, help create an authentic audience for them, give them the means to make their thinking transparent, and enable them to watch it, do it, teach it, then I’m going to snag it. Scribe posts were the embodiment of David’s fundamental beliefs about technology use. By recreating the day’s lesson, scribes became the teacher, articulating their thought processes while presenting the content, all within the public forum of a blog. This post was in essence a verbal window into a student’s thoughts and understanding of mathematics; an illustration of their knowledge. Promoting a positive student self-concept, applying research findings to instruction, enabling transparent thinking, creating a virtual place, and incorporating cooperative learning strategies, are not only a foundation for instructional technology

146 design, they are the foundation for a deeper, over-riding philosophy. The evidence suggests it is the pedagogical beliefs of these participants that drive the intentionality for the design of technology-rich activities. Research Question 1b: How and to What Extent Do These Tools Support Constructivist Learning Theory? As presented in Chapter III, constructivism is a learning theory and not a prescription for a learning strategy or a teaching methodology (Moore, 2004; V. Richardson, 2003). However, Perkins (1992) notes, "If learning has this constructive character inherently, it follows that teaching practices need to be supportive of the construction that must occur" (p. 49). This can be accomplished through the design and implementation of learning environments. Brooks and Brooks (1999), Ferguson (2001), and Sprague and Dede (1999) suggested teacher beliefs that can promote such constructivist learning environments: •

Learning is relevant and meaningful to students

•

Activities are problem-based with a focus on real-world issues

•

Student inquiry is encouraged to promote knowledge construction

•

Enable learners to interpret multiple perspectives

•

Collaboration is encouraged

•

Student autonomy is encouraged and accepted

Evidence supporting each of the listed teacher behaviors was drawn from participant interviews as well as teacher, class, and student blogs. (See Table 4 for a comparison chart of

147 participant beliefs that promote a constructivist learning environment.) The next section will address data representative of each teacher behavior present for each participant. Table 4 Participant Beliefs that Promote a Constructivist Learning Environment Teacher Beliefs Learning is relevant and meaningful to students

Katie X

Activities should be authentic and are often problem-based Student inquiry is encouraged to promote knowledge construction Enable learners to interpret multiple perspectives Collaboration is encouraged

Mike

Rita

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Encourage and accept student autonomy

Grant X

X

Evan

Donna

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Jeff

David

Note. X = present in data

Learning is Relevant and Meaningful to Students For activities to be meaningful and relevant, they be must authentic and of interest or importance to the student (Means & Olson, 1995). This was the case for all of the participants, but in varying degrees. The student work associated with Donna, Jeff, Evan, and David’s class was of high appeal and relevance to the students’ lives. Self-selection facilitated student interest as Rita, Grant and Katie often gave students a choice of what to include in their blog post. Mike’s blog was unique as students were often the subject of

148 his posts. Students frequently emulated Mike’s type of encouraging posts when they commented on the blog. Activities Should Be Authentic and Are Often Problem-Based It matters not whether activities are simulations or actual practice; to be authentic they must provide opportunities that enable students to think and act as an expert (Honebein, 1996). In this setting, students can develop a deeper, richer understanding of the knowledge domain (Sprague & Dede, 1999, p. 8). This was the case for five of the participants. David’s scribe post and Jeff’s Literature Circles wiki were designed for students to create content that served as a resource for other students. Their peers were dependent on the accuracy and thoroughness of their work. Authentic learning opportunities were not present in Mike’s blog. However, Mike used a wiki to provide an opportunity for his ELL students to act as language coaches for younger, less capable students. Initially, Donna’s blog served as a learning space as students responded to teacher posts regarding student use of steroids. Later, this space transformed into a demonstration of acquired knowledge as students used this blog to relate ideas that might assist and inform adults about this serious issue. Grant involved not only his students but students from around the world as they studied an historical fiction novel with the actual author as a mentor. Rita did design occasional opportunities for authentic activities like the students’ reaction to the movie A Planet in Peril, and their post on how they can make a difference in this serious issue. As with the first teacher behavior category, there was a range of authenticity as well as the frequency of opportunities for such experiences. Data from this study revealed problem-based activities were only offered by the three high school teachers; an

149 intentional decision to make use of the blog’s design to increase the level of authenticity and relevance to the student. Student Inquiry is Encouraged to Promote Knowledge Construction Knowledge construction rather than reproduction is a tenet of constructivism (Jonassen, 1992). Sprague and Dede (1999) suggested framing open-ended questions and encouraging students to question their peers are viable methods for promoting student inquiry. Without a single exact answer, students are challenged to probe and investigate as they go beyond the expected to formulate their own understanding. Solving authentic problems is a natural stimulus for student inquiry. The openended blogging and wiki activities designed by Jeff, David, and Donna provided the perfect environment for student inquiry. Student products were original, and in David’s class often motivated other students to produce products of the same or better caliber. Evan also posed open-ended questions to his students. Questions like, “What similarities do you see with the guerrilla warfare tactics used in Missouri in 1863 and Iraq in 2008?” require students to synthesize information, necessitating a much higher level of thinking than finding a single correct answer. Enable Learners to Interpret Multiple Perspectives Commenting is a unique factor associated with blogs. When students post their work to a blog, they expect, even anxiously anticipate, receiving comments from a novice as well as an expert audience. These comments can serve as a form of evaluation or stimulate an argument giving students a different perspective than their original posted thoughts. Comments can also ignite a conversation as ideas and possible clarifications are

150 exchanged through a series of responses; presenting all parties involved in the conversation a chance to listen and reflect on the interchange of ideas. Allowing students to make and/or receive comments was the source of multiple perspectives, a feature utilized by seven of the eight participants. (See Table 2 for a breakdown of tool uses.) Despite the absence of the commenting feature on wikis, Jeff’s students were still compelled to interpret multiple perspectives. In order to create collaborative content, students had to hear, analyze, and synthesize individual ideas to produce a unified piece of work. This entailed a high degree of reflection and compromise. Collaboration is Encouraged Collaboration provides the groundwork for the sharing of multiple perspectives (Honebein, 1996), as it affords students the opportunity to share ideas, ask questions, discuss concepts, and revise their ideas and misconceptions (Sprague & Dede, 1999, p. 8). A wiki is a natural way to facilitate collaboration. Mike and Jeff used a wiki to establish this opportunity for their students; collaboration was at the heart of their intent. Again, David’s scribe post was a perfect vehicle for collaboration. While only one student authored the post, other members of the class shared their opinions, made suggestions, and asked questions. Katie’s students often received general comments from a variety of audience members. However, Katie had acquired university students to serve as mentors for each of her students. This was where the power of collaboration was most evident. Mentors structured their comments carefully to support, encourage, and model, a perfect way for these first graders to reflect on their work and revise their

151 misconceptions. (See Figure 18.) Like Katie, David also used mentors to collaborate with his students.

Figure 18. A comment from a university blogging buddy to one of Katie’s students

Collaboration on Evan’s book blog was authentic, but limited. Asking questions and discussing the events of the book with the author were highly engaging. While the public could view these interactions, a fluid collaborative exchange of ideas was limited by a blog’s inherent commenting structure. When students asked questions of the author, she would respond directly to them and vise versa. Because this was a class blog,

152 students could not comment on a comment. They could only comment to the original post on the blog, so a second response to a comment may not be physically located next to the intended comment as blog posts are in chronological order. (See Figure 19 to illustrate this point.) While not ideal, this was the most efficient way to manage the interaction of over 300 participants.

Figure 19. Class blog with one-way vs. two-way commenting

Encourage and Accept Student Autonomy If learners are to be expected to construct their own knowledge and not simply assimilate that of the teacher, they must be afforded the opportunity to do so (Jonassen,

153 Peck, & Wilson, 1999). This requires a shift in control as learning becomes more studentcentered, giving the student a greater voice and more ownership of her learning (Honebein, 1996). “These students—in pursuit of new understandings—are led by their own ideas and informed by the ideas of others” (Brooks & Brooks, 1999, p. 103). Two participants used blogs and/or wikis to provide opportunities for students to pursue new understandings. As a group, Jeff’s class generated categories that would be necessary to produce a resource similar to Cliff Notes. These categories were then used as a framework for each group to construct the wiki that served as the reference for their self-selected novel. This activity required students to apply literary concepts as they analyzed their novel for elements necessary to complete their task. As class scribes, David’s students consistently created content for the class blog. A task that required students to evaluate their understanding of the material and articulate this well enough for others to achieve the same understanding. Students used whatever aids would help convey their information, drawings, diagrams, analogies, even colored text. Acting as the instructor was a highly active learning experience. For Jeff and David’s students, working as a group provided ideal conditions for students to reflect upon and modify their thoughts as they heard different ideas and opinions from other group members. Students wrestled with their knowledge along with information acquired from group interactions to create new understandings. Not all behaviors were exhibited in the same frequency or to the same degree by the eight participants in this study. What is clear is the technology, blogs and wikis, provided the opportunities for teachers to act on their beliefs. More than simply providing a public area to display student work, blogs enabled the audience to become actively

154 involved by questioning or disagreeing with the student’s thoughts and ideas; suggesting ideas or interpretations of their own; and bringing in other print or human references that might extend or enhance the original material. While opportunities abound, it is still incumbent upon the teacher to construct activities that take advantage of this potential. Research Question 2: Student Preparation to Use Blogs or Wikis Two common categories emerged from the data regarding the preparation of students to use blog or wikis, audience awareness and online safety. (See Table 5 for a comparison chart of student preparation.) It is important to note that while these categories were present in the interview data, not all the participants talked about these topics with their students. These situations will be clarified in the following sections. Audience Awareness Katie, Mike, Grant, Evan, and David all discussed the fact student work no longer had the typical audience of teacher, classroom peers, and parents with their students. Their online document now was available for any and all to view and critique. These teachers lectured about the importance for students to check their work for errors because it now had such a public audience. Evan made it a much more personal form of evaluation by telling his students, “People are going to see and judge you based on how you write.” Rita, Donna, and Jeff all talked about the importance of having an audience other than the classroom teacher. In the interview data, Rita consistently talked about the benefits of having a pubic audience for her students. She believed they took more ownership of their work and reflected on their work more frequently because they knew a large number of people could read their work and make comments. While Rita did not

155 directly state she instructed her students on the topic of audience awareness, evidence of such was revealed in one of her blog posts. “Reading your work out loud is a great way to proofread your writing. You should do this before you publish every single post.”

Table 5 How Do Teachers Prepare Their Students to Use Blogs or Wikis? Katie

Mike

Audience awareness

X

X

Online safety

X

Rita

X

Writing style differences

Grant

Evan

X

X

X

X

X

Comment modeling

X

X

Donna

Jeff

X X

X

X X

Digital ethics Procedural instruction Collaborative ownership and accountability

David

X X

X

X X

Note. X = present in data

Jeff designed his wiki project to have an authentic purpose which did provide an authentic audience, an audience limited to students who attended the same school. This was an action based on Jeff’s belief that, “Their best audience is each other.” In fact Jeff believed his students were more accountable by writing for each other than if they had written for anyone. To write for the world wide world is easy because the world is anonymous. If you’re writing to a specific person or a specific group of 10 people, you need to be much more careful. Those people can confront you and can question you and are relying on your wisdom for whatever you’re doing to steer them the right way.

156 If you’re writing to the whole world, you can assume that maybe no one is ever going to look at it. Online Safety Online safety was another common factor. Certain practices were followed by all: students were not allowed to use their complete names; no personal information was allowed in a post; and no names were associated with any pictures. Katie also screened comments for personal information that may lead to the identification of a student, such as a relative signing their comment with a last name. All the participants except Mike and Jeff discussed the issue of online safety with their students. Jeff’s wiki was accessed through Blackboard and could only be viewed by parents and invited guests. Mike was the only party that could post original content to the blog, and he also screened all the comments. No revealing information was allowed to be posted. Online safety was a significant concern for Donna. While her students created and signed a safe blogging policy, she removed the blog from public viewing and placed it on a content management system which was password protected after the project was completed. Her concern for online safety might explain the reason she did not make student work available for comments from the general public. Writing Style Differences Current methods of communication have given birth to a more informal form of writing, raising the question that this is now an accepted practice with today’s students (Shortis, 2007). Rita and Evan made it clear to their students that there is a distinct difference between the informal writing form of texting with its cryptic spellings and the formal more standard written form. Blogs posts were expected to be written in the

157 standard vernacular, without exception. None of the remaining participants indicated this issue was addressed with their students. Comment Modeling Commenting was an essential function for Grant. “If I didn’t have other classrooms commenting to the work they’re doing, then I probably wouldn’t be doing it (blogging).” Grant was looking for more than “drive by commenting.” He wanted more substantial comments that would “push the original writer a little bit and change their thinking.” Grant understood this was an acquired skill. Every week he selected a comment received by one of the students to use as a model. The class analyzed the quality of that comment, both the good and bad features, and discussed possible improvements. Rita also discussed the quality of commenting with her students and made it the subject of one of her posts to the class blog. (See Figure 20.)

Figure 20. Rita’s post on making quality comments

Modeling comments took on a different purpose for Mike. One function of his class blog was to serve as a means to increase the self-concept of his students. His posts

158 served as a model for other students as they too offered comments filled with praise and encouragement for their classmates. Digital Ethics David was the only participant to address digital ethics with his students. Videos were posted to the blog on the topics of digital dirt, the fact nothing posted to the Web can be removed, bullying, and Internet safety. Every student must tell David they have watched all the posted videos, read the list of guidelines for student bloggers, and agreed to abide by this policy. He also offered students the opportunity to make suggestions for revisions to the policy. Procedural Instruction Only three participants provided their students with procedural instruction on the operation of a blog or wiki. For Rita, this was a natural outcome of conducting a class dedicated to the use of a blog. Katie hoped her students would gain a level of independence after group instruction in a lab setting which was done early in the school year. This was important as blogging was an independent center activity during guided reading. While David provided his students with technical instruction, he did so reluctantly. “Even those 5 minutes, I’d rather someone else was teaching them that.” Collaborative Ownership and Accountability Jeff said he had developed a list of theories and realities about using wikis with students. People often assume the ideal will happen; “everything works out wonderfully, and everyone participates, and everybody edits.” The reality, according to Jeff, is a few students do the majority of the work to earn a desired grade. To alleviate this problem, Jeff assigned roles to each student. This gave everyone a responsibility and helped make

159 editing someone else’s work an acceptable practice. “The idea that every kid was accountable for a certain aspect at every step along the way ensured that you’re going to get higher quality work, and all the kids are involved in a vested interest.” Ownership was another aspect that required instructional attention. Collaboration to create content was not a natural activity for Jeff’s students. It was difficult for them to release ownership of the words they placed on the wiki. Ideas discussed in group planning sessions were also considered intellectual property. Developing the understanding that this is a collaborative writing task is strengthened by Jeff’s metaphor of changing a quilt with its separate pieces into a comforter, a uniformed piece that flows together. Out of eight participants, only three found it necessary to actually take instructional time to teach their students how to use the tool. Modeling proper commenting techniques was the only other strategy unique to using a blog. These results suggest participants did not consider it necessary to devote large amounts of time teaching their students how to use a blog or wiki. Once the students understood which buttons to push, emphasis was placed on the purpose for using the tool, not the tool itself. Research Question 3: How and to What Extent are Blogs or Wikis Structured to Promote or Enrich Student Writing? Access to an Authentic Audience While there is not single instructional method for writing instruction (Raimes, 1991), Chapman (2006) and Heap (1997) suggested specific techniques can be used to enhance student writing. One of these techniques is to provide students with access to an authentic audience; one that is represented by more than the classroom teacher and not contrived to suit a purpose. Some participants escalated simple audience access to

160 audience interaction by enabling their students to make and/or receive comments. While the extent to which each participant used blogs or wikis to promote or enrich student writing varied, every participant expressed the importance of having an audience for their students’ work, but the type of audience varied. (See Table 6.) Table 6 How and to What Extent are Blogs or Wikis Structured to Promote or Enrich Student Writing? Katie

Mike

Rita

Grant

Evan

Donna

Jeff

David

Access to an authentic audience

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Authentic purpose

X

X

X

Opportunity to write

X X

Publishing forum

X

Application of language skills

X

Use of mentors

X

Collaboration Venue

X

X X

X

X

X X

X X

Note. X = present in data for primary tool

Katie first used her blog as a place to display her students’ work. Then she saw how motivated they were to write because they had an audience; they had someone to write for. When Katie saw the power having an audience had on her students, she began looking for other schools to blog with and exchange comments. Her blogging tool Class Blogmeister, is expressly used by educators. Katie was able to find schools looking for partners through Blogmeister’s forum. Another contact was established with a school in Australia. Katie had received a comment on her blog asking Katie to comment in return.

161 When she did, she discovered it was a student, not a teacher. The student had actually been blogging at home with his father over their holiday break. Kathy was able to begin a partnership with this student’s second grade class. A single blog post from a second grade student made a significant impact on two classes on two different continents. Mike’s blog was not structured to receive outside comments. His posts were directed toward the children, not the general public. He did use the fact the blog was public to motivate his students to write more carefully and check for errors. The question must be asked, if students never received a comment from the public, how much care did they really take? While Mike’s blog was truly intended to be used with just his class, Mike indicated he would have done more with his blog if he knew his students and parents could see it at home. Only two of Mike’s students had Internet access. Access to an authentic audience was present in the data for Rita and Grant. Allowing personal blogs for their students provided an avenue for audience comments to go directly to the individual student; increasing their exposure to multiple perspectives and the potential to extend their thinking. These teachers felt strongly enough about the importance of audience involvement, they solicited comment partners by inviting other schools to participate on their blogs. Grant’s words make it clear just how important access to an audience was. “It means very little if they’re posting and have no audience.” Evan also invited outside members of the blogging community to participate in his book blog. It is important to note the difference, as participants were not interacting with each other; they were interacting with Evan and the author of the book. While this may seem limiting, having access to the thoughts and ideas from all who shared in this

162 experience was still a powerful way to view different views about the same question and perhaps offer another perspective. (See Figure 21.)

Figure 21. A post from Evan’s book blog

For Donna this was an essential reason for using a blog. Her research indicated students wrote better when they knew they had a public audience. Yet Donna did not allow anyone other than her and her students to make comments. The topics of teen steroid use and the ownership of artifacts are pertinent to so many, it is important to question the impact the interaction with a truly public audience, perhaps even outside

Figure 21. A post from Evan’s book blog

163 experts, may have had on Donna’s students. Opportunities for student reflection and the creation of new understandings were certainly missed. Jeff considered the most important audience students could have was other students, so using a password protected wiki served his purpose. Audience awareness remained an important topic to address with this class. Jeff felt there was no “true” audience, if there was no purpose for writing. Creating a resource that was used by other students for an exam was highly authentic and made their task more critical as others depended on the quality of their work. David considered an authentic audience an important factor in his students’ learning. Finding mentors to engage in a conversation with his students was a way for David to provide his students with additional eyes to scrutinize their work, and again provide that different perspective. David understood the direct impact this had on his students. “That’s another part towards encouraging them toward metacognition; reflecting upon where they are in their learning; trying to get better at it.” A blog was the mechanism that provided the audience so students had the opportunity to “illustrate what they’ve learned in meaningful way.” Authentic Purpose As discussed in Chapter II, students often write for an imaginary audience, one contrived by the teacher for a specific writing assignment (Bos & Krajcik, 1998; Cohen & Riel, 1989; Heap, 1989; Lankshear & Knobel, 2003). Establishing an authentic purpose for writing can be a challenge. Blogs however remove the barriers of place and time and offer endless possibilities for a dynamic legitimate audience that can help to create an authentic purpose.

164 David and Katie took advantage of this potential and provided their students with mentors. As their students wrote about their learning, mentors commented on their work, offering constructive comments, encouragement, and recognition of achievements. Students in Evan’s class had the exceptional opportunity to participate in a book blog with the author of the book they were studying—a chance to see writing through the eyes of an expert. David and Jeff also designed a learning task where their students became the experts. David’s mathematics students took on the role of instructor as they recreated the day’s lesson based on their understanding of the concept. As the expert, they fielded any questions for clarification from their peers. Jeff’s students also took on the role of expert. Their task was to create a resource so complete, another student, unfamiliar with the content, could use it to answer test questions. Opportunity to Write For David, writing was a corollary. It was not one of his objectives for using the blog. Providing his students with an opportunity to write was an essential reason Mike used a blog with his students. Blogs were one more way for his ELL students to use their emerging literacy skills; something Mike hoped to increase in the future. Rita created the blogging class with an expressed interest to work on the application of writing skills. As for Evan, he considered blogging and writing to be synonymous. “Blogging is writing. Any chance that you have the students writing more, it’s going to help their overall ability to communicate.”

165 Publishing Forum Katie, Grant, Rita, and David all considered their blog to be a publishing forum, a place to display students’ work, but not simply an electronic bulletin board. Students, even Katie’s first graders, understood the purpose for a blog. By posting their work students were inviting the audience to take note. To use Grant’s analogy, they were fishing for comments. Comments were an acknowledgement of their work, giving value and purpose to their efforts. Application of Language Skills Most of the participants discussed the need for students to proofread their work, but for some this appeared to be a secondary remark, not a primary emphasis. As the instructor for an actual blogging class, Rita stated she consistently discussed the need for accuracy with her students. Katie invited university students to act as writing mentors for her students. Mentors commented on students’ work complimenting students when they demonstrated proper conventions and encouraged them for attempting to sound out difficult words. These mentors also modeled correct language use, most of the time. Jeff’s wiki project required a high level of literary analysis and application. While it appears they represent a wide range of grade levels, the focus for all of these teachers was in the area of language arts. Use of Mentors This use of mentors has already been discussed multiple times in the discussion for research question three, but it is still important to note the public nature of blogs enabled university students and experts in the field from across their respective countries

166 and provinces to mentor children. These mentors affected not only the students’ writing, but their thinking and learning as well. Collaboration Venue Jeff was the only participant to use a wiki as his primary tool. He viewed this as the ideal device to teach his students about collaborative writing; a process where several students create a single unified piece of writing. Jeff felt many get this confused with peer editing. I think a lot of people don't see the difference between peer editing and collaborative writing. You know peer writing is just getting feedback on your paper. It's just your name on top. Collaborative writing brings up a whole gamut and a whole realm of different strengths and different considerations that you have to have. Jeff believed collaboration entailed the need to negotiate meaning, giving students the opportunity to critique, reflect, and modify. Research Question 4: How Do K-12 Teachers Perceive These Tools Have Impacted Their Students? The perceptions of participants regarding the impact blogs and wikis had on students was just as varied as the perceptions regarding the impact blogs and wikis had on student writing. (See Table 7 for a breakdown of perceptions of student impact.) It appears the perceived student impacts are related to the participants’ intent to use blog or wikis with their students. (See Table 8 for participants’ intent to use blogs or wikis.)

167 Table 7 How Do K-12 Teachers Perceive These Tools Have Impacted Their Students?

Increased motivation

Katie

Mike

Rita

Grant

Evan

X

X

X

X

X

Improved student writing

X

Increased desire to write

X

Increased learning

X

X

Donna

David X

X

X

X

X

Improved performance

X

X

X

Increased accountability

X

X

Increased opportunity to write Audience awareness

X

Access to authentic audience

X

X

X

X

X

X X X X

Removed physical barriers

X

X

X

X

X

Carry over

Increased opportunity for collaboration

Jeff

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

Addressed multiple learning styles

X X

Voice for reluctant students

X

Ownership

X

X

X

X

X

X

Real-world application

X

Opportunity for reflection Note. X = present in data for primary tool

X

X

168 Table 8 What is the Intent or Purpose for Using Blogs and/or Wikis? Katie

A place to share their learning

Mike

Develop literacy skills and self-concept

Rita

To write in a more creative way and to review other concepts while increasing motivation for writing

Grant

A place to correspond, collaborate, and communicate

Evan

To have a virtual space

Donna

To make the curriculum relevant to students’ lives and apply what research and experts have to say about writing and authentic audience

Jeff

To take advantage of technology to pursue beliefs of cooperative learning

David

To create an audience for them to illustrate what they’ve learned in a meaningful way. To make their thinking transparent

Katie Katie considered her class blog a place to share their learning. To establish a way to share, students not only posted their work, they also made comments to and received comments from the general audience. It was this access to an authentic audience that also increased both the motivation and the desire to write for Katie’s students and provided an increased opportunity for collaboration. Through this collaboration with other schools, like the ones from New Zealand and Australia, student learning increased. “We’ve been able to learn about things that otherwise we wouldn’t have.” These first graders often wrote for their university blogging buddies, and always received return comments. Katie felt this real-world application gave her students a sense of being an author. “They feel like they’re writers, because not only are people reading it, but they’re commenting on it as well.”

169 Mike Mike used his class blog as an aid to develop student self-concept and a way to work on the literacy skills of his ELL students. He knew his students were already motivated by technology. He only saw this motivation increase as the blog was published. “They’ll sit there and read that (the blog) before they read a book.” Making comments on the blog was just a way to offer increased opportunities to write; another literacy skill. According to Mike, this writing was impacted by the fact students were aware of an outside audience and knew anyone could see their work. Rita Rita’s blogging class was a means for her to improve upon their writing curriculum, at the same time applying concepts from other content areas. She wanted to provide students with a more creative way to write and hoped this would in turn increase their motivation and enthusiasm for writing. Motivation was a definite outcome from using blogs. Rita attributed increased learning and performance to her students’ motivation. “I feel sometimes the work I get out of them is better because they’re more interested, and they’re more motivated to show what they know.” Fully aware they had an audience that could not only read their work but also provide comments, gave them a sense of ownership and proved to be inspiring; even for the more reserved students who were reluctant to perform in the regular classroom. Rita also believed audience comments gave students the opportunity for reflection; a chance to consider the thoughts and ideas of others in relation to their own. Katie believed the ability of blogs to apply writing to real-world situations was the key to the success of this tool.

170 Grant Grant considered blogs to be a natural way to provide students with an opportunity to correspond, collaborate, and communicate with one another and people from all around. Awareness of this impressive audience was very motivating for Grant’s students. “I think it’s really powerful to give kids an audience for their work.” Grant attributed the power of having an authentic audience for increasing his students’ desire to write. Evan Evan’s main intent was to establish a virtual space where he could have students from different classes interacting. As a virtual space, blogs also removed any barriers of time and space and extended collaboration beyond the classroom. If students wanted to post a comment about something they read, they did not have to wait until a specific time on a specific day or even risk forgetting the thought altogether. Evan felt immediate availability to a virtual space increased the quality of the students’ work and the class discussions. Access to an authentic audience was a direct outcome of using a blog as a virtual space. Receiving comments from different people in different locations was very motivating for students and increased their desire to write better and increased the quality of their writing. Before we had blogs…I don’t think it was really critiqued as much. I probably didn’t do as much of a quality job of giving feedback...It wasn’t being read the same. It wasn’t being discussed the same. It’s a lot richer type of writing now than it would have been before.

171 In fact, Evan thought they might be writing more because there was so much less paperwork for him with the digital format of a blog. An increased opportunity to write was seen as way to increase the potential for communication. Donna The research Donna read indicated students wrote better when they knew someone other than the classroom teacher would read their work. This was a primary reason Donna chose to use a blog. Since Donna had done this same activity previously with paper and pencil, she was able to make some acute comparisons. Donna saw an improvement in student writing, especially in the area of making and supporting arguments. She attributed this to the availability of an authentic audience, even though it was only an audience of their peers. Having access to the thoughts and ideas of their peers carried over into class and made for more interesting discussions. Jeff Cooperative learning is the foundation for Jeff’s teaching. Using a wiki was a means for his students to create collaborative content, a natural way to increase the potential for collaboration. Working in small groups also increased accountability as student performance was judged on a group not an individual basis. As students worked to create collaborative content, requiring a high level of negotiation, the idea of working back and forth to come to a consensus, was necessary. Jeff considered this a vital skill, and indicated he saw an improvement in their literary analysis. Like Donna, the audience was limited to other students in the school. This did not decrease the authenticity of the audience, however, as Jeff’s students prepared a product to be used by that same audience. “Now the audience becomes a little more real, and there’s a little bit more of a vested interest.”

172 Summary Many studies have investigated the impact of audience on student writing (Bos & Krajcik, 1998; Kulik, 2003a; Lankshear & Knobel, 2003; Reed, 1996). Throughout this study, audience was found to be a significant theme. It first appeared as a participant’s intent to use a blog or a wiki and later appeared as a factor for each research question. Teachers chose to use these tools because they offered students access to an authentic audience. Not all the participants used a public host. In the end, two chose to keep their sites password protected. Yet these two still believed access to an audience was an important component of blogs and/or wikis. Several participants used the fact the students’ work was available to anyone who chose to look as leverage for their students to write carefully with proper conventions. Limitations This study looked at a small pool of eight participants. Limited contact was made with these participants in the form of two or three interview sessions and brief email clarifications. While an attempt was made to select participants that represented a wide range of grade levels, these eight participants may not be a typical representation of teachers who currently use blogs or wikis with students. Furthermore, experience with technology may be a consideration as several of the participants were recognized for their use of technology and also presented at conferences. In addition to human factors, physical equipment must also be considered. When examining technology for instructional purposes, many factors such as availability and reliability of equipment can influence a teacher’s use of technology. None of the participants indicated this was an issue for them, but it cannot be said that the conditions

173 were equal. These case studies may offer depth in description, but the findings are intended to be suggestive and should not be generalized. Further research on a larger scale is required. This study only analyzed the use of blogs and wikis from the perspective of the teachers. These perceptions and interpretations may not be the same as those of the students using the tools. A more thorough study of all parties involved would provide a clearer understanding of how these tools are used for instructional purposes and the impact they may have on students. It may also be informative to study the effect blogs may have on mentoring. What impact would a tool that was available on demand and removed any limitation of distance have on the process of mentoring? This is a question worth investigation. Conclusions Audience This study analyzed the stories of eight K-12 teachers, and how they used blogs and/or wikis in the classroom. For these participants, establishing an audience for student work played a significant role in the intent and design for the use of blogs or wikis. Every participant chose to use a blog or wiki to provide an audience for his or her students other than that of the teacher, because they understood the significance of writing for an audience. In some cases, the audience was internal; work was only accessible by students, parents and teachers. While this may appear to be limiting, Oelz (1989) and Zemelman, Daniels, and Hyde (2005) suggested students can learn from one another when they are able to share their published writing. The remaining participants permitted their student’s work to be viewable by any World Wide Web visitor. For some, the public Internet environment was enough to

174 constitute an authentic audience. Others were not willing to wait for someone to stumble upon their blog. They solicited an audience for their students. Some found other class blogs and worked out a partnership to have students exchange comments. Content area experts and university students were also invited to serve as mentors, creating a specific audience for student writing. Participants who had professional blogs also wrote about their students’ work and invited visitors to participate in special projects such as Evan’s book blog. All these efforts were directed towards ensuring that students had a constant authentic audience. Publishing student work in a newspaper, magazine, or journal can also provide an audience for student work, but it is a passive audience; one that reads, perhaps admires or questions, but cannot address the author. Here in lies the power of a blog; the ability to receive comments directly from the reader. The audience can now interact directly with the writer. Students receive feedback on their writing, giving them cause to consider a different perspective, perhaps multiple perspectives, as they reflect on their original writing. As students read and respond to comments, an active dialogue is established creating an open forum for the construction of knowledge (Gay, Sturgill, Martin, & Huttenlocher, 1999, Conceptual context section, ¶ 1). It is important to note that every teacher approved all comments before they were publicly posted. Commenting Many remarks were made by the participants regarding the enthusiasm and motivation displayed by the students when they received a comment on their blog. Katie said, “They feel like they’re writers, because not only are people reading it, but they’re also commenting on it as well.” These first-grade students were experiencing the writing

175 process as true authors. Grant saw comments as the catalyst for an increase in the desire to write. “There’s a palpable sense with some in my class that they want to write and post to the website because others will read it, see it, and comment back.” It is important to note that the five teachers who made student work available to a global audience indicated an increase in student motivation occurred. The two participants who kept work for internal viewing only, did not see any changes. Just as the concept of an authentic audience varied, so did the use of comments. Depending on how the blog was structured, students could only make comments on the blog, one-way commenting, or they could make and receive comments, two-way commenting. One-way commenting was typically used when students did not have their own personal blog. Students would respond to a teacher’s prompt by posting a comment; as in the case of Mike and Evan’s blog. This restricted the flow of conversation as students could not receive direct personal audience feedback. By having a personal blog, all comments went directly to the student regarding a specific piece of student writing or post, making the conversation between student and reader more fluent and direct. For these students, it was as if it was an expected conversation. To speak, writing a post, would be caught by a waiting ear, and in time a response would return in the form of a comment; as natural an expectation as speaking face-to-face. Comments have the potential to scaffold student learning (Ferdig & Trammell, 2004) by facilitating an environment where students can revisit and revise their thoughts and ideas based on the input received from an outside audience member (Krajcik, Blumenfeld, Marx, & Soloway, 1994). A comment such as, “I agree” may be complimentary, but it encourages little, if any, reflection on the part of the writer. Writing

176 effective comments is an acquired skill that comes through practice. Participants handled this matter in two distinct manners. Rita and Grant chose to directly instruct their students on effective commenting techniques. Katie and David chose to use mentors to achieve the same purpose. The remaining participants did not indicate they addressed effective commenting with their students, nor was evidence of such found on their blogs. Mentoring, an ideal implementation of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development principles, was used by both Katie and David to facilitate student learning. Mentors for the first grade students as well as those for high school mathematics students focused on a content area. David considered the student as a learner, not just a student of mathematics as he used a mentor to help students focus and reflect on their thinking as well. She also mentored my students on their blog; pushing their thinking and challenging them on what they were writing. Linda’s not a math specialist. So she kind of focuses on motivational stuff; the quality of learning; encouraging them to reflect more on what they’ve been asked. Nancy and Warren try to get them to dig more into the content; really justify what they’re saying and make it really clear. So it’s not just my eyes that look at their work. The kids see that because other people can then leave those comments. That’s another part towards encouraging them toward metacognition; reflecting upon where they are in their learning; trying to get better at it. These experts from Ohio, Kentucky, and Michigan, along with student teachers from a university, conversed, exchanged and revised ideas, deepened understandings, and created knowledge with students from another country; all made possible by commenting on a class blog. Student Writing The connection between writing and the use of blogs or wikis was clearly evident. Every participant chose to use a blog or wiki in order to provide their students with access to an authentic audience. Every participant did this with the intention of

177 influencing student writing, except for one. David did not. David indicated that previous to his use of blogs, he found writing to be contrived and artificial. I hated it. I thought it was such an artificial thing. It was so inauthentic. The whole idea of a math journal…Journals could be more or less; could be better or worse in the way that they’re done. But it was mostly, a lot of the talk around mathematics, it was strained. While not David’s original intent for using blogs, blogging did impact his students’ writing. With blogs, it’s just a very natural way to express yourself. What my kids are writing, they’re writing about the content, what they learned in class that day…So by having to blog about it on a regular basis, using the language, using the terminology, and articulating it well enough for an interested learner to learn it as well; that’s authentic. That’s real. When I started, I didn’t do this to bring writing into the mathematics’ classroom. That’s not why I started doing it. That’s been a corollary consequence. It’s not been the main focus. The main focus is learning the mathematics and articulating what you’ve learned. Blogs are about the conversation between the writer and the audience. A wiki is about working together to create a collaborative piece of work. Despite the appearance of a wiki’s limited audience input, the process of coming to a consensus in order to create a unified piece of writing requires a great deal of reflection and revision, not just of words on paper, but ideas, thoughts, and understandings as well. This process plays perfectly into Jeff’s pedagogical beliefs about cooperative learning. Intent Teachers often have the choice whether or not to use technology when they design learning activities. What is it the trigger, the hook, the impetus that brings a teacher to make that choice? Evidence from this study suggested that the participants’ intent for using a blog or wiki was in accord with the process used to determine when to use technology for instructional purposes along with their pedagogical beliefs. This adds a

178 deeper complexity to previous knowledge about the influence of pedagogical beliefs on the instructional use of technology. Blogs and wikis can potentially offer multiple benefits for students; among them are accesses to an authentic audience, increased student motivation, an increased desire to write, an increased opportunity to write, and a venue for collaboration. As Jeff stated, it is not a matter of “if you build it, they will come and all will be bright and rosy.” Merely using these tools does not guarantee benefits to students. It is more like a symphonic concert. A concert, of course, has musicians and an audience; but it must begin with a composer. The composer is the designer who determines the style of the music, how the piece will ultimately sound, at what tempo it will move, and how the solo instrumentation and accompaniment will meld and compliment one another. All the pieces must work in concert to create a symphony. In this case, blogs and wikis serve as the instruments. Students play them for the audience. Without a well written score from the composerteacher, students will simply play notes, not music. This study has shown blogs have the ability to stimulate and motivate students to write. That is only a beginning step. Now it is incumbent upon the instructor to design activities that are open-ended, involve defining and solving real-world problems in order to engage higher levels of thinking and increase opportunities to construct knowledge. The tools are that are here today, like blogs and wikis, will continue to change. However, the tool is only a device. The intent for the use of the tool is the key not only to how that tool impacts students and student learning, but the degree of impact as well.

179 Implications This study did contribute to the current knowledge base of how blogs and wikis are used for instructional purposes with K-12 students. The results revealed a teacher’s pedagogical beliefs, as well as the determination to use technology as an instructional tool, influenced the intent to use blogs or wikis. Other factors such as audience interaction, commenting options, and increased motivation were also influenced by a participant’s intent to use technology. Awareness of this connection can help in the preparation of both pre-service and in-service teachers. As the monetary investment for technology continues to escalate, knowledge of a teacher's pedagogical beliefs can assist technology trainers to better assess professional development needs and assist teachers in designing student learning opportunities that are more aligned with their pedagogical beliefs (Zhao et al., 2001). This may not only better prepare teachers to use blogs and wikis for instructional purposes and promote the use of these tools with students, but it may also help to alleviate some resistance that exists towards using technology in the classroom. The ability to articulate one's pedagogical beliefs can also impact pre-service teachers. Teacher educators can assist pre-service teachers as they define, analyze and reflect on their beliefs about teaching, learning, and the determination to use technology. This will be extremely important for today’s university students, as they are often huge technology consumers and producers on a personal level. Despite this familiarity with technology, they need to learn about technology’s instructional uses and the impact their beliefs have on the design of student technology-based activities.

180 Instructional design and development must be based upon some theory of learning and/or cognition; effective design is possible only if the developer has developed reflexive awareness of the theoretical basis underlying the design. (Bednar, Cunningham, Duffy, & Perry, 1992, p. 19) A personal awareness of one's pedagogical beliefs can directly impact the design of instructional technology activities for student instruction as shown in this study. This harmony between the intent of the activity and the philosophy of the instructor was also shown to have a positive bearing on the desire to use the activity with future classes. Being cognizant of one's personal beliefs can enable more informed decisions on the design of technology activities which can in turn lead to more productive and sustained use. Final Thoughts Salomon (2000) talks of a “horse race approach” to research technology use in education; “who runs faster, who arrives first…pitting one medium against another” (Disappointments and their reasons III section, ¶ 1) as a means to determine which technology provides the best outcomes. The race to see which approach comes out on top only reinforces the concept that technology is the deciding factor. According to Salomon, it is not the technology alone that makes the difference. It is how it is used. Perhaps the words of Donald Leu (2000) can best explain the importance of the findings from this study suggesting a connection between the teacher’s intent to use blogs and wikis, the determination to use technology, and her pedagogical beliefs. Technology and the literacies they prompt are changing so quickly that their importance to our children’s future is often clear before a consistent body of research evidence appears objectively demonstrating their efficacy… Research might be better spent exploring issues of how to support teachers’ efforts to unlock the potentials of new technologies, not demonstrating the learning gains from technologies we already know will be important to our children’s success at

181 life’s opportunities. If technologies continually change in the years ahead, it may become increasingly important to study teachers’ envisionments of these technologies for literacy and learning. Teachers’ envisionments, in a time of rapid technological change, may be one of the more stable components of literacy education in the future. (p. 762) Whether blogs and wikis morph into something new or disappear completely will not matter in the long run. What will matter is how teachers intend to use tomorrow’s technological tools to orchestrate student opportunities to participate in the concert of learning.

REFERENCES Airasian, P. W., & Walsh, M. E. (1997). Constructivist cautions. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(6), 444-449. Akyalcin, J. (1997). Constructivism: An epistemological journey from Piaget to Papert. Retrieved March 27, 2007, from http://web.archive.org/web/ 20000608200332/http://www.kilvington.schnet.edu.au/construct.htm Alber, S. R. (1999). Focus on mainstreaming: "I don't like to write, but I love to get published": Using a classroom newspaper to motivate reluctant writers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15(4), 355-360. Alpay, E. (2003). The contribution of Vygotsky's theory to our understanding of the relation between the social world and cognitive development. Retrieved March 26, 2007, from http://www.ic.ac.uk/chemicalengineering/common_room/ files/PsychEd_5.pdf Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0?: Ideas, technologies and implications for education. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/ documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf Anstey, M., & Bull, G. (2006). Teaching and learning multiliteracies: Changing times, changing literacies. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Applebee, A. N. (1977). Writing across the curriculum: The London projects. The English Journal, 66(9), 81-85. Applefield, J. M., Huber, R., & Moallem, M. (2000). Constructivism in theory and practice: toward a better understanding. The High School Journal, 84(2), 35-53. Augar, N., Raitman, R., & Wanlei, Z. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. Paper presented at the 21st ASCILITE Conference, Perth. Ba, H., Tally, W., & Tsikalas, K. (2002). Investigating children's emerging digital literacies. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 1. Retrieved November 21, 2007, from http://www.jtla.org Baker, E. A., & Kinzer, C. K. (1998). Effects of technology on process writing: Are they all good? In T. Shanahan & F. Rodriguez-Brown (Eds.), Forty-seventh Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.

183 Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1993). The word processor as an instructional tool: A metaanalysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63(1), 69-93. Beck, N., & Fetherston, T. (2003). The effects of incorporating a word processor into a year three writing program. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 139-161. Bednar, A. K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. M., & Perry, J. D. (1992). Theory into practice: How do we link? In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 17-34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Blood, R. (2000). Weblogs: A history and perspective. In J. Rodzville (Ed.), We've got blog: How weblogs are changing our culture. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing. Blood, R. (2002). Weblogs: A history and perspective. In J. Rodzvilla (Ed.), We've got blog (pp. 7-16). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books Group. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Boiarsky, C. (1991). Fluency, fluidity, and word processing. Journal of Advanced Composition, 11(1), 123-133. Boling, E. C. (2005a, June 29). Preparing teachers to integrate technology in literacy instruction. Paper presented at the National Educational Computing Conference, Philadelphia, PA. Boling, E. C. (2005b, June 29). Preparing teaches to integrate technology for literacy instruction. Paper presented at the National Educational Computing Conference, Philadelphia, PA. Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Borja, R. R. (2005). 'Blogs' catching on as tool for instruction. Education Week, 25(15), 1-17. Bos, N., & Krajcik, J. (1998, April 13). Students' awareness of audience in webpublished science writing. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego. Bradley, V. N. (1982). Improving students' writing with microcomputers. Language Arts, 59(7), 732-743.

184 Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Brecia, W. F., & Miller, M. T. (2005). What's it worth? The perceived benefits of instructional blogging. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 5, 44-52. Retrieved September 18, 2007, from http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume5/Brescia.pdf Brooks-Young, S. (2005). Writing for an audience: Use blogs to expand your students' horizons. Today's Catholic Teacher, 39(2), 10-13. Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Brown, J., Bryan, J., & Brown, T. (2005). Twenty-first century literacy and technology in K-8 classrooms. Innovate, 1. Retrieved November 18, 2007, from http://innovateonline.info/print.php?view=pdf&id=17 Bump, J. (1990). Radical changes in class discussion using networked computers. Computers and the Humanities, 24, 49-65. Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work?: Employers' perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century workforce. Retrieved November 1, 2006, from http://www.conferenceboard.org/pdf_free/BED-06-Workforce.pdf Chapman, M. (2006). Research in writing, preschool through elementary, 1984-2003. L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 6, 7-27. Cobb, P. (2005). Where is the mind? A coordination of sociocultural and cognitive constructivist perspectives. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice (pp. 39-57). New York: Teachers College Press. Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Word processing and writing in elementary classrooms: A critical review of related literature. Review of Educational Research, 61(1), 107155. Cochran-Smith, M., Kahn, J., & Paris, C. L. (1990). Writing with a felicitous tool. Theory into Practice, 29(4), 235-245. Cohen, M., & Riel, M. (1989). The effect of distant audiences on students' writing. American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 143-159. Connor-Greene, P. A. (2000). Making connections: Evaluating the effectiveness of journal writing in enhancing student learning. Teaching of Psychology, 27(1), 4446.

185 Cooper, D. J. (1997). Literacy: Helping children construct meaning (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Corio, J. (2003). Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. Reading Teacher, 56. Retrieved November 17, 2007, from http://www.readingonline.org/ electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic/RT/2-03_column/index.html Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Pearson Education. D'Arcy, P. (1987). Writing to learn. In T. Fulwiler (Ed.), The Journal Book (pp. 41-46). Portsmouth, NJ: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Daiute, C. (1983). The computer as stylus and audience. College Composition and Communication, 34(2), 134-145. Daiute, C. (1986). Physical and cognitive factors in revising: Insights from studies with computers. Research in the Teaching of English, 20(2), 141-159. Danielson, L. (2000). The improvement of student writing: What the research says. Journal of School Improvement, 1. Retrieved September 25, 2007, from http://www.ncacasi.org/jsi/2000v1i1/improvement Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2002). Constructivist discourses and the field of education: Problems and possibilities. Educational Theory, 52(4), 409-428. Desilets, A., & Paquet, S. (2005). Wiki as a tool for web-based collaborative story telling in primary school: A case study. Paper presented at the EdMedia 2005, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia, &Telecommunications, Montreal. Dickinson, D. K. (1986). Cooperation, collaboration, and a computer: Integrating a computer into a first-second grade writing program. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 357-378. Downes, S. (2004). Educational Blogging. Educause Review, 39(5), 14-26. Drexler, W., Dawson, K., & Ferdig, R. E. (2007). Collaborative blogging as a means to develop elementary expository writing skills. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 6, 140-160. Retrieved November 14, 2007, from http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume6/Drexler.pdf Du, H. S., & Wagner, C. (2007a). Learning with Weblogs: An empirical investigation. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(1), 1-16.

186 Du, H. S., & Wagner, C. (2007b). Learning with weblogs: Enhancing cognitive and social knowledge construction. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(1), 1-16. Duffy, P., & Bruns, A. (2006). The use of blogs, wikis and RSS in education: A conversation of Possibilities. Paper presented at the Online Learning and Teaching Conference 2006, Brisbane. Dybahl, C. S., Shaw, D. G., & Blahous, E. (1997). The impact of computer on writing: No simple answers. Computers in the Schools, 13(3/4), 41-53. Evans, P. (2006). The wiki factor. BizEd, 5(2), 28-32. Farmer, J. (2003). The potential of personal publishing in education III: Where to now? Retrieved September 19, 2007, from http://www.xplanazine.com/archives/2003/10/incorporated_su_5.php Feldman, S. (2001). The link, and how we think: Using hypertext as a teaching & learning tool. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28(2), 153-158. Ferdig, R. E., & Trammell, K. D. (2004). Content delivery in the 'blogoshpere' THE Journal, 31(7), 12, 16-17, 20. Ferris, S. P., & Wilder, H. (2006). Uses and potentials of wikis in the classroom. Innovate, 2. Retrieved September 12, 2007, from http://www.innovateonline.info/print.php?view=pdf&id=258 Fiedler, S. (2004). Introducing disruptive technologies for learning: Personal web publishing with weblogs. Retrieved September 23, 2007, from http://web.archive.org/web/20061231122016/http://static.cognitivearchitects.com/ gems/Seblogging/EdMediaSymposium.pdf Forte, A., & Bruckman, A. (2006). From Wikipedia to the classroom: Exploring online publication and learning. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, Bloomington, IN. Fosnot, C. T. (2005a). Constructivism revisited: Implications and reflections. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice (2nd ed., pp. 276-291). New York: Teachers College Press. Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.). (2005b). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (Second ed.). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

187 Fossey, E., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36, 717-732. Fulwiler, T. (Ed.). (1987). The Journal Book. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Gay, G., Sturgill, A., Martin, W., & Huttenlocher, D. (1999). Document-centered peer collaborations: An exploration of the educational uses of networked communication technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4. Retrieved September 26, 2007, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue3/gay.html#Discussion Gibson, S. (2006). Using a wiki: A textbook case. Retrieved November 3, 2007, from http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2061136,00.asp Gilbert, C., Goldstein, S., Jacobs, G. M., & Winn-Bell Olsen, J. (1997). Six questions and 58 answers about using cooperative learning. ThaiTESOL Bulletin, 10, 16-24. Retrieved March 16, 2008, from http://www.georgejacobs.net/6_Questions_and_58_Answers.htm Gillmor, D. (2005). The read-write web. We the media: Grassroots journalism by the people, for the people Retrieved June 26, 2007, from http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/wemedia/book/ch02.pdf Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1991). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. White Plains, NY: Longman. Goddard, M. (2002). What Do We Do with These Computers? Reflections on Technology in the Classroom. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(1), 19-26. Godwin-Jones, B. (2003). Blogs and wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 12-16. Goldberg, A., Russell, M., & Cook, A. (2003). The effect of computers on student writing: A meta-analysis of studies from 1992 to 2002. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 2, 1-51. Retrieved September 3, 2007, from http://escholarship.bc.edu/jtla/vol2/1/ Goodwin-Jones, B. (2003). Blogs and wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7, 12-16. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/emerging/default.html Grejda, G. F., & Hannafin, M. J. (1992). Effects of word processing on sixth graders' holistic writing and revisions. Journal of Educational Research, 85(3), 144. Hackmann, D. G. (2004). Constructivism and block scheduling: Making the connection. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(9), 697-702.

188 Hagood, M. C., Stevens, L. P., & Reinking, D. (2002). What do they have to teach us? Talkin' 'cross generations! In D. E. Alverman (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 68-83). New York: Peter Lang Publishing. Hannafin, M. J., & Hill, J. R. (2002). Epistemology and the design of learning environments. In R. A. Reiser (Ed.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 70-82). Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall. Harris, M. (1992). Collaboration is not collaboration is not collaboration: Writing center tutorials vs. peer-response groups. College Composition and Communication, 43(3), 369-383. Hartman, K., Neuwirth, C. M., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., Cochran, C., Palmquist, M., et al. (1995). Patterns of social interaction and learning to write: Some effects of network technologies. In Z. L. Berge & M. P. Collins (Eds.), Computer mediated communication (pp. 47-78). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press Inc. Hawisher, G. E. (1987). The effects of word processing on the revision strategies of college freshman. Research in the Teaching of English, 21(2), 145-189. Hawisher, G. E. (1988). Research update: Writing and word processing. Computers and Composition, 5(2), 7. Hawkins, J., Sheingold, K., Gearhart, M., & Berger, C. (1982). Microcomputers in schools: Impact on the social life of elementary classrooms. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 3, 361-373. Heap, J. L. (1989). Writing as social action. Theory into Practice, 28(2), 148-153. Hermann, A. W. (1990). Computers and writing research: Shifting our governing gaze. In D. H. Holdstein & C. L. Selfe (Eds.), Computers and writing. New York: The Modern Language Association of America. Honebein. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments (pp. 11-24). Englewood, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Howard, L., & Monfils, G. (2007). Is chatspeak destroying English? Learning & Leading with Technology, 35(3), 8-9. Huann, T. Y., John, O. E. G., & Yuen, J. M. (2005). Literature Review: Weblogs in education. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://www.moe.edu.sg/edumall/rd/litreview/weblogs_in_education.pdf

189 Huffaker, D. (2004). Spinning yarns around the digital fire: Storytelling and dialogue among youth on the Internet. Retrieved September 6, 2007, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_1/huffaker/index.html Huffaker, D. (2005a). The educated blogger: Using weblogs to promote literacy in the classroom. AACE Journal, 13(2), 91-98. Huffaker, D. (2005b). Let them blog: Using weblogs to advance literacy in the K-12 classroom. In L. T. W. Hin & R. Subramaniam (Eds.), Literacy in technology at the K-12 level: Issues and challenges (pp. 337-356). Hershey, PA: Idea Group. Huijser, H. (2006). Refocusing multiliteracies for the net generation. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 2(1), 21-33. Hunter, W. J., Jardine, G., Rilstone, P., & Weisgerber, R. (1990). The effects of using word processors: A hard look at the research. The Writing Notebook, 8(1), 42-46. International Reading Association. (2002). Integrating literacy and technology in the curriculum. Retrieved November 18, 2007, from http://www.reading.org/downloads/positions/ps1048_technology.pdf Jackowski-Bartol, T. (2001). The impact of word processing on middle school students. Unpublished master's thesis, Chestnut Hill College, Philadelphia, PA. Jenkinson, E. B. (1988). Learning to write writing to learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 69(10), 712-717. Johnston, B. (1999). Theory and research: Audience, language use, and language learning. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues (pp. 55-64). Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism vs. constructivism. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14. Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Evaluating constructivist learning. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 137-148). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Jones, I. (1994). The effect of a word processor on the written composition of secondgrade pupils. Computers in the Schools, 11(2), 43-54.

190 Juzwik, M. M., Crucic, S., Wolbers, K., Moxley, K. D., Dimling, L. M., & Shankland, R. K. (2006). Writing into the 21st century: An overview of research on writing, 1999 to 2004. Written Communication, 23(4), 451-476. Kahn, J. (1987). Learning to write with a new tool: Young children and word processing. The Computer Teacher, 14(9), 11-12, 56. Kamil, M. L., Intrator, S. M., & Kim, H. S. (2000). The effects of other technologies on literacy and literacy learning. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, D. P. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 3, pp. 771-788). Nahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Kantrov, I. (1991). Keeping promises and avoiding pitfalls: Where teaching needs to augment word processing. Computers and Composition, 8(2), 63-77. Keetley, E. D. (1995). Comparison of first grade computer assisted and handwritten process story writing. Unpublished master's thesis, Johnson and Wales University, Providence, Rhode Island. Kellner, D. (2000). New technologies/new literacies: Reconstructing education for the new millennium. Teaching Education, 11(3), 245-265. Kelly, K. (1990). Computer-assisted writing instruction: A marriage of effective instruction and technology. Retrieved September 29, 2007, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/are/vol1no2/litrev/KarenKelly.pdf Kennedy, K. (2003). Writing with web logs. Technology and Learning, 23(7), 11-14. Kerka, S. (2002). Journal writing as an adult learning tool. Columbus, OH: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 470782). Killion, J. (1999). Journaling. Journal of Staff Development, 20. Retrieved September 28, 2007, from http://www.nsdc.org/library/publications/jsd/killion203.cfm Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. Retrieved March 25, 2007, from http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/SocialConstructivism.htm King, F. B., & LaRocco, D. L. (2006). E-journaling: A strategy to support student reflection and understanding. Current Issues in Education, 9. Retrieved September 28, 2007, from http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume9/number4/ Kinzer, C. K. (2003). The importance of recognizing the expanding boundaries of literacy. Reading Online, 6. Retrieved November 17, 2007, from http://www. readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic/kinzer/index.html

191 Klantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2001). 'Multiliteracies' a framework for action. In M. Klantzis & B. Cope (Eds.), Transformations in language and learning (pp. 19-31). Australia: Common Ground Publishing. Knight, J. (2003). Crossing boundaries: What constructivist instruction can teach us about intensive-explicit instruction, and what intensive-explicit instruction can teach us about constructivist instruction. Retrieved March 26, 2007, from http://www.kucrl.org/htmlfiles/SE2005/constructivist.rtf Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 94(5), 483-497. Krause, S. D. (2005). Blogs as a tool for teaching. Chronicle of Higher Education, 51(42), B33-B35. Kreeft Peyton, J. (1997). Dialogue journals: Interactive writing to develop language and literacy. Emergency Librarian, 24(5), 46-47, 49. Kulik, J. A. (2003a). Computer use helps students to develop better writing skills (Issue Brief No. P10446.001). Arlington, VA: SRI International. Kulik, J. A. (2003b). Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say (SRI Project No. P10446.001). Arlington, VA: SRI International. Kurth, R. J. (1987). Using word processing to enhance revision strategies during student writing activities. Educational Technology, 27(1), 13-19. Lamb, B. (2004). Wide open spaces: Wikis ready or not. Educause Review, 39(5), 36-48. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003, April 3). Do-it-yourself broadcasting: Writing weblogs in a knowledge society. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago. Larochelle, M., & Bednarz, N. (1998). Constructivism and education: Beyond epistemological correctness. In M. Larochelle, N. Bednarz & J. Garrison (Eds.), Constructivism and education (pp. 3-20). New York: Cambridge University Press. Leu, D., & Corio, J. (2004). New literacies for new times: why and how the literacy community needs to rethink its mission. WSRA Journal, 44(5), 3-7. Leu Jr., D. J. (2000). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education in an information age. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 743-770). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

192 Leu Jr., D. J., & Kinzer, C. K. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction with networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 108-127. Leu Jr., D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Corio, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570-1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Littrell, A. B. (2005). "My space": Using blogs as literature journals with adolescents. Unpublished dissertation, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville. Liu, C. H., & Matthews, R. (2005). Vygotsky's philosophy: Constructivism and its criticism examined. International Education Journal, 6(3), 386-400. Longhurst, J., & Sandage, S. A. (2004). Appropriate technology and journal writing. College Teaching, 52(2), 69-75. Lowe, C., & Williams, T. (2004). Moving to the public: Weblogs in the writing classroom. Retrieved September 3, 2007, from http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/moving_to_the_public.html Luffman, T. (2001). Technology in the composition classroom: Blessing or curse? Retrieved October 10, 2007, from http://web.archive.org/web/ 20041120215434/http://dana.ucc.nau.edu/~tel4/eng519/tp-519-main.htm Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (2000). Literate futures: Report of the review for Queensland state schools. Retrieved November 19, 2007, from http://education.qld.gov.au/ curriculum/learning/literate-futures/pdfs/lf-teacher-summary.pdf Lyons, H. K. (2002). The effects of technology use on student writing proficiency and student attitudes toward written assignments in a ninth grade language arts classroom. Unpublished Dissertation, Idaho State University, Pocatello. Maddux, C. D., Johnson, D. L., & Willis, J. W. (2001). Educational computing: Learning with tomorrow's technologies (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Mader, S. (2007). Wiki vs. blog. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.businessblogwire.com/2006/03/stewart_mader_wiki_vs_blog.html Mahoney, M. J. (1991). Human change processes. New York: Basic Books.

193 Matthews, M. (1996). Vygotsky and writing: Children using language to learn and learning from the child's language what to teach. In L. Dixon-Krauss (Ed.), Vygotsky in the classroom (pp. 93-110). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers. Mayher, J. S., Lester, N. B., & Pradl, G. M. (1983). Learning to write/writing to learn. Portsmouth, NJ: Boynton/Cook Publishers. McDowell, D. (2004). Use of wiki in the high school classroom. Retrieved November 1, 2007, from http://www.guhsd.net/mcdowell/visions/wiki-litreview.pdf McIntyre, S. R., & Tlusty, R. H. (1995). Computer-mediated discourses: Electronic dialogue journaling and reflective practice. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Means, B., & Olson, K. (1995). Technology's role within constructivist classrooms. Menlo Park, CA: Sri International. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED383283). Medway, P. (1973). From talking to writing. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 177554). Medway, P. (1987). Logs for learning: Writing in one English school. In T. Fulwiler (Ed.), The Journal Book (pp. 64-76). Portsmouth, NJ: Boyton/Cook Publishers. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Mitchell, A., Posner, I., & Baecker, R. (1995). Learning to write together using groupware. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://web.archive.org/web/20050408152716/http://www.kmdi.toronto.edu/rmb/p apers/p14.pdf Moeller, D. (2002). Computers in the writing classroom. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Moore, K. C. (2004). Constructivism & metacognition. Retrieved March 25, 2007, from http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle.html Murphy, E. (1997). Constructivism from philosophy to practice. Retrieved June 18, 2007, from http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle.html

194 National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). The Nation's Report Card: Writing highlights 2002. Retrieved 11/13/07, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/ pdf/main2002/2003531.pdf National Commission for Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. (2003). The neglected "R". Retrieved October 23, 2007, from www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdf National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. (2004). Writing: A ticket to work...or a ticket out, a survey of business leaders. Retrieved October 23, 2007, from http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/ writingcom/writing-ticket-to-work.pdf National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. (2005). Writing: A powerful message from state government. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/powerfulmessage-from-state.pdf National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. (2006). Writing and school reform. Retrieved November 13, 2007, from http://www.writingcommission. \org/prod_downloads/writingcom/writing-school-reform-natl-comm-writing.pdf NCTE Executive Committee. (2004). NCTE beliefs about the teaching of writing. Retrieved October 6, 2007, from http://www.ncte.org/prog/writing/research/ 118876.htm New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Education Review, 66(1), 60-92. Ng, W. (2006). Web-based technologies, technology literacy, and learning. In L. T. W. Hin & R. Subramaniam (Eds.), Handbook of research on literacy in technology at the K-12 level (pp. 94-117). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference. Nichols, L. M. (1996). Pencil and paper versus word processing: A comparative study of creative writing in the elementary school. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 29(2), 159-166. Null, J. W. (2004). Is constructivism traditional? Historical and practical perspectives on a popular advocacy. Educational Forum, The, 68(2), 180. Oelz, N. G. (1989). All ears on the author. Reading Teacher, 42(7), 555.

195 Olssen, M. (1996). Radical constructivism and its failings: Anti-realism and individualism. British Journal of Educational Studies, 44(3), 275. Oravec, J. (2003). Blending by blogging: Weblogs in blended learning initiatives. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2-3), 225-233. Oravec, J. A. (2002). Bookmarking the world: Weblog applications in education. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(7), 616-621. Owston, R. D., & Wideman, H. H. (1997). Word processors and children's writing in a high-computer-access setting. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(2), 202-220. Oxford, R. L. (1997). Constructivism: Shape-shifting, substance, and teacher education. PJE. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(1), 35-66. Padgett, A. L. (2000). Journal writing in the elementary school: Word Processing vs. paper and pencil. Unpublished Masters of Arts in Educational Technology and Bible, Johnson Bible College, Knoxville, TN. Palmeri, J., & Daum, S. (2001). Fending for themselves: A student-directed model of peer response writing groups. In E. J. Isaacs & P. Jackson (Eds.), Public works: Student writing as public text (pp. 78-86). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers. Parker, K. R., & Chao, J. T. (2007). Wiki as a teaching tool. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3(1), 57-72. Parkinson, D. (2004). The double-dialectic and lifelong learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 22(5), 475-485. Pearson, H., & Wilkinson, A. (1986). The use of the word processor in assisting children's writing development. Educational Review, 38(2), 169-187. Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers' beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(2), 57-76. Penrod, D. (2007). Using blogs to enhance literacy: The next powerful step in 21stcentury learning. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Perkins, D. (1992). What constructivism demands of the learner. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction (pp. 161-165). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), 5-12.

196 Phipps, J. J. (2005). E-journaling: Achieving interactive education online. Educause Quarterly, 28. Retrieved September 28, 2007, from http://www.educause.edu/apps/eq/eqm05/eqm0519.asp?print=yes Polly, D. (2007). Blogs: Turning technology-driven social fads into an educational tool. VSTE Journal, 21, 1-7. Retrieved September 3, 2007, from http://www.vste.org/publications/journal/attach/vj_2007/vj_2007_04.pdf Prawat, R. S. (1996). Constructivisms, modern and postmodern. Educational Psychologist, 31(3/4), 215-225. Quinn, D., Duff, A., Johnston, H., & Gursansky, D. (2007, July). Blogging: Infusing engagement, enjoyment (joy) and reflection into learning. Paper presented at the HERDSA 2007 - Enhancing Higher Education Theory and Scholarship, Adelaide, South Australia,. Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 407-430. Rakes, G. C., Flowers, B. F., Casey, H. B., & Santana, R. (1999). An analysis of instructional technology use and constructivist behaviors in K-12 teachers. International Journal of Educational Technology, 1(2), 1-18. Reed, W. M. (1996). Assessing the impact of computer-based writing instruction. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(4), 418-437. Regina Public Schools, & Saskatchewan Learning. (2004). Constructivism: Knowledge building in the secondary classroom. Retrieved June 18, 2007, from http://wblrd.sk.ca/~consthighkm/what/philosophy.html Reinhold, S. (2006). WikiTrails: Augmenting wiki structure for collaborative, interdisciplinary learning. Paper presented at the 2006 International Symposium on Wikis, Odense, Denmark. Reither, J. A., & Vipond, D. (1989). Writing as collaboration. College English, 51(8), 855-867. Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 16231640. Richardson, W. (2003). Web logs in the English classroom: More than just cchat. English Journal, 93(1), 39. Richardson, W. (2006). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful Web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

197 Rodrigues, D., & Rodrigues, R. (1989). How word processing is changing our teaching: New technologies, new approaches, new challenges. Computers and Composition, 7(1), 13-25. Ross, K. (2007). Teachers say text messages r ruining kids' riting skills. American Teacher, 92(3), 4. Roussin, J. (2008). Readers respond: Is chatspeak destroying English? Learning & Leading with Technology, 35(5), 6. Sade, G. (2005). Weblogs as open constructive learning environments. Retrieved September 3, 2007, from http://incsub.org/blogtalk/images/bog_talk_gsade_v71.doc Salomon, G. (2000). It's not just the tool, but the educational rationale that counts. Retrieved November 16, 2007, from http://web.archive.org/web/ 20041204215511/http://construct.haifa.ac.il/~gsalomon/edMedia2000.html Savenye, W. C., & Robinson, R. S. (2004). Qualitative research issues and methods: An introduction for educational technologists. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 1171-1195). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem Based Learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(1), 31-38. Schaffert, S., Bischof, D., Buerger, T., Gruber, A., Hilzensauer, W., & Schaffert, S. (2006). Learning with semantic wikis,. Paper presented at the First Workshop on Semantic Wikis--From Wiki to Semantics (SemWiki2006), Buvda, Montenegro. Retrieved November 2, 2007. from http://www.wastl.net/download/paper/Schaffert06_SemWikiLearning.pdf Scheepers, D. (2000). Learning with Computers. Retrieved June 18, 2007, from http:// hagar.up.ac.za/catts/learner/2000/scheepers_md/projects/loo/theory/theories.html Seitzinger, J. (2006). Be constructive: Blogs, podcasts, and wikis as constructivist learning tools. Learning Solutions eMagazine, 1-13. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://www.elearningguild.com/pdf/2/073106DES.pdf Sevelj, M. (2006). Weblogs as dynamic learning spaces. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://seeking.wikispaces.com/space/showimage/DEANZ_blog_paper.pdf Shortis, T. (2007). Gr8 txtpectations: The creativity of text spelling. English Drama Media, 8, 21-26.

198 Simic, M. (1994). Computer assisted writing instruction. Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, English and Communication. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED376474). Simon, S. D. (1999). From Neo-behaviorism to social constructivism: The paradigmatic non-evolution of Albert Bandura. Retrieved March 26, 2007, from http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/simon.doc Snyder, I. (1993). Writing with word processors: A research overview. Educational Research, 35(1), 49-69. Sommers, E. A., & Collins, J. L. (1984). What research tells us about composing and computing. Buffalo, NY: Computer Educators League. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 249497). Spitzer, M. (1990). Local and global networking: Implications for the future. In D. H. Holdsetin & C. L. Selfe (Eds.), Computers and writing. New York: The Modern Language Association of America. Sprague, D., & Dede, C. (1999). Constructivism in the classroom: If I teach this way, am I doing my job? Learning and Leading with Technology, 27(1), 6-17. Staton, J. (1982). Dialogue journals in the classroom context. In J. Staton, R. W. Shuy, J. K. Peyton & L. Reed (Eds.), Dialogue journal communication: Classroom, linguistic, social, and cognitive views. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Steffe, L. P., & Gale, J. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Storybook Weaver Deluxe. (1994). [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: The Learning Company (MECC). Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill. Tudge, J. R., & Winterhoff, P. A. (1994). Vygotsky, Piaget, and Bandura: Perspectives on the relations between the social world and cognitive development. Human Development, 36(2), 61-81. Tyner, K. (1998). Literacy in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Utecht, J. (2007). Blogs aren't the enemy: How blogs enhance learning. Technology & Learning, 27(9), 32-34.

199 von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In P. Watzlawick (Ed.), The Invented Reality: How do we believe what we know?: Contributions to Constructivism (pp. 17-40). New York: Norton. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wang, C., & Turner, D. (2004). Extending the wiki paradigm for use in the classroom. Paper presented at the ITCC 2004: International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing, Las Vegas. Wang, M., Fix, R., & Bock, L. (2005). Blogs: Useful tool or vain indulgence? Paper presented at the World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Vancouver. Wang, Y. (1993). E-mail dialogue journaling in an ESL reading and writing classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene. Ward, J. M. (2004). Blog assisted language learning (BALL): Push button publishing for students. TEFL Web Journal, 3(1), 1-16. Warrick, W. R. (2004). Constructivism: Pre-historical to post-modern. Retrieved June 18, 2007, from http://mason.gmu.edu/~wwarrick/Portfolio/Products/PDF/constructivism.pdf Warschauer, M. (1999). Electronic literacies: Language, culture, and power in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and writing. In C. Davidson & J. Cummins (Eds.), Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 1-13). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer. Weiler, G. (2003). Using Weblogs in the Classroom. The English Journal, 92(5), 73-75. Wickstrom, C. D. (2003). A "funny" thing happened on the way to the forum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(5), 414-423. Williams, J. B., & Jacobs, J. (2004). Exploring the use of blogs as learning spaces in the higher education sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(2), 232-247. Willis, J., Thompson, A., & Sadera, W. (1999). Research on technology research and development. Educational technology research and development, 47(4), 29-45.

200 Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131-175. Witte, S. (2007). "That's online writing, not boring school writing": Writing with blogs and the Talkback Project. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(2), 92-96. Wollman-Bonilla, J. E. (2001). Can first-grade writers demonstrate audience awareness? Reading Research Quarterly, 36(2), 184-201. Wolsey, T. D. (2004). Literature discussion in cyberspace: Young adolescents using threaded discussion groups to talk about books. Reading Online, 7. Retrieved September 26, 2007, from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=/articles/wolsey/ Wrede, O. (2003). Weblogs and discourse: Weblogs as transformational technology for higher education and academic research, Blogtalk Conference. Vienna. Yancey, K. B. (2004). Using multiple technologies to teach writing. Educational Leadership, 62(2), 38-40. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Yoder, P. L. (2007). Shifting paradigms: assessment and technology in the composition classroom. Pedagogy, 7, 141-146. Retrieved October 10, 2007, from http://pedagogy.dukejournals.org/cgi/reprint/7/1/141.pdf Young, A. (1994). The wonder of writing across the curriculum. Language and Learning across the Disciplines, 1. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from http://wac.colostate.edu/llad/v1n1/young.pdf Zacharias, M. E. (1990). The relationship between journal writing in education and thinking processes: What educators say about it. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 327870). Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A. (2005). Best practice: Today's standards for teaching and learning in America's schools (3rd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Zhao, Y., Beyers, J., Mishra, P., Topper, A., Chen, H., Enfield, M., et al. (2001). What do they know? A comprehensive portrait of exemplary technology-using teachers. Journal of computing in teacher education, 17(2), 25-37.

201 Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482-515.

APPENDIX A CONSENT LETTER

201

202 My name is Rena Shifflet. I am a doctoral student at Illinois State University. I am conducting a qualitative research project in order to gain an understanding of the use of blogs and wikis with K-12 students. The results of this research project will be used as the basis of my dissertation in Curriculum and Instruction. I may also present the results in an academic venue or publish them in a professional journal. I would like you to participate in this research. Your participation would include being interviewed one or two times for approximately forty minutes to an hour each time. I’ll ask you questions about your use of blogs and wikis. I would like to digitally record these interviews. The reason for recording is so that I can construct a verbatim transcript to use in analysis. I will delete the recording once I have completed the transcription process. I would also like to review any public student artifacts created as a result of using blogs and wikis. The risks of participating in this are very low. There is a risk of loss of time to participate in the study and a risk of loss of privacy. To minimize the loss of privacy I will keep whatever information you provide confidential. The information you provide will not be identified by your name. I will use a pseudonym in the final report I construct. Only the researchers in this study will have access to the transcripts and notes. In the final research report I write, there may be some quotations from the interviews and some descriptions from my observations of student artifacts, but I will not use your real name and will protect your identity so that you will experience no adverse effects for your honesty in the interviews and your willingness to participate. You may benefit from this research project as you reflect on your purpose and intent for using blogs and wikis with your students. You may also experience an extrinsic reward of advancing the knowledge of the instructional use of blogs and wikis for other educators. Your participation is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for deciding not to participate. Also, you are free to withdraw from participation at any time, for any reason, with no penalties of any sort. If you have any questions about this research or your rights as a participant, please contact me Rena Shifflet, 309-829-5901, [email protected]; my professor Dr. Cheri Toledo, 309-438-3490, [email protected]; or the Illinois State University Research and Ethics & Compliance, 309-438-8451 I have read and understand the statements above. Typing your name below is evidence that you consent to the use of your data in this study.

Name _____________________________________

Date __________________

APPENDIX B EXAMPLE OF SCRIBE POST

203

204 Scribe: (DABC) Sine/Cosine; Relations and Modes of Representation As your scribe for today, I will put my efforts into defining today's lesson. I hope that standards will be met and that this may be used to a greater extent as a future reference. Today, we learned more about trig functions. We learned how to sketch the graphs, interpret the information, and undo our steps to either find equations from analyzing the graph or vice versa. There were many things that we went over today, upon which I will try to reexplain.

Class 1: Morning To start the class off, we put our thoughts into questions that were written on the board. 1.) On the same cartesian plane, using 2 different colours, sketch at least 2 cycles of: f(x) = Cos(x) and g(x) = Sin(x)

As Mr. K stated during the class, graphing these functions are as easy as counting from 14. In this example, upon which the graph is in intervals of Π/2, you would label your scale as Π/2, Π, 3Π/2, and 2Π on the positive side of the x-axis. On the negative side of the x-axis, you would label the scale with the same values except that they are negative: -Π/2, -Π, -3Π/2, and -2Π. There are things to remember when graphing in order to achieve full marks. Some of which are quite simple: - label your axis - add arrows to your axis and your curves - **make certain that the curve arrows either point up or down, NOT STRAIGHT Back to the question, there are things that you should notice about the function of Sin(x) and Cos(x). - both "wrap" around a line, known as the "sinusoidal axis" or the "average value of the function" - Cosine starts at its max value

205 - Sine starts at its sinusoidal axis Exploring further into the concept, we find that we can rewrite the function of Sin(x) in terms of Cosine, and rewrite the function of Cos(x) in terms of Sine. Sin in terms of Cos: -> Cos(x- Π/2) = Sin(x) Cos in terms of Sin: -> Sin(x+ Π/2) = Cos(x) NOTE: Π/2 in both of these equations are the phase shift a long the horizontal axis, either left or right, depending on its sign, which will be discussed further on in this post. 2.) Without using a calculator, sketch each of the following graphs: a.) y = Sin(x) - 1

b.) y = -2Sin(x) Notice that the amplitude, in this case (2) is not negative because amplitudes are described as distances and therefore should not be negative.

c.) y = 2Sin(x) + 1

In graphing these functions, there are certain steps that may be followed to help make graphing easier also explained later in this post.

206 ----------In general or standard form, the equation of sine functions are: •

f(x) = ASinB(x-C) + D

-Cosine is affected by the same transformations: •

f(x) = ACosB(x-C) + D

A- The value of A relates both to the amplitude and whether the function will be inverted or not over the y-axis. The amplitude (which is the absolute value of A: |A|) of the graph is the distance from the sinusoidal axis. Its sign influences whether the curve will "flip" over the y-axis or if it retains its normal position. Further explained later on. B- Parameter B is not the period of the graph but helps determine the period. This is also explained further into the class. C- The phase shift/ horizontal shift of the graph. D- Parameter D is the sinusoidal axis, average value of the function, or the vertical shift. ---------Now, having discovered the properties of the transformations, we dive deeper into the concept and talk about how these variables effect the graph and how graphing can be put into an easier form of remembering. Ex. Sin2x •

the value of "B" causes "everything to happen twice as fast"

•

the angle is "doubled" before finding the value of sine

Ex. Sin-2x •

Inputs are made negative first

•

Note: x-coordinates are changing sign

•

Note: the negative signs do not flip the graph vertically over the x-axis but horizontally over the y-axis

207 **To help us improve our understanding of these examples, we compared them with Sin(x) on the same Cartesian plane. Now diving even deeper with this new knowledge, we compare more examples to notice occurring patterns (mathematics is the study of patterns). We do this by observing sketches of functions. Sinx = 1/2 <-- 1 wave between 0-2Π Sin2x = 1/2 <-- 2 waves between 0-2Π Sin3x = 1/2 <-- 3 waves between 0-2Π Sin4x = 1/2 <--4 waves between 0-2Π So, we find that the value of "B" is somehow related to the number of waves between a given interval (in this case 0-2Π). However, when the word "Period" comes to mind, people ask themselves, is the value of "B" in fact the period? The answer to that is no. "B" is in fact not the period of the graph, but indeed helps determine it. •

A period is the distance of a hill and a wave.

Using this mode of representation, we can find the relationship between the value of "B" and the period.

Now discovering all of this in the first class of the day may be quite a load. However, one thing that should definitely not be forgotten is the concept of the mnemonic: DABC. At first, the abbreviation may look unfamiliar. However when you peer closer, you notice that A, B, C, and D, are part of the transformational equation of Sine and Cosine! DABC is actually that, except in the form of order upon which can be helpful in remembering how to sketch trig functions. D - Is the first step in sketching the graph of a trig function. D is the vertical shift or sinusoidal axis of the graph and should be found first, as you should know that the graph "wraps" around the sinusoidal axis. A - Is the second step in sketching the graph of a trig function. A is the amplitude and determines the stretch of the graph. Also important about the amplitude is its sign. If it is negative, the graph appears to be inverted; it flips horizontally over the y-axis. If positive,

208 Sine graphs will start at zero, and Cosine graphs will start at its max value, which is one. B - Is the third step in sketching the graph of a trig function. B represents a factor that influences the period of the graph. This is used to determine the scale values of the xaxis. C - Last but not least, the last step in sketching the graph of a trig function. C represents the horizontal shift of the graph. When thinking of graphing one of these monsters, you may curse in the form of DABC (pronounced: Dah - Bick!). Then all of a sudden, a flash of insight washes over you and you suddenly remember how to sketch the graph! Isn't that amazing everyone? Finally, we reached the last couple minutes of a long class (or short?). Mr. K put up an example, which he ended up sketching quickly on the board: y= -3Cos2(x - Π/4) + 1

For indication purposes, during the class, Mr. K compared graphing trig functions to the "etchisketch" which is quite the analogy. He stated that one dial of the etchisketch could be compared to Sin and the other dial could be compared to Cos. Imagine both of the dials being turned simultaneously and the result is quite frankly circular functions displayed in a graphical manner or atleast visual.

Class 2: Afternoon We started off the afternoon by taking a look at these two previous equations: f(x) = AsinB(x-C)+D

209 f(x) = AcosB(x-C)+D Discussing briefly about the two, we move quickly to an example. Ex. y = -2sin3(x+Π/6)+1 •

•

Note: The vertical shift is to the left in this example. The positive sign is due to a negative value input replacing the variable C. Since the formula has a negative sign, and the example has a positive sign, the horizontal shift is to the left because a (-)(-) = (+). Note: When solving this equation, for any reason, simply use the order of operations: BEDMAS

Now having graphed this function, Mr. K talked brought up a great topic. He said that, if you know how to do something one way in math, you should know how to undo it. So, that's what we ended up doing. Instead of converting the equation to a graphical mode of representation, we reversed the method and converted the graphs into symbolic modes of representation: in the form of an equation. So you might ask, how do you do that? Well, we started off by find the values ABCD of the transformational equations of sine or cosine. Note: For this one graph, there can be a large (when I say large, I mean LARGE) quantity of equations that when graphed, will all look similar or are exact replicates. We decided to rewrite the equation in Cosine: •

A= -2

•

B= 3 (B= 2

•

C= 0 (normal cosine curves start at its max, whiel this graph starts at its min due

Π/p = 2Π/2Π/3 = 3)

210 to the negative amplitude sign) •

D= 1

By substituting the numbers back into the framework equation, we get: y=-2cos3x+1 Next we decided to rewrite the equation 3 more times: 2 in terms of cosine, and 1 in terms of sine. Sine • • • •

A= 2 B= 3 C= Π/6 D= 1

y=2sin3(x-Π/6) + 1 Cosine1 • • • •

A= 2 B= 3 C= -Π/3 D= 1

y=2cos3(x+Π/3) + 1 Cosine2 • • • •

A= 2 B= 3 C= -Π/3 D= 1

y=2cos3(x+Π/3) + 1 After all those nice examples, we look at where the quadrants are located in the graph. To put it short, depending on where your starting point is, the period of the curve is divided by 4 pieces, quadrant 1, 2, 3, and 4 before repeating itself again.

211

After this, we quickly went over number 15 of exercise #5, and number 12 of exercise #6. We are now DONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE the unit and our pretest is on its way (supposedly thursday). Tomorrow, we are taking notes into our super duper "Math Dictionary of Power" (lol) and are going over any issues, concerns, and questions about the unit! Make sure to ask some questions or we'll just have wasted a class that could've been used towards our exam studying time near the end. WOW THAT WAS A DOOZY. Now we near the end. Any comments, suggestions, error fixing, criticism, appreciation, is accepted :) Homework for tonight: Curve sketching posted by Mr. K (so far has not appeared) Scribe for tomorrow: Bertman! (sorry Sam, Bert asked me first :P) Have a nice day. Night. Posted by Tim_MATH_y at 4:42 PM Labels: Circular Functions, Scribe, Tim_MATH_y

29 comments: aichelle s. said... Good job Timmy, I really like your graphics and use of colour! Everything was very detailed. =) Tim_MATH_y said... thanks! =) VincentR said... Good job, Timmy! Way to go! This might have take a whole night of games?! haha. Anyway, very small amount of grammatical error and the fact that Mr. K. recommended not to use arabic values to indicate the quadrants. Use roman numerals instead. Overall, it rocks! HAHA! I'm just curious where you happened

212 to construct those perfect graphs. It would hasten a lot of our fellow bloggers because they're easier to make instead of drawing them free-handedly. Good job again and see you tomorrow! Tim_MATH_y said... wows thanks man! lol i forgot about the roman numerals for quadrant numbering.. bah! well i got the idea from mr.k when i asked him how to make quick graphs. mr.k showed me the link on our blog called "Mathematics Archives" where mr.k dug through to find me a list of programs to use. i asked john about it and he perscribed me graphmatica. i downloaded and used it :), with the help of john and richard to answer questions about it Tim_MATH_y said... This post has been removed by the author. Tim_MATH_y said... http://archives.math.utk.edu/software/msdos/ graphing/grmat/.html Graphmatica, download windows version, its an excellent program. Jojo Rocks said... I'm speachless. Ver niice job. *claps* Anonymous said... ;) lol now i know about DABC --sheep SAMUS said... SHEEP! you are here! i never see you on anymore. oh so lauressa isnt a big jello after all. haha. hi sheep =) VincentR said... I suggest Timmy's scribe post is inducted to the Hall of Fame because of the fact that the post entails every detail involved in yesterday's class. Not only that, he

213 also clarified some confusing points. His images and text both contribute to the quality of the post. Grey-M said... I second Vincents motion to have this inducted into the H.o.F. because of the enormous amount detail this post contains. GJ Timmy. Tim_MATH_y said... wow awesome i got 2! ty Kasiaw said... I cast my vote that Tim-MATH-y's scribe post be inducted into the hall of fame because it was very detailed and the use of graphs was very helpfil. e said... Hello Mathy Tim! I also think your post is great. I only now had a chance to read it and I don't know if I can vote, but I'd certainly vote for Hall of Fameness :) I still have to do my job, which is to ask questions. 1. What is the difference between: a) f(x)=2sin(3)x+5 b) g(x)=2sin(3x)+5 c) h(x)=2sin3x+5? 2. You said: "A- The amplitude of the graph is the distance from the sinusoidal axis. Its sign indicates whether the function will be inverted or not over the x-axis, further explained later on in the class." Elsewhere in the post you said that A can not be negative as it describes the distance. Let's consider f(x)=-7sin(3x+pi/3)+2 What are A, B, C and D in this example? I'll wait for response and further discussion :) e aichelle s. said...

214 I also think this post should be inducted into the hall of fame because of the graphics, use of colour incorporated with in the post, and I find I can understand it. Tim_MATH_y said... WoW, great questions. I guess I should try to the best of my abilities to answer them for you. 1.) Well from the looks of these functions, and considering that this question seems quite difficult for me to explain, I do believe that they all seem quite similar, in respect to how they would be drawn on the same cartesian plane. However, I believe there might be more of a twist to these examples. a) f(x)=2sin(3)x+5 b) g(x)=2sin(3x)+5 c) h(x)=2sin3x+5? 2.) I was quite uncertain when pondering about this concept. A= -7 B= 3 C= pi/9 D= 2 f(x)=-7sin(3x+pi/3)+2 f(x)=-7sin3(x+pi/9)+2 Now, taking this information in, I notice that my post has a minor error. The value of "A" is not the amplitude. However, the value of |A| is the amplitude, and I believe that is should answer your question. Well correct me or discuss upon what you think about my thoughts. =) Lani said... Hi Tim Math y, Congratulations on an examplary scribe! Your detailed explanations and graphics contributed to the understanding of the content. In addition, you collaborated to reach this excellence, and your post generated such a great discussion. I'd like to offer a "Hall of Fame" worthy!

215 Best, Lani Tim_MATH_y said... All I can do right now is: =) e said... Hi Tim, I like how you handled 2. I agree that we should allow A to be negative, and that its absolute value is the amplitude. Nice job. Let's talk about 1. Here are the functions: a) f(x)=2sin(3)x+5 b) g(x)=2sin(3x)+5 c) h(x)=2sin3x+5? You remember discussion about input and output of functions with grey-m? That is what the differences above are all about. I can rewrite the functions so that it would be clearer: a)f(x)=2sin(3)x+5 = 2*sin(3)*x+5 = = (2*sin(3))x+5, so f is really just a linear function with slope 2sin(3) and y-intercept 5. See, here the input for sine is 3, not 3x (that's why there are parentheses there). b)g(x)= 2sin(3x)+5 is what you wanted to have, a trig function with A=2, B=3, C=0 and D=5. c)h(x)=2sin3x+5 I can't tell. I would say that it's same as f, but I think you wanted it to be same as g. It is in this case ambiguous as to what the input for the sine function is. What do you think? e said...

216 Tim, One more thing. In 2. is C pi/9 or -pi/9? I hope you're still smiling because you're doing an awesome job :) e Mr. K said... Let me add my vote to make it 7 so far. ;-) I think this post deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame not only for all the reasons people before me have mentioned, but also for the conversation that has evolved in the comments. The difference between y=sin(3)x and y=sin(3x) and the ambiguity in expressions like y=sin3x may seem small but are quite significant. As e has pointed out, one is a line and the other is a wave the last is ...? Very different functions. You've heard me say "learning is a conversation" ... this is a real learning conversation. Keep it up! ;-) Tim_MATH_y said... Haha! Well, for starters, I knew there was a twist with those examples! Especially example(a) of question 1 because I actually graphed all three of the functions and found that it was linear. That put quite the suspicion in my mind but I did not quite know how to explain what I was seeing. Thank you for pointing out the differences of the three examples, It definitely filled some gaps. Now for number 2.. hrm.. I think that you are trying to hint upon something about this question. Trusting my thoughts, I believe that.. OH! FLASH OF INSIGHT! yes C= -pi/9 since the example shows: x+pi/9 and the equation is x(MINUS)C. Therefore, (-)(-) cancel out to give + result! Yes, C= -pi/9.. bah how'd I mess up to start.. :P Ricky said...

217 Oh, I totally forgot to vote tim-math-y's scibe into the hall of fame. Ok I formally want to vote tim-math-y's scribe into the hall of fame because of his excellent details on solving each and every question and his excellent visuals and finally for his rational to be able to do the scribe while avoiding video games. Excellent Work Tim-Math-Y «Craig» said... Well, I would have to say HALL OF FAME!!! I really got to experience the full use of the Scribe Post. I was not present for this class, but I really felt I was "there" after reading this scribe. The explanations were so detailed and were exactly how I think Mr. K. would present them. The graphics were stunning and the work was displayed nicely. Plus it was about as long as a Math class anyways. LOL «Craig» said... Wow, I just counted, Tim-Math-y is in the 'Scribe Hall of Fame' with 9 votes!!! e said... You graphed the functions I gave you? Nice job, I wouldn't have thought to do that. I learned something, too. Use technology more often :) But I am definitely glad that you wanted an explanation, too! We'll talk more, I'm sure. Tim_MATH_y said... Nice! Thank you all for voting my scribe post into the Hall of Fame! (Hononored). Wow, 26 comments! Awesome! =) Kina said... Hey! I don't know why you have made this blog thing, but I'm a trigonometry student and the way my teacher tries to teach us trig just is NOT working. And i googled some of it to get some definitions and your blog just made EVERYTHING click. GAH thank you SO much, sosososo much. This is amazing and I'm going to ace my next test cuz of you. Tim_MATH_y said... Wow! I don't know much to say! I'm glad that my scribe post has really enriched your knowledge of trig!

218 Knowing that my scribe post has helped someone like you really makes me feel great =). Thanks! Goodluck on your test!

APPENDIX C CLASS SURVEY FOR DAVID’S MATHEMATICS CLASS

219

220 Class Survey from David’s Mathematics Class BITTERSWEET I'm sure everyone is thinking the same thing, "Math is FINALLY done! OH YEAH!" that's great and all but when you stop to think about it, math was really fun. I really had fun in that class, I can honestly say that it's the best class I've had ever. Math was actually fun because I had my friends and everyone else there was friendly and helpful. We worked as a class and everyone got along well. We fought in class but that was all based on math, that's how we learned. It's sweet that we don't have to worry about math now, however it's bitter because everyone made math bearable! It was like fun and math put together, didn't think that there was such a thing. Well, I'm going to miss this class the most. Good luck with you all! (Bittersweet was posted by a student) Class Survey Results The exam is over and we did a little survey in class. The results are below; 27 students participated. If you'd like to add another comment on what you see here email me or leave a comment below this post. Without any further ado, here are the results of our class's survey. Please share your thoughts by commenting (anonymously if you wish) below ..... Classroom Environment The questions in this section were ranked using this 5-point scale: Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 The bold numbers after each item are the average ratings given by the entire class. 1. The teacher was enthusiastic about teaching the course. 4.89 2. The teacher made students feel welcome in seeking help in/outside of class. 4.52 3. My interest in math has increased because of this course. 3.70 4. Students were encouraged to ask questions and were given meaningful answers. 4.74 5. The teacher enhanced the class through the use of humour. 4.56 6. Course materials were well understood and explained clearly by the teacher. 4.15 7. Graded materials fairly represented student understanding and effort. 4.16 (This question was answered by 26 students.) 8. The teacher showed a genuine interest in individual students. 4.19

221 9. I have learned something that I consider valuable. 4.48 10. The teacher normally came to class well prepared. 4.56 Overall Impression of the Course The questions in this section were ranked using this 5 point scale: Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good 1 2 3 4 5 1. Compared with other high school courses I have taken, I would say this course was: 4.30 2. Compared with other high school teachers I have had, I would say this teacher is: 4.78 3. As an overall rating, I would say this teacher is: 4.70 Course Characteristics 1. Course difficulty, compared to other high school courses: Very Easy Easy Average Difficult Very Difficult 0% 4% 22% 59% 15% 2. Course workload, compared to other high school courses: Very Easy Easy Average Difficult Very Difficult 0% 7% 48% 37% 7% 3. Hours per week required outside of class: 0 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 5 5 to 7 over 7 15% 37% 15% 26% 7% 4. Expected grade in the course: F D C B A 11% 15% 37% 37% 0% Specific Feedback [Ed. Note: Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of students, over 1, that gave the same answer.] What was your best learning experience in this course? Learning other things in life that involved math (3) The Blog (16) Workshop Classes (6) Developing Expert Voices Project (11)

222 the SMARTboard (5) flickr assignment group work (7) pre-tests (6) interactive work (2) class discussions (4) scribes (7) Mr. K. (2) asking questions the different projects we did Mr. K's speeches What was your worst learning experience in this course? Developing Expert Voices Project homework (2) not doing homework not asking questions working alone (4) late getting tests back (2) flickr assignment group work (3) doing my Developing Expert Voices Project alone nothing (3) pop quizzes not knowing what to do (3) "that I learned awesome software called SMARTboard" whenever Mr. K. was absent not being able to answer easy questions What changes would you suggest to improve the way this course is taught? teach slower teacher gets off topic and makes me lose motivation teacher sometimes wordy explaining different concepts bring back Go For Gold lighten the homework load give tests back ASAP (4) ask and solve questions consistently; not in different ways more group work (2) more math jokes more review before the exam none (4) start semester with a test on previous knowledge give more notes instead of just lecturing

223 bring back the "Math Dictionary" (2) bring back the del.icio.us box Additional Student Comments this class was the best ever the teacher answered questions even when asked 100 times good use of SMARTboard technology I really enjoyed this class; it was fun and not boring Mr. K. was extremely enthusiastic and creative about everything It's interesting to compare the items that were considered both the worst and best learning experiences. Also, take a look at the list of worst learning experiences compared to suggestions for next year. Help me do a better job next year by commenting on what you see here .... (Pre-calculus course, Fall of 2007) http://pc40sf07.blogspot.com/