| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Improving Attitudes of Eighth-Grade Students |
Teacher Years # G/T # Spec. Ed. |
ID Teaching in class in class Male Female |
1 7 8 15 15 0 0 7 5 8 10 |
2 3 4 0 0 7* 7 5 5 2 2 |
Total 12 10 10 12 |
Note:* One special education student was also limited English proficient as Spanish was the student’s primary language. A= 2001-2002 B= 2002-2003
The first project, conducted during the 2001-2002 school-year, was called Shakespeare on Trial. Teachers used technology as an informating tool (Zuboff,1988) to facilitate students’ access to high quality information and to build critical learning relationships within and outside of the school. The project targeted the needs of learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, limited English proficient, and gifted and talented students. The diverse group of middle-school students worked cooperatively to study the works of Shakespeare. Specifically, they studied Macbeth. The students interacted via distance learning with 10th grade students in an Advanced Placement (AP) class from a neighboring school district. The groups conducted a videoconference trial of Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth as a culminating activity.
The students read Macbeth and learned about the trial process prior to conducting a three-day videoconference trial. Students assumed the roles of the prosecution team, witnesses, and members of a jury. Students conducted organized Internet searches to gather information. The teachers taught the students how to analyze websites and web addresses to determine fact from fiction and quality information from disinformation.
The class conducted a series four videoconference sessions with Shakespeare’s Globe Theater in London, England as one method of learning about Shakespearian literature. The Globe Theater is world renowned for its productions of Shakespeare’s works. The education director of the theater provided lessons on interpreting Macbeth and other works by Shakespeare. The students, under the direction of the Globe Theater’s education director and the classroom teachers, conducted character and plot analyses. The students studied how the characters’ traits and actions impacted the plot and outcomes.
The same eighth-grade teachers repeated the project during the 2002-2003 school using the book, A Separate Peace, by John Knowles. They followed the same format and time-line.
The teachers created surveys to gather data on students’ attitudes in three areas. Students responded to 20 questions using a 5-point Likert scale with 1 indicating a strong negative response and 5 indicating a strong positive response (See Appendix A). A survey was given prior to the teachers telling the students about the project (pre) and again at the conclusion (post). These students never participated in a videoconference session prior to this project and they were unfamiliar with the videoconference process.
A two-tailed, paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the means from the pre and post-project survey results. A two-tailed t-test was used because little replicable, empirical research demonstrating positive impacts of technology use on student attitudes is available.
The means of the total score for the students’ attitudes showed statistically significant (p< .008) improvement in all three areas of the survey by the end of project. The mean for the pre-test survey was 72.55 and the mean for the post-test survey was 92.36. There were 100 points possible for each survey. Table 2 shows the student scores and Table 3 summarizes the results.
ID Pre Post ID Pre Post |
A B A B A B A B |
1 80 63 95 76 12 77 78 94 90 |
2 63 70 88 79 13 78 77 91 90 |
3 72 76 90 81 14 77 82 93 92 |
4 58 88 89 83 15 76 69 93 94 |
5 88 76 96 84 16 74 73 92 94 |
6 59 75 79 87 17 68 70 95 94 |
7 72 71 98 88 18 82 79 90 95 |
8 73 69 88 88 19 64 75 88 95 |
9 70 80 89 89 20 73 75 95 95 |
10 75 81 90 90 21 71 68 83 96 |
11 76 78 90 90 22 70 82 82 96 |
Note: 100 points possible. Scale 0-100.
Survey | N | Mean | SD | Sig. | Gain |
Pre | 22 | 72.55 | 7.18 |
|
|
Post | 22 | 92.36 | 4.68 | .008 | +19.81 |
Note: All three sections are included in the results.
100 possible points from three sections.
Scores for the individual sections of the 2001-2002 survey indicated statistically significant growth (p< .000). Significance levels were calculated for the mean scores of each section on the pre and post-project surveys. There were 35 points available for the Social section, 40 points for the Content section, and 25 points for the Technology section of the survey. The total points available were 100. Table 4 summarizes the results.
Section | N | Mean | Mean per Response | SD | Sig. | Gain |
Social Pre | 22 | 23.82 | 3.40 | 4.82 |
|
|
Social Post | 22 | 31.09 | 4.44 | 3.37 | .000 | +7.27 |
Content Pre | 22 | 29.91 | 3.73 | 3.29 |
|
|
Content Post | 22 | 36.45 | 4.55 | 2.32 | .000 | +6.54 |
Technology Pre | 22 | 18.82 | 3.76 | 2.79 |
|
|
Technology Post | 22 | 22.82 | 4.56 | 1.82 | .000 | +4.00 |
Note: 35 points possible for 7 questions from the Social section
40 points possible for 8 questions from the Content section
25 points possible for 5 questions from Technology section.
The students’ attitudes overall showed statistically significant (p<.000) improvement. The mean for the pre-test was 75.23 and the mean for the post-test was 89.36. Table 5 shows the individual student scores and Table 6 summarizes the results.
The scores for the individual sections of the 2002-2003 survey indicated statistically significant growth (p< .019).
Survey | N | Mean | SD | Sig. | Gain |
Pre | 22 | 75.23 | 5.78 |
|
|
Post | 22 | 89.36 | 5.74 | .000 | +14.13 |
Note: All three sections are included in the results.
100 possible points from three sections.
Section | N | Mean | Average | SD | Sig. | Gain |
Social Pre | 22 | 23.32 | 3.31 | 4.72 |
|
|
Social Post | 22 | 31.55 | 4.50 | 3.51 | .000 | +8.23 |
Content Pre | 22 | 30.36 | 3.79 | 4.66 |
|
|
Content Post | 22 | 34.09 | 4.26 | 2.88 | .019 | +3.73 |
Technology Pre | 22 | 21.55 | 4.31 | 2.94 |
|
|
Technology Post | 22 | 23.73 | 4.76 | 1.70 | .004 | +2.18 |
Note: 35 points possible for 7 questions from the Social section
40 points possible for 8 questions from the Content section
25 points possible for 5 questions from Technology section.
The multi-faceted project emphasized the development of the cognitive and affective domains. Teachers created technology enriched activities targeted at higher-order thinking skills (Bloom, 1956). They used complex literary works, Macbeth and A Separate Peace, combined with technology integration via videoconferencing and accessing the Internet to motivate students to analyze texts and apply knowledge.
Just as technology played a meaningful role in the project, combining classes for instruction had a real-life purpose for the students. The diverse group of students learned and worked together toward a common goal. Technology facilitated communication among the middle schools and between the students, high school students, and the Globe Theater.
The technology infused projects had a positive impact on student attitudes toward: a) The subject area of reading and the content of the particular literature class, b) peer relationships with unfamiliar and academically diverse students, and c) working in a technology rich environment. All measures showed statistically significant positive differences (p<.05) between the pre and post-project surveys. Some measures showed significance at the p<.000 level. Using technology as an informating tool can improve students’ attitudes toward learning, peers, and technology use.
The ideas embedded in the informating model are congruent to ideas that would improve student attitudes toward learning content and interacting with diverse peers. Students used technology to informate when they strategically searched for, created, shared, and managed knowledge and skills on their own terms. November (2001) stated, “Informating requires thinking about opportunities that could not be achieved without the technology.” (p.xxii) In an informated learning environment students can create instead of just imitate. They can become persistent learners. Those who traditionally did not have access or control, the students, were more empowered during this project.
Could student attitudes improved without using technology? Possibly, but what would that project have involved? Would the students have been able to interact rapidly with international experts in the field of Shakespearian literature without the technology? No. Technology was used to build unique learning relationships. Would the students been able to conduct autonomous research on Shakespearian characters, plan defense strategies, and prep witnesses without technology? Sure, but they would not have had access to the same amount of information easily without using technology. Would they have been able to access the same quality information easily? No. Would students have the same sense of empowerment without the technology? Considering the scope and reach of the project: No.
Using technology to informate instead of automate made a positive difference in the learning experiences of the students. The students responded positively and the survey results supported the conclusion. It is important to note the difference between informating and simply placing computers in classrooms and hoping something happens. Schools and teachers must plan comprehensive learning sequences and lessons to create an informated environment. Technology can be an effective tool to inspire students and expand learning horizons. The opportunities are limited only by one’s creativity and persistence. The project continues today and was recognized as a Best Practice by the New Jersey Department of Education in 2003.
Bloom, B. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. (Handbook I). New York; Toronto: Longmans, Green.
Bruce, B.C. & Levin, J.A. (1997). Educational technology: Media for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(1), 79-102.
Dewey, J. (1943). The child and the curriculum /The school and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hoy, W.K., & Forsyth, P.B. (1986). Effective supervision: Theory into practice. New York: McGraw Hill.
Means, B. (1994). Introduction: Using technology to advance educational goals. In B. Means (Eds.), Technology and education reform: The reality behind the promise (pp. 1-21). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
November, A. (2001). Empowering students with technology. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight.
Shavelson, R., Habner, J., & Stanton, G. (Summer, 1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of educational research, 407-411.
Taylor, R. P. (1980). The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee. New York: Teachers College Press.
Waller, W. (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York: Wiley.
Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine. The future of work and power. New York: Basic Books.
Attitude Toward Language Arts/Reading Content
I am motivated to read and think in language arts class?
I like to read outside of school.
I gain valuable information from novels assigned in language arts class?
Knowledge of details and characters is critical to successfully understand a story?
Guest speakers who speak to our class about literature related topics get me interested in reading.
I learn valuable information from guest speakers that help me understand the literature I am reading?
It is important to understand the underlying content or subject matter of a story.
I possess an understanding of Shakespeare’s Macbeth.
Attitudes Toward Students Different from Themselves
I work with students who have diverse learning styles and abilities often.
I feel comfortable collaborating with students who have different learning styles and abilities?
I think working in mixed ability groups is productive.
I am not apprehensive about interacting with older or younger students.
I enjoy performing/speaking in front of students I do not know.
I find it easy to verbally communicate with other students who are not like me.
I think conducting collaborative projects will help me better understand students who are different from me.
Attitudes toward technology
I am familiar with the distance-learning/videoconferencing lab.
I am comfortable working in the distance-learning/videoconferencing lab.
I think it is important to incorporate videoconference experiences into language arts and reading lessons.
I think it is important to use the internet to conduct research.
I frequently use the Internet for research.
Christopher H. Tienken, Ed.D. is Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction for the Monroe Township School District in Monroe Township, New Jersey-USA. He is a part-time professor at the Rutgers University Graduate School of Education. Correspondence should be sent to: 1104 Ocean Road, Spring Lake Heights, NJ 07762 USA. Email: goteach1@hotmail.com.
Scott Sarraiocco, MCSE, is the Director of Technology for the Absecon School District in Absecon, New Jersey-USA.
The authors would like to thank the teachers who created and implemented this project
Ms. Barbara Horner and Ms. Kathleen Schurtz.
Their hard work and dedication made a difference in the lives of their students.