Web 2.0 Tools for Struggling Readers

1. Web 2.0 Tools for Struggling Readers Mary Ellen Oslick, moslick@uca.edu Haihong (Helen) Hu, hhu@uca.edu

2. Introduction • Aresearch study to evaluate teacher candidates’ technology perceptions, integration and feedback while enrolled in graduate-level reading courses as they learn about and implement web 2.0 technologies in their interventions with struggling readers. • The results of the study may help teachers (in schools and universities) better understand how to include technologies in working with students and assist them to design instructional practices accordingly. • The data from this research will be used to inform Reading and Instructional Technology educators on instructional strategies and technologies that may result in positive learning outcomes and perceptions.

3. What is Web 2.0 to You? • http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/ODQ3Mjg5NjMw • Do you read blogs? • Do you listen to podcasts? • Have you published your own writing, art, photos, music, videos, etc., online? • Are you part of an online community?

4. How To Vote via Texting EXAMPLE Standard texting rates only (worst case US $0.20) We have no access to your phone number Capitalization doesn’t matter, but spaces and spelling do TIPS

5. How To Vote via PollEv.com EXAMPLE Capitalization doesn’t matter, but spaces and spelling do TIP

6. How To Vote via PollEv.com/username EXAMPLE Capitalization doesn’t matter, but spaces and spelling do TIP

7. How To Vote via Twitter EXAMPLE Capitalization doesn’t matter, but spaces and spelling do Since @poll is the first word, your followers will not receive this tweet TIPS

8. Don’t forget: You can copy-paste this slide into other presentations, and move or resize the poll.

9. Web 2.0 Tools • Cyberlearning literacy --- “the knowledge and skills needed for successful use of Web 2.0 tools” (p. 126, Smaldino book) • Online Multimedia Tools • Wordle: • http://www.wordle.net/ • http://blip.tv/creativelive/keyword-clouds-august-2008-1162665 • Toondoo: • http://www.toondoo.com/ • VoiceThread: • http://voicethread.com/ • https://voicethread.com/share/3196476/

10. Wordle http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/6310248/hunger1

11. Toondoo Instructions http://www.toondoo.com/

12. VoiceThread https://voicethread.com/#q.b3196476.i0.k0

13. What is Voice Thread? • Voice Thread is a Web 2.0 tool • It can be used for teaching arts, foreign languages, diverse cultures, collaborative writing, multimedia design and development… • It is valuable for creating book reviews, fostering global conversation, conducting peer reviews, and sharing creative products. • It is exceptional in that it allows you to connect the visuals with the audio and text formats of media and communication.

14. Voicethread for online teaching & Learning http://voicethread.com/share/908650/

15. K-12 VoiceThread Examples • Collaborative Writing: http://blog.wikispaces.com/2011/07/my-story-the-progressive-story-project.html • 8th grade Historical Fiction: http://voicethread.com/about/library/8th_grade_Historical_Fiction_from_Shirley_Scamardella/ • 7th Grade - Exploring Probability from Britt Gow : https://voicethread.com/share/222931/

16. http://voicethread.com/share/8381/

17. Instructional Strategies for PD • Lecture & Demonstration • Job Aids / Handouts • Examples • VoiceThread

18. Procedures • Pre-Test (Questionnaire) • Instructional demonstrations + Job Aids • Technology practices • Creating & Implement lesson plans with technology-integration, and • Reflections on these activities • Post-Test (Questionnaire)

19. Instruments • Questionnaire to gauge pre-, and post- acceptance on using the Web 2.0 technologies for teaching and learning reading • Technology-integration lesson plans will be graded using the International Reading Association's standards for technology

20. Web 2.0 Technologies Acceptance Adaptedfrom (Yoo, S. J., & Huang, W.-H. D., 2011)

21. International Reading Association's Standards for Technology http://www.readoregon.org/pdf/IRAstandards_2010.pdf

22. Demographic Information

23. Analysis of Weekly Usage Frequency of Web 2.0 Applications

24. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 • Using it increases my productivity, mostly negative • Using it for learning is a good idea, mostly negative • Most participants don’t feel that people who influence their behavior think that they should use it • Second Life, mostly negative for all the items

25. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 Some Changes in Perception about Usefulness

26. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 The 3 items trained, no change or feel even less useful after the training

27. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 Few technologies were considered to help with task completion

28. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 More positive perception re easiness of using technologies at the end than the beginning of the semester; however, change is small.

29. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 Much more positive perception re easiness of using the 3 technologies trained at the end than the beginning of the semester; however, change is small

30. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 Few participants thought Web 2.0 tools made learning more interesting

31. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 With the 3 technology tools trained, participants’ perception changed to be more positive re making learning more interesting, at least with the 2 they thought were easier.

32. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 Few participants like learning with the tools, even for Instant messenger, Facebook, and YouTube.

33. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 • Few participants like learning with the 3 tools trained, changed a little toward the positive side after the semester, but not much.

34. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 Most of the participants don’t feel that they were intimidated by the Web 2.0 tools, except for Second Life.

35. Analysis of Technology Acceptance of Web 2.0 With the 3 tools trained, the participants’ perception about intimidation by the Web 2.0 tools changed toward the positive side, at least with the 2 they thought were easier.

36. Observation Notes October 29th, 2012 (Monday, 4:30-5:30pm) • Phonics or Sight Words • 3 pairs = 6 students, 2 teachers • Writing with paper & pencil first • 3 minutes, -all, -ight, -ick, How many words can you come up with? • Wordle, page opened up directly? • Student L & Student S, in the group again from Summer 2012, Reading level any better than in the summer? More familiar with Wordle? • Word Study • Student A is in the group, 3 students, 1 teacher • Used Visual Thesaurus to find the words related with “cold”, e.g., frosty, ice-code, chilly, hot • Wrote on paper first, and then repeated the same words in Wordle • Students don’t know how to copy & paste, yet. • Reading Comprehension • 2 students (including Cecilia), and 1 teacher • Read “The Dolphin” first, and then made one Wordle by telling the teacher key words, and the teacher typed the words in for students. November 5th, 2012 • Reading Comprehension • 1 teacher, 2 students (1 boy, 1 girl), the least serious group • Read the book “Vote Grace for President” first before each worked on a Wordle. • Started working on the Wordles at 5:15pm, problem with time management and planning for Tech Integration • The teacher let students use the Wordle Instruction provided by the researcher during the training • The boy keeps looking at the book for words, the teacher asked “What else did you learn about the president campaign?” without looking at the students. • The girl keeps saying “I messed up, can’t do it”, and insisted that she had to go to the bathroom right then.

37. Observation Notes November 12th, 2012 • Reading Comprehension • 1 girl (Cecilia), 2 boys, and 1 teacher • Read “Dragon with a Cold” first, and then each worked on a Toodoo.com cartoon strip. • One boy, Student P ( 3rd grade) created a picture called “Santa got sick” (scared by a monster) on the way to deliver gifts. • One boy, Student B, colored a monster he selected, and the monster said “I do not feel so good” • One girl, Student C, kept asking “Now what?” needed to go to find a cheerleader, princess, fairy, background took too long looking for characters • Reading Comprehension • Read “Legend About Bluebonnet” first, then created Wordlesusing descriptor words for the main character • 2 boys who made Wordle before in the summer, but said “I don’t remember” • Students had problem with typing, and created wordleswith the same color scheme, and similar layout. • Reading • 1 student (Student T), and 1 teacher • Read “Sharks”?, and used key words for the Wordle? • Printing cost money in the lab, and the instructor could have saved the Wordleas a pdf & sent to herself by email, but she did not remember how to do this and did not bring the Wordlehandout provided during the training.

38. Summary from Observation • General atmosphere? • What technologies were used? • How were technologies used? • Classroom management challenges? • Student technology proficiency?

39. Q & A • Thank You for your interest in our study & presentation! • Any questions? • Mary Ellen Oslick, moslick@uca.edu • Haihong (Helen) Hu, hhu@uca.edu