Educational Technology Research and Development

, Volume 56, Issue 4, pp 487–506

Digital storytelling: a meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning

International Review

Abstract

Although research emphasizes the importance of integrating technology into the curriculum, the use of technology can only be effective if teachers themselves possess the expertise to use technology in a meaningful way in the classroom. The aim of this study was to assist Egyptian teachers in developing teaching and learning through the application of a particular digital technology. Students were encouraged to work through the process of producing their own digital stories using MS Photo Story, while being introduced to desktop production and editing tools. They also presented, published and shared their own stories with other students in the class. Quantitative and qualitative instruments, including digital story evaluation rubric, integration of technology observation instruments and interviews for evaluating the effectiveness of digital storytelling into learning were implemented to examine the extent to which students were engaged in authentic learning tasks using digital storytelling. The findings from the analysis of students-produced stories revealed that overall, students did well in their projects and their stories met many of the pedagogical and technical attributes of digital stories. The findings from classroom observations and interviews revealed that despite problems observed and reported by teachers, they believed that the digital storytelling projects could increase students’ understanding of curricular content and they were willing to transform their pedagogy and curriculum to include digital storytelling.

Keywords

Digital storytelling Engaged learning Photo story Technology integration 

References

  1. Allen, D., & Tanner, K. (2006). Rubrics: Tools for making learning goals and evaluation criteria explicit for both teachers and learners. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 5, 197–203.Google Scholar
  2. Barrett, H. (2006). Researching and evaluating digital storytelling as a deep learning tool. In C. Crawford, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 647–654). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  3. Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Combs, A., & Beach, D. (1994). Stories and storytelling: Personalizing the social studies. The Reading Teacher, 47, 464–471.Google Scholar
  5. Dexter, S., Anderson, R., & Becker, H. (1999). Teachers’ views of computers as catalysts for changes in their teaching practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 221–239.Google Scholar
  6. Dorner, R., Grimm, P., & Abawi, D. (2002). Synergies between interactive training simulations and digital storytelling: a component-based framework. Computers & Graphics, 26, 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Duffy, M., & Cunningham, J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Educational communications and technology (pp. 170–199). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Earle, R. S. (2002). The integration of instructional technology into public education: Promises and challenges. ET Magazine, 42(1), 5–13. http://bookstoread.com/etp/earle.pdf. Retrieved 11 January 2007.
  9. Gils, F. (2005). Potential applications of digital storytelling in education. In 3rd Twente Student Conference on IT, University of Twente, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science, Enschede, February 17–18.Google Scholar
  10. Griest, G. (1996). Computer education as an obstacle to integration and Internet working. Learning and Leading with Technology, 24(8), 59–63.Google Scholar
  11. Harris, J. (2005). Our agenda for technology integration: It’s time to choose. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2). http://www.citejournal.org/vol5/iss2/editorial/article1.cfm. Retrieved 27 February 2007.
  12. Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, C. (2003). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59–71.Google Scholar
  13. Hoffman, B. (1997). Integrating technology into school. Education Digest, 62(5), 51–55.Google Scholar
  14. ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education). (2003). National educational technology standards. http://www.iste.org. Retrieved 15 March 2006.
  15. Jacobsen, M. (2001). Building different bridges: Technology integration, engaged student learning, and new approaches to professional development. Paper presented at AERA 2001: What We Know and How We Know It, the 82nd Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA, April 10–14.Google Scholar
  16. Jonassen, D. H. (2003). Designing research-based instruction for story problems. Educational Psychology Review, 15(3), 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jonassen, D. H., & Carr, C. (2000). Mindtools: Affording multiple knowledge representations in learning. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools, Vol. 2: No more walls (pp. 165–196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  18. Jonassen, D.H., & Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002). Case-based reasoning and instructional design using stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jonassen, D., Peck, K., & Wilson, B. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  20. Jonassen, H., Wilson, G., Wang, S., & Grabinger, S. (1993). Constructivist uses of expert systems to support learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20(3), 86–94.Google Scholar
  21. Kafai, B., Ching, C., & Marshall, S. (1997). Children as designers of educational multimedia software. Computers & Education, 29(2–3), 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lim, P., & Tay, Y. (2003). Information and communication technologies (ICT) in an elementary school: Students’ engagement in higher-order thinking. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(4), 425–451.Google Scholar
  23. Lim, P., Nonis, D., & Hedberg, J. (2006). Gaming in a 3D multiuser virtual environment: Engaging students in science lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 211–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lynch, G., & Fleming, D. (2007) Innovation through design: A constructivist approach to learning. LAB 3000, RMIT University. http://lab.3000.com.au/research/research/index.jsp. Retrieved 5 March 2007.
  25. Meadows, D. (2003). Digital storytelling: Research-based practice in new media. Visual Communication, 2(2), 189–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mergendollar, J. (1997). Technology and learning: The research. Education Digest, 62(8), 12–15.Google Scholar
  27. Mertler, A. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(25). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=25. Retrieved 4 April 2007.
  28. Moskal, M. (2003). Recommendations for developing classroom performance assessments and scoring rubrics. Practical assessment. Research & Evaluation, 8(14). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=14. Retrieved 4 April 2007.
  29. Nanjappa, A., & Grant, M. (2003). Constructing on constructivism: The role of technology. Electronic Journal for the integration of Technology in Education, 2(1). http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/nanjappa.htm. Retrieved 11 January 2007.
  30. Office of Technology Assessment. (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection. Report Summary, U.S. Congress, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. OTA-EHR-616.Google Scholar
  31. Painter, R. (2001). Issues in the observation and evaluation of technology integration in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 17(4), 21–25.Google Scholar
  32. Papadimitriou, C. (2003). MythematiCS: In praise of storytelling in the teaching of CS and Math. In The International Conference on CS Education, ITICSE, Thessaloniki, Greece, July 2.Google Scholar
  33. Pedersen, E. (1995). Storytelling and the art of teaching. FORUM, 33(1). http://exchanges.state.gov/forum. Retrieved 17 February 2008.
  34. Pritchard, A. (2004). Introducing new students to ICT: Giving a purpose to it all. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(3), 248–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rakes, G., & Casey, H. (2002). An analysis of teacher concerns toward instructional technology. International Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1). http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/ijet/v3n1/v3n1articles.html. Retrieved 2 March 2007.
  36. Richards, T. (1998). Infusing technology and literacy into the undergraduate teacher education curriculum through the use of electronic portfolios. T.H.E. Journal, 25(9), 46–50.Google Scholar
  37. Robin, B. (2005). Educational uses of digital storytelling. Main directory for the educational uses of digital storytelling. Instructional technology Program. University of Huston. http://www.coe.uh.edu/digital-storytelling/default.htm. Retrieved 12 February 2007.
  38. Robin, B., & Pierson, M. (2005). A multilevel approach to using digital storytelling in the classroom. Digital Storytelling Workshop, SITE 2005, University of Houston. http://www.coe.uh.edu/digital-storytelling/course/SITE2005. Retrieved 12 February 2007.
  39. Roe, D., Stoodt, D., & Burns, C. (1998). Secondary school literacy instruction: The content areas. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  40. Sadik, A. (2006). From national challenges to a global community: establishing and implementing a low-cost learning object repository for Egyptian teachers. Paper presented at the 2nd International Open & Distance Learning Symposium, 13–15 September, Anadolu University, Turkey.Google Scholar
  41. Schiro, M. (2004). Oral storytelling and teaching mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  42. Schofield, J. (1995). Computers and classroom culture. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. SERVE. (1996). Technology infrastructure in schools. Hot topic publication for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Tallahassee, FL: SERVE.Google Scholar
  44. Sheingold, K., & Hadley, M. (1990). Accomplished teachers: Integrating computers into classroom practice. New York: Center for Technology in Education, Bank Street College.Google Scholar
  45. Spivey, N. (1997). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing, and the making of meaning. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  46. Stake, E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Standley, M. (2003). Digital storytelling using new technology and the power of stories to help our students learn—and teach. Cable in the Classroom. http://www.ciconline.org/home. Retrieved 5 December 2006.
  48. Strommen, E., & Lincoln, B. (1992). Constructivism, technology, and the future of classroom learning. Education and Urban Society, 24, 466–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. The Digital Storytelling Association. (2002). The center for digital storytelling. http://www.dsaweb.org. Retrieved 18 February 2007.
  50. Trilling, B., & Hood, P. (1999). Learning, technology, and education reform in the knowledge age or “We’re Wired, Webbed, and Windowed, Now What?” Educational Technology, 39(3), 5–18.Google Scholar
  51. Tsou, W., Wang, W., & Tzeng, Y. (2006). Applying a multimedia storytelling website in foreign language learning. Computers & Education, 47, 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tyner, K. (1998). Literacy in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  53. WestEd. (2002). Preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology (PT3), Integration of Technology Observation Instrument grant. Arizona State University West. http://www.west.asu.edu/pt3. Retrieved 5 March 2006.
  54. Wheatley, G. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75(1), 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Instructional & Learning Technologies, College of EducationSultan Qaboos UniversityMuscatSultanate of Oman

Personalised recommendations