Skip to main content
Log in

Measuring experiences of interest-related pursuits in connected learning

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes an effort to develop a survey instrument capable of measuring important aspects of adolescents’ experiences of interest-related pursuits that are supported by technology. The measure focuses on youths’ experiences of connected learning (Ito et al. in Connected learning: an agenda for research and design. Digital Media and Learning Research Hub, Irvine, 2013), an emerging model of learning across settings supported by digital media. Specifically, the instrument aims to measure the depth with which youth are able to engage in an interest-related pursuit, the level of support and encouragement they receive from peers, and the degree to which their pursuit involves performance or media production as an essential feature. The survey also elicits information regarding the connections between youths’ interest-related pursuits and academic goals, the involvement of adults as co-participants in pursuits, and youths’ access to technology tools they deem necessary for their pursuits. The paper reports on results from a pilot study and two rounds of field-testing, in which we evaluated the validity and reliability of the instrument and compared results with evidence from interviews with youth. Our aim was to investigate the feasibility of an approach to measuring youths’ interest-related pursuits to inform future research and evaluation of initiatives focused on digital media and learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Parameter estimates and fit statistics from the first wave of data are not discussed here, but are available from the authors upon request. Item parameter estimates from the unidimensional models of individual principles and the multidimensional models are nearly identical.

References

  • Abramovich, S., Schunn, C. D., & Higashi, R. M. (2012). Are badges useful in education? It depends on the type of badge and the expertise of learner. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(2), 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B., Gomez, K., Pinkard, N., & Martin, C. K. (2014). The Digital Youth Network: Cultivating digital media citizenship in urban communities. Boston, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B., Levinson, A., Martin, C. K., Mertl, V., Stringer, D., Rogers, M., et al. (2010). Supporting young new media producers across learning spaces: A longitudinal study of the Digital Youth Network. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 203–211). Chicago, IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B., Martin, C. K., Takeuchi, L., & Fithian, R. (2009). Parents as learning partners in the development of technological fluency. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2), 55–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, R. W. (2005). Access and affiliation: The literacy and composition practices of English-language learners in an online fan fiction community. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(2), 118–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buechley, L., Peppler, K. A., Eisenberg, M., & Kafai, Y. B. (2013). Textile messages: Dispatches from the world of e-textiles and education. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, Q., & Kafai, Y. B. (2014). A decade of game-making for learning: From tools to communities. In H. Agius & M. C. Angelides (Eds.), The handbook of digital games (pp. 689–709). New York, NY: Wiley.

  • Catalano, R. F., Berglund, M. L., Ryan, J. A. M., Lonczak, H. S., & Hawkins, J. D. (2004). Positive youth development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth development programs. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 98–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dadey, N., Penuel, W. R., & Maul, A. (under review). Looking at differences and changes in the outcomes of connected learning. Applied Developmental Science.

  • Davis, K., & Singh, S. (2015). Digital badges in afterschool learning: Documenting the perspectives and experiences of students and educators. Computers & Education, 88(1), 72–83.

  • DeNavas-Walt, C., Proctor, B. D., & Smith, J. C. (2012). Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2011. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devedžić, V., & Jovanović, J. (2015). Developing Open Badges: A comprehensive approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 603–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. (Eds.). (1992). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugan, T. E., Stevens, R., & Mehus, S. (2010). From show, to room, to world: A cross-context investigation of how children learn from media programming. In K. Gomez & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 992–999). Chicago, IL: ISLS.

  • Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, A., & Morrell, E. (2013). City youth and the pedagogy of participatory media. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(2), 123–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games and good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning, and literacy. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2010). New digital media and learning as an emerging area and “worked examples” as one way forward. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. R. (2010). Women and gaming: The Sims and 21st Century Learning. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S., Booker, A., & McDermott, M. (2008). Mixing the digital, social, and cultural: Learning, identity, and agency in youth participation. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 185–206). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, K. D., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Tejada, C. (2000). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harel, I., & Papert, S. A. (1991). Constructionism. New York: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, M. (Ed.). (2009). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K. D., Livingstone, S., Penuel, W. R., Rhodes, J. E., Salen, K., et al. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, M., Horst, H. A., Bittani, M., Boyd, D., Stephenson, B. H., Lange, P. G., et al. (2009). Living and learning with new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2010). Transmedia storytelling and entertainment: An annotated syllabus. Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 24(6), 943–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2012). “Cultural acupuncture”: Fan activism and the Harry Potter Alliance. Transformative Works and Cultures, 10. http://journal.transformativeworks.org/index.php/twc/article/view/305/259.

  • Kafai, Y. B., & Peppler, K. A. (2011). Youth, technology, and DIY: Developing participatory competencies in creative media production. Review of Research in Education, 35(1), 89–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, K., Riemer, N., Ackerman, C., Mishel, E., Trent, R., Bradley, E., & Arum, R. (2014). AY2013-14 Hive Networks final report: Connecting youth: Digital Learning Research Project. New York, NY: New York University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (1983). Thematic analysis: Systems, structures, and strategies. Semiotic Inquiry, 3(2), 159–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masters, G. M. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middaugh, E., & Kirshner, B. (Eds.). (2015). #youthaction: Becoming political in the digital age. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mislevy, R. J., & Haertel, G. D. (2006). Implications of evidence-centered design for educational testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(4), 6–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2011). Learning science through computer games and simulations. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2015). Identifying and supporting productive STEM programs in out-of-school settings. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W. R., DiGiacomo, D., & Van Horne, K. (2015). FUSE Studios evaluation report. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W. R., Lee, T. R., & Bevan, B. (2014). Designing for equitable learning across settings. San Francisco, CA: Exploratorium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polman, J. L., Saul, E. W., Newman, A., Farrar, C., Singer, N., Turley, E., et al. (2010). A cognitive apprenticeship for science literacy based on journalism. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 61–68). Chicago, IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, G. (1960). Studies in mathematical psychology: I. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Oxford, UK: Nielsen & Lydiche.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riconscente, M. M., Kamareinen, A., & Honey, M. (2013). Badge-based STEM Assessment: Current terrain and the road ahead. New York, NY: New York Hall of Science.

  • Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B., Baker-Sennett, J., Lacasa, P., & Goldsmith, D. (1995). Development through participation in sociocultural activity. In J. Goodnow, P. Miller, & F. Kessel (Eds.), Cultural practices as contexts for development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salen, K. (Ed.). (2008). The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salen, K., Torres, R., Wolozin, L., Rufo-Tepper, R., & Shapiro, A. (2011). Quest to Learn: Developing the school for digital kids. Chicago, IL: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, L., & Gutiérrez, K. D. (2013, March). Turn-taking and inventos: Examining the everyday lives of Latino families and designing learning ecologies with youth and undergraduates. Paper presented at the digital media and learning conference, Chicago, IL.

  • Sebring, P. B., Brown, E. C., Julian, K., Ehrlich, S. B., Sporte, S. E., Bradley, E., & Meyer, L. (2013). YOUmedia Chicago: Teens, digital media, and the Chicago Public Library. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V. J., Ventura, M., & Torres, R. (2012). Formative evaluation of students at Quest to Learn. International Journal of Learning and Media, 4(1), 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soep, E. (2006). Critique: Assessment and the production of learning. Teachers College Record, 108(4), 748–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–1939. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R., Satwicz, T., & McCarthy, L. (2008). In-game, in-room, in-world: Reconnecting video game play to the rest of kids’ lives. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning (pp. 41–66). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, M., Ahn, J., & Waugh, A. (2015). The role of school librarians in enhancing science learning. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 47(1), 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traphagen, K., & Traill, S. (2014). How cross-sector collaborations are advancing STEM learning. Los Altos, CA: Noyce Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tripp, L. (2011). Digital youth, libraries, and new media literacy. The Reference Librarian, 52(4), 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ünlüsoy, A., de Haan, M., Leander, K., & Volker, B. (2013). Learning potential in youth’s online networks: A multilevel approach. Computers & Education, 68, 522–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, S. C. (2011). Digital divide: Navigating the digital edge. International Journal of Learning and Media, 3(2), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, M., & Adams, R. J. (2012). Properties of Rasch residual fit statistics. Journal of Applied Measurement, 14, 339–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., Wilson, M. R., & Haldane, S. A. (2007). Acer ConQuest. Version 2.0. Camberwell, VIC: ACER Press, Australian Council for Educational Research.

  • Zickuhr, K. (2013). Reading, writing, and research in the digital age. Paper presented at the edUi 2013 annual conference, Richmond, VA.

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this survey development effort comes from the MacArthur Foundation. All opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the authors. We wish to thank the youth leaders in the sites that facilitated data collection for the field test and members of the Connected Learning Research Network for their generous input into the survey development process and feedback on the survey itself.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William R. Penuel.

Appendix: Survey of principles of connected learning

Appendix: Survey of principles of connected learning

Think of an activity that:

• You enjoy doing

• You get better at doing, the more you engage in the activity

What is that activity?

How long have you been doing this activity?

____ years _____ months

The rest of the questions are about the activity you listed above.

Shared purpose principle

In the past 6 months, when participating in the activity, have you:

 

Yes

No

1. Completed a group project?

2. Had the chance to lead others or take a leadership role?

3. Taken part in a performance, presentation, or competition?

4. Had an opportunity to use your judgment about a decision?

Say how much you agree or disagree with each statement below.

 

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

5. In the activity, there are clear goals.

6. In the activity, everyone is trying to achieve the same goals.

7. People in the activity make sure that everyone has the opportunity to participate and contribute.

8. In the activity, everyone gets a say.

9. I feel like my ideas count in the activity.

10. I contribute to the activity.

Production centered principle

When making or designing things while you are engaged in this activity, how often do you:

 

Never or hardly ever

1–3 times a month

Once a week

More than once a week

1. Think about what will be interesting for other people?

2. Design or create something that can be seen by 10 people or more?

3. Design or create something that has a message about how to make a difference in the world?

When you engage in the activity, how often do you:

 

Never or hardly ever

1–3 times a month

Once a week

More than once a week

4. Get help from adults on how to use tools to create or design things?

5. Use tools that professionals use?

6. Learn about the ways that professionals use tools to create or design things?

Openly networked principle

When you are making or doing things in or at the activity:

 

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Hardly ever or never

Does not apply

1. I have access to hardware that I need.

2. I have access to software tools that I need.

3. I can get help with technology when I need it.

When creating or designing things with technology when you are engaged in the activity, can you:

 

Yes

No

4. …get access the tools and work you need for this activity wherever you want to?

5. …use the internet to communicate with others about this activity?

6. …get feedback and support from others engaged in this activity from others?

For each of the statements below, say whether it is true or false for you.

 

True for me

False for me

7. Someone I know has helped me find other people who share my interests in the activity.

8. It’s easy to learn about places where I can engage in [activity].

9. It’s easy to find out the requirements for participating in all the activities at [site].

10. I hear about cool things people do when engaged in the activity, but I don’t know how I can start to do those things.

11. I don’t really know where I could go to get better at the activity.

12. It’s easy for me to find information about new places to engage in the activity.

13. It’s easy for me to find people who share my interests in the activity.

14. People help me figure out where else I can do this activity.

Interest powered principle

Where are all the places you pursue the activity?

 

Yes

No

1. At home

2. At my school

3. At a different school from my own school

4. At a museum or cultural center

5. At a youth organization in the community

6. At a church, synagogue, temple, or other faith-based center

7. On the internet

8. Other

Please tell us if you have done the following things since you started participating the activity:

 

Yes

No

9. Looked for information related to this activity on your own (e.g., looked on the web, checked out a book?

10. Looked for other people, in real life or online, who are interested this activity?

Say how much you agree or disagree with each statement below.

 

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

11. The activity is related to what I want to do for work in the future

12. By participating in the activity, I discovered a talent or an interest I didn’t know I had

13. The activity changed my mind about what I wanted to do in the future

14. The activity helped me become more curious about things I wasn’t interested in before

Peer supported principle

Say how much you agree or disagree with each statement below.

 

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Hardly ever or never

Does not apply

1. When I get stuck I can get helpful suggestions from someone about how to solve the problem.

2. When others see something in my work that could get better they give me good ideas.

3. People who also participate invite me to try doing new things that push me to grow.

4. When someone who engages in this activity does really well everyone is happy.

5. People who mage this activity want everyone to be able to pursue what they are interested in

6. If you are not doing well in this activity someone is there to listen to you.

7. Is there anyone who encourages you to participate in this activity?

  • □ A parent

  • □ A mentor

  • □ A brother or sister

  • □ A cousin

  • □ An uncle or aunt

  • □ A grandparent

  • □ One or more friends

  • □ No one encourages me to participate

For each of the following kinds of people, please tell us if you have had the following experiences because of your current or recent involvement with this activity. MARK ALL THAT APPLY.

 

A parent or guardian

A teacher or teachers

A program leader or leaders

A friend or friends

Nobody

8. Because of my participation in this activity I developed or improved a relationship with:

9. Because of my participation in this activity I had good conversations with:

10. Because of this activity I came to feel more supported by:

How does each of the people listed below help you in the following ways when you are taking part in the activity? MARK ALL THAT APPLY.

 

A parent or guardian

A teacher or teachers

A program leader or leaders

A friend or friends

Nobody

11. These people teach me new things about the activity.

12. These people work with me on a project related to this activity.

13. These people help me find information related to my interests in this activity.

14. These people sign me up for things that are related to this activity.

15. They buy or give me things I need to help me pursue this activity.

16. They give me advice related to this activity.

17. They let me teach them about what I know about this activity.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maul, A., Penuel, W.R., Dadey, N. et al. Measuring experiences of interest-related pursuits in connected learning. Education Tech Research Dev 65, 1–28 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9453-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9453-6

Keywords

Navigation