Schott Thesis: How teachers can use web based resources and technology to increase student engagement and understanding

Using Web Based Resources to Increase Student Engagement and Understanding
John N. Schott
Master of Science in Education Program
Northwestern University
August 2005

Schott - ii
Table of Contents
Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ ii
Figure Table of Contents ...............................................................................................................iii
Rationale for the project / Research Question Development.......................................................... 1
Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 3
Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 21
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 43
References..................................................................................................................................... 48
Appendices.................................................................................................................................... 51
Appendix A: Strategies/Considerations for teaching search engine aptitude.......................... 51
Appendix B: Phone interview with Prof. Christopher Essex. 5/23/05 1:30 p.m. ................... 56
Appendix C: Interview with ---, high school social studies teacher, 6/27/05........................... 59
Appendix D: Monetary Policy Simulation Survey................................................................... 62
Appendix E: Monetary Policy Simulation Survey Results....................................................... 65

Schott - iii
Figure Table of Contents
Figure 1: Student responses to: “I learn better exploring a subject on my own rather than guided
by a teacher” ................................................................................................................................. 27
Figure 2: Student responses to: “I learn better exploring a subject on my own pace rather than
with structured classroom activities”............................................................................................ 28
Figure 3: Student responses to “Were able to intuitively use the interface (that is, was how the
system worked make sense to you?)”........................................................................................... 37
Figure 4: Student response to “You are willing to do another on-line scenario on a different
subject” ......................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 5: Student responses to “You prefer on-line simulations to workbook exercises” ........... 38
Figure 6: Student responses to “The on-line simulation reinforced/added to your knowledge of
monetary policy”........................................................................................................................... 39

Schott - 1
Rationale for the project / Research Question Development
In considering my question for the Master’s Project, I knew I had to narrow the domain
down from a very broad initial topic – teachers’ use of digital media in developing and delivering
curriculum – to a narrower one. As I conducted my preliminary literature review, I solidified my
narrower focus of how teachers use web-based resources to develop curriculum, regardless of the
delivery channel. That is, my focus was on how web-based resources aid curriculum
development, including curriculum that may not be conveyed to students via computers or the
Internet. My Master’s project question originally was “how do high school social studies
teachers use web-based resources to develop effective curriculum?”
After student teaching, I realized that the best curriculum is worthless unless students are
engaged. Furthermore, I realized that the goal of every curriculum is to develop student
understanding. Therefore, my question became How do high school social studies teachers use
web-based resources to increase student engagement and understanding?
My interest in using web-based resources to create effective curriculum has created my
deepest point of doubt in that I seek to understand how I can use web-based resources to spark
student engagement and increase student understanding. The issue of how to infuse web-based
resources into curriculum is the main focus of my project. My first professional position was
with CognitiveArts (formerly Learning Sciences Corporation), an E-Learning corporation started
by Roger Schank, the world’s foremost expert on how to incorporate cognitive theory, computer
science (including artificial intelligence), psychology, and linguistics into computer programs to
help people learn. After leaving CognitiveArts, I held positions with strategy consulting, digital
security, and front-end web design companies. Therefore, I am very comfortable with
information and instructional architecture, front-end programming, and technology in general.

Schott - 2
Upon matriculating in the MSEd program, I became interested in pursuing a master’s project that
would merge my coursework with my professional background and interest in web-based
applications. I conducted interviews and discussions with instructors and students regarding not
only the use of web-based resources in the classroom, but also how teachers can create engaging
activities to help students develop understanding. Unfortunately, the teachers that I have
observed use technology as simply an upgrade over traditional, conventional teaching
methodologies. I thought I had escaped the use of PowerPoint for evil instead of good, but the
pervasive power of PowerPoint knows no boundaries. Teachers grab digital images from the web
to show via a digital display, which has replaced transparencies placed on an overhead projector,
and the VCR has replaced the 16mm filmstrip. Unfortunately, it seems that “bells and whistles”
take precedent over features and advantages and the transformative features of the web have
been forced into long-established teaching methodologies and philosophies. I seek to use my
professional background and personal passion for technology with the theoretical and practical
knowledge I have gained from my coursework and action research in order to develop applicable
methodologies for use in the classroom.

Schott - 3
Literature Review
Introduction
Using technology in the classroom has become a major focus for educators and
administrators in high schools. The explosion of the World Wide Web (WWW) with the
introduction of the Netscape Navigator in 1994 allowed people across the world to be connected
and to view and share information and thoughts. Furthermore, the increasing pervasiveness (and
decreasing cost) of technology hardware and the use of technology in professional positions has
alerted educators not only to the need for students to be exposed to technology but has also
created new opportunities for developing student engagement and understanding. I define
engagement as willingness to be involved and understanding as developed comprehension of
content or skills. Unfortunately, most educators and administrators are hesitant to use
technology in their classrooms to encourage student engagement and foster student
understanding either because of a personal aversion to technology or because they simply do not
know where to begin.
While I was comfortable and had many ideas about using web-based applications to
engage students and further their understanding, I was surprised by how much I needed to learn
about the issues teachers face with using technology and web-based resources in the classroom.
Through this literature review, I intend to examine three domains regarding my master’s project
that represent the three most important aspects of using web-based resources. First, I will
address the pedagogical basis for using technology in the classroom. Second, I will address
some uses of web-based resources in the classroom to enable/further student understanding.
Finally, I will address on-line goal-based and problem-based scenarios.

Schott - 4
Pedagogical basis for using technology in the classroom
“Good tools do not make an excellent teacher, but an excellent teacher makes good use of
tools.” -- Eleanor Doan
In light of the predominance of technology in society, pedagogy – the science or art of
effective teaching – must include proper use of technology in the classroom. O’Donnell (1996),
in an analysis of challenges encountered by educators looking to use technology in classrooms
states, “computer use in the classroom should be a response to an instructional need. The
teaching strategies employed with computers should be appropriate to the grade level, the
instructional goals, and the specific needs of the students” (94). Poole (1997), in his analysis of
the best practices of using technology in the classroom, furthers this analysis by stating “teachers
must not only evaluate learning materials before incorporating them into lesson plans; they must
also evaluate the effectiveness of those materials while students are using them as well as after
their use in order to determine whether or not they should be used again” (143). Finally,
November (2001) states, “It is always a good idea to look beyond the Internet for sources of
authentic information” (18). Therefore, in addition to using web-based resources, students
should also use, literature or secondary sources, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and other reference
materials in the off-line environment. These authors all stress the importance of teachers
focusing on pedagogical issues when using technology in the classroom – in determining
effectiveness of curriculum, teachers should ask how will the activities contribute to student
understanding, how do students respond to the learning activities, and what resources should
students use during the activities? These are questions teachers should ask regardless of delivery
platform, whether technology is even used, teachers need to ask these questions to ensure their

Schott - 5
activities are pedagogically sound. Therefore, the use of technology is just another component to
effective activity creation, and in analyzing using web-based resources into the curriculum, these
articles serve as a reminder that sound teaching practices should drive the use of technology in
the classroom and not the other way around.
Unfortunately, most technology learning tools are not very effective. One expert states,
“99 percent of the educational programs are terrible, really terrible.” (Oppenheimer, 1997, 11)
Poole confirms this from his interviews with actual educators who “were concerned about the
lack of software, and found a lack of correlation between some of the available software and
instructional goals” (28). Beyond educational software, the Web itself poses problems to
educators as “the web is littered with…course-related pages that are technically and/or
pedagogically flawed” (Maddux & Cummings, 2000, 148). Even if the Web only was populated
with accurate information and there were multitudes of pedagogically sound software application
that would fit into a teacher’s curriculum, there would still be many challenges. O’Donnell
(1996) states, “educators mistakenly expected that the integration of computers into the
instructional process would occur if the hardware, the software, and a minimum of guidance and
staff development programs were offered to teachers. However, this has not been the case. The
integration of computers into instruction is a complex process, with a multiplicity of factors
which occur over a long period of time” (86). These factors include the learning curve for both
the teacher and students in adapting to new hardware and software as well as the ability of
teachers to properly incorporate technology into classroom activities. November (2001), in an
analysis of successful use of technology in the classroom, warns “we should only expect to see
incremental improvement when we bolt technology onto individual classrooms and keep the
same assignments within the structure of the same teacher/student relationship we have had for

Schott - 6
the past eighty years” (xxii). As these articles reflect, incorporating web-based resources into a
curriculum is a difficult undertaking. There are issues for both teachers and students to adapt to
a technical environment. Furthermore, there is a dearth of off the shelf products that are
engaging for students and help build their understanding. Therefore, teachers must be
comfortable with technology, probably develop the technology products themselves, and ensure
that their students can use the products effectively.
The research regarding technology in the classroom is guided by one overriding caveat –
technology doesn’t just work in the classroom without thoughtful consideration about how the
technology fits into the curriculum. (O’Donnell, 1996, Bass, 1994, November, 2001, Poole,
1997). Conversely, using technology as a learning tool for delivering on sound pedagogy rather
than using technology just because there’s a push to incorporate it into the classroom will allow
teachers to infuse technology into their curriculum in a way that contributes to student
understanding (Bass, 1994, Haviland and McCall, 1999, Leflore, 2000, November, 2001,
O’Donnell, 1996, Oliver and Herrington, 2000, Poole, 1997, Schank and Joseph, 1998). As
Larry Cuban points out “schooling is not about information. It’s getting kids to think about
information. It’s about understanding and knowledge and wisdom” (Oppenheimer, 1997, 21).
As these articles state, web-based resources should be seen as a tool for students to think about
information. Without sound pedagogy, using technology is worthless. Similarly, without
technology that supports the pedagogy, the learning exercise will not be effective. Therefore,
technology must be dovetailed with curriculum to engender student understanding. Starting with
the sound pedagogy, then identifying the end goal allows educators to develop engaging and
effective curriculum. The final step in developing the curriculum is for the teacher to determine
the delivery method and platform for the lessons.

Schott - 7
Social studies naturally lends itself to skill-building outside the content in areas such as
critical analysis, oral and written communication, and research skills, and in the process of
building those skills, students also learn social studies content. Furthermore, social studies
teachers can use technology to extend the classroom into real-world contexts, for example, using
email to teach human geography by connecting students from around the world. There are a lot
of email services that connect classrooms, for example www.epals.com and www.iecc.org. In
this way, “computer networks make the world more connected. By communicating with other
students who are from different schools and countries, students gain multiple perspectives.”
(Bonk, et. al., 2000, 68) Ultimately “computers and other technology are not just useful
approaches to teaching but highly motivating tools that engage students and teachers as well.”
(Rice, et.al, 2001, 13)
November (2001) stresses the importance of thinking of the role of technology in the
classroom in a holistic assessment of how technology affects pedagogical theory. He states
The real revolution in learning is not about adding technology on top of the
current structure of schooling. Instead, the real revolution is about a
transformational shift of control from the school system to the learner. Teachers
are faced with the historic opportunity of teaching students to know what to do
with the power to access unlimited amounts of information and to extend their
relationships of learning (xv-xvi).
This is the greatest contribution of technology in education – teachers are able to use technology
to actualize curriculum that gives students power over their own learning. Rice, Wilson &
Bagley’s (2001) example of a high school social studies teacher who has transformed his
curriculum with the infusion of technology highlights the effect that technology can have on an

Schott - 8
entire classroom environment. The teacher’s use of technology, which ranged from simply
playing a Louis Armstrong audio track to creating a daily student newscast broadcast via public
access cable television, changed his entire approach to teaching. The teacher understood that
technology is not the answer or the end point, but the beginning on how to use on- and off-line
tools in a pedagogically sound way to help empower students to take responsibility for their
education. As the teacher states:
I now feel we must teach students to think for themselves, tell them what they need
to know and give them the tools to find the answers for themselves. We have got
to quit telling them what they must know and asking them to reflect what was said
on a test. If students find the things they need to know, then they can make their
own decisions on what that information says or means. Let them interpret,
analyze, and develop their own conclusions. (Rice, et.al, 2001, 8)
The teacher accomplished this by transforming his role into that of a facilitator, as “students want
to use technology to learn, they don’t want teachers to use it to teach them. The best thing that I
have found when using technology is that students teach themselves and other students. Students
seem more willing to listen to their peers” (Rice, et.al, 2001, 9). This reflects the generalized
belief that “in all areas of study, students need to be able to access the database of human
experience that has contributed to a field of knowledge. The easier and more enjoyable this
access, the more likely that students will discover the learning for themselves.” (Poole, 1997,
144) The social studies teacher confirmed this, as “the biggest change that I saw in my students
was the birth of creativity. They began to think about what they were doing and learned history
as a by-product of the other things that they were learning (i.e., the use of technology)” (Rice,
et.al, 2001, 9-10). The example of this teacher, combined with theories about how to effectively

Schott - 9
use technology in the classroom to facilitate student understanding, should serve as a guide on
how to understand technology’s role in creating and delivering curriculum as well as inspiration
on what can be accomplished in the classroom. No longer can a teacher say “I wish I could do
X,” because the potential for anything exists. Here is a teacher whose students produce a daily
news program!
Not all schools or districts have the capacity to support a daily news program. There are
other potentially negative considerations as well regarding using technology. Bastiaens and
Martens (2000), in their realistic analysis of incorporating web-based resources into the
classroom state, “some of the most important [disadvantages] are the relative lack of support,
guidance and interactivity, the fact that course material is often static and is not tailored to meet
the needs of the users, and the lack of interim adjustments to take account of what students
actually do” (17). The main concerns are therefore, first, availability of resources, second,
access to assistance, and third, ability to create and revise applicable course content. All these
are concerns teachers have regardless of delivery method; however, adequate resources is the
largest hurdle to overcome due to the cost involved in procuring some technology. Therefore, in
this analysis, I will assume a school has the resources necessary to incorporate web-based
resources into a curriculum, namely a computer lab and a networked computer and digital
projector in the classroom.
Uses of web-based resources in the classroom to enable/further student understanding
“In considering multiple intelligences and authentic assessment, the use of Web-based
technology needs to be seen as one component that has great potential to engage and
empower learners. In some cases it may be the medium for the final presentation such as
a slide show. In other cases, it may be the tool used to enhance and ease musical

Schott - 10
composition, research, design projects, and communication beyond the classroom, but it
is not necessarily the medium of the final product” (Fisher, 2000, 83).
Before exploring how teachers can use web-based resources to further student
understanding, it is important to note students’ relationships with the Internet. I have seen
teachers and librarians go to great effort to assemble lists of educational databases for students to
access for research only to have the students go straight to Google or Ask Jeeves, type in a
search term and click on the first link that appears. November (2001) has developed a practical
project for teachers to help students understand the World Wide Web. As he states, “Too many
young people believe that if they see it on the Internet, it must be true” (2001, 2) November’s
(2001) project is also pedagogically sound, as “teaching students to use the Internet is much
more complex than simply using a search engine to surf the web. What we need to do is reveal
the structure of information on the Internet to students…There is an Internet grammar that
necessitates that students know what is the Internet’s equivalent to, among other things,
footnotes, indexes, and bibliographies.” (4-5) [Please see Appendix A for suggestions and
activities regarding introducing and using web-based resources in the classroom] This example
shows that using web-based resources in the curriculum not only helps build student
understanding, but also develops their real-world skill set. Proper use of web-based resources is
not only a necessary skill in the 21st
century, but also a student that properly understands and
uses the web can actively accomplish more in the classroom through authentic assessments
(Fischer, 2000, 83).
Teaching students proper approaches to Internet use is critical because “somehow when
information is seen on the Web, many students find it more relevant to the real world, even

Schott - 11
though the identical information might be found in a book in the library” (Fisher, 2000, 97).
Therefore, when students are prepared to ethically and correctly use the Internet, teachers can
take advantage of student interest in the Web to create engaging activities. Preparing students to
use the Web as early as possible allows teachers to utilize web-based curriculum effectively
throughout the year. Lewis Perelman, Director of Project Learning 2001 at the Hudson Institute,
states “two decades of research show that computer-based instruction produces at least 30%
more learning in 40% less time at 30% less cost compared to traditional classroom teaching”
(Poole, 1997, 30).
O’Donnell (1996) stresses the importance of framing the use of technology in a way that
students will understand why and how it fits into the lesson. She states:
Before assigning any student to the computer in a whole class setting, the teacher
should review the objectives of the lesson with the class and discuss the total
content of the lesson, with emphasis on what is to be learned during each class
session. Each step in the lesson should be explained and demonstrated. The
software should be named and an explanation given of how it relates to the lesson.
While utilizing a large-screen monitor, the teacher should demonstrate how the
software is to be used. Research shows that two students to a computer is optimal
(92).
In addition to describing the process, describing the final assessment is important to creating an
effective activity. Rubrics “have served as advance organizers to guide project experiences.
They helped students focus on teacher expectations and examples have shown teachers how to
meet the expectations outlined in the rubrics. In addition, [students] have been more able to
reflect and improve their own work and evaluate the work of peers” (Fisher, 2000, 88-89).

Schott - 12
Finally, “posting example answers is crucial to overcoming student anxiety about course
requirements as well as establishing quality standards. Posting student work is not only a model
or example for future students, it is a classroom legacy…. Publishing student work on the Web
reveals to colleagues and peers the range and quality of student learning in one’s class” (Bonk,
2000, 63). In reviewing these instructions, any teacher recognizes that this is standard classroom
management methodology. Teachers should introduce lessons, describe what students will be
doing and how they should do it, provide detailed instructions about the assessment and a rubric
so students know how they will be evaluated, either model or show students examples of what
they are expected to do or produce, and provide a public forum for student work to be displayed.
While there are effective ways to have learning activities centered around technology,
ideally, learning with technology will take place where the technology seamlessly serves the
learning activity. Just as the social studies teacher used technology to transform his classroom to
the point where the technology was just another learning tool, web-based resources can serve as
a seamless curricular element. This is being carried out in the American Crossroads Project at
Georgetown University. While not a high school class, the methodology can easily be
implemented in a high school social studies classroom. Bass (1994) writes of authentic tasks and
complex inquiry manifested in “simulated archives of electronic primary materials…[which]
provide new ways of enabling novice learners to engage in authentic research tasks and complex
inquiry assignments” (12-13). For example, in developing social studies units, teachers can
develop a problem-based learning question with an archive of supporting resources already
developed at the beginning of the unit organized in an accessible and approachable information
architecture scheme that would be engaging for students. Bass’ response is that “electronic
libraries…are not serving in these instances as ‘engines’ of productivity leading students to

Schott - 13
answers, but as engines of inquiry, contributing to a context that might lead students to ask
better, more subtle, more complex, questions about the cultural materials before them” (Bass,
1994, 22). Consequently, “knowledge is not transmitted, it is constructed. Each individual must
reconstruct knowledge” (Papert, 1990, 8).
Another benefit of self-contained on-line resources “is in allowing students, at their own
pace, to spend time looking at the [content] which otherwise would be projected as slides for a
restricted time” (Bass, 1994, 26). Having course materials, including text elements, images,
video, and audio organized thematically for students to explore on their own time, at their own
pace with specific questions to answer would be much more engaging for students. Combining
this with an asynchronous communication tool (i.e. an on-line discussion board) for students to
post their responses to the questions can serve as the foundation for their answer to the problem-
based learning challenge. If effective, “the computer [will be] absorbed; it [will] become part of
the culture” (Papert, 1990, 7).
Asynchronous communication assignments can extend a class beyond the classroom
while fostering another environment for student understanding. Tools such as bulletin boards,
weblogs, Instant Messenger, and chatrooms “can significantly impact [students’] depth of
processing of the material and help create a sense of a learning community within the regular
class” (Bonk, et. al., 2000, 66). Asynchronous communication tools are important to include
because student activities should be group-based. I was pleasantly surprised at how often I
uncovered research stressing the importance of students working together when using
technology. Bastiaens and Martenss (2000), in their analysis of developing student
understanding in distance learning programs stress,

Schott - 14
Collaborative work is central to learning with real cases. Students are expected to
solve problems and complete assignments in groups. As students work in
collaborative groups, they are forced to articulate and reflect upon their thinking.
The workspace has to support collaboration and provide procedural facilitation
that enables students to use their own thinking, share knowledge and reflect on the
way knowledge is used in real life (16).
Therefore, asynchronous communication forums, while extending the classroom, also facilitate
higher-level thinking as well as students’ metacognitive development.
In addition to creating new ways of learning, web-based resources can also transform
projects for better student engagement and understanding. Haviland and McCall’s (1999)
Hypercard project is a great way of turning a pedagogically sound off-line learning project into a
digital project and adding additional skill developments. The teachers have students research an
abstract noun -- such as love, joy, or curiosity -- via several different channels such as
encyclopedias, unabridged dictionaries, a book of quotations, concordances to the Bible and
Shakespeare, Granger’s Index to Poetry, and then create a report on their word. (Haviland and
McCall, 1999, 63) The transformation occurred when instead of preparing a product that was an
end – a hard copy of a student project left to gather dust – the product turned into a public
deliverable that was built in stages with multiple revisions – a HyperStudio presentation. Not
only are students engaged in their own work, but by digitally presenting their products, they
become “manipulators and disseminators of information. In doing so, students move from being
passive consumers and users to very active designers and producers of that information”
(Haviland and McCall, 1999, 65). Furthermore, the project adds to the original, off-line project
in that it “stimulates both interpersonal in intrapersonal intelligences; it allows both collaboration

Schott - 15
and independent decision-making, as students work together but ultimately maintain control over
their individual projects” (Haviland and McCall, 1999, 65). Additionally, by using digital
presentation applications (having the students create a website could just as easily replace having
them create a HyperStudio stack), students gain skills in information architecture, interface
design, and content presentation – all while pursuing subjects that are “personally interesting to
them and [sharing] it immediately in an informal, collegial setting” (Haviland and McCall, 1999,
67). Therefore, it is no surprise that having students explore something of personal interest and
sharing their findings in an engaging way enabled the students to “’love’ the independence,
creativity, and sharing that the project allows.” (Haviland and McCall, 1999, 67)
As the preceding research and examples highlight, using web-based resources can
transform the learning environment to facilitate student understanding and engagement.
Persichitte (2000), in a case study describing her experience teaching an on-line course, reported
the following lessons learned: “(a) students need time to formulate and contribute higher quality
responses, (b) the quality of on-line interactions improves over time, (c) group interaction is a
motivating factor, and (d) students in Web-based learning environments tend to work harder and
produce higher quality products than in a traditional setting” (193). I think that the reason there
is a learning curve for students to reach their potential with these activities is that they are not
used to doing them in an educational context. (A) Asynchronous communication forums allow
students to take the time they need to develop high quality responses – something they are not
used to in class, since usually students have seconds at the minimum and perhaps a few minutes
(for example, in response to a writing prompt or “bellringer” activity) to answer a teacher’s
question. (B) Then, as students become comfortable interacting on-line, they stop thinking about
the technology and are able to focus on the task. (C) Working with others on- and off-line

Schott - 16
provides support and engagement, especially if (D), the task has a real-world context or public
audience.
The Web allows this real-world context or public audience in that “one of the most
powerful lessons I have learned about student motivation is that if students are given an authentic
audience they work harder as a group than they work for their teacher alone. Creating authentic
audiences for students is one of the emerging skills for teachers. Many teachers also agree that
students generally work harder for an authentic audience than for a grade” (November, xxii).
One way to accomplish this is to assign students to create web pages for publication because it
“motivates students by granting credit for work performed in class… If students know that the
best work will be put on display [on-line], they will put more time and effort into their Web
products. Second, if such work is exemplary, then the instructor has just gained high quality
resources for his or her next class” (Bonk, et al.,2000, 62-63). So in addition to having
motivated students, the teacher can use the students’ work in future activities!
Certainly, this has not been a comprehensive analysis of how to incorporate web-based
activities into a curriculum. However, it perhaps has been an introduction regarding how to
approach using web-based resources into a curriculum to actualize a teacher’s goals for their
students to develop understanding.
On-line goal-based scenarios for social studies curriculum
“[The computer] does not care how often the learner makes a mistake. The dehumanized
environment of the computer actually can create a very healthy learning environment for some
students, especially for at-risk students…The anonymity of the Internet provides this same lack
of judgment, and, if designed correctly, provides instant feedback” (November, 2001, xv)

Schott - 17
Combining problem-based learning exercises in a controlled on-line environment – for
example, a website that is custom-built and populated with content for a specific learning activity
designed to further the understanding of a known set of students – will allow students to engage
in authentic tasks and complex inquiry toward the accomplishment of a goal. For example, a
teacher can create a website of primary documents from the Progressive Era organized by theme
(women’s rights, national politics, labor rights, etc.) that serves as the basis for a DBQ
assignment. In this instance, the computer would be a tool seamlessly incorporated into
activities for student learning, as it is “just a powerful instrument that [empowers]… students”
(Papert, 1990, 7). Schank and Joseph (1998) state “human beings are simply not very good at
remembering facts except when we use them in a context that is meaningful to us” (60). One
solution to this issue is via a problem-based activity that “facilitates learners solving authentic
problems which reflect the way in which the learned information will be used outside classroom
settings. Authentic problems tend to be ill-structured with multiple solutions… This form of
learning…[can enhance] students’ abilities to continue to learn beyond the classroom setting”
(Oliver & Herrington, 184).
Certainly, people learn best by doing, and the most opportune point for instruction is
when people make an error or are surprised. This is best accomplished in a goal-based scenario
(GBS) where students can work at their own pace to approach specific, authentic tasks. For
example, at the beginning of a unit on monetary policy in an economics class, a teacher can
create a GBS where the students need to assist the Fed chief in slowing down a rapidly growing
economy. The GBS provides the students with an interactive environment to build
understanding through a realistic range of instant expert feedback – proactive, or after making a

Schott - 18
mistake (being surprised) – that accompanies their decisions. In this way, students teach
themselves. As Poole (1997) states,
Simulations, computerized or not, are excellent learning tools when they put
students into an interactive discovery mode; they are most effective when a
realistic range of feedback accompanies the interaction…[Students] have little
difficulty suspending disbelief and often become engrossed with software that
steps them through a science experiment, or a historical sequence of events, and,
along the way, prompts them for feedback to monitor understanding and point the
way to deeper learning (1997, 159).
Just as with off-line activities, teachers creating web-based goal- or problem-based
scenarios must first identify learning goals and objectives and actionable teaching points. Then,
teachers can begin work on the front-end information architecture for a goal-based simulation or
on-line document repository that drives a problem-based learning exercise. In this way, the users
(students) will work on a system that encourages and promotes their understanding as identified
by their teacher.
Using a self-contained on-line resource -- such as a custom-built website for a goal based
scenario or a database repository of primary documents that students can access from any
networked computer -- for students to use for either solving a problem-based learning objective
or for self-directed research (or both) allows for students to be “more engaged, reflective, and
critical about what they do” (Bass, 1994, 32). Creating an asynchronous communication
environment for students to share answers and work together on group project work engenders
social interaction and creates an atmosphere of communal learning. The final step is to ensure
there is an authentic assessment exercise for the students before creating the on-line resource

Schott - 19
repository. Whether it is developing a website to answer the problem-based learning task (and
support the decision) or an off-line assessment, the assessment should enable the students to take
what they have learned and produce a high quality deliverable.
Conclusion
Poole (1997) cited a Budin, Taylor, and Kendall (1987) study where they identified the
following as directions to pursue in the use of computers in teaching social studies:
1. Develop more software that involves students in decision making in regard to
social studies issues, and expects more input from them
2. Use software that makes more use of graphics to convey subject matter
3. Use technology such as telecommunications to increase students’ global
understanding
4. Use the computer to stimulate more social interaction on the part of the
students.” (Poole, B. 1997, 28).
Since the Budin, et .al. article was published, technological advances have caused a paradigm
shift in education. While pedagogy has stressed student-centered classrooms and the role of self-
directed inquiry for students to build understanding, effective use of web-based resources can
transform a classroom into an environment where students can develop their own knowledge
base independently. There are many factors that combine to infuse technology in the classroom
to create a student-centered curriculum. First, teachers must have an understanding on how to
effectively use technology in the classroom. Technology is not just an “add-on.” It is a complex
process of determining learning goals and assessments and analyzing how technological
elements can contribute to creating effective learning activities. There are countless ways to

Schott - 20
infuse technology into the classroom environment to both engage students and contribute to their
skill and knowledge development such as goal based scenarios, on-line problem based learning
websites, or creating their own artifacts using movie or song production software, html to build
websites or PowerPoint to build presentations. Certainly, teachers need to be comfortable with
hardware and software, but they also need to teach students how to responsibly use these tools.
Then, teachers and students can use these tools in the classroom. In a social studies context,
problem-based learning exercises and goal-based scenarios are the two most effective ways to
use web-based resources. Not surprisingly, these tactics work well in both off- and on-line
environments. However, it is in the on-line context where student engagement is best sparked to
cultivate their understanding.

Schott - 21
Data Collection
I interviewed Indiana University Professor Christopher Essex (Appendix B), who teaches
a course for high school teachers to learn how to incorporate web-based resources into
curriculums, and I interviewed a high school social studies teacher (Appendix C) at an urban
magnet school. Professor Essex served as a great resource regarding the use of web-based
resources from a theoretical perspective, while the urban high school social studies teacher I
interviewed served as a great resource from a practical perspective. Rather than focusing
exclusively on technology in the curriculum, the interviews garnered responses about curriculum
development and goals for student understanding, with technology being a pedagogical tool that
was one component of their methodology. I also gathered general input regarding positive and
negative issues regarding the availability and use of technology in the schools and classroom.
I was able to observe 13 AP Economics students who completed a GBS on monetary
policy. I administered a survey to the students to gauge their ideas about how using the GBS
contributed to their understanding and skill development (Appendix D). Nine students
completed and submitted the survey during the same class period. I also conducted a focus
group with these students where we discussed the GBS and other issues including what
motivated them to learn and their perspectives on school and schooling.

Schott - 22
Ethics Statement
As part of my research, students at a suburban High School were given an online goal-
based scenario (GBS) as part of their regular AP Economics curriculum. I received approval
from the teacher to administer the GBS to the students during their class time over two days.
The students filled out exit slips in the form of a survey asking for their input on the experience.
I kept responses to the survey anonymous. I notified students of their role as subjects in the
research, and I complied with the policy of the high school regarding student participation in
research. The exit slips were not coded, and students knew that their responses on the exit slips
would not impact their grade.
Regarding identifying interview subjects, unless the educators are publicly known
experts, I do not name them, but rather identify them as a teacher. The educator who is a
publicly known expert is a University Professor, and I named him with his consent.
I am keeping the high school teacher’s identity anonymous because I do not want to
expose her students or school. Also, since I was interested in both success stories as well as
failures – or instances where there were unexpected results – it was important that I assure the
teacher that the information she provided me would be confidential and I would change or
remove characteristics/traits/demographics/etc. that would allow someone to identify the teacher
or school.
I have strived to conduct and report my research studies accurately. I have not knowingly
engaged in fraudulent research nor have I consciously attempted to distort or misrepresent data
or deliberately bias my results.

Schott - 23
Analysis and Interpretation
As I began to look at the data I collected from my subject matter interviews, student
surveys, and student focus group, three themes arose. These themes are 1) the challenges of
developing understanding, 2) issues and challenges of using technology in the classroom, and 3)
using goal-based scenarios to develop student understanding. In attempting to answer my
research question, I looked at student’s attitudes about learning and how teachers can use
technology to increase student engagement and understanding.
Theme #1: The challenges of developing understanding
Analysis
An issue for all teachers regardless of curriculum distribution method is getting students to
develop lasting understanding. Christopher Essex, Indiana University professor and Coordinator,
Instructional Design and Development, Indiana University School of Education stated, “students learn
best when they are doing things, when they are not just passive receptors. Sometimes to get the
information out there, you have to actually lecture, but then you also want to involve them later on. So
in terms of when I teach, I do my best to get the information out there and then get the students to do
something with it so the knowledge is taken from something inert to something that can be incorporated
into their knowledge schemas, something that they use and do something with.” He continued, “you
need to bring that information into larger context with facts and skills by providing the students with
links – tell them, 'this is the sort of thing you will do in college or in a science lab or in a certain
profession.' In this way, you bring a real life context to what they would do with that information.”
A social studies teacher teaching a group of motivated, high-achieving students in a summer
program commented on her use of technology to foster student engagement and understanding. “Today,
we’re working through 20th
century leaders, and I wanted them to get a definition of dictators, so we

Schott - 24
started with Lenin. Now, I have a document about Lenin that I want them to work with, but we went to
the Time 100 Greatest Leaders of the 20th
Century website to get background because they write these
articles. Now, I can hop from that page to another page to another page without having to copy it all and
hand it all out. Then I put a pause on that and we read a document that I handed out and then we could
go back to the site and use more components from that and then finish the whole discussion. That’s a
successful lesson for me – when I can integrate it all and I know that it’s working and ready and
accessible to the kids. This is also like sitting in a movie to them. I can be assured that they will be
focusing in when it comes to putting something up on the television. I know I can get them. Do I know
if they’re retaining? That’s a totally different story. But to get their attention, this works. Giving them
a sheet of paper, that doesn’t always work; giving them a book doesn’t always work. I think they’ve
been socialized to think those are boring. But from young ages, you pop in a video to keep them
entertained. So honestly, it’s variety. It’s changing it up. It’s making it interesting. It’s trying to make
them aware of what’s out there and keeping them interested and I think subversively, I’m using the
technology to try to get them to understand the history as a subtext, but it takes a lot of planning to get it
that way.”
During a focus group, when a motivated student was asked what he thought his peers’ attitudes
toward high school was, he answered, “I think 98% of all people hate it.” The students that participated
in the focus group were AP economics students – seniors and sophomores. At one point in the group,
they engaged in a discussion on the nature of learning and understanding:
Student 2: We’re anachronisms. What’s wrong with sitting around a table with a bunch
of original texts and reading them and discussing them or having someone that’s

Schott - 25
knowledgeable come to your classroom and talk to you about a reading that you’ve done?
It’s been around for 2000 years.
Student 1: There’s been such a move in teaching to do something different, and different
doesn’t always work.
…
Student 2: Why force people to learn? This is beyond the scope of what you’re getting
at, but if someone is being forced to learn then maybe they shouldn’t be learning, and
that’s a terrible thing to say, but like, that’s just a perennial problem, if someone is not
interested in learning, you could have web quests and fun things to do…
Teacher: What do you with [people who aren’t interested in learning], as a society…
Student 2: Put them out in the world and they realize they can’t function then they come
back and…
Student 6: Maybe instead of trying to figure out ways to get students to learn, why not,
like, try to get them to understand why they need to learn?
Student 1: You can’t answer that question
Student 3: I think everyone knows why they have to learn, in our society if you don’t go
to college you don’t amount to anything, so everyone knows why.
Regardless of if students realize the importance of developing understanding, it is still the
teacher’s responsibility to develop student understanding. When asked about how they develop

Schott - 26
understanding, one student began, “for AP, you’re trying to learn the most in a little amount of time, so
when it comes to efficiency…” and another student finished the statement, “for us, it’s give us the
lectures and we read the textbook and we’re fine.” However, another student responding to a discussion
about a simulation, had a different response when he stated, “in a real practical sense, even if the whole
thing was wrong, I would learn from not understanding. That’s what I don’t know – why the wrong
things don’t work.”
In response to interest in doing a student-focused activity, one student responded, “You want to
get it over with as soon as possible, you don’t want to sit there and be like ‘I’m learning,’ you want to be
like, ‘hey, I’m done.’ Nobody wants to learn, they just want to get it over with.” This was echoed by
another student, who stated, “A few students may want to learn, but a majority of students just want to
get it done and be over with it.”
In addition to the discussion, the same students completed a survey regarding their preferences of
self-guided versus teacher-led instruction and self-determined pace versus structured pace. Five
students answered that they preferred self-guided instruction (by answering “agree” or “somewhat
agree”), two answered they preferred teacher-led instruction, and two were neutral:

Schott - 27
Figure 1: Student responses to: “I learn better exploring a subject on my own rather than
guided by a teacher”
Student preference for self-guided vs. teacher-led learning
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat
agree
Are neutral Somewhat
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Student opinion
Numberofstudents
Six students preferred a self-determined pace to a structured pace, 3 students were neutral, and no
student preferred a structured pace:

Schott - 28
Figure 2: Student responses to: “I learn better exploring a subject on my own pace rather
than with structured classroom activities”
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat agree Are neutral Somewhat
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Student opinion
Numberofstudents
Interpretation
The interviews with instructors provide a sharp contrast with the student responses. The
instructors stress the need for students to get involved in authentic activities and be involved in
learning activities – regardless of delivery method. The students comment on their complete
lack of interest. Even highly motivated students seem to want to be passive receptors instead of
active participants.
The social studies teacher uses technology to engage students, even if she is unsure of the
effectiveness of the technology to develop understanding. As “computer use in the classroom

Schott - 29
should be a response to an instructional need” (O’Donnell, 1996), the teacher uses technology to
“subversively” grab and maintain the students’ attention by using on- and off-line resources to
deliver an engaging lesson. She is also able to use these resources to develop higher-level
thinking skills beyond the content. As Larry Cuban pointed out “schooling is not about
information. It’s getting kids to think about information. It’s about understanding and
knowledge and wisdom” (Oppenheimer, 1997, 21), this teacher is able to make the students think
about all the information and synthesize it into an analysis of the nature of dictators.
This teacher admits it takes a lot of planning to develop an engaging lesson, probably
because, as the students admitted, an incredibly small percentage of students like school, much
less learning. The students even question the benefit of “forcing” the vast majority of the student
population who are uninterested to learn. Even motivated students claim they just want the
material presented to them in a lecture and/or textbook and perhaps a discussion as well.
Certainly, this is the antithesis of Essex’ desire for students to be engaged in a real life context
with the material.
However, one student’s comment provides room for a possible compromise, when he
said, “in a real practical sense, even if the whole thing was wrong, I would learn from not
understanding. That’s what I don’t know – why the wrong things don’t work.” This student
admitted that he would be interested in something that provided no simple or correct answers but
rather only incorrect information. By learning what doesn’t work, the student would not only be
engaged, but he would build understanding about what does work. This complies with Essex’
desire for authentic tasks because often in the real world, the correct answer is not only difficult
to determine, but often times there is not an absolute correct answer. This also complies with

Schott - 30
students’ desire not to be “forced” to learn, as they would be internally motivated to develop
understanding.
Furthering this possibility are the students’ comments in the focus group that conflicted
with their answers to the survey. In the focus group, students said they just want the teacher to
give them the information they needed, yet in the survey only two of nine students said they
preferred teacher-led instruction and none said they preferred a structured learning pace. These
students comments relate to Rice’s (2001) argument that “we must teach students to think for
themselves, tell them what they need to know and give them the tools to find the answers for
themselves. We have got to quit telling them what they must know and asking them to reflect
what was said on a test. If students find the things they need to know, then they can make their
own decisions on what that information says or means. Let them interpret, analyze, and develop
their own conclusions” (Rice, et.al, 2001, 8). So perhaps these students are saying that they
really want authentic activities that are “messy” where they have to figure out why what is wrong
is wrong which perhaps gives them an idea about what is “right.” This echo’s Cuban’s desire to
have students think about information, Essex’ desire to have students be involved in their
learning, and the social studies teacher’s desire to have students be engaged.
Theme #2: Issues and Challenges of Using Technology in the Classroom
Analysis
In my literature review, I stated I would assume a school had the resources necessary to
incorporate web-based resources into a curriculum. During my data collection, I learned that
even this given does not guarantee technology can be incorporated into the classroom.
Furthermore, this is not a given for many schools and districts. As Professor Essex states, access
is a big issue since, “Indiana has widely varying schools in terms of finances, and also

Schott - 31
socioeconomic status varies around the state in the same way. So sometime it’s just thinking
about ‘can I assign this and have the students do this?’ – if they have computers at home to get
the job done.” Essex also commented on the unreliability of national statistics when he stated,
“it’s still surprising that the digital divide is still there since we hear so much in the news that
supposedly 98% of schools are networked, that can be true but it may be that it’s one computer
used for administrative purposes. Other schools may have computer labs, but we don’t know
how they are using them.”
The urban social studies teacher certainly knows how technology is used at her school.
Essex was interested in faculty buy-in regarding use of technology when he stated, “Another
issue is whether other faculty or administration is on the bandwagon of incorporating internet
materials into the curriculum, and also the issue of getting the infrastructure up and running and
being able to maintain the infrastructure.” The teacher commented “At [my school], we have an
Assistant Principal now who not only does he oversee the technology department for the school,
but he will notify particular departments of things. So there’s fit things like Questia and using
things like turnitin.com. I will get things in my mailbox that say ‘check this out’ or there will be
something after school.”
While there is support from the top at her school, the teacher continues by saying that
there is not a content-specific, organized support system in place. “There’s no particular history
go-to person. I would say the younger people tend to be more available for that kind of things
just because we’re more familiar with those things overall, but that’s just because of our
willingness to tinker around.” When asked about how technology is approached at her school,
the teacher responded, “I think there’s definitely more in the grassroots vicinity just from my
own personal experience, and if there is support from the top, it’s not going to be topic specific.

Schott - 32
So they’ll offer me the technology to use it, but I have to figure out how to make it into my
classroom.”
The teacher’s biggest source of frustration comes with actual use of technology in the
school. From an organizational standpoint, she stated, “technology in my school is shared so I
don’t always have access to it if someone else needs it or I didn’t sign up on time or if the system
is down.” Infrastructure issues were another of her concerns. “Our wireless was down for a
month, and it’s [the district] -- things get fixed when they get fixed. You have to have a really
strong foundation of ability and competence and regularity behind this to be able to use this. I’ll
be the first to admit that I am completely comfortable with technology and there are times when I
don’t use it because I can’t be guaranteed that all the preparation I put into it will be realized
when something doesn’t work.” Regarding her hesitation to use more technology because she is
unsure if the time it takes to prepare may be wasted if the infrastructure fails or there are other
off-line issues, the teacher stated, “I hate that. I’m telling you, it makes me not want to do it. It
makes you want to revert back to pen and paper. And I hate that you wind up there. I’d want to
make more use of things, but there’s no promise that it’s going to work.” Nevertheless, despite
these challenges, the teacher still strives to “make use of the technology that we know is
available, know we can use on a regular basis, and know that if something breaks down we have
someplace else to go. So my use of this stuff has been limited to projection onto a screen to
show a website or some PowerPoint that I’ve put together or documents I’ve gotten and put up to
read sections of.”
Regarding student use of technology in the classroom, particularly using computers, the
teacher expressed frustration with the amount of supervision the students need. In response to
the question of how she ensures the students are on task, she stated, “Constant surveillance. And

Schott - 33
I hate that because it makes me feel like a warden. But I’ve stooped to threatening their grade – I
always have a 25% unknown participation grade. …But when I’m having them doing things on
the computer it feels like police work.”
In addition to frustration with lack of student engagement in tasks, the teacher had issues
with the amount of time she had to accomplish her goals each day. “Right now, I have 50-
minute periods, but when you look at actual time for the lesson, it’s only about 40 minutes.
When you have questions and you want to generate good dialogue, that’s just not enough time
and my schedule is not set up to take advantage of everything I’d like to do. Full on immersion
needs solid time.”
While out of the scope of this study, the teacher stated that she had no issues with using
technology outside of the classroom that assisted her with accomplishing tasks. As she stated,
“we have Edline! I love it, I’d much rather email parents than talk to them – not that I don’t
mind talking to them, I love that – but I know that I can send an email and they’ll get it and be
able to respond to me so you can have a dialogue. Kids hate it because their parents know their
grades all the time. …The stuff that is controlled by the teacher, and self-contained, like EdLine,
I think most of us use handily and have no problems.”
Interpretation
Even the most technologically astute teacher faces hurdles when trying to infuse
technology into his or her curriculum. Even if the teacher works in an environment where there
is support for use of technology from the top, an infrastructure in place, and knowledge of
hardware and software that can be used in the classroom, that is still not a guarantee that the
teacher would want their students to use technology. First, an administration can provide the
infrastructure for their teachers and offer support, but content-specific assistance is not provided

Schott - 34
usually leaving the teacher to seek out resources on his or her own. Second, a knowledgeable
teacher may not want to incorporate technology into the classroom because the time commitment
necessary to create certain activities may not yield appropriate student results. Additionally,
system failures could sabotage lesson plans – a very real possibility that made the high school
teacher livid, as this reality has forced her to curtail her ambitions for using technology in the
classroom. All these considerations are reflected by Bastiaens and Martens (2000), in their
realistic analysis of incorporating web-based resources into the classroom when they state,
“some of the most important [disadvantages] are the relative lack of support, guidance and
interactivity, the fact that course material is often static and is not tailored to meet the needs of
the users, and the lack of interim adjustments to take account of what students actually do” (17).
Poole (1997), stated “teachers must not only evaluate learning materials before
incorporating them into lesson plans; they must also evaluate the effectiveness of those materials
while students are using them as well as after their use in order to determine whether or not they
should be used again.” It is the realities of infrastructure unreliability and the time commitment
required by teachers to single-handedly develop content and curriculum using technology that
causes the scope of Poole’s statement to be minimized in practical applications. Furthermore,
the lack of student interest in classroom learning activities contributes to the limitation of the
“effectiveness” of lesson plans. So while Essex is concerned about the impact the digital divide
has on use of technology in the schools, the high school teacher is concerned about the impact
the unreliability of technology and student engagement has on lesson planning.
The concern the teacher has regarding using technology brings new meaning to the
statement, “the integration of computers into instruction is a complex process, with a multiplicity
of factors which occur over a long period of time” (O’Donnell, 1996). The teacher has no

Schott - 35
problem using technology to develop curriculum or to interact with parents. In fact, technology
has improved these processes for this teacher. However, it is in delivering curriculum to students
where technology is indeed a complex process.
Theme 3: Using goal-based scenarios to develop student understanding
A group of 13 high school AP economics students completed a monetary policy goal-
based scenario. The students had already studied monetary policy, so the GBS was designed
with their ability level in mind. All the students completed the GBS – some in a matter of
minutes, some in over 30 minutes. After the GBS, the students worked with their instructor to
develop a flowchart of monetary policy procedures. Finally, the students participated in a round-
table discussion of the GBS and learning activities.
Analysis – GBS
In evaluating the GBS, the students lauded the system, but discounted it’s practicality for
them as motivated students. One commented, “this was … good, but college is lecture based,
since AP econ is a college course and you’re going to be taking lectures and writing papers, it’s
not going to be, like something that you’re going to go on line and do simulations.” Another
endorsed the lecture method while still acknowledging the benefits of using GBS’ for students
with the comment, “lecturing is used because it works. A web based kinda interactive format is
cool for maybe like junior high or early high school age kids so they can get familiar with
technology because they are just starting to use it…” A third student synthesized the previous
comments: “It’s a cool thing, interactive kinda thing, good situation for kids that wouldn’t be
motivated or otherwise wouldn’t have any interest, but for AP kids like us, it’s like, a useful tool
for practice, but I don’t think it would be useful for it to be mandatory – maybe as a resource for
us.”

Schott - 36
Acknowledging that the students already had studied monetary policy, one student
addressed the benefit the GBS would have had if they had completed it as an introductory
activity by stating, “it would be a good way to start out because you get to see your mistakes.
Like when you make a mistake, you get to see why it’s wrong. It’s like, if you do something
wrong, you go back and test your other options.” However, another student disagreed by stating,
“I’d rather listen to a boring lecture than do this.”
The students also commented on how the system would provide tutoring if there was an
incorrect action and return them to the simulation. One student said, “another thing about the
natural tendency of students is that something has to be right, so they’ll just go through until they
find the right thing and then they say ‘OK, I’m done now.’ So they haven’t really done anything,
they’ve just gone through and found the right answer.” When asked how to change this, the
student said, “make it a game,” a statement which was immediately refuted by another student
who commented, “but that what this is, it’s a game, and that’s how people think. People would
much rather have a hole in one than a pretty swing, and that’s just, like, how people think.” This
was confirmed by another student who stated, “if I didn’t know how to do this and I got a wrong
answer, I would just click the back button because I’m just a lazy, apathetic high school student.
So there are two things, like, … worksheets…, or like the webassign, like actually number
crunching, because we don’t know how to do that.”
The students’ responses to the survey (Appendix E) also provided insight into their
attitudes. All the students found the GBS intuitive in design and purpose:

Schott - 37
Figure 3: Student responses to “Were able to intuitively use the interface (that is, was how
the system worked make sense to you?)”
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Ratings (10 high-1 low)
Numberofstudents
Only one student was unwilling to do another GBS:
Figure 4: Student response to “You are willing to do another on-line scenario on a different
subject”
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Numberofstudents

Schott - 38
All students would rather do GBS’ to workbook exercises (with three being neutral):
Figure 5: Student responses to “You prefer on-line simulations to workbook exercises”
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Numberofstudents
Finally, five of the students felt as if the GBS did not contribute to their understanding of
monetary policy:

Schott - 39
Figure 6: Student responses to “The on-line simulation reinforced/added to your knowledge
of monetary policy”
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Numberofstudents
Interpretation -- GBS
These students, admittedly highly motivated, had conflicting reactions to the GBS.
While they all completed the system successfully, they had differing views about the
effectiveness of the system. Even though some remarked that the system was not practical for
them, they all nevertheless completed the system correctly. For those that completed it in a
matter of minutes, the system confirmed they had retained knowledge of monetary policy
procedure. For those that took much longer to successfully complete the system, it served as
another opportunity to develop understanding of monetary policy. Therefore, the benefit of the
GBS was established as either confirming understanding or helping to develop understanding.
The class was split regarding the effectiveness of this system to contribute to their
understanding at this time. Five said the system did not help, two were neutral, one was just

Schott - 40
above neutral, and two gave it the highest positive response possible. Since these students had
already studied monetary policy, it makes sense that the students that retained their
understanding would not find the system valuable to developing their understanding. For the
students that did not retain understanding, the system would be invaluable to developing their
understanding. Furthermore, it was an engaging activity for while some students stated they only
wanted to have lectures, all except one expressed their willingness to do other GBS around other
content and no student stated a preference to workbook exercises over a GBS. Therefore, it
would be optimal if the GBS was administered at the beginning of a unit rather than after the
students had studied the content. In this way, the students could go though the system at their
own pace to develop their understanding. However, because there was a correct path through the
system, there is the possibility that the students could “game” the system and simply randomly
click on links until they made it to the end and not develop understanding at all.
Analysis -- GBS assessment
The students were given a worksheet to complete while undertaking the GBS. The
worksheet asked the students to document the choice they selected and the resulting response
from the system. The students had many comments regarding the shortcomings of the worksheet
and suggestions for a better form of assessment, particularly if the GBS was administered at the
beginning of a unit. One student commented, “If it was a first time experience type of thing, the
path [worksheet] you gave us should have been … go to the glossary, what is the discount ratio,
and then like, let’s assume you want to raise the money supply, what do you do? Cuz that one
just had blanks and like no direction. So for a first time thing you need direction. So have a
page for each path cuz it’s a first time thing you need some sort of structure.” He continued, “if
it’s a first time thing, you want the kids to go through each thing instead of just getting the

Schott - 41
answer right away like a lot of us did, you know, like go to open market operations cuz that’s the
right one and then click on it and click on it again. But if it’s the first time, you want to go to all
three [paths in the simulation], and have that be like, structured, so they’re not clicking random
places, and they know which ones do what.”
Another student echoed the need for an assessment that structured the students’
interaction with the GBS when he stated, “like maybe have [a worksheet] that’s completely
structured so they are kinda forced to follow a path, and then when they learn it, have one where
they can go through it on their own.” Another student said the assessment should be more
structured regardless of the students’ previous knowledge base so they are required to document
their understanding. He said, “I think what’s useful about this for us, the students who are
already familiar with monetary policy is why the things that are wrong are wrong. So if I had to
put down why it’s wrong to decrease the reserve ratio, which is obviously wrong, I would want
to go to that link and find out why it is wrong…the worksheet gave us no incentive to read that
[the tutoring for an incorrect choice]. We just chose the right path instead of looking at the
wrong path. Like, I would have learned a lot from that.”
Finally, a student commented on the need for the off-line assessment to help build critical
thinking skills. He stated, “if you made the worksheet where you have to explain to the best of
your knowledge monetary policy, then it would make you go to every single link and like make
it essay based instead of A, B, C, or D, because then they’ll read for concepts instead of
randomly click for letters.”

Schott - 42
Interpretation – GBS assessment
Randy Bass (1994), stating the need for students to construct knowledge, insists,
“electronic libraries…are not serving in these instances as ‘engines’ of productivity leading
students to answers, but as engines of inquiry, contributing to a context that might lead students
to ask better, more subtle, more complex, questions about the cultural materials before them.”
The monetary policy GBS served as an engine of inquiry. However, the corresponding
assessment did not encourage students to construct their own understanding through inquiry.
The students were correct in their desire to have had a guide that dictated the expectations of
their experience undertaking the GBS.
As Fisher (2000), states, rubrics “have served as advance organizers to guide project
experiences. They helped students focus on teacher expectations and examples have shown
teachers how to meet the expectations outlined in the rubrics. In addition, [students] have been
more able to reflect and improve their own work and evaluate the work of peers.” If the students
had a worksheet that guided their experience, along with a detailed rubric that helped them
understand expectations, the students perhaps would have been more deliberate as they
progressed through the GBS.
Particularly with first time content exposure, an off-line assessment with clear
instructions and detailed expectations would help guide students toward developing their own
understanding. Therefore, simply having an on-line activity is not enough. There has to be a
corresponding assessment that provides a roadmap for students as they progress through the
activity not only to help them build understanding but also to allow the instructor to confirm that
the students have developed adequate understanding.

Schott - 43
Conclusion
In the research and data collection of my master’s project, I have been able to begin
identifying methods for high school social studies teachers to use web-based resources to
increase student engagement and understanding. However, my master’s project question, How
do high school social studies teachers use web-based resources to increase student
engagement and understanding?, is too large in scope to answer in this context. There are too
many methodologies teachers can utilize, too many issues regarding student engagement, too
many issues regarding student understanding, and too many issues regarding the use and
challenges of technology in the classroom to answer the question effectively.
My question implies a search for practical, actual ways teachers have used web-based
resources in the classroom. Certainly, I did uncover successful tactics and procedures for using
web-based resources. However, in my research and data collection, I was also able to determine
some universal theoretical implications of the use of web-based resources that are relevant to all
practical applications of the use of web-based resources in the classroom. The major component
I uncovered regarding using web-based resources to foster student engagement and
understanding is the pedagogical basis that underlies the practical use of web-based resources.
The pedagogical basis relates not only to educational theory but also to infrastructure realities,
the learning styles and attitudes of the students, and the types and ways teachers use web-based
resources.
Pedagogically, the use of technology should be another component to effective activity
creation, and sound teaching practices should drive the use of technology in the classroom and
not the other way around. Furthermore, technology can serve to transfer power over learning
from the teacher to the students, as documented in Rice, et. al.’s (2001) study. Professor

Schott - 44
Christopher Essex strives to instruct all teachers to use technology to enable students to engage
in authentic activities and take responsibility for their own learning. Therefore, the pedagogical
basis of using technology in the classroom is no different from current best-practice educational
theory. This is particularly true regarding assessment, as sound pedagogy demands that
assessment helps develop and demonstrate student understanding and contributes to student
engagement during an activity.
One unique component of using technology as it relates to pedagogy is infrastructure
considerations. I began my research assuming a utopia of resources and an absence of logistical
issues. However, after interviewing two practitioners, I learned that the infrastructure couldn’t
be ignored. The public school teacher, who has been trained in sound pedagogy, commented that
she could not develop a lesson using technology without first analyzing the plausibility of
implementing the lesson with regard to potential technological issues. Therefore, using
technology adds another wrinkle to practice, as teachers not only have to consider the
pedagogical foundation but also the technical feasibility of using web-based resources.
Despite limitations, there are countless pedagogically sound uses of web-based resources
in the classroom. I have barely scratched the surface regarding the possibilities. Teachers can
use web-based resources to teach digital media literacy, as in the search engine lesson plan, and
to transform a curriculum, as in the American Crossroads project. Technology can extend the
classroom, as in using asynchronous communication tools, and change the methods of delivery,
as in the public school teacher’s use of interactive web sites.
Focusing on Goal Based Scenarios allowed me to analyze all these elements in depth.
GBS’ are pedagogically sound and allow students to take responsibility for their own learning.
Especially used at the beginning of a unit with an appropriate assessment, GBS’ can engage

Schott - 45
students and empower students to develop their own understanding at their own pace. GBS’ also
have limitations, as the teacher must consider technical acumen of students as well as the
availability of necessary resources and the assurance that the resources will be available and
functioning when needed.
Since my question had a large scope, there were considerable limitations to my study.
Instead of asking “how do…,” a more realistic question would be “how can high school social
studies teachers use web-based resources to increase student engagement and understanding?”
There are innumerable ways that high school social studies teachers “do” use web-based
resources in the classroom. However, as I learned in my research and analysis, there are specific
theoretical underpinnings to how high school social studies teachers can use web-based
resources to build student engagement and understanding. Using these lessons, future research
can focus on specific practical applications of web-based resources in the classroom.
Of particular interest for future research is teacher use of asynchronous communication
tools. Progressive and technologically savvy teachers have started using bulletin boards, text
messaging, and web logs in their curriculum. Additionally, new hardware devices have begun to
change the landscape of web-based delivery from strictly computers to include PDA’s, mp3
players, telephones, and hybrids such as the PSP. Therefore, future research should focus on
how to infuse technology into a classroom in a pedagogically sound way that engages students
and contributes to their understanding. As I eventually focused on Goal Based Scenarios
delivered on a traditional platform (a computer), future research should focus on specific
applications delivered over specific platforms in order to fully identify best practices and issue
considerations and resolutions.

Schott - 46
Other considerations include methods of data collection. Certainly, I needed to interview
more practitioners and interact with more students. While I was fortunate to be able to interview
an effective teacher who makes good use of web-based resources in her classroom, my study
would have benefited from the input of other teachers. Also, my study could have benefited
from interactions with more students. As all students and classrooms are different, the more
students a researcher interacts with, the more the researcher can understand about how students
become engaged and how they build understanding. Also, I interviewed AP students, who are
very motivated and already engaged students. On one hand, it would have been better if I had
observed and surveyed “average” students. On the other hand, the students I did interact with
were incredibly self-aware and were able to articulate their interests and motivations very well.
Therefore, future research should focus on all students. Furthermore, the research should be
longitudinal so the research can identify shifting attitudes about engagement and developing
understanding as students use web-based resources over the course of a unit, year, or entire high
school career.
I wanted my masters project to have practical applications. Therefore, the most
important result of my project should be its implications of the project for the field. Here, my
research and data collection did provide insights. Underlying all use of web-based resources is
the need to adhere to pedagogically sound methodologies. This includes all aspects of
curriculum development from understanding students’ ability levels to creating assessments. It
also includes being aware of limitations of the infrastructure. Web-based resources, while full of
potential for creating student engagement and contributing to student understanding, must be
incorporated into a curriculum in a pedagogically sound manner with full understanding of their
limitations and opportunities.

Schott - 47
Moving forward, I would like to use the results of my action research to try different uses
of web-based resources in my curriculum. I feel comfortable with the pedagogical basis of using
technology in the classroom, and I will attempt to use web-based resources at different times and
for different purposes to try to promote student engagement and understanding in the classroom.
I also hope to continue doing action research on web-based research in particular and student
engagement and understanding in general as I continue my practice. Perhaps the biggest lesson I
learned from this project is that you cannot assume anything. The best example of this is that
infrastructure concerns is a huge issue that cannot be taken for granted. Also, every student and
every class is different and what is engaging for one set of students may not be engaging for
another set. Regardless of the purpose, using the elements of action research during my practice
will certainly inform my practice and improve the experience for my students.

Schott - 48
References
Bass, R. (1994). Engines of inquiry: teaching, technology, and learner-centered approaches to
culture and history. American Studies Crossroads Project.
Bastiaens, T. & Martens, R. (2000). Conditions for web-based learning with real events. In B.
Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education (pp. 1-31).
Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Berge, Z., Collins, M., & Dougherty, K. (2000) Design guidelines for web-based courses. In B.
Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education (pp. 32-40).
Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Berry, L. (2000) Cognitive Effects of web page design. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and
cognitive impacts of web-based education (pp. 41-55). Hershey, PA: Idea Group
Publishing.
Bonk, C., Cummings, J., Hara, N., Fischler, R., & Lee, S.M. (2000) A ten-level web integration
continuum for higher education. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of
web-based education (pp. 56-77). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Danielson, J., Lockee, B. & Burton, J. (2000) ID and HCI: A marriage of necessity. In B. Abbey
(Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education (pp. 118-128). Hershey,
PA: Idea Group Publishing.

Schott - 49
Earnst, E. (2002). Evaluating internet resources. Retrieved Apr., 2005, from Tom Snyder
Productions Web site: http://www.tomsnyder.com/enews/articles/2002-09-A.asp.
Fisher, M. (2000). Implementation considerations for instructional design of web-based learning
environments. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based
education (pp. 78-101). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Haviland, V.S. & McCall, M.J. (1999). Transformation through Technology: How hyperstudio
updated middle school research. English Journal, 89, 63-68
Leflore, D. (2000). Theory supporting design guidelines for web-based instruction. In B. Abbey
Maddux, C. & Cummings, R. (2000) Developing web pages as supplements to traditional
courses. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education
(pp. 147-155). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
November, A. (2001). Empowering students with technology. Arlington Heights, IL: SkyLight
Professional Development.
O’Donnell, E. (1996). Integrating computers into the classroom: the missing key. Lanham, MD:
The Scarecrow Press, Inc.

Schott - 50
Oliver, R. & Herrington, J. (2000) Using situated learning as a design strategy for web-based
learning. In B. Abbey (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education
(pp. 178-191). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Oppenheimer, T. (1997). The Computer Delusion. Atlantic Monthly. 280 (1) 46 – 82
Papert, S. (1990). A critique of technocentrism in thinking about the school of the future.
Epistemology and Learning Group Memo No. 2. MIT Media Laboratory: Cambridge, MA
Persichitte, K. (2000) A case study of lessons learned for the web-based educator. In B. Abbey
Poole, B. (1997). Education for an information age: teaching in the computerized classroom .
Burr Ridge, IL: McGraw Hill.
Rice, M.L., Wilson, E.K., & Bagley, W. (2001). Transforming learning with technology: lessons
from the field. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 211-230.
Schank, R., & Joseph, D. (1998) Intelligent Schooling. In R. Sternberg & W. Williams (Eds.)
Intelligence, Instruction and Assessment, (pp. 43 – 66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Schott - 51
Appendices
Appendix A: Strategies/Considerations for teaching search engine aptitude.
Understanding Search Engines and Websites
There are three parts to understanding meta-web information: web addresses, links, and search
engines
Search engines: “Search engines search databases of several different Internet directories to give
the user results that are not always sorted the same way. For example, the search engine Google
reports their results by popularity while Yahoo! sorts results into pre-assigned categories. Other
search engines may list results by the number of times keywords appear in sites. With this in
mind, just because a certain site is listed first does not mean it is the best or that it provides
accurate information.” November (2001)
“Students need to learn the difference between advocacy and objectivity.” “Students should ask
what the site is trying to do and why the site was created…Are ninth-graders taught how to
distinguish between objectivity and advocacy? Make sure that students understand the purpose
of a Web site, and that the purpose may not be entirely obvious.” November (2001)
“The internet is a place where you can find ‘proof’ of essentially any belief system that you can
imagine. It is a powerful and potentially manipulative environment.” November (2001)
“Because of the proliferation of Web pages containing unverified – and sometimes unverifiable –
information, students can practice analysis and discernment and apply filtering criteria to the
pages they are reading to estimate their reliability.” Berge, et. al. (2000)
Exploring links
“What can we learn from the pattern of links embedded in a Web site? What can we learn from
the pattern of links pointing to a Web site from outside of the site? …Scanning the link address
on a page is similar to reading footnotes. If every footnote of an article were by the author,
would that raise a cautionary red flag for the potential of author bias? If every page is a
reference to another Web page by the same author, students should begin to question the
potential of bias.” November (2001)
Regarding: cross-referencing: “What does the pattern of these links reveal? Finding these links
will not give [the student] a definitive answer about the value of the information, but it will
reveal how [a site] fits into other sites.” November (2001)
How to cross-reference:
Go to Google.com

Schott - 52
In the search field, type “link:” followed by a url and click “search”. The resulting list will show
all the sites that provide a link to the URL entered in the search field. Sometimes a link
command will yield few or no related Web sites. In this case, truncate or shorten the Web
address and use the more general section of the Web address for the cross-referencing (for
example, shorten northwestern.edu/interpretivequestion/bonanza/ to northwestern.edu)
Search Engines
“purpose: to guide students to see the order of a search engine’s results does not necessarily
equate with the site’s importance or accuracy.
Investigation
1. divide the class into four groups and assign each group to use a different search engine
(yahoo.com, dorthernlight.com, altavista.com, google.com)
2. Choose a class research topic – a current news event, historical event, popular culture, or
content area fact
3. Ask the class to go to www.searchenginewatch.com to learn how different search engines
rank their returns
type in “miserable failure” into google search
on-line resource for which search engine to use depending on need:
http://www.noodletools.com/debbie/literacies/information/5locate/adviceengine.html
http://searchenginewatch.com
http://profusion.com
Comparing for Understanding from November (2001)
“purpose: to compare two or three Web sites to determine their reliability, usability, and validity
Investigation
In advance of a class meeting, the teacher investigates two or three Web sites on the same topic
or theme related to the content and curriculum under study. For example, a search of global
warming sites might yield the following sites among thousands of others:
EPA global warming site: www.epa.gov/globalwarming
Global Warming International Center: www.globalwarming.net
Global Warming Information Page: www.globalwarming.org
In class, explain to students what can be understood about the sites just by reading parts of their
respective URL’s.

Schott - 53
Ask the class to brainstorm evaluation criteria. Web sites dealing with the topic of evaluation
can be visited prior to discussion.
Presentation
Each student group ranks the usefulness of each site according to the criteria they established and
reports their findings back to the class
From Earnst, E. (2002). Evaluating internet resources. Retrieved Apr. , 2005, from Tom Snyder
Productions Web site: http://www.tomsnyder.com/enews/articles/2002-09-A.asp.
Who's Sponsoring the Web Site?
When you first look at the URL http://www.martinlutherking.org, you may expect that this
would be an appropriate site to visit for information on the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
The .org extension leads us to believe the site was created by an organization that presents an
authentic view of the life of Dr. King. The following steps will help you examine this Web page
more closely:
1. Launch your Internet browser (Netscape or Internet Explorer) and type in the URL
http://www.martinlutherking.org.
2. Read the information on this page. Under the picture of Dr. King, click the words
‘Click Here’ next to ‘Contact the Webmaster’.
3. Your computer will launch the default email application and you will see the email
address of the webmaster. Notice that the webmaster's email address ends with ‘stormfront.org.’
4. Go to http://www.stormfront.org/. The Stormfront slogan, White Pride, World Wide,
reveals that the martinlutherking.org Web site is sponsored by a group whose message
differs greatly from that of Dr. King.
Another website evaluation activity
Led by the teacher, the class brainstorms 8 – 10 websites they have visited & enjoyed (no
unacceptable/inappropriate sites allowed)
1. teacher writes each URL on a separate card
2. teacher divides class into teams of 3 or 4
3. each team draws a card

Schott - 54
4. each team visits the site on the card, prints out its home page, and writes a brief
description of that site that includes the following:
a. the site’s author(s)
b. The site’s apparent purpose
5. Using www.register.com (or whois.net), students research which company “owns” the
URL
6. Each team pastes the home page in the middle of a large piece of poster board with its
URL written clearly above the printout. The company who owns the URL should be
written below.
Presentation:
Each team gives an oral presentaion to the class using their visual that explains which company
owns their url, why the company would have an interest in the Web site, and what those
connections tell us about the site
Compare
http://pubweb.acns.nwu.edu/~abutz/di/intro.html
and
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/index.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005143
Have students develop their own list of “bookmarks” throughout the year – reliable websites they
have found & what type of information they find there.
Asynchronous communication considerations:
Use one type of tool per activity – threaded discussion for open-ended topics, long term project
posts, weblogs for analysis of a specific topic/issue/artifact, IM for one-time conversations
(which can be saved for inclusion in a report or project),
“Students may become more cautious about what they post. They begin to realize that each
typewritten message may have an impact on their course grade. Instructors must be sensitive to
the potential change in environment. Whereas conventional assignments are typically submitted
solely to the instructor, classmates can more easily view assignments posted to a web conference.
Once accomplished, the quality of student work is evident to all.” (Bonk, et. a. p. 67)
“Without set requirements and points awarded, students…may simply decide not to participate.
At the same time, it must be recognized that students have many competing activities for their
time.” (Bonk, et. a. p. 67)
“The assignment of a student to start the discussion and one to end or wrap up the discussion
each week fostered interactive discussion and depth to the dialogue. Without such preset starters
and wrappers, discussion was disjointed and scattered. Such simple pedagogical interventions
like the starter-wrapper technique and various role-play activities, in fact, may determine the

Schott - 55
success of Web integration. To reduce students’ initial anxiety, it is beneficial for students to see
models or examples of different roles.” (Bonk, et. a. p. 67)
“To implement the discussion, the instructor posted opening questions in the topic discussions.
These questions typically encouraged students to take a position on an issue and reflect on
classroom experience. In the discussion each student was required to post an initial response to a
topic question and respond to at least two topic threads related to other students’ initial responses
for each discussion. Each topic discussion was ‘live’ for two weeks. It became clear that
whenever a WWW-based discussion tool was used – a listserv, chatroom, forum, or
CourseRoom – discussion guidelines were necessary.” (Fisher, p. 93)
“Instructors need to listen in on group discussions and offer advice. Try to get the student to
think a little further or view a subject from a different angle. Instructors should try to respond to
all initial comments by students in discussions and ask questions in responses to students to
encourage discussion at a deeper level.” (Fisher, p. 95)
“We have found discussion groups numbering seven or eight have worked best. Smaller groups
often lack resources and larger groups have difficulty working together due to logistical
conflicts. Our experience has been that the less teacher-controlled, the more indepth discussion
occurred. (Fisher, p. 95)
“Students can be provided with questions and activities that must be completed by groups rather
than individuals. The Web actually is an improvement over normal group-based activities
because what each student does is published in some way. This means that an instructor can
actually see who has taken an active part in the process.” (Leflore, 111)
Increased electronic communication can limit the capacity of teachers to deal with students. In
electronic conferencing, the content of the discussion can be poor and not all topics relevant to
the courseware may be discussed.
“early on, emphasize the use of thee WWW for communications. Use individual e-mail,
listservs, mailing lists, synchronous and asynchronous discussion areas to open as many
electronic channels of communication as possible. Students will develop their reliance on these
communication tools as use is modeled and encouraged by the instructor.” (Persichitte, 196)

Schott Thesis: How teachers can use web based resources and technology to increase student engagement and understanding

Schott Thesis: How teachers can use web based resources and technology to increase student engagement and understanding

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Schott Thesis: How teachers can use web based resources and technology to increase student engagement and understanding

Similar to Schott Thesis: How teachers can use web based resources and technology to increase student engagement and understanding (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Schott Thesis: How teachers can use web based resources and technology to increase student engagement and understanding