This document summarizes a study on using different web technologies to engage students' critical thinking abilities in a required writing course. The study found that blogging and a traditional argument essay were most effective, while wikis and in-class writing were least effective. Students enjoyed open-ended projects that allowed choosing genres like videos or blogs. Facebook groups constrained critical thinking due to its structure. Reflective writing provided insights into students' experiences. Technologies that restricted text or were unfamiliar presented barriers to critical thinking.

1. Web 2.0: It’s Social, Can it be Critical Too?Sarah BosargeUniversity of UtahELI Annual Meeting, Austin, TXJanuary 20, 2010

2. Abstract: Research suggests that our current generation of undergraduates work and play in many modes simultaneously via ubiquitous web technologies. We know they like them, but when used in a learning environment, are some modes more effective at structuring critical-thinking experiences than others? This poster presents the results of a qualitative study of students in a required writing course. Students participated in a class online network, blogs, wikis and Wikipedia, and turned a formal, academic essay into a web-accessible public work of their own design. The poster presents evidence about which technologies succeeded in engaging students' critical-thinking abilities.

3. Background Assumptions:Conference on College Composition and Communication (2003)“The focus of writing instruction is expanding: the curriculum of composition is widening to include not one but two literacies: a literacy of print and a literacy of the screen. In addition, work in one medium is used to enhance learning in the other.”Course based on the assumptions of this position paper: http://www.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions/digitalenvironmentsThe National Council of Teachers of English (2008)Twenty-first century readers and writers need to: Develop proficiency with the tools of technology

4. Build relationships with others to pose and solve problems collaboratively and cross-culturally Design and share information for global communities to meet a variety of purposes Manage, analyze and synthesize multiple streams of simultaneousinformation Create, critique, analyze, and evaluate multi-media texts

5. Attend to the ethical responsibilities required by these complex environmentshttp://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinitionhttp://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Press/Yancey_final.pdf

6. Study Context

7. Study Design:With the goal of improving interaction in a hybrid (blended) writing course, traditional in-class informal writing assignments were moved to an online environment. Various technologies were used based on the pedagogical goal of individual assignments. Students would be given credit/no-credit for completion of all informal assignments, so this presented an opportunity to evaluate the affordances of individual technologies with regards to demonstration of critical thinking without penalizing students for variation in the technologies. This study constitutes in-classroom teacher action research. It was naturalistic in the sense that very little instruction was offered in how to use the various technologies, so that students’ own paradigms for using the technologies were on display. Students had the option of meeting with the instructor if they felt uneasy with the technology but no students did. Furthermore, no students expressed anxiety about using any of the technologies and all students completed all assignments.

8. Demographics20 students in first-year academic writing (3 credits)Hybrid (blended) course9 women, 11 menMost prefer taking courses that use technology moderately*Most describe their overall experience using the course learning management system as positive*Most were neutral about whether or not IT in their courses improves their learning**students were given part of the ECAR Students and Information Technology in Higher Education survey

9. MethodsThe section was part of a pilot project of the campus Visual, Information, and Technical Literacy (VITL) committee. Students answered some questions from the ECAR Students and Information Technology in Higher Education survey.Students completed a questionnaire about their technology and learning experience in the course. Some students were interviewed about their technology and learning experience in the course. The instructor evaluated general trends in the way course assignments were completed with regards to critical thinking and completed a discourse analysis of reflective essays students wrote about their learning in the course. Codes for analysis were developed from the following rubric categories.

10. Study Rubric for Critical ThinkingFor the purposes of this project, “critical thinking” is demonstrated by the following: Thinking which is responsive to and guided by relevance, accuracy, precision, clarity, depth, and breadth. Thinking that demonstrates the development of traits such as humility, integrity, perseverance, empathy, and self-discipline. Thinking in which the thinker can identify the elements of a problem and make logical connections between the elements and the problem itself. Thinking that is routinely self-assessing, self-examining, and self-improving. Thinking that is responsive to the social and moral imperative to not only argue from alternate and opposing points of view, but also to seek and identify weaknesses and limitations in one’s own position.

11. Results

12. BloggingInstructor grade: B+ Students’ grade: C“Easy and convenient”“Interesting to see ideas I had not considered”“Some had great feedback; others not”“As I created it, the more I recognized the usefulness”

13. BloggingStudents were assigned specific writing tasks throughout the semester that were to be posted to a blog at a private social network (www.ning.com). Students were typically required to post comments to a certain number of their peers’ posts. Most students found these exercises “somewhat helpful.”

14. Many liked the opportunity to see what others posted but didn’t find comments given them to be very helpful. The instructor likes the ease of use of this technology. Students preferred the blog/comment paradigm over the threaded discussion paradigm. The instructor liked the flexibility of this technology. Students’ rhetorical choices are not constrained. The potential to demonstrate critical thinking is present in the original posts, comments to peers, and responses to peers’ comments.NEXT TIME: Provide more direction and modeling for how to offer constructive comments.

15. Creating a WikiInstructor grade: C- Students’ grade: C-“I liked doing it but it wasn’t helpful”“I had never worked in wikis and had a hard time understanding what to do”“It wasn’t bad, but personally I would learn more from a class discussion”

16. Creating a WikiStudents were assigned to collaborate on a wiki (at pbwiki) that would be a reference resource about characteristics of web genres. A list of genres was created in class and then the instructor set up the initial organization of the wiki based on this list. Most students were unfamiliar with wiki publishing and ended up just posting comments to the wiki instead of collaboratively writing and editing the content. Most students listed this as the least helpful of all the class activities. Some students did think the wiki provided a good resource for the web projects they would create later. The instructor did not want to take precious class time to teach students how to edit the wiki.NEXT TIME: Leave this assignment off the syllabus. Perhaps incorporate an assignment in the future in which students add to or edit Wikipedia pages about their research topics.

17. In-Class WritingInstructor grade: C Students’ grade: B2 students rated in-class writing “very helpful” 15 students rated in-class writing “somewhat helpful”“At the time they seemed like busy work, but over time the process was helpful as part of the big picture”“They helped in my writing but I put them off until the last minute”“They prepared me for the larger assignments”

18. In-Class WritingVarious typical in-class writing assignments (sometimes “in-class” actually means submitted through Blackboard’s assignment or assessment tools). Students are comfortable with these “traditional” assignments, but some students find them to be busy work. The instructor is bored by them and feels there is evidence that students are bored by them as well. Some students take them seriously, but many do not and dash off fairly thoughtless answers. By their nature they are one-way communication from student to instructor. They are not dialogic.NEXT TIME: Use in-class writing only to check understanding of concepts. Use more dialogic technologies to facilitate the practice of critical thinking.

19. Researched Argument SequenceTraditional EssayInstructor grade: A- Students’ grade: AWeb ProjectInstructor grade: B+Students’ grade: AReflective WritingInstructor grade: B Students’ grade: B

20. Argument EssayA traditional researched argument essay of at least 1800 words citing at least six academic sources. Addressing a counter-argument was a required element of the assignment. Students rated this assignment highest for helping them learn. Students took this assignment most seriously as being relevant to the rest of their education. The instructor was pleased with the demonstration of critical thinking in the final revisions of most students’ papers, especially with regard to addressing counter- arguments, and logical fallacies in their own arguments. Students are often writing for the instructor, so pairing with the open genre web project was a nice twist.NEXT TIME: Keep assignment sequence.

21. Open Genre Web ProjectStudents wrote a traditional researched argument essay and then turned their claim into a public, web-based project for which they could choose the genre. They also wrote a reflective essay about the rhetorical choices they made in creating the project. Completed projects included:2 videos posted to YouTube1 site created at wetpaint6 Facebook groups created6 blogs started3 wikis started Students enjoyed this assignment the most; most report that it helped them look at their argument in new ways. The instructor liked the combination of project + reflective essay. Some projects failed to reflect critical thinking but all demonstrated an awareness of audience and rhetorical situation.NEXT TIME: Keep assignment, but adapt to disallow Facebook groups as an option.