ARTICLE+TABLE

||  Yang, S. C. (2009). A case study of technology-enhanced historical inquiry. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(2), May 2009, 237-248. doi: 10.1080/14703290902844040 ||  Authentic historical inquiry using technology Yang, Shu Ching (Teaches at Graduate Institute of Education, National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan)  ||   Learning history from the text book does not provide opportunities for students to learn more than one perspective nor to think critically/analytically about historical events. ||  Qualitative/experimental Students in grades 5-11 did an independent study where they conducted interviews of elders. Small groups of students collaboratively synthesized their information into multimedia web pages. ||  Interviews with students, the students’ web-based projects, researchers’ observations, and surveys. ||  Categorical and thematic analysis. Categorical coding students’ responses as challenges or advantages. Then using surveys and observation to group by learning theories and web technology. ||     ||   Rule, A. C. & Barrera, M. T., III. (2008). Three authentic curriculum-integration approaches to bird adaptations that incorporate technology and thinking skills. Online Submission. 2008 30 pp. (ED501247) ||  Comparing academic success of different authentic learning techniques that involve technology. Rule, A. C., Associate Professor, University of Northern Iowa Barrera,, M. T. III, Ph.D., National Center on Educational Outcomes, Metropolitan State University, Minneapolis  ||   What are the strengths and challenges of different authentic learning models as it pertains to integrating thinking skills and computer technology? Specifically looking at content knowledge, curiosity, and vocabulary development. ||  Mixed approach. Compared three classes each taught using a different authentic learning technique: problem based instruction, thematic, and object box).         ||   Quantitative/qualitative. 3 third grade classes taught using 3 different authentic learning Researcher observation, teacher’s diaries, pre- and post-tests containing 3 open-ended questions and 7 multiple choice questions.   ||   Demographic data was collected. Pre-testing, intervention, post-testing was done. Then mean pretest, posttest, and gain scores measured Qualitative data was used for descriptive purposes; there is no mention of coding.    ||      ||   Gkatzidou, S. & Pearson, E. (2009). The potential for adaptable accessible learning objects: A case study in accessible vodcasting. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 292-307. (EJ847459)         ||   Adaptable accessible vodcasting; learning objects.      Stavroula Gkatzidou & Elaine Pearson, Accessibility Research Centre, School of Computing, University of Teeside, United Kingdom ||  The increasing need for educators to meet the needs and preferences of individual learners for anytime, anywhere learning. The instructional form must vary based on the need for different adaptive devices to accommodate for students’ different disabilities. ||  Qualitative action research case study. Problem definition and analysis (plan), development (act), trial and evaluation (observe), and consider implications (reflect). Adapted internet technology modules to fit mp3/mp4 devices. ||  Demographic questionnaires and Structured Interviews or written surveys (were used for deaf participants) ||  Used a member of group not involved in research to get more objective responses. After intervention interviews (1 hr)/written surveys with standardized questions were given. Questions were open-ended. Percentages were calculated for each response. Verbal and written comments were categorized into themes. ||     ||   Brown, C. (2007). Learning through multimedia construction: A complex strategy. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(2), 93-124. Retrieved August 30, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals. doi: 1288309701 ||  Multimedia construction and higher order thinking Christine Brown, University of Wollongong, Australia ||  How to teach and assess higher order thinking” using multimedia construction given the social demand for this type of education within the economic and technical confines in which learning takes place. ||  Qualitative case study looking at two groups of learners (one elementary gifted students; the other pre-service teachers) using multimedia to demonstrate their learning. It also examined the effects of graded and non-graded work. ||  Detailed diary notes on class plans, observations, student work, student interviews and surveys, video recordings, and multimedia artifacts. Also, teacher survey. ||  Based on feedback from external evaluators used AUTC Learning design technique which diagrams data. Also, thematic analysis of qualitative data identifying similarities and differences were presented descriptively and in table format. ||     ||   Murray, R., Shea, M., & Shea, B. (2004). Avoiding the one-size-fits-all curriculum: Textsets, inquiry, and differentiating instruction. Childhood Education, 81(1), 33-35. Retrieved September 6, 2010, from Career and Technical Education. doi: 723915711. ||  Differentiating science instruction Inquiry based approach Rosemary Murray and Mary Shea, Associate Professors, Camisus College, Buffalo, NY. Brian Shea, Adjunct Instructor, Camisus College and 6th grade teacher, Lockport, NY  ||   How to support inquiry and differentiated learning in such a way as to facilitate student interest in science and their content learning. ||  Qualitative case study of one researcher teaching an inquiry based thematic science unit utilizing a wide variety of print and non-print resources. ||  Pre- post-survey to collect data on students’ background knowledge and attitudes toward science. Summative end of unit test. Also ongoing assessment. ||  Pre-survey and post-survey results were compared. No statistical information provided. Also, a summative end of unit test. Noted that, based on circulation, the number of science books checked out from library increased after intervention. ||     ||   Salsbury, D. E. (2006). Comparing teacher-directed and computer-assisted Instruction of Elementary Geographic Place Vocabulary. The Journal of Geography, 105(4), 147-154. Retrieved September 6, 2010, from Research Library. (Document ID: 1140705081). ||  Geographic vocabulary acquisition Computer Assisted Instruction Denise E. Salisbury, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Ed, Ball State University. ||  The problem the researcher attempted to address was how to best facilitate fourth grade students learning of geographic place names in social studies. She hypothesized that teacher directed and computer assisted instruction would both be good methods. ||  Quasi-experimental research design with a qualitative component. ||  A pre- and post-intervention test of vocabulary, also formative assessments throughout the intervention. A pre- and post- survey. Interviews of students. ||  Pre and post-test of science terms compared using t-tests and ANOVA. Post intervention researcher conducted interview with students in all groups were conducted using specific open-ended questions to assess their attitudes. ||     ||   Putman, S. M. & Kingsley, T. (2009). The Atoms family: Using Podcasts to enhance the development of science vocabulary. International Reading Association, 63(2), 100-108. doi: 10.1598/RT.63.2.1  ||   Podcasting and Science Vocabulary acquisition Putnam, Associate Professor at Ball State University, IN. Kingsley, fifth grade teacher at Sand Creek Intermediate School, Fishers, IN. ||  Does access to podcasted instruction outside the school day improve student achievement? ||  Mixed approach/ Quasi-experimental with qualitative data. Researchers created weekly podcasts that experimental group was required to listen to in addition to classroom instruction. ||  Pre-test, weekly applications requiring use of terms, post-test. Student surveys. ||  Multiple choice pre-tests were used to compare prior vocabulary knowledge of experimental and control groups. Post-test scores compared. Used means and ANOVA to analyze results. Post intervention surveys used 4 point Likert scale and open comments section. ||  Abbie Brown, Dept. of Mathematics, Science, and Instructional Technology Education, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC   ||   What are the impact and potential uses of podcasting for instruction? ||  Action research approach using cooperative inquiry model. Reflection-action-action-reflection. ||  Qualitative data: emails, journals describing activities. Student written feedback. ||  Research group met and reflected during intervention via email reports, used GoogleDocs to share information. Coordinator compiled data into one document and identified themes and coded data. Then all members checked the coding. ||  S. Kim MacGregor, Associate Professor, Louisiana State University   ||   Students need support to develop research skills. How should teachers scaffold research learning? ||  Exploratory pilot project. Mixed method research – quantitative/qualitative. ||  Quantitative pre-test. Student collected information, free recall, and multimedia slide shows scored via rubric. Qualitative data: attitudinal scale –observation, and individual conversations -   ||   On a free recall end of unit assessment students earned 1 point for each correct fact; also earned 1 point for each correct free call; slide show scored via rubric looking for creativity, content, and organization. Analyzed mean scores and standard deviation. Attitudinal scales comprised of six adjective pairs (e.g., boring-interesting) were administered to students after intervention. Interview data was categorized. Individual conversations consisted of “talk about” Inter-rater reliability was analyzed. ||  *Note: original article 10 was not research based and therefore has been replaced with this article. ||  Digital documentaries    ||   The potential benefits of digital history in social studies have exceeded the real benefits? Thus how does the teacher’s pedagogic aim influence technology use and learning? ||  Qualitative case study. ||  Field notes, semi-structured interviews, focus group responses, and documentary evidence: teacher created handouts and student products. ||  2 different teacher’s were observed – one for 24 days of observation throughout semester and 2 - 60 minute interviews; other for 3 – 90 minute class periods with informal interviews at end of each class and 1 formal semi-structured. Both researchers coded data. Follow-up interview conducted to clarify questions. Quantified formative feedback teacher gave students. Quantified students’ learning based on their product. ||  Jan Strickland, Assistant Professor, Curriculum and Instruction, College of Education, University of West Georgia   ||   Compare the use of WebQuests with traditional instruction   ||   Quasi-experimental. Quantitative data using experimental and control groups  ||   End of unit exam scores to compare experimental and control groups’ content knowledge learning. Rubric for student products and teacher perceptions of products. ||  End of unit exam consisted of matching, true/false, and multiple choice items. Scores analyzed using t-tests. Since rubrics for two groups were different, conducted teacher interview to assess student high order learning skills. ||  Mark Hofer, Assistant Profession, School of Education at College of William and Mary. Kathleen O. Swan, Assistant Professor in Department of Curriculum Instruction at the University of Kentucky. ||  How do you integrate technology and still keep primary focus on content learning? ||  Action research. ||  Qualitative data collected via observation of classes and voluntary follow-up interviews with randomly selected students. Quantitative data gathered on students’ products. ||  Qualitative data was categorized and used in descriptive manner. Researcher analyzed student products for content using NCHS benchmarks and assignment guidelines. ||  Claire Bradley and Tom Boyle, London Metropolitan University   ||   Does the inclusion of multimedia learning objects improve student retention and pass rates? ||  Action research. ||  Quantitative and qualitative data. 4 student questionnaires, interview, and tracking data to determine number of uses and time of use. ||  Questionnaires contained Likert scale and multiple choice questions. First questionnaire at beginning of semester, then 2nd questionnaire completed mid-semester; 3rd questionnaire at end of semester. Students randomly interviewed. No information about type of interview conducted nor how it was analyzed, but did present percentages of different responses. || Retrieved from []. ||  Student generated video Matthew Kearney & Sandy Schuck, Faculty of Education, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia  ||   Teachers’ rationales, students’ learning outcomes, and ways in which pedagogy was enhanced through use of student-generated digital video projects   ||   Case studies. ||  Qualitative data. Questionnaires, observation of lessons, video of class activities. Interviews with teachers, administrators, and students. focus group with students. Artifacts - School documents re: rationale and use and students’ videos. ||  Prior to activity open-ended questionnaires used to collect demographic data, view about administrative structures, probe rationales for student generated video. Observation and video of classes – semi-structured schedule. Data was categorized according to research questions and analyzed for trends and differences. ||  Quantitative tool was a standardized Knowledge Monitoring Assessment paper and pencil tool to assess changes in science curriculum vocabulary. This tool was used with experimental and control groups. ||
 * Article Comparison Chart **
 * || ** Article **   || **  Topic, Author, Author’s Background  ** || **  Problem/Research Statement  ** || **  Research Methods  ** || **  Types of Data, Data Sources  ** || **  Data Collection Strategy and/or Instrument  ** ||
 * 1
 * 2
 * 3
 * 4
 * 5
 * 6
 * 7
 * 8  ||   Brown, A., Brown, C., Fine, B., Luterbach, K., Sugar, W., & Vinciguerra, D. C. (2009). Instructional uses of podcasting in online learning environments: A cooperative inquiry study. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37(4), 351-371. doi: 10.2190/ET.37.4.b   ||   Podcasting in online learning environments
 * 9  ||   MacGregor, S. K., & Lou, Y. (2004/2005). Web-based learning: How task scaffolding and web site design support knowledge acquisition. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(2), 161-175. (EJ690967)   ||   WebQuests and resource based learning and scaffolding instruction
 * 10  ||   Manfra, M. M. & Hammond, T. C. (2006). Teachers’ instructional choices with student-created digital documentaries: Case studies. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2), 223-245.
 * 11  ||   Strickland, J. (2005). Using WebQuests to teach content: Comparing instructional strategies. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2), 138-148.    ||   WebQuests impact on content learning
 * 12  ||   Hofer, M. & Swan, K. O. (2005). Digital moviemaking-The harmonization of technology, pedagogy and content. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 1(2), 102-110.    ||   Digital moviemaking and historical inquiry
 * 13  ||   Bradley, C. & Boyle, T. (2004). Students’ use of learning objects. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 1-8. Online.   ||   Use of multimedia learning objects to aid instruction
 * 14  ||   Kearney  , M. & Schuck, S. (2005). Students in the director’s seat: Teaching and learning with student-generated video. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2005 (pp. 2864-2871). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
 * 15  ||   Valkanova, Y. & Watts, M. (2007). Digital story telling in a science classroom Reflective self-learning (RSL) in action. Early Child Development and Care, 177(6 & 7), 793-807. doi: 10.1080/03004430701437252   ||   Student self-reflection using digital videos in science education   ||   Does allowing students to watch videos of their instruction help their metacognition and learning?   ||   Quasi-experimental.   ||   Qualitative and quantitative data. Observation, student narration,    ||   Researchers videoed science lesson. Then observed students as they created narration for the video. Video-recorded data was transcribed and analyzed focusing on five themes.