Web 2.0 tools

Center
for
Children
and
Technology

Integrating
Web
2.0
tools
into
the
classroom:

Changing
the
culture
of
learning

Daniel
Light

Deborah
Keisch
Polin

EDC
Center
for
Children
and
Technology

New
York,
NY

dlight@edc.org

June
28,
2010

This
research
was
funded
by
a
grant
from
Intel.®

Web 2.0: Changing the culture of learning

Executive
Summary

This
report
presents
findings
from
a
two-‐year
investigation
of
the
ways
in
which

Web
2.0
tools
and
social
networking
technologies
are
being
used
to
support

teaching
and
learning
in
classrooms
across
the
United
States.
With
funding
from

Intel®,
the
Education
Development
Center’s
Center
for
Children
and
Technology

(EDC/CCT)
interviewed
or
visited
over
30
educators
in
22
different
schools

throughout
the
country
as
they
employed
these
tools
in
their
classrooms
in

innovative
ways.
We
also
spoke
with
and
observed
a
number
of
students
in
these

schools.

Currently,
there
is
much
discussion
and
excitement
about
Web
2.0
in
education,

but
we
still
know
very
little
about
how
these
tools
actually
work
in
the
classroom.

Therefore,
the
goal
of
this
research
was
simply
to
interview
and
observe
educators

and
students
who
are
experimenting
with
these
tools
in
the
classroom
to
see
what

uses
are
emerging
and
to
explore
the
learning
affordances
of
blogs,
wikis,
and

other
Web
2.0
tools.

Over
the
two
years
of
our
research,
the
sample
of
teachers
was
drawn
from
the

Intel®
Teach
Essentials
course
and
the
network
of
master
teachers
and
training

agencies
that
has
grown
up
around
that
program.
Through
this
network
of

educators,
we
sent
out
a
request
for
volunteers
to
teachers
that
are
experimenting

with
Web
2.0
technologies
in
their
classrooms.
During
the
first
year
we
recruited

12
individual
teachers,
but
for
the
second
year
we
targeted
districts
with
larger

groups
of
teachers
experimenting
with
Web
2.0
and
were
able
to
reach
27

educators
across
three
districts.

Our
report
is
divided
into
two
sections:
(1)
a
summary
of
some
of
the
most

frequent
Web
2.0
applications
we
encountered
and
(2)
a
discussion
of
different

themes
and
issues
concerning
the
use
of
Web
2.0
tools
in
classrooms
that
emerged

from
all
the
interviews
and
visits.

The
first
section
of
this
report
presents
a
catalog
of
the
range
of
tools
that
we

observed
teachers
using
or
that
teachers
reported
using.
We
discuss
the
most

salient
examples
in
more
depth,
but
we
also
present
tables
listing
all
the
tools
and

defining
how
teachers
reported
using
them.
Web
2.0,
a
term
we
use
almost
every

day,
is
actually
an
ambiguous
concept
referring
to
a
large
and
shifting
set
of

technological
tools.
We
sought
to
solve
the
definition
problem
by
limiting

ourselves
to
the
tools
we
encountered
in
our
visits
and
grouping
the
tools
into

loose
categories
according
to
the
teachers’
pedagogical
goals
for
them.
Our
list
is

not
meant
to
be
exhaustive.
We
divided
the
resources
into
the
following
four

categories:

1.
Tools
that
create
or
support
a
virtual
learning
environment.

2.
Tools
that
support
communication
and
cultivate
relationships.

3.
Resources
to
support
teaching
and
learning.

4.
Tools
enabling
students
to
create
artifacts
representing
what
they
are

learning.

2

The
second
part
of
this
report
discusses
and
interprets
our
observations
about
the

use
of
these
tools.
The
initial
thrust
of
the
research
was
intended
to
identify
broad

themes
and
to
help
demonstrate
the
extent
of
Web
2.0
use
across
a
variety
of

classrooms
and
a
range
of
teachers
and
students.
While
this
project
did
not
aim
for

a
set
of
definitive
findings,
the
following
key
themes
emerged
that
will
be
a
useful

starting
point
for
further
and
deeper
research.

Our
overall
finding
is
that
these
tools
show
potential
to
transform
many
aspects
of

teaching
when
web2.0
teachers
are
thoughtful
about
how
they
use
the
tools
and

they
are
blended
with
careful
instructional
designs.

Innovative
teachers
are
using
the
networked
nature
and
ease
of
Web
2.0
to
create

virtual
extensions
of
their
classrooms.

Teachers
and
schools
we
visited
are
using
different
Web
2.0
tools
or
programs
to

create
virtual
spaces
or
networks
that
support
and
enrich
their
pedagogical
goals,

both
at
the
classroom
and
the
district
level,
and
increase
educational
capacity
by

extending
learning
beyond
the
physical
walls
of
the
classroom.
These
virtual

extensions
are
a
daily
part
of
teaching
and
learning
in
their
classrooms.

The
Web
2.0
tools
that
teachers
are
selecting
are
very
easy
to
use,
and
this
ease
of
use

appears
to
be
a
key
factor
in
the
decision
to
use
any
individual
tool.

A
salient
feature
of
this
current
generation
of
technologies
is
the
relative
ease
with

which
users
can
create
products
and
virtual
spaces.
From
teachers
creating
virtual

classrooms
to
support
teaching
and
learning
to
fluid
communication
among

students,
teachers,
and
parents
to
students
doing
online
activities
to
mashing
up

products
from
different
programs,
learning
how
to
use
the
technology
was
seldom

a
focal
point
of
the
activity.
Nor
was
much
time
spent
logging
into
sites,
designing

spaces,
or
dealing
with
“decorative”
aspects
of
creating
products.
In
fact
many

teachers
reported
not
using
Web
2.0
tools
that
could
not
be
embedded
into
their

own
virtual
spaces,
required
a
complex
login,
or
presented
any
other
type
of

roadblock
to
use.

Educators
are
using
Web
2.0
tools
to
promote
new
avenues
of
communication
among

teachers,
students,
and
the
community
in
ways
that
can
strengthen
the
community
of

learners.

When
the
assignment
is
meaningful
and
supports
the
learning
objectives,
Web
2.0

tools
are
being
used
to
increase
communication
(not
just
dissemination
of

information)
in
ways
that
strengthen
the
educational
community
and
help
to

center
classroom—and
out-‐of-‐classroom—conversation
on
issues
and
topics
that

support
and
deepen
learning.
We
examine
the
following
four
lines
of

communication
in
the
report:
(1)
communication
among
students,
(2)

communication
between
students
and
teachers,
(3)
communication
with
parents,

and
(4)
communication
among
educators.

As
the
networked
nature
of
Web
2.0
begins
to
blur
our
traditional
boundaries

between
school/home,
public/private
or
youth/adult
culture,
it
presents
an
emerging

challenge.

3


Web
2.0
technologies
are
fundamentally
reshaping
and
realigning
many
aspects
of

the
communication
loop:
the
people
with
whom
teachers,
students,
and
parents

communicate;
how
they
communicate;
what
they
communicate
about;
and
where

and
when
they
communicate.
These
ongoing
processes
bring
to
the
fore
exciting

opportunities
and
novel
challenges
for
educators.
As
schools
use
these

technologies
to
build
communities,
the
old
boundaries
between
public
and
private,

in
school
and
out
of
school,
and
youth
culture
and
adult
culture
are
melting
away

and
being
redrawn.

4

Introduction

Current
discussions
among
technology
advocates
suggest
that
Web
2.0

applications
have
tremendous
potential
to
transform
students’
learning.
Recent

surveys
show
that
although
Web
2.0
tools
such
as
Facebook,
MySpace,
wikis,
and

blogs
are
part
of
nearly
every
student’s
home
life,
these
technologies
are
barely

used
in
school
(Consortium
for
School
Networking,
2009;
Interactive
Educational

Systems
Design,
2009;
National
Center
for
Educational
Statistics,
2010).
Given
high

expectations
but
little
school
use,
experts
are
renewing
calls
to
do
qualitative
and

situated
research
on
Web
2.0
in
the
classroom
to
understand
better
how
these
new

networked
technologies
and
social
media
might
play
out
and
be
harnessed
for

student
learning
(Greenhow,
Robelia,
&
Hughes,
2009).
With
funding
from
Intel®,

the
Education
Development
Center’s
Center
for
Children
and
Technology

(EDC/CCT)
has
been
able
to
visit
classrooms
to
observe
and
talk
to
teachers
and

students
in
order
to
document
the
range
of
activities
that
are
emerging
in
U.S.

classrooms
using
Web
2.0
tools
and
social
networking
technologies.
To
learn
more

about
the
educational
benefits
and
challenges
of
such
tools,
we
conducted

qualitative
research
over
two
years
with
a
sample
of
teachers
who
are
innovating

using
Web
2.0
tools
in
their
classrooms;
the
teachers
were
recruited
through
the

Intel
Teach
Essentials
Course
V10
and
its
network
of
state-‐level
trainers
and

technology
coordinators.

Analytical
Framework,
Methods,
and
Data
Sources

This
project
represents
our
initial
attempt
to
explore
the
learning
affordances
of

blogs,
wikis,
and
other
Web
2.0
tools
by
interviewing
and
observing
educators
and

students
who
are
experimenting
with
these
tools
in
the
classroom.
During
this

preliminary
stage
of
the
work,
when
we
collected
data
broadly
relating
to
a
wide

variety
of
Web
2.0
use,
we
needed
a
framework
within
which
to
analyze
patterns

and
trends
across
activities.

We
developed
our
analytical
perspective
from
the
emerging
literature
on
the

concept
of
technological
pedagogical
content
knowledge
(TPACK)
(Ferdig,
2006;

Freidhoff,
2008;
Harris,
Mishra,
&
Koehler,
2009).
TPACK
suggests
first
of
all
that

the
instructional
design
of
technology
–rich
activities
is
crucial
for
success
(Ferdig,

2006)
and
that
specific
tools
work
in
particular
ways
that
may
or
may
not
support

the
instructional
objectives.
Second,
the
technological
affordances
of
a
tool
vary
by

specific
learning
goals
and
content
area.
In
our
descriptions
of
the
uses
of
Web
2.0

tools
we
encountered,
we
attempt
to
highlight
the
teacher’s
instructional

objectives,
the
affordances
of
each
tool,
and
how
these
affordances
facilitated
or

inhibited
those
pedagogical
objectives.

Our
sampling
strategy
changed
over
the
two
years
of
research,
both
in
terms
of

whom
we
interviewed
and
the
aspect
of
their
practice
on
which
we
focused.
In
the

first
year
the
sample
consisted
of
teachers
who
participated
in
a
professional

development
experience
promoting
Web
2.0—Intel®
Teach
Essentials
V10—and

the
research
focused
on
the
materials
teachers
developed
from
that
training.
In
the

5


Essentials
10
course,
teachers
are
asked
to
design
a
unit
plan
using
Web
2.0
tools

and
other
technologies
with
students.
Study
participants
were
recruited
through

trainers,
as
well
as
through
an
open

e-‐mail
request
to
teachers
who
had
completed

the
training.
We
collected
28
unit
plans,
from
which
we
randomly
selected
12

units.
Although
our
request
specifically
asked
for
unit
plans
using
the
Web
2.0

tools,
only
seven
of
the
12
teachers
interviewed
used
wikis
or
blogs
with
their

students.
Two
other
teachers
used
podcasts,
two
included
blogs
in
their
unit
plans

but
did
not
use
them,
and
one
teacher
did
not
plan
to
use
any
social
media.

We
developed
an
artifact-‐based
interview
protocol
about
the
Web
2.0-‐based
unit

plan
and
its
implementation
in
the
classroom.
The
interviews
asked
teachers
to

describe
the
lesson
activities,
note
student
reactions,
and
judge
the
success
of
the

lesson.
Each
participant
was
asked
about
the
use
of
Web
2.0
tools,
as
well
as
other

aspects
like
the
use
of
formative
assessments
or
supporting
21st-‐century
skills.

The
interviews
were
performed
face
to
face
when
possible
or
over
the
telephone.

In
the
second
year,
because
we
wanted
to
explore
a
range
of
tools
in
the
classroom

and
to
visit
all
study
participants,
we
decided
to
recruit
schools
or
districts
with

multiple
teachers.
Using
the
network
of
Intel
training
agencies
in
three
states,
we

recruited
three
districts
that
were
well
known
in
their
state
for
experimenting

with
Web
2.0
tools
in
the
classroom.
In
each
chosen
district
five
or
more
teachers

who
were
using
a
variety
of
Web
2.0
tools
agreed
to
speak
with
us.
Not
all
teachers

were
Intel
participants,
although
all
were
receiving
support
from
district

technology
coordinators
who
were
Intel
Master
Teachers.
We
spent
two
to
three

days
in
each
district
observing
classrooms
and
interviewing
teachers,

administrators,
and
students
about
Web
2.0.
In
the
second
year
we
spoke
with
27

educators
from
13
schools
in
three
districts.

During
the
entire
two-‐year
research
period
we
spoke
with
39
educators
from
22

schools.
The
sample
included
teachers
from
Alaska
to
Florida
and
included

classroom
teachers,
technology
coordinators,
and
administrators.

6

Findings

Our
report
is
divided
into
two
sections:
(1)
a
summary
of
some
of
the
most

frequent
Web
2.0
application
we
encountered
in
our
visits
and
interviews
with

teachers
and
(2)
a
discussion
of
the
different
themes
and
issues
concerning
the
use

of
Web
2.0
tools
in
classrooms
that
emerged
from
all
the
interviews
and
visits.

Web
2.0
Applications

Web
2.0,
a
term
we
use
almost
every
day,
is
an
ambiguous
concept
that
refers
both

to
a
large
and
shifting
set
of
technological
tools
and
to
an
approach
to
the
socially

and
technologically
integrated
use
of
technology.
Some
studies
use
“web
2.0,”

others
use
the
term
“social
computing”(Redecker,
2009)
or
simply
the
phrase

“digital
age,”
(Greenhow,
et
al.,
2009).
Some
of
the
touchstone
authors
in
the
field

talk
about
new
media
practices
(Ito
et
al
2008)
but
they
are
all
talking
about
tools,

ranging
from
blogs,
Facebook,
and
media-‐sharing
sites
to
platforms
such
as
virtual

worlds
or
virtual
learning
environments,

and
even
Web-‐based
applications,
for

example,
VoiceThread
or
Google
Earth.
In
addition,
scholars
often
refer
to
a
Web

2.0
approach
or
connectedness
as
much
as
to
any
one
tool.
For
example,
videos

have
been
available
over
the
Internet
for
years,
but
it
is
the
ability
to
upload
and

share
videos
on
YouTube
and
similar
sites
that
has
brought
video
into
a
Web
2.0

context.
We
sought
to
solve
the
definition
problem
by
limiting
ourselves
to
the

tools
we
encountered
in
our
visits
and
grouping
these
tools
into
loose
categories

according
to
the
teachers’
pedagogical
goals
for
them.
Our
list
is
not
intended
to
be

exhaustive,
nor
do
we
expect
it
to
resolve
the
issues
of
how
to
define
categories
of

Web
2.0
applications.
The
purpose
of
this
section
is
simply
to
review
the
tools
and

applications
we
encountered
in
our
visits
and
conversations
with
educators.

Our
presentation
of
Web
2.0
resources
is
grouped
according
to
the
goals
of
the

teachers
using
these
tools.
Some
tools
are
so
flexible
that
they
can
be
used
to

support
a
variety
of
objectives,
and
the
reader
may
therefore
easily
disagree
with

our
categorization.
Nevertheless,
we
hope
that
our
discussions
of
how
we
saw
the

tools
being
used
will
still
be
informative.
We
divided
the
resources
into
the

following
four
categories:
(1)
tools
that
create
or
support
a
virtual
learning

environment;
(2)
tools
that
support
communication
and
cultivate
relationships;

(3)
resources
to
support
teaching
and
learning;
and
(4)
tools
enabling
students
to

create
artifacts
representing
what
they
are
learning.
We
also
saw
teachers
using

devices—for
example,
iPods,
interactive
whiteboards,
or
Flip
video
cameras—that

were
critical
to
their
ability
to
undertake
many
of
the
learning
activities
we
saw.

We
did
not
specifically
review
those
devices,
but
they
are
mentioned
in
the

discussion
of
the
relevant
activities.
Tables
1
through
4
list
all
the
applications
that

educators
mentioned
in
our
conversations,
but
not
all
of
them
are
discussed
in
the

sections
below.
Appendix
A
lists
all
the
tools
and
links
to
their
websites.

1.
Tools
That
Create
or
Support
a
Virtual
Learning
Environment

The
teachers
and
schools
we
visited
used
different
Web
2.0
tools
or
programs
to

create
virtual
spaces
or
virtual
networks
that
support
their
pedagogical
goals,
both

at
the
classroom
and
the
district
level.
This
section
describes
some
platforms

7


teachers
used
to
create
or
support
their
virtual
learning
environments
and
other

tools
they
used
to
plan
lessons
or
create
virtual
materials.

Table 1. Tools that create or support a virtual learning environment
ActivExpression
basic application on the Promethean board
Blackboard
learning management system
DropBox
stores and shares files and folders via Internet
Edmodo
social platform and learning management system
ExamView
builds comprehensive tests
GoKnow software
iWeb
MyUdutu
Puzzlemaker
Quia
Raptivity
Sharepoint
Schoology
Trackstar

learning environment for mobile devices
Apple software for building websites
rapid e-learning authoring tool
builds puzzles
builds activities, quizzes, online worksheets
Microsoft collaborative work space
lesson plan storage/depository

Virtual
learning
environments.
A
virtual
learning
environment
(VLE)
is
a

software
platform
that
provides
a
private
(password-‐protected)
virtual
classroom

space
in
which
teachers
can
perform
a
variety
of
both
static
and
interactive
tasks

and
provide
classroom
resources.
A
VLE
system
might
also
be
known
as
a
course

management
system
(CMS),
or
learning
management
system
(LMS),
but
the

concept
of
a
VLE
is
used
to
emphasize
that
the
platform
is
a
tool
for
teaching
and

learning
as
much
as
for
management.
VLEs
provide
a
range
of
functions:

administrative
tasks
such
as
file
storage;
assessment
and
grading;
links
to
a
variety

of
activities
for
students;
and
tools
such
as
blogs
and
forums
for
communication

with
and
among
students.

For
the
teachers
we
observed,
these
VLEs
also
served
as
a
type
of
online

“homeroom,”
functioning
the
way
a
Web
portal
might
have
functioned
in
the

past—as
the
starting
place
for
most
of
the
online
activity
connected
to
a
particular

class.
Many
of
the
learning
platforms
had
built-‐in
tools
such
as
blogs
or
wikis.

Some
of
the
more
innovative
teachers
we
visited
had
course
pages
built
around
a

class
blog
that
served
as
a
central
forum,
or
central
meeting
space,
for
the
students.

Some
VLEs
were
districtwide,
that
is,
the
district
had
purchased
a
license
and

required
teachers
to
have
accounts
and/or
home
pages.
Other
VLEs
were
created

and
used
by
individual
teachers,
who
encouraged
their
use
by
word
of
mouth.

Examples
of
the
ways
in
which
we
observed
teachers
using
VLEs
include
the

following:

•As
a
Web
portal
that
connects
students
to
resources
(both
outside
and
within

the
VLE).

•As
a
way
to
stimulate
student
interest
in
a
topic.

•As
a
storage
space
for
student
work.

•As
a
way
to
track
student
progress.

•As
a
space
for
student
discussion.

8

•As
a
place
for
to
post
assignments.

•As
a
way
for
students
to
work
collaboratively
on
assignments.

•As
a
way
to
ensure
that
all
virtual
classroom
work
and
discussion
happens

within
an
educational
space
and
under
the
purview
of
the
teacher.

Of
the
three
districts
we
visited,
two
had
districtwide
platforms
(Blackboard
and

Moodle);
in
the
third,
individual
teachers
created
their
own
course
site
with
a
free

VLE
(Edmodo).
These
three
VLEs
are
described
below:

Blackboard
is
contracted
through
the
district.
Districts
can
opt
for
a
variety
of

tools
within
Blackboard
as
part
of
their
package,
so
it
can
be
tailored
to
a

district’s
needs.
Teachers
build
a
homepage,
which
links
to
different
tools
and

sections
(such
as
the
discussion
board).

Edmodo
is
currently
free
so
does
not
offer
districtwide
contracts.
Defining

itself
as
a
social
platform
for
education,
it
has
the
look
and
feel
of

Facebook,

the
popular
social
networking
site.
Most
of
the
action
on
Edmodo
happens
on

(or
through)
the
teacher’s
homepage.

Moodle
(Modular
Object-Oriented
Dynamic
Learning
Environment)
is
a
free
and

open-‐source
e-‐learning
software
platform.
Moodle
is
similar
to
Edmodo
in
that

it
emphasizes
classroom
community
building.
The
district
we
visited
that
was

using
Moodle
had
contracted
with
a
local
webmaster
to
use
Moodle
to
develop

its
VLE.

Other
VLEs
are
also
available.
A
technology
administrator
in
one
of
the

districts
mentioned
her
interest
in
a
VLE
called
Schoology;
however,
we
did

not
observe
use
of
this
site.
Another
teacher,
who
had
previously
used
a

number
of
Palm-‐based
activities
in
her
classroom,
was
using
GoKnow,
a
VLE

for
mobile
devices.

Classroom
management
tools.
We
found
that
teachers
had
very
positive

reactions
to
a
variety
of
administrative
tools
that
were
either
built
into
VLEs
or

were
separate
programs
that
they
could
embed
into
their
pages.
All
of
the
virtual

learning
platforms
had
student
accounts
and
ways
for
students
to
hand
in

homework
online.
All
of
the
teachers
liked
the
convenience
of
automatically

keeping
track
of
student
work
and
progress.
Some
teachers
were
also
using

automatic
e-‐mail
and
text
messages
to
remind
students
about
homework
or
field

trips.
Perhaps
to
compensate
for
adolescent
tendencies
not
to
tell
parents

anything,
two
middle
school
teachers,
in
different
districts,
were
even
using
built-‐
in
e-‐mail
notification
systems
to
keep
the
parents
informed
of
class
activities.

Quiz-
and
test-building
tools.1
Teachers
also
spoke
about
tools,
for
example,
Quia

and
ExamView,
that
allowed
them
to
create
and
administer
online
quizzes
and

tests.
They
appreciated
these
tools
because
they
offer
quick
and
easy
ways
to
check

what
students
know,
and
students
can
do
these
quizzes
as
part
of
their
own
self-‐
assessments.
Quia
allows
teachers
to
create
their
own
quizzes
as
well
as
other

1

Other
tools,
like
BrainPop
or
Study
Island,
also
offer
quizlike
activities
but
are
not
principally
test-‐
making
tools
for
teachers.
Those
sites
are
covered
in
the
group
of
Resources
to
support
teaching

and
learning.

9


learning
activities
(flashcards,
word
scrambles,
etc.).
ExamView
offers
a
bank
of

thousands
of
test
items
aligned
to
state
standards
for
language
arts,
reading,
math,

science,
and
social
studies.
One
teacher
who
used
ExamView
within
Blackboard
felt

that
it
really
helped
her
differentiate
instruction,
as
the
online
tests
and
bank
of

test
items
made
it
easy
for
her
to
test,
reteach,
and
then
retest
as
many
students
as

she
needed
for
any
level
of
her
content.
Most
of
these
tools
have
an
extensive
bank

of
test
items
that
will
automatically
update
or
refresh
a
test
with
new
items
if
the

same
student
takes
it
again.

Another
quiz
tool,
ActiveExpressions,
is
part
of
the
Promethean
board
package.
It

includes
a
handheld
device,
or
clicker,
that
students
use
to
respond
to
questions;

the
responses
are
then
collected
in
real
time
and
in
various
formats
(graphs
for

numerical
responses,
text
for
word
responses)
on
the
Promethean
board.
This

application
allows
the
teacher
to
check
students’
understanding
in
mid-‐lesson
with

quick
quizzes
with
automatic
tabulation
,on
the
whiteboard.
The
teacher
we

observed
who
used
this
tool
told
us
that
she
often
shows
students
pictures
at
the

beginning
of
a
unit
and
then
asks
them
to
text
in,
simultaneously,
what
they
think

the
unit
is
going
to
be
about.
This
approach
both
engages
students
and
tests
their

foreshadowing
abilities.

E-learning
authoring
tools.
These
tools
help
teachers
quickly
build
interactive

teaching
resources
or
lesson
plans
that
are
then
stored
online.
Most
teachers
we

interviewed
built
their
simple
resources
using
either
Word
or
Excel,
which
they

then
uploaded
into
their
virtual
classroom
space,
but
one
teacher
did
report
using

an
e-‐learning
authoring
tool,
Myudutu,
to
create
lessons
and
resources
that
she
was

able
to
import
into
the
district
Moodle.
E-‐learning
or
rapid
e-‐learning
resources

allow
teachers
to
create
simple
interactive
learning
materials,
such
as
worksheets

that
auto-‐grade
or
quizzes
that
adapt
to
individual
ability
by
changing
subsequent

questions
based
on
the
student’s
response
to
the
previous
one,
or
multimedia

resources
to
support
their
lessons.

Flipchart
is
another
software
tool
included
with
the
Promethean
board
that

teachers
can
use
to
create
interactive
presentations
for
students.
Not
only
does
it

provide
teachers
with
a
wide
variety
of
multimedia
resources
to
use
during
the

lesson,
but
the
resulting
flipcharts
can
also
be
shared
with
students
via
e-‐mail,
so

that
they
can
then
use
the
teacher’s
presentation
to
review
the
lesson.
One
teacher

showed
us
a
lesson
she
created
on
Flipchart
incorporating
music,
text,
photos,
and

videos
to
demonstrate
the
influence
of
gospel
music
on
jazz.
Her
students
had

never
heard
of,
say,
Mahalia
Jackson
or
Aretha
Franklin,
and
she
was
able
to
embed

links
to
audio
clips
of
these
singers
and
others
in
the
Flipchart.
She
said
she

couldn’t
imagine
teaching
this
unit
with
just
a
textbook,
and
that
this
tool
“brought

the
outside
world
in”
for
her
students.

This
same
teacher
also
created
unit
reviews
for
students
using
Flipchart
and

embedded
quizzes
into
the
review.

Document-
or
resource-sharing
tools.
These
allow
documents
to
be
edited

collaboratively
and
asynchronously,
as
well
as
making
it
easy
for
a
community
of

users

to
share
professional
resources
such
as
websites.
To
the
extent
that
VLEs

provide
places
for
teachers
to
upload
and
make
resources
available
for
students,

10

they
support
sharing
resources;
“document
sharing,”
however,
refers
to
a

technology-‐enabled
way
to
keep
track
of
a
co-‐authored
document
that
may
change

over
time.
Some
teachers,
for
example,
mentioned
Blackboard’s
document-‐sharing

capacity,
but
those
teachers
also
reported
that
it
was
easier
to
use
Google
Docs.

Google
Docs
allows
multiple
users
to
share,
create,
and
edit
documents
(in

Word
or
Excel)
collaboratively
and
asynchronously.
We
saw
students
using
this

tool
to
work
collaboratively
on
documents
for
group
projects
without
having
to

schedule
face-‐to-‐face
meetings.
We
also
spoke
to
a
teacher
who
used
it
to

provide
fast
feedback
to
students
on
their
work.

Delicious
allows
for
the
storage
and
sharing
of
Web
references.
In
the
first
year

of
our
research,
a
group
of
teachers
from
the
same
school
used
Delicious
to

share
websites
with
one
another.

2.
Tools
That
Support
Communication
and
Cultivate
Relationships

Two
central
features
of
the
classrooms
and
teaching
practices
we
encountered
in

the
course
of
our
observation
visits
were
the
range
of
tools
and
techniques
that

teachers
and
students
used
to
communicate
with
one
another
(and
with
parents)

in
new
ways
and
the
ways
in
which
this
intergroup
communication
fostered
a

learning
community.

Table 2. Tools that support communication and cultivate
relationships
online, chronological presentation of commentary
and information
Blogs
Microsoft product that supports communication
and collaboration
Communicator
Diigo
social networking bookmarking tool
Delicious
social networking bookmarking tool
ePals
online international learning community
Jing
social networking tool
Twitter
sending text messages via cellphone to another
phone or to a website
Texting

This
section
presents
some
of
the
tools
and
techniques
used
to
support
both
the

method
and
content
of
student-‐teacher
communication.
Our
emphasis
here
is
on

text-‐based
communication;
video-‐
and
audio-‐based
activities
are
discussed
in
the

section
on
tools
enabling
students
to
create
artifacts.

Wikis
and
blogs
are
often
lumped
together
as
Web
2.0
communication
tools,
but

our
observations
suggest
that
they
function
differently
as
pedagogical
tools.
Wikis

are
collaborative
writing
tools
that
permit
the
creation
and
editing
of
content
by

multiple
users.
Blogs
(“Web
logs”)
are
chronologically
organized
online
writing

spaces
that
can
be
constructed
individually
or
collaboratively.
Another

communication
tool
we
found
in
use
was
Twitter.
In
addition,
some
teachers
used

11


the
automatic
texting
feature
built
into
the
VLE
to
reach
students
and
parents
(see

section
on
classroom
management
tools
above).

Some
teachers
we
interviewed
described
wikis
as
having
a
more
research-‐
oriented
focus
than
blogs,
thus
serving
as
an
opportunity
for
students
to

collaborate
while
learning
content
or
skills.
Overall,
we
did
not
find
very
many

teachers
using
wikis,
and
most
teachers
we
interviewed
did
not
seem
to
think

them
a
particularly
useful
tool.
We
encountered
a
variety
of
wiki
tasks,
but
found

only
a
few
teachers
using
the
wiki
for
a
group-‐authored
document.
Most
teachers

used
wikis
in
more
static
ways,
essentially
as
a
place
to
store
class
documents.
One

elementary
school
teacher
used
wikis
as
a
format
for
her
students
to
collaborate

on
creative
writing
projects:
she
gave
groups
of
students
lists
of
characters,

settings,
and
activities
from
which
to
choose
and
then
had
the
groups
work
on

building
a
story
together
using
their
selections
from
the
lists.

We
observed
“static
wikis”
in
use
by
teachers
we
observed
in
a
district
that

required
teachers
to
have
a
wiki.
Most
of
those
teachers
had
created
their
own

VLEs
elsewhere
(e.
g.,
Edmodo)
but
they
were
using
the
required
wiki
on
the

district’s
site
to
post
the
class
syllabus,
rubrics,
and
accompanying
samples
of

student
work.
While
their
VLE
was
restricted
to
students,
the
wiki
was
open
to

parents
as
well.
One
teacher
we
interviewed
was
aware
that
this
was
not
a

sophisticated
use
of
a
wiki,
but
it
met
his
need
for
increased
transparency
with

parents
and
helped
them
gain
a
sense
of
the
caliber
of
work
that
was
expected
for
a

given
assignment.
He
felt
that
parents
better
understood
the
grades
he
gave
as
a

result,
particularly
when
these
were
lower
than
parents
were
hoping.

Blogs
are
chronologically
organized
online
writing
spaces
that
can
be
constructed

individually
or
collaboratively.
Outside
the
classroom
context,
blogs
are
usually

written
by
one
individual,
with
other
individuals
then
posting
comments.
However,

most
teachers
we
observed
did
not
use
blogs
in
this
way.
The
most
common

approach
we
saw
was
the
creation
of
a
classroom
blog
as
shared
space
for
students

and
teachers.
The
teachers
we
interviewed
characterized
blogs
as
more
of
a

conversation
tool,
to
inspire
interest
and
communication.
As
with
wikis,
we

observed
a
wide
variety
of
blog
tasks,
which
fell
broadly
into
classroom
blogs
and

individual
blogs
or
journals.

Classroom
blogs,
centralized,
teacher-‐directed
blogs,
were
often
found
on
the
class

or
VLE
homepage,
where
students
would
post
comments.
Often,
the
teacher’s
goal

was
to
generate
a
discussion
among
students,
via
such
comments,
in
response
to
a

teacher-‐generated
statement
or
question.
We
found
examples
of
blog
tasks
that

had
at
least
one
of
the
following
four
pedagogical
objectives:
to
elicit
prior

knowledge,
generate
interest,
support
student
debates,
or
provide
students
with

feedback
from
their
peers.
A
number
of
teachers
used
blog
tasks
as
activities
to

test
prior
knowledge
or
generate
interest.
For
example,
one
social
studies
teacher

used
a
blog
to
introduce
her
Civil
War
unit.
The
night
before
beginning
the
unit,

she
posted
the
question,
“What
do
you
know
about
the
Civil
War?”
to
the
blog
and

required
students
to
post
a
response,
as
well
as
a
comment
on
another
student’s

response,
by
a
certain
time.
Both
the
students
and
the
teacher
reported
that
this

approach
generated
excitement
as
students
posted
facts,
tried
to
outdo
one

another
with
more
facts,
or
disagreed
with
one
another
on
historical

12

interpretations.
Generating
hundreds
of
posts
in
one
evening,
this
activity
not
only

engaged
students
in
the
topic,
it
permitted
the
teacher
to
gauge
student
knowledge

and
misconceptions
prior
to
beginning
the
unit.
A
language
arts
teacher
in
a

different
district
used
a
blog
task
to
generate
interest
and
prior
knowledge
before

teaching
the
science
fiction
novel
Flowers
for
Algernon,
posting
the
blog
prompt,

“What
is
intelligence,
and
does
it
matter?”
After
conducting
a
spirited
online
debate

about
street
smarts,
book
learning,
and
human
dignity
throughout
the
evening,
the

next
day
her
students
started
to
read
the
tale
of
man
whose
very
low
IQ
is

artificially
tripled
but
who
then
finds
his

newfound
“intelligence”
quickly
slipping

away
as
the
effects
wear
off.

We
also
heard
about
many
blog
debates.
The
students
really
liked
these
activities,

claiming
that
they
were
different
from
classroom
discussions.
Students
felt
that
the

class
blog
allowed
them
to
participate
even
if
they
were
too
shy
to
speak
in
class.
A

blog
also
allowed
them
to
give
more
critical
feedback,
because
they
could
take
the

time
to
write
a
statement
that
was
critical
of
another’s
position
but
not
mean-‐
spirited.
Students
in
one
middle
school
class
told
us
of
a
very
heated
blog

discussion
they
had
had
about
whether
the
Iditarod
dog
sled
race
was
animal

cruelty
or
not.
One
final
example
of
a
blog
task
requiring
students
to
give
feedback

to
one
another
is
both
powerful
and
very
particular.
A
middle
school
art
teacher

spends
a
lot
of
time
helping
her
students
learn
to
give
and
receive
criticism
about

their
artwork.
After
a
few
weeks
of
face-‐to-‐face
“crits”
for
training,
she
moves

online.
Each
week
on
her
class
blog,
a
student
posts
a
digital
image
of
a
recent

work
and
self-‐critiques
it;
over
the
week
the
other
students
post
their
feedback.

Individual
blogs
or
journals,
which
could
be
public
or
private,
required
students
to

write
and
post
individually.
For
some
of
these
blog
tasks,
other
students
were

expected
to
comment.
From
what
we
observed,
however,
it
was
difficult
for

teachers
to
create
meaningful
educational
activities
using
these
individual
blogs.

Some
of
the
problems
were
logistical,
as
students
were
often
required
to
log
in
and

out
of
several
other
students’
blogs
in
order
to
make
comments;
thus,
not
only
was

the
resulting
communication
isolated
from
the
larger
group
and
often
inauthentic,

but
the
mechanics
were
frustrating.
For
example,
in
a
French
class
we
observed,
all

students
had
an
individual
blog,
where
they
both
posted
their
homework
and

commented
on
other
students’
assignments
on
their
respective
blogs.
Many

students
were
not
getting
credit
for
their
comments,
however,
because
in
order
for

the
teacher
to
see
them,
the
comment
first
had
to
be
accepted,
and
thus
made

public,
by
the
student
to
whose
blog
it
had
been
posted.
Most
students
did
not

remember
to
accept
their
peers’
comments,
so
the
teacher
then
had
to
create
a

paper-‐and-‐pencil
checklist
to
track
who
had
and
had
not
completed
the
task.

Besides
these
logistical
problems,
it
also
proved
challenging
to
design
a
meaningful

blog
task
that
would
motivate
students
to
write
posts
and
read
one
another’s

comments.
For
example,
in
the
same
French
class
students
were
assigned
to
post

the
French
names
of
three
favorite
foods
to
their
blog
and
then
comment
on
their

peers’
selections.
The
task
of
selecting
an
individual
blog
task
that
generates
real,

meaningful
communication
appears
to
be
very
difficult,
which
may
explain
why
we

found
that
the
most
successful
individual
blog
activities
were
tasks
that
only
the

teacher
read.

13


One
teacher
treated
private
individual
blogs
(not
accessible
to
other
students)
as
a

space
for
students
to
reflect
freely
on
their
classroom
experience
and
learning
and

to
promote
communication
between
herself
and
each
student.
She
required

students
to
post
regular
reflections
on
their
blogs,
in
which
they
were
free
to

express
any
and
all
feelings
about
the
class.
These
blogs
thus
served
as
the

students’
private
journals,
and
the
teacher
felt
that
they
were
an
effective
way
for

her
to
understand
what
individual
students
were
thinking
and
feeling
about
the

work
of
the
class.
In
another
example,
a
Spanish
teacher
we
observed
in
the
first

year
of
our
research
used
a
travel
blog
activity
for
each
chapter
of
her
textbook,

centered
on
a
Spanish-‐speaking
country.
She
had
her
students
blog
about
an

imaginary
visit
to
that
country.
Her
goal
was
to
get
her
students
to
write
in

Spanish,
but
she
also
liked
the
fact
that
a
Web-‐based
journal
allowed
them
to
post

pictures,
news
clippings,
advertisements,
and
so
on
as
part
of
their
blogs.

A
social
networking
site
is
designed
to
promote
communication
among
the

members
of
a
particular
community.
While
these
sites
are
quite
popular
for

personal
use
(most
students
we
interviewed
reported
having
either
a
Facebook
or

MySpace
page),
we
did
not
observe
much
classroom
use
of
them.
However,
many

teachers
used
the
VLE
to
create
a
truly
educational
SNS.

Twitter,
which
we
did
encounter
a
few
teachers
using,
is
an
SNS
that
allows

users
to
post
short
blurbs,
known
as
“tweets,”
of

up
to140
characters
in

length,
as
well
as
read
the
tweets
of
other
users.
These
messages
are
by
default

visible
to
the
general
public,
but
a
user
can
subscribe
to
other
users’
tweets,

which
then
show
up
on
that
user’s
own
home
page.
And
this
is
the
extent
to

which

the
community
and/or
audience
can
be
controlled.
In
our
research,
we

observed
Twitter
being
used
less
as
a
space
for
dialogue
and
more
as
a
way
for

members
of
the
classroom
community
to
read
and
post
updates
on
activities.

The
most
effective
uses
of
Twitter
we
observed
were
highly
supervised

instances
in
which
students
were
asked
to
post
with
a
particular
audience
in

mind—usually
parents—about
what
they
were
doing
or
learning
in
that
class

or
on
a
field
trip.

One
teacher
who
taught
a
gifted
and
talented
pull-‐out
program
for
students
in

grades
1
to
3
used
a
class
Twitter
account
so
that
each
group
of
students
could

share
what
they
were
doing
with
the
students
from
the
other
grades:
“They

can
see
what
other
kids
are
doing
in
the
other
classes.
First
graders
get
to
see

[what]
third
graders
are
doing.
My
first
graders
like
it
more
than
anyone.”

We
also
observed
Twitter
being
used
in
less
successful
ways.
In
one
classroom

the
teacher
asked
students
to
post
reactions
to
their
classmates’
final
projects

while
they
were
actually
presenting.
While
the
comments
were
positive
(e.g.,

“Nate’s
was
cool;
I
liked
his
diorama”),
they
were
not
very
constructive;
nor

did
students
appear
to
take
it
very
seriously.

3.
Resources
to
Support
Teaching
and
Learning

In
the
networked
world
of
these
innovative
classrooms
we
visited,
teachers
used
a

variety
of
Web-‐based
resources
to
present
material
to
students
and
engage
them
in

14

larger
conversations
about
the
content.
Unlike
the
e-‐authoring
tools
described

above,
teachers
do
not
need
to
build
such
resources
themselves.
This
section

presents
some
of
these
resources
and
provides
examples
of
how
they
were
used
in

the
classroom.

Table 3. Resources to support teaching and learning
Brainpop
animated, curriculum-based content activities
Curriculum Associates
online curricular materials
Google Earth
satellite images of the Earth
Grammar Girl
audio and text "mini-talks" on grammar
Holt Online
online textbook and grading system
Kto8.com
database of exercises that reinforce critical skills
Mountain
Math/Language/Science
skill building and test prep software
ReadPlease
text-to-speech software
Starfall
phonics website
Study Mate
interactive assessment activities
Study Island
online standards-based learning tools
SurveyMonkey
online survey tool
Thinkfinity
standards-based lesson plans and resources
YouTube
video-sharing site

Video
and
audio
resources.
Teachers
downloaded
these
materials
from
online

libraries
or
resource
repositories.
Some
of
these
repositories,
like
Teacher’s

Domain,
were
specifically
for
education;
others
were
general
audience
sites
such

as
YouTube.
While
many
of
these
sites
also
allow
users
to
upload
their
own

resources
(e.g.,
posting
one’s
own
video
to
YouTube),
we
did
not
observe
this
use

as
an
educational
activity
for
students
in
our
research.
We
mostly
learned
how

teachers
used
these
sites
to
bring
audiovisual
resources
into
their
classrooms,
and

we
noted
how
they
could
become
exciting
tools
for
learning
via
display
devices

such
as
interactive
whiteboards.
In
the
classrooms
we
visited,
the
technology
was

able
to
bring
such
resources
into
the
learning
process
quickly
and
seamlessly.

A
teacher
with
a
collection
of
well-‐chosen
videos
is
well
placed
to
take
advantage

of
a
teachable
moment.
For
example,
we
observed
one
teacher
whose
students

were
reviewing
literary
devices
for
the
state
language
arts
assessment.
A
question

about
flashback
and
foreshadowing
came
up.
The
teacher
quickly
pulled
up
the

Disney
cartoon
“Ugly
Duckling”
on
YouTube

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3t5BmU3uYQ)
on
the
interactive

whiteboard
and
had
the
students
identify
the
different
literary
devices
used
in
that

nine-‐minute
version
of
the
story.
The
class
stopped
or
replayed
the
cartoon
at

various
points
to
discuss
the
difference
between
foreshadowing
and
flashback
(as

well
as
other
literary
devices),
or
to
compare
the
use
of
devices
here
to
their
use
in

other
films
and
television
shows
(the
use
of
flashback
in
Lost
was
of
particular

interest
to
these
students).
In
another
example,
a
high
school
world
history
teacher

shared
how
he
changed
his
way
of
teaching
the
movie
Gandhi
once
he
obtained
a

digital
version
through
United
Streaming.
The
students
read
about
Gandhi
in
the

textbook,
but
he
uses
the
movie
to
help
students
connect
to
history
as
real
life.
He

likes
to
stop
the
video
at
key
points
to
discuss
events
portrayed
with
his
students,

15


and
it
used
to
take
him
over
three
days
to
go
through
the
entire
movie.
But
with
a

whiteboard
and
a
digital
version,
he
now
goes
directly
to
the
key
scenes
he
needs

in
order
to
set
up
the
discussion
and
shows
only
about
15
minutes
of
the
movie
in

class.
Students
watch
the
entire
movie
on
their
own
first,
but
he
needs
only
one

teaching
period.

YouTube
and
Vidler
are
free
video-‐sharing
sites.
TeacherTube
is
an
educational

version
of
YouTube
but
the
teachers
we
interviewed
used
the
general
site

because
of
the
far
greater
number
of
resources.

Teacher’s
Domain,
a
free
online
media
library
created
by
the
Corporation
for

Public
Broadcasting,
offers
material
produced
by
public
television
and

specifically
packaged
for
use
in
K–12
classrooms.

United
Streaming
is
a
subscription
site
for
video
resources
that
schools
or

districts
can
purchase.

Multimedia
resources.
Other
types
of
visual
resources
available
online
besides

videos
include
the
mapping
program
Google
Maps
or
earth
imaging
program

Google
Earth.
Google
Earth
is
an
interactive
satellite
image
of
the
entire
planet
that

allows
one
to
“fly”
over
the
Earth
and
zoom
in
on
any
spot
close
enough
to
see

buildings
and
cars.
As
one
zooms
in
close,
a
setting
on
Google
Earth
displays

webcams
and
pictures
tagged
to
different
places
on
the
globe.
One
history
teacher

we
interviewed
explained
that
he
uses
a
Google
Earth
“flyover”
on
the
interactive

whiteboard
to
introduce
each
new
region
to
his
class.
For
the
unit
on
Asia,
he
starts

the
flyover
from
above
his
midwestern
school;
spins
over
to
Asia
to
show
the

students
the
Great
Wall
of
China
and
the
Japanese
Islands;
and
finally
zooms
in
to

India,
then
New
Delhi,
and
eventually
a
webcam
showing
a
live
feed
of
a
particular

commuter
train
station
in
that
city.
As
the
students
watch
the
ebb
and
flow
of

thousands
of
people
in
the
station,
he
begins
to
discuss
the
role
of
public

transportation
in
the
social
and
economic
life
of
a
city,
which
he
then
connects

back
to
a
conversation
about
highways
and
public
transit
in
the
students’
own
city

in
the
Midwest.

Simple
games
and
skill-building
sites.
These
tools
support
individualized

student
reinforcement
activities
and
test
preparation.
Some
teachers
we
observed

were
able
to
use
these
tools
to
meet
students’
individual
learning
goals
without
the

students
themselves
being
aware
that
they
had
been
placed
in
different
ability

groups.
For
example,
the
teacher
would
direct
students
to
a
set
of
exercises
at
one

of
these
sites
through
their
individual
folders
in
the
virtual
classroom
space,

simply
assigning
different
ability
levels
as
appropriate
without
announcing
the

variations
publicly.
Students
were
then
able
to
move
at
their
own
pace,
and
the

teacher
could
easily
check
on
their
progress.
Here
are
three
sites
the
teachers
we

interviewed
mentioned:

Brain
Pop
provides
free,
animated,
online
educational
activities
(concepts
and

review)
in
a
variety
of
subject
areas
that
are
tied
to
state
standards.

Kto8.com
is
a
subscription
site
that
offers
skill-‐building
exercises
from

kindergarten
to
eighth
grade.
Game
activities
are
interspersed
with
the

16

exercises,
and
students
earn
more
“lives”
depending
on
how
well
they
do
in

the
exercises.

Study
Island
offers
online
test
preparation
activities
in
a
variety
of
subject

areas
;
schools
must
purchase
a
license
to
use
it.

4.
Tools
Enabling
Students
to
Create
Artifacts
Representing
What
They
Are

Learning

Web
2.0
tools
also
offer
a
variety
of
ways
for
students
themselves
to
create

products
that
reflect
what
they
are
learning.
Some
tools
are
completely
online,
and

students
need
nothing
more
than
Internet
access
to
create
a
document
or
a

presentation;
others
are
programs
that
can
be
run
from
a
class
computer
or
a

mobile
device
such
as
a
Flip®
video
camera
or
iPod.

Video
production.
We
found
a
number
of
teachers
using
simple
video
production

tools
to
allow
students
to
create
quick
video
presentations.
The
tools
ranged
from

Flip
cameras
and
Moviemaker
software
to
online
video
tools,
such
as
Newsmaker,

that
use
a
laptop’s
built-‐in
webcam.
A
central
feature
in
all
cases
was
that
teachers

sought
to
limit
the
amount
of
production
time
involved
in
making
these
videos.

The
teachers
using
these
tools
spoke
about
their
ease
of
use
and
specifically

limited
the
amount
of
time
students
spent
on
editing
or
production.
They
wanted

students
to
focus
on
content
and
learning
rather
than
production
values.
For

example,
a
pair
of
teachers
working
on
a
poetry
unit
with
their
middle
school

students
were
using
the
book
Immersed
in
Verse,
by
Allan
Wolf,
which
covers
six

genres
of
poetry
from
classic
poets
to
hip-‐hop
to
Goth
poets.
Students
were
divided

into
groups,
with
each
assigned
to
make
a
video
about
their
life
if
they
were
a
poet

from
a
different
genre.

The
videos
we
saw
were
engaging,
humorous,
and
to
the

point,
and
the
students
had
completed
them
in
two
class
periods.
Using
a
Flip

camera
and
a
quick
upload
to
Moviemaker,
they
made
a
short
video
in
no
time
at

all.
An
elementary
teacher
had
her
students
making
short
newscasts
about
the

Titanic
using
the
online
tool
Newsmaker.
Using
only
the
webcam
attached
to
their

classroom
computer,
they
finished
their
newscast
in
about
10
minutes.
Such

activities
provided
the
students
with
another
way
to
think
about
how
to
organize

their
information
creatively,
but
without
taking
up
too
much
time.

Newsmaker
allows
students
to
create
their
own
newscasts,
from
writing
to

recording
to
publishing
online.

Camtasia
is
used
to
make
video
presentations
for
teaching.

Podcasting.
This
tool
uses
audio
productions.
We
saw
a
couple
of
podcasting

activities
used
to
support
learning.
In
one
first-‐grade
classroom,
students
recorded

themselves
reading
their
favorite
story
and
then
uploaded
the
podcast
to
the
class

website,
where
they
were
able
to
access
and
listen
to
it
with
their
parents
at
home.

In
a
middle
school
English
class,
students
produced
audiobook
reviews
that
were

then
uploaded
to
the
class
website.
Creating
an
audio
version
of
their
own
writing

allowed
the
students
to
explore
the
difference
between
reading
and
hearing

information.
In
our
focus
group
with
the
students,
they
talked
about
having
to

17


rewrite
some
of
their
book
reviews
because
“some
of
the
words
didn’t
sound

right.”

Table 4. Tools enabling students to create artifacts representing what
they are learning.
Animoto
video production tool
ArtRage
painting and drawing software
open-source software for recording and editing audio
files
Audacity
Audio streaming
creates sound files
BibMe
creates citations
Camtasia
Frontpage
Microsoft web design software
Garage Band
Apple software for recording and editing audio files
Glogster
creates interactive posters
GoAnimate
cartoon maker
Google Docs
document sharing
KidPix
drawing software
Mixbook
creates picture books
Newsmaker
platform to make student newscasts
Notetaker
note-taking software
PhotoPeach
creates slideshows with photos, text, sound
Picasa
photo-editing software
Picnik
photo editing
Prezi
online presentation tool
Sketchy
animation and drawing tool
Slideshare
upload and share presentations
Snagit
screen capture tool
Tuxpaint
drawing program
VoiceThread
creates online slide show with text or voice descriptions
Wordle
creates graphics of word usage

Web-based
multimedia
tools.
These
allow
students
to
create
projects
or

presentations
completely
online
using
a
variety
of
media.
They
are
similar
to

PowerPoint
but,
because
the
tools
are
all
online,
it
can
be
easier
to
embed
links
to

other
websites
into
a
presentation.
We
saw
these
tools
being
used
for
final

projects,
as
a
way
for
students
to
demonstrate
what
they
had
learned
from
a

particular
unit.

VoiceThread
is
a
public
online
photo
documentary
tool
that
offers
the
option
to

attach
text
or
voice
descriptions
to
the
photographs.
It
also
has
the
capacity
for

viewers
to
comment
on
the
pictures
using
voice
or
text.
One
teacher
devised
a

project
for
which
she
asked
students
to
share
stories
about
their
home

traditions
using
photographs
of
objects
and
places
important
to
them.
Using

VoiceThread,
students
narrated
comments
discussing
the
photographs.
The

teacher
had
previously
assigned
this
activity
as
a
text-‐only
assignment,
and

she
reported
that
students
used
to
write,
on
average,
a
five-‐paragraph
essay,

about
a
page
and
a
half,
describing
their
home
traditions.
When
students

created
their
work
using
VoiceThread,
most
wrote
about
four
pages.
When
we

18

asked
students
why
they
had
written
more
this
time,
they
told
us
that

although
using
this
tool
made
the
writing
longer
[in
length],
it
was
“more
fun

to
do.”
They
said
that
they
“didn’t
think
about
the
writing”
when
using
this

tool.

Mixbook
creates
picture
books
from
users’
uploaded
photos
and
text.
It

contains
a
feature
that
simulates
turning
the
actual
pages
of
a
book.
One

teacher
we
observed
offered
this
tool
to
her
students
as
one
of
their
options

for
the
creation
of
a
study
guide
for
an
end-‐of-‐unit
review
of
language
and

grammar.
The
teacher
reported
that
one
of
the
things
she
liked
about
Mixbook

was
that
it
comes
with
an
embed
code
that
students
will
post
on
the
class

homepage
when
they
are
finished
with
their
projects.
She
can
then
go
to

homepage
and
click
on
the
link
a
student
has
posted
to
go
directly
to
that

student’s
work.

Glogster
is
actually
an
SNS,
but
we
saw
it
used
to
make
multimedia
posters

(glogs)
with
text,
hyperlinks,
images,
music,
and
video.
It
advertises
itself
as
an

SNS
to
promote
the
idea
that
there
is
a
community
of
creators
that
encourages

meeting
new
people.

Picnik
is
a
photo-‐editing
tool
that
allows
students
to
compile
photographs
into

a
slide
show.
One
teacher
showed
us
a
project
for
which
students

photographed
their
hands,
eyes,
and
profiles;
edited
them;
put
them
together

with
a
poem
they
wrote;
and
gave
the
finished
products
to
their
parents
or

another
family
member
as
a
holiday
gift.

19


Emerging
Themes

The
Web
2.0
applications
and
tools
that
we
encountered
were
seldom
used
in

isolation
from
other
Web
2.0
tools,
and
in
most
cases
they
formed
a
daily
part
of

classroom
activities.
Most
teachers
we
interviewed
and
observed
routinely
used
a

variety
of
these
tools
to
create
a
virtual
reflection
of
their
classroom
and
establish

a
certain
learning
environment
or
network
of
resources
for
their
students
that

helped
them
meet
their
long-‐term
pedagogical
goals.
The
following
discussion

examines
the
broader
issues
and
patterns
that
emerged
from
our
data.

Creating
the
Virtual
Classroom

Teachers
and
schools
we
visited
use
different
Web
2.0
tools
or
programs
to
create

VLEs
that
support
their
pedagogical
goals,
both
at
the
classroom
and
the
district

level,
and
extend
learning
beyond
the
physical
walls
of
the
classroom.
Throughout

the
districts
we
visited
we
observed
ways
in
which
these
virtual
classrooms
or

class
resources
supported
a
range
of
pedagogical
goals—from
educators

leveraging
the
communication
aspects
to
promote
the
social
construction
of

knowledge
and
collaborative
groups
to
those
using
the
spaces
to
connect
students

to
individualized
learning
resources.
The
most
innovative
virtual
classroom
spaces

that
teachers
created
fulfilled
multiple
functions:
static
elements
such
as
storage
of

student
folders,
the
syllabus,
and
support
materials;
more
active
components
for

students
and
teachers
such
as
forums,
blogs,
or
wikis;
links
to
individualizable

learning
resources;
and
even
a
system
tracking
students’
completion
of
online

activities.

Teachers
can
use
Web
2.0
to
create
virtual
spaces
that
support
classroom
community

building.

Some
of
the
teachers
we
interviewed
had
created
VLEs
that
functioned
as
an

extension
of
their
classroom
community,
with
a
focus
on
generating
an
ongoing

discussion
among
the
students
about
what
they
were
learning.
These
virtual

classrooms
used
interactive
communication
tools
such
as
class
blogs,
text

messages,
or
wikis
to
encourage
students
to
share
and
debate
ideas
or
to
work

collaboratively.

In
one
classroom
we
observed,
which
was
using
Edmodo,
the
teacher
and
students

used
the
virtual
classroom
constantly.
The
class
website
linked
the
students
to
all

the
online
resources
they
would
need:
a
class
blog
in
the
center
of
the
screen
was
a

forum
of
constant
communication,
and
students
could
collaborate
through
the
site

and
hand
in
work.
Students
knew
to
go
to
this
space
to
keep
up
with
the
latest

information
about
assignments,
as
well
as
to
communicate
with
their
teacher
and

connect
with
one
another
about
the
work
in
which
they
were
engaged.

Teachers
can
use
a
Web
2.0
approach
to
create
a
virtual
classroom
that
supports

individualized
learning
by
connecting
learners
to
a
vast
network
of
resources.

Other
teachers
we
interviewed
used
Web
2.0
tools
to
support
their
goal
of

differentiation
and
individualized
learning
by
creating
a
VLE
that
served
as
a
Web

portal
to
a
variety
of
resources
adaptable
to
the
needs
of
individual
students.

Teachers
were
able
to
tailor
this
space
to
students’
particular
needs
by
connecting

20

them
to
a
variety
of
level-‐appropriate
and
relevant
resources.
Students
were
thus

able
to
meet
their
individual
learning
goals
at
their
own
pace
during
class
time,

and,
if
desired,
in
their
own
time.
In
these
types
of
spaces
the
VLE
functioned
less

as
a
virtual
gathering
place
(less
evidence
of
blogs
or
other
group
communication)

and
more
as
a
conduit
to
link
individual
students
easily
and
flexibly
to
constantly

changing
resources
and
learning
activities.
This
type
of
virtual
space
can
act
just
as

much
as
an
extension
of
the
learning
that
happened
in
the
classroom
and
as
an

opportunity
to
build
capacity,
in
this
case
by
focusing
on
individual
student

progress.

In
one
district
where
we
observed
this
approach,
every
teacher
had
a
Blackboard

homepage
where
students
could
access
the
class.
One
teacher
reported
that

because
her
students’
reading
ability
ranged
from
a
third-‐grade
to
a
12th-‐grade

level,
for
her
the
ability
to
differentiate
learning
for
those
students
was
a
key

benefit
of
using
Web
2.0.
We
observed
her
class
of
seventh
graders
engaged
in

learning
stations,
each
using
different
technology
tools
to
which
they
connected

through
her
homepage.
Some
students
were
writing
a
short
skit,
another
group
of

students
was
sitting
together,
but
all
were
working
on
individual
language
arts

exercises
through
the
Kto8
program.
Although
the
students
were
working

individually,
they
remained
engaged
with
one
another;
they
talked
about
what

they
were
each
doing,
asked
one
another
questions
about
a
particular
activity,
yet

were
all
working
at
different
levels.
The
atmosphere
in
the
room
was
lively
and

engaged.
The
teacher
saw
herself
as
a
facilitator.
“Differentiation
is
the
key—and

[these
tools]
help
me
with
that.”
She
said
that
her
goal
was
for
all
her
students
to

demonstrate
competency
by
achieving
the
same
product,
and
believed
that
these

tools
provided
them
with
different,
individualized
means
to
get
there.
“All
roads

lead
to
Rome,”
she
told
us,
but
here
it
was,
“All
roads
lead
to
the
test.”
This
teacher

also
used
online
tests
and
quizzes
like
ExamView
or
Holt
Online
for
students
to

self-‐assess
and
track
their
own
progress.

Usability

A
salient
feature
of
the
Web
2.0
tools
and
this
current
generation
of
technologies
is

the
relative
ease
with
which
users
can
create
products
and
virtual
spaces.
From

teachers
creating
virtual
classrooms
to
support
teaching
and
learning
to
students

doing
online
activities
to
mashing
up
products
from
different
programs,
learning

how
to
use
the
technology
was
seldom
a
central
aspect
of
the
activity.

Web
2.0
can
make
things
easier
for
teachers
and
students,
regardless
of
technology

background
or
prior
experience.

The
Web
2.0
tools
that
we
saw
used
supported
teachers’
management
of
classroom

activities
and
materials.
It
was
easy
for
teachers
to
upload
and
update
materials,

and
equally
easy
for
students
to
download
materials
and
keep
track
of

assignments.
In
addition,
many
of
the
tools
have
features
that
allow
teachers
to

track
student
progress
(e.g.,
time
stamps).
Generally,
there
are
few
or
no

complicated
features
to
learn,
and
programming
or
technical
expertise
beyond

understanding
how
to
navigate
online
space
is
seldom
required.

21


Both
teachers
and
students
we
interviewed
mentioned
this
ease
of
use.
We
have

been
promoting
educational
technology
for
over
10
years,
and
in
earlier
iterations

the
time
it
took
to
learn,
teach,
and
use
the
technology
often
emerged
in
the

findings
as
one
of
the
leading
barriers
to
effective
and
sustained
use.
However,

when
we
asked
one
particularly
zealous
Web
2.0
user
and
technology
trainer
what

she
considered
the
biggest
impediment
to
teachers’
use
ofWeb
2.0,
her
response

was,
“They
don’t
know
it
exists!”
Another
veteran
teacher,
who
described
herself

as
a
“reformed
technophobe,”
mentioned
Web
2.0’s
“convenience”
as
a
primary

benefit
it
brought
to
the
classroom.

This
ease
of
use
allows
both
teachers
and
students
to
focus
on
the
content
rather

than
on
the
look
of
their
products.
Several
students
in
a
class
we
observed

described
how
the
seamlessness
of
using
Web
2.0
tools
removed
mechanical

barriers
to
their
writing
or
brainstorming
process.
While
using
an
online
Venn

diagram
program
to
brainstorm
similar
traits
in
characters
from
two
novels,
one

student
remarked,
“It
makes
it
easier
to
think
because
your
thoughts
can
just
flow.”

He
described
how
he
had
previously
had
to
struggle
to
write
clearly
in
the
tiny

spaces
provided
in
paper
Venn
diagrams,
whereas
the
Web-‐based
tool
simply

expanded
to
fit
whatever
he
typed
in.

Ease
of
use
is
important
to
teachers
and
students.
Teachers
make
decisions
about

which
websites,
tools,
or
activities
to
use
with
their
students
based
on
how
easy
it
is
to

access,
use,
and
embed
those
sites
or
the
final
product
into
their
virtual
class
website.

The
educators
we
spoke
with
worked
to
keep
their
technology
use
easy.
They
tried

to
avoid
websites
if
they
required
passwords
or
if
they
could
not
link
to
them
from

their
virtual
classroom.
For
example,
one
district
created
a
district
Moodle
site
that

allowed
teachers
to
set
up
a
virtual
classroom
with
an
internal
blog
and
wiki

capacity.
The
district
also
provided
teachers
and
students
with
accounts
that
could

be
accessed
through
the
Moodle
site
from
any
computer
on
the
network.
One

password
was
all
students
needed
to
access
all
the
virtual
resources
for
their
class.

Students
told
us
that
this
accessibility
made
a
difference.

The
ease
and
transparency
of
many
of
these
tools
also
shortens
the
learning
curve

and
supports
increased
use.
One
technology
coordinator
relayed
how
she
wanted

to
share
a
great
project
idea
she
had
developed
using
Audacity
with
a
teacher
who

could
not
come
in
for
training
after
hours
because
she
had
to
get
home
to
her

young
children.
The
teacher
didn’t
want
to
learn
the
tool
in
the
classroom
either,

because
she
was
anxious
about
the
amount
of
class
time
it
would
require.
She
just

couldn’t
imagine
learning
the
tool
at
the
same
time
as
her
students,
believing
she

needed
to
become
expert
in
it
first
so
that
she
could
help
them
over
the
learning

curve
that
she
assumed
existed.
And
all
of
this
just
seemed
like
too
much
work
to

her.
When
the
coordinator
finally
convinced
her
and
arranged
in-‐class
training,

after
the
session
both
teacher
and
students
were
confident
with
and
excited
about

the
program.
The
teacher
was
both
surprised
and
pleased
that
mastering
it
taken

so
little
of
her
(and
her
students’)
time.

Because
teachers
now
largely
believe
that
these
tools
should
be
easy
and
know

that
there
are
multiple
tools
available,
however,
when
teachers
or
students

experienced
anything
cumbersome
about
the
applications,
they
said
they
were

22

unlikely
to
continue
using
that
tool.
A
student
in
a
school
that
did
not
have
a
VLE

echoed
a
common
frustration:
“Our
biggest
negative
is
that
all
of
these
places
have

different
logins
and
it
is
hard
for
us
to
remember
all
of
the
logins.”
A
teacher
we

spoke
with,
who
often
used
the
online
interactive
poster-‐making
tool
Glogster,

reported
that
he
had
attempted
to
use
the
“education
version”
of
the
tool
but
had

experienced
more
glitches
in
that
version
and
therefore
preferred
the
“regular”

version.
Because
of
this,
he
had
to
use
a
public
tool
that
contained
advertisements

and
made
his
students’
work
publicly
accessible;
but
he
preferred
navigating
a
tool

with
these
drawbacks
to
one
that
was
vetted
for
school
use
but
still
had

unacceptable
kinks.

This
desire
for
convenience,
along
with
teachers’
growing
ease
with
these
new

tools,
is
also
encouraging
teachers
to
bring
in
new
resources
if
the
tools
provided

by
the
district
are
too
limiting
or
restrictive.
For
example,
in
one
district
teachers

using
Blackboard
deemed
it
cumbersome
and
used
different
tools
even
though

Blackboard
was
supposed
to
have
the
capabilities
they
needed.
As
an
example,
one

teacher
explained
that
she
used
Google
Docs
document
sharing
because
she
found

Blackboard
document
sharing
too
unwieldy.
In
another
district,
the
teachers
who

found
the
district
wiki
site
too
limiting
all
used
Edmodo
to
create
their
own
VLEs.

Communication

When
the
assignment
is
meaningful
and
supports
the
learning
objectives,
Web
2.0

tools
increase
communication
(not
just
dissemination
of
information)
in
ways
that

strengthen
the
educational
community
and
help
center
classroom
—and
out-‐of-‐
classroom—conversation
on
issues
and
topics
that
support
and
deepen
learning.

We
observed
this
benefit
in
the
following
four
areas:
(1)
communication
among

students,
(2)
communication
between
students
and
teachers,
(3)
communication

with
parents,
and
(4)
communication
among
educators.

Communication
among
Students

1.

Teachers
are
using
Web
2.0
tools
to
create
ongoing
conversation
among
students

that
appears
to
support
deeper
engagement
and
learning
of
the
content.

Most
of
the
conversation
we
observed
among
students
took
place
either
on
class

blogs
or
directly
on
the
homepage
of
virtual
classroom
spaces.
Teachers
were
thus

able
to
manage
and
monitor
these
conversations,
as
well
as
allow
students
to

engage
in
them
as
natural
extensions
of
their
classroom
dialogue.

One
teacher
we
interviewed
required
students
to
respond
to
an
online
discussion

prompt,
“What
do
you
know
about
the
Civil
War,”
prior
to
beginning
a
unit
on
the

Civil
War.
Not
only
did
this
ignite
advance
interest
in
the
topic,
it
allowed
the

teacher
to
get
a
sense
of
students’
previous
knowledge
of
the
topic
before
she

began
the
in-‐class
lesson.
The
students
used
the
space
to
discuss,
challenge,
and

explore
their
own
and
others’
knowledge
and
assumptions.

23


The
students
we
spoke
with
enjoyed
engaging
in
these
online
conversations.
Some

students
reported
liking
online
debates
because
the
format
allowed
them
to
gather

their
thoughts
before
entering
the
discussion.

One
elementary
school
teacher
who
taught
enrichment
programs
to
gifted
and

talented
students
from
third
to
sixth
grade
used
Twitter
to
connect
her
students

across
classes
and
grade
levels,
even
though
they
all
met
with
her
at
different

times.
All
of
her
groups
followed
one
another
on
Twitter,
and
each
group
of

students
sent
tweets
about
what
they
were
learning
for
the
others
to
read.
This

allowed
younger
students
to
see
what
the
“big
kids”
were
doing
and
enabled
all

students
to
share
projects
and
ideas
with
one
another.

Developing
an
authentic
or
meaningful
conversation
was
fundamental
to
generating

a
student
discussion
that
supported
learning
and
engaged
their
interest.
Attaining

this
goal
required
careful
selection
of
the
tools
and
prompts
and
was
difficult
for

some
teachers.

As
noted
in
the
Findings
section
of
this
report,
developing
a
blog
prompt
or
a

Twitter
task
that
fostered
a
meaningful
or
“learning”
conversation
using
these

tools
was
challenging.
We
observed
both
successful
and
less
successful
attempts
by

teachers
to
get
their
students
to
engage
in
meaningful
discussion
using
Web
2.0

tools.
Often,
the
prompts
missed
the
mark,
and
many
tasks
that
one
would
think

should
work
did
not.
Matching
of
the
tool
to
the
pedagogy
was
understandably

tricky
for
teachers,
particularly
when
they
were
experimenting
with
new
activities,

as
in
the
case
of
the
teacher
we
observed
who
asked
students
to
post
to
Twitter

while
classmates
give
a
presentation.
Another
teacher
asked
students
to
post
on

one
another’s
individual
blogs
and
created
a
guessing
game
to
try
and
make
the

comments
meaningful.
This
was
the
first
time
the
teacher
had
attempted
this

activity,
and
she
reflected
that
it
did
not
work
the
way
she
had
intended.

Teacher-Student
Communication

2.

Some
of
the
most
interesting
uses
of
Web
2.0
tools
we
observed
created
positive
shifts

in
teacher-student
communication
by
offering
ways
for
students
to
interact
with

teachers
both
privately
and
“in
front
of”
their
peers.
Additionally,
the
technology

helped
teachers
follow
students’
online
conversations
and
debates,
enabling
them
to

intervene
at
just
the
right
time.

Our
interviews
with
teachers
show
that
their
use
of
the
tools
extended
their

options
for
communicating
with
students.
Many
of
these
teachers
had
a
virtual

classroom
site
that
contained
one
or
more
communication
tools.
Embedded
in
the

sites
were
two
ways
for
students
to
communicate
with
teachers.
First,
students

always
had
the
ability
to
post
or
send
private
comments
to
the
teacher
through
the

site.
Second,
teachers
were
able
to
monitor
student
comments
to
the
group
blog,
so

that
students
could
pose
public
questions
to
the
teacher
within
that
space.

24

Additionally,
some
teachers
programmed
the
virtual
classroom
site
or
blog
to

notify
them
via
text
message
to
their
cell
phones
when
a
student
posted
a

comment.
These
teachers
could
monitor
the
conversations
in
real
time
and
also

post
their
own
comments
in
response.
For
example,
one
middle
school
teacher
felt

that
it
was
important
for
her
always
to
respond
after
the
first
few
student
postings

for
each
new
activity:

“When
the
first
kid
responds,
I
immediately
respond
back
to

that
kid
so
they
see
that
I
am
engaged
and
watching
them
so
they
know
that
they

have
to
respond.”

Web
2.0
technologies
can
create
new
ways
to
support
teacher-student

communication
outside
of
formal
class
time.

Teachers
we
interviewed
who
were
engaged
in
both
public
and
private
online

discussion
and
communication
with
their
students
saw
this
form
of

communication
as
an
opportunity
to
move
the
conversation
about
what
they
were

studying
beyond
the
textbook
and
beyond
the
walls
of
the
classroom.

One
teacher
we
interviewed,
who
received
text
messages
whenever
her
students

posted
on
her
class
blog,
mentioned
that
one
of
her
goals
since
using
these
tools

was
to
create
more
constant
conversation
and
discussion
with
her
students.

Another
teacher
believed
that
her
students
would
not
remember
to
do
an

assignment
if
she
didn’t
text
them
reminders
about
it,
and
she
saw
this
as
a
useful

tool
that
she
employed
often.

A
third
talked
about
the
importance
of
her
ability
to
be
constantly
available
and

was
happy
that
these
tools
just
expanded
this
availability.
She
remarked,
“Kids
can

contact
you
around
the
clock.
But
I
am
that
kind
of
teacher.
If
I
don’t
make
myself

accessible
I
am
not
teaching
them.
.
.
.
I
want
the
kids
to
be
thinking
about
learning

outside
of
the
classroom.
If
I
really
want
them
to
be
changing
their
lifestyle
to
think

about
learning
.
.
.
I
don’t
want
to
stifle
that.
.
.
.
It
does
give
them
more
access
to

me,
but
isn’t
that
what
we
want?
It
depends
on
what
kind
of
teacher
you
are.”

Teachers
we
interviewed
mentioned
that
Web
2.0
tools
allowed
them
to
feel
more

connected
to
their
students
and
provided
a
new
way
to
engage
them
in
class

material.

One
teacher
who
used
a
variety
of
tools
to
support
students’
individualized

learning
told
us
that
the
tools
helped
her
to
meet
the
kids
“where
they
are,
because

they
are
so
networked
and
these
tools
are
in
their
lives
anyway.”
She
went
on
to

say,
“Web
2.0
drives
their
engagement,
which
is
really
hard
to
do
otherwise.
These

kids
are
so
focused
on
television
and
instant
gratification
and
multitasking.
They

feel
like
.
.
.
why
would
we
do
just
paper
and
pencil
at
school—we
don’t
do
that
at

home.”

The
teacher
we
described
earlier
who
used
Google
Earth
and
webcams
felt
that
his

students
really
developed
a
stronger
connection
to
the
content
because
they
were

seeing
live
images
from
India.
Likewise,
the

Spanish
teacher
who
required
her

25


students
to
create
fictitious
travel
blogs
felt
that
surfing
the
Web
to
find
news

articles
or
current
information
from
Costa
Rica
or
Spain
helped
connect
students

more
to
the
real,
living
culture
of
those
countries
than
just
seeing
photos
of
art

museums
and
bullfights
in
their
textbooks
would.

3.
Communication
with
Parents

The
schools
and
teachers
we
visited
used
Web
2.0
technologies
to
communicate
with

parents
in
ways
that
gave
parents
more
immediate
information
on
their
children’s

activities
and
invited
them
into
their
children’s
learning
in
new
ways.

Web
2.0
tools
can
be
used
to
increase
transparency
regarding
both
the
practice
of

teaching
and
student
progress.
One
teacher
we
observed
used
a
class
wiki
to
post

rubrics
and
accompanying
samples
of
student
work.
While
he
was
aware
that
this

wasn’t
a
sophisticated
use
of
a
wiki,
it
met
his
need
for
increased
transparency

with
parents
and
helped
them
gain
a
sense
of
the
caliber
of
work
that
was
expected

for
a
given
assignment.
He
felt
that
this
tool
helped
parents
understand
the
grades

he
gave,
particularly
when
these
might
be
lower
than
parents
were
hoping.

Some
of
the
teachers

used
Web
2.0
tools
to
incorporate
the
parents
into
their

children’s
learning
in
new
ways,
either
by
sharing
more
technology-‐based

products
made
by
students
or
by
using
the
tools
to
involve
parents
in
discussions

and
reflections
with
their
children
and
other
parents.
After
a
lower
elementary

school
teacher
posted
audio
clips
of
her
students
reading
books
on
the
class

website,
she
reported
that
students
would
come
in
and
talk
about
listening
at

home
together
with
their
parents.

A
small
number
of
educators
used
SNS
technologies
like
Twitter
and
texting
to
keep

parents
updated
about
special
class
activities

Schools

still
seem
to
be
wary
of
technologies
such
as
Twitter,
and
we
found
this

tools
in
use
in
only
a
few
instances.
Twitter
and
texting
(the
latter
being
much

more
widespread
in
teacher-‐student
interaction
than
in
teacher-‐parent

communication)
were
used
in
similar
ways:
to
push
quick
updates
or
reminders
to

parents
about
school
or
classroom
activities.
A
middle
school
teacher
we

interviewed
had
set
up
Twitter
accounts
for
her
classes
so
that
parents
could
sign

up
to
follow
their
child’s
class.
She
used
Twitter
to
remind
parents
about
field
trips

or
special
presentations
that
the
students
might
be
making.
Generally,
the
teacher

always
worked
with
the
students
to
decide
what
to
tweet
to
the
parents
and
to

draft
the
message.

4.
Communication
among
Educators

A
few
schools
also
used
Web
2.0
communication
tools
as
an
addition
to
their

professional
development
and
professional
community-building
activities.

26

The
activities
we
observed
were
different
from
the
online
professional

development
courses
in
which
some
of
the
districts
were
involved,
and
were
less

formal
instances
of
professional
support.
For
example,
at
one
school
the
principal

hosts
an
online
reading
group
using
a
blog.
Every
semester,
on
a
volunteer
basis,
a

group
of
teachers
pick
a
book
that
is
relevant
to
their
teaching,
which
they
read

and
discuss
throughout
the
semester.
The
teachers
have
added
a
shared
blog
space

where
teachers
respond
to
a
guiding
question.
This
allows
teachers
to
stay
on
track

even
if
they
miss
a
section,
but
it
also
changes
the
dynamic
among
the
teachers
to

strengthen
their
professional
community
and
create
ways
for
teachers
who
don’t

often
meet
to
support
one
another
by
sharing
lesson
ideas
or
intervention

strategies.
The
principal
commented
that
teachers
whose
classrooms
are
at

different
ends
of
the
building
are
now
beginning
to
share
ideas
and
talk
about

visiting
each
other’s
classrooms
in
person.

Blurring
Boundaries

Web
2.0
technologies
are
reshaping
and
realigning
many
aspects
of

the

communication
loop:
the
people
with
whom
teachers,
students,
and
parents

communicate;
what
they
communicate
about;
and
where
and
when
they

communicate.
These
ongoing
processes
bring
to
the
fore
exciting
opportunities

and
novel
challenges
for
educators.
As
schools
use
these
technologies
to
build

communities,
the
old
boundaries
between
public
and
private,
in
school
and
out
of

school,
and
youth
culture
and
adult
culture
are
melting
away
and
being
redrawn.

Issues
of
privacy,
anonymity,
tolerance,
ownership,
and
student
voice
are
complex

concerns
that
teachers
must
consider
when
using
SNS
tools.

The
public
nature
of
many
SNS
tools
is
an
issue
of
concern
for
some
teachers.
Some

expressed
concerns
about
student
voice
and
the
ability
to
encourage
students
to

speak
freely,
yet
appropriately,
while
ensuring
that
they
would
not
face
negative

consequences.
Teachers
were
concerned
about
students
who
might
feel
too

inhibited
to
speak
their
mind,
as
well
as
about
repercussions
for
those
who

expressed
their
viewpoints
freely.
For
example,
one
creative
writing
teacher

abandoned
the
class
blog,
reporting
that
she
works
hard
to
get
her
students
to

trust
her
to
read
their
intimate
writing
and
found
that
blogging
undermined
that

trust
and
inhibited
her
students.
Another
teacher
attempted
to
conduct
a
project

on
bullying,
but
her
students
would
not
freely
engage
in
a
blogging
activity
about

when
they
had
been
bullied
or
had
seen
bullying.

Other
schools
relied
on
strict
filtering
systems
in
an
attempt
to
avoid
some
of
the

ambiguity
around
this
issue.
In
some
cases
these
decisions
were
made
for
the

teachers
at
the
district
level,
or
even
at
the
federal
level
as
part
of
a
funding

requirement.
In
one
district
the
leadership
seemed
frustrated
by
the
strict
filtering

set
as
a
condition
for
federal
funding.
“I
personally
believe
that
it
is
more

important
to
educate
people
to
navigate
it
all
rather
than
prevent
them
from
going

there
in
the
first
place,”
noted
one
administrator.
An
art
teacher
in
that
same

district
mentioned
the
drawbacks
of
the
filtering
system,
commenting
that
she

27


would
like
to
have
access
to
more
online
image
databases,
but
that
many
are

restricted.
She
reported
that
she
had
argued
her
case
with
the
district,
mentioning

that
even
her
textbooks
have
some
nudity
in
the
images,
but
the
filter
was
not

usually
lifted.

Some
trends
seem
to
be
emerging
with
regard
to
the
way
virtual
space
is

perceived,
the
goals
of
using
Web
2.0
tools,
and
the
perceptions
of
how
tightly
the

spaces
should
be
controlled.
For
example,
teachers
who
used
virtual
classroom

spaces
in
which
the
online
community
was
simply
an
extension
of
the
existing

classroom
community
did
not
often
share
these
concerns.
These
teachers
had
built

strong
in-‐class
communities
and
had
intentionally
and
carefully
carried
that

achievement
over
into
their
online
environments.
Students
in
these
classes

extended
their
in-‐class
modes
of
behavior
to
the
online
learning
environments;

they
did
not
mistake
these
spaces
as
places
for
social
and
personal
interactions,

but
rather
saw
them
as
belonging
to
the
classroom
and
thus
limited
their
use
of

them
to
learning
activities.
In
environments
where
the
tools
are
seen
more
as
a

way
to
connect
students
to
resources,
with
a
focus
on
individualization
rather
than

community
building,
educators
appeared
more
concerned
about
regulating

student
behavior
in
online
space.
These
themes
would
benefit
from
further

exploration
and
unpacking
through
future
research.

Most
teachers
and
schools
reported
limiting
students’
ability
to
post
private

comments
or
send
personal
e-mails
to
one
another
inside
the
virtual
classroom
in

order
to
ensure
a
safe
and
comfortable
learning
environment,
free
of
bullying.
Nearly

all
student-to-student
communication
happened
in
communal
spaces,
under
the

supervision
of
teachers.

Teachers
who
were
comfortable
and
sophisticated
users
of
online
classroom
space

were
quite
intentional
about
their
management
of
that
space.
In
most
of
the

classrooms
we
visited,
private
online
student-‐to-‐student
communication
was

restricted.
Teachers
did
not
have
to
worry
about
students
engaging
in
potentially

negative
communication,
because,
just
as
in
their
classroom,
they
were
a
constant

presence
and
were
in
control
of
the
means
of
communication,
which
was
always

“public,”
that
is,
under
their
supervision.
This
approach
did
not
mean
that
the

teachers
was
always
online,
but
rather
that
all
communication
from
students
was

stored
and
easily
visible
to
the
teacher
whenever
needed.
One
district,
for
example,

had
a
policy
that
all
student
communication
must
be
archivable
and
searchable
by

teachers,
which
meant
that
it
did
not
allow
student
e-‐mail.

Teachers
were
also
intentional
about
translating
their
expectations
of
students’

comments
in
educational
space,
and
they
understood
that
constructive

communication
might
have
to
be
modeled,
just
as
it
would
in
a
face-‐to-‐face
or

handwritten
interaction.
For
example,
one
art
teacher
we
observed
reminded

students
of
the
difference
between
blogs
and
their
online
journals:
She
emphasized

that
only
she
would
read
their
journals,
so
they
were
free
to
write
things
there
that

they
might
not
want
the
rest
of
the
class
to
see,
whereas
everyone
would
read
the

blog.
This
same
teacher,
who
required
students
to
blog
art
critiques
of
one

28

another’s
work,
reported
spending
six
weeks
at
the
outset
of
the
year
modeling

how
to
do
this
constructively.
She
also
made
sure
that
she
commented
at
least
once

on
everyone’s
blog
“so
they
know
[I’m]
looking.”

Most
of
the
teachers
we
interviewed
also
saw
a
clear
separation
between
what

they
had
control
over
(the
educational
space
they
created
and
the
learning
that

happened
within
it)
and
what
they
didn’t
(how
students
communicated
with
one

another
outside
of
class
time
and
class
space,
whether
in
person
or
online).

Students
made
clear
distinctions
between
their
virtual
classroom
community
and

their
other
Web
2.0
virtual
presences.
It
is
important
for
educators
to
keep
these

distinctions
in
mind
to
use
the
virtual
classroom
effectively
for
educational
purposes.

Although
they
enjoyed
their
Web
2.0
learning
activities
and
participation
in
the

virtual
classroom
community,
the
students
we
interviewed
made
clear
distinctions

between
this
community
and
their
personal
activities
on
social
networks
such
as

Facebook.
In
fact,
some
students
identified
three
distinct
virtual
communities
that

overlapped
in
their
lives:
the
classroom
network
of
their
fellow
students,
the
social

network
of
their
school
and
neighborhood
friends,
and
a
third,
private,
virtual

community
of
people
they
knew
only
online.
In
a
classroom
conversation
about
the

similarities
and
differences
between
their
class
Moodle
and
Facebook,
one
student

said
that
she
also
had
a
Fanfiction.net
account
where
she
posted
her
artwork
and

writings,
but
added,
“No
one
here
is
ever
going
to
see
it.”
Her
visitors
to
this
site

came
from
all
over
the
world,
yet
she
kept
it
hidden
from
her
fellow
students
and

friends
at
school.
The
students
recognized
that
there
were
different
expectations

and
rules
within
each
sphere.

Whether
in
online
debates
or
in
creative
projects,
students’
work
is
shaped
by
the

knowledge
that
it
will
be
seen
by
their
classroom
community.

Students
are
aware
that
whatever
they
post
in
a
virtual
classroom
space
is
shared

by
the
teacher
and
by
their
classmates.
Instead
of
viewing
this
as
limiting,
they

understand
that
this
is
what
happens
in
a
virtual
educational
space,
as
opposed
to

an
online
social
space;
some
students
we
interviewed
felt
that
it
made
them
more

thoughtful
about
the
work
that
they
did
post.

Second-‐grade
students
engaged
in
an
educational
videocasting
project
stated
that

they
“had
to
practice
and
talk
well[sic]”
because
they
did
not
want
to
embarrass

themselves
on
video,
so
they
really
thought
about
what
they
were
doing
and

saying.

29


Conclusion

Like
a
naturalist
exploring
an
undiscovered
forest,
our
initial
objective
for
this

research
was
exploratory:
to
just
go
out
and
collect
examples
of
how
teachers
are

integrating
Web
2.0
tools
into
the
classroom.
Although
we
cannot
yet
offer
any

definitive
conclusions,
a
number
of
hypotheses
emerged
from
the
data.
While
this

study
suggests
great
potential
for
these
tools,
it
also
demonstrates
that
careful

planning
is
required
to
align
instructional
activities
and
the
affordances
of
these

tools.
Teachers
need
to
design
activities
in
which
the
communication
facilitated
by

the
Web
2.0
tools
is
meaningful
and
relates
to
students’
learning
of
the
content
or

to
their
own
lives.
But
when
the
communication
is
useful
for
a
larger
or
more

authentic
goal,
the
students’
use
of
the
tools
promotes
different
student
and

teacher
relationships.
Additionally,
the
way
in
which
these
networked
tools
blur

older
boundaries
between
public
and
private,
school
and
home
requires
more

reflection
and
research.

One
of
the
most
salient
themes,
consistent
among
more
sophisticated
users
across

all
of
our
sites,
is
that
we
are
perhaps
beginning
to
see
a
Web
2.0
approach
or

mentality.
It
may
not
be
the
tool
itself
that
defines
Web
2.0,
but
how
it
is
used
to

support
teaching
and
learning,
both
in
individual
classrooms
and
as
part
of
a

school’s
or
district’s
larger
vision.
All
the
tools
employed
within
this
approach
do

not
necessarily
have
to
be
what
immediately
comes
to
mind
when
one
thinks
of

“Web
2.0”
(e.g.,
blogs
and
wikis).
However,
the
philosophy
that
has
developed

through
the
use
of
these
tools
embraces
a
Web
2.0
mentality.
The
tools
are

interactive,
they
can
by
used
asynchronously,
they
are
collected
together
as
a
suite

of
resources
within
a
virtual
platform,
and
teachers
are
integrating
them

seamlessly
into
their
classrooms
to
extend
and
deepen
the
educational

environment.

30

Bibliography

Consortium
for
School
Networking.
(2009).
Leadership
for
Web
2.0
in
Education:

Promise
and
Reality.
Alexandria,
VA:
Consortium
for
School
Networking.

Ferdig,
R.
E.
(2006).
Assessing
technologies
for
teaching
and
learning:

understanding
the
importance
of
technological
pedagogical
content

knowledge.
British
Journal
of
Educational
Technology,
37(5),
749-‐760.

Freidhoff,
J.
R.
(2008).
Reflecting
on
the
Affordances
and
Constraints
of

Technologies
and
Their
Impact
on
Pedagogical
Goals.
Journal
of
Computing

in
Teacher
Education,
24(4),
117-‐122.

Greenhow,
C.,
Robelia,
B.,
&
Hughes,
J.
E.
(2009).
Learning,
Teaching,
and

Scholarship
in
a
Digital
Age:
Web
2.0
and
Classroom
Research:
What
Path

Should
We
Take
Now?
Educational
Researcher,
38(4),
246-‐259.

Harris,
J.,
Mishra,
P.,
&
Koehler,
M.
(2009).
Teachers'
Technological
Pedagogical

Content
Knowledge
and
Learning
Activity
Types:
Curriculum-‐based

Technology
Integration
Reframed.
Journal
of
Research
on
Technology
in

Education,
41(4),
393-‐416.

Interactive
Educational
Systems
Design.
(2009).
Safe
Schools
in
a
Web
2.0
World

Initiative
National
Online
Survey
of
District
Technology
Directors
Exploring

District
Use
of
Web
2.0
Technologies
(pp.
73).
New
York:
IESD.

National
Center
for
Educational
Statistics.
(2010).
Teachers’
Use
of
Educational

Technology
in
U.S.
Public
Schools:
2009.
Washington,
D.C.:
National
Center

for
Education
Statistics,
Institute
of
Education
Sciences,
U.S.
Department
of

Education.

Redecker,
C.
(2009).
Review
of
Learning
2.0
Practices:
Study
on
the
Impact
of
Web

2.0
Innovations
on
Education
and
Training
in
Europe
(pp.
188).
Spain:

European
Commission,
Joint
Research
Centre,
Institute
for
Prospective

Technological
Studies.

31


Appendix

Tools that create or support a virtual learning environment
Application
Description
URL
Edmodo
social platform and learning
http://www.edmodo.com/
management system
Blackboard
http://www.blackboard.com/
Quia
builds activities, quizzes, online http://www.quia.com/
worksheets
GoKnow software a learning environment for
http://www.goknow.com/
mobile devices
ExamView
builds comprehensive tests
http://www.einstruction.com/pr
oducts/assessment/examview/in
dex.html
iWeb
Apple software for building
http://www.apple.com/ilife/iweb
websites
/
Trackstar
lesson plan storage/depository
http://trackstar.4teachers.org/tr
ackstar/
ActivExpression
basic application on the
http://www.prometheanworld.co
Promethean board
m/server.php?show=nav.15997
Sharepoint
Microsoft collaborative work
http://sharepoint.microsoft.com
space
Puzzlemaker
makes puzzles
http://puzzlemaker.discoveryed
ucation.com/
DropBox
stores and shares files and
https://www.dropbox.com/
folders over the Internet
Schoology
https://www.schoology.com/ho
me.php
MyUdutu
http://www.myudutu.com/
Raptivity
http://www.raptivity.com/

Tools that support communication and cultivate
Application
Description
Twitter
Jing
Communicator
Microsoft product that supports
communication and collaboration
Diigo
social networking bookmarking
tool
Delicious
social networking bookmarking
tool
ePals
online international learning
community

relationships
URL
http://twitter.com/
http://www.jingproject.com/
http://office.microsoft.com/enus/communicator/?CTT=97
http://www.diigo.com/
http://delicious.com/
http://www.epals.com/

32

Resources to support teaching and learning
Application
Description
YouTube
video-sharing site
Study Island
online standards-based learning
tools
Study Mate
creates interactive assessment
activities
Kto8.com
database of exercises that
reinforce critical skills
Mountain
skill-building and test prep
Math/Language/Sci software
ence
Grammar Girl
audio and text "mini-talks" on
grammar
GoAnimate
cartoon maker
Starfall
phonics website
Google Earth
satellite images of the Earth
Brainpop
animated, curriculum-based
content activities
SurveyMonkey
online survey tool
ReadPlease
text to speech software
Thinkfinity
standards-based lesson plans
and resources
Holt Online
online textbook and grading
system
Curriculum
online curricular materials
Associates

URL
http://www.youtube.com/
http://www.studyisland.com/
http://www.respondus.com/stud
ymate/samples.shtml
http://kto8.com/
http://www.mtmath.com/forum/
mtmath.php
http://grammar.quickanddirtytip
s.com/
http://goanimate.com/
http://www.starfall.com/
http://earth.google.com/
http://www.brainpop.com/
http://www.surveymonkey.com/
http://www.readplease.com/
http://www.thinkfinity.org/
http://my.hrw.com/
http://www.curriculumassociate
s.com/

33


Tools enabling students to create artifacts representing what they are
learning
Application
Description
URL
Voicethread
creates online picture
http://voicethread.com/#home
documentary with text or voice
descriptions
Glogster
creates interactive posters
http://www.glogster.com/
Wordle
program that creates graphic
http://www.wordle.net/
representation of word usage
Google Docs
document sharing
https://www.google.com/
BibMe
creates citations
http://www.bibme.org/
Picnik
photo editing
http://www.picnik.com/
Mixbook
creates picture books
http://www.mixbook.com/
PhotoPeach
slideshows with photos, text,
http://photopeach.com/
sound
Notetaker
note-taking software for
http://www.apple.com/downloa
students
ds/macosx/home_learning/notet
aker_aquamindssoftware.html
Frontpage
Microsoft Web design software
http://www.microsoftfrontpage.
com/
KidPix
drawing software
http://www.mackiev.com/kid_pi
x.html
Sketchy
animation and drawing tool
http://www.goknow.com/Produc
ts/Sketchy/
Prezi
online presentation tool
http://prezi.com/
Newsmaker
platform to make student
http://www.aboutnewsmaker.co
newscasts
m/
Camtasia
http://www.techsmith.com/camt
asia.asp
ArtRage
painting and drawing software
http://www.artrage.com/
Tuxpaint
drawing program for ages 3–12 www.tuxpaint.org/
Audacity
open-source software for
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
recording and editing sounds.
Garage Band
Apple software for recording and http://www.apple.com/ilife/gara
editing audio files
geband/
Snagit
screen capture tool
http://www.techsmith.com/scre
en-capture.asp
Animoto
http://animoto.com/
Picasa
free photo-editing software from https://www.google.com/
Google
Slideshare
upload and share presentations http://www.slideshare.net/

34

Web 2.0 tools

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to Web 2.0 tools (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Web 2.0 tools