26 web 2.0 tools for teaching and learning

Would the development of (Personal and Social) Values and Attitudes be still achieved by conducting

the Inquiry Based Learning online?

網上探究式專題研習是否能實現價值觀（個人和社會）及態度的發展？

Researcher: Dr Felix Siu

Purpose

• This study investigates the efficacy of conducting inquiry project based learning with the use of educational technology for students in four primary schools with an emphasis on the development of values and attitudes in student projects.

Centre for Information Technology in Education

Backgrounds

•Reflection in learning is a pedagogical technique used to promote the higher order cognitive skills of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation that constitute the concept of critical thinking. •According to Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, it consists of three domains: – cognitive (about knowing)– affective (about attitudes, feelings)– psychomotor (about doing).


Backgrounds

• The affective domain has a hierarchy of five levels: – receiving, – responding, – valuing, – organization – characterization.


Backgrounds

• receiving: is willing to notice a particular phenomenon• responding: makes response, at first with compliance, later

willingly and with satisfaction• valuing: accepts worth of a thing• organisation: organises values; determines inter-

relationships; adapts behaviour to value system• characterisation: generalises certain values into controlling

tendencies; emphasis on internal consistency; later integrates these into a total philosophy of life or world view.


Backgrounds

Backgrounds

• Why use Bloom Taxonomy?• Today's teachers must make tough decisions about

how to spend their classroom time. Clear alignment of educational objectives with EDB standards is a necessity. Like pieces of a huge puzzle, everything must fit properly.

• The Bloom's Taxonomy Table clarifies the fit of each lesson plan's purpose, "essential question," goal or objective.


Methodology

• To foster affective reflection in learning, students were encouraged to create written reflection in their projects online

• besides a set of interview questions and questionnaire based on the characteristics of these five levels, were developed to scaffold students in their reflection process with an emphasis to enhance the development of values and attitudes in inquiry based learning.

• The methodology used for the research was a mixed method of quantitative and qualitative techniques using three instruments: student survey, focus group interview and students’ written feedback in their projects.


Data Collection and Analysis

• The data was collected and examined using multiple sources of evidence, such as student questionnaires given after the students’ group assignment, a focus group interview conducted by research assistant, and the analysis of information recorded in Google Sites.



The questionnaire• The student questionnaire consisted of closed-ended

questions. Responses to the closed-ended questions were given according to a four point Likert scale to examine the students’ five levels of affective domain of Bloom’s Taxonomy, where 1 referred to “Totally disagree” and 4 denoted “Totally agree”.



The questionnaire



The focus group interview• The interview was conducted after the questionnaires

have been given to clarify some of the students’ answers, or to probe further to understand their deepen comprehension.



The focus group interview



Students’ group assignment • Information generated by different groups was

collected through Google Sites, and analyzed and sorted by types of category, which corresponds to the five levels of affection domain of Bloom’s Taxonomy. We combined this evidence to get an overall picture.



Students’ group assignment


Findings and Discussion

• 1. Data from student questionnaires



• 1. Data from student questionnairesJudging from means (3.18) of the findings which is well above the average of 2.5.

• On average over 80% of the students did strongly agree to each level of the five level of affective domain learning objectives.



• 2. Data from focus group interview• Data from interview was collected to get a deepen understanding of

students’ reflection.• Students were invited to involve to the interview, which consisted of five

questions in correspondence with five levels of affection domain. • Majority of the students showed a positive value and attitude towards the

project experience.– For example– For receiving level, students were asked whether they have spotted the effect of

smoking, alcoholism and drug abuse on self development after project. There was widespread relief that 100% students referred to realize the bad effect. As to responding level, the question whether the students know more about the topic after project was referred to. It has shown that majority of the students made it clear that they have knowledge enriched, and they would devote themselves to encourage others to get rid of smoking, alcoholism and drug abuse if they had opportunities.



• 1. Data from student’s websites• The outcome of students’ group project have been shown on

Google Sites, which facilitate us to get understand in depth what kind of content was taking place and what kind of reflection would come out.

• Most of the groups were actively involved in this project.• For example: All five groups described the various kinds of

cigarettes, alcoholic drink and drug, as well as the reasons why people addicted to them. In the receiving level, all groups realized the bad effect of cigarettes, alcoholic drink and drug. In the responding level,4groups gave their confirmation that their knowledge has increased.



Students’ group assignment



In conclusion• The primary goal of the investigation in

exploration of any resultant evidence of student critical thinking, and a subsequent evaluation of the development of value and attitudes in doing inquiry based learning online has showed that the development of (Personal and Social) Values and Attitudes would be still achieved by conducting the Inquiry Based Learning online.


References

• Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York, NY: McKay.

• Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1969). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I I: Affective domain (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Longman, McKay

• Geoff Isaacs (1996) Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Teaching and Educational Development Institute, The University of Queensland.
