Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Sarah Fitzpatrick
ETEC 500
study” researchers Najat Smeda, Eva Dakich and Nalin Sharda investigate the effect that digital
storytelling (DS) has on student engagement, achievement, and motivation. The purpose of their
research project was to investigate digital storytelling through a pedagogical lens by looking at
how it could impact learning outcomes and engagement by asking the question “How can digital
storytelling enhance the student engagement and provide better educational outcomes for
learners?” (pg. 4). They also had a secondary purpose which was to research what teachers and
students’ perspectives were on (DS). As identified by the authors, our education system is
struggling with student engagement. Through this research project they sought to confirm what
much of the literature indicates about DS; that it is a tool that teachers can use to increase
motivation in learners at the primary and secondary levels. Smeda et al. (2014) discuss previous
research that has found that technology integration can enhance students’ engagement in the
classroom but while the technology needed for DS is available it is not being utilized, and DS
has not yet been “recognized as a valuable tool for developing students’ learning skills and
SIGNIFICANT RESEARCH
Smeda et al. (2014) look at various research to build their argument for DS as a
pedagogical tool, the most significant being that of Pitler (2006), Armstrong (2003) and Neal
(2001). They summarize the research from Pitler (2006) who found that technology integration
in the classroom can build “motivation to learn, encourages collaborative learning and develops
critical thinking and problem-solving strategies.” (pg. 3). To build on these findings Smeda et al.
(2014) use Armstrong (2003) and Neal’s (2001) research. Armstrong (2003) confirms that DS
2
can help students build and develop their creativity as well as problem-solving skills, while Neal
(2001) asserts that DS is a valuable pedagogical tool. Combining these two findings, gave Smeda
RESEARCH DESIGN
To collect their data Smeda et al. (2014) used a mixed-methods approach by collecting
qualitative and quantitative data to evaluate “if and how digital storytelling enhances teaching
and learning outcomes” (pg. 4). The research in this study is problem-based. As noted, Smeda et
al. (2014) state that “the education system still face[s] many challenges” (pg. 1) one being
student engagement. Through this research, they wished to prove that DS has the power to act as
both an educational tool to motivate learners and increase their technological skills while helping
teachers meet curriculum outcomes. The primary research design was non-intervention as they
did not change or alter any of the participants’ conditions. The participants were not compared to
a control group, they were solely looking for a relationship between student engagement and
tool.
VARIABLES
The independent variable in this study was the assignment of creating a digital story in
the classroom. The dependent variable was the students’ success with the educational outcomes.
In addition, there were the attribute variables of student engagement and motivation with levels
of low, moderate and high. Three extraneous variables, age, skill set, and teaching styles were
mentioned but not measured. Also, other extraneous variables such as class size, the time allotted
for completion, and gender may have been correlated with the results but no mention was given.
3
SAMPLE
The researchers used five cases in this research project. These cases included five
different classrooms and teachers from different age groups and subjects. They observed and
collected data from Years 3 and 4 together, 7, 9 and 11, as well as from an English as a Second
Language classroom from an Australian school. The subjects taught in these various classes
3/4 Library 8
7 Arts 92
9 Sciences 29
ESL English 4
Smeda et al. (2014) state that “In order to enhance the reliability and validity of the
research, both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and analysis were used”
(pg. 7), however, the researchers in this study did not address or present any information on
validity. If the researchers were going to do so they would report on two kinds; content validity
when measuring student success with educational outcomes, and construct validity when
measuring student engagement and motivation. After reviewing students scored on their digital
story, each of the five cases had a mean average above 65 percent. Although the results are
favorable, the reliability of these results is low because no elements of control were
4
implemented, no follow up study was conducted, and the results were not compared to another
DATA COLLECTION
For this study Smeda et al. (2014) used a mixed-method approach. They used a case
study design which consisted of using observations, interviews and field notes to collect their
qualitative data and a timed observation form and scoring rubric to collect quantitative data. The
scoring rubric for students’ digital story was scored by the classroom teacher to assess the quality
of the story by measuring their achievement on the educational outcomes. In addition, students'
level of engagement was also measured using a scoring rubric. Following this step, researchers
interviewed teachers to confirm whether or not curriculum outcomes were achieved. A case
report was prepared for each of the five grade levels with a cross-matrix for each of the research
questions.
MAJOR FINDINGS
According to Smeda et al. (2014) all their major findings are in accordance with the
current literature. When answering their question of “How can digital storytelling enhance the
student engagement and provide better educational outcomes for learners?” (pg. 4) they were
able to find many positive relationships. They concluded through this research that although it
fluctuated throughout the process, overall, the “levels of student engagement fluctuate between
moderate and high.” (pg. 12). They also concluded that DS increased collaboration between
students and helped to increase students’ technological skills as well as enhance students
learning skills other academic areas such as reading, writing, and spelling.
CRITIQUE
Smeda et al. (2014) collected a range of data to help confirm that DS has many positive
5
effects when used in the classroom. To help strengthen their research they used a mix-methods
approach to confirm much of what the literature has to say about using DS in the classroom as a
pedagogical tool to help motivate and keep students engaged, as well as deliver a creative way to
meet educational outcomes. This being said, there are gaps and weaknesses in their research.
Firstly, no control features were implemented as the participants were not compared to
any other groups or data. Although final scores and final interviews from the five teachers
confirmed that student engagement and achievement of educational outcomes was higher, it
would increase reliability if they had been compared to students who did not partake in DS.
Because no comparison was given it is impossible to say whether or the same results would have
been yielded using a traditional way of teaching. Smeda et al. (2014) also make no mention of
how these classrooms were selected. If not random, it is possible that they were chosen because
teachers in these classrooms already integrate technology on a regular basis. If this were the case
then they would not have needed to teach them new skills which could have increased the final
grades.
Another weakness of this study was the sample. Although this study used various grade
levels to prove that DS can have a positive effect no matter what age, they used a wide range of
sample sizes for their different cases that are not ideal for research. The Art case, for instance,
had 92 students while the Grade 11 group only had 17. As Suter (2014) mentions, if a sample
size is too small can have an effect on finding a true relationship that exists in that particular
population. Therefore, although the findings within this population were positive the small
Another gap in this paper is that Smeda et al. (2014) make no note of research that
6
They also do not offer what Sutter (2014) describes as alternative explanations. For instance,
there is a possibility these students performed well because they were excited to use a new form
of technology and/or to work together with their peers. Therefore, if they were to repeat a similar
assignment in the following grade level they may not be as engaged because they would have
without considering the extraneous variables such as teaching approach, class size and time
given to students to complete their assignment. As Suter (2014) explains, one program or idea
may work in one classroom but have a completely different effect in another because of such
variables.
CONCLUSION
While Smeda et al. (2014) found many positive relationship between DS and student
engagement there are weaknesses in their research. Follow up research studies would need to be
done in order to yield a more reliable conclusion of the correlated relationship between the two.
increase reliability and validity, as well as a new experimental research study where the same
7
Work Cited
Pitler, H., Viewing technology through three lenses. Principal-Arlington 85(5), 38–42 (2006)
Smeda, N., Dakich, E., & Sharda, N. (2014). The effectiveness of digital storytelling in the
classrooms: A comprehensive study. Smart Learning Environments, 1(1), 1-21.
doi:10.1186/s40561-014-0006-3
Suter, W. N., & SAGE Research Methods Core. (2012). Introduction to educational research: A
critical thinking approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE.