CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

DESIGN PROJECT: CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH Stacey Bernier Irfan Aaron Kaljanac Alexis Mauricio Mike Singh ETEC 510 - Section 66C University of British Columbia

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH Key Frameworks

What is the focus of your design project?

The Internet is a tool with great flexibility. Anyone can create a place to disseminate any type of information they desire. For this reason, the focus of the design project is teaching students to think critically about information they discover on the Internet. Critical thinking is the ability to reason effectively, use systems thinking, make judgements and decisions, solve problems and ask significant questions that clarify points of view that lead to better understanding and solution (Partnership for 21st century skills, 2004). This literacy is necessary for all Internet users.

How are you situating your design activities in the academic literature?

In constructing a design activity, the Critical Thinking Consortium states ...that critical thinking involves thinking through problematic situations about what to believe or how to act (Case & Daniels, n.d., p.1). Our design structure will address the following questions: does the question or task require judgement?; will the challenge be meaningful to students?; does the challenge address key aspects of the subject matter?; and, do students have the tools or can they reasonably acquire the tools needed to competently address the challenge? (p.3) The above questions all have great weight when students are examining information on the Internet. Our interactivity is a WebQuest which is built around having students determine what kind of information is relevant, valid, and trustworthy. The tools they will need for this project are the four parts of critical thinking as outlined by Bailin, Case, Coombs, and Daniels

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH (1999). Background knowledge, operational knowledge, knowledge of key critical concepts, heuristics, and habits of mind (Bailin, Case, Coombs, & Daniels, 1999, p. 290) provided a foundation for our design activities.

What/Whose ideas about learning and learning environments are relevant?

Constructivism is a major theory we have drawn upon for our design. Students will build knowledge and generate strategies for critical thinking with a teacher who acts as a facilitator as well as through social interactions with other members of a group. Vygotskys theories of proximal development and scaffolding also figure prominently, because the students are led through strategies they can use to critically think about and discern relevant or irrelevant information from a variety of websites before they perform the tasks on their own. Critical thinking goes hand in hand with the cognitive domain of Blooms Taxonomy. The background knowledge and operational knowledge parts of critical thinking correspond with the knowledge, comprehension, and application levels of Blooms Taxonomy. Analysis, synthesis, and evaluation are used in the knowledge of key critical concepts and heuristics (Case, n.d., p. 3) parts of critical thinking.

What/Whose theoretical insights and perspectives frame your thinking about the particular group of learners your project targets?

Our group of learners is grade 6-8, ages 11-14. Vygotskys theories will provide perspective as this age group will require scaffolding and guidance from peers and a teacher as

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH they discover ways to think critically. Constructivism is also important because of the emphasis on social interaction and learning that this age group tends to demonstrate.

How are you framing the primary educational activities? How are you framing the use of educational media?

The primary educational activity is a WebQuest that directs students to determine the suitability and effectiveness of a variety of information on the Internet. The WebQuest will be used by students after discussion of critical thinking. It will provide guidance through examples and prompt students to use critical thinking skills in the relevant contexts. We are using a WebQuest as our educational media because the structure of a WebQuest has a format that will allow the students to respond to a variety of tasks.

Intentions and Positions

What do you intend to accomplish by means of this design?

While students today may be technologically sophisticated, they are not as adept in applying appropriate research strategies and judging the quality of Internet information (Weiler, 2005, p.46). By using the prescribed learning outcomes stated by the British Columbia Ministry of Education in Grades Six and Seven Social Studies as a guideline, we intend to accomplish the following goals through this design framework:

students will be able to apply critical thinking skills including comparing, classifying, inferring, verifying, summarizing, and drawing conclusions to a range of issues

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

students will be able to evaluate the credibility and reliability of selected sources to help them with research (B.C. Ministry of Education, 2006) The development of information literacy skills remains an integral part of student

learning. According to the Association of College and Research Libraries (2000), information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and effectively use the needed information. In this definition, Blooms cognitive levels of thinking can be applied; a student must be able to perform analysis to recognize when information is needed, as well as evaluation, especially when assessing the reliability of a resource (Bloom, 1984). Therefore, critical thinking is a crucial component in achieving information literacy. Several information literacy programs in practice today aim to help students improve on their thought processes and arrive at carefully reasoned decisions (Shelley, 2009). The definition of information literacy also needs to be extended to the online environment. Critical literacy, as proposed by Kerka (2000), involves reading the world, taking a questioning stance, and analyzing the form and the content of communication... in online environments. This can involve students asking questions such as: How can I access information?; How do I know if the information is reliable?; What version of events is provided?; From whose perspective is it presented? (Kerka, 2000). Thus, it is essential for students to develop critical habits of thought when evaluating the credibility of online sources to avoid being ...victims of fraud and misinformation... (Kerka, 2000).

What does scholarship in Education have to say about placing value on this particular cluster of goals?

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH To be successful and effective in the 21st century, individuals must be able to apply various functional and critical thinking skills related to information, media, and technology (Partnership for 21st century skills, 2004). It has been found that Generation Y students tend to overestimate their abilities to search for and evaluate information found on the Internet (Manuel, 2002, p. 98). This current generation of students has grown up with accessing and downloading information instantaneously; in the information seeking process, it has been discovered that students will often accept inappropriate information or information of lower quality if finding it takes less time (Weiler, 2005, p.50). Therefore, it is essential that students must be trained in finding information and evaluating it for accuracy and relevancy. Critical thinking in information literacy education encourages ...deep, rather than surface, learning, and may potentially transform students into independent, self-directed, and lifelong learners... (Bruce, 2002). Breivik (1998) also states that there is a need to move away from prepackaging information in the form of textbooks, lectures, and artificially constrained multimedia sources. Instead, active learning needs to be facilitated using real-world information sources.

What might be a counter-argument to placing value on this particular set of outcomes?

Throughout most of the research, certain barriers to implementing critical thinking in instruction were emphasized. First of all, there is great pressure for educators to aim for breadth in covering content, rather than covering material in depth to help develop students critical thinking skills. This is true in many classrooms where there is a significant focus on increasing student (and whole school) performance on standardized tests, which emphasize knowledge over the thought process (Mandernach, 2006). As a result, students are motivated to concentrate

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH more on factual textbook information that is likely to be assessed. If critical thinking is addressed in classrooms, it is typically introduced as a generic skill that students are expected to independently apply to their schooling and everyday life (Case n.d.). Furthermore, critical thinking is ...designated as higher order thinking... (Case n.d.); some interpret this as more complex thinking that can only be introduced once students have mastered lower-order thinking. In the Ontario curriculum, applied courses for non-academic students are distinguished from academic courses according to the level of thinking expected of students, rather than the content. As an example, Case (n.d.) noted that applied curriculum writers used lower-order verbs in the syllabus, changing student expectations from interpret to describe or from explore to record. Therefore, Case (n.d.) makes the inference that the curriculum writers assume that students enrolling in applied courses are not capable of complex thinking and are ...relegated to simple tasks like reading and repeating.... Case (n.d.) concludes by stating that teaching critical thinking skills is not a priority, and it is ...often reserved solely for the best students. Moreover, the habitual nature of teaching influences instructional styles; teachers tend to teach the way they were taught with an emphasis on instructor-based strategies that value content acquisition over the learning process (Mandernach, 2006). Teachers must also contend with other obstacles in developing critical thinking skills and information literacy in students such as time constraints, growing class sizes, and limited district funds.

How do the stated goals of your project fit, or not, with larger sets of goals (e.g., globalization, a School District position paper, and so on)?

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH Having the ability to access quality information on the Internet effectively is essential in facilitating learning and making informed decisions. In order to navigate through infinite resources, students must be active processors of data. More than 50% of people aged 18-29 who regularly use the Internet acquire news from an online source (Reuters, 2008). Some of this information may be untrustworthy, or even deliberately misleading. Therefore, there is a need to train students to identify bias, logical fallacies, and deceptive arguments (Potter, 2010) so that they can be astute citizens as well as active and intelligent contributors in society (Potter, 2010). Building future critical thinkers is also necessary in the management of global challenges. The United Nations (2010) identified the following millennium development goals to be achieved by 2015: ending poverty and hunger, promoting universal education, encouraging gender equality, supporting healthy families, ensuring environmental sustainability, and establishing a global partnership. A thriving global society is dependent on the strong research and development skills of its citizens; the basis of critical thinking. Future generations must be equipped with the skills in gathering pertinent information, being creative and innovative in assessing potential solutions, and be aware of their capacity to effect change in their communities, society, and world (Alberta Education, 2005).

Key Concepts and Contexts

What is the knowledge (both conceptual know that, and procedural know how, that is the focus of your design project?

The concept behind the project is to get students to think critically about the information that they come across when doing research on the Internet. We will provide them with the

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH background information that students will need to make a well-informed judgment and then the criteria that they will consider while making their assessment of data. (Case n.d.). Through a WebQuest the students will use these tools to critically assess the information by looking at alternative perspectives, organizing information and then making informed decisions. Ultimately the students will build critical thinking skills and attain a level of information literacy.

What academic scholarship is relevant to thinking about this particular knowledge focus?

Critical thinking promotes understanding of content and mastery of skills. Students who have critically examined, interpreted, applied, and tested information are far more likely to retain information than those students who passively receive information (Case, n.d.). While one of the main aims of this WebQuest is to have students critically examine the websites that they use, we will be teaching students to examine everything they learn about or read with a critical eye. As stated above, information that is looked at in a critical manner helps promote understanding and mastery. A key aspect of having students think critically is the presence of a critical challenge. In order for students to improve their critical thinking ability, they must be provided with opportunities to engage in situations that stimulate their ability to challenge information that they are given. According to Case & Daniels (n.d., p.3) when making a critical challenge we must ask ourselves:

Does the question or task require judgement?

Will the challenge be meaningful to students?

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

Does the challenge address key aspects of the subject matter?

Do students have the tools or can they reasonably acquire the tools needed to competently address the challenge? By using these questions as guidelines, we have created our critical challenge to model

and encourage good critical thinking practices.

What is the context for your design project?

The context is a middle school classroom where students have regular Internet access both at home and at school.

What academic scholarship is relevant to thinking about this particular context?

The ease of finding information on the Internet is both a gift and a curse. The answers to questions that students have can be answered in lightning speed, and often there is little to no question as to where the information is coming from and if it comes from a reliable source. In this activity we will prepare our students with the tools necessary to critically examine the validity of the information that they come across on the Internet. (November, 2001, p.2) Primary and middle school students can begin to learn important commitments and habits of mind. These include: thinking reasons and truth are important, respecting others in discussion, being open minded, and being willing to look at issues from others' points of view. Students can learn how to critically evaluate when the meaning of a term is unclear and

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH reminding themselves to double check claims before accepting them as fact (Bailin, 1999, p.298). In this context middle schoolers, will focus on examining specific aspects of the websites. They will rate them based on set criteria. By doing this, students will realize where inaccuracies may lie, and learn not to accept everything they read on the Internet as fact.] InterActivities

What kinds of dynamic objects will you create for carrying out your designs in a specific context?

The deliverable Interactivities are in the form of a WebQuest at http://www.zunal.com/webquest.php?w=108751. The design group decided to create a WebQuest that will challenge students to think critically about Web literacy. The WebQuest will guide students through a series of tasks that will give them the Web Literacy skills required to critically analyse information on the Internet. However, in order to progress through the WebQuest tasks students must also use critical thinking. Thus the goal of this WebQuest is twofold: 1) To provide students with the skills to make reasoned judgments about the validity of Internet sources; and 2) To engage students in critical thinking. The choice to create a WebQuest as our interactivity was clear from the beginning was made fairly early in the planning stage, as the format of the technology allows for problem solving, decision-making, analysis and inquiry, which are essential components to critical thinking. As Dodge (2001) claims, WebQuests are especially useful for tasks that require higher level thinking. Thinking skills required by WebQuests include: comparing, classifying,

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH inducing, deducing, analyzing errors, constructing support, abstraction, and analyzing perspectives (Dodge, 1997). These thinking skills line up with the critical thinking strategies promoted in Roland Cases (n.d.) Introduction to the TC2 conception of critical thinking. WebQuests also allow for a constructivist approach, as they give learners ownership over their learning. Through our WebQuest, students will build knowledge and generate strategies for critical thinking collaboratively with group members. Background Activity

During the background activity, students will acquire the background information required to make well-informed judgments about the suitability of Internet resources. Dynamic objects include videos sourced from the web on the topic of Web Literacy and evaluating Internet sources, links to external sites with information on Web literacy, and links to example Web sources for students to explore and compare. During this initial task students will be split into groups. Each member will then explore the content and Website links as directed in the process page of the WebQuest. Through this interactivity, students will gather information on how to assess the validity of content published on the Web. Students will progress through the WebQuest by visiting and comparing different web pages and answering questions about them.

The task will require students to critically evaluate: 1. 2. 3. The physical layout of a webpage The author or publisher The Web address and external links

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH By critically exploring each website, students will learn about the criteria that makes a good website (background knowledge) and develop the skills to evaluate the credibility and appropriateness of Internet content. This task will also develop their critical thinking vocabulary. For example, students will have to determine whether a site has a bias or point of view, which is an important concept for thinking critically. Following this task, students will rejoin their group to share their knowledge and come up with a list of 'agreed' upon criteria to evaluate information on the Web. Students will use these criteria to develop a checklist that they will use to assess web pages critically. Students will be provided with a template to help them organise their checklist. Having developed the tools to address the challenge, students will use their completed checklist to solve the final critical challenge.

Critical Challenge

With checklist in hand, students will be challenged to evaluate a number of web pages and decide which are the most suitable sources of information. Once students have critically analysed each site, they will then rank them in order from best to worst. This critical challenge requires students to make a judgment on which of the possible website options are the most appropriate. Once each group has ranked all the sites in order of quality, they will share their rankings during a followup discussion/debate and compare them with their classmates. Each group will be required to discuss how they came to their conclusions, and defend their rankings by explaining how they ranked each site in relation to one another.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH What are the main steps you need to take to produce the materials that will support InterActivity? How will the /objects/learning materials be produced?

The design group decided to produce the WebQuest using Zunal WebQuest Maker, a web-based software for creating WebQuests. Rather than building a site from the ground up and hosting it on our own, the design group decided to use a free online tool. We felt that this would allow the team more time to focus on designing the actual WebQuest tasks and content rather than spending that time with initial site setup. We choose Zunal after considering the questions posed by Bates and Pooles (2003) SECTIONS framework in A Framework for Selecting Technology. We choose to use Zunal because it is a free service that is intuitive and easy to use. It is easy to edit and upload content, and the template design ensures that the WebQuest is well-organized. The group felt that these are important considerations for teachers with limited time and budgets. The Zunal site hosts all the content of the Web Literacy WebQuest, including background learning activities, the critical challenge activity, embedded dynamic objects, and links to outside websites. We also considered ease of use for our students when designing the WebQuest. Because Zunal is Web-based, the WebQuest can be accessed by any student with access to a Internetenabled computer. Zunal WebQuests are intuitive, well-organized and easy to use, with a consistent, simple but attractive layout, which means that our target age group of middle school students should have no trouble using it (Bates & Poole, 2003). In order to be effective, WebQuests need to follow the six main elements below: Key WebQuest Elements Function

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

Introduction

Provides background information on the topic and sets the stage for the investigation or activity.

Task

Includes an activity that is doable and is of interest to the students; often identifies roles for cooperative group members.

Resources

Provides links to high -quality Internet-based resources that students will use to complete the activity; links may be embedded in Process.

Process

Provides a step-by -step guide for completion of the activity; should provide a clear description of exactly what students should do to complete the task.

Evaluation

Should illustrate exactly what students should do to be successful; usually in the form of a rubric or checklist.

Conclusion

Brings closure to the activity and summarizes what you hope the students have learned as a result of completing the activity.

(Dodge, 1997 & Strickland, 2005) Our decision to choose Zunal is also based on the fact that the default Zunal layout follows these 6 key elements. Following this template, the WebQuest includes an introduction that provides background information and sets the stage for the WebQuest; a brief description of the task; a set of resources needed to complete the task, embedded in the WebQuest itself and links to information on the Web; a description of the process the learners should go through to accomplish the task broken down into clearly described steps; an evaluation rubric that states

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH exactly what students should do to be successful; and a conclusion that brings closure to the quest, reminds the learners what they have learned, and encourages them to extend the experience into other domains (Dodge, 1997). Developing the learning content and questions required the group to explore relevant literature on Web Literacy, which we used to develop our own criteria for evaluating Internet sources. With this criterion, the design group explored the Web for suitable web pages to include as example Web sources in the background learning activity and critical challenge. We also used this knowledge to develop questions that challenge students to think critically about the Internet sources they are exploring.

Verifications

As the students begin the tasks and process pieces of the WebQuest, members of the design team will observe how students work through this to determine if they are proceeding in the intended way. The design team will use formative assessment throughout the project, in the form of anecdotal assessments, mini-conferences with the groups, and informal observation. Speaking with students at various stages of the WebQuest will help the design team to ascertain whether or not the students are using the WebQuest in the intended way. This can be extended to include taking video or voice recordings of each groups ideas and interactions as they go through the WebQuest. Students will also write a series of reflections as they complete the background activities; to help them do this, the design team will provide questions and prompts. Students do not have to use these prompts to complete their reflections, however. Furthermore, class discussion will occur once the critical challenge is completed, as students will be required to discuss and defend their rankings of the websites with the rest of

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH their peers. Through these discussions, the design team intends to analyze how each group worked through the WebQuest Process and Tasks. The evaluation rubric that has been established for the students could also be used by the designers to determine if the design is accomplishing the goals that we set out to accomplish. The final project that students complete as part of this design would verify if students have met expectations in the area of web literacy, which would be assessed using the evaluation rubric.

Group Reflection

Creating a WebQuest

The decision to create a WebQuest as our interactivity was born out of our discussions and later research that confirmed our belief that the WebQuest format allows students to exercise critical thinking strategies such as decision-making, problem solving, inquiry and analysis (Dodge, 1997, 2001) from a constructivist approach. We decided to use the free version of Zunal WebQuest Maker. Zunals step-by-step layout conforms with the key elements of an effective WebQuest as described by Dodge (1997) and Strickland (2005). It did not allow the team to add or rearrange pages, but this did not restrict us. The simple, logical layout made constructing our WebQuest relatively easy, as we could collaboratively create each page in Google Docs, and then simply paste it into the corresponding page in Zunal. The Process page of the WebQuest was a collaborative effort, and contained the bulk of the tasks and content. The most challenging aspect was finding quality resources. This involved

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH finding quality dynamic objects for students to interact with including: videos sourced from the web on the topic of Web Literacy and evaluating Internet sources; links to external sites with information on Web literacy; and links to sample Web sources for students to analyse.

Working with Google docs

Working with Google docs was an important part of our group interaction. It allowed us to have a common work space, where we could both work individually and as a team. When we were online at the same time, we could use the chat function and discuss our questions and concerns, in real time. It was a great way to work collaboratively on our project without being in the same physical space. When we weren't online at the same time, we were able to leave messages for each other. We were able to highlight certain areas for discussion, and make suggestions to help improve each others work. In addition, we came up with a system to help with the editing process. We were each assigned a different color which helped us indicate who was making edits to our group project. This was a great way to show where changes were made and provided a jump off point for further discussion. Although all of us had busy schedules, we were able to use Google docs as a place to collaborate, and truly make our final project a group effort.

Asynchronous Group Activity

The asynchronous nature of our group interaction online provided several advantages. We could work on our project at any time in any place, which was especially convenient given busy schedules and summer holidays. One thing that was a concern at the beginning of the

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH project was the different working and writing styles that we possess. During the proposal stage, we all met online and edited the document together before handing in the completed work. Staying in contact with group members was the most important factor in this project. The planning and division of the tasks took place on Skype, which was a live conversation. The rest of our interactions either took place on e-mail, Google Docs notes, or the Vista forum. SECTIONS Framework

The SECTIONS framework (Bates & Poole, 2003) provides a useful lens for us to analyze our design project.

S With this group of learners (grades 6-8, ages 11-14), they will require scaffolding and guidance from peers and the teacher as they progress through the background activities and critical challenge. The jigsaw cooperative learning strategy applied here will assist students of various abilities to think critically, give them ownership of their learning, and assign responsibility.

E The host site for our WebQuest, www.zunal.com, appears to be ...well-structured, intuitive for the user to use, and easy to navigate...(Bates & Poole, 2003). This is especially important for our group of learners who will need to be able to locate the guidelines, instructions, and evaluation criteria easily. In terms of reliability, the host site is well-established, as it has been in operation for ten years with over 100,000 users to date. There is also technical support provided to users through forum pages, and the administrators can be contacted if there are any other issues.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH C In terms of costs, a basic account (allowing only one WebQuest to be created) on www.zunal.com is free to any user. Teachers with satisfactory Internet skills will be able to develop and deliver the course material using this platform; specialists will not necessarily be needed for technological support. Students would need regular access to a computer to complete this project.

T This technology allows for multiple media (YouTube videos, graphics, text, and websites) to be used to deliver content and support the development of critical thinking skills.

I Learners are required to demonstrate their application of critical thinking skills in this project as they interact with the material on the WebQuest. They will answer questions related to the websites they are analyzing, generate criteria to guide them in website evaluation, and rank the websites according to their criteria. There is also interaction between the learner and other learners (Bates & Poole, 2003) as all of this work will be completed collaboratively in groups.

O If a teacher does not have a satisfactory level of Internet skills, he/she will have to seek some additional support either through the forums on www.zunal.com, or from the IT department at the institution.

N This type of technology is not novel, as the host site has been around for ten years, implying that it is reliable and has been fully developed.

S The area of critical thinking and Internet literacy is constantly changing; the content can easily be updated on the WebQuest to reflect these changes.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

Stacey Bernier -- Individual Reflection

This was the first group assignment where I used Google Docs. I plan on using it in my class in the 2011-2012 school year, so it was a great exercise for me to get to know it. When my fellow group members and I started the project, I assumed that there would be difficulty in integrating all of the pieces of the proposal together to make it coherent because of different writing and working styles. This wasnt the case. We met online before the proposal was due and went through it together in much the same way that I think we would have if we had met in the physical world. My fellow group members and I separated the tasks we needed to do for the project in what we all felt was an equal way. I chose to do the Evaluation section for the WebQuest interactivity portion of or final assignment. I had some difficulty establishing evaluation criteria for the design that we were working with. I created the evaluation criteria using the website

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH http://rubistar.4teachers.org/. I found it difficult to establish the criteria mostly because I worked on the criteria as we established the process and task sections of the WebQuest. I was concerned throughout the rubric building process that my vision for the final project may differ from that of my group members, and that I would have to rebuild the rubric. As our due date came closer, I feel myself becoming less unsure about the asynchronous nature of the interactions online. I found myself logging onto Google docs and Vista and hoping to see one of my group members so that I can hash some things out with them instead of waiting for their responses to my messages. Once I was able chat online with a member of my group while working on the project, I felt more confident with what I am doing with the project. The WebQuest format is quite easy to create using the template available through www.zunal.com. Ive often thought the WebQuest was an outmoded style of setting up a learning activity, but the way weve worked through this as a group and the ease which Ive had with using Zunal made me think again. Im going to be looking for ways to use some of the WebQuests available on Zunal and hopefully tackle creating another one.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

Aaron Kaljanac -- Individual Reflection

In designing the WebQuest, I have learned a great deal about how to promote critical thinking. I was drawn to the subject of critical thinking because I was familiar with Critical Thinking consortium (TC2), having used their publications in my Social Studies lessons. I knew the publications to be excellent learning materials, but I was less familiar with the scholarship behind the publications. I found that having a background in the work by TC2 writer Roland Case and others has better prepared me to help students improve as critical thinkers and has given me the tools to create a community of thinkers in my own classroom, as we have done with our collaborative WebQuest. I found that collaborating through Google docs has been a successful and overall pleasant working experience. Google docs allowed the group to create and edit online while collaborating in real-time. Documents can be shared, opened, and edited by multiple group

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH members at the same time, which facilitates efficient collaboration as it allows the design group to simultaneously work on the same document. However Google docs also allows for asynchronous communication, which was ideal considering the varied availabilities of the group. We could write messages to one another within the body of the document, or leave comments in the margins. But when we were able to meet as a group, the synchronous chat function within Google docs proved to be an invaluable collaborative tool. This was my first experience creating a WebQuest, however the experience of my colleagues and the choice to use Zunal, a free web-based WebQuest creation tool made my introduction to WebQuest creation much smoother. This is because Zunals WebQuest template provides step-by-step instructions for the inexperienced teacher. There was also an extensive gallery of published WebQuests that I was able to explore for inspiration. I enjoyed the experience of creating the WebQuest, and I am pleased with our results using Zunal. I learned that WebQuests are a great way to give students ownership of their learning and to build their own knowledge. It is also a format that promotes critical thinking skills: problem solving, decision making, analysis and inquiry. My experience designing this interactivity has made me excited about integrating WebQuests into my future lessons, and the relative ease of creating our WebQuest in Zunal has given me the confidence to try making one on my own.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

Alexis Mauricio -- Individual Reflection

Throughout this experience, I learned that online group work can be just as dynamic and engaging as it is in person, especially when collaborative tools such as Google Docs and Skype are effectively used. The synchronous environment on Skype was helpful when our group met to discuss the key frameworks, concepts, contexts, and interactivities of the proposal as well as divide up the work; we also met on Skype in early July to discuss the structure of the final project. Furthermore, synchronous communication on Google Docs was used to finalize the proposal; I found this especially useful as the document and the related chat could be viewed side by side, making it convenient to refer to both simultaneously. Overall, our group was cooperative, accommodating, and open to feedback throughout the process. Our group also used asynchronous communication through emails, a Vista discussion forum, and the comment feature on Google Docs. The Google Docs comment function was

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH excellent, especially in seeking feedback from group members during the revision process. What I also found useful was receiving this feedback on my mobile device; I viewed the comments on my phone as I was out or away from my computer and gave myself time to reflect on these comments before replying to the comments or adjusting the work as needed. Furthermore, this was my first time in creating a formalized proposal for a project, and it was helpful for me that it was completed collaboratively. The proposal helped to provide an excellent framework; I often referred to it while I was working on the tasks and process sections of the WebQuest to ensure that I was staying on track, especially with incorporating the critical thinking literature. I created a chart to illustrate how we applied the critical thinking requisite tools in our critical thinking challenge, and this helped me to further solidify the connections between our proposal and the final project. I also had the opportunity to learn more about the foundation literature of TC2, the critical thinking consortium. Before this project, I had used some of the lessons provided by the consortium with some of my classes, but I was unfamiliar with the literature behind it. Now, I am motivated to incorporate even more of these lessons in the future after studying the literature and seeing that critical thinking is an essential 21st century skill that must be developed in students to prepare them for the future.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

Mike Singh -- Individual Reflection

There was a lot of learning that took place by engaging in this particular set of design activities. Previous to this assignment I had never used Skype. I had heard about it through friends and co- workers, and always associated it with video chatting. So once we decided as a group to meet on Skype I wasn't exactly sure how the chat session would go. I somehow envisioned a group video chat. When I actually used it for the first time it was just like group chatting on Msn messenger. It was a great way to meet with group members to discuss our project, as long as we could decide on a time to meet. I must admit I was probably the worst at being punctual during our meeting times. Luckily my group members were accommodating in filling me in on what I had missed, and I was able to jump right in the conversation and contribute to the discussion. Skype was a useful tool in allowing us to communicate with each other in real time. Once our individual tasks were done, it also provided a place to discuss our

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH final project and refine our work in preparation for handing it in. I have learned to use Skype for other projects , finding it a great way to communicate whether it is through the group chatting function or Skype calls. Google Docs was another useful tool during our group design project. It enabled us to work on our separate tasks but also provided us a space to see each others progress and edit documents together. Again, we were able to divide up tasks and then come together to make sure that we could have a final product that reflected a cohesive group effort. By using the live chat function on Google Docs and by leaving messages for each other, we were able to communicate both synchronously and asynchronously. I am relatively new to doing course work online. Initially, I felt that it would be difficult to do a group project. To me, the thought of doing a group project without physically meeting with people seemed strange, and I was a little skeptical on how it would work out. Through the use of Google Docs, and Skype it made things much easier. We were able to share ideas, collaborate and work together without being in the same physical space. The ease of use of both of these programs definitely made me think of ways to apply them to my classroom practice. Through doing this project I was able to learn how to use these programs and am excited to utilize these tools in the upcoming school year.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH

References

Alberta Education. (2005). Social studies kindergarten to grade 12. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Education. Retrieved from: http://education.alberta.ca/media/773701/soc10_1.pdf

Association of College and Research Libraries. (2000). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/informationliteracycompetency.cfm

Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. & Daniels, L. (1999). Conceptualizing critical thinking. Junior Curriculum Studies, 31 (3), 285-302.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Chapter 4: A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. (pp. 77-105). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Bloom, B.S. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Breivik, P.S. (1998). Student learning in the information age. American Council on Education. Series on Higher Education. Phoenix, Arizona, ORYX Press.

British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2006). Social studies K-7 integrated resource package. Retrieved from: http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/irp/irp_ss.htm

Bruce, C. (2002). Information literacy as a catalyst for educational change: A background paper. White Paper prepared for UNESCO, the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, and the National Forum on Information Literacy, for use at the Information Literacy Meeting of Experts, Prague, The Czech Republic.

Buffington, M.L. (2007) Contemporary approaches to critical thinking and the world wide web. Art Education, 18-23.

Case, R. (n.d.). Bringing critical thinking to the main stage. Retrieved from: http://www.tc2.ca/pdf/profresources/Mainstage.pdf.

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH Case., R. & Daniels, L. (n.d.). Introduction to the TC2 conception of critical thinking. Retrieved from: http://www.tc2.ca/pdf/profresources/IntroductionTC2Conception.pdf.

Dodge, B. (1997). Some thoughts about WebQuests. The WebQuest Page, San Diego State University. Retrieved July 30, 2011from: http://webquest.sdsu.edu/about_webquests.html

Dodge, B. (2001) FOCUS: Five rules for writing great WebQuests. Learning and Leading with Technology, 28, 6-9, 58.

Gruenfeld, E.(2010). Thinking creatively is thinking critically. New Directions For Youth Development, 125, 71-83. DOI: 10.1002/yd.339.

Jonassen, D. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models: Volume II,215-239.

Kerka, S. (2000). Extending Information Literacy in Electronic Environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 88, 27-38. Mandernach, B.J. (2006). Thinking critically about critical thinking: using online tools to promote critical thinking. Insight: A Collection of Faculty Scholarship, 1, 41-50.

Manuel, K. (2002). Teaching information literacy to Generation Y. Journal of Library Administration, 36, 195-217. doi:10.1300/J111v3601_12

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH Mcleod, J. and Vasinda S.(2008). Critical literacy and web 2.0: exercising and negotiating power. Computers in the Schools,Volume 25 (3-4), 259-274. November, A. (2001). Empowering students with technology. Glenview, Illinois: LessonLab, Skylight. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2004). P21 Framework Definitions. Retrieved from: http://www.p21.org/

Potter, M.L. (2010). From Search to Research: Developing Critical Thinking Through Web Research Skills. Retrieved from: http://learningonlineinfo.org.

Reuters. (2008). Nearly 70 percent believe traditional journalism is out of touch, and nearly half are turning to the Internet to get their news. Retrieved from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/29/us-internet-newsidUSN2824650420080229

Shelley, A. (2009). Beyond buzz words and skill sets: the role of critical thinking in information literacy. Library Student Journal. Retrieved from: http://www.librarystudentjournal.org/index.php/lsj/article/view/110/233

Strickland, J. (2005). Using webquests to teach content: Comparing instructional strategies. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5, 138-148.

Weiler, A. (2005). Information-seeking behavior in Generation Y students: motivation, critical

CRITICAL THINKING AND ONLINE RESEARCH thinking, and learning theory. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31, 46-53. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2004.09.009

United Nations. (2010). A gateway to the UNs systems work on the millennium development goals. Retrieved from: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/

Zheng, R. , Perez J., Williamson J., Flygare, J. (2007) WebQuests as perceived by teachers: implications for online teaching and learning. The Authors Journal Compilation. 24, 295-304.