Running head: DIGITAL STORYTELLING AS AN ASSESSMENT TOOL 1

Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool

Kristi Mead

California State University, Fullerton

IDT 510, Section 09

December 15, 2010

Carl Renold, PhD

Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 2

Abstract

Students allowed to create assignments using Digital Storytelling were compared to students

taught with traditional methods in the area of 6th grade core science curriculum. Both groups

were tested using a common standard assessment in three different units from the core

curriculum. Students using Digital Storytelling are expected to achieve significantly higher

scores because they are more engaged and form deeper connections with the material.
Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 3

Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool

Introduction

Students today are authors, who creatively publish their thoughts and ideas on social

networks sites, blogs, and a host of other web 2.0 applications; tech savvy innovators who should

not be required to power down when they get to school to be taught in the same way their

teachers were. The traditional methods of educating children and assessing their content

understanding are outdated. Educators need a paradigm shift to engage students and become

facilitators allowing students to reach a deeper level of content understanding of core curriculum

material.

Preliminary research supports the need for a paradigm shift. For instance, Project-Based

Learning (PBL) has been heralded by some as a major development in education (Gijbels,

Dochy, Van den Bossche, and Segers, 2005). Though much of the research is conducted in the

context of higher education, and, indeed, in medical schools, with students who are more

sophisticated learners than we have in mind for the present study, it seems reasonable that some

of the basic principles would apply. Waks and Sabag (2004) compared traditional methods of

instruction with a PBL approach incorporating technology to examine the influence on student

achievement finding that students employing the PBL approach outscored their classmates using

traditional methods, supporting the principle that the more students are engaged, the better they

understand the course content, and that better understanding translates into higher test scores.

Group dynamics may be another important consideration in designing a successful PBL module,

but there does not seem to be much in the way of a clear picture in the literature. For example,

Song, and Grabowski (2006) looked at how design and implementation affected student

motivation, while Goldstein and Puntambekar (2004) examined the role of gender in technology
Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 4

rich collaborative learning environments, but neither study was able to produce significant

differences between groups. Lastly, Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) seems to offer promise

especially to instructional designers (van Merriënboer, J., and Ayres, P. 2005), as it details how a

buffer memory, with limited capacity to absorb new information, and a long-term memory,

essentially unlimited, work together to create expertise in an individual through the creation of

cognitive schemas. Such a model can be used to make predictions about how students learn best

opening the door for an intelligent use of technology to reduce the cognitive processing load,

with the payoff of making some previously impossible tasks now possible, while turning other

tasks into easier ones. Yet, studies show that caution must be used in employing technology in

an undisciplined way. Schnotz and Rasch (2005) considered how animation improves learning.

Among other things, they found that animation can have a negative effect on learning, especially

if it reduces essential processing required for a student to make deeper connections. In fact,

interactivity, too, added haphazardly, may actually inhibit learning. Moreno and Valdez (2005)

found that the addition of an interaction component (where participants had to arrange a random

sequence in the correct order before going on to the next step) did not help participants score

higher—there was either no significant effect or a negative one where students with interaction

scored lower than their non-interaction counterparts. The interactive component did not engage

students, it was simply a distracter.

In the present study, we seek to test the idea that the use of rich digital media, otherwise

known as digital storytelling, will enable students to take ownership of their learning experience

and connect with information in a way that traditional methods simply cannot. We posit that

students who complete assessments using a choice of rich digital media will have a deeper
Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 5

content understanding and a longer retention rate of the course material than those that employ

traditional techniques.

Method

From a pool of volunteer students in the 6th grade from California public schools with a

middle class background and proficient in English, a survey was administered to assess each

participant-candidate's comfort level with technology. Students expressing at least some comfort

with technology were chosen to partake in the four week study and were randomly assigned to

the Control (Traditional Method) and Treatment (Rich Media) groups. Additional data should be

obtained from both groups so to academic balance between the two groups can be ensured, such

additional information would include as their current GPA and a transcript. Three consecutive,

standard topics from the 6th grade Science curriculum were presented to both groups. At the end

of each topic, participants were asked to take a common assessment covering the important

concepts.

Results

We obtain, from each group, raw assessment scores from the three completed units. Only

students who complete all three units will be included in the study. These scores will be

analyzed using ANOVA for independent groups. Should there be a significant difference, as

expected, a post-hoc analysis can be performed to determine if the difference is due to a higher

treatment group exam average.

Discussion

If the students in the treatment group do significantly better on the standard assessments

than the students in the control group, then this will be an indicator that students learn better

using digital storytelling, perhaps because of an increase in the level of student engagement.
Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 6

There will be, by necessity, differences in the way the classes are carried out for both groups and

these differences may be the cause of any differences between the two groups, so a careful

analysis will be needed. Differences in instructors, or, if the same instructors are used,

differences in enthusiasm for one method over another, should also be noted, even if this can't be

quantified and incorporated into the ANOVA. Further, designing an effective (from the CLT

point of view) set of Digital Storytelling assignments will be crucial.

Additional research may pursue the traits of optimal Digital Storytelling assignments, the

adaptation of Digital Storytelling to other subjects, or perhaps the differences in brain

functioning between Digital Storytellers and traditional students.

Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 7

References

Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of Problem-Based
Learning: A Meta-Analysis from the Angle of Assessment. Review of Educational
Research
75(1), 27-61.
Goldstein, J., & Puntambekar, S. (2004). The Brink of Change: Gender in Technology-Rich
Collaborative Learning Environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology
13(4), 505-522.
Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive Load and Learning Effects of Having Students
Organize Pictures and Words in Multimedia Environments: The Role of Student
Interactivity and Feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3),
35-45.
Schnotz, W., & Rasch, T. (2005). Enabling, Facilitating, and Inhibiting Effects of Animations in
Multimedia Learning: Why Reduction of Cognitive Load Can Have Negative Results on
Learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 47-58.
Song, H., & Grabowski, B. (2006). Stimulating Intrinsic Motivation for Problem Solving Using
Goal-Oriented Contexts and Peer Group Composition. Educational Technology Research
and Development, 54(5), 445-466.
van Merriënboer, J., & Ayres, P. (2005). Research on Cognitive Load Theory and Its Design
Implications for E-Learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3),
5-13.
Waks, S., & Sabag, N. (2004). Technology Project Learning versus Lab Experimentation.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(3), 333-342.
Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 8

Sample Consent Form

TITLE OF RESEARCH: Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool

INVESTIGATOR: Kristi Mead

Explanation of Procedures
You have been asked to take part in a research study. For four weeks, your regular
science class, and only your science class, will participate in an education study. You will be
asked to take three tests, as part of the study, and you will be compared to others participating in
the study, anonymously. Your name and other personal data will be kept confidential.

Legal Rights
You are not waiving any of your legal rights by signing this informed consent document.

Your signature below indicates that you agree to participate in this study. You will
receive a copy of this signed document.

Signature of Participant or Legally Authorized Representative Date

Signature of Principal Investigator Date

Digital Storytelling as an Assessment Tool 9

Sample Questionnaire

This questionnaire is designed to assess your familiarity with technology. Please respond to each
statement by circling 1 (strongly disagree) through 5 (strongly agree).

A. I am very familiar with the internet.

1 2 3 4 5
(strongly disagree) (disagree somewhat) (no opinion) (agree somewhat) (strongly agree)

B. It is difficult for me to write papers using the computer.

1 2 3 4 5
(strongly disagree) (disagree somewhat) (no opinion) (agree somewhat) (strongly agree)

C. I enjoy using the internet to find out new things.

1 2 3 4 5
(strongly disagree) (disagree somewhat) (no opinion) (agree somewhat) (strongly agree)

D. I can create digital photos and movies easily.

1 2 3 4 5
(strongly disagree) (disagree somewhat) (no opinion) (agree somewhat) (strongly agree)

E. Computers are complicated and hard to use.

1 2 3 4 5
(strongly disagree) (disagree somewhat) (no opinion) (agree somewhat) (strongly agree)