Methods Used to Conduct the Study

Three sources of data were used in forming this report. First, since this field is evolving so quickly, the study tapped the latest insights of researchers to supplement a review of the published literature. This first phase of data collection was then used to refine questions for teacher interviews and an online survey that formed phases 2 and 3. Leading researchers were identified by reviewing major publications and conference programs to identify authors and presenters on the topic of “literacy and technology” from the preceding five years. From the list assembled and resulting referrals, five researchers were contacted and agreed to a telephone interview; these were Margaret Honey (EDC/Center for Children and Technology), Charles K. Kinzer (Vanderbilt University, and editor of the Electronic Classroom department of this journal), Donald J. Leu, Jr. (University of Connecticut, and chair of the advisory council of this journal), Margaret Riel (Center for Collaborative Research in Education, University of California, Irvine), and Bonnie Thurber (The Collaboratory Project, Northwestern University). The researcher interviews were semi-structured, with questions based on the following English language arts standards (National Council of Teachers of English and International Reading Association, 1996):

• Students conduct research on issues and interests by generating ideas and questions, and by posing problems. They gather, evaluate, and synthesize data from a variety of sources (e.g., print and nonprint texts, artifacts, people) to communicate their discoveries in ways that suit their purpose and audience.
• Students use a variety of technological and information resources (e.g., libraries, databases, computer networks, video) to gather and synthesize information and to create and communicate knowledge.
• Students participate as knowledgeable, reflective, creative, and critical members of a variety of literacy communities.

These standards correlate to and overlap with the International Society for Technology in Education’s (1999) “National Educational Technology Standards (NETS)” for students for using productivity, communication, and research tools. In addition, the following NETS for teachers (International Society for Technology in Education, 2000) provided a focus for interview questions:

• Apply current research on teaching and learning with technology when planning learning environments and experiences
• Facilitate technology-enhanced experiences that address content standards and student technology standards
• Use technology to support learner-centered strategies that address the diverse needs of learners

A second source of data came from interviews with and observations of teachers who use the Internet extensively for literacy instruction. Nominations of teachers to participate in the study were solicited from the the membership of the International Reading Association (IRA, publisher of this journal), the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), and the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), and from the researchers interviewed for the study. In some cases, nominees recommended additional teachers to include; these recommended teachers were also contacted. In all, we contacted 37 teachers, of whom 13 eventually participated in the study.

The interviewees included twelve English teachers and one social studies teacher from seven U.S. states (Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Virginia, and Wisconsin). Eight taught at the high school level, three at middle school, and one at elementary school, and one worked across kindergarten through twelfth grade. In addition, observations were made in the classrooms of four of the high school English teachers and the elementary teacher while their students engaged in Internet-based activities.

As with the researchers, the interview questions and observation protocol used with the teachers were semi-structured, with questions based on the English language arts standards and NETS for students and teachers identified above.

Third, we conducted an online survey (Figure 1) of teachers and staff developers to gather descriptive information about Internet-based literacy learning in the classroom. To elicit survey participation, an announcement explaining the purpose of the survey and providing a link to it was sent to an e-mail distribution list that included teachers who had not been interviewed but were referred from IRA, NCTE, and ISTE, as well as members of the 21st Century Teachers’ Network and teachers and development staff who had participated in invitational national and regional conferences on evaluating technology in education during 2000. We employed “snowball sampling” by encouraging recipients of the e-mailed announcement to forward it to colleagues who would qualify for the survey.

Respondents completed the survey via an interactive online form. Seventy-one unique responses to the survey were received from October 10 to October 23, 2000. Of these responses, 15 were disqualified because respondents indicated less than 15 minutes per week of Internet use by either themselves or their students (see Figure 1, questions 1 and 2). Twenty-three of the remaining 56 respondents received the original announcement, 13 did not, and 21 did not provide enough identifying information for us to determine whether they were among the original recipients of the announcement.

Of the 56 survey respondents to the online survey, 42 were classroom teachers. The remaining 14 had occupations in which they provided staff development with teachers and students related to Internet-based literacy learning; they identified themselves as preservice and inservice faculty in teacher education, district- or building-level technology coordinators, computer teachers or trainers, librarians or media services specialists, peer coaches or mentors, teacher specialists, and coordinators of gifted education Eight of the classroom teachers also reported performing staff development services for other teachers. In addition, 24 respondents indicated providing inservice to teachers, and nine listed preservice.

The survey respondents represented 25 states from all regions of the United States. Twenty-four hailed from rural areas, with 22 reporting suburban locations and 10 reporting urban. Within the K-12 setting, respondents were most likely to teach middle school (21), followed by elementary (18) and high school (18). Since the call for participation in the survey targeted English language arts standards, it is not surprising that 41 survey respondents reported teaching that discipline. In decreasing order of prevalence, survey respondents also indicated they taught history or social studies (40), science (39), interdisciplinary studies (34), mathematics (30), fine arts (23), and health (16). Among those who taught English language arts, all but two reported teaching at least one other subject, and 25 said they taught four or more other subjects.

Table 1 presents a summary of the data collection across phases 1 to 3 of the study.

The study was not intended to generate data from a representative sample of U.S. teachers. Instead, the research sought to gather in-depth information from teachers who are relatively advanced in their classroom uses of the Internet for literacy learning. The aim was to hear firsthand from classroom teachers about the benefits that accrue from Internet use, the literacy skills students need to use this tool effectively, the instructional strategies teachers find effective, and the professional development they believe is needed for teachers to capitalize on the Internet’s potential. To obtain such information, it was necessary to target respondents with significant experience in classroom uses of the Internet, rather than a broader sample of teachers. Because of the nature of the sample and its small size, however, the data reported here should not be regarded as representative of the views and experiences of U.S. teachers. The report’s findings are meant instead to identify emerging issues and suggest areas where additional research may be warranted.

The focal point for the study was gleaned from a focus group discussion held at the National Educational Computing Conference in Atlanta, Georgia, in June 2000. In addition, survey instruments from several related studies (Becker, 1999, online document; Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, 1998; Norris & Soloway, 2000) informed the questions asked during this study. In turn, data from the interviews with the researchers and teachers informed the development of questions for the online survey.

From “Literacy Learning on the Net: An Exploratory Study,” by M.L. McNabb, B. Hassel, & L. Steiner
Reading Online, June 2002
© 2002 North Central Regional Educational Laboratory