Dr. Sam Chu, Associate Professor

Developing students’ 21st century skills: inquiry learning through collaborative teaching and social media培訓21世紀學生的技能：探究式學習，協作教學和社會媒體的應用 Dr. Sam Chu, Associate Professor Deputy Director, Centre for IT in EducationDivision of Information and Technology Studies, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong http://web.edu.hku.hk/academic_staff.php?staffId=samchu

Scholars who have inspired my work

Presentation outline • What are 21st century skills • Why are 21st century skills important? • Teaching strategies that foster students’ 21st century skills development • Inquiry project based learning(探究式學習) • Collaborative teaching approach(協作式教學) • Study 1 at primary school level • Use of Web 2.0 (social media) technologies(Web 2.0科技) • Study 2 at primary school level (with practical guides for implementing the strategies) • GS group project • English co-writing • Study 3 at secondary school level

What’s P21 (Partnership for 21st Century Skills)?

What are 21st century skillsP21 framework for 21st century skills 學習與創新生活和職業技能資訊、媒體及科技素養 Source: http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf

What are 21st century skillsP21 framework for 21st century skills

Presentation outline • What are 21st century skills • Why are 21st century skills important? • Teaching strategies that foster students’ 21st century skills development • Inquiry project based learning(探究式學習) • Collaborative teaching approach(協作式教學) • Study 1 • Use of Web 2.0 (social media) technologies(Web 2.0科技) • Study 2 (with practical guides for implementing the strategies) • Study 3

Why are 21st century skills important? • The acceleration of digital technology development(加速科技發展) in the 21st century has required people to acquire different sets of digital skills and knowledge(對科技的知識和技能的掌握) (Black, 2009) • Routine and manual work are being assigned to computers and jobs nowadays emphasize “expert thinking”(which involves critical thinking and problem solving)(專家思考:批判性思維和解難能力)and “complex communication”(which involves interpretation of information and communicating ideas to the others)(闡釋資料及與人溝通)(Levy & Murname, 2004, p.5) • Hence it is important for educators to find effective ways to help students develop these skills

Presentation outline • What are 21st century skills • Why are 21st century skills important? • Teaching strategies that foster students’ 21st century skills development • Inquiry project based learning(探究式學習) • Collaborative teaching approach(協作式教學) • Study 1 • Use of Web 2.0 (social media) technologies(Web 2.0科技) • Study 2 (with practical guides for implementing the strategies) • GS group project • English co-writing • Study 3

Teaching strategies that foster students’ 21st century skills development - Inquiry PjBL (1) Inquiry project-based learning (inquiry PjBL) • The EDB (Education Bureau) of the HKSAR / Hong Kong Special Administrative Region(2002) defines Inquiry-based learning (IBL) as a student-centred(以學生為中心) approach that promotes the integration of skills, knowledge, and values (技能、知識和價值觀的整合) in the learning of General Studies(常識科). • In the inquiry process, • Students are active constructors of knowledge (知識創造者) • teacher is a facilitator of learning(老師擔任學生學習的促進者) • Instead of the teacher giving the right answers, students have to raise questions, find their own answers and look for the necessary information. • They are engaged in identifying problems(找出問題), collecting information(搜集資料) and solving the problems(解決問題)they encounter.(Education Bureau, 2007))

Teaching strategies that foster students’ 21st century skills development - Inquiry PjBL (2) • IBL may occur in the best manner through the implementation of projects (探究式學習最好利用專題研習進行)(Wilhelm, Sherrod, & Walters, 2008). • Projects can capture students’ interests(提升學習興趣), provoke serious thinking(引發思考), and enable students to apply their knowledge(實踐知識) in a problem-solving context (David, 2008). • IBL + project = inquiry PjBL (project-based learning)

Inquiry PjBL – Problems encountered • 學生似乎缺乏探究式專題研習所需要能力和技能 • 進行口頭報告時，一組小學四年級學生利用一張A3尺寸紙張展示他們的報告內容 • 另外一組小四學生製作了近20頁的簡報，但在口頭報告過程中只利用了其中數頁

To tackle the problems… • Maximizing support for students加強對學生的支援 • By bringing in teachers who could support students in inquiry PjBL in various ways在教學過程中引入不同科目的老師 • By bringing in relevant resources向學生介紹相關的資料 • E.g., WiseNews (慧科新聞) • Proposition: If we can maximize students’ needed support, we can help them maximize their learning主張: 如果我們能夠為學生提供他們所需的支持，我們可以幫助他們更有效地學習

Teaching strategies that foster students’ 21st century skills development- Collaborative Teaching Approach • Research suggests that collaboration between different teachers promotes effective IBL (Thousand, et. al, 2006). 老師間的合作可令探究式學習更有效率。 • Although there is much anecdotal evidenceregarding successful teacher and librarian collaboration(老師和圖書館員間的成功合作例子), there is scarce research that looks into the specific practice of teacher and librarian collaboration in primary schools (Montiel-Overall, 2007). • Although there are professional guidelines for librarians to promote collaborative work with teachers to develop students’ information literacy (AASL,1998), further research is needed to examine the effect of these practices on the academic achievement of students.

Introduction to the 3 studies • Study 1: A study on inquiry-based learning （探究式學習）in primary schools through librarian-teacher partnerships (Jan. 2006 - June 2007); Faculty Research Fund (HK$18,560). (Project report) • Study 2: Promoting a collaborative teaching approach （協作式教學）to inquiry project-based learning （探究式學習）with Web 2.0 （Web2.0 技術）at upper primary levels (Apr. 2009 – Jan. 2012); Quality Education Fund （優質教育基金）(HK$2,973,900). (Project report) • Study 3: Developing information literacy （資訊素養） through an inquiry project with Web 2.0 (Jul. 2010 – Jun. 2013); General Research Fund / GRF(優配研究金)(HK$746,756).

Study 1: Inquiry PjBL with collaborative teaching approach (1) • Modeled behind Harada and Yoshina (2004) and Kuhlthau’s (2003, 2007) work, the Principal Investigator and the school principal provided guidance and leadership in bringing the teachers and the school librarian in this study to work together to guide the Primary 4 (P4) students on projects. • Over the six months, students were asked to do two General Studies projects (常識科專題研習)in two phases. • The students were free to use any database, search engine, or printed sources.(學生可自由選擇運用任何資料庫、搜尋器或印刷資料) • The grades for the two projects were not included in the final subject grades awarded to the students so as to minimize parents’ concern on how well their children had fared in the inquiry PjBL projects.(學生的報告分數不會被算入科目的最後分數中，以減少家長對其子女在此專題研習所得的成績的憂慮)

Study 1: Inquiry PjBL with collaborative teaching approach (2) • The four teachers approach for Inquiry PjBL • The researchers of this study promote a close partnership between 4 kinds of teachers (General Studies, Chinese, IT, and School Librarian) to maximize the learning supports for students. 這項研究的研究人員促進了4種教師（分別任教常識，中文，資訊科技，圖書館科）緊密的合作夥伴關係，以增強對學生的學習支持。 • The study investigates the role of each type of the teaching staff and the collaboration between the teachers in guiding P4 students through inquiry group project-based learning.這項研究探討每種老師在指導小四學生進行探究式專題研習的角色，並研究老師間的合作。 (Chu, Tang, Chow, Tse, 2007)

Study 1: The Four Teachers’ role Contributions of the collaborating teachers and librarian in the instructional design (各種老師的責任範圍) • General Studies: Research skills (研究技能) • IT: IT literacy skills (科技素養)e.g. Chinese keyboarding skills, Excel, PowerPoint • School Librarian: Information literacy skills (資訊素養)e.g. search the Web & WiseNews • Chinese: Reading and writing abilities(閱讀及寫作能力)

Study 1:The inquiry project-based learning (IPjBL) model adopted for the general studies group projects Chu, S. (2009). Inquiry project-based learning with a partnership of three types of teachers and the school librarian. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8): 1671-1686.

Study 1:Participants(參加者) • All P4 students of a local primary school participated in the study • Three kinds of participants:

Study 1:Data Collection (1) In inquiry learning, students are engaged in 5 kinds of learning: curriculum content, information literacy, learning processes, literacy competencies, and social abilities(課程內容，資訊素養，學習過程，讀寫能力和交際能力) (Kuhlthau et al., 2007). Eight dimensions representing some of the competencies of the five kinds of learning were identified and served as the dependent variables in this study.(此研究的因變量為八個學習範疇) 22

Study 1:Data Collection (2) 23

Study 1:Data Collection (3) Various perceptions related to the first IBL project were measured using a similar 5-point scale, with questions on project difficulty, helpfulness of project components, school support, and parental participation.(專題研習的難度，學校的支持，家長的參與) Gender and academic abilities(性別及學習能力) were considered variables that might affect the students’ learning. Interviews with the parents and teachers were conducted.(對家長和老師進行面談) The General Studies teachers evaluated the group projects and the grades were compared with the project grades of the students who had followed the traditional approach the previous year.(學生的報告分數和前一年(利用傳統教學法)的分數作比較) 24

Study 1:Findings and Discussion1. Evaluation of Group Projects T-tests showed statistically significant differences (p<0.001), with the inquiry PjBL group obtaining higher grades than the traditional group.(探究式學習的同學比傳統學習模式的同學在報告中取得更高的分數)

Study 1:Findings and Discussion2. Eight Dimensions of Learning - 1 • The 3 participant groups perceived the students’ learning dimensions to have improved(3個參與者組別也覺得學生的不同學習範疇有進步), with the teachers generally rating the improvements higher than the students and the parents. • No statistically significant differences were observed - improvements of the students in these 8 dimensions of learning were perceived to be similar by the teachers, parents, and the students themselves.

Study 1:Findings and Discussion3. Students’ Enjoyment and Perceptions of Inquiry PjBL Projects • The students reported positive enjoyment (3.77±1.02)(學生表示他們享受探究式學習) • The teachers and the parents even reported higher levels of perceived student enjoyment of the projects (teachers: 3.9±.568; parents: 3.94±.813). • the differences were not statistically significant (p>0.05). • Students’ reported enjoyment of the project appears to have a linear relationship with 5 of the 8 learning dimensions. • Regression analysis showed that there are significant linear relations between level of enjoyment & information literacy, reading ability, writing ability, subject knowledge, and communication skills (all have p<0.001). • These findings imply that learning may be facilitated by activities that the students enjoy.(此結果顯示如果學生享受學習的活動，他們的學習會更有效)

Study 1:Findings and Discussion4. Perception of Difficulty and Support - 1 • Both the parents and the students rated the tasks as relatively easy, while the teacher’ ratings were in the middle of the scale, signifying a neutral perception. (家長，老師和學生認為探究式學習是容易的) • no significant differences between the group ratings (p>0.05).

Study 1:Findings and Discussion6. Implementation of the Collaborative Teaching Approach Enablers • Commitment and leadership of the school admin. (學校行政者的支持和領導) • Formal meetings for all stakeholders. (除了家長及學生外，包括所有參與者的正式會議) • Formal meetings between the research author and each of the four kinds of teaching staff. (包括研究人員及各種參與老師的小組會議) • Informal meetings among the teaching staff. (老師間的簡短會議)

Study 1:Findings and Discussion6. Implementation of the Collaborative Teaching Approach Inhibitors • Teachers’ lack of time(時間不足) • “extra workload”(額外工作量)

Study 1: Findings and Discussion6. Implementation of the Collaborative Teaching Approach Benefits for the teachers and the school administration. • The teachers noted that the implementation of the new method provided more opportunities for them to communicate with each other.(為老師提供更多溝通機會) • The parents and teachers generally thought it was advisable to continue the implementation of inquiry PjBL in their school.(家長和老師也認為探究式學習應於學校繼續推行)

Study 1: Conclusion and Implications • The project grades of the students who took part in the intervention were significantly higher than the grades of the control students.(同學透過協作教學做的專題研習，比採取傳統學習模式的同學在報告中取得更高的分數) • The participant students had enjoyed doing the projects and found the tasks challenging.(學生十分享受學習過程，並覺得探究式學習具挑戰性) • Students made notable improvements in the eight dimensions of learning.(學生在八個學習範疇中有明顯進步)

Study 1: Conclusion and Implications • Data gained from interviews indicated aspects beyond the dimensions of learning that were reported to have improved as well, such as independence and self-confidence.(研究發現學生的自主學習及自信心有進步) • The perceived improvement in the dimensions of learning was not affected by the students’ gender.(性別對進步沒影響) • Students with different academic abilities were all able to benefit from inquiry PjBL(探究式學習能為不同的學術能力帶來正面影響)

Teaching strategies that foster students’ 21st century skills development- Use of Web 2.0 technologies • Integrating Web 2.0 technologies (e.g., blogs, wikis) into education has been seen as beneficial in facilitating teaching and learning (Chu, Chan & Tiwari, 2012; Chu & Kennedy, 2011; Richardson, 2006)(Web 2.0科技對教學有所幫助) • Wiki is often described as “a collaborative web space (網上協作平台)where anyone can add content and anyone can edit content that has already been published”(任何人都可新增及修改協作平台上的內容) (Richardson, 2006, p. 8) • Pifarre and Starrman (2011) point out that wiki opens up shared dialogic spaces for students to discuss ideas and accomplish tasks together using such ideas, thus scaffolding their critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Woo et al., 2011).

Study 2: Instructional Design Three main stages: 1. Implementation of P4 collaborative inquiry PjBL (with a project in Chinese) 2. Implementation of P5 collaborative inquiry PjBL with social media (with a project in Chinese) 3. Implementation of P5 collaborative inquiry PjBL with social media (with a project in English)

Study 2: New teaching model12 dimensions in students improvement

Study 2: Participants(參與者) • P4 (n=385) and P5 (n=420) students in four primary schools(小學) in Hong Kong • The academic performance of the participating schools is average/above average(參與學校的學術表現為中等或中等以上)

Study 2: Data Collection(數據收集) (1) An online survey(網上調查) • Administered to 420 P5 students who participated in the GS group project • 20 questions adapted from the Hazari’s scale (Hazari, North & Moreland, 2009) • Examined four factors regarding the use of wiki in supporting inquiry PjBL • Learning/pedagogy學習/教學 • Motivation 學習動機 • Group interaction小組互動 • Technology 科技 • Anchored on a 5-point Likert-type scale (with 1 being “strongly disagree”, 5 being “strongly agree”) (2) Focus group interviews(焦點小組訪談) • With a total of 42 students who took part in English collaborative writing(英文協同寫作) • Students’ insights on the use of wiki in collaborative writing were explored(探討學生使用維基進行協作寫作的看法)

Study 2: Sample of students’ GS project on wiki(學生在維基上的常識科報告的例子) • Sample of students’ GS project work on Google Sites (with annotations in red)

Web 2.0 (wiki) technologies in inquiry GS group projects – Finding (1) • Learning/ Pedagogy(學習/教學) • A student reported that he had “little interest [in the beginning] but after doing this project, [he] want[s] to learn more.” 一位學生說：「開始時興趣不大，但在做完這個研習後，我想學習更多」

Web 2.0 (wiki) technologies in inquiry GS group projects – Finding (2) • Motivation 學習動機 • A student commented that when compared to the traditional pen-and-paper approach, working on wiki had given him “the motivation to accomplish tasks”. 一位學生表示維基讓他「更有動機完成任務」。

Web 2.0 (wiki) technologies in inquiry GS group projects – Finding (3) • Group Interaction 小組互動 • Student A: “it is easier to communicate [via wiki] with each another” 一位學生表示：「維基使同學間的溝通更方便」

Web 2.0 (wiki) technologies in inquiry GS group projects – Finding (4) • Technology 科技 • Students found that the online working platform allowed them to work on their projects “anytime and anywhere” in a simultaneous manner. 學生表示網上平台可讓他們「隨時隨地」一起工作。

Web 2.0 (wiki) technologies in English co-writing • A total of 42 students also took part in English collaborative writing.(42 名學生參加了英語共同寫作活動） • Students’ insights on the use of wiki in collaborative writing were explored. （了解同學對於在寫作過程中運用維基的看法）

Sample of students’ English collaborative writing on wiki • Comments made on grammar by various students and the corresponding revisions made by the group on their writing (indicated with words in red and green)(有幾位同學提供了關於英語文法上的意見，然後一位同學在維基中對內容作出修改，紅色和綠色字顯示了修改位置)

Web 2.0 (wiki) technologies in English Collaborative Writing – Finding • Peer Learning (同儕學習) • “If we use Google Sites as the collaborative platform, we get to read the pieces of writing from other classes, exchange views and comment on our classmates’ work. If we write on paper, we can only read a few pieces.”（Google Sites讓我們讀到更多同學的作品） • After reading his classmate’s work, a student wrote “Your writing is good but I do not [understand] the meaning of truthful”. • The writer responded, “truthful means honest.”

Implementing the strategies - The Integrated Teaching Timetable at P4 level

Implementing the strategies - Roles of different subject teachers and the school librarian at P4 level 各老師/圖書館員的角色 • 常識科老師 • 主要幫助同學掌握研究題目的知識，發展其研究、社交及口頭報告各方面的能力 • 圖書科老師 • 負責訓練學生的資訊素養 • 提供各樣有關的資訊來源 • 透過中央圖書館的團體借閱服務租借出200本圖書方便學生在進行專題研習時使用 • 中文科老師 • 改善學生的讀寫能力(如找出文章重點、寫作摘要以及運用恰當詞彙) • 電腦科老師 • 教導學生使用中文輸入法、PowerPoint簡報及利用Excel繪製圖表，以提高他們口頭報告和使用資訊科技的能力

Implementing the strategies (實施策略)- The Integrated Teaching Timetable at P5 level(五年級的綜合教學時間表) The Integrated Teaching Timetable for P5 (2nd term) The Integrated Teaching Timetable for P5 (1st term)

Dr. Sam Chu, Associate Professor