Methods
Purpose of Study
In a study conducted by Robert Rozema on the effects different virtual environments have on learning in the literature classroom, the author references Jeff Wilhelm’s work from You Gotta Be the Book (NCTE 1997), a book that focuses on promoting greater student engagement in classroom literature. In his book, Wilhelm suggests that good readers interact and engage with texts on three different levels: the “evocative dimension,” the “connective dimension” and the “reflective dimension.” In the “evocative dimension,” students show interest in the plot, identify with characters, and are able to envision the story world. In the second dimension, the “connective” dimension, students connect personal experience to those of the characters. In the third dimension, the “reflective” dimension, readers engage in more analytical activities, such as filling extra-textual information and recognizing literary conventions. While more sophisticated readers can operate on all three levels simultaneously, Wilhelm asserts that less proficient readers “did not respond in connective or reflective ways unless they first overtly responded on all of the evocative dimensions” [Rozema, 2002, pg.3]. Wilhelm’s theory would suggest that readers must be able to first engage with and become part of the story before they can think critically about it.
As a teacher, I strive to provide and foster an environment where interaction with all three of these dimensions can be achieved. If Wilhelm’s theory is accurate, it would seem that strong interaction and connection to the first dimension, “the evocative dimension,” where students show interest in the plot, interact with the characters, and envision the story world is most important when dealing with less proficient readers, for without establishing these connections, interaction with the second and third dimensions will most likely not occur. Effective classroom discussions where students actively initiate, engage, and interact with each other instead of giving short answers to discrete questions, often produces strong interactions with the “evocative dimension,” as well as promoting study through the “connective” and “reflective” dimensions, but are often difficult to manifest because of the differences that exist between the rules of classroom dialogue versus conversations between social equals. Feelings of shyness, intimidation, or apathy on the students’ part may also have a detrimental impact, thus not achieving the necessary connection with the first dimension, thereby limiting the possibility that these readers will interact with the second and third dimensions that promote deeper analysis and understanding, and thus a richer reading of the text.
This study, conducted in the spring of 2005, utilized a synchronous electronic environment where students were able, anonymously, to interact and participate in discussions focused on classroom content. The purpose of the study was to work to create an additional environment outside the classroom where discussions that encouraged interaction with the “evocative dimension” would be fostered, thus having a positive impact on students’ motivation, enjoyment, and interaction with the literature. Data collected from the study focuses on students’ use of, and response to this type of computer-mediated communication, and the effects it had on their motivation and participation, as well as their enjoyment and awareness of the literature they read in class.
Participants/Setting
The participants in this study were 19 students enrolled in the spring semester of Contemporary Literature, the lower-ability tracked literature class required for juniors at Mound Westonka High School, which I teach. All participants had their parent/guardian sign an informed-consent agreement, in addition to signing an assent agreement themselves, both documents that acknowledged their informed and voluntary consent to be a part of this study. These documents, which were approved by the IRB, also gave permission to use their responses from the electronic transcripts, surveys, and interviews. Mound Westonka High School is a suburban school that serves about 1000 students, grades 8-12. A graduating class is about 200 students, which affects a heightened social connection both inside of and outside of class. The population of the school is around 98% white, while the socio-economic level of the students varies greatly.
Procedure
All participants in the study over the course of the semester participated in synchronous online discussions as part of in-class work. Those who had the access and inclination also used the medium outside of school to foster smaller class discussions, as well. To facilitate these synchronous “chat sessions,” I used the educational website tappedin.org. Tappedin.org is a site where educators have the opportunity to dialogue with other educators about curriculum and instruction. In addition, educators may also bring their students online to conduct academic discussions. The use of this reputable website ensured that the conversations students would be having would be secure. The site, through a system of identity codes, gave me the power to “lock” and “unlock” the chat room, thus initiating the conversation. These identity codes also ensured students anonymity online, while allowing me to track their responses. All conversations lasted approximately 25-30 minutes.
Instruments
This is a mixed-methods study, so measures were both quantitative and qualitative. The quantitative section of the study had a pre-post design. All participants completed a questionnaire (Appendix A) prior to their participation in the electronic activity. This questionnaire measured perceptions of how in-class discussion had an impact on their motivation and engagement with literature in class, as well as their attitudes regarding technology and access. This questionnaire consisted of a series of Likert-scale questions, as well as a few open-ended questions.
After participants completed the activity, they completed an exit questionnaire (Appendix B), that contained similar questions regarding motivation and participation as the first questionnaire, but focused specifically on the relationship the electronic form had on these factors. Data from both of these questionnaires was measured and compared. Responses from these questionnaires determined which participants were selected for the critical-case interviews. Four participants took part in the semi-structured interviews (Appendix C). These four students had divergent opinions on the effectiveness of the online chat sessions and the impact it had on their motivation, enjoyment, and understanding of the literature. Data taken from my field notes, observations, and these critical-case interviews were coded for trends and triangulated to ensure credibility.
Researcher’s Role/Background
As both the teacher and the researcher in this study, I had the role of both participant and observer. Because of the high number of participants in the in-class chats (12-13 participants), conversations sometimes became confusing because of the number of threads. To help to alleviate this confusion, and also to try to foster depth of analysis and thought, I served as the moderator in all of the discussions, creating initial and follow-up questions that provided a loose framework and structure to the conversation. Because I was a participant in all discussions, I was also able to monitor all responses students contributed. Unlike the students, I was not an anonymous participant.
Results of Data
Content of Conversations
In Rafaeli and Sudweek’s study on Networked Interactivity (1997), the researchers conclude that “interactivity leads to engagement” [Rafaeli & Sudweeks, pg 2]. The first and fundamental purpose of this activity was to promote and build increased engagement in the literature of the class. Initial questions asked sought to first promote interaction with Wilhelm’s “evocative” dimension, seeking students’ responses to the plot and the events of the book, and then move them to the more “connective” dimension where they are asked to connect more personal experience to those of the characters. For example, below is an excerpt from an online conversation that took place near the beginning of Tim O’Brien’s novel The Things They Carried, where students were asked to consider their favorite character. All transcripts that follow have been edited for space, but the essence of each conversation has been preserved. All individual contributions are represented as they were posed; spelling, syntactic, and punctuation inconsistencies have not been adjusted.
SaraWi: Who is your favorite character in the book thus far? Is there a character
that you connected with or that you feel you are the most like? Why?
Kansas: mark fossie
Kansas: for sure
SaraWi: Why?
Iowa: my favorite characture in the book i would have to say is im unsure
right now
Kansas: he gets jealous and is very protective of his g/f
Montana: I really like Kiowa…but I especially like Tim – i can relate to him
sooo well. Another character I appreciate is Henry Dobbins – with the monk
thing.
Iowa: i guess if i had to say right now i would say i’m like tim
Pennsylvania: I don’t know because I cant think this fast, i would have to take a
little time and actually remember something aboiut each character
Wyoming: I think Kiowa is my favorite character so far, because he is true to
his people by carrying his grandfathers hatchet with him. That shows loyalty to
me and thats what I think is the most definite thing in war, without it then you
would be lost
Alabama: My favorite character in the book so far is…none of them, actually,
I guess I dont really have a favorite….Tim i guess
SaraWi: Can some of you tell me why you chose the character you did?
NewYork: It would be Henry Dobbins…in spite of the war going on…you can
still see the kindness in him…
Kansas: could u guys be saying tim because he is telling the story
Wisconsin: I probably think that Kiowa was my favorite but not anymore because he was into jesus and everything, although I am not, he was still
committed to something even though he was in war. It made him stay on top
of things.
Alaska: Kiowa – he is someone who shows emotion, and helps care for
others when they are having problems
Iowa: i chose tim because he I feel I can relate to him because he struggles
with decision and i do as well sometimes
Wyoming: I can relate to Kiowa as well because I would probably bring
something with me of my father’s to show me what I am fighting for and to show
that I care about who I am fighting for and such.
Alabama: i relate to tim because he thinks he doesnt belong there and he doesnt want to be there which is how I would feel as well
The students’ responses illustrate the process of them becoming a part of the story through thinking more in-depth about how they are connecting and interacting with the characters of the text. These text-to-self connections allow students to more deeply consider both the characters and themselves, creating greater potential become more interested and engaged with the text itself. In addition, because of the medium, students are also exposed to many different perspectives on why their classmates connect with or relate to different characters in the book. These perspectives may help to clarify or better shape their own ideas and allow them to think about the characters in ways they previously hadn’t considered, thus fostering greater overall interest and engagement in the book.
Through the fostering of this type of engagement with the novel, these types of questions also allow and encourage students to move into deeper and more reflective interactions with the text. The response below is from a student who not only achieves interaction with the “evocative” and “connective” dimensions of the text, but moves on to the “reflective” dimension, where she is able to be more of a spectator of the text, commenting on how events reflect on who the characters are and what ideas they represent.
Montana: Tim seems so real. He isn’t some big war hero or anything like that He’s just a man who was confused on the topic of going to war. He shares his
experiences (it doesn’t matter if they are exaggerated or not) the point is that he
WANTS to share with everybody so we all have this same sort of consensus
(spelling) of emotion on one topic. As for Kiowa, i really admire him and
everything he represents. I’m not sure why or anything…but he’s just amazing
to me. Henry Dobbins on the other hand is phenomenal because he CARES
about the people INVOLVED in the war. The civilians. An example of this
is when he tells Azar to dance right because he was mocking that little girl.
He has substance and personality. WOW, sorry i wrote so much.
This type of medium is particularly conducive to fostering these transitions from lower to higher-order level thinking because the electronic environment is easier than a traditional in-class face-to face environment in allowing the moderator to easily compile and mentally digest students’ thoughts, and then craft follow-up questions that serve as a bridge from the “evocative” to the “connective” and “reflective” realms. Below is an example from a conversation regarding Jon Krakauer’s non-fiction book Into the Wild. Excerpts from this conversation illustrate this type of transition from a more literal understanding of the character and the events of the text transitions to a more reflective nature because of the questions presented.
SaraWi: So, what is your first impression of this kid throwing off the