Digital Reader Response: Creating Book Trailers with Explain Everything

Authors: Chase Young (Texas A & M University – Corpus Christi), Katie Stover (Furman University), and Bethanie Pletcher (Texas A & M University – Corpus Christi)

Do you remember making dioramas? Many of our classmates thought it was fun to transform an ordinary shoe box into an inanimate three-dimensional representation of a story.  Sadly, we did not. But to us, the reading effort was not worth the reward. Fortunately, times changed and shoebox technology advanced.  Imagine walking into a first grade classroom and observing students expressing their reading comprehension authentically with digital tools and sharing their learning with the world beyond the classroom. We think a digital approach to reader response is more efficient than going door to door with a diorama and certainly more suitable for the 21st century. We dedicate this strategy to students who precociously evaluate the varying benefits of reader response activities, and to teachers looking to motivate even the most resistant readers.

The rapid appearance of the Internet and the continuous development of new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have changed the nature of literacy and the way we communicate (International Reading Association, 2009; Leu & Kinzer, 2000; Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, & Cammack, 2004). With this constantly evolving definition of literacy, it is essential that teachers prepare students for the demands of new literacies through the integration of ICTs into the curriculum (International Reading Association, 2009; Lankshear & Knobel, 2006; Zawilinski, 2009). The ability to read, write, and communicate online require additional skills and strategies beyond the traditional (International Reading Association, 2001).

The New London Group (1996) suggests the need for a broader view of literacy beyond the traditional language based approaches. New digital tools change the way text is created, distributed, and communicated (Lankshear & Knobel, 2003), as students construct, share, and access information using a range of literacies. Meaning is generated and negotiated through face-to-face and digital interactions (Lankshear & Knobel, 2007). Thus, literacy is viewed as a collaborative and multifaceted process (New London Group, 1996). The participatory nature of ICTs promotes collaboration among Internet users (Karchmer-Klein & Harlow Shinas, 2012; Laru, Naykki, & Jarvela, 2012).

These new literacies allow students to interact with content through various modalities. For instance, rather than solely reading or writing printed text, students can engage with technology that incorporates audio and visual literacies. In this way, students determine how to convey information in many ways. The interactive nature of digital literacies increases active construction of knowledge. Furthermore, with the adoption of the Common Core State Standards (2010) across much of the United States, there is a greater emphasis on the integration of technology, including using the Internet to produce and publish a range of writing.

We offer this article to help educators conceptualize the potentials of new literacies in the classroom where traditional types of reading and writing practices are often emphasized.  We share one versatile and engaging application known as Explain Everything as a tool to bridge both approaches in the classroom setting. What follows is how one class used this application to create online book trailers.

Explain Everything

Explain Everything is an iPad application that allows users to create slideshows using graphics, drawings, or pictures. The then narrates each slide to match the pictures. The final show is compiled and produced into a movie that can be shared in various ways, such as Facebook, Email, YouTube, or simply saved on the device for future viewing.

You may be thinking, “What’s the difference between this and PowerPoint?” In our experience, it takes a great deal of time and effort to teach students how to effectively use such programs, but we have seen students in Kindergarten successfully create class projects with Explain Everything. So, now your mind is probably racing with the potential educational applications. We have used it in many ways, including publishing essays and fictional stories, illustrating audio journals, and the strategy shared here—creating book trailers.

Using Explain Everything to Create Book Trailers in the Classroom

The students have already read the text and written the book review (Dalton & Grisham, 2013). They are now ready to create a digital book trailer using Explain Everything (or a similar application). To help increase independence and guide their projects, the students answer these questions along the way.

Should I use images from the web, my own drawings, or photos that I take? Here, students determine the best source of graphics for their slides. Often times, they will use all three on any given slide. For example, they may download a picture of Superman and draw the setting around him or take a picture of a classmate and draw in the cape and Superman symbol. In any case, students decide which pictures/graphics/drawings will be suitable for their narration.

Do my illustrations match my narrative? The students are required to illustrate each page. There is no limit to the number of pages needed; however, creating too many slides eliminates the coveted “quickness” of this application. Once the pages are properly sequenced and represent what the student has written, the student moves into the next step.

Have I practiced my narration? It is imperative that students are exposed to good examples of movie and book trailers to accomplish this step. The students should strive for that unique movie trailer narration, overflowing with expression to capture the audience’s attention and leave them in suspense.  Once the student can read the trailer with appropriate expression, he/she is ready to record. This is done by pressing the record button, reading the text intended for the particular page, and stopping the recording. The student then progresses to the next page and repeats this procedure until all slides include narration. Upon completion, the student has the option to share the final production.

Classroom Example

Consider the following example that comes from the first author’s second grade classroom. Two students worked together to create a book trailer for Maybelle in the Soup (Speck, 2007). After learning about book trailers, including the style, content, and purpose, the students began discussing the guiding questions and working on the iPad.

Should I use images from the web, my own drawings, or photos that I take? The girls decided to use pictures from the web. However, in the introduction, they determined that Maybelle was a cockroach that lived under the refrigerator, and decided to use multiple photographs for the illustration. They copied and pasted cockroach and refrigerator images from the Internet and situated them on the slide to fit the oral description (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Example of using Pictures from the Web in Book Trailers
Figure 1. Example of using Pictures from the Web in Book Trailers

Do my illustrations match my narrative? The students accomplished this goal by utilizing pictures that fit their narration. For example, on one slide the students quoted characters from the book with “No dust, no mess, and absolutely, positively NO BUGS!” and created the corresponding illustration in Explain Everything (Figure 2). Again, the students decided to use a combination of drawing and photos from the web.

Figure 2. Example of Students Using a Combination of Photos and Drawings
Figure 2. Example of Students Using a Combination of Photos and Drawings

Have I practiced my narration? After adding visuals, the students read and reread their lines, much a like a rehearsal for a performance. They even decided that in some spots they would read in unison and in others take turns. Having watched the final video, it was clear that they practiced, as the video possessed strong elocution that entertained audiences. In this case, these second graders shared their book trailer on the teacher’s class YouTube channel. Following is the script for their book trailer.

Student 1: There are two main characters. Their names are Maybelle and Henry.

Student 2: There are two evil characters as well. Their names are Mr. and Mrs. Peabody. Student 1&2: They always say, “No dust, no mess, and absolutely positively NO BUGS!” Student 1: Maybelle wants to taste something that has not hit the floor.

Student 2: The next day, the Peabodys made mock turtle soup. Maybelle wanted to try it and almost got spotted.

Student 1&2: Will she survive or will she be caught? Read Maybelle in the Soup to find out. Don’t forget to read Maybelle in the Soup by Katie Speck!

Toward Independence

After producing a couple book trailers as a class, and reflecting on students’ productions as a group, the class created a book trailer workstation. Here, students read books independently and developed book trailers. Using a workstation (or center) for these projects worked well because iPads are limited in many schools. Also, students completed the entire task independently and uploaded their own work. Teachers can later view the student productions as well as share the masterpieces with students’ families and friends near and far.

Conclusion

Although we really enjoy the Explain Everything App, there are likely other similar kid-friendly applications.  However, with any application used to make book trailers, the task provides a digital experience that requires students to engage in multiple literate processes. For example, students are essentially creating detailed summaries (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000) and leaving out the resolution of the story to create suspense. So, in order to render a quality production, they need a deep understanding of the text. Students also engaged in an authentic writing experience, as they focused on embedding voice into their writing (Culham, 2011; Dorfman & Cappelli, 2007). In addition, the need for expression in the narration requires students use their prosodic skills to convey the appropriate meaning and tone of their chosen stories. In the end, students have a lot of fun, enhance their technological skills, and share learning via the Internet with other classrooms, teachers, friends, and family. By offering students digital opportunities, they are able to expand their learning community beyond classroom walls into virtual learning spaces (Larson, 2009, p. 646).

After the students reached independence and we added the “book trailer” workstation, it became the most highly anticipated destination. Students read voraciously to prepare themselves for it. As an unintended positive consequence, the strategy was naturally differentiated—every student, regardless of reading ability, created book trailers. In fact, the students collectively created over 100 book trailers in three months. And, as we guessed, not one of them lamented about the absence of a diorama project.

References

Culham, R. (2011).  Reading with a writer’s eye.  In T. Rasinski (ed.), Rebuilding the Foundation, Effective Reading Instrution for the 21st Century (pp. 245-270).  Bloomington, IN:  Solution Tree.

Dalton, B. & Grisham, D.L. (2013). Love That Book: Multimodal Response to Literature. The Reading Teacher, 67(3), 220–225. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.1206

Dorfman, L. R., & Cappelli, R. (2007) Mentor texts: Teaching writing through children’s literature, K-6. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse.

International Reading Association. (2001). Integrating literacy and technology in the curriculum: A position statement of the Intenational Reading Assocation. Newark, DE: Author. Retrieved from http://reading.org/downloads/positions/ps1048_technology.pdf

International Reading Association. (2009). New literacies and 21st century technologies: A position statement of the International Reading Association. Newark, DE: Author. Retrieved from http://www.reading.org/Libraries/position-statements-and-resolutions/ps1067_NewLiteracies21stCentury.pdf

Karchmer-Klein, R. & Shinas, V. H. (2012). Guiding principles for supporting new literacies in your classroom. The Reading Teacher, 65(5), 288-293.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2003). New Literacies: Changing Knowledge and Classroom Practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2006). New Literacies: Everyday Practices and Classroom Learning (second edition). Maidenhead and New York: Open University Press.

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2007). Researching new literacies: Web 2.0 practices and insider perspectives. e-Learning, 4(3), 224-240.

Laru, J., Naykki, P., & Jarvela, S. (2012). Supporting Small-Group Learning Using Multiple Web 2.0 Tools: A Case Study in the Higher Education Context. Internet And Higher Education, 15(1), 29-38.

Leu, D. J., & Kinzer, C. K.  (2000).  The convergence of literacy instruction with networked technologies for information, communication, and education.  Reading Research Quarterly35(1), 108-127.

Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J. & Cammack, D.W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other informational and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570-1613). Newark, DE. International Reading Association.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for English Language Arts & literacy. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Offices.. Retrieved from http://corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_ELA%20Standards.pdf

New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1) 60-92.

Zawilinski, L. (2009). HOT blogging: A framework for blogging to promote Higher Order Thinking. The Reading Teacher, 62(6), 650-661.

Literature Cited

Speck, K. (2007). Maybelle in the soup. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

Teaching & Learning with E-Readers: Promoting Deep Learning or Deep Trouble?

Authors: Nance Wilson (SUNY Cortland), Vicky Zygouris-Coe (University of Central Florida), & Victoria Cardullo (Auburn University)

E-readers, such as iPads, present teachers with opportunities to design challenging, active, and engaging curriculum.  They provide students with access to interactive texts, the Internet, and applications.  iPads are changing the way  knowledge is shared, constructed and enacted.

Researchers have examined the use of iPads in academic settings since they were adopted into the classroom (Cardullo, 2013; Larson, 2010; Wilson, Zygouris-Coe, & Cardullo, 2014).  A common theme throughout all of the iPad-related research is that teaching and learning with e-readers changes teacher pedagogy (Stors & Hoffman, 2013).  These changes require a new pedagogical framework to address issues of teaching and learning with one-to-one technology. The Metacognitive Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (M-TPACK) framework (Wilson, Zygouris-Coe, Cardullo, & Fong, 2013) is built upon the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006).  Within TPACK, technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge intersect to create dynamic and interacting knowledge to support technology integration.  The main distinction of the M-TPACK framework is reflected in the “claim”: teaching and learning with mobile learning and emerging technologies, requires a metacognitive teacher.  Such a teacher is not only knowledgeable about content, pedagogy, students, and technology, but is adaptive and has positive dispositions toward technology integration into his or her teaching (see Figure 1). Metacognitive teachers “are aware of what they know regarding content, pedagogy, students, and technology and use this knowledge to adapt their teaching to assure that students meet curricular goals” (Wilson, Zygouris-Coe, Cardullo, & Fong, 2013, p. 7).

The focus of M-TPACK on teacher’s disposition rather than knowledge is key.  Knowledge is what we know whereas a disposition is a person’s  “tendency to act or think in a particular way” (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). M-TPACK is unique because it begins not with the technology, but with the teacher.  To assure that teaching with iPads promotes deep learning, professional development must start with building metacognitive awareness in teachers through a series of embedded opportunities.

 

image001

Figure 1. Pedagogical Framework for e-Readers in the Classroom (Wilson, Zygouris-Coe, Cardullo, & Fong, 2013)

“Building” the metacognitive teacher

The disposition to utilize technology begins with building teachers’ confidence with technology (Bauer & Kenton, 2005) and their confidence that their instructional goals will be addressed with technology (Wozney, Venkatesh, & Abrami, 2006).  Somekh (2008) emphasizes teachers’ needs for time and support from administration to acclimate, practice, and build knowledge of the iPads and how they can be used in the classroom.  In addition, teachers need time to collaborate with peers as well as experts; to reflect, discuss, and problem-solve about implementation, instructional, pedagogical, technological, or student learning challenges (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, & York, 2006).  When providing teachers with time and opportunities to use an application such as Noteability to take hand and type written notes that can embed images, webpages, and audio, teachers learn through their own experiences how to use the application for academic purposes.  Using this application for the teacher’s learning will help build his or her understanding of how to integrate technology in the classroom.  When teachers have the opportunity to use technology in relevant and authentic ways, as they would use it with their students, they not only learn the technology but they also have a chance to plan ahead for challenges, instructional problems, and logistics prior to working with students.

The time and professional development around the use of Noteability should encourage a teacher to consider a series of questions around developing knowledge prior to adopting the application as a digital tool in the classroom.  These questions help to build a teacher’s disposition as a metacognitive teacher.

  1. What is Noteability and how can it help meet my curricular goals?  (Content Knowledge)
  2. How can Noteability build my students’ deep understanding of content? (Content Knowledge)
  3. For which purpose will I use Noteability, when, and how often?  (Pedagogical Knowledge)
  4. What protocols do I need to create for using Noteability?  (Pedagogical Knowledge)
  5. Before implementation, how will I examine my students’ prior knowledge of Noteability? (Student Knowledge)
  6. How much practice (and when will I allow for it) will my students need before they become familiar with Noteability? (Pedagogical Knowledge)
  7. What do I need to consider about downloading Noteability and ways in which we will use it in my classroom? (Pedagogical Knowledge)
  8. What evidence will I collect to ensure that my students are using Noteability to improve learning?   (Student Knowledge and Pedagogical Knowledge)

By providing teachers with time and support for learning about technology prior to and during integration builds their metacognitive awareness by supporting the development of questions such as the ones above.  The professional development is going beyond building teacher’s knowledge to help develop the metacognitive awareness that is key to creating 21st century learners.

Providing Content Specific Technological Experiences

It is not enough to provide teachers with opportunities to practice using iPads for academic purposes; teachers must see how the iPad can be used to build active learning in their discipline (Beach & O’Brien, 2012).  Choosing applications require that teachers have a deep understanding about pedagogical and content knowledge to assure that the applications that they choose support students’ learning and are aligned with curricular goals.  For example, when working with a group of social studies teachers provide them with an opportunity to engage with the application Timeline Builder to create their own timelines before demonstrating for an entire class (or small groups of students) will allow teachers to understand its multimodal capabilities and how the application works.  Scaffolding the teachers’ experiences in this way will create positive teacher interactions with the device, and in turn, will help them to develop metacognitive and adaptive learning skills as well as teaching strategies.

Providing teachers with time to build academic experiences with the device and its applications is only a piece of the puzzle for promoting the development of the metacognitive teacher at the center of the M-TPACK framework.  Teachers also need support through Professional Learning Communities (PLC) (Dufour, 2004) and co-teaching opportunities.  PLCs can promote technology efforts and provide teachers with a forum for discussing how integration of technology can improve student achievement, learning, and teacher collaboration.  In addition, a PLC focused on the integration of iPads in the classroom allows teachers to discuss the adaptations needed to ensure that all students are learning using the devices. During the PLC she learns how to adapt to the technology and she knows that a ubiquitous learning environment is about access to content, research, support, expertise, real world artifacts, accessing information sources, ease of mobility, motivation, curiosity, communication, and collaboration (Cardullo et al., 2014).  The collaborative culture of the PLC provides a culture offers a place for teachers to develop best practices and solve problems.

When building metacognitive awareness with a teacher who is working towards integrating iPads into the classroom, co-planing and teaching with a professional development provider, a PLC teammate, or technology coordinator allows the classroom teacher  the opportunity to see adaptations in real time and offering support when recognizing that adaptations need to be made.  Co-teaching is when two or more professionals co-plan to deliver active instruction within a single classroom (Friend & Cook, 2003).  For instance, when co-teaching with the Subtext application on the iPad both teachers were walking around assisting students with the application and the close reading.  As the teachers worked together with the students the classroom teacher had the opportunity to see the technology coach revise their original teaching plan to meet the needs of a student who was unable to use the application in the way originally planned. The PLC along with support using co-teaching builds a classroom teacher who is metacognitive regarding her knowledge and technology integration.  After the teaching session, the coach and teacher would discuss a series of metacognitive questions, such as those above used to illustrate the awareness needed to ensure flexible and adaptable application of Subtext.

When integrating iPads into the classroom, we must begin with the teacher.  We must build the teacher’s knowledge about the technology and about pedagogical practices that are necessary for implementing the technology.  We must provide the teacher with opportunities to ask questions about the role of the iPad in her classroom.  We must support teachers as they build their content, student, technological, and pedagogical knowledge about using iPads through embedded professional development that supports day-to-day teaching and learning.

Deep learning refers to using knowledge and skills in ways that prepare students for real life (The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, 2014).  On the other hand, deep trouble is what happens in classrooms that adopt technologies without a plan, purpose, teacher professional development, and a school culture that neither embraces nor supports teaching and learning with technology.  In short, preparing teachers to engage with iPads is a complex endeavor that requires more than traditional professional development; an endeavor that if approached strategically and effectively can result in deep student learning, and if not, it can result in deep trouble (i.e., frustration, instructional time loss, decrease in teacher and student motivation, etc.).  Teachers need time with the devices before they incorporate them for learning in the classroom. Training is needed both inside and out of the classroom, and teachers need to be adaptive and reflective as they bridge emerging technologies and content.  Building teacher metacognitive awareness in the context of 21st century teaching and learning should start in teacher preparation programs and continue throughout a teacher’s professional career.

Works Cited

Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in schools: Why it is not happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13, 519-546.

Beach, R., & O’Brien, D. (2012). Using Apps for learning with literacy across the curriculum. iBooks.

Cardullo, V. (2013). Eighth-grade students reading nonfiction literature on the iPad: An exploratory case study. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest (3578623). http://gradworks.umi.com/35/78/3578623.html

Cardullo, V., Zygouris-Coe, V., & Wilson, N.S.  (2014). The benefits and Challenges of Mobile Learning and Ubiquitous Technologies. In  Keengwe, J. (Ed.).  Promoting Active Learning through the Integration of Mobile and Ubiquitous Technologies. (pp. 185-196). Hershey, Pennsylvania:  IGI Global.

Dispositon. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disposition.

Dufour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & York, C. (2006). Exemplary technology-using teachers: Perceptions of factors influencing success. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(2), 55-61.

Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2003). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals. (4th edition). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Larson, L.C. (2010). Digital readers: The next chapter in e-book reading and response. The Reading Teacher, 64(1), 15–22.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Munoz,C., & Sperling, G .(2013). Bringing America’s students into the digital age. White House Blog. Retrieved from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/06/06/bringing-america-s-students-digital-age

Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 449-460). New York, NY: Springer.

Storz, M. G., & Hoffman, A. R. (2013). Examining response to a one-to-one computer initiative:  Student and teacher voices. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 36(6), 1-18.

Contact information: Nance Wilson – nanceresearch@gmail.com