Collaboratively designing and constructing a webquest with
children with Mild General Learning Disabilities
Nicholas Roche
A project submitted to the University of Dublin, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for
the degree of Masters of Science in Technology and Learning
May 2008
1
Declaration
I declare that the work described in this document is, except where otherwise stated, entirely
my own work and has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at this or any other
university.
Signed: _______________________
Nicholas Roche
28th May 2008
2
Acknowledgments
I wish to thank my supervisor Brendan Tangney for his patience, support and guidance
during this assignment and throughout the year.
Thanks to staff and children of Scoil Eoin Primary School and Coláiste Eoin for their support.
A special thanks to my wife and family who all have very busy academic undertakings this
year but found time for encouragement and support.
3
Contents
List of Figures
5
List of Tables
5
List of Appendices
6
Abstract
7
Section 1: Introduction
8
Section 2: Literature Review
11
Section 3: Design of the Learning Experience and Artefact
17
Section 4: Methodology and Implementation
25
Section 5: Findings and Discussion
27
Section 6: Conclusion
29
Recommendations for future research
30
Appendices
31
References
40
4
List of Figures:
FIGURE 1:
Webquest Entry page. ---------------------------------------------------- p.19
FIGURE 2:
Webquest Introduction page.-------------------------------------------- p. 20
FIGURE 3:
Webquest Podcast page.-------------------------------------------------- p. 24
FIGURE 4:
Class presentation 1 of Webquest--------------------------------------- p. 26
FIGURE 5:
Class presentation 2 of Webquest -------------------------------------- p. 28
List of tables:
Table 1:
Design Table--------------------------------------------------------------- p. 17
Table 2:
Project tasks for Webquest design and construction------------------ p. 23
5
List of Appendices
Appendix
1
Evaluation sheet one ----------------------------------- p. 31
Appendix
2
Evaluation sheet two------------------------------------ p. 32
Appendix
3
Evaluation sheet three---------------------------------- p. 33
Appendix
4
Student questionnaire----------------------------------- p. 34
Appendix
5
Questionnaire for Webquest Team------------------- p. 36
Appendix
6
Letter to parents/guardians of Webquest Team ---- p. 39
6
Abstract
Most children with Special Educational Needs (SEN) are capable of learning provided there
is recognition of, and provision for, their specific learning styles and needs. Within the area
of SEN children with Mild General Learning Disabilities (MGLD) are one group who
respond well to an adapted curriculum which meets their learning needs and capacities.
Based on the ideas of Piaget, Vygotski and Papert this research investigates the benefits
gained by SEN children who engaged in a collaborative design and construction exercise by
creating a webquest for use by their peers. This activity of creating the webquest was
designed to enhance the learning outcomes of this group of children and their peers,
underpinned by constructionist, enquiry based and motivational theory. Studies indicate many
benefits of using ICT with SEN children (Williams, 2005). Similarly, Florian and Hegarty
(2004) cited the value of ICT and the possibility it offered for inclusion for children with
SEN. Reynolds, Treharne and Tripp (2003) have demonstrated that ICT motivated children to
engage in learning. Further motivation was provided for the children by having them present
the webquest to their peers as a learning experience, evaluate subsequent peer learning and
possibly receive some positive feedback on their work from their peers.
The research question posed in this project investigates if collaborative webquest authoring is
a suitable learning experience for children with MGLD. The webquest was constructed by a
sample group of four MGLD children, aged 13-15 years, supported by a teacher and a special
needs assistant. This webquest was based on the theme of the history of Newgrange. The
children used desktop computers, laptops, email, digital cameras and mobile phones to carry
out the task.
The research model was a case study and data was collected from the core group and their
peers for evaluation purposes.
The findings show that the children were both motivated and enabled to learn with greater
application and that the experience did enhance their ability to plan cooperatively and to
utilise the GAP framework - Gather, Arrange, Present (Caverly, 2000) in the development of
the webquest.
7
Section 1: Introduction
Children with special educational needs are often labelled at an early age and assumptions are
sometimes made about their ability to learn, to develop and to become valued members of
their community. The label Mild General Learning Disability is applied to children who are
very often socially disadvantaged and experience environmental factors which are
contributory causes to their disability. Vygotsky (1962) would say that the social
environment of the child can be an important deciding factor for future learning development.
One aspect of Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory claims that children can learn by
watching others but that this may lead to the acquisition of negative attitudes or behaviours.
The characteristics of these children are divided into three groups: the cognitive, the
academic and the social emotional (Meese, 2001). In special schools providing for children
with MGLD, it is not only the identifiable learning disability that is important, it is the
emotional and behavioural difficulty which the student may also present with. Meeting the
educational needs of these children requires the provision of a balanced yet adaptable
curriculum, supported by suitable teaching methodologies (Walsh, 20003), as provided by the
Irish Junior Certificate School Programme (NCCA, 2002).
By engaging in this project the children hoped to be guided and assisted in building a learning
environment which would address the learning disabilities of their peers while
simultaneously providing them with coaching in higher order thinking skills. The learning
experience provided will have its basis in the educational theories of Dewey, Piaget, Papert
and Vygotsky. Can children benefit from working collaboratively in a computer mediated
environment both in terms of new learning and of experiencing an enjoyable activity? Papert
believes they can, provided we first recognise “the child’s natural strengths as a learner”
(Schwartz, 1999) and then provide the correct support and encouragement. Vygotsky’s idea
of the zone of proximal development is essential to the theory of this research, as it is this
idea which indicates the difference between what the learner can achieve alone and what can
be achieved with assistance. This study will look at which aspects of the webquest
construction promoted new learning and to what effect. Will this collaborative construction
exercise promote greater teamwork among the children in their ongoing learning? Will the
children recognise the need for cooperation and consensus as required elements in any
collaborative undertaking? The notion that the children should be the creators (with
8
assistance) and not merely the users of an educational webquest meant a shift in role
perception for this researcher.
The children’s prior knowledge of both the specific webquest topic and ICT skills will enable
them to engage in the construction of a learning tool embedded in technology. This prior
knowledge included a guided visit to Newgrange and the use of computers, mobile phones
and digital cameras. They were provided with school email addresses and instructed in their
use. Their prior knowledge of the webquest format, defined by Dodge (1995) as a structured
inquiry based activity, was the use of a historical webquest tracing the origins and
development of their school from 1777 to the present day. This had proved popular with the
children and they agreed that a webquest about the historic Newgrange site would have
enhanced their understanding and learning about ancient Ireland had one been available to
them prior to their visit. They had failed to understand much of what the tour guide said
during their visit and became bored and disinterested. A webquest would have been an
excellent primer for such a visit and they were eager to construct one which might benefit
their peers. The children expressed opinions that indicate they had some idea that this project
would involve collaborative and cooperative learning while engaged in a meaningful activity
of design and construction (Simina & Hamel, 2005). While the construction of the webquest
would engage the children in Bloom’s lower order thinking skills it had the possibility of
helping develop the higher order skills of analysis, synthesis and evaluation (Aviles, 1999).
For this case study a small group of children with MGLD were engaged to work on an ICT
project for use with their peers. The children would construct a learning environment which
will draw on their learning in ICT and would recognise their need for structured learning.
This researcher’s belief in the use of webquests in SEN settings was strengthened by this
project. The children struggled to express some of the ideas they wanted to bring to the
project and limited attention span also proved an issue but appropriate scaffolding, as
described by Bruner (1996), helped to minimise these presenting characteristics of SEN
children.
In the area of educational resource building for children with SEN it is fair to say projects
such as this have real benefit. They provide an advanced learning opportunity for children
who have attained certain ICT skill levels and, as a by-product, produce an educational
9
resource for use by their less able peers. This project allowed a small group of children with
MGLD to reflect on a prior learning experience, to indicate what they perceived as
weaknesses in that learning experience and to create, using technology, a new learning
experience on the same topic for the use of their peers. In doing this they expanded and
improved their own learning skills. Participation in this project has provided these children
with opportunities to be involved in active learning, in collaborative work with their peers at
a critical time in their overall development and in their words to be ‘trusted’ to use ICT
independently, both inside and outside school. The children were encouraged to and did
engage in both creative and critical thinking.
Road map for document:
Section Two reviews the literature on the use of ICT supporting learning for children with
Mild General Learning Difficulties.
Section Three examines the project and the children who took part.
Section Four examines the Methodology and Implementation.
Section Five examines and comments on the project’s data.
Section Six draws a conclusion on the project findings and possibilities for future research.
10
Section 2: Literature Review
Introduction:
Special schools catering for children with MGLD constitute the second largest group within
the special schools sector (Griffin & Shevlin, 2007). The causes of MGLD are difficult to
define but the literature would indicate a multiplicity of presenting reasons external to the
child on the social, economic, educational, and physical levels. Children who have been
assessed by an educational psychologist as having an I.Q. in the 50 to 70 range, where this is
taken as an indicator, are considered to have a MGLD. Such children are capable of learning
provided they are supported in that learning by those responsible, the parents, class teachers,
specialist teachers, special needs assistants and the school management. ……………………
The JCSP provides a learning framework for children with MGLD. The learning experiences
and organisational support offered to children with MGLD should be designed to meet the
particular needs of these children.
The JCSP recognises the value of ICT within the programme, both as a subject to be studied,
learning about ICT, and a learning tool in the education of children with special needs,
learning with ICT. This view of ICT within the JCSP would seem to run contrary to both
Abrami (in Reynolds et al., 2004) and Cuban (in Reynolds et al., 2004). Abrami maintains
that teachers should focus on learning with ICT, whilst Cuban maintained that computers, as
a medium of instruction and as a tool for student learning, are largely incompatible with the
requirements of teaching.
Many educators recognise a certain value in the use of technology to enhance learning but
there is no consistent application within the curriculum (Papert,1993) nor has there been any
significant level of research into ICT and its use with children with learning difficulties
(Harrysson in Williams, Nicholas & Jamali, 2005). In his research study Williams (2005)
cited many benefits of using information and communication technology with special
educational needs students. Likewise, Florian and Hegarty (2004) cited the value of ICT and
the possibility it offered for inclusion for children with special educational needs.
11
While the literature mentions positive and negative experiences of the usage of ICT in the
area of special needs education, it is often the specific usage rather than the specific ICT itself
which results in the negative feedback. Having children learn about ICT, how it works and
why we use it, is surely a prerequisite for future effective usage in pursuit of learning. This is
why the JCSP has a distinct advantage over mainstream curriculum; it incorporates ICT as a
subject in first year. Florian (2004) described a number of benefits of ICT in a learning
environment in special educational needs including:
1) Improving exploratory learning: allowing the student to interact with the material
and have more control over their learning. The internet is an example of how ICT can
be used in an exploratory manner.
2) Using ICT as a tool: this type of learning is about the skills involved in using the
tools of ICT.
Williams (2005) cited the following benefits of using ICT:
1) Enhancing the paper-based work of illiterate pupils;
2) Obviating problems of manual dexterity;
3) Having access to a vast repository of images and other material;
4) Improving oral communication;
5) Evidencing work.
Many of these benefits are evident in the work of pupils pursuing the JCSP and it is also
evident that the pupils, having learnt about ICT, were better prepared to utilise it to greater
effect. Williams (2005) goes on cite a number of constraints and barriers in the use of ICT.
These included:
12
1) lack of experience/operating knowledge of various applications;
2) mistrust of the accuracy of information on the internet;
3) difficulty with age appropriate material;
4) lack of technical support.
The later two constraints mentioned by Williams would be evident in the operation of ICT in
the JCSP. Age appropriate material for pupils in the eleven to fourteen year age group is
difficult across the curriculum, especially in the area of literacy. Software for this age group
is difficult to source, Wellington Square Reader Series (Granada) being one exception. This
is where the ability of teachers to produce materials could be crucial to improvements in the
learning outcomes of their pupils.
The lack of technical support is common and all too often the teacher of ICT or the class
teacher trying to incorporate ICT into the learning environment is left to their own devices.
There is little in the literature about the provision of embedded technical support for ICT,
there may be some capital expenditure on initial hardware or software but thereafter the onus
falls to the ICT teacher or coordinator. This person may or may not have received the training
required to carry out the tasks associated with the subject and if they have, then they may
well have used their own time to upskill and train in ICT.
Motivation and ICT in SEN.
Reynolds, Treharne and Tripp (2003), writing in the British Journal of Educational
Technology, cited the fact that ICT seemed to motivate pupils and thus brought about higher
standards. When using ICT, whether as a subject in its own right or as a learning tool in
cross-curricular mode there seemed to be increased application to the learning task in hand.
For children with SEN who have often experienced failure in school ICT seems to offer
13
success and to level the playing field. The failing child can now avoid handing in a smudged
paper copy with words/letters crossed out and spellings mistakes. Their poem can be written
and illustrated as well as the more able pupils in the class. They can be aided to be more
creative, they can try different things, they can evolve their own learning, they can
experiment without fear. The potential of ICT to increase commitment to learning and to
increase the pupil’s sense of achievement in learning is best illustrated by the pupil’s desire to
produce copies of their work to take home to show parents. Many of these children would be
taking or rather wanting to take home work to show off for the first time. ICT would seem to
able to engage certain pupils whether they be weaker learners or some of the more disruptive
learners.
Denning (cited in Reynolds et al., 2003) in a collaborative study found that sixty six percent
of pupils would benefit from and achieve higher standards if using ICT. Teachers involved in
the study particularly cited the increased achievement of those pupils who would be
perceived as traditional underachievers.
There is some evidence in the literature that pupils with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity
Disorder can gain benefit from interaction with ICT both in school and at home. A research
project by Shaw & Lewis (2005) found that computerised presentation significantly improved
the accuracy of responses and the on-task focus of participants with ADHD .
Within the special school sector a significant number of those pupils attending with MGLD
are also assessed as being on the ADD or ADHD spectrum. A number of these pupils are on
medication for this. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that these pupils can gain benefit from
participation in ICT centred work. They would appear to stay on task longer, show improved
levels of learning outcomes and display less disruptive behaviour within the work setting. It
would seem that further research is warranted in this area and that research so far indicates
that pupils with ADD or ADHD can benefit from tasks which are presented by ICT. In an
earlier study Ceci and Riazzi(1994) stated that:
For instance, if a task is perceived as a video game it may help recruit a set of
strategies that children have acquired to conquer video games that might not be
recruited if the same task is perceived as a type of test.
14
(Ceci & Riazzi, 1994, p.77)
This is far removed from the drill-and-practice of early educational software (Woodward and
Rieth, 1997).
15
Conclusion:
The literature indicates that ICT can positively influence the learning outcomes of children
with MGLD. Careful consideration must be given to the context in which ICT is employed,
the type of ICT to be employed and the belief by the teacher that ICT can improve their
teaching and therefore the learning outcomes of their pupils. Much of the progress made
using ICT in the special school sector seems to be despite rather than because of Department
of Education and Science policy. The more successful schools, in terms of ICT application,
seem to have an individual teacher or a small group of teachers who take it upon themselves
to upskill
and introduce technological innovation. An example of this teacher driven innovation is the
Priory Woods School web site at http://www.priorywoods.middlesbrough.sch.uk. Developed by
Ian Bean who has for many years promoted the use of ICT within the Special Educational
Needs sector.
From the literature it is clear that research into ICT and its application in the field of SEN has
not been a priority. For children, many of whom are labelled from an early age, there is a
need to seek more positive utilisation of ICT to promote their learning and preparation for
life. The references to SEN, MGLD, ADD, ADHD in this review should make it obvious that
we need to look again at our children, see them as individuals and try harder to provide the
best we can for their whole development. Information Communication Technology can and
should have a role in that development.
16
Section 3: Design of the Learning Experience and the Artefact
Design Table
Design aspect from
the
Incorporation of design aspect into
Theory
artefact/learning experience
literature
Social interaction
Social learning
Webquest designed using prior learning experiences,
Vygotsk
(e.g. computer skills, team work and prior knowledge
Aided learning
of webquest format.)
Learning through
Piaget
Webquest content product of collaborative learning
collaborative,
Papert
and group consensus.
constructional means.
Dewey
Technology used by children to show and convey
Children in the
understanding to their peers.
Technology.
Learning teams
Glasser
Creation of Webquest content encourages talk, discussion,
working together to learn and share understanding.
Enquiry based learning
Motivation
Dewey
Children asking questions, investigating, checking and
Brunner
sharing, drawing conclusions.
Keller
Eager to show how a webquest could have made their visit
more interesting and to make a webquest for
their peers.
Relevence
Dodge
Prior visit to Newgrange gave them some ownership
March
of the site, new knowledge that stayed with them
and which they could present to their peers.
Belief that they could improve on some of the presentation
of the Newgrange guide.
Table 1: Design Table
17
Background:
The learning experience chosen for this project was the design and construction of a shortterm webquest. This was to be collaboratively designed and constructed by a group of
children with Mild General Learning Disabilities (MGLD). These children, nevertheless, are
digital natives and have grown up with all the technology of the digital age. The curriculum
they follow is based on the Junior Certificate School Programme (JCSP). The JCSP provides
an educational framework which assists schools to devise and implement a more flexible
means of educational provision and Information Communication Technology (ICT) is a
separate subject within this framework. This framework follows a common structure,
underpinned by the principle of differentiation and allows for adaptive methodologies which
best suit the specific needs and learning styles of the children. Differentiation is defined by
Westwood (2001) as ‘learning differently according to observed differences among learners’.
For children with MGLD this concept is essential in supporting their learning and should be
evident in the teaching styles they encounter.
Collaborative Learning
Collaborative learning usually involves groups of learners working together to complete a
given task and provides the learners with opportunities to engage with peers in problem
solving or creative activity. The following elements are indicative of a collaborative learning
exercise (Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991):

Positive interdependence. Team members are obliged to rely on one another to
achieve the goal. If a team member fails to work on or complete their task, the team as
a whole experience a level of failure.

Individual accountability. All children in the team are held accountable for their
assigned share of the task work and keeping team members updated on progress.

Appropriate use of collaborative skills. Children are assisted and encouraged to
develop communication skills; using ICT, decision making skills and trust building
skills.
18

Team processing of individuals work to bring about consensus on the construct of the
end product.
Figure 1: Entry page to Webquest.
In Vygotsky’s notion of the “zone of proximal development”, the zone is defined as:
“the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent
problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through
problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable
peers.”(Vygotsky, 1978. P.86).This key concept has been central to much of the
educational research which has sought to study learning as a collaborative exercise.
Furthermore some of this research has cited the computer as a medium for the
provision of collaborative learning experiences (Newman, Griffin & Cole, 1998)
19
Vygotsky further states that children who work collaboratively can perform at the
level of higher order thinking skills while not doing so when working individually.
The design of this project sought to provide a collaborative learning experience
which utilised basic ICT skills already acquired by the children. The set task was
authentic to them as it was related to prior experience they had of the topic and they
were motivated by the idea that they had the opportunity to improve a learning
experience for their peers.
Having explored the long history of their school (founded 1777) using a historical webquest
the children were eager to become involved in the design and construction of a new
webquest. They would use what ICT skills they had acquired and be supported by school
staff working with ICT. Their prior knowledge of the webquest topic and their dissatisfaction
with its presentation to them as learners meant they were keen to demonstrate how they might
present the topic more successfully to their peers. This idea touches on March’s (1998) notion
of the topic or problem being connected to the children’s life experience.
Fig. 2 :Webquest Introduction page.
20
Selection of participating children.
The children selected for the project have all been assessed as having MGLD but would
exhibit little or no behavioural or emotional outbursts. Their participation in first year ICT
classes was a factor in their selection as was their home access to the technology needed to
engage in the project. The final deciding factor was their eagerness to be involved and an
acceptance by them that this project was not going to be curtailed or disrupted by
unreasonable behaviour. Having agreed certain ground rules about the project and their
participation in it, the group was formally convened.
ICT can be used as a learning tool to assist children with MGLD to develop critical thinking
and higher order learning (Loveless & Ellis in Woodward & Ferretti, 2001) see SAGE. The
importance of social interaction to learning as outlined by Vygotsky underpinned the design
of this project. Drawing on his theory of “the zone of proximal development” and the basic
principles of cooperative learning: positive interdependence, face to face interaction,
individual accountability, small group and interpersonal skills, and group self evaluation
(Doolittle, 1997) the work began with the creation of email accounts for the children and
coaching in the sending and receiving of email.
Children with MGLD display some of the following characteristics:

Poor retention ability

Limited attention span

Low self-esteem

Emotional behaviour

Delayed language development

Difficulty expressing themselves clearly.

Immature personal behaviour.
SERC report (1993).
21
ICT can be used as a learning tool to assist children with MGLD to develop critical thinking
and higher order learnng (Loveless & Ellis, 2001). The importance of social interaction to
learning as outlined by Vygotsky underpinned the design of this project. Drawing on his
theory of “the zone of proximal development” and the basic principles of cooperative
learning: positive interdependence, face to face interaction, individual accountability, small
group and interpersonal skills, and group self evaluation (Doolittle, 1997), the group was
convened.
Planning :
The children selected were called to an initial meeting to hear about the project and to get
their reaction to it. They were asked to review the webquest about our school history, to give
their reactions to the webquest format and to compare it with their experience of being taught
history in school. Their overall response was positive and they were then asked to consider if
the webquest format could be applied to some aspect of the history curriculum they had
already studied. They mentioned three topics, the Egyptians, the Normans and Ancient
Ireland, as being suitable subjects. Initially they favoured working on the Egyptians but on
finding out that Newgrange was older than the pyramids they decided to work on a webquest
of Ancient Ireland. Another reason for choosing Newgrange as the topic was that they had
previously visited there but had had a disappointing and boring time and not understood
much about the site and its significance. Their prior learning experience about Newgrange
was the starting point for this project. What was missing from that experience? How were
they going to ensure a more positive outcome for their peers when they came to study
Newgrange?
Each child was required to have the use of the following,

Mobile phone for text messages.
22

Desktop computer and or laptop.

Digital camera.

Email account (provided through the school website).

Internet broadband connection,

Out of school time to commit to project.
In the first week of the project the children were required to demonstrate their ability to use
the ICT listed above. Each night short exercises were assigned to validate capability. The
children were required to communicate with each other via email and mobile text, to share
specific answers to given tasks sourced on the internet. One child had no broadband
connection at home one day but phoned his local library to book time on their computers.
He had an hour on the library computer, did his research, got the answers he needed and
email them to the other team members. No one replied to his emails before his hour was up
so he emailed the project facilitator with some very choice language about his team mates.
The following table illustrates the main tasks in this process
Define the problem/task.
Consensus.
Develop questions to be addressed.
Collaborate and cooperate.
Search for relevant resources.
Working independently on assigned tasks.
Design a site suitable for target audience.
23
Teamwork to achieve agreed design.
Apply logical thinking to the task.
What will provide the learning for their peers?
Decide evaluation rubric
How will peer learning be assessed?
Table 2: Project tasks for Webquest design and construction
All the above scaffolding activities were mirrored by the project team as they set
about their task, the design and construction of the webquest. Two areas which the
children expressed interest in were use of audio and video in the design of the
webquest. Suitable video was sourced on the internet but the children failed to find
audio resources about the topic. One child then suggested they make their own audio
resource specifically for the webquest. The other children were reluctant at first but
having listened to a trial audio recording they all agreed to a short podcast as part of
the resources to be made available in the webquest. This was one part of the project
which impressed their peers and was the best fun of the experience for the children
thems
elves.
Figure 3: Webquest Podcast page
24
Section 4: Methodology and Implementation
For this research study a qualitative design model of a single case study was adopted. “The
case study is particularly appropriate for individual researchers because it gives an
opportunity for one aspect of a problem to be studied in some depth within a limited time
scale” (Bell, 1999, p.10). (MG) Other characteristics of a case study are being able to focus
on specific instances of a phenomenon, e.g. children with MGLD and being able to take their
perspective into consideration (Gall, Borg & Gall, 1996).
Educational Research: An Introduction. New York: Longman Publishers.
A group of four children with MGLD were assigned the task of designing and building a
webquest on a historical theme. The theme chosen was the ancient passage tomb at
Newgrange, a designated World Heritage Site.
The critical element of a webquest is that it facilitates the conversion of new information into
newly constructed and assimilated understanding (March, 2003).
The children, having visited Newgrange and having had a guided tour believed that they
retained little of the information they heard and constructed and even less understanding of
the site and its significance. Given that they present with MGLD it was not surprising that
this had been their experience. No allowances were made for their disabilities in the guide’s
presentation.
For this project to be a viable task for the children there must be appropriate teacher support
which would allow the children to progress beyond their present ability. This support is
described as scaffolding, an important concept in social constructivism. This allows children
to perform beyond their present ability and, according to Vygotsky (1978), enables a category
of problem solving skill which he calls ‘a skill that the child can perform with help’.
25
Strategies:
“ A WebQuest is a scaffolded learning structure that uses links to essential resources on the
World Wide Web” (March). Other scaffolding activities include:

Helping children develop the right mindset.

Engaging children with the topic/problem.

Dividing tasks into doable/manageable units.

Directing children to the core elements of the learning goals.
(Ngeow & Kong, 2001)
Figure 4: Class presentation 1 of Webquest
26
Section 5: Findings and Discussion
This section will attempt to show, using evidence from the project, that children with Mild
General Learning Disabilities have the ability to engage in higher order thinking skills or
critical thinking skills. These skills of analysis, evaluation and synthesis form part of Bloom’s
Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain. The children were provided with a learning
environment which allowed them to experiment, to have “fun”, to not be threatened by
assigned tasks, to collaborate rather than compete, to succeed rather than fail, to sit around a
table and contribute, to agree or disagree. Technology presented the children with a different
way of interacting with the curriculum, using methodologies which suit their learning needs.
All the children reported that they had greater ICT skills because of their work on this project
and would like to be involved in any future projects.
Benefits
All the children noted their overall enjoyment of the project, were positive about the
experience and took pride in producing a learning tool that would be used by their peers and
by the class teachers. They expressed the view that their experience of history in school had
been dull and boring and very book based. The webquest allow the use of audiovisual
material to deliver new knowledge and promote active learning in an engaging way. There
was a high degree of motivation present throughout and the children became very possessive
of the project. In their questionnaire mention was made of getting their own email address for
the first time and they want to keep them after the project ends. After they had been given
email accounts and coached in the use of them, they proceeded to bombard the project
facilitator with emails detailing their progress on the project tasks.
The children all had difficulty expressing their ideas about the webquest design. This was
partly due to lack of appropriate vocabulary and they needed lots of scaffolding but soon
became familiar with the language used. The children were happy that, by making use of
ICT, they were able to communicate meaning which would make learning easier for their
peers.
27
Once the students had gathered relevant information from the internet, they need to
summarize and synthesize that information (Leahy & Twomey, 2005) and, by consensus,
agree what information should be included in the webquest to best bring about new
knowledge in their peers. This type of exploratory learning is described by Florian (2004) as
one of the benefits of using ICT in a learning environment in special educational needs. It
allows the child to interact with new knowledge and learning and to have greater control over
that learning. Williams (2005) noted that the use of ICT could provide benefits to learning by
allowing children access to a vast repository of images and other material.
Figure 5: Class presentation 2 of Webquest
Constraints
Some constraints were evident during the project in relation to ICT and children with MGLD.
The children were initially suspicious of the inclusion of mobile phones and internet usage in
the project. This was probably caused by the level of control within the school environment
of both the use of mobile phones and the use of the internet. One child commented that at last
they were to be ‘trusted’ and allowed to work independently on a school project both at
school and at home. The use of some of the technology was difficult for them but they were
strongly supported and never left without assistance. Prior practise with the technology, both
hardware and software would address some of the following, cited by Wilson (2005):

Lack of experience/operating knowledge of various applications.

Difficulty with age appropriate material.

Lack of technical support.
28
Section 6: Conclusion
To try to assess how successful this exercise was, to gauge its usefulness to the children in
developing new or better skills is a difficult task. According to their own responses the
children enjoyed the learning involved in the design and construction of the webquest.
There was an echo of Papert’s hard fun in their responses but a willingness to do further
work. They worked well as a team with little discord and used known and new technologies
to the benefit of the project.
All the children completed their individual tasks, shared their findings with the team and
allowed a leader to emerge who led from the front. One very striking comment was about
being able to use email to keep in contact with other team members. It appeared to hint at the
social isolation that can occur for the adolescent child with MGLD, particularly in the context
of attendance at a non local school.
The research question posed concerned collaborative webquest authoring as suitable learning
experience for children with MGLD. The children were certainly motivated by the task they
undertook and using their mobile phones was another motivating factor. Within the very
structured construction of this webquest project these children may have touch on the higher
order thinking skills but they may have scored greater success in the area of self-esteem and
interpersonal skills. Cox (2003) calls for these skills to be included in a wider definition of
educational success.
29
Recommendation for future research
This very limited case study has indicated that webquest design and construction by children
with MGLD creates strong motivational drive in the children involved. The process involves
collaboration, cooperation and teamwork, all focused on a common goal. The provision of
email accounts for the purpose of transmitting information during this project may have had
other positive social consequences for the children involved. Likewise the use of mobile
phones has improved social networking and parents have commented upon the positive
effects this project has had on their children.
The possibility of a more extensive case study to investigate the learning of skills in
collaboration and cooperation whilst engaged in a design and construction of a webquest
might be a worthwhile and beneficial endeavour.
30
Appendix 1 – Evaluation Sheet 1
C.A.L. - Computer Assisted Learning – Coláiste Eoin
Evaluation: Newgrange Webquest
True or False.
Tick here
Newgrange is a
Passage Tomb.
Newgrange is about
3200 years old.
Newgrange is near the
river Boyne.
Newgrange is older
than the Egyptian
pyramids.
Newgrange was built
by Stone Age people.
31
Marks
Appendix 2 – Evaluation Sheet 2
Newgrange
The Missing Word
MARKS
River
Liffey
Boyne
Bronze
Iron
_________
Tomb
Way
East
__________
3200
4200
5200
_________
Suir
Nore
_________
age people
Stone
New
Passage
West
6200
years old
Older than
the
Hills
Pyramids
_________
32
Vatican
Dublin
Appendix 3 – Evaluation Sheet 3
Newgrange Word Search
r
f
v
r
k
t
u
s
c
o
o
z
x
v
e
b
h
t
h
m
o
w
q
f
r
h
n
o
a
b
f
y
d
j
b
h
m
n
m
o
b
p
a
s
s
a
g
e
b
y
o
e
w
o
t
t
e
a
e
n
x
r
n
n
o
u
o
p
r
e
a
p
m
g
n
w
t
o
m
b
u
l
o
v
e
g
y
p
t
k
p
e
o
p
e
x
v
c
j
Egypt
People
l
Tomb
Passage
Boyne
Stone
Roofbox
Kerbstone
Chamber
Dawn
33
Appendix 4 - Student Questionnaire on Newgrange Webquest.
1. Did you enjoy the webquest experience? If yes, which part?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2. Would you prefer to use the webquest before or after your visit to Newgrange?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Why?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
3. Did you think ICT made the story of Newgrange more interesting?
___________________________________________________________________________
How?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
4. Name something you learned using the ICT.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
5. Did you like working in a team?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
34
6. Which part of the ICT was the most interesting?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Why?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
35
Appendix 5 – Questionnaire for WebQuest Team
Did you enjoy the project?
What did you enjoy about it?
Did you enjoy the teamwork?
What did you find interesting
about the project?
Name something new you learned.
Which ICT did you like?
Did you have email before the
project began?
36
Will you continue to use it after
the project?
Did the project help you manage
your time better?
Would you do another WebQuest?
Why would you ?
How did ICT make it easier
to understand the topic ?
Which ICT worked best ?
Why? What did it do?
37
If you did not have email before
would you like to keep it
after the project ?
Why so ?
Was your mobile helpful
to the project?
How so ?
Is the webquest better than
a history book ?
Why so?
38
Appendix 6 – Letter to parents/guardians of Webquest Team
Nicholas Roche
MSc in Technology and Learning 2007 – 2009,
Departments of Computer Science and Education,
Trinity College,
Dublin 2.
I thank you for taking the time to fill out this form.
I consent to _______ being part of the team involved in your research for the above course.
We understand that the email address provided to ______ is for the duration of the project
and can only be accessed by him.
Signed : ____________________________________________________________
Date:
_____________________________________________________________
39
References

Aviles, C. B. (1999). Understanding and testing for “Critical Thinking” with Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Council on Social Work Education (45th, San Francisco, CA, March 10-13, 1999).

Bandura, A. Social learning theory, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1977.

Bell, J. (1999) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in
education and social science (3rd ed). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Bruner, J., The Culture of Education, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass.,
1996

Caverly, D. C. (2000). Technology and the “Knowledge Age.” In D. B. Lundell & J.
L. Higbee (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Meeting on Future Directions
in Developmental Education [Online] (pp. 34-36). Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota, General College and The Center for Research on Developmental
Education and Urban Literacy.
Available: www.genumn.edu/research/crdeul

Ceci, S. J. & Roazzi, A. (1994). ‘The effects of context on cognition: postcards from
Brazil.’ In Sternberg, R. J. & Wagner, R. K. (eds) Mind in Context: Interactionist
Perspectives on Human Intelligence, pp. 74-104. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
40

Cox, E. ‘Creating socially competent and ethical schools’. Independent Education
33:3.

Department of Education and Training, On track project, DE&T, MELBOURNE,
2004.

Dodge, B., (1995) Some Thoughts About Webquests retrieved April 26, 2008 from
http://webquest.sdsu.edu/about_webquests.html

Doolittle, P.E. (1997). Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development as a Theoretical
Foundation for Cooperative Learning. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching,
8(1), 83-103.

Florian, L. (2004). ‘Uses of technology that supports pupils with special educational
needs’,

in Florian, L. and Hegarty, J. (Eds), ICT and Special Educational Needs: a Tool for
Inclusion ( pp 7-20).

Buckingham: Open University Press.

Gall, M., Borg, W., & Gall, J. (1996). Educational Research: An Introduction. New
York: Longman Publishers

Griffin, S. & Shevlin, M. (2007). Responding to Special Educational Needs: An Irish
Perspective. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan.
41

Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson and K.A. Smith, Cooperative Learning:Increasing
College faculty Instructional Productivity, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.
4, George Washington University, 1991.

Leahy, M & Twomey, D. (2005). Using web design with pre-service teachers as a
means of creating a collaborative learning environment. Educational Media
International, Volume 42, Number 2, June 2005 , pp. 143-151(9).

March, T. (1998). Why webquests?, an introduction. WebQuest for Learning Web site
(accessed 8/4/08) http://www.ozline.com/webquests/intro.html

March, T. (2003) What WebQuests Are (Really)
retrieved 10/04/2008 from http://bestwebquests.com/what_webquests_are.asp

Meese, R.L. (2001). Teaching learners with mild disabilities:

Integrating research and practice. Belmont, CA: Wadsorth

Thomson Learning.

NCCA (2002) Draft Guidelines for Teachers of Students with General Learning
Disabilities,
Book 3, available at http://82.195.132.36:5050/j/sen/PDFS/tguide.pdf

Newman, D., Griffin, P. & Cole, M. (1989) The Construction Zone: Working for
cognitive change in school. New York: Cambridge University Press.
42

Ngeow, K. & Kong, Y. (2001) Learning to Learn: Preparing Teachers and Students
for problem-Based Learning. ERIC Digest. [ED 457 524]

Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine – Rethinking school in theage of the
computer.

New York: Basic Books.

Reynolds, D., Treharne, D. & Tripp, H. (2003). ICT – the hopes and the reality.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), pp. 151-167. Retrieved March 3,
2008, from Blackwell Synergy database.

Schwartz, D., “Ghost in the Machine – How Computers fundamentally change the
way Kids Learn”
Interview of Seymour Papert at
http://www.papert.org/articles/GhostInTheMachine.html, 1999

Shaw, R., and Lewis, V. A. (2005). The impact of computer-mediated and traditional
academic task presentation on the performance and behaviour of children with
ADHD. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 5(2), pp.47-54.

Simina, V. & Hamel, M.J. (2005). CASLA through a social constructivist perspective:
WebQuest in project-driven language learning. ReCALL Journal, 17(2), pp. 217-228.
Retrieved April 2008 from Cambridge Journals.

Vygotsky, LS, Thought and language, MIT Press, Cambridge Mass., 1962.
43

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological
Processes MA : Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological
processes.
(M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Scribner, Eds.) Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press.

Walsh, D. (2003) Awakening Creativity in Children with Mild General Learning
Disabilities.
REACH Journal of Special Needs Education in Ireland, 17(1), 23-32.

Westwood, P. (2001) ’Differentiation as a strategy for inclusive classroom practise’
Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 6, 1: 5-11

Williams, P. (2005). Using information and communication technology with special
educational needs students. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 57(6),
pp. 539-553. Retrieved March 4, 2008, from Emerald Insight database.

Williams, P. (2006). Exploring the challenges of developing digital literacy in the
context of special educational needs communities. Exploring the challenges of
developing digital literacy, 5(1), pp. 1-16. Retrieved March 4, 2008, from
http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/italics/vol5-1/pdf/Williams_final.pdf.

Williams, P., Jamali, H.R., & Nicholas, D. (2006). Using ICT with people with
special education needs: what the literature tells us. Aslib Proceedings: New
44
Information Perspectives, 58(4), pp. 330-345. Retrieved March 4, 2008, from
Emerald Insight database.

Woodward, J. & Ferretti, R. ‘New machines and new agendas: the changing nature of special
education technology research’, in Florian, L. (2006) (ed.) The Sage Handbook as Special
Education. London: Sage Publications.

Woodward, J. & Rieth, H. (1997). A Historical Review of Technology Research in
Special Education. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), pp. 503-5.
45