Blocked or Unlocked: Recognizing the Benefits and Challenges of Digital Literacy Storytelling Projects

Abstract

Increasingly, national standards require K-12 students to develop digital literacy practices. In literacy, teachers’ use of digital media platforms has unrecognized potential to impact students’ literacy engagement. Moreover, students gain English Language Arts skills and knowledge of the writing process when completing digital literacy storytelling projects. This study records the preparedness and willingness of participants in a graduate-level teaching English Language Arts to implement digital literacy storytelling projects in K-12 settings. Results indicate that some participants unlocked the possibilities of using the Digital Literacy. Storytelling Project as a learning tool for English Language Arts, while others remained blocked to the potential for the Digital Literacy Storytelling Project due to their challenges with technology. The study highlights the implications of supporting the digital development of K-12 teachers.

Keywords

digital literacy technology language arts digital storytelling literacy

For over a decade, the National Council for Teachers of English (NCTE, 2009) has outlined the need to consider the cultural and communicative practices of new 21st-century literacies. New media literacies, including television, computers, video games, cellular phones, the internet, and social media, infuse the lives of young children (Marsh et al., 2015). To incorporate new literacies into their classroom, teachers require pedagogical approaches, content knowledge, technological knowledge, technological content knowledge, and technological pedagogical knowledge (Chai et al., 2010; Koehler et al., 2014; Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Additionally, the National Educational Technology Plan (NETP; U.S. Department of Education, 2017) recommends educator preparation programs infuse more technology into preservice teachers’ courses so they are prepared to assist their future students’ learning.

Moreover, NCTE (2009) recommends the need to develop fluency with technological tools, to organize and manage information, and to evaluate and create multi-media texts that span across cultural connections by building collaborative relationships. With the initial onset of COVID-19, many educators were faced with developing technology fluency, technological content knowledge, and technological pedagogical knowledge without much prior experience or professional development for using such technology due to the rapid spread of the virus. Fernandez-Batanero et al. (2021) found that teachers already possessed a level of stress and anxiety when implementing technology prior to the pandemic; however, this stress and anxiety was heightened during the pandemic (Pressley et al., 2021). Implementing new technology to teach virtually caused many educators stress and burnout as they were learning new technology while trying to balance their families’ and students’ well-being (Rubilar & Oros, 2021). COVID-19 also exposed digital inequities pertaining to who did and did not have access to the digital tools needed to have an effective learning experience (Early & Hernandez, 2021; Reynolds et al., 2022). For those students with access, educators had to teach students how to use the multitude of virtual learning platforms, when educators, themselves, may have been learning simultaneously with the students. Learning during COVID-19 also gave educators the opportunity to “view” into the lives of their students’ homes via technology cameras and through more meaningful ways, such as learning about the students’ access to technology, understand what it means when several students live in the same home and must share a technological device, and developing empathy for students who lost relatives due to COVID-19.

One way to teach students about technology is for teachers to be technologically literate themselves. Digital storytelling thus allows teachers to deepen their technological knowledge. With digital literacy storytelling, teachers can increase their ability to perfect such skills as the writing process (brainstorm, draft, revise, edit, and publish), video recording via computer software, and embedding voice over, videos, and pictures into computer-based tools and software. Teachers (e.g., younger teachers vs. older teachers; more experienced teachers vs. less experienced teachers; secondary teachers vs. elementary teachers Sanchez-Cruzado et al., 2021) who had experience with tasks such as these may have had an easier time using technology to create engaging virtual lessons during COVID-19 than those who did not. Additionally, teachers’ self-efficacy and competence in using digital storytelling allows them to be equipped to aid their students in completing their own digital storytelling projects.

Although digital storytelling is not new, students can express their thoughts and emotions to depict important events in their lives, such as the pandemic, by using text, images, music, and other multi-media sources to combine new literacies with content learning, as digital storytelling projects are culturally responsive (Gay, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 1995) student learning experiences. Digital storytelling projects meet the tenants of cultural responsiveness in that high expectations are set, different communication styles are appreciated, and students’ environments are affirmed because the students are able to tell their story. Digital-mediated learning opportunities, like the digital literacy storytelling project (Lambert, 2003; Center for Digital Storytelling, 2010), merge students’ interests and communication styles with literacy skills and strategies when implemented effectively. Culturally responsiveness allows for students to communicate using their linguistic diverseness and interests, which may be cultural, when sharing their stories. Moreover, teachers need to create opportunities for students to explore “the role of text, language, and literacy” across disciplines (Moje, 2008, p. 80). This study records participants’ preparedness for and response to completing a digital literacy storytelling project to determine their readiness and willingness to implement digital literacy storytelling projects in K-12 settings.

Literature Review

Digital storytelling incorporates computers or other similar electronic tools to tell narratives or short stories (Robin, 2006; Robin & McNeil, 2019). The Center for Digital Storytelling (2010), a community arts organization co-founded by Lambert (2003), collects digital recordings for “Digital Storytelling” research and outlines the process. Digital storytellers develop a documentary, computer narrative, a digital essay, an electronic memoir, or tell a story in another interactive way (The University of Houston, 2018). A multi-media design inclusive of graphics, audio, video clips, text, and web publishing is key to digital storytelling (Center for Digital Storytelling, 2010; Robin and Mcneil, 2019). Digitized stories include images, text, recorded narration, video, and music. Despite the short presentation times of two to ten minutes, the planning, writing, and revising requires time and detailed preparation (Center for Digital Storytelling, 2010). Teachers facilitate planning, writing, and editing a storytelling script by focusing on the seven elements of storytelling (The University of TheUniversity of Houston, 2018).

Elements of Digital Storytelling

The Center for Digital Storytelling (2010) identifies seven essential elements required for writing the digital storytelling script. Those elements include point of view, a dramatic question, emotional content, the gift of voice, the power of the soundtrack, economy, pacing, and the focus/purpose of the story. The point of view relays the central location through the perspective of the author. The dramatic question appears early in the storytelling process to create suspense and demand attentive listening. The third element of digital storytelling is to appeal to one’s emotions by sharing stories that are non-fiction, real stories that impact oneself, friends, or family. Lambert (2003) indicates that factual stories appeal to young readers. The fourth element of digital storytelling, the editing process, focuses on economy, voice, and the soundtrack.

During editing, writers consider the power of their words, “poetic sensibility,” and removal of redundant ideas (Center for Digital Storytelling, 2010). The Center for Digital Storytelling (2010) recommends that scripts tell a “great story” in 200 words or less. One’s voice should match the economy, the emotional quality, the presentation of images, and the tonal nature of any paired music. The music selection enhances the script by adding “another layer of the narrative” to communicate the message and emotional tone (Center for Digital Storytelling, 2010).

Instructional Benefits of Digital Storytelling

When structured around the use of digital devices, literacy events support both reading and vocabulary development (Molin & Lantz-Andersson, 2016), writing (Girmen et al., 2019), and speaking skills (Nair & Yunus, 2021). Researchers find that “well-designed digital stories that use these pedagogical cues to intensify word learning in a synergistic manner might be helpful to children who have fewer background experiences or might need greater supports for deriving meaning” (Neuman et al., 2019, p. 11). Moreover, when examining the required pedagogical support necessary for learning vocabulary from educational media, socioeconomic status, and diverse cultural backgrounds impacts how students make reading connections. However, storytelling helps learners to structure or understand the context, in part because they make deeper connections to a familiar narrative (Brown et al., 2004) despite their varied experiential backgrounds.

Like storytelling, digital literacy learning opportunities encourage students to research topics in ways that encourage connection building (Lisenbee & Ford, 2018; Meadows, 2003). In reading, students, who make connections, “text-to-text, text-to-self,” or “text-to-world connections” improve comprehension skills and better express their thinking as readers and writers (Tovani, 2000). Lisenbee and Ford (2018) also suggest that digital storytelling helps students make connections between their personal experiences and texts, especially in early childhood classrooms. Connection building develops the neural networks required for learning and retaining knowledge. Moreover, considering students' neural pathways is of importance when designing an enhanced instructional experience that is “energized” (Zadina, 2014) or engaged. For teachers who want to be culturally responsive to Students of Color, engaging and motivating students in ways that activates their intellectual capacity for learning is necessary for authentic instruction and is a part of the framework for culturally responsive teaching (Hammond, 2015). Digital storytelling engages both teachers and learners (Robin, 2007, 2008) because digital storytelling enables students to communicate ideas effectively when teachers apply technology to motivate and engage in creating (Chan et al., 2017). Students engage with 21^st-century literacies when they merge real-world tools, in digital and media forms, with the curriculum. Students “generally find composing for digital video-in visual, aural, and written modes-engaging and fun” as opposed to formulaic standard writing practices (Pandya, 2012, p. 184). Moreover, when children create digital stories about shared learning experiences, they engage by gaining new skills as they create, communicate, and collaborate (Fantozzi et al., 2018). Such practices create positive emotional engagement whereby the real-world experiences are aligned with the authentic pedagogical approaches (Herrington, et al., 2014) and contributes to a culturally responsive pedagogy because teachers leverage technology to build trust and rapport that begins with listening to the students’ contributions (Hammond, 2015, p. 77) in the form of the digital narratives that they produce.

Researchers also note the potential of digital literacy practices for supporting inclusive teaching and learning and for increasing curriculum accessibility (Dennis et al., 2015). Digital literacy-rich environments link student learning goals to the real world and create “access to the same rigor” for students with varied abilities, including those students with learning disabilities (Dennis et al., 2015, p. 201). Thus, digital storytelling can be used to build an inclusive community of learners who practice writing skills with a deliberate focus on real-world literacy practices for the 21st century.

Researchers attempt to examine the strategies for literacy learning in technological environments and find that technology-based research focuses on out-of-school literacy practices for students rather than reviewing the in-class applications (Conley et al., 2008). Similarly, Burn and Reed (2018) note that students have extensive experience as viewers of popular culture, and their social identities become more apparent as they produce digital videos. Nonetheless, students require “metalinguistic scaffolding” to discuss video composing processes like “digitize, fade, timeline, edit audio-track, cross-zoom, sequence, clip, drag, copy, paste, save” (Burn & Reed, 2018, p. 17). Moreover, teachers need guidance to ensure a balanced approach to theory and practice exists when designing digital projects. Teacher preparation programs can provide the foundation for such practices.

Teacher Preparation

Barrett (2006) calls for a more in-depth investigation into the benefits of digital storytelling for students, teachers, administrators, and parents. Teachers require support as they develop their practices to foster the application of digital literacies in the classroom and to encourage active and critical uses of technology while also developing subject knowledge (Hague & Payton, 2010). Research demonstrates that training or resources may be needed to rework how teachers perceive themselves in the context of digital learning, or as teachers of digital text. Burnett (2011) found that a disconnect exists due to teachers’ identities and teachers’ digital practices in both their professional and personal lives. Preservice teachers’ beliefs, specifically those that teachers presume to be integral to their teacher identity, may prevent them from implementing digital literacy practices (Burnett, 2011).

New teachers define instructional success by measuring classroom control, structured class proceedings, and pupil support. Yet, Watulak (2018) noted that preservice teachers enjoyed the less-structured environment of “messing around” with technology to learn-by-doing and with the freedom to explore different technologies while creating a digital storytelling project themselves. This freedom and exploration, however, is not transferred to their classrooms when preservice teachers become teachers as the pedagogical practices of digital literacies afford students with a less-structured environment during the creative processes, which teachers deem risky due to their desire to maintain classroom control (Burnett, 2011).

Additionally, when students are in the “transitional space,” the creative processes in which they select objects and build representations, students may skew the truth due to social or emotional pressure. If the narrative for the storytelling process relies on facts, and not creative fiction, then misrepresentations create ambivalence and complicate the teacher’s assessment of digital storytelling practices (Brushwood Rose & Granger, 2013). Teachers need training that demonstrates the process of integrating technology into the content lessons and assessment processes (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Preparation can help teachers overcome the perceived challenges of blending technology with pedagogy and content with learning experiences that integrate digital practices. Burnett (2011) suggests that teachers need technological experiences across various contexts of their lives to capitalize on technological advances in their K-12 classrooms. More importantly, teachers need training that demonstrates technology integration into the content lessons (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Sanchez-Cruzado et al., 2021). Teacher preparation programs can help new teachers overcome the perceived challenges of blending technology with pedagogy and content with learning experiences that integrate digital practices.

Method

This study employs formative design (Bradley & Reinking, 2011) to examine course participants’ preparedness and willingness for implementing digital literacy storytelling projects (DSLPs) in K-12 settings and reveals the related benefits and challenges. The following questions guide the study: How do graduate students, who are enrolled in a literacy education course, respond to the tasks of a DLSP? What are the participants’ perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English Language Arts K-12? What are the participants’ perceptions about their preparedness and willingness for implementing DLSPs in K-12 settings?

Participants

Course participants included 18 graduate participants between the ages of 25–65 enrolled in a graduate-level course, Teaching English Language Arts and Reading. Course participants included 17 females and one male with some level of teaching experience (i.e., teacher, interventionist, reading specialist, and substitute). Course participants were required to complete the DLSP for the course as a standard class requirement. After the semester’s end, the researchers conducted an information session seeking voluntary study participants. Of the 18 graduate students enrolled in the graduate course, all course participants elected to participate in the research study. Those who agreed to participate in this research study resubmitted their coursework as data points to be evaluated after the end of the course, and they completed a follow-up survey.

Graduate Course Design

The course instruction provided at a four-year institution of higher education in the southwestern part of the U.S. took place during a 16-week hybrid course (courses that meet 50% face-to-face and 50% online.) Course lecture topics included an introduction to language arts, theories, models of writing, writing and spelling development, writing instruction, instructional strategies for genres, grammar, mechanics, English language arts instruction (reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing, and visually representing), and for instructing special populations. Specific learning objectives required course participants to examine the current theories and models of reading, understand the cognitive and psychological development of writing, design instructional approaches for writing, and understand effective programs for teaching English language arts. The primary course requirement of the course included completing a DLSP to incorporate English Language Arts (reading, writing, listening, speaking, viewing, and visually representing—NCTE & IRA, 1996).

Before concluding the DLSP, the course participants examined resources to learn about digital storytelling. Course participants researched the necessary steps for completing digital storytelling (Morra, 2013), explored digital storytelling development, and learned about the seven elements of digital storytelling (Lambert, 2003). Course participants also read relevant articles outlining the principles of digital storytelling (Eisner et al., 2007; Morra, 2013). The objective was for participants to gain knowledge about the key elements that enhance digital storytelling and to consider the ways such projects could enhance writing instruction in their K-12 classrooms.

Course Tools

The course tools included the DLSP, a soundtrack, a written reflection of the DLSP, and a follow-up survey. Each tool was standard to the course requirements and used to assess course participants’ understanding of the course content. For those students who opted into the study, the course tools became data upon the course term’s end. Descriptive details of these course tools/data points follow.

The Digital Literacy Storytelling Project

Assignment objectives for the DLSP included: (a) explore the benefits of digital storytelling; (b) locate and evaluate digital tools for K-12 students completing DLSPs; (c) reinforce K-12 English Language Arts lessons using DLSP processes; (d) collaborate with the community, school, or libraries; (e) identify the instructional benefits of incorporating DLSP practices in the K-12 classroom. Participants completed the following steps as part of the DLSP:

1. Plan for the accompanying soundtrack.

2. Select and digitize images.

3. Develop a written narrative autobiography.

4. Explore and select digital tools.

5. Revise and edit.

6. Create a DLSP video.

7. Submit and share the DLSP video.

8. Complete the reflection of the DLSP.

9. Complete the follow-up survey of the DLSP.

These nine steps served as a checklist for participants to follow. Once completed, the participants presented the videos. The primary researcher observed the videos to determine if all nine requirements from the checklist were met for the course assignment. After the end of the term, the videos from study participants became data sources and were re-observed for analysis.

Soundtrack, Narrative, (Auto)Biography, and Video Development

Course participants developed a soundtrack to accompany their DLSP by creating a shareable digital file system. Next, they selected and stored eight to ten representative songs with APA citations to pair with their storyline by completing the steps aligned in the “Soundtrack of Your Life” activity (Georing, 2007). The assignment required participants to think of 8–10 important events or milestones in their lives and write a paragraph about each event or milestone. Then, they determined a song that would explain their feelings and emotions towards the event or milestone. Next, participants drafted an 11–12 paragraph narrative description of the songs selected and the song’s relevance to each of the events or milestones. Participants then collected images and audio to develop the storyboard (Morra, 2013). Participants drafted their narrative script and embedded the seven elements of digital storytelling (Lambert, 2003) into the storyboard. Afterward, participants edited their narrative script and images. Finally, they imported content using their choice of software and shared the final DLSP in a class presentation.

Reflection of the Digital Literacy Storytelling Project

After presenting the DLSP, participants wrote a learning and experience reflection. Participants reflected on the following prompts: What is the educational benefit of digital literacy storytelling? How can you incorporate digital literacy storytelling practices into your K-12 classroom? What tools can help K-12 students as they develop their own digital literacy stories? How can digital literacy storytelling reinforce English Language Arts lessons? Overall, what did you learn about the DLSP? What other reflections can you add concerning the DLSP?

Follow-up survey of the DLSP

After the end of the course, participants completed a follow-up survey. The survey recorded the participants’ understanding of the writing process, the flexible organization of ideas, the development of new designs, the K-12 student’s opportunities to interact with a real audience, and the impact of DLSP on student engagement in the writing process. The survey items varied in format and included both open and closed survey questions (see Results and Discussion).

To determine the validity of the survey, an expert in the field examined the questions to ensure content validity. A small group of participants completed member checks by reading through the survey questions before the final administration to check for accuracy, wording, and other factors of validity to establish internal validity. For reliability, the survey was administered as a pilot. Because the survey was conducted only once, the test-retest reliability was not measured, and an equivalent form has not been developed. However, the survey data were triangulated with the participants’ reflections and in-class observations. Nonetheless, the survey data provided an additional point in the audit trail necessary for establishing confirmability. During the inquiry audit, an outside person reviewed and examined the process (audit trail) to ensure the consistency of findings and the potential for duplication (transferability), and the extent to which the pilot survey and DLSP activity could be applied in the context of another course (Lincoln and Guba, 1985).

Data Analysis

Data were collected from the 18 participants and included the DLSP, reflection of the DLSP, and the DLSP follow-up survey, which were part of the standard course requirements. Data drawn from the DLSP follow-up survey offered triangulation points. Observational notes were kept during class discussions of the project to ensure researcher saturation. The primary researcher observed the videos produced during the DLSPs and reviewed researcher reflections from an observation journal.

Data analysis employed a mixed-methods triangulation design (Creswell, 1999). The researcher collected and analyzed the qualitative and quantitative data points separately for the same phenomenon. The results of initial analysis were converged to identify similarities and differences. When completing the separate analysis of the qualitative data points, the researchers employed a modified content analysis. For instance, summative content analysis allows counting and comparing keywords or content to be interpreted by the researcher. However, a modified content analysis includes approaches “unique to digital contexts” (Greenhow, 2011) and inferences made about online material, online or digital communication, and the messages in digital text (Eriksson & Giacomello, 2013). Analysis served to examine digital videos produced using virtual ethnography methods (Steinkuehler et al., 2005) of systematic inquiry to gain an understanding of participants' literacy practices and for developing digital teacher identities.

Data analysis of closed survey responses included univariate analysis of frequency distribution, central tendency, and dispersion to reveal descriptive patterns in the data (Glass & Stanley, 1970). For open responses from the follow-up survey and the reflection of the DLSP, the researchers applied qualitative measures of open coding to label, define, and develop categories using Grounded Theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Open coding categories included benefits, potential benefits, and challenges:

• Benefits. This category indicates the participants’ recognition of DLSP benefit(s) for K-12 learners as a way to express themselves or knowledge, as a process for learning engagement, and as an innovative way to provide instruction (a novelty). The properties of this code include expression or creativity, innovation or novelty, and engagement, or connection. This coding category also includes participants’ recognition of the benefits of engaging learners in the writing process and ELA instruction.

• Potential Benefits. This coding category includes the participants’ recognition of the DLSP for benefit or application outside of the projects’ original assigned context or grade level and includes cross-curricular approaches. Challenges. This coding category indicates the inability to recognize or accept the benefit, application, or potential of the DLSP. Properties for this include time constraints, limited experience and meaning extracted from various phrases used to indicate a lack of technical knowledge or skills.

Table 1 provides a sample of the open coding process employed for qualitative data points.

Table 1.

Example: Open Coding for Qualitative Data from the Digital Literacy Storytelling Project.

Emerging Themes	Open Code	Properties	Participants Words	Research Question Alignment
Unlocked	Benefits	Engagement Expression Innovation Reflection novelty	“Students engage in the writing process in new and innovative ways.”	RQ2: What are the participants’ perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English language arts K-12?
Unlocked	Benefits	Innovation	“It breaks away from the traditional essay or reflection format.”	RQ2: What are the participants' perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English Language Arts K-12?
Unlocked	Benefits	Expression Novelty	“It allows students to express themselves, their ideas in new and different forums.”	RQ2: What are the participants' perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English language arts K-12?
Unlocked	Benefits Application	ELA Emotion (2) Voice Feeling	“The educational value of digital literacy storytelling is to help the presenter to give emotion, voice, feeling, and to get readers or viewers to feel the same emotion as the author.”	RQ2: What are the participants' perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English language arts K-12?
Unlocked	Application	ELA Engagement Flexibility	“It is required that students use all components of ELA into one engaging assignment/project.”	RQ2: What are the participants' perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English language arts K-12?
Unlocked	Benefits	Cross-curricular	“I like that it can be adapted across subject matter and content areas.”	RQ2: What are the participants’ perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English Language Arts K-12?
Unlocked	Benefit Application Potential	Cross-curricular Curriculum planning	“A digital story can be geared toward all subjects, it can be used to reinforce ideas/concepts, especially if students can produce smaller projects every nine weeks detailing what they understand.”	RQ1: How do graduate students, who are enrolled in a literacy education course, respond to the tasks of a DLSP?
Unlocked	Benefit	ELA	“It is a great way to reinforce the visual process.”	RQ2: What are the participants' perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English Language Arts K-12?
Blocked	Challenge	Time	“Time consuming,….. [the] digital storytelling was not a good activity for me. It was so time consuming.”	RQ3: What are the participants' perceptions about their preparedness and willingness for implementing DLSPs in K-12 settings?
Blocked	Challenge	Technology	“I had to play with different apps to get it done.”	RQ3: What are the participants' perceptions about their preparedness and willingness for implementing DLSPs in K-12 settings?

Note. Table one provides an example of the researcher’s categorization process and the development of themes from some of participants’ words as recorded in observational data.

By employing open coding to the qualitative data, two themes emerged. For this study, the emerging themes are referred to as the “Blocked” school of thought and the “Unlocked” school of thought.

The Blocked school of thinking includes include those unable to overcome their expressed challenges despite the benefits of using DLSPs. Blocked coding included expressions of angst, hesitation, or resistance in response to the DLSP activities. This theme includes those participants who willingly created a DLSP due to course requirements, but who also expressed resistance to employing the DLSP as teachers in K-12 English Language Arts classes. Blocked participants found the DLSP too challenging to implement in their teaching practice due to time constraints and their limited technological abilities. Participants who expressed these challenges, yet still indicated that they would consider DLSPs in their future practice were not classified as blocked, but rather classified as unlocked due to their ability to focus on the benefits of the DLSP.

The Unlocked school of thinking includes participants who recognized the benefits of DLSP as a tool for teaching K-12 English Language Arts. This emerging theme includes participants who directly identified the benefits of the DLSP for engaging students. Unblocked participants included those who willingly embraced the challenge of making text-to-self, text-to-text, and text-to-world connections in the form of a DLSP. Unlocked participants also recognized the DLSP benefits for instructing writing, language, grammar, spelling, and for personal expression. Unlocked participants recognized the benefits of the DLSP and accepted the DLSP as a tool for teaching K-12 English Language Arts (and specifically the writing process) despite any of their technical challenges. These themes are further discussed and delineated in the results.

Results

All 18 participants completed the nine required tasks for the digital literacy storytelling project which served as a checklist for the graduate course requirements. To develop and confirm the emerging themes, Unlocked and Blocked, open coding was applied to identify recurring patterns of the thematic properties, or sub themes (benefits, potential benefits, and challenges). After presenting their digital storytelling videos, course participants were asked to respond with a written reflection on what they learned and experienced while making their own DLSP. In reflections and observations, recurring patterns indicated the benefits, potential benefits, and challenges of the DLSP. In a follow-up survey to triangulate and confirm initial patterns, participants also responded to a five-point Likert scale of agreement in response to the benefits and challenges of the DLSP. The following provides an overview of the results as arranged by the themes, Unlocked and Blocked.

Unlocked

This theme emerged from patterns of thought that indicated participants were unlocked to the benefits or potential benefits of the DLSP for K-12 learners. 16 participants were classified as Unlocked because they identified the benefits or potential benefits of DLSPs.

Benefits

Unlocked participants could identify the general cross-curricular benefits for students because they believed that digital knowledge and skills could be utilized in various learning settings across K-12 grade levels. For instance, in the reflection course, participants wrote that incorporating digital storytelling practices would benefit K-12 learners across “various content areas and grade levels,” and “in content-area writing experiences.” Two participants saw the potential benefits of creating DLSPs requiring the use of technology for students “in all grade levels and content areas.” One student expressed the need to incorporate digital storytelling practices “in upper-grade levels, like high school,” for students who already have technical skills and digital knowledge. Another course participant suggested that digital storytelling would benefit students in grades five and up because they believed that “older learners may have an increased aptitude for learning about technology.” For confirmability of this emerging theme and to triangulate observations and reflections, participants completed a follow-up survey following the course and collection of the DLSP.

Survey data, the only point containing quantitative data in this study, served to confirm initial thinking and fill in descriptive details with numerical representations as collected on a Likert scale. When asked to examine the overall benefit of the DLSP on a scale of “a great deal of benefits” to “no benefit,” a majority of the participants responded positively. Of the 18 course participants, 16 indicated that they found the DLSP to be a valuable tool for teaching and learning literacy in K-12 settings. These participants were “Unlocked” as they perceived the DLSP to contribute “a great deal of benefit” and “a good deal of benefit” or a “moderate amount of benefit” to the learning experience. Zero course participants responded with “no benefit.”

When further describing the benefits in reflection or observation, Unlocked participants identified learning engagement, engagement with the writing process, personal connections and engagement, and application in the English Language Arts classroom as the most obvious benefits of the DLSP.

Engagement

When describing the benefits of DLSP in reflection, all of the participants expressed the potential for DLSPs to engage K-12 learners with technology applications across content areas and grade levels. In reflections and observational data, Unlocked participants were identified by their expressions of excitement, engagement, and/or promise when describing the benefits because they indicated that they experienced engagement with the activities they completed for the DLSP. For instance, participants indicated that the DLSP technology experiences were an “innovative way to provide instruction,” or a “novelty,” that engaged them as learners or that they were “engaged in the writing process.”

Unlocked participants also include those who willingly embraced the challenge of making text-to-self, text-to-text and text-to-world connections in the form of a DLSP. In written reflections, participants indicated the DLSP provided opportunities for personal engagement as participants could “make connections to themselves and other concepts” and express “emotions.” Additionally, reflections indicated that the DLSP engaged learners because the activities allowed for “personal expression” and “creative interactions” in the digital learning space.

Data collected from the survey questions confirmed the DLSP’s potential for impacting students’ learning engagement and engagement in the writing process. Primarily, 37% of the course participants indicated that they perceived the DLSPs to have a good measure of benefit, or the potential to increase student engagement in the writing process. Table 2 relays the degree of confirmability as measured with a Likert scale to determine the perceived benefits of the digital literacy storytelling project on learning engagement and engagement with the writing process.

Table 2.

Perceived Impact of the Digital Literacy Storytelling Project on Writing Engagement and Engagement in K-12 English Language Arts.

Survey Statement	Great Amount of Impact	Good Amount of Impact	Moderate Amount of Impact	Little Amount of Impact	No Amount of Impact
Benefit of digital literacy storytelling project on students’ engagement in the writing process	25.00%	37.50%	12.50%	12.50%	12.50%
Benefit of digital literacy storytelling project have on students’ understanding of the writing process	25.00%	25.00%	25.00%	25.00%	0.00%

Note. Table 2 relays the percentages of participants to a Likert Scale, estimating the DLSPs potential for impacting learning engagement and engagement in the writing process for K-12 learners completing Digital Literacy Storytelling Projects.

As indicated, Unlocked participants recognized the benefits of the DLSP for learning engagement, engagement with the writing process, and for personal engagement via making personal connections. Participants also recognized the benefits of DLSPs for teaching specific English Language Arts (ELA) skills or for students to attain ELA content knowledge.

English Language Arts Application

Unlocked participants recognized the benefits of applying the DLSP as a tool for teaching in the K-12 English Language Arts classroom because the embedded writing process reinforces content area concept building and content skills. One participant found that the DLSP had the potential for increasing K-12 “students' ability to develop expression as authors” (i.e., writing, speaking, and visually representing). Another student recognized the benefit of DLSPs for creating opportunities for “interpreting emotional appeal as viewers” (i.e., listening and viewing).

Participants also recognized the potential for building general skills necessary for critical thinking and for reading comprehension. For instance, a key perceived benefit of DLSP was the “integration of language arts skills with that of problem-solving skills when paired with technology.” In written reflections course participants also noted the potential benefit of DLSPs for “developing and supporting fluency skills,” writing skills, “visualization processes,” and “reading comprehension” development.

Survey results supported the findings that Unlocked participants recognized the benefits of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English Language Arts (and specifically the writing process) to K-12 learners. In response to the survey, 37.50% of the participants found the DLSP to be a valuable tool for teaching English Language Arts to K-12 learners. Participants gave the same assignment, 37.5%, identifying the DLSP as a useful tool for K-12 students to work in groups on writing projects. Additionally, 75% of the course participants noted the potential to convey messages, promote student interest, and emotionally charge the writing process with the DLSP. Further, 50% percent of the participants valued the DLSP for supporting the comprehension of tone and as a method for delivering a message with a personal writing voice.

In addition, course participants completed qualitative open-ended questions that allowed them to reflect upon and add additional benefits they recognized. Participants responded to a five-point Likert scale of agreement on a follow-up survey that included questions about the benefits of the DLSP concerning K-12 students’ understanding of the writing process and the benefits of the DLSP as a flexible approach to organizing ideas. Survey participants noted that the DLSP presented other instructional benefits due to its potential for reinforcing the writing process (planning, drafting, and editing) through the organization of ideas and by interacting with a real audience. Table 3 depicts participants' degree of agreement when considering the benefit of the DLSP for teaching ELA skills, writing organization, and about the audience.

Table 3.

Perceived Benefits of Digital Literacy Storytelling Projects for Engaging in the Writing Process.

Survey Statement	Percentage Strongly Agree	Percentage Agree	Percentage Neutral	Percentage Disagree
Digital literacy storytelling projects allow for flexible organization of ideas	12.50%	37.50%	50.00%	0.00%
Digital literacy storytelling projects provide opportunities for students to interact with a real audience	12.50%	12.50%	37.50%	37.50%

Note. Table 3 relays the percentages and number of participant responses to a Likert Scale of agreement and disagreement, data used for confirmability when examining the perceived benefits of the Digital Literacy Storytelling Project for instructing K-12 ELA content and the writing process.

Observational notes from face-to-face meetings revealed some of the benefits being discussed by course participants who were “Unlocked” to the possibility of applying the DLSP in K-12 ELA settings. When considering engagement, those discussions revolved around the blending of video, audio, text, and images. Additionally, in course discussions participants all discussed how the DLSP could be a tool for engaging students in the writing process. A closer examination of the reflections indicates the benefits of DLSP include increasing K-12 student engagement in the writing process and for improving English Language Arts skills. Table 4 offers a random sampling of student comments and the related teaching of English Language Arts skills.

Table 4.

Random Sampling of Observed Participant Statements Relating the DLSP to ELA Knowledge and Skill Development.

Participant	Participant Comment	Teaching English Language Arts (ELA) Skill Supported by the DLSP
1	“Students are required to listen to the information as well as write beforehand; thus, it helps reinforce writing skills.”	Listening skills
2	“Students must speak coherently and put words together in a way that makes sense.”	Speaking skills
3	“The story must flow in a logical manner.”	Writing skills
4	“If [writing/reading] text is included, then digital storytelling improves fluency.”	Reading skills/Speaking skills
5	“Digital Literacy Storytelling Projects require a script that must be planned and written.”	Writing skills
6	“Students must read and re-read their written work before recording their digital story.”	Reading skills

Note. This table presents a small sampling of participant’s comments as recorded in observational notes and the corresponding coding of ELA skills.

Further, the comments in Table 4 indicate that course participants consider the DLSP to be a useful tool for reinforcing the planning, writing, and editing processes for K-12 learners in ELA.

Although the benefits were discussed by all participants in reflection and observational data and confirmed by survey responses, the context of reflections and observations also revealed some challenges of the DLSP. Limited technological skills, a perceived lack of time, and the absence of completed project examples were noted. Most students who recognize the challenges of the DLSP remained unlocked because they continued to focus on the benefits of DLSP.

Challenges

Limited technological experiences and professional development in the development and application of digital projects posed a challenge for many of the participants. Of the 18 participants, only three had previous experience with the development of a project like the DLSP specifically for their own K-12 ELA students. The remaining 15 participants with no previous digital project experiences expressed small gaps in their ELA content knowledge and concerns about their limited abilities in technology.

Additionally, participants found themselves challenged by the time required to learn digital skills and complete the DLSP. All of the course participants held full-time jobs in educational settings at the time of the study. Thus, they had to balance work with life with the demands of completing the DLSP as students. Furthermore, Course participants found time constraints to be a challenge when following DLSP instructions because the DLSP required step-by-step processes and continued or prolonged attention. One participant, Ellen (pseudonym), stated:

The assignment was challenging and time-consuming for graduate participants because we are working full-time jobs as teachers, and we are tutoring. The challenge is that it takes time to complete the assignment (Ellen, Digital Story Reflection, Paragraph 2, pg. 1).

As indicated, participants dealt with the challenges of learning new content while also developing the skills required for new technologies.

For example, students had to manage and store digital content, then pace the content with that of musical and narrative accompaniment. One student expressed her personal challenge as she worked to upload photos that would correspond with a moment in the music and her vocal description of the narrative story. She explained, “It was difficult to get the photos in just the right place with the song in the background, and to overlay my voice in the story (Arianna, Digital Story Reflection, Paragraph 2, p. 1). In addition to learning new content and skills with time constraints, participants recognized the differences they experienced when completing the DLSP because of their personal or cultural backgrounds. One shared her unique cultural experience and the way that her experiences created unique challenges when completing the DLSP:

This was the first time in my life, creating an autobiography with a video of my pictures, song selections, and narrating voice. I needed to find a free trial to make movies. […] It was difficult to get my baby pictures because they were in Mexico. Some had to be scanned. Then, it was hard to select the pictures to upload into the video. Also, remembering what age you were in each picture was difficult. Parents should write the date on the back of their children's pictures! (Arianna, Digital Story Reflection, Paragraph 2, p. 1).

Despite identifying time and technological skills as challenges, 16 participants still indicated that they would consider DLSPs in their future teaching practices because of the benefits. Participants who continued to focus on the benefits over the challenges remained Unlocked because they accepted the DLSP as a tool for teaching K-12 English Language Arts (and specifically for teaching the writing process) despite any of their technical challenges.

In other instances, participants remained Unlocked to the DLSP because they identified ways to overcome their challenges. For example, because the DLSP required technology skills and devoted blocks of time to complete, half of the course participants (nine) struggled to envision the possibilities for digital storytelling in early literacy settings. As a result, one of the course participants provided an example from their teaching experiences with using digital tools (iPad) for early literacy students engaged in the process of “retelling.” Afterward, participants discussed the way the experience could be combined with DLSPs or replicated in their own classrooms. Thus, these participants indicated that the DLSP benefits outweighed the challenges of implementing DLSPs because they could overcome their challenges by varying elements of the project.

Additionally, several participants indicated that they needed more explicit examples of how to implement the DLSPs or related projects in their specific teaching settings, especially in those setting where students present varied knowledge, skills, and abilities. Samuel (pseudonym) suggested that more experienced teachers with “technology knowledge act as campus mentors for less experienced teachers who want to use various digital applications to develop storytelling assignments for students of varied skills and abilities” (Samuel, DLSP, Reflection, Response F-6). In this case, participants identified a possible programmatic opportunity to explore at their campus sites, whereby mentorship would increase the technology and content knowledge skills of teachers and allow them to overcome their challenges.

Blocked

When participants could not overcome their perceived challenges, they were thematically categorized as Blocked from recognizing the benefits or potential benefits of the DLSP. The Blocked School of Thinking includes those participants who willingly created a DLSP due to course requirements, but who also rejected the potential for using the DLSP as a tool for teaching K-12 English Language Arts. Before completing the DLSP, most participants expressed concern that despite their own teaching experiences, they had little to no experience with DLSPs, or lacked preparation for similarly crafted technology-based activities. As a result, all students were initially hesitant to accept the project’s potential as a learning and teaching tool. But after completing the DLSP, only two participants who expressed hesitation remained Blocked, unable or unwilling to recognize the benefits of the DLSP.

Observational data indicated a pattern of resistance to the DLSP. One participant found there “to be a little benefit” and the other “felt the project would not benefit K-12 students.” The follow-up survey results triangulated the results, as the same students reported there to be “little benefit” for K-12 students who complete the DLSP. These two participants expressed angst, hesitation, or resistance to the DLSP.

In reflection, one participant expressed complete resistance “to using technology in the classroom for teaching the writing process”; The other participant did not see the potential benefits of the DLSP because they “did not plan to work in a K-12 classroom” (despite being enrolled in a graduate course for educators). These two Blocked participants also reflected that they “did not enjoy completing the activity” because it was “too challenging.” Despite any benefits or potential benefits from completing the DLSP, the two Blocked participants indicated resistance to future applications of DLSP in their own K-12 classrooms because of their time constraints and their limited technological abilities.

Discussion

Although digital storytelling has been around for quite some time and many perceive them as valuable tools, there is still some resistance to employing such digital processes in the classroom due to some teachers' inexperience with technology. This study records the benefits and challenges of the DLSP and the preparedness and willingness of participants in a graduate-level teaching English Language Arts to implement digital literacy storytelling projects in their future K-12 settings.

Research Question 1

How do graduate students, who are enrolled in a literacy education course, respond to the tasks of a DLSP? Of the 18 participants, all completed the DLSP and related learning activities for their coursework, 16 of which were unlocked to the benefits of the DLSP because they indicated a willingness to implement DLSPs or similar projects in their future K-12 instructional settings due to the benefits or potential benefits they experienced.

Unlocked

Benefits

In response to the DLSP participants identified the benefits and potential benefits of the DLSP. Participants recognized the potential benefits of the DLSP for completing cross-curricular projects, for application in collaborative learning contexts, and across various grade levels and content areas. Participants indicated that the DLSP has potential in collaborative contexts and the project scope could be adjusted to develop documentaries; digital essays, interview, or memoirs; or to complete research across a broad spectrum of content areas. These results support previous research that indicates instructional practices in digital literacy increase the potential for learning engagement (Chan et al., 2017).

Chan et al., (2017) found that digital storytelling approaches communicate ideas effectively and can be employed as an approach to engage and motivate students to learn.

Similarly, participants in this study shared that the digital learning conditions of the DLSP increased engagement with technology, engagement in the writing process, and personal engagement via making personal connections. The majority (16) of the participants found the DLSP to be a valuable tool for increasing general student engagement because technology created unique learning activities. Additionally, the DLSP promoted authentic learning engagement by encouraging personal expression, creative interactions, and the use of emotion in the digital learning space.

The DLSP provides as realistic learning context where the writing process elicits positive emotions from the learner. Findings indicate an alignment with the pedagogical approaches for authentic learning (Herrington, et al., 2014 p. 402) and for culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2018; Hammond, 2015; Ladson-Billings, 1995) because the digital space of the DLSP allowed participants to make personal connections and to consider the application of real-world activities similar to their future instructional endeavors. For instance, the DLSP provided opportunities for personal engagement while also upholding the rigorous instructional elements of the writing process, which are indicators of culturally responsive teaching (Hammond, 2015). When digital practices overlayed the writing process, participants immersed themselves in an interactive process as they created narratives that elicited positive emotions from the learner. Furthermore, the digital opportunities created an environment where participants could integrate their personal and cultural elements by making connections during the storytelling process, or in an “intellectually safe space” Hammond, 2015, p. 20).

Research Question 2

What are the participants’ perceptions of the DLSP as a tool for teaching English Language Arts K-12? The majority of the participants perceived the DLSP to be beneficial tool for teaching concepts, skills, knowledge, and the writing process in K-12 English Language Arts. Participants felt that the DLSP was a beneficial tool for reinforcing the writing process and for teaching English Language Arts because it required them to create compelling narrative stories. The instructional conditions of the DLSP reinforced basic knowledge of ELA concepts by requiring students to learn and apply the content because they went through the writing process to create the stories in simplified steps.

Completing the DLSP supported teacher development as they considered their own practice by fostering the application of digital literacies in the ELA subject classroom. The DLSP encouraged active and critical use of digital technologies while also further developing ELA subject knowledge, which is one of the objectives of applying digital literacy across the curriculum (Hague & Payton, 2010). Participants identified the benefits of DLSP for improving ELA skills including speaking, listening, reading, writing, and visually representing because of the requirements to present a final product prepared through writing and presented by speaking. Other benefits identified by participants included the integration of problem-solving skills, exploration of writing elements, listening skills, and the potential connection to reading comprehension. When U.S. students, reading outcomes show that students are not reading proficiently (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019) digital technologies may help to bridge reading comprehension gaps. Participants learned to recognize the skills of readers while considering them as an audience during the DLSP writing process. Thus, they noted the benefits for improving reading comprehension and the potential for improving fluency, visualization, and for interpreting/conveying written messages.

Research Question 3

What are the participants’ perceptions about their preparedness and willingness for implementing DLSPs in K-12 settings? All in all, participants were able to see how reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing, and visually representing are all employed in the DLSP and the majority expressed their willingness for implementing DLSPs in K-12 ELA settings; however, participants also expressed concern about implementation due to limited professional development and the time constraints they perceived.

THE DLSP posed some challenges to participants because of time constraints they perceived as well as a lack of teacher preparation in digital skills, visual and audio production, music and vocal narration, and even writing for their field. Nonetheless, all participants completed the project and most expressed a willingness to learn the skills necessary to implement the DLSP or similar projects in their future K-12 settings because they recognized the overall benefits.

Of the 18 participants, only three had completed a task such as the DLSP before this study and therefore found the technology to be challenging. Yet, in reflections each of the participants held an undergraduate degree and all were holding professional positions in the field of education. Nonetheless, participants indicated that a lack of previous teacher preparation, limited experiences with the application of technology-based projects, and even limitations in the skills of writing for their field created challenges. Thus, participants struggled to learn the necessary skills and complete the DLSP while balancing the time constraints of their professional duties. Still, the majority (16 participants) expressed a willingness to learn or apply the DLSP in future settings despite the challenges they expressed. For 16 participants, the responses supported existing research (Burnett, 2011) that indicates teachers feel successful when they have classroom control, structured class proceedings, and pupil support. Thus, even if they see the benefits of completing a similar project, they may not risk implementation if they feel inadequately prepared.

Additionally, two participants who responded to the course requirement to complete the DLSP, remained “Blocked” or resistant to the possibility of implementing DSLP projects in their K-12 classroom because they did not plan to teach or did not like technology. Burnett (2011) suggests that technology resistance may relate to how they perceive themselves through a digital context; Further training and resources may be needed to revisit or rework how these participants perceive themselves in the digital space or in the context of learning technologies.

In summary, participants increased their relevant knowledge and reported improved perceptions of the benefit of digital storytelling in K-12 classrooms. Most participants unlocked their understanding of the DLSP by recognizing the benefit and impact that such projects have for building K-12 English Language Arts skills. Participants reported that after completing the DLSP they considered their classroom commitments, ensured time for engaging in writing projects, and adjusted their approaches to teaching by incorporating digital modes of learning in the classroom. Two participants remained blocked, unable to recognize the benefits of the DLSP due to their own limited classroom experience. They also remained blocked due to lingering concerns about their ability to implement DLSPs under time constraints and without additional technological training. Nonetheless, most participants in the course recognized the importance of engaging K-12 students with digital modes of learning as well as using technology to enhance and improve content teaching. Additional comparative studies are needed to determine if the two Blocked instances were outliers.

Limitations in this study include the participants’ varied technological experiences and their disparate digital knowledge as well as a small sample size (18 participants). The limitations of a small sample size and a coursework study term did not allow for a deeper analysis of the study participants’ technology anxiety, a concern presented by blocked participants but also shared by unblocked participants. In fact, all of the participants expressed the need to learn new technologies to complete this DLSP for themselves and their future K-12 students. Each participant also recognized that implementation of the DLSP in their K-12 classrooms would require an increase in their knowledge about the writing process as well as thorough instructional planning. Gaining a teacher’s investment in digital literacy practices requires a long-term investment beyond the study period (one college semester). Teachers need sustained technological support, specific technology training, and experience in the field that affords them the tools and opportunities to implement digital storytelling practices.

Implications for Practice and Research

All of the participants in this study demonstrated an understanding of the elements of writing and how to complete a DLSP project by completing their own DLSP. The majority of participants were “Unlocked” to the potential of DLSPs and expressed an interest or willingness to try similar projects in their K-12 classrooms. Yet, they also reported that conceptualizing a plan for their K-12 classrooms was challenged by a concern with time constraints and their anxiety about teaching with technology. Their concerns are not uncommon. For over a decade, NCTE has established recommendations for including more digital literacies in K-12 settings (NCTE Position Statement, 2018). Although many teachers have a desire to implement various technologies, research has shown that teachers experience technology stress or “technostress,” as defined by Brod (1984). COVID-19 heightened teachers’ technostress as many did not have the initial technology training to teach students virtually, and some teachers had to implement additional resources for students who did not have adequate access to virtual learning.

Nonetheless, projects, such as DSLPs, allow teachers to learn about multiple aspects of technology. For example, teachers can choose an appropriate digital storytelling platform, import media (texts, pictures, music, videos, etc.), export and share files, etc. Although technology is constantly changing, teachers must receive the latest professional development to help reduce the stress they may experience from incorporating new technology into the classroom. These professional development opportunities should be taught explicitly and with ample time for learning so that teachers become confident in using the technology. Additionally, teachers’ self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) will allow them to implement projects such as DSLPs to assist students with their language arts skills. DSLPs, also, provide students the opportunity to express their thoughts and emotions through writing, speaking, and visually representing, thus sharing their identity (Anderson & Mack, 2019). Teachers, then, can read, listen to, and view the students’ DSLP to get a “glimpse” into the lives of the students.

Researchers should seek to examine DLSPs that benefit learners across the broad field of education (content areas and grade-levels) to outline best practices in digital literacy. Future studies should focus on developing and supporting teachers who need training in digital storytelling activities as guiding their implementation. Moreover, longitudinal studies are required to determine best practices for digital storytelling activities in the classroom and to determine the potential of digital storytelling for the assessment of specific literacy skills.

DLSPs can provide opportunities for students to engage in a project that is centered around one of the highest Bloom (1956) educational objective verbs, create. Creating is a higher-level thinking skill that requires students to problem solve, as well. As COVID-19 has caused many students grief, a DLSP can give them an opportunity to write about their experiences and tell their story through multiple multi-media venues. For students to pursue DLSPs, teachers must feel confident in planning and implementing DLSPs.

Participants in this study demonstrated an understanding about the elements of writing and how to complete a DLSP project by completing their own DLSP. Yet, they all reportedly struggled to conceptualize a plan for their K-12 students due to their concern about time constraints and their anxiety about technology. When teacher educators design their ELA/reading methods courses they should provide technology instruction on the available tools to reduce anxiety, provide examples of completed DLSP projects across subject areas and grade levels, and engage teachers in the process of developing a structured DSLP assignment (complete with instructions and a digital sample) that can be taken into their existing or future classrooms. By doing so, participants can focus on the benefit of DLSPs and move from conceptualizing to actualizing the DLSP in the context of their K-12 classes despite their technical challenges. Then, they can truly be unlocked to the possibilities of Digital Literacy Storytelling Projects.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Ramona T. Pittman

References

Anderson

K. M.,

Mack

(2019). Digital storytelling: A narrative method for positive identity development in minority youth. Social Work with Groups, 42(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/01609513.2017.1413616

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Barrett

(2006). Researching and evaluating digital storytelling as a deep learning tool. n C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.). In Proceedings of SITE 2006--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 647–654). Orlando, FL: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Technology and Teacher Education. Technology and Teacher Education Annual. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/22117/

Bloom

B. S.

(1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook: The cognitive domain. David McKay.

Bradley

B. A.,

Reinking

(2011). Revisiting the connection between research and practice using design research and formative experiments. In: Duke

Mallette

(eds) Literacy research methodologies (2nd ed.), (pp. 188–212). Guilford Press.

Brod

(1984). Technostress: The human cost of the computer revolution. Addison-Wesley.

Brown

J. S.

Denning

Groh

Prusak

(2004). Storytelling in organizations: Why storytelling is transforming 21st-century organizations and management. Butterworth-Heinemann.

Brushwood Rose

C.,

Granger

C. A.

(2013). Unexpected self-expression and the limits of narrative inquiry: Exploring unconscious dynamics in a community-based digital storytelling workshop. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(2), 216–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2012.666286

Burn

A.,

Reed

(2018). Digi teens: Media literacies and digital technologies in the secondary classroom. English in Education, 33(3), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-8845.1999.tb00720.x

10.

Burnett

(2011). Pre-service teachers’ digital literacy practices: Exploring contingency in identity and digital literacy in and out of educational contexts. Language and Education, 25(5), 433–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2011.584347

11.

Center for Digital Storytelling (2010). https://www.storycenter.org/

12.

Chai

C. S.

Koh

J. H. L.

Tsai

C. C.

(2010). Facilitating preservice teachers’ development of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Educational Technology and Society, 13(4), 63–73.

13.

Chan

B. S. K.

Churchill

Chiu

T. K. F.

(2017). Digital literacy learning in higher education through digital storytelling approach. Journal of International Education Research, 13(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.19030/jier.v13i1.9907

14.

Conley

M. W.

Friedhoff

J. R.

Gritter

Duinen

D. V.

(2008). Strategies that improve adolescents’ performance with content-area texts. In Conley

(Ed) Adolescent literacy policy and instruction: The research we have and the research we need (pp. 88–104). Guilford Press.

15.

Creswell

J. W.

(1999). Mixed method research: Introduction and application. In Cijek

(Ed.), 472) (p. 455). San Deigo, CA: Academic Press.

16.

Early

J.,

Hernandez

(2021). Digital disenfranchisement and COVID-19: Broadband internet access as a social determinant of health. Health Promotion Practice, 22(5)–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399211014490

17.

Eisner

Fleming

Kaffel

Vogel

(2007 Nov). Digital storytelling: Evaluation methods. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. http://courseweb.ischool.illinois.edu/∼jevogel2/lis506/howto.html

18.

Eriksson

J.,

Giacomello

(2013). Content analysis in the digital age: Tools, functions, and implications for security. In Krüger

Nickolay

Gaycken

(Eds) The secure information society. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4763-3_6

19.

Fantozzi

Johnson

Scherfen

(2018). Technology and play: An important intersection for 21^st century literacies. Young Children, 73(2), 88–93.

20.

Fernández-Batanero

J. M.

Román-Graván

Reyes-Rebollo

M. M.

Montenegro-Rueda

. (2021). Impact of educational technology on teacher stress and anxiety: A literature review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(2), 548. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020548

21.

Gay

(2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.

22.

Georing

(2007). The soundtrack of your life. Lesson Plans. https://www.corndancer.com/tunes/tunes_lesplan.html

23.

Girmen

Özkanal

Ü.

Dayan

(2019). Digital storytelling in the Language Arts classroom. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(1), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070108

24.

Glaser

B. G.,

Strauss

A. L.

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.

25.

Glass

G. V.,

Stanley

J. C.

(1970). Statistical methods in education and psychology. Prentice-Hall.

26.

Greenhow

C. M.

(2011). Research methods unique to digital contexts: An introduction to virtual ethnography. In Duke

Mallette

(Eds) Literacy research methodologies (2nd ed.) (pp. 70–87). Guilford Press.

27.

Hague

C.,

Payton

. (2010). Digital literacy across the curriculum: A future handbook. FutureLab. http:www.futurelab.org.uk/projects/digitalparticipation

28.

Hammond

. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among the culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin/Sage Publications.

29.

Herrington

Reeves

T. C.

Oliver

. (2014). Authentic learning environments. In Spector

J. M.

Merrill

M. D.

Ellen

Bishop

M. J.

(eds) Handbook of research on educational communication and technology (pp 401–412). Springer.

30.

Koehler

M. J.

Mishra

Kereluik

Shin

T. S.

Graham

C. R

. (2014). The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework. In Spector

J. M.

(eds) Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_9

31.

Ladson-Billings

. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165, https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543675

32.

Lambert

(2003). Digital storytelling cookbook and traveling companion. Digital Diner. http://www.storycenter.org/cookbook.pdf

33.

Lisenbee

P. S.,

Ford

C. M.

(2018). Engaging students in traditional and digital storytelling to make connections between pedagogy and children’s experiences. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(1), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0846-x

34.

Lohnes Watulak

(2018). Making space for preservice teacher agency through connected learning in preservice educational technology courses. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34(3), 166–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2018.1453894

35.

Marsh

Hannon

Lewis

Ritchie

. (2017). Young children’s initiation into family literacy practices in the digital age. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15(1), 47, 60, https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718x15582095 http://er.sagepub.com

36.

Meadows

. (2003). Digital storytelling: Research-based practice in new media: , . Visual Communication, 2(2), 189–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357203002002004

37.

Mishra

P.,

Koehler

M. J.

(2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge. A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810610800610

38.

Moje

E. B.

(2008). Responsive literacy teaching in secondary school content-areas: The research we have, the research we need. In Conley

(Ed),Adolescent literacy policy and instruction: The research we have and the research we need (pp. 58–87). Guilford Press.

39.

Molin

L.,

Lantz-Andersson

(2016). Significant structuring resources in the reading practices of a digital classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 131–156. https://doi.org/10.28945/3513

40.

Morra

(2013). 8 Steps to Great Digital Storytelling. https://samanthamorra.com/2013/06/05/edudemic-article-on-digital-storytelling/

41.

Nair

V.,

Yunus

M. M

. (2021). A systematic review of digital storytelling in improving speaking skills. Sustainability, 13(17), 9829. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179829

42.

National Council of Teachers of English and International Reading Association (1996). Standards for the english language arts. National Council of Teachers of English.

43.

National Council of Teachers of English (2009). Literacy learning in the 21st century. https://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Magazine/CC0183_Brief_Literacy.pdf

44.

National Council of Teachers of English (2018). Beliefs for integrating technology into the english language arts classroom. https://ncte.org/statement/beliefs-technology-preparation-english-teachers/

45.

National Center for Education Statistics (2019). Nation’s report card. National Assessment of Educational Progress.

46.

Neuman

S. B.

Wong

K. M.

Flynn

Kaefer

2019, Learning vocabulary from educational media: The role of pedagogical supports for low-income preschoolers, 111(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000278

47.

Pandya

J. Z.

(2012). Unpacking pandora’s box: Issues in the assessment of English Learners’ literacy skill development in multimodal classrooms. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 56(3), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.00124

48.

Pressley

Learn

(2021). Teacher stress and anxiety during COVID-19: An empirical study. School Psychology, 36(5), 367–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000468

49.

Price-Dennis

Holmes

K. A.

Smith

(2015). Exploring digital literacy practices in an inclusive classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(2), 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1398

50.

Reynolds

Aromi

McGowan

Paris

(2022). Digital divide, critical-and crisis-informatics perspectives on K-12 emergency remote teaching during the pandemic. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 73(12), 1665–1680. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24654

51.

Robin

B. R.

(2006). The educational uses of digital storytelling. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2006--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. (pp. 709-716). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/22129/

52.

Robin

. (2007). The effective uses of digital storytelling as a teaching and learning tool. Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (vol. 2). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

53.

Robin

B. R.

(2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st-century classroom. Theory Into Practice, 47(3), 220–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802153916

54.

Robin

B. R.,

McNeil

S. G.

(2019). Digital storytelling. In Hobbs

Mihailidis

(Eds), The international encyclopedia of media literacy (pp. 1–8). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118978238.ieml0056

55.

Rubilar

N. V.

Oros

L. B.

(2021). Stress and burnout in teachers during times of pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.756007

56.

Sanchez-Cruzado

Campion

R. S.

Sanchez-Compana

M. T.

(2021). Teachers’ digital literacy: The indisputable challenge after COVID-19. Sustainability, 13(4), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000278

57.

Steinkuehler

C. A.

Black

Clinton

K. A.

(2005). Researching literacy as a tool, place, and way of being. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(1), 95–100.

58.

The University of Houston (2018). Seven elements of digital storytelling. The University of Houston. http://digitalstorytelling.coe.uh.edu/page.cfm?id=27&cid=27&sublinkid=31

59.

Tovani

. (2000). I read it, but I don’t get it: Comprehension strategies for adolescent readers. Stenhouse Publishers.

60.

U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology . (2017). National education technology plan. https://tech.ed.gov/netp/

61.

Zadina

. (2014). Multiple pathways to the student’s brain: Energizing and enhancing instruction. Jon Wiley and Sons.