DIGITAL BACKCHANNELING: A STRATEGY FOR MAXIMIZING ENGAGEMENT DURING A PERFORMANCE-BASED LESSON ON SHAKESPEARE’S MACBETH

• Authors: Jenell Krishnan , Elizabeth Poleon
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Engaging students during the reading of a complex text is a difficult task for any educator. Digital backchanneling, a Web 2.0 technology, is one tool that can promote: student engagement, low risk participation, learning community development, digital citizenship, an opportunity for formative assessment, and timely response to students’ questions. The purpose of observing the effect of digital backchanneling in an English 11 classroom was to measure the level of students’ engagement with the reading of Shakespeare’s Macbeth. Student engagement increased to 100% when digital backchanneling was introduced during a performance-based lesson.

Keywords

EN

digital backchannelling

• Publisher: IATEFL Poland Computer Special Interest Group & University of Nicosia
• Journal: Teaching English with Technology
• Year: 2013
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 38-48

Contributors

author

Jenell Krishnan

• State University of New York at Fredonia Fredonia, NY USA

author

Elizabeth Poleon

• State University of New York at Fredonia Fredonia, NY USA

References

• Byrne, R. (2010). Five platforms for a classroom back-channel chat. Web. 10 May 2013 http://www.freetech4teachers.com/2010/01/five-platforms-for-classroom-back.html
• Common Core, Inc. (2010). Appendix A. Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. Retrieved from http://csmp.ucop.edu/files/resources/files/640_Appendix_A.pdf
• Gabriel, T. (2011). Speaking up in class, silently, using social media. New York Times, p. A1.
• Jarrett, K., & Devine, M. A. (2010). How to use backchanneling in your classroom. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 76(1), 41-44.
• McCarthy, J. F. (2005, April). Digital backchannels in shared physical spaces: experiences at an academic conference. In CHI'05 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1641-1644). ACM.Mueller, D. (2009). Digital underlife in the networked writing classroom. Computers and Composition, 26, 240-250.
• Pohl, A., Gehlen-Baum, V., & Bry, F. (2011). Introducing backstage -- A digital backchannel for large class lectures. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 8(3), 186-200.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, Digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon 9(5), 1-6.
• Prensky, M. (2006). Don't Bother Me, Mom, I'm Learning!: How Computer and Video Games are Preparing Your Kids for 21st Century Success and How You Can Help! St. Paul: Paragon House.
• Richards, R . (2010). Digital citizenship and web 2.0 tools. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 6(2), 516-22.
• Ugoretz, J. (2005). ‘Two roads diverged in a wood’: Productive digression in asynchronous Discussion. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 1(3). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.186.4080&rep=rep1&type=pdf
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard UP. Print.
• Yardi, S. (2008). Whispers in the classroom. Digital youth, innovation, and the unexpected. Edited by Tara McPherson. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 143-164.