CITED AS: Chu, S.K.W., Chin, Y.M., Wong, C.Y., Chan, I.H.Y., Lee, C.W.Y., Wu, W.W.Y., &

CITED AS: Chu, S.K.W., Chin, Y.M., Wong, C.Y., Chan, I.H.Y., Lee, C.W.Y., Wu, W.W.Y., & Pun. B.L.F. (2011). Using Google Sites in collaborative inquiry project-based learning at secondary school level. Paper presented at 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.

Title: Using Google Sites in collaborative inquiry project-based learning at secondary school level1

Authors: Chu, Samuel Kai Wah; Chin, Yiu Ming; Wong, Chun Yin; Chan, Ice Hoi Yi; Lee, Celina Wing Yi; Wu, Wendy Wai Yue; Pun, Boris Lok Fai

Abstract: The benefits of integrating Web 2.0 technologies into mainstream education were well observed in different studies, indicating Web 2.0 technologies function as facilitators in learning and teaching. A type of Web 2.0 technologies called Wiki has yielded very positive outcomes at the primary school level, and through this article, the authors would like to illustrate the positive outcomes found in the research conducted at the secondary school level. This article provides the instructional design on how Wiki can be implemented in the secondary school classroom, highlights the affordances of Google Sites, and how students have improved and benefited from the integration of Web 2.0 technologies.

Keywords: Collaborative learning, junior secondary, Liberal Studies, Google Sites, Wiki, Hong Kong

1. Introduction

The recent challenges in conducting collaborative inquiry project-based learning in education reflects the urge in new platforms in supporting such implementation. For these years, a variety of technological tools have been used to facilitate collaborative learning across different subjects (De Pedro et al., 2006; Franklin et al., 2007; Hanson et al., 2008). Among these tools, this paper focuses on the ways Web 2.0 technologies support collaborative inquiry project-based learning in junior secondary Liberal Studies education.

2. Literature Review

The rapid development of information and communications technology, especially the internet, has led to an overwhelming flow of information in societies. The new generation born in this digital era benefits from facilitated learning, with Web 2.0 technologies (e.g. blogs, wikis) integrated into education (Chu et al., 2012). In this Web 2.0 era, the internet not only provides a platform for information search, but also facilitates interaction and communication through Web 2.0 tools such as blogs (Chu et al., 2011), wikis, RSS, social bookmarking, social networking, feeds and Google applications. Thus everyone can participate in the internet world, creating and contributing information by publishing content (Churchill, 2007).

A Web 2.0 collaborative tool called Wiki, which can be used at different levels and domains of education – primary, secondary and tertiary across different subject areas including Chinese, English, General Studies, Geography, Science, Knowledge Management and Information Management – have revealed its benefits to students at large (e.g. Chu, 2008a; Law et al., 2011; Woo et al., 2011; Yu et al., 2011). In primary schools, students would work on a group project, sharing their tasks such as information search, editing, and so on. They would also comment on others’ works by using the comment function of the Web 2.0 collaborative platform like the Goolge Sites (Chu, 2008a; Law et al., 2011; Woo et al., 2011). In universities, the approach is similar to the one in primary level. It was found that the wiki methodology helps students in group project work as time can be saved in areas such as organizing group meetings, avoidance of writing similar content, and the final editing work (Chu, 2008a).

1 This paper is presented as part of an interactive events session for the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (2011).

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:08:59 上午 1 Both students and teachers have been found to have benefitted from the Web 2.0 technology. For students, Wiki carries several benefits to them. Through the examination from different researches about the use of Wiki in education, it is found that Wiki helped improve students’ level of collaboration, as well as their quality of work (Chu, 2008a). Moreover, it was considered as a useful tool for knowledge management in terms of knowledge creation and sharing (Chu, 2008a; Chu, Cheung, Ma & Leung, 2008). A recent research studying on how Web 2.0 facilitates English collaborative writing showed that students expressed their enjoyment on using the Wiki and commented that it helped them in team working, encouraged peer-to-peer interaction, and facilitated online group work (Woo et al., 2011). For teachers, Wiki enhances the teacher’s role as a facilitator of students’ group project work (Chu, 2008a). Moreover, teachers perceived the exchange of comments through a Wiki platform as beneficial to students’ collaboration of their group writing (Tavares et al., 2011; Woo et al, 2011). It also provokes the experience and teaching material sharing among colleagues in different schools. Feedback and comments from other colleagues help teachers improve their teaching and manage the database (Chu, 2009).

These studies showed that Wiki implementation for collaborative learning in various subjects has been positively rated by teachers and learners. With the implementation of the New Senior Secondary (NSS) Curriculum, students have much more oppurtunites in conducting group project work early in junior forms. Collaborative learning facilitated by Google Sites, a Wiki variant, in secondary education in the Hong Kong context is yet to be explored. As a result, this study aims to address the research gaps by conducting a research study at a local secondary school where junior form students are required to conduct a collaborative Liberal Studies project using Google Sites.

3. Research setting and methodology

A local secondary school has participated in this research. Research participants include the Liberal Studies (LS) subject teachers, and students (n=347) who were enrolled in Form 1 (n=166) and Form 2 (n=181) level during the entire 2010-2011 academic year. In November 2010, students were trained on using Google Sites by the IT specialists of the university research team, in order to ensure that students possess fundamental understanding to the application and the use of Google Sites. From November 2010 to March 2011, students worked on their group projects using Google Sites. Teachers visited their students’ Google Sites and left comments regularly to provide supports and suggestions. Upon the project completion, the research team went through the students’ project on Google Sites and captured all contents, including their project inputs and comments from teachers and peers, which were saved in document files for quatitative and qualitative analysis.

Shortly after the completion of the group projects, a questionnaire-based survey (see Appendix A) was conducted to examine students’ perceptions on the use of Google Sites. The survey consists of 15 statements, addressing five categories: learning/pedagogy, motivation, group interaction, technology, and knowledge management (Hazari, North & Moreland, 2009). Students rated their opinion on a scale from “Strongly disagree” (1) to “Strongly agree” (5) for the statements in the survey. A Chinese version of this perception questionnaire (see Appendix B) was given to avoid misunderstanding as Chinese is the mother lauguage for the students.

In order to have a better understanding to the students’ perception on the use of Wiki, results from an analysis of survey data were used to design questions for in-depth interviews. Groups of students were selected for a perceptual interview on the use of Google Sites and other collaborative tools. All interviews’ data were sound- recorded and transcripted.

4. Research findings

4.1 Teachers’ review

Teacher A, the Head of Liberal Studies Department of the school reflected that there are several differences between using Google Sites and traditional way in doing group project work. Due to the unique characteristics of Google Sites, teachers were found to be satisfied with the new way in conducting students’ group work. Teacher B, a frontline teacher in facilitating the research, mentioned in an experience-sharing talk that “there are several advantages in using Google Sites instead of the traditional way of teaching and learning.” The teacher has pinpointed and examined the collaborative function of Google Sites and how Google Sites has transformed the way in conducting collaborative work is listed below and categorized into four aspects.

2D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:08:59 上午 a) Continuity in assessment by history review and version comparison of student work

Traditionally, teachers gave marks only to the final products of the group works where the division of labour was unclear and unseen. Besides, teachers gave marks equally to each group member within a group as teachers were unable to observe the contribution of each student. Student group leaders often found completing the work unfair as other group members did not do their own parts but only relied on the group leader. The teacher had pinpointed the problem as followed:

“One of the problems of Hong Kong students is that sometimes they are lazy. They would complete their projects like a week or two before deadline.”(Transcript from Teacher B)

Google Sites allows the owners to grant access right to different people by adding their e-mail addresses in the collaboration system. Once people are invited in the Google Sites, they can contribute to the project in Google Sites by editing or commenting. Students can control the rights of different parties in viewing, editing, and managing their page.

Figure 1: Access rights management, extracted from one of the students’ projects

“I think in Google Sites, cooperation is shown. Everyone posted something on the sites……they did some editions/ editing and made the sites different. They must have done something.” (Transript from Teacher B)

“I can see the sentences deleted by the students, some remain unchanged. I can see their progress on the projects.”(Transcript from Teacher A)

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:08:59 上午 3 Google Sites provides a continuous and comprehensive assessment to each student. Teachers and students can view the different versions of students’ work in Google Sites by using the function called “History review”. The “version comparison” function helps students and teacher find out changes made in content in different versions.

Figure 2: Revision History review, extracted from one of the students’ projects

Students can revert their project sites to the previous version or retrieve the information that was deleted by mistake . As the learning process is visualized, teachers can monitor the students’ work week by week and give valuable comments to them continuously.

“We, teachers, have to give marks to the process… With the help of Google Sites, we can make the process become visualized… And also we can see the division of labour.” (Transcript from Teacher A)

The review function helps teacher mark the students’ performance in a much fair and objective way, by examining the content that was contributed by individuals. The pressure of individual contribution and peer influence helps students focus more on working their respective part responsibly.

b) Collaboration and communications among teachers and students

Commenting is an essential pedagogical process to facilitate students’ progressive learning. In the days when Web 2.0 technologies were not prevailing, teachers gave comments to the students once they finished the final product. At least a few days were required for the teachers to digest and to write valuable feedback to the students. As marks had already been given, students usually did not pay attention to the comments and lacked the motivation for improvements.

One common function in collaborative platform is the commenting. There are rows of space for commenting in each webpage of Google Sites, where different users can share their view. The example below shows that one student was asking advices from other viewers, and people gave comments which serve the purpose of reminding the students about spelling mistake, or appreciating and motivating the teammates to work hard.

4D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:08:59 上午 Figure 3: Comments, extracted from one of the students’ projects

“I can give comments at any time I want. Giving comments on Google Sites would be more convenient to teachers and students.” (Transcript from Teacher B)

With the help of the commenting function in Google Sites, teachers can leave comments whenever and wherever they want. Commenting is no longer restricted by text, by place, and by time. Embedding videos, inserting photos or quoting related websites can let students understand relevant concepts and amend their work with the teachers’ guidance.

c) Convenience in editing texts and attaching multi-media sources

Teachers have noticed that students are eager to make their presentation as interesting as possible by adding special animation effects and attaching photos and videos. Traditionally, students had to send e-mails with the attachments of photos and videos to seek for their groupmates’s opinion towards the use of those multi-media resources. Time would be largely spent in waiting for the response as well as attaching and downloading the video clips, especially when they are long in length and large in size. Moreover, various versions of the presentation file would be produced when different group mates edited it according to personal preferences, resulting in difficulty to combine the final presentation product.

“I think, in some ways, it can serve as a substitute to MS Word, since you can type and embed graphs in it.” (Transcript from Teacher B)

Basic word processor functions, such as bolding, are available at Google Sites. The tools and function keys work similar as in Microsoft Word. Also, unlike other collaborative platforms, all the different Google Apps can directly synchronize Google Sites because of their compatible nature designed by the Google team. For instance, Youtube videos can be directly embedded in Google Sites and the videos can be played on the same webpage. This feature is different from other collaborative platforms that would have to play the video in a new webpage.

d) Catering for learning diversity

Following the traditional way, students usually spent most of the classroom time in conducting collaborative work during class time. Due to the tense classroom atmosphere and limited lesson time, high caliber students completed most of the required tasks assigned by the teachers during the lesson, while low achievers did not have as many oppourtunities as the high achievers had in conducting group work. However, with the version tracking function of Google Sites, as suggested in the quote below, teachers can give better support to the less capable students.

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:08:59 上午 5 “Some of the elite students like to upload and edit more. And then I can see the various versions. But some students may be a little bit lazy and some may not be as devoted as the others. With Google Sites, I will be able to identify such students and discuss with them why they are not as involved in the project as other students.” (Transcript from Teacher B)

The collaborative platform allows a clear division of labor where students with lower ability could complete their work at home with the stimulation of other students’ work. They can work in a more relaxing environment and have more time to think of how to improve their contribution towards the group work. Besides, by reading the group mates’ work and other groups’ work, low achievers can refer to their work before they work on their own parts. The co-construction feature of Google Sites produces peer stimulation and peer influence that can cater for learning diversity within the group.

All in all, frontline teachers have reflected that Web 2.0 tools are able to achieve the objectives including promoting collaborative learning among students, motivating and enhancing students’ ability in autonomous learning and promoting “assessment for learning”, which leads to continuous improvement of students’ work. By tracing back the record of different versions, teachers can facilitate the meta-cognition of the students and let them reflect on themselves in improving the work. Students in a group also share the sense of responsibility as what they do and how much they contribute is shown to their classmates and teachers. This also enhances the mutual stimulation among peers where they can learn from each other.

4.2 Students’ review

All 347 students participated in the questionnaire survey on their perceptions of Google Sites. The 15 statements are categorized into five areas: Learning/Pedagogy; Motivation; Group Interaction; Technology; Knowledge Management. The overall statistical results are presented in Appendix C. Besides, five Form 1 groups and five Form 2 groups, who scored the highest marks in their projects, were interviewed for about 20 minutes after they have completed their projects. Quotes from the interviewees were extracted below to demonstrate their view towards Google Sites on the five areas.

Area 1: Learning/ Pedagogy

Three statements are designed to investigate how Google Sites affects students’ learning: Statement 1 “Use of Google Sites enhanced my interest in working on the project”, Statement 2 “I participated in the project more because of using Google Sites” and Statement 3 “Use of Google Sites aided me in achieving project objects”.

Figure 4: Statistic responses for Statements 1, 2 and 3.

Note: The bar charts reflect the average number of students responding the questions regarding the respective areas. The scores “1.00”, “2.00”, “3.00”, “4.00” and “5.00” refer to “Strongly disagree”, “Disagree”, “Neutral”, “Agree” and “Strongly agree” respectively. The means are calculated accordingly in Appendix C.

6D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:08:59 上午 Most of the students either comment in a neutral or positive perspective. The statistical data illustrates that students overall were satisfied in achieving their learning goals using this new learning method. Similar opinions were noted in the interviews:

“ We mainly use Google Sites to conduct our project. Google Sites is a good platform. It is multi-functional.” (Transcript from interviewee from Class 2E)

“I think Google Sites allows the teacher to know about the work distribution of the groups. Teacher would know the ratio of the work distribution, and so we do not have to write down a work distribution list as the list is quite ‘artificially’ made.” (Transcript from interviewee from Class 2A)

The emphasis on responsibility revealed by the review revision history function encourages students to participate in the project as their working process is continuously monitored by the teachers’ and other classmates. Also, as students can collaborate with their group mates through the commenting function of Google Sites, the objective in conducing group work is achieved.

Area 2: Motivation

To explore the significance of Google Sites in enhancing students’ motivation to conduct the project, the survey includes Statement 4 “Benefit of using Google Sites is worth the extra effort & time required to learn it”, Statement 5 “I would prefer creating projects using Google Sites over other projects that do not use Google Sites” and Statement 6 “I will continue to explore use of Google Sites for learning”.

In this area, the majority of the students ranked “Neutral” and the average rating was 3.22 (see Appendix C) which is above the mid-point of the scale, indicating that students held an overall positive perception regarding the significance of Google Sites in motivating them to conduct the project.

“I would introduce Google Sites to the students if I were a teacher. It is because unlike other software, Google Sites has a user guide to help the students to do a better project.” (Transcript from interviewee from Class 2A)

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:08:59 上午 7 “It is less complicated than MS Word, we do not have to open the Word file, modify the text and upload the file again to e-mail. Other than that, we do not have to copy the information by hand; do not have to type again onto MS Word. It saves a lot of time!” (Transcript from interviewee from Class 2A)

The quotes showed that some students welcomed the idea of using Google Sites in group projects as it seemed to have helped them do a better job. Some other students compared Google Sites with the more traditional use of MS Word and they indicated that they would prefer using the new technology more, implying that Google Sites appeared to be more able in enhancing students’ motivation in conducting group projects.

Area 3: Group Interaction

Statement 7 “Use of Google Sites promoted collaborative learning”, Statement 8 “Use of Google Sites for the project helped me interact more with my group mates” and Statement 9 “Because of using Google Sites, my group was able to come to a consensus faster” reflect students’ perception on group interaction when using Google Sites in conducting their group projects.

The majority of students have selected “Neutral” and “Agree”. It reflected that the collaborative function of Google Sites is well perceived by those young users. Google Sites help students see each others’ process and comment on others’ work. They are not only completing their own sectors of the work, but also comparing themselves with others and making valuable contribution to others’ work.

“…Google Sites makes our communication easier and increases our efficiency…” (Transcript from interviewee from Class 1D)

“We can find some information. We can put them on Google Sites, and other group mates can see them and it can help us to do the project.” (Transcript from interviewee from Class 1E)

Many students appreciated the commenting function of Google Sites which allowed them to communicate more efficiently. Furthermore, it offered the students shared online platform where they could upload and share their information easily.

Area 4: Technology

Statement 10 “The interface and features of Google Sites were clear and easy to understand”, Statement 11 “Technical features in Google Sites helped enhance my learning” and Statement 12 “Benefits of using Google

8D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:00 上午 Sites outweighed any technical challenges of its use” collect students’ opinion on the technological features of Google Sites.

Most of the students ranked “Agree” for this area, except for Statement 12, where more students opted for “Neutral”. The result reflected that the unique features in Google Sites could benefit the students in their learning process, yet there are still technical challenges that students might face when using Google Sites, as organizing the information resources in the form of a webpage requires some more technical knowledge than presenting the project by Powerpoint or MS Word. The positive perception credits to the Google Apps synchronizing function which enable students to attach Youtube videos and other multi-media information to their convenience. Also, features including history review and version comparison functions help the students greatly in reflecting their own learning experience. Besides, the basic word processer function enriches the usefulness and computability of Google Sites. Student’s positive comment generated from these functions is shown:

“ … any group mates can comment on the document instantly, thus quicker modification can be done…” (Transcript from interviewee from 2A class)

As a result, these functions of Google Sites altogether help students modify their work in a quicker and more convenient way.

Area 5: Knowledge management

In order to examine students’ perception in knowledge management when using Google Sites, three statements are designed: Statement 13 “Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge creation. (i.e. development of new knowledge and innovations that did not exist before)”; Statement 14 “Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge sharing”; Statement 15 “Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge dissemination. (e.g. broadcasting it to a larger population)”.

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:00 上午 9 Figure 8: Statistic responses for Statements 13, 14 and 15.

In general, the area Knowledge Management ranked the most positively among the five areas.

“Google Sites is an online tool which makes it easy for us to collect data from the internet, so that we do not need to copy the data by hand or print out the data. Using Google Sites to organise the data is more systematic.” (Transcript from interviewee from 1D class)

“I think Google Sites is helpful, it is a platform which allows us to share opinions, and thus the efficiency is increased. We do not need to communicate by phone calls.” (Transcript from interviewee from 1D class)

In fact, the collaborative and comment function of Google Sites helps people share their information with each other. Students can look at other groups’ work and leave comments to their peers. Through this process, both sides (i.e. the students who leave and those who receive the comments) played a role in the student-centred learning approach. Students can fill the knowledge gap according to different abilities, thus enhancing the knowledge management and sharing.

The overall positive ranking (see Appendix C) reflects that Google Sites has improved students’ level of collaboration, as well as their quality of work. This finding is similar to Chu’s (2008b) previous study. Especially for the area Knowledge Management, Google Sites was considered as a useful tool for knowledge management in terms of knowledge creation and sharing, which further reinforced the similar conclusion suggested in the studies of Chu (2008a) and Chu, Cheung, Ma & Leung (2008).

5. Conclusion

It can be seen that Wiki, as one of the Web 2.0 techonologies, helps increase working efficiency and effectiveness. As shown in this study, various functions and characteristics of Google Sites make it a useful tool in collaborative work. Education is a field where such tools can be utilized to its fullest potential, as students are required to do group work on various subjects frequently.

The various advantages of using the interactive means of Wiki are seen in the school. Generally, both teachers and students find it a useful tool in teaching and learning. Teachers are satisfied with the history review function for convenient marking. Students feel comfortable and motivated with embedding videos and photots in project report, as well as presenting their group work in a webpage format. Last but not least, students were able to manage their own time in doing the projects outside the classroom. The trend of Wiki as a facilitative tool in

10D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:00 上午 collaborative work is yet to be examined. The use of Wiki and its potential benefits are good subject matters for further research studies.

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:00 上午 11 References

Chu, S.K.W., Chan, C.K.K., & Tiwari, A.F.Y. (2012). Using blogs to support learning during internship. Computers & Education. Chu, S.K.W. & Kennedy, D.M. (2011). Using online collaborative tools for groups to co-construct knowledge. Online Information Review, 35(4): 581-597 Chu, S.K.W., Tavares, N.J., Chu, D., Ho, S.Y., Chow, K., Siu, F.L.C., Wong, M. (2012). Developing upper primary students’ 21st century skills: inquiry learning through collaborative teaching and Web 2.0 technology. Hong Kong: Centre for Information Technology in Education, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong. Chu, S. (2008a). TWiki for knowledge building and management. Online Information Review, 32(6), 745-758. Chu, S. (2008b). Grade 4 students’ development of research skills through inquiry-based learning projects. School Libraries Worldwide, 14(1), 10-37 Chu, S. (2009). Inquiry project-based learning with a partnership of three types of teachers and the school librarian. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1671-1686. Chu, S. K. W., Cheung, J. N. C., Ma, L. D. Y., & Leung, D. W. K. W. (2008). Student’s co-construction of group project work via Twiki. Paper presented at the 2008 International Conference on Knowledge Management, Columbus, Ohio. Churchill, D. (2007). Web 2.0 and possibilities for educational applications. Educational Technology, 47(2), 24- 29. De Pedro, X., Rieradevall, M., López, P., Sant, D. et al. (2006), “Writing documents collaboratively in higher education using traditional vs. wiki methodology (II): quantitative results from a 2-year project study”, paper presented at the 4th International Congress of University Teaching and Innovation, 5 July, Barcelona Franklin, T. & van Harmelen, M. (May, 2007). Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education. Technical report. Hanson, C., Thackeray, R., Barnes, M., Neiger, B., & McIntyre, E. (2008). Integrating Web 2.0 in Health Education Preparation and Practice. American Journal of Health Education, 39(3), 157-166. Hazari, S., North, A., & Moreland, D. (2009). Investigating pedagogical value of wiki technology. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2), 187-198 Law, H.C., Chu, S.K.W., Siu F., Pun, B. & Lei, H. (2011). Challenges of Using Google Sites in Education and How Students Perceive Using It. Paper presented at CITE Research Symposium 2011, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. Tavares, N., Chu, S. K. W. & Weng, M. (2011). Experimenting with English collaborative writing on Google Sites. Paper presented at QEF Project Dissemination Symposia: Applying a collaborative teaching approach to inquiry project-based learning with Web 2.0 at upper primary levels, the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, June 30, 2011. Yu, C.T., Fong, C. S., Kwok, W. K., Law, S. M., Chu, S.K.W. & Ip, I. (2011). Using Google Sites for Collaborative Inquiry Projects in General Studies. Paper presented at CITE Research Symposium 2011, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. Woo, M. Chu, S., Ho, A. & Li, XX. (2011). Using a Wiki to Scaffold Primary School Students’ Collaborative Writing. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 14(1): 43-54.

12D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:00 上午 Appendix A

Survey on students’ perception on Google Sites This survey aims to collect students’ opinion in using Google Sites for group projects.

Name: ______Class: ______Group Number: ______

Part I. Students’ perception on Google Sites Please rate your opinion on the following statements in a scale of 1 to 5 and with 1 being “strongly disagree”, 2 being “disagree”, 3 being “neutral”, 4 being “agree” and 5 being “strongly agree”. Please circle your choice. S D N A S t t i e g r r s u r o o a e t n n g r e g r g a e l l l y y e

D A i g s r a e g e r e e

1 Use of Google Sites enhanced my interest in working on 1 2 3 4 5 the project. 2 I participated in the project more because of using Google 1 2 3 4 5 Sites. 3 Use of Google Sites aided me in achieving project objects. 1 2 3 4 5 4 Benefit of using Google Sites is worth the extra effort & 1 2 3 4 5 time required to learn it. 5 I would prefer creating projects using Google Sites over 1 2 3 4 5 other projects that do not use Google Sites. 6 I will continue to explore use of Google Sites for learning. 1 2 3 4 5 7 Use of Google Sites promoted collaborative learning. 1 2 3 4 5 8 Use of Google Sites for the project helped me interact more 1 2 3 4 5 with my group mates. 9 Because of using Google Sites, my group was able to come 1 2 3 4 5 to a consensus faster. 10 The interface and features of Google Sites were clear and 1 2 3 4 5 easy to understand. 11 Technical features in Google Sites helped enhance my 1 2 3 4 5 learning. 12 Benefits of using Google Sites outweighed any technical 1 2 3 4 5 challenges of its use. 13 Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge creation. 1 2 3 4 5 (i.e. development of new knowledge and innovations that did not exist before) 14 Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge sharing. 1 2 3 4 5 15 Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge 1 2 3 4 5 dissemination. (e.g. broadcasting it to a larger population)

Appendix B

學生 Google Sites 認知問卷

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:01 上午 13 本問卷旨在調查學生對 Google Sites 和 Delicious 用於製作專題報告的認知。

姓名：班別：組別：

第一部分：Google Sites 問卷調查請圈出你對以下說法的認可程度，1 表示十分不同意，2 表示不同意，3 表示中立，4 表示同意，5 表示十分不同意。

十不中同十分同立意分不意同同意意

1 Google Sites 提升了我製作專題報告的興趣。 1 2 3 4 5 2 Google Sites 令我更積極地參與製作專題報告。 1 2 3 4 5 3 Google Sites 幫助我達成專題報告的目標。 1 2 3 4 5 4 我認為花在學習使用 Google Sites 的精力和時間是值得 1 2 3 4 5 的。 5 相比不使用 Google Sites 製作的專題報告，我更喜歡使 1 2 3 4 5 用 Google Sites 製作的專題報告。 6 我會繼續嘗試使用 Google Sites 進行學習。 1 2 3 4 5 7 Google Sites 促進協作學習。 1 2 3 4 5 8 使用 Google Sites 製作專題報告，加強了我和組員之間 1 2 3 4 5 的溝通。 9 Google Sites 令我的小組更快達成共識。 1 2 3 4 5 10 Google Sites 的版面和功能是清晰易用的。 1 2 3 4 5 11 Google Sites 的技術功能幫助我學習。 1 2 3 4 5 12 使用 Google Sites 所帶來的好處大於操作時遇到的困難。1 2 3 4 5 13 Google Sites 能幫助創造新知識。 1 2 3 4 5 14 Google Sites 能幫助分享知識。 1 2 3 4 5 15 Google Sites 能幫助傳播知識。 1 2 3 4 5

14D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:01 上午 Appendix C SD D N A SA Items Mean (1.00) (2.00) (3.00) (4.00) (5.00) Area 1: Learning/Pedagogy 1. Use of Google Sites enhanced my interest in working on 20.00 66.00 135.00 106.00 20.00 3.12 the project. 2. I participated in the project more because of using 16.00 54.00 127.00 115.00 35.00 3.29 Google Sites. 3. Use of Google Sites aided me in achieving project 10.00 32.00 107.00 152.00 45.00 3.55 objects. Overall Average 15.33 50.67 123.00 124.33 33.33 3.32

Area 2: Motivation 4.Benefit of using Google Sites is worth the extra effort & 14.00 57.00 137.00 107.00 32.00 3.25 time required to learn it. 5. I would prefer creating projects using Google Sites over 28.00 64.00 125.00 86.00 44.00 3.16 other projects that do not use Google Sites. 6. I will continue to explore use of Google Sites for 15.00 58.00 130.00 106.00 34.00 3.25 learning. Overall Average 19.00 59.67 130.67 99.67 36.67 3.22

Area 3: Group Interaction 7. Use of Google Sites promoted collaborative learning. 9.00 45.00 115.00 134.00 43.00 3.45 8. Use of Google Sites for the project helped me interact 20.00 67.00 95.00 113.00 50.00 3.31 more with my group mates. 9. Because of using Google Sites, my group was able to 20.00 65.00 129.00 102.00 30.00 3.16 come to a consensus faster. Overall Average 16.33 59.00 113.00 116.33 41.00 3.31

Area 4: Technology 10. The interface and features of Google Sites were clear 22.00 36.00 78.00 145.00 65.00 3.56 and easy to understand. 11. Technical features in Google Sites helped enhance my 19.00 57.00 112.00 119.00 37.00 3.28 learning. 12. Benefits of using Google Sites outweighed any 15.00 53.00 136.00 111.00 30.00 3.26 technical challenges of its use. Overall Average 18.67 48.67 108.67 125.00 44.00 3.37

Area 5: Knowledge Management 13. Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge creation. (i.e. development of new knowledge and 17 65 153 91 18 3.08 innovations that did not exist before) 14. Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge sharing. 7 31 86 165 55 3.67 15. Google Sites is an enabling tool for knowledge 8 27 99 156 54 3.64 dissemination. (e.g. broadcasting it to a larger population) Overall Average 10.667 41 112.67 137.33 42.33 3.46 Note: The mid-point of the scale is 3.00. So students held an overall positive perception to all five areas.

D:\Docs\2018-04-14\066deb1d8b5f02f46132f8a11b01631c.doc 5/8/2018 7:09:01 上午 15