Computer Assisted Language Learning

ISSN: 0958-8221 (Print) 1744-3210 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ncal20

Students’ perceptions about the effects of

collaborative digital storytelling on writing skills

Fatih Tanrıkulu

To cite this article: Fatih Tanrıkulu (2020): Students’ perceptions about the effects of
collaborative digital storytelling on writing skills, Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:
10.1080/09588221.2020.1774611

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1774611

Published online: 12 Jun 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 34

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ncal20
COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1774611

Students’ perceptions about the effects

of collaborative digital storytelling on writing skills
Fatih Tanrıkulu
Faculty of Education, Kahramanmaraş S€utçu€ _Imam University, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
This study aims to identify the students’ perceptions about Action research;
how collaborative digital storytelling use in writing class collaborative digital
affects their writing skills. Having a qualitative research storytelling; writing skills;
digital storytelling
design, the research has utilized an action research model.
The research was conducted in two different classes with
first-year university students studying at the Department of
Turkish Education (N ¼ 61). Students have produced two
different digital stories (DSTs) throughout the course. The
first DST was created individually, and the second collab-
oratively. Students actively participated in producing and
criticizing the phases of digital stories. The researcher and
students’ diaries and focus group interviews were used as
data collection tools. Data were analyzed through the
Nvivo 12 qualitative data analysis program. During the ana-
lysis process, data were first converted into codes, and the
obtained codes were divided into themes and sub-themes.
Findings indicated that students have a perception that
DST improves their writing skills. It is reflected in the stu-
dent views that DST positively affects the internal and
external structure of the text. The multimedia feature and
the script have positive effect on writing and help to har-
monize technology and writing.

1. Introduction
In the digital age, students who use digital environments frequently
should be encouraged to write (Bumgarner, 2012) and alternative writing
methods should be sought (Saunders, 2014). One of these methods, digital
storytelling (DST) writing offers a high-quality learning experience as an
alternative method for developing digital content in education (Jakes,
2005). DSTs provide opportunities for students to be actively involved in
the learning setting by helping them acquire educational objectives (Figg
& McCartney, 2010). This technology-based method enables the 21st
century students to utilize technologically advanced resources in order to

CONTACT Fatih Tanrıkulu [email protected] Faculty of Education, Kahramanmaraş S€ u _Imam

utç€
University, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey.
ß 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 F. TANRIKULU

produce meaningful stories and contents, and further allows them to

deepen and use their knowledge (LaFrance & Blizzard, 2013). DST (digital
storytelling) which combines traditional storytelling with digital media
(Gakhar & Thompson, 2007) enables the production of multimedia texts
by combining traditional and new literacy approaches (Sylvester &
Greenidge, 2009). There have been a number of researches conducted to
improve the writing skills through DST, which is used as a preferable
alternative method in teaching writing. Most of these studies have been
carried out with a focus on L2. In EFL classes, individual DST studies
have been conducted (Vinogradova, Linville, & Bickel, 2011; Abdel-Hack
& Helwa, 2014; Balaman, 2018; Hava, 2019). Also, in EFL classes, collab-
orative DST studies have been conducted (Chuang et al., 2013; Hafner &
Miller, 2011; Kalyaniwala-Thapliyal, 2016; Sepp & Bandi-Rao, 2015).
However, there are both individual and collaborative DST studies in EFL
classes (Oskoz & Elola, 2014; Hwang et al.,2016), and there are a few FL
studies on the effect of DST writing skills (Sevilla-Pav
on, 2015; Oskoz &
Elola, 2016). However, within the context of L1 classes, collaborative stud-
ies are limited (Bumgarner, 2012; Nishioka, 2016). Furthermore, there are
studies focusing on the effects of individual DST in the writing class (Xu,
Park, & Baek, 2011; Campbell, 2012; LoBello, 2015; Sarıca-Çıralı & Koçak-
Usluel, 2016; Yamaç & Ulusoy, 2016). This study investigated student
perceptions about the effectiveness of collaborative DST on writing skills
in L1 writing classroom.

2. Literature review
2.1. Digital story
There are many definitions of DST writing in the literature (Meadows,
2003; Bull & Kajder, 2004; Banister, Hodges, & Michalski, 2005; Robin,
2006; Dogan, Robin, et al., 2008; Jenkins & Lonsdale, 2007; Skinner &
Hagood, 2008; Casta~ neda, 2013). These definitions revolve around the
idea of writing DSTs by combining various multimedia sources such as
images, audios, and videos. More generally, DST writing is described as
creating a short film through combining the multimedia artefacts pro-
vided by technology using software for a story or event axis. The aim is
two-fold; to make the knowledge much more effective and lasting by
making use of the plot of the story, and to urge students to be active
participants in the learning setting through technology. DST process con-
sists of seven stages:”writing an initial script, planning a storyboard, dis-
cussing and revising the script, sequencing the images through video
editor, inserting the narrative track, adding special effects and transitions,
and adding a soundtrack providing time permits”(Bull & Kajder, 2004:
 COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING 3

49). These stages offer activities where students can develop different
skills. Language can be used effectively in these activities. The process
contributes to the development of students’ different language skills
(Yoon, 2016). Research on DST indicates that these types of activities
develop students’ reading and speaking skills and communication skills
(Kajder, 2004; Banister et al., 2005; Davis & McGrail, 2009; Gubrium &
Scott, 2010; Morgan, 2014; Kurudayıoglu & Bal, 2014; Miller & Kim,
2015; Del-Moral-Perez, Villalustre-Martınez, & Neira-Pi~
neiro, 2019). In
DST, which supports the development of different language skills
(Yuksel, Robin, & McNeil, 2011), as an important stage revising the
script has been found to have a positive effect on the writing ability
(Sevilla-Pav
on, 2015). During the DST process, writing skills and other
language skills are used effectively. Using DST in writing class can be
expected to improve not only students’ writing skills but also their other
language skills.

2.2. Digital storytelling in writing

Students’ reading and writing skills can improve through using multi-
media technologies in DST writing (Bagui, 1998; Banister et al., 2005),
which offers a combination of both traditional (Campbell, 2012; Herrera,
2014; Balaman, 2018) and multimodal approaches (Porto & Alonso
Belmonte, 2014; Oskoz & Elola, 2016) allowing students to visualize their
written narratives and writing more effectively (Jakes, 2005). Also, DST
writing encourages students during the writing process (Miller, 2009). In
addition, with its multimedia components and by creating an ideal learn-
ing environment, DST writing encourages students to write (Banister
et al., 2005; Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009). Furthermore, Xu et al. (2011)
assert that DST may encourage people who do not like writing and do
not dare to write.
Story writing is the most important stage of DST narration where the
aim is to tell stories to people. Writing is an integral and important part
of this process (Ohler, 2006; Miller, 2009; Lambert, 2010). Writing scripts
is a key process to DSTs as the final product is media-based production
(Yang & Wu, 2012). Writing a script on a storyboard is the basis for the
writing of a DST, and the inclusion of various multimedia elements
serves to construct the story (Jakes, 2005). A well-written script for story-
board makes the digital story more effective and successful (Xu et al.,
2011). Writing takes an organizing role that combines meaningful pieces.
During the writing process, knowledge about the target topic is explored
to create scripts (Yang & Wu, 2012). Once the materials for the story
have been gathered, the script begins to be written, the scripts are
4 F. TANRIKULU

recorded and edited on a computer and everything is recorded in a draft,

which is called a storyboard (Robin, Pierson, et al., 2005; Sarıca-Çıralı &
Koçak-Usluel, 2016). Students write short scripts of approximately 500
words (Miller & Kim, 2015; Oskoz & Elola, 2016). They record these
texts on a computer (Bull & Kajder, 2004). Writing short stories helps
the storyteller to understand important points in the script and manage
and organize their time in the production process (Lambert, 2010). After
the scripts are finalized, peer evaluation is conducted, and scripts are
revised according to feedback and correction suggestions (Miller, 2009;
Yang & Wu, 2012; Pardo, 2014). As presented in the literature, the cre-
ation process of individual storytelling is commonly studied. However, in
this regard, there are fewer studies in the literature on collaborative DST
than in individual studies.
DST process requires the collaboration of students (Pardo, 2014).
Bearing this feature in mind, it increases collaboration and interaction,
which is one of the basic features of peer learning (Fokides, 2016).
Thanks to its open structure, it enables students to interact with their
peers and their teachers (Yoon, 2013). Students learn to incorporate
feedback from their groups and class into their work, which offers the
opportunity to apply both Speaking and writing skills during the editing
phase. (Miller & Kim, 2015). By running such cooperation together, stu-
dents develop their thinking skills and build their communities (Sadik,
2008). It contributes to the development of different kinds of skills by
bringing together students with different learning styles (Robin, 2006).
These features of DST can be used as an effective tool for improving
cooperation (Dupian & Maguire, 2005; LaFrance & Blizzard, 2013; Miller
& Kim, 2015). Studies have also shown that activities in the DST process
improve collaborative learning (Dupian & Maguire, 2005; Yuksel et al.,
2011; Diaz, 2016). Briefly, DST, which is capable of developing collabor-
ation, can be considered as an effective tool in collaborative writing.
The previous studies in L1 writing classrooms have shown that DST has
positive effects on writing skills. Campbell (2012) found that there was an
improvement in the quality of products and the level of participation and
writing of DST students in the 5th and 6th grades. LoBello (2015) has
observed improvements in DST writing motivation, self-perception, cre-
ativity, and overall writing performance in the 4th grade. Sarıca-Çıralı and
Koçak-Usluel (2016) have found a significant improvement in DST writing
skills in primary education. Xu et al. (2011) have revealed that DST is
more effective than offline writing and it can be used effectively in class-
room settings to teach writing. In Yamaç and Ulusoy (2016) study, third
grade primary school students showed improvement in word choice, sen-
tence fluency, spelling quality and writing task demands with DST.
 COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING 5

Figure 1. The Dialectic Action Research Spiral (Mills, 2007, p. 20).

Therefore, studies have shown that the use of DST in the writing class-
room has positive effects on writing skills. Although there are many stud-
ies on individual DST, collaborative research is limited. This study aims to
determine students’ perceptions about the collaborative DST’s effects on
their writing skills. To serve this aim, an answer to the following question
has been sought in the present study:
What are the students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the collaborative digital
storytelling on writing skills?

3. Method
This research has been conducted as an action research. Action research
is a method aiming at improving education by changing the educational
environment and managing the implementation process (Kemmis &
McTaggart, 1992). There are a few models for employing action research,
the basic one consists of four steps: identifying an area of focus, collect-
ing data, analyzing and interpreting the data, and developing an action
plan (Mills, 2007:20). Figure 1 depicts the steps of progressive action
research below:

3.1. Identifying an area of focus

In writing classroom, writing lessons are carried out with more non-
digital tools rather than the digital ones. The researcher suggested that
writing software and digital applications for writing should be considered
in writing classrooms. The researcher reflected that the multimedia fea-
ture that supports the writing phase of DST could make a difference to
the writing classrooms and improve the students’ writing skills. The
6 F. TANRIKULU

researcher got informed about what previous studies had determined,

explored, and conducted about the related topic (Naughton & Hughes,
2009). Seeing the positive effect of DST on writing skills in the literature, the
researcher decided to employ DST in his writing classroom. It has been
observed in the literature that there are both individual and collaborative
research. The researcher considered the assumption that the DST structure
could be more effective in collaborative writing. He shared the issue with the
committee. Taking their opinions into consideration, it was decided to con-
duct the study collaboratively, but during the first weeks to gain experience
students are required to make individual DST for educational purposes.

3.2. Participants
The implementation was conducted with a total number of 61 students
in two different classes (n ¼ 30, n ¼ 31 at each) at the Department of
Turkish Education at a state university. Participants of the research are
researcher, validity committee, students and focus interview group stu-
dents. The researcher had roles both as a participant and researcher. The
researcher is responsible for planning and carrying out the implementa-
tion (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1992; Koshy, 2005). The validation commit-
tee was formed to observe and provide advice on the research process.
For the validation committee, three academics from the Department of
Educational Sciences were selected. The committee held holds regular
meetings throughout the research and followed the process. The partici-
pants of the study consist of 61 undergraduate students from the
Department of Turkish Education. The ages of the students ranged from
19 to 20. The students are 40 female and 21 male students. The focus
group students consisted of volunteer students selected from two classes.

3.3. Data collection tools

Research data were obtained from diaries (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1992),
focus group interviews (Stringer, 2007). Participants were encouraged to
keep diaries during the learning process (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1992).
The diaries reflect students’ opinions about how the application works,
contribute to them and affect the learning environment. At the end of
the implementation, the students typed their diaries in Word documents
and submitted them. It is important to note that diaries constitute the
most important part of the findings as they have a significant contribu-
tion to the present study in terms of reflecting students’ views in a com-
prehensive manner.
 COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING 7

Focus group interviews give more detailed information to the research-

ers and allow them to follow the ideas about the research (Taylor, Baser,
& Wilkie, 2006). They can help develop rich debates with wide-ranging
responses compared to an individual interview (Taylor et al., 2006). They
also enable participants to express their experiences and perspectives
(Stringer, 2007). Two focus group interviews were conducted in this
research. The focus group interviews were conducted with five students.
Audio and video were recorded during the focus meetings. The focus
groups consisted of two groups of volunteer students.

3.4. Data collection procedure

Action research focused on researching student perceptions about the
effect of collaborative DST on writing skills. In the first stage of the
research, students created individual stories to learn the use of DST.
After the students learned DST at a basic level, a collaborative DST
application was carried out. At this stage, students continued to collabor-
ate on DST by forming groups of 2 or 3.
Students were lectured about digital storytelling and also informed
about the use of the Windows Movie Maker program for DST. Besides,
they were given information about audio, visual, and video editing pro-
grams. In the first stage, they made the DST individually so that the stu-
dents could learn how to make DST. The students identified DST topics,
and the first DSTs were developed individually. In this regard, the draft-
ing stage and completion of the product was realized by considering the
received feedback. In the evaluations, each student had the opportunity
to comment on DSTs. Completed DST products were shared in the
classroom. After the students learned the construction of DST at a basic
level, the collaborative DST application was started.
The action was revised, and the new cycle was carried out as collab-
orative DST. The weaknesses in the students’ first DSTs were detected,
and they were given both theoretical and practical information. Students
formed groups of 2-3. Observation of digital story creation and providing
feedback was ensured. The researcher’s notes about the process and col-
laborative DST were shared with the committee. The students presented
their collaborative DST products and the implementation was finalized.
Finally, the focus group interview was held.

3.5. Data analysis and coding

The data obtained from the researcher and student diaries, researcher
diaries and the focus group interviews were written and transferred to
8 F. TANRIKULU

the Nvivo 12 program. The program provided a great convenience in the

detailed analysis of data as well as in the creation, classification, and edit-
ing of the codes. Coding is the process of tagging the content of the
data, which means naming the meaningful parts (such as a word, sen-
tence, paragraph) of the data (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011). Similar views
were gathered under the same code. These codes were gathered under
themes (Ekiz, 2009; Stringer, 2007). Sentence-based, word group-based,
or word-based coding were conducted. The codes were named with titles
that were very close to the students’ expressions in the codes. In order to
provide richness and reflect the impartiality of the research, the codes
that had almost the same meanings were put into the same theme with a
different code title. The codes were then analyzed by two different
experts from the faculty of education. Considering their feedback, the
codes and themes were restructured. After reviewing the codes, the codes
were rearranged, and the experts’ views were asked again. After this
stage, the themes and codes took their final forms.

3.6. Ethics
A written consent form was obtained from the participants who volun-
teered to take part in the research. Participants were given the right to
leave the research at any time at their will (Taylor et al., 2006).

3.7. Reliability and validity

In order to ensure the reliability and validity of qualitative data, data are
collected from multiple sources and multiple perspectives, and then
cross-checking is performed with different sources to determine compli-
ance and non-compliance (Naughton & Hughes, 2009).
The number of codes of the same opinion and the codes obtained
from different sources are high significance in terms of reflecting the
reliability of the research. Codes and themes were confirmed by two aca-
demics. Coding was made to an academic to determine the kappa coefi-
cients of the codes. Compared to the researcher codes, Kappa coefficients
value of writing skills theme was found to be 0.81 (very good). This
value is considered as high reliability. Table 1 displays themes and codes
Kappa coefficients values.

4. Findings and discussion

Research findings were shown in the coding table. The first column of
the code tables in the themes includes the theme, sub-theme, and code
names. Codes are the names summarizing the students’ opinions. The
 COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING 9

Table 1. Kappa coefficients.

Theme and Codes Kappa coefficients
Writing Skills 0,81
Developing Writing Skills 0,6157
Organizing Role of Script 0,8119
Providing Effective Writing 0,7581
Positive Effect of Imagery on Writing 0,7771
Increasing Attention in Writing 0,8651
Contribution of Multimedia to Facilitating Writing 0,8243
Students’ Exploration of Writing Skills 0,7999
Scheduled Writing 0,8254
Taking Care of Spelling Rules 0,9663
Decrease in Error Rate in Writing 0,8111
Adaptation between technology and writing 0,8933

Table 2. Coding table.

Theme and Codes Number of sources Number of codes
Writing Skills 7 36
Developing Writing Skills 3 7
Organizing Role of Script 2 7
Providing Effective Writing 4 5
Positive Effect of Imagery on Writing 1 4
Increasing Attention in Writing 2 3
Contribution of Multimedia to Facilitating Writing 1 3
Students’ Exploration of Writing Skills 2 2
Scheduled Writing 2 2
Taking Care of Spelling Rules 1 1
Decrease in Error Rate in Writing 1 1
Adaptation between technology and writing 1 1

classified codes were collected under themes. In the second column, the
number of sources” indicates how many different data sources were
obtained from the codes. In the third column, “the number of codes”
indicates how many times the same or similar views were repeated.
Table 2 displays themes, sub-themes and codes for language skills. 36
codes were obtained from 7 different sources in total.
The students’ opinions in the code ‘Developing Writing Skills’ reflect
that DST is effective in writing: ‘It improves writing skills and I can make
more beautiful writings day after day (F_G_I_1). While creating the
digital story, it contributes to the development of writing (S_39).’ The
results of previous studies have similarly shown that DST is effective in
improving writing skills (Campbell, 2012; LoBello, 2015; Sarıca-Çıralı &
Koçak-Usluel, 2016). Balaman (2018) has revealed that DST is effective
in improving students’ writing skills.
The students stated that collaborative DST is more effective in writing:
‘Especially in the second manuscript, DS progressed further, and good writ-
ings appeared (F_G_I_2). There were positive differences between the first
and the second (F_G_I_2).’
10 F. TANRIKULU

The students’ opinions in the code ‘Increasing Attention in Writing’

reflect that DST increases attention in writing: ‘DST minimizes error rate.
We will be more careful in writing since it will appear to more people
(F_G_I_1). It is necessary to be more careful to be consistent with pictures
and text (F_G_I_1).’ Similarly, other codes also show that students pay
attention to the structure of writing. The students’ opinions in the code
‘Taking Care of Spelling Rules’ reflect that DST helps students pay more
attention to spelling rules: ‘We spent more effort on punctuation and
spelling rules, and by doing so, we paid extra attention to it (F_G_I_1).’
Furthermore, in the code ‘Decrease in Error Rate in Writing’ students’
opinions have revealed that DST reduces spelling errors: ‘Minimizes error
rate in writing. We are more careful in writing because people will read it
(F_G_I_1).’ Students’ views show that DST is effective on both internal
and external structure of writing.
The students’ opinions in the code ‘Students’ Exploration of Writing
Skills’ reveal that it helps students discover their own writing skills: ‘The
student explores the use of information technologies, writing skills, lan-
guage skills and the harmony between them (S_13).’ Students’ comments
on their writing skills can be explained by the fact that DST has the
potential to activate writing skills.
The students’ opinions in the code ‘Providing Effective Writing’ sug-
gest that DST makes writing more effective: ‘The student learns to write
emotions, thoughts, wishes and dreams in an effective and planned way
(S_13). Another student stated that it was more impressive than an
ordinary narrative. This assignment gave us an impressive and creative
narrative technique instead of an ordinary narrative (S_19). DST is more
effective and more instructive than traditional, classical teaching methods
that are based on lecturing (S_6)’. These students’ perceptions indicate
that DST supports effective writing. This result is in line with Yamaç
and Ulusoy (2016) study that word choice, sentence fluency and spelling
quality increased with writing demands. Herrera (2014) concluded that
DST improved writing and helped build sentences appropriate in terms
of language structure. The findings of this study match those of the pre-
vious study.
The students’ opinions in the code ‘Adaptation between technology
and writing’ show that DST served as a bridge between technology and
writing: ‘The student explores the use of information technologies, writing
skills, language skills and the harmony between them (S_13).’ The stu-
dents’ opinions in another code ‘Organizing Role of Writing’ reflect that
DST has been shown to have the organizing feature of the text: ‘I think
writing plays a central role, we act accordingly, we put the pictures accord-
ing to the text, we put them in order, we create them, otherwise it would
 COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING 11

be difficult to emerge (F_G_I_2). Since the digital story is writing-oriented,

it has a relationship with written narration (F_G_I_1).’ It is seen that
these comments focus on the script. The students’ perceptions demon-
strate that the script stage is the key stage of DST. Similarly, the students’
opinions in the code ‘Scheduled Writing’ reflect that DST is effective on
planned writing: ‘The student learns to write emotions, thoughts, wishes
and dreams in an effective, planned way (S_13). Student views in these
codes show that DST has an effect on the structure of writing.
The students’ opinions in some codes show that multimedia is effect-
ive in writing. The students’ opinions in the code ‘Contribution of
Multimedia to Facilitating Writing’ reflect that the multimedia feature of
DST has a facilitating effect on writing: ‘Not only do we think much
about writing, but when you write a digital story, there is also a picture
and sound. They all evoke something and make it easier to write
(F_G_I_2). We are doing research for a lot of things when we write the
story. The things we do remain in our minds, and they become associated
more effectively with the writing process (F_G_I_2).’ In addition, the stu-
dents’ opinions in the code ‘Positive Effect of Imagery on Writing”
reflected that the visual multimedia features have positive effects on writ-
ing: ‘We become more careful to ensure consistency with images
(F_G_I_1). We would not pay so much attention if there were no images,
but visuality changes everything (F_G_I_1).’ These students’ perceptions
show that the multimedia feature of DST is effective in writing. Similar
results have been reported in previous studies. Xu et al. (2011) have
observed that multimedia helps learners see the story structure, realize
the errors and rearrange their thoughts in a logical way. Oskoz and Elola
(2016) found that students who switched from a traditional text to a
multimodal narrative recognized the structure of language.
Purcell, Buchanan, and Friedrich (2013) concluded that DST can be
used as an aid in writing and DST can be used as an alternative method
in the writing class for educators looking for new methods in the digital
age. The findings of this study also show that students have a perception
of DST’s positive effect on their writing skills in the writing class.

5. Conclusion and limitations

This study focuses on determining student perceptions about how the
7 weeks collaborative DST practice affects their writing skills. Student
perceptions showed that the use of collaborative DST in writing class has
a positive effect on writing skills. It was reflected in the comments of
students that the collaborative DST was effective in creating the internal
and external structure of writing. A more effective writing process was
12 F. TANRIKULU

reflected in the student comments. It is reflected in the student views

that DST with multimedia feature helps to write. It is reflected in the
student views that DST’s script phase is effective in writing and harmo-
nizes between technology and writing.
This study is limited to the effect of using collaborative DST on writ-
ing skills in L1 writing class. The data of the research were not analyzed
separately as individual and collaborative, it is based on common cod-
ings, though. In the future studies, the results of individual and collab-
orative studies can be focused on separately and afford opportunities for
making comparisons between the two. This study was conducted with
undergraduate students, but further studies can be applied in different
writing classes with participants from different ages and educational
majors. Also, L1 writing skills may be considered to be more effective
for less developed classes. More specific studies can be carried out on
different language skills and whether other skills help writing in the DST
process can be investigated in detail. In addition, it should be noted that
the researcher’s position in the study may have affected the data. As the
researcher is also the teacher who teaches writing, it should be taken
into consideration that students can act biased in diaries and interviews.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes on contributor
Dr. Fatih TANRIKULU is a assistant professor at the Department of Turkish Education,
Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University. Dr. Tanrikulu completed his Ph.D. in Turkish
Education at Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University in 2014. His academic interest areas
are computer assisted language learning, e-learning, L2 language learning and children
literature. He has over than 4 journal articles published in national and international
indexes, papers submitted to international meetings.

References
Abdel-Hack, E. M., & Helwa, A. A. (2014). Using digital storytelling and weblogs
instruction to enhance EFL narrative writing and critical thinking skills among EFL
majors at faculty of education. International Research Journal, 5(1), 8–41.
Bagui, S. (1998). Reasons for increased learning using multimedia. Journal of
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7, 3–18.
Balaman, S. (2018). Digital storytelling: A multimodal narrative writing genre. Journal of
Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(3), 202–212.
Banister, S., Hodges, D., & Michalski, P. (2005). Digital storytelling in the middle child-
hood special education classroom: A teacher’s story of adaptations. Teaching
Exceptional Children Plus, 1(4), 3.
 COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING 13

Bull, G., & Kajder, S. (2004). Digital storytelling in the language arts classroom. Learning
& Leading with Technology, 32(4), 46–49.
Bumgarner, B. L. (2012). Digital storytelling in writing: A case study ofstudent teacher
attitudes toward teaching with technology (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of
Missouri, Missouri
Campbell, T.A. (2012). Digital storytelling in an elementary classroom: Going beyond
entertainment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 385– 393. doi:10.1016/j.
sbspro.2012.11.424
Casta~ neda, M.E. (2013). I am proud that I did it and it’s a piece of me”: Digital storytell-
ing in the foreign language classroom. CALICO Journal, 30(1), 44–62.
Chuang, W. T., Kuo, F. L., Chiang, H. K., Su, H. Y., Chang, Y. H., et al. (2013).
Enhancing reading comprehension and writing skills among Taiwanese young EFL
learners using digital storytelling technique. In L.-H. Wong,. (Eds.), Proceedings of the
21st International Conference on computers in education (pp. 753e758). Indonesia:
Uhamka Press.
Davis, A., & Mcgrail, E. (2009). "Proof-Revising” with podcasting: Keeping readers in
mind as students listen to and rethink their writing. The Reading Teacher, 62(6),
522–529. doi:10.1598/RT.62.6.6
Del-Moral-Perez, M. E., Villalustre-Martınez, L., & Neira-Pi~ neiro, M. D. R. (2019).
Teachers’ perception about the contribution of collaborative creation of digital story-
telling to the communicative and digital competence in primary education schoolchil-
dren. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(4), 342–365. doi:10.1080/09588221.
2018.1517094
Diaz, M. A. (2016). Digital Storytelling with pre-service teachers. Raising awareness for
refugees through ICTs in ESL primary classes. Digital Education Review, 30, 1–16.
Dogan, B., Robin, B., et al. (2008). Implementation of digital storytelling in the class-
room by teacherstrained in a digital storytelling workshop. In K. McFerrin. (Eds.),
Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International
Conference 2008 (pp. 902–907). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. 13.
Dupain, M., & Maguire, L. (2005). Digital storybook projects 101: How to create and
implement digital storytelling into your curriculum. In 21st Annual Conference on
Distance Teaching and Learning (Vol. 6). Retrieved from https://www.lifescitrc.org/
download.cfm?submissionID=6926
Ekiz, D. (2009). Bilimselaraştırmay€ontemleri (2. Baskı). Ankara: AnıYayıncılık.
Figg, C., & McCartney, R. (2010). Impacting academic achievement with student learners
teaching digital storytelling to others: The ATTTCSE digital video project.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 38–79.
Fokides, E. (2016). Using digital storytelling to help first-grade students’ adjustment to
school. Contemporary Educational Technology, 7(3), 190–205. doi:10.30935/cedtech/
6172
Gakhar, S., & Thompson, A. (2007). Digital Storytelling: Engaging, Communicating, and
Collaborating. In R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.),
Proceedings of SITE 2007–Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
International Conference (pp. 607–612). San Antonio, Texas, USA: Association for the
Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Gubrium, A. C., & Scott, T. (2010). Teaching and speaking to social change: A digital
storytelling approach addressing access to higher education. Societies Without Borders,
5(2), 126–151. Retrieved from https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.
cgi?referer=https://scholar.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1115&context=swb
14 F. TANRIKULU

Hafner, C. A., & Miller, L. (2011). Fostering learning autonomy in English for science:
A collaborative digital video project in a technological learning environment.
Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 68–86.
Hava, K. (2019). Exploring the role of digital storytelling in student motivation and sat-
isfaction in EFL. Computer Assisted Language Learning.doi:10.1080/09588221.2019.
1650071
Herrera, Y. E. (2014). Writing skill enhancement when creating narrative texts through
the use of collaborative writing and the Storybird Web 2.0 tool. Colombian Applied
Linguistics Journal, 15(2), 166–183. doi:10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a02
Hwang, W. Y., Shadiev, R., Hsu, J. L., Huang, Y. M., Hsu, G. L., & Lin, Y. C. (2016).
Effects of storytelling to facilitate EFL speaking using Web-based multimedia system.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 215–241. doi:10.1080/09588221.2014.
927367
Jakes, D. S. (2005). Capturing stories, capturing lives: An introduction to digital story-
telling. Retrieved from http://www.jakesonline.org/dstory_ice.pdf.
Jenkins, M., & Lonsdale, J. (2007). Evaluating the effectiveness of digital storytelling for
student reflection. ASCILITE conference (pp. 440–444). Singapore. 28.
Kajder, S. B. (2004). Enter here: Personal narrative and digital storytelling. The English
Journal, 93(3), 64–68. doi:10.2307/4128811
Kalyaniwala-Thapliyal, C. (2016). Collective digital storytelling: An activity-theoretical
analysis of second language learning and teaching. Canadian Journal ofLearning and
Technology, 42(4), 1–27.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1992). The action research planner (3nd ed.). Geelong,
Vic.: Deakin University Press, Victoria 1992.
Koshy, V. (2005). Action research for improving practice. London: Paul Chapman
Publishing.
Kurudayıoglu, M., & Bal, M. (2014). The usage of digital storytelling in mother language
€
education. SakaryaUniversitesiE g itimFak€
ultesiDergisi, (28), 74–95.
LaFrance, J., & Blizzard, J. (2013). Student perceptions of digital storytelling as a learn-
ing-tool for educational leaders. International Journal of Educational Leadership
Preparation, 8 (2), 24–43.
Lambert, J. (2010). The Digital storytelling cookbook. Berkeley, CA: Digital Diner Press/
Center for Digital Storytelling. Retrieved from https://wrd.as.uky.edu/sites/default/
files/cookbook.pdf.
LoBello, C. (2015). The impact of digital storytelling on fourth grade students’ motivation
to write (Unpublished master’s thesis). State University of New York, the USA
Meadows, D. (2003). Digital storytelling: Research-based practice in new media. Visual
Communication, 2(2), 189–193. doi:10.1177/1470357203002002004
Miller, J. K., & Kim, S. (2015). Digital Storytelling as an Integrated Approach to Secont
Language Learning and Teaching. Language and Communication Quarterly, 4 (3-4),
41–55.
Miller, E. A. (2009). Digital storytelling (Unpublished master dissertation). University of
Northern Iowa, USA. Retrieved from https://icss.uni.edu/researchhelps/miller.pdf.
Mills, G.E. (2007). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (3th ed.). Mexico:
Pearson Education.
Morgan, H. (2014). Using digital story projects to help students improve in reading and
writing. Reading Improvement, 51(1), 20–26.
Naughton, M.G., & Hughes, P. (2009). Doing action research in early childhood studies.
New York: Open University Press.
 COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING 15

Nishioka, H. (2016). Analysing language development in a collaborative digital storytell-

ing project: Sociocultural perspectives. System, 62, 39–52. doi:10.1016/j.system.2016.07.
001
Ohler, J. (2006). The world of digital storytelling. Educational Leadership, 63, 44–47.
Oskoz, A., & Elola, I. (2016). Digital stories: Bringing multimodal texts to the Spanish
writing classroom. ReCALL, 28(3), 326–342. doi:10.1017/S0958344016000094
Oskoz, A., & Elola, I. (2014). Integrating digital stories in the writing class: Towards a
21st century literacy. In: Guikema, J. G. and Williams, L. (eds.), Digital literacies in
foreign language education: Research, perspectives, and best practices. San Marcos, TX:
CALICO, 179–200
Pardo, B. S. (2014). Digital storytelling: A case study of the creation, and narration of a
story by EFL Learners. Digital Education Review, 26, 74–84.
Porto, M. D., & Alonso Belmonte, I. (2014). From local to global: Visual strategies of
glocalisation in digital storytelling. Language & Communication, 39, 14–23. doi:10.
1016/j.langcom.2014.05.001.
Purcell, K., Buchanan, J., & Friedrich, L. (2013). The impact of digital tools on student
writing and how writing is taught in Schools, Pew Research Center’s internet &
american life project, Washington. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/files/
old-media/Files/Reports/2013/PIP_NWP%20Writing%20and%20Tech.pdf
Robin, B. (2006). The educational uses of digital storytelling. In C. Crawford. (Eds.),
Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International
Conference 2006 (pp. 709–716). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Robin, B. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century
classroom. Theory into Practice, 47(3), 220–228. doi:10.1080/00405840802153916
Robin, B., Pierson, M., et al. (2005). A multilevel approach to using digital storytelling
in the classroom. In C. Crawford. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2005 (pp. 708–716).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for
engaged student learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(4),
487–506. doi:10.1007/s11423-008-9091-8
Sarıca-Çıralı, H., & Koçak-Usluel, Y. (2016). Digital storytelling in the educational con-
text: A rubric development study. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 6(2),
65–84.
Sarıca-Çıralı, H., & Koçak-Usluel, Y. (2016). The effect of digital storytelling on visual
memory and writing skills. Computers & Education, 94, 298–309. doi:10.1016/j.com-
pedu.2015.11.016
Saunders, J. M. (2014). Where writing happens: Elevating student writing and develop-
ing voice through digital storytelling. Teaching/Writing: The Journal of Writing
Teacher Education, 3(1), 8.
Sepp, M., & Bandi-Rao, S. (2015). Creating an Effective Model for Digital Storytelling in
the ESL Writing Class. CUNY Academic Works, 2(1), 76–88.
Sevilla-Pavon, A. (2015). Examining collective authorship in collaborative writing tasks
through digital storytelling. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning,
18(1).
Skinner, E., & Hagood, M. (2008). Developing literate identities with English language
learners through digital storytelling. The Reading Matrix, 8(2), 12–38.
Stringer, E.T. (2007). Action research (3. Baskı). California: Sage Publications.
16 F. TANRIKULU

Sylvester, R., & Greenidge, W. (2009). Digital storytelling extending the potential for
struggling writers. Reading Teacher, 63(4), 384–395.
Taylor, C., Baser, J., & Wilkie, M. (2006). Doing Action Research. London: Paul
Chapman Publishing.
Vinogradova, P., Linville, H. A., & Bickel, B. (2011). Listen to my story and you will
know me”: Digital stories as student-centered collaborative projects. TESOL Journal,
2(2), 173–202. doi:10.5054/tj.2011.250380
Xu, Y., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2011). A new approach toward digital storytelling: An
activity focused on writing selfefficacy in a virtual learning environment. Educational
Technology & Society, 14(4), 181–191.
Yamaç, A., & Ulusoy, M. (2016). The effect of digital storytelling in improving the third
graders’ writing skills. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(1),
59–86. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1126674.pdf
Yang, Y. C., & Wu, W. I. (2012). Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic
achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: A year-long experimental
study. Computers & Education, 59(2), 339–352. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.012
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma y€ontemleri. Ankara:
SeçkinYayıncılık.
Yoon, T. (2013). Are you digitized? Ways to provide motivation for ELLs using digital
storytelling. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology,
2(1). doi:10.5861/ijrset.2012.204.
Yoon, T. (2016). Improving EFL learners’ english skills through-mediated language strat-
egy. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology, 5(2), 35–48.
doi:10.5861/ijrset.2016.1573
Yuksel, P., Robin, B., & McNeil, S. (2011). Educational uses of digital storytelling all around
the world. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 1264–1271).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE.