EdTech 523: Module 4 Reflection

Leave a comment

Overlooking the Old City of Jerusalem

Overlooking the Old City of Jerusalem

Module 4 was a transition period because I was ending one group project while I was getting started with another, and in between we had Spring Break, when my wife and I traveled a few days to Jordan and Israel. I agreed to work with one group to develop an online resource for online teachers and work with some other students to develop some discussion questions for the upcoming module.  This gave me collaboration opportunities where we met in Google Hangouts, shared a Google Doc, and exchanged friendly emails. I’m glad that I did both as I was able to use some of the work from the online resource as a reference in my communication plan.

Doing homework at the Dead Sea.

Doing homework at the Dead Sea.

Additionally, I was able to work ahead  by reading the material for the next module so I could prepare the discussion questions I will present.  Lastly, I would like to comment about chapter 9  on “Transformative Learning” in Building Online Learning Communities. This chapter was very inspirational for me because it described so much of what learning online has meant for me.  It also aligns with my philosophy on learning and teaching.  This chapter meant so much to me, since it is affirming my desire to grow confident learners through online education.

The other course textbook, Learning in Real Time, helped me to envision the role of synchronous communication in online learning.  As I was reading through this text I had to think of discussion questions, but my mind was really opened to the power of synchronous communication for building an online community.

Self Evaluation Using My Grading Scale

It seems natural for me to transition my skills as a teacher to the online environment.  I enjoyed putting together my grading scale for online discussions. My experience as a teacher has helped me know how to clarify expectations and also prevent problems with students before they happen.  Of course, I imagine students that range from a typical pre-teen to a solid full-fledged teen, which are the age groups that I have been working with the last few years.  Also, my grading has been influenced a little bit by the IB Curriculum, which is my current grading standard.

It is also a little unfair evaluating myself with my own grading scale, and this is based on two factors.  First, I made the grading scale based on general ideas that I have used when I respond to a discussion prompt.  This will likely work in my favor because I know what I like in a response, because it is often what I do.  However, the second factor does not work in my favor so much.  I am probably my own worst critic, so using my grading scale with my perception would probably cause me to nit-pick details in my response. When I consider my experience, while using my own scale to evaluate myself, I would not make any changes to my scale.

Nonetheless, I think of my last post which responded to one of the students who posted a discussion question.  I know that I didn’t do all the tasks that were associated with the research of his writing prompt, so I would probably loose about 3 points there.  I make up some ground in the area of content for posting some relevant information. I really wanted to discuss Chapter 9, which was one of the required readings and no one made a prompt that addressed this chapter, so I took the opportunity to steer the discussion in this direction, but at the same time I did address many things in the response.

There were many opportunities to respond to other students’ posts and I know I met the minimum requirement, and my posts are generally very thoughtful, so I received all 10 points.  Finally, I am a language teacher so I have developed many skills for using language in communication.  I make occasional mistakes with my writing, but I usually make a point to review, and I pride myself on my creative approach to writing, especially the introductions.  I know I took care of these details in my response, so I received 5 points for each scale.  Oops! I did not include any picture or media to accompany it, but at least I made up for it in this post.  This brings my total score to 32 of 35 points in that post.

Changes to Discussion Facilitation

Even though I have not facilitated a full scale discussion yet, I can already imagine some of the challenges associated with it.  I already know what it is like to feel overwhelmed with reviewing many writing assignments, so I could imagine the work load easily getting out of hand if students are constantly posting lengthy responses.  I would have to get to know certain features of the LMS that allow me to review overall activity.  Even though I want my students to write with quality and to feel like they are writing with a purpose, I know half of my job is complete just by getting them to do that.  In other words, I won’t feel that it is necessary to read every word, especially for the student responses.  I would have to learn some teacher shortcuts for reviewing these, as well as encourage more peer review and accountability among the students.

Communication Plan for Online Teaching

Leave a comment

ONLINE LANGUAGE COURSE

This communication plan is considering the communication role of the teacher and the student.  It encompasses considerations for the administration, content delivery, peer to peer communication, and assigned work done during an online language course.  It is divided into four parts.

PART 1: ROUTINE ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS

Every Work Day

  • Check General Questions or Technical Problems Forum
  • Reply to direct contact inquiries
  • Post any relevant updates in the News Forum
  • Set up  or solicit a communication appointment with 1-2 students

2-3 Days Into a Module

  • Check for activity on discussion forums and provide feedback
  • Scan LMS for activity or monitor the flow of multiple step activity
  • Dedicate time to grading or offering feedback from previous module
  • Finish grading most activities from previous module
  • Display and comment on poll results if a poll given the first day of the module

2-3 Days Before Module Ends

  • Scan LMS for lack of activity and contact students or parents as necessary
  • Check discussion forum and monitor student feedback
  • Be available for an informal synchronous discussion (offer different times on different days)
  • Prepare supplemental resources for the next module

PART 2: DISCUSSION FORUM STRATEGIES

At the Beginning of the Course

  1. At this point, you should present your prepared orientation of the course, which includes: a teacher introduction, a tour of the course webpage, rules of netiquette, warning about password safety and other security issues, and completing an icebreaker activity with a teacher example.  Also review the  Orientation Guide for Preparing New Online Learners.
  2. For the first activities, ask the students to update their course profile with a short biography.
  3. Also, ask them to complete a poll or brief survey about previous experience in online courses.  If possible, allow the students to see the ongoing statistical results of the poll or survey, so they can compare themselves with the overall level of their peers. 
  4. Lastly, whether it is an icebreaker activity or an assigned post, require the students to upload (with their post) an image within the LMS.  This will help them gain confidence with the technical aspect and the user friendliness of the LMS.  The Caption Contest is just one example of an icebreaker that will allow students to accomplish this goal.

Throughout the Course

  1. For each module, the students will be provided instructions for posting in a discussion, as well as a minimum requirement for responses to other students. 
  2. Each module will provide a prompt that sets the standard for content.  In the “Discussion Forum Assessment” (below)guidelines are provided for the quality of peer responses.  Equal consideration will be given to the use of language and the unique expression, or creativity, of each post. For more information, review the following section.

PART 3: DISCUSSION FORUM ASSESSMENT

Each discussion is worth 35 points.  The grading scales below will indicate how the total point values will be calculated for each discussion.  Review the tips for each scale.  These will indicate the best strategy to maximize your discussion forum grade.

Content Scale: 1-15

Tip: Read the discussion prompt thoroughly.  Make sure you have addressed all of the content requested in the prompt.  Some prompts will have more than one question.  Also, reread any written posts to make sure your ideas are clear for the reader.  Use appropriate structure of sentences and paragraphs as necessary. If the response to the content is unclear, this will affect your overall grade.

Peer Response Scale: 1-10

Tip: When responding to peers, make sure that at least two responses are thoughtful and complete.  For example, a thoughtful response goes beyond the “Good job” or “I like it” and reflects on what the other student has written. Here are some general examples: Your response can connect your own personal experiences to what your peer has written, it can question your peer to seek clarification or ask about his or her sources or opinion, or it could offer constructive criticism about their argument or opinion.  Be cautious with constructive criticism, since the person, who wrote the post, has feelings.  In order to avoid a war of words, be gentle and/or gracious with your criticisms.

Language Use Scale: 1-5

Tip: Make sure that you are checking for general correctness in spelling, vocabulary, capitalization, and punctuation. Also, because this is a language course, text language should be used lightly (not more than 2-3 occurrences in a post).  In other words, make sure your words are complete.  Smiley-cons are acceptable when appropriate.

Creativity Scale: 1-5

Tip: Each person is unique in their own expression, however to tip the creativity scale in your favor you can consider the following.  Look for opportunities to write creative introductions to your posts.  Consider inserting an image, drawing, or video that supports your content.  Add a link to text when you are referencing something that is not directly related to the material or it is not considered general knowledge.

Note: Inappropriate posts or responses may be removed and will affect your grade.  Depending on the severity of the inappropriateness, further action may be taken against the student as indicated in the Code of Conduct.  If your profile security has been violated or breached, communicate this to your professor as quickly as possible, and try to remedy the situation if you can (for example: changing the password, making sure you log out from public computers, etc.).


PART 4:  MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND STRATEGIES (CONTINGENCY PLAN)

When working with a group of students online, there are possible issues that will arise, requiring the teacher to respond with communication strategies.  Consider the following communication needs to confront the related issues.

Individual Communication

  1. As noted in the section “Part 1: Routine Administrative Tasks”, an online teacher will be watching for inactivity in individual students and make contact with those students or parents a priority. 
  2. Other issues that might require a teacher to make individual contact, is when a student shows any dominant characteristics in general, by trying to control discussions or responses, or perhaps he or she may exhibit dominant characteristics in group activities.  Although this may be difficult to perceive online, if there are any repeated actions by one student that may be deemed as unhealthy for group communication, it should first be dealt with by communicating privately with that student. 
  3. If offenses have occurred between 2 students and it has escalated to a heated exchange, it may be necessary to meet with those students privately during a small group chat.

Whole Group Communication

  1. There are instances when a teacher notices undesirable activity in public places and perhaps it needs to be addressed with the whole group. 
    1. If a heated exchange between 2 or more students escalates to an inappropriate level, the teacher may need to consider censoring communication and addressing the whole group about the problem. 
    2. A similar type of teacher intervention may be necessary when a discussion gets off track and the main topic is no longer being discussed.  In this case, consider posting a reminder on the thread or in a general forum area, which reminds students of the topic or redirects them, and if necessary, a thread can be frozen or removed if the discussion is creating a strong diversion. 
  2. Other situations that may call for whole group communication is when a teacher perceives that there is either a lack of whole group activity or a common misconception among many responses. 
    1. In the case of misconceptions, the teacher can address this with more clarity about the instructions, or create an alternative presentation that describes the common misconception, or a presentation that either offers more guidance for the students or even shows a teacher example. 
    2. In the case of whole group inactivity, the teacher can reach out to the whole group through various forms of communication and solicit feedback and try to determine if there is a problem with the material or tasks. 
    3. However, what might work best is gathering information from regular contact with the students and use it to form a poll or survey that can be distributed to the whole group.  By soliciting the students in this way, it is less intimidating for them to voice their opinion or concerns, which are related to the course.

EdTech 523 Reflection: Voices About Social Media

Leave a comment

In this week’s activity, we were suppose to assume the role of a school board member, principal, teacher, parent, or student (our choice) and choose a side to support or oppose the use of social media in education.  I will respond to the teacher’s questions with regard to this activity.

Can you recognize one or two voices and/or tones from the in the activity you completed this week?

I suppose that I do, but I am not in the thick of this discussion, as most of my online colleagues are, who are States side in the USA, while I am living abroad in Saudi Arabia.  It really makes a difference in perspective.  I’m sure there are many cases reported in the USA concerning the misuse of social media.  Ironically, most people automatically associate social media with Facebook first, then Twitter.  I was glad to see that some professional educators, no matter what their role was, were promoting alternative options for social media, some of which are more appropriate for school environments. 

This is the second country that I have lived in, within the Middle East, and I have also lived for periods of time in Latin America.  Living abroad has given me an interesting perspective of society in general.  I have a lot of respect for American society, based on what I have seen elsewhere, but we (American society) are struggling to make sense of the social media revolution, just like many other places in the world.  However, (in my opinion) the USA culture seems a little more hypersensitive about the negative social effects of social media.  I’m not sure if that is related to the news culture of the USA being more transparent, or possibly  more “scandal seeking”, or if we have a higher regard for the risks. Nonetheless, we hate to hear of victims of the abuse of social media, but that is exactly what we are talking about, the abuse of something that is intended to be used for good.

One time in this region, in Egypt, social media made international news; most people in America probably gaped when they heard that the government shut down the internet to keep the message of protest spreading.  We in America really cherish our freedom, and like it or not, banning social media is a form of infringement on freedom, even if it is for a good cause.  The difficult task is deciding when it is justified and when it is not.

Do you notice these voices and/or tones in your current discussion board responses with students, if applicable?

No, these issues haven’t come up, despite the fact that I have used Facebook and Google+ with my students and I have seen very little problems with inappropriate postings.  It’s not that my students are angels, it’s has more to do with the student discrepancies not playing out in school dramas, at least not yet.

Discuss potential changes in your approach to discussions in the future. Take into account the need to rely less on hearing your own voice in favor of supporting participants reflections and learning.

The landscape of education is changing is such a way that the term “social media” is either going to branch off or broaden to include “social virtual education”.  In my opinion, “virtual-osity” cannot be avoided in formal education.  Too much of our society is developing on its foundation.  In order to maintain a competitive edge in the world stage, the next generation must be considered for driving the machine. 

EdTech 523: Collaboration Web-Based Style

Leave a comment

This is a unique position; I’m looking at education from the simultaneous perspective of a teacher and a student.  There are many advantages to this dual perspective; one in particular is that, as a teacher, I can imagine the challenge of a student trying to balance the many tasks that he or she has.  When it comes to collaboration in education, I believe that the teacher’s perspective is quite different from that of the student.  Teachers are often quite considerate of the variables that can affect collaboration negatively, so they carefully plan the tasks to avoid the pitfalls as much as possible.  During this process the teachers become invested in the expected outcomes and, if like me, begin to form fairytale images of how it all plays out.  However, many students groan at the though of collaboration, but after the student becomes invested (usually motivated by a grade), they get to encounter all of the unforeseen problems that even the teacher did not anticipate.  So, what to do now?  As a teacher, I try to offer support, but as a student, I try to solve the problem.  The maturity level of the student also plays a big part.

Fortunately, as an EdTech student, I have worked collaboratively with some very mature and capable students. These experiences have all been online and it served my professional skills to participate in these collaborative tasks.  As a K-12 teacher, many of my collaboration fairy tales have not come true, yet, it has been the challenges that help me to plan and facilitate more effectively.

  • Do you see value in Web-based collaborative tools?

I have experienced first hand the value of collaborative tools both as a teacher and a student.  My “student” benefit is more obvious.  If it weren’t for the web-based collaboration tools, I would not be able to study this program and collaborate with my peers, while living in Saudi Arabia.  As a teacher, I have also been able to use web based tools, even though I teach in a traditional classroom setting.  Web based tools have helped me communicate better with my students by creating an online network, sending detailed instructions, and recording information multimedia.  Additionally, some of these tools have helped me track accountability, especially in the collaboration tasks.

  • What are potential pitfalls in implementing collaborative activities using Web-based tools?

As a teacher, the pitfall has been the digital inequality of my students.  Even though all of my students have access to most of the latest technology, not all of them are accustomed to using it in the way that I require, or they just don’t know how to navigate through web-based tools.  Many of the issues have been related to maturity level.  Students don’t remember their password, or they prefer to be spoon-fed the instructions rather than trying to be problem solvers.  Also, when students have the opportunity to be sneaky, they always seem to find the capacity.  Some web-based tools are not set with accountability measures so it is hard to track fraudulent identities or other undesirable activities.

EDTECH 504: Emerging Theories Reflection

Leave a comment

How do you view education, and what is at stake for manifesting that view in the “Three”?  For students, if their view is not clouded by negative experiences or environmental influences, they generally view education as means to an end, or a way to improve their level of knowledge and abilities.  In this case, students accept the personal investment of time and money to help them achieve their goal.  Teachers, who truly desire to teach, view education as a way of making information and learning experiences relevant to their students.  Their manifestation is in the time spent to organize content for their students, and in many places if the institutional goals are not met in the performance of the students, they risk their livelihood.  Administrators tend to view education as a system for transferring or building knowledge in a mass collection of students.  They manifest this by building curriculum around learning theories and they risk public scrutiny or job loss if their direction does not produce desired results.  Even in traditional educational environments, these three have struggled to maintain a harmony among their views and manifestations because of the many variables.  Now, considering the impact of how technology is changing the playing field, these three have even a greater struggle to find harmony.

As a result of advances in technology, many emerging educational theories are attempting to point out the effects of shifts in sociological and psychological factors in the process of education.  These shifts are especially present in online or virtual environments.  The Transactional Distance Theory attempts to account for the gap in clarity or understanding that can exists between students and teachers in a virtual environment, especially referring to learner independence and teacher engagement as key factors for narrowing or bridging that gap (Gokool-Ramdoo, 2008).  Another theory, Connectivism, portrays the vast amounts of interconnected knowledge as a sort of chaos that can be accessed and harnessed by individual learners in real time to not only achieve a task, but also analyze information for current relevance, because knowledge and information are constantly changing (Siemens, 2005).  The changing medium for delivering and interacting in educational environments has also brought considerable attention to the epistemological and methodological understandings.  To further explore this, the terminology, technological pedagogy of content knowledge (TPCK), was developed to account for effective and non-effective ways for implementing a systematic online approach to education.  TPCK has identified several flaws simply due to environmental shifts, and the protocols that exists in the old environment, do not necessarily work effectively in the new one (Angeli and Valanides, 2009).

So as I consider the Three along with all this information for learning theory, I must reflect on what this means to education.  First, I will start with my current primary role, teacher, which definitely has a changed from a deliverer of content to more of a facilitator of activities designed to produce challenges for the students, which produce understanding and skills, which can be applied to lifelong learning.  I have a secondary role, student, in the Master’s of Educational Technology program, which from the beginning has been adapting my understanding of how I can problem solve with technology tools in order to achieve my learning tasks.  Though my students are not as far along in the education continuum, and therefore need certain content delivered to them, I still have a need and desire to introduce them to challenges where they engage with technology tools, for I understand this will mark so much of their future education. Finally, administrator is a role I have not had, and based on experience is one that I desire very little.  However, I have come away with a greater appreciation for the decision making process that they undertake, because the decisions are tied into big budgets that they have to give an account for not only in purchases, but also in results of students’ performances in system wide implementations.

References:

Gokool-Ramdoo, S. (2008). Beyond the theoretical impasse: Extending the applications of transactional distance education theory. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/541

Siemens, G. (2005, April 5). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace. Retrieved October 25, 2012, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006

EdTech 541: The RISKS of the Internet

4 Comments

Google Presentation taken by Jink Screenshot

Some people choose to have nothing to do with the Internet because they the think the risks are too high, that someone will seek them out, use their information inappropriately, or try to hack into their private life.  We can call these people a virtual hermit.  Why a “virtual” hermit? Because it would be hard for even the most stringent hermit to keep his name out of some sort of virtual database.  Bank accounts, credit card accounts, service accounts, and even governmental records on citizens are kept in virtual safes.  So as the rest of the world forges ahead with Internet activity, what can the virtual hermit expect from his lack virtual participation. The problem with this approach is that it will become more difficult to function, much less compete, in the world without some sort of virtual identity.

Don’t get me wrong, when you or your information are connected to the Internet, there are risks.  However, there are many benefits to having access to the Internet and for this reason it is used so widely, so much so, that everyday activities are being completed online.  If you don’t participate, you will be left behind (Free Press Org, 2009). None the less, you should be aware or your effect of your activity on the Internet as well as the dangers.  This acronym  “RISKS” will help you remember these important details about your risk management while you our online.

R is for Responsibility

Most institutes require student to sign some sort of Acceptable Use Policy in order to access the Internet or computer equipment in an organized learning environment.  In other words, the users are required to be responsible with the privileged of Internet access.  This refers to anything that is related to the intentional search and network bypass of digital material that is not appropriate for school or is contrary to school and social ethics.  The Kent School District has set up an Internet Safety & Cyber Citizenship page that not only advises about Cyber Citizenship, but also points out common online risks.

I is for Information

There is a debate about how much personal information should be used in online profiles.  This short video, “Privacy and Responsibility on the Internet: Who Should Control your Identity on the Web?” by the Carnegie Council will point out both sides of the debate.  Some argue for anonymity for safety purposes, while other argue for the efficiency of data transfer with secure online profiles.  Google is a proponent of the later, and here is their video about how to set up a secure profile using Google services.

If you are not certain about the security of your online profile, it is wise to limit the amount of personal information that you include in that profile.

S is for Seekers

The two primary features of the Internet are 1) it helps connect people, and 2) it is vast.  Because of these two features, there are a lot of people that try to connect with or get the attention of many people across the Internet.  The majority of these seekers come in the form of harmless advertisements or online acquaintances.  Unfortunately, there are seekers that don’t know you, but will try to make personal connections.  You may not know the motives of these seekers, but because of the uncertainty, it is recommended not to engage in online contact with that person.  Most social networks provide the option to decline a communication request, or to even expel an online contact if their behavior has become offensive or too personal.

Perhaps the type of seeker that gets the most attention and warning are the online predators.  Here is an interesting report called “1 in 7 Youth: The Statistics about Online Sexual Solicitations” by the Crimes Against Children Research Center.

KS is for Kinky Sharing

Perhaps the biggest risk that face online users is the one that they least expect.  Kinky is a word in general that means crazy or unacceptable; sharing refers to the way in which people can easily share online content and information with friends.  Together, these two words are a recipe for disaster.  It is quite common that someone wants to share either personal information about themselves with a friend, or even intimate photos of themselves, and they probably don’t intend to share it with other people.  Unfortunately, confidence has been betrayed many times in these circumstances and the unthinkable happens, many people have read or seen your private information.  Here is a basic rule that you should follow for posting any information online: if you will be embarrassed or ridiculed by these words or content, don’t post it.  This is not to say that friends can’t be trusted, or that those that share personal content without your consent shouldn’t be punished, but the most secure way of protecting your private content, is not to share it in the first place.

Also, be aware that some online places will make your correspondence available to the public, even when it is shared between two individuals.  Take for example the US Congressman and his Tweet Scandal.

References:

Video Free Press (2009, April 9) What is the “digital divide?” . Retrieved Oct. 22, 2012 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCIB_vXUptY

EdTech 504: Reflection of Annotated Bibliography

Leave a comment

This is the first time that I have completed an annotated bibliography.  Even though the reading and research was tedious, I found many interesting investigations in areas of personal and professional significance.  Each annotation seemed to flow through certain areas of experience and goals.  For example, the first half of my listed resources seemed to focus heavily on system wide technology integration in ways that I have not yet experienced.  Nonetheless, I have increased my professional knowledge base and have already implemented many strategies in technology integration, which is helping prepare me for the next stage of my career.  Of particular interest is a study done on mobile learning environments and the effective use of mobile learning tools (McAndrew, Taylor, and Clow, 2010).  Also, I am very interested to see how education will incorporate the use of virtual worlds, and there are two resources that take an early look at educational investigations and practices within the virtual world called Second Life (Minocha, Quang Tran, and Reeves, 2010) (Jamaludin and Elavarasen, 2011) .

The second half of my annotated bibliography focuses on observations that I have made in my content area and other educational domains  throughout my professional teaching career.  Whether the article addressed technology integration or not, I made a point to reflect on the significance of the findings as they relate to trends in educational technology and social and communication patterns among the modern student.   Since my content area is language development through literacy, writing, and oral exchanges, I found some resources that specifically addressed this area.  For example, using a literacy app to allow students to manipulate the text and images in ways that traditional literacy study is limited (Allington, 2011).  Also, the changes in technology and its affect on how students and teachers are interacting in society (Shum and Ferguson (2012) is something that we are currently witnessing in all areas of education.  A investigation into process of implementing a change in educational practices (Bourke and McGee, 2012) is also very significant, since many institutions are faced with a need for adaptation of curriculum and teaching strategies.

Additionally, during my teaching stint in the USA, I could not escape the subject of high-stakes testing and its effect on education.  One investigation drew considerable attention to the negative effect it has had on language development and teaching strategies, but in the process they reveal a complex dichotomy that exists between teacher training programs and the real world teaching experience.  (Stillman, Anderson, Fink, and Kurumada, 2011).    Also, during that time, the educational domain that I worked in was bilingual education.  One investigation revealed the benefit of connecting with students in their native language (Razfar, 2012), but it did not apply any  information for virtual learning environments, and the study was conducted in informal learning settings.  It seems at this point, research is somewhat limited with bilingual education in virtual settings.

I really liked the research and information that I found, which is based around the Cultural Historical Activity Theory.  Based on my personal and teaching experiences, the framework of this theory seems to make more sense when analyzing the cognition process, because we are inseparable from our environment and culture, and we learn to interact with the acceptable tools used within that culture.  Yet, technology has caused shifts in society which affect the way we interact and  education is either adapting or resisting those changes.

Annotated Bibliography: Cultural Historical Activity Theory

Reference:

  • McAndrew, P., Taylor, J., & Clow, D. (2010). Facing the Challenge in Evaluating Technology Use in Mobile Environments. Open learning, Vol. 25(No. 3), 233–249.
  • Minocha, S., Quang Tran, M., & Reeves, A. J. (2010). Conducting Empirical Research in Virtual Worlds: Experiences from two projects in Second Life. Journal of virtual world research, The Researcher’s Toolbox, 3(1).
  • Jamaludin, R., & Elavarasen, M. D. (2011). Second Life & Education. Centre for instructional technology & multimedia’s bulletin of instructional technology, 7–8.
  • Allington, D. (2011). Learning to Read in the 21st Century. Centre for research in education and educational technology: The Open University. Retrieved from http://www8.open.ac.uk/creet/main/projects
  • Shum, S. B., & Ferguson, R. (2012). Social Learning Analytics. Journal of educational technology & society, 15(3), 3–26.
  • Bourke, R., & McGee, A. (2012). The Challenge of Change: Using Activity Theory to Understand a Cultural Innovation. Journal of educational change, 13(2), 217–233. doi:10.1007/s10833-011-9179-5
  • Stillman, J., Anderson, L., Fink, L., & Kurumada, K. S. (2011). To Follow, Reject, or Flip the Script: Managing Instructional Tension in an Era of High-Stakes Accountability. Language arts, 89(1), 22–37.
  • Razfar, A. (2012). ¡Vamos a Jugar Counters! Learning Mathematics Through Funds of Knowledge, Play, and the Third Space. Bilingual research journal, 35(1), 53–75. doi:10.1080/15235882.2012.668868

Older Entries