Foundations of Educational Technology.

Here, we learned about educational technology's early days, efforts to making teaching easier through automation like Sidney Pressey's automatic teacher (Petrina, 2004), and concerns that arise because of these innovations, reaching far to include such concepts as environmental impact and e-waste.

This might sound like it has the potential to be as dry as a stereotypical History class, but it wasn't.  It was that history class where the students really begin to understand that learning history teaches us not only where we have been, but where we need to go.  It was the history class where students don't just memorize the dates and names, but they begin to understand genuine personalities and motivations that led to events of years gone by, and how those events must now inform our decisions as we synthesize these understandings with a sense of social and pedagogical responsibility to future generations. 

It was that history class where Kozma (1994) and Clark (1994) adamantly debated whether media influences learning - and whether or not they should.  Their arguments spur questions as to whether the cost involved in keeping up with technology is worth it, and where exactly does good pedagogy lie.  Not in the technology.  Cuban and Kirkpatrick (1998) joined the evaluation and challenged popular thinking  that computers automatically enhance education.  For a new student to the field at this time - like me - they deconstructed some of the research and the then-current modes of implementation to prompt awareness and help prepare me for the evaluations and analyses of technologies I would soon engage in. So right here, right at the entrance, ETEC 511 challenged me to always consider the educational value - the real educational value - in any technological choice.  It laid an undercurrent of analysis of purpose for any and all classroom technology choices.  Media are not to be implemented solely for bells and whistles, nor simply to make a teacher's job easier.

This was the history class where my eyes were opened to the role of the student in technology choices (Druin, 2002), bringing understanding and reinforcing intuition that students' involvement in choices pertaining to their own education can be powerful.  It was the class that reviewed early success programs (Moody, 1999) that served to inspire.

This was the history class that prompted consideration of political and economic motives in bringing technology into the classroom (Monahan, 2005; Aurini & Davies, 2004), keeping education before economics including the why and the how (Puryear, 1999).   It prompted consideration of the potential for utopian futures by way of cyborganism (Haraway, 1985), dystopian by way of our abuse of the environment through e-waste , or potentially either one depending on how possessive, collaborative, communal, or secretly thieving we wish to be with that which is and isn't *ours* (Philip, 2005).  Perhaps I should say how copyright or copyleft we wish to be.

This was the history class where our constructivist discussions took us from these considerations further into appalled awareness of e-waste and sacrificed health for the benefits we attribute to the buzz of technological progress and efficiencies.  (See Last, Lupo & Williams, 2009).

It was the class where we read - a lot. 

It was also that history class where students leave inspired, empowered, and motivated.

What better way to start my MET program, set for the challenges that face me in this myriad of passages, hallways, reflections, and adventure?

References

Aurini, J. & Davies, S. (2004).  The transformation of private tutoring: Education in a franchise form.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials.  Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore.  (Reprinted from Canadian Journal of Sociology, 29(3), 419-438)

Clark, R. E. (1994).  Media will never influence learning.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29)

Cuban, L. & Kirkpatrick, H. (1998).  Computers make kids smarter, right?  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Technos, 7(2), 26-31)

Druin, A. (2002).  The role of children in the design of new technology.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Behaviour and Information Technology, 21(1), 1-25)

Haraway, D. (1985).  A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology, and socialist feminism in the 1980s.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Socialist Review. 15(2), 65-107)

Kozma, R. B. (1994).  Will media influence learning?  Reframing the debate.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19)

Last, M., Lupo, O., & Williams, N. (2009).  Activity: E-waste case study.  ETEC 511: Politics of Ed Tech Group.  Retrieved from https://edtechpolitics.wetpaint.com/page/Activity%3A+E-Waste+case+study

Monahan, T. (2005).  Technological cultures.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Globalizations, Technological Change and Public Education, New York: Routledge.  73-92)

Moody, K. (1999).  The children of Telstar.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from The Children of Telstar.  New York: Vantage.

Petrina, S. (2004).  Sidney Pressey and the automation of education, 1924-1934.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Technology and Culture, 45(2), 305-330)

Philip, K. (2005).  What is a technological author?  The pirate function and intellectual property rights.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Postcolonial Studies, 8(2), 199-218)

Puryear, J. M. (1999, September).  The economics of educational technology.  ETEC 511 Custom Course Materials. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from TechnKnowLogia, 46-49)

Research Methodology in Education

This course re-impressed upon me the diligence and analytic mind required of the competent researcher.  It was a comprehensive review that deepened my knowledge and understanding of types of studies, their methods and modes of data analysis.  Formatting formalities and due attention to ethics speak to a level of control required for valid, reliable and honourable results.

While I had begun a foundation in research during my under-graduate degree in Psychology, ETEC 500 - with the assistance of Gay, Mills and Airasian (2009), a resource I continue to consult for the intricacies in educational research - took that foundation and moved it from sand to something more solid.  I wouldn't say rock.  Maybe clay.  With a truckload of pea gravel.  About 16 yards or so.

Educational Research (Gay, Mills and Airasian, 2009) was our primary reading, but Hart's (1998) Doing a Literature Review was also of major importance, given that this was one critical task within ETEC 500 and it was difficult to find other resources that dealt so precisely with the unique structure of this type of writing.  Sipe and Constable (1996) provided a playful look at research paradigms, but through this play, we all discovered a little more about how we situate ourselves, philosophically, within the world of educational researchers.  Given the number of times we re-evaluate ourselves and our philosophies within MET, this was an important step.

Then, there was Flinders (1992).  Flinders (1992) discusses ethics and modes through which we might guide ourselves in depth, in order to determine that we were and will in fact be ethical throughout the course of any research in which we might endeavour.  While the basic premise comes down to the golden rule of doing unto others as we would have done unto us, Flinders puts this under the microscope.  A reading of his work should make any researcher critically reflective and aware of his or her own every move and the justices or injustices it may reflect on research participants.

References

Flinders, D. J. (1992). In search of ethical guidance: Constructing a basis for dialogue. Custom Course Materials ETEC 500. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Qualitative Studies in Education, 5(2). 101-115) 

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E, Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (9^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review. Custom Course Materials ETEC 500. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage)

Sipe, L. & Constable, S. (1996). A chart of four contemporary research paradigms: Metaphors for the modes of inquiry. Custom Course Materials ETEC 500. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia, Bookstore. (Reprinted from Taboo, The Journal of Culture and Education, 1, 153-163)

Learning Technologies: Selection, Design and Application

This was my breakthrough course in application.  Precisely as the name suggests, we learned to evaluate and select learning management systems, course management systems according to specific criteria.  We learned to petition for our choice as a result of our sound evaluations.  Then, we learned to design in a variety of web 2.0 platforms in accordance with our desired outcomes.  This is where html became relevant for me and I began to travel the bridge from theory to practice ... and then back and forth from here on in.

One of the most influential readings here was on Bates and Poole's (2003) SECTIONS model.  It was in implementing this model that so many of us really began to evaluate educational technologies in terms of students, ease of use, costs, teaching, interactivity, organizational issues, novelty, and speed.  In fact, when I was faced with a decision of choosing a SMARTboard or a Mimeo teach system last year, this was precisely the model I turned to.  (Both evidently and unfortunately, there were some unforeseen costs and organizational issues that have and continue to add to my learning experience, both seemingly influenced by novelty and affecting speed.  Alas, will my learning never cease?)

References   

Bates, A. W. & Poole, G. (2003).  Chapter 4: A framework for selecting and using technology.  Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success (pp. 77-105).  San Francisco: Jossey Bass.  Retrieved from https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/lc5116011.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct

Technology in the Arts and Humanities Classroom

Arts, fine arts, and story-telling to convey social studies and literary content through digital means made their way to the forefront here.  My creative, artsy and poetic side began to re-emerge... just a little. Synthesizing the content here with points of interest that arose earlier in ETEC 500, I began to ask more structured questions around my immediate teaching environment.

It is readings from this class that seem to most resonate in my daily ventures to the classroom.  The words and enthusiasm expressed by Fisch's (2007) students when discussing how blogging has given their writing a greater sense of relevancy (Wesch, 2007; Downes, 2004), desire to write, and even confidence for the most timid of writers, along with Alexander's (2006) emphasis that technology has now effectively brought in the need to educate for a new kind of literacy, have been integral in my efforts to incorporate my students' perspectives and future needs into daily lesson planning.  Each of these continue to remind me to be both creative and relevant in preparing my students for their futures.

References

Alexander, B. (2006).  Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?  EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 33-44.   Retrieved from https://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0621.pdf

Downes, S. (2004).   Educational blogging.   EDUCAUSE Review, 5 (38).   Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0450.pdf

Fisch, K. (2007).  Blogging: In their own words.  The Fischbowl.   Retrieved from https://thefischbowl.blogspot.com/2007/06/blogging-in-their-own-words.html

Wesch, M. (2007).  A vision of students today (and what teachers must do).  Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/blogs/2008/10/a-vision-of-students-today-what-teachers-must-do/

Application of Learning Theories to Instruction

Whereas I entered this course with the potentially dangerous assumption that I had covered this course material in earlier undergraduate psychology and education courses, I quickly learned that that was all I had done: covered it.  As a teacher, I hold myself accountable to never 'just cover' material, so this course taught me that, while my earlier introductions were sound, I needed to go deeper now, learning more about these theories and theorists, additional theories that informed them, and the newer theories that are emerging from them.  It all feeds into making me stronger, more solidly grounded and relevant as a 21st century educator.

This time around, I acquired a much deeper appreciation for Piaget's breadth of work (Campbell, 2006), if still not endearing myself to all his ideas.  My affinity for Vygotsky (Pratt, 2002; Miller 2002) was renewed while I was also able to nourish my pedagogy on the expansion of these theorists' ideas through Bruner's work (Driscoll, 2005), which was wholly new to me.  It is a result of ETEC 512 that I have processed how I might better structure my problem-based approaches, learning more about just how to structure students' levels of discomfort (Kanuka, 2008) so as to ensure it spurs learning rather than frustration.  This, of course, circles back to re-incorporate my understanding of Vygotsky's zone of proximal development, something that has always just made so much sense that I can usually use this as a starting point of inquiry for any lesson I do not effectively conduct, with the question of just how I structured or failed to structure levels of discomfort a close second.

References

Campbell, R. (2006).  Jean Piaget's Genetic Epistemology: Appreciation and Critique.  Retrieved from: https://hubcap.clemson.edu/%7Ecampber/piaget.html

Driscoll, M. P. (2005).  Psychology of Learning for Instruction.  Toronto, ON: Pearson.  In Custom Course Materials ETEC 512.  Vancouver, BC; University of British Columbia, Bookstore.

Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and Practice of Online Learning (pp. 91-118).  Retrieved from: https://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/04_Anderson_2008_Kanuka-Online_Learning.pdf

Miller, P. H. (2002).  Theories of Developmental Psychology, 4^th ed.  New York: Worth.  In Custom Course Materials ETEC 512.  Vancouver, BC; University of British Columbia, Bookstore.

Pratt, D.D. (2002). Good teaching: One size fits all? In J. Gordon (Ed.), An Update on Teaching Theory. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.  Accessed online at: https://www.teachingperspectives.com/PDF/goodteaching.pdf

Text Technologies: The Changing Spaces of Reading and Writing

We got creative, reflective and investigative in ETEC 540, digging deep into philosophical roots of just what constitutes technology and beginning to realize just how fully our culture is infiltrated, touched and influenced in every way by technology. The very concept of literacy as a primary identifier of our culture is rooted in the emergence of early technologies.  Now that technology has advanced so as to actually begin to remove the urgency of penmanship, will we begin to migrate back to a type of primary orality?

Reading Walter Ong (2002) was thought-provoking.  Weighing his words against Chandler's (2000), the work of ETEC 540 tickled old tendencies towards the philosophical, re-awakening the academic joy of negotiating Plato's ancient proclamations regarding the decline of memory via the intrusion of papyric script, one of our earlier forms of technology in record keeping, and a game changer in terms of oral versus literate culture.

It was in contemplation of these readings and Kress (2005) that I began to really see the lasting leadership and influence of Plato.  Surely, I recognized him as an important figure in the history of knowledge, but it was here that I began to see his role as a political figure, with knowledge and techne as his power.  And if that was the case for Plato, then the continued debate over literacy, illiteracy and multi-literacy must be rooted in some designation of power.

From a language educator's perspective, I also took great interest in the works of the New London Group (1996) and Dobson and Willinsky (2009) on just  what these multi-literacies are and how they should impact education to better prepare students for their futures.

References

Chandler, D. (2000). Technological or media determinism. Retrieved from https://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tdet01.html

Dobson, T. and Willinsky, J. (2009). Digital literacy (draft). The Cambridge Handbook on Literacy. Retrieved online at https://pkp.sfu.ca/files/Digital%20Literacy.pdf

Kress, G. (2005). Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge, and learning. Computers and Composition, 22(1). Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2004.12.004

New London Group (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66 (1), 60-92. Retrieved online at https://newlearningonline.com/~newlearn/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/multiliteracies_her_vol_66_1996.pdf

Ong, W. J. (2002). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York, NY: Routledge.

Design of Technology-Supported Learning Environments

In this course, we re-evaluated learning platforms and learning designs, synthesizing all to determine an appropriate design and platform for a targeted demographic.  With consideration for what is immediately available in my district, we chose WebCT as the platform in which and for which to hone our skills and fought to keep the design streamlined out of andragogical respect for our emergent-English adult students.

Because the focus of this course was on development and implementation of technology-supported learning environments, there wasn't a lot of ground-breaking new theory to deal with.  It was an opportunity to reflect and apply.  Many of the past readings were again relevant (eg: New London Group, 1996; Downes, 2004).  In the WebCT environment that my group created, we paid particular attention to constructivist theory and design (Driscoll, 2005; Driver & Oldham, 1986) while keeping ourselves inline with Vygotskian philosophy (Hua Lui & Matthews, 2005), ISTE's (2010) guidelines for technology in education, and our perpetual concerns for valuable authentic learning in any environment (Lonmbardi, 2007), especially given our awareness of the pressure and demands on the English Language Learners we each teach.  We paid due attention to Seymour Papert (1980) and Marlene Scardamalia & Carl Bereiter (1994) and their pioneering visionary work to structure intentional computer-assisted learning environments, beneficial to the construction of knowledge and the individual's desire to learn. 

We did venture more into the direct relationship between technologically enhanced learning environments and our specific demographic of English language learners.  Here we found a number of considerations, including reports of significant benefits to incorporating computers into the language classroom (Toohey, 2007; Yamauchi, 2009), and challenges such as cultural sensitivity and respect in a process of globalization (Sifakis & Sougari, 2003) and maximizing individual potentials both for the sake of personal and societal well-being (Olaniyan & Okemakinde, 2008).

Working on the learning design in ETEC 510 was especially interesting given that we were designing for adults.  My students are teenagers - kids, if you will,  but kids caught in that perpetual tug-of-war between childhood and adulthood.  Their teachers are traditionally taught sound pedagogy.  But it was out of this assignment and our decision to focus on adult learners that a colleague, an instructor of adults, was able to - in beautiful constructivist manner - teach me and our other colleague about andragogy (citing Knowles, 1977).  It was the first I had considered either the etymology or philosophy of pedagogy as being directed at children, rather than everyone.  I grow in humility; my students, harvesters of the potential of my growth.

References

Downes, S. (2004). Educational blogging. EDUCAUSE Review, 5 (38). Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0450.pdf

Driscoll. M. P. (2005).  Constructivism.  Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Toronto, ON: Pearson.

Driver, R. & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.

Hua Lui, C. & Matthews, R. (2005). Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal, 6 (3), 386-399.

ISTE. (2010). International Society for Technology in Education. Retrieved from: https://www.iste.org/welcome.aspx

Knowles, M. S. (1977). Adult learning processes: Pedagogy and andragogy.  Religious Education, 72(2), 202.

Lombardi, M. M. (2007).  Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview.  EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. Retrieved from: https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf,

New London Group (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures.  Harvard Educational Review, 66 (1), 60-92.

Olaniyan, D.A & Okemakinde. T.  (2008).  Human capital theory: Implications for educational development.  European Journal of Scientific Research.  24(2), 157-162.  Retrieved from https://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr%2024%202.htm

Papert, S. (1980).  Introduction: Computers and children and chapter 1: Computers and computer culture.   Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283.

Sifakis, N. C., & Sougari, A. (2003). Facing the globalisation challenge in the realm of English Language Teaching. Language and Education, 17(1), 59-71. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Toohey, K.,(2007). Computers boost ESL skill [Final Edition].  Langley Advance, p. 14. (Document ID: 1387123841).

Yamauchi, M. (2009).  Integrating Internet technology into the EFL cclassroom: A case study. International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning, 5(2), 3-17.  Retrieved from https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=329823205855419;res=IELHSS

Curriculum Issues in Cultural and Media Studies

From the historical, philosophical and theorectical investigations of earlier courses, we now moved into what is current, how we got here, where we might be going, and what the implications of this journey may be.  Using software installed on my own computer (for a change!  So much happens in web 2.0), my thoughts seemed to self-synthesize into a media production interpretive of my understanding of this significance.  The spiritual is so often not considered in conjunction with technology.  Here, we might come to see that it should be.

Reflecting on ETEC 531 is an exercise on why we should reflect.  A course I started just 7 months ago, finished just 4 months ago, I nearly forgot the theorectial pinings that synthesized the initiation of my media production and most recent moodle collaboration.  And yet, to venture back into Murphie & Potts (2003), seemingly a thick read at the time, brings back a nostalgic warmth with thoughts of our progression through the modern to the post-modern, the human through the post-human.  In retrospect, both curious and settled at my comfort with the cyborg, the balance between love of both the quiet of the unplugged and the buzz of the rapid-fire future is such a natural state that I am thankful for courses such as these that take the time to walk us through our history for heightened enlightenment.  Without them, we are so blindly progressive that we would too soon become enthralled by the likes of Stelarc and simulacra that we would forget the quiet altogether (Schrader, 2011).

This was the course that brought together for me further intricacies between technolgy & art and politics & economics.  I had not previously made the connections between architecture and social, religious or political agendas.  For all my reactions to art, from fully connecting to downright replusion or questioning artistic classification,  I had never fully processed artists as "'antennae' of society, foreshadowing in their art the social impact of technological change" (Murphie & Potts, 2003, p. 39).

ETEC 531 was a great place to synthesize all this with the ETECs that preceeded it.

References

Murphie, A. & Potts, J. (2003).  Culture and Technology. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillon.

Schrader, V. (2011). ETEC 531 MP - What does it mean to be post-human FINAL verison [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx_9W7Ft91s&feature=youtu.be

My capstone, graduating project

This is the summary and synthesis of my learning.  As I leave it all here for you, I invite you to join me in an attempt to articulate just what this all means.  I welcome you to my feedback page.  Share with me and my other guests what thoughts you generate in response to my work.  I am a teacher; it only seems right that I invite you to join me in the joys of learning through thought-formation and articulation.  Likewise, I am a student; I invite you to push my boundaries and challenge me to keep learning.

I have tried to be meticulate in my selection of artifacts.  So much is produced throughout MET as a result of our explorations and productive synthesis of learning.  As I prepared these reflections here to reveal the theorectical structures now framing me as an ever-growing educational technologist, I continued to find additional artifacts I would love to share with you.  But, as with non-metaphorical housekeeping, cognitive housekeeping must also resist clutter.  How much fun would a funhouse be with its props all scattered about, its special effects gone haywire?  So I have tried to spare you.  I believe I have allowed enough outside links that the truly curious can easily find many of these productions: additional pages in my UBC and Wordpress blogs, additional contributions to the ongoing ETEC 540 class blog, Youtube uploads, and other easily forgotten contributions to cyber-clutter that may, hopefully, someday, be the long-forgotten gem for a cyber-surfer in search of just the right toondoo or who-knows-what.

Housekeeping is not my forté.  But I have tried my best here to highlight that which has been most transformative in my learning while also representing the breadth of my learning, the integration of relevant theory, and an informed, evaluative approach to technological temptations (Moon, 2001; UBC_TQS, 2004).  It is not my intention to overwhelm, but to be justly representative. 

It is my appreciation for the dynamic nature of the Internet and the knowledge-building power that comes through interaction in spite of distance, forming community, that invites you to join me in fully integrating this ePortfolio into the realm of "network of networks" (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2000, as cited in Cambridge, 2001, p. 4). 

Cambridge (2001) highlights the importance of assessment in learning.  As such, I have taken an active role in creating a rubric - as a part of ETEC 590 - to be used in the assessment of this ePortfolio as it is in fact intended to be used as the ultimate artifact, evidence of my transformative learning through MET.  This rubric, which I have titled The Evaluator, reminiscent of midway rides with names echoic of Judgement Day, is informed by Vandervelde (2011), Yancey (n.d.), and collaborative efforts amongst my peers.  Go there if you please.

References

Cambridge, B. (2001).  Introduction. Electronic portfolios as knowledge builders. In: (Ed.) Cambridge, B. Electronic Portfolios: Emerging Practices in Student, Faculty, and Institutional Learning. AAHE Publications.  Retrieved from https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/lc5116011.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct [Course Materials within WebCT Vista].

Moon, J. (2001).  PDP Working Paper 4: Reflection in Higher Education Learning.  LTSN Generic Center.  Retrieved from https://www.york.ac.uk/admin/hr/researcher-development/students/resources/pgwt/reflectivepractice.pdf

University of British Columbia (2004, December 14). Process for UBC-TQS Collaboration. Office of Graduate Programs and Research. Retrieved from https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/lc5116011.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct [Course Materials within WebCT Vista].

Vandervelde, J. (2011). EPortfolio (Digital portfolio) rubric. University of Wisconsin.  Retrieved from https://www2.uwstout.edu/content/profdev/rubrics/eportfoliorubric.html

Yancey, K. (n.d.). What makes a good web portfolio?  Retrieved from https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/lc5116011.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct [Course Materials within WebCT Vista].

Literacy in the Content Areas: Intermediate Through Secondary

My Next Step.  Come January, I will take all you see here, in a cognitive sense, into further study on how I can be more effective in helping students become more literate, on how I can make the content areas more accessible to language learners.  With anxious anticipation, I wait in line for the next ride.

If you've not yet been, the Portfolio starts here.