In the course participants will examine a myriad of ways the Internet may function within teaching and learning contexts through internet-supported technologies (e.g., web, apps etc.). The course will focus on these technologies’ capabilities for instructional use, learning, professional development, and research. The course will provide a set of foundational readings to situate your thinking in this educative space. Then you will lead your own experiences with a diverse array of Internet-based instructional and learning tools; it will also encourage you to consider these tools with a critical eye, always determining the advantages and disadvantages of using particular web-supported or web-based tools.
This course focuses on the role of Internet-based technologies within face-to-face or hybrid learning situations and mostly within PK-12 realms. For all uses we consider, we will use the following questions (as well as any you offer) to structure our analysis of Internet uses:
• What assumptions about the nature of knowledge and learning does this innovation make (either explicitly or implicitly)?
• What unique role does the technology play in facilitating learning?
• How is this innovation seen to fit with existing school curriculum (e.g., Is the innovation intended to supplement or supplant existing curriculum? Is it intended to enhance the learning of something already central to the curriculum or some new set of understandings or competencies?)
• What demands does the innovation place on the knowledge of teachers or other “users”? What knowledge supports does the innovation provide?
• How does the technology fit or interact with the social context of learning? (e.g., Are computers used by individuals or groups? Does the technology support collaboration or individual work? What sorts of interaction does the technology facilitate or hinder? Does it change or reify social systems?)
Course goals include:
• Understanding the historical context of uses of the Internet and Web for teaching and learning
• Experiencing what it is like to be an actor in the ‘participatory’ or ‘semantic’ or ‘connected’ culture of the Web
• Developing a critical framework for evaluating web uses in educational contexts
• Interpreting (i.e., reading, understanding, interpreting, adapting) educational research that focuses on teaching/learning with the Internet-supported technologies
This course is not about fully online or distance education topics. If you are interested in that topic, consider taking LT’s “Online Learning” course(s).
An Overview of Criteria for Selecting an LMS.docx.David Brooks
Paper presented at Second Canadian International Conference on Advances in Education,Teaching & Technology 2017, 29-31 July, 2017, Toronto, Canada
This letter is to inform you that the scientific committee has selected your abstract for oral presentation in the Second Canadian International Conference on Advances in Education,Teaching & Technology 2017 (EduTeach2017) which will be held on 29-31 July 2017, at the International Living & Learning Center, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada.
One of several presentations at a school of arts and sciences retreat for Salem State College, January 2009, to stimulate thought on the future of higher education in 10 years. I chose to focus on PLEs (Personal Learning Environments) as a concept that encompasses several key behaviors and technologies widely adopted by our incoming students.
Advances in computer technology continue to change the
lives of instructors and students. One of the exciting new ways
to use computers in education is in testing. According to Brown
(1997), computer-based tests (CBTs) have been used in second
language testing since the early 80's. This rapid change in mode
of administration of tests is very understandable. As Jamieson
(2005) states, computers have a number of very desirable
functions that considerably eases up the test creation and
assessment task, including item creation and presentation,
answer collection and scoring, statistical analysis, and storage,
transmission, and retrieval of information. Also the literature on
computer-assisted language learning indicates that language
learners have generally positive attitudes towards using
computers in the classroom (Reid, 1986; Neu and Scarcella,
1991; Phinney, 1991).
Computer-based assessment has been used in many
disciplines to give both formative feedback and to offer
summative testing. This is especially so in the sciences. There is
evidence to suggest that formative computer-based assessment
can produce improvement in student learning outcomes
(Clariana, 1993) and that this can lead to a positive attitudes of
students to learning.
This project focuses on Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and its goal is to make people aware of its importance and increasing use.
This study shows the difference between a Virtual Learning Environment and other educational websites and how we can understand its specificities. This paper addresses Moodle, which is a modular object-oriented dynamic learning environment used by study communities all over the world for free; and EnglishTown, which is an on-line English school using Adobe’s Adobe Connect 8. Both are accessed by many people and can help us be aware of what a VLE is.
An Overview of Criteria for Selecting an LMS.docx.David Brooks
Paper presented at Second Canadian International Conference on Advances in Education,Teaching & Technology 2017, 29-31 July, 2017, Toronto, Canada
This letter is to inform you that the scientific committee has selected your abstract for oral presentation in the Second Canadian International Conference on Advances in Education,Teaching & Technology 2017 (EduTeach2017) which will be held on 29-31 July 2017, at the International Living & Learning Center, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada.
One of several presentations at a school of arts and sciences retreat for Salem State College, January 2009, to stimulate thought on the future of higher education in 10 years. I chose to focus on PLEs (Personal Learning Environments) as a concept that encompasses several key behaviors and technologies widely adopted by our incoming students.
Advances in computer technology continue to change the
lives of instructors and students. One of the exciting new ways
to use computers in education is in testing. According to Brown
(1997), computer-based tests (CBTs) have been used in second
language testing since the early 80's. This rapid change in mode
of administration of tests is very understandable. As Jamieson
(2005) states, computers have a number of very desirable
functions that considerably eases up the test creation and
assessment task, including item creation and presentation,
answer collection and scoring, statistical analysis, and storage,
transmission, and retrieval of information. Also the literature on
computer-assisted language learning indicates that language
learners have generally positive attitudes towards using
computers in the classroom (Reid, 1986; Neu and Scarcella,
1991; Phinney, 1991).
Computer-based assessment has been used in many
disciplines to give both formative feedback and to offer
summative testing. This is especially so in the sciences. There is
evidence to suggest that formative computer-based assessment
can produce improvement in student learning outcomes
(Clariana, 1993) and that this can lead to a positive attitudes of
students to learning.
This project focuses on Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and its goal is to make people aware of its importance and increasing use.
This study shows the difference between a Virtual Learning Environment and other educational websites and how we can understand its specificities. This paper addresses Moodle, which is a modular object-oriented dynamic learning environment used by study communities all over the world for free; and EnglishTown, which is an on-line English school using Adobe’s Adobe Connect 8. Both are accessed by many people and can help us be aware of what a VLE is.
Universal Design in Learning at Learning Disabilities Association Conference ...rbomar
Universal Design in Learning is a framework where learning theory, diversity of learners, education legislation and evidenced-based instructional practices can intersect. This power point will show you the history and science behind UDL and provide some practical application of UDL to the instructional practices in the classroom.
Universal Design in Learning at Learning Disabilities Association Conference ...rbomar
Universal Design in Learning is a framework where student diversity, evidence-based instructional practices, education theory and education legislative requirements can intersect. This power point presents the history and brain science behind UDL and some practical suggestions for implementing UDL in your classroom.
This presentation will assist in preparing a novice online EFL teacher for not only the complexities, problems, responsibilities and challenges encountered but also the tremendous rewards that can be gained from the e-moderation process. The role played by the e-moderator in creating and teaching an online course in English as a Foreign language will be explored. In particular, the e-moderators beliefs and perceptions as well as the challenges encountered throughout the process. Furthermore, It will detail the relevant theories of online learning and show how they are represented through various models, creating a framework to assist the e-moderation process.
COMPARING THE CHALLENGES OF IMPLEMENTING WEB-BASED AND TRADITIONAL TEACHING S...adeij1
Web-based teaching systems have several advantages and have the potential to benefit education greatly. It
is significant to carefully consider learners' and instructors' specific needs and circumstances when
deciding whether to use these systems. Using web-based and traditional teaching methods may be
appropriate to provide a well-rounded educational experience. It may be appropriate to use a combination
of web-based and traditional teaching methods to provide a well-rounded educational experience. Webbased teaching systems have the potential to greatly benefit education in developing countries by
increasing access to quality education and reducing the cost of delivering education. However, there are
also several challenges to implementing these systems in developing countries, such as limited
infrastructure and resources, limited access to technology, and low digital literacy. The purpose of this
review article is to analyse and contrast the efficacy of web-based teaching systems with traditional
teaching systems, assess their respective advantages and disadvantages, identify the factors that influence
their effectiveness, and conclude that web-based teaching systems offer certain benefits over traditional
teaching systems, including greater flexibility, convenience, and the capacity to deliver multimedia content.
However, traditional teaching systems also have advantages, such as the ability to provide face-to-face
interaction and immediate feedback. This review paper examines the factors that impact the efficacy of
both systems, such as the system's design, the quality of the educational materials, and the proficiency of
the instructor. Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses, and the best approach depends on the
specific needs and circumstances of the learner and the instructor
Comparing the Challenges of Implementing Web-Based and Traditional Teaching S...adeij1
Web-based teaching systems have several advantages and have the potential to benefit education greatly. It is significant to carefully consider learners' and instructors' specific needs and circumstances when deciding whether to use these systems. Using web-based and traditional teaching methods may be appropriate to provide a well-rounded educational experience. It may be appropriate to use a combination of web-based and traditional teaching methods to provide a well-rounded educational experience. Webbased teaching systems have the potential to greatly benefit education in developing countries by increasing access to quality education and reducing the cost of delivering education. However, there are also several challenges to implementing these systems in developing countries, such as limited infrastructure and resources, limited access to technology, and low digital literacy. The purpose of this review article is to analyse and contrast the efficacy of web-based teaching systems with traditional teaching systems, assess their respective advantages and disadvantages, identify the factors that influence their effectiveness, and conclude that web-based teaching systems offer certain benefits over traditional teaching systems, including greater flexibility, convenience, and the capacity to deliver multimedia content. However, traditional teaching systems also have advantages, such as the ability to provide face-to-face interaction and immediate feedback. This review paper examines the factors that impact the efficacy of both systems, such as the system's design, the quality of the educational materials, and the proficiency of the instructor. Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses, and the best approach depends on the specific needs and circumstances of the learner and the instructor.
This PowerPoint was an accessory for a presentation about why dynamic learning with 21st century tools is important. Included is information on how to support Moodle within a school or district. Additional resources can be provided by hollyrae.
Pivot Points for Technology Integration (Tech & Learning Live Austin Keynote)Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
Dr. Hughes kicks off a day of professional development workshops and discussions with a presentation on developing a “distributed vision” for K-12 technology initiatives.
She believes the technology vision is not a piece of paper filed away but a new way of living and working – impacting day-to-day and long-range thinking, actions, decisions, and processes. She will share research-based examples of how schools successfully navigate this cultural shift to get all stakeholders on board and provide tips and tools you can use to replicate these success stories in your schools and districts.
Situational ingenuity of teachers: The key to transformative, content-focused...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
This presentation was shared at a colloquium sponsored by the University of Houston, Victoria on April 28, 2014 (Please read the slide notes for generally what I said in the presentation). I share my vision for the use of digital technologies in education. I refer to it as transformative, content-focused classroom technology integration. I illustrate this concept through 3 stories of practice: from teachers, a school and its district, and a college of education. Tom is a mathematics teachers who designs a lesson with ropes, video, ipads, and graphing calculators to help students learn to write an equation for a trig function. Hilly High School began a iPad learning innovation in which all students got ipads - I share how they developed their vision which included both a technology-focus and a learning-focus. Finally, I share data on preservice teachers' use of social technologies and discuss how COEs could design a set of experiences that would develop preservice teachers to be connected educators. These will show the possibilities but also many of the challenges involved in this work. In these stories, I hope that you’ll discover ways that you, as a teacher, a school leader, a teacher educator, a parent, can assist in this transformation. I end by describing "situational ingenuity" and how I see teachers as most interested in this challenging work in their classrooms and how I see it as the key to designing content-focused, technology-supported innovations in classrooms.
SITE 2014 Presentation: Preservice Teachers' Social networking use, concerns,...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
This paper was presented at the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education on March 18, 2014 by Sa Liu (representing the authors). It is authored by Joan Hughes, Yujung Ko, Mihyun Lim, and Sa Liu. If you would like a copy of the paper, please contact Dr. Joan Hughes
An audio-recording of the presentation will be available soon at http://techedges.org
Panel Presentation from "Lightning Talk Series - At The Helm: Women's Impact in EdTech" sponsored by EdTech Women (http://edtechwomen.com).
In this presentation, I share four stories of graduate students I mentored from the Learning Technologies program at the University of Texas at Austin who are putting the "ed" into "edtech" in their current work. I call for all of us to mentor others, especially those underrepresented in the edtech field, and to ensure that the "ed" is in "edtech" and to seek help if you are unsure. Ultimately, collectively we will continue to shape and change education.
Audio for this presentation is located at http://techedges.org/sxswedu-2014-presentation-and-audiorecording/
Descriptive Indicators of Future Teachers’ Technology Integration in the PK-1...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
This research examined preservice teacher graduates' positioning toward integrating technology in future teaching. Participants included 115 preservice teachers across three cohorts in 2008-2009 who graduated from a laptop-infused teacher education program. The study implemented a case study methodology that included a survey administered upon graduation.Indicators of positioning toward technology integration included: digital technology self-efficacy, attitude toward learning technologies, pedagogical perspective, personal/educational digital technology behaviors during the program, and TPACK knowledge used to rationalize their most valued technologies for future teaching. Results indicated graduates held moderate digital technology self-efficacy, positive attitude toward learning technologies,and moderate constructivist philosophy. During their preparation,productivity software activities were used most widely for educational purposes.Their most valued technologies for teaching subject matter were predominantly productivity software as well as general hardware, such as computers, projectors, and document cameras. They described teacher-centric uses three times more often than student-centered. Graduates showed low depth of TPACK. Teacher education programs need to consider the degree to which their candidates are exposed to a range of contemporary ICTs, especially content-specific ICTs, and the candidates' development of TPACK, which supports future technology-related instructional decision making. Such knowledge is developed across the teaching career, and technological induction programs may support continued TPACK development.Future research should employ longitudinal studies to understand TPACK development and use across novice and veteran teachers.
Course developed by Dr. Joan E. Hughes at The University of Texas at Austin
The purpose of this class is to introduce you to the theories, assumptions, and practices underlying the use of qualitative research in education. In the tradition of survey courses, this class examines the broad history, concepts, and themes that distinguish multiple methods of qualitative research, specifically as they relate to education research. Students will study, practice, and reflect on different qualitative research methodologies and consider the components and challenges faced when engaging in qualitative research methods. Each student will design and conduct his/her own qualitative study. Issues related to data collection, negotiating access to the field, ethics, and representation will be of particular importance. While it is not assumed that you will gain a comprehensive, rich understanding of any one particular qualitative research tradition over the trajectory of the course, it is expected that upon completion you will acquire the foundational knowledge and experience to begin evaluating, selecting, and defending appropriate qualitative methods for use in your own future research projects.
Goals:
1. Understand historical background and fundamental tenets of qualitative research.
2. Understand ethical issues within qualitative research.
3. Develop a researchable question.
4. Identify the limits and affordances of qualitative research designs.
5. Develop a beginning awareness of qualitative inquiry approaches, including ethnography, case studies, narrative, postmodern, critical, and basic interpretive.
6. Engage in qualitative research activities, including: field observations, interview, coding, analysis, and report writing.
Teaching English with technology: Exploring teacher learning and practice (Hu...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
In 1998-2000, I developed the RAT (p. 30+) and TPCK / TPACK (see page 137+; p. 178 for figure) in this dissertation at Michigan State University as a doctoral student.
Abstract: The purpose of this study, conducted during the 1998-1999 school year, was to examine the nature of teachers’ technology-supported English practice and understand teachers’ learning to teach with technology. Four middle-school English teachers, who used technology in support of teaching English content, agreed to participate in this study. The data included a combination of classroom observations and life-history teacher interviews. Observations focused on the teachers’ use of technology in relation to instruction and student learning experiences. The series of interviews explored the teachers’ life histories, including history of educational preparation, career(s), teaching positions, technology experiences, technology learning, and technology use.
The dissertation study was written in the format of three journal articles. In the first article, a technology use taxonomy was developed to analyze teachers’ technology use in content areas: technology as replacement, technology as amplification, and technology as transformation. Across time, participants used technology across all three categories, not in a sequential order. This finding challenges the notion that sophistication of technology use is linked to technology experience. This finding may be explained by the expansion of practical uses for technology, the teachers’ reform-oriented beliefs, and the possibility that these teachers learned from others’ “expert knowledge.” Varieties of technology transformation that may have been obscured in the data analysis are discussed.
Analysis in the second article explored how teachers learned to use the technology they reported knowing. Using technology to support subject matter instruction occurred more often when a teacher’s initial learning experience involved either (a) learning technology in the context of learning more English language arts content or (b) learning technology with an awareness of a connection between the technology and the English language arts. From analysis of trends in four teachers’ technology-learning, I developed a general model that illustrated the technology-learning process and described how teachers take multiple pathways through this learning model.
In the third article I analyzed and compared why and how teachers learned and used technology. The teachers’ reasons for learning technology were closely associated with the reasons they used technology in their teaching practice. Further, the manner in which the teachers learned impacted the design of learning opportunities for their students. I conjecture about the kinds of knowledge (TPCK, TPACK) that teachers develop through the process of learning to teach with technology.
Common Writing Issues for Undergraduates, Masters, and Ph.D. StudentsJoan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
Handout from my undergraduate course at UTexas which focuses on assisting students to develop research and writing skills. I appended some other writing tips that I also provide for Masters/Ph.D.students, with their descriptions in the APA 6.0 Manual.
RAT Question Guide: Using the Replacement, Amplification, and Transformation ...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
This downloadable question guide can help districts, schools, or individuals identify the important dimensions of the teaching and learning process and THEN use those dimensions to explore how the use of technology impacts these dimensions. I use this guide in my consulting with schools and districts (and in my graduate-level teaching) to support the change process related to educational technology integration and transformation.
Please note this is Copyrighted. Please contact me for use.
For more information see the RAT Slides: http://www.slideshare.net/joanhughes/rats-lides
or
The RAT article: http://www.slideshare.net/joanhughes/hughes-scharber-site2006
or
A presentation that puts RAT in context with school change and professional learning: http://www.slideshare.net/joanhughes/transformative-technology-integration-in-classrooms
Ready, Aim, Fire: A presentation about technology integration and iPad integr...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
In this presentation, I speak about the challenges of technology integration with a group of U.S. K-12 district superintendents and principals. I use my recent research on a high school's endeavor to integrate iPads into teaching and learning to situate my remarks about technology integration. Topics covered include: school change, vision/goals for technology integration, my RAT (replacement, amplification, transformation) model for assessing lessons that integrate technology, and using subject-specific problems of practice to drive technology-related professional learning for teachers.
This handout was shared with a group of superintendents, principals, and directors of teaching/learning after they visited the University of Texas Visualization Laboratory in the College of Education. We then led them in an introductory visualization activity with Gapminder.com and encouraged them to share these resources with their high school teachers who might want to integrate data analysis and visualization into their content area activities.
Session conducted on Thursday, October 3, 2013
This activity was used in a session with school district leaders (superintendents, principals, directors of teaching/learning) to expose them to beginner data visualization tools.
UGS 302 Syllabus: The role of technology among youth in society and education...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
Fall 2013. A semester-long, writing-intensive course that leads first-year students in considering inventions and innovations (technological and historical) that have changed society and education. We weave from exploring current trends to historical shifts to again current digital innovations with critique from a range of perspectives (educational, political, advertising/marketing, technical, psychological). This course includes university-level requirements including: visiting remarkable places at UT (Harry Ransom Center, TACC VisLab), attending university lectures, engaging in research, writing and oral presenting, and being taught by a Ph.D. tenured faculty member.
iTeach and iLearn with iPads in Secondary Language Arts (AERA 2013 Presentation)Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
Presented at: American Educational Research Association (AERA) Conference, April 2013, San Francisco, CA.
Authors: Gregory S. Russell and Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
Abstract: Tablet computers like the iPad seem to be well-suited for educational purposes, but little empirical research yet exists that examines its potential. This ethnography characterizes the ways in which two, veteran English Language Arts teachers and their students use ubiquitous iPads to facilitate teaching and learning in high-school. Results indicate that the iPad improves the efficiencies of learning activities but also introduces new classroom management issues. Many teaching and learning activities replicate or amplify previous approaches, and a few are transformed. This research can provide guidance for other schools that endeavor to create ubiquitous tablet computing environments. Future research should examine the longitudinal effects of similar interventions.
Technology Integration: The RAT – Replacement, Amplification, and Transformat...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
The reference is: Hughes, J.E., Thomas, R., & Scharber, C. (2006, March). Assessing Technology Integration: The RAT – Replacement, Amplification, and Transformation – Framework. (SITE) Conference Proceedings (CD-ROM).
Abstract: This brief paper will introduce an assessment framework, called RAT – Replacement, Amplification, and Transformation, that can be used with preservice and inservice teachers to increase critical decision-making concerning integration of technology into the K-12 classroom. The framework is currently being refined through (a) expanding our literature review to refine conceptual and theoretical categories, (b) subsequently applying the framework to videotaped technology - supported classroom lessons, and (c) working with practicing teachers interested in learning self-assessment techniques to improve their technology integration decision-making.
A framework for action: Intervening to increase adoption of transformative we...Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
Abstract: Web 2.0 tools have emerged as conducive for innovative pedagogy and transformative learning opportunities for youth. Currently, Web 2.0 is often adopted into teachers’ practice to simply replace or amplify traditional instructional approaches rather than promote or facilitate transformative educational change. Current models of innovation adoption do not adequately address successful diffusion of transformative educational technology. A new interactional model, called a framework-for-action (FFA), repositions ‘success’ on qualitative criteria and necessitates timely intervention by change agents at ‘points of factor interaction’ in the change process. These interventions engage potential adopters (i.e., teachers) in meaningful learning opportunities that reposition individuals or groups to make decisions leading to adoption of technologies that support transformative learning and teaching with web 2.0 tools.
Final published article can be found at:
Hughes, J. E., Guion, J.*, Bruce, K.*, Horton, L.*, & Prescott, A.* (2011.) A framework for action: Intervening to increase adoption of transformative web 2.0 learning resources. Educational Technology, 51(2), 53-61.
This compilation paper was presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting in April 2011 at an invited session of the TACTL (Technology as an Agent of Change for Teaching and Learning) Special Interest Group.
Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, April 2011
Authors: Michelle Fulks Read, Sara Jolly Jones, Joan E. Hughes, & Gloria Gonzales-Dholakia
Degree of Digital Equity in Schools by Race and Socio-Economic CharacteristicsJoan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
This handout summarizes a research presentation from the American Educational Research Association Conference in April, 2011. This research examined and compares digital equity at two different middle schools. Focus is placed
upon minority student in- and out-of-school technology use to explore the relationship of school and digital equity. The first middle school, Saguaro, is a minority-majority school, with 93% Hispanic and
African-American students. The second middle school, Porter, is a historically white majority school participating in a district student-transfer program with a 50% white and 50% Hispanic/African
American population. Data from the two schools is compared to examine student in- and out-of-school technology use and perceived technology skill level. In exploring the relationship of student technology use both in and out of school to that of the school and minority status, digital inequities were present. Students at the historically white school were more likely to utilize various technologies for
communication, creation, web, and productivity activities both in- and out-of-school.
Please contact Dr. Hughes if you would like a full paper.
The Art Pastor's Guide to Sabbath | Steve ThomasonSteve Thomason
What is the purpose of the Sabbath Law in the Torah. It is interesting to compare how the context of the law shifts from Exodus to Deuteronomy. Who gets to rest, and why?
How to Create Map Views in the Odoo 17 ERPCeline George
The map views are useful for providing a geographical representation of data. They allow users to visualize and analyze the data in a more intuitive manner.
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdfkaushalkr1407
The Roman Empire, a vast and enduring power, stands as one of history's most remarkable civilizations, leaving an indelible imprint on the world. It emerged from the Roman Republic, transitioning into an imperial powerhouse under the leadership of Augustus Caesar in 27 BCE. This transformation marked the beginning of an era defined by unprecedented territorial expansion, architectural marvels, and profound cultural influence.
The empire's roots lie in the city of Rome, founded, according to legend, by Romulus in 753 BCE. Over centuries, Rome evolved from a small settlement to a formidable republic, characterized by a complex political system with elected officials and checks on power. However, internal strife, class conflicts, and military ambitions paved the way for the end of the Republic. Julius Caesar’s dictatorship and subsequent assassination in 44 BCE created a power vacuum, leading to a civil war. Octavian, later Augustus, emerged victorious, heralding the Roman Empire’s birth.
Under Augustus, the empire experienced the Pax Romana, a 200-year period of relative peace and stability. Augustus reformed the military, established efficient administrative systems, and initiated grand construction projects. The empire's borders expanded, encompassing territories from Britain to Egypt and from Spain to the Euphrates. Roman legions, renowned for their discipline and engineering prowess, secured and maintained these vast territories, building roads, fortifications, and cities that facilitated control and integration.
The Roman Empire’s society was hierarchical, with a rigid class system. At the top were the patricians, wealthy elites who held significant political power. Below them were the plebeians, free citizens with limited political influence, and the vast numbers of slaves who formed the backbone of the economy. The family unit was central, governed by the paterfamilias, the male head who held absolute authority.
Culturally, the Romans were eclectic, absorbing and adapting elements from the civilizations they encountered, particularly the Greeks. Roman art, literature, and philosophy reflected this synthesis, creating a rich cultural tapestry. Latin, the Roman language, became the lingua franca of the Western world, influencing numerous modern languages.
Roman architecture and engineering achievements were monumental. They perfected the arch, vault, and dome, constructing enduring structures like the Colosseum, Pantheon, and aqueducts. These engineering marvels not only showcased Roman ingenuity but also served practical purposes, from public entertainment to water supply.
How to Make a Field invisible in Odoo 17Celine George
It is possible to hide or invisible some fields in odoo. Commonly using “invisible” attribute in the field definition to invisible the fields. This slide will show how to make a field invisible in odoo 17.
The French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France. It marked the decline of absolute monarchies, the rise of secular and democratic republics, and the eventual rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. This revolutionary period is crucial in understanding the transition from feudalism to modernity in Europe.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
Teaching and learning with Internet-supported technologies - Course syllabus
1. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
Teaching and Learning with Internet-supported Technologies
Spring 2014* EDC 385G
Online Course
Instructor
Joan E. Hughes, Ph.D.
244M Sanchez Bldg
Office Hours: Tuesdays 2:00-4:00 PM; Sign up http://tinyurl.com/jehofficehours (Skype or in
Canvas Conference available)
Phone/Voice Mail: 512.232.4145
E-mail: joanh@austin.utexas.edu
Course Description & Goals
In the course participants will examine a myriad of ways the Internet may function within teaching and
learning contexts through internet-supported technologies (e.g., web, apps etc.). The course will focus on
these technologies’ capabilities for instructional use, learning, professional development, and research.
The course will provide a set of foundational readings to situate your thinking in this educative space.
Then you will lead your own experiences with a diverse array of Internet-based instructional and learning
tools; it will also encourage you to consider these tools with a critical eye, always determining the
advantages and disadvantages of using particular web-supported or web-based tools.
This course focuses on the role of Internet-based technologies within face-to-face or hybrid learning
situations and mostly within PK-12 realms. For all uses we consider, we will use the following questions
(as well as any you offer) to structure our analysis of Internet uses:
•
•
•
•
•
What assumptions about the nature of knowledge and learning does this innovation make (either
explicitly or implicitly)?
What unique role does the technology play in facilitating learning?
How is this innovation seen to fit with existing school curriculum (e.g., Is the innovation intended
to supplement or supplant existing curriculum? Is it intended to enhance the learning of
something already central to the curriculum or some new set of understandings or competencies?)
What demands does the innovation place on the knowledge of teachers or other “users”? What
knowledge supports does the innovation provide?
How does the technology fit or interact with the social context of learning? (e.g., Are computers
used by individuals or groups? Does the technology support collaboration or individual work?
What sorts of interaction does the technology facilitate or hinder? Does it change or reify social
systems?)
Course goals include:
• Understanding the historical context of uses of the Internet and Web for teaching and learning
• Experiencing what it is like to be an actor in the ‘participatory’ or ‘semantic’ or ‘connected’
culture of the Web
• Developing a critical framework for evaluating web uses in educational contexts
• Interpreting (i.e., reading, understanding, interpreting, adapting) educational research that focuses
1
2. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
on teaching/learning with the Internet-supported technologies
This course is not about fully online or distance education topics. If you are interested in that topic,
consider taking LT’s “Online Learning” course(s).
Course Web Page
The website for this course will use Canvas. https://canvas.utexas.edu
You should be already enrolled in the course called “Teaching and Learning with the Internet,” and you
log-in using your UT EID.
Course Structure
Readings (you may obtain at the library, online, or in the Canvas course)
Alvermann, D. E., Hutchins, R. J., & McDevitt, R. (2012). Adolescents' Engagement with Web 2.0 and
Social Media: Research, Theory, and Practice. [Article]. Research in the Schools, 19(1), 33-44.
Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2010). Transformational play: Using games to position
person, content, and context. Educational Researcher, 39(7), 525-536.
Beach, R. (2012). Uses of Digital Tools and Literacies in the English Language Arts Classroom. [Article].
Research in the Schools, 19(1), 45-59.
Berners-Lee, Hendler, & Lassila (2001). The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284(5), 34-44.
Dede et al. (2009). A Research Agenda for Online Teacher Professional Development [Part of the special
issue, Innovative uses of technology in teacher education]. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1),
8-19.
Donnelly, D., McGarr, O. & O’Reilly, J. (2011). A framework for teachers’ integration of ICT into their
classroom practice. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1469-1483.
Generation M2 Report, 2010 (Kaiser Foundation) – Available:
http://www.kff.org/entmedia/mh012010pkg.cfm
Gentry, L. B., Denton, C. A., & Kurz, T. (2008). Technologically-based mentoring provided to teachers:
A synthesis of the literature. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(3), 339-373.
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age:
Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? . Educational Researcher,
38(4), 246-259. http://www.aera.net/publications/Default.aspx?menu_id=38&id=7886
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The
search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review, 9, 47-64.
Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among members of the "Net
Generation". Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92-113.
Jenkins, Henry. (2006.) Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the
21st Century, Available at:
http://www.digitallearning.macfound.org/site/c.enJLKQNlFiG/b.2029245/k.C6EC/Library.htm
Krueger, K. (2013). 'Connected educators' spur connected learning. eSchool News, 16(9), 45. Available:
http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/b124b13d#/b124b13d/45
Lenhart, A., Kristen Purcell, Aaron Smith, Kathryn Zickuhr (2010). Social media and young adults.
http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., & Henry, L. A. (2013). New literacies: A dual-level theory
of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In D. E. Alvermann, N. J. Unrau
& R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (Vol. 6th, pp. 1150-1181).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Owston, R. D. (1997). The World Wide Web: A Technology to Enhance Teaching and Learning?
Educational Researcher, 26(2), 27-33.
2
3. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
Schulten, K. (2013). What 'connected education' looks like: 28 examples from all over. The New York
Times. Retrieved from http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/what-connected-educationlooks-like-28-examples-from-teachers-all-over/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
Wallace, R. M. (2004). A Framework for Understanding Teaching With the Internet. American
Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 447-488.
Windschitl, M. (1998). The WWW and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take? Educational
Researcher, 27(1), 28-33.
Wong, T. (2013). Meeting needs: Are you connected? School Library Monthly, 29(8), 33-34.
Some readings not listed here are directly linked within Canvas to external websites where the reading is
located.
Required Technology
1. Bibliography Software (your choice)
a. Zotero - http://www.zotero.org/ (Free)- Please download and install on your computer.
Consult help materials on their website, as needed.
b. Endnote - $79; https://webstore.hied.com/cgibin/WebObjects/CampusComputer.woa/13/wo/tbsXh81YJxSFdbOeD5Yin0/0.6.7
There is a range of technologies that you may need to complete the projects. Some of these may involve
purchasing apps, software, hardware, or membership to online tools. These costs are low to moderate and
should be considered part of your “books” (please consider the fact that there are no required books.)
Please do not go out and purchase all these items until you know you need them – it is unlikely you
will need all of these tools/features. Some of these are also available for free check-out in the Learning
Technology Center (LTC): http://www.edb.utexas.edu/education/centers/ltc/
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Good quality headset (earphones) with microphone
Audacity: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ or GarageBand
Domain Names Costs (www.godaddy.com)
Webserver / webhosting fees
Website service fees (e.g., blogging, video / podcasting hosting, etc.)
Camera
Videocamera
Audio recorder
External microphone
Class Participation
Class participants are required to read assigned readings, contribute to discussions, and participate
maximally in all class activities.
Assignments
Students are required to:
· Prepare all assigned readings for discussion and contribute to discussions
· Conduct on-line or off-line literature research
· Complete assignments related to course topics
3
4. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
Performance Outcomes
1. Experience Badges (3)
2. PSC Internet Project (Adopted, Used, Analyzed)
3. Expert Panel Discussion
4. Participation
(Point Values)
n/a
100
15
77
Total
192 Points
Performance Outcome Short Descriptions (see Long Descriptions in Canvas Assignments for more
information)
1. Experience Badges
•
You need to earn at least three web experience badges. When completing them, you earn
badges that are displayed within Canvas, and you can serve as a more knowledgeable other
(MKO) for others in the class who may be pursuing challenges related to the web experience
you already have. In this way, we will try to cultivate a learning community.
2. PSC Internet Project – Adopted, Used, Analyzed, Project
•
You will become part of the “participant, semantic, and connected culture” of the
Internet. You will develop the requisite technology for your project and keep a diary (in
Canvas Collaborations) relating to your own experience as a participant in a journal. You
will write a final paper that describes your experiences being a web user/creator/connector
using literature perspectives from the course’s readings to explain/understand your
experience. Ph.D. students: will end their paper by sketching ideas about how one might
conduct research to study aspects of teaching and learning related to your developed project.
3. Expert Panels – Q & A
•
As a culminating activity to the course, several expert panels will be assembled from
class participants to respond to a range of questions from class audience, community peers,
and the course instructor. The panel will occur as an asynchronous text-based, archived
conversation.
4. Participation in Discussions
• High participation is expected in online activities and discussions. Expectations will be
set for each activity/discussion in the Module Overview.
******File Backups*******
You are responsible for your files. Therefore, you must backup all your files to your own disk, key drive,
or cloud. Make sure you back-up your data in several places! In addition, you may want to type any
responses in a Word document and copy/paste into Canvas just to be sure your thoughts are not lost if
there’s a technological malfunction.
Relevant Policies
Course Drop:
January 16th is the last day of the official add/drop period; after this date, changes in registration require
the approval of the department chair and usually the student’s dean. January 29 th is the last day to drop
and possibly receive a refund.
Policy On ADA:
The University of Texas at Austin provides upon request appropriate academic accommodations for
qualified students with disabilities. For more information, contact the Office of the Dean of Students at
471-6259, 471-4641 TTY.
4
5. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
Policy on Scholastic Misconduct
Scholastic misconduct is broadly defined as "any act that violates the rights of another student in
academic work or that involves misrepresentation of your own work." Scholastic dishonesty includes,
(but is not necessarily limited to): cheating on assignments or examinations; plagiarizing, which means
misrepresenting as you own work any part of work done by another; submitting the same paper, or
substantially similar papers, to meet the requirements of more than one course without the approval and
consent of all instructors concerned; depriving another student of necessary course materials; or
interfering with another student's work.
I process all incidents of scholastic misconduct.
Definition of Grades
A - achievement that is outstanding relative to the level necessary to meet course requirements.
B - achievement that is significantly above the level necessary to meet course requirements.
C - achievement that meets the course requirements in every respect.
D - achievement that is worthy of credit even though it fails to meet fully the course requirements.
S - achievement that is satisfactory, which is equivalent to a C- or better (achievement required for an S is
at the discretion of the instructor but may be no lower than equivalent to a C-.) ---F(or N) - Represents failure (or no credit) and signifies that the work was either (1) completed but at a
level of achievement that is not worthy of credit or (2) was not completed and there was no agreement
between the instructor and the student that the student would be awarded an I (see also I).
The grading for this course is as follows
A 95 – 100%
A- 90 – 94%
B+ 87 – 89%
B 84 – 86%
B- 80 – 83%
C+ 77 – 79%
C 74 – 76%
C- 70 – 73%
D+ 67 – 69%
D 64 – 66%
D- 60-63%
F Below 60%
Academic Dishonesty
Academic dishonesty in any portion of the academic work for a course shall be grounds for awarding a
grade of F or N for the entire course.
Incomplete Grades:
The grade of "I" or “X” (incomplete) is not a regular grade and cannot be given without special
arrangements under unusual circumstances. It cannot be given merely to extend the time allowed to
complete course requirements. If family or personal emergency requires that your attention be diverted
from the course and that more time than usual is needed to complete course work, arrangements should be
made with the instructor of the course before the quarter ends and consent obtained for receiving an
"Incomplete" or "I" grade. These arrangements should be made as soon as the need for an "I" can be
anticipated. A written agreement should be prepared indicating when the course assignment will be
completed. I require an "Incomplete" grade for a course to be removed within two weeks into the
5
6. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
semester immediately following its receipt.
Receipt of Final Grade:
Feedback and grades will conducted within Canvas. Your final grade is available online with the
Registrar after they are posted. You are more than welcome to make an appointment to meet with me to
discuss your work or evaluation at any time.
Course Schedule
January 17-24: Introduction, Examples
Topics and Activities:
• Introductions and Class Overview/Syllabus
• Course Website
• Watch Movie: Julie & Julia
• Lecture: Austin Forum’s From Sous Vide to Social Search, How Technology is Changing How
We Cook and Eat
• Discussion
January 24-31: Conceptualizations of the Internet as Participatory/Semantic/Connected
Readings:
• Read: Jenkins, Henry. (2006.) Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media
Education for the 21st Century, Available at: http://www.digitallearning.macfound.org/
• Read: Berners-Lee, Hendler, & Lassila (2001). The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284(5),
34-44.
• Watch: Tim Berners-Lee: “Linked Data” TED Talk (Long Beach, CA 2009):
http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_berners_lee_on_the_next_web.html?embed=true
• Watch: Tim Berners-Lee: 2010 TED talk update:
http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_berners_lee_the_year_open_data_went_worldwide.html
• Read: Wong, T. (2013). Meeting needs: Are you connected? School Library Monthly, 29(8), 3334.
• Read: Connected Educator Profiles at http://connectededucators.org/innovations/connectededucator-profiles/
January 31-February 7: A Decade+ Ago: The World Wide Web and Teaching and Learning
Reading:
• Read: Owston, R. D. (1997). The World Wide Web: A Technology to Enhance Teaching and
Learning? Educational Researcher, 26(2), 27-33.
• Read: Windschitl, M. (1998). The WWW and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take?
Educational Researcher, 27(1), 28-33.
6
7. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
February 7- Feb 14: Web 2.0 and “Classroom Learning”
Due February 14: Participant in Internet project proposal
Readings:
• Read: Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in
a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? . Educational
Researcher, 38(4), 246-259.
• Read: Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher
education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review, 9, 47-64.
February 14 – Feb 21: Frameworks: Learning/Teaching with the Internet
Due February 14: Participant in Internet project proposal
Readings:
• Read: Wallace, R. M. (2004). A Framework for Understanding Teaching With the Internet.
American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 447-488.
• Read: Donnelly, D., McGarr, O. & O’Reilly, J. (2011). A framework for teachers’ integration of
ICT into their classroom practice. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1469-1483.
•
February 21- Feb 28: New Literacies
Readings:
• Read: Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., & Henry, L. A. (2013). New literacies: A
dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In D. E.
Alvermann, N. J. Unrau & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading
(Vol. 6th, pp. 1150-1181). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
• Read: Alvermann, D. E., Hutchins, R. J., & McDevitt, R. (2012). Adolescents' Engagement with
Web 2.0 and Social Media: Research, Theory, and Practice. [Article]. Research in the Schools,
19(1), 33-44.
February 28- March 7: Focused Project Work
•
SXSWedu conference (optional)
March 7 -14: SPRING BREAK
March 14 - 21: What do new literacies look like in classrooms?
Readings:
• Read: Beach, R. (2012). Uses of Digital Tools and Literacies in the English Language Arts
Classroom. [Article]. Research in the Schools, 19(1), 45-59.
• Watch and Read: Schulten, K. (2013). What 'connected education' looks like: 28 examples from
all over. The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/what-connected-education-looks-like-28-examplesfrom-teachers-all-over/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
• Read: Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2010). Transformational play: Using
games to position person, content, and context. Educational Researcher, 39(7), 525-536.
7
8. Teaching and Learning with the Internet: Hughes
March 21 - March 28: Youth, Media, and the Internet: Are Youth Ready for This?
Readings:
• Read: Generation M2 Report, 2010 (Kaiser Foundation) – Available:
http://www.kff.org/entmedia/mh012010pkg.cfm
• Read: Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among
members of the "Net Generation". Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92-113.
• Read: Amanda Lenhart, Kristen Purcell, Aaron Smith, Kathryn Zickuhr (2010). Social media and
young adults. http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx
March 28 – April 4: Trends in Teacher Use of Web 2.0 Technologies: Are Teachers Ready for This?
•
Read: Selected Readings/Data from NCES, ECAR, PEW
April 4 – April 11: Learning from the AERA Conference
•
Special AERA Readings to be announced
April 11 – April 18: Teacher/Faculty Development for New Literacies and Web 2.0
Readings:
• Read: Krueger, K. (2013). 'Connected educators' spur connected learning. eSchool News, 16(9),
45. Available: http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/b124b13d#/b124b13d/45
• Review: Connected Educators Month: Getting Started http://connectededucators.org/cem/cemgetting-started/
• Read: Gentry, L. B., Denton, C. A., & Kurz, T. (2008). Technologically-based mentoring
provided to teachers: A synthesis of the literature. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,
16(3), 339-373.
• (Optional for Ph.D. Students) - Read: Dede et al. (2009). A Research Agenda for Online Teacher
Professional Development [Part of the special issue, Innovative uses of technology in teacher
education]. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 8-19.
April 18-April 25: Internet for Teaching and Learning – Distinguished Panels Discussion
•
Class members are grouped into expert panels for an interactive closing panel discussion.
April 25 – May 2: Project Presentations
Due May 4: Project Paper
•
Presentations of Internet Technology Participation, Analysis, and Projected Research Individual
“Poster” sessions
8