Skip to main content

Home/ ETAP640/ Group items tagged academic integrity

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Erin Fontaine

Critical Thinking Development: A Stage Theory - 0 views

www.criticalthinking.org/...483

shared by Erin Fontaine on 29 Jun 12 - No Cached
  • We must recognize the importance of challenging our students — in a supportive way — to recognize both that they are thinkers and that their thinking often goes awry. We must lead class discussions about thinking. We must explicitly model thinking (e.g., thinking aloud through a problem). We must design classroom activities that explicitly require students to think about their thinking. We must have students examine both poor and sound thinking, talking about the differences. We must introduce students to the parts of thinking and the intellectual standards necessary to assess thinking. We must introduce the idea of intellectual humility to students; that is, the idea of becoming aware of our own ignorance. Perhaps children can best understand the importance of this idea through their concept of the "know-it-all," which comes closest to their recognition of the need to be intellectually humble.
    • Irene Watts-Politza
      Irene Watts-Politza on 29 Jun 12
       
      This is a great foundation for an icebreaker module.
  • recognize that they have basic problems in their thinking and make initial attempts to better understand how they can take charge of and improve it.
  • begin to modify some of their thinking, but have limited insight into deeper levels of the trouble inherent in their thinking. Most importantly, they lack a systematic plan for improving their thinking, hence their efforts are hit and miss.
  • ...40 more annotations...
  • appreciate a critique of their powers of thought.
  • we must teach in such a way as to help them to see that we all need to regularly practice good thinking to become good thinkers.
  • We must emphasize the importance of beginning to take charge of the parts of thinking and applying intellectual standards to thinking. We must teach students to begin to recognize their native egocentrism when it is operating in their thinking.
  • since practicing thinkers are only beginning to approach the improvement of their thinking in a systematic way, they still have limited insight into deeper levels of thought, and thus into deeper levels of the problems embedded in thinking.
  • need for systematic practice in thinking.
  • Practicing thinkers recognize the need for systematicity of critical thinking and deep internalization into habits. They clearly recognize the natural tendency of the human mind to engage in egocentric thinking and self-deception.
  • regularly monitor
  • articulate the strengths and weaknesses
  • often recognize their own egocentric thinking as well as egocentric thinking on the part of others. Furthermore practicing thinkers actively monitor their thinking to eliminate egocentric thinking, although they are often unsuccessful.
  • intellectual perseverance
  • have the intellectual humility required to realize that thinking in all the domains of their lives must be subject to scrutiny, as they begin to approach the improvement of their thinking in a systematic way.
  • We must teach in such a way that students come to understand the power in knowing that whenever humans reason, they have no choice but to use certain predictable structures of thought: that thinking is inevitably driven by the questions, that we seek answers to questions for some purpose, that to answer questions, we need information, that to use information we must interpret it (i.e., by making inferences), and that our inferences, in turn, are based on assumptions, and have implications, all of which involves ideas or concepts within some point of view. We must teach in such a way as to require students to regularly deal explicitly with these structures (more on these structure presently).
  • Recognizing the "moves" one makes in thinking well is an essential part of becoming a practicing thinker.
  • Students should be encouraged to routinely catch themselves thinking both egocentrically and sociocentrically.
  • advanced thinkers not only actively analyze their thinking in all the significant domains of their lives, but also have significant insight into problems at deeper levels of thought. While advanced thinkers are able to think well across the important dimensions of their lives, they are not yet able to think at a consistently high level across all of these dimensions. Advanced thinkers have good general command over their egocentric nature. They continually strive to be fair-minded. Of course, they sometimes lapse into egocentrism and reason in a one-sided way.
  • develop depth of understanding
  • nsight into deep levels of problems in thought: consistent recognition, for example, of egocentric and sociocentric thought in one’s thinking, ability to identify areas of significant ignorance and prejudice, and ability to actually develop new fundamental habits of thought based on deep values to which one has committed oneself.
    • Irene Watts-Politza
      Irene Watts-Politza on 29 Jun 12
       
      What do YOU believe in? How and why do you believe it?
  • successfully engaged in systematically monitoring the role in their thinking of concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc., and hence have excellent knowledge of that enterprise. Advanced thinkers are also knowledgeable of what it takes to regularly assess their thinking for clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc.
  • critique their own plan for systematic practice, and improve it thereby.
  • articulate the strengths and weaknesses in their thinking.
  • reduce the power of their egocentric thoughts.
  • a) the intellectual insight and perseverance to actually develop new fundamental habits of thought based on deep values to which one has committed oneself, b) the intellectual integrity to recognize areas of inconsistency and contradiction in one’s life, c) the intellectual empathy necessary to put oneself in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them, d) the intellectual courage to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs, or viewpoints toward which one has strong negative emotions, e) the fair-mindedness necessary to approach all viewpoints without prejudice, without reference to one’s own feelings or vested interests. In the advanced thinker these traits are emerging, but may not be manifested at the highest level or in the deepest dimensions of thought.
  • our students will not become advanced thinkers — if at all — until college or beyond. Nevertheless, it is important that they learn what it would be to become an advanced thinker. It is important that they see it as an important goal. We can help students move in this direction by fostering their awareness of egocentrism and sociocentrism in their thinking, by leading discussions on intellectual perseverance, intellectual integrity, intellectual empathy, intellectual courage, and fair-mindedness. If we can graduate students who are practicing thinkers, we will have achieved a major break-through in schooling. However intelligent our graduates may be, most of them are largely unreflective as thinkers, and are unaware of the disciplined habits of thought they need to develop to grow intellectually as a thinker.
  • have systematically taken charge of their thinking, but are also continually monitoring, revising, and re-thinking strategies for continual improvement of their thinking. They have deeply internalized the basic skills of thought, so that critical thinking is, for them, both conscious and highly intuitive.
  • As Piaget would put it, they regularly raise their thinking to the level of conscious realization.
  • Accomplished thinkers are deeply committed to fair-minded thinking, and have a high level of, but not perfect, control over their egocentric nature.
  • To make the highest levels of critical thinking intuitive in every domain of one’s life. To internalize highly effective critical thinking in an interdisciplinary and practical way.
  • Accomplished thinkers are not only actively and successfully engaged in systematically monitoring the role in their thinking of concepts, assumptions, inferences, implications, points of view, etc., but are also regularly improving that practice. Accomplished thinkers have not only a high degree of knowledge of thinking, but a high degree of practical insight as well. Accomplished thinkers intuitively assess their thinking for clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, logicalness, etc. Accomplished thinkers have deep insights into the systematic internalization of critical thinking into their habits. Accomplished thinkers deeply understand the role that egocentric and sociocentric thinking plays in the lives of human beings, as well as the complex relationship between thoughts, emotions, drives and behavior.
  • Naturally inherent in master thinkers are all the essential intellectual characteristics, deeply integrated. Accomplished thinkers have a high degree of intellectual humility, intellectual integrity, intellectual perseverance, intellectual courage, intellectual empathy, intellectual autonomy, intellectual responsibility and fair-mindedness. Egocentric and sociocentric thought is quite uncommon in the accomplished thinker, especially with respect to matters of importance. There is a high degree of integration of basic values, beliefs, desires, emotions, and action.
  • For the foreseeable future the vast majority of our students will never become accomplished thinkers 
  • important that they learn what it would be to become an accomplished thinker. It is important that they see it as a real possibility, if practicing skills of thinking becomes a characteristic of how they use their minds day to day.
  • Thus it is vital that an intellectual vocabulary for talking about the mind be established for teachers; and that teachers lead discussions in class designed to teach students, from the point of view of intellectual quality, how their minds work, including how they can improve as thinkers.
  • in elementary school an essential objective would be that students become "beginning" thinkers, that is, that they will be taught so that they discover that they are thinkers and that their thinking, like a house, can be well or poorly constructed. This "discovery" stage--the coming to awareness that all of us are thinkers--needs to be given the highest priority. Middle school and High School, on this model, would aim at helping all students become, at least, "practicing" thinkers. Of course, students discover thinking only by discovering that thinking has "parts." Like learning what "Legos" are, we learn as we come to discover that there are various parts to thinking and those parts can be put together in various ways. Unlike Legos, of course, thinking well requires that we learn to check how the parts of thinking are working together to make sure they are working properly: For example, have we checked the accuracy of information? Have we clarified the question?
  • We are not advocating here that teachers withdraw from academic content. Rather we are suggesting that critical thinking provides a way of deeply embracing content intellectually. Within this view students come to take intellectual command of how they think, act, and react while they are learning...history, biology, geography, literature, etc., how they think, act, and react as a reader, writer, speaker, and listener, how they think, act, and react as a student, brother, friend, child, shopper, consumer of the media, etc.
  • to effectively learn any subject in an intellectually meaningful way presupposes a certain level of command over one’s thinking, which in turn presupposes understanding of the mind’s processes.
  • Thinking is inevitably driven by the questions we seek to answer, and those questions we seek to answer for some purpose. To answer questions, we need information which is in fact meaningful to us only if we interpret it (i.e., by making inferences). Our inferences, in turn, are based on assumptions and require that we use ideas or concepts to organize the information in some way from some point of view. Last but not least, our thinking not only begins somewhere intellectually (in certain assumptions), it also goes somewhere---that is, has implications and consequences.
  • Thus whenever we reason through any problem, issue, or content we are well advised to take command of these intellectual structures: purpose, question, information, inferences, assumptions, concepts, point of view, and implications. By explicitly teaching students how to take command of the elements of reasoning we not only help them take command of their thinking in a general way; we also provide a vehicle which effectively enables them to critically think through the content of their classes, seeing connections between all of what they are learning.
  • if I am to develop my critical thinking ability I must both "discover" my thinking and must intellectually take charge of it. To do this I must make a deep commitment to this end.
  • the human mind, left to its own, pursues that which is immediately easy, that which is comfortable, and that which serves its selfish interests. At the same time, it naturally resists that which is difficult to understand, that which involves complexity, that which requires entering the thinking and predicaments of others.
  • When we learn together as developing thinkers, when we all of us seek to raise our thinking to the next level, and then to the next after that, everyone benefits, and schooling then becomes what it was meant to be, a place to discover the power of lifelong learning. This should be a central goal for all our students--irrespective of their favored mode of intelligence or learning style. It is in all of our interest to accept the challenge: to begin, to practice, to advance as thinkers.
Diane Gusa

E-Coaching Tip 25: Discussion Wraps - A Useful "Cognitive Pattern" or "Collection of Di... - 0 views

www.designingforlearning.info/...tip25.html

E-Coaching tip discussion wraps module 4 assignment cognitive presence online courses

shared by Diane Gusa on 06 Jul 11 - No Cached
  • Here are some roles/tasks that are pertinent for online weekly discussion groups. Information and opinion giver. Offers facts, opinions, ideas, suggestions, and relevant information to help group discussion. Information and opinion seeker. Asks for facts, opinions, ideas, suggestions, and relevant information to help group discussion. Summarizer. Pulls together related ideas or suggestions and restates and summarizes main point discussed. Coordinator. Shows relationships among various ideas by pulling them together and harmonizes activities of various subgroups and members. Diagnoser. Figures out sources of difficulties the group has in working effectively and the blocks to progress in accomplishing the group's goals. Reality tester. Examines the practicality and workability of ideas, evaluates alternative solutions, and applies them to real situations to see how they will work.
  • "Each of us has a typical way of acting in a group. Some people like to lead, some act to keep the group focused on the task and some serve to keep the group from taking itself too seriously." (Svinski, 2006
  • Mayer et al. (1996), showed not only that students remember more of the important material when it is presented as a summary but that they also better understand the material.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • Svinicki, M. (2006). "The Discussion Class: Interaction Functions." from <www.utexas.edu/academic/diia/gsi/coursedesign/interaction.php> Accessed on 10-20-06.
  • Schallert explains why she uses the technique of creating a separate word document for weekly summaries. <www.utexas.edu/academic/blackboard/examples/videos/schallert_02.html>
  • Create a closing discussion thread labeled "Summary," "Wrap-up" "Key Ideas"
  • Create a separate word document that encapsulates the key postings of the week integrating these statements with the key conceptst
  • Create a group summary be asking each student to identify the key concept for t
    • Diane Gusa
      Diane Gusa on 06 Jul 11
       
      I do this in my weekly essay assignment.
    • Diane Gusa
      Diane Gusa on 06 Jul 11
       
      I guess this is the role I access the most in my posts.
J Robin Ward

Preparing Instructors for Quality Online Instruction - 1 views

www.westga.edu/...yang81.htm

shared by J Robin Ward on 12 Jun 10 - Cached
  • The major concerns are centering on the following questions: What will be the new role for instructors in online education? How will students' learning outcomes be assured and improved in online learning environment? How will effective communication and interaction be established with students in the absence of face-to-face instruction? How will instructors motivate students to learn in the online learning environment?
  • Instructors have many concerns about online education. Their primary concern is how online education changes their roles and responsibilities, and how they can adapt to this change. Online education is widely accepted as student-centered education, and the traditional education is regarded as professor-centered education. Due to a shift to online education, the instructor's role has become more of a facilitator than a traditional lecturer. Therefore, the traditional professor-centered educational environment and student-centered online educational environment will have many differences. Besides their role shifting, the role of the virtual instructor is to select and filter information for student consideration, to provide thought-provoking questions, and to facilitate well-considered discussion (Kettner-Polley, 1999).
  • Clark (2002) pointed out that online learner must be a constructivist learner. This suggests that the learner must be active in the process, cognitively complex and motivated. According to Clark , motivating factors in the learning process include self-reference, personal goals, control and autonomy . Howland & Moore's (2002) study examined 48 students' experiences in online environments. Their results confirmed that the students who were the most positive in their perceptions of online learning were those with attributes consistent with constructivist learners. The most positive students were more independent, proactive and responsible for their learning.
  • ...14 more annotations...
  • Alley and Jansak (2001) have also identified 10 keys to quality online learning. The authors suggested that online courses will be high quality when they are student-centered and when: Knowledge is constructed, not transmitted. Students can take full responsibility for their own learning. Students are motivated to want to learn. The course provides “mental white space” for reflection. Learning activities appropriately match student learning styles. Experiential, active learning augments the Web site learning environment, Solitary and interpersonal learning activities are interspersed. Inaccurate prior learning is identified and corrected. “Spiral learning” provides for revisiting and expanding prior lessons, The master teacher is able to guide the overall learning process. (p. 6-17)
  • nstructors may lack sufficient information on how well learners actually perform
  • how to appropriately use technology to serve an instructional purpose tends
  • they have to face the challenge of lack of direct interpersonal contact with students
  • the instructor to motivate students to adjust their roles when becoming an online learner
  • Since face to face instruction is usually eliminated in online classes, i
  • While arguments have been made in opposition to online education, there are proponents who are in support of this mode of instruction. They suggest that the lack of face-to-face interaction can be substituted by online discussions in bulletin board systems, online video conferences or on listservs (Blake, 2000). Online education can also promote students' critical thinking skills, deep learning, collaborative learning, and problem-solving skills (Ascough, 2002; Rosie, 2000). Donlevy (2003) asserted that online education may help schools expand curricula offerings with less cost and can help graduates gain important technology skills to improve their marketability. Proponents also argue that online education can encourage non-discriminatory teaching and learning practices since the teachers and students, as well as students and their classmates typically do not meet face-to-face. Palloff and Pratt (1999) have concluded that because students cannot tell the race, gender, physical characteristics of each other and their teachers, online education presents a bias-free teaching and learning environment for instructors and students.
  • academic dishonesty of online learners (Muirhead, 2000)
    • J Robin Ward
      J Robin Ward on 02 Jun 14
       
      This is one of the topics I expressed interest in -- need to take a look at the source.
  • several factors that may deter faculty from teaching online.
  • lack of professional prestige
    • J Robin Ward
      J Robin Ward on 02 Jun 14
       
      Similar to Rogers 2003.
  • While many critics have suggested that there is no sure way to hold students accountable for academic dishonesty, Heberling (2002) concluded that while maintaining academic integrity in the online instructional setting may be a challenging, many strategies may be employed to detect and prevent plagiarism, such as reversing an Internet search, tracking back to an original source.
  • 10 keys to quality online learning
  • Knowledge is constructed, not transmitted. Students can take full responsibility for their own learning. Students are motivated to want to learn. The course provides “mental white space” for reflection. Learning activities appropriately match student learning styles. Experiential, active learning augments the Web site learning environment, Solitary and interpersonal learning activities are interspersed. Inaccurate prior learning is identified and corrected. “Spiral learning” provides for revisiting and expanding prior lessons, The master teacher is able to guide the overall learning process. (p. 6-17)
  • Alley and Jansak (2001)
Joan McCabe

Assessment Design and Cheating Risk in Online Instruction - 0 views

www.westga.edu/...on_lambrinos_buffolino133.html

assessment cheating proctored exams

shared by Joan McCabe on 21 Jun 12 - No Cached
  • It would be a mistake to minimize the problem of cheating in f2f classes. Four stylized facts emerge from a survey of the literature on cheating in f2f undergraduate courses. First, cheating by college students is considered widespread (McCabe and Drinan 1999). For example, estimates from five studies of college students reporting having cheated at least once during their college career range from 65% to 100% (Stearns 2001), and Whitley (1998) reports an average of 70% from a review of forty-six studies.   Second, cheating by college students is becoming more rather than less of a problem. Estimates from five studies of the percentage of college students cheating at least once in their college career have been steadily rising over the period 1940 to 2000 (Jensen, Arnett et al. 2002). A study administered in 1964 and replicated in 1994 focused on the incidence of serious cheating behaviors (McCabe, Trevion et al. 2001). This study reported that the incidence of serious cheating on written assignments was unchanged at 65-66%, but the incidence of serious cheating on exams increased from 39% to 64%.  Third, the format of assessment is correlated with cheating. Whitley (1998) reviewed 107 studies of cheating by students over the span of their college courses (published since 1970), and reported that from 10 studies a mean estimate of 47% for cheating by plagiarism, from 37 studies a mean estimate of 43% for cheating on exams, and from 13 studies a mean estimate of 41% for cheating on homework. Fourth, student characteristics of age and GPA are negatively correlated with cheating.  Whitley (1998) reviewed 107 studies on college cheating (published since 1970), and found 16 studies reporting a small negative correlation between GPA and cheating and 10 studies reporting a negative correlation between age and cheating.
  • In the growing literature about online instruction there are two opposing views on the integrity of assessments. One view is that cheating is as equally likely to occur in the f2f format as in the online format of instruction.
  • The alternative view is that proctored exams are the only way to protect the integrity of grades by guaranteeing both that a substitute is not taking the exam and that students are not working together on an exam.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Summary and Conclusions This study reports three principle findings.  First, from a survey of student opinion it is reported that 59% believe that the frequency of cheating is the same in both the online and the f2f instructional format. The proportion is significantly greater than 50% at the .05 level. It is also reported that the responses to the question of cheating and instructional format are significantly different depending on whether the student came from an online class or a f2f class, but only at a p-value of .1060.  Recalling the literature review in Table 1, which reported mixed findings by previous empirical studies, an interesting implication for future research is whether student experience with each instructional format influences student perceptions of differences in the frequency of cheating. Second, on proctoring and the frequency of cheating on essay exams and multiple choice exams, it is reported that roughly half of the respondents perceive unproctored assessments as having greater cheating risk than the same assessment in a proctored format, and half think they have equal cheating risk. These findings are consistent with the conventional perception that in a side by side comparison of two courses with comparable content and predominately multiple choice exam assessments, the course with unproctored exams is viewed as having greater cheating risk. Third, in our analysis of assessment design in 20 online courses it is reported that 70% base roughly half the course grade on unproctored multiple choice exams.     These findings imply that online courses, which have unproctored multiple choice exams, can reduce perceived cheating risk by proctoring some of their multiple choice exams without significantly altering the original mix of assessment types. Gresham’s Law suggests that online courses debased by assessment designs with high cheating risk will displace courses with relatively lower cheating risk. Institutions of higher education tone deaf to the issue of proctoring online multiple choice assessments may understandably find other institutions reluctant to accept these courses for transfer credit.  The benefit of proctoring is not without cost.  A proctored exam limits the spatial and the asynchronous dimensions of online instruction, which may have been the core reason the student enrolled in the online. These costs can be mitigated to some extent by early announcement of the time and date of the exam, by allowing for some flexibility of time of exam, and by permitting use of alternate certified proctoring centers. The costs to individual instructors are formidable but there are potentially significant economies of scale to be realized by integration of online courses with an existing system that administers proctoring of exams for f2f classes.  Proctoring of some multiple choice exam assessments will reduce cheating risk. The elephant in the room, however, is the cheating risk on non-exam unproctored assessments (for example term papers, essays, discussion, and group projects). These are widely used in f2f instruction and, as online instruction evolves, will likely become equally widely used in online courses. These assessments are valuable because they encourage learning by student-to-student and student-to-faculty interactions, and because they measure Bloom’s higher levels of learning. These assessments have higher cheating risk than proctored multiple choice exams. These assessments, more so than multiple choice exams, challenge the ability of faculty and administration to inspire students to behave ethically and to refrain from academic misconduct.
  • Joan McCabe on 21 Jun 12
     
    Two views on online assessment. Student and teacher opinions on online assessment. How to reduce cheating.
Heather Kurto

http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/submission/index.php/AJET/article/viewFile/157/55 - 0 views

www.ascilite.org.au/...55

Web 2.0 teachers

shared by Heather Kurto on 07 Jun 13 - No Cached
    • Heather Kurto
      Heather Kurto on 07 Jun 13
       
      Web 2.0 has driven pedagogy so that teachers need to know, not only how to use the Web 2.0 tools for personal purposes but how to use them to support and enhance their students' learning
    • Heather Kurto
      Heather Kurto on 07 Jun 13
       
      Over the last few years, Web 2.0 applications, and especially blogs, wikis, e-portfolios, social media, podcasting, social networking etc., have received intense and growing educational interest, with uses including diverse learning groups, from primary and secondary education (Tse, Yuen, Loh, Lam, & Ng, 2010, Sheehy, 2008; Woo, Chu, Ho, & Li, 2011; Angelaina & Jimoyiannis, 2011) to higher education (Bolliger & Shepherd, 2010; Ching & Hsu, 2011; Deng & Yuen, 2011; Roussinos & Jimoyiannis, 2011; Yang, 2009; Zorko, 2009), vocational training (Marsden & Piggot-Irvine, 2012) and teachers' professional development (Doherty, 2011; Wheeler, & Wheeler, 2009; Wopereis, Sloep, & Poortman , 2010).
    • Heather Kurto
      Heather Kurto on 07 Jun 13
       
      Existing literature, regarding the integration of ICT in schools, shows that despite governmental efforts and directives, the application of ICT in educational settings is rather peripheral acting, in most cases, as an 'add on' effect to regular teacher-centred classroom work. It remains a common practice, for most teachers, to use ICT primarily for low-level formal academic tasks (e.g., getting information from Web resources) or for administrative purposes (developing lesson plans, worksheets, assessment tests, etc.) rather than as a learning tool to support students' active learning (OFSTED, 2004; Jimoyiannis & Komis, 2007; Tondeur, van Keer, van Braak, & Valcke , 2008).
  • ...1 more annotation...
    • Heather Kurto
      Heather Kurto on 07 Jun 13
       
      The theoretical framework presented and the empirical research phase of the paper addressed some of the critical issues arising around Web 2.0 in school practice. TPACK 2.0 and authentic learning can develop and support a coherent pedagogical and instructional framework for future teacher professional development programs aiming to help educators: * to adopt Web 2.0 not as a matter of acquiring new ICT skills but in terms ofspecific pedagogical and instructional dimensions; * to move beyond oversimplified approaches which treat Web 2.0 as a 'trend', a 'special event' or an 'extra tool'supplemental to their traditional instruction; * to understand how Web 2.0 technologies change both pedagogy and learning practice; * to consider, in their instructional design, Web 2.0 technologies, Content and Pedagogy not in isolation, but in the complex relationshipssystem they define.
efleonhardt

Development and validation of the Online Student Connectedness Survey (OSCS) | Bolliger... - 0 views

www.irrodl.org/...2206

development validation distance learning community

shared by efleonhardt on 22 Jun 14 - No Cached
  • e socially and academically integrated in order to provide meaningful learning experiences
  • “relationships with cohorts”
  • hat interaction between peers is important to online students and suggests that “the psychological presence of peer students can also bring a positive effect on various aspects of distance learning”
  • ...13 more annotations...
  • id not participate as often in departmental activities as residential students,
  • “people with high levels of connectedness are better able to manage their own needs and emotions through cognitive processes”
  • that student isolation is one of the major problems for online learners
  • Connectedness is the sense of belonging and acceptance
  • are on their own, likely to be anxious, defensive and unwilling to take the risks involved in learning”
  • can reduce student dropout rates and “can help meet the quality challenge”
  • groups of people engaged in intellectual interaction for the purpose of learning”
  • perceives the availability of, and connectedness with, people in his/her educational setting”
  • social, teaching, and cognitive
  • learners’ levels of motivation and satisfaction.
  • work together collaboratively can reduce levels of student isolation
  • artments and instructors need to create safe learning environments (Stelzer & Vogelzangs, 1994) in which learners feel comfortable and are encouraged to participate without fear of persecution.
  • they are more likely to limit their interactions with an instructor and peers or less likely to ask for support
Michael Lucatorto

Using collaborative course development to achieve online course quality standards | Cha... - 1 views

www.irrodl.org/...1644

shared by Michael Lucatorto on 06 Jun 11 - No Cached
  • The common practice of systematic design, such as the ADDIE model, simply did not fit well with the academic culture (Moore & Kearsley, 2004; Magnussen, 2005). Over the past two decades, instructional designers in higher education have needed to redefine their role and practice. The role of a change agent emerged as instructional designers worked side by side with faculty to rethink their teaching in order to integrate technology into course design and delivery (Campbell, Schwier, & Kenny, 2007). Not only do instructional designers play the role of advisers to faculty and department on issues of curriculum and course quality, they also play a vital role in faculty development and institutional change when it comes to researching and implementing new learning technologies. Undoubtedly, instructional designers in higher education need to modify their approach and design models to fulfill their widening role and to make meaningful contributions. New design prototypes have evolved through field experience in higher education (Power, 2009), and role-based design has been proposed to transform the field of instructional design (Hokanson, Miller, & Hooper, 2008).
  • There was strong agreement among participants that the guidelines are more helpful for new and less-experienced faculty members.
efleonhardt

What is Interdisciplinary Teaching? - 0 views

serc.carleton.edu/...what.html

interdisciplinary teaching

shared by efleonhardt on 01 Jun 14 - No Cached
  • Interdisciplinary instruction entails the use and integration of methods and analytical frameworks from more than one academic discipline to examine a theme, issue, question or topic.
1 - 9 of 9
Showing 20▼ items per page