Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

It’s interesting to see the pendulum swinging the other way, and libraries wanting to go back to use-based/per-use charges. Harvard is recommending it for scholarly journal content.

It’s my understanding that the shift from per-use charges to flat charges was actually pushed by libraries (can anyone around then confirm this?).

Meanwhile, David Walker pointed out to me that the Copyright Clearance Center’s “Get It Now” service , which charges per-download for particulating publisher content, could be considered not just as an alternative to ILL, but as an alternative for libraries to flat rate “platform” licensing for scholarly content.

. While many of those scientists seek to discover general principles of learning, we all acknowledge that there are differences among students. Understanding these differences and applying that understanding in the classroom can improve everyone's education

First, whether we call it talent, ability, or intelligence, people vary in their capacity to learn different areas of content

Second, and often intertwined with ability, students differ in their interests. If a student loves the piano, or basketball, or chess, or the biology of frogs, that student will no doubt learn material related to that subject faster than another one who does not share that fascination.

The best teachers are not always, not even usually, those teachers with the most sophisticated content knowledge. The best teachers do know their material, but they also know a lot about the process

or many centuries, education has been focused on the learning of course content, but the learning styles of the students have been ignored .

global “platform” that has vastly expanded access to all sorts of resources, including formal and informal educational materials. The Internet has also fostered a new culture of sharing, one in which content is freely contributed and distributed with few restrictions or costs.

Web 2.0, has blurred the line between producers and consumers of content

the Web 2.0 is creating a new kind of participatory medium that is ideal for supporting multiple modes of learning

is needed is an approach that helps teachers learn how to choose, apply, evaluate and further develop different configurations of tools and artifacts - digital and otherwise - depending on their practice, their learners, the contexts they are in, and the nature of the subject they teach. If this sounds like teaching our teachers how to fish, it is. They should not be given a prescribed technology or the proverbial fish; instead, they must learn how to fish, or specifically to think through, critically choose or design and configure, learn and apply technologies that will best meet the teaching and learning needs that exist within their context. If this can be done, teachers can go beyond thinking of themselves as merely being passive consumers of technological tools and begin thinking of themselves as being designers or purposeful users of technology specifically to aid students' learning.

Koehler and Mishra (2007) explained that good teaching with technology for a given content is complex and multidimensional. It requires a nuanced understanding of how a combination of certain technologies and pedagogical technique can make learning of a particular content area more meaningful.

Key design considerations for creating activities and conditions tofacilitate socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation

The Enrichment Triad Model was designed to encourage creative productivity on the part of young people by exposing them to various topics, areas of interest, and fields of study, and to further train them to apply advanced content, process-training skills, and methodology training to self-selected areas of interest. Accordingly, three types of enrichment are included in the Triad Model (see Fig. 2). Type I enrichment is designed to expose students to a wide variety of disciplines, topics, occupations, hobbies, persons, places, and events that would not ordinarily be covered in the regular curriculum. In schools - that use this model, an enrichment team consisting of parents, teachers, and students often organizes and plans Type I experiences by contacting speakers, arranging minicourses, demonstrations, or performances, or by ordering and distributing films, slides, videotapes, or other print or non-print media. Figure 2. The enrichment triad model. [Click on the figure to see it as a PDF file.] Type II enrichment consists of materials and methods designed to promote the development of thinking and feeling processes. Some Type II training is general, and is usually carried out both in classrooms and in enrichment programs. Training activities include the development of. (1) creative thinking and problem solving, critical thinking, and affective processes; (2) a wide variety of specific learning how-to-learn skills; (3) skills in the appropriate use of advanced-level reference materials; and (4) written, oral, and visual communication skills. Other Type II enrichment is specific, as it cannot be planned in advance and usually involves advanced methodological instruction in an interest area selected by the student. For example, students who become interested in botany after a Type I experience might pursue additional training in this area by doing advanced reading in botany; compiling, planning and carrying out plant experiments; and seeking more advanced methods training if they want to go further. Type III enrichment involves students who become interested in pursuing a self-selected area and are willing to commit the time necessary for advanced content acquisition and process training in which they assume the role of a first-hand inquirer. The goals of Type III enrichment include: providing opportunities for applying interests, knowledge, creative ideas and task commitment to a self-selected problem or area of study, acquiring advanced level understanding of the knowledge (content) and methodology (process) that are used within particular disciplines, artistic areas of expression and interdisciplinary studies, developing authentic products that are primarily directed toward bringing about a desired impact upon a specified audience, developing self-directed learning skills in the areas of planning, organization, resource utilization, time management, decision making and self-evaluation, developing task commitment, self-confidence, and feelings of creative accomplishment.

student–student (SS), student–teacher (ST), or student–content (SC) interactions

A strong association is found between strength and achievement for asynchronous DE courses compared to courses containing mediated synchronous or face-to-face interaction

Traditional course management systems such as Blackboard, Moodle, or WebCT provide integrated solutions for faculty to post course content, assignments, and student grades.

They are often document-centered, allowing instructors to post PowerPoint slides, Word and PDF files, and other course content for students to access. In addition, many course management systems allow students to log in to check grades, submit assignments, or take exams electronically. The responsibility lies with the instructor to create the course content for students to download or access.  

The focus of this paper is teaching presence, which has been defined as “the design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile outcomes” (Garrison et al., 2000).

Instructor teaching presence is hypothesized to be an indicator of online instructional quality.  Empirical research has supported this view with evidence indicating strong correlations between the quality of teaching presence and student satisfaction and learning (Bangert, 2008; Picciano, 2002; Shea, Pickett, & Pelz, 2003)

First, there is a need to revisit two of the original three teaching presence elements.

learners are active participants orco-producers rather than passive consumers of conten

mphasises activeparticipation, connectivity, collaboration and sharing of knowledge and ideas among users

collaborative remixability – a transformative process in which the informationand media organised and shared by individuals can be recombined and built on to create new forms,concepts, ideas, mashups and services