Group items tagged

"Censorship in the classroom: Understanding controversial issues\n\nhttp://www.readwritethink.org/lessons/lesson_view.asp?id=203\n\nA lesson plan for grades 9-12 English Language Arts and Information Skills\nLearn more\n\n * Learn more about banned books, biases, censorship, language arts, media, persuasive writing, propaganda, reading, stereotypes, and writing.\n\nHelp\n\nPlease read our disclaimer for lesson plans.\nLegal\n\nPrint\n\n * Print\n\nShare\n\n * Email\n * Delicious Delicious\n * Digg Digg\n * Facebook Facebook\n * StumbleUpon StumbleUpon\n\nIt is important for young people to understand their individual rights and what they, as citizens, can do to protect these rights. In addition, young people need to understand the way in which bias and stereotyping are used by the media to influence popular opinion. In this ReadWriteThink lesson, students examine propaganda and media bias and explore a variety of banned and challenged books, researching the reasons these books have been censored. Following this research, students choose a side of the censorship issue and support their position through the development of an advertising campaign.\nNorth Carolina Curriculum Alignment\nEnglish Language Arts (2004)\nGrade 9\n\n * Goal 3: The learner will examine argumentation and develop informed opinions.\n o Objective 3.01: Study argument by:\n + examining relevant reasons and evidence.\n + noting the progression of ideas that substantiate the proposal.\n + analyzing style, tone, and use of language for a particular effect.\n + identifying and analyzing personal, social, historical, or cultural influences contexts, or biases.\n + identifying and analyzing rhetorical strategies that support proposals.\n\nGrade 10\n\n * Goal 3: The learner will defend argumentative positions on literary or nonliterary issues.\n o Objective 3.01: Examine controversial is

This sources is a brief introduction to education 3.0. It outlines the meaning of education 3.0, compares it to 1.0 and 2.0, and gives additional resources for more information.

Web 2.0 is when you interact with the internet, like I am doing right now. Diigo is an example of web 2.0 tools. Web 3.0 is when the internet interacts with you. For example, Google has all this data on you that when you search for something you get different search results than others who do the same search.

This Wired article was about how Education 3.0 can be most effectively leveraged if educators have a good understanding on how the brain learns. Keeping in mind what learners care about, giving them the ability to place their learning in context, and allowing students to identify patterns of knowledge (think making connections in neural pathways) all can expand upon the the experience of learners in a course.

This video talks about the 3 Big Ideas we want to have in a PLN for educators

This video talks about the 3 Big Ideas we want to have in a PLN for educators

This is a more technical site that better describes CoPs.  It talks about what a CoP is and what the requirements are.  I particularly like that the it states that the learning is not necessarily the primary reason for the existence of a CoP.  It also gives some sources for further study.

This article is an outline of Communities of Practice with description of relevant terminology outlined and defined. Identifies the three components of CoPs - domain, community and practice. This article says that the central component of this learning theory is to draw participants deeper into the community through the attractiveness of developing skills relative to the domain.

This one I didn't summarize, only because I really had a hard time grasping the three elements of the CoP, and I thought this site encapsulated it nicely. Incidentally, my creative assignment for this week was inspired by the reference to Star Trek fans in this post. Here are the three elements make up CoP, and again, this information below is taken straight from the source (long quotes), because the definition is so good: 1. There needs to be a domain. A CoP has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest (e.g. radiologists, Star Trek fans, middle school history teachers, Seahawks football fans, etc.); it's not just a network of people or club of friends. Membership implies a commitment to the domain. 2. There needs to be a community. A necessary component is that members of a specific domain interact and engage in shared activities, help each other, and share information with each other. They build relationships that enable them to learn from each other. In this way, merely sharing the same job does not necessitate a CoP. A static website on hunting in itself is not a community of practice. There needs to be people who interact and learn together in order for a CoP to be formed. Note that members do not necessarily work together daily, however. Wenger points to the example of Impressionist painters who sometimes met in cafes to discuss their painting styles. He indicates that even though these men normally painted alone, these kinds of interactions were essential to making them a CoP. 3. There needs to be a practice: A CoP is not just people who have an interest in something (e.g. sports or agriculture practices). The third requirement for a CoP is that the members are practitioners. They develop a shared repertoire of resources which can include stories, helpful tools, experiences, stories, ways of handling typical problems, etc. This kind of interaction needs to be developed over time. A conversation with a random stranger who happens to be an exp

This is one of my favorite websites to discover and explore new tech tools. There are a number of Web 2.0 tools, apps, game websites, etc. that are useful to teachers at any level. Many of the resources shared on the 3 Tech Ninjas site have been put into regular use in my classroom!

Research regarding the benefits of being a member of a community of practice. While the information seems a bit forced (the communities of practice used for the study were exclusively face-to-face communities), the benefits of being a member of a community of practice still seem valid. According to the study, they are (1) autonomy and freedom to think beyond, (2) sources to ideas, (3) sounding board, (4) intellectual discussion, (5) like-mindedness, (6) alternative perspective and cross-pollination of ideas, (7) overcoming intellectual isolation, (8) move towards collaborative research, (9) response to research pressure, (10) synergy and leverage, (11) time and energy saving, (12) an informal ground for learning and training, (13) fostering of tangible returns, (14) driving research, (15) opportunities to met, (16) networking, information sharing and updates, (17) support and guidance, (18) sense of belonging, (19) identity, and (20) intrinsic fulfillment. As the article is about higher education, there are certainly some benefits that are more specific to their context, but I think the findings of the article are still valid.

Research regarding the benefits of being a member of a community of practice. While the information seems a bit forced (the communities of practice used for the study were exclusively face-to-face communities), the benefits of being a member of a community of practice still seem valid. According to the study, they are (1) autonomy and freedom to think beyond, (2) sources to ideas, (3) sounding board, (4) intellectual discussion, (5) like-mindedness, (6) alternative perspective and cross-pollination of ideas, (7) overcoming intellectual isolation, (8) move towards collaborative research, (9) response to research pressure, (10) synergy and leverage, (11) time and energy saving, (12) an informal ground for learning and training, (13) fostering of tangible returns, (14) driving research, (15) opportunities to met, (16) networking, information sharing and updates, (17) support and guidance, (18) sense of belonging, (19) identity, and (20) intrinsic fulfillment. As the article is about higher education, there are certainly some benefits that are more specific to their context, but I think the findings of the article are still valid.

Throughout this website, Etienne Wenger describes Communities of Practice as "groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly." It strongly conveys the importance of working together and emphasizes teamwork as a vital component for success. I could not agree more.

This short summary did a really good job of making this concept simple to understand. It explains that you need three things for a COP: a domain, a community and practice. Great short explanation

This article is an overview of CoPs. The highlight for me is that it must be a collaboration over time, not a one-time Professional Development.

This Flat Classroom project brings together Grades 3-5 to explore similarities and differences in their lives and cultures. Using Edmodo, Wikispaces, VoiceThread, and other online multimedia tools, it helps students learn, connect, share, and create.

Here is my Positive digital Footprint assignment for module 3. It is on Google Drive as it is one of the few acceptable sharing sites that my district allows.

Summary: The authors of this article clearly prove that a learner who is in control of h/her own learning will benefit the most, especially if h/she designs and navigates h/her own network. A learner will learn whether the connection is strong or weak as long as h/she has: 1) a choice in what network is joined, 2) a true passion or interest, and 3) a flexible method of communication (could be in person or via technology).

This clearly follows the belief that personalized learning is beneficial to the learner. By getting to create your PLN you are strategically picking who to network with and the topics you want to be involved in.

In this article, the discussion of personal learning networks surrounds working professionals and how they manage their professional network. The article presents a model of personal professional networking with the goal of creating a personal learning network.

This is my second unusual reference but well worth it. Chapter 3 provides the reader with a research article that considers the value of the PLEF Personal Learning Environment Format when implementing personalized mashups to increase collaborative learning. This peer reviewed article provides a Connectivist theoretically based argument for engaging dynamic virtual and network learning in lifelong, informal and personalized learning environments.

The "community of practice" is defined and there are examples. The characteristics are the domain, the community, and the practice. There are examples given and explanation of where the concept came from and where it is being applied.

Great article on Community of Practice. It is defined and there are examples listed. Its very basic.

Wegner describes three important criteria for a community of practice, the domain, the community, and the practice. When the three criteria are combined, it creates the basis of a community of practice where interaction takes place and participants gain knowledge on a topic/topics.

here are my strategies to develop a positive digital footprint!

This article focuses on the role of personal learning environments in higher education. I particularly appreciated the description of the PLE in the article. Pointing out what it offers that Learning Management Systems do not, the PLE is explained as the future of education where the student takes control and responsibility from the reigns of the institution. It also suggests that PLEs have staying power in education due to the fact that they are not wrapped up with a specific technology, rather they have the ability to adapt and change as technology around us continues to do so. The author discusses how students should be given challenging situations rather than ridged assignments. The article finishes with an example where this idea was implemented in an online learning environment. Väljataga, T. (2010). Learner control and personal learning environment: a challenge for instructional design. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(3), 277-291.