Implementing
The practice of implementing tools for specific learners
This section of my ePortfolio focuses on the practice of user-based design and implementation.
When I began to design my ePortfolio, I struggled with the idea of Implementing as its own category. However, after some consideration, I concluded that while there is a lot of overlap between Designing, Implementing, and Analyzing, that Implementing did deserve its own place. That is why I used a Venn diagram for the basis of my portfolio; ideas have their own space, but they also share space with other ideas. While there is great joy and excitement in designing a new idea, the difficulty and skill comes to play in executing and implementing the idea. So implementing does involve design, but the practice of implementation specifically looks at the end user and carefully adjusts and caters the design to be successful for the learner that will be using the design, tool, or learning technique. Artifacts include:
0 Comments
Reflecting on the Development of an Online Learning Cafe
This project was completed in the course Constructivist Strategies for E-Learning (ETEC 530). As I discussed in my other artifact reflection for ETEC 530, this course was one of the most influential courses I took during my MET journey, because of the course's focus on knowledge creation (epistemology) and active, authentic learning. This was the only online research cafe that I developed within MET. Essentially an online research cafe works as a mini informal workshop where learners bring a topic into the cafe, and discuss the topics within the cafes that they sign up for. I created my cafe on Constructivism and Online Learning Feedback. Feedback is an important aspect of learning, but it can be hard to provide in online contexts, particularly elaboration feedback which is intended to help guide and scaffold learning. Click on the link below to view the cafe instructions and guidelines: https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec530constructivismandfeedbackresearchcafe/ Reflecting on critiquing and improving lessons
I completed this lesson plan critique in ETEC 512: Applications of Learning Theories to Instruction. ETEC 512 focused on varying learning theories and how to apply them to our own learning designs and techniques. As I also discuss in a reflection on the Designing page, ETEC 512 provided a good foundation for me in understanding the benefits and challenges of varying instructional methods. This assignment involved finding a "bad" lesson plan and critiquing it and improving it by utilizing learning theories. This is a assignment I have come back to throughout my whole MET journey. Having this artifact has allowed me to refresh my memory on constructivism (Glasersfeld, 2008), information processing (Orey, 2002), situated and distributed cognition (Brown et al., 1989), and the Zone of Proximal Development (John-Steiner and Mahn, 1996). For my critique I found a lesson plan on Inuit History and Inukshuk's for grade seven students from Historica Canada. The lesson plan was lacking information, there was some incorrect information, and it lacked organization. So I analyzed and redesigned the lesson plan using learning theories to help a potential instructor integrate the lesson into their teaching. |
ImplementingThe practice of implementing tools and strategies for specific users is an important skill of educational technologists. And being mindful of users is an important part of the PCK of TPCK as "PCK is concerned with the representation and formulation of concepts, pedagogical techniques, knowledge of what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn, knowledge of students' prior knowledge, and theories of epistemology" (Mishra & Koehler, 2006, p. 1027). Click here for Page References
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, S. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42. Cox, K., Franklin, M., Hagen, S., Handford, A., & Mauro, S. (2017). ETEC 500: Research Methodology in Education, research proposal assignment submission [Written PDF document]. Glasersfeld, E. Von. (2005). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers’ College Press, 21-25. Glasersfeld, E. Von. (2008). Learning as a Constructive Activity. AntiMatters, 2(3), 33-49. Handford, A. (2017). ETEC 530: Constructivist Strategies for E-Learning, assignment 1 submission [Written PDF document]. John-Steiner, V. & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework, Educational Psychologist, 31, 191-206. Kraemer, E. W., Lombardo, S. V., & Lepkowski, F. J. (2007). The librarian, the machine, or a little of both: A comparative study of three information literacy pedagogies at Oakland University. College & Research Libraries, 68(4), 330-342. Orey, M. (2002). Information Processing. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Pritchard, D. (2014). What is this thing called knowledge?. Routledge. Wang, Y., Han, X., & Yang, J. (2015). Revisiting the blended learning literature: Using a complex adaptive systems framework. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,18(2), 380-393. Categories
All
Archives |