So much for that bipartisan Senate bid to prevent the FBI from gaining expanded hacking powers. Senators Ron Wyden, Chris Coons and Steve Daines have failed to block changes to the US’ criminal procedure rules (specifically, Rule 41) that would let the FBI hack computers in any jurisdiction provided they have a search warrant. Texas Senator John Cornyn and other Republican leaders thwarted the measure. The rule change should take effect on December 1st, barring surprises.
Sahlberg, an education scholar and the author of Finnish Lessons 2.0, answers the theoretical question in his article’s title, writing in part: “I argue that if there were any gains in student achievement they would be marginal. Why? Education policies in Indiana and many other states in the United States create a context for teaching that limits (Finnish) teachers to use their skills, wisdom and shared knowledge for the good of their students’ learning.”
++++++++++++++++++++++
more about Finland Phenomenon in this IMS blog
Weiler, A. (2005). Information-Seeking Behavior in Generation Y Students: Motivation, Critical Thinking, and Learning Theory. Journal Of Academic Librarianship, 31(1), 46-53.
The research indicates that only a very small percentage of the general population prefer to learn by reading.
members of “Generation Y,” the generation born between 1980 and 1994.
The first model for study of information-seeking behavior in the general population was developed by James Krikelas in 1983. This model suggested that the steps of information seeking were as follows: (1) perceiving a need, (2) the search itself, (3) finding the information, and (4) using the information, which results in either satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
A second model developed by Carol C. Kuhlthau of Rutgers University stresses a process approach with an emphasis placed on cognitive skills; as they increase, so does information-seeking effectiveness. This model is one of the few that was developed based on actual research and not simply on practical experience.
Eisenberg and Berkowitz proposed a model based on the “Big Six Skills”—task definition, information seeking, implementation, use, synthesis, and evaluation. Their model is flexible and nonlinear in the same way that hypertext is, allowing for different areas and avenues to be explored out of sequence. In addition, seekers can go back to refine and reidentify the information need, implementing new strategies.
Critical thinking is a process that is widely acknowledged in the literature to be crucial to the learning process, to cognitive development, and to effective information seeking.
A more effective lesson on Internet information then, rather than specifically dwelling on “good” and “bad” Web sites, would be to present actual examples and to raise questions rather than giving answers, opening the student up to the next level intellectual development, “multiplicity.” Multiplicity is the ability to acknowledge that the world contains knowledge that the student cannot yet classify as right or wrong, knowledge which requires further study and thought (the so-called “gray area”).
Behavior Theory, first developed by B. F. Skinner in the 1950s, uses the concepts of “positive” and “negative” reinforcement to control behavior. This theory explains learning behavior very simply: Reward students who perform well, and punish students who do not.
The “Control Theory” of behavior was developed by William Glasser. The theory states that, rather than being a response to outside stimulus, behavior is determined by what a person wants or needs at any given time, and any given behavior is an attempt to address basic human needs such as love, freedom, power, etc.
The Myers–Briggs Personality Analysis test, developed by Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs, was developed using Jung’s theory of personality types in an effort to determine what type any given individual is. The personality type then determines the learning style of a given individual.
Multiple Intelligences
Gardner’s theory relates more directly to intelligence rather than to personality. Gardner states that intelligence is comprised of a group of different abilities, which originate in the stages of development each person passes through as they grow to adulthood. He identifies seven such intelligences—verbal–linguistic, logical–mathematical, visual–spatial, body–kinesthetic, musical–rhythmic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal—but he suggests that there are probably more.
Information seeking is a highly subjective process, one which students approach with prior knowledge, strongly held opinions, and differing levels of cognitive development. From the research it is apparent that, aside from personal preconceptions, issues of time and levels of difficulty in obtaining information are usually of more concern to students than issues of accuracy. It is still unclear, however, whether this is because they are not concerned about the accuracy unless their instructor is, or because they are assuming most information is by nature accurate.
doctoral cohort student’s request for literature: “I am looking for some more resources around the historical context of teacher evaluation.”
pre-existing bibliography:
Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. I., Lun, J., Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of Effective Teacher-Student Interactions in Secondary School Classrooms: Predicting Student Achievement With the Classroom Assessment Scoring System—Secondary. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 76–98.
Baker, B. D., Oluwole, J. O., & Green, P. C. (2013). The Legal Consequences of Mandating High Stakes Decisions Based on Low Quality Information: Teacher Evaluation in the Race-to-the-Top Era. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(5), 1–71. http://doi.org/http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1298
Benedict, A. E., Thomas, R. a., Kimerling, J., & Leko, C. (2013). Trends in Teacher Evaluation. Teaching Exceptional Children. May/Jun2013, 45(5), 60–68.
Bonavitacola, A. C., Guerrazzi, E., & Hanfelt, P. (2014). TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE IMPACT OF THE McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM ON PROFESSIONAL GROWTH.
Charlotte Danielson. (2016). Creating Communities of Practice. Educational Leadership, (May), 18 – 23.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A. E., & Pease, S. R. (1983). Teacher Evaluation in the Organizational Context: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 53(3), 285–328. http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053003285
Darling-Hammond, L., Jaquith, A., & Hamilton, M. (n.d.). Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting Effective Teaching.
Derrington, M. L. (n.d.). Changes in Teacher Evaluation: Implications for the Principal’s Work.
Gallagher, H. A. (2004). Vaughn Elementary’s Innovative Teacher Evaluation System: Are Teacher Evaluation Scores Related to Growth in Student Achievement? Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 79–107. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327930pje7904_5
Hallgren, K., James-Burdumy, S., & Perez-Johnson, I. (2014). STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHER EVALUATION POLICIES PROMOTED BY RACE TO THE TOP.
Hattie Helen E-Mail Address, J. T., Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. [References]. Review of Educational Research, .77(1), 16–7. http://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Ingle, W. K., Willis, C., & Fritz, J. (2014). Collective Bargaining Agreement Provisions in the Wake of Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Legislation. Educational Policy. http://doi.org/10.1177/0895904814559249
Moskal, A. C. M., Stein, S. J., & Golding, C. (2016). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Can you increase teacher engagement with evaluation simply by improving the evaluation system? Can you increase teacher engagement with evaluation simply by improving the evaluation system? http://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1007838
Quinn, A. E. (n.d.). The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin Looking a t th e B igger Picture w ith Dr. R o b ert M arzan o : Teacher E valuation and D e v e lo p m e n t fo r Im p ro ved S tu d en t Learning.
Riordan, J., Lacireno-Paquet, Shakman, N., Bocala, K., & Chang, C. (2015). Redesigning teacher evaluation: Lessons from a pilot implementation. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/
Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (n.d.). Evidence of systematic growth in the effectiveness of midcareer teachers Can Teacher Evaluation Improve Teaching?
Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (n.d.). The problematic implementation of teacher evaluation policy: School failure or governmental pitfall? http://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213502188
Wong, W. Y., & Moni, K. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of and responses to student evaluation of teaching: purposes and uses in clinical education. http://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.844222
my list of literature:
Avalos, B., & Assael, J. (2006). Moving from resistance to agreement: The case of the Chilean teacher performance evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(4-5), 254-266.
Cowen, J. M., & Fowles, J. (2013). Same contract, different day? an analysis of teacher bargaining agreements in Louisville since 1979. Teachers College Record, 115(5)
Flippo, R. F. (2002). Repeating history: Teacher licensure testing in Massachusetts. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 16(3), 211-29.
Griffin, G. (1997). Teaching as a gendered experience. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 7-18.
Hellawell, D. E. (1992). Structural changes in education in England. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1(4), 356-65.
Hibler, D. W., & Snyder, J. A. (2015). Teaching matters: Observations on teacher evaluations. Schools: Studies in Education, 12(1), 33-47.
Hill, H. C., & Grossman, P. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 371-384.
Hines, L. M. (2007). Return of the thought police?: The history of teacher attitude adjustment. Education Next, 7(2), 58-65.
Kersten, T. A. (2006). Teacher tenure: Illinois school board presidents’ perspectives and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing, 37(3-4), 234-257.
Kersten, T. A., & Israel, M. S. (2005). Teacher evaluation: Principals’ insights and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing, 36(1-2), 47-67.
Korkmaz, I. (2008). Evaluation of teachers for restructured elementary curriculum (grades 1 to 5). Education, 129(2), 250-258.
Lamb, M. L., & Swick, K. J. (1975). Historical overview of teacher observation Educational Forum.
Maharaj, S. (2014). Administrators’ views on teacher evaluation: Examining Ontario’s teacher performance appraisal. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (152)
Naba’h, A. A., Al-Omari, H., Ihmeideh, F., & Al-Wa’ily, S. (2009). Teacher education programs in Jordan: A reform plan. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 30(3), 272-284.
Ornstein, A. C. (1977). Critics and criticism of education Educational Forum.
Pajak, E., & Arrington, A. (2004). Empowering a profession: Rethinking the roles of administrative evaluation and instructional supervision in improving teacher quality. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 103(1), 228-252.
Stamelos, G., & Bartzakli, M. (2013). The effect of a primary school teachers, trade union on the formation and realisation of policy in Greece: The case of teacher evaluation policy. Policy Futures in Education, 11(5), 575-588.
Stamelos, G., Vassilopoulos, A., & Bartzakli, M. (2012). Understanding the difficulties of implementation of a teachers’ evaluation system in greek primary education: From national past to european influences. European Educational Research Journal, 11(4), 545-557.
Sullivan, J. P. (2012). A collaborative effort: Peer review and the history of teacher evaluations in Montgomery county, Maryland. Harvard Educational Review, 82(1), 142-152.
Tierney, W. G., & Lechuga, V. M. (2005). Academic freedom in the 21st century. Thought & Action, , 7-22.
Turri, M. (2014). The new italian agency for the evaluation of the university system (ANVUR): A need for governance or legitimacy? Quality in Higher Education, 20(1), 64-82.
VanPatten, J. J. (1972). Some reflections on accountability Journal of Thought.
Vijaysimha, I. (2013). Teachers as professionals: Accountable and autonomous? review of the report of the justice Verma commission on teacher education. august 2012. department of school education and literacy, ministry of human resource development, government of India. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 10(2), 293-299.
Vold, D. J. (1985). The roots of teacher testing in America. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 4(3), 5-7.
Wermke, W., & Höstfält, G. (2014). Contextualizing teacher autonomy in time and space: A model for comparing various forms of governing the teaching profession. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(1), 58-80.
Ydesen, C., & Andreasen, K. E. (2014). Accountability practices in the history of Danish primary public education from the 1660s to the present. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(120)
The Internet Archive is a repository for all sorts of things, and while you probably know it for the ever-useful Wayback Machine, it’s also great for public domain films, independent media, TV broadcasts and newsreels, and other media that you’re free to use and remix on your own as well as sit back and enjoy for yourself.
YouTube is home to a ton of free, and freely-published movies and TV shows, many of which are YouTube originals, and others that are available via Creative Commons or shared in the public domain.
MoviesFoundOnline collects free films, independent films, stand-up comedy, TV shows, and other media freely available around the web. From full films to indie TV series to classic film, you can browse the site’s categories across the top—like short films, documentaries, viral videos, or comedy to name a few—to find something you’re interested in specifically.
Vimeo is most certainly second seat to YouTube when it comes to size and popularity, but it’s still a great video upload service for short film and independent filmmakers, and for people who want the freedom and flexibility of a mobile-friendly, HD-capable upload service with great privacy and video management controls and an upbeat community of users.
In the wake of Edward Snowden’s revelations about NSA and FBI dragnet surveillance, many Americans are concerned that their rights to privacy and intellectual freedom are under threat. But librarians are perfectly positioned to help our communities develop strategies to protect themselves against unwanted surveillance. In this webinar, Alison Macrina and April Glaser of the Library Freedom Project will talk about the landscape of surveillance, the work of the LFP, and some tips and tools librarians can use to resist pervasive surveillance in the digital age.
About the Presenters:
Alison Macrina is a librarian, privacy rights activist, and the founder and director of the Library Freedom Project, an initiative which aims to make real the promise of intellectual freedom in libraries by teaching librarians and their local communities about surveillance threats, privacy rights and law, and privacy-protecting technology tools to help safeguard digital freedoms. Alison is passionate about connecting surveillance issues to larger global struggles for justice, demystifying privacy and security technologies for ordinary users, and resisting an internet controlled by a handful of intelligence agencies and giant multinational corporations. When she’s not doing any of that, she’s reading.
April Glaser is a writer and an activist with the Library Freedom Project. She currently works as a mobilization specialist at Greenpeace USA, where she focuses on ending oil extraction in the Arctic. Prior to Greenpeace, April was at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, organizing around the net neutrality campaign and EFF’s grassroots programming. April also previously worked with the Prometheus Radio Project, where her efforts helped propel the passage of the Local Community Radio Act, the largest expansion of community radio in U.S. history. She lives in Oakland, California and continues to work with local organizations on a range of digital rights issues.
Can’t make it to the live show? That’s okay. The session will be recorded and available on the Carterette Series Webinars site for later viewing.
Experience explore expand. Adventure based how to collaborate in ways we have not collaborated before pedagogical guidelines internet driven
Instructor – content – design
Today: first think is design, content, instructor. So how do we design learning environments is the most important one
Guide learners as designers. Constructivism. Design for meaning. Through the power of the story.
Geotetic design a learning environment learn geography using GIS
Situated movies (student-centered learning)
Grant Earthducation go to the most remote parts of the world to align their education with their culture, instead of what the government is downing as culture
Use of phone: whoever answers instructor’s question first, gets to pose the next question to the rest of the audience.
Design based research
Self-narrative, referencing the experience real world issues in real time
the U Media Lab.
The Changing Earth. App GoX (instagram on steroids. tell their story through the app). How is this different from Google Earth
Raptor Lab (rehabilitate a raptor).
podcast pontification (audio version of blog self reflections)
Greg Steinke The U
A Digital Story Assignment using WeVideo
WeVideo is the Google response to iMovie cloud
The U is on Google email and thus google drive and all other google tools
The Center for Digital Storytelling. short videos, 3-5 min incorporate photographs with the author narration, reflection
Assignment (verbal directions). process (write a 2 page script, every page is about a minute of video), gather images that support the story; edit the script (rewrite); record audio to the script (use an app on the phone instead of WeVideo), WeVideo can edit the audio recording; edit the story, edit the photos to match the story; YourTube and/or Google+
working with faculty: is the digital story a good fit for your course? two questions: does the course have many writing assignments? does everyone have to do the same type of assignment? do you want to offer choices? do you want your students to share their work outside of the class? to you want to explore opportunities for students to develop 21 century skills?
google communities for sharing
wewideo has a tutorial at Center for Digital Storytelling
students can use the digital story for their eportfolio
the entire exercise is entirely based on mobile devices
time frame: scaffolding options
3d printing products were the tangible result of the project and the digital storytelling just the format to present
Google Drive master folder for the phone images and video; iOS apps: MoviePro, FiLMc Pro, VoiceRecord Pro (including mp3); Android: WeVideo
Storyboard template
Faculty Development Programs: Digital Storytelling Community of Practice
chemistry professor. 3D printing with different materials.
what else can be made (e.g. reaction vessel)
printing of atoms
crystalography dbase
Karen: pre-service teachers professor: how to use 3d printers and be comfortable with them. Steve Hoover. Thinkercad and Autodesk123D>
3D academy http://www.team3dacademy.com/index2.html. Pinterest board for3d Printing with resources
Lisa: graphic design. not intuitive. Rhinoceros (not free anymore). 123D strong learning curve. 3d printing will be incorporated in the curriculum. sculpture students and others don’t like fudging on the computer, but Adobe people love it. Some items takes up to 4 hours to print out. when working on the computer is difficult for some students to visualize the dimensionality.
collaborative learning opportunities.
no makerspace or fab lab. additional interest from the theater and business dept. 3d printing is connected to future work skills. new media ecology or media literacy set of skills.
the main presenter: build excitement and interest and gradually step back. how much material goes through and should we charge back. clean and maintenance involved; not too bad. better then a copier. plastic inexpensive. sizes with plastic – $25 and $50. how many project of a spool: depending on the size of the projects but considerable amount. two printers one art dept and one in the faculty dev area.
non profit visually impaired students. how 3d can make difference in special ed.
3d printing lab with access for everybody. ownership brings policy. where housed: neutral place.
only one printer is barely sufficient for faculty to figure out how to use it. purchasing two more if students and curricula to be involved.
The Balancing Act: Team-Creating an eBook as an Alternative Method for Content Delivery Tom Nechodomu, University of Minnesota
Susan Andre uses a slide titled “trust” to elucidate how the entire project was enabled. “trust” and “transparency” are sparse currency in the environment I work in. if she is right an ebook ain’t happening anytime soon at my place.
inclining habitat.
students involvement. use stipends. student artists. food for the video interviews. create a community, student centered.
people able to change the book.
copyright process; did you find it cumbersome. copyright permission center.
time span and amount of hours spent: 3-4 months per chapter.
Main speaker
David Wiley. Making Teaching and Learning Awesome with Open
MN Learning Commons
open educational resources
LUMEN
education – sharing feedback, encouragement with students passion about the discipline, yourself
open is not the same as free. free + permissions + copyright permission: 5 r = retain (make and own copies), reuse (use in a wide range of ways), revise (adapt, modify, and improve), remix (combine two or more), redistribute (share with others)
open:
free and unfettered access
perpetual, irrevocable copyright permissions
(look but don’t touch is not open)
tech enables OER permits
traditionally copyright materials on the Internet – not so good ; jet on the road
openly copyright materials on the internet _ yes: jet in the air
permission-less innovation. relatively inexpensive and broad permissions.
intellectual infrastructure of education: learning outcomes/objectives; assessments; textbooks. they are relatively expensive and narrow permissions.
so what?
open education infrastructure: open outcomes, objectives, activities, educational resources
the culture of glued legos must be eradicated. open pedagogy. open credentialing model
To foster creativity, teachers can make room for more freedom around activities in class
project-based learning as a way that educators are beginning to introduce choice, and thus freedom, into school work, making space for at least some creativity.
To develop ideas that could be considered creative, the brain has to be both stable and flexible at the same time.
they aren’t the same idea. Mass higher education, conceptually, is practical, low cost, skills oriented, and mainly concerned with teaching. It caught on because state legislatures and businesses saw it as a means of economic development and a supplier of personnel, and because families saw it as a way of ensuring a place in the middle class for their children. Research universities, on the other hand, grant extraordinary freedom and empowerment to a small, elaborately trained and selected group of people whose mission is to pursue knowledge and understanding without the constraints of immediate practical applicability under which most of the rest of the world has to operate. Some of their work is subsidized directly by the federal government and by private donors, but they also live under the economic protection that very large and successful institutions can provide to some of their component parts.
Tens of millions of Americans have a direct connection to higher education, and probably only a tiny minority of them are even familiar with the term “research university.” So universities themselves have contributed to the lack of public understanding of the centrality of research.
“You see then, here are two methods of Education; the end of the one is to be philosophical, of the other to be mechanical; the one rises toward general ideas, the other is exhausted upon what is particular and external,” he wrote. “Knowledge, in proportion as it tends to be more and more particular, ceases to be Knowledge.”
“The pursuit of science and scholarship belongs to the university. What else belongs? Assuredly neither secondary, technical, vocational, nor popular education. Of course, these are important; of course, society must create appropriate agencies to deal with them; but they must not be permitted to distract the university.”
