Course Evaluation & Grade Access

I have finished grading all of your Technology Integration Plans and Online Participation (blogs + comments). I have also calculated final grades. You can immediately access your final grades by completing a COURSE EVALUATION SURVEY* [click here]. When you submit the survey, you will be given a code to unlock your grades at the links below. *THE COURSE EVALUATION CLOSES DECEMBER 24TH AT 5PM.

(If you do not fill out a course evaluation, then you will have to wait until January 2nd to find out your score breakdown and final grade through Engrade and WESS)

Have your code? Click on a link below:

Technology Integration Plan Rubric Score Breakdown (by last 4-digits of CWID) 

Total Score Breakdown w/Final Course Grade (by last 4-digits of CWID)

Interested in leveraging your PLAYground experience? If you're interested in participating in Summer 2014 teacher professional development (possible stipend available) please contact Dr. Domine directly during the Spring 2014 semester.

Final Project Feedback. . . Coming Soon

I am nearly finished grading and commenting your Technology Integration Plan(s). Check your Technology Integration Plan blog post for my personalized comments. If you don't see a comment posted, it is because I have not yet assessed yours. I should have all of the scores (including your online participation score) and your final course grade available by the end of this week.* 

After completing an end course evaluation, you will be granted immediate access to your final grades—weeks before they will officially appear on WESS. If you do not complete an (anonymous) end course evaluation, you will have to wait until your grade is posted on WESS (as late as January 2nd) and I formally post them to Engrade on December 28th. 

In the next few days, I will blast an email to your MSU account to let you know when and how to access the online evaluation form (and your grades). Stay tuned.

*Please leave your course blog public and online at least until February, in case of a grade dispute. I strongly recommend that you build upon it as a professional portfolio, if you do not have one already.

Interactivity #5 Feedback

Interactivity #5 required you to remix a PLAYground canvas from Interactivity #4 to collaborate with another content area. Your canvas should have contained a unit plan in your content area that complemented the unit plan on the original canvas. Your weekly blog entry should have explained the logic behind your remix and linked to your remixed canvas. The good news is that 78% of the class earned a B or better on this assignment. The not so good news is that the remaining 22% did not earn a passing score.

To (re)view the specific requirements for Interactivity #5 [click here]. All Interactivity #5 scores are now posted in Engrade. The class average score was 8.3 out of 10 points. For a class breakdown of scores by last 4 digits of your CWID [click here].

Michelle and I were especially impressed with the following creative, thoughtful and even complex remixes (Note: the links below lead to the blogposts as entry points to the remixed canvas):

• Introduction to Unit Plan on Geometry of Circles (remixed with Shakespeare's representation of hierarchy) [click here]
• Ancient Egypt Remix (Art and History) [click here]
• Poetry Anthology Lesson (and Music)  [click here]
• The Civil War and Clay Animation  [click here]

If points were deducted from your own score, pay careful attention to the points breakdown. Were the deductions in content, technical, comments and/or the blogpost? Here were some of the reasons for points deduction (in no particular order):

• Canvas did not contain an explanation of the new unit;
• Canvas content lacked cohesion and/or visual organization;
• Comment widget missing
• Image gallery non-functional
• A link to the original canvas was not included (if the original canvas did not transfer in the remix);
• No thumbnail image to identify the remixed canvas.
• Incorrect title of the canvas and/or blogpost;
• Insufficient tagging of canvas;
• Poor grammar and/or spelling in blogpost or canvas
• Excessive word count in narrative blogpost

This culminating interactivity challenged your ability to integrate media toward a curricular end. Most certainly it tested your technical ability. You may (or may not) decide to use the PLAYground as a tool in your own teaching. The determining factors should be the extent to which you want students to create, curate, connect, and collaborate using the Web. It's about a participatory pedagogy.

Technology Integration Plan (Final Project)

Submission Deadline: Dec 15th by 11:59pm EST 

Essential Reading: Rethinking Technology in Schools (Chapter 5) & 4 Steps to Standards Integration [PDF download] 

This final project is a culminating activity that builds on the skills you have developed through all of the previous interactivities in this module. It asks you to integrate the technological knowledge and pedagogical skills you have developed this semester across your co-requisite courses. You will work with a lesson plan you have already worked with (for example, in your Inclusion module or English Language Learners module or any other context). DO NOT CREATE A NEW LESSON PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT. Beyond the adaptations that you already made to that lesson plan, your task now is to infuse technology in ways that are not just supportive, but are also transformative. In other words, you're not simply "adding on" technology, but you are enriching and transforming the ways in which students learn (and you teach) through the careful selection and intentional uses of specific technologies. [Read the complete set of guidelines here]. 

Interactivity #4 Feedback

Interactivity #4 required you to "play" with Web 2.0 tools to create an introductory unit plan "canvas" through the PLAYground. Additional challenges were to align your web content with the Common Core Curriculum standards, and to strategically select and place image, text, video, hyperlinks, etc. on a single canvas to introduce to a curriculum unit. Most of you successfully completed this task; the average score was 8.3 out of 10 points.To view your score and point breakdown, [click here]
The most common reasons for losing points on this assignment include the following:

• Posting less than three comments, as outlined in Step 7
• Exceeding the 300 word count limit in the companion blog post
• Providing less than 3 images in the gallery
• Outside sources are not hyperlinked or, conversely, are just links rather than descriptive titles
• Unclear or grade inappropriate presentation of Common Core standards
• Canvas lacks organization or conveys confusion or incoherence of web resources
• No thumbnail to signify the canvas within the larger network/collection

If you scored lower than an 8 (B-minus), please make sure you understand your errors prior to submitting Interactivity #5. As always, you can contact Michelle or me with specific questions.

Interactivity #5: Remixing Technology and Curriculum

For this final interactivity, each of you will be responsible for remixing a classmate’s PLAYground canvas from Interactivity #4 to include collaboration with your content area. So, the canvas you’re remixing must be from a different content area. Your remixed canvas must contain a unit plan in your content area that complements the unit plan originally on the canvas. This promotes cross-content collaboration. For a complete set of guidelines, suggestions and and grading rubric for Interactivity #5 [click here].

Interactivity #3 Feedback

Interactivity #3 asked you to select and analyze a lesson plan that incorporated technology and to map your analysis using a public Google spreadsheet. Many of you were able to successfully articulate your rationale and analysis in a narrative blogpost of less than 300 words. The average score on this assignment was 8 out of 10 (B-minus). To see a breakdown of your score (listed by last 4 digits of your CWID) [click here].

There are many examples of excellent and very good blogposts and spreadsheets. Here are just a few that you can examine more closely:

• Matt had really strong alignment in his spreadsheet. He also used his own lesson plan from an earlier music methods course: Listening Lesson Plan (Music Grades 4-12) [view spreadsheet]

• Jennifer chose to tackle data analysis and probability through a repertoire of various technologies that supported both student-centered and teacher-centered strategies: Understanding Probability (Math Grades 6-8) [view spreadsheet]

• Ana Sophia took Shakespeare in a different direction and significantly re-mapped the curriculum standards, strategies and technologies in Hamlet's Journey: What is a Hero (English Grade 12) [view spreadsheet]

If you scored below 8 out of 10 points for this interactivity, you are in the danger zone.
Deducted points most likely occurred through one or more of the following mistakes:

• The chosen lesson plan was insufficient in length (1 day or class session).
• The lesson plan link/URL was missing.
• The spreadsheet was inaccessible (settings were not set to "public") and therefore could not be evaluated.
• The spreadsheet did not contain basic information in the header and/or footer (see Step Four).
• The spreadsheet lacked essential information in the standards, strategies and/or technology column(s).
• The spreadsheet did not adequately "map" or reflect an analysis of the lesson plan, evidenced by 1 or 2 rows, rather than 4 or 5.
• The spreadsheet did not contain any new information, based on your analysis.
• The narrative blogpost did not adhere to the 250-300 word count parameter.
• The narrative blogpost was unclear, incoherent, and/or did not address the questions listed in Step Five.
• The narrative blogpost contained an excessive number of spelling and/or grammatical errors.

Note that this type of lesson plan mapping will be required again for the final project in this course. Therefore, it is essential that you reflect on your practice for Interactivity #3. 

Interactivity #4: Discovering Web 2.0 on the PLAYground

For Interactivity #4, you will expand your technological repertoire of web-based tools. The medium for doing this is a remixing tool developed by the Annenberg Innovation Lab at USC. The tool is called the PLAYground and each of you will be responsible for creating what is called a "canvas" on which you can place and remix web-based media (i.e., YouTube videos, RSS feeds, Tweets, images, comment boxes). Your task is to create a canvas that serves as an introduction to a curricular unit that you would teach in your content area. (Note that a unit usually takes place over a course of about 3-4 weeks. You do not have to write out individual lesson plans for the unit.) This unit must be an expansion of the lesson you chose for IA#3. This assignment is due 11:59pm EST on 11/3. For the full set of criteria and guidelines for this interactivity, [click here]

Interactivity #2 Feedback

Jane relished in the moment of
un-friending Betsy on Facebook.

While uploading a single image or graphic along with a one-line caption may have sounded very simple, Interactivity #2 (History of Technology in Schooling) was actually a complex task requiring media literacy. Your task required creating a message about the historical influence of a particular technology upon your particular content area using both image and text. In this regard, your image could not stand alone without your caption; and your caption would not convey your message without the image. Together, they were supposed to create a unified message. Many of you accomplished this goal.

The good news is that the average score for Interactivity #2 was 8.4 (84 percent), which is very high. You can download the full grade report with a breakdown of points by the last four digits of your CWID by [clicking here]. Here are some of the reasons points were deducted:

• Image portrayed a post-1990 version of the technology
• Image did not convey the impact on schooling
• A link or source for the image was not provided, or was linked to the wrong source
• Unclear linkeage between the image and/or caption and the subject content area
• Caption contradicted (rather than complemented) the image
• More than one sentence was used as a caption
• Text was included in the image
• A narrative blog entry was posted as part of Interactivity #2

If you are perplexed, disappointed (or both) at your score, please take the time to look at three things: 1) your score breakdown; 2) the assignment criteria; and 3) your Interactivity #2 post. Critically examining all three will help you discern where you misunderstood the assignment (this is part of the reflective practice that we tout in the Portrait of a Teacher). After due diligence, if you still need clarification on your score then feel free to contact Michelle or myself and we'll be happy to provide you with additional feedback.

Since you must pass this course with a B-minus or better to move forward in your program, everyone who scored 7 points or lower on this (or any other) interactivity is encouraged to set up an appointment to come speak with me directly so that we can get you on the right track to successful completion of this course module.

Interactivity #3

The Pedagogical Uses of Technology

Due date: Sunday, Oct 20th by 11:59pm EST

(Want to make a word map yourself? Go to wordle.net)

How many teachers use a Smartboard simply because there is one installed in their classroom instead of intentionally choosing the tool based on thinking deeply about what they pedagogically want to accomplish? At this point in the module, I want you to conscientiously think about where, when and how learning occurs and how to intentionally create technological environments that facilitate those learning goals. This is not an easy task. However, it is incumbent upon every teacher to approach technology integration in this way.

To read the guidelines and instructions for Interactivity #3 [click here]

Interactivity #1 Feedback

Scores for Interactivity #1 are now posted within your Engrade account(s). There is an uploaded file with a score breakdown to see where you may have missed points. Note that the overall class average was very high (84%). If you scored below average, please make sure you review your breakdown to see where you missed points. Feel free to schedule an appointment to come see me if you are unable to discern why you were docked points in any particular area.

The strongest technology autobiographies included detailed examples of how the top 3 technologies influenced specific aspects of their lives for better and for worse. Some of you were able to self-reflect in honest, critical ways to see both the good and the bad. However, many of you are only able to see the benefits of your chosen technologies. Strong autobiographies also adhered to the 750-word limit in a smooth, narrative writing style and included reflection on the content of the "Learning to Change" video. 

You will see from the grade breakdown in Engrade the areas of where everyone lost points (your individual privacy is protected). For some it was not clearly mentioning the video and/or failing to discuss how your stance is similar to and different from those of the young people in the video. Some of you missed points because you went (in some cases) way over the 750-word limit for the blogpost or perhaps did not title the blog post correctly. I also noticed that many of you switched voices in your discussion of technology. Instead of keeping in first person ("I") as an autobiography should do, many of you switched and starting talking about "you" or "society," and that was confusing since an autobiography can only be about you (which, in this case, is "I").

Also, when you craft each blog post, think of your blogspot as a professional portfolio and your audience being a superintendent who is trying to determine whether to call you in for an interview. It is probably therefore not a good idea for posts to be assembled in bullet-pointsYour post should therefore not resemble bullet-points or a class assignment. Each post should be a carefully crafted, concise narrative. As a reminder, blogging criteria are [posted here]

If you review the assignment description for Interactivity #1 with a critical eye, you will discover where you made mistakes. Learn from this first interactivity that assignment details matter. 

Finally, I thought you might find it interesting that the majority of you ranked your cell/smart phone as the number one technology that has influenced you the most up to this point in your life (see graph below). The second most influential technology was pretty evenly split between computer/laptop and cell/smartphone (see 2nd graph below). Third place is shared by cell/smartphone, computer/laptop, and TV (note that somehow cell/smartphone was listed twice, separately).

I was surprised that most of you framed your autobiography with technologies that are present-day, rather than those technologies that you used while growing up. Wouldn't technologies that you used when you were much younger play a larger, more influential role in who you have become as a person up to this point in your life? Does the majority of this group really believe cell phones have made them the person they are today? If so, there is much to be concerned about, on several levels.

If you find any of the aggregate data above or below to be interesting, it may compel you to compose a blogpost for your online participation for this week (or not). 

The Technology That Has Influenced You the Most (Ranked #1) (60 responses)

The 2nd Most Influential Technology in Your Lives (Ranked #2) (60 responses)

The 3rd Most Influential Technology in Your Lives (Ranked #3) (60 responses)

Interactivity #2 (The History of Technology in Schools)

The first interactivity asked you to self-reflect on your own relationship to communications technologies—and how that relationship might be similar to and/or different from those of the young people that you will teach. At this point, you should be more aware of those technologies that have most influenced your own life and also aware of their negative as well as positive influences. You will receive feedback and an Engrade score for Interactivity #1 by this Friday.

Interactivity #2 asks you to look back into history to more deeply reflect on how communications technologies have influenced (for better and worse) the formalized education process through schooling. The purpose for doing this (twentieth-century) historical tour is to more deeply understand the political and economic imperatives that have traditionally surrounded the (non)use of technology in schools, so that we can move forward in rethinking and renewing our educational technology efforts to better meet the current (twentieth-century) needs of students.

In terms of workload for the next two weeks, I am requiring you to view a brief (9-minute) video, chapter two from Rethinking Technology in Schools and a short journal article, A Social History of Media, Technology and Schooling. You will find the links to all three of these texts as well as the assessment criteria on the Interactivity #2 assignment page.

The deadline for this assignment is 11:59pm EST on October 6th.

Have questions? I will be hosting a live chat through Google+ to address any of your questions and concerns on Monday, September 30th at noon. It's an optional session for those who might need clarification or additional assistance. If you can't make it, feel free to email your questions to Michelle or myself. If you prefer a phone appointment or F2F, feel free to schedule an appointment through Deanna at ext 5187.

Having textbook issues?

Some of you have indicated that you are unable to obtain the course textbook in a timely manner. Although Amazon indicates 1-3 weeks for shipment, as of Sept 11th, Barnes and Noble has used copies available for $15 and immediate shipment. You can also order directly from the publisher, Peter Lang. There are various other used book sites you might check out, such as Abe Books, I have not yet assigned the second interactivity, so you have until the first week of October to obtain a copy. 

Engrade Log-In

If you submitted your CWID along with your blog URL, then I have already established an Engrade account for you. Go to Engrade.com and log in using your NetId as your username and your CWID as your password. If you have an existing Engrade account, then use your previous log-in credentials and add this course to your existing account. Michelle has suggestions on how to do this [click here]

Course Introduction (8 Steps)

Note that this 1-credit course module begins September 4th and runs through December 19th.

Step One: Download and review the course syllabus—including all policies, practices and requirements [click here]. It is too easy to simply gloss over a syllabus. In an online course, it is essential that you are aware of both the technical and academic requirements.

Step Two:  Sign up above to "Follow by email". This means that you will receive course updates as they are posted, rather than having to periodically check the course blog.

Step Three: Complete and submit a Technology Self-Assessment. [click here]

Step Four: Purchase the required course text. [Amazon awards students free 2-day shipping]. There is not a lot of reading in this course module; however, it is from a very specific ideological stance of technology. Data show that those who complete the assigned readings score much higher on the interactivities and final project than those who do not. Note all royalties from the sale of this book are donated to the National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE). Note: You will not be assigned any reading from this text until the end of September.

Step Five: Set up your own professional blog for this course [view tutorial]. Ideally, this should be done through Blogger. First, you'll need to establish a Google Account using a non-MSU email address. (You do NOT need a gmail address to set up a Google Account. You can use one of your non-MSU email addresses). Make sure to set the "Settings">"Permissions" so that "Everybody" can read your blog. Don't forget to write down or bookmark your blog address. It will be http://[yourcustomname].blogspot.com.  
*If you have already started a professional online portfolio, then you may be able to use it to complete this course module. Contact my teaching assistance, Michelle Thomas, for details on how to proceed.

Step Six: Everyone needs a professional-looking profile photo and basic information about themselves on their Blogger profile. [click here for advice]. 

Step Seven: Submit your blog address to me here: http://tinyurl.com/curr316blogspots Once I receive your address, I will link our course site to your personal blog. This is essential in enabling others to read and respond to your blog posts, as well as engaging in online participation, which is part of your course grade. Look for your hyperlinked name to appear on the Groups page.

Step Eight: Register your Engrade account. This is where your scores and individual feedback will be posted. You should receive a separate email by the end of the first week of the semester from Engrade with instructions on how to do this. If you have an existing Engrade account from a previous class, then click here to add this course to your account. Note: Engrade is a free and versatile tool for teachers. You might find yourself using it professionally in the future.

You should have the items above completed by September 15th in order to stay on track for the semester.