Select Page

Link Theory to Practice



Audio Reflections on Key Competency 5



Key Competency:

Link and apply modern learning theories as well as current research findings to professional practice and development (including other MET Courses)

Metaphorical Equivalency:

Consult with trainers and other health professionals, listen to your body, customize your program to maximize your health benefit and achieve your highest goals.

Lesson Plan Critique

Course ETEC 512 - Applications of Learning Theories to Instruction (core)

Why This Artifact is First for Key Competency 5

Audio Reflection (1:27)

Lesson Plan Critique Reflection

I very much enjoyed this assignment. We were able to choose any lesson plan from any source and then apply at least three valid learning theories to improve upon it. With a value of 30% of the total grade, it was important to do well on this one – and, fortunately, I did.

Where I lost a mark was in the category of “Theoretical Understanding.” As I reflect on this, I realize that, in the entire critique, not one mention is made of the name Jean Piaget, a widely respected developmental theorist, who is usually at least mentioned in any discourse about constructivism and Vygotsky. I remember thinking about Piaget as I worked on the critique, did not write about him. Perhaps it was an oversight. Or it may have been my bias getting the better of me and causing me to selectively omit him. Or maybe I was worried about the maximum word count and didn’t think I could fit in all that could be said about Piaget. In retrospect, I would hope to not make such an oversight (or selective omission) in the future and I look forward to the day when I can write without worrying about maximum word counts.

Whatever my excuse, there’s this thing called credibility and presenting a perspective that one disagrees with can actually help establish one’s credibility–especially in academic circles.  Having been around for a few years, I know this stuff – but, in this case, I messed up.

Please tap or click on the image below to read the critique.

Please tap or click here to read the paper in Google Drive if the above file does not load on your device.

Help Me Fix My Mistake 😉

Please feel free to use the space below to suggest how Piaget’s perspective may have been easily applied in the critiqued lesson plan.

Lesson Plan Critique Criteria

The purpose of this assignment is to consolidate your thinking about how the different theoretical perspectives presented in the course are applied in educational settings. This assignment will involve critiquing and improving on an existing lesson plan. This assignment will be completed individually. There are two components to this assignment. First, you will need to identify and get approval for an appropriate lesson plan. More specifically, by the end of Week 6, you will need to submit a lesson plan to the instructor for approval. This submission should include the lesson plan you will analyze, as well as a 150-200 word (maximum) overview of the theoretical perspectives that are relevant to the lesson plan. This part of the assignment is worth 5 marks, and you will receive feedback from the instructor about the appropriateness of your lesson plan and theorizing. You can choose something from your own teaching or learning experiences, or you can find something available on the internet. You will likely get the most out of this assignment if you choose something that is relevant to your own teaching (e.g., similar age or similar topic). Finally, do not try and find the ‘perfect’ document as it will be difficult to change or improve it. You also don’t want one that is too short such that you have no material to work with.

Once you get approval for your lesson plan, you can begin to critique and update it. You should use at least three theories presented in this course as the basis for your critique and changes. The analysis should describe how the lesson plan reflects each of the theories, as well as the ways in which it doesn’t. You should also describe how your proposed changes will improve the document, from a theoretical perspective. Additional references may be used to support your analyses. Please keep in mind that this assignment is not about critiquing how the lesson plan was written (e.g., whether the learning objectives match the learning outcomes); rather it is an analysis how the goals/objectives/assignment fit into different theoretical perspectives. Also, we are using the term ‘Lesson Plan’ very broadly. There is no pre-determined form that it must take, although it must describe the lesson thoroughly. If you are not familiar with making lesson plans, there are plenty of good examples on the internet.

Your analysis should be no more than 3 to 5 pages in length (double spaced; maximum 1500 words). Along with this critique, you will need to submit the original Lesson Plan/Syllabus, as well as your improved-upon version.

Your Lesson Plan Critique will be evaluated based on the criteria listed in the rubric shown here: 


Source: ETEC512 Course Content Syllabus Page for the Lesson Plan Critique Assignment (2014)

Mobile Learning: Forecasting Project

Course: ETEC 565M - Mobile and Open Education

Tap or click here to check the references for the above artifact and reflection.


Applying the SECTIONS Framework to an Open Educational Resources

Course: ETEC 565M – Mobile and Open Education

Applying the SECTIONS Framework to a MET Course Assignment

One of the MET Programs newer courses, ETEC 565M: Mobile and Open Education, provided numerous opportunities to link and apply modern learning theories to the three major projects that were assigned during the term. For the Open Educational Resource (OER) project, our group chose to apply our knowledge of the SECTIONS Framework (Bates & Poole, 2003) to the assessment pages of our OER. The video (below left) is an overview of that application and the survey form (below right) is a sample survey that anyone who knows PowerPoint can complete.  Microsoft PowerPoint is one of the oldest and most commonly used technologies in the classroom. Most educators are familiar with it, so this would be an anonymous and fun place to share what you really think of it. 

Overview Video of Our Application of the SECTIONS Framework

After viewing this video, please complete the SECTIONS-based survey on the right.

Your Feedback

Please use the SECTIONS-based survey form to assess PowerPoint.

Tap or click here to check the references for the above artifact and reflection.


Setup Video for Assignment in Online Constructivist Sample Lesson

Course: ETEC 530 - Constructivist Strategies for E-Learning

Audio Introduction and Reflection to the Setup Video (2:06)



Clarification: The setup video was produced for a sample online constructivist lesson in ETEC530. I have been thinking about redesigning this particular lesson in my real life multimedia writing class and will being implementing those changes either this September or next January. If time permits, I will also be implementing a formative online quiz like the one I refer to in the audio introduction (and that is demonstrated in the last few minutes of this Moodle Site Tour Video.)

Tap or click here to check the references for the above artifact and reflection.





Arts Based Project: A Direct Application to New Multimedia Class

Course: ETEC 532 - Technology in the Arts and Humanities Classroom



This course was one of my first two in the MET program and, because its content was so closely related to the new multimedia course that I had designed and was launching at the same time as this course, I was able to apply many of my newly learned concepts to real life and provide a much better blended learning experience than would have otherwise been possible without ETEC532.

It goes without saying that the multimedia writing class helped me a lot in this course by providing authentic student work samples (as shown below) as well as very meaningful student feedback on the new learning methods that many of them were experiencing for the first time in their lives.



Written Component

To read the written component of this project, please tap or click on the word cloud image below: 

Tap or click to read the papers via Google Drive's PDF viewer (for devices that don't have Adobe Reader installed)

Tap or click to view the requirements for this assignment.

Final Paper / Arts Based Project (50 marks)

This final paper/project is the culminating assignment for the course. For this assignment, you will choose a topic that critically examines the use of technology in the arts and humanities. Often students have found it helpful to focus on the context in which they teach. The final paper is divided into different parts that will be submitted and evaluated throughout the course: Statement of the topic, Outline, Articles Annotation and Critique / Literature Review, Final Paper/Project ,and Collaborative Peer Review.

Statement of the topic, Research Outline

At the end of Week 6, email your topic and a short paragraph to the instructor. You will receive feedback by week 7.

By the end of Week 7, post the topic for your final paper and a short 500 hundred-word paragraph or equivalent that provides some details about the topic. Post topic in the designated discussion forum. That will provide other students with the opportunity to share with you any resources that they may have about your topic. You are encouraged to review all the topics and do the same.

Articles Annotation and Critique / Literature Review (Pass/fail) (week 9)

By the end of week 9 you will need to have searched online and in libraries for information (5-7 articles) that will enhance your discussion of the topic. The articles that you will find, read and annotate will help clarify key terms, theories, or the context so that your own Starting with an annotated bibliography of the articles you read. After annotating the articles that you chose you will prepare a literature review.

For further information on annotating bibliography see: Delamont, Sara. (1992). Some guidelines for finding and recording literature. In Fieldwork in educational settings: Methods, pitfalls and perspectives (pp. 17-22). London: The Falmer Press).

When you annotate follow the next steps and answer these questions:

Full bibliographic details (authors, complete title, date of publication, publisher and place, name of journal, page numbers, library catalogue #, ISBN, URL for on-line publications)

As you annotate each article consider the following points:

  • What are the key points in the article? Or one point that you want to focus on if it is a very long article.
  • How do these points relate to other course readings? To your topic?
  • What are your points of agreement and disagreement with the claims made in the paper?
  • What view(s) of technology, teaching and learning, are being elaborated here? What evidence is used to support these views?
  • Do the author’s views resonate with, contradict, or relate to any of your experiences in the classroom? In what ways?
  • What is the significance of the article you read as you consider technology, arts and humanities and your topic?

After the annotation you will be ready to write the literature review. Remember, a literature review is NOT just a summary of the articles that you have read. It is a discussion of key ideas, issues and themes in the field you are exploring in your paper. The literature review provides the reader with the theoretical context and it situates your paper in a larger body of research in the field. It is a thorough and sophisticated review of the literature – where you identify terms, locate literature, check relevance, organize what you have selected to include and then write the review. In the literature review you will critically examine your topic as you consider the course readings and discussions as well as the articles that you have annotated earlier. You will also define the need and significance for your own study within the existing body of research.

By Tuesday of Week 10, the literature review and the annotated bibliography are due (Assignment Drop Box).

For more information about a literature review:

Boote, David and Beile Penny. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher 34 (6) 3-15 (also available on line)

Criteria for evaluating the Articles Critique / Literature Review

    • Includes title of the Final Paper/Project.
    • Includes bibliographic details for each article using APA style

For more information about APA Style:

  • Includes the annotation of each article using questions above
  • Includes an analysis/synthesis/critique of all the articles chosen for the literature review. In the literature review you will critically analyze the articles and relate them to your topic and the question you pose in the final paper. This is the most significant section in the Articles Critique /Literature Review.

Collaborative Peer Review (Pass/fail)

Learning occurs within communities of inquiry. Throughout the course you will have the opportunity to collaborate with your fellow course members to critique and edit your writing before submitting the final version to the instructor for evaluation. This is an opportunity for you to obtain valuable feedback on your writing from your peers. We will use the same process for your final paper/project.

As a peer editor you will receive the paper (or material such as concept papers/web sites/i-movies/poetry/photographs/ etc. for arts based projects) by email (Week 11), you will read it and provide written feedback to the author (emailed by the end of week 12).

You will provide feedback both throughout the document using tracking as well as a summary of your feedback either at the beginning or end of the document.

When you provide feedback consider the following points:

  • Read the complete piece
  • Comment (in writing both throughout the paper and in the summary) about the flow of ideas – coherence and logic within the argument
  • Identify the main message
  • Comment about the connections between the argument and the quotes
  • Highlight the parts that are most powerful, engaging and significant
  • Is there any part that can be cut from the piece?
  • Is there a part that is flat, needs clarification or is confusing?
  • Note language choices and grammar
  • End the summary with some editorial suggestions

Consider using the voice tool for a discussion of the feedback.

Email your written feedback to the author and use Assignment Drop Box to submit to Instructor. Use tracking so that it is easy to see the comments within the text, as well as a summary at the end or beginning of the document. Written feedback should be sent to the author by the end of week 12.

Final Paper Or Arts Based Project (50 marks)

For this assignment, you will choose a topic that critically examines the use of technology in the arts and humanities. Often students have found it helpful to focus on the context in which they teach. Taking your environmental context into consideration and the literature review that you have completed and based on observations, conversations and course readings and discussions you could choose to write through text, photography, dance, performative inquiry, visual transformation or other manipulated technological means:

  1. a) To analyze the ways in which technology is integrated into your context.
  2. b) To propose a new vision of integrating technology into your context.

Whatever your choice you will have to address the following questions:

  1. How is technology currently integrated in your context?
  2. What are the particular challenges and barriers to change in your context regarding the use of technology?
  3. How can these challenges and barriers be addressed?

The final paper should be 7-8 pages or equivalent (about 2500 words or equivalent + references).

You may choose to do this paper with a partner in the class who shares a similar vision or is grappling with similar challenges. This means that your combined efforts must be greater than one individual’s submission.

The final paper is due at the end of week 13.


You may propose a final project that will better suit your goals for the course. In order to complete this option you will have to discuss your proposal with the instructor early in the course.

Source: ETEC532 Syllabus – 2013

Tap or click here to check the references for the above artifact and reflection.




Discussion Forum Video: Applying Constructivism in an Online Lesson

Course: ETEC 530 - Constructivist Strategies for E-Learning

Discussion Forum Video

Some topics and ideas are better explained with multimedia, as I demonstrated in this post to our ETEC 530 Discussion Forum.  At first glance, it may seem strange to include this in Key Competency 5, but the theories that I am linking to practice are multiple intelligences theory , learning style theory , and universal design for learning (UDL) theory .  Rather than confining myself and my classmates to a text-based discussion of some very complex relationships and concepts, I am using those theories that all seem to agree that multimedia is preferable over text only in such situations.

In the video itself, I also apply the assigned Constructivist theories   to my own online course sample lesson, which is, in turn, directly linked with my real life Multimedia Writing class. 



Tap or click here to check the reference for the above artifact.





Real Life Examples of Linking Theory to Practice:

The following blurbs will connect you to current examples of linking theory to practice.

More About Gary

additional information about Gary’s background & current practice

Reflections on HYU Practice

ongoing initiatives to support learners and faculty at Hanyang University

Overview of Current Sites

e-learning spaces that Gary currently uses in professional practice

Links to Old Spaces

discontinued spaces that trace Gary’s online footprint back to 2001

References for Key Competency 5


Tap or click to view all the references for this Key Competency




Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published.