Select Page

ETEC 532

Technology in the Arts and Humanities Classroom

%

Final Grade: A+

Class Average: 89%

Extemporaneous Comments

Although most of the discussion forums in the MET courses were text-based, many of my contributions were made in video or audio format, as presented below in the audio player.  Please note that these comments are mainly unscripted. The references were added later, after reflecting on the comments.

 

The arts and humanities have traditionally encompassed the study of literature, music, visual arts, performing arts, social studies, rhetoric, and philosophy as a means to understand the human condition. Education has played a vital role in engaging learning in school settings as well as life-long learning through community-based organizations. The arts and humanities can be studied within specific disciplines, but it can also extend to learning about the many aspects of society around us. In this course the arts and humanities will be explored as a way to bring people together to discuss shared values and differences in communities and critically inquire about our personal and social heritages.

Source:  http://met.ubc.ca/met-courses/course-overview-2/

In this course, students will have opportunities to:

  • Identify and investigate through digital learning environments how conceptions and contexts of the arts and humanities are being maintained and transformed in contemporary societies. Explore the connections between pedagogy, curriculum and technology in multiple settings.
  • Examine and reflect on particular educational aspects of technology in your own personal and social contexts in light of course readings and discussions.
  • Identify teaching and learning strategies for using technology in K-12 schools and adult education.
  • Examine how the semiotic and social meanings of the arts and humanities have been and continue to be re-interpreted.

source: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Course:ETEC532

Unit I: Introduction
Module one: Getting Acquainted and Introduction

Unit II: Technology and the Arts and Humanities
Module two: Critical Inquiry about Ideas and Issues
Module three: Pedagogical Positions and Practices

Unit III: Case Studies — Research and Representation
Module four: Inquiry into ICT and the Arts and Humanities
Module five: Using ICT in Your Own Educational Learning Environment

Unit IV: Dialogue and Assessment
Module six: Culminating Research

source: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Course:ETEC532

1. Participation (50 marks)
30 Marks designated by the instructor and 20 Marks self-assessment.

As course participation, on a weekly and modular basis, is crucial to learning and the successful cohesion of the course, On-line Discussion Forums and group participation are graded accordingly.

2. Case Study Analysis (50 marks)

This Case Study Analysis / Arts Based Project is the major project, the culminating assignment for the course. For this assignment, you will critically examine the use of technology in your own setting. It is divided into the following five areas:

  • Statement of the topic
  • Research Outline
  • Articles Annotation and Critique / Literature Review
  • Case Study Paper / Arts Based Project
  • Collaborative Peer Review

source: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Course:ETEC532

Alex de Cosson, Ph.D.

Alex F. de Cosson, Ph.D., is an a/r/tographer who has worked as a professional sculptor exhibiting nationally and internationally for over twenty-five years. He recently walked/ran the Victoria International Marathon in 4 hours and 47minutes; a pedagogy of walking plays a central role in his understanding of being a teacher. Alex has an MFA from York University and was on the faculty of the Ontario College of Art and Design from 1989 to 2006 and is currently Coordinator of the Teaching From The Heart Cohort for the Teacher Education Office and Academic Advisor for the Burnaby Visual and Performing Arts Cohort. He is a Sessional Instructor in the Curriculum Studies Department and the MET program, for which he teaches ETEC 532. Alex has been an active member of Inner City Angels in Toronto, dedicated to bringing art to inner city school kids through artist-centered programs since 1987. He has been awarded numerous grants from, among others, the Canada Council, the Ontario Arts Council and the BC Arts Council. Alex was awarded the Gordon and Marion Smith Award for Excellence in Art Education, from UBC’s Curriculum Studies Department, in 2003.

Alex passionately believes that art and art making, in the broadest possible terms, are central to a curriculum of well-being in the classroom. His research interests are centered within arts-based and autobiographical ways of knowing and being. He has published in numerous educational journals and contributed chapters to books furthering arts-based forms of teaching and learning. In 2004 he was co-editor, with Rita L. Irwin, of A/r/tography: Rendering Self through Arts-Based Living Inquiry, published by Pacific Educational Press. And in 2007 he was a contributor to Gary Knowles & Ardra Coles, Handbook of the Arts in Qualitative Research: Perspectives, Methodologies, Examples and Issues, published by Sage Publications.

Source: http://met.ubc.ca/person/alex-de-cosson/

Tap or click to see references for some of the "Extemporaneous Comments"

References

Analysis of Vignette #1: Art, Culture, Identity and Representation: A Conversation with Three Art Educators

ETEC532
Tap or click to check out the general instructions for the vignettes assignments

Analysis of (2) Vignettes, Pass/Fail:

This task has two parts: one completed in week 4 and the other in week 8. You will analyze the first vignette in week 4. Working on it individually, you will respond to the questions listed in week 4 Tasks Vignette #1 Analysis. Prepare a 500 word analysis of this vignette responding to the question in the weekly tasks and the questions bellow

,PEER EDITING

Learning occurs within communities of inquiry. For your the Final Paper/Arts Based Project you will be working with a peer editor. To prepare for this task we will utilize Peer Editing for our vignette assignment. You will choose a fellow group member to critique and edit your Vignette Analysis before submitting the final version to the large group discussion (and to the assignment drop box) . This is an opportunity for you to obtain valuable feedback on your writing from your peers.

As a peer editor you will receive the Vignette Analysis by email before the Friday of Week 4, you will read it and provide written feedback to the author.

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 and in the summary) about the flow of ideas – coherence and logic within the argument
  • 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 back to the author and use Assignment Drop Box to submit your edited copy.

Analyse the vignette and after you have done a peer edit with at least one member of your group post your analysis in the small group discussion forum so that you can read and post discussion to each other’s analysis. For Submission use theAssignment Dropbox. Use word documents saved as .doc or .rtfand paste into the Submission box.

In Week 8 you will analyze a vignette individually. For Submission use the Assignment Dropbox.

For the analysis of vignette #2 you will be in a new group. After each one chooses a vignette for analysis, analyse the vignette and do another peer edit process as per vignette #1. After the peer edit post your analysis to the assignment drop box and post in the small group discussion forum so that you can read and post discussion to each other’s analysis.

In the analysis of vignette 2 consider the following questions (as well as other questions embedded within the vignettes).

  • How is learning interpreted?
  • What are some indicators that learning occurred?
  • What is the role of the teacher?
  • What is the role of students?
  • What is the learning environment?
  • What role does technology play in the vignette?
  • Does technology enhance or hinder learning?
  • What are some advantages in the use of technology?
  • What are some limitations and challenges?
  • What are some changes/modifications that you can propose that will help overcome the challenges?
  • What are the relationships between technology, content and pedagogy?

Refer to course readings and online discussions as well as your own experience and context as you respond to these questions and analyze the vignette. Prepare a 500 word analysis of each of the vignettes that you chose (in week 4 and then in weeks 8 – a total of two vignettes).

We would like to draw your attention to the following quote from the chapter by Palloff and Pratt (1999):

“How people look or what their cultural, ethnic or social background is become irrelevant factors in this [computer-mediated environment] medium, which has been referred to as the great equalizer” (P. 15).

Read other group members’ postings in the weekly discussion forum.

Palloff, R.M. & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Source: ETEC532 Syllabus – 2013

Reflection

Once I got my head around the concept of a “vignette,” I was able to better appreciate the combination of individual and collaborative work on these assignments. By comparing my own perspectives against those of the vignette authors plus the other students in my cohort, I was able to develop wider perspectives and more balanced understandings of various key aspects of art, art education, and education in general. 

A PDF of my original draft (peer-reviewed by Jennifer) is accessible here.

Tap or click here for even more detailed information about Vignette #1

In the vignette you are going to observe, three art educators met to discuss the ways in which teaching art provides a tool to explore and analyze questions of identity, culture and representation. Stacy Friedman is an art educator who uses puppets to explore identity, race and voice. Sylvia Kind is an art educator who shares various media that she uses (knitting, sewing and collage work) to bring to the front questions of identity, difference and “other”. Roger Dane is a student teacher in Stacey’s class and he discusses his final project in the course he took with Stacey. The three artists discuss their experiences of making art and teaching art as they negotiate tensions of representation and voice in their own work as artists and as educators.

They use different media from puppetry making, to textiles and the creation of a documentary film as vehicles for their explorations of teaching and learning.

Analyse the vignette and after you have done a peer edit with at least one member of your group post your analysis in the small group discussion forum so that you can read and post discussion to each other’s analysis.

Source: ETEC532 Syllabus – 2013

Peer Reviews and Collaborative Projects

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

Peer Review Videos

 

Audio Reflection (1:52)

 

 

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

References 

 

The Tried and True Approach to Peer Review

The word cloud below is based on and linked to Jennifer’s text-based peer review, which was a tremendous help to me as I was back in school for the first time in several years and a bit apprehensive about my writing skills.

Preparing for Online Knowledge Building

Courses: ETEC 532 and ETEC 510

Screenshot from The Blog, a Companion Course Site for HYU Students

 

Audio Reflection (3:18)

 

theblog_artsb1

 

Prior to starting on the MET Program, this page of The Blog did not exist. It is the direct result of the introductory content of ETEC 532. This amazes me because, prior to starting that inspiring course, I had never really given much consideration to the value of art in any classroom. However, the weekly tasks and discussions during those first couple of weeks of MET training really opened my eyes.  Among the many items we were given to contemplate in relation to education and technology were these three fascinating videos:

Tap or click to see one of my first discussion forum posts. Warning: It's really, really, REALLY long...

 Thread: Post: Author: Week 1 Response Week 1 Response Gary Bartanus Posted Date: Edited Date: Status: January 6, 2013 7:32 AM January 6, 2013 7:39 AM Published

When I first watched “face projection,” I was both intrigued and confused. I actually didn’t know what to make of it or understand what was going on in those videos. So I moved on to the other piece, “Straight and Arrow,” and although I thought I knew what was going on, it turns out that I was pitifully naive. As I was listening to the cute and peppy music, watching the lights, and marveling over the moving images of twitching body parts, I was thinking, “My oh my! These people are very well-trained dancers. They are in such perfect sync with each other. What incredible muscle control and teamwork!” For whatever reason, I just assumed that those little wires and thingies that looked like electrodes were props! Probably due to some theatrical experiences in my past, I initially thought that the whole presentation was a kind of macabre musical production, intricately choreographed and performed by a very talented dance company with incredible muscle control! 

I had no idea that those were actual electrodes delivering actual electrical impulses to actual human beings. I have to admit that, after reading some of the articles about this production, besides being a little embarrassed at myself, I was reminded of the famous Stanley Milgram obedience experiment that involved using fake electrical impulses and good actors. In that context, I was and still am a little unsettled about Manabe’s fascinating work. It’s not so much that he was delivering real electrical impulses to people who were not just dancers (or actors), but I think what unsettles me is that, on a purely metaphorical level, his work causes me to reflect on myself and ask some serious questions. 

When I use technology in my teaching, what is my primary motivation? Am I truly trying to help my learners learn? Or am I simply trying to create something interesting? Or something sensational? Or something that satisfies some powerful inner need to be a master controller like Milgram (or perhaps even Manabe)? I also ask myself if I truly am the one who is controlling the technology or, as Gillian questioned in her thoughtful response, is the technology perhaps controlling me? These are questions that I will be continuously thinking about as I work on this course and at my place of employment. 

I expect that, by considering and evaluating the many examples of educational technology that I am sure we are to encounter in this course, I will not only become more aware of the ”wonderful toys” that continually become our partners in this dance of technological development, but I will also become aware of some external points of reference to which I can compare my own accomplishments and thereby begin to determine how well or poorly I have done. Depending on that outcome, I will be able to either make corrections or, more hopefully, build on some of the work that I have actually done correctly. Only time, research, collaboration, feedback, and reflection will tell. Quite frankly, at this point, I do not anticipate a negative self-assessment. I truly believe that my use of technology will prove out to be a good thing. But I am keeping an open mind because I have a lot to learn and if I do learn(albeit unexpectedly) that my “innovation” has not been as pedagogically appropriate as I thought it was, then of course, I will need to change. 

This brings me to guiding question number 1: “How you have used educational technologies and pedagogic strategies, self-directed learning, critical inquiry, or intercultural communication specifically within the context of your area of employment.” 

In my role as a university ESL instructor in Korea, I believe that my use of educational technologies for intercultural communication and critical inquiry has been essential. My students are expected to develop confidence and competence in one of the world’s greatest fears, public speaking. Over the course of a 15 week semester, every student in my class must give a minimum course of a 15 week semester, every student in my class must give a minimum of four presentations in English, each lasting from 3 minutes to 7 or 8 minutes. This is incredibly difficult for all of them because, by nature, Korean people are very shy about speaking English in front of each other. (It’s tied in with the a culturally-rooted fear of losing face, I think.) But when they enter my classroom, their fears are doubled: they are already shy about conversing in English, and then our curriculum requires them to stand in front of an entire class of 20 peers and give an academic presentation with proper posture, good eye contact, clear pronunciation, and appropriate vocal delivery—four times per semester! 

If I were to simply grade their presentations on a rubric, write a few comments, and sit down with each student one-on-one to explain where he/she needs to improve, there is potential for all kinds of problems, inter-culturally, and in the realm of critical inquiry. Furthermore, there is too much room for doubt. A Korean student who has never had a foreigner for a teacher before may not feel 100% confident about my accuracy or fairness—and rightfully so. To overcome this situation, I use a video camera and individually record the presentations of each student. In the next class after presentation day, students bring their USB/Flash drives or Smartphones to class and get a copy of their video in compressed format that doesn’t take long to transfer. Each videos is identified by student name and I always double check with each student when transferring the files, so they don’t ever have to worry about someone else ever seeing it. (Their peer assessments are only done live on presentation day.) I then tell students to watch their videos several times–until it no longer feels uncomfortable or embarrassing for them to hear the sound of their own voice–and then do a self-assessment. This self-assessment only needs to demonstrate that they have watched their videos, analyzed their own strengths and weakness, and chosen a few self-improvement goals for their next presentations. For those that need a some direction, I provide them with 4 or 5 guiding questions that are posted on their course page. They are not required to answer any of my questions as long as they can demonstrate that they have analyzed their own work and developed a definite plan to improve. The self-assessment can be done either in writing (MLA format) or in the form of a video, depending on whichever delivery method is most comfortable for the learner. 

The self-assessments must then be uploaded via an app that I have set up on the course page and it delivers everything to my Dropbox account. Students are also welcome to visit me in person or via my Google+ Hangout Virtual Office to discuss their presentation videos (which I consider to be another acceptable for of self-assessment). 

The use of technology in this way, in my opinion, facilitates good intercultural communication and it also allows students to engage in critical inquiry as painlessly as possible. Of course there is also an element of self-directed learning in this, too, because students are not just getting their new presentation goals from me; they are also getting them from themselves. There is one big flaw in this process that I will try to correct next semester. On the day that students get their videos, they bring their flash drives to me one by one while the rest of the class watches a subtitled English-language sitcom called Modern Family. Although most of the students and I agree that the sitcom is a wonderful way to learn about North American culture, we don’t think using up three classes each semester is the best use of class time. After all, they can easily watch Modern Family on the Internet anytime they want. Therefore, after conducting surveys with all the students in my classes, I’ve decided to take advantage of the fact that 99.9% of my students have smartphones. These smartphones all have excellent cameras and, rather than me record all the students videos, they will record their own videos. Then they will have their own video without the need for me to waste their class time transferring videos back to their flash drives. I did a little research and discovered a recently developed tripod that accommodates iPhones and smartphones of all sizes so all I will need to do is bring the tripod and students will be able to quickly slide their phones in and out whenever they do their presentations. Of course, students will also be welcome to just ask a friend to hold the camera and, as long as they are steady and take good video, that can also work. 

I will still need to have copies of the students’ videos because I will need them for double checking my evaluations or for possible grade reviews, so again I’ve done some research and learned that, with a Google Gmail account, students will be able to download and install the Google Drive app to their smartphones and use it to immediately upload copies of their videos to a Google Drive folder that they have shared with me. Of course, I will need to make sure that all students get a Google account and share a Google Drive folder with me, so I will prepare a video tutorial that will walk them through that and, hopefully, get the use of a computer lab for a few classes at the beginning of the semester. For the very small percentage of students who may not have unlimited data transfer accounts on their smartphones, they will still be able to transfer their videos to their computer at home and upload to the shared Google Drive folder from their home computer. 

Although I’m really excited about the good possibilities of this plan, I would be most appreciative of any feedback, positive or negative, because the new semester does not start until March and, if there is something I have overlooked or just plain figured wrong, it would be much better for my students if I improve this plan while there is still time. 

Finally, if this long post is an inappropriate use of this thread, I apologize and ask that you please let me know. This is my very first MET course, so I’m really new at this. 

 

Tap or click to view references for the above artifact and reflection

References

Analysis of Vignette #2

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

 

The Writing Process with Partners

The word cloud (below) is based on and attached to a pdf version of my analysis of “Vignette #2.” It was a very enjoyable assignment from my early MET experience: working together with well educated adults for the first time in my life was, at first, a bit intimidating, but it got easier as we all got to know one another personally.  Further reflection is embedded in the audio player below:

Tap or click to read the detailed assignment description and expectations

In Week 8 you will analyze one vignette each. Begin by reading all of the vignettes, watching the various videos, going to the suggested web sites and reading the additional readings. Indicate the vignette of your choice to your group. Please note: Each member of your group must choose a different vignette to analyze. The vignettes present various forms of teaching and learning and dilemmas with the use of educational technologies.

How do I teach/learn from creating a website?

The social studies teacher started incorporating technology in school as a part of an extra-curricular Web Club. The club was small and students learned together their first steps in web design. They worked on creating websites that would be used by students. With the success of the websites, there was financial support from the government as well as growing support of the administration. The next step was to incorporate web-design into the classroom.

The websites generated at the school have been used in several ways: 1) websites for individual teachers, who post course outlines, hand-outs and assessment rubrics. 2) websites that provide students with research resources and are integrated into the learning process. Examples of such websites, created by groups of students are: Commercial Drive and how it has changed over the years, geography of the Fraser River. And 3) website are used as a medium for connection with other students in other schools (in Europe).

Students and teachers involved in creating these websites learned research skills as well as elements of presentation. The focus has shifted from the content and product to the process of learning the material and finding the most appropriate ways to exhibit it. Now that these sites are functioning other students use them as instructional resources.

In a discussion around the use of technology in learning social studies, students indicated that they enjoy the use of technology, however, they don’t want technology to replace the teacher and real classroom discussions. They emphasized the importance of variety of strategies used in the classroom. They warned about the challenges of using particular programs (statistics in geography in particular) without technical support. They also pointed to challenges of access and lack of computers at home as well as limited access in school. They worry that if the teacher uses technology as a way of having students access resources and analyze them, the teacher many not “cover the material from the textbook” and they will have to tackle that by themselves as they study for their final exams. The students discussed the links between using technology and working in small groups in collaboration with other students. They mentioned their frequent use of chat rooms to share information and help each other with homework.

The questions that still remain lingering are how to integrate the use of computers into the classroom particularly when there are only five computers in every class; how to involve students in using the resources on the web in meaningful ways; how to provide students with the technical as well as the critical skills needed in order to use the technology thoughtfully; how to overcome questions of access; how to invite parents to explore the websites and become more active partners in the students’ learning; how can the teacher negotiate the gaps in students’ experiences and expertise in using technology; what are the necessary shifts in assessment that will follow a more integrative approach to technology?

Source: ETEC532 Syllabus – 2013

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

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

References

 

Arts Based Project: A Direct Application to New Multimedia Class

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

 

Reflection

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:

http://library.concordia.ca/help/howto/litreview.php

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:

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

  • 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.

Optional

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.

References 

 

 

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

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published.